Talk:Antisemitism in Islam

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Misleading title[edit]

The first reaction when I read this title is "Oh Islam is by essence judeophobic". Like its a clearly defined section and part of it. Chapter 5: Be Judeophobic. It is totally wrong. I understand there are not a lot of experts in Islam in Western society but guys this is a science website. When we don't know something we ask experts. Proven experts. (I am not an expert but apparently I know more than the initial author of the article / title about the pure theological part of this religion).

I am also very disappointed by the lack of accuracy and scope in this article that makes it extremely misleading to the point it leads people into thinking something wrong: Islam has judeophobic views.

So yes, first of all, we should say judeophobic instead of antisemitic. Because as you mentionned it semitic means something totally different.

It mixes 2 different problems:
- The relationship between Islam and Judaism (the pure theory of the religion)
- The relationship between muslims and jews (the social nature of people)

Islam as a religion has no hate against Judaism. Its only stance is that the teachings of Moses and following prophets until Jesus have been corrupted by the sons of Israel with edits and inserts of things that were not there initially. That's all. So it just says "This judaic religion is irrelevant because we lost the original content and it is crippled by lies". There is no hate in Islam against people solely because of their religion.

Now indeed there is judeophobic people who identify as muslims and use Islam as a way to justify their hatred as being legit. But the same goes for all communities. Jewish people hating muslims based on their religion... Atheist and christians, so on and so forth. There is no new info there.

So what's the point of this article anyway ? It feels totally irrelevant.

I see 3 options:
- delete it (I saw it was proposed yet rejected, I need to read the argument why I am curious to see what was useful in it)
- modify the title to speak of judeophobia in countries with a majority of muslims (and then we will need to do the same for every single religion ??? Next islamophobia in Israel, in France...)
- modify the the title to mention just the relationship of obsolescence between Islam and Judaism and focus only on that. The study of the thoery and not behaviour of people (sure why not, that could be interesting)

This is the classic mistake. Person X has trait A and thinks B implies that whoever has A thinks B which is totally wrong. There is not necessarly a causality link between A and B. It has to be proven. This is often used in hate speeches as a logical fallacy and I see it in this article.

Anyway I am all ears because honestly this is a mess.

Kashmiri, I wanted to bring to your attention that cancelling edits just to dewikify one word is not considered a good practice. While I value your contributions to Wikipedia, I kindly ask you to refrain from any behaviour that could be perceived as harassment. If such behaviour persists, I may find it necessary to reach out to the administrators for assistance.

Additionally, I've noticed that some of my edits have been cancelled without due consideration. Therefore, I urge you to reconsider cancelling edits without careful review.

Furthermore, it's concerning that these actions began after you saw my message condemning the sexual crimes of Hamas, including rape. Let's endeavour to engage in constructive discourse and respect each other's perspectives. Aisha8787 (talk) 12:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aisha8787: Firstly, don't try to threaten others. Avoiding links within quotes is the standard on Wikipedia, see MOS:LINKQUOTE. Your claim that it "is not considered good practice" is made up. Re. the second edit, I self-reverted it immediately, so I have no idea what you are jumping at.
Newly registered accounts that come directly to edit controversial topics attract scrutiny of established editors. That's how it works on Wikipedia – for a reason. Cheers, — kashmīrī TALK 12:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kashmīrī, thank you for your response. I understand the standard practice you mentioned. However, I want to clarify that my concern wasn't to threaten, but to express feeling harassed due to the abrupt cancellation of edits. The fact that my account is "new," as you say, is not a reason to thoughtlessly cancel contributions. I hope we can foster a positive editing environment and collaborate effectively. Bye-bye. Aisha8787 (talk) 13:41, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]