Talk:Leaving Islam

Inclusion of quotes
Quotes without any sense of context are not appropriate for encyclopedia articles. Context is needed. Is there a reason why this quote is used instead of other passages in the book? What is this quote illustrating in the book? Has this quote been notorious amongst reviewers and/or critics. "Random" (i.e. unexplained non-contextualised) quotes are arbritary and toe a fine line of WP:NPOV. Especially on a page this size, where the quote actually exceeds the size of the article. It is undue weight.--ZayZayEM 11:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I did not pick it. Picking a representative quote out of books seems to be in style. I assure you that it represents the book well. Why don't you read it yourself and see what you think? Arrow740 18:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * "I assure you that it represents the book well.". Your assuration is Original research. This needs to be backed up by a credible third party source. Please give an example where a small stub-class article gives so much weight to a large quote.--ZayZayEM 03:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a book about people who left Islam. They're obviously not going to say nice things about Islam. You just have to accept that. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 18:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * All the more reason not to include such quotes without qualifying them. We do not want to push the book's quite blatant POV. Including indiscriminate unqualified quotes is doing that. The article itself makes no mention about how obviously the book says not-nice things about Islam.--ZayZayEM 02:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you mean, push the POV? This book is naturally going to be against Islam. Whats the problem with that? You're demanding an orange from a basket of strawberries. I think I want to put these quotes back in. Whats the policy that prohibits this? --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 05:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No I am asking for an accurate representation of all the strawberries in the basket as verified by a third source. Not just a single persons pick of the bunch (who probably selectuive chose the ones he thought were red and juicy looking).--ZayZayEM 07:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Issues
General issue: Beware of WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE.

Quotes from book: Unless a certain quote has actual significance (say it is being quoted, referenced to in a notable manner) it probably doesn't deserve inclusion. Using quotes to give a general idea of the book is entirely subjective and should be avoided.

Reviews: Firstly Wikipedia is not amazon.com it is not a place to place reviews and advertise books based on their topic. A book should be notable and its article should explain why it is notable, not why it is good.

Reviews consisting entirely of quotes: these do not give the reader any notion as to why these reviews have been chosen. Who are the reviewers, may they have any conflict of interest, what makes them a reputable source for a review, how do their reviews shape up against other reviews. This produces POV, by unequivecolly echoing the single (biased?) source.

Reception vs Reviews: Reception would be a better section. this section should ideally deal with how the notable book has been recieved by notable groups: reviewers, public, and outspoken notable people. What have been positive reactions. What have been negative reactions. Has the book stirred contraversy?

Producing Undue Weight: By providing a single (positive?) review from a single source we are placing undue weight on that particular (supportive?) source. Is this an accurate representation of other reviews? Are there are other reviews? (if not is this book notable?) Have there been negative reviews? Has anyone confronted this particular review? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ZayZayEM (talk • contribs) 07:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:LeavingIslam.jpeg
Image:LeavingIslam.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 13:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LeavingIslam.jpeg
Image:LeavingIslam.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Return to Islam
I removed this sentance from the "Synopsis" section:

"One of the authors, Michael Muhammad Knight, reverted to Islam within a few years of writing his essay."

It's unsourced (so fair game for removal), but also I don't feel it belongs in a "synopsis" section. It should be presented in direct context of Leaving Islam or it slowly edges towards irrelevent matter. Has anyone (including Knight or Warraq) made a deal about his return to Islam?--ZayZayEM (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "It's unsourced (so fair game for removal)." I suppose... though tagging might have made more sense.  I'm unaware of ibn Warraq making any deal of Knight returning to Islam.  Actually, at the time he published the essay, Knight already had, so his inclusion of it was dodgy - and furthermore I doubt if ibn Warraq had permission to reprint it (it originally appeared on a website somewhere, since taken down).  See Knight's article: yes, his return was quite public and he's been active as a progressive-sort of muslim ever since.  Consequently, I think that fact is worth mention in this article, I'm only willing to concede the synopsis might not be the best place in the article for it, though I think it was a fair place.  Curiously, the end part of Knight's essay is also anonymously reprinted at http://www.faithfreedom.org/Testimonials/free_man.htm and http://islam-watch.org/LeavingIslam/FreeMan.htm Шизомби (talk) 00:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)