Talk:Early social changes under Islam

message: Currently it makes it seem like there is a consensus that the adoption of Islam improved women's status. According to http://books.google.com/books?id=zOAo9VvT4FEC&pg=PA77&sig=IiMFAyu6P3-rNii4QQmN_q3mXQQ, there is healthy scholarly debate about whether the changes were good for women. This is also now a problem in the Women and Islam article, which I believe was previously more balanced. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please be bold and improve the article, but also please note that we are only discussing the impact of Islam on the women within the early years of Islam. That is, we are not dealing with the later "interpretation of jurists, local traditions, and social trends which brought about a decline in the status of Muslim women." Cheers, --Be happy!! (talk) 22:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV in status of women section 

message: It's much better to change the title to "Early social changes under Islam". Alefbe (talk) 01:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: This says that the early Islamic imperium was the first welfare state. Was not the Maurya Rajavamsa of Bharata under Asoka a welfare state? 
96.255.208.108 (talk) 16:59, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Rome was a welfare state. 2600:1702:2340:9470:997C:8A80:E3E5:88C4 (talk) 21:35, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: First welfare state

message: This article has been edited by a user who is known to have misused sources to unduly promote certain views (see WP:Jagged 85 cleanup). Examination of the sources used by this editor often reveals that the sources have been selectively interpreted or blatantly misrepresented, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent.
Diffs for each edit made by Jagged 85 are listed at Cleanup3. It may be easier to view the full history of the article.
A script has been used to generate the following summary. Each item is a diff showing the result of several consecutive edits to the article by Jagged 85, in chronological order.
* :Early social changes under Islam: , , , , , , , 
Johnuniq (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed these parts. Added a tag as the article lacks a nuanced approach, depicting changes mostly as improvements and generelly following an epistemological line of describing things becoming better, more advanced, more just, more generous under Islamic rule etc. etc.  Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misuse of sources 

message: I'm a little confused, I know that it's someone elses assertion but it's entirely false the Qur'an does order women to cover themselves with their jalabeeb (Jilbab). What proof is there otherwise? Muwwahid (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qur'an does require women to wear veils 

message: This article is rubbish. John Esposito is notorious for his favorable opinions of Islam. The man owes his professorial tenure to Islamic endowments. Talk about conflict of interest!--74.190.107.228 (talk) 12:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: So, can you suggest some persons who give opposite opinions with valid, verifiable, reliable sources for this article? Swingoswingo (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  As  says, if you want to address possible WP:NPOV violations in this article, you should consult reliable sources that reflect alternative points of view and summarize them here, or verify the already cited sources to make sure they're reflected correctly. As of now, your edits have no basis in WP policy. Not only does Esposito's book meet criteria for RS, the statement you've changed is sourced by five other mainstream academic citations, and the pseudohistory and revisionism labels are based on nothing more than your personal opinion, in violation of WP:NOR. Eperoton (talk) 18:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pseudohistory 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Early social changes under Islam. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214071901/http://muttaqun.com/marriage.html to http://muttaqun.com/marriage.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807045042/http://www.alastairmcintosh.com/articles/2000_watt.htm to http://www.alastairmcintosh.com/articles/2000_watt.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:06, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: about this: "John Esposito states that "women were given inheritance rights in a patriarchal society that had previously restricted inheritance to male relatives,"[13] Similarly, Annemarie Schimmel wrote that "Compared to the pre-Islamic position of women, Islamic legislation meant an enormous progress; the woman has the right, at least according to the letter of the law, to administer the wealth she has brought into the family or has earned by her own work". Didnt Khadija (RA) own a business before/while married? She inherited from her previous husband when he died? this seems to be conflicting with the article of Khadija (RA). Either this is wrong or that is wrong because it does not make sense to say that women could not previously inherit or hold wealth & property on their own, while also saying that this woman inherited property and wealth on her own. Please fix  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.70.63.74 (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Early social changes under Islam's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Ahmed":
From Women in Islam: Ahmed, Ali S. V.; Jibouri, Yasin T. (2004). The Koran: Translation. Elmhurst, NY: Tahrike Tarsile Qurān. Print.
From Islam: Ahmed, Imad-ad-Dean. Signs in the heavens. 2. Amana Publications, 2006. Print.  pp. 23, 42, 84. 
From Islam and violence: Ahmed, Ali S. V.; Jibouri, Yasin T. (2004). The Koran: Translation. Elmhurst, NY: Tahrike Tarsile Qur'ān. Print.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:55, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Early social changes under Islam]]