Talk:Khaybar

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Khaybar article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Khaybar is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Saudi Arabia Low‑importance

	Saudi Arabia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia 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.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chant

I've added the section on the chant from the article Khaybar Khaybar, which is up for AfD here [1], in response to multiple suggestions that the material be merged into the article on Khaybar. For those who regularly follow this article, if I've stepped on your toes, I apologize, and please feel free to either undo what I've done or modify it further. Akradecki 16:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Chant section should be removed (commonly used!! (by Hizbullah), it is not related to the topic) . So should the Jews of Khaybar in Arabic folklore. And definitely The journey of Benjamin of Tudela section. Which I think should be in an article by itself.Xevorim (talk) 22:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's how history is casting its shadow today; it's definitely relevant... AnonMoos (talk) 05:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are such views about jews in Syria. And there were bad views about jews in Nazi Germany. They aren't and shouldn't be posted right smack in the middle of the respective articles. There are similar views towards Arabs among Israelis, which also shouldn't be mentioned in the Israel article. Just because some extremes "think" of some race in a certain way...it isn't an enough reason to be mentioned. Xevorim (talk) 22:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, this information isn't mentioned in the Hebrew wikipedia nor the Arabic wikipedia articles on Khaybar. Xevorim (talk) 23:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, dude -- the purpose of this discussion is not (and should not) be a competition about where and when in the course of human history there has been the most bigotry or racism, but rather to discuss whether modern allusions to the battle of Khaybar are relevant to an article on the battle of Khaybar. Since the "battle of Badr" article contains modern allusions in section Battle_of_Badr#Military, and there's a whole article on Modern_usage_of_al-Qādisiyyah, I don't see why we can't mention modern usage of Khaybar here... AnonMoos (talk) 13:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I suggest moving the chant section to the Battle of Khaybar article. The Jews of Khaybar in Arabic folklore section should be removed. Xevorim (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done! The material now lives at Battle of Khaybar#Present use. Musashiaharon (talk) 00:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has been removed from the Battle of Khaybar article. I don't have a strong opinion whether it should be here or there but it seems notable so unless there are compelling reasons to put it there I suggest to restore it here. Alaexis_¿question? 20:30, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re-edit

I removed the Jews of Khaybar in Arab Folklore section. And redirected the Journey section to the Benjamin of Tudela article, which is a more appropriate place. Xevorim (talk) 16:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think it usefull to completly delete text and just leave a link to some info elsewere. This way any article could easily be reduced to a list of links. I put in some basic info to why Benjamin of Tudela could be of interest for Khaybar. As guideline I would suggest to keep enough information about things that have articles of their own, so that the article is still usefull when printed out on paper and further than just a click away from the internet. --T.woelk (talk) 17:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the changes to Tayma and Khaybar. It looks good.--Xevorim (talk) 20:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jizya

I'm not so sure that the jizya was instituted after 'Umar went to Khaybar because the jizya is mentioned in the Qur'an -- which precedes 'Umar as caliph.

Betrayal

The article as it is written now, states that: "The Jews were exiled from Khaybar in reign of caliph Umar (634-644) for betrayal during the battle of Khaybar". This is obvious not a proper expression, and I imagine it contradicts the spirit of neutrality that must be followed in Wikipedia. The Jews could of course not betray anyone who came to conquer and kill a large part of them (the Banu Nadir tribe). The Jews were against them who came and conquered them, and this should be stated in a neutral tone. --Fjellgauk 03:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)