Jump to content

Talk:Ex-Muslims

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of useful refs

[edit]
  • Najma Al Zidjaly, (2021). "Repair as activism on Arabic Twitter (Chapter 9)". Approaches to Discourse Analysis, 2021. Georgetown University Press: 136-158

In:Volume 11: Issue 1 Publisher: Brill

  • Lauritzen, Anne Mette, and Stjernfelt, Frederik. Your Post Has Been Removed: Tech Giants and Freedom of Speech. Germany, Springer International Publishing, 2019. Page 181

Bookku (talk) 09:04, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 02:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Refs of individual persecutions

[edit]

Also see

[edit]

Need of the article

[edit]

While reading Cotee's I came across few points that would help to differentiate this article from Apostasy in Islam and it will be pertinent to jot down those points here being indirectly relevant for later discussions.

IMO, basically difference is of Islamic perspective and ex-Muslim perspective since ex-Muslim do not remain Muslim once they leave Islam and thus perspective changes. And encyclopedia need to cover Muslim as well as ex-Muslim perspectives and this particular article attempts to cover primarily ex-Muslim perspective.

Cotee say's about focus of his authorship is on in his own words(p.4):

1) Social situations, experiences and self-understanding of ordinary ex-Muslims
2) ...instead asking what the Quran and Hadith says about apostasy, I ask, What do Islamic apostates about apostasy in Islam
3) ...Instead of asking what actions constitute apostasy,I ask, How does one leave Islam and become an apostate.
4) ...instead of asking 'what is the punishment of apostasy in Islam, I ask, 'What challenges and difficulties apostates encounter in leaving Islam...
5) ...in other words focus is on lived realities of apostates and how they subjectively make sense of their situation and the world in which they live....

One of the concern we discussed at User talk:Nederlandse Leeuw is differentiating between with article Apostasy in Islam so as not to overlap the content.

To the minimum "Ex-Muslim activism" remains an independent scope topic.

As of now what else this article is covering and at Apostasy in Islam is

  • sociological perspective of ex-Muslims
  • psychological and social processes which individual people who leave Islam go through

User:Nederlandse Leeuw says on his talk page: "....sociological perspective of ex-Muslims themselves. This is mostly missing from the article 'Apostasy in Islam', which mostly takes an Islamic theological/legal and a human rights perspective, but doesn't really talk about the psychological and social processes which individual people who leave Islam go through. I'm not sure if this (a) merits a separate article, (b) fits under the title 'ex-Muslim movement', or (c) should be merged into Apostasy in Islam, but I'm convinced it has added encyclopedic value and it's worthwile to write about. Whether it should be merged wtih 'Apostasy in Islam' is not necessarily something we need to decide right now, so we can begin our work already...."

and User:Normal Op says What you are describing fits under life-after-cults, or any "life after" any of several tightly-controlled groups that operate using mind control, belief systems, and pressures (by society, the group, and an individual's family). Though one might think that it could fit under any other wiki article about "leaving cults" (I don't even know if there are any), the ex-Muslim has struggles unique to Islam, Islamic culture, and Arabic-type cultures. I applaud you for tackling the subject as a new article, because the material is VAST. As to the name of the article, I recommend you keep working on the draft (as I see is being done) and the name will fall into place later. I implore you not to select a lengthy title, such as Ex-Muslim thought, life and activism, because that sounds like the title of a book, not a wiki article. Good luck on this venture, and do let me know if I can help....

Just jotted down for latter. discussions. While work on the article is still in process let me express my deepest gratitude to User:Nederlandse Leeuw and User:Normal Op for their inputs and pro-active contribution to the article.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 08:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Themes and slogans

[edit]

If we get RS refs a sub-section can be added pertaining to themes and slogan IMO.

Bookku (talk) 11:55, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Online platforms

[edit]

If we get RS refs a sub-section can be added pertaining to themes and 'Online platforms' IMO.

Bookku (talk) 10:13, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About Leaving Islam article

[edit]

@დამოკიდებულება:

Hi, thanks for your comment @ Q:Talk:Apostasy in Islam#Leaving Islam. I am not conversant enough with all of Wikiquote rules, but what do I request you to have a look at this en-wikipedia talk page and the draft article about Draft:ex-Muslims.

While I can't predict what en-Wikipedia community takes decision about name for this article but you will notice majior focus of this article is 'Why and How of Leaving Islam'. Secondly if we name q:Leaving Islam as q:Ex-Muslims then other wikiquote users might create hassles to accept quotes if words 'apostasy or ex-Muslim' not found in text but texts refers to reason and discussion on leaving Islam.

I don't know how to put forward my concerns on wikiquote and I seek your help in the same respect.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku (talk) 14:29, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Next ?

[edit]

I have added Draft talk:Ex-Muslims/to do at top of this talk page. Initial part of the article has become heavily dependent on academic study based references relating to "Study of Sociological approaches to leaving Islam". While starting the article it was not necessarily intended but since being reliable sources got the priority. Article needs further be updated with ex-Muslim experiences from their own books articles more.(again one need to segregate content created by ex-Muslims themselves in primary and secondary and also do without infringing on copyright aspects).

Lot many of ex-Muslims are on Youtube but again I was not sure which YouTube would be okay and which one not as Wikipedia Reliable source so I left that till we discuss more on talk page.

As said in earlier section Draft talk:Ex-Muslims#Need of the article difference between this article from Apostasy in Islam is basically of perspectives and focus. It is for Wikipedians to discuss more whether we should retain this article as single one or split and fork.

As a single article it can own up any of all all of article titles Ex-Muslim, Ex-Muslims, Former Muslim, Leaving Islam (Which are redirected else where as of now or strive for any of following titles or readers can suggest some other title.

The other option is split and fork where in fork out separate article ex-Muslim movement and leave Sociological part for Ex-Muslims article of Leaving Islam article.

And again in spite of differences in perspective and focus some might suggest to merge other that ex-Muslim movement to Apostasy in Islam; as a Wikipedia user what are your opinions pl. do discuss here. In first round of discussion I will invite who are particularly interested in this topic. Later we can invite more inputs from general Wikipedians too.

Bookku (talk) 08:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bookku Check WP:CFORK to be sure to not duplicate content with same the scope of Apostasy in Islam. Also, I noted that Zandaqa is not mentioned in the draft nor in the article about apostasy. Rupert Loup (talk) 17:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting this to mainspace

[edit]

Greetings Bookku! I have done a lot of work on atheism and I am willing to help get this article to mainspace and, eventually, good article status (maybe even FA one day). Do you mind if I work on this draft? Cheers. Wretchskull (talk) 13:31, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Wretchskull:,
Many thanks for your willingness to proactively expand and support the article. I am already busy with many more articles so it is very nice of you to help. Since you asked as formality I will ping Nederlandse Leeuw to keep him informed of this discussion, they being major contributor to the article like me.
As far as taking to main space is concerned there are some questions @ Draft talk:Ex-Muslims#Next ?, then some likely questions and discussion is expected about possibilities of merging article in Apostasy in Islam which I personally I do not favor but convincing other users on Wikipedia can be challenging. So I started a discussion Talk:Apostasy in Islam#Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ? as part of very very slow process to go step by step discussion, to achieve some sort of community consensus. Since issues are kind of inter related but most people are not aware of nuances of Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic.
Without adequate awareness on above fronts discussions in main space can be challenging and diverting lot of time from main expansion work so I was going slow.
But if you find to have enough energy to get into eventual discussions and all, you can jump in by taking article to main space ( as of now I don't have that energy), or may be , like me, you want to wait for some discussion to take place @ Talk:Apostasy in Islam#Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ? then @ Draft talk:Ex-Muslims#Next ? and meanwhile improve the draft further. I leave it to you.
I am looking for some article expansion help in some other areas like irrational beliefs etc. that separate request I will make on your talk page.
Many many thanks and best wishes for all your endeavors. Warm regards
Bookku (talk) 15:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bookku, are there any obstacles to moving to mainspace? I don't see a problem with moving to Ex-Muslims. Article topic is clearly notable and distinct from other wikipedia articles so I don't think it would be deleted. (t · c) buidhe 19:22, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wretchskull and Buidhe: Thanks for encouragement. As both of you suggested I brought from Draft:Ex-Muslims to main space @ title Former Muslim. I am not well versed in the move process completely enough to move article to already existing title Ex-Muslims. I request both of you to help me out in this respect.
I request and look forward to both of yours on going support to this article. ' Now it is over to you. '
Just for information a new academic book on the topic is coming up & I have requested for source help @ Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request#Need a chapter from Former Muslims in Europe: Between Secularity and Belonging. As and when it becomes available I will update the article from my side.
@Nederlandse Leeuw: Just once again thanks for all your contribution and support.
Warm regards to all of you Bookku (talk) 01:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku: Well done! Now that your work is on mainspace, I will try to copyedit as well as use short citations instead of full book references. What do you think of sfn-refs? Wretchskull (talk) 12:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wretchskull: Many thanks for your valuable support. With more focus on researching I could not focus on Mos things ever. I would love any improvement in ref style but I do not know how to do that, You can go ahead with a new style, I will try to copy practice the same on sand box first. We will keep discussing below through subsections so will be helpful to not miss imp things, if any. Warm regards Bookku (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Short citation

[edit]

@Wretchskull: Following ref is hopefully expected to become available by July or August since the book is yet to become available officially. May be you want to suggest short Ref style so I will practice and use same when ref document becomes available. Bookku (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Vliek, Maria (2021). "Conclusion". Former Muslims in Europe: Between Secularity and Belonging. Abingdon Oxon: Routlege: 196-203. ISBN 978-1-003-14357-4.

First Top lead sentence

[edit]

@Wretchskull:

  • After user:Pincrete's c/e first wording has become, "Ex-Muslims are former Muslims.." to "Ex-Muslims are Muslims..". I am not very good enough in English grammar for c/e purposes. So I do not know saying "Ex-Muslims are Muslims.." is how much correct. Just want to enquire if "Ex-Muslims are those people who.." or something like that will improve? Thanks Bookku (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]


  • Earlier first version of intro sentence before first c/e by user:Pincrete
"Ex-Muslims are former Muslims by upbringing or by conversion in the Islamic religion who were raised with Islamic values or culture or those converted to Islam and then left/renounced Islam...."
  • Version after c/e by user:Pincrete
"Ex-Muslims are Muslims who were raised with Islamic values or culture or those who converted to Islam and later leave or renounce Islam...."
  • Version after your c/e ( user:Wretchskull)
"Ex-Muslims are Muslims who were raised with Islamic values or culture or those who converted to Islam and later left or renounced Islam...."
  • My suggested change:
"Ex-Muslims are those people who were raised with Islamic values or culture or those who converted to Islam and later left or renounced Islam...."
@Bookku: Do not worry about WP:MOS and English grammar - I will take care of it. I have corrected the description of an Ex-Muslim per the stated sources; they state that they are people who were born Muslims or converted to Islam and later left. "Islamic values" is somewhat redundant, as the definition of a Muslim is a person practices Islam, which includes its values, teachings, and rules. Wretchskull (talk) 14:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bookku: By the way, we should move the title to "Ex-Muslim", as articles should be singular, such as Ex-Mormon, though I am not entirely sure. Wretchskull (talk) 16:11, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wretchskull: Thanks for your continued support.

  • I have no issues with change of name whatever is grammatically more ok is ok to me, just for sake of it Article titles Christians and Muslims are there, I don't know whether singular is better or plural is better.
  • Up til now I have covered more from academic sources, as said above by next month or so we may include one more academic Maria Vliek.
  • From "Ex-Muslims" own literature only one Author Ali Rizvi has been partially covered. Quite a few of them have self published their books-well established publication houses usually trade cautiously to not to offend lefty customers so most "Ex-Muslims" authors don't get established publication houses- but Wikipedians are averse to self published sources, that has hampered coverage of "Ex-Muslims" own literature a bit, if you know or come across any "Ex-Muslims" own literature, which is acceptable to Wikipedia norms, then help include the same.
  • Mean while one way to cover "Ex-Muslims" own opinions is from their coverage in mainstream media. That too is limited . I have partially referred from one Tufail Ahmad's ref that I will discuss in separate subsection bellow.

Thanks Bookku (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lena Richter

[edit]
  • Copyright info Just for record:

In section Humor as activism tool we have used as is large Quote of Lena Richter since content seems to be registered under similar licence to Wikipedia, the MDPI journal webpage has foot note which reads as "This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited " When clicked on Creative Commons Attribution License link opens @ CCBY 4.0

Bookku (talk) 18:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ref of Tufail Ahmad

[edit]

To be contd. Bookku (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a prohibited POV fork

[edit]

I propose that this article be merged into Apostasy in Islam since it is a prohibited POVFORK (see, e.g., "And encyclopedia need to cover Muslim as well as ex-Muslim perspectives and this particular article attempts to cover primarily ex-Muslim perspective"). Please continue and contribute to the discussion regarding this proposal on the Apostasy in Islam talk page. Snuish (talk) 07:13, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not even a POVFORK; not everyone told something when raised believes it (the case with significant percentage of the world) (many other reasons.)--dchmelik (t|c) 06:14, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ex-Muslims of Kerala

[edit]

It seems some one / few from Ex-Muslims of Kerala community have attempted few good faith edits and we need to re-examine some of those and only retaining good ones with sources as per Wikipedia prevailing norms.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:00, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Removed contested content 1
Unlike other Indian states, Kerala has an active ex-Muslim organization with 5,000 members

named Ex-Muslims of Kerala.[1]

  • Removed contested content 2

On 16th August 2021, two women who have a connection with IS arrested by National Investigation Agency (NIA) from Kannur, Kerala , have made a public appeal to assassin Jamitha Teacher, an ex-Muslim who became a popular Youtuber.[2]

References

  1. ^ "Registration | ExMuslims of Kerala". EX Muslims of Kerala. Retrieved 2021-09-05.
  2. ^ "ISIS agents' plot to assassin Jamitha Teacher". Nastik Nation. Retrieved 2021-09-05.

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tufail Ahmad

[edit]

The edit attributed to the journalist Tufail Ahmad has been tagged with Template:Unreliable source? vide the 'edit dif'.

In brief: to best of my perception Tufail Ahmad in himself is credible and reliable journalist enough to stand above any platform they would write for. And even when with Firstpost their news report seem neutral and credible enough.

Detail:

To best of my perception Tufail Ahmad, the journalist, who has worked with news organization of repute like BBC long enough would be aware of journalistic responsibilities and would have enough credibility of own to stand above platforms he would write for.

Even when he wrote for Firstpost, in the same period his other articles can be seen to express concerns for Muslims, also criticize government of the day and all where he thinks that is due.

To my perception, even before and after his Firspost tenure Ahmad can be very well seen speaking his own mind, i.e. independent enough, through his reports. At times expressing concerns for Muslims and at other times taking liberal reformist position about Islam. I suppose, no one would hold, Ahmad having liberal reformist and anti-extremism position in itself, against Ahmad to question Ahmad's journalistic credibility.

Educationally, besides Post-Graduate Diploma in journalism, Ahmad seem to have education in Sociology and social systems from universities like Aligarh Muslim University and Jawaharlal Nehru University.

When I checked archives of WP:RSN concerns about Firstpost seem largely about political and entertainment related reporting. Ahmad's cited reporting used in this article is neither political nor entertainment and carries positive weight of Ahmad's own credibility.

This is my perception other editors may have other points and I am respectful to other views too, so please feel free to share.

  • (Pl. while searching, do not confuse the journalist Tufail Ahmad with another science background Tufail Ahmad from same university)

Bookku (talk) 06:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ex-Muslims&oldid=1215628809"