Talk:Ibn al-Athir

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ibn al-Athir article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 180 days

Islam: Muslim scholars

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Muslim scholars task force.

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Military history: Biography / Historiography / Early Muslim

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Military historiography task force
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Encyclopedia britanicca RS[edit]

~~Last time you deleted my EB citation i replied with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_281#Britannica.com stating that it is totally reliable source~~

User:HistoryOfIran replied: “the most recent being https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_115#Is_Encyclopedia_Britannica_a_reliable_source?), yet you conveniently took the one that supported your revert the most.”

~~This is definitely not the most recent one it’s from 2012, Even the summary of the discussion you sent doesn’t even say that EB is unreliable source~~

~~The discussion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_281#Britannica.com~~

~~Which is more recent (from 2019) says that it’s a totally reliable source~~

So what is your point from removing it’s citation ? It’s looks like that you remove it’s citation from everywhere on your own based on the claim you made up that EB not being RS Ikhnatoun (talk) 18:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled[reply]

I already said that I misread 2012 as 2022, as well that it doesn't change my point [1]. I'm not sure if we are reading the same thread, since I see comments like "Consider a specialist source" and "I can give you an example where a globally blocked sockpuppet here managed to get his fringe views into Britannica." in that one. Where do you get the impression that the participants reached to the conclusion that it is reliable? --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~“ Where do you get the impression that the participants reached to the conclusion that it is reliable?”~~

~~From the author who summarized the discussion he wrote:~~

I believe noone will object if I summarise the dispute as follows: whereas the EB articles authored by reputable scientists or scholars can be used as a source for Wikipedia in the absence of better sources, it would be desirable to replace them with references to reliable secondary sources when such possibility exists.--Paul Siebert

~~———————- So where did you get that EB is not RS ? He never said that~~

~~Nevertheless, the most recent one states that EB is totally relible: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_281#Britannica.com~~

~~So i wonder where does your point stand ? Ikhnatoun (talk) 19:23, 28 December 2022 (UTC)~~ <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled[reply]

I am talking about the 2019 thread, which you kept mentioning. But now we are talking about the 2012 one? Right, Sieberts comment was one of many, and it didn't get any support as far as I can see. The thread ended up becoming stale, and thus closed. Also, if you do support his stance, then why you do insist on adding Britannica here when he literally said "I, however, do not support the idea to use EB in parallel with reliable mainstream secondary sources. When such sources are available, EB can and should be removed." That is literally the case right now, as there is already another source that supports the Arab origin of al-Athir. Also, have you by any chance made another account before? --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:32, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it’s clear that the majority here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_281#Britannica.com agree on EB reliability, perhaps only two or three users just stated that EB sometimes contain some errors, that’s all,

~~—-have you by any chance made another account before?~~

~~Yes i had one few years ago but i forgot it’s username and password since they were long ago Lol Ikhnatoun (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)~~ <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled[reply]

Not at all. And didn't you support Sieberts comment a moment ago? And that so? How unfortunate. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And confirmed as a sock (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amr.elmowaled). So much for that account that was made few years ago. I'm gonna cross his comments and revert his nationalistic edits. Other users can decide if those edits or at least parts of them should stay or not. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]