Talk:Black Standard/Archive 1

Archive 1

2011 talk

yeah, this is a difficult one, as the internet is perfectly saturated with unreferenced nonsense. Here may be a lead: "Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radhiallaahu anhu) reports that Rasulullaah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said:'Black flags (an army) will emerge from Khuraasaan. None will be able to turn them back, until they are planted -in Baitul Maqdis.' [Tirmidhi Shareef]"[1]

i.e. the tradition is attributed to Abu Hurairah by Tirmidhi. Of course this is still rather far from anything that would deserve the title of "reference". --dab (𒁳) 18:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have been trying to find evidence of jihadist black flags from the 1990s. But it is difficult to do google searches by date. Also, it seems plausible that the internet only became interested in this stuff after 9/11.

As the article is aware, the plain black flag has a long tradition (Muhammad, Caliphate, and 19th century examples) and could have turned up intermittently at any time. But the jihadist tradition to add white designs seems to be rather recent. There is plenty of evidence dating to just after 9/11, but so far I have no clear evidence of this from 2000 or earlier. --dab (𒁳) 09:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Misshapen circle

Ok seriously, what the hell is wrong with the ISIS flag? It brings out the autist in me. Why is the circle all misshapen?

It's as if some noob jihadi badly vectorized a normal circle and everyone of them just kept copying, no one bothered to think about it, to correct the retarded graphics -- 02:48, 9 August 2014‎ 184.161.64.74

The design comes from the Signet Ring used as the Seal of Muhammad Gazkthul (talk) 05:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The black standard in use

Looking at news reports and video releases, it seems that the black with a white circle initially used by the Islamic State of Iraq is becoming increasingly used by other groups. I have seen it used by Al-Shabaab, Al-Qaeda in Arabian Peninsula, the original Al Qaeda in Pakistan tribal areas etc. Pmolloy291 (talk) 11:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Its not quite like that - ISIL adopted an existing flag in use by others and then got famous. Legacypac (talk) 07:20, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Ahmadiyya black flag

It appears User:Acruxlilt would like a discussion regarding the Ahmadiyya black flag. So here it is. The reasoning given by the user is "nothing to do with original Islam", an idea which is oft-repeated in multiple articles and usually unacceptable per Wikipedia guidelines.--Peaceworld 16:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I think you should start a new article called Black Standard (Ahmadiyya). You are mixing up current Ahmadiyya flag with original Islamic flag which is completely black without anything written on it and without any logos. Acruxlilt (talk) 16:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Not really, the current flag in use demonstrates the flag of the Emirate of Afghanistan and none of the Jihadist flags in use are solid black, yet they are totally acceptable for the article. The Ahmadiyya black flag is a flag in response to Islamic eschatology.--Peaceworld 16:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

You can only add things to lead which are explained below in the article extensively. You have not added anything about Ahmadiyya in the article below and added it directly to the lead. If you check I just added your lead information into the article below. You can now explain in discussion why is it necessary in the lead. Second it has to be important and notable enough to be added to the lead as Ahmadiyya is a very small sect out 1.6 billion Muslims. Acruxlilt (talk) 17:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Peaceworld111 has a history of trying to infuse Ahmadiyya information into the lead of every article related to Islam I think that should be taken into consideration. Acruxlilt (talk) 17:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with that provided it makes sense to do so. Back to discussion, Ahmadiyya is certainly larger than the historical Emirate of Afghanistan and the multiple Jihadist groups. Why the flag should be in the lead? because it gives an example of a flag drawn in response to Islamic eschatology, an important (but lacking in detail) part of the article.--Peaceworld 17:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

No edit warring is not a way to add information to the lead when that information is not at all explained in the article below. I removed the reference to the Emirate of Afghanistan in the lead and added it to the article below.Acruxlilt (talk) 17:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Have a read of WP:3RR and see what edit warring is, and no, lack of explanation in the main body is never a reason to remove certain details from the lead. Honestly, at the current state, the article is a total mess: two solid flags, multiple headings with little detail and removal of the Ahmadiyya flag without a valid reason.--Peaceworld 17:43, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

In the WP:LEAD it says, "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important aspects." You directly added Ahmadiyya information into the lead without a single word being in the article itself. Acruxlilt (talk) 17:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

This point reflects that the article's main body lacks the detail and work should be done on that, not that the mention in the lead should be removed simply because no one has put the effort in the main body of the article. Why Ahmadiyya flag should be in the lead? because Islamic eschatology is an important part of the black standard and the Ahmadiyya flag serves a perfect example.--Peaceworld 17:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I added the Ahmadiyya information into the article and now you should make a effort to add information about Ahmadiyya into the article as well not add things directly to the lead without any reference in the article itself. Acruxlilt (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

This is about the Black Standard in Islamic tradition. Needless to say, if the Ahmadiyya and Babi flags are explicitly tied to this tradition, they are on topic. By contrast, any random flag that happens to be black, as in the Anarchist flag, are not in the scope of this article. So, if you have a reference saying "the Babi flag was black", "the Ahmadiyya flag was black", this is not really sufficient. If, however, you have a reference how "the Ahmadiyya/Babi used a black flag to represent Mahdi" or similar, of course it should go in the article. It's not a question of whether you are right. It's a question of did or did you not show a quotable reference. --dab (𒁳) 13:27, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Possibly misleading

The article currently strongly suggests that any black flag containing the shahada is exclusively jihadist (in the colloquial sense of Islamic terrorism), however this may misrepresent other religious use of the shahada.

The use of bold in that section for "black flag of jihad" also falsely implies that the Black Standard in general is associated with terrorism, because bold formatting has a specific purpose according to Wikipedia's Manual of Style.--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:53, 11 January 2015 (UTC)