Jump to content

Talk:Abu Bakr: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Zabranos (talk | contribs)
1,188 edits
Line 61: Line 61:
*This article is not encyclopedic. Needs to be revised
*This article is not encyclopedic. Needs to be revised
[[User:Zabranos|Zabranos]] ([[User talk:Zabranos|talk]]) 02:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
[[User:Zabranos|Zabranos]] ([[User talk:Zabranos|talk]]) 02:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Zabranos was blocked for a week for abusing multiple accounts. (See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zabranos/Archive here] for details.) *{{User|Nanner-Nanner}} is a {{confirmed}} sock of {{User|Zabranos}}

Revision as of 23:29, 7 October 2013

Factual accuracy

This may not be the best description of the problem, but this article has too much material directly copied from various Hadiths, eg [1] and [2]. Just as we do not use the Bible as a historical source, we should not be using hadiths in this way. Maybe we need a separate article for Abu Bakr in hadiths, but this article shouldn't be using them. Some sections seem very good, others have virtually no sources. Dougweller (talk) 14:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.abubakr.org/ ^^this site says that the hadiths are "supposedly 100% authentic"... suspicious anyone? so the hadiths are not 100% reliable, but good for main points and background info. Churst0514 (talk) 23:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)churst0514Churst0514 (talk) 23:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone revise this?

"When the fever developed he directed Abu Bakr to go to the war following Usama who was 18"

Which war??? there was no war going on at that time.... Which Usama??? is that a joke???

I revised the sources and it says that the Prophet of God sent Abu Bakr to lead the prayer. I tried to edit it but I was threatened with a permanent block. — Hima78 (talk) 01:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, Same here. Most of this article is not properly cited and does not provide facts. I am also under threats of being block but I am not scared. Its so hypocritical that other religious articles are flagged for various issues but when it comes to this article people get upset when you go against their religious view points. And then threaten you with a request for being block. Pathetic, face me one on one rather than going to other for help for a petty complaint. -Zabranos

Request for comment

Proposal for removing prefixes "Islamic views on xyz"
I have started a request move to remove the prefixes Attached with the Prophets in Islam to there Names as in Islam. Like Islamic views on Abraham → Ibrahim as it becomes difficult to search the topic. Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Page Thanks. --Ibrahim ebi (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Bakr literally means Father of the Young Camel not Virgin

I have tried to make the change even trying to cite the paragraph that cites citation #24. Please make that change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.253.19.27 (talk) 22:00, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sunni View and Article Errors

This may not be the best description of the problem, but this article has too much material directly copied from various Hadiths, eg [1] and [2]. Just as we do not use the Bible as a historical source, we should not be using hadiths in this way. Maybe we need a separate article for Abu Bakr in hadiths, but this article shouldn't be using them. Some sections seem very good, others have virtually no sources. Dougweller (talk) 14:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  • There are sections that are clearly sunni viewpoints and should be placed in a sunni subsection since Wikipedia articles are suppose to be neutral.
  • You can't discriminate and have a shia subsection and not have a Sunni subjection.
  • There are many quotes in this article that dont have reference. As you know you cant qoute something and represent it as a fact if its missing references.
  • There are many dated material that are not sourced. In order for it to be a fact and accurate please add sources to them. Otherwise its just an opinion claiming to be a fact.
  • Hadiths should be removed as soon as possible because Wikipedia Although it is a normal practice in much religious writings (from various religions), it's not standard for academic/reference writing. Therefore the hadith have to be removed. Wikipedia policy WP:NOTREPOSITORY, point 3. Primary sources have very little value to Wikipedia, because they are open to varying interpretations amongst scholars. Similarly, Qwyrxian states that, "religious primary texts (this case Hadiths) are of particularly little value, because their age and function is not to provide "facts" but rather to provide the foundation for a religion."
  • I agree with Dougweller they should be removed as soon as possible.
  • This article is not encyclopedic. Needs to be revised

Zabranos (talk) 02:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abu_Bakr&oldid=576213084"