Misplaced Pages

Talk:Muhammad: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:25, 8 September 2014 editIan.thomson (talk | contribs)58,562 edits Undid edit-warring and continued attacks by Eyewitness44← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:04, 13 January 2025 edit undoCannolis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers40,165 edits Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 January 2025: Responded to edit requestTag: editProtectedHelper 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skip to talk}} {{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|auto=yes|search=yes}} {{Talk header|search=no|noarchives=yes}}
{{tmbox
{{Vital article|level=3|topic=People|class=GA}}
|style=border-color:#b00000;
{{FAQ|collapsed=yes}}
|type=content
{{pbneutral}}
|text=<div>
{{Article history|action1=PR
'''Important notice''': Prior discussion has determined that '''''some pictures of Muhammad are allowed'''''.
<big>'''Discussion of images, and of edits regarding images, MUST be posted to ]. Removal of pictures without discussion will be reverted.'''</big><br /> If you find images of Muhammad offensive, it is possible to configure your browser or use your personal Misplaced Pages settings not to display them; see ].

The '''FAQ''' addresses some common points of argument, including the use of images and honorifics such as "peace be upon him". The FAQ represents prior ] of editors here. If you are new to this article and have a question or suggestion for it, please read ] first.}}
{{censor}}
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
{{American English}}
{{Article history|otddate=May 2, 2004|otdoldid=6718112
|otd2date=June 8, 2005|otd2oldid=16335247
|otd3date=June 8, 2006|otd3oldid=57510475
|otd4date=June 8, 2018|otd4oldid=844848325
|itndate=September 19, 2012|itnlink=Special:PermanentLink/513609434

|action1=PR
|action1date=September 7, 2005 |action1date=September 7, 2005
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Muhammad/archive1 |action1link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Muhammad/archive1
Line 38: Line 52:


|topic = religion |topic = religion

|currentstatus=GA
|action7 = GAR
|action7date = 21:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
|action7link = Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Muhammad/2
|action7result = delisted
|action7oldid = 1174803389
|currentstatus = DGA
}} }}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|listas=Muhammad|living=no|1=
{{ITN talk|September 19|2012}}
{{WikiProject Biography |core=yes |military-work-group=y |military-priority=Low}}
{{On this day|date1=2004-05-02|oldid1=6718112|date2=2005-06-08|oldid2=16335247|date3=2006-06-08|oldid3=57510475}}
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=Top|Salaf=yes|Shi'a-Islam=yes|Sunni=yes}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=no|class=GA|core=yes|listas=Muhammad}} {{WikiProject Arab world|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Islam|Prophets-of-Islam=yes|class=GA|importance=top}} {{WikiProject Saudi Arabia|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Arab world|class=GA|importance=top}} {{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Saudi Arabia|class=GA|importance=Top|Mecca=yes|Mecca-importance=Top}} {{WikiProject Military history|class=B|Biography=y|Medieval=y|Muslim=y|b1=no|b2=yes|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes}}
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|class=GA|importance=top}} {{WikiProject Religion|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=GA
| B1 <!-- Referencing and citations --> = y
| B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy --> = y
| B3 <!-- Structure --> = y
| B4 <!-- Grammar and style --> = y
| B5 <!-- Supporting materials --> = y
|Biography=yes|Medieval=yes|Muslim=yes}}
{{WikiProject Religion|class=GA|importance=Top}}
{{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=GA|category=Philrelig|VA=yes|coresup=yes}}
}} }}
{{annual readership|scale=log}}
{{Press {{Press
|collapsed=yes |collapsed=yes
Line 87: Line 99:
|author6=K.C. Jones |author6=K.C. Jones
|date6=February 7, 2008 |date6=February 7, 2008
|url6=http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206106192 |url6=https://www.informationweek.com/wikipedia-refuses-to-delete-picture-of-muhammad/d/d-id/1064361
|title6=Misplaced Pages Refuses To Delete Picture Of Muhammad |title6=Misplaced Pages Refuses To Delete Picture Of Muhammad
|org6=] |org6=]
Line 95: Line 107:
|org7=] |org7=]
}} }}
{{pp-move-indef|small=yes}}
{{Article discretionary sanctions|topic=muh-im}}
{{tmbox
|style=border-color:#b00000;
|type=content
|text=<div>
'''Important notice''': Prior discussion has determined that '''''some pictures of Muhammad are allowed'''''.
<big>'''Discussion of images, and of edits regarding images, MUST be posted to ]. Removal of pictures without discussion will be reverted.'''</big><br /> If you find Muhammad images offensive, it is possible to configure your browser or use your personal Misplaced Pages settings not to display them, see ].

The '''FAQ''' addresses some common points of argument, including the use of images and honorifics such as "peace be upon him". The FAQ represents prior ] of editors here. If you are new to this article and have a question or suggestion for it, please read ] first.}}
<!--{{To do}}--> <!--{{To do}}-->
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Muhammad/Archive index|mask=Talk:Muhammad/Archive <#>|mask=Talk:Muhammad/images/Archive <#>|mask=Talk:Muhammad/Mediation Archive <#>|Mask=Talk:Muhammad/images|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}} {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Muhammad/Archive index|mask1=Talk:Muhammad/Archive <#>|mask2=Talk:Muhammad/images/Archive <#>|mask3=Talk:Muhammad/Mediation Archive <#>|mask4=Talk:Muhammad/images|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
|maxarchivesize = 250K |maxarchivesize = 250K
|counter = 28 |counter = 36
|algo = old(21d) |algo = old(60d)
|archive = Talk:Muhammad/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Muhammad/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Archives|bot=MiszaBot|age=60|list='''Main archives: (])'''<br>{{Archive list|nobr=yes}}
{{Archives|search=yes|list=&#x20;
----
], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],
], ], ] '''Image archives:'''<br>{{Archive list|root=Talk:Muhammad/images|nobr=yes}}
----
'''Mediation archives:'''<br>
1. ]<br>
2. ]<br>
3. ]<br>
4. ]<br>
5. ]<br>
{{Archive list|prefix=Mediation Archive|prefixspace=yes|start=6|nobr=yes|linkprefix=Archive|linkprefixspace=yes}}
----
'''Images Arbitration:'''<br>
1. ]<br>
2. ]
}}
{{Section sizes}}


== '''Frequently asked questions''', please read before posting ==
*'''Image archives'''
<!-- ] 00:02, 5 July 5672 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|116839929765}}
], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],
Please read ] for answers to these frequently-asked questions (you need to tap "Read as wiki page" to see the relevant text):
], ],
], # ]
], # ]
], # ]
# ]
],
# ]
],
# ]
],
# ]
],
# ]
],
], # ]
# ]
],
],
*'''Mediation Archives'''
# ]
# ]
# ]
# ]
# ]
# ]
# ]
# ]
* '''Images Arbitration'''
# ]
# ]


This section is for mobile-device users who do not see the normal talk page header. This section should not have any comments, so that it stays on this talk page and does not get archived.
*''']'''

}}
==GA Reassessment==
{{Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Muhammad/2}}

== GA or Featured nomination ==

Is there any plan for this article to be made up to the standards of ] or even ]. This is a very high importance figure and the article should be made up to the best standards. If there is any plan to enact a nomination please let me know so I can help. ] (]) 21:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

:I would recommend you take a look at the ], and maybe see if there are places in the articles that you could help bring up to those criteria. If you have questions, let me know: GA and FA are different processes and one generally takes place before the other. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 21:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
:It was GA for a long while until now-blocked editor Kaalakaa took it upon himself to rewrite most of the article over a period of several months starting in Jun 2023. This talk page history has records of some contention that caused.
:One of the fallouts was this article losing its GA status, because the article that earned GA wasn't the same article as what it eventually became. Kaalakaa's edits weren't bad, they were overall improvements I think, but his view on what sources are reliable, and his interpretation of them, have been questioned.
:What needs to happen to restore GA status is to go through every one of his hundreds of edits with a fine-tooth comb and check the sources. This is a big job because not all sources are available online, and not all aren't behind paywalls.
:As for FA, that isn't feasible. FA articles are unprotected when featured on the main page, and this Muhammmad article experiences enough disruption when it's unprotected that it would be impossible to keep it free from disruption by people who take offense at its content if it became FA. I mean, do you know of ''any'' article about a contentious topic that ''ever'' became a Featured Article? ~] <small>(])</small> 02:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
::So the main problem is with the citations, thank you, I will try to check them but as you said it is a long process. As for contentious FAs ] is one. ] (]) 20:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
:::It isn't just the sources. Many of the sources are good sources, but the interpretation needs checking. Some of the sources may be questionable. A recent example is ''The Generalship of Muhammad: Battles and Campaigns of the Prophet of Allah'' by Russ Rodgers, published by the University Press of Florida. Archived discussions ], ], ] (about 2/3 the way into the conversation), and ], is that the book includes extraordinary claims that demand support of multiple reliable sources, yet the author is rather obscure (more of a hobbyist historian) having been largely ignored by academia with few citations. The book may be useful for some military tactics, though. ~] <small>(])</small> 14:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Here's my question: if some of these sources are so hard to find (acknowledging that's not inherently a criterion for reliability)—shouldn't we consider removing material that's only verifiable in those sources per ], given the enormity of the topic? This article is over 13k words long—frankly, to me that always indicates that we should be cutting it down somewhere, and this seems like obvious low-hanging fruit. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 09:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::That particular source by Rodgers is a candidate for removal, yes. I can't say about the others. I suggest you start going through Kaalakaa's edits starting in June 2023, and take notes. He put a lot of work into it, most of it good, but such an overwhelming amount that the other regulars here haven't found the spare time to check it all. ~] <small>(])</small> 18:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::That is my impression as well. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 21:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I have removed the Rodgers source for now ] (]) 22:40, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Thanks. ~] <small>(])</small> 23:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::I am going to remove all the citations which cannot be found in the ] section. All the ones not found already have more than one citation, so I would not be removing any information. ] (]) 01:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::The more critical task would be checking whether what the Misplaced Pages article says aligns with what the citations say, in proper context. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

== Opening paragraph ==

I find the current opening paragraph to be problematic, in that it emphasizes the fact that Muhammad was "an Arab religious, social, and political leader" over the fact that he was "the founder of Islam". I tried to survey how some other encyclopedias introduce him in their very first sentence, and this is what I found (I'll omit technical information like transliteration of his name and his dates for brevity):
{{talkquote|Muhammad was the founder of Islam and the proclaimer of the Qurʾān.|source=}}
{{talkquote|Muhammad, also known as the Messenger of God, or the Prophet, founder of the religion of Islam and of the Muslim community.|source=Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions, p 754}}
{{talkquote|Muhammad, the prophet who, according to Muslims, received God's revelation in the Qur'an, and established Islam. His importance for Muslims is emphasized by the central Islamic profession of faith: "There is no god but God, and Muhammad is his (sic) Messenger."|source=, p 304}}
{{talkquote|Muhammad, the prophet and founder of Islam and that faith's most important and significant messenger. He received his first revelation of the Holy Koran via the angel Gabriel when he was circa forty years old.|source=, "Mohammed"}}
{{talkquote|Muhammad is acknowledged by more than one billion Muslims as the last messenger of God. It was through him that the Quranic passages, which his followers believe present the word of God, had been revealed to guide the nascent community through its predicaments. The religion that Muhammad preached is called Islam, meaning submission to God; its creed asserts that there is but one God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God.|source=Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, p 478}}
{{talkquote|Muhammad is revered by Muslims as the prophet to whom the Quran, the sacred scripture of Islam, was revealed.|source=, p 6220}}
In other words, every single of the encyclopedia above introduces Muhammad as the founder of Islam/Muslim community and the proclaimer of the Qur'an, much more than being an Arab social and political leader. I think the opening paragraph can still mention ], but not in the first sentence.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 03:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

:I'd say feel free to propose a rearrangement of the lead. ] requires that the lead be a concise overview of the contents of the article, and insofar as the article goes into depth (likely more than other encyclopedias) about political leadership, I don't see the ordering of facts in the lead as a problem, but I don't object to changing it. ~] <small>(])</small> 14:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Another one (already cited in the article):
{{talkquote|The Prophet of Islam was a religious, political, and social reformer who gave rise to one of the great civilizations of the world. From a modern, historical perspective, Muḥammad was the founder of Islam. From the perspective of the Islamic faith, he was God 's Messenger (rasūl Allāh), called to be a “warner,” first to the Arabs and then to all humankind.|source=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World, }}
So I propose this is the opening paragraph:
{{quote|Muhammad (/moʊˈhɑːməd/; Arabic: مُحَمَّد, romanized: Muḥammad, lit. 'praiseworthy'; ; c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was the founder of ]. According to Muslims, he was the ] sent by ], to preach and confirm the monotheistic teachings of ], ], ], ], and other prophets. Muhammad's life and ], along with the ], form the basis for ] and ]. Muhammad established the ], which later gave rise to the ].}}

Definitely open to suggestions.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 22:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:Makes sense to me. ] (]) 11:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:maybe "final" is more correct than "last"? — '''] '']''''' 02:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:The final prophet isn't "according to Muslims" it's "according to most Muslims" or "according to nearly all Muslims". Amadiyya consider themselves Muslims but they recognize a prophet after Muhammad. ~] <small>(])</small> 04:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:I don't see the problem. He was "an Arab religious, social, and political leader" because he was the founder of Islam. --] (]) (]) 14:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::I agree, the proposed replacement isn't really an improvement over what we have. The lead sentence already says he's the founder. Maneuvering the words around to get "founder" to appear earlier in the sentence isn't making the lead paragraph better. ~] <small>(])</small> 15:10, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Heck, the fact that he founded Islam is only really important because he was able to use it to become the dominant religious, social, and political leader. Lots and lots of religious movements are started and more or less quickly fade away. --] (]) (]) 15:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::::Can you cite several sources, maybe a dozen, that introduce him as "an Arab religious, social, and political leader"? Because I've cited above 7 above that introduce him as a founder of Islam (or some variant of that), and could probably easily find a dozen more. Lets focus on the sources.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 02:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::I see that this description may neglect the theological message he delivers. He did had unique ideas by subjugating the Arabian pantheon under one supreme deity he later identified with the God of the Talmudic tradition. He did have unique contributations in matters of theology as well. But this shouldn't mean that the part about his political identity should be removed, maybe just emphazize more his role as a religious figure? ] (]) 19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
:::To me, the current lead fits the best as the proposed doesn't make the opening paragraph more appropriate for the figure than the current. Even before what is known as ], being active in Arab tribal meetings, ] and his participation in ] (as sources mention) also indicate sort of his social as well as political role (although not as leading person) and not as religious role at that time. Though the latter role got widely known. ] (]) 19:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::::And that's what this is about: what is Muhammad known ''the most'' for. No one is saying those other parts of his life shouldn't be in the lead, but we shouldn't claim somehow his early life is more important than his founding of Islam.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 01:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::@] I didn't propose removing his political identity but rather writing it as "Muhammad established the ], which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization." This is not inconsistent with ], ], ] and ] all being introduced as (one of) the founders of the Republic of Turkey, United States, modern Egypt and Pakistan, respectively, in the first sentence. What do you think was his political identity? ''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 02:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Another one:
{{talkquote|In the perspective of history, the origin of Islam can be traced back to the prophetic career of Muhammad, its historical founder in the first third of the seventh century.|source=''The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought'', "Muhammad", p 367}} ''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 03:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

:Why not just shift the word "founder" forward in the existing opening sentence? You rewrote the entire first paragraph, and to me it isn't an improvement over what we already have. ~] <small>(])</small> 19:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
::Like I said, I'm open to rewording. Lets consider your proposal: "Muhammad was the founder of Islam and an Arab political, social and religious leader." That would be an improvement over the current version. But we can improve it further:
::*Isn't it redundant to describe him both as a "founder of Islam" and a "religious leader"? The former just about covers the entirety of his religious career.
::*I replaced "Arab political and social leader" with "Muhammad established the ], which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization". Isn't that more specific?
::''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 21:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
:::To your points: Sure, "religious leader" could be removed. The second replacement is fine too. It's your middle sentence in your proposal that isn't an improvement over what we have already. How about:
::::Muhammad (/moʊˈhɑːməd/; Arabic: مُحَمَّد, romanized: Muḥammad, lit. 'praiseworthy'; ; c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) is the founder of Islam, and an Arab social and political leader who established the first Islamic state that was the precuror to the Islamic civilization. According to Islamic doctrine,...
:::~] <small>(])</small> 07:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::That's a longish opening sentence. I sort of get the point that the OP makes at the beginning of this thread. But I think that the reason the wording kinda underplays the founding of Islam is not so much its position in the sentence but the use of "and" to add it. It gives it a "tacked on" feel. It seems right to begin with the "personal" fundamentals about him: that he was an Arab leader - though the "social" descriptor doesn't add much, IMO. My suggestion would be closer to the current wording but: {{tq|Muhammad...was an Arab religious and political leader who founded Islam.}} ] (]) 08:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::Thanks for making suggestions, its important we make them. But I don't think yours is an improvement. Calling Muhammad "an Arab religious and political leader who founded Islam" makes it sound like he was a politician first who decided to create a religion. Historically, we know it was the other way around; he began religious preaching in 610 CE, and only founded a state in 622 CE.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 05:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Just to add that the opening formula of "X...was ...who " is a common solution across many WP bios - from ] to ]. ] (]) 09:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::Yes, that was kind of my point earlier. I think the existing opening sentence is fine. If it can be improved by giving more prominence to the position of "founder" then that's good too but I'm not really happy with the alternative so far, including my own suggestion. ~] <small>(])</small> 17:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::::I think "founder of Islam" fits really well as both a personal description as well as what he did. I'm fine with "an Arab social and political leader who established the first Islamic state that was the precuror to the Islamic civilization" anywhere in the first paragraph but probably not the first sentence.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 05:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Vice regent}} It is important to mention he was a Arab leader given that it is through his leadership and those following that not only Islam but also the Arabic language and culture spread from its homeland across most of the Middle East and North Africa (and as a language of scholarship, much further). ] (]) 03:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
::::I'm fine to mention him as an Arab leader, but he must be mentioned as the founder of Islam ''first''. That is the absolute one thing he is the ''most'' notable for. Everything else is important, but secondary. ''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 05:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
::::@], also can you quote sources that describe his influences on Arabs that you mentioned above? It will help us in seeing what wording scholars use to describe that and then perhaps we can mimic that wording.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 05:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Well Britannica has "For instance, a Syriac chronicle dating from about 640 mentions a battle between the Romans and “the Arabs of Muhammad,” and an Armenian history composed about 660 describes Muhammad as a merchant who preached to the Arabs and thereby triggered the Islamic conquests. Such evidence provides sufficient confirmation of the historical existence of an Arab prophet by the name of Muhammad." The earliest evidence of Muhammad outside of Islamic sources describe Muhammad as an Arab leader. BTW are you saying that Muhammad should not be described as an Arab leader in the lead? ] (]) 14:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
::::::Thanks. The ] says that Muslims believe he was "God 's Messenger first to the Arabs and then to all humankind." I'm fine with describing him as an Arab leader both in the lead and the first paragraph but not the first sentence, I'll explain in a table below (English Misplaced Pages FAs and GAs on early Islamic leaders don't tend to call them Arabs in the very first sentence). One way to describe his Arab-ness would be:
::::::"Muhammad established the first Islamic state in ], which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization. He also proclaimed the Qur'an, the central religious text of Islam and widely regarded as a masterpiece of ]." ''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 21:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 November 2024 ==
{{collapse top|title=FAQ No. 5}}
{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
] (]) 16:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Add Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam by the side of The name of our prophet.
:{{notdone}}. Muhammad's full name is already given and sources are cited. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 November 2024 (2) ==
{{collapse top|title=FAQ No. 5}}

{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
] (]) 16:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/Muhammad change it to https://en.wikipedia.org/Muhammad+Sallallahu+Alaihi+Wasallam

cause it is must to read this thing beside our prophet name for muslim
:Hi Hasbbdee. Please read the FAQ at the top of this talk page, as this is a commonly discussed issue. Thanks! <span style="font-family: Arial; padding: 2px 3px 1px 3px;">] ]</span> 16:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{notdone}}. See ] for information about how articles are titled. ~] <small>(])</small> 20:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 November 2024 ==
{{collapse top|title=FAQ No. 5}}

{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
My request is to write the name of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him with respect and not only his name, so please write “Prophet Muhammad” with respect ] (]) 11:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

:Hi, Please read the FAQ section at the top of this page as well as ] to see why we don't do this. Thanks! <span style="font-family: Arial; padding: 2px 3px 1px 3px;">] ]</span> 11:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
:also {{notdone}} <span style="font-family: Arial; padding: 2px 3px 1px 3px;">] ]</span> 11:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
:Misplaced Pages is a secular encyclopaedia that is not bound by Muslim custom. ] (]) 06:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
{{collapse bottom}}

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 November 2024 ==


{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
== Al-Isra Wal Miraj a Physical Journey ==
Muhammad's birth date is 571 so it should be changed to 571 from 570 ] (]) 18:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:{{Not done}}: please provide ] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> --] (<span style="font-variant:small-caps">]</span>) 18:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)


== Encyclopaedia of Islam source ==
I think it should be included that Imam Bukhari and many others have presented the Al-Isra Wal Miraj as a physical journey before Ibn Ishaq stated his views. There were many people prior to Ibn Ishaq who believed that Al-Isra Wal Miraj was a physical journey. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:25, 14 August 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:How can Imam Bukhari state his views before Ibn Ishaq while Ibn Ishaq lived long before Imam Bukhari did? Also note that, such matters, if needed, shall be addressed in its own entry ] --» ''] ] ]'' 18:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


Hello! I have been looking over the sources of Islam-related pages and one I find consistently is "Buhl and Welch 1993", which is only linked to a purchase page for the book.
== Edit page title request ==


Yesterday I find out that it is actually ]. This got me thinking: is it better to leave the source's link as it is, or should we link the aforementioned reference.
Please Edit the page title from Muhammad to Muhammad Paigambar.
]


In addition, I cannot find Buhl or Welch's names as the authors of the Muhammad section which is most frequently used. I can only Trude Ehlert. I would be grateful if somebody clears up my confusion. ] (]) 06:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
== Big mistake which must be altered asap. ==


::See . ] (]) 13:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
The article states:
:::Thank you! ] - ] 13:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::::F.&nbsp;Buhl was the author of the Muhammad section in the first edition of ''The Encyclopaedia of Islam'' (1934), which in the 1993 edition was revised and updated by A.T.&nbsp;Welch .] (]) 14:29, 26 December 2024 (UTC)


:I've bundled a citation underneath for the new online edition of that article. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 07:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Muhammad expelled from Medina the Banu Qaynuqa, one of three main Jewish tribes. '''Although Muhammad wanted them executed,''' Abd-Allah ibn Ubaiy chief of the Khazraj tribe did not agree and they were expelled to Syria but without their property.
::I assume the above user meant that the should replace the |url= in the existing main Encylopaedia of Islam source, not that a new citation should be added with a url going to what is for them also inaccessible content. ] (]) 17:41, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::That was my inquiry pretty much. ] - ] 17:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 December 2024 ==
The text in bold which states the Muhammad wanted them executed is ''not'' supported by evidence and the writer does not even give a source. This is because no source actually infers that muhammad called for their execution (rather narrations claim that he was angry). Seems to me to be written by an Islamophobe. Change this please as I am unable to make edits.] (]) 16:31, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
:A source is given (that 119 that appears at the end of that sentence), and looking into and . even admits that Muhammad had to be called to show mercy to them (indicating at the least that he was going to call for some sort of unmerciful action).
:Please ] on behalf of editors, and make sure that that an addition does not have sources and is counter to sources before claiming it is unsupported. ] (]) 16:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)


{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
:: The "wanted them executed" is certainly disputed. Other sources state that he wanted them to leave Medina and Abdullah ibn Ubayy pleaded to stop the expulsion. For example, ] writes: "Only 'Abd-Allah ibn-Ubayy tried to stop the expulsion. He urged upon Muhammad the important contribution Qaynuqa could make to his forces in the event of further fighting with the Meccans -- they were said to have 700 fighting men, of whom about half were armored. But Muhammad insisted that they must leave, though he was prepared to be lenient about the other conditions." (Watt, 1974, Muhammad: prophet and statesman, p.131). Also, the source cited is not reliable (An Introduction to the Quran, from 1895), see . <b><font color="#4682B4">]</font></b><sup>(<font color="#99BADD">]</font>)</sup> 23:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
change date of birth, its 22nd Apr, 571 ] (]) 09:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)


:What source do you have? Consider ]. ] (]) 10:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::History is written by winners, we know; still we have to give preference to first hand citations than to what someone from distant would state. Even within the sources, it is not clear whether Muhammad wanted all of them to be executed or not, and there was a discussion about what to do with them including options for executing and enslaving them. As we find there is a dispute, the sentence in the article should be considered for a rephrase. --» ''] ] ]'' 00:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
::::I would probably support this, but we need first to find sources putting a different point of view. ] (]) 00:03, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
::::: (MMK translation 5-59-362) somewhat supports the narrative that is in current version in this Misplaced Pages article. --» ''] ] ]'' 04:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
:::::: While the hadith supports that Banu Qaynuqa were exiled, it doesn't support Muhammad "wanted them executed". Even concerning their exile, some sources state that it "never took place during Muhammad's lifetime".. The earliest source that supports what's in the article is ]. However, it is his explanation and not part of the narrative. Other sources like ] and ] (in addition to Watt and others) make no mention of it. The current article is reporting what al-Waqidi wrote as truth, which is one sided, other sources do not make this claim and his account of the exile is disputed. <b><font color="#4682B4">]</font></b><sup>(<font color="#99BADD">]</font>)</sup> 19:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
:::::::It is unclear whether he wanted to execute surrendered men, but it is clear that he killed some men (on battle??). Is there any source from Qaynuqa or Jews perspective? I searched over Muslim and Bukhari, there is really nothing much about it there. Can't find much of other source. This might seem silly; but probably this single phrase has pivotal role about characterization of the Prophet. We need more care :/ (confused, resigning from this discussion for now). --» ''] ] ]'' 23:32, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 January 2025 ==
::::::::The chief of Khazraj tribe was Sa'd ibn Ubadah, not Abd-Allah ibn Ubaiy who wasn't the chief of any tribe at all. This is the first mistake in the sentence. The second mistake is the claim that the Prophet Muhammad wanted them executed. This is absolutely a false claim.--] (]) 11:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
::::::::It is true that the Prophet Muhammad was the Hero of Heroes, and that He was victorious over all His enemies who fought against Him in battles . However, He always judged His defeated enemies with Grace .
Change leading sentence from {{green|'''Muhammad''' (c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious, social, and political leader}} to {{green|'''Muhammad''' (c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious leader"}} as per ] that states: "Do not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead, spread the relevant information out over the entire lead.". The lead sentence should stick to what he was primarily known for. The infobox is there to include additional occupations. The world knows him as a religious leader, not as a political and social leader. For example, ] was a prominent philanthropist and poet but since the world knows him as a professional boxer, we have that on his article. ] (]) 08:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::Banu Qurayza were judged by Sa'd ibn Mua'dh "a Companion of the Prophet Muhammad", not by the Prophet Muhammad Himself. This is why they were judged by Justice rather than by Grace.
::::::::Prophet Muhammad judged all his defeated enemies with Grace . The only exception was Banu Qurayza, who were judged by Sa'd ibn Ubadah not by the Prophet, and he judged them with Justice not by Grace.
::::::::This great example of the Prophet was observed later by his Companions during the Muslim conquests. For example, when Omar entered Jerusalem in 637, he judged its people with Grace. He didn't kill any single citizen and didn't destroy any single church .


:I don't find the current writing particularly overloaded/everything. Social/political is quite relevant, religious too limited. ] (]) 12:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
==Edits==
::Political can arguably be relevant as he was the founder and ruler of a state but social is definitely not that relevant. Just because a few social norms changed during Muhammad's lifetime doesn't mean he's widely known as a social leader in the world. Major encycloepdias' introductory sentence just calls him a religious leader or the founder of Islam i.e. {{green|Muhammad (born c. 570, Mecca, Arabia —died June 8, 632, Medina) was the founder of Islam and the proclaimer of the Qurʾān.}}. Best case scenario is having {{green|'''Muhammad''' (c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious and political leader"}}. ] (]) 14:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
I went ahead and was {{sc|bold}} and moved things around in the lede. If anyone didn't understand why my edits fell under general policy:
:::I'd be fine with removing 'social'. It does seem redundant. {{ping|Gråbergs Gråa Sång}} Agree? ] (]) 04:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Drive by comment: I too do not see the need for the term "social". I'm not sure what constitutes a "social leader" to begin with. ] 04:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::same ] (]) 06:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Good enough. ] (]) 07:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::: Done. ] (]) 08:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 January 2025 ==
{{nowrap|(''a'') ]}} is to use c.&nbsp;(no italics, with a no-break space) rather than write out the entire word.<br>
{{nowrap|(''b'') Similarly,}} our house style is to begin the {{sc|]}} with the article's title wherever practical. Here, it helps with the flow and also allows a helpful link to the ] article for those who are curious what all those ibns are on about.
&nbsp;—&nbsp;] 22:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


{{edit extended-protected|Muhammad|answered=yes}}
==Date of death==
Dear (who will take time and read my request) :
My personal feeling is the circa on the date of death is misused to the point of being misleading. It's not that his death happened some ''day'' around that day: that <u>is</u> the ''exact'' day of his death according to tradition but the tradition itself might be off by months or years. I think the current footnote already does a fine job of explaining all that, and the circa should just be removed.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] 22:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
:Agreed. --» ''] ] ]'' 23:31, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


I hope you are doing well. I recently came across an article featuring images of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). While I truly appreciate the effort in sharing insights across different perspectives, I wanted to kindly bring something to your attention regarding Islamic teachings.
==Names==
I'm sure you guys have discussed this before, but I will note that ] is to at least ''mention'' the very common historical and alternative names ''somewhere'' on the page. The "Names and appellations in the Quran" is cleverly entitled to sidestep what should be obvious: it should simply be a "Name" section. I would suggest three parts: Translation and commentary about "Muhammad" and his full name, explaining what its different parts mean; his names and epithets within the Quran; and historic and common English forms of the name, sourced and with discussion about the culture behind and (roughly) how to say it properly.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] 22:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
:Can you add it? Converting the ''appellation in Quran' into a different (sub) section can be a good idea too. --» ''] ] ]'' 23:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


In Islam, depicting the Prophet is avoided as a way to maintain respect and prevent any unintended idolization. The Prophet said, “The people who will be most severely punished on the Day of Judgment will be the image-makers” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 5950). Additionally, there’s a general discouragement of creating images of living beings, as mentioned in the hadith: “Those who make images will be punished on the Day of Resurrection. It will be said to them, ‘Bring to life that which you have created’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 5951).
== Let's include this ==


Out of respect for these principles and the significance they hold for Muslim readers, I kindly request the removal of these images, if possible. This small adjustment would greatly enhance the inclusivity and respectfulness of the piece without detracting from its value.
The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History is a 1978 book by Michael H. Hart, reprinted in 1992 with revisions. It is a ranking of the 100 people who, according to Hart, most influenced human history.


Thank you so much for your understanding. ] (]) 21:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
The first person on Hart's list is the Prophet of Islam Muhammad. Hart asserted that Muhammad was "supremely successful" in both the religious and secular realms.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/The_100:_A_Ranking_of_the_Most_Influential_Persons_in_History</ref> <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:20, 2 September 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:{{not done}}:<!-- Template:EEp --> see faq 1 ] (]) 22:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{ping|Musafirsafwan}} That used to be there but it was decided the author was an inappropriate source. "He has described himself as a white separatist and is active in white separatist causes." --] <sup>]</sup> 14:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:04, 13 January 2025

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Muhammad article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Important notice: Prior discussion has determined that some pictures of Muhammad are allowed. Discussion of images, and of edits regarding images, MUST be posted to the images subpage. Removal of pictures without discussion will be reverted.
If you find images of Muhammad offensive, it is possible to configure your browser or use your personal Misplaced Pages settings not to display them; see the FAQ.

The FAQ addresses some common points of argument, including the use of images and honorifics such as "peace be upon him". The FAQ represents prior consensus of editors here. If you are new to this article and have a question or suggestion for it, please read the FAQ first.
Censorship warningMisplaced Pages is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.
? view · edit Frequently asked questions

Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning Muhammad.

To view an explanation to the answer, click the link to the right of the question.

Q1: Shouldn't all the images of Muhammad be removed because they might offend Muslims? A1: Further information: Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not § Misplaced Pages is not censored, and Misplaced Pages:Content disclaimer

There is a prohibition of depicting Muhammad in certain Muslim communities. This prohibition is not universal among Muslim communities. For a discussion, see Depictions of Muhammad and Aniconism in Islam.

Misplaced Pages is not bound by any religious prohibitions, and it is an encyclopedia that strives to represent all topics from a neutral point of view, and therefore Misplaced Pages is not censored for the sake of any particular group. So long as they are relevant to the article and do not violate any of Misplaced Pages's existing policies, nor the laws of locations where Misplaced Pages's servers are hosted, no content or images will be removed from Misplaced Pages because people find them objectionable or offensive. (See also: Misplaced Pages:Content disclaimer.)

Misplaced Pages does not single out Islam in this. There is content that may be equally offensive to other religious people, such as the 1868 photograph shown at Bahá'u'lláh (offensive to adherents of the Bahá'í Faith), or the account of Scientology's "secret doctrine" at Xenu (offensive to adherents of Scientology), or the account at Timeline of human evolution (offensive to adherents of young Earth creationism). Submitting to all these various sensitivities would make writing a neutral encyclopedia impossible.

Q2: Aren't the images of Muhammad false? A2: No claim is made about the accuracy of the depictions of Muhammad. The artists who painted these images lived hundreds of years after Muhammad and could not have seen him themselves. This fact is made absolutely clear in the image captions. The images are duly presented as notable 14th- to 17th-century Muslim artwork depicting Muhammad, not as contemporary portraits. See Depictions of Muhammad for a more detailed discussion of Muslim artwork depicting Muhammad.

Similar artistic interpretations are used in articles for Homer, Charlemagne, Paul of Tarsus, and many other historical figures. When no accurate images (i.e. painted after life, or photographs) exist, it is a longstanding practice on Misplaced Pages to incorporate images that are historically significant artwork and/or typical examples of popular depictions. Using images that readers understand to be artistic representations, so long as those images illustrate the topic effectively, is considered to be more instructive than using no image at all. Random recent depictions may be removed as undue in terms of notability, while historical artwork (in this case, of the Late Medieval or Ottoman period) adds significantly to the presentation of how Muhammad was being topicalized throughout history.

These depictions are not intended as factual representations of Muhammad's face; rather, they are merely artists' conceptions. Such portrayals generally convey a certain aspect of a particular incident, most commonly the event itself, or maybe the act, akin to the Western genre of history painting. The depictions are, thus, not meant to be accurate in the sense of a modern photograph, and are presented here for what they are: yet another form in which Muhammad was depicted.

None of these pictures hold a central position in the article, as evident by their placement, nor are they an attempt to insult the subject. Several factions of Christianity oppose the use of hagiographic imagery (even to the point of fighting over it), but the images are still on Misplaced Pages, exactly for what they are—i.e. artistic renditions of said people.

Q3: How can I hide the images using my personal Misplaced Pages settings? A3: If you do not wish to view Muhammad images, you can hide the depictions in this article from your personal account by following these steps:
  1. Sign in or create an account
  2. Click on this link to modify your personal CSS stylesheet (if no page is there already, just go ahead and create a page)
  3. Click the edit button, and add the following line: .page-Muhammad .depiction {display: none;}
  4. Click Publish changes or Publish page to save the preference

Please note that this will not hide the images for other users, or from yourself if you log out of your account.

Alternatives: If you do not have an account, and do not wish to register an account, you can disable all images on Misplaced Pages by going to the mobile version of the website (en.m.wikipedia.org), then going to "settings" and choosing "images off".

You may also block a list of specified images, following the format of this example.

Experienced JavaScript programmers can hide depictions of Muhammad on the desktop site using Greasemonkey or a similar tool.

Q4: Why does the infobox at the top of the article contain a stylized logo and not a picture of Muhammad? A4: This has been discussed many times on Talk:Muhammad and many debates can be found in the archives. Because calligraphic depictions of Muhammad are the most common and recognizable worldwide, the current consensus is to include a calligraphic depiction of Muhammad in the infobox and artists' depictions further down in the article. An RFC discussion confirmed this consensus.

Q5: Why is Muhammad's name not followed by (pbuh) or (saw) in the article? A5: Further information: Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles § Muhammad Misplaced Pages's biography style guidelines recommend omitting all honorifics, such as The Prophet, (The) Holy Prophet, (pbuh), or (saw), that precede or follow Muhammad's name. This is because many editors consider such honorifics as promoting an Islamic point of view instead of a neutral point of view which Misplaced Pages is required to maintain. Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (people) also recommends against the use of titles or honorifics, such as Prophet, unless it is the simplest and most neutral way to deal with disambiguation. When disambiguation is necessary, the recommended form is the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

Q6: Why does the article say that Muhammad is the "founder" of Islam? A6: While the Muslim viewpoint about Muhammad is already presented in the article, a Misplaced Pages biography article should emphasize historical and scholarly viewpoints. The contention that Islam has always existed is a religious belief, grounded in faith, and Misplaced Pages cannot promote religious beliefs as facts. Because no religion known as "Islam" exists in any recorded history prior to Muhammad, and Muhammad created the conditions for Islam to spread by unifying Arabia into a single religious polity, he effectively founded the establishment of Islam as the dominant religion in the region. The word "founder" is used in that context, and not intended to imply that Muhammad invented the religion he introduced to Arabia.

Q7: Why does it look like the article is biased toward secular or "Western" references? A7: Further information: Misplaced Pages:Assume good faith and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view

Accusations of bias toward Western references are often made when an objection is raised against the display of pictures of Muhammad or lack of honorifics when mentioning Muhammad. All articles on Misplaced Pages are required to present a neutral point of view. This neutrality is sometimes mistaken for hostility. Note that exactly the same guidelines apply to articles about Christianity or any other religion.

In addition, this article is hosted on the English-language Misplaced Pages. While references in languages other than English are not automatically inappropriate, English-language references are preferred, because they are of the most use to the typical reader. This therefore predisposes the material used in this article to some degree (see WP:NONENG).

Q8: Why can't I edit this article as a new or anonymous user? A8: Persistent disruption of the page has forced us to disable editing by anonymous editors and new accounts, while still allowing edits by more experienced users who are familiar with Misplaced Pages's editorial policies and guidelines. This is likely to remain the case for the foreseeable future. In any case, the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License grants everybody the right to republish this article elsewhere, and even to modify it themselves, so long as the original authors (Misplaced Pages contributors) are also credited and the derivative work is distributed under the same license.

Q9: Can censorship be employed on Misplaced Pages? A9: No. The official policy is that Misplaced Pages is not censored.

Q10: Because Muhammad married an underage girl, should the article say he was a pedophile? A10: This question has been actively discussed in Talk:Muhammad, and those discussions are archived. According to most traditional sources, Muhammad consummated his marriage to his third wife Aisha when she was nine years old. This was not considered unusual in Muhammad's culture and time period; therefore, there is no reason for the article to refer to Muhammad in the context of pedophilia. Even today, in parts of the world, the legal age of consent is as young as eleven years old, or any age inside of a marriage. In any case, any modern controversy about Aisha's age is not best dealt with in a biography about Muhammad. See the articles on Aisha and Criticism of Muhammad § Aisha for further information.
References
  1. C. (Colin) Turner, Islam: The Basics, Routledge Press, pp.34–35
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Former good articleMuhammad was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 7, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
January 8, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 30, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
July 5, 2008Good article nomineeListed
October 2, 2010Good article reassessmentKept
May 14, 2012Good article reassessmentKept
September 10, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "In the news" column on September 19, 2012.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 2, 2004, June 8, 2005, June 8, 2006, and June 8, 2018.
Current status: Delisted good article
This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconBiography: Military / Core
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.
WikiProject iconIslam: Salaf / Shi'a Islam / Sunni Islam Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Salaf task force.
This article is supported by the Shi'a Islam task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Sunni Islam task force.
WikiProject iconArab world Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSaudi Arabia Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMiddle Ages Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Biography / Medieval / Early Muslim C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Military biography task force
Taskforce icon
Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)
Taskforce icon
Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)
WikiProject iconReligion Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Archiving icon
Archives

Main archives: (Index)
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36


Image archives:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27


Mediation archives:
1. Request for Clarification/Muslim Guild
2. Statements
3. Clarity discussion/Refining positions
4. Ars' final archive
5. The rest of the mediation by Ars
Archive 6, Archive 7, Archive 8


Images Arbitration:
1. Images Aribitration Remedies
2. Arbitration related RfC



This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Section sizes
Section size for Muhammad (49 sections)
Section name Byte
count
Section
total
(Top) 8,061 8,061
Biographical sources 340 11,253
Quran 2,679 2,679
Early biographies 3,742 3,742
Hadith 4,492 4,492
Meccan years 47 39,734
Early life 9,057 9,057
Beginnings of the Quran 6,708 6,708
Opposition in Mecca 4,721 4,721
Quraysh delegation to Yathrib 2,138 2,138
Migration to Abyssinia and the incident of Satanic Verses 5,537 5,537
Attempt to establish himself in Ta'if 3,986 3,986
Isra' and Mi'raj 2,784 2,784
Migration to Medina 4,756 4,756
Medinan years 47 30,322
Building the religious community in Medina 1,680 1,680
Constitution of Medina 1,610 1,610
Beginning of armed conflict 5,204 5,204
Conflicts with Jewish tribes 3,126 3,126
Meccan retaliation 3,038 3,038
Raid on the Banu Mustaliq 1,016 1,016
Battle of the Trench 3,850 3,850
Invasion of the Banu Qurayza 4,318 4,318
Incidents with the Banu Fazara 616 616
Treaty of Hudaybiyya 2,034 2,034
Invasion of Khaybar 3,783 3,783
Final years 17 9,049
Conquest of Mecca 3,823 3,823
Subduing the Hawazin and Thaqif and the expedition to Tabuk 3,583 3,583
Farewell pilgrimage 1,626 1,626
Death 1,717 1,717
Tomb 4,055 4,055
Succession 2,038 2,038
Household 5,403 5,403
Legacy 12 27,818
Islamic tradition 4,598 14,144
Appearance and depictions 9,546 9,546
Islamic social reforms 2,283 2,283
European appreciation 7,374 7,374
Criticism 1,273 1,273
Sufism 833 833
Other religions 1,899 1,899
See also 485 485
References 15 32,018
Notes 26 26
Citations 34 34
Sources 29,223 31,943
Encyclopaedia of Islam 2,720 2,720
External links 1,254 1,254
Total 173,207 173,207

Frequently asked questions, please read before posting

Please read Talk:Muhammad/FAQ for answers to these frequently-asked questions (you need to tap "Read as wiki page" to see the relevant text):

  1. Shouldn't all the images of Muhammad be removed because they might offend Muslims?
  2. Aren't the images of Muhammad false?
  3. How can I hide the images using my personal Misplaced Pages settings?
  4. Why does the infobox at the top of the article contain a stylized logo and not a picture of Muhammad?
  5. Why is Muhammad's name not followed by (pbuh) or (saw) in the article?
  6. Why does the article say that Muhammad is the "founder" of Islam?
  7. Why does it look like the article is biased towards secular or "Western" references?
  8. Why can't I edit this article as a new or anonymous user?
  9. Can censorship be employed on Misplaced Pages?
  10. Because Muhammad married an underage girl, should the article say he was a pedophile?

This section is for mobile-device users who do not see the normal talk page header. This section should not have any comments, so that it stays on this talk page and does not get archived.

GA Reassessment

Muhammad

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history· Article talk (edit | history· WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: While instability is not in itself a reason to delist, poor quality sourcing is; the discussions on the talk page constitute, in my view, consensus that the sourcing has been degraded. Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

It has recently been brought to light that this page and its sourcing have been altered fairly wholesale since the page was last reviewed and kept as GA, and that there is little reason to believe the level of former quality has been maintained; on the contrary, recent informal assessments by editors have uncovered significant issues in terms of prior content and source removal, as well as in terms of the quality of new sourcing and the resulting balance of the page and its contents. The sum conclusion of the current state of affairs has already been assessed by several editors as no longer meeting GA standard. For details, see the existing talk page discussion at Talk:Muhammad#Removal of "good article" status, as well as the broader discussion entitled Talk:Muhammad#Recent neutrality concerns, and other subsequent talk page discussions. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Fails Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria It is not stable due to edit warring on the page....: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Moxy- 04:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Even excluding the wholesale rewriting the article has undergone recently, 2012 is a long time ago, and the article quality standards back then were arguably lower. I do not see a reason to maintain GA status given the current edit warring. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA or Featured nomination

Is there any plan for this article to be made up to the standards of GA or even Featured. This is a very high importance figure and the article should be made up to the best standards. If there is any plan to enact a nomination please let me know so I can help. Titan2456 (talk) 21:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I would recommend you take a look at the GA criteria, and maybe see if there are places in the articles that you could help bring up to those criteria. If you have questions, let me know: GA and FA are different processes and one generally takes place before the other. Remsense ‥  21:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
It was GA for a long while until now-blocked editor Kaalakaa took it upon himself to rewrite most of the article over a period of several months starting in Jun 2023. This talk page history has records of some contention that caused.
One of the fallouts was this article losing its GA status, because the article that earned GA wasn't the same article as what it eventually became. Kaalakaa's edits weren't bad, they were overall improvements I think, but his view on what sources are reliable, and his interpretation of them, have been questioned.
What needs to happen to restore GA status is to go through every one of his hundreds of edits with a fine-tooth comb and check the sources. This is a big job because not all sources are available online, and not all aren't behind paywalls.
As for FA, that isn't feasible. FA articles are unprotected when featured on the main page, and this Muhammmad article experiences enough disruption when it's unprotected that it would be impossible to keep it free from disruption by people who take offense at its content if it became FA. I mean, do you know of any article about a contentious topic that ever became a Featured Article? ~Anachronist (talk) 02:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
So the main problem is with the citations, thank you, I will try to check them but as you said it is a long process. As for contentious FAs Jesus is one. Titan2456 (talk) 20:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
It isn't just the sources. Many of the sources are good sources, but the interpretation needs checking. Some of the sources may be questionable. A recent example is The Generalship of Muhammad: Battles and Campaigns of the Prophet of Allah by Russ Rodgers, published by the University Press of Florida. Archived discussions here, here, here (about 2/3 the way into the conversation), and on RSN, is that the book includes extraordinary claims that demand support of multiple reliable sources, yet the author is rather obscure (more of a hobbyist historian) having been largely ignored by academia with few citations. The book may be useful for some military tactics, though. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Here's my question: if some of these sources are so hard to find (acknowledging that's not inherently a criterion for reliability)—shouldn't we consider removing material that's only verifiable in those sources per WP:DUE, given the enormity of the topic? This article is over 13k words long—frankly, to me that always indicates that we should be cutting it down somewhere, and this seems like obvious low-hanging fruit. Remsense ‥  09:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
That particular source by Rodgers is a candidate for removal, yes. I can't say about the others. I suggest you start going through Kaalakaa's edits starting in June 2023, and take notes. He put a lot of work into it, most of it good, but such an overwhelming amount that the other regulars here haven't found the spare time to check it all. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
That is my impression as well. Remsense ‥  21:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
I have removed the Rodgers source for now Titan2456 (talk) 22:40, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
I am going to remove all the citations which cannot be found in the Household section. All the ones not found already have more than one citation, so I would not be removing any information. Titan2456 (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
The more critical task would be checking whether what the Misplaced Pages article says aligns with what the citations say, in proper context. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

I find the current opening paragraph to be problematic, in that it emphasizes the fact that Muhammad was "an Arab religious, social, and political leader" over the fact that he was "the founder of Islam". I tried to survey how some other encyclopedias introduce him in their very first sentence, and this is what I found (I'll omit technical information like transliteration of his name and his dates for brevity):

Muhammad was the founder of Islam and the proclaimer of the Qurʾān.
— Britannica

Muhammad, also known as the Messenger of God, or the Prophet, founder of the religion of Islam and of the Muslim community.
— Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions, p 754

Muhammad, the prophet who, according to Muslims, received God's revelation in the Qur'an, and established Islam. His importance for Muslims is emphasized by the central Islamic profession of faith: "There is no god but God, and Muhammad is his (sic) Messenger."
— The Encyclopedia of World Religions, p 304

Muhammad, the prophet and founder of Islam and that faith's most important and significant messenger. He received his first revelation of the Holy Koran via the angel Gabriel when he was circa forty years old.
— Encyclopedia of World Religions, "Mohammed"

Muhammad is acknowledged by more than one billion Muslims as the last messenger of God. It was through him that the Quranic passages, which his followers believe present the word of God, had been revealed to guide the nascent community through its predicaments. The religion that Muhammad preached is called Islam, meaning submission to God; its creed asserts that there is but one God and that Muhammad is the Messenger of God.
— Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, p 478

Muhammad is revered by Muslims as the prophet to whom the Quran, the sacred scripture of Islam, was revealed.
— Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd edition, p 6220

In other words, every single of the encyclopedia above introduces Muhammad as the founder of Islam/Muslim community and the proclaimer of the Qur'an, much more than being an Arab social and political leader. I think the opening paragraph can still mention Muhammad's reforms, but not in the first sentence.VR (Please ping on reply) 03:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I'd say feel free to propose a rearrangement of the lead. WP:LEAD requires that the lead be a concise overview of the contents of the article, and insofar as the article goes into depth (likely more than other encyclopedias) about political leadership, I don't see the ordering of facts in the lead as a problem, but I don't object to changing it. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Another one (already cited in the article):

The Prophet of Islam was a religious, political, and social reformer who gave rise to one of the great civilizations of the world. From a modern, historical perspective, Muḥammad was the founder of Islam. From the perspective of the Islamic faith, he was God 's Messenger (rasūl Allāh), called to be a “warner,” first to the Arabs and then to all humankind.
— The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World, Muḥammad

So I propose this is the opening paragraph:

Muhammad (/moʊˈhɑːməd/; Arabic: مُحَمَّد, romanized: Muḥammad, lit. 'praiseworthy'; ; c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was the founder of Islam. According to Muslims, he was the last prophet sent by God, to preach and confirm the monotheistic teachings of Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other prophets. Muhammad's life and normative examples, along with the Quran, form the basis for Islamic theology and law. Muhammad established the first Islamic state, which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization.

Definitely open to suggestions.VR (Please ping on reply) 22:16, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. 142.105.69.34 (talk) 11:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
maybe "final" is more correct than "last"? — 🧀Cheesedealer 02:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
The final prophet isn't "according to Muslims" it's "according to most Muslims" or "according to nearly all Muslims". Amadiyya consider themselves Muslims but they recognize a prophet after Muhammad. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't see the problem. He was "an Arab religious, social, and political leader" because he was the founder of Islam. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I agree, the proposed replacement isn't really an improvement over what we have. The lead sentence already says he's the founder. Maneuvering the words around to get "founder" to appear earlier in the sentence isn't making the lead paragraph better. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:10, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Heck, the fact that he founded Islam is only really important because he was able to use it to become the dominant religious, social, and political leader. Lots and lots of religious movements are started and more or less quickly fade away. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Can you cite several sources, maybe a dozen, that introduce him as "an Arab religious, social, and political leader"? Because I've cited above 7 above that introduce him as a founder of Islam (or some variant of that), and could probably easily find a dozen more. Lets focus on the sources.VR (Please ping on reply) 02:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
I see that this description may neglect the theological message he delivers. He did had unique ideas by subjugating the Arabian pantheon under one supreme deity he later identified with the God of the Talmudic tradition. He did have unique contributations in matters of theology as well. But this shouldn't mean that the part about his political identity should be removed, maybe just emphazize more his role as a religious figure? VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
To me, the current lead fits the best as the proposed doesn't make the opening paragraph more appropriate for the figure than the current. Even before what is known as foundational event of the religion, being active in Arab tribal meetings, setting the Black stone and his participation in Pre-Islamic tribal wars (as sources mention) also indicate sort of his social as well as political role (although not as leading person) and not as religious role at that time. Though the latter role got widely known. MSLQr (talk) 19:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
And that's what this is about: what is Muhammad known the most for. No one is saying those other parts of his life shouldn't be in the lead, but we shouldn't claim somehow his early life is more important than his founding of Islam.VR (Please ping on reply) 01:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
@VenusFeuerFalle I didn't propose removing his political identity but rather writing it as "Muhammad established the first Islamic state, which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization." This is not inconsistent with Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Thomas Jefferson, Muhammad Ali of Egypt and Muhammad Ali Jinnah all being introduced as (one of) the founders of the Republic of Turkey, United States, modern Egypt and Pakistan, respectively, in the first sentence. What do you think was his political identity? VR (Please ping on reply) 02:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Another one:

In the perspective of history, the origin of Islam can be traced back to the prophetic career of Muhammad, its historical founder in the first third of the seventh century.
— The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, "Muhammad", p 367

VR (Please ping on reply) 03:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Why not just shift the word "founder" forward in the existing opening sentence? You rewrote the entire first paragraph, and to me it isn't an improvement over what we already have. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Like I said, I'm open to rewording. Lets consider your proposal: "Muhammad was the founder of Islam and an Arab political, social and religious leader." That would be an improvement over the current version. But we can improve it further:
  • Isn't it redundant to describe him both as a "founder of Islam" and a "religious leader"? The former just about covers the entirety of his religious career.
  • I replaced "Arab political and social leader" with "Muhammad established the first Islamic state, which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization". Isn't that more specific?
VR (Please ping on reply) 21:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
To your points: Sure, "religious leader" could be removed. The second replacement is fine too. It's your middle sentence in your proposal that isn't an improvement over what we have already. How about:
Muhammad (/moʊˈhɑːməd/; Arabic: مُحَمَّد, romanized: Muḥammad, lit. 'praiseworthy'; ; c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) is the founder of Islam, and an Arab social and political leader who established the first Islamic state that was the precuror to the Islamic civilization. According to Islamic doctrine,...
~Anachronist (talk) 07:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
That's a longish opening sentence. I sort of get the point that the OP makes at the beginning of this thread. But I think that the reason the wording kinda underplays the founding of Islam is not so much its position in the sentence but the use of "and" to add it. It gives it a "tacked on" feel. It seems right to begin with the "personal" fundamentals about him: that he was an Arab leader - though the "social" descriptor doesn't add much, IMO. My suggestion would be closer to the current wording but: Muhammad...was an Arab religious and political leader who founded Islam. DeCausa (talk) 08:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for making suggestions, its important we make them. But I don't think yours is an improvement. Calling Muhammad "an Arab religious and political leader who founded Islam" makes it sound like he was a politician first who decided to create a religion. Historically, we know it was the other way around; he began religious preaching in 610 CE, and only founded a state in 622 CE.VR (Please ping on reply) 05:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Just to add that the opening formula of "X...was ...who " is a common solution across many WP bios - from Christopher Columbus to Martin Luther King Jr.. DeCausa (talk) 09:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, that was kind of my point earlier. I think the existing opening sentence is fine. If it can be improved by giving more prominence to the position of "founder" then that's good too but I'm not really happy with the alternative so far, including my own suggestion. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I think "founder of Islam" fits really well as both a personal description as well as what he did. I'm fine with "an Arab social and political leader who established the first Islamic state that was the precuror to the Islamic civilization" anywhere in the first paragraph but probably not the first sentence.VR (Please ping on reply) 05:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
@Vice regent: It is important to mention he was a Arab leader given that it is through his leadership and those following that not only Islam but also the Arabic language and culture spread from its homeland across most of the Middle East and North Africa (and as a language of scholarship, much further). Erp (talk) 03:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm fine to mention him as an Arab leader, but he must be mentioned as the founder of Islam first. That is the absolute one thing he is the most notable for. Everything else is important, but secondary. VR (Please ping on reply) 05:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
@Erp, also can you quote sources that describe his influences on Arabs that you mentioned above? It will help us in seeing what wording scholars use to describe that and then perhaps we can mimic that wording.VR (Please ping on reply) 05:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Well Britannica has "For instance, a Syriac chronicle dating from about 640 mentions a battle between the Romans and “the Arabs of Muhammad,” and an Armenian history composed about 660 describes Muhammad as a merchant who preached to the Arabs and thereby triggered the Islamic conquests. Such evidence provides sufficient confirmation of the historical existence of an Arab prophet by the name of Muhammad." The earliest evidence of Muhammad outside of Islamic sources describe Muhammad as an Arab leader. BTW are you saying that Muhammad should not be described as an Arab leader in the lead? Erp (talk) 14:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World says that Muslims believe he was "God 's Messenger first to the Arabs and then to all humankind." I'm fine with describing him as an Arab leader both in the lead and the first paragraph but not the first sentence, I'll explain in a table below (English Misplaced Pages FAs and GAs on early Islamic leaders don't tend to call them Arabs in the very first sentence). One way to describe his Arab-ness would be:
"Muhammad established the first Islamic state in Arabia, which later gave rise to the Islamic civilization. He also proclaimed the Qur'an, the central religious text of Islam and widely regarded as a masterpiece of Arabic literature." VR (Please ping on reply) 21:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 November 2024

FAQ No. 5
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hasbbdbee (talk) 16:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC) Add Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam by the side of The name of our prophet.

 Not done. Muhammad's full name is already given and sources are cited. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 November 2024 (2)

FAQ No. 5
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hasbbdbee (talk) 16:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/Muhammad change it to https://en.wikipedia.org/Muhammad+Sallallahu+Alaihi+Wasallam

cause it is must to read this thing beside our prophet name for muslim

Hi Hasbbdee. Please read the FAQ at the top of this talk page, as this is a commonly discussed issue. Thanks! Gaismagorm (talk) 16:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
 Not done. See WP:COMMONNAME for information about how articles are titled. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 November 2024

FAQ No. 5
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

My request is to write the name of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him with respect and not only his name, so please write “Prophet Muhammad” with respect 156.215.43.238 (talk) 11:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Please read the FAQ section at the top of this page as well as Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles § Muhammad to see why we don't do this. Thanks! Gaismagorm (talk) 11:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
also  Not done Gaismagorm (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages is a secular encyclopaedia that is not bound by Muslim custom. 2401:7000:CA83:7400:8559:E255:3053:DFE6 (talk) 06:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Muhammad's birth date is 571 so it should be changed to 571 from 570 Berkyyy (talk) 18:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --AntiDionysius (talk) 18:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia of Islam source

Hello! I have been looking over the sources of Islam-related pages and one I find consistently is "Buhl and Welch 1993", which is only linked to a purchase page for the book.

Yesterday I find out that it is actually available online. This got me thinking: is it better to leave the source's link as it is, or should we link the aforementioned reference.

In addition, I cannot find Buhl or Welch's names as the authors of the Muhammad section which is most frequently used. I can only Trude Ehlert. I would be grateful if somebody clears up my confusion. Daminb (talk) 06:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

See p. 376 (left column). AstroLynx (talk) 13:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! Daminb - Here 13:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
F. Buhl was the author of the Muhammad section in the first edition of The Encyclopaedia of Islam (1934), which in the 1993 edition was revised and updated by A.T. Welch .AstroLynx (talk) 14:29, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I've bundled a citation underneath for the new online edition of that article. Remsense ‥  07:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I assume the above user meant that the archive.org link should replace the |url= in the existing main Encylopaedia of Islam source, not that a new citation should be added with a url going to what is for them also inaccessible content. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 17:41, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
That was my inquiry pretty much. Daminb - Here 17:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change date of birth, its 22nd Apr, 571 AbdulHakeeem27 (talk) 09:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

What source do you have? Consider Mawlid#Date. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 January 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change leading sentence from Muhammad (c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious, social, and political leader to Muhammad (c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious leader" as per MOS:FIRST that states: "Do not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead, spread the relevant information out over the entire lead.". The lead sentence should stick to what he was primarily known for. The infobox is there to include additional occupations. The world knows him as a religious leader, not as a political and social leader. For example, Muhammad Ali was a prominent philanthropist and poet but since the world knows him as a professional boxer, we have that on his article. Mirza Elia (talk) 08:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't find the current writing particularly overloaded/everything. Social/political is quite relevant, religious too limited. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Political can arguably be relevant as he was the founder and ruler of a state but social is definitely not that relevant. Just because a few social norms changed during Muhammad's lifetime doesn't mean he's widely known as a social leader in the world. Major encycloepdias' introductory sentence just calls him a religious leader or the founder of Islam i.e. Muhammad (born c. 570, Mecca, Arabia —died June 8, 632, Medina) was the founder of Islam and the proclaimer of the Qurʾān.. Best case scenario is having Muhammad (c. 570 – 8 June 632 CE) was an Arab religious and political leader". Mirza Elia (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
I'd be fine with removing 'social'. It does seem redundant. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Agree? Srnec (talk) 04:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Drive by comment: I too do not see the need for the term "social". I'm not sure what constitutes a "social leader" to begin with. Anonymous 04:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
same Rainsage (talk) 06:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Done. Rainsage (talk) 08:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 January 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Dear (who will take time and read my request) :

I hope you are doing well. I recently came across an article featuring images of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). While I truly appreciate the effort in sharing insights across different perspectives, I wanted to kindly bring something to your attention regarding Islamic teachings.

In Islam, depicting the Prophet is avoided as a way to maintain respect and prevent any unintended idolization. The Prophet said, “The people who will be most severely punished on the Day of Judgment will be the image-makers” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 5950). Additionally, there’s a general discouragement of creating images of living beings, as mentioned in the hadith: “Those who make images will be punished on the Day of Resurrection. It will be said to them, ‘Bring to life that which you have created’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 5951).

Out of respect for these principles and the significance they hold for Muslim readers, I kindly request the removal of these images, if possible. This small adjustment would greatly enhance the inclusivity and respectfulness of the piece without detracting from its value.

Thank you so much for your understanding. Hanenbou11 (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: see faq 1 Cannolis (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories: