Talk:Umm Kulthum bint Ali

Awn ibn Ja'afer.
Awn ibn Ja'afer I couldn't cross-reference his name on any Arabic website, some cite a Marawan --The Brain 03:40, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

I found his name in her biography in seyar alaam alnblaa -an Arabic book- مجاهد الكناني (talk) 14:17, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

About the Burial Place
It's not a certain fact that his burial place that is mentioned in this article is true. According to the following reference: http://www.tebyan.net/Islam_Features/Prophet/Companions/2006/2/7/27498.html Arjanizary (talk) 18:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Notability
Notability is not inherited. Being the child of a notable person, and the wife of another, does not make a person notable in their own right. We need sources that discuss this person and, right now, it doesn't look like we have them. This may well be a candidate for deletion. - Sitush (talk) 16:37, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I think you may well be right. I am still unfamiliar with judging a topic's notability status so I think you would be best to decide. When I first came to the page, it was full of rubbish. Please see history of page and you will know what I mean. I had to delete practically half the page. As it stands now it gives no meaning or context to this persons life anyway. Please do whatever you think may be appropriate. Mbcap (talk) 01:21, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


 * It is not an area with which I am familiar. My note above was intended as a "shot across the bows" in the hope that some people who are familiar might be able to improve this thing. I suspect that improvement might involve use of non-English sources and I would thus suggest that people consult WP:NOENG for the accepted protocol regarding use of those. Other than that comment, let's give it a bit of time. - Sitush (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Sources of marriage
Added tag for reference. Removal of tag without reference/source may be avoided for the sake of neutrality and authenticity. Nannadeem (talk) 21:36, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Nannadeem - What part requires reference? Mbcap (talk) 22:36, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * AoA (thanks brother).Personally I am not interested in our differences with regard to relationships but I am interested that our differences which are amendable per math should be attempted for settlement sincerely. I opted to place here tag for marriage references  so that researchers could get benefit from our deliberations. Please see:

It is also said that according to: Sayyid Muḥsin b. Sayyid ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Amīn al-ʿĀmilī (سید محسن بن سید عبدالکریم الامین العاملي) (b.1284/1867-d.1371/1952) son of 'Abd al-Karim al-'Amili "The daughters of Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib whose names or Kunyas are Umm Kulthum have been three or four"1. Umm Kulthum Kubra, the daughter of Lady Fatima 2.	Umm Kulthum Wusta, the wife of Muslim b. Aqil 3.	Umm Kulthum Sughra 4.	Zaynab Sughra whose kunya is Umm Kulthum
 * Very little is known about her though her name appears several times in history. By popular accounts she was younger than Hazrat Zainab but like her she was very intelligent and pious. She was married to Muhammad Bin Jaffer. Source: http://www.aldhiaa.com/english/book/book/holy_prophet_and_ahlul_bayt_library/fatime_al_zahra/a_brief_biography_of_hazrat_fatima_a_s/010.html
 * See a marriage dispute discussed at: http://www.al-shia.org/html/eng/books/encyclopedia/chapter5a/9.html

Now see what confusion is here. So more references(primary/secondary or tertiary) would be great help. Nannadeem (talk) 15:02, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Nannadeem: Thank you for the reply. Both of the sources you have posted are Shia fan sites and fail WP:RS. We do not source information at Wikipedia from fan sites or anything of that nature.
 * Some secondary sources are Mir'at ul-Oqool by Majlisi, Al-Mabsoot by Al-Tusi, and al-Istighathah fi Bida‘ ath-Thalatha by Abul Qasim al-Kufi. All of these are Shia scholars vetted by the Shia school and were experts in their field. Others are Al-Shafi by Sharif al-Murtaza and Takmilat Al-Rijal by Abdal Nabi Al-Kazimi.
 * There is no confusion here. The marriage information is well sourced.
 * I have no idea why you mention her piety and intelligence as they are not relevant to the discussion.


 * Mbcap (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Furu al-Kafi, Vol. 5, p. 346, as quoted in Tragedy of al-Zahra can be read at Shia view of Umar.
 * Caliph Umar did have a wife named Umm Kulsoom Bint Jarwal Ansari. She died in the 50th year after Hijra. Her namaz Jinaza was lead by Imam Hasan. (Al Istiab by Ibn Abdul Barr Volume 2 page 795 Tareekhe Khamees vol II p 318 History of al-Tabri vol 12 p 15 also Roza tul Ihbab Volume 3 page 585,  Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah Tareekhe Khamees Volume 3 page 318.  These all are 100% secondary & tertiary. Tertiary sources are publications such as encyclopedias and other compendia that summarize primary and secondary sources.   So confusion is self explanatory.


 * Wikipedia is a tertiary source. It is better for all of us to have balanced page incorporating view point of each and every community.  I do not want to paint the page with references anymore just for debate.Nannadeem (talk) 23:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Nannadeem; yes there are also tertiary sources for this as well as secondary. I have just added another nine references so as to satisfy those who are not yet convinced. The references are from the most notable experts in the field of Shia school. I appreciate your desire to have a debate but I would ask that we keep the discussion focused on building the Wiki. However you are welcome to debate with me through email correspondence if you wish. Mbcap (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Mbcap Having been impressed of your grip over history, I request you to please create the page of  Umm Kulthum bint Jarwila Khuzima. You may see noting at page Hazrat Umar where reference 119 (Nasab Qurayshi, P.349 by az-Zubayri) has been provided. I t would be a great help for researchers. Thanks. Any mistake from my side may please be pardon considering me a human composed of the material to err. Nannadeem (talk) 20:52, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

It is clear that there is evidence to suggest that Umar ibn Khattab was not the spouse of Umm Kulthum bint Ali; my edit made it clear that this position is held by SOME Muslims. I did not vandalize the page or attempt to hide pieces of information. Please allow Wikipedia users to explore the sources of both positions. Kaztrack (talk) 05:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that the position of Umm Kulthum bint Ali being the disputed wife of Ali be labelled as a 'minority position'. Would anyone have objections to this? Kaztrack (talk) 05:18, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Stop adding false and fringe bordering information onto the article. I suggest you read the sources again. Mbcap (talk) 18:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I have read the information you have provided, have you read the information from the sources that you removed from the page? It is impolite to accuse me of adding false information to the article, when it is clear that many Muslims are uncertain about whether a marriage took place between Umm Kulthum bint Ali and Umar ibn Khattab--and clear evidence has been provided. I have attempted to constructively edit the page and offered a solution to resolve this dispute but you have belied my suggestion. Please do not allow Wikipedia to become an outlet for sectarianism, and allow both competing views to be considered by Wikipedia users. I am awaiting a constructive solution to this dispute on your end. Kaztrack (talk) 20:01, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Accuse you? You are adding fringe bordering information that you have sourced from a Shia fan site and a blog. You call this clear evidence. The sources are a joke. Please read WP:RS. Mbcap (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Mbcap The sources are acceptable and there are clear references within these sources which clearly elucidate the nature of this historical dispute (I should also note that there is information in this article that is completely uncited that you leave untouched). It is clear that other users before me have also challenged your claims. You first state that there is no historical dispute (in your initial edit summary), then you state that yes there is a historical dispute but the opinion that Umm Kulthum bint Ali didn't marry Umar ibn Khattab is 'fringe'? So is there a dispute or not? When I attempt to show Wikipedia users that this is an issue of historical dispute you erase the information. Your behaviour is unacceptable and I refer you to the policies and guidelines page WP:PGCHANGE. You make no attempts to offer a solution to this dispute. May I remind you that this Wikipedia page is not your personal blog, it has no sole owner and attempting to silence competing points of view should be discouraged. Kaztrack (talk) 22:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Kaztrack You say that the sources you provided are acceptable. You present Shia fan sites and blogs as sources so you must be incompetent. I apologise but such bogus sources will not do. I reverted you and so did another editor because the mess you created had to be cleaned up. Mbcap (talk) 02:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Mbcap

Have you checked out the original 11 sources of the article for yourself? I have just reviewed the two sources I provided. The second one is I agree not suitable for an encyclopedia, but the first one certainly is. It is a well researched article that provides a litany of sourcing.
 * Kaztrack, please check Wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources. Mbcap is correct - the websites you link are not reliable sources. Edward321 (talk) 05:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Composing observation to page
This page has unique characters amongst ENWP articles. This page has 14 lines in its references box/Section + 11 Lines in Bibliography totaling to 25 lines. Whereas it has only 11 (including 3 without source) lines in text. Therefore it needs to be expanded in view of material from both sects in order to satisfy the neutrality. Nannadeem (talk) 12:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Marriage age, death of umer and possibility of children
How can marriage be consummated when bride was 8 years old? According to dates given in wikipedia, umer died when umm e kulthum was 10 years old. How is it possible to produce two children for a 10 year old? Farhadali1005 (talk) 14:28, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Umm Kulthum's date of birth is given here as 630. I question this; I think the year is sometimes given as 628. However, I can't produce a source for the alternative date, so I'm not able to introduce it to the article. In any case, she cannot have been born much earlier than 628, since her parents were married in 624 and she was their fourth child.


 * The marriage date of December 638 is absolutely sound, being from Tabari. Unless there is a rival date from an equally good source, we shall have to accept it. I'd rather not think about "how" such a marriage could have been consummated. It is not our job to pass moral judgment on history but only to record what happened.


 * Umar died in November 644, so Umm Kulthum would have been 14 by then, and it's quite possible that she had given birth to a child. Two children is a stretch, but perhaps they were twins? With such an obstetric history, it is perhaps unsurprising that poor Umm Kulthum had no children by her subsequent husbands.Petra MacDonald (talk) 13:27, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * There is a reference to Umm Kulthum's age in Dhahabi's Siyar, volume 3 page 500.
 * Running it through Google Translate indicates that she was born in 6 AH, which, according to the calendar converter, was between May 627 and May 628.
 * This would make her between 10.5 and 11.5 when she married Umar; and 17, plus or minus 6 months, at his death.
 * The same article indicates that she died "early in the reign of Muawiyah". He became Caliph in 661; I'm not sure how many years into his reign would be considered "early".Petra MacDonald (talk) 10:28, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

How can umer marry Janabe Umme Kulsum (sa)?
Umer's daughter, Hafsa was a wife of Prophet Muhammad. This makes Hafsa the Step-mother of Hz Fatima and the Step-Grandmother of Umme Kalthum, the daughter of Ali and Fatima. Do you know what this means? It makes Umer the Step-Great Grandfather of Umme Kalthum. The sunnis claim the daughter of Ali married her Great Grandfather? Is such sort of marriage allowed in Islam, please prove from the Quran Hasnain11072 (talk) 01:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't think it matters whether such a marriage is "allowed" in Islam; we only record that it happened.
 * Perhaps the sharia ruling was not as well developed in 638 as it is now.
 * Two of Uthman's wives were mother and daughter. He divorced the mother before the daughter was born, so technically he was never the girl's stepfather. I hope this kind of marriage would not be allowed today, but nobody seems to have complained at the time.Petra MacDonald (talk) 13:33, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Fixing articles
The article currently has many primary sources, hopefully in the coming hours, I will fix these primary sources with secondary sources. Just informing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.73.112.10 (talk) 14:35, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Bibi (sa) name was not Zaynab
Zaynab (sa) was Ali (as) other daughter. Kulthum bint Ali (sa) real name is not sure. WikiShia records many different names so we cannot only put Zaynab in the starting. Her name is disputed, I'm removing Zaynab. Thnx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.63.138.237 (talk) 18:47, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Although it does not sound like it umm kulthum is a name so she might not even have another "real" name مجاهد الكناني (talk) 05:07, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

IP edits
It seems a bit dishonest to describe the following book as a primary source: -- Toddy1 (talk) 12:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Third source
I have checked the third source -marked unreliable- and there is nothing there about any controversy. Note that I could only find the two first prints of the book from 1981 and 1982 and not the 2001 print mentioned as a reference. 2A02:CB80:4097:808:7A:F4A1:453D:461E (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

The infobox
An IP editor objects to the infobox. The reasons he/she gave are as follows: As far as I can see, the old infobox is more useful to the reader. -- Toddy1 (talk) 20:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 15:54, 19 May 2022 Adding the royalty template which is much suitable and usually founded on the wives of caliphs/kings/emperors
 * 18:31, 19 May 2022 Re-adding template; not 'a lot of good information' was removed; her alleged cause of death being poisoning disputed (see her WikiShia article), its only al-Sana'ni who says this; the only thing removed was the unneccessary long relative list, which would include so many people from her father's family, her grandfather's family; it would be infobox bloat; this template has also far more and better information for her; also re-adding all four spouses

Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2022
i am sunni muslim and none of prophets grand daughter were married to umar /usman or abubakar sideeq rz Hammadshah73 (talk) 14:39, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

ok Hammadshah73 (talk) 14:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:43, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Marriage to Umar
@Albertatiran it is not clear why you reverted the edits I made without any prior discussion. Using alleged as a title suggests that it is the most likely view. Though, it is a fringe bordering view that even Shias dispute. Shias make 10% of Muslims. And even less Than 10% of Shias have these views. Yet, they are being over-represented as if it is the mainstream view. Please read WP:RS & Reliable sources and undue weight. I would suggest you create a seperate page for Umm Kulthum in Shia Islam. Belomaad (talk) 23:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)


 * As an example of an odd thing attributed to a source, what is the line about genealogists doing the when the quote provided alongside the source says nothing of genealogists? Iskandar323 (talk) 03:26, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @Iskandar323,
 * The source is quoting the genealogist’s findings.
 * I would also like to cite the findings of, Shia historian, Dr. Sayyed Jafar Shahidi (Life of Fatemeh Zahra(SA)” Pp.263-265.). Dr. Shahidi is, in my opinion, one of the most distinguished contemporary Shia historians, and I know of no contemporary Shia historian to be more reliable than him. Belomaad (talk) 14:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Belomaad Looking at I see "Dr. Shahidi is in my opinion the most distinguished contemporary Shia Historian, and I know of no contemporary Shia historian to be more reliable than him, but at the same time we all may make mistake. "
 * That's exactly what you wrote above except for the "but at the same time we all make mistakes". Can you explain this?
 * Also, where is his book published? Doug Weller  talk 16:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @Doug Weller,
 * What is there to explain?
 * The original book and its summary have been published many times (~60) by, among others, Farhang Publishing House. Belomaad (talk) 16:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Belomaad I want an explanation about your making a statement that seems to be your opinion that Is copied from another website.
 * 60 publishers! Evidence? Doug Weller  talk 17:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Doug Weller
 * This is a discussion why do you need a citation for every word I type??
 * not 60 publishers but 60 editions… Belomaad (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That’s different. But you still haven’t answered my main question, why did I find that something you wrote.above as your opinion can be found word fr word on a website?l Doug Weller  talk 19:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Probably a coincidence Belomaad (talk) 10:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Belomaad Very unlikely Doug Weller  talk 10:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Edit: Shias make 10% of Muslims. And even less Than 10% of Shias have these views. Yet, they are being over-represented as if it is the mainstream view. Please read WP:RS & Reliable sources and undue weight. I would suggest you create a seperate page for Umm Kulthum in Shia Islam. Belomaad (talk) 11:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Also I am sure you are aware that there are very few works that discuss the marriage of Umm Kulthum, which is why this section is heavily reliant on one source. In cases like this, it is ok to cite primary sources. Belomaad (talk) 10:28, 28 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Adding content to an article requires consensus per WP:CONSENSUS. I suggest that you revert your edits and see if that consensus exists.


 * For my own part, I think your edits have noticably degraded the article. Your sources, such as alseraj.net and Qamoos Arrijal, are all partisan and sectarian. In particular, the books you cite are either primary or published by a publisher without a reputation for fact-checking. As a result, your edits have repeatedly violated WP:NEUTRALITY. By the way, nowhere does WP:CITE allows you to abandon the principle of WP:VERIFIABILITY.


 * May I ask for your advice here? Thank you. Albertatiran (talk) 15:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * There are at least another two scholarly sources mentioning the marriage that are not currently cited: one Routledge and the other a further mention by Madelung from the Encyclopedia Iranica. Perhaps these might help resolve the impasse. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * is Ali al-Sallabi a reliable historian? Belomaad (talk) 11:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * What source is that? If it's Ali al-Sallabi, that's a rather political chap. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Iskandar323 He did get involved in politics just like Madelung Belomaad (talk) 13:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Madelung was a tenured Oxford fellow, not a political activist ... Iskandar323 (talk) 14:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * He did get a degree from multiple institutions Belomaad (talk) 10:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Albertatiran There is no controversy regarding the marriage of Umm Kulthum. The majority of historians subscribe to the mainstream view. It may seem that there is a controversy due to 1 or 2 historians mentioning conspiracy theories. But the article is giving such fringe views too much weight, when one or two sentences regarding this should be more than enough. Feel free to contact me, should you have any further queries. Sorry for not responding earlier. Belomaad (talk) 14:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't recall alseraj.net or any such thing Belomaad (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Belomaad FYI, Footnote 24 redirects to alseraj.net, one of the many unreliable and polemic sources you've introduced into the article. Based on the advice you have received so far, the right course of action would have been to revert your edits, see if there is consensus for your edits, and, if not, cooperate with other editors towards a consensus by replacing your unreliable and partisan sources with the scholarly ones that Iskandar323 has shared (or similar ones). But you only seem interested in forcefully inserting your sectarian POV into the article. Consider this to be my last warning before reporting you to the admins' noticeboard: Please revert your poorly-sourced edits and follow the standard procedure. Albertatiran (talk) 05:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Al Sistani (alseraj.net) is a very reputable scholar.
 * Here is another secondary source mentioning the marriage: https://historyofislam.org/changes-in-gender-relations/ and another from a book by the historian, Ali al-Sallabi.
 * Generally speaking, reverting the edits of fellow editors doesn't help improve the article. If you believe that a source is not reliable, try reaching out to the editor explaining to them why the specific source doesn't meet that specific criteria and try finding a different source instead.
 * This will, 1, help the editor avoid such mistakes in future edits, thereby improving other articles, indirectly, and, 2, improve the article being edited, so that other editors won't have to add similar things again only to be reverted, thereby making no improvements to the article.
 * The sources I cited aren't partisan. They are scholarly.
 * Please keep your accusations to yourself.
 * If anyone is forcefully inserting their sectarian POV into the article, it is not me, especially that the article is giving too much weight to the minority view. Belomaad (talk) 11:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It is funny that you accuse me of sectarianism when all my edits of Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and Wikidata are related to either biology, chemistry or European history. You, on the other hand, are a part of a sectarian task force and solely edit articles related to islamic politics and islamic figures. I have no affiliation to any sectarian taskforce and most of my contributions are in biology related Hungarian Wikidata items. I started editing for the purpose of improving access to reliable multilingual information on jargon. Wikipedia is not one's personal blog to inflate their own fringe views. It is there to provide an unbiased view. Belomaad (talk) 11:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Recent edits by are, in their entirety, drawn from partisan and polemical sources that do not meet the WP:RELIABILITY criteria for Wikipedia articles, especially for articles about the history of Islam. In particular, none of the books cited by Belomaad are published by publishers known for fact-checking. These sources include alsersj.net and Mir'at ul-oqul by the Shia jurist Muhammad Baqir Majlisi.
 * As a result, the content added by Belomaad repeatedly violates the principles of WP:NEUTRALITY and WP:VERIFIABILITY. In addition, there does not seem to be a WP:CONSENSUS for his/her edits and Belomaad has refused to investigate whether there is one.
 * All these issues were brought to Belomaad's attention on several occasions; see Talk:Umm Kulthum bint Ali and the recent edit history of the article. Another editor,, even shared academic sources, currently unused in the article, that could replace the unreliable ones introduced by Belomaad.
 * All these have been to no avail as Belomaad seems only interested in forcefully and repeatedly inserting his/her sectarian POV into the article, over and over, ignoring other editors' advice. Please see the recent edit history for the developments.
 * Separately, Iskandar323 and have raised some concerns about Belomaad's integrity in Talk:Umm Kulthum bint Ali and his/her responses suggest a flagrant ignorance about the mission of WP:WikiProject Islam. For instance, in one of his/her responses, Belomaad suggests that the article should largely reflect the the polemics of the majority rather than the academic findings of historians and Islamicists. (There is still room in the article for sectarian views when they are clearly labeled as such, e.g., a separate section about Shia views.) Albertatiran (talk) 13:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I will be citing the sources that Iskandar123 mentioned in due course. However, going through them will take some time.
 * The sources I cited aren't polemical nor partisan, as you claim. They are known for fact-checking. Belomaad (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Albertatiran The results for stale in your editwarring report. I'd suggest ANI. Doug Weller  talk 13:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)