Talk:Zaynab bint Ali
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia'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. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. | |
| This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page
|
||
 |
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Salafs article assessment section, a WikiProject related to the Salaf. It has been rated - on the quality scale. |
 |
Zaynab bint Ali is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] First revisions
Aladdin, I ended up doing a little research and making some major changes. I removed some material that I thought was dubious -- but not all. I don't have ANY reliable sources on this matter. I don't have the relevant volumes of Ibn Sa'd, Baladhuri, or Tabari. You may object to removing the link to the article re intercession at graves, but the link seemed tenuous, and the statement that ALL Sunni Muslims disapprove of such intercession is wrong. Many Sunni Sufis make pilgrimages to the graves of famous Sufi pir hoping to receive baraka. You may not approve of such practices, but they do exist, and the worshippers are generally conceded to be Sunni. Sorry if this response to your revision is disappointing. I do appreciate your work in removing so much of the Shi'a rhetoric. Zora 02:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Zora, thank you for responding to my request for review. I have no objections to any of your changes. I came across this article while I was browsing the contributions of certain known, "passionate" Shi'a editors, looking for major POV imbalances. This article fit the bill immensely. If you examine my changes, you will see that the intercession of saints point was not mine, nor was the Sunni view of the same. I merely reworded for grammar. I am fine with removing it, the need to link it is not strong. As for Sufism, yes what you say is true. Academically speaking, I believe it is also true that a significant number of Sunni schools disqualify Sufism as Islam at all. Tangled web, eh?--AladdinSE 03:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
i was just going to add that in the introduction to this article it reads that her father is the last sunni caliph this statement is incorrect as Ali is the fourth caliph and not the last- others do follow him!
[edit] Binte VS Bint
I tried my best to explain our friend Grenavitar that binte is the right way of saying daughter of in Arabic but he keeps on insisting that it should be bint. Bint has a spelling mistake since it leaves out the -e- from binte. Whoever started writing Islamic article in on wikipedia wrote the article with acb bint acb and acb bin acb. Which are wrong because in Arabic the right way of saying daughter of is Binte and the correct way of saying son of is Ibn. Salman
I am sorry but this is wrong. In Arabic, the word for son is "ibnun" and daughter is "bintun". When one of these words is followed by a Noun, the construction becomes "ibnu _____" or "bintu _____" in the Nominative case. The Accusative case is "Inna ibna ____" and "Inna binta _____", and the genitive case is "fi ibni _____" and "fi binti _____"- Thus, if you would fully vowel it would be Zaynab bintu Ali and this is how it is pronounced in formal Arabic. Most of the time however, there is a pause after the word "bint" which is why the Islamicists transcribe it as "bint".
The construction where you would say in all cases "Zaynab binte Ali" is in the Persian language (and thereby also in Urdu, Turkish, etc), which is a grammatical form unique to those languages. The Arabic language does not support this construction. This is most clear if you look at the word "Abdullah", which means slave of Allah. If the "binte" is Arabic, then you would say "Abde Allah" which is clearly incorrect.
[edit] Unsourced material
The entire story in the introduction about Zaynab's birth and Ali and Husain's reaction is unsourced, and I would wager disagreeable for most Sunnis. Maybe the person who posted it should work on finding sources? If not then it seems logical to tag it as questionable until then.
[edit] Tags/Edits
Much of this article is unsourced and seems quoted verbatim from Shia hagiographical texts, which makes it unsuitable for Wikipedia. Thus, it seems reasonable to tag this article
Someone reversed my edits without explanation; the bint/binte issue has been outlined above. It is incorrect Arabic to write the latter. I changed Ali (cousin-brother of Prophet) to just cousin, because this is what the facts bear out. The notion that Ali is a brother to the Prophet is an OPINION of the Shia scholars in a metaphorical sense. There was also a mention about Ali taking his rightful position as Imam which is POV. Finally, several times I swtiched Holy Prophet to Prophet, because the former is stating an opinion and presenting it as fact. The reader of an encyclopedia, and the majority of Muslims, would disagree that the Prophet is holy in terms of being divine. For you to state this in an encyclopedia is POV.
Do not reverse the changes I mentioned above without discussion, otherwise it will be vandalism. 69.113.242.250 12:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Spasage, your reverses amount to vandalism. There is an active discussion here on the basis of which some changes were made, and for you to reverse them is vandalism--if we report this to Wikipedia, this article will be locked, which none of us want. 69.113.242.250 21:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Added a Sunni View point link also to maintain NPOV
- KazakhPol and SmackBot, can you please indicate the things that you disagree with in this article. I tried writing this article from a neutral point of view and if you think that this article is not written from a neutral POV then kindly please help me by indicating the errors, and I will try my best to fix them. Can you please tell me the sentences where you think the neutrality of the article is being damaged? Please don’t ruin the look of this article by placing some tags on it. Thank You Salman 18:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Salman, I haven't been near this article in months and I'm distressed by what I see. For one thing, it's a direct copyvio from [1]. It has no references and is pure Shi'a hagiography. I'll see if I can find an earlier version and restore it. It was tolerable once. Zora 21:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
OK, restored the older version. Please take a look. Zora 21:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Zora, can you please takeout sometime out of your busy schedule, to go over these websites.
- And while you are at it, after viewing all these website can you please tell me which website copied its material from another website. I am reverting this article and please don’t revert it again before this disputed is finished. Thank you Salman 01:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Answers.com copies from WP, and thus copied your copyvio. I don't know which of the Shi'a sites copied from each other, but that doesn't excuse copyvio on WP. I'm reverting back, on copyvio and neutrality grounds. Zora 02:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please Zora stop reverting the article because this dispute is not over yet. You are saying that the material in this article has been copied from another website. Can you please tell me from which website the material has been copied from? And then I will revert the article for you. Please please please, do not revert the page again before we settle our dispute. Just prove that the information has been copied from another and please also tell me how the information of my article showed up on those other websites. Thank You Salman 02:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Salman, the Al-Islam website is long-established website, and the material on Zaynab is credited to M. H. Bilgrami, who apparently wrote a book published in Pakistan and agreed to let his book be featured on this website. Are you claiming that M. H. Bilgram copied from Wikipedia? That's just plain incredible. Yes, some sites, like allexperts and answers.com copy from WP, but Al-Islam obviously didn't. The material you're defending is copyvio, as well as being unsourced, unreliable, and hagiographic. Please stop defending it. Zora 02:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- And what about websites like almujtaba.com, nuradeen.com, and al-shia.com, who did they copied from. Fine I agree that some of the things in this article relates to the material written in the book of M. H. Bilgrami. But that doesn’t mean we have to delete the whole article and start from scratch. We can paraphrase some of the sentences that relate to the book of M. H. Bilgrami. Thank You Salman 04:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
The article reads more like a hagiography than a biography. The sourced facts need to be sorted out from the legends and traditions about Zaynab. Kerowyn Leave a note 00:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- That's because Salman has copied most of it from Shi'a Muslim websites. I just reverted to a less hagiographic version. Please help me keep it neutral. Salman keeps reverting to the pious version. Zora 06:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
