Jump to content

Talk:Medina

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Madina)
Former good article nomineeMedina was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 27, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
October 15, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Needs Major Work

[edit]

The article is OK from history but it's woefully in need of help in describing the city as it relates to today. What is it's infrastructure like? What are the facilitites? It's unlike any other city article about cities in Saudi Arabia. What about the physical city? What about the public transit? Radio? Etc etc etc.... 63.26.123.156 (talk) 06:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)eric[reply]

Article comment

[edit]

The following comment by 202.156.2.202 is moved from the main article page before a reversion:

"When the Jews refused to convert, the qibla was changed from Jerusalem to Makkah." The aforementioned statement is incorrect.In actuality, the order to change the Qibla was ordered by Allah as in the Quran and not due to refusal of the Jews to convert to Islam.

rhyax 08:22, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This is the truth. I can confirm this. I have got a certified copy of the original tape.

Why was it reverted?

[edit]

I made some corrections to the text yesterday, but it has been reverted. I corrected the paragraph on naming, putting the correct full official name "al Madina alMunawwarah". I also updated the estimated population to match the number published by the Medina provincial governate. Finally I corrected the paragraph regarding the prophet's mosque: The kind chambers (the prophet's apartment) was not originally part of the mosque, it was incorporated into the mosque 90 years later as part of the mosque's fourth expansion. Can you please reinstate the changes?

changing of the Qibla

[edit]

On the issue of the changing of the Qibla, I see that the sentence should be removed. Wikipedia aims to take a neutral stance, so any hypothesis (however reasonable to a western reader) should not be stated in such an unequivical manner. Best to just state the empirical fact without any of the perceived reasoning for the change (ie. The direction of the Qibla was changed in the year XXX . full stop). Or at least integrate into the paragraph a sentence that clearly shows that it is disputed by muslims. In any case why is this in the Medina page? It should be on the page about Islam.


Can you folks sign and date these entries? I have no idea how old this discussion is. Anyway, Medina has nothing to do with the Qibla. It might warrant a mention on Mecca, and of course it should feature on Qibla, but not here. --Irishpunktom\talk 14:08, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

All Islamic sources record the tribes breaking the treaty. However, I will put in the exact text from the Banu Qurayza article if you feel that is necessary.Heraclius 14:58, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I included a sentence that exhibited concern over the fact that the only sources there are are Islamic ones written 2 centuries after the event. This means that the event itself may have been quite whitewashed and we will never know the truth.Heraclius 15:14, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Zeno has just removed the info I added calling it irrelevant. Ironically, Zeno's version contains no mention of the execution of the tribes, making it very POV.Heraclius 05:12, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
While some of it was relevant, the part about the judge was trivia, and certainly didn't belong in a small article like this about the city. Jayjg (talk) 05:15, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I still think Sa'ad ibn Mua'dh is relevant as the article was made for a reason and it should be linked to, even in the historical section of a city.Heraclius 05:21, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
He doesn't appear to have anything to do with the city, even if there is an article about him. Can you explain why he is important to the city? Jayjg (talk) 05:25, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
According to Muslim histories he knew enough about the city to be appointed a judge over the fate of one of the tribes and he also was an ally of one of the tribes.Heraclius 05:49, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The Muslim histories say nothing about the city, just about his relationship with the tribes. Trivia. Jayjg (talk) 05:53, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Being a chief of the one of the most powerful factions in the city warrants a mention.Heraclius 14:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dome of the Prophet

[edit]

The page called the Dome of the Prophet "Gumbat-e-Khizra". But is that not the Persian name? If so, there is no conceivable reason why it should be used since Arabic is both the language of Islam and the only local language. I changed it to "Qubbat an-Nabi", which I believe to be the correct Arabic equivalent. If I am wrong, I apologize.


could you also write why the holy cities of medina and makkah are off limits to non-muslims

because you're not muslims

History

[edit]

Begining of the third para in the History section just does not make any sense. Which tribes were hostile and to whom? Alsandro 18:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peace be Upon Him

[edit]

Is it really necessary to add this after each instance where Muhammad is mentionned? It seems redundant, and it makes for a less agreable reading.

I didn't change it in order not to offend anyone, but I was wondering if it was necessary. I saw no such redundance in the Muhammad article itself.

yeah i think it's too much, in arabic we have to say that but when it comes to writing in arabic there is a small block of words that says that, but in english you don't have it so i guess it's fine --mo-- (Talk | #info | ) 20:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I have removed the "peace be upon him"s, and some of the "prophet"s to make for easier reading; where 'Prophet' is used, I have inserted 'the', which was missing and made for poor English. Using 'Muhammad' alone is consistent with the main article on the Prophet of Islam (it is not an objective encyclopaedic statement but rather a cultural-religious imperative). As a student who has studied Islamic law at postgraduate degree level, it is rare to find PBUH or SAW written in English scholarly/journal articles, and when they do, the religious conviction of the author is inferred. That is why it should not be considered NPOV for the purposes of Wikipedia. Pob1984 (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Muslim religion every time the word "Muhammad" is said, the phrase "Peace be upon him" must follow it. I think it wasn't neccesary because it is only written, and not said so i dont think it will offend anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.221.200.135 (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why has this been nominated for a neutrality check?

[edit]

Why has this been nominated for a neutrality check? The article deals up facts and nothing else. Is it safe to assume that someone doesn't like the information being made easily known?

  • The article was tagged after I asked about the "Peace be Upon Him" statements which were after each instance of Muhammad. It is has been removed now (not by me, but I do agree with it). Lunargent 13:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    • it is important to all who follow islam to say these words when readina bout Prophet Muhammed. You can remove the "pease be upon him" and replace with "(SAW)" which means the same thing. it means Sallah wallahiwasalim... which in arabic means "peace be upon him"


NPOV

[edit]

I sectioned the article and spoted some pov. But i dont care enough to NPOV it. --Striver 01:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And those of POV are...? --The-pessimist 00:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


'Yathrib which was founded by Jewish refugees'

[edit]

This statement is inaccurate historically. Yathrib is an oasis with water & with farming land & a cravan stop on the ancient 'frank incence' trade route from Yemen to Rome from 2000BC. So it has been inhabited from ancient times. at least after the advent of invention of farming in Mesopotamia in 8000BC. It is a recorded history that the two tribes of Al-Aws & Al-Khazraj moved from Yemen after the destruction in 1000BC of the Maarib Damn there built by the Saba kingdom in Yemen. The three jewish tribes only moved there later from Palestine after its capture by Nebuccanassar in 500BC.ILAKNA (talk) 08:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Yathrib, along with Tema, was a resort of late babylonian kings. It was referred to as iatribu in Babylonian resources. Thus, the statement that it was founded by Jewish refugees needs to be reviewed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.71.37.85 (talk) 15:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The article's overview and history section appear a bit Judeo-centric. Thus, I have corrected the aforementioned offending statement. The city of Yathrib appears in Assyrian texts from the 6th century BC. Jews arrive to the city 800 years later; in the 2nd century AD. It would be absurd to say that the city "was founded by Jewish refugees"!--Xevorim (talk) 19:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First mosque

[edit]

"The first mosque of Islam is also located in Medinah and is known as Masjid Quba" - this is incorrect. The first mosque of "Islam" is the Haram or the mosque in Makkah. The first mosque in the lifetime of Muhammad perhaps. --The-pessimist 00:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Al-Masjid al-Nabawi (Mosque of the prophet) stands at the east of the city and resembles the mosque at Mecca on a smaller scale.'

[edit]

This is incorrect. The Prophetic Mosque at Madina does not resemble the Sanctified Mosque at Makkah. The latter has Kaaba & is Qiblah for Muslims.

Ignoring history

[edit]

I am concerned that the contributors have chosen to ignore significant aspects of history within this article. For example, the article gives the impression that Abu Sufyan was a military general bent on taking conquest of Medina, yet glaringly fails to mention that in 623 Mohammed took a band some 300 strong and lay in wait to ambush Sufyan's caravan. The caravan's leader - Sufyan - got wind of the trap, altered his course, and requested assistance from Mecca in response to this attempted and unprovoked attack. The Quraish were sent against Medina in direct response to the robbery attempt. 624 saw the battle at Wadi Bedr at which Mohammed was victorious, leading Abu Sufyan to vow revenge, an oath that would lead to future battles.

To further the pattern of ignoring history with the explicit purpose of spinning the history to the positive the histories of Afak, Asma and Kab ibn al-Ashraf go a long way towards explaining why the Jews of Medina, yet are dismissed only with "some Jewish tribes turned against him". The reasons why they did so are extremely important, yet are intentionally left out. One should note that it was in Medina in 624 that the qibla was changed from Jerusalem to Mecca.

The defeat of the Muslim forces in 625 at Ohod at the hands of Sufyan is completely ignored (intentional whitewash, hiding the bad to portray on the good?), and the entry on the battle of the trench neglects to mention that the slaughtered Jews were given the choice of conversion to Islam or death. Again, this is relevant information that should have been presented, but wasn't.

Madina not Medina

[edit]

There is a town in Ghana almost at the outskirt of the Greater Accra Region of the country called Madina and not medina as indicated. Medina is in Saudi Arabia how could it be in Ghana or has anything to do with the country Ghana? It is from Madina that you get to Adenta and then to Somanya and the adjorning towns and cities. It will be of great prudence if this could be further edited and the corrections made to this.

Al-Madina(h) is the Arabic name for Medina. Some native Arabic-speaking or non-Arab Muslims most of the times call Medina by this name. - Qasamaan 18:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pronunciation of "hay, bay, say, etc" do not exist in Arabic. As the city was named by Arabic speakers, it must be Madinah. Kindly correct this. Alexwharf001 (talk) 00:29, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We are not speaking Arabic, we are speaking English. Kindly, be mindful of the language you are using to communicate. 134.228.18.153 (talk) 18:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

[edit]

This article is about the city of medina, and is in need of expansion. Currently it just tells the importance to muslims and the history, but says nothing about how the city functions. This needs to be added.--Sefringle 02:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a bit more on the history of the city, as hitherto it only related that there was strife and how Muhammad took over the city. But I agree that various important aspects of the current city need to be covered as well, about geography/topography, infrastructure, economoy etc. Str1977 (smile back) 15:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IPA transliteration

[edit]

The IPA transliteration is wrong. /æ/ does not occur as a short vowel in Arabic; it is usually /ɛ/. Also the short "a" in "munawwarah" is more like /ʌ/ as in "cut", and not like /ɑ/ as in "ball." Here is my suggestion: /lmɛˈdiːnɛl mʊˈnʌwːʌrʌ/.

Medina and non-Muslims

[edit]

Is Medina off-limits to non-Muslims, or is that just Mecca? Josh 21:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that in practice, Medina is also off-limits to non-Muslims. I think the verse that the rule is at least partially based upon is from chapter 9, verse 28:
"O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-knowing, All-wise."
I'm not sure if "approach the Sacred Mosque" includes the Prophet's Mosque in Medina, or it's meant to include the entire vicinity of Mecca and Medina.Furtfurt 16:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No , Mecca only , this text from koran talks about the holy mosque of mecca. Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 10:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No the prohibition is as per the Prophetic Hadith :"Verily, God has forbidden Makkah {from nonbelievers entering it as it is His Sanctuary for His Worship to avoid conflict of belief as being the place of peace, inviting to His House only His worshippers}, & I forbid Madinah (ie. make it a sanctuary only for Muslims who come to visit my mosque).The sanctuary extends as per the Hadith from Mount Ohad northwards to Mount Salaa southwards & between the two 'Harratain' or the lava fields eastwards & westwards of the Prophetic Mosque. ILAKNA (talk) 07:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, non-Muslims are banned in both Mecca and Medina, I believe. Hill Crest's WikiLaser (Boom). (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Banu Aws and Banu Khazraj" quotation

[edit]

It seems like something's wrong with this sentence:

'Jewish Encyclopedia states that they did so "By calling in outside assistance and treacherously massacring at a banquet the principal Jews" Banu Aus and Banu Khazraj finally gained the upper hand at Medina.'

1. It should be changed either to:

a) Jewish Encyclopedia states that they did so "By calling in outside assistance and treacherously massacring at a banquet the principal Jews". Banu Aus and Banu Khazraj finally gained the upper hand at Medina.

or

b) Jewish Encyclopedia states that "By calling in outside assistance and treacherously massacring at a banquet the principal Jews Banu Aus and Banu Khazraj finally gained the upper hand at Medina".


2. Shouldn't "treacherously massacring at a banquet the principal Jews" be changed to "treacherously massacring the principal Jews at a banquet"? I'm not changing it only in case it's a literal quotation.

It seems like one of the Masada stories! Can you get the claim corroborated historically with some neutral sources, since the Islamic sources do not record any such event happening. Otherwise it is a POV & not a fact & does not belong in encyclopedia.

Can we get this article up and running?

[edit]

As has been said before, right now as an article on a large, modern world city this is severely lacking. It entirely lacks sections on economy, demographics, and public services, among other things. I can try to get things jump started if no one else has the time but i'm already working hard on a few other articles. It might be easier if there can be a few of us that each looks up a little bit, because as it is this article just doesn't seem acceptable. MezzoMezzo 15:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you , but for some reasons i dont edit cities articles anymore , you can include this task to WP:KSA Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 10:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


WikiProject Judaism tag

[edit]

dispute talk regarding insertion of this tag {{WikiProject Judaism|class=start|importance=mid}} in relation to making the article display NPOV towards jewish related matters at historical medina.

User:Sefringle, the history of judaism travels also at some point in time through the city of medina, originally built by jewish tribes (according to the article). As such, i found it important that the project would perhaps devote some time to perhaps expand or give notes where they feel that jews/judaism (a synonymous thing at the time) are being misrepresented.

your statement that "this is a city article not a religous article"[1] is true to the extent that it does not go very deeply into religious detail. but it is also false considering the intro has "second holiest city in Islam, and the burial place of Muhammad."and i've just seen this edit in it while this intro has no refrence that jews started the city and made it holy to begin with (see the article body).. as such, i've allready found one place where jews/judaism are not being properly presented in the article and i'm fairly certain that there are more to be added into the article.

considering that "project judaism" tends not only to religious topics but (i)also to the history of the jewish people and that there is (ii)no projectwiki historical medina (and no intention to make one) to tag instead of it (like there is a 'wikiproject palestine'). i feel that this tag is the best left option i've come up with to allow people to get acqainted with the articlke and touch up on the way the city is occupied by arabs. (we should probably also note that jews and israel would never dream to demand back these lands).

anyways, i'm (iii)open to hear replacement wikiprojects if you have them, but i think a removal will only 'perpetuate misrepresentations' and only allow one side to tell it's story on the jews of 'historical medina' and will therefore (iv)make an unbalanced POV article.

last note: (v)respect to other people's history should be given. Jaakobou 23:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Full Article Re-write

[edit]

The article extremly need a full re-write . Such as the previous re-write projects for Jeddah, Riyadh and Mecca.

Points of improving

  1. Removing unnesseceray text.
  2. Displaying Medina article as a City not as a religious topic.
  3. Adding new photos.
  4. Fixing laguage and grammer.
  5. Protecting the article from the dialy vandalism.
  6. Using Chapers and Sections standard that used in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities.

 A M M A R  02:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None of this justifies the full rewrite tag, it is just the sort of miscellaneous improvement that most articles need. Choalbaton (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Medina / Madinah?

[edit]

Not that I'm an expert, but I've never heard this city called Medina. It's always Medinah. Unless people more familiar with the topic have any objections, I think we should rename the article to Madinah. Jasepl (talk) 10:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

(i tink Madinah should be renamed to Madina Al Munawwarah)
                                                             -thank you  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.235.73.18 (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note 23 in this paper is misleading

[edit]

According to Note 23 in this article, French historian Robert Mantran would argue in his book that Sa'd ibn Muadh would have based his judgement on Jewish Law (Deuteronom). This assertion is clearly mistaken from what is actually written, hereafter is the correct quote excerptes from L'Expansion Musulmane, Nouvelle Clio, pp.85-86:

« A La Mecque, Aboû Sofyân réunit une grande coalition et, en mars 627, marche sur Médine. Informé,Mohammad fait creuser un fossé (khandaq) pour défendre la ville ; le siège entrepris par les Mecquois ne donnant aucun résultat en dépit des appels aux Banoû Qurayza pour se joindre à eux, Aboû Sofân et ses troupes se retirent, laissant à Mohammad le bénéfice du succès. Celui-ci décide alors d'éliminer la dernière tribu juive de Médine qui, sur l'avis d'un arbitre, Sa'd ibn Mo'âdh, est condamnée à l'extermination totale : les hommes sont décapités, les femmes et les enfants réduits en esclavage. Cette solution définitive a soulevé la réprobation. Il convient cependant de la replacer dans les mœurs du temps et surtout dans la situation particulière des Émigrés, qui redoutaient toujours une menace sur leurs arrières. Cet acte est aussi le dernier de ceux que l'on peut qualifier de "défensifs" pour les musulmans. Désormais, de 628 à 632, se déroule la phase "offensive". »

Sorry I did not translate the quote but even non-french speakers can see that neither the word "Torah" nor "Deuteronome" is used in this text. Robert Mantran cannot be quoted as source to argue that Sa'd would have based his judggement on jewish law. To my knowledge, the only external source supporting this idea is Professor Mohammed Hamidullah in his own "Life of Muhammad". Hamidullah has based his own assertion on Ibn Ishaq, Tabari (both of them do not share this wiew) and Ibn Sa'd. Best regards --Ahlelkitab (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of pilgrim

[edit]

I have removed the picture prominently showing a smiling pilgrim with Al-Masjid al-Nabawi in the background. This is entirely inappropriate for an encyclopedia as the image is of low quality and the focus is clearly upon the person and not the subject of the article. DO NOT replace this picture with out at least discussing the issues I have raised—Wikipedia is not a depository for tourist pictures. Xargon666x6 (talk) 22:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i wanted to know what are the names of each of the doors in the masjid al nabawi MADINA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.15.233 (talk) 21:23, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"al-Madinat an-Nabi"

[edit]

At the top right corner of the article above the picture of the Prophet's mosque it says "al-Madinat an-Nabi". That is grammatically incorrect. It should be "Madinat an-Nabi". The construction here is the so-called iDaafa which signifies a possessive relationship ("city of...") and the first part ("madina") cannot have a definite article. Both words can have definite articles only if one is a noun ("ism") and one is an adjective ("Siffa"), for example "al-masjid an-nabawi" - literally "the prophetic mosque". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.100.75 (talk) 23:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Medina/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheSpecialUser (talk · contribs) 00:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm busy with real life, I've been doing reviews which can only be completed at a glance. I'm sorry to say but this article is far away from GA standards. Here are the 3 basic reasons behind it:

  • The article is of 22K words but still I feel that a topic like this needs additional 10-20K words or more. Many paragraphs are of one-two lines and many sections need expansion like "Character" and "Climate"
  • Few things which are in the lead are not covered in the later part of the article which is a problem. Anything in the lead should be covered later in the article with more details and lead should be summary of the article per WP:LEAD. The article is not at all summarized by the lead and the lead is full of WP:POV sort of things.
  • Neutrality of the article appears to be disputed as many facts are presented in a promotional manner and they need to be neutralized and presented in a WP:NPOV manner.
  • Grammar and similar issues seems to be existing and the article is in need of copyediting throughout.
  • There is lack of refs. This is the main reason for the failure. The article is full of unsourced material and thus it is extremely tough to verify the content and to track down any vandalism. We need references to WP:RS in order to verify the content and this article has 70% of its content as unsourced. To get this up to GA level, each and every fact in the article should have at least one reliable source using well formatted citation.

Unfortunately, these issues cannot be addressed in 3-4 months as the issues are too many and pretty big. Sorry to say but I've to quickly fail it. Once addressed the issues raised above, anyone can go for another nom. Thanks! TheSpecialUser TSU 00:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article blows

[edit]

The largest section is about the 2nd to 7th centuries AD, when Medina was a little village. The 9th to 20th centuries, when it was a capital of Islam, are completely ignored. This article deserves the worst possible rating. Shii (tock) 09:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite section on Battle of Uhud

[edit]

The section on the Battle of Uhud needs major copy editing or a complete rewrite. The writing is awkward and uses terminology that is likely unfamiliar to non-Muslim readers ("Kafirun"). It also does not cite any sources. Perhaps shorten it or link it to the main article on the Battle of Uhud? Foreignshore (talk) 03:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Medina

[edit]

What is missing from the city timeline? Please add relevant content. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Medina. 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 00:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong etymology

[edit]

The article makes believe that Medina is originally an Arabic word – this is not the case. It's an Aramaic-Hebrew name by the original settlers, which was assimilated as loanword into Arabic. -- 188.192.196.18 (talk) 11:13, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Medina. 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 15:49, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Medina. 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) 13:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Medina. 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) 10:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency between "Makkah" and "Mecca"

[edit]

Throughout this article, both "Makkah" and "Mecca" are used interchangeably. For clarity, I would suggest picking a single spelling to use throughout; using both only in the first instance. "Mecca" is used for the article on that subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecca. Wwatinski (talk) 16:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of islamic sources

[edit]

Hello, is someone able to prove that there is three main islamic sites, comprising jerusalem? Or is everyone repeating this claim whiteout any knowledge?--HaSalam (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am renominating this article under GAN

[edit]

Dear fellow editors, I am but a 15-year-old trying his best to make the Saudi Arabian Wikipedia articles as good as the ability I possess. What you all have posted on this talk page literally looks like a bunch of baloney to me. And I, after taking this whole day, the 25th of June, 2020, to not only rewrite sections of this article but improve it considerably, add pictures and most importantly, respect everyone's views on this page, I do not ask for any honor or any messages of gratification. I see this as an obligation upon me as both a Muslim and a resident of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. After taking more than 10 hours to edit this article and add approximately 10,131 bytes (the last I counted) to bring the article to the 70,700 bytes (again, this was the last time I checked), I hereby am sending this article for consideration for renomination under GAN. I do not want any hate under this message of mine. Rather, if you have any complaints against my edit, go ahead and change it, for that is what Wikipedia wants of us. Thank You. P.S. improve the infobox if you can. I literally cannot get wrap my head around that piece of crap template. And, also, someone needs to create the page "List of names of Madinah", as according to the third book in the "Further reading" section, Madinah, The Enlightened City: History and Landmarks, the city has been referred to by 30 names in ahadith. That book is gifted at one of the exhibitions near the al-Masjid an-Nabawi and thus, I see it as a credible source. Thank you again. --AccordingClass (talk) 20:07, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate change in name usage

[edit]

User:AccordingClass's change of primary name used in text from Medina to Madinah is inappropriate. The page is named Medina because that is English language usage. Usage within the page should follow the example of the page title. --Khajidha (talk) 13:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Khajidha: At this point this is a personal attack. You left a message on my talk page and ideally should have given me at least 12-24 hours to respond, or at least, tried to fix the problem yourself. Instead, you reverted the Mecca article to an objectively worse past edition and came on here to turn the people who have worked on this article against me. If you are not going to fix a problem, don't make it worse for a person who will at least try to do so. I do not want to start an edit war to disqualify this article from Wikipedia:GAN. If you have a problem, come on my talk page, wait 12-24 hours, and, at least until September, I will respond as quickly as I am able, and we will talk your problem through.--AccordingClass (talk) 20:36, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The note on your talk page was actually the last thing I did. I completely reverted your changes to Mecca because such undiscussed name changes are often POV vandalism. That I was also involved in several location naming discussions at the same time probably colored my impressions. I considered reverting on Medina, but there were many other edits by others in the same time period that I did not want to do away with. I posted a note on the talk page there for more dedicated editors of that page to look over the article. It was only then that I really noticed how much other material you had added and came to the conclusion that you were probably a well meaning editor, but were simply unaware of naming conventions. I then posted to your page to make sure you understood what the problem was. I did not intend to malign you in any way and apologize for leaving you with that impression.--Khajidha (talk) 14:13, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possible PD images?

[edit]

The Turkish publication Servet-i Funun published some images of Medina, then in the Ottoman Empire:

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:57, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Better source needed.

[edit]

"Medina has been inhabited at least 1500 years before the Hijra, or approximately the 9th century BC.[5] "

The citation is to an archived copy of a defunct web page. But the archive link appears to be defunct as well. This is a big claim to be making, and so this clearly requires a better source. Comiscuous (talk) 18:51, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Masjaid of Hazrat Muhammad

[edit]

It is located in Madinah and built by the Holy prophet Hazrat Muhammad (P.B.U.H) 39.37.252.84 (talk) 17:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

understand

[edit]

its not clearly understandable 31.166.105.76 (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Makkah is correct spelling,

[edit]

Makkah is correct spelling Not mecca. 213.166.157.14 (talk) 20:25, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not in English and Wikipedia English follows the standard spelling. George Custer's Sabre (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Madina

[edit]

I was reading this talk page and found out that there is a suburb in Ghana named Madina. I know that Medina is also sometimes spelled Madina. However, when a user is searching for Madina, Ghana using the search term "Madina", he will be redirected to this page. Should we at least move Madina to a disambiguation page? Luwuyi (talk) 02:53, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Medina&oldid=1200542045"