Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Islam-related articles)/Citing Quran
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Quran ref
I propose this format:
- Sura 4.35 translated by Shakir
-
- And if you fear a breach between the two, then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people; if they both desire agreement, Allah will effect harmony between them, surely Allah is Knowing, Aware
--Striver 05:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- It is beautiful. BUT I *have heard* Yusuf Ali is the most famous translation. Isn't it? --Aminz 05:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citing the Qur'an
Is there a standard forma on Wikipedia for citing a part of the Qur'an? Should you use the sura name or just the number? I asked this on the Qur'an article talk page once, adequate reason for it to be included in this style manual. MeltBanana 01:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- Just the number, I think, linked appropriately (e.g. 10:13; the articles are all under the names but redirects exist for the numbers); it conveys the same information in the least amount of space, which is ideal for references. —Charles P. (Mirv) 02:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- I propose this format:
- Sura 4.35 translated by Shakir
-
- And if you fear a breach between the two, then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people; if they both desire agreement, Allah will effect harmony between them, surely Allah is Knowing, Aware
I agree with this latter suggestion, as it's better to also state which translation is being used. MP (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I suggest this then:
- Sura 4:35 translated by Shakir
-
- And if you fear a breach between the two, then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people; if they both desire agreement, Allah will effect harmony between them, surely Allah is Knowing, Aware
--Aminz 05:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Though not sure if we are better to use Yusuf Ali or Shakir (?) --Aminz 05:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yusuf Ali has a reputation of being anit-semitic in its tranlation, Shakir is shi'a in its translation. Don't ask me why, but he is. --Striver 11:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- I see :D --Aminz 22:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
How about my latest invention? --Striver 01:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed guildline
- We should not reference to Qur'an directly in wikipedia since Qur'an is a primary source. There are many verses and Hadiths that are all used together by Islamic scholars. We can however quote "Scholar X in his commentary on verse X". Please note that the Scholar X should be a renowned Muslim scholar.
-
- Of course we should be able to cite verses from the Qur'an -- not to say what they mean (that's interpretation) but just to specify what is under discussion. If there's any discussion of what the verses mean, then we cite scholars.
- We should not reference to Qur'an directly in wikipedia since Qur'an is a primary source. There are many verses and Hadiths that are all used together by Islamic scholars. We can however quote "Scholar X in his commentary on verse X". Please note that the Scholar X should be a renowned Muslim scholar.
-
- Of course we should be able to cite verses from the Qur'an -- not to say what they mean (that's interpretation) but just to specify what is under discussion. If there's any discussion of what the verses mean, then we cite scholars.
-
- Per above, we should use the Qur'an when talking about verses, but use someone's interpretation (or preferably several interpretations) when talking about what a verse means. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 04:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Template
I have created Template:QuoteQuran and would like to present it here as an proposed standard model for quoting the Qur'an. --Striver 06:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)