Talk:Forced conversion/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Edits of Swingoswingo

User:Swingoswingo, User:XLPeeker99p9, User:Oskimua, Special:Contributions/182.58.57.247 and User:Janosik-Ruzalka are all banned Sockpuppets who were involved in disruptive and dishonest editing. The editor was a self-declared non-conformist for which he was banned. See the editor’s comment. The editor is clearly not here to contribute constructively. His comment proves he is not eligible to edit Islamic history articles. In this edit, for example, XLPeeker99p9 wrote About the Mughal empire, W.H. Moreland observed, "it became a fashion to raid a village or group of villages without any obvious justification, and carry off the inhabitants as slaves." But W.H. Moreland in his book, p. 92 actually said Capture was recognised by both Hindu and Moslem law, and in India this recognition led to serious abuses, for it became the fashion to raid a village or group of villages without any obvious justification, and carry off the inhabitants as slaves. In page 91, Moreland said Slavery must be accepted as a Hindu institution. Clearly, XLPeeker99p9 grossly misrepresented the source.

In this Forced conversion article too, the user Swingoswingo made some dishonest edits. They started a new section "India" and started adding false claims. The user wrote In a Mughal-Sikh war in 1715, many Sikhs were beheaded and about 780 Sikh prisoners of war were pressurised to convert to Islam and added an unreliable and fringe source The Khalsa Generals, p.12. But the claim was not present on page 12 even in that source as evident here. Page 19-20 seem to discuss some event of persecution. According to this source, the clash was between shiks and the Governor of Jammu. It didn't say it was Mughal. Again, the user wrote On their refusal, all were ordered to be executed. Every day, 100 Sikhs were murdered in public and provided again a propagandist & unreliable source Glimpses of Sikhism. But even there, there is hardly a mention of forced conversion. Again, to give a political conflict a religious color is misrepresentation. Such content are welcome if it comes from constructive and non-biased editors. But if a seriously biased editor like Swingoswingo makes such content (especially when he rejects all the academic & traditional sources as evident in his remark), it is not possible to justify how much true info it contains, and how much false it spreads, and how much misinterpretation it contains. Also note that the banned user rarely uses online sources; and many of the sources used by Swingoswingo are all self-published, biased, and propagandist sources. -AsceticRosé 02:17, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Maybe Persecution of Hindus kind of material doesn't need to be brought here and maybe small summaries of Swing could be written to keep it WP:DUE. I removed your content merging from Ghar Wapsi, which is just a conversion program and there is no conviction or consensus that conversions are forced. 182.70.69.246 (talk) 04:18, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

One or two poor quality sources and one faulty page number don't justify blanking all contents. A7howto (talk) 13:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

AsceticRose, I am not involved in that SPI that you are citing as justification for your content merging from Ghar Wapsi which is just a conversion program. See my above comment. I have no opinion on the edits of above user. 182.70.69.246 (talk) 04:39, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Above IP is clearly not Swingoswingo, though the above account maybe his. Finally if you have problems with the edits you need to discuss here instead of restoring content about Ghar Wapsi which doesn't involve any forced conversion. Capitals00 (talk) 04:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I am not Swingoswingo and AsceticRose needs to show where I added his content. 182.70.69.246 (talk) 04:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Capitals00, I see you are working as an accomplice to Swingoswingo. If Ghar wapsi is a problem, why did you restore Swingoswingo's edit, especially when you already have participated in the talk-page? Please explain. -AsceticRosé 05:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

No I am not.. Ghar Wapsi is a problem but rest of the content was also verifiable. I was about to add some more modern sources but with your revert I will have to wait for 24 hours before touching that particular content again. If you want to remove specific sentences you can let me know here but they seem to be having significance in this subject of Forced conversion, and article is relatively small, so why remove? Capitals00 (talk) 05:16, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

You clearly restored Swingoswingo's edits with your reverts. I've already explained above what was the problem with his edits. Most of his sources are unverifiable, are self-published, and promotional in nature, as I see. And it was his habit to add biased content; he often misrepresented sources. If claims come from scholarly, academic sources with the option of verifiability, that's always welcome. -AsceticRosé 05:27, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Capitals00, I already pointed out some of the problems in my first post of this thread. Please read that. And note that fringe, self-published, and promotional sources will not suffice for crucial claims. Again, scholarly, academic sources with the option of verifiability are always welcome. -AsceticRosé 05:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Apart from the above, there are many claims without any reliable sources. See this In an invasion of the Kashmir valley (1015), Mahmud of Ghazni converted many Hindus to Islam. In his later campaigns, in Mathura, Baran and Kanauj, again, many conversions took place. Those soldiers who surrendered to him were converted to Islam. In Bulandshahr alone 10,000 persons were forced to convert including the king. According to Nizamuddin Ahmad, he spread Islam in Punjab by "both the consent of the people and the influence of force." Again, Aurangzeb often employed all means available to encourage conversions to Islam. Also see that when there are sources, many of the sources are self-published like Canadian Sikh Study & Teaching Society, Sikh History Research Department. And almost all the sources are unverifiable. How will a neutral reader know that these are true, especial when they come from biased editor? And sources should not be misrepresented. -AsceticRosé 06:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Just added a number of more sources to most of these statements. I couldn't find any of these information to be incorrect or non-existing. Mentions of Kashmir Valley, Mathura, are sourced to K.S. Lal, who was a renowned historian, and if you can find rebuttal of those information then only I will consider removal of it. Though it missed mention of Tipu Sultan, and it is necessary to mention him before talking about modern period, thus I have mentioned Sultan. Capitals00 (talk) 04:56, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Capitals, you have not provided urls (except in Tipu Sultan), so we are unable to verify the claims. Your asking that “if you can find rebuttal of those information” is invalid here because it is ridiculous to think the sources will say “no, this has not happened”. Rather, we have to see if reliable sources support those claims. And the burden is on you to prove, as you have added them.

The section at its current state demands a POV or a Disputed tag, I believe. -AsceticRosé 17:08, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Hinduism

What is Soul harvesting? That article does not exist; mention of which seems to be attributed to a non-reliable blog source. El_C 01:59, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Plenty of material and videos available on Soul Harvesting - conversion of Hindus to Christians in India by missionaries. Well known term used by Christian organizations.

https://www.harvestindia.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.189.212 (talk) 02:02, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Please review our guide to reliable sources, which your source seems to fail, still. The article Soul Harvesting does not exist on Wikipedia, still. Thanks. El_C 02:13, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Your issue is with the phrase "soul harvesting". Well. Did you do any research or looked up the phrase? I am guessing not. Clearly you have no idea about the conversion practices of Christian missionaries of South Asia. One of the link is from Youtube other is from SoulHarvest.org. SoulHarvest.org is avery infamous Christian conversion organization. One Youtube video has been quoted by 64...., if you research there are several other similar videos. These are not fake videos. 3rd Link is just an analysis of "Soul Harvest" and techniques used by "Soul Vultures" (term missionaries use for themselves). I am suggesting you reduce your level of ignorance on the sub-topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.189.212 (talk) 23:40, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not inclined to do your work for you. El_C 17:31, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

UNDUE

There seems to be an UNDUE focus on forced conversion in Pakistan and the UK. While forced conversion in Pakistan is a real problem, the current article devotes more space to it than any other sub-section in the article. And the section on the UK is more about allegations of forced conversion and rebuttals to those allegations than about actual substance. Both of these sections should be summarized per WP:UNDUE.VR _talk 15:42, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Forced conversion to Islam

In the section on Africa, why no mention of Boko Haram, of the Chibok schoolgirl kidnappings and subsequent forced conversion of some if not all of the kidnapped girls, as well as instances of forced conversions of other people in the African subcontinent? Kathy wiki edit (talk) 02:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Christianity

There is apparently a misunderstanding around an article which is being sourced here from the NYT entitled "Pope Concedes Unjustifiable Crimes in Converting South Americans". :https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/24/world/americas/24pope.html The title of this article is absolutely fictional, since nowhere in the article did Pope Benedict make ANY such assertion. The quote in the article is that it is “not possible to forget the suffering and the injustices inflicted by colonizers against the indigenous population, whose fundamental human rights were often trampled.” Nothing about Forced conversions. If someone has ANY materials where the Pope stated there were "forced conversions" or coercion or anything to that effect, then this source would be legitimate. As it stands, it is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C401:6AC0:6956:5E18:D284:5F8B (talk) 06:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, glad to see you using the talk pages. I am following the protocol of wikipedia which is found here WP:BRD. I reverted your edits because in wikipedia you need to have sources for the claims. The source on the Americas is from the pope's concession of unjustifiable crimes in conversion of native people in line with other claims by other historians. It states "These leaders and groups cited the standard historical view that Spanish and Portuguese colonizers forced conversion by giving natives a choice between “the Cross and the sword.”" That source was relevant and the removal was not justified.

For the second source, I read the source and did not see the authors explicitly claiming that some forced conversion occurred. Can you provide a quote from the source that indicates so?Ramos1990 (talk) 07:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

If you are going to use that source, then quote it appropriately, since the Pope NEVER mentioned forced conversions. You can us it to say "some South American Leaders stated..." etc. The Pope referred to "colonizers", which were the secular authorities. If you are going to say "According to Pope Benedict" then you have to quote him correctly. That is if you have a conscience...and apparently you do not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C401:6AC0:6956:5E18:D284:5F8B (talk) 08:00, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

The pope was apologizing broadly and recognized injustices including forced conversions by supposed Christians - which is what the piece addressed. The Pope has no reason to apologize for secular Spanish activity - only religious activity. Catholicism is not Spain or the Spanish so he was clearly apologizing for forced abuses of natives. BTW I removed your vandalism on my talk page as such racist nonsense does not belong on wikipedia (I am not Mexican by the way (no seas payaso/payasa) so I am immune to your anti-Mexican hatred - they are nice people though).

Bias

Please take a look at the lead for the Christian forced conversions and compare that to the one in Islam. The Islamic lead is practically a defense of the practice and an overemphasis on scholars who apparently claim that forced conversions weren't common. That is dubious and the lead needs to be reformatted or edited to clear it of blatant bias. 2600:4040:9012:1100:AD3F:6304:D37C:FCBB (talk) 07:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)