Talk:Liyathnah

POV and primar

There is a clear reliance on primary sources from the 1800s for controversial information that is disputed by some secondary sources. [1] Makeandtoss (talk) 12:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rajoub570: By what right have you removed the tags without regard to WP guidelines? Makeandtoss (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

WP guidelines require that those who reject the neutrality of the article should provide sources that contradict the content. Why haven't you done so? Rajoub570 (talk) 16:04, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rajoub570: First of all WP guidelines do not require the presenting of sources that contradict the content; it requires the listing of reasons on the talk page, which I have done. Second, there is a clear reference at the end of my sentence, both here and in the other article. So there is no justification for this unwarranted removal. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:09, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

The sole reference you provided has no mention for either the Bedul nor the Liyathnah, so I don't see how it's related to the subject. Random claims on this and that scholar are not enough for tagging an entire article as pov. If you find another origin story contrasting the ones mentioned in the article I welcome you to add it. Rajoub570 (talk) 16:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rajoub570: Clearly, the abstract of the paper linked explicitly mentions Bedul and Liyathnah in the tenth line, and also very clearly elaborates in Arabic on the topic, a language you should be able to understand. Not only have you removed the POV tag but also the primary sources tag, without regard to WP guidelines. It is your personal opinion that this is not enough of a reason, not the consensus. WP works by consensus, i.e. engaging on the talk page, not removal of tags without discussion and without consideration of the guidelines. Waiting for your kind self-revert. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2024 (UTC)