48,466
edits
User talk:Axius: Difference between revisions
m
→Muhammad and Aisha Task
| Line 573: | Line 573: | ||
Hi Ax. I don't understand why you added [http://wikiislam.net/w/index.php?title=WikiIslam:Tasks&curid=7002&diff=111648&oldid=111431 this] task. I think it is a pretty terrible idea. Those two pages have two distinct purposes, so merging them makes no sense. It would in fact make it harder for readers to use to counter Muslim arguments, make the page ridiculously long, AND make our other pedophilia pages redundant (if you want to merge the "Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age" with the "Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha" page, then why not also merge the [[Aisha_Age_of_Consummation|Aisha's Age of Consummation]]" page with the "Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha" page? It's the exact same situation). | Hi Ax. I don't understand why you added [http://wikiislam.net/w/index.php?title=WikiIslam:Tasks&curid=7002&diff=111648&oldid=111431 this] task. I think it is a pretty terrible idea. Those two pages have two distinct purposes, so merging them makes no sense. It would in fact make it harder for readers to use to counter Muslim arguments, make the page ridiculously long, AND make our other pedophilia pages redundant (if you want to merge the "Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age" with the "Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha" page, then why not also merge the [[Aisha_Age_of_Consummation|Aisha's Age of Consummation]]" page with the "Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha" page? It's the exact same situation). | ||
The [[Refutation_of_Modern_Apologetics_Against_Aishas_Age|Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age]] page refutes only a single, stand-alone apologetic argument. This argument is basically, '''"Some Islamic sources say Aisha was aged 12, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 21 when Muhammad had sex with her"'''. If you look at the [[Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha|Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha]] page, this is [[Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#Some_Islamic_sources_say_Aisha_was_aged_12.2C_14.2C_15.2C_17.2C_18_and_21_when_Muhammad_had_sex_with_her|argument number six]]. So basically what your new task is saying is to copy/paste that detailed, long and well-crafted stand-alone article under argument number six. I don't understand why you would even consider that a viable option. | The [[Refutation_of_Modern_Apologetics_Against_Aishas_Age|Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age]] page refutes only a single, stand-alone apologetic argument. This argument is basically, '''"Some Islamic sources say Aisha was aged 12, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 21 when Muhammad had sex with her"'''. If you look at the [[Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha|Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha]] page, this is [[Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#Some_Islamic_sources_say_Aisha_was_aged_12.2C_14.2C_15.2C_17.2C_18_and_21_when_Muhammad_had_sex_with_her|argument number six]]. So basically what your new task is saying is to copy/paste that detailed, long and well-crafted stand-alone article under argument number six. I don't understand why you would even consider that a viable option. That one argument (that the hadith say Aisha was older) is practically as long as the page you want to merge it with, and that page contains 20+ different arguments. | ||
Think about it from a reader's view: that's like a science teacher (WikiIslam) having a creationist student (Muslim) question one single aspect of evolutionary theory (Muhammad's pedophilia), but rather than give a detailed rebuttal to that single objection (Aisha's age according to hadith), the teacher slaps a 1000 page encyclopedia about the evolutionary theory in front of him and tells him to find the answer in there somewhere. | Think about it from a reader's view: that's like a science teacher (WikiIslam) having a creationist student (Muslim) question one single aspect of evolutionary theory (Muhammad's pedophilia), but rather than give a detailed rebuttal to that single objection (Aisha's age according to hadith), the teacher slaps a 1000 page encyclopedia about the evolutionary theory in front of him and tells him to find the answer in there somewhere. | ||
| Line 579: | Line 579: | ||
And like I mentioned earlier, merging this article also begs the question; why not merge every page concerning Mo and Aisha into that one page? [[Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#The_hadiths_do_not_say_Muhammad_had_sex_with_Aisha_when_she_was_9._They_have_been_poorly_translated|Argument number 4]] is '''"The hadiths do not say Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was 9. They have been poorly translated"''', so why not delete the "[[The Meaning of Consummate]]" page and copy/paste that into "Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha" too? [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 21:29, 1 March 2015 (PST) | And like I mentioned earlier, merging this article also begs the question; why not merge every page concerning Mo and Aisha into that one page? [[Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#The_hadiths_do_not_say_Muhammad_had_sex_with_Aisha_when_she_was_9._They_have_been_poorly_translated|Argument number 4]] is '''"The hadiths do not say Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was 9. They have been poorly translated"''', so why not delete the "[[The Meaning of Consummate]]" page and copy/paste that into "Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha" too? [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 21:29, 1 March 2015 (PST) | ||
:The only reason I can think of is that both titles have similar words in them ("Refutation/Response" and "Apologetics"). If that's the case, then only a name change is needed to more accurately reflect the topics of the pages. TBH not only does "Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age" need its name changed, but so does the "Aisha's Age of Consummation" page. I remember you previously said you preferred to keep the title as it is simply because that's an early article. However, the "Aisha's Age of Consummation" page has a misleading title as its content is not really about Aisha's age of consummation. It's about whether or not Mo can be classed as a pedophile. "Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age" should be renamed "Aisha's Age of Consummation" because that IS the actual topic of the page. And "Aisha's Age of Consummation" should be renamed "Muhammad and Pedophilia" or something like that. [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 21:42, 1 March 2015 (PST) | :The only reason I can think of is that both titles have similar words in them ("Refutation/Response" and "Apologetics"). If that's the case, then only a name change is needed to more accurately reflect the topics of the pages. TBH not only does "Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age" need its name changed, but so does the "Aisha's Age of Consummation" page. I remember you previously said you preferred to keep the title as it is simply because that's an early article. However, the "Aisha's Age of Consummation" page has a misleading title as its content is not really about Aisha's age of consummation. It's about whether or not Mo can be classed as a pedophile. "Refutation of Modern Apologetics Against Aisha's Age" should be renamed "Aisha's Age of Consummation" because that IS the actual topic of the page. And "Aisha's Age of Consummation" should be renamed "Muhammad and Pedophilia" or something like that. [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 21:42, 1 March 2015 (PST) | ||
::"Muhammad and the Clinical Definition of Pedophilia" is a good name. I'll rename these pages when I can. There is a fair bit of redirecting that I will also have to do. [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 21:49, 1 March 2015 (PST) | ::"Muhammad and the Clinical Definition of Pedophilia" is a good name. I'll rename these pages when I can. There is a fair bit of redirecting that I will also have to do. Also wanted to add that if I am correct about the reason, then as administrators we must base our decisions off more than a cursory glance at the title of a page. A merge of those two pages would have big repercussions, not least to the logical structure and quality of the site. [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 21:49, 1 March 2015 (PST) | ||