Talk:Legality of polygamy

Remove India from "Countries that only recognize polygamous marriages for Muslims" and add it to "do not recognize polygamous marriages"
In 2015, the Supereme Court of India declared that polygamy was not an integral part of Islam:

Source 1: https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/triple-talaq-polygamy-not-integral-islamic-practices-govt-tells-sc-51025 Source 2: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/polygamy-not-integral-part-of-islam-sc/articleshow/46180105.cms Source 3: https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/polygamy-is-not-integral-part-of-islam-says-supreme-court-47396.html

User:DontWannaDoThis ≠ 01:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Based on your links it would seem that the court has declared, as you say, that polygamy was not an integral part of Islam. But the case was about civil service rules, not the Muslim Personal Law. The implication seems to be that the government could ban polygamy for Muslims - but it hasn't done so yet. - htonl (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Source and Accuracy of Map
Polygamy map What is the source for the map? And is it a good source? For instance, why does the map state that polygamy is "performed" in MN and IA (or any US state)?
 * It does not say that, that is a misunderstanding of what the map shows and/or its colors. The color for MN and IA and some other US states is the color indicating that polygamy is illegal.  In other U.S. states polygamy is both illegal and constitutionally banned.  A similar color applies somewhere else in the world, where polygamy is actually practiced, apparently. --Doncram (talk) 22:50, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It used to say this, before the map was removed (on 1 October 2021); and then it was added again with modified wording (by User:Borysk5 on 26 Jan 2022). Still, this has not solved the problems of the map.2A02:2F0F:B3FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C223 (talk) 01:49, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed the map again. It is unsourced, therefore it fails WP:V. Also "Issue under political consideration" is not appropriate for legend. Laws are often under consideration all over the world, until/unless a law is changed, the map should reflect current law. And the map wasn't even correct for eg. Polygamy in Myanmar that has been outlawed in 2015. 2A02:2F0F:B3FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C0AF (talk) 05:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I restored the map. It's fine to identify that there is one update required, or alternatively one qualification to be provided in a map title or note, to date the map as being from 2011 or 2015 or to footnote that one modification for Myanmar has not yet been updated.  Otherwise, the article is truly terrible, it is flag junk and incomprehensible.  A sensibly organized map makes order and understandability.  A map plus a footnote is fine.  The only way a person can identify that there is some glitch for one country is to consult the map;  it is impossible to consider what the rest of the article says without the map.
 * I came here from noticing that template:Polygamy map is up for deletion at wp:TFD, perhaps/probably as an inappropriate attempt to win a battle here (i presume a battle for the advocates of unintelligibility here). --Doncram (talk) 08:16, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please feel free to comment at Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_March_1. --Doncram (talk) 08:29, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note, the map is sourced by the article, i.e. by all the sources given in the article, which it summarizes. If your complaint is that the legal status of some/many countries is not adequately supported in the article, that is fine to discuss and address, but the map is needed to summarize all that.  Maybe the legal status of some nations and U.S. states is not known, in which those areas should be coded in some color indicating that. --Doncram (talk) 08:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I removed the map again. It is unsourced. It is not even sourced according to the text of this article. In some countries (including India) polygamy is only legal for Muslims - this must be reflected on the map. And where are the sources for the countries listed in the legend as "Polygamy illegal, polygamous marriages constitutionally banned" vs those listed as only "Polygamy illegal"? And, as it has been pointed above "Issue under political consideration" is not an appropriate category for the legend. Laws are under consideration all the time all over the world. A map should show the current legal status; if/when a law is changed, the map is changed too. I therefore removed the map. When you try to add contested unsourced material to an article, you need WP:CONS to do it.2A02:2F0F:B3FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C223 (talk) 00:02, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * A reson given in support of the map (here:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_March_1) is that: "I restored the map to the Legality of polygamy article, where it saves the article [...] The map provides means of understanding something in the world."
 * How can the map "save the article" and "provide means of understanding something in the world" when:
 * it is unsourced
 * it is blatantly incorrect/outdated for some countries (eg Myanmar)
 * it has a vague legend "Issue under political consideration" - what are readers going to understand from this
 * it oversimplifies the legal status: it does not show that in some countries (eg. India, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Lebanon - according to the article) polygamy is only legal for Muslims 2A02:2F0F:B3FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C223 (talk) 00:55, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * An argument for the map is that it is sourced to the text of this article. But it is not! The legend of the map differentiates between countries where the status is "Polygamy illegal, polygamous marriages constitutionally banned" vs countries where the status is "Polygamy illegal". This is not in any way sourced to the text of the article (or to any other source). 2A02:2F0F:B3FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C223 (talk) 01:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * If there are no objections, I'm going to remove the map in a few days.2A02:2F0F:B2FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C011 (talk) 06:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I removed the map now.2A02:2F0F:B1FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:C4B3 (talk) 08:51, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Life Sience
Xylem and The phloem 41.113.234.108 (talk) 19:20, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Israel
Doesn't Israel have customary laws for Muslims and I think polygamy is covered there? Nlivataye (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)