Talk:Wahhabi Islam: From Revival and Reform to Global Jihad

Explanatory notes
I realize this is an unusually long article especially for a relatively obscure book. I've gone to all this trouble because DeLong-Bas's work is somewhat unique in being of basic considerable interest to anyone studying Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, but ummm ... not an easy read. So I thought going over the main points of the book -- as opposed a few paragraphs of description -- might provide a cliffsNotes "I read it so you won't have to" service.

The book is "the first extensive explication of the theology" of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab (according to one reviewer) and  the first time an English speaker has made "a close study" of 14 volumes of Wahhab's collected works (I think). It is also the one book that contradicts the historical consensus that Wahhabis were Takfiris, who believed almost all other Muslims were not true Muslims. On the other hand at 290 not-terribly-well-written pages is likely to try the patience of even readers very interested in the Middle East and Saudi Arabia. I myself only summoned the will to finish reading it with inspiration of writing this article.

One other thing. I have shortened Ibn Abd al-Wahhab to "IAW" a number of times in the article to avoid too much repetition. al-Wahhab is one of the Names of God, so rather inappropriate for shortening. "Abd al-Wahhab" was the name of IAW's father, so is not so accurate either. I suppose "Wahhab" might work, but it's so ... un-Arabic IMHO. --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Very well researched and written essay, however, as per WP:PSTS, primary sources can not be used to "analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize" the topic and WP:ANALYSIS needs to be supported by independent reliable sources. Tanbircdq (talk) 12:26, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * But they have not been used to "analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize", only to summarize. --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:50, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * As per WP:PLOT, the summary you have written for the topic appears to be far too lengthy. Tanbircdq (talk) 14:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is was much work to write and it is information that can't be found elsewhere. --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC)