Talk:Ruqayya bint Husayn

message: Can somebody please revise this entire article? It's biased, unfocused and the grammar is atrocious.
- to the guy above, it is not unbiased, youre simply gaslighting and trying to cause problems where there is none. you cannot erase the tragedy of Karbala or paint it where you cherry-pick the facts and who was the oppressed one and who the oppressor was. we see what youre doing. we all do. this is an unmitigated fact that the events portrayed in this article follow the majority reports and analysis by scholars. this article does a good enough job. sure grammar could be better. ive seen worse wiki articles. this is not propaganda so its already better.
and upon reading the rest of the article, did not know so many people took offense on how to reference a literal child. what you prefer to address an abused and tortured child? it is not offensive to address respected figures especially ones who had an impact on the world such as this 4 yr old child. why is this offensive I ask? you have a belief where adding bibi, which just means sister as something contrary to human morals? You regard your mother as mother right? not on a first name basis? why is that and why would that be considered offensive to your mother then if you did? I mean just what am I reading here? it is no secret that the majority Shia and proper Sunnis revere these figures. Heck even the Christians of the Arab region and hindus of the south-asian revere them and learn this history. You would have no problem referring to Elizabeth from England, as Queen Elizabeth despite her not being a queen in any sense. Or Isaac Newton as Sir Isaac Newton? despite not having any relations or connections? Heck why do we capitalize the first letter on names? should i stop calling my mother by mother becuase she goes by [insert name] everywhere else? I mean what? seriously?? Yet the term bibi is met with such argument and offense? despite you knowing very well it is part of Islamic etiquette and language to do so. how is it not neutral, when the audience who consumes these stories and spread this history and commemorate this history refer to all women as bibi anyway. but a 3-4 yr old has to be subject to your rhetoric and repression of history. just come out and say you dont like actual facts of the matter be presented and instead want to cause superficial 'debates' just to mask the fact that you would be on yazeeds side during the events of Karbala. Or that you dont really care other than to give people who spread this history a hard time. this is an age old tactic. Or that you wholeheartedly support the ummayads and the erasure of true islam. Where is the neutrality on your taking offense? where is the neutrality in you nitpicking history and trying to inject propaganda. I have also read other nonsense articles surrounding Karbala and the key figures, and its abhorrent the level of twisting of facts and outright lies. socially, historically, religiously and objectively there is nothing wrong with what the OP has written. is it wrong for holocaust survivors to talk about their tragedy and call the nazis evil? is that unbiased? is that 'NEUTRAL?' is that offensive to nazis? and not being considerate of them? should we silence holocaust survivors? even germany does better than you lot. no the true rhetoric is those who have no morals and a level-head would be the ones who have problems with someone who is part of the community that commemorates this history to actually portray the facts and not the nonsensical pandering to the stonehearted who feel attacked whenever the truth is spoken about. you guys are no different than flat-earthers. youre not convincing anyone.Ralvi (talk) 05:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I mentioned to Salman0 that this page was parahrased close enough to warrant possuble charges of plagiarism (it was not a verbatim copy of the www page referenced)  - he appears to be a new and inexperienced user, methinks he could have been cut a bit of slack / given a chance to explain himself & fix the problem - Assume Good Faith & all that, as he was definitely moving this article forward & out of the realm of possible copyvio - if this page was, then every page which uses only one source is as well.Bridesmill 14:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio?

message: This latest edit is not encyclopedic. I suggest a revert to the stub. I have tried to improve the neutrality of the page (my previous revert was reversed), but it's practically impossible and Salman0 has ignored my comments on neutrality. T. J. Day 16:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Not encyclopedic

message: I cut it down and added such info and links as I could find. We need birth and death dates, the birth DAY translated into the Western calendar, and confirmation of the name. Sakoon looks like a Persian word, not an Arabic one. Also, Sakina looks a lot like the Hebrew Shekina, Wisdom, and I'm wondering if her name could equally well be derived from another Arabic root. 
I would also like confirmation that Sakina even existed. Is she mentioned in Tabari? I don't have that volume. 
Fair enough? Zora 00:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A more accurate translation of sakina, like shekina, is "grace", as far as I know. Wikipedia entry on Shekinah translates it as "glory", though. Pecher Talk 07:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: On the other hand, I don't find translations of names to be terribly encyclopedic in articles on each and every person bearing that name. Pecher Talk 07:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, I was remembering wrong, then. I vaguely remembered, or mis-remembered, that the Kabbalists equated Shekina with Sophia, Wisdom. That's what I get for not checking things. Zora 08:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drastic revision 

message: <glyph of banging head on wall>
You removed ALL the indications that citations were needed, and you called her "Bibi" in the I-tried-to-keep-it-neutral section. That's a title of respect, and we don't use titles in WP. You also messed up the formatting, which I had adjusted carefully so that the picture didn't run into the links section. 
I'm pissed off, so I'm not going to edit for a while. Perhaps someone else will come along and deal with it. Zora 00:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salman ... 

message: Pecher, I think it's OK to allow emotive language and Shi'a praise terms in the Shi'a section, as long as it's clear that WP doesn't adopt those attitudes. I'm not sure that someone who was not a Shi'a would get the full flavor of their belief without the emotive language. Perhaps we should do it with quotes, rather than a WP summary such as I wrote? Then it is very clear that WP doesn't endorse it. Zora 20:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was actually more to Salman's edit than the edit summary implied: in fact, he just reverted. Salman must first realize that pushing Shi'a POV accross the whole article is unacceptable. Pecher Talk 20:40, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: However, I don't mind adding this sort of language to the Shi'a section. Pecher Talk 07:09, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

text: BTW, there is more of the same on Qasim ibn Hassan. Pecher Talk 20:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: ...and on Abbas ibn Ali. It's just astonishing. Pecher Talk 20:43, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shi'a section 

message: Salman; I understand what you are trying to say, and that you are trying to do so while remaining respectful and not betraying your beliefs.  One way that you can accomplish this, is instead of saying 'Bibi Sakina was this that and the other thing' is to say 'Shi'a believe that Sakina - who they refer to out of respect as 'Bibi Sakina' - was this that or the other thing'. It is not easy to write from a neutral point of view when your own beliefs are strong and honest, but please remember that not everyone has the same belief - we all deserve to know what Shi'a believe and why - but you must be careful not to put it as if we already know these things or should just take your word for it - how do you feel if I say 'Jesus is the one true Saviour'? (I'm not christian btw - just using this as an example) wouldn't you feel better if it said 'Christian people believe that....'? Bridesmill 02:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible approach to NPOV this and other articles like it 

message: I changed Hussain to Husayn in her name, to be consistent with her father's name here and on his page, but shouldn't this page also have the main title "Sakina bint Husayn"? Can't you change that? Nöldeke, April 28, 2006.
: Yes, we just need to move it. Husayn is more common in the scholarly works I own. I think we have Hussain because the article was started by someone who speaks Persian. Consensus on the move, to make it consistent? Zora 05:43, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title inconsistency 

message: Is there a reason that the dates in this article don't give the gregorian equivalents (at least approximately), or at the very least wikilink inline directly to information on the Islamic calendar system? The lack of this makes it much less useful to those who aren't already familiar with such things. SamBC(talk) 13:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: It has been written in this article that Maula Imam Husain sua had 3 daughters. This is incorrect
Imam sua had 5 holy daughters. 4 of them were present in Karbala. All of them were imprisoned. 2 of them martyred in Damascuss during imprisonment.
The holy Name of all the 5 daughters was FATIMA sua.
1..The eldest was the wife of hazrat Hasan e Musanna sua, the eldest son of Maula Imam Hasan bin Ali aua aj.
This family was present in Karbala. Hazrat hasan e Musanna sua was seriously injured at Karbala but HE sua did not embrsed martyrdom there. he was taken along by some kufites and treadted at Kufa for one full year. after recovering, HE sua went back to Madina. His 3 years old son hazrat Abdullah ibn alHasan sua aj, is a martyr of Karbala.
2.. Bibi sua was also present in Karbala and was married in the night of 10th Muharram with shehzada hazrat Qasim ibnal hasan sua aj.
3.. Bibi sua was left home at Madina. Bibi went to Damascuss lateron in 62 hijri, along with most of the family members, when due to plaque epidemic in Madina, Her holy mizar is also in Damascuss; bab Al-Sagheer.
4.. Bibi was born in 56 hijri, was at karbala, martyred in Damascuss, during the imprisonment. Two places were used as prisons for the Holy Family of Maula Imam Husain sua. First they were kept in a prison just behind the palace of yazid L. Later; due to unrest in public and a wave of hate, they were shifted in another prison behind the graveyard of bab Al-Sagheer. An ancient mosque, with no roof. Here due to snow fall and chilling cold, Masooma martyred.
5.. The Youngest holy Daughter was about 2 years of age at Karbala. Due to the tourchering long journey from Kufa to Damascuss, Bibi sua felt ill and martyred few days after the Holy Family was imprisoned behind the palace. A beautiful Mizar has been recently constructed here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.170.60 (talk) 01:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not what I see from accessed references. For example, what about the daughter that was named 'Ruqayyah' and also called 'Sakînah'? Leo1pard (talk) 12:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holy Daughters of Maula Imam Husain sua 

message: The following text was in a html comment in the article: 
NOT CLEAR WHAT THIS IS EITHER Sakīnah bint Husayn, is also known as Rukayya.  I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE FOLLOWING THREE LINES ARE ABOUT SO COMMENTED THEM OUT (This article is dedicated to daughter of Imam Husain who is the youngest and was 4 years old at time of death. She is referred to by both Sakina as well as Rukayya. There is another daughter of Imam Husain, Fatema Kubra, 11 years old, who is also named as Sakina, please refer to article Sakinah bint Husayn).
Arcandam (talk) 21:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: html comment from article

message: Much of the contents of this article consisted of unsourced gushing, reading as a narrative rather than an encyclopedic entry. There was a lot of over emotional language involved, for example referring to the subject as "bibi," a term of endearment used in Indo-Persian cultures. Additionally, a lot of the article's content revolved around the tyranny of Yazid I and his conflict with Hussein bin Ali, which is relevant to those articles but holds little relevance to this one. The Shi'ite perspective section mentions that this girl's story is often retold emotionally at their religious celebrations, and it certainly showed in the unsourced material which I deleted. This article needs major work in terms of reliable sourcing and NPOV. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced gushing 

message: Ruqayyah (who in popular tradition is referred to as Sakina) is reported to have been a different (younger) daughter of al-Husayn ibn Ali than Sukayna, who was about 12 years old during the incident in Karbala. This article seems to be mixing them (as is often done in popular culture), since Sukayna is the elder, but the article is mostly about the younger one. Perhaps someone can fix this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamma Draconis (talk • contribs) 05:57, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  not confusing the daughters of al-Husayn with each other 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Sukayna bint Husayn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110214210850/http://www.coej.org:80/boardsdesks/ica/project-enlightenment-mainmenu-729/2178--bibi-sakina-as-the-young-hashemite-princess to http://www.coej.org/boardsdesks/ica/project-enlightenment-mainmenu-729/2178--bibi-sakina-as-the-young-hashemite-princess
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091016134802/http://ihic.org.au/articles.php?a_id=32 to http://www.ihic.org.au/articles.php?a_id=32
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090221072107/http://members.fortunecity.com:80/masoom110/TRUEISLAM/id17.html to http://members.fortunecity.com/masoom110/TRUEISLAM/id17.html/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101023031734/http://www.shia.org:80/aliakbar.html to http://www.shia.org/aliakbar.html/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:55, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Leo1pard (talk) 13:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page views 

message: See this. Leo1pard (talk) 13:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I can not find discussion to redirect this page. I am reverting it to original state. --Spasage (talk) 15:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

text: But what is in this article that is not there, or should not be there? Leo1pard (talk) 07:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Besides, the way I see it, the relationship between Husayn ibn Ali and his daughters, is like the relationship between Cecil the Southern African lion and his son Xanda. As in, just as Xanda was WP:notable due to his father being notable (which is why it was decided not to have a separate article for Xanda), it appears that Ruqayyah and her sisters were notable mainly because their father was notable. If Ruqayyah and her sisters had not been daughters of a prominent person like Husayn, then would they have been as prominent as they currently are in Shi'ite culture, amongst other things? Leo1pard (talk) 11:53, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Take this quote that is attributed to Husayn. It appears from the quote that a number of people were killed by the regime of Yazid I, but which victims do we know of better than Hashimite figures like Husayn and Ruqayyah? Leo1pard (talk) 12:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Which is why I prefer that Sukayna bint Husayn should be merged with Daughters of Husayn ibn Ali. Leo1pard (talk) 16:00, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  They are two different pages. I do not see any merit of redirecting to Daughters of Husayn ibn Ali. Article on Sukayna bint Husayn in its own right is very important. --Spasage (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Except for the almost identical information on Ruqayyah. Leo1pard (talk) 06:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I redirected it to ''[[Daughters of Husayn ibn Ali]]''