Talk:Muhammad the World-Changer: An Intimate Portrait

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

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

Muhammad the world changer.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is a fair-use image of the book's cover. It's OK if hosted on en.wikipedia but not on Commons.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 05:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More reviews

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 05:26, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also The Booklist

https://www.proquest.com/docview/2568762165/6331FDFF05B14055PQ

There's also an additional piece of coverage of the Portuguese edition of the book in Diário de Notícias.

https://www.dn.pt/edicao-do-dia/18-jun-2022/maome-era-poderoso-na-sua-simplicidade-14948843.html

So those should be helpful. Silver seren^C 06:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor note: I believe the Library Journal and Booklist reviews are by the same reviewer (Hassanali), though the reviews themselves are different (I suppose he writes multiple reviews for different venues). The Religion News Service is also cited in the article. One thing the article doesn't do well is to also convey the criticisms of reviewers like Hassanali and Rosen, even though both are cited and the latter is quoted. R Prazeres (talk) 08:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]