User talk:Israfilsulayman

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 23:27, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

September 2021
Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Muhammad and the Bible. Drmies (talk) 23:32, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you explain to me which parts were not sourced? -Israfil Sulayman


 * The issue is that you were not citing a reliable source. Academic papers are good sources, if they have been published in a journal and, thus, subject to peer review. Research published on a professor's blog/website, without peer review, are not reliable. —C.Fred (talk) 00:56, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I just mentioned several reliable sources. (Professor John reeves) (Bernard Lewis). So why was it deleted now?

-Israfil Sulayman


 * The only source you cited was an unpublished (well, published only on his university web page) research project by Reeves. —C.Fred (talk) 01:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Muhammad and the Bible) for a period of 24 hours for persistently adding information not backed up by reliable sources. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. —C.Fred (talk) 01:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I also sourced his Academia.edu work -Israfil.

The only opinion that is NOT mentioned in any of those sources is the following sentence: "Nevertheless, the similarity of the work to the account of Jews of Arabia waiting for an Arabian Prophet in Islamic literature may be evidence from outside the Islamic tradition that Jews were waiting for an Arabian prophet who would give them victory over their enemies.  " Which is my opinion from my book, Muhammad in the Torah. It is a minority opinion. By the way, I've studied under many scholars of Islamic law for at least 20 years.
 * So you concede that you have been adding original research to the article, then, which is inappropriate. —C.Fred (talk) 01:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh ok, I didn't know that was the rules. Islamic law has traditionally been studied under scholars. Academia and means of study is not the ONLY way that Islam has been studied. In fact, traditional studies of Islam have been the main source and the most reliable source of Islamic knowledge, compared to Academic studies which are considered by Islamic scholars such as Nuh Keller to be unreliable compared to  learning under traditional scholars. But learning under traditional scholars will not necessarily get you a p.h.d from a university or a "published" work, but that doesn't mean it's less reliable. In fact, it is the opinion of Nuh Keller that Academic publications and oreintalist works are Unreliable compared to studies under a traditional teacher. Additionally all researched, published or otherwise may contain "original research." -Israfil
 * Well, Israfil, it's always helpful to know the rules before you jump in somewhere. It's a mystery to me why you thought you could just continue after being reverted three or four times. Where you studied doesn't really matter here, and it also doesn't matter that published material contains "original research"--it's published, and that is the first step toward being acceptable. Nuh Keller would probably not want to contribute to Wikipedia under our set of rules and guidelines, and that's fine. If you don't find ways to contribute that adhere to our rules, then the next block is likely to be a real block. Drmies (talk) 13:54, 12 September 2021 (UTC)