Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Prophets of Islam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] References in Qur'an section
I was going through the above-mentioned section of the prophet Saleh. The verses are individual and it is difficult to read considering some of the verses are adjacent to each other. I see that the references are from www.submission.info and they allow listing of multiple verses. I have edited the links so that one page will show consequetive ayats for easy reading.
It is easy to do this by changing the verseEnd value to the last verse in the sequence as in the example below.
I hope this is ok with the writers. Please let me know and I could help do the same for the other pages when I have time. Azhad 10:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] So Where From Here?
I suggest that after we get a sufficient number of participants, we start something along the lines of the Article Improvement Drive or Collaboration of the week so we can focus our attention on one article at a time. Any other ideas? joturner 22:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think we can start by cleaning up some of the stubs and short articles. I have already started working on some of them. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 23:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Merge"
Does anyone else think that demerging the information for all of the prophets like David who are in other articles? Keep a section in the main articles but also make them not redirects... gren グレン 06:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. I think most, if not all, of the merged articles should be made into separate articles. That is especially true for John the Baptist (Yahya). The and to most will give the impression that it's about a Christian figure. joturner 06:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- In fact, all of the prophet articles appear to be Christian-centric. joturner 06:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, they should be. I did this to Zakariya. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 06:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why seperate articles?
Dear contributers, i was wondering, how would those articles listed in this project link to articles in other languages? for example, if we take the arabic wikipedia, article موسى , ie musa is and should be linked to article moses. the same for adam to mohammed, whith the possible (but i think shouldnt be) exception of jesus christ (isa). those articles in wikipedia in languages that have a majourity of muslim contributers are islam-centric, just as much as the articles about most of the articles about those figures are christian-centric in the english wikipedia, so i suggest that those articles should be merged as much as possible with articles with english names, since they talk about the same figures, with slightly diffrent details, and a diffrent pronounciation of the same name, that solowly due to the fact that the name is used in two diffrent languages!
If you see that there should be a seperate article about those figures that talk about them from an islamic perspective or according to islamic texts, i belive the article name should clearly state that! ie , Adam in islamic texts instead of Adam (prophet), and if the pronounciation of the name differs, then a redirect can be made to the the major article , for example to the article of noah in the case of nuh, or possibly -but i dont see that as a best practice- to the article that talks about this or that figure according to islamic scripts.
please note, that all names of those figures, with the exception of isa, are also used in christian and jewish arabic scripts. and that these scripts all talking about the same figure is not disputed, with the -possible- exception of isa.--Mayz 15:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think we should submit to clear Christian point-of-view on articles just because we may have trouble with translations of articles. And that point-of-view isn't just limited to Adam and Eve. I most clearly saw it on Abraham, where an editor removed a template because Abraham was not solely a Islamic figure. Likewise, another template added by a different user (which essentially regarded Jewish prophets) was removed on the basis that templates for other religions would need to be added. Either there is a Christian point-of-view in these articles or neutral-point-of-view gone awry. You can decide for yourself.
- Also note that you referred to an article as Adam (prophet). That's not what it's called; it's called Adam (prophet of Islam) which does indicated that the article is about Adam in Islam. joturner 02:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- There is so much information about prophets in Islam that is different that each need their own articles so that these can be discussed including all the references to them. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 03:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
As someone who is not subscribing to any of the faiths related to these historical figures, my opinion is that the articles should be kept together. Most of the things that can be said about these people are not contradictory in the Old Testament and the Qur'an. What sets Wikipedia apart as an exceptional source of information is that people work on the same texts from very different points of view. In my opinion it is much better to rewrite the original article to make it less Christianity-centered, than to create a fork that is dedicated to one point of view. (Note that this applies to historical figures, such as kings. Characters that are only noteworthy because of miracles that they performed, or their interaction with God, could be considered as separate tales, if the accounts are in fact different according to different religions.) --PeR 15:34, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- The reason for the separate ones is that there are differences between the religious views on the prophets. It's not a pov fork, we have several for the Jewish view too. Certainly in both cases the information is too much to be added to the original article. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
An editor removed the template from John the Baptist, and I restored it. The same editor removed from Noah the templates Prophets in the Qur'an and Adam to David. Rather than restore them to Noah, I put them in Nuh. I really don't think Noah and Nuh are POV forks, or if they are, they are "real world" forks in some sense. Certainly we should link to each article from the other, if we do not already. Also in Noah, the editor removed the 'References to Nuh (Noah) in the Qur'an.' I support putting these into Nuh, but I didn't feel competant to do it myself. There is a handy template, Template:Bibleverse, that someone might want to adapt. Tom Harrison Talk 14:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Adam (prophet of Islam) in Trouble
It looks like Adam (prophet of Islam) may be in jeopardy as editors in Talk:Adam and Eve are calling it a fork. Make sure you express your sentiments there. I think I have already been very clear on that talk page about my opinion that the article about Adam as a prophet of Islam (as well as all information about just Adam) should be on a separate page. joturner 02:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Good work!
Good work Guys! Unfortunatly, i have my hands filled fighting the NWO, so i cant help with this :)
Keep up the good work! --Striver 00:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Yahya?
Per some discussion on Talk:John the Baptist, does anyone object to breaking out Yahya as a separate article? Tom Harrison Talk 01:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think the split is a good idea. joturner 01:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Done; some cleanup will be nedded. Tom Harrison Talk 19:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Template
Hi all; I have no idea if this is useful or appropriate, but I've made a template that might make references to the Qur'an easier. Entering this: {{User:Tom harrison/Quran|6|85|87|Qur'an 6:85-87}} produces this: User:Tom harrison/Quran.
It's at User:Tom harrison/Quran. Feel free to edit and improve it. If people think it might be useful, we can move it to template space. If not, or if I've duplicated something that already exists, it's no loss. It didn't take long to make, and I learned something about templates. Tom Harrison Talk 19:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
The template is now at Template:Quranquote. Tom Harrison Talk 13:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- I have responded on the template talk page. Pepsidrinka 14:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Question
Arnt Samuel & Saul discussed is Quran ? If I remember correctly, they are discussed without using their names . F.a.y.تبادله خيال /c 20:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Well I found it .
2:246. Have you not thought about the group of the Children of Israel after (the time of) Musâ (Moses)? When they said to a Prophet of theirs, "Appoint for us a king and we will fight in Allâh's Way." He said, "Would you then refrain from fighting, if fighting was prescribed for you?" They said, "Why should we not fight in Allâh's Way while we have been driven out of our homes and our children (families have been taken as captives)?" But when fighting was ordered for them, they turned away, all except a few of them. And Allâh is All-Aware of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers).
2:247. And their Prophet (Samuel) said to them, "Indeed Allâh has appointed Talût (Saul) as a king over you." They said, "How can he be a king over us when we are better fitted than him for the kingdom, and he has not been given enough wealth." He said: "Verily, Allâh has chosen him above you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and stature. And Allâh grants His Kingdom to whom He wills. And Allâh is All-Sufficient for His creatures' needs, All-Knower."
2:248. And their Prophet (Samuel) said to them: Verily! The sign of His Kingdom is that there shall come to you At-Tâbût (a wooden box), wherein is Sakinah (peace and reassurance) from your Lord and a remnant of that which Musâ (Moses) and Hârûn (Aaron) left behind, carried by the angels. Verily, in this is a sign for you if you are indeed believers.
2:249. Then when Talût (Saul) set out with the army, he said: "Verily! Allâh will try you by a river. So whoever drinks thereof, he is not of me, and whoever tastes it not, he is of me, except him who takes (thereof) in the hollow of his hand." Yet, they drank thereof, all, except a few of them. So when he had crossed it (the river), he and those who believed with him, they said: "We have no power this day against Jalût (Goliath) and his hosts." But those who knew with certainty that they were to meet their Lord, said: "How often a small group overcame a mighty host by Allâh's Leave?" And Allâh is with As-Sâbirin (the patient ones, etc.).
So Samuel is discussed without name & Saul with name . F.a.y.تبادله خيال /c 20:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Samuel a prophet and Saul just a king? Nevertheless, Samuel is just alluded to in the Qur'an; his name is not actually mentioned. I do, however, think the Samuel article is in need of some information about him in Islam. About whether his name should be added to the template... what does everyone else believe? I'm afraid to change the template as it looks so perfect now and his name is not specifically mentioned in the Qur'an. joturner 20:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spelling of Ishaq
Please see Talk:Ishaq, I've noticed a spelling contradiction but don't know the answer personally. - Draeco 04:29, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suleiman-Sulayman?
i typed in Suleiman and it came up with one of the prphets before muhammad. what happed to the great conquer? what about the Suleiman that defeated constatinople <- (spelling?) i am doing my history homework and he is not in here. thx!
- The person you're looking for is Suleiman the Magnificent. I'll add a link from Sulayman to Suleiman the Magnificent so other readers won't get confused. joturner 00:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] FYI
Please add a comment here: [1] --Striver 14:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removing Mariam
FYI, I'm removing Mariam from this project because she's not a prophet in Islam. If you want to object, please see the talk page there. --Ephilei 05:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Key articles for Wikipedia 1.0
Hello! We at the Work via WikiProjects team for Wikipedia 1.0 would like you to identify the "key articles" from your project that should be included in a small CD release due to their importance, regardless of quality. We will use that information to assess which articles should be nominated for Version 0.5 and later versions. Hopefully it will help you identify which articles are the most important for the project to work on. As well, please add to the Prophets of Islam WikiProject article table any articles of high quality. If you are interested in developing a worklist such as this one (new) for your WikiProject, or having a bot generate a worklist like this one automatically for you, please contact us. Please feel free to post your suggestions right here. Thanks! Walkerma 04:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 18:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
