Talk:William Muir

1
What is the muslim view of his work?

His he thought as a friend, foe or in-bettwen?

--Striver 10:04, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Ah, now i know, he was in a sunni enviroment and therfore accepted rethoric as "there is not a shadow of evidence for Ali having thought the caliphat" as facts.

Anyone who have read about Ghadire Khumm knows that is not true. --Striver 10:32, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Merge
I've suggested that Annals of the Early Caliphate be merged into this article because the book is apparently not notable enough for its own Wikipedia article and belongs in the context of this article. -- Mikeblas (talk) 23:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Updates Of Article of October 2011
I will be slowly updating the page. This is not a re-write. I am aware of the recent changes to the page and my goal is to polish the content and present it in a neutral, more readable, encyclopedia-style of writing. I will not be removing any referenced material without first ensuring that there is consensus, nor will I be adding anything that may shape the perception of the reader towards any single viewpoint. Bringing this to a GA standard is the overall goal, by presenting a well rounded biography that is usable by both first time readers and experts. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Citing Life of mahomet on wikipedia ok given we dont present it as fact
Admin on RSN says his life of mahomet book is ok: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&oldid=481469083#William_Muir.27s_opinions_in_Life_of_Mahomet but never should be presented as facts. furthermore, fellow academics like Watt have praised his books and said: "Among 20th century scholars, W. M. Watt (1961) described Muir's Life as following 'in detail the standard Muslim accounts, though not uncritically', and Albert Hourani (1989) declared that it 'is still not quite superseded'. Bennett (1998) praises it as 'a detailed life of Muhammad more complete than almost any other previous book, at least in English,'" So its ok to use the source (his a famous and well known historian and academic), just dont present his view/book it as fact--Misconceptions2 (talk) 12:48, 12 March 2012 (UTC)