December 2011 UTC Just to support ClaretAsh s positions remember Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which tries to be neutral and factual You may be right that religious scholars describe him or criticize him in a certain way In that case identifying and quoting them somewhere in the article may be appropriate Finding academic scholars who note such criticism event better But very biased language and putting something in the lead that is not proved in the text is always problematic Following the rules can help you get any valid points across without having them repeatedly reverted and having article locked for a while 13 39 29