Wikipedia:Peer review/Islamic military jurisprudence/archive1

Islamic military jurisprudence
I would like this article to be reviewed for the following:


 * Whether the article is clear, concise and readable by someone who is not familiar with Islamic law.
 * Whether this article is grammatically correct.
 * Whether this article meets WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NOR.
 * Whether this article is written in accordance to the appropriate manual of style.
 * Lastly, and very importantly, what can be done to improve this article?

Automated Peer Review
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Davnel03 17:03, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 * This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Image use policy and fit under one of the Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.[?]
 * If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
 * There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

I found the current version of the article difficult to follow. There is a link to "jihad," but not to "lesser jihad." The introduction says that the laws govern diplomacy, but the only diplomacy-related comments in the article were duplicate comments about the requirement to accept peace treaties. There was nothing in the article about how Islamic soldiers are dealt with when accused of military offenses; is there an Islamic equivalent to the Western court-martial? Where differences of interpretation were noted, it was not made clear if this is because the Quran does not specifically address those issues, leaving room for interpretation based on different traditions, or whether there are specific texts but different traditions insist on differing applications of those verses. The line "historically, lack of a central religious authority..." could well be expanded into its own paragraph, with well cited examples through history. The article does seem grammatically correct, but it would help to break the longer sentences into short, one-thought sentences where practical. It would be useful to cite research about how different philosophies of military jurisprudence have contributed to the outcomes of various battles and wars between the Islamic world and opponents from other cultural and religious traditions. VisitorTalk 05:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Several things:
 * Lesser jihad is a redirect to jihad.
 * I have added a section on "negotiations". Coupled with "Declaration of war" it's a good start to the inclusion of diplomatic issues. Of course, more work has to be done.
 * I don't know what Islam dictates is to be done in case of offenses. This has to be researched.
 * The reason for different interpretations also has to be made clear, I'll try to do that.
 * I will also try and find some historical info.Bless sins 17:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)