User talk:Ibn3alee

Hanbali article
Sir, I think it might be a good idea to review WP:IRS, WP:V and perhaps even WP:SYNTHESIS. For various reasons, Wikipedia policy leans toward secondary sources, especially those which can be independently verified by the majority of readers (that means modern, English-language sources wherever possible). If in doubt, it's always best to start a discussion on talk pages first. MezzoMezzo


 * Thank you and I'm sorry if my edition

were in contrast with Wikipedia rules. "modern, English-language sources" Yes, I understand but what if reliable English texts aren't available, is Wikipedia going to give WRONG information only because there are no available English texts are there?


 * I hope you don't mind, but I moved your comments below mine as typically the latest comments come further down on a talk apge.
 * Anyway, I think a good essay to read would be Verifiability, not truth. While it isn't a policy, approved essays are reflective of community consensus. Perhaps one editor thinks information on a page is wrong, but at the end of the day it doesn't matter what any of us think; it only matters what we can prove.
 * If you check GoogleBooks, you will find many reliable publishers such as Brill or Cambridge University Press make their works available for free, and a great deal of research is devoted to th development of Muslim schools of thought. That would be the simplest way to start. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:20, 30 March 2014 (UTC)