Talk:Islam/GA2

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

Original review
Dunkloesteus77[edit] I applaud you for being the first to tackle the Abrahamic religions. I see you earlier attempted a review with Christianity and, in my opinion, you faced a lot of unfair criticism, so if you'd like to renominate it, I'd be happy to review it after this one Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] There are lots of citation needed tags in the article Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] I had cleaned up all the tags but five days ago a user went on a tagging spree and I appreciate their concern for improvement! Working on addressing their citation needed tags. Sodicadl (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] I mean I would've put them there if they hadn't, at minimum every paragraph should end with a reference Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] I've trimmed a fair bit of this material. Much of it entailed fairly trivial details at the end of paragraphs, some was duplicative to material elsewhere in the page, and other parts were simply a bit undue in the context of the breadth of this topic. I've left in the tagged material that I believe is of importance/broad interest. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] There's still a lot of citation needed tags which need to be addressed Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 22:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] There's still citation needed tags Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Another was added in January. Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] The first note is unsourced and doesn't make mathematical sense. If the stress has 2 options, the s has 2 options, and the a has 3 options, then shouldn't there be 2 * 2 * 3 = 12 ways to pronounce it? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] It is removed now. I tried to find a reference for it but I don't think there is any. Sodicadl (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] When you're doing number ranges, you should use the n-dash – instead of the hyphen - Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 16:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You're inconsistent about using sfnp or rp to designate page numbers, you should stick to sfnp Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 20:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "provide a secondary constitutional model for Muslims" you should spell out that the Quran is the primary Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done? Constitutional model refers to Muhammad's normative example, so I took out 'secondary'. Sodicadl (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "in descending order" and "respectively" are redundant Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Reworded to take out respectively. Sodicadl (talk) 22:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You should bring up Muslim conquest at some point in the lead, especially because you later say trade and missions had a lot to do with Muslim expansion Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] I believe another user did this. Sodicadl (talk) 01:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "traditionally dated during the reign of" I would remove "dated" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Reworded now. Sodicadl (talk) 01:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You should use % instead of spelling out percent Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You're inconsistent with how you're using italics and capitalization in Acts of worship. The 1st time you bring up shahada it's capitalized and un-italicized, but the 2nd time it's lower case and italicized, for example. Sometimes you italicize Arabic words, like wudu, and sometimes you don't, like as-salah Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] The word "obligatory" implies every single Muslim does all of these, which is untrue Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] 'Obligatory' is translating for fard. That article uses the word 'duty' so switched to 'duty' instead. Sodicadl (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Performing prayers five times a day is compulsory" yes it's said in the Quran that you have to as a Muslim, but not every Muslim will pray 5 times a day. Maybe just specify that the Quran tells people to do this? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] 'Compulsory' is translating for fard. That article uses the word 'duty' so switched to 'duty' instead. Sodicadl (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You're inconsistent with writing Kaaba or Ka'bah Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done now. Like other terms in the article, gave the alternative spellings when the term is first mentioned and then used the most common version of word throughout rest of article. Sodicadl (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Make sure every paragraph ends with a reference Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 22:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "having also served as a shelter for the poor" this makes it sound like the only reason it's important for Muslims to meet with Masjid an-Nabawi (which is odd wording in itself) is because Masjid an-Nabawi served in the past (but not anymore) as a homeless shelter Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Rewrote sentence, hopefully this is better. Sodicadl (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Minarets are towers used to call the adhan" this sentence should go with where you fist bring up adhan. You're also inconsistent italicizing adhan Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done now. The Manual of Style recommends to use italics for foreign words that are not used everyday in English.[1] The word adhan seems to be used in English for the Islamic call to prayer more than using the term "Islamic call to prayer" so I took the italics out now for all occurrences. Sodicadl (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You're inconsistent with using ā when spelling zakat Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done now. There was consensus that if sources give differing transliterations to list them at first mention of the word but then consistently use the most common transliteration for rest of the article.[2][3] Thus, using "zakat". Sodicadl (talk) 04:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "well-off owe to the needy" remove "to" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 21:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "wealth is seen as a 'trust from God's bounty' and is seen as a 'purification' of one's excess wealth" are these quotes coming from the Quran? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Fixed now. I can see how the wording was confusing. Sodicadl (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "is a much encouraged supererogatory charity" it'd be good to explain the word supererogatory Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done now at the lead of the section since the word appears multiple times in that section. Sodicadl (talk) 20:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] It would be better to use simpler words, like "optional" for example Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 03:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "which financed hospitals and schools" does it not exist anymore? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Clarified it now. Sodicadl (talk) 18:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "there are other days when fasting is supererogatory" such as? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done Sodicadl (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Medina is also a site of Islamic pilgrimage and Jerusalem, the city of many Islamic prophets, contains the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which used to be the direction of prayer before Mecca" it seems like a word is missing here Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] There is nothing wrong with this sentence, nothing is missing. it's most certainly a sentence fragment, is it supposed to be a list? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. There were more than a word missing. Sodicadl (talk) 02:22, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "has been described as an excellent act of worship" by whom? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. The source didn't say exactly that so rewrote sentence. Sodicadl (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "begins with the recitation of the Quran" certainly not the entire Quran? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] That content was not mentioned in the source cited so it is removed now. Sodicadl (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "who, it is said, will be able to" it says this in the Quran? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. The source says it is from the hadith, so it is now mentioned as such. Sodicadl (talk) 21:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] It would be good to say when supplication would normally take place Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] link bedouin Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Born in Mecca in 570, Muhammad was orphaned early in life" seems like because he was born in Mecca, he obviously was orphaned early in life Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] No, it does not seem so. This is a very common way of writing short biographical overviews. Done. The way the sentence fragments were arranged, it looked like the first sentence fragment was the part that comes after "because". Should be better now. Sodicadl (talk) 02:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "leaving out weaker segments of society without protection" you don't need "out" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "He acquired the nickname 'trustworthy' " how? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] I rewrote it but I'm not sure if it is better. Sodicadl (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] You should specify CE when you bring up 570, not way later at 610 Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:07, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "The Meccan elite profited from the pilgrimages to the idols of the Kaaba and felt Muhammad was destabilizing their social order" maybe you should say "but" instead of "and" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Still, feel that "and" works better because it is not contrasting - a significant reason the Meccan elite felt Muhammad was destabilizing was because the Meccan elite profited from pilgrimages to the idols that Muhammad was preaching against. Sodicadl (talk) 01:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Oh that wasn't clear at all Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] you should clarify this point Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Reworded. Sodicadl (talk) 03:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Inconsistent spelling of Mu'awiyah with or without the h Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. The list of alternate spelling was added to the main article of Mu'awiya and made consistent spelling on this article using most commonly used spelling. Sodicadl (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] "During the early Abbasid era, scholars such as Bukhari and Muslim compiled" use their full names Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 03:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] wikilink Sufism on first mention Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 03:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "conform to the Mutazila idea of the creation of the Quran" inconsistent spelling of Mutazila, and also what is this referring to? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Made spelling consistent. Also, elaborated a little and put in hyperlink. Sodicadl (talk) 03:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "sought to harmonize Aristotle's metaphysics within Islam" what does this mean? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Reworded it a little simpler, I hope it's better now. Sodicadl (talk) 23:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Many non Muslims" use hyphen Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "The vast Abbasid empire proved impossible to hold together" did they expand the empire after the Umayyads? You never say Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Might be better without that sentence so reworded without it. Sodicadl (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Some dates and locations regarding the fall of the Abbasid empire would be good, like mention when those soldiers splintered off dynasties and where they were centered, when the Fatimid dynasty took control of North Africa, when Shia Century is, etc. Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "and stealing the Black Stone" the Black Stone has never been mentioned Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Elaborated and added hyperlink. Sodicadl (talk) 23:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] You randomly jump from the decline of the Abbasids to Islam in the far east, then the section ends, and you start up with syncretism in the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans in the 14th century, and then jump all the way back to the end of the Abbasids in the 13th century Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] It appears random but each paragraph has its own topic, so it is not 100% chronological like a timeline. I rewrote it now to make the first sentence of each of the paras to explain what the paragraph is about, let me know if that helps. Sodicadl (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] You should mention the Mongols converted to Islam, and if you're gonna talk about the history of Muslims in China you should bring up the Mongol Yuan Dynasty Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 01:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Inconsistent spelling of Ismaili Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Its own article uses Isma'ili rather than Ismaili so staying consistent with the more prominent version. Sodicadl (talk) 02:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] I don't understand the need for the quote in the Pre-modern section, are you trying to describe syncretism?Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] I understood it as the editor conveying there is syncretism. Perhaps the quote is not needed. I took it out and mentioned about syncretism instead. Sodicadl (talk) 00:57, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "The Turks probably found similarities between Sufi rituals and Shaman practices.[239] Muslim Turks incorporated elements of Turkish Shamanism beliefs to Islam." redundant to say both of these Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Took out first sentence. Sodicadl (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] You should first wikilink Muslims in China in the last sentence of the Classical Age section when you first mention them. Maybe here should clarify foreign Muslims in China were forced to assimilate, as it kinda reads there were no ethnically Chinese Muslims Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] It is wikilinked already. I now changed the hyperlink to make it more clear. Sodicadl (talk) 00:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "sometimes by force" like threat of death or...? Is this still the Yuan Dynasty? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] This is the Ming Dynasty, I mentioned it as such now. "sometimes by force" the punishment for flouting laws mandating intermarriage was beating and enslavement but I think that might be too much detail so I now elaborated that it was by laws rather than forced by society. Sodicadl (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] "The Mongol Khanates in Iran and Central Asia converted to Islam and those regions benefited from increased cross-cultural access to East Asia under Mongol rule" seems to say their conversion to Islam directly led to cross-cultural access to East Asia Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Reworded, hope its better now. Sodicadl (talk) 01:03" w, 19 February 2023 (UTC) "Gunpowder empires" inconsistent capitals Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Its own article does not capitalize g. Sodicadl (talk) 02:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] You're inconsistent in writing out centuries or not (for example, "19th century" vs "fifteenth century") Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] You catch things that go over my head. Good eye! I thought since the wikipedia article titles for each century goes with the numeral version, I standardized them to numerals. Sodicadl (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "where the state monopolized religious scholarship and are often seen as puppets of the state" who are the puppets? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] I can see how that is confusing. Reworded, hope it is better now. Sodicadl (talk) 00:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Salafism was funded for its quietism" where? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:53, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "since they stood out and worshiped their own god" as opposed to whose god? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] The source was talking about the Muslims been targeted for having separate traditions, so reworded to match that. Sodicadl (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "presented a new breed of" who was the old breed? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] That is a relatively new para with a touch of recentism and undue weight for something happening to be topical. Changed to what the first source listed talks about. Sodicadl (talk) 00:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "About 23.4% of the global population" as of what year? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "It has been estimated that" by whom? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] "with a minority belonging to" as in <1%? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Took that out, the source actually says, "Given the relatively small numbers of people associated with such groups, this report does not provide separate figures for them" Sodicadl (talk) 17:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] In the Sunni sections you say a lot of names which are not wikilinked or explained at all, they're just kinda there, like Asharism or Maliki Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] I wikilinked them now. Sodicadl (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Which of the names you just listed are considered traditionalist? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] I reworded. Hope its better now. Sodicadl (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] What is Salafi? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] What is the Khawarij movement? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Done. Sodicadl (talk) 23:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] In Mysticism 3rd par, why is Sufism italicized? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] I think you might be referring to the 2nd paragraph, I corrected that now. Sodicadl (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] Sorry I've been extremely busy and delaying this article for a really long time, I'll ask someone else to finish the review (hopefully in a more timely manner) Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply] No worries. There is no rush. Sodicadl (talk) 14:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Original review

Dunkloesteus77[edit]

I applaud you for being the first to tackle the Abrahamic religions. I see you earlier attempted a review with Christianity and, in my opinion, you faced a lot of unfair criticism, so if you'd like to renominate it, I'd be happy to review it after this one Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are lots of citation needed tags in the article Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had cleaned up all the tags but five days ago a user went on a tagging spree and I appreciate their concern for improvement! Working on addressing their citation needed tags. Sodicadl (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean I would've put them there if they hadn't, at minimum every paragraph should end with a reference Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've trimmed a fair bit of this material. Much of it entailed fairly trivial details at the end of paragraphs, some was duplicative to material elsewhere in the page, and other parts were simply a bit undue in the context of the breadth of this topic. I've left in the tagged material that I believe is of importance/broad interest. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's still a lot of citation needed tags which need to be addressed Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 22:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's still citation needed tags Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another was added in January. Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first note is unsourced and doesn't make mathematical sense. If the stress has 2 options, the s has 2 options, and the a has 3 options, then shouldn't there be 2 * 2 * 3 = 12 ways to pronounce it? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is removed now. I tried to find a reference for it but I don't think there is any. Sodicadl (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When you're doing number ranges, you should use the n-dash – instead of the hyphen - Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 16:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're inconsistent about using sfnp or rp to designate page numbers, you should stick to sfnp Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 20:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"provide a secondary constitutional model for Muslims" you should spell out that the Quran is the primary Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done? Constitutional model refers to Muhammad's normative example, so I took out 'secondary'. Sodicadl (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"in descending order" and "respectively" are redundant Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Reworded to take out respectively. Sodicadl (talk) 22:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should bring up Muslim conquest at some point in the lead, especially because you later say trade and missions had a lot to do with Muslim expansion Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe another user did this. Sodicadl (talk) 01:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"traditionally dated during the reign of" I would remove "dated" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded now. Sodicadl (talk) 01:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should use % instead of spelling out percent Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're inconsistent with how you're using italics and capitalization in Acts of worship. The 1st time you bring up shahada it's capitalized and un-italicized, but the 2nd time it's lower case and italicized, for example. Sometimes you italicize Arabic words, like wudu, and sometimes you don't, like as-salah Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The word "obligatory" implies every single Muslim does all of these, which is untrue Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'Obligatory' is translating for fard. That article uses the word 'duty' so switched to 'duty' instead. Sodicadl (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Performing prayers five times a day is compulsory" yes it's said in the Quran that you have to as a Muslim, but not every Muslim will pray 5 times a day. Maybe just specify that the Quran tells people to do this? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'Compulsory' is translating for fard. That article uses the word 'duty' so switched to 'duty' instead. Sodicadl (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're inconsistent with writing Kaaba or Ka'bah Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done now. Like other terms in the article, gave the alternative spellings when the term is first mentioned and then used the most common version of word throughout rest of article. Sodicadl (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Make sure every paragraph ends with a reference Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 22:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"having also served as a shelter for the poor" this makes it sound like the only reason it's important for Muslims to meet with Masjid an-Nabawi (which is odd wording in itself) is because Masjid an-Nabawi served in the past (but not anymore) as a homeless shelter Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote sentence, hopefully this is better. Sodicadl (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Minarets are towers used to call the adhan" this sentence should go with where you fist bring up adhan. You're also inconsistent italicizing adhan Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done now. The Manual of Style recommends to use italics for foreign words that are not used everyday in English.[1] The word adhan seems to be used in English for the Islamic call to prayer more than using the term "Islamic call to prayer" so I took the italics out now for all occurrences. Sodicadl (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're inconsistent with using ā when spelling zakat Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done now. There was consensus that if sources give differing transliterations to list them at first mention of the word but then consistently use the most common transliteration for rest of the article.[2][3] Thus, using "zakat". Sodicadl (talk) 04:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"well-off owe to the needy" remove "to" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 21:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"wealth is seen as a 'trust from God's bounty' and is seen as a 'purification' of one's excess wealth" are these quotes coming from the Quran? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed now. I can see how the wording was confusing. Sodicadl (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"is a much encouraged supererogatory charity" it'd be good to explain the word supererogatory Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done now at the lead of the section since the word appears multiple times in that section. Sodicadl (talk) 20:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It would be better to use simpler words, like "optional" for example Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 03:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"which financed hospitals and schools" does it not exist anymore? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clarified it now. Sodicadl (talk) 18:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"there are other days when fasting is supererogatory" such as? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Sodicadl (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Medina is also a site of Islamic pilgrimage and Jerusalem, the city of many Islamic prophets, contains the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which used to be the direction of prayer before Mecca" it seems like a word is missing here Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with this sentence, nothing is missing.

it's most certainly a sentence fragment, is it supposed to be a list? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. There were more than a word missing. Sodicadl (talk) 02:22, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"has been described as an excellent act of worship" by whom? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The source didn't say exactly that so rewrote sentence. Sodicadl (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"begins with the recitation of the Quran" certainly not the entire Quran? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That content was not mentioned in the source cited so it is removed now. Sodicadl (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"who, it is said, will be able to" it says this in the Quran? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The source says it is from the hadith, so it is now mentioned as such. Sodicadl (talk) 21:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It would be good to say when supplication would normally take place Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
link bedouin Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Born in Mecca in 570, Muhammad was orphaned early in life" seems like because he was born in Mecca, he obviously was orphaned early in life Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, it does not seem so. This is a very common way of writing short biographical overviews.

Done. The way the sentence fragments were arranged, it looked like the first sentence fragment was the part that comes after "because". Should be better now. Sodicadl (talk) 02:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"leaving out weaker segments of society without protection" you don't need "out" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"He acquired the nickname 'trustworthy' " how? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote it but I'm not sure if it is better. Sodicadl (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should specify CE when you bring up 570, not way later at 610 Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:07, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"The Meccan elite profited from the pilgrimages to the idols of the Kaaba and felt Muhammad was destabilizing their social order" maybe you should say "but" instead of "and" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Still, feel that "and" works better because it is not contrasting - a significant reason the Meccan elite felt Muhammad was destabilizing was because the Meccan elite profited from pilgrimages to the idols that Muhammad was preaching against. Sodicadl (talk) 01:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that wasn't clear at all Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you should clarify this point Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded. Sodicadl (talk) 03:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent spelling of Mu'awiyah with or without the h Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The list of alternate spelling was added to the main article of Mu'awiya and made consistent spelling on this article using most commonly used spelling. Sodicadl (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"During the early Abbasid era, scholars such as Bukhari and Muslim compiled" use their full names Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 03:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
wikilink Sufism on first mention Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 03:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"conform to the Mutazila idea of the creation of the Quran" inconsistent spelling of Mutazila, and also what is this referring to? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Made spelling consistent. Also, elaborated a little and put in hyperlink. Sodicadl (talk) 03:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"sought to harmonize Aristotle's metaphysics within Islam" what does this mean? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded it a little simpler, I hope it's better now. Sodicadl (talk) 23:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Many non Muslims" use hyphen Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 02:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"The vast Abbasid empire proved impossible to hold together" did they expand the empire after the Umayyads? You never say Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Might be better without that sentence so reworded without it. Sodicadl (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some dates and locations regarding the fall of the Abbasid empire would be good, like mention when those soldiers splintered off dynasties and where they were centered, when the Fatimid dynasty took control of North Africa, when Shia Century is, etc. Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"and stealing the Black Stone" the Black Stone has never been mentioned Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elaborated and added hyperlink. Sodicadl (talk) 23:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You randomly jump from the decline of the Abbasids to Islam in the far east, then the section ends, and you start up with syncretism in the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans in the 14th century, and then jump all the way back to the end of the Abbasids in the 13th century Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears random but each paragraph has its own topic, so it is not 100% chronological like a timeline. I rewrote it now to make the first sentence of each of the paras to explain what the paragraph is about, let me know if that helps. Sodicadl (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should mention the Mongols converted to Islam, and if you're gonna talk about the history of Muslims in China you should bring up the Mongol Yuan Dynasty Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 01:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Inconsistent spelling of Ismaili Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Its own article uses Isma'ili rather than Ismaili so staying consistent with the more prominent version. Sodicadl (talk) 02:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand the need for the quote in the Pre-modern section, are you trying to describe syncretism?Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understood it as the editor conveying there is syncretism. Perhaps the quote is not needed. I took it out and mentioned about syncretism instead. Sodicadl (talk) 00:57, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"The Turks probably found similarities between Sufi rituals and Shaman practices.[239] Muslim Turks incorporated elements of Turkish Shamanism beliefs to Islam." redundant to say both of these Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Took out first sentence. Sodicadl (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should first wikilink Muslims in China in the last sentence of the Classical Age section when you first mention them. Maybe here should clarify foreign Muslims in China were forced to assimilate, as it kinda reads there were no ethnically Chinese Muslims Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is wikilinked already. I now changed the hyperlink to make it more clear. Sodicadl (talk) 00:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"sometimes by force" like threat of death or...? Is this still the Yuan Dynasty? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the Ming Dynasty, I mentioned it as such now. "sometimes by force" the punishment for flouting laws mandating intermarriage was beating and enslavement but I think that might be too much detail so I now elaborated that it was by laws rather than forced by society. Sodicadl (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"The Mongol Khanates in Iran and Central Asia converted to Islam and those regions benefited from increased cross-cultural access to East Asia under Mongol rule" seems to say their conversion to Islam directly led to cross-cultural access to East Asia Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded, hope its better now. Sodicadl (talk) 01:03" w, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
"Gunpowder empires" inconsistent capitals Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Its own article does not capitalize g. Sodicadl (talk) 02:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're inconsistent in writing out centuries or not (for example, "19th century" vs "fifteenth century") Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You catch things that go over my head. Good eye! I thought since the wikipedia article titles for each century goes with the numeral version, I standardized them to numerals. Sodicadl (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"where the state monopolized religious scholarship and are often seen as puppets of the state" who are the puppets? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can see how that is confusing. Reworded, hope it is better now. Sodicadl (talk) 00:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Salafism was funded for its quietism" where? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:53, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"since they stood out and worshiped their own god" as opposed to whose god? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source was talking about the Muslims been targeted for having separate traditions, so reworded to match that. Sodicadl (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"presented a new breed of" who was the old breed? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is a relatively new para with a touch of recentism and undue weight for something happening to be topical. Changed to what the first source listed talks about. Sodicadl (talk) 00:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"About 23.4% of the global population" as of what year? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"It has been estimated that" by whom? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"with a minority belonging to" as in <1%? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Took that out, the source actually says, "Given the relatively small numbers of people associated with such groups, this report does not provide separate figures for them" Sodicadl (talk) 17:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the Sunni sections you say a lot of names which are not wikilinked or explained at all, they're just kinda there, like Asharism or Maliki Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wikilinked them now. Sodicadl (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which of the names you just listed are considered traditionalist? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I reworded. Hope its better now. Sodicadl (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is Salafi? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is the Khawarij movement? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sodicadl (talk) 23:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In Mysticism 3rd par, why is Sufism italicized? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might be referring to the 2nd paragraph, I corrected that now. Sodicadl (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I've been extremely busy and delaying this article for a really long time, I'll ask someone else to finish the review (hopefully in a more timely manner) Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. There is no rush. Sodicadl (talk) 14:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Various opinions
Vice regent[edit] Sodicadl, in response to this message, were you looking for me to review this article, or assist you in improving the article in response to recommendations made by Dunkleosteus77?VR _talk 21:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Assist in improving the article in response to recommendations made by Dunkleosteus77. Sodicadl (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Capitals00[edit] I suggest moving the sentence "Islamic scientific achievements encompassed a wide range of subject areas especially medicine, mathematics, astronomy, agriculture as well as physics, economics, engineering and optics.", from the lead to the section "Classical era (750–1258)", since the achievements were not only scientific, and many non Muslims were part of these achievements (such as Hunayn ibn Ishaq, Bukhtishu, Masawaiyh, etc); the preceding sentence is sufficient for lead. It is also worth mentioning under the section 『Classical era (750–1258)』that non-Muslims were part of these achievements during the Islamic Golden Age as many of scholars of the House of Wisdom were Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians; for example the article in the section "Classical era (750–1258)", includes a photo of an eye manuscript by Hunain ibn Ishaq, who was a Nestorian Christian. Capitals00 (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] I believe another user added what you are requesting. Sodicadl (talk) 14:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Æo[edit] The accounts SonoCat and Riopex recently made many edits to this article. Please check their edits, as they have been blocked as sockpuppets of Jobas and Rajputbhatti, respectively, and both are known for pushing pro-Christian and anti-Islamic bias.--Æo (talk) 15:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Thank you for pointing this out. However, some of their edits were still with cited sources. There was a list of further reading that I took out that were obviously polemic and not much academic value. Sodicadl (talk) 19:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply] Amyipdev[edit] I looked through the article, and it's very good - would definitely give it GA status. There were some small issues I noticed, I sent in some edits to correct them. Most Islamic articles are significantly devoid of neutrality and lacking in qualifiers; this article does much better in that, and due to its depth, I would 100% recommend it for GA. --Amyipdev (talk) 17:41, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply] Pbritti[edit] I'll take a moment this week to investigate the article for the GA criteria but I have a question for @Sodicadl: Catholic Encyclopedia is listed as a source in the references but I was unable to find where it is cited. Speaking out of an abundance of caution, I would discourage using that particular source for articles on Islam-related articles due to its highly polemic nature. I say this as someone who has regularly leaned on the CE for articles related to liturgy. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply] Thank you for consideration into this! I am looking through the sources and will be taking out anything not actually cited. Sodicadl (talk) 23:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply] Second Opinion from Midnightblueowl[edit] Having had some experience with getting religion themed articles through GAN and FAC over the years, I thought I'd offer a second opinion, if it is still needed. Although a lot of good work has clearly been done here, I'm quite concerned by the use of referencing throughout the article. Multiple different styles of citation are employed, and often books and articles are cited without the specific page numbers that are relevant being cited. I can see at least one sentence without any supporting citation. In my view, this article does not meet the Good Article criteria at the present time. Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:31, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Review[edit]

~~Starting at the beginning of the "Mysticism" section.~~ Beginning at the start of the article. This is a little more detailed than I would typically do for a GA due to the size and importance of the subject.

This is all I have for prose right now. I'll do a full GOCE-style copyedit tomorrow and then take a look at a lot of sources. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'm also aware that I might have a slight unconscious bias here and I am on the lookout for that (raised in a protestant American church, though now pretty separated from that ideology), but please feel free to challenge something I say/suggest if you feel it is incorrect or undue. AviationFreak💬 04:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Discussion[edit]

I've completed prose and source reviews, and it appears that some good progress has been made by the nominator with respect to the prose. The source review uncovered a few problems in the 19 footnotes checked, many of which were relatively minor and would require only small tweaks (worth keeping in mind, I selected some of the most "likely-to-be-challenged" claims to check). However, given the ~470 footnotes in the article, one must question the extent of these footnote errors. I think at this point the best step forward is to seek a second opinion from an experienced GA reviewer (this would be relatively uninvolved, not requiring any additional reviewing of the article itself). I'd encourage any editor(s) who plan to provide this opinion to read through the assessments of all of the footnotes above, as the ones marked with question marks range widely in severity. I am personally leaning towards promoting the article to GA given that most of the discrepancies are small and don't demonstrate bad-faith attempts to twist the sources' words, but I would like to hear what other editors think. Besides sourcing, I think this article meets all of the criteria; the article takes a neutral view of the subject (which was apparently not the case during previous reviews), and the stability is as good as can be expected given the importance of the subject. Earwig doesn't show any copyright issues. AviationFreak💬 18:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Contents

GA Review[edit]

Dunkloesteus77[edit]

Vice regent[edit]

Capitals00[edit]

Æo[edit]

Amyipdev[edit]

Pbritti[edit]

Second Opinion from Midnightblueowl[edit]

Prose Review[edit]

Source review[edit]

Discussion[edit]