Talk:Will and Testament of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá

Appointment of Shoghi Effendi
Where can this be added? Wiki-uk 12:47, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Hands of the Cause
It's mostly quotes with almost no text, and there's a main article. I recommend we use the  template and migrate most of those quotes to that page. It just seems cleaner.


 * Not sure. These are key concepts in Baha'i divisions, and it seems clearer to quote the provisions rather than summarize. Editorializing these will open it up to interpretation and edit conflicts over that. It also creates the opportunity to introduce some of the (just corrected) mistakes found in "The Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice" sub-section.
 * The Guardian is not the Center of the Covenant — `Abdu'l-Baha is.
 * `Abdu'l-Baha did not establish the House of Justice or give it authority to address issues not found in the writings — Baha'u'llah did. (Tablets, pg. 68)
 * It's not a "duty" of the Guardian to appoint Hands — it's a right.


 * I do think that we are about at the limit with respect to size. MARussellPESE 14:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

And "dispute" section to the article.
Hello, I would like to add a new section "dispute" or "Criticism" to this article. Will and Testament of Abdul Baha was not accepted by everyone, the handwriting-experts gave their opinion about it, as a result, it's authenticity was disputed. Some people left the mainstream Baha'i faith and formed new sects. This has been discussed in these pages : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baháʼí_divisions, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Baháʼís , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Zimmer , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._Ainsworth_Mitchell , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_White_(Baháʼí_author) Thank you.Serv181920 (talk) 10:09, 26 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Not sure what the recommendation is. There is currently a "Challenges to the Will" section already in the article. It mentions Ruth White and the handwriting thing. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  19:44, 26 November 2020 (UTC)


 * My bad, I don't know how i missed it. It is already there. :) Thank you.Serv181920 (talk) 07:49, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Original Research
, please read No original research. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  20:16, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Cuñado I would request you to read WP:USINGPRIMARY policy of Wikipedia before making changes to my edit.Asad29591 (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no WP:USINGPRIMARY, and I think what you are referring to is WP:PRIMARY, which is what I linked to above. Quoting primary source material to introduce a POV that is likely to be challenged, and also part of a tiny minority, is not in line with numerous core content policy guidelines. This article needs to be brought in line with policies, which means finding neutral, reliable secondary sources to set up a framework for the page and reducing the amount of quoting the document. You are doing the opposite by adding more of the primary source material, selectively to add a disputed POV, I might add. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  16:35, 9 December 2020 (UTC)