This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofIslam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofOrganizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
I'd like to propose removing the External Links from the bottom of the template. First, all six link to the same site, which is overkill in my opinion. Second, the same links are already included inNation of Islam,Elijah Muhammad, and some of the other articles that link to the template. Finally, these links may not appropriate for every article that links to the template (Malcolm X, for example). I'd appreciate other people's views on the question. Thanks.Malik Shabazz05:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Don't rush into removing them. The links have obviously been placed there for a reason by more experienced editors. They are useful sources of information. Not spam.Retiono Virginian20:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not suggesting that they're spam, just that I think they're redundant and therefore unnecessary. For example, the template includes a link toMessage to the Blackman in America. Isn't that article the appropriate place for an external link to the text of the book? As I mentioned, every one of the links is included twice on some pages (such asElijah Muhammad andNation of Islam), once as part of the article and again as part of the template. (Visit either article and you'll see how strange it looks to see the same links listed twice within the space of a few inches.) Finally, if the links must stay, why not a single link to Elijah Muhammad's Books and Other Writings (i.e., the first link)? All the other links go to various pages within that site. (As a side-note, "Messenger" probably is inconsistent withWP:NPOV.)Malik Shabazz20:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the group and its leader Clarence 13X as he was not a leader of the NOI and the group has refused affiliation with the NOI. --SevenOfDiamonds20:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
rename it what? Malcolm X in a way was a leader, not in the sense that he was the head of the NOI, which he wasn't, but in the sense that he was a minister who attracted/convinced many to join the NOI, he gave many speeches, made it a more popular/notable organization, brought it into the mainstream, and to a large extent was a spokesperson for the NOI while he was a member. In that sense, he is a leader.YahelGuhan01:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. You're right, Malcolm X was the public face of the NoI during the late 50s and early 60s. It just struck me as odd because each of the other people in that section held the top leadership position of the organization but he didn't. —Malik Shabazz (talk·contribs)02:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It does seem a little odd. I suppose if there are any other major leaders, they should be added as well; I just can't think of any off the top of my head.YahelGuhan02:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Malcolm X has the tendency to become the center of attention (as Elijah Muhammad learned). Still, a large number of the people checking into Nation of Islam topics are probably looking for him, so he might as well stay there. Another might be Khalid Abdul Muhammad, but he was never a significant force in NOI.Njsamizdat (talk)15:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know much about Quanell X, but Malcolm X was national spokesman for the NoI for almost a decade. He was widely considered number 2 in the movement (whether that was true is debatable), and he may have been better-known to the public as the face of the NoI than Elijah Muhammad. —Malik Shabazz (talk·contribs)23:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
