Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/`

https://i.imgur.com/dVDi1NM.png

https://i.imgur.com/CHHi3K2.png

Gonna be cataloguing major fights as I find them.

Archive 31

2 The inappropriate depiction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/Archive_32#The_inappropriate_depiction

Not much drama here; included because pictured of Muhammad are a common topic you'll be seeing a lot of.

Please take in consideration the majority of Muslims more than 99% whom they refuse any depiction of their Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Also it is falsehood and not in confirm with the descriptions made by their companions, like Oum Maabad, and Ali, and others. Also the depiction of Angels are prohibited, and the painter give a proof of his falsehood because he surely never seen an angel. It is more likely the job of Christians which give the wing of chicken and birds to the angels, Muslims never say that the wings are made with feathers . Rgabido (talk) 04:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Subhanallah, Islam rejects the f*id.

Also the angel depicted like a woman, and every Muslim know that angels aren't girls, that is the saying of the payens of Arabs, who ascribed Angela as daughter s of Allah, سبحانه وتعالى. Allah set replied them all in the Quran 53. Surah An-Najm (The Star)

10 Allah or God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/Archive_32#Allah_or_God

The same users asks that Allah be used in place of God.

Allah is not really the name of God, as God in Islam is immune to any specific qualifiers. In fact, naming God (as is done in Judaism, where God has a name) in Islam is similar to idolatry unless the source and the name are separated; like with the Alawites in their divine triads [3] or Christianity. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

A theme you'll find throughout these archives: references to Islamic belief to justify edits.

Rgabaido comes out with a wall of text.

https://pastebin.com/izhsRSzh

33 Deliberate POV bias, why the criticism has been diluted and made so lame

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/Archive_32#Deliberate_POV_bias,_why_the_criticism_has_been_diluted_and_made_so_lame

A seething Hindu asks that Wikipedia denounce Islam.

This is so blatant to dilute the criticism that it serves no purpose and hardly provides any info. Not onlythis is biased, but also lacks Due Balance. Please add a proper summary of main Criticism of Muhammad including hypocrisy, debauchery, pedophilia, rape, violence, intolerance, etc. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

44 Slavery

@HafizHanif: clearly that does not mean that prophet Muhammad had 'slaves' (per slavery definition). He encouraged freeing slaves [5]. Prophet Muhammad Pbuh tried to demolish slavery gradually because at that time Arabs had lots of slaves in which it was difficult to stop slavery immediately. Regardless of this, adding this category without any prove at all that prophet Muhammad servents were slaves and that they weren't free is considered controversial what is more important, more disrespectful and unfriendly is your editwarring trying to add it before even ending the discussion so I kindly suggest you self-revert your edits. Thanks --SharabSalam (talk) 01:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

HafizHanafi is a user you'll be seeing more of. So is SharabSalam.

56 Short Description: Founder vs. Promulgator

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/Archive_32#Short_Description:_Founder_vs._Promulgator

Our first really lengthy thread.

Muslims do not believe that Muhammad founded Islam, because there were many prophets and messengers before him

This is a violation of neutrality!

Some nerd who play Star Control and doesn't like to talk about the isotopes of Krypton responds. Batreeq fires back.

Secular does not equal unbiased.

Some boring shit, more boring shit. Batreeq destroys the libs.

Facts[1] do not care about your feelings. Face-smile.svg

Our discussion begins to heat up, with this response by HafizHanafi.

Some who edit wikipedia do so to share facts, not embellish legends or make inconsiderate apologies for such barbarity argued as peace, justice, and so forth. If it is you who is the apologist, then you stand corrected by centuries of Islamic practice. Go in peace.

Note: "Hafiz" means someone who has memorised the Quran. This user, however, is on the anti-Muslim side.

This nerd wants Wikipedia editors to show their real names.

It would be very advantageous that real names to real people were needed as a qualification to use Wikipedia so accountability can be honored and measured

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HafizHanif

Batreeq fires back with an essay that uses religious quotations to demonstrate that Islam is a religion of peace.

@HafizHanif: Shame on you for decontextualizing the Quran and promoting your extremist beliefs. You know well what the verse means, even without scholarly explanations.

[Some boring shit.]

I suggest you remain on topic in regards to the article and avoid Islamophobia and trolling. – Batreeq (Talk) (Contribs) 01:26, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

HafizHanafi responds with this outraged rant, which I've put on Pastebin because its long.

https://pastebin.com/Vr7i9LDj

‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ comes out with a request for peace; both sides cuck the janny.

Your useless ramblings are useless ramblings, yes. Stick to the point; should this page say "founder"? Ideally, remove your comments above which do not pertain to that question. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps myopic minds fail to understand. It's understandable. -- HafizHanif (talk) 22:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)