Talk:The Lady of Heaven

Help from editors

I suggest a more critical eye editing this article. For example, until I added it, the article nowhere mentioned that the writer of this movie, Sheikh Yasser Al-Habib, has had one purpose for this movie since its inception: converting non-Muslims, especially in the West, to Shia Muslims. At the moment the project was announced, he said that Shia Muslims like him seek vengeance against figures such as Abu Bakr and Umar he saw as oppressive, and he cited the apparent failure of Shia Muslims throughout history to topple these figures as the primary reason why this movie should be made. (Any person speaking Arabic can listen to these videos and see that the purposes are religious.) He is seen as the spiritual father of Fadak TV, a Shia Muslim channel focused on apologetics to help convert Sunni Muslims to Shia Muslims. The channel regularly asks for donations to finance the movie, citing the purpose of the movie in converting non-Muslims to Shia Islam as the main reward for donating.

This is where I ask the kind editors here for help. I think it is extremely misleading to write an article about a movie like The Lady of Heaven without mentioning the explicit purpose of the movie as mentioned by its writer, repeated ad nauseam throughout the years on Fadak TV and used to bring millions of dollars of financing for the movie. It is important context that helps the reader understand exactly why this movie was made, why Shia Muslims watching Fadak TV keep donating to it, and what it's trying to achieve. Several, if not all, members of Enlightened Kingdom are also members of the Mahdi Servants Union, which runs Fadak TV. This minimization of Fadak TV's role in bringing this movie about is concerning to the neutrality of this article. How can we go about better explaining such a role?

tl;dr This movie has explicit religious reasons behind it to convert non-Muslims to Shia Islam and attempt to degrade figures seen as opponent in Shia Islam. I believe readers of this article should be informed of these facts. Cheers.

FlantasyFlan (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Reception errors

Those involved in the film cannot have their own quotations input into the reception of the film. Besides the obvious bias, those who created the film cannot have a say on its reception, as they are not the ones receiving it but the ones granting it.

The quotations can be moved elsewhere, but not in the reception section. JasonMoore (talk) 23:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Marketing

The content written by the producers, film-makers, writer(s), was moved from Reception to Marketing.

Further, I urge others not to have a biased opinion against (or for), this movie when conducting edits. This is Wikipedia and any clear biases will be dealt with cordially. JasonMoore (talk) 23:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

JasonMoore, thank you for your valuable contributions.

I was wondering if you can help out regarding the movie’s proselytizing nature. This movie was made and funded with the intention to convert Western masses to Shia Islam. Another purpose is to dent the reputations of Sunni figures like Abu Bakr and Umar. My personal belief is that it hurts the article’s neutral POV not to mention these things. Unfortunately, W:RS stands in the way: most of the sources for this are reposted YouTube videos, and since Fadak TV is so little known and barely any news agency reports on their activities, there exists a scarcity of material.

Is there a workaround? This movie clearly was made to proselytize, and the Wikipedia reader is going to be missing out on crucial context.

Thank you again, hoping to see you again on another realm of Wikipedia! FlantasyFlan (talk) 03:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Bias

The introduction concludes by saying, "the film attempts to link the Islamic State in the 21st century and the origins of Islamic terrorism with historical figures revered in Sunni Islam." Such a statement must have evidence in its support, or it is simply inflammatory opinion. Zaslav (talk) 06:02, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

You simply have the watch the film. Throughout the film there is a continual attempt to suggest that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were unjust and tyranical figures and that they were the antecedents to ISIL. I'm assuming you're making this as an ironic point? Sscloud21 (talk) 16:45, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

If someone has written a review with these observations and conclusions, including that with a source listed is fine. Editors writing their own commentary and reviews is a different thing entirely. --Killuminator (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Wrong information provided and disrespect of Holy Prophet and his companion made

This film story is propaganda against Shia and Sunnis and is totally based on lies and fals information. Seriously condemned by disrespecting the respectful personalities. 2A04:4A43:8BAF:F278:4118:6FCD:358E:211F (talk) 22:18, 26 October 2023 (UTC)