Talk:List of people who did not pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr

message: Where did this list come from? No authentic sources to support this bogus list! (except for biased Shia sources of course) How do you report this nonsense? How do we nominate this article for deletion? can anyone help? 7 January 2007 (UTC) TW
:Anon, do you consider Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari as un-authentic sources that are shi'a? --Striver - talk 15:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bogus list! 

message: Please find verifiable reliable and nuetral sources for your references, otherwise this article will be seriously re-written. Al-Islam.org is not a valid reference, unless you say in every quote from it that it is from the Shia view Aaliyah Stevens 21:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: al-Islam? Since when is Bukhari a Shi'a source? --Striver - talk 19:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Give a couple of days, and i will have some edit requestments ready... Hamid-Masri 11:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mainly from Shia sources

message: This article is by design hopelessly POV, is basically without credible sources, and should be deleted. Previous discussions are like Parisian drivers confronted with a four-way stop sign: simply baffled, the community !votes "keep."Proabivouac 10:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I have as a Lutheran no real stake in any of the two sides. Still, it appears interesting to read something on how this obviously decisive issue is seen by Sunni *and* Shia sources. Thus, it is not a good idea for a balanced article to present one list including disputed cases. Rather I would expect two lists, one based on Sunni sources and one on Shia sources. One "all inclusive" list necessarly makes for a large list - so the Sunni side would be "structurally" disadvantaged. This given, the articel has its worth. In the current form, it needs severe reworking. Best regards, --JanBarkmann (talk) 15:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: I am going to try and find a copy of Yaqubi's book to verify if any such statements are made. If not, anything that use Peshawar Nights has to go. Unflavoured (talk) 04:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As expected, Yaqubi specifically points out that ALL sahaba gave bay'ah to Caliph Abu Bakr within less than six months. I am removing all the entries that falsely use Yaqubi/Peshawar Nights as a source. Unflavoured (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peshawar Nights is not a RS 

message: I am moving the page to List of Sahabah that did not give Bay'ah to Abu Bakr because it is the proper grammar. This event took place in the past so the terms should be past tense not present tense. Zabranos (talk) 01:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title correction 

message: I think in a part of the article it is written "Sunni Islamic scholar" and in another part "Shia Islamic scholar". They might be two different people but if not then check whether this person is a Sunni or a Shia.
عمر چودھری  19:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yaqubi, 9th century islamic scholar 

message: The author doesn't even directly quote Muhammad Al-Bukhari when he said "Muhammad Al-Bukhari said/agreed/etc.". The same went with Ibn Qutayba and his Al-Imama wa Al-Siyasa (And that Yaqubi, which and whose Yaqubi?). Let me tell you, if you want to quote Muhammad Al-Bukhari, quote Muhammad Al-Bukhari, don't quote Shaikh Asif or Peshawar Nights or Shaikh Al Musawi. Write "According to Shaikh Al Musawi in 'A Shi'i-Sunni Dialogue', Bukhari also said..." or "Shaikh Asif said that Bukhari also said...". Don't say Bukhari or Yaqubi or Al-Qurtubi this-and-that without  citing them directly.  Just look at it, the author uses these sources throughout what he called "detailed list" with little to no other sources.
After all if what they said could be easily verified as what Bukhari, Yaqubi and/or Ibn Qutayba really said, it should be easy to quote the respective Bukhari/Yaqubi/Ibn Qutayba entry for Wikipedia purposes like this alongside those other indirect ones, am I wrong?.
Furthermore, this article primarily quotes Shia sources (I mean written/compiled by Shi'is). Of course it will be biased. I suggest this article be nominated once more for deletion, or at least mention that even Ali ultimately give his bay'ah to Abu Bakr after those six months, according to the only direct Bukhari quotation he used. Concerning on how Bukhari repeatedly mentioned in the list, this should also be said, right?.
Tsubasanomura (talk) 03:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article issues 

message: Where did Abu Quhafa and Umar bin Al-Khatab receive the authority to veto Ali bin Abu Talib , the Prophet's deputy ( his Haroon) come from ? Is it the scriptural norm for those without the pedigree of prophethood to inherit their mantle of leadership ? 
Did the Prophet and Ali not represent the Muslims as "ourselves" ("anfusana ") in the Mubahala Verse (Qur'an 3: 61 ) ?
Did the Prophet not hand the flag of leadership to the "One who loves Allah and His Apostle , and is loved by Allah and His Apostle" , i.e,  Ali bin Abu Talib ? 
Did the Prophet of Allah not anoint Ali by lifting his hand at the gathering of the believers at the pond (Ghadir Qumm ) ? And did the Prophet not proclaim , "for whomever I am his leader , Ali is his leader " ?
Who was the person who accepted Islam after the Prophet and Khadija , Ali ? 
Was Ali not the leader of the most exhalted Ahlul Bayth, after the Prophet ? 
Who was the first to taste battle in defense of Islam at Badr , if not Ali ? 
Whom did the Prophet send to read the Verses of Surah at - Tauba to the pilgrims , if not Ali ? 
What happened in Darul Saqifa , after the passing away of the Prophet was nothing but an equivalent of modern day coup d'etat , one devoid of heavenly and worldly legitimacy. 105.112.126.101 (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who issued Abu Quhafa and Umar bin Al-Khatab authority?