Talk:Battle of Siffin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Shi'a Islam, a WikiProject related to the Shi'a Islam. It has been rated - on the quality scale.

	This 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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
More information... PEER This article has had a peer review which is now archived.
Related task forces... Medieval warfare task force (c. 500–c. 1500)

[edit] Does This article contain Shi'a or Sunni POV or not?

This article does not consider the Shi'a POV, and i actually question whether it even is the Sunni POV. Striver 19:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Given that the Shia commanders are all described as "brave" and all of Ali's actions are portrayed as upright and saintly (not that they weren't!!!) while no positive adjectives are used to describe the Sunni; given that the references are both Shia; given that all attempts at negotiation are attributed to Ali, it is fairly obvious that this is on the Shia side of the fence. It's close enough to neutral not to be a problem though. I hope this article doesn't become burdened with with massive bias like the other sunni/shia contested ones. Maronz 03:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this article is up to Wikipedia's standards. Firstly, the language is unprofessional. For example, Malik Ashtar should not be described as "The brave commander." If the author thinks Ashtar's bravery (or cowardice) is worth mentioning, he should write "Malik Ashtar, famous for his bravery at such-and-such a battle" and then give a citation. Simply describing him as "The brave commander" with nothing to back it up looks incredibly biased. Secondly, the article contains what can at best be seen as errors and inaccuracies. At worst, they could be seen as deliberate distortions. For example, the traditional Shia complaint is not that Muawiyah made the caliphate absolute, but that he made it dynastic. 86.135.207.143 21:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC) Salim.

Hello my brothers, Salim and Maronz, How are you? Firstly, I would like to tackle the issue of neutrality of this article. Well I believe that this article is neutral and because I don’t see a sentence that contains the SAW, AS, or P.B.U.H after the names of highly respected individuals in the history of Islam, even Shi’as’ Mola Imam Ali (AS) isn’t stated as Imam Ali (AS). Secondly, Malik Ashtar is described by the historians as a brave, loyal, honest, and religious man. Saying that, Malik Ashtar was a famous for his bravery and he was a brave commander would not be a POV since it is published in some of the books that contain information about him. Unfortunately I don’t have a book that contains information about Malik Ashtar or I would give you guys the title of that book so you can read it as well. Because of these reasons I don’t think that this article is being said from a Shi’a POV or a Sunni POV. This article is just telling what happened in the battle of Siffin in a neutral way. Thank You Salman

This article is strongly biased against Ali(AS). Definitely Shi'a POV rejects this article. Even sunnis see Ali(AS) as the fourth Rightly Guided Caliphate and a strong faithfull muslim . --194.80.32.8 01:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The article was changed without discussing the issue on the talk page first

Islami my brother, please try your best to discuss the matter on the talk page before you actually make the changes in the article. It is very important to discuss the issue (why you want to change the article or a paragraph) on the talk page first because by doing that you will inform other editors of why the article is being changed. If a sentence sounds like a Shi’a or a Sunni POV to you might not sound like a POV at all. I am reverting the article because you didn’t tell anyone (didn’t discuss on the talk page) because changing the article. Thank You Salman

I did not "completely change the article". See the edit history before you accuse me with that. I am only changing the numbers of troops based on primary sources. You on the other side is not only removing my changes, but also trying to completely change the article to a more POV version. --Islamic 03:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

How is the article POV, I wasn’t there when the Battle was being fought. I am just saying what I absorb from my sources. My sources are in the external link, you can also check them out. I am sorry because I may have miss read the history of the article. But someone was changing the article after my edition without discussing the changes n the talk page before actually making the changes. Thank You Salman

[edit] My changes to the article

I've substantially rewritten the article, because it badly needed it. My priorities were to present the subject in more neutral terms, correct some factual errors, flag up divergent views ("Sunni belive... Shia believe"), eliminate speculative material, introduce more specificity, and provide basic analysis. I'm also aware, though, that there's a lot more work to be done. This is a very important battle in the history of Islam and it deserves a good article - and my attempt is not good enough. So what else needs to be done?