Jump to content

Talk:Islamic feminism/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Colgate University

Hello, we are students at Colgate University. We are editing this article as part of our class, Women in Islam. Our names are Mick Moran, Caroline Potolichio, and Maddy Tennis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtennis (talk • contribs) 16:02, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Shariah section

There might be a need for a shariah section for this entry, but what is there at the moment is problematic. The repeated references to "Islamic feminists believe", "Islamic feminists do", etc are misplaced in an academic entry. There are no references for these. Certainly some Islamic feminists might "believe" or "do" what is being suggested, but these sweeping statements are incorrect.

The whole discussion about which countries have adopted what degree of "shariah" is also not really relevant to this entry.

The Qur'an does NOT say anything about breastfeeding women having to be paid; this is a scholarly opinion, not from the Qur'an. Such a serious error seems to indicate a level of ignorance about the issue from the writer.

I am therefore deleting this whole section. - Amandla (talk • ) 11:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

Hi Amandla,
Regarding this passage - "Some Islamic feminists have taken the attitude that a reformed MPL which is based on the Qur'an and Sunnah, which includes substantial input from Muslim women and which does not discriminate against women is possible"
My understanding of Islamic Feminism is that it rejects Sharia completely and where no Sharia/MPLs exist, campaigners do not in any way wish to see them implemented because there is a recognition that any MPL will be discriminatory - I have heard this view from several IFs and scholars including Dr Nayereh Tohidi, Margot Badran, Shaheen Sardar Ali - This is a difficult topic to find online references for and much of my studying has been through attendances at conferences which often don't publish papers so I realise it's a bit tricky to find references but could you perhaps make reference to where this view is held?
I'm keen to see this article expanded as much as possible because it is currently very very short and not very substantial - perhaps we could come up with a TODO list of sections to work on for this article? I'll start another section in the talk page when i've got a couple of ideas to start with!
Regarding section on BreastFeeding, it was perhaps a bit silly of me to include it without confirming, it was from a source, Balghis Badri (Sudan) at the II Congress on IF in Barcelona last November but I didn't verify it. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gazzelle (talk • contribs) 15:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC).


Dear Gazelle. We should be careful of homogenising Islamic Feminisms and Islamic feminists. That would be dangerous mistake. On the issue of the Shariah, I do not believe it is correct to say that Islamic Feminisms "reject Shariah completely". Some Islamic feminists would argue that by definition they have to be consistent with the shariah but would, at the same time, argue that the implementation of Shariah in various parts of the world is unIslamic. Hence their attack is not against the Shariah per se but against its (mis?)implementation. But, also, we shouldn't be tempted to conflate "shariah" with Muslim personal law. MPL is a small subsection of the Shariah. Some IFs that might reject the notion of the application of "Shariah" in a society might nevertheless believe that a reformed MPL can deliver justice to Muslim women.
You mentioned Shaheen Sardar Ali. She has been campaigning against Pakistan's hudud law arguing that it is actually not consistent with the Shariah and with the Qur'an (the primary source of the Shariah). Such an argument is not a complete rejection of Shariah. In South Africa where the MPL debate has been raging for a while, there is a difference of opinion among Islamic feminists (all of whom believe in a just shariah) about whether the way to deliver justice to Muslim women is through a reformed MPL or by simply recognising Muslim marriages and allowing the civil courts to deal with the consequences. In Nigeria, Islamic feminists engage the so-called shariah laws and attempt to cerate spaces within them rather than trying to ignore and reject them completely. Whether they all would like to reject the shariah law or not is open to debate, but in the real world in which they live, they prefer to engage and win victories in that way.
The website of the Barcelona conference has a number of online resources you can check out. Look particularly at the articles (linked there) of Margot Badran and Na'eem Jeenah. I refer to these because both of them attempt definitions for what IF is and who IFs are.
On the breastfeeding issue, I don't know what exactly Ms Badri said, but you would be correct if you said that a large of (classical) Muslim scholars have the position that breastfeeding mothers are entitled to financial compensation for the breastfeeding. I think this point should be made in a section on the position of IFs on women and the home (something to that effect). However, I must say that I haven't come across any opinion that says that it is definitely the responsibility of the mother to breastfeed; it is always supposed to be her choice. Remember that in the tribal Arab society (like that of Muhammad), if the mother didn't want to breastfeed, she (or hubby) would get a wetnurse. Amandla 14:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Amandla, regarding: "Hence their attack is not against the Shariah per se but against its (mis?)implementation" - I would agree, I get the impression that's a central aspect of IF in the sense that it is a feminism rooted in the Quran and Islam itself - my understanding is that a lot of IFs are using the concept as a tool to fight oppression that is carried out in the name of Islam like the Hudod laws in Pakistan you cited that are completely unIslamic. I think this is probably an important point to expand on in the entry - what do you think?
"...large of (classical) Muslim scholars have the position that breastfeeding mothers are entitled to financial compensation for the breastfeeding. I think this point should be made in a section on the position of IFs on women and the home (something to that effect)" - YES! sounds good! Re "I must say that I haven't come across any opinion that says that it is definitely the responsibility of the mother to breastfeed; it is always supposed to be her choice." I didn't think i said that in my previous entry, oops if i did because i am aware of that! Having had a look around on google for issues about breast-feeding and Islam, there's quite a bit of US blogs/sites spouting crap about the issue, so it would be good to clarify it here on WP. Sounds like we've got a Breast-feeding section from this discussion anyway. Gazzelle 14:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

New lead definition?

Can we use this as a starting point - thought i'd pop it in here before editing:

Islamic feminism is a form of feminism that aims for the full equality of all Muslims, regardless of sex or gender, in public and private life. Islamic feminists advocate women's rights, gender equality, and social justice grounded in an Islamic framework. Although rooted in Islam, the movement's pioneers have also utilised secular and western feminist discourses and recognise the role of Islamic feminism as part of an integrated global feminist movement[1]. Advocates of the movement seek to highlight the deeply rooted teachings of equality in the Quran and encourage a questioning of the patriarchal interpretation of Islamic teaching through the Quran, Hadith and Sharia towards the creation of a more equal and just society.[2]

Thought the stuff about Qasim Amin could then be moved to a more appropriate section on History and Development... I'll wait a couple of days for comments before making any changes on this bit.Gazzelle 22:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.feminismeislamic.org/eng/index.htm
  2. ^ http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2002/569/cu1.htm

MPL

I removed that MPL is a construct of colonialism because the claim was unsourced and its relevance unclear. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Strange edit buttons

I can see no edit button by the top of the first section, but two at the top of the second section. I have never seen this fault on any other page. Can others see this, or is it just me? Does anyone know how to fix it? Thanks BrainyBabe 09:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

It may have been a product of the template obscuring an edit button. It looks okay to me now. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Re-add queer

I have just re-added the word queer. The editor who removed it stated it was slang and redundant (to homosexual and bisexual). I believe that it is neither. The meaning of the word has changed significantly over the past generation, and while it is still in some contexts and from some people a term of abuse, it has also been reclaimed (as indeed has the word "gay"). See queer theory and queer studies. It does not mean the same as homosexual and bisexual either -- queer politics, for example, do not emphasise same-sex marriage in the heteronormative manner of mainstream gay politics. Therefore the word adds something different and useful to the article. BrainyBabe 09:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

What does this have to do with Islamic feminism? SlimVirgin (talk) 23:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
see new section below BrainyBabe 10:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Re-add section on sexuality

I have re-added the section on sexuality that was recently deleted. We may have a disagreement of perspective so fundamental that compromise is impossible - but I still hope, optimistically, to learn from the experience! So, what follows is why I see a political understanding and discussion of sexuality as intrinsic to feminism:

Women are socially "constructed" as different from men, in societies all over the world, based primarily on their biology and what follows from that -- i.e. the ability to bear children and the need to raise them. Reproduction comes from sex -- we are not an asexual species. Men want to know who their children are, and in the millenia before DNA tests, the easiest way to achieve this was to control women's expression of sexuality, whether that be pre-marital or extra-marital. Social systems in most of the Islamic world accept this, as does much of the rest of the world too in different ways, although not universally. Within this system, a woman's reproductive potential belongs not to her individually, but to her husband and his family; if she divorces, the tendency is for the children to stay with him. Likewise her sexuality is seen collectively; if she has sex before marriage, she brings shame on her family. If she falls in love with another woman, she must hide it. If she decides she wishes to become celibate, temporarily or permanently, her husband is unlikely to respect her decision. One of the functions of feminism is to examine the socal systems women live under, and point out their disadvantages and unfairnesses.

I am not claiming these issues are exclusive to Islamic feminism -- far from it. But these issues, of the control of women's sexual and reproductive power, exist in most (all?) societies, and are dealt with differently according to cultural norms, religious edicts, local scientific understanding, etc. And so the way in which issues of sexuality are discussed and treated within Islam, and are critiqued by feminists within that tradition, seems to me to be a vital part of the equation.

I hope this makes my position clear, and I look forward to constructive and thought-provking debate. BrainyBabe 10:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to be very thought provoking BrainyBabe because i largely concurr with what you're saying. Sexuality, particularly female/women's sexuality is intrinsic to the discussion of all feminisms including Islamic Fem. This is recognised among Islamic Feminist writers/scholoars/activists and is thus very relevant to this article. The debate on homosexuality/queer issues within IF is a much smaller discussion thus far within the IF debate but none-the-less it does exist and should also be included.Gazzelle 17:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I have another question but will start a new thread. BrainyBabe 22:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

To Do List to improve article?

It would be good to see this article expanded, here's a TODO list that maybe we could work on gradually. Any suggestions? Here's a bunch of suggestions for sections (although not the section headers...)in no particular order:

  • History and development of the idea - perhaps that's already covered by the introduction?
  • Opposition to the movement - key forces opposing the movement eg. some ulamas & imams & govts
  • Key ideas of Islamic Feminism - i think the article still lacks some basic explinations of the aims of campaigners/scholars in the movement so it would be good to clarify this
  • More on Sharia - perhaps a break down of the main issues in Sharia/Personal Status Law that Islamic Feminists are campaigning against eg. Polygyny, marriage/divorce laws, child custody issues, zina/adultery, family planning and abortion, stoning/lashing (would be good to give examples of cases?)
  • Distinction between 'Muslim Feminists' and 'Islamic Feminists' although this is quite a minor distinction, it might be helpful for people confused (like me!) about exactly what that distinction is...
  • Distinction between Islamic Feminism and Islamism - because it's not the same thing!

Gazzelle 16:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


Gazelle, I think this is a good start for a TODO list. Perhaps we should just work on this before adding any more tasks. Just 1 or 2 comments. Firstly, even before "Hist an Dev", and perhaps within the intro, we should have some discussion about what exactly the animal is. What is the definition of Islamic feminism? Is this a contentious issue? If so, why? etc. Secondly, I suggest we dont make the distinction between IF and Islamism an issue just yet. Thats because Islamism itself is a contested term and some IFs might actually also self-identify as Islamists. (Perhaps I should hop over to the Islamism page and see what it says :). In South Africa, eg, some progressive Muslims who feminists and have been involved in the anti-apartheid struggle call themselves Islamists - because they have been calling themselves that for the past 2 decades - before the term got aligned to the Bin Ladens and their cronies. Amandla 13:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Amandla, I agree that there needs to be a more substantial definition however i feel a bit wary of doing this myself, i'm quite new to wikipedia editing so i don't exactly have amazing WP writing style, but i'll have a think/read about it and post some ideas here. In terms of Islamism, the key distinction that i have found throughout my studying of IF is that Islamists are not working for full equality for women and men but rather equality in the public sphere eg. jobs, entry to military, voting rights etc. From what i understand, they do not wish to challenge the position of women or gender roles in the personal sphere and this is a considerable difference and arguably not feminist. Perhaps the definition could include a reference to Muslim Feminism as i mentioned in the todo list.Gazzelle 14:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


One place to start with the defintions issue is the sources I mentioned earlier. But I will also gie it a thought. As to the Islamist vs IF thing: again, your contention about Islamists is not true for all Islamists. It certainly is true for some, but then if we want to make this point, it needs to be clear that it is some. In my opinion, omitting trying to distinguish between IF and Islamism doesnt lose any value. Amandla 14:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
As per BrainyBabe's suggestion, i've added a TODO list at the top of the page that is more permanant and workable. Please use that to add to or remove or modify this todo list! Gazzelle 13:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Totally disputed

I added this tag because Qasim Amin was from turn of the century (1900) Egypt... maybe the term Islamic feminism started in the 1990s but feministic Islams started earlier even according to this article. gren グレン 13:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Gren, I'm not sure you can add the disputed tag because of a "see also," and what exactly is the objection to its inclusion? SlimVirgin (talk) 02:46, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
I'm removing the tag as there's no discussion about it. SlimVirgin (talk) 06:41, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

I probably could have just fixed that earlier... see what you think of my changes. Qasim Amin was turn of the century (19th) so to say it started in the 1990s is silly. However, I don't think it was called "Islamic feminism" until later. Well, tell me what you think. gren グレン 08:07, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks good, Gren, thanks. I've tweaked it slightly. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:31, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

WHat are the source for the See also lists? I can understand how most these people are feminists, but I can't see how there are "Islamic". (Esp. Irshad Manji, who in her book tries to argue that Prophet muhammad is very much like Bin Laden)Bless sins 04:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Would that mean she's not Islamic? SlimVirgin (talk) 06:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
As in she (or some feminists could be he), considers themselves secular and draw inspiration from secular sources. "Islamic" would be some one religious drawing inspiration from the Quran and have appreciation for the Islamic tradition.
Irshad Manji, according me, is NOT Islamic, (as she endlessly tries to demonize Prophet Muhammad and twists the Quran to show whatever she wants to show). Ofcourse, that's original research. But i could probably some up with many sources to back up my claims.Bless sins 04:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Well I am not sure that your opinion counts all that much. I agree that the vast majority of Muslims would probably agree with you. In fact I might agree with you too. But she is a Muslim, she calls herself a Muslim, she says what she is doing is Islamic. She is an Islamic feminist even if her idea of Islam is weird. It is not for Wikipedia to start takfiring people. Lao Wai 07:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank goodness, Lao, you are keeping up on these Islamic entries in Wikipedia (nearly all articles are, IMO, non-NPOV). Irshad Manji not only self-identifies as a Muslim[1], she cites the Qur'an to support her belief that lesbians are as much a creation of Allah as anybody else, and she cites the Qur'an to support her belief that Muslims ought to recover an intellectual openness (Ijtihad) lost in the late Middle Ages. There is little doubt, therefore, that her feminism is informed by the Qur'an and Islamic faith; a fortiori, she is an Islamic feminist. Tm19 01:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Its a moot point since the page must, for neutrality, discuss feminist who are not muslem but whose focus is islam. You may not remove a reference to any promenent feminist whose focus is islam, even if she isnt islamic herself. Of course, you may subdivide the list into feminists claiming to be muslems and those claiming to not be muslems; however, such subdivisions are always done by self identification on wikipedia. There are plenty of liberal christians who say GWB aint a good chrisitian, but that doesnt matter when it comes to his article.

I agree that Irshad Manji should not be on the list. According to the entry: "Islamic feminism is defined by Islamic scholars as being more radical than secular feminism,[1] and as being anchored within the discourse of Islam with the Qur'an as its central text." Irshad Manji certainly does not regard the Qur'an as a central text for her feminism - and that is the difference. 03:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)~~ Same w/AYaan Hirsi Ali. She is NOT Muslim!

Yeah, I was surprised to find this article even existed, and was sort of expecting it to maybe be about "the right to not have sulfuric acid thrown in your face without first getting trial by sharia court" or something equally absurd. I have been made aware time and time again that because the islamic text hasn't been translated, there is no room for re-interpretation or possibility of errors. I have also seen this claim stated on fliers passed out on college campuses in the united states by otherwise-seeming "more liberal or moderate" islamics, which strongly gives me the impression that the only reason for being moderate is to avoid a lengthy prison sentence. I wonder why this article has not been nominated for replacement with a redirect to oxymoron. Zaphraud (talk) 02:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Islamic Feminism Symbol

Can we have a source on that symbol? And if it doesn't go back as far as early islam, it technically should be moved down to relevant sub-section. If a source cannot be provided, then it should be removed. Faro0485 (talk) 02:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Qassim Amin was NOT Feminist

Qasim Amin was not feminist, according to Leila Ahmed's Women and Gender in Islam (published in 1992 by Yale University), but colonialist. pp.155-163, 171, 179. He believed that Western civilization was necessarily more civilized. The education he said was good for women was hardly revolutionary for his time, he blames women for problems with their sexuality (even saying an Egyptian wife could not experience true love), and the complete removal of the veil, which he supported, prevents people from living important cultural and religious practices by choice. The chapters of his work that seem feminist were likely contributed by someone else. (p. 159, 161) Please either remove this man from the list, or honestly note that his works were not truly feminist. The veil does not, itself, signify oppression - only those circumstances which force a woman to don or remove it. Fennasnogothrim (talk) 12:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

uhmmm divorce is not necessarily liberation

if you read the actual page on taliq, women pretty much couldnt divorce men, only men could divorce women. then the men didn't have to pay for anything of theirs. . .

implying this is somehow 'superior' to 'western' culture is kind of... you know ... not neutral. i mean... yeah. think about it.

guys running around, doesnt like his wife, 'i divorce you', she is left with no money and no jobs, he can go get a new wife. you call that equality? i dont know. on the face of it, it is very worrisome to think in this illogical manner and make such a strange argument withotu much proof Decora (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

the term 'western world'

the term 'western world' is incredibly vague to the point of having no meaning. Decora (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

True: Australia is, sometimes Turkey or Japan or Haiti are too. Our article Western world offers different definitions. Could you propose a wording here that might fit into the context of the article? BrainyBabe (talk) 16:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

source

Here. Muslim feminists deserve to be heard" RANDA ABDEL-FATTAH AND SUSAN CARLAND January 28, 2010 Comments 92 Women don't have to give up Islam for rights, argue Randa Abdel-Fattah and Susan Carland.

Orientalists writing on Islam and Muslims have tended to represent Muslim women as infantilised and oppressed, victims in need of rescue by the enlightened West. This is a classic example of the tyranny of self-projection, where the rescuer assumes a position of superiority so the belief systems, values and norms of Muslim women are judged against the Western experience.

BrainyBabe (talk) 19:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Male/Female Allah

Are there some moslem feminists that have promoted the idea that Allah with/without a gender, or that he/she could have some female elements ? 69.157.229.14 (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

In the context of the Arabic language, no grammatical noun can be truly "without a gender", since adjective forms and second person and third person verb forms all inflect for grammatical gender (masculine vs. feminine). I imagine that most Islamic religious scholars would admit that God is not male in any literal biological sense, but they would still consider it highly inappropriate to refer to the word Allah with feminine adjectives, verbs, and pronouns. Certainly the word Allah الله does not morphologically contain any feminine ending... AnonMoos (talk) 06:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, one must note that Allat as the feminine form of allah, is denounced in Quran 53:19-23 Faro0485 (talk) 01:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually, Al-Lat was NOT a female version of Allah, but rather the pagan arabs thought that she was one of Allah's daughters. The article below explains everything.

Allah, the unique name of God Ksweith (talk) 016:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

source

Furthermore until the third through the ninth century women prayed in the mosques unveiled? This sentence is taken from a paragraph in article. In this paragraph, there's a source. Is this source a reference for that sentence? Kavas (talk) 00:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

History

Táhirih

Aisha Abd al-Rahman was not the first modern lady to undertake Qur'anic exegesis, Táhirih came before her, and as the talk section above titled "Where does non-Qu'ranic feminism by Muslim women fit" it was indicated that even non-muslims can be considered Islamic Feminists, so surely one such as Táhirih who was born into, highly learned in, and practising Islam for a large part of her life qualifies. Daniel De Mol (talk) 13:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Women in Islamic Golden Age?

I'm a bit confused, here. Why is Nana Asma'u being discussed in the section on feminism during the Islamic Golden Age? Nana Asma'u wasn't born until 1793, and the Golden Age of Islam is commonly considered over when the Mongol Horde marches into Bagdhad in 1258. In fact, the sections on education, civil / military work and Marriage rights seem out of place here, as they jump around in timeline, refusing to commit themselves, pretending to fill in the void that exists between 1258 and the Nineteeth Century. Are there not enough Islamic Feminists between these two time periods to warrant its own section? Jmgariepy (talk) 08:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Islamic feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Islamic feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Islamic feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:54, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Islamic feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:02, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Islamic feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Just an opinion

I've just read the article, and wheter its structure is crafted to sound encyclopedical, it's not entirely, for the simple reason it lacks the fundamentals concepts of, for example, the voice "Feminism". It's pretty obvious the intent is mainly to show it exists a feminist movement within Islam. But: what about abortion? what about the various types of permitted cloths within the vast area of Islam? What about, precisely and not aneddotically, the position about divorce? The voice is not very effective for the simple reason is a collection of anedocts that purposely and vaguely assembly episodes and small facts to portrait a movement that doesn't exist as such. Sorry to say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.40.118.149 (talk) 15:49, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Requesting wider attention

I felt article Islamic_literature is in bit of neglect so I added my note on talk page there, requesting to take note of Talk:Islamic_literature#Article_review. If possible requesting copy edit support. Suggestions for suitable reference sources at Talk:Islamic_literature is also welcome.

Posting message here too for neutrality sake


Thanks and greetings

Bookku (talk) 07:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam

Hi,

I came across this promising Draft:Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam (relating to women's rights) and myself supported the same editorially too. IMO since topic potential is vast many Reliable sources on Google scholar seem to be available hence the article needs more editorial hands for some more update and expansion along with appropriate references.

Pl. do join to update and expansion, your help will be most welcome.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 15:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Where does non-Qu'ranic feminism by Muslim women fit?

This is a philosophical or Wikipedic-structural question. There are Muslim women who agitate on behalf of women's rights and/or call themselves feminists, but do not explicitly cite the Qu'ran, or do not base their whole critique on it. Where do they fit in? I'm not entirely comfortable with the intro as it stands, because it seems to squeeze out Muslim women "doing feminism" outside the mosque, as it were. I am thinking of 1st or 2nd generation immigrants in the West, as well as the somewhat secularised and well-educated elite in Muslim countries. These women live in a largely Muslim ghetto or almost totally Muslim society. They identify and analyse the problems around them. Without blaming Islam per se, and without turning to the Qu'ran, they seek solutions. They themselves may be devout or not. There will always be those who call them, and any woman who opens her mouth, "un-Islamic" -- that proves nothing. For example, the two presidents of Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Nor Submissives), the organisation that started with young women in the mostly Muslim ghettos of France to resist gang-rapes, the curtailment of education, coerced marriages, and pressure to wear the hijab: Samira Bellil and now Fadela Amara. Do they count as Muslim feminists? Any thoughts welcome. BrainyBabe 22:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, i'm still newish to Wikipedia so not really sure on the procedure for changing a part of the page as important as the intro so i put it up on this talk page a couple of months ago for people to discuss but no-one did so i just ended up doing it the other day - I wasn't happy with the previous intro but by all means lets improve it - i'd love to see this article grow.
Anyway, to answer your Q - I've hinted at this issue before in my suggested TODO list (above) - what is the difference between Islamic Feminists and Muslim Feminists. The impression i have so far gotten from people involved in this movement is that IFs are grounding their arguments/campaigns in Islamic principles/texts where Muslim Feminists are Muslims who are feminists but do not necessarily ground thier debates in Quranic teachings per se. I'm not exactly clear on this though and don't claim to be spot on but i think it's worth clarifying in the article and perhaps in the intro also. However, I have heard this question posed to a panel of IFs and there were broadly differing viewpoints so it's not so simple i guess. Additionally, i have got the impression that to be an Islamic feminist, you dont necessarily have to be a Muslim, just someone who respects the religion/teachings/scriptures and who cares about equality, thus IF can incorporate more than Muslims. Gazzelle 19:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
You say you are new, but I think you have obeyed the spirit of Wikipedia better than I have in this case! I should have read more of the debate above. BTW There is a template for TO DO, which goes at the top of some talk pages to focus efforts. The advantage over a simple item in the list is that it stays visible at the top.
I hope your interpretation of IF/MF is correct. It is wide enough to make sense. Now all it needs is sources! Not my forte in this case. I tend to flit around between far-flung articles, tidying up style and grammar, and then seeing structural issues or NPOV that I want to re-balance. I don't have the expertise or books, so will leave this as it is. Good luck with this article! BrainyBabe 20:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Although above discussion is old, nuances would need a little more attention.
There can be Islamists who would argue, 'Islam of traditional patriarchal hirarchichal gender roles in itself good (feminist) enough'-Basically that is just traditional apologetic at times presented in new way but do not comply with modern expectations of gender equality, gender justice and human rights fully, so they need to be kept aside and need not be confused with Islamic Feminists.
Islamic Feminists are those who share values of gender equality, gender justice and human rights with secular feminists but find inspiration in Islamic scriptures itself but by reinterpreting.
There are secular Muslim feminists, who do not get into business of reinterpreting Islamic scriptures but strait away stand against patriarchy refer to human rights and demand gender equality and gender justice.
When Muslim feminist activists, secular as well as Islamic just talk against patriarchy it is difficult to differentiate between two groups because both oppose patriarchy talk for gender equality and gender justice. In the fields at times can be found together but different in inspirations, approach and ideological boundaries.
Since secular Muslim feminists identify themselves as secular they are counted in with general feminist hence we do not find a Wikipedia article about them. But they also need to be covered some where so I have created two drafts Draft:Autobiographies of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women and Draft:Expressions of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women through media ineteractions where Muslim women activism of every hue can be covered.
For look into ideological side of this particular article of Islamic feminism a new article has come up Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam it is also popularly called Feminist tafsir.
drafts Draft:Autobiographies of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women and Draft:Expressions of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women through media ineteractions and Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam need proactive support of many more hands in updating and expansion.
Thanks Bookku (talk) 02:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Islamic vs Muslim

Forgive me if this is an ignorant question, but isn't the adjectival form of "Islam" "Muslim", not "Islamic"? In other words, shouldn't the title of this article be "Muslim feminism"? Webbbbbbber (talk) 18:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Muslim is most common in referring to what pertains to individuals, Islamic to the religion in general. Don't think there's a big problem with the title... AnonMoos (talk) 06:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
@ Webbbbbbber Since I was looking for help in related articles, I thought it would be ok to reply to this old discussion. Actually discussion in above section covers a reply in detail.
Many Muslim feminists are muslim same time take feminist inspirations from values of Human rights equality and justice directly without referring to Islamic scripture while taking feminist position.
Islamic feminist share values of Human rights gender equality and gender justice but find inspiration in Islamic scriptures by reiterpreting those.
In nutshell, Islamic feminist are Islamic and feminist both but not Islamist. (Islamist support patriarchal gender roles). And hence all muslim feminists are not referred as Islamic feminists.
Bookku (talk) 03:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Edits of concern Jagged 85. Let us discuss relevance

Update 2020 June 19: Wide Edit dif:Removed pre-19 th century Islamist interpretative views at least temporarily. Since modern Islamic feminism begins post 19th century. Remaining to be Islamic same time opposing gender biased hierarchy and demanding gender equality and justice are essential attributes of post 19th century Islamic feminism; That's why pre-19 th century Islamist interpretative views don't fit in well, that's why deleted. Read detail discussion below and in Talk:Islamic_feminism#To_do_list_Updated_in_June_2020. Bookku (talk) 02:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

I am looking for if some one can proactively help out in long pending verification of refs of two edits: (+2942) & (+6368) and updating @ Talk:Islamic_feminism#Islamic Feminism Jagged 85 problem resolution analysis table.

I have checked for 17 out of 19 still two significant are remaining. And now feeling bit weary -also have other focus areas to work on- but still wish task gets completed, so decision making about content and article's other related tasks can breathe with little more ease.

Initially I was pretty confused with hat note notice relating to Jagged 85. After bit of search I realized that edits of a particular user are of particular concern i.e. Checking relevance of inserted content and reliability of sources and whether content matches the quoted reference source are majior concerns.

  • Edits to be cross checked

Some edits seems to have been already deleted and some seem to be still to be addressed.

My first observation was even before source, some of those edits relevance itself is supposed to be in question but before that Wikipedians shall need to decide what this article is supposed to cover.

Confusion seems to be with feminization of Islam Vs. claims of conservative patriarchal Islam itself was and is feminist enough. As of now both content is included in the article. And Wikipedians will need to decide on relevance of the "..claims of conservative patriarchal Islam itself was and is feminist enough..." for this article. These claims can be incorporated in Women in Islam. Beyond context and criticism sections is there any relevance for it in this particular article?

Bookku (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@70.67.193.176: Hi, Sorry and Thanks both. Sorry, for you were attempting to communicate at Reference Desk and some how I did not get notification and I missed on that conversation.

And thanks for your support. Some how my focus bit shifted to some other article for a while, when I will come back to this topic again I will communicate again. Warm regards and greetings Bookku (talk) 01:22, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Islamic Feminism Jagged 85 problem resolution analysis table

Jagged 85 problem resolution analysis table
Edit no. Edit difference opens after clicking byte size Still exists or reverted, If exists What does edit adds, If referenced whether matches to the reference
1 (+2942) Analysis of refs of two big edits will need additional time and energy. Need help from additional helpful hands Analysis done at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2020_June_16#Can_some_one_help_in_verification_of_refs
2 (+6368) Analysis of refs of two big edits will need additional time and energy . Need help from additional helpful hands.
4 (+706) + Addition is of an alleged quote of Noah Feldman, 's quote suggesting, British common law regressed on advent of British colonialism on Women's property law in comparison to medieval Sharial law.
8 (+694)
  • Edit consists claim that Aisha Abd al-Rahman, is one of early modern Islamic Feminist of 20th Century. Also talks of that Naguib Mahfouz' work. Seems to match Given Ref : Ruth Roded's article in the journal : Bint al-Shati’s Wives of the Prophet: Feminist or Feminine? :journal=British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies
  • Above Ref: of Ruth Roded also matches for claim made in next edit (+354) claiming Aisha Abd al-Rahman, wrote biographies of early women in Islam, including the prophets family members.
9 (+354) + Addition claims Aisha Abd al-Rahman, wrote biographies of early women in Islam, including the prophets family members
  • Content seems copy edited but still exists in article.
  • Google books ref cursory check of Ref: "zeidan" Arab Women Novelists: The Formative Years and Beyond by Joseph T. Zeidan, State University of New York Press, 1995 failed confirmation Some body else needs to veryfy once again if at all I missed on some ref somewhere. or Rahman has written but Zeiden didn't mentioned but ref is some where else but Jagged 85 misused ref ?
  • While Zeidan does not seem to match but earlier ref of Ruth Roded's article in the journal : Bint al-Shati’s Wives of the Prophet: Feminist or Feminine? :journal=British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies seems to match the cliam
 Ref verification Zeidan seems to fail, One more ref check needed to be on safer side.

But Ruth Roded ref in earlier sentence/edit seem to macth. to this edit also.

11 (+1389) This apologetic content inform on ease of divorce and remarriage for Muslim Women benefiting from Sharia in Medieval times
  • Content seems to be copy edited but still there.
  • Following ref Instead of Page 2 or 5 and 6 found on Page 1 on JSTOR Ref:Rapoport, Yossef (2005), Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society, Cambridge University Press, p. 2, ISBN 978-0-521-84715-5
May be some one confirm it once again.
  • Comment: This content is coming as apologetic of medieval Sharia, instead of Islamic feminist commentary is concern and probably needs to check for appropriateness of context.
Original ref source mentions but plays down aspects where women didn't have equality including lack of landed property in hands of women mentioned by original source but not Jagged 85.
12 (-250) -According to Al-Sakhawi, as many as three out of ten marriages in 15th century Cairo ended in divorce.

-In the early 20th century, some villages in western Java and the Malay peninsula had divorce rates as high as 70%.[1]

moderate
13 (+521) + Addition detailed about 15 century female Muslim scholars.
  • Not same but text of similar apologetic seems to be around still in the article (When this table is updated-June 2020). Jagged 85's this edit text was deleted or changed by which edit still to be confirmed.
  • Relevance of references to status of Muslim Women Pre 19th century, beyond context and criticism sections remains in question.
14 (+32) + at certain points (Cautionary addition)

+In the medieval Islamic world and the [[Ottoman Empire]] to In the [[Mamluk Sultanate (Cairo)|Mamluk Sultanate]] and early [[Ottoman Empire]]

-in the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and [[Syria]]


Inline citation :Rapoport, Yossef (2005), Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society, Cambridge University Press, pp. 5–6, ISBN 052184715X

  • Ref confirmed on Page 1 instead of 2 or 5-6 on JSTOR see item 10



 See item 10
17 (+740) + This addition was an apologetic stating that some Gallup] poll survey shows that Muslims in Europe as well as Muslim countries are okay with Muslim Women's property rights as per sharia.


  • Not checked with reference since (-740 Seems already deleted wide this edit dif)
  • If some published RS scholarly article has used Gallop poll to discredit Islamic Feminism then could have been appropriate in criticism section, but otherwise User Jagged 85r's use of it proves to be Original research using primary source
  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Rapoport was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Small edit analysis

Question of relevance unsettled; Whether edit still exists not yet confirmed.

Edit no. Edit difference opens after clicking byte size What does small edit adds Impact
3 (+40) + {{see also|Women in Islam|Madrasah|Islamic economics in the world}} Marginal
5 (+4) Addition of internal links to wording ' [[common law]] ' Marginal
6 (-2) Removal of a inverted coma Marginal
7 (+19) +{{quote|As for [[sexism]], the [[common law]] long denied married women any property rights or indeed legal personality apart from their husbands. Marginal
10 (+14) + {{see also|Women in Islam|Women in Iraq|Madrasah|Islamic economics in the world}} Marginal
12 (-250) -According to Al-Sakhawi, as many as three out of ten marriages in 15th century Cairo ended in divorce.

-In the early 20th century, some villages in western Java and the Malay peninsula had divorce rates as high as 70%.[1]

moderate
14 (+32) + at certain points (Cautionary addition)

+In the medieval Islamic world and the [[Ottoman Empire]] to In the [[Mamluk Sultanate (Cairo)|Mamluk Sultanate]] and early [[Ottoman Empire]]

-in the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and [[Syria]]


Inline citation :Rapoport, Yossef (2005), Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society, Cambridge University Press, pp. 5–6, ISBN 052184715X



Need to confirm
15 (0) Relocating ref [2] Marginal
16 (-6) [[Early Islamic philosophy|Islamic philosopher]] Marginal
18 (+19) {{See also|Women in Islam|Islamic Golden Age}} Marginal
19 (+23)
See also: Madrasah
 Marginal

Bookku (talk) 14:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Rapoport was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/gender.htm

To do list Updated in June 2020

1.1) Change section heading from History to Context and history

1.2) Include a sub-section on Gender roles in Islam, equality, justice and Category:Women's rights in Islam issues to put Islamic feminist movements in proper context.

1.3) Add a sub-section of Feminist tafsir and fetch Feminism in Islam section upwards

1.4) Delete/trim(or shift to Women in Islam article, the lesser-relevant claims "..claims of conservative patriarchal Islam itself was and is feminist enough..." for this article, other than necessary part in Context section and Criticism section.

That includes at least temporary removal of Jagged 85 edits in history section, and women in Islam section and later put in relevant portion in context and criticism section after weighing in on relevance and WP:RS

2.1) A brief forked section differentiating Islamic feminism from Islamists and Secular feminists with projection of expansion in article Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam

2.2) Also a criticism section projection of expansion in article Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam

3) Discuss and fork out longer parts of Dress code subsection in separate article of Islamic feminist discourse and movements about Islamic dress codes. So existing subsection looks trim and neat

4.1) Update and expand more on (Islamic) feminist movement sections and campaign sections with more Muslim women's rights issues being real core of the article

4.2) Add Section and subsections on regions wise Islamic feminist activity namely Africa, middle east, Turkey-Iraq-Iran, Central Asia, South Asia, East Asia, Americas-Europe-Australia

5) Put notable Islamic feminist tafsir authors and Islamic feminist activists for article for creation in Draft namespace.

6) Expand and update Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam Draft:Autobiographies of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women and Draft:Expressions of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women through media ineteractions and fork and include relevant parts in relevant sections.


Bookku (talk) 13:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Islamic feminist view on dress code Sub-Section

@I.am.a.qwerty: and other users,

Islamic_feminism#Dress_codes section has grown too long. Requesting opinions on following aspects.

1) To fork out a separate article of "Islamic feminist discourse and movements about Islamic dress codes." Please discuss a suitable title for the article. May be "Islamic feminist view on dress code" ?

2) Existing subsection should preferably be focused on Islamic feminist views. And avoid apologetic and WP:OR

3) Not hard set rule but as preference Existing subsection length should be limited to 4-6 Paras. Any additional information can be made available in separate respective article "Islamic feminist view on dress code"

4) As of now Whether last two paragraphs one related to fashion and second related to connections / comparison with other religious traditions are those really relevant for this article on Islamic feminism? If those two paras are not relevant should those be removed for non relevance.

5]] For example one of existing sentence is sounding like apologetic OR A growing number of women have begun to incorporate the hijab into their cultural dress, whether they live in predominantly Muslim countries or not.

Requesting opinions

Bookku (talk) 05:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

User:Bookku, I am unfamiliar with Islamic tradition but if it were a Jewish page, Id suggest the section have a {main} template and link to Tzniut (modesty in Judaism). I notice per Islam-related pages there is Intimate parts in Islam. Is that page sufficient for this section or should that article be broadened to "modesty in Islam"? I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 08:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@I.am.a.qwerty: Thanks for your response. I added link to Haya (Islam) then other important pages related Islamic clothing are already linked. But scholarly views can divided in categories in multiple ways but for this article views of Islamic feminist are having a primary role, then there can be secular feminist views and conservative views. Most of the traditional discussion surrounds traditional conservative discussion.

What happens is there is tendency to overshadow liberal thought with conservative apologetic that has happened in this article also, that needs to be cleaned up. Islamic feminism is a separate school of thought and there are varied views among them also. Some Islamic feminist may support or oppose veiling of women at varying degrees, what is common for them is their distinct school of thought represented by Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam (or Feminist tafsir. So this article being about Islamic feminism their point of views need to get primacy.

There are lot many Islamic feminists and even with their school of thought section is likely to as much overflow to make a separate article about Views on veiling among Islamic feminists. So that's why I started this discussion.

(Tip: Criticism and overshadowing are distinct things, I am not against criticism but overshadowing with non relevant information would remain a concern.)

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 10:23, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Splitting the article sounds like a good idea. May I suggest as title Islamic feminist views on dress codes OR Feminist views on Islamic dress codes. The latter could integrate the views of secular ex-Muslims on the modesty codes they have developed an argument against. (NB both titles use plural nouns, as with many other "feminist views" articles.) Carbon Caryatid (talk) 00:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Requesting some help

Hi,

Recently initiated a new Draft:Sexual politics and looking for proactive help in updating and expanding the article. Please do see if contributing to Draft:Sexual politics would interest you.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 02:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Rfc: Why participation of Muslim background women on Wikipedia as editors is so low?

Hi.

If you feel interested in, then kindly do share your inputs on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam#Why is editorial participation of Muslim women on Wikipedia so low?

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 01:53, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Peer review request

Requesting peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Women in Islam/archive1,

Bookku (talk) 09:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Feminist movement in Turkey

Did the act of unbanning the headscarf ban have a correlation with the feminist movement in Turkey, and after the headscarf ban was resolved did it increase women's participation in politics in government with equality and no clothing discrimination. What impact of feminism did this have before and after the ban.

Fatihbaruch98 (talk) 04:17, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

deeply flawed statement

At the lead section of the article it has been stated that "In the 2016 Olympics, fourteen Muslim women won medals, participating in a wide range of sports.[7]", giving this Buzzfeed tier mic.com article as a citation. Apart from failing to mention fourteen being an horrible misrepresentation among thousands of women medalists, the article lists women from predominantly Muslim countries and immediately assumes that they are "Muslims" without any sources whatsoever. Not all athletes from Muslim majority countries are themselves Muslim, and that the article as it stands makes this assumption. For example, according to the article Mariya Stadnik, an Ukrainian Azerbaijani athlete is a Muslim, yet there are no sources or public statement from her to verify this assumption. I also cannot find any sources stating half-Russian Aliya Mustafina, Kazakh Zhazira Zhapparkul, Indonesian Sri Wahyuni Agustiani, Egyptian Sara Ahmed, Turkish Nur Tatar or Azerbaijani Patimat Abakarova among others being Muslims.

The so-called good article Muslim women in sport is an equally flawed article because of this issues. It's like claiming any sportswomen from Europe or the USA "Christian" regardless of any public statement by them. It is dreadfully reductionist and assumptive and need to be deleted. --Gogolplex (talk) 19:12, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Table

First round of discussion about 'Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ?' in relation to Wikipedia article titles has been initiated at following talk pages.

Since I had promised at this notice board to keep informed hence a discussion invitation message.

Why at multiple talk pages, because 1) it is just initial first round only 2) to reach out a more people over a long long period.

Please do join in discussions, Thanks and regards Bookku (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

First round of discussion about 'Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ?' in relation to Wikipedia article titles.
Talk:Islamic art
Talk:Islamic dietary laws
Talk:Islamic culture
Talk:Women in Islam
Talk:Apostasy in Islam
Talk:List of former Muslims
Talk:Islamic Golden Age

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 6 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jackielupinblack, AubreeRaya. Peer reviewers: Wenhongchi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 16 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Annaybanez. Peer reviewers: Amcbayy.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Requesting inputs

Greetings,

Adequate and nuanced overview for even non– Muslim audience is expected out of the articles Muslims and Muslim world. Whether the articles are achieving that purpose adequately? Requesting and expecting proactive participation in providing inputs from non–Muslim audience too along with Muslim users.

Since the article Muslim world is tagged various improvements it can not be submitted to formal review process still I feel the article deserves more inputs for content improvement.

Requesting your visit to the articles

and provide your inputs @

Thanks

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Refs



Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 08:38, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): WGST320 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by WGST320 (talk) 19:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Islamic_feminism/Archive_1&oldid=1216614786"