Talk:Hamza ibn Abd al-Muttalib

message: The historical facts that had been written here, which is that Hamza still acted like elite meccans is wrong because he was the son of AbdalMuttalib ibn Hashim. There was no conversion of Hamza into Islam as he already knew Muhammad as the seal of prophets  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.36.13.170 (talk) 12:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You would need a very good source to justify that "there was no conversion of Hamza into Islam." Both Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Saad state otherwise.Petra MacDonald 03:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Conversion?

message: I have done significant work on this article, but I think some issues still remain.
# I have rearranged the material so that his life-story is told in more or less chronological order, deleting repetitions where necessary.
# I have added basic material that was missing, such as his activities at Badr and the names of his wives and children.
# I have deleted most of the unsourced material, but kept in a few unsourced or poorly sourced assertions that I think may turn out to be correct. I am not happy with "Prophet Muhammad for All" as a reliable source and would be glad if someone would replace it with material from a reputable historian.
# I have sourced nearly everything to Ibn Ishaq or Ibn Saad. I deleted a reference to Bukhari that did not say what the editor claimed it would say.
# I have tried to tone down the language to something more neutral. Readers should be aware, however, that Ibn Ishaq's tone is far from neutral: he often describes events in a lively, non-encyclopaedic style, and he writes about supernatural occurrences on the assumption that they are objectively true.
# I have corrected the grammar so that the article reads more like something that a native speaker would write and tidied up some of the links.
I agree with the complaints below and I hope the article is now not quite so "embarrassing" to Wikipedia. However, contributions from other editors would be highly desirable.Petra MacDonald 03:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean-Up

message: No mention of genocide, oppression, or other atrocities in Iran  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.254.111 (talk) 03:25, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course not. Which of these occurred in Hamza's lifetime?Petra MacDonald 10:11, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: How Convenient

message: Per WP:BURDEN I had requested the Reliable source for this exceptional claim that this puppet belongs to Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib. But 's unexplained reverts shows that We are having a case of WP:Like and WP:GAMING. SpyButeo (talk) 05:38, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither I nor anyone else has claimed that the puppet belonged to Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib. Please read the actual caption posted by whoever added the picture in the first place. I also suggest you explain why you feel WP:GAMING has anything to do with anything posted in this article. Edward321 (talk) 04:39, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The picture appears to have been added about two years ago by an IP. The original caption in Dutch says it is an puppet of Hazma used in Indonesia.{https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:COLLECTIE_TROPENMUSEUM_Houten_wajangpop_Amir_Hamza_alias_Menak_alias_Jayengrana_voorstellend_TMnr_6148-5-4a.jpg] That matches the English language caption. Edward321 (talk) 04:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:   If you're not sure then why are you reverting my edits. SpyButeo (talk) 15:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  That caption is not a Reliable Source per WP:HISTRS. SpyButeo (talk) 16:18, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  No caption on any picture is a reliable source, should we therefore delete all picture on Wikipedia? There no indication that the caption is wrong. Edward321 (talk) 01:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

text: Forgive me if I am wrong, but based on the way you described it, it seems the original caption to the image is correct. Removing it because you personally feel it qualifies more as entertainment than promoting Islam (In actuality it could be both, in the same way the Ramayana is performed both for entertainment and for promoting Hinduism), is really a personal feeling, and not really grounds for deletion. Also, for your analogy about Superman to be correct, this picture would have to be appearing on the main page for Islam, which it does not. If you could find reliable sources saying Superman was based on a specific person from Jewish mythology and used to spread knowledge of the Jewish flight from the Holocaust, that probably would merit inclusion on that person's page. UnequivocalAmbivalence (talk) 01:44, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib 

message: There is both legitimate and false controversy over Hamza's date of birth.
*The earliest sources assert that Hamza was four years older than Muhammad and was 59 years old at his death in 3 AH. This would place his birth c.567 CE.
*Slightly later sources claim he could only have been two years older than Muhammad because Thuwayba nursed both of them.
Since scholarly sources argue for both 567 and 569, it is only fair to cite both. However, the argument for the younger age is very weak. There is nothing to say that Thuwayba could not have nursed another child between Hamza and Muhammad, or that she didn't give birth to another child of her own.
*WP edits, without citing sources, have argued that they must have been the same age because "their two mothers were married on the same day"; or that they couldn't have been the same age "because one woman could not have nursed both at the same time".
These arguments are original research until they are sourced to a scholar. However, anyone who understands obstetrics knows that a wedding does not necessarily lead to immediate pregnancy; and anyone who understands lactation knows that a mother of twins is able to nurse both of them.Petra MacDonald (talk) 05:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of Birth

message: 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) 10:07, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion