Jump to content

Talk:Ali

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 85.154.167.40 (talk) at 14:20, 21 November 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeAli was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 3, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
January 16, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee
Additional archives

Completely and Absolutely Un-Neutral Point of View in this Article.

This is one of the most unneutral articles i have ever read in my life. Will be subject to deletion if not balanced immediately. --85.154.167.40 (talk) 14:20, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

my recent edits............

Please remove the photographic images they are highly offensive:} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Almortian (talk • contribs) 01:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i have replaced the picture info box, the one of Imam Ali mosque in najaf by the image of extant of Ali's empire.

The picture of Imam Ali mosque is now in the section Aftermaths


more over, in the info box, the heading off springs and wives seems odd to me, in the wife section there are only the names of Ali's two wives, although it is belived that Ali married 24 women till his death in 661. I am not sure it should be add there or not. moreover the royal house heading is for kings, not for Caliph. It should be removed.

Mohammad Adil (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The map is incorrect. Egypt was controlled by Imam Ali until 658.--Seyyed(t-c) 12:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Basically this template is for rulers and Caliph is just another title for ruler so there is no need to replace this template. Regarding names of wives and children you can come with whole list with reliable and verifiable references but in the template there is practice to include only prominent/importanty wife and children.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 12:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • The map clearly states that it was domain of Ali in 661.
  • Is there any reason of removing the map ???? and as for campaign box of Ali, the usual practice is to place it below info box, so i had placed it below the info box. I hope i am clear ! I am restoring it back if there are any issues, it can be discuss here, just reverting is not the way !

More over there is no need to mention commander of belivers with amir ul mominen title, it have its own article which give a satisfactory explaination. More over in the article of Abu Bakr, Uthman, Alexander the Great only main titles are mentioned not their meaning, it looks odd. so please dont restore it, if you want to maintain article's reputation. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 16:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deal separately with Shia and Sunni accounts?

The section Succession to Muhammad seems to be pretty pro-Shia as phrased. Should we maybe split it into two sections one from the Shia perspective and one from the Sunni perspective? Alternatively, simply go through and describe where they disagree. (The claim about Abu Bakr setting the house on fire for example is I think more or less exclusively Shia). JoshuaZ (talk) 03:59, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this idea, this article is too pro=shi'ate sect. there are things mentioned in this articles, which are to extent blasphemy for other muslim sects. it is better and safe approach to have seprate prospects from both leading sects on different pages to aviod any controversy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.251.134.144 (talk) 10:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Map Fault

The map given along with the article has a fault. It shows green areas that were under Ali till 661 at his death time. It is known that Hijaz Yemen and northern Iraq were at that time under Muavia control but in the map they are shown under Ali's control. Please rectify the mistake. --Citrus1000 (talk) 04:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This section is historic report. We have described religious views somewhere else. You can read former discussions about this issue such as 1 and 2.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was merge into Ali. — Favonian (talk) 20:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Asadullah concerns a specific title of Ali and the circumstances of its granting. It should be merged into the main article with a redirect. Favonian (talk) 13:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Asadullah is only two sentences and it describes a "personal title" that is only ever used in reference to Ali (no one else is called by this title) so it should reasonably be merged into Ali. Possibly the section "In Battles" would be a good spot for it? Doc Tropics 14:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am the city of knowledge and 'Ali(r.a) is its gate so whoever desires knowledge let him enter the gate. محمّد

Add quote please.'

Ditc (talk) 04:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)ditc[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ali&oldid=327113555"