Talk:History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (1928–1938)

Untitled

I have posted an entirely new text for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hassan al Banna articles, as well as several new articles:

• History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt
  • History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (1928-1938)
  • History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (1939-1954)
  • History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (1954-present)
• History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria

This amounts to over 12,000 words of text, and is the result of months of research, discussed in Talk:Muslim_Brotherhood, using reputable scholarly texts found at the library of the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London. Every paragraph in the main articles is marked with page-number references to the work it is based on.

I am not an expert on this subject, and nothing in these articles is original; I have simply summarised the material in the sources listed. Some of the sources are more favourable to the Muslim Brotherhood; others are more critical. By attempting to represent accurately the accounts given in these sources, I hope to have produced a set of articles that members of the Brotherhood, as well as well-informed critics of the organisation, could see as fair and balanced. However, these articles may well contain errors; if you believe that anything in the text is inaccurate, please correct it, referencing your sources, and leave a note here about the change.

If you are new to this subject, as I was when I began this process, please be aware that a great deal of misinformation can be found on the Internet, and in the press, about the Muslim Brotherhood. In order to keep these articles reliable and neutral, I suggest that, as far as possible, like my humble contributions, all contributions should be based on reputable academic texts by specialists in the field; journalistic sources should only be used for current events, and only if they appear in major national or international news outlets, preferably when the same information is reported by several sources. It is my hope that this policy will enable Wikipedia to be a more reliable source of information about the Muslim Brotherhood than much of what can be found on the Internet.

A few words about my own motivations for doing this: I am not a Muslim, but I respect Islam and I am opposed to imperialism. Although I am certainly not very knowledgeable about Islam, it seems to me that Western misunderstandings about Islam and the Muslim world are contributing to tragic conflicts, and that people need knowledge and understanding of one another in order to live in harmony. I hope that Wikipedia can be a small contribution to that goal, and that people who know more about this subject than I do will improve on this work.

--Beroul 21:06, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

I have removed the cleanup tag from this article, for two reasons. Firstly, I think the article is pretty good - unusually well referenced for a wikipedia article! Secondly, whoever added the cleanup tag did not provide a rationale, and no criticism of the article is present in the discussion. I am more than happy for someone to decide to reinstate the cleanup tag, but only with an explanation of why the tag is there, and what they think needs changing. Saluton (talk) 03:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

single source

Pretty well written, but it avoids all the controversial topics (the Battalions al-Banna organized, the shootings and bombings they are accused of, etc etc., and the affiliation with the Palestinian mufti and praise of his violent methods). Essentially, this is a single source paper, based almost entirely on the Norwegian scholar, Lia, who is an admitted apologist for al-Ikhwan. So it's not really an encyclopedia article on the Brotherhood so much as a lengthy summary of its principal source; more needs to be done to see the organization from other sides, to include a few critics. And based on this article, you would never guess that the Brotherhood would start assassinating people a few years later; and that turn can only be explicable in the context of a much earlier commitment to violence to support its views.Theonemacduff (talk) 04:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)