Talk:Muhammad ibn Saud
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Too pro-Saud?
This looks a bit pro-Saud to me. I paraphrased what was said in the article but deleted "earned respect" because it sounds too much like an overt compliment. "Built support" sounds more factual, so I left it in.
Also, I'm concerned as to whether using religion as a basis for legitimacy really did set the House of Saud apart (ie whether nobody else in the Penninsula was doing that), though I left it in, as I have no specific evidence to contradict it. I did, however, elminate "other tribes fought only for power and presitge" as it seemed a gratuitous shot at them. If use of religion really did set the House of Saud apart, that's the important thing, and all you really need to say.
I still have my concerns from an NPOV point of view.
--stancollins 27 April 2005
[edit] Wahhab?
"Using the ideology of Wahhab..."
His name wasn't "Wahhab". Nor was it 'abdul-Wahhab (that's his fathers name). His name was Muhammad. You can write "BIN ABDUL-Wahhab" (son of abdul-Wahhab), but you can't write "Wahhab" because that's not what his name was at all. Nor was it his fathers name. Wahhab is one of the names of God, in islam, and this mans name was "ABDUL-Wahhab" The slave/servant of Wahhab. The same with ABDUL-LAH, the slave/servant of Allah.
Who took the freedom to rename this fella?

