Talk:Malik al-Ashtar

strong need for a "Caliph" template

The only available one is "monarch" while this can (kind of) apply to Emirs and Sultans it absolutely cannot apply to the office of Caliph or Caliphate. These are two extremely different terms and it's important to recognize this as such. A monarch is one that is bound by a constitution or is absolute, a Caliph must be binding to the Quran, the Sunnah and the Shura of his people. This is one of the responsibilities outlined to Malik Al-Ashtar by Ali (RA) himself. I would be more than happy to provide more sources for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1970:5163:1200:0:0:0:9486 (talk) 03:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Part about uthman

the part about uthman uses shiite ahadith as references and these hadith are extremley biased and especially so against uthman. shiite ahadith is not accepted by sunnis who make up 85%-90% of claiments to islam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.15.199.110 (talk) 03:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

[Untitled]

I strongly question the idea that Malik died in the Battle of Siffin. Usually he and Ali Talib are thought to be victorious and went onto fight the battle of Layla-tul-Harir. freestylefrappe July 1, 2005 21:43 (UTC)

Dear brother, do you even know what that was or when it happend?

In that case, could you enlighten me?

--Striver 1 July 2005 22:48 (UTC)

Haha...it is an obscure event...perhaps strongly question was an bit extreme...but view the second link. freestylefrappe July 2, 2005 02:20 (UTC)

Let me make a guess.. You never heard of it befour reading it in that link? --Striver 2 July 2005 19:39 (UTC)

No I heard of it...just not an expert concerning it..though..no one seems to be...it would be good to find more external links to draw info from. freestylefrappe July 2, 2005 21:42 (UTC)

So, would you like to retract "Usually he and Ali Talib are thought to be victorious and went onto fight the battle of Layla-tul-Harir"? If you read that article more carefully, youll se that it says nothing of the kind --Striver 2 July 2005 22:17 (UTC)

Changing the Title and the Arabic

I'm new to wiki editing so I don't know how to do this. There is a correction that must be made to the title, "Malik ibn Ashter". It must be corrected to "Malik al-Ashtar since "al-Ashtar" was an appellation and not his father's name. I have mentioned this in the article, but I don't know how to make the change to the title, nor do I know how to do this for the Arabic language part where his name his written again as "Malik ibn Ashtar" which is incorrect. Any changes and/or assistance would be much appreciated. --Furtfurt 20:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Blatant POV

Blatant POV in the Malik al-Ashtar article under the heading "Views on al-Ashtar." No references provided to support the claim, thus removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.172.179 (talk) 23:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Serving in Ali's Caliphate

This section needs to be cleaned up if anyone has the time. If not, I'll get to it at some later point in time. Furtfurt 20:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I cleaned it up for you by shifting it into several sub sections. Hope you like it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabranos (talk • contribs) 06:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Malik al-Ashtar. 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/20121203070212/http://www.sayedammar.com/ARBAEEN%202011/arbaeen2011poppa.html to http://www.sayedammar.com/ARBAEEN%202011/arbaeen2011poppa.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121203070212/http://www.sayedammar.com/ARBAEEN%202011/arbaeen2011poppa.html to http://www.sayedammar.com/ARBAEEN%202011/arbaeen2011poppa.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205023047/http://www.eskiyurt.org.ua/az_melik.html to http://eskiyurt.org.ua/az_melik.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:46, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 21 December 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: restore the stable title Malik al-Ashtar per the discussion below and the block of the originator of this request as a sockpuppet. Dekimasuよ! 05:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

---

Malik bin al-Harith → Malik ibn al-HarithMalik ibn al-Harith – Early Islamic figures are all written with "ibn" instead of "bin" such as Ammar ibn Yasir, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Amr ibn al-As, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr etc. Literally all are spelled this way, "bin" is more used on modern articles such as Mohammed bin Salman, Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan etc. Shi'anAliIbnAbiTalib (talk) 10:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). – robertsky (talk) 01:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

• Move back to original title Malik al-Ashtar – This page was moved on 15 December away from Malik al-Ashtar by Template:Noping, who is a block-evading sock (SheryOfficial). More to the point, Malik al-Ashtar appears to be the common name (compare 463 vs 33 or 24 results in Google Scholar). Apart from that, per WP:MOSAR Template:Tq (we are dealing with a basic transcription here, as for most or all historical figures), so the OP is right to request "ibn". If not the apparently most common name Malik al-Ashtar, the title of this page should at the very least be Malik ibn al-Harith or Malik ibn al-Harith al-Ashtar (cf., e.g., [1]). ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 17:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

NPOV

Article is written mostly from the Shia view AlexBobCharles (talk) 17:20, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Pages on contentious figures from early Islamic history will often split the Sunni and Shia views into subsections under a section heading like “religious assessment” or “legacy”. In some cases it gets to the point where there are separate articles on “Sunni view of ____” and “Shia view of ____”. This particular individual I think warrants the first option of subsections, with corresponding edits made throughout, but not two full separate articles. Malik, although reviled by some as an assassin and beloved by others as a defender of the Ahl-al-Bayt, is a fairly marginal figure in early Islamic history and he is not an enormously important figure in the views of either of the two denominations in question. Sharamzada (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2025 (UTC)