Talk:Black Standard

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Heraldry and vexillology

Black Standard is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology articles

Arab world Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Black Standard article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 365 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Black Standard. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Black Standard at the Reference desk.

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Black Standard, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard.
Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

With respect to any reverting restrictions:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Split?[edit]

Shouldn't there be a separate article for the jihad flag? It is not the same as the all-black flag. FunkMonk (talk) 05:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it's just a point of "design". The inscribed flag is supposed to represent the all-black flag, but to make sure everyone gets the point that this is an Islamic black flag, they apparently feel the need to write stuff on it. --dab (𒁳) 10:28, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But that misses the point entirely. The whole point of plain is Mohammed wanted nothing on it. That way it is 'holy' like an empty hole. The writings and pictures are a modern CIA funded perversion of this, defeating the purpose of the plain flag entirely, and associating terrorism with the utterly true & peaceful side of Islam. It needs a separate article. -- 06:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

"The writings and pictures are a modern CIA funded perversion of this, defeating the purpose of the plain flag entirely, and associating terrorism with the utterly true & peaceful side of Islam."

How has this claim gone unsourced and unrefuted for nearly 8 months? If you want to put it in the context of assumed intent, it's simpler to argue the association of Jihadist Islamism with the black flag lies with the symbolic display of the inscribed flag. As such, the "perversion" of the original Islamic black flag is committed by the Jihadists who wield the black flag with the added Shahada inscription. How does the CIA even tie into this? -- 01:01, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

this article is about black standard .you guys are intentionally connecting black standard with isis to defame it. isis flag is not complete black. y dont you just write about the devil here since that is also related to black colour. write all the shit you can and dont let others edit it and this way you say wikipedia is unbiased -- 21:14, 13 May 2019‎ 2601:982:202:2744:e9ac:33ab:2b22:9661

Unusual text order in the ISIL flag[edit]

This article (as well as innumerable articles in the Western press) state that the text on the ISIL black banner flag is **exactly** the text of the Shahada (Islamic creed).

However it appears to me that they are overlooking an important detail: the three words in the "white bubble" at the bottom (muḥammadur rasūlu-llāh) are written bottom-to-top rather than top-to-bottom. This discussion on Quora has an explanation of the unusual order in terms of the seal of Muhammad. I am going to add this to the article to clarify the situation.

Shahada in Arabic		Text on the flag		Flag
لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله	lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh muḥammadur rasūlu -llāh	لا إله إلا الله الله رسول محمد	lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh -llāh rasūlu muḥammadur

192.55.54.40 (talk) 19:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

jihadism[edit]

why are you relating black standard to jihadism. black standard is only a religious symbol of prophet and the others flag that are used are not complete black. like ahmaddiyas and isis and others. remove those bad things from this article. have some respect for others religion and if you cannot than stop posting things about islam. -- 21:14, 13 May 2019‎ 2601:982:202:2744:e9ac:33ab:2b22:9661

Wikipedia uses independently verifiable WP:V facts from reliable sources WP:RS for its content. Britishfinance (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad was a jihadist. There are many instances of Muhammad or his followers going to or coming back from Jihad in the Sahih Bukhari. In the Sahih Bukhari there is even a separate book for jihad-related hadith by Muhammad. So there is no reason to remove these.103.149.60.76 (talk) 05:22, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of clarity on what the liwāʾ or ʿalam were[edit]

The text says 'not to be confused with the liwāʾ or ʿalam, an identifying mark like a red turban'. What does 'like' mean here? That a liwāʾ and/or ʿalam could, for example, be a red turban? Or that they were comparable/similar to a red turban in terms of their functions? Much more importantly for the purposes of this article, could a liwāʾ and/or ʿalam (also?) be a flag in our modern understanding and not a turban? If so, what was the difference between them and the rāya? The text goes on to call the rāya 'this larger flag', suggesting that the liwāʾ and/or ʿalam were flags, too, but smaller. However, this isn't stated when they are introduced; instead, there is just the confusing comparison/exemplification with a turban. The text also says the rāya was a square banner. Does that mean that the liwāʾ and/or ʿalam were flags of some other shape? 87.126.21.225 (talk) 06:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]