Talk:Native Americans and Islam

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 native americans and islam (such as the villages in chiapas that have begun converting to islam in the last ten years). 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 19:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree his sources are in fact POV, one of which is a message board! Another thing, one of the links that the creator linked to, a supposed Cherokee chief by the name of Ramadhan Ibn Wati is in fact really Cherokee leader and Confederate general Stand Watie! http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/sequoyah1.htm

Abstrakt 19:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes thats right and he was considered a muslim and he gave his son a muslim name. Being a conferderate general and a muslim at the same time is entirely possible. There are dozens of recorded cases of Muslims fighting with the british and the americans in the civil war.

If you have an issue with a specific reference then highlight that specific issue, because As far as i can see this article has more references as a percentage than around 90% of the entire wikipedia pages. 81.178.73.30 08:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

That is pseudo history for you to revise in such a manner, it is documented that Confederate general Stand Watie was a Christian. There is NO such Cherokee chief named Ramadhan Ibn Wati in all of Cherokee history. The only reference, I can find of this "Ramadhan Ibn Wati" is from *surprise* from a story on a message board [[1]] written by Mahir Abdal Razzaq-El. The chief of the Cherokee in 1866, who I believe Mahir Abdal Razzaq-El is alluding to, was General Stand Watie, who, although being chosen by a faction "mix-bloods" as their chief, was not the principle chief of the Cherokees - which was Chief John Ross. Stand Watie's father's name was Oo-wati in Cherokee, meaning "the ancient one". His father was also a Christian and went by his Christian name of David Oowatie. His mother was half-Cherokee, and was also a Christian and known by the name Susannah. Chief Stand Watie's Cherokee name was Takertawker, which means "he stands". Stand Watie, who was also a Christian, was given the Christian name of Isaac, however, he preferred the English version of his name "Stand" to the name Isaac. Later, the "Oo" was dropped from "Oo-watie" and the family name became Watie.

So I ask of you 81.178.73.30, where are the sources stating that Stand Watie was a Muslim Cherokee chief? Where are your sources for this? If I were to get in touch with the Cherokee Nation, they would agree with me, that you are doing nothing more than making up history. You have NO source for this, yet you keep on pushing your revision of history. Just because you happen to say he was a Muslim Cherokee chief means nothing, please give us sources for this, otherwise you're just blowing hot air and wasting your time trying to push your POV. Unless you can come up with a reliable source proving that Stand Watie was really a man named "Ramadhan Ibn Wati", then you have nothing to talk about. Abstrakt 00:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I put in a call for assistance at the wikiproject Islam message board, so hopefully some other subject matter experts will come along and lend their opinion/assistance; it is going to be quite a job attending to this and other related ones.--cjllw | TALK 00:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll also note that the "language connections" are ludicrous. For example, "Chicago" does come from an Algonquian language, Potawatomi, where the word is zhgagozh, meaning "wild onion" (cognate with Ojibwe zhigaagwanzh, as CJLippert points out). But this word is not monomorphemic. It consists of zhgagw, meaning "skunk" or "smelly" (English "skunk" comes from a related Algonquian language), and wanzh, meaning "bush" or "plant". Now, I have no idea if Turkish "Chee-kahkahl" (you know, considering there's a standard orthography for Turkish, it sure would be helpful if the Turkish words were written in it...) can be segmented or not. If it can be, the idea of a link is effectively proven false. Even if not, the only possibility is a loan from an Algonquian language into Turkish; in that case, the word in Turkish would just have meant "wild onion"; Turkish speakers would not have known how the Algonquian word segmented and what the meanings of its individual parts were. Since the article, of course, does not even identify the "Indian language", doesn't use the standard Turkish orthography, and gets the translation of the "Indian word" somewhat wrong, it's clear that this isn't a theory that is well-supported by any facts.

Whatever. I'm rambling. The point is, just looking over this article, it's clearly utterly POV and, I would say, unencyclopedic. Wikipedia doesn't need to be reporting on every crackpot pseudoscientific theory a handful of people come up with. One more comment: what's with the references at the bottom? They don't make any frigging sense! How is someone supposed to verify the claims made in the article with that mess of a references section? --Miskwito 01:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sir Francis Drake and the Lost Colony?

One of the absurb claims by this article is that the Lost Colony of Roanoke Island was made up primarily of Muslim prisoners who were liberated Turkish and Moorish slaves. Abstrakt 04:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Well if you actually bothered to read the reference, you will see that Documents in LONDON (you know the capital of England) confirmed turks where left there (after being rescued from a spanish gallery), and some where taken back to London to be exchanged with British Prisioners held by the Turks and the Moroccons. Did you not know that at that period the Turkish and Moroccon navy where the most powerful in the region. 81.178.73.30 08:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Famous Native American Muslims

The creator of the page(7day claims that "Mahir Abdal-Razzaaq El a cherokee blackfoot and Muslim who writes for the Muslim Publication the Message."

However http://muslimspace.com/blog/view/?ID=7326 dissects Mahir Abdal-Razzaaq El as a complete and utter fraud. My advice to 7day please research your sources more carefully next time! 209.247.22.37 05:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

My advise to 209.247.22.37 is to read the article a little more closely, and maybe actually bother to read the article by Abdal-Razzaaq, you will then find that this page does not reference his works AT ALL. but is mainly sourced from the books written by Jerald F Dirks, and Fell. 81.178.73.30 08:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)