Talk:Al-Bayyina

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Al-Bayyina article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Islam Mid‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles

It is requested that one or more audio files be included in this article to improve its quality.
Please see Wikipedia:Requested recordings for more on this request.

Proposal to move page to Al-Bayyinah

Al-Bayyinah reflects the arabic transliteration more closely. The current title completely misses the last consonant ة (h). Fauzan^{talk ✆ email ✉} 14:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copied and pasted without any acknowledgement

Much of the text in this article appears to be copied without any acknowledgement from [1]. AstroLynx (talk) 09:48, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Theme and subject matter of section is copy/past.Saff V. (talk) 08:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18 January 2020: Recent Edits

Koreangauteng recently made several edits, some of which will certainly be controversial. The editing job might have been a little more careful, as it broke up some references and made the page harder to read. I have attempted to rectify some of the errors introduced by those edits, but have also made other changes, some of which had the effect of removing text added by Koreangauteng. I wanted to explain the removals here so that we could avoid an edit war:

I removed the divisions by āyah. This is a very short sūrah, & when the subdivisions have no substantive information other than the text of the sūrah itself, they make the page harder to read. The practice of breaking up short sūrahs by āyah has drawn objection from other editors on Koreangauteng's talk page. It seems like this should be discussed before this practice continues.
I removed the link to The Tribune Papers, as this does not fit the description given by Koreangauteng.
I retained the other two critiques of 98:6, as I believe that they're the heart of what Koreangauteng wanted to add to the page. In general, I don't think that this is a good way to handle critique of Islam—there's no obvious reason that we should privilege to far-right organisations. However, I think the appropriate editing would be to flesh out this discussion rather than to delete information.
I removed the mention that Ibn Kathir's tafsir covers āyahs from this sūrah. Ibn Kathir's tafsir covers the whole Qur'ān. It's like saying 'Martin Luther translated this verse of the Bible.' It adds no useful information.
I removed the 'citation needed's. I think these were ill placed, as there in fact was a citation in every instance (until, in one instance, the previous edit deleted it). I have added publication information for the Oxford University Press translation of the Qur'ān, but really before adding citation needed tags, the editor should consult the discussion on Citing the Qur'ān.

I hope that explains the changes I've made, & that we can avoid an edit war. Pathawi (talk) 17:25, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I don't think Gatestone institute or a rightwing thinktank attacking CAIR (neither source about the Surah itself) are reliable either, but I'll leave it be for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.37.186.35 (talk) 02:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think they're unbalanced, & that this is bad-faith editing. (The goal isn't actually to expand exegetical knowledge that may aid a general reader, but instead to advance an islamophobic agenda.) However, in terms of reliability, I don't know what they need to be reliable for. I left them because I thought the appropriate response was to flesh out the article. I'm currently traveling, but will hopefully have time to contribute to that later this week. Pathawi (talk) 06:27, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Islam#Some_issues_with_the_current_Wikipedia_Quran_articles Koreangauteng (talk) 10:54, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See comments by AshleighHanley82 here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SharabSalam#Keep_up_the_good_work_and_the_insane_pensum_%F0%9F%91%8D Or here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AhmadF.Cheema#I_need_your_insight_and_help_regarding_the_recent_edits_of_a_user to get what I mean. In almost every single case the descriptors given to the sources have been 100% true. See Ahmad Cheema's comment #3 on talkpage for more info — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.37.186.35 (talk) 13:01, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Subtle error in summary of surah.

I noticed that it is written on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Bayyina#cite_note-2

'People of the Book and polytheists are the worst of all creatures, destined for hell[2]'

This is not exacly the meaning of the verse since it is says

"Indeed, those who disbelieve from the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the Fire of Hell, to stay there forever. They are the worst of ˹all˺ beings."

it is the people of the book who disbelieve. because there are still people of the book with a sound belief in the Divine unity.

peace be with you and god knows best,