Talk:International Society for Science and Religion

Mistake

I realize it's easy to make a mistake with exceptional facts, so this [1] redaction is no big deal, but it is an error. See page 7 of A Vanished World where it states that "the Muslim rule that once blanketed Spain was hemmed into a pocket of land surrounding Granada. ... punishing siege of Granada in 1491 .... Ferdianad and Isabella undertook another stunning initiative during 1492, forcing their Jewish subjects within a scant four months to embrace Christianity or depart Spain forever." --Firefly322 (talk) 16:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

None of which verifies the claim that "peaceful discourse between scholars of Judaism, Christianity and Islam" existed up "until the late 15th century". Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 16:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

That's the whole premise of the book. Did you even read it's google overview blurb? Your claim and actions here are unreasonable and lack WP:AGF towards other editors. In fact, I suspect that you're taking your own sense of truth and point of view in this matter. Do we need to take this up with another party? --Firefly322 (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

1. "That's the whole premise of the book" = WP:SYNTH: "Do not put together information ... that is not stated explicitly by any of the sources." (WP:PSTS also states "All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.")
2. "Did you even read it's google overview blurb?" = failure to WP:AGF. And, as a matter of fact, yes I bloody well did! NOTHING in the blurb "stated explicitly" that "peaceful discourse between scholars of Judaism, Christianity and Islam" existed up "until the late 15th century".
3. Your claims about WP:AGF are (i) hilariously WP:POT given #2 above, (ii) fails to distinguish between "good faith" & "competence" -- I can assume the former without assuming the latter (and assuming the latter would require amnesia as to your entire wikipedia editing career).
4. And I "suspect" that you still have no real understanding of wikipedia policy.

Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 03:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment First, for copyright reasons, we shouldn't be quoting verbatim from the website without marking our verbatim quote as such. There would be less of a problem if we were saying,

The Society states on its website that it "took shape after a four-day conference in Granada, Spain, which until the late 15th century was the center of peaceful discourse between scholars of Judaism, Christianity and Islam."

At that point, the historical accuracy of their statement about 15th-century Spain would be less of an issue as well. I actually think their statement is correct (and reputable sources like this one agree with them). Ideally though, we should try to find a secondary source pointing out the significance of Granadan history to this society, and cite that secondary source. And in any event, we cannot simply copy and paste the website wording unless we mark it as a quote. JN466 15:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with you as to "the historical accuracy of their statement". The 'golden age' (generally associated with the Umayyad Caliphate of Córdoba) ended long before the physical overthrow of Moorish Spain. See Islam and antisemitism#Spain & Almohad dynasty for some details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrafn (talk • contribs) 16:47, June 26, 2009

It does not really matter, does it? If it is included as a quote, it is accurate: this is what they say on their website. If we wanted to include it as an historical fact, we would need a secondary source making that connection, which at the moment we don't have anyway. (I also believe I read that Jewish-Muslim relations in Granada recovered somewhat during the reign of the Nasrid dynasty, which lasted for more than 250 years, and that Jews were known to move to muslim-ruled Granada to escape persecution by Christians during that time.) JN466 23:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I would question whether the quote (with its underlying oversimplification of the history of Al-Andalus) is sufficiently on-topic for inclusion. This article should be about secondary source's assessment of the ISSR, not the ISSR's assessment of Spanish history. Also, WP:SELFPUB would seem to apply, and it "involve[s] claims about events not directly related to the subject". Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 03:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Society for Science and Religion. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20080329223546/http://www.issr.org.uk/about/founding_members.asp to http://www.issr.org.uk/about/founding_members.asp

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 23:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on International Society for Science and Religion. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20080828211048/http://www.issr.org.uk/presidents.asp to http://www.issr.org.uk/presidents.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080206212339/http://www.issr.org.uk/id-statement.asp to http://www.issr.org.uk/id-statement.asp

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 07:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)