Talk:Suhuf-i-Ibrahim

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Sources

As you can see from the edit war, this article needs reliable sources. Case reported to Mediation Cabal. MP (talk) 10:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The edit war seems to have stopped. But I'll be your mediator. SynergeticMaggot 11:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've removed the questionable material, but I expect Moroniidris to revert it soon. We'll wait and see... MP (talk) 11:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. If an edit war starts though, I'll request page protection. That way, no one will edit until its resolved. SynergeticMaggot 11:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It appears that the editing has stopped. I've messaged the other user and they havent gotten back to me. I may have to go on a short wikibreak, so I'm going to have to resign as mediator from this case. I'm leaving the case open for you though. Regards. SynergeticMaggot 00:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article messed up badly

This article has now suffered from a severe bout of anon's (or perhaps the same anon using different names ?) adding questionable info. into the article. It looks like vandalism to me. Therefore, I'm going to revert. MP (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I am a Mormon (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints), and we do not beleive we are adopted as children of Abraham. We believe if individuals are not literal descendents of one of the tribes of Isreal (grandson of Abraham) they are adopted into the tribe of Ephraim (great-grandson of Abraham). We have never used the honorific talked about in the article in any measure. Our church sees Abraham as an important individual, because of the covenants made with him by God. We do not see ourselves a some form of set aside Muslim group. Someone has been given a real tilted veiw on this subject with regards to the Mormons.EErick 21:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moses/Musa and Abraham/Ibrahim LDS thought paragraph

This paragraph doesn't appear to have reliable sources and in this context it would have to be deleted unless references could be found. Addhoc 11:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd recommend making the article a stub instead of deleting any more information. As long as the edit wars have stopped the mediation case should probably be closed, as the extract referring to a questionable source that required compromise/mediation is no longer a contentious issue any more. Jsw663 21:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

The (removed by me) link supporting this paragraph ([1]) is dead. Google's cache ([2]) suggests it was original research (the author refers to it as "my theory") and all Google could come up with is sites that repeat this content from Wikipedia. However, I'm going to tag it with WP:WEASEL since I'm not an LDS scholar and I don't know that Google is either. And I don't want to start another edit war.

As an aside, I'm not sold on the addition of Peace Be Upon You, both because I'm not sure it's encyclopaedic, and because I was under the impression it is actually Peace Be Upon Him... But I'm not going to actually do anything about it apart from link to the relevant Wikipedia article.

TBBle 12:09, 16 December 2006 (UTC)