Talk:Kaaba

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2024

To whom it may concern,

Under the history section of the page on the Kaaba, there exists a media file annotated "Miniature from 1307 CE depicting Muhammad fixing the black stone into the Kaaba".

This illustration, depicting the prophet Muhammad may be viewed as offensive to many users. It would be ideal to either mark out the face of the figure, or replace the image with something else of relevance.

Thank you for your time in reading this request.

Good day. 154.198.88.224 (talk) 08:51, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Please see Talk:Muhammad/FAQ for the reason why your request will not be accepted. It also contains advice on how you may stop images being shown to you. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 09:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2024

In this sentence:

Islamic sanctities received great attention from the Circassian sultans during the period in which they ruled the Islamic world (1382–1517 CE), with the Kaaba receiving significant attention.

please remove the CE. It's obvious from the context: if this were BCE, it would be 1517-1382, not the other way around, and since Muhammad was born in the sixth century CE, there weren't any Islamic sanctities in 1382 BCE because Islam didn't exist yet. WP:ERA says "In general, omit CE or AD, except to avoid ambiguity or awkwardness", so CE should be omitted. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 01:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done In most cases your analysis would be correct but in this article, CE is being distinguished from AH, not from AD. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

But according to Hijri year, the current AH year is 1445 or 1446. If you don't generally use AH, you'll assume that this means AD unless it says otherwise. If you do generally use it, you'll know that 1382 was just a few decades ago (when there weren't sultans ruling the Islamic world) and 1517 is in the future. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I can see the logic of that argument and in general we try to avoid attaching an era notation when no ambiguity arises (to avoid nonsense like "2024 AD"). But in this case I believe that the correct way to resolve it is to give the date in both notations, hence "during the period in which they ruled the Islamic world (784–924 AH, 1382–1517 CE)", which I have now done. Of course another editor may agree with you and disagree with me: if so I will concede the point. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2024

I want to edit this section in Background :

"In her book Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the Kaaba was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which probably represented the days of the year.[27] However, by the time of Muhammad's era, it seems that the Kaaba was venerated as the temple of Allah, the High God,"

why? the Kaaba can only be used to refer to the house of allah in itself, it doesn't have any other meaning, now the problem here is, this place couldn't be called el Kaaba before it was even built, and calling it that, causes some people to have a false assumptions about muslims worshipping others dietys in allah own house which is extremely offensive,

instead it should be something like this:

"In her book Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the grounds in which the Kaaba was built upon was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which probably represented the days of the year.[27] However, by the time of Muhammad's era the Kaaba was built as the temple of Allah, the High God,"

as a Muslim and an Arabic speaker, I can tell you that the Kaaba is not a land again its the house of allah in itself and its important to distinguish between the kaaba in itself and the ground that it was built upon. Adam.R12 (talk) 05:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please read WP:VERIFY and feel free to reopen the edit request if you can find a reliable source that supports your proposed change. M.Bitton (talk) 09:36, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Just to be clear: what you say is most probably true. But for this high-profile article, every assertion needs supporting evidence. So when you find that evidence and it supports clearly what you say, then it can be incorporated. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Did you ever gone to the Kaaba sharif?

I'll go when I'm able to go. Im not currently in the "traveling" situation 😃 Haraf13 (talk) 13:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

This a talk page to discussion on the improvement of the article. This is not a forum or discussion page about the travel plans. Xoocit (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Kaaba: Demand for Deletion of Blasphemous Imaged of the Last Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Subject: Request for Immediate Removal of Blasphemous Images from the "Kaaba" Wikipedia Page

Dear Wikipedia Team,

I hope this message finds you well. My name is [Your Name], and I am writing as a member of the Muslim community deeply concerned about the presence of pictorial depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his blessed companions on the Wikipedia page titled "Kaaba" (http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Kaaba).

These images, located under the 'History' tab, are '''highly offensive and blasphemous to Muslims around the world, as any visual representation of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is strictly prohibited in Islam'''. The specific images in question are:

'''1. "Muhammad at the Ka'ba" from the Siyer-i Nebi, showing Muhammad with a veiled face, c. 1595.'''

'''2. A miniature from 1307 CE depicting Muhammad fixing the black stone into the Kaaba.'''

These images not only disrespect our beliefs but also deeply hurt the sentiments of millions in the Muslim community, including myself. The existence of these images on a public platform like Wikipedia fosters misunderstanding and disrespects our faith, which is rooted in profound reverence for our beloved Last Prophet (Peace be Upon Him). We kindly request that these images be removed from the Wikipedia page immediately, without any delay or further explanation.

We understand that Wikipedia requires supporting evidence for high-profile articles. '''In this case, the prohibition of visual depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is well-documented in Islamic teachings and widely recognized by scholars and religious authorities. Numerous fatwas based on Qur'anic scripture and hadith traditions from all schools of thought strictly prohibit drawing images of the last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his blessed companions, deeming such acts as blasphemy. This prohibition is rooted in Islamic teachings that emphasize the importance of avoiding idolatry and misrepresentation. Scholars unanimously agree that there is no permissibility whatsoever for visual representations of the Last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) or his blessed companions, as such depictions are considered blasphemous and fundamentally incompatible with Islamic teachings.'''

Furthermore, surveys indicate that a significant portion of Muslims find such depictions offensive. The Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization highlights that Muslims believe visual depictions of all prophets should be prohibited, particularly those of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as they hurt their emotions and go against their faith (Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization). We urge you to consider the sensitivity of this matter and its impact on millions of Muslims worldwide.

'''Addressing Wikipedia's FAQ:'''

'''1.Wikipedia is not censored:''' While Wikipedia aims to provide a neutral point of view, it is essential to consider how these images offend deeply held beliefs. The presence of such content does not foster an inclusive environment for all users.

'''2.Historical accuracy:''' The images in question are historically inaccurate, as acknowledged by Wikipedia. The artists who created these works lived centuries after Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and could not have seen him. Using inaccurate images perpetuates misconceptions rather than providing educational value.

'''3.Offense to Muslims:''' Wikipedia recognizes that depictions of Muhammad are offensive to many Muslims. This offense affects millions globally and cannot be dismissed as a minor issue. Suggesting that users change their settings to hide images is not a viable solution; such representations on a public platform like Wikipedia perpetuate disrespect and harm.

'''4.Preventing idolatry:''' The traditional prohibition against images of prophets serves to prevent idolatry—a principle that should be respected in any educational context. The presence of these images on Wikipedia violates this fundamental religious principle.

'''5.Comparison to other figures:''' While Wikipedia may use images of historical figures like Jesus, it is crucial to note that any depiction of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) is universally forbidden in Islam. This distinction makes comparisons inadequate and unjustifiable.

'''6.Separate link for images: '''Creating a separate link for these images is also not an acceptable solution. The core issue remains that any depiction of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) is considered blasphemous in Islam, and there is no allowance for such visual representations under any circumstances. The existence of these images on a public platform like Wikipedia is inherently offensive and harmful.

We acknowledge the FAQ section on the Talk:Muhammad page but believe that this request warrants special consideration due to its unique nature. The presence of these images does not contribute to the educational value of the article but rather perpetuates significant cultural and religious offense.

'''Examples of Content Removal from Wikipedia '''

'''1.John Seigenthaler Wikipedia Hoax (2005):''' A false and defamatory article about journalist John Seigenthaler was posted on Wikipedia and removed after being identified. This instance illustrates Wikipedia's commitment to maintaining content integrity by removing material that is harmful or misleading.

'''2.Essjay Controversy (2007):''' Contributions from a prominent Wikipedia editor who falsified his credentials were scrutinized and subsequently removed, demonstrating that Wikipedia actively removes content undermining its reliability.

'''3.Wiki-PR Scandal (2012): '''Manipulated content created by a company using sockpuppet accounts was removed, showcasing Wikipedia's efforts to prevent abuse of its platform.

'''4.Orangemoody Investigation (2015):''' Fraudulent content posted by a group of blackmailers using sockpuppet accounts was removed, highlighting Wikipedia's proactive stance against harmful content.

Relevant Policies

'''Wikipedia's Policy on Images:'''

According to your guidelines, '''"images that would bring the project into disrepute... may be removed by any user."''' The continued presence of these offensive images directly contradicts this policy as they clearly offend a significant portion of users.

'''Wikipedia's Policy on Offensive Material:'''

'''1.According to Wikipedia:''' Offensive material, while Wikipedia aims to include material that may offend, it explicitly states that "offensive words and offensive images should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner." The inclusion of these blasphemous images does not meet this criterion as they serve no educational purpose but rather cause harm.

'''2.Neutral Point of View:''' As outlined in Wikipedia's Guide to Deletion, all content must adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV). The presence of these offensive images violates this policy by failing to respect a significant portion of your readership who find such content unacceptable.

'''3.Speedy Deletion Policy: ''' This policy states that pages can be deleted without discussion if they meet criteria for speedy deletion due to being obviously inappropriate for Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Deletion policy). Given their blasphemous nature, these images qualify for immediate removal under this guideline.

'''4.Content Integrity Maintenance: ''' Content that undermines Wikipedia's reliability or trustworthiness can be removed proactively by editors or administrators (Wikipedia:Content Integrity). Allowing these offensive images undermines your credibility as an encyclopedia committed to accuracy and respect.

'''5.Adherence to Neutrality: ''' Wikipedia has a strong stance against Holocaust denial and antisemitism, clearly reflected in the Holocaust denial page, which debunks false claims and provides historical evidence. This commitment to neutrality and respect for deeply held beliefs should be extended to the depiction of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as well.

'''Handling of Other Sensitive Topics:'''

'''1.Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: '''Wikipedia handles content related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with sensitivity and neutrality, ensuring a balanced representation of different perspectives.

'''2.Abortion: '''Wikipedia presents diverse viewpoints on abortion respectfully, acknowledging the sensitivity of the topic.

'''3.Censorship and Internet Freedom: '''Wikipedia respects local laws and cultural sensitivities, demonstrating its commitment to respecting different cultural and religious practices.

In light of these considerations and your own policies, I urge you to take immediate action to remove these offensive images from the "Kaaba" page and review your guidelines regarding sensitive religious content moving forward.

Thank you for your understanding and swift action on this matter.

Sincerely, Yasha Ullah Afghan 202.47.33.85 (talk) 05:41, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

For the longer answer, see Talk:Muhammad/FAQ. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)