Talk:Islamic literature

Good topic

This is a good topic someone put stuff on here we need help!!!!!!!!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.17.253.39 (talk) 15:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

To Wikiedia

I am doing a project for school. No worries. I will post my knowledge on this subject when I'm done with it. There will be a lot to learn.71.169.135.119 22:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)Prof.Dekah

What is the point as it stands?

The article is now just an imprecise almost circular definition of what Islamic Literature might be. There is no history, no categorization, no source, no reference.

The article says "Islamic literature is a field that includes the study of modern and classical Arabic and the literature written in those languages."

1) "is a field that" is padding.

2) "includes" rather than "comprises" suggests there is more which the editor has deliberately or otherwise not revealed to us.

3) "the study of ..." is not an attribute of the literature. Study of some language is a prerequisite for some people for some languages but not, for example, for a native speaker of Egyptian reading or studying current Egyptian Islamic literature.

4) The article ignores that there is also non-Islamic Arab literature.

5) The article says "It also often includes other ..." I should have thought that it always included Islamic literature in any language.

6) "modern, classic or ancient" is padding as is "of any area".

7) Isn't including Hebrew without reference casting one's net upon snaggly rocks?

"Islamic Literature" is deserving of a Wikipedia entry but the present article is not encyclopedic and if anything demeans the subject. In that the first anonymous Talker and I agree, but the note To Wikiedia (sic) gives me to fear that a whole load of proud nonsense will arrive. There must be real scholars, Islamic or otherwise (not the kind who say "seed" for "seen") who could contribute.

8) Don't quibble about "Egyptian" or argue that Arabic has no P, so Wikiedia is OK.--SilasW 15:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Revert

Reverted as latest edit fouled up display of article--SilasW (talk) 11:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

After 6 months none addressed my July 2007 points so I did. Now not a padded school essay.--SilasW (talk) 11:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Islamic literature. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080206072116/http://www.islamset.com/isc/nafis/drroubi.html to http://www.islamset.com/isc/nafis/drroubi.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080206072116/http://www.islamset.com/isc/nafis/drroubi.html to http://www.islamset.com/isc/nafis/drroubi.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080626154647/http://www.london.gov.uk/gla/publications/equalities/muslims-in-london.pdf to http://www.london.gov.uk/gla/publications/equalities/muslims-in-london.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Islamic literature. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120127115858/http://lawpark.jimdo.com/other-lists/cwana-canonical-texts/ to http://lawpark.jimdo.com/other-lists/cwana-canonical-texts/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:05, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Article review

I am bit surprised to find this article in neglect. Anyways. In my honest opinion, More than enough reference material seems to exist to support following kind of improvements.

1)Remain clear whether this article is together with Muslim literature or separate

2) One of the missing subtopic section is Draft:Islamic advice literature

3) Detail Adab literature intro which is now in lead need to be first transferred to Adab literature section retaining only one or two introductory sentences in the lead about Adab literature

4) A section needed to take encyclopedic note of Impact of Islamic literature on Muslim culture and impact of Muslim cultures on Islamic literature

5)Need a section on Modern progressive liberal culturally Muslim literature

6) need a section on Criticism of liberal human faculties through Islamic literature (Emphasis on literary side) – what do you mean by "faculties"?

7) need a section on Criticism of Islamic literature by liberals (Emphasis on literary side)

8) Many subtopics seems to have been covered in subtopic articles list available in see also section and may be related categories - A little introductory forking from subtopics with additional sections about women literature, region and language wise literature, poetic literature

9) A section on inclusion and impact of literature and literary criticism in visual arts, performing arts, theater, TV dramas & movies.

10) + Sections for Muslim autobiographical and travelogue literature + Draft:Autobiographies of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women + Draft:Expressions of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women through media ineteractions

11) Need a section of Islamic poetry

Am I missing any point? do discuss on Talk:Islamic literature page.

Thanks and greetings

Bookku (talk) 05:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Bookku, to what extent is this topic already covered by Arabic literature, and similar articles? And to what extent might material from these numerous articles be added here (with suitable acknowledgement of course. I did a search for "Islamic novels in English" and found this. Best of luck with your project. Rwood128 (talk) 12:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks that is good point. Some how good number of people seem limiting and assuming Arab literature and culture as Islamic but unfortunately that leaves huge amount of rest of Islamic literature beyond purview.

On second thought I feel 'Culturally Muslim literature' would have been more inclusive title because defining what is Islamic and what is not can be contentious issue.

Thanks for your inputs ones again

Bookku (talk) 08:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Influence on Shakespeare?

The presence of Moors in plays by Shakespeare and others doesn't exactly count as a literary influence, and therefore the following should be deleted (unless sources in Moorish Islamic literature exist): "The Moors also had a noticeable influence on the works of George Peele and William Shakespeare. Some of their works featured Moorish characters, such as Peele's The Battle of Alcazar and Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, Titus Andronicus, and Othello, whose title character is a Moor. These works are said to have been inspired by several Moorish delegations from Morocco to Elizabethan England at the beginning of the 17th century". Rwood128 (talk) 14:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

List of useful refs

• Persian Print Culture

• Islamic Literature in Contemporary Turkey: From Epic to Novel By K. Cayir, Google books
• The Poetry of Arab Women from the Pre-Islamic Age to Andalusia By Wessam Elmeligi · 2019 ISBN: 9780429836329, 0429836325
• Abū Ṭayyib al-Washshāʾ and the Poetics of Inscribed ObjectsYaron Klein

Bookku (talk) 02:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Difference between Muslim literature and Islamic literature?

According to [1] Muslim is purely someone who practices Islam and Islamic is anything influenced by Islam or produced by Muslims. So I’ve done some of the (requested via women’s rights article) copyediting on that basis. Please correct my ignorances with sources if wrong. Thanks! Dakinijones (talk) 17:14, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Dakinijones:, You do have an important point here. Understanding of this nuance will be very helpful. And Wikipedians need to revisit article titles to give better justice to article content and avoid mis perceptions.

One academic scholar M.M. Knight too has pointed out this aspect as below. I am in process tabulating articles word Muslim and Islam and Islamic in article titles and putting up case better before Wikipedian community.

According to M.M. Knight, when one does not speak for real Islam (i.e.'an abstracted ideal' that floats above, Muslim, human cultures but speaks for 'lived traditions') it is preferable to use the term Muslim instead of the term Islam or Islamic.

M.M. Knight further says, terms 'Islam/ Islamic' imposes claim of normativity, which is distinct with lived experiences hence need not be conflated. (My emphasis)

As far as this particular article is concerned I would support renaming it as Muslim literature and redirect Islamic literature to Islamic advice literature because most of Islamic literature as religion are either Tafsir or Islamic advice literature, What does not fit the bill as Tafsir or Islamic advice literature can always be included in Muslim literature .

Hope and look forward to more discussion and awareness on this aspect.

Thanks and warm regards Bookku (talk) 07:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

References

• Above discussion was referred @Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ?

Bookku (talk) 04:52, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Requesting inputs

Greetings,

Adequate and nuanced overview for even non– Muslim audience is expected out of the articles Muslims and Muslim world. Whether the articles are achieving that purpose adequately? Requesting and expecting proactive participation in providing inputs from non–Muslim audience too along with Muslim users.

Since the article Muslim world is tagged various improvements it can not be submitted to formal review process still I feel the article deserves more inputs for content improvement.

Requesting your visit to the articles

• Muslims and
• Muslim world

and provide your inputs @

• Talk:Muslims/Archive 8#Requesting inputs and
• Talk:Muslim world#Requesting inputs

Thanks

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:43, 26 March 2022 (UTC)