This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of
History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. Listed for almost a month and no explicit objections to moving the article. Some rewriting may be necessary due to the points Eperoton brought up, but I'll leave that to the participants here.
Jenks24 (
talk)
05:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)reply
@
Anthony Appleyard: IMO a plural is a plural, whether it's regular or irregular. Mawla does not seem to be so much more unknown to English-speakers than mawali, considering the
amount of what-links-here. Of course there would still be a redirect from mawali to mawla. Admittedly, although I know the basics of Arabic, I'm not that proficient. Perhaps other users of Arabic can chime in (
MezzoMezzo)? -
HyperGaruda (
talk)
07:43, 13 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
HyperGaruda and
Anthony Appleyard: I speak Arabic, but given the point Anthony brought up, I don't consider myself more qualified to speak than the two of you. Mawla is singular; mawali is plural. But does Arabic broken plural have a separate rule, or is a plural a plural? I'm inclined toward the latter simply because exceptions to the rules make me uneasy, so take my cautious opinion for what it is. Although...is it possible to run a search to see which term appears more often in English-language academic publications? And if it is possible, would that be relevant?
MezzoMezzo (
talk)
03:56, 14 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I think it depends on the scope of the article. The word mawla has different meanings (Encyclopedia of Islam 2nd ed has a long article about them) and the predominant association for the singular seems to be the Quranic usage in the sense of "lord" (best known outside of Arabic in the form mawlana, "our lord"). The technical usage of tribal client relationship in Arabia and its later adaptation in the Islamic era is usually used in the plural in English texts. For example, in Hourani's "History of the Arab peoples" and Berkey's "Formation of Islam" one finds mawali but not mawla. So, if we want to have an article about the uses of the word mawla and its plural, we should rename the article. If we want to keep it about the client relationship, it should probably stay where it is.
Eperoton (
talk)
04:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Comment It should be stated that the term "Mawali" is also the common name of a large Bedouib tribe of mixed ethnic ancestry that dominated parts of central Syria during the Ottoman era and who were still active during French rule. I'll start an article on the tribe soon. I support moving this article to "Mawla" per HyperGaruda's reasoning above. --
Al Ameer (
talk)
22:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Mawali tribe article
@
Al Ameer son: Skimming search results in Google books shows that the term mawali is much more commonly used in the sense covered by this article, so I think an article about the Mawali tribe should be called "Mawali (tribe)", and "mawali" should continue to redirect here with a "for" message at the top.
Eperoton (
talk)
16:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)reply
The sentence "Ultimately, Umayyad attitudes, being antithetical to Quranic principles, held no religious value, and became a major source of the collapse of Umayyad rule." was
added in August 2014 and stayed since then. I removed it because it is purely POV, unsourced and biased. --
Minorities observer (
talk)
11:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Metweli??
Does this phrase have any relation with "Metweli", the term for Lebanese Shias? If so, that would give an interesting perspective into the history of Lebanese Shias... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
47.145.100.34 (
talk)
19:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)reply