User talk:ParthikS8/Archive 2

Disambiguation link notification for November 19
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
 * Al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi
 * added a link pointing to Iman
 * God in Islam
 * added a link pointing to Incomparable

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Colonialism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Illyricum.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Ibn Taymiyyah
Hi Parthik, You have added the word controversial to this page that's not encyclopedic way to write anything. We can't add controversial to any pages whether they are or not as per encyclopedic terms. I know Ibn Taymiyyah reputation is not well among people but for that we can't do that. You have given two sources for the claim, "Ghobadzdeh, Naser; Akbarzadeh, Shahram (18 May 2015). "Sectarianism and the prevalence of 'othering' in Islamic thought". Third World Quarterly. 36 (4): 691–704. doi:10.1080/01436597.2015.1024433. S2CID 145364873. Retrieved 6 June 2020. Yet Ibn Taymiyyah remained unconvinced and issued three controversial fatwas to justify revolt against mongol rule." and '''Grigoryan, S. (2011). Anti-Christian Polemics of Ibn Taymiyya: Corruption of the Scriptures (Doctoral dissertation, MA thesis), Central European University, Budapest).'''. Both are unreliable references and that should be removed from the page. MA thesis or Ph.D thesis are not accepted as reliable references. For Third World Quarterly reference, wikipedia itself says not reliable source. Anyone issuing controversial fatwas doesn't mean controversial scholar. There are many controversial leaders in the history but I have never seen the word controversial in their pages or any other encyclopedia. I have read more than 20-25 books about Ibn Taymiyyah including encyclopedias but I didn't find the word controversial. Will you please consider to remove? Hasan (talk) 01:14, 28 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I think this should not be regarded as an issue for my personal talk page - it relates to a large, high traffic and heavily edited article where many other editors are also involved - so please post it on talk:Ibn Taymiyyah under a new section titled "Controversial?", and I will respond on there. Happy editing, ParthikS8 (talk) 01:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shaykhism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kermani.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Help!
Hello dear friend, I would like to know your opinion about these two sections (here and here). The first section titled "Wahdat al-wujud" is not well written, not well presented, and not well sourced. Perhaps this section should be re-written or removed altogether? As for the second section titled "Comparative theology", it contains some strange/weird phrases such as, "But the Islamic concept of God is less personal than in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and is known only from natural signs and can only be spoken about in parables. Muslim Turks further assimilated Tengri, the personification of the eternal heaven, with the Islamic concept of God."

The Qur'an clearly states in 16:74 that: "Do not make up any parables about Allah (God); Allah (God) knows while you do not know!"

I don't know what the sources specifically say, but I think at least these phrases should be attributed to whoever said them, per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. The concept of God becoming human was and is contrary to the Jewish & Islamic concept of God's absolute oneness and absolute transcendence. Feel free to take a look at my sandbox to see what I'm referring to. If you are interested and have some free time, we can work together to improve this article in general. Best Regards.--TheEagle107 (talk) 07:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes I certainly think the view should be attributed to that author. I am sure reliable secondary sources can be found that state the opposite, this is after all a common occurence that certain western authors have a poor understanding of fundamental theology of non-native religions. It is true for other religions as well, like Buddhism etc. As for helping you with the page, I do not think I can do so today as I will be busy (off-wiki) but Insha'Allah (God-willing) I'll look into it in near future. Happy editing, ParthikS8 (talk) 06:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--TheEagle107 (talk) 13:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)