Talk:Muhammad
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
- Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
- New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.
- Assume good faith
- Be polite and avoid personal attacks
- Be welcoming to newcomers
- Seek dispute resolution if needed
 | Important notice: Prior discussion has determined that some pictures of Muhammad are allowed.
Discussion of images, and of edits regarding images, MUST be posted to the images subpage. Removal of pictures without discussion will be reverted. |
 | Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image. |
Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning Muhammad.
To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.
There is a prohibition of depicting Muhammad in certain Muslim communities. This prohibition is not universal among Muslim communities. For a discussion, see Depictions of Muhammad and Aniconism in Islam.
Wikipedia is not bound by any religious prohibitions, and it is an encyclopedia that strives to represent all topics from a neutral point of view, and therefore Wikipedia is not censored for the sake of any particular group. So long as they are relevant to the article and do not violate any of Wikipedia's existing policies, nor the laws of locations where Wikipedia's servers are hosted, no content or images will be removed from Wikipedia because people find them objectionable or offensive. (See also: Wikipedia:Content disclaimer.)
Wikipedia does not single out Islam in this. There is content that may be equally offensive to other religious people, such as the 1868 photograph shown at Bahá'u'lláh (offensive to adherents of the Bahá'í Faith), or the account of Scientology's "secret doctrine" at Xenu (offensive to adherents of Scientology), or the account at Timeline of human evolution (offensive to adherents of young Earth creationism). Submitting to all these various sensitivities would make writing a neutral encyclopedia impossible.
Similar artistic interpretations are used in articles for Homer, Charlemagne, Paul of Tarsus, and many other historical figures. When no accurate images (i.e. painted after life, or photographs) exist, it is a longstanding practice on Wikipedia to incorporate images that are historically significant artwork and/or typical examples of popular depictions. Using images that readers understand to be artistic representations, so long as those images illustrate the topic effectively, is considered to be more instructive than using no image at all. Random recent depictions may be removed as undue in terms of notability, while historical artwork (in this case, of the Late Medieval or Ottoman period) adds significantly to the presentation of how Muhammad was being topicalized throughout history.
These depictions are not intended as factual representations of Muhammad's face; rather, they are merely artists' conceptions. Such portrayals generally convey a certain aspect of a particular incident, most commonly the event itself, or maybe the act, akin to the Western genre of history painting. The depictions are, thus, not meant to be accurate in the sense of a modern photograph, and are presented here for what they are: yet another form in which Muhammad was depicted.
None of these pictures hold a central position in the article, as evident by their placement, nor are they an attempt to insult the subject. Several factions of Christianity oppose the use of hagiographic imagery (even to the point of fighting over it), but the images are still on Wikipedia, exactly for what they are—i.e. artistic renditions of said people.
- Sign in or create an account
- Click on this link to modify your personal CSS stylesheet (if no page is there already, just go ahead and create a page)
- Click the edit button, and add the following line:
.page-Muhammad .depiction {display: none;} - Click Publish changes or Publish page to save the preference
Please note that this will not hide the images for other users, or from yourself if you log out of your account.
Alternatives: If you do not have an account, and do not wish to register an account, you can disable all images on Wikipedia by going to the mobile version of the website (en.m.wikipedia.org), then going to "settings" and choosing "images off".
You may also block a list of specified images, following the format of this example.
Experienced JavaScript programmers can hide depictions of Muhammad on the desktop site using Greasemonkey or a similar tool.
Accusations of bias toward Western references are often made when an objection is raised against the display of pictures of Muhammad or lack of honorifics when mentioning Muhammad. All articles on Wikipedia are required to present a neutral point of view. This neutrality is sometimes mistaken for hostility. Note that exactly the same guidelines apply to articles about Christianity or any other religion.
In addition, this article is hosted on the English-language Wikipedia. While references in languages other than English are not automatically inappropriate, English-language references are preferred, because they are of the most use to the typical reader. This therefore predisposes the material used in this article to some degree (see WP:NONENG).
- References
- ^ C. (Colin) Turner, Islam: The Basics, Routledge Press, pp.34–35
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation. | |
 | This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance). | |
 | This article is listed on the project's core biographies page. | |
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
 | This article is supported by the Salaf task force. | |
| This article is supported by the Shi'a Islam task force. | ||
 | This article is supported by the Sunni Islam task force. | |
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
| This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||||||||||
| C | This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. | ||||||||||||||||
 |
| ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
 | This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
|
Main archives: (Index) Image archives: Mediation archives: Images Arbitration: |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Frequently asked questions, please read before posting
[edit]Please read Talk:Muhammad/FAQ for answers to these frequently-asked questions (you need to tap "Read as wiki page" to see the relevant text):
- Shouldn't all the images of Muhammad be removed because they might offend Muslims?
- Aren't the images of Muhammad false?
- How can I hide the images using my personal Wikipedia settings?
- Why does the infobox at the top of the article contain a stylized logo and not a picture of Muhammad?
- Why is Muhammad's name not followed by (pbuh) or (saw) in the article?
- Why does the article say that Muhammad is the "founder" of Islam?
- Why does it look like the article is biased towards secular or "Western" references?
- Why can't I edit this article as a new or anonymous user?
- Can censorship be employed on Wikipedia?
- Because Muhammad married an underage girl, should the article say he was a pedophile?
This section is for mobile-device users who do not see the normal talk page header. This section should not have any comments, so that it stays on this talk page and does not get archived.
GA Reassessment
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: While instability is not in itself a reason to delist, poor quality sourcing is; the discussions on the talk page constitute, in my view, consensus that the sourcing has been degraded. Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
It has recently been brought to light that this page and its sourcing have been altered fairly wholesale since the page was last reviewed and kept as GA, and that there is little reason to believe the level of former quality has been maintained; on the contrary, recent informal assessments by editors have uncovered significant issues in terms of prior content and source removal, as well as in terms of the quality of new sourcing and the resulting balance of the page and its contents. The sum conclusion of the current state of affairs has already been assessed by several editors as no longer meeting GA standard. For details, see the existing talk page discussion at Talk:Muhammad#Removal of "good article" status, as well as the broader discussion entitled Talk:Muhammad#Recent neutrality concerns, and other subsequent talk page discussions. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Fails Wikipedia:Good article criteria It is not stable due to edit warring on the page....: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Moxy-
.svg/15px-Maple_Leaf_(Pantone).svg.png)
04:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- Even excluding the wholesale rewriting the article has undergone recently, 2012 is a long time ago, and the article quality standards back then were arguably lower. I do not see a reason to maintain GA status given the current edit warring. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 July 2024
[edit]FAQ No. 6
| |
|---|---|
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
make Muhammad Prophet Muhammad Expenderous (talk) 18:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Not done: Per Q5. Nythar (💬-🍀) 01:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Abraha's expedition
[edit]Presently the following is present in the article:
Islamic tradition states that Muhammad's birth year coincided with Yemeni King Abraha's unsuccessful attempt to conquer Mecca.[49] Recent studies, however, challenge this notion, as other evidence suggests that the expedition, if it had occurred, would have transpired substantially before Muhammad's birth.[1][50][51][52][53][47] Later Muslim scholars presumably linked Abraha's renowned name to the narrative of Muhammad's birth to elucidate the unclear passage about "the men of elephants" in Quran 105:1–5.[50][54] The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity deems the tale of Abraha's war elephant expedition as a myth.[51]
1) "Myth" has multiple meanings. Which meaning is intended here? One is "supernatural" and the other is "false". Such ambiguous words should be replaced with unambiguous words.
2) Can unsuccessful expedition transpire substantially? The incident is about an expedition which failed to achieve its mission. Can such a failed attempt transpire anything "substantially" in the part where it failed? The sentence seems to be illogical.
3) This Wikipedia article says:
The Quran, however, provides minimal assistance for Muhammad's chronological biography; most Quranic verses do not provide significant historical context and timeline.[19][20] Almost none of Muhammad's companions are mentioned by name in the Quran, hence not providing sufficient information for a concise biography.[18]
So it seems confusing to say "unclear" here specifically.
4) I read this. This is the first citation given to show that the Abraha's expedition has not taken place. But this source does not say Abraha's expedition did not take place. But it discusses the year it happened.
5) There is no need of saying in the article it is a myth because it is already known it is a miraculous thing that birds killing elephants.
6) This appears to be unwanted, disruptive edit.
7) This says about likelihood. So should the sentence contain "likelily" even if it is kept in the present form.
8) What about removing the term "unclear" before the term "passage"?
9) Atleast rewriting seems to be necessary.
10) Kindly write about the remaining sources.
So remove:
"Recent studies, however, challenge this notion, as other evidence suggests that the expedition, if it had occurred, would have transpired substantially before Muhammad's birth.[1][50][51][52][53][47]
remove:
The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity deems the tale of Abraha's war elephant expedition as a myth.[51]
Neutralhappy (talk) 21:53, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Myth: "an ancient story or set of stories, especially explaining the early history of a group of people or about natural events and facts:". MOS:MYTH has a little guidance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- 11) Does the term "studies" in the said part mean just writings or study papers or archeological evidence or mathematical calculations or something else? When we see or read the term "studies" the first meaning that comes to our mind is "archeological discovery". So it should be replaced with the better term "archeological discovery" if it so. If it is not archeological discovery, it should replaced be with "writings", "academic writings", "publications", "study papers", "analysis", or the like. Thus this part in the current form is confusing, and thus not in the best form. Removal is an option to solve the problem.
- 12) The two sentences I proposed for deletion in the part are non-biographical information. Hence there is no significant problem with its removal.
- 13) If it corrected it should be similar to one like "though the year of the expedition does not likely coincide with the Muhammad's year of birth." This is not necessary because it contains "Islamic tradition states".
- 14) There was a different but better 1 July 2023 version of this current apparent bad faith edit. That would be better than the present one. Note this edit has added the term "Islamic" and the edit did not say the expedition did not take place though several citations were added. It is important and intresting to note that the citations added to say the expedition took place but it must have taken place earlier than the year of birth of Muhammad. The citations used to say this are:
- Conrad, 1987
- Reynolds, 2023 p. 16
- Peters, 2010 p. 61
- Muesse, 2018 p.213
- Buhl&Welch, 1993 p. 361
- The same citations, except that of Johnson, are used to say the seemingly illogical thing of failed attempt transpiring substantially. These are the present sources used to say this seemingly illogical thing and create a notion that the expedition did not take place:
- Conrad, 1987
- Reynolds, 2023 p. 16
- Johnson, 2015 p. 286
- Peters, 2010 p. 61
- Muesse, 2018 p. 213
- Buhl&Welch, 1993 p. 361
- 15) Use of the term "evidence" in the present version also seems to be misleading since they likely refer to tradion. Overall the edit is of poor quality.
- 16) The same editor who was later banned from editing on topics related to Islam reworded their own edit but this time giving the opposite notion that the expedition never took place, besides making the article saying the seemingly illogical thing of failed attempt transpiring substantially.
- 17) Because it contains the seemingly illogical thing of a failed thing transpiring substantially, there needs at least a "clarify" tag.
- 18) Overall the part in the present form could be said to be illogical, disruptive, unwanted, confusing and not directly biographical.
- 19) Using the term "myth" to refer to miraculous things is not needed because generally supernatural or miraculous things altogether are apparently considered not possible to happen, by many. Here it is a miraculous thing of the birds killing the elephants. So remove the part saying "myth". This also creates a notion that this use the word of "myth" is done after conducting a study on the subject whereas the source likely have used the term "myth" just because it is a miracle or a supernatural thing. Moreover there should be a clarification why they used it. If it is because of its supernatural or miraculous nature, it might be better to say either "since all supernatural things are myths" or "since it considers all supernatural things as myths" Neutralhappy (talk) 20:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- 20) On 1 July 2023 itself, the same editor later added the citation of Johnson to say the expedition of Abraha took place. Again the same editor on 1 July 2023 changed the year "2023" to "2015" which is in the current version.
- Going through this book (published: 13 September 2012) I found the following:
Thus it is important to distinguish, on the one hand, the campaign of 552, which allowed Abraha to reestablish his authority over almost all of inner Arabia, and on the other hand, the Battle of the Elephant, which happened later and could be the cause of the collapse of Himyarite domination over inner Arabia. This Battle of the Elephant could be dated between 555 and 565, probably closer to 565, toward the end of Abraha's reign.
- I found in the 2015 book on page 285:
This 2015 book, which is another edition of the book published on 13 September 2012, is the same book used in the article to say it is a myth and to say the illogical thing of a failed thing transpiring substantially and to create a notion that the expedition did not take place.... Abraha's reign , probably around thirty years from 535 to 565 , is not easy to define with precision . Dated ... Abraha had two successors , two sons who did not reign very long . It is thus plausible that Abraha died a few years ...
- One option to solve all this problem is just to remove the two sentences I proposed for deletion. Neutralhappy (talk) 05:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I find most of what you have written in your WP:WALLOFTEXT rather incomprehensible. Most of your issues seem to come from a rather poor grasp of words in English such as "myth', "substantially" and studies. The two sentences you want to remove are fine and should stay. There is ample scholarship that doubts the Year of the Elephant ever occurred, or if it did it was prior to Muhammad's birth and not per Islamic tradition. And that's all the passage is saying and it's fine. I have no idea why you keep talking about "bad faith". DeCausa (talk) 06:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I said "apparent bad faith", not just "bad faith" edit. I would not like to further discuss these suggestions for edits. I leave it to other editors. I also leave to other editors to consider removing this illogical thing of a failed attempt transpiring something substantially. Neutralhappy (talk) 06:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Look, "if it had occurred, would have transpired substantially before Muhammad's birth" means if it did happen it would have happened mostly before Muhammad's birth. It's not that difficult. DeCausa (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- This discussion has got me wondering. Given that we have already presented the "Oxford Handbook's" view that it deems the expedition to be a myth, would it be possible, for WP:Balance purposes, to include the statement, "Although, some consider the historicity of a failed expedition to be completely plausible.[1]"
- Maybe removing the word 'Although,' if needed, to avoid editorializing. StarkReport (talk) 13:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- For that not to be WP:FALSEBALANCE and WP:UNDUE, those two views would have to be equally prominent in scholarship to be presented like that. Is that the case? DeCausa (talk) 14:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hmmm, well, according to my impression from reading the section, the overwhelming sources address the timing of the expedition. Only one source categorizes it as a myth, so perhaps in that case, the answer is yes. However, if multiple high-quality sources describe it as a myth, then it would be best not to include my proposed addition. StarkReport (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- For that not to be WP:FALSEBALANCE and WP:UNDUE, those two views would have to be equally prominent in scholarship to be presented like that. Is that the case? DeCausa (talk) 14:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Look, "if it had occurred, would have transpired substantially before Muhammad's birth" means if it did happen it would have happened mostly before Muhammad's birth. It's not that difficult. DeCausa (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ Robin, Christian Julien (2015). Fisher, Greg (ed.). Arabs and Empires Before Islam. Oxford. p. 152. ISBN 978-0-19-965452-9.
Didn't he die at the age of 63?
[edit]I think he died at 63 Aquarium670154 (talk) 06:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Aquarium670154 63 years of age according to one tradition according to the Hijri calendar; not according to the CE calendar. Infobox generally lists births and deaths according to the CE calendar. Khaatir (talk) 06:42, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 August 2024
[edit]|answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.Muhhammad is not the founder of Islam. He is the first preacher. 103.153.230.157 (talk) 16:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: See Q6 in the FAQ near the top of this page. O3000, Ret. (talk) 16:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
If you have an opinion, please join. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)