Talk:Quran code

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Speedy keep, 12 July 2021, see discussion.
keep, 9 June 2021, see discussion.

Islam Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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

Mysticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mysticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mysticism 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.MysticismWikipedia:WikiProject MysticismTemplate:WikiProject MysticismMysticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Examples and OR[edit]

Rilum, this is the English Wikipedia and the rules are different than the German Wikipedia. There is no doubt whatsoever that the material I deleted violated the WP:OR policy as well as the WP:UNDUE policy as they exist on this project. Using character counts you compile yourself, no matter what software you "cite", to justify supposed patterns in a religious text is WP:SYNTH, and therefore original research. Unless you can find cites by other researchers that are published in reliable sources (as this project understands them), the material must be removed. I hope this explains the differences between the projects. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 13:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Those Character counts are not from me: You can find the Character Counts in Rashad Khalifas books, in Edip Yüksels book, in Submission.org website etc. I did not count the Characters all by myself. I even gave the references of those counts, and stated that those are claims by Rashad Khalifa, but I took 2 other countings from Submission.org, as Rashad Khalifa had errors in those 2 instances. I even gave references to his online presence of his Quran translation Appendix 1, which he dedicates to the Quran Code. The books mentioning Initial counts are for example: Nineteen: God’s Signature in Nature and Scripture from Edip Yüksel, The Computer Speaks: God's Message to the World, Renaissance Productions International, ISBN 9780934894388. The Code 19 in general: Al-Qur'an: The Ultimate Miracle, Library of Islam. Again those countings are not just my subjective countings I made for fun, dont get me wrong, I even tryed introducing them as Claims by XY. Rilum (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rilum: The purpose of Wikipedia articles is to present what reliable secondary sources say about a topic. Wikipedia pages are not an extension of external websites that promote (or even criticise) the topic. It is inappropriate for you to fill the article up with examples. All it needs is a small number of examples to give the reader an idea of what the subject is about, then they can go to the external books and websites to find out more if they want. Zero^talk 05:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also referring to books, from Edip Yüksel or Rashad Khalifa, and then people accuse me of using original source, that is not fair really. When I want to expllain a topic and its varieties I can make different paragraphs in wikipedia and one should allow me to give at least one example of the aspect which is being presented. But instead most of the times examples, which I meant to explain to the reader, get deleted, because of Originial Source, when I am referring to a published book. If the article is called Quran Code, then I can present different aspects of it in detail, just letting me write 2-3 sentcnes on a paragraph when I am trying to explain the aspect is not really fair. I mean I do want present claims as claims(!). Rilum (talk) 06:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hip. Hip. Hoorey. The WP:OR rubbish is back. [1] --87.162.164.208 (talk) 20:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Number of verses[edit]

The text said that Quran has 6346 verses. MohsynZ added a note "[Note: Incorrect information: Total verses are 6348]". I removed the note because we aren't allowed to add editorial commentary to articles. However, MohsynZ is correct. The explanation is that Khalifa removed two verses (see the Criticism section). This can be mentioned if a proper source is provided. Zero^talk 12:33, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]