Talk:Pre-Columbian Islamic contact theories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] POV

This article does not represent a scientific viewpoint - but a tendentious attempt at rewriting history. There are no conclusive evidence, or even evidence which makes probable, any precolombian contact between africa or arabia and the americas. The present article presents speculation and myth as historic fact, it doesn't cite any opposing viewpoints even though they are the (vast) majority and it doesn't adress the actual historically documented instances of early moslem presence in the americas (all of which are post-colombian). The article is extremely biased and written so tendentiously as to almost appear a hoax.The articles creator removed the disputed tag stating only that his references are not POV, which they clearly are, since no mainstream scholars at all are referenced.Maunus 19:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I've moved this article to a title which is less presumptive that such contacts ever took place, and had a go at rewriting the lead in what is intended to be a more balanced and contextual assessment of these claims.

I realise that this rewrite is open at the moment to a charge of "hey, no sources!", and I will see if I can track some down which discuss (in the contrary view) these claims are not held in high regard by mainstream historians.

However, given that the claims in favour of pre-Columbian Islamic contact are few and far between, and more often than not it seems apparently made by rather peripheral characters (eg the Malian playwright Diwala; I guess Menzies would be an exception) it may be a little difficult in tracking down specific sources which have even bothered to counteract these claims.

Even so, I think my rewrite does not state anything which would not be reasonably accepted as true; I would be happy though to debate and consider the point if anyone has objections to it.--cjllw | TALK 02:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zheng He

7day: If you want to mention he Zheng He map then do it in a way that makes it obvious why such a mention is relevant to the topic. As you wrote it it mentioned neither zheng he or islam or what the relevance of the map is to thinking that moslems were present in precolumbian america. Right now it is a non-sequitur within this article (which is a non sequitur by itself) but I am not going to rewrite it for you so I'll cut it untill you write it in a manner that proves it to be relevant.Maunus 17:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] intresting

Interesting topic... --Striver 16:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)