Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Qibla/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ealdgyth via FACBot (talk) 15 August 2020 [1].

Qibla

edit
Nominator(s): HaEr48 (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Muslims face the Ka'bah in Mecca during prayers; this direction is called the qibla. Aside from the religious usage, the article includes discussions such as theoretical and practical methods to find this direction from places far from Mecca, and how the determination was done before astronomy and with the early astronomy of the medieval period, and how historical qiblas can differ from each other and from the modern calculated direction. I find it a very interesting topic, and included references that covers its religious, technical, and historical aspects. I hope it is ready for FA review. HaEr48 (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have an existing open FA nomination, but a coord gave me permission to start this one concurrently. HaEr48 (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC) The other review has completed. HaEr48 (talk) 03:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Not at all my subject, but I like the prose - the article is understandable for this general reader. I have made a few tweaks, hope they are OK. I was a little surprised at the use of an 18th century illustration of Mecca to illustrate an event of several centuries earlier. ϢereSpielChequers 08:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you WereSpielChequers (nice username, by the way!) for taking a look and for your support. Your tweaks look fine to me, thank you for those as well. May I know which 18th century illustration of Mecca you are talking about? HaEr48 (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Whoops, that was on a linked page, I have struck the comment. ϢereSpielChequers 15:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Image review—pass
  • Images are free—I'm assuming the prayer rug is not copyrightable.
  • Image captioned "A modern city map of a section of Cairo" I am struggling to understand the relevance of the image, and it causes sandwiching above and a broken section below—probably should be removed.
    It seemed obvious to me that the map showed three mosques each with a different alignment, however perhaps the caption could spell this out more clearly? ϢereSpielChequers 15:37, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) It illustrates the slightly different orientation of mosques (probably I should have mention it in the caption). I removed it because based on the reviewer's feedback that it causes layout problems. HaEr48 (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Calculating the qibla from Yogyakarta, Indonesia (see text)" looks really weird stuck in the middle of the screen, wouldn't it make more sense to float left or right?
    The reason I put it in the center is because it guides the reading of the text, e.g. the mathematical notations used in the text refer to the notations in the picture. Usually when I see such an illustration in a text book, it would appear inline in the prose rather than floating right or left as a decoration, so the reader wouldn't miss it. What do you think? HaEr48 (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it works best floated to the right, so it doesn't break up the text. Images are not supposed to be decoration, they should only be added if they increase reader understanding. MOS:IMAGELOC says that the purpose of centered images is, "To present images larger than the guidelines above (e.g. panoramas)". (t · c) buidhe 16:19, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Buidhe: Moved to the right, per MOS:IMAGELOC you cited. I do feel it makes it more likely for readers to miss the image, so please consider if it is worth making an exception of the MOS here. HaEr48 (talk) 00:40, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Religious aspects—image sandwiches the nav sidebar. This could be fixed by moving the sidebar up, to just below the lead images so its sits opposite the TOC. Or you could remove it. (t · c) buidhe 12:40, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed the sidebar to avoid the sandwiching and probably a sidebar so big does not add that much navigation value anyway. HaEr48 (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Comments Support by A. Parrot

Seems pretty thorough. I only have two large-scale comments about content, and the rest of my comments are about details of clarity, redundancy, and prose. A. Parrot (talk) 01:28, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Large-scale comments

  • The article on Mizrah seems to indicate that Jews pray in the cardinal direction closest to the direction of Jerusalem, and this article seems to indicate that Muhammad copied this practice until changing the qibla toward Mecca, nearly due south of his location in Medina. This seems to indicate that Muhammad used cardinal directions for the qibla, even though Jerusalem is not due north of Medina, and that only later did Muslims start focusing on the exact direction toward the Kaaba. I could be wrong, but if the sources indicate an evolution of the qibla like the one I'm inferring from the article text, it would be good to describe the process explicitly.
    I've tried to track it down in various sources, unfortunately can't find any more detail than just facing Jerusalem, without any mention about whether it was due north or slightly northwest, or how the exact direction was determined. HaEr48 (talk) 02:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The final section has subsections for the qibla in the early Islamic world, North America, Indonesia, and space. There must be other parts of the world where the qibla has been a problem, and while not every one of them will have coverage in the sources, I can't help thinking that some of them must. South America may not have a substantial enough Muslim population to produce such coverage, but what about Africa, East Asia, or Australia?
Unfortunately couldn't find any significant material on Australia, East Asia, or Sub-Saharan Africa. Even this bibliography is silent on those regions. Found some interesting material on the Maghreb North Africa though, somewhat different than the ones we already have in the article because they're based on modern-day survey of the actual mosques, rather than using historical documents. Added it to the #Early Islamic world section. Let me know what you think. HaEr48 (talk) 16:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Smaller-scale

  • The article uses "the qibla" and "qibla" inconsistently. If the former is used, it should be used everywhere, except when the word is being used as a modifier for another noun (e.g., in the phrase "qibla calculations"). Wikipedia's usage is generally based on that found in the sources; how do the English-language sources on the subject tend to treat it?
    I checked the sources and I think it's pretty clear that "the qibla" is the norm - it's just inconsistent because of my oversight. Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the customs of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad in one's place"
    What is the suggestion? HaEr48 (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, forgot to finish writing this bullet point! The phrase feels a bit awkward, and in fact the whole sentence could be split and slightly reworked. My suggestion: "Before the development of astronomy in the Islamic world, Muslims used traditional methods to determine the qibla. These methods included facing the direction that the companions of Muhammad had used when in the same place; using the setting and rising points of celestial objects; using the direction of the wind; or using due south, which was Muhammad's qibla in Medina."
    Good point, applied a slightly modified version of your suggested. HaEr48 (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The link to mizrah is an Easter egg link and should be made more visible, though I'm not sure how best to adjust that sentence.
    I just added (see mizrah) at the end of the sentence, how does that sound? HaEr48 (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Giving the reader parenthetical commands in the text "(see mizrah)", isn't ideal. You might just say "…the same direction used by the Jews of Medina for their prayers, the mizrah."
    Went with " the same direction as the prayer direction—the mizrah—used by the Jews of Medina", which also avoid parenthetical command. HaEr48 (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's some inconsistency in the treatment of Islamic religious terms. Most are given brief explanations, but some, such as tawaf, Hajj, and umrah, are not.
    Done for tawaf, ihram, and hadith. Hajj and umrah are mentioned as "pilgrimages", so I think they're already explained. Even if they are glossed, usually hajj is just "pilgrimage" or the "major pilgrimage" as opposed to umrah which is a the "minor pilgrimage". 03:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Note B seems to go into rather irrelevant detail. The key points for the purposes of this article are that most Muslims didn't accept the Qarmatians' attempt to change the qibla (or so I assume), the stone was eventually returned, and everything went back to normal, and those seem worth incorporating, albeit briefly, in the main text.
    Added "for a time" to the main text to note that it is temporary - otherwise removed the footnote per your feedback. HaEr48 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Religious aspects" is a somewhat odd section title, as it implies that the other aspects of the qibla are non-religious. But it's really an inherently religious subject, although most of the article is taken up with the technical details of how it is determined. Might "religious significance" work?
    Good point. "Ritual aspects" might also work, but I like your suggestion, "religious significance". Done. HaEr48 (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The link to ijtihad is a bit of an Easter egg link as well; there may be a way to work the term into the sentence.
    Changed into this: one is to make one's own determination—to do an ijtihad—by the means at one's disposal. How is that? HaEr48 (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    This depends on how the Arabic word tends to be used in English-language writing. The article on ijtihad seems to treat it as something a person uses (a mental faculty) rather than something a person does (a practice). Perhaps "to use ijtihad or "to use one's ijtihad"?
    I think "a mental faculty" is just the etymological origin, the actual definition is the "independent reasoning" or "exerting oneself" part, which are acions/practices. Anyway, I checked the Encyclopedia of Islam article on "Idjtihad" (the EoI has a slightly different transliteration) and it uses "to exercise idjtihad" (without an article), which seems reasonable so I change this article to use it too. HaEr48 (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure how to address it, but the overlapping subject matter in "Traditional methods" and "Pre-astronomy" feels like it's created some redundant text in the article.
    I totally understand what you mean.. I've tried to reduce the overlap by focusing on different directions in each sections. I thought hard about it, that feels like the best that can be done. Deleting the "traditional methods" would deemphasize the fact that some of these directions are still used today , and deleting the "pre-astronomy part" will lose us some historical detail about how these methods develop and the "Development of methods" section will have some gaps in its timeline. Ideas welcome. HaEr48 (talk) 03:06, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I cut a small bit of redundant explanation out of the Pre-astronomy section, but with that done, I think the current amount of overlap is acceptable. A. Parrot (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The traditional directions were still in use when mathematical methods later developed and found different directions to Mecca…" feels awkward. I suggest "The traditional directions were still in use when methods were developed to calculate the qibla more accurately…"
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "…the concept of latitude and longitude introduced in Ptolemy's Geography…" I suggest saying "taken from Ptolemy's Geography", because the important point here is where the Islamic world got the idea, not where it was invented.
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section on Indonesia talks first about general problems with finding the qibla there, then quotes recent opinions about it, then talks about qibla disputes in the Dutch East Indies. The resulting jump back in time is strange, though I'm not sure how exactly to rearrange the section, given that the sentences about general problems should come first.
    I split them into two paragraph to clarify that they are talking about different ideas. HaEr48 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The passage about the four options for prayer in space, "in order of priority", is unclear. I'm having difficulty thinking of a good way to word it. I gather that Muszaphar was told to use the first option if possible and fall back on the other options, successively, if it proved impossible.
    Your understanding is correct. Added another sentence to clarify that. HaEr48 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the same passage, I'm not certain what "the projection of the Ka'bah into space" means.
    My understanding is that if you expand the spherical Earth into the location of the astronaut, the Ka'bah will be (imaginarily) projected into a location in the resulting imaginary sphere. The recommendation is to face that. I added a note, let me know what you think. HaEr48 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I've been trying to work out how best to explain this whole subject, and I think it needs some significant rearrangement that's difficult to explain in text. So I made a revised version in the sandbox, in this revision. See what you think. A. Parrot (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for taking the time to write that down. I think it's very good, so I just copied it over with minor adjustments. HaEr48 (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@A. Parrot: Thank you very much for your review all your points are good. I have responded to your comments. Most are done as suggested but some I have further queries and some can't be done due to unavailable sources. Sorry for the delay as I needed some research to address them. Let me know what you think, and if you have further comments. HaEr48 (talk) 16:55, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@HaEr48: I've added my replies to five of your queries above. Aside from those, all the issues I raised look satisfactory, and I just have two last points. First, might Indonesia be listed before North America in the final section? The section seems arranged sort of chronologically, starting with the early Islamic world and ending with space, but Islam reached Indonesia before it reached North America. Second, the Wired article about the qibla in space mentioned that Muslims who pray while in motion, as on a train, use the direction that was the qibla when they started praying. Is there a good place to mention this? A. Parrot (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@A. Parrot: thank you for your follow up. I've addressed them and made further edits to the article. I reordered Indonesia and North America as you suggested. As for praying in a vehicle, I understand there are multiple opinions on this (there are some who say you should wait until the trip ends so that you can find a stable place to pray, for example); what Abdali said may be applicable to just a certain group, so I hesitate to use it authoritatively. In the first #Religious significance section, where most of the religious practice is discussed, I try to only use "overview" sources which review and summarize the possible differences in practices, such as Wensinck and Hadi Bashori. Unfortunately they don't talk about praying in a moving vehicle, and I can't find a good overview RS elsewhere that does. HaEr48 (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

edit

I've added this to the urgents list and the source review list. --Ealdgyth (talk) 15:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FunkMonk

edit
  • Didn't have time to review the other FACs about ancient Islamic subjects before they got enough supports, so I'll get in on this one soon. FunkMonk (talk) 12:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a couple of duplinks, you can find them with this tool:[2]
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 15:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a huge deal, but in a couple of areas, your image alignment makes images clash with the section headers beneath them, which could be avoided by reversing the image alignment. The sections "Ayn al-ka'bah and jihat al-ka'bah" and "On the world map" are affected by this.
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 15:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, FunkMonk. Looking forward to your review. HaEr48 (talk) 15:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any reason why Muhammad isn't linked in the intro, and why kaaba isn't linked at the first mention outside the intro? Ideally, all terms should be linked both at the first mention in the intro and first mention outside it, there may be more cases. I wonder if Mecca and Muslim should also be linked.
    Done for Muhammad, Kaaba and Mecca. Didn't do it for Muslim, it feels like a common enough word to not require wikilink. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "directly above the Ka'ba" Be consistent in how you spell kaaba.
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Medina, and Jerusalem" Link these in caption of the map.
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The qibla status of the Kaaba" why in italics here?
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "when defecating, urinating, and spitting" I wonder if these very common terms need links? I could understand it if they linked to articles about those things in a religious context, but it's just the basic articles.
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A pilgrim makes a supplication" Link supplication?
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mecca, Medina, and Jerusalem" I wonder if this caption could be given more context?
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Ayn al-ka'bah is a position" Give translation?
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in Al-Andalus (historical Spain and Portugal)" That seems an odd way to define it? Wouldn't it be more clear to say Islamic Iberia or something like that?
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "for example Ibn Arabi—consider ayn al-ka'bah to be obligatory during the ritual prayer, while others consider it only obligatory when one is able. For locations further than Mecca, scholars such as Abu Hanifa and Al-Qurtubi argue that" This and other places read as though you are giving current opinions, when looking at the respective articles shows these are centuries old. Could be good to give approximate dates or something, especially since you use present tense.
    Added years that indicate these are past authors. These opinions are still influential/cited today in Islamic law/ritual. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likewise under for example Determination, it could be useful to know when these various theories were developed.
    The #Determination section is intended for the current status of these methods. The #Development section covers the historical aspects. Where appropriate, dates have been given when #Determination mentions past authors as contexts. HaEr48 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @FunkMonk: Thanks for reviewing and for your feedback. I've answered above and done most of your suggestions. HaEr48 (talk) 23:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "known to Muslim astronomers since the 9th century (3rd century AH), developed by various Muslim scholars" I'm not sure the second "Muslim" is needed if you already qualify you are talking about Muslims the first time?.
    Done. HaEr48 (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately I suck at math, so I can't evaluate the calculations!
  • "instruments created in the 18th century Iran" Seems "the" is unneeded.
    Removed. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "has a picture of one of the isntruments" Typo.
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "known as ilm al-falak i" Translate?
    Added the literal translation. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "using either analemmas or direct the application of formulas." Not sure what the last part of the sentence means, something missing?
    Should be "using either analemmas or the direct application of formulas". Fixed now. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You link Baghdad under "With astronomy" instead of at first mention.
    Fixed. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "An electronic version could use satellite coordinates to calculate and indicate the qibla automatically." So this does not exist yet? Maybe make clearer it is hypothetical, and whether it is being worked on?
    Reading the source again, looks like such models exists, so reworded. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "According to the doctrine of jihat al-ka'bah" Translate?
    Already done in #Religious significance. Do we need it again because there's quite a distance before this section? HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Under "Indonesia" you mention some studies, but it hard to know whether they are recent or much older?
    Now all events and opinions in this section have years or year ranges.
  • "in October 2007." Is the month really necessary in one place?
    Removed the month. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor" Is his name really Sheikh, or is it a title? In which case, I don't think we use titles when referring to people?
    Yes it is part of his name, and not a title. It is quite unusual, but all RSes I found include it as part of his name. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in chapter 2 (al-Baqarah) verses 144, 149, and 150" Is this level of detail necessary for the intro?
    Reduced detail. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "is the direction of the building Kaaba" Or direction towards? From how I read the article, it's not about the direction of the building itself?
    Changed to towards, and removed "building". Any further suggestion? HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The spaceflight of a devout Muslim, Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor, to the International Space Station in October 2007 generated a discussion with regard to the qibla direction from outer space. On Sheikh Muszaphar's request, the Islamic authority of his home country, Malaysia, issued a detailed guidance, suggesting a determination "based on what is possible" for the astronaut, in line with recommendations from other Islamic scholars." This is a large chunk of the intro devoted to a tiny part of the article, could be more balanced?
    Reduced amount of text about this in the lead. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - looking great to me now! FunkMonk (talk) 10:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Qibla/archive1&oldid=973208956"