Template:Did you know nominations/Hasyim Muzadi


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:30, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Hasyim Muzadi

 * ... that Indonesian Muslim cleric Hasyim Muzadi rejected calls to send Indonesians for a jihad against the US-led invasion of Afghanistan? Source: Azra 2004 p.50 (in English), this link in Indonesian" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
 * ALT1:... that President Joko Widodo flew to visit the Indonesian Muslim cleric Hasyim Muzadi one day before Hasyim's death? Source:
 * ALT2:... that Vice President Jusuf Kalla led the funeral procession of the Indonesian Muslim cleric Hasyim Muzadi? Source:
 * ALT3:... that Indonesian Muslim cleric Hasyim Muzadi said that the September 11 attacks were a "tragedy of humanity" and must not be turned into a religious conflict?
 * ALT4: ... that Indonesian Muslim cleric Hasyim Muzadi ran as the running mate of the incumbent president in the 2004 presidential election?


 * Reviewed: K. B. Sainis

5x expanded by HaEr48 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Thank you for a detailed bio, on good sources. Hooks: I am not yet happy. Better mention 9-11 if you go for the original. The ALTs tells us that he was prominent, but nothing about why. The political run might be more interesting to the general readership. I could imagine also something based on "He said that the September 11 attacks were a tragedy of humanity and must not be transformed into a religious conflict.", - easier to grasp than the original hook. - Article: I did minor copyediting, but didn't know how to fix "he did not call for liberal thought should be denied". -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talk • contribs) 07:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for copyediting, really appreciate it :) About liberal thought, sorry I missed proofreading that passage. I updated it, hopefully it's clearer, but if it's not, the original source is here Rumadi p.258, let me know what it should read in that sentence. About hooks, ok let's strike ALT1 and 2. I added ALT3 and ALT4, is any of them better? Also, what do you mean mention 9/11 with the original hook? I think the jihad in Afghanistan would be in response to the US-led invasion, not directly about 9/11. HaEr48 (talk) 07:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks for fast responses to all concerns. I should also say that I found no obvious copyvio. I approve all three remaining hooks, my favourite would be ALT3, making me curious about the person. If ALT4, I'd drop the runoff appendix, - let's not say everything ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg There is close paraphrasing from the sources. It is not enough to move around the same words, but to use your own words to express the thought. Otherwise, put it in quotes.
 * Source: He maintained that a jihad does not always mean holy war; efforts to develop Islam and the Muslim ummah are also called jihad.
 * Article: He said that jihad did not always mean holy war; developing Islam and the Muslim community (ummah) was also jihad.
 * Source: He also believed that the terrorist attacks in the United States were a tragedy of humanity, not a tragedy of religion.
 * Article: He said that the September 11 attacks were a tragedy of humanity and must not be transformed into a religious conflict.
 * Source: The goal was to target students with strong religious sentiments but who have yet to receive solid religious training. This group of students is seen as particularly susceptible to fundamentalism
 * Article: He saw college students with strong religious sentiments but without solid Islamic training and tradition as susceptible to fundamentalism
 * Re ALT3, it is not clear from the source that it's talking about the September 11 attacks. This should also be fixed in the article. Yoninah (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . I paraphrased all of the above, and quoted some oriignal phrases, hopefully now it's not too close? As for 9/11 attacks, the chapter (for example, see intro, and then throughout the chapter) is clearly about "terrorists' attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in the United States, and the subsequent U.S. military retaliation against Afghanistan" (p.44), and no other terrorist attacks in the US were mentioned. So, "the terrorist attacks in the United States" (with a definite article) clearly refers to 9/11. I hope this clarifies, otherwise I'm happy to clarify further. HaEr48 (talk) 14:33, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Thank you, . The text that you left is still too close to the original, so I put a lot of the phrases in quotes. Thanks for explaining the "terrorists' attacks" as referring to 9/11. The ALT3 that Gerda and I like is now inaccurate, and I would suggest just putting it in quotes as in the article. What do you think about this:
 * ALT3a: ... that Indonesian Muslim cleric Hasyim Muzadi, a proponent of moderate Islam, said that the September 11 attacks were a "tragedy of humanity, not a tragedy of religion"? Yoninah (talk) 20:29, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note and for copyediting. Why is the original ALT3 inaccurate? the religious conflict bit is also in the source.
 * He also believed that the terrorist attacks in the United States were a tragedy of humanity, not a tragedy of religion. As such, the terrorist attacks should not be transformed into religious conflicts. (p50)
 * I feel that the original ALT3 is better because (1) it has less direct quote and a bit more paraphrasing and (2) "religious conflict" might be more interesting to the general reader than "tragedy of religion" (which is IMO slightly an unusual phrase). HaEr48 (talk) 20:42, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I hear you. I just thought that the quote had a nice ring to it. Let's decide between ALT3 and ALT3a, as this is her review. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg I guess it's my turn to approve, because I didn't make a hook ;) - I am with the "ring" of the quote, Yoninah, because it almost makes us hear our subject's style, but I am even more with you, HaEr48, as the article creator, - just today an article I wrote was shown with a hook I didn't like. Having said that: both are approved, - please watch what will happen in the preparation phase, when you can still change things. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment - This is currently on RD at ITN. Does that preclude this from running in DYK (like an ITN blurb would)? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:01, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The DYK rules explicitly say that "Articles linked at ITN or OTD not in bold, including the recent deaths section, are still eligible." HaEr48 (talk) 02:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Alright. I wasn't sure if the rules had changed since 2014. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:28, 19 March 2017 (UTC)