Wikipedia

Talk:Religion in Egypt/Archive 1

< Talk:Religion in Egypt
Latest comment: 2 years ago by 88.93.123.245 in topic 20% give me a break !!
Archive 1

Untitled

Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article is meant to give an overview of religious life in Egypt. Unless the prolems facing all religious groups are discussed, posting detailed and specific grievances concerning a particular group on this page is inappropriate. Hussein M Allam 16:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The title of this article is Religion in Egypt, and based on that title a whole bunch of things can (and should) be included about religion in Egypt. Things like religious life in Egypt, and also the condition of religious populations in Egypt, and general views of the population and the government about religion and religions in Egypt. The article does so, with some sections clearly being stubs. But Wikipedia does not remove content because some other content is missing; instead the process clearly involves editors adding content where it is underrepresented. Furthermore this article is definitely not long enough for it to invovke the Wikipedia:Summary style, where content is moved to other articles. In fact this article is a really a subsection of the Egypt article, which neccessitates going into detail about religion which cannot be discussed in the main Egypt article. -- Jeff3000 14:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Sources

citation needed

Latest comment: 14 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

May be there is a source, but I failed to follow the source, may be it is broken link « PuTTYSchOOL 20:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That's highly unlikely. It said "http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2386" and "IPS News (retrieved 09-27-2008)", so the idea that a citation is needed after looking at that is either a mistake or intentionally wrong. Pick one. ~ Troy (talk) 20:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
No, It is very clear that the citation was about that reference "Article in the local Al Dustur Newspaper dated Wednesday 12th March 2008."
your other reference according to the WINEP wikipedian article is not a neutral reliable source, please stop your edit wars and reverting my edits without any logical reason.« PuTTYSchOOL 20:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
You can't cite other Wikipedia articles and that is not relevant to the source. As well, you ignored all of the other sources brought up by myself on Talk:Egypt. I will not repeat myself again. ~ Troy (talk) 20:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

"The original Ancient Egyptian religion has all but disappeared." That is what the article says. Can anyone sight any reference to the woship of pagan gods after the 7th century? Realistically has there been any modern worship of the ancient gods?125.237.111.80 (talk) 00:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Kindly stop inserting figures from unreliable sources

Latest comment: 16 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Troy 07 (talk · contribs) references are either un reliable sources, or outdated contracted by new article from the same newspaper. Here is the summary about five deceiving new references inserted in article Religion in Egypt :

  1. Reference 7 is a copy from reference 12
  2. Reference 8, is outdated November 1997; his claim about the reference is the Washington post is fake; it is from an unreliable source with Google add-ons.
  3. Reference 9 from New York Times is an outdated, published on March 15, 1993 giving a round figure of 17%, while reference 18 also from the New York Times published February 11, 2008, giving a definite figure of 10%
  4. Reference 10 from The Christian Post is an outdated Published December 7, 2004, giving a round figure of 15%, while reference 16 also from The Christian Post published July 8, 2008, giving a round figure ranging from 7.5% to 10%
  5. Reference 11 from NLG Solutions, which is a Traveling Agent; can’t be a reliable source, contradicts itself, giving a round figure of 15%, then in population percentage by religion giving a definite figure of 6%

The issue was discussed thoroughly from September 26, 2008 till October 5, 2008 i.e. for 9 days.
All references were analyzed, one by one on Egypt article talk page
So kindly stop inserting figures from unreliable sources into the text; stop you disruptive editing and reverting my edits with no reason.
This issue has already been thoroughly discussed for 9 long days on Egypt article talk page; we will not repeat our self. --Great Sphinx (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

The issue was over and dealt with as it was agreed that all of the sources relevant sources may be included by being properly weighted and properly incorporated. The only thing you did was REMOVE references blatantly, and I will not spend time with your editing (which is far more disruptive than mine because I discussed this on Talk:Egypt while you didn't discuss it at all). Also, you are almost certainly a sock of Putty (as per evidence and similar use of {{user|}}). May be if you didn't call me an "evil editor", I would actually care, but after having discussed it to death, you have no reason to remove references. ~ Troy (talk) 22:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Start of paste

In reply to your post:
  1. References 7 and 12 are the same, and this is ok. There's nothing in Wiki against repeating the same source twice at 2 different places.
  2. Reference 8 is from 1998. This does not make it outdated, unless you can provide a more recent and neutral reference that proves that information in reference 8 is no longer valid on the ground.
  3. Reference 9 is from 1993. This does not make it outdated, unless you can provide a more recent and neutral reference that proves that information in reference 8 is no longer valid on the ground. As for the contradiction in information provided by references 9 and 10, both figures should be included with allusion to the appropriate sources.
  4. Reference 10 is from 2004. This does not make it outdated, unless you can provide a more recent and neutral reference that proves that information in reference 10 is no longer valid on the ground.
  5. I agree with you that reference 11 is a weak reference. It does not add much to the argument at any rate.
I hope this helps.--Lanternix (talk) 02:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Lanternix is this another method of twisting facts, regarding troy 07 (talk · contribs) edit which is by all means a method of twisting Wikipedia to his point of view, using a trivial method of deceiving the readers.
  1. Reference 7 is a copy from Reference 12 and both are the same atricle, not in two different places, as you wrote, which makes it problematic edit. can't you see the list [6][7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]?
  2. Reference 8, is outdated November 1997, not from the Washington post, as troy wrote while defining the reference, it is an un-reliable source and not every page on web can be used a reference for population, compare it to true reliable up-to-date referances included by the article.
  3. Reference 9 is an outdated 1993 from the New York Times giving a round figure of 17% , while Reference 18 is up-to-date 2008 and also from the New York Times giving a definite figure of 10%.
  4. Reference 10 is an outdated 2004 from the Christian Post giving a round figure of 15% , while Reference 16 is up-to-date 2008 and also from the Christian Post giving a round figure 7.5% to 10%
  5. it is a natural that we must use the up-to-date reference if we have two references from the same news paper or publisher.
  6. troy 07 (talk · contribs) is writing the access data, not the published date, and according to Wikipedia stype of editing, this is another sign of his intention for deceiving the readers.
  7. troy 07 (talk · contribs) intention in removing the “pro-Israeli” source from the article and hiding the nature of the source is another problematic edit.
  8. You agreed with reference 11 from NLG solutions as it contradicts it self, by giving a 6% of the total population, at the same time Troy choice of such reference is an indication about how he did not respect Wikipedia.
  9. According to troy 07 (talk · contribs) Claim I used "LOOKLEX Encyclopedia" (and not in all edits) as it is the only reference that give the number of native Egyptian Christians other than Copts, also it is used by more than 20 articles as a reference about population, at the same time I did not use any of the Arabic or Islamic Reference, as all give a definite percentage of 6. But I never see an article from a news paper talking about a percentage from X to Y, used as a reference except for Egypt articles.
I hope this helps. « PuTTYSchOOL 07:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

End of paste I pasted the above from puttyschool talk page. Now either cease being disruptive or we can go this way WP:RFC --Great Sphinx (talk) 17:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Look, it has been discussed already and agreed upon. End of story. I'm not to be expected to waste my time with someone who thinks I'm "evil" and "perverting" articles that I'm interested in as well. What I'm not interested in is the edit wars. If you think enough is enough—then stop removing references. ~ Troy (talk) 17:55, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

THE Oriental-Orthodox Church?!?

What is THE Oriental-Orthodox Church? There is the Oriental-Orthodox family of churches, to which the Coptic one belongs. More precision and differentiation needed!

Muslim Brotherhood

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Muslim Brotherhood is a political party, and as such should not be referenced here as impacted by restrictions of freedom of religions. Please respond before I remove this reference --Paul Lewison (talk) 05:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

20% give me a break !!

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

first of all i am an Egyptian 15% or 20%? thats really funny . i will not verify the governmental or official censuses that give the definite number of 6% but i am sure that Christian percentage in Egypt dosn't break the 10% barrier. some figures like 15% or 20% is too exaggerated  !!! in Egypt there is only 4 or 5 governorates in which Christians make a significant percentage otherwise Christians percentage doesn't exceed 5% of any other governorate so the figure 20% or even 15% doesn't make any sense —Preceding unsigned comment added by Egyptianknight22 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I guess the Christian percentage is considerably higher. Just by randomly driving through the streets of Cairo, you see av lot of cars with crosses hanging from the mirror, a lot more than 1 in 10 cars. In Upper Egypt there are big villages, small towns with almost 100 percent Christians. But the most stupid thing about this, is that the Egyptian government very well know the exact number of Muslims and Christian - as that is an information printed on every Egyptian person’s identity card. I guess the reason for the Muslim government to keep this information a secret is that the number of Christian is a lot higher than official numbers or estimates. --88.93.123.245 (talk) 20:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Recent reverts by User:Voiceofplanet

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I am restoring the edits made by User:Voiceofplanet for the following reasons:

  • 1. The user insists on deleting any reference to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy in the sentence a number of published sources such as the Washington Institute, in addition to some of the Coptic sources, uphold that Christians represent more than 10% of the total population and claim that they actually still compose up to 15 or even 20% of the Egyptian population. This is in spite of the fact that the sentence is very well referenced.
  • 2. The user insists on deleting the sentence Until recently, Christians were required to obtain presidential approval for even minor repairs in churches. Although the law was eased in 2005 by handing down the authority of approval to the governors, Copts continue to face many obstacles in building new churches. These obstacles are not as much in building mosques. The user also places a template requiring citations in this section in spite of the fact that both the above statement and the entire paragraph are well referenced.
  • I am thus restoring all deleted referenced material. --λⲁⲛτερⲛιξ[talk] 15:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The reasons for my edit were as follows:

  • 1. Regarding the points you have made in this section concerning my editing of:

While some government sources have claimed a percentage of around 6 to 10%, a number of published sources such as the Washington Institute, in addition to some of the Coptic sources, uphold that Christians represent more than 10% of the total population and claim that they actually still compose up to 15 or even 20% of the Egyptian population. to While many government and international sources have claimed a percentage of around 6 to 10%, a number of unofficial sources estimate that Christians represent more than 10% of the total population, with some claiming that they compose up to 15 or even 20% of the Egyptian population. - I changed "some government sources" to "many government sources", as there are many. The references already present after this statement (8) is quite a lot, and many more could be added. In fact, I couldn't find any government sources that don't fall within this range. If you find any, maybe you could add them. - I removed the mention of the "Washington institute to the Near East Policy" as I fail to see why it is necessary to specifically mention in the text that a U.S. based think tank established by the "American Israel Public Affairs Committee" is amongst those who support the claim of Christians constituting 15-20%. I left them in as one of the references for this claim, but couldn't see what made this group significant enough to warrant a mention in the text. - The template requiring citations has been placed after these two sentences, as neither of them are referenced: Coptic Christians, being the largest religious minority in Egypt, are the most negatively affected. and Copts have faced increasing marginalization after the 1952 coup d'état led by Gamal Abdel Nasser

  • 2. Regarding the points you have made in this section concerning my editing of:

Until recently, Christians were required to obtain presidential approval for even minor repairs in churches. Although the law was eased in 2005 by handing down the authority of approval to the governors, Copts continue to face many obstacles in building new churches. These obstacles are not as much in building mosques. to Although until 2005 Christians were required to obtain presidential approval for even minor repairs in churches. However, Presidential Decree No. 291 eased regulations allowing churches to make minor repairs without waiting for government approval. For major renovations, the decree requires governors to process requests within 30 days, and to give reasons should they reject an application. However, Copts continue to face many obstacles in building new churches. - I didn't remove the information, I expanded on it by explaining the changes in the law. These changes have been referenced. I hope that explains my recent edits. Voiceofplanet (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)


Here's my reply to your answers:
  • 1.I suggest the following compromise: Governmental sources usually put forward a percentage of 6% to 10% for Copts in Egypt. However, independent non-governmental institutions such as the Washington Institute, in addition to Coptic sources, uphold that Christians represent more than 10% of the total population and claim that they actually still compose up to 15 or even 20% of the Egyptian population. I think this is fair compromise between the different versions. The mention of the Washington institute to the Near East Policy is necessary because it adds credibility to the independent sources discussed in the text. If you would like, please feel free to add more names for credible independent sources that tackled this issue.
  • 2. The sentence Coptic Christians, being the largest religious minority in Egypt, are the most negatively affected does not require a reference because it's self evident. It's an introductory sentence that is proven by the rest of the statements, all of which are well referenced.
  • 3. For the sentence Copts have faced increasing marginalization after the 1952 coup d'état led by Gamal Abdel Nasser, here's one reference that I will be adding to the text (I am positive there are many more, I just have no time to look right now, but I will later on): Harvard encyclopedia of American ethnic groups By Stephan Thernstrom. Page 242.
  • 4. For your last edit, the English structure of the sentence is incorrect. It is also incorrect that that decree allowed for minor renovations to be undertaken without government approval as you claim. If you're from Egypt you'd know that if you place one single stone in a church bathroom without governmental approval you simply get put in jail. The link you provided does not work anyway. --λⲁⲛτερⲛιξ[talk] 14:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Please

Would you both please provide one or two brief (one or two paragraph) quotes from reliable secondary sources regarding the status and state of Coptic Christians in Egyptian society? Please avoid primary, governmental, NGO, and think tank references. Try to find high quality sources that interpret and select those references for us. I will do a quick search and add quotes from the first few I find to help you along the way. --Vassyana (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Ismailis?

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The claim there are Ismailis still present in Egypt is not cited properly. There is no claim in the World Fact Book about an Ismaili presence in modern day Egypt. Can anyone provide evidence of the existence of a native Egyptian Ismaili community in Egypt today? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NorthernCat12 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Religion in Egypt. 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:

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) 18:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Religion in Egypt. 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:

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) 15:56, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge Proposal from Freedom of religion in Egypt

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I propose that Freedom of religion in Egypt be merged into Religion in Egypt. The content of Freedom of religion in Egypt is virtually all from a woefully outdated US government report, and Religion in Egypt covers the topic much more effectively.. Rosguill (talk) 05:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Many Egyptians as many Greeks, merge atheism and agnosticism

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

They merge atheism and agnosticism in some groups of friends, and if you are mono-ideologue only agnostic or only atheist, you cannot feel at home.

Agnostics are open towards the possibility of the importance of the personhood of a supposed universal creator.

Mixing ideology is great in politics and for large numbers.

Many Egyptians and Greeks who are mono-ideologue non-theists, feel alone because they have no specific home to belong.

Non-thinkers (metalogically shallow) want to be anti-something. Ok, anti-something is fun, but some people are mono-something and should be respected with separate organizations.

The theist and the deist misinterpretes the universe via the personhood of man via the notion of god.

The atheoagnostic doesn't focus specifically on atheism or on agnosticism, but mainly on antireligion and on human rights.

Human rights are great but some people are philosophically specific and aren't respected!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4117:A100:ED7B:DC44:2F3E:E80D (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Number of Christians in egypt

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A section for discussing the claims made in [edit] by Mark1218. it seems perfectly possible this is true, but can we provide sources here before making the edits, if as claimed there are sources for the numbers reported. Oathswarm (talk) 11:36, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Religion_in_Egypt/Archive_1&oldid=1171733314"