Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Laken Riley Murder: Blueboar and Masem are extremely policy-expert, experienced and neutral editors and IMO have given excellent assessments and recommendations here. Respectfully, maybe it's time to absorb, accept and benefit from some of what they've had to say. |
→Banu Qurayza: reply to Kaalakaa |
||
Line 783:
:Regardless, several books about [[Muhammad]] use "{{tq|the prophet}}" as a pronoun for Muhammad, but we cannot do that on Wikipedia because it conflicts with [[MOS:PROPHET]]. Some books might say "{{tq|Muhammad received revelations from God,}}" but we should instead phrase it as "{{tq|'''Muhammad said''' that he received revelations from God}}." The same principle, in my opinion, applies here. The claim that [[Banu Qurayza]] violated the treaty comes from Muhammad and Islamic sources, which was (and is still) used as justification for the subsequent massacre ordered by Muhammad against the men of Banu Qurayza and the enslavement of their women and children, some of whom were sold to [[Najd]] to buy weapons and horses for the Muslims. Several secondary sources also doubt that Banu Qurayza violated the treaty with Muhammad or even took part in it [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMuhammad&diff=1225258470&oldid=1225257528]. Therefore, I believe the statement that "Banu Qurayza broke the treaty", if included, should be attributed to Muhammad or Islamic sources. — [[User:Kaalakaa|<span style="color: #154360;">'''Kaalakaa'''</span>]] [[User talk:Kaalakaa|<sup style="color: #003366;">(talk)</sup>]] 09:25, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::The complaints about the above sources are trivial and irrelevant in most instances ... if mildly offensive and aspersion riddled. The religious affiliation of scholars does not alter their reliability when we are talking about tenured professors published in the world's most renowned university presses. Imagine if Christian professors could not comment on Christian history. We would likely have to gut the history of early Christianity, the crusades, etc. The very notion is daft. It raises the question of how the poster thinks academia works. It's an altogether unbecoming line of thought. [[User:Iskandar323|Iskandar323]] ([[User talk:Iskandar323|talk]]) 10:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::{{tq|Jonathan AC Brown and Tariq Ramadan are Muslims, and therefore they have a conflict of interest in writing their books}} is an absolutely bonkers statement. Imagine saying Jews have a conflict of interest in writing about Judaism, or Christians have a COI about Christianity. This statement by itself should lead to a topic ban. '''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;font-size:90%">nableezy</span>]]''' - 18:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
== 2021 Canadian church burnings ==
| |||