Talk:Fatima: Difference between revisions

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2021

Hello There is a huge mistake in the information regarding Fatima D/O Muhammad (PBUH) She wasn't killed by Hazrat Umer Ibn Khattab , Her reason of death was deep sorrow after Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) left this world, Umar ibn Khattab was 2nd Caliph of Islam and was the close friend of Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) Please take a look upon this request Wajeehkhan90 (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Please Take A Look Upon The Information Regarding Death Of Fatima D/O Muhammad (PBUH) Wajeehkhan90 (talk) 12:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello There is a huge mistake in the information regarding Fatima D/O Muhammad (PBUH) She wasn't killed by Hazrat Umer Ibn Khattab , Her reason of death was deep sorrow after Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) left this world, Umar ibn Khattab was 2nd Caliph of Islam and was the close friend of Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) Please take a look upon this request Wajeehkhan90 (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Truth929 (talk) 20:04, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2021

Change the pronouns he/his used for Fatima to she/her 84.255.184.157 (talk) 00:03, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. It appears the pronouns are correct. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:15, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I fixed a few of them in the article. (his-->her) Albertatiran (talk) 06:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

typo

God's Apostle foretold that Fatimah will the first person to enter Heaven, while a Shia hadith adds that Fatimah will take with her to Heaven everyone who loved her and lived righteously like her.

the first clause of the sentence above seems to be missing a verb LeesOtter (talk) 14:46, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Fixed! Albertatiran (talk) 15:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

A daughter or The daughter

Some Shia editor wrote 'the daughter' of Khadija.... instead of 'a daughter'. It is to be noted that Khadija had three more daughters Umm Kulthum, Ruqayyah and Zaynab. Calling Fatimah a daughter is a clear POV Shia view. The view is not even found in any Shia hadith. Sunnis, Zaydi Shias and Historians agree that Khadija had four daughters so calling Fatimah 'a daughter' is wrong. 6:11, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I understand your concern. I'll clarify in the lead that there are two views about the matter and add sources for both views tomorrow, I hope. However, the claim that the current view is not supported by Shia hadith is false and that'll become clear with the new sources. Albertatiran (talk) 18:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Albertatiran, Al-Saaba. 6:25, 20 October 2021

New edits

In the next few weeks, I'll hopefully add new sources (more modern ones), fix capitalization issues, improve readability, etc. I'll discuss any major changes here first. Albertatiran (talk) 06:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Biased

The article is biased a lot against Abu Bakr and Umar.

I've broken down your comments below which I hope you don't mind. Basically, I'll hopefully work on the article in the coming weeks which will address some of these concerns. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

For example, it says Abu Bakr assumed power and 'seized' Fadak from Fatimah whereas he didn't.

"Assumed power" is not a biased choice of words. The takeover of Fadak appears in Sahih al-Bukhari, among many other sources. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

It also says Ali regarded Abu Bakr as a 'liar' and 'traitor' which are completely POV views.

This claim appears in Sahih Muslim. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

The article says Umar made a 'raid' on the house whereas he just went to the house, asking allegiance.

Multiple Sunni sources, listed in the article, report that that the confrontation escalated. I'll add more sources soon, especially modern ones. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, what are these 'discussion' sub-headings? Wikipedia's talk pages are for discussion, not the actual articles. These lines 'Here "we" summarize Fatimah's own account of what happened. When Omar and his aides arrived to take Ali away by force, Fatimah firmly refused to open the door. Instead, from behind the door, she repeatedly implored Omar to leave them alone and reminded them of the sanctity of her home in the Quran. Unfortunately, the confrontation escalated rapidly: An enraged Omar kicked the door open, pinning Fatimah behind the door, which was aflame by now. When Fatimah continued to resist the intruders, Omar physically assaulted her with his sheathed sword and (or) a whip. Some accounts have that, at this point, Ali managed to intercept Omar before being overpowered by Omar's aides' is so biased.

The article is clear that this is the Shia point of view. I'll improve the presentation add more sources soon. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Almost the entire article has dead links such as ذهبی. میزان الاعتدال vol. 1. p. 139.

Thanks for catching this. I'll hopefully fix that and add modern sources whenever possible. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

These types of lines 'As a result, this question has loomed large ever since: Fatimah was Muhammad's daughter and extremely dear to him. Why was she buried secretly? Why do we not know where her grave is?'

This should be fixed and I'll hopefully take care of that. Albertatiran (talk) 07:07, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Like, at this point, this article starts to frustrate me about how biased it is against Umar and Abu Bakr. Since my edits are usually reverted, Albertatiran I hope you change these issues. Thanks. Al-Saaba 20:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

First paragraphs

The first paragraphs makes no sense. It says 'According to Sunni Muslims, Fatimah was the youngest of their daughters, whereas Shia Muslims maintain that Fatimah was the only biological child of the couple who lived to adulthood'. The comparision makes no sense. For example, if it was written Sunni Muslims believe she was the youngest daughter whereas Shia Muslims maintain she was the eldest. Then the line would make sense. Its like saying Sunni Muslims believe Ali was the fourth caliph whereas Shia Muslims maintain Ali was the eldest son of Abu Talib. Does this make any sense? Al-Saaba 20:17, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

"A believes in X whereas B believes in Y" is a valid sentence. Basically, the Sunni view is that they had four daughters together whereas the Shia view is that Muhammad and Khadija had only one daughter, Fatimah, and the other girls were Muhammad's stepdaughters who were adopted by the couple after Khadija's sister died. In the next few weeks, I'll also hopefully improve the readability of the article which would hopefully address this and similar concerns. Albertatiran (talk) 07:14, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

References

This is a note to say that there are now two references in the article named ":27", with different lists of sources. Could the editor(s) that added them please disentangle which set of sources is supposed to belong with which statement and rename (at least one of) them? In my opinion it's better to give references more descriptive names where possible to avoid such problems (or, for an article like this which uses shortened footnotes, just write the {{sfn}} out again; it's not many extra characters and it's much clearer to future editors). Thanks in advance, Wham2001 (talk) 21:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

This is a good suggestion. I'll hopefully implement that. Albertatiran (talk) 07:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Questionable content

@PZMir: Hi, I have trouble finding your recent claim about Uthman in the two sources you have provided. Could you clarify this by adding the page numbers and publishing info? Thanks. Albertatiran (talk) 18:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@PZMir: Hi again, as I asked you above, I'd again encourage you to clarify your source for the claim above. Your claim does not appear in the sources you have provided, i.e., Rogerson and Rahman. Unless you can provide a reliable source, we'd need to remove them. If this behavior persists, we'd also need to inform a few of the admins. I'd also invite you not to use false labels, e.g., "disruptive edit" for removing unsourced material. Albertatiran (talk) 09:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Waiting to see a response here. --Mhhossein ^talk 04:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@PZMir: Thanks for replacing your source. However, note that the new source (which uses honorifics, e.g., "Hadrat") does not meet the standards of Wikipedia for a reliable secondary source, i.e., published recently by a reputable publisher with "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". This criterion excludes sources that are written from a religious point of view and lack objectivity. Per MOS:ISLAM, we should later remove/replace unreliable secondary sources, e.g., your new source or موسوعة التاريخ الاسلامي, and primary sources, e.g., الطبقات الكبرى. There is more info about what constitutes a reliable secondary source in WP:RS and WP:NOR. Albertatiran (talk) 16:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

• @PZMir: You are making edits which are challenged by the involved users. Besides the content issues, you have used sources which are deemed not be reliable for the purpose of adding those content. As per WP:ONUS, "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." You are expected to actively participate the talk page discussions (which you have not shown to be able to do so far). From the other hand, it is you who should show the used sources are reliable (per WP:BURDEN). I am going to revert your recent changes based on the issues discussed here and you are expected to enter the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Best. --Mhhossein ^talk 06:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• @Albertatiran: and @Mhhossein:, can you explain what is the problem with my latest edit? Now I provided a reliable secondary source and it is again removed. Can I finally get a consensus on this issue. PZMir 10:00, 6 Janiary 2022 (UTC)