Talk:Islam in Mozambique

Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Mozambique Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Mozambique (assessed as Low-importance).

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Islam in Mozambique. 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:

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) 07:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abel Xavier's scandal[edit]

What, exactly, is the reason for not listing the unique characteristic of Abel Xavier being the first Premier League player to be found guilty of using performance-enhancing drugs? Aside from that he's a completely unremarkable player. It's debatable whether he should even be listed here at all, frankly, since he converted late in his life. But if he is then we might as well list something unique about him. 96.59.49.49 (talk) 16:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of misinterpreted material[edit]

I noticed that recent edits to Islam in Mozambique (like the one here) includes text that is not mentioned in the sources. For example, while this source by Deutsche Welle does mention the presence of slave traders in East Africa, it makes no claim that they were one of the two factors involved with spreading Islam in Mozambique (it also doesn't even name the country). I previously reverted that text and source for similar reasons. The second source seems not to work and I therefore can't verify it. The last source which is a book,is about Kenya, not Mozambique. Even the, it makes no such mention. Also, this editor removed this existing source which is an academic article written by a Islamicist that specializes in East African Islam. This source is more appropriate (and superior to at least the first source) and actually backs what the text says. The claim that Arab slave traders were one of the main factors behind the introduction of Islam into the area is simply not supported by the sources. I will revert these recent changes for the reasons cited. SlackingViceroy (talk) 23:47, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of the academic source in favour of a poorer source suggests that the reason for this edit was polemical and geared towards pushing a POV. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:55, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]