Talk:Hadith of the twelve successors

Power link

In the section titled Bible there is this sentence: "In Shia view, God promised twelve rulers (Arabic: Imam), and when God says "rulers" or "kings" or the like, he always means prophets, imams, ie people with divine authority, since God is not interested in secular power."

The word "power" was a link to the article "Power", which is a disambiguation page that directs people to many power related articles. I believe the article Power (sociology) is the most relevant article for the way "power" is used in the sentence above, so I changed it. Gerry Ashton 17:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Good work! --Striver 18:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Revert

I am reverting this since i see no source or motivation for the change.--Striver 13:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

No Hadith?

What's the point in a "Hadith" page where you can't even find any versions of the hadith..? (as per Editor2020's edits). Toushiro (talk) 04:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The article is not "Listing of the various versions of the Hadith of the Twelve Successors". Like all Wikipedia articles, it's supposed to be about the concept of the hadith, and an explanation of the varying interpretations of the hadith. If one wants to read the different versions, one can go to Wikisource or Wiki Commons.

How about this compromise? One quote, from a hadith collection considered legitimate by both Sunni and Shiites.--Editor2020 (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I have added a hadiths with reference, please consider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.103.195.117 (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://books.google.com/books/about/Crisis_and_Consolidation_in_the_Formativ.html?id=4ILYAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MER-C 06:07, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Recent changes

@HyperGaruda I was editing the article while you were doing the same, I have mistakenly edited through the conflict, can you take a look at the recent change and give your opinion? Feel free to revert me if you need to. Regards FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

@FreeatlastChitchat: Looks fine to me. I had only deleted the long list of caliphs, which you would have likely deleted too. - HyperGaruda (talk) 07:30, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

@HyperGaruda I wanted to migrate the references at the end of the narration(First heading) to the bottom of the page in footnote form, but I seem unable to do so, and they look very ugly sitting there. Can you help with the cosmetic issue? Ty FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:46, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

@FreeatlastChitchat: I've tried grouping them per specific hadith and the list is somewhat shorter now, but it's still an ugly 35 notes in a row. Can't think of something else at the moment though... - HyperGaruda (talk) 08:37, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

POV list

@FreeatlastChitchat: Why successors list is POV list? Please explain more about your mass deletion.Saff V. (talk) 07:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

@Saff V. because no source is given and the list is of shia successors so it is shia POV added by an IP troll. Also it falls under WP:OR as it is not supported by WP:RS FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:26, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

pushing agenda against valid NPOV edit by false libels

@FreeatlastChitchat:, @Jim1138: You two seem to have an agenda to keep out a valid sourced POV from the article! Worse you come forward accusing me of edit warring because I only defended my edits by explaining away ChitChat's unexplained or bogus removals. But instead of agenda and accusation care to explain why you don't want that POV included as per WP:NPOV. Other users involved in the page may also have their say. 5.232.159.210 (talk) 08:53, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

The Hadith's text

Where's the Hadith itself?

Also, the article needs to include the views on its validity. ¬Hexafluoride ^(talk) 14:43, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hadith of the Twelve Successors. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20130511192252/http://www.schiiten.com/backup/AhlelBayt.com/www.ahlelbayt.com/articles/rebuttals/12-caliphs.html to http://www.schiiten.com/backup/AhlelBayt.com/www.ahlelbayt.com/articles/rebuttals/12-caliphs.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:37, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Potentially WP:OFFTOPIC addition.

Regarding recent additions[1], the main focus of the article is the hadith of the twelve successors and its significance in Shia belief. The addition shifts the focus to a broader historical debate about the origins of different Shia sects, which, while interesting, is not directly related to the interpretation of the hadith itself.(WP:OOS)

The section cohesively discusses early Shia versions of the hadith, leading to its significance in their belief. The new addition disrupts this flow and introduces a potentially unrelated argument, which may also raise concerns of neutrality and inevitably lead to other editors adding counterpoints with sources and so on. StarkReport (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@StarkReport Not only WP:OFFTOPIC, but the paragraph in question also misrepresents the source (first page of Hodgson's article). The source says that we obviously can't talk about Twelver Shi'ism before the Twelve Imams had come to be. For example, Zaydis did not separate from Twelvers because the line of Twelve Imams was not yet complete at the time. The source doesn't talk about the list of imams, nor does the hadith in question (at least the versions studied in this Wikipedia article). For Belomaad's information, Imamis were the predecessors of Twelvers, recognized as such some time after the Occultation. I'll remove that paragraph for the above reasons and the lack of consensus. Albertatiran (talk) 11:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I would concur with the removal. StarkReport (talk) 12:59, 8 August 2024 (UTC)