User:Gun Powder Ma/Misuse of sources

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note[edit]

The following list focuses on the misuse of sources particularly in the history of technology and the attribution of inventions.

The collected examples of misuse range from 2007 through to 2010. That the problem is an ongoing one is shown by the large proportion of the sample (six out of fifteen) which dates from after 1 March 2010.

Note that almost every single one of these problematic claims has been added to multiple articles here on Wikipedia — demonstrably, some of them on up to thirteen separate articles (see claim for "#Earliest psychatric hospitals"); the additional diffs I provide are not meant to be complete in any way, but rather to give the reader a feel for the dimension of the misuse.

Edit pattern[edit]

Edit count[edit]

Jagged 85 – Edit Counter (as of 16 April 2010)

With 63,164 edits in the article space (95.76%), the user is one of the top contributors in Wikipedia in terms of quantity, ranking #209 on the List of Wikipedians by number of edits. The very small percentage of 1.46% for talk page edits is evidence for his pronounced disinclination to engage in on-topic discussions with other editors.

Deleted articles[edit]

He had two of his articles deleted for violating WP:SYN, WP:NPOV and WP:OR in support of what the community found to be an Islamic agenda:

Top contributor on tagged articles[edit]

The user is the top contributor by a huge margin on six articles which have been tagged for up to two years for disputed neutrality, disputed factual accuracy, original research, unpublished synthesis of published material, inappropriate or misinterpreted citations which do not verify the text, and improper references to self-published sources. By date of tagging:

Major misuses[edit]

Astronomy in medieval Islam[edit]

Invention of navigational astrolabe

— 18:59, 19 September 2007

This edit added the claim that the "first navigational astrolabe was invented in the Islamic world".

The source cited for this was: Robert Hannah (1997). "The Mapping of the Heavens by Peter Whitfield", Imago Mundi 49, p. 161-162

But Hannah is totally silent on any act of invention:

To Islamic astronomers, he [Whitfield] points out, we owe the retention of the Ptolemaic corpus which, from the twelfth century, found its way into the West through Latin translations or epitomes written in Spain. But whether Eastern or Western, astronomy continued to be pursued primarily for utilitarian purposes-calendrical, navigational and astrological. Whitfield includes here as a map the stylized and ornate Islamic navigational astrolabe (whose polar projection system he explains further in a brief Appendix). The more regular star charts of the medieval world are well chosen. (pp. 161-162)

Note: The claim has also been included by the user in

Crank (mechanism)[edit]

Origin of the crank

— 21:07, 3 October 2009, 02:54, 4 October 2009, 9 October 2009

This series of edits repeatedly added the claim that the origin of the crank dates back to an ancient Egyptian type of drill.

The source cited for this was: Richard S. Hartenberg, John Schmidt, Jr. (April 1969), "The Egyptian Drill and the Origin of the Crank", Technology and Culture, 10 (2): 155–65{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

But the cited authors arrive at the very opposite conclusion:

On the basis of our analysis and actual operating experience with a simulated artifact, we conclude that the Egyptian drill was not a crankdriven device at all but one of considerably more complexity, with a modern counterpart in an ill-equipped glass shop. This Egyptian drill, then, does not provide the first crank in machine or tool as has been surmised from time to time. (p. 165)

Note: I had to revert three times (01:49, 4 October 2009, 00:52, 5 October 2009, 15:50, 10 October 2009) and the user ignored a comment of mine on talk page in the process (01:49, 4 October 2009).

Inventions in the Islamic world[edit]

Dardanelles Gun as invention[edit]

— 02:00, 22 March 2010

This edit added the claim that the Turkish super-sized Dardanelles Gun represents a 'Muslim invention'.

The source cited for this was: Schmidtchen, Volker (1977b), "Riesengeschütze des 15. Jahrhunderts. Technische Höchstleistungen ihrer Zeit", Technikgeschichte 44 (3): 213–237 (226–228)

But Schmidtchen never made the claim that such superguns were a Turkish invention, but rather assumes that the technology was adopted by the Ottoman army by a "sort of technological transfer from Europe", that is medieval Western Europe:

Das Dardanellengeschütz: Auch außerhalb Westeuropas, wenngleich vermutlich über eine Art von technologischem Transfer aus dem europäischen Raum bedingt, sind im 15. Jahrhundert Riesengeschütze gegossen worden. The Dardanelles Gun: Outside of Western Europe, too, although presumably by some sort of technological transfer from Europe, superguns had been cast in the 15th century. (p. 226)

To make the claim, the editor used an old edit of mine (18:31, 15 June 2009), removed the essential qualification (01:46, 22 March 2010) that "such super-sized bombards had been employed in Western Europe" and then went on to add the gun as a genuine Islamic invention in Inventions in the Islamic world (02:00, 22 March 2010, link above).

Invention of copper pipes[edit]

— 21:53, 31 March 2010

This edit added the claim that copper pipes were first used in the 12th century in some Muslim water clock.

The source cited for this was: Donald Routledge Hill (1991), "Arabic Mechanical Engineering: Survey of the Historical Sources", Arabic Sciences and Philosophy: A Historical Journal, 1, Cambridge University Press: 167-186 [174], doi:10.1017/S0957423900001478

But Hill makes no such claim of invention, and in fact mentions the copper pipes only in passing. The full passage runs (reference to copper pipes in bold):

(ix) Ridwan b. al-Sa'ati (Damascus), On the Construction of Clocks and their Use (completed 600/1203) Neither of these works is an exhaustive treatment of the treatise, which is a lengthy and repetitive work describing the repairs that Ridwan made to the clock at the Jayrun gate in Damascus, built by his father about the middle of the 6th/12th century. The English work is a commentary on the construction and operation of the clock, with adequate explanatory drawings. The German work is partly a translation, partly a paraphrase; the explanatory drawings are unsatisfactory. The Damascus clock is inferior in its construction to al-Jazari's first clock, which it closely resembles (see next entry). Moreover, because Ridwan was a physician, not an engineer, his descriptions are often confused and his specifications imprecise. Nevertheless, the work has certain features that enhance its value. In the first place, because of Ridwan's lack of technical training, he sometimes gives us details of manufacture that an engineer would regard as too mundane for comment. This applies, for example, to his meticulous instructions for the manufacture of copper pipes. Also, he gives us valuable information about the exchange of horological ideas between the Hellenistic world and Sasanid Iran.1 The clock built by Ridwan's father was commented upon by several travellers who inspected it, thus adding to our meagre store of evidence for the undoubted existence in Islam of large public water-clocks. (p. 174f.)

Invention of ventilator[edit]

— 05:13, 25 July 2007

This edit added the claim that ventilators were invented in Egypt.

The source cited for this was: David A. King (1984). "Architecture and Astronomy: The Ventilators of Medieval Cairo and Their Secrets", Journal of the American Oriental Society 104 (1), p. 97-133

But King does in fact state very much the opposite:

The early history of the ventilators of medieval Cairo is still a matter of some speculation. It is well known that ventilators were featured in domestic architecture in ancient Egypt. However, the notion that the ventilators of medieval Cairo represent a purely Egyptian development of the ancient Egyptian ventilators is probably to be abandoned because of philological considerations. (p. 100)

Note: The claim has also been included by the user in

Plated mail[edit]

Invention of plated mail

— 20:01, 29 June 2008

This edit added the claim that Geber invented plated mail for use in armour, helmets and shields.

The source cited for this was: Ahmad Y Hassan, The Colouring of Gemstones, The Purifying and Making of Pearls, And Other Useful Recipes

But Hassan mentions no act of invention whatsoever, but merely quotes Geber with:

If you make from it mail-and-plate armours (jawasin), helmets (bid) and shields (daraq), they cannot be cut by iron.

Note: The claim has also been included by the user in

Matchlock[edit]

Invention of matchlock

—18:29, 13 October 2009

This edit added the claim that the "Janissary corps of the Ottoman army were using matchlock muskets as early as the 1440s".

The source cited for this was: Nicolle, David (1995). The Janissaries. Osprey. p. 22. ISBN 1-85532-413-X.

By adding the claim in Inventions in the Islamic world, the editor credits the creation of the weapon mechanism to Islamic inventors. But in the cited passage, Nicolle is unambiguous about the matchlock having been adopted by the Janissaries from – Christian – Hungary:

Yet it was the Janissaries' use of firearms that caught their enemies' attention. At first the soldiers, proud of their neat appearance, disliked dirty guns, but after witnessing their power in Hungary in 1440-43 the Janissaries gradually accepted the matchlock arquebus. (pp. 21f.)

Academic degree[edit]

— 16:47, 23 March 2010

This edit added the claim that the "origins of the degree dates back to the ijazah in the early Madrasah."

The main source cited for this was: Makdisi, George (April–June 1989), "Scholasticism and Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West", Journal of the American Oriental Society, 109 (2): 175–182 [175–77], doi:10.2307/604423{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date format (link)

However, by including only a reference to Makdisi's 1989 paper, the editor willfully ignored a simultaneously ongoing discussion on Ijazah (21-23 March 2010), in which I have presented him evidence to the contrary, namely

  • that Makdisi stresses the "fundamental differences" between the Christian doctorate of the medieval university and the Islamic ijazah of the Madrasa in a 1970 paper (01:24, 21 March 2010)
  • that Huff (2003), in a discussion of Makdisi's later thesis, concludes that "it remains the case that no equivalent of the bachelor's degree, the licentia docendi, or higher degrees ever emerged in the medieval or early modern Islamic madrasas". (14:37, 23 March 2010)

Although the editor was made fully aware of these references, he completely ignored them, acting as if they did not exist in his subsequent edit on academic degree which only included Makdisi's 1989 hypothesis.

Less major misuses[edit]

Abbas Ibn Firnas[edit]

al-Maqqari's account of Ibn Firnas

— 14:50, 14 March 2010

This edit added the claim that the Moroccan historian Ahmed Mohammed al-Maqqari used many early sources no longer extant in his account of Ibn Firnas' gliding attempt.

The source cited for this was: Lynn Townsend White, Jr. (Spring, 1961). "Eilmer of Malmesbury, an Eleventh Century Aviator: A Case Study of Technological Innovation, Its Context and Tradition", Technology and Culture 2 (2), p. 97-111 [100f.]

But White makes it clear that, in the case of Ibn Firnas, al-Maqqari cited only one contemporary source:

No modern historian can be satisfied with a source written 750 years after the event, and it is astonishing that, if indeed several eye-witnesses recorded b. Firnas's flight, no mention of it independent of al-Maqqari has survived. Yet al-Maqqari cites a contemporary poem by Mu'min b. Said, a minor court poet of Cordoba under Muhammad I (d. 886 A. D.), which appears to refer to this flight... (p. 101)

Compass rose[edit]

Invention of 32-point compass rose

— 11:27, 17 October 2007

This edit added the claim that the earliest 32-point compass rose was developed by Arab navigators seafarers.

The source cited for this was: G. R. Tibbetts (1973), "Comparisons between Arab and Chinese Navigational Techniques", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 36 (1), p. 97-108 [105-106].

But Tibbetts mentions no act of invention whatsoever, but merely contrasts the Arab 32-point compass rose with the different Chinese one:

The Arabs had a compass rose of 32 points and their normal method of indicating these points used the rising and setting of 15 prominent star groups together with the Pole star to indicate the pole. Other groups were also occasionally used by the Arabs in this way. The Chinese had a completely different rose based on 24 points, described in full by Needham.

Comment: To credit the Arabs flat out with the invention, it would have obviously needed a reference explicitly saying so, in particular with a view to the numerous other medieval seafaring peoples using various types of compass roses, too (Europeans, Persians, Indians etc.).

Note: The claim has also been included by the user in

Bomb vessel[edit]

Earliest bomb vessel

— 02:46, 22 March 2010

This edit added the claim that "the earliest known instance of a ship using a super-sized bombard was at the Battle of Zonchio in 1499" by the Ottoman navy.

The source cited for this was: John F. Guilmartin, Jr. (2007), "The Earliest Shipboard Gunpowder Ordnance: An Analysis of Its Technical Parameters and Tactical Capabilities", Journal of Military History, 71 (3): 649-669 [659]

But this is not what Guilmartin wrote, neither by intents nor contents. In a discussion about the Western European shift from wrought-iron to bronze-cast bombards in the late 15th century, he merely notes in a brief digression that

Guns of this type were used on shipboard on occasion: a Turkish carrack mounting a pair of huge bombards fought at the battle of Zonchio in 1499. But such cases were exceptional, and it is clear that the vast majority of bombards in fifteenth-century warship inventories were wrought-iron breech-loaders of modest dimensions. (p. 659)

Note: The claim has also been included by the user in

Inventions in the Islamic world[edit]

Short-hemmed and short-sleeved hauberk[edit]

— 18:29, 13 October 2009

This edit added the claim that the "short-hemmed and short-sleeved hauberk is thought to be of Islamic origin".

The source cited for this was: David Nicolle (1994), Saracen faris 1050-1250 A.D., Osprey Publishing, p. 58, ISBN 1855324539

But this claim was utterly taken out of context. What Nicolle does in the relevant passage is talk the reader through a modern coloured plate (no. K) depicting several types of amour which were typical of the crusader's period. In this context, his phrase "of Islamic origin" just refers to the origin of that particular hauberk shown, not to the origin of this type of armour (which actually dates back to the Celtic period).

Next comes the first layer of mail - in this instance a long-hemmed long-sleeved hauberk captured from the Crusaders, then a layer of quilted cotton filled with silk waste. This kazaghand is based on one described in Usama's Memoires. The second layer of mail has a short-hemmed short-sleeved mail hauberk of Islamic origin. Over this was the outer layer of silk brocade. The kazaghand opened fully down the front where there was an overlap. A slit at the back of the garment went from hem to crotch. (p. 58)

Note: The claim has also been included by the user in

Unreliable sources for exceptional claims[edit]

Inventions in the Islamic world[edit]

Earliest psychatric hospitals[edit]

— 05:20, 23 January 2008, expanded to 21:55, 5 August 2008

These edits added the claim that "the first psychiatric hospitals were built in the medieval Islamic world."

The source cited for this was: Ibrahim B. Syed PhD, "Islamic Medicine: 1000 years ahead of its times", Journal of the Islamic Medical Association, 2002 (2), p. 2-9 [7-8]

But, while Syed lists "asylums for the mentally ill" in a number of medieval Islamic cities, the cited source falls short of claiming psychatric hospitals to be a Muslim invention. More importantly, the editor should have been aware that the plain Muslim manifest at the end of the article makes Syed's article a partisan source which complies neither to WP:Reliable nor Wikipedia:Neutral point of view:

Conclusion: 1,000 years ago Islamic medicine was the most advanced in the world at that time. Even after ten centuries, the achievements of Islamic medicine look amazingly modern. 1,000 years ago the Muslims were the great torchbearers of international scientific research. Every student and professional from each country outside the Islamic Empire, aspired, yearned, dreamed to go to the Islamic universities to learn, to work, to live and to lead a comfortable life in an affluent and civilized society. Today, in this twentieth century, the United States of America has achieved such a position. The pendulum can swing back. Fortunately, Allah has given a bounty to many Islamic countries – an income over 100 billion dollars per year. Hence Islamic countries have the opportunity and resources to make Islamic science and medicine number one in the world, once again. (p. 9)

Note: The biased claim has been included by the user over the course of almost two years in (ordered by date)

Invention of Howitzer[edit]

— 00:23, 12 October 2009

This edit added the claim that the howitzer was an Islamic invention because the Ottoman Abus gun was "an early form of howitzer" and "no other civilization used a gun quite like this gun up until this time".

The source cited for this was: William Johnson, "The Sultan's Big Guns." Dragoman, vol.1, no.2 [1]

But Johnson, apart from being a source of doubtful reliability, does not make such a claim of invention or uniqueness, but merely writes that

The Abus guns were a form of howitzer and came in 10- and 7centimeter diameter bores.

Sensitive issues[edit]

This category includes problematic edits of topics which are particularly sensitive in that they touch racial and religious relations and current events and developments.

Islam in England[edit]

— Islam in England: 01:28, 5 April 2010

This edit added the claim that the "The media [in London, UK] has also been criticized for under-reporting hate crimes against Muslims".

The source cited for this was: Jenny Bourne (4 February 2010). "Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hate crime in London". Institute of Race Relations. Retrieved 2010-04-05.

But, quite to the contrary, Bourne actually criticizes the newly established centre for research into anti-Muslim hate crime for giving insufficient empirical evidence for its findings that the majority of anti-Muslim hate crimes go unreported:

There is absolutely no doubt that its authors are well intentioned and care deeply about this subject. However, there are a number of weaknesses in the report. It purports to reflect the situation in London, but contains just seven serious cases plus a discussion of other issues such as low-level assaults, threats, the problem of underreporting, and the impact of the British National Party. So it is hard to gauge on what empirical evidence the general findings - that in London serious attacks, including murder take place; assaults, abuse and intimidation occur on a regular basis; the majority of anti-Muslim hate crimes go unreported - are actually based.

Note: Even though his edit had been reverted within 24h on the grounds of being "dubious" (00:52, 6 April 2010), Jagged 85 still went on to add the very same claim in Islamophobia several days later (00:17, 11 April 2010).

Exaggerated father complex[edit]

The editor shows a marked propensity to call – almost exclusively Islamic – scientists the father of their respective discipline and that at every opportunity (even repeatedly in one and the same article). This designation may or may not be found in the cited references (which are often themselves liable to WP:POV). But the sheer scale of the practice of attributing the establishment of entire scientific disciplines to individuals is unheard of and uncalled for in WP, and demonstrates a tendentious edit pattern.

  • "Abu al-Qasim (Abulcasis), regarded as the father of modern surgery..." (02:39, 14 May 2007)
  • "Avicenna, considered the father of modern medicine..." (01:30, 9 October 2007)
  • "Ibn al-Nafis was the first to describe pulmonary circulation and coronary circulation, which form the basis of the circulatory system, for which he is considered the father of the theory of circulation..." (10:52, 28 November 2007)
  • "Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi (Abulcasis), regarded as the father of modern surgery..." (02:33, 14 May 2007)
  • "In al-Andalus, Abu al-Qasim (Abulcasis), the father of modern surgery..." (17:50, 19 July 2007)
  • "Avicenna (Ibn Sina), a Hanbali and Mu'tazili philosopher and doctor in the early 11th century, was another influential figure. He is regarded as the father of modern medicine..." (17:54, 19 July 2007)
  • "Avicenna (Ibn Sina) is considered the father of modern medicine..." (06:31, 20 September 2007)
  • "...Ibn Zuhr (Avenzoar), who introduced the experimental method into surgery, for which he is considered the father of experimental surgery..." (13:17, 7 January 2008)
  • "Ibn Zuhr (Avenzoar) is considered the father of experimental surgery..." (13:17, 7 January 2008)
  • "Ibn al-Nafis, the father of circulatory physiology..." (23:43, 13 December 2007)
  • "His student Muhammad ibn Zakarīya Rāzi (Rhazes) is considered the father of pediatrics..." (22:36, 2 November 2007 )

The above is only a small selection. By his usual copy & paste multiplication method, the editor has introduced his father complex all over WP's science and technology articles.

See also[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Gun_Powder_Ma/Misuse_of_sources&oldid=356481402"