User contributions for Mohammed Al-Keesh

9 July 2025

• 00:3000:30, 9 July 2025 diff hist +183 Draft:Ahmed Jehani Submitting using AfC-submit-wizard
• 00:3000:30, 9 July 2025 diff hist +46 N Draft talk:Ahmed Jehani Adding WikiProject tags using AfC-submit-wizard
• 00:1900:19, 9 July 2025 diff hist +374 Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion →Draft:Ahmed Jehani: new section

20 October 2024

• 04:2304:23, 20 October 2024 diff hist +686 Talk:Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom →Please leave the Medina entry: Reply Tag: Reply
• 04:1304:13, 20 October 2024 diff hist +654 Talk:Druze →Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 October 2024: new section
• 02:1502:15, 20 October 2024 diff hist +211 Talk:Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom →Please leave the Medina entry: Reply Tag: Reply
• 02:1402:14, 20 October 2024 diff hist +784 Talk:Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom →Please leave the Medina entry: Reply Tag: Reply
• 00:1500:15, 20 October 2024 diff hist +2,625 Talk:Banu Qurayza →This article is heinously anti-muslim: Reply Tag: Reply

19 October 2024

• 22:5222:52, 19 October 2024 diff hist +513 Talk:Banu Qurayza →This article is heinously anti-muslim: Reply Tag: Reply
• 22:4722:47, 19 October 2024 diff hist +422 Talk:Siege of Banu Qurayza →Can you revert to my edit?: new section Tag: New topic
• 22:3922:39, 19 October 2024 diff hist +419 User talk:Mohammed Al-Keesh →October 2024: Reply Tag: Reply
• 20:1720:17, 19 October 2024 diff hist +297 User talk:Mohammed Al-Keesh →October 2024: Reply Tag: Reply
• 20:1520:15, 19 October 2024 diff hist +416 User talk:Mohammed Al-Keesh →October 2024: Reply Tag: Reply
• 20:0020:00, 19 October 2024 diff hist +166 Talk:Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom →Please leave the Medina entry: new section Tag: New topic
• 20:0020:00, 19 October 2024 diff hist +306 m Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom Undid revision 1252073533 by R Prazeres (talk) Tags: Undo Reverted
• 18:5818:58, 19 October 2024 diff hist +297 Talk:Banu Qurayza →This article is heinously anti-muslim: Reply Tag: Reply
• 18:5318:53, 19 October 2024 diff hist +853 Talk:Banu Qurayza →This article is heinously anti-muslim: new section Tag: New topic
• 18:4218:42, 19 October 2024 diff hist +294 User talk:Mohammed Al-Keesh →October 2024: Reply Tag: Reply
• 15:1615:16, 19 October 2024 diff hist −1 m Banu Qurayza changed line Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 15:1615:16, 19 October 2024 diff hist +465 Banu Qurayza Everything I write is guaranteed to be deleted like before. All because I showed historians who offered a different perspective and applied reasoning based on the Qur'an, the highest authority on everything Islamic. Equating sunni hadiths with Qur'an just exposes your insincerity, and not making this clear for the uninitiated will of course mislead people. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 15:0815:08, 19 October 2024 diff hist −393 Banu Qurayza This is exactly the anti-muslim and islam-hating text I expected from a page that pretends diverse perspectives don't exist. "Muslims are intrinsically violent". This is what you guys want? Who wrote this? Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 15:0615:06, 19 October 2024 diff hist +620 Banu Qurayza You guys removed everything I wrote. All because I offered the secular perspective? I listed hadiths, shia sources, engaged in critical historical analysis. Whereas you guys just want orientalists....ok. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 14:5514:55, 19 October 2024 diff hist +306 Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom Undid revision 1246918995 by R Prazeres (talk) Tags: Undo Reverted

16 October 2024

• 09:5809:58, 16 October 2024 diff hist −186 m Battle of Uhud Simply inaccurate Tag: Visual edit

25 September 2024

• 03:1903:19, 25 September 2024 diff hist +36 m Siege of Banu Qurayza Small addition, please help with the table bug Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 03:1703:17, 25 September 2024 diff hist −150 Siege of Banu Qurayza I did some cleanup by giving the modern secular perspective and the traditional Muslim perspective. The modern perspective was sorely missing, I didn't even mention people like Fred Doner who doubts if this event took place. Old age Orientalists who just translate work rather than critically engage is out-dated, such as William Muir (especially with their mountainous bias). Moreover, the Qur'an was barely mentioned in the previous version, while it is the crux of Muslim faith. Odd. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 03:0703:07, 25 September 2024 diff hist +1,306 Siege of Banu Qurayza There is emerging scholarship which ought to be mentioned, challenging the Abbasid era sources Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 02:4402:44, 25 September 2024 diff hist +8 m Siege of Banu Qurayza finished a sentence Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 02:1702:17, 25 September 2024 diff hist +1 m Siege of Banu Qurayza Fixed table problem Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 02:1702:17, 25 September 2024 diff hist +248 Siege of Banu Qurayza Added more context and perspective from the Muslim side. There's various different descriptions of the event, so I attempted to capture some of that and explain the source for the history (primarily hadiths and Ibn Ishaq who al tabari relays) - which is especially critical for theology as it's a sensitive issue. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 02:0102:01, 25 September 2024 diff hist +838 Siege of Banu Qurayza Added more to the Muslim perspective, although there's much analysis on the verses that could be done. As hadiths purely focus on the outcome Tags: Reverted Visual edit

24 September 2024

• 21:4721:47, 24 September 2024 diff hist +952 User talk:Mohammed Al-Keesh →September 2024: Reply Tag: Reply
• 21:3621:36, 24 September 2024 diff hist +302 m Military career of Muhammad Adjusted perspective by showing more of the Muslim view Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 21:3321:33, 24 September 2024 diff hist −841 m Banu Qurayza Speculation with no evidence. Why does the opinion of an orientalist have so much weight? Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 21:1821:18, 24 September 2024 diff hist −431 m Banu Qurayza Speculation with no evidence Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 21:0821:08, 24 September 2024 diff hist −1,711 Banu Qurayza One paragraph was deleted that had no relevance. Then the opinion that Deuteronomy is purely contextual is just one opinion, many other's contradict that. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 20:5320:53, 24 September 2024 diff hist −1,338 m Banu Qurayza This is an important point which exists in Islamic history, the idea that no contemporary sources exist is a fallacy; as no contemporary sources exist on this event regardless. Lastly the idea that Deuteronomy is purely contextual is just the writer's opinion, not a fact by any stretch. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 20:3720:37, 24 September 2024 diff hist −488 m Banu Qurayza Huge leaps taken, with no semblance of neutrality. Verses from the Qur'an are taken, without evidence, to be a response to Banu Qurayza? No historian has ever made this claim. Additioanlly Quraysh and Qurayza are conflated, a serious error. Then there's the fabrication of "attacking faith". Lastly is not presenting the casus belli for the Muslims, just about 5 words on that. That's a perspective sorely missing. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 20:2720:27, 24 September 2024 diff hist −36 m Battle of Khaybar Any reading from any Sirah would indicate there were pragmatic reasons that led to the capture, not divine revelation. The primary reason is working with the Meccans, it's really strange to ignore that. Tag: Visual edit
• 20:1320:13, 24 September 2024 diff hist −155 m Battle of Khaybar No citation given for the portrait. Tag: Visual edit

5 September 2024

• 03:3303:33, 5 September 2024 diff hist −454 m Cousin marriage in the Middle East The citation says Arabs, while the removed text said Middle east. Then the image suggests Muslim and Muslim adjacent world, which just adds to the confusion. Another reason I removed it was because I felt as though putting a statistic to such an underresearched subject belies the uncertainty and large spread in estimates. Tag: Visual edit

1 September 2024

• 00:4400:44, 1 September 2024 diff hist −890 m Agbu Kefas All three citations did not make any reference to the statement made; fake citations Tag: Visual edit

31 August 2024

• 21:0621:06, 31 August 2024 diff hist −2,011 Islamic views on slavery Please communicate with me if these changes are undesirable, last time someone just reverted my changed without saying anything. My rationale is simple, the previous version was: bloated, startingly dissimilar to the Christian and Jewish pages on slavery (this had so much more scrutiny and biased), made no distinction between Qur'an and hadith (huge oversight) and encroached on the "History of slavery in the Muslim world" page. Tag: Visual edit

30 August 2024

• 04:0704:07, 30 August 2024 diff hist +342 Talk:Islamic views on slavery →Quranic rules as "emancipatory" is an opinion...not fact: Reply Tag: Reply
• 03:5903:59, 30 August 2024 diff hist −2,019 Islamic views on slavery I made changes to the intro of the page. I felt as though it was startingly bloated and antithetical to the style of "Christian views on slavery". I also wanted to make a clear distinction between Quran and hadiths, as this there is sectarian disagreement on hadiths (the article otherwise should've been called sunni views on slavery). If this introduction is mostly acceptable I will rewrite further. Feedback is appreciated. I believe the spectrum of opinions should be represented. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 03:1203:12, 30 August 2024 diff hist +396 Talk:Islamic views on concubinage →Merge to Slavery page?: new section Tag: New topic

29 August 2024

• 06:4706:47, 29 August 2024 diff hist +364 Slavery and religion if hadiths are going to be used as "islam" then the opposing hadiths should also be mentioned. But I believe a distinction should be made in the first place, as a muslim is not bound to hadiths in the way they are to Qur'an - very important for non-muslims to understand that distinction. Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• 06:4306:43, 29 August 2024 diff hist +35 m Islamic views on slavery it really should be mentioned that the numbers are wildly all over the place and that to a skeptic they're bs. After all if there were this many we would see people like the zanj in Iraq be preponderant, but they're only located there. And of course the afro-arab, but that's a small amount. Tag: Visual edit

28 August 2024

• 16:5616:56, 28 August 2024 diff hist +270 Talk:Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114 →I believe America abstained in the UN resolution: new section Tag: New topic

22 August 2024

• 13:1313:13, 22 August 2024 diff hist +11 Jihad It previously said hadith only mentions jihad in military sense, this is patently false. The phrase greater jihad has its origin in hadith and numerous hadiths are on the non-martial side of jihad Tags: Reverted Visual edit