Talk:Gerd R. Puin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think it was CltFn who had edited this article to say that it disproved the divine origin of the Qur'an. That's his belief; WP should not be used to state that as a fact. CltFn also exaggerated the extent of the divergences between the Sana'a texts and the currently accepted Cairo text. Puin's academic article describes only minor variations in wording and sura order. No sweeping conclusions should be drawn on the basis of preliminary results. Let's wait for the book. Zora 05:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hardly an exageration , the Sanaa fragments that Gerd Puin photographed and collected clearly show revisions over time.--CltFn 04:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- You state your own conclusions to why previous verses existed on the same fragments as fact. I could easily replace it with "due to scarcity of writing material, many parchments were reused over and over" pushing my own conclusions to the reader as facts. Please keep your own conclusions to yourself, write the facts and leave the conclusions to the reader. mistknight 10:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unclear statement
The last sentence of this article says the Puin has clarified the apparent contradiction between two statements; however, it leaves out HOW. I can't read German; can someone look at the article and figure it out? 00:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
Qur'an in the House of Manuscript in Sana'a should be merged with the relevant section from this article, since their topic is 100% identical. Azate 21:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Dear Azate. The topic is not 100% identical. PLease see my comments on the talk page for the (newly renamed) Sana'a manuscripts article. Stroika 08:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)