Talk:Race and Slavery in the Middle East
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information". Random quotes and TOC listings are not appropriate in encyclopedia entries. Rhobite 03:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
- I did not find a mention of the TOC and what you deleted was not a random quote. Where may I ask shall we find a mention of the TOC in wikipedia policy? Going around blanking out stuff can be considered vandalism That fact that you may be an admin does not grant you the right to give misleading statements about Wiki policy and mis-implement others.--CltFn 04:23, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- I tend to agree with CltFn. This is a stub. Arguably, they wouldn't have a place in complete, well-written article, but in the mean time quoting the opening sentences of the book and listing the TOC seem to me reasonable ways to give some indication of what it is about. Crust 21:01, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Falsification of content
Anyone who reads this book will note that it focuses on the history of slavery within the context of Islam. An editor Yuber, who evidently has not read the book has gone so far to make the summary politically correct as to insert a completely false summary so as to imply that the book details the history of slavery of all the religions in the middle east. --Fredwlerr 06:53, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The content of the book
The book is about Islam's role in slavery in the middle East. In the beginning of the book it introduces the topic by saying that all religions have had slavery, but the whole topic of the book is about Islam's role in slavery in the middle east. If I read a book about Italian spaghetti that in the intro mentions that the Chinese also have had their version of pasta , that would not mean that the book is principally about Italian pasta and also about chinese pasta. The chinese pasta was just a mention , the book content was on the Italian pasta.--CltFn 01:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How odd
that a book entitled "race and slavery in the Middle East" is apparently concerned largely with religion and not at all with race. How very strange. Palmiro | Talk 02:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- True. It is the Middle East that is the focus, and Islam is the predominant religion in the Middle East, ergo, when religious connections are explored, Islam is the focus. --AladdinSE 06:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- How odd? If you had not insisted on deleting the TOC and quote then we would not have to be arguing about all this.
[edit] Quote
- In 1842 the British Consul General in Morocco, as part of his government's worldwide endeavor to bring about the abolition of slavery or at least the curtailment of the slave trade, made representations to the sultan of that country asking him what measures, if any, he had taken to accomplish this desirable objective. The sultan replied, in a letter expressing evident astonishment, that "the traffic in slaves is a matter on which all sects and nations have agreed from the time of the sons of Adam up to this day." The sultan continued that he was "not aware of its being prohibited by the laws of any sect, and no one need ask this question, the same being manifest to both high and low and requires no more demonstration than the light of day." The sultan was only slightly out of date concerning the enactment of laws to abolish or limit the slave trade, and he was sadly right in his general historic perspective.
[edit] Contents
- Chapter 1. Slavery
- Chapter 2. Race
- Chapter 3. Islam in Arabia
- Chapter 4. Prejudice and Piety. Literature and Law
- Chapter 5. Conquest and Enslavement
- Chapter 6. Ventures in Ethnology
- Chapter 7. TheDiscoveryofAfrica.su
- Chapter 8. In Black and White
- Chapter 10. The Nineteenth Century and After
- Chapter 11. Abolition
- Chapter 12. Equality and Marriage,
- Chapter 13. Image and Stereotype.
- Chapter 14. Myth and Reality
--CltFn 12:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
