Talk:Islamic view of Zechariah

Untitled
I support keeping this article. I'am opposed to mergin it with Zacharias.Bless sins 19:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC) In general, there is much to say in favour of merging views from different cultural or religious traditions into one article. But there are several disadvantages as well. To do justice to all traditions, not only different but also common views must be explicitly mentioned. Also the order of appearance may not be indifferent to many readers. A practical solution would be to merge only if the body of information is limited. If there is a wealth of information, separated articles are more desirable. Obviously, mutual links are required, as well as clarity on the source of the information. KoosJaspers 20 aug 2006
 * I agree, i am removing the merge tag. --Striver 10:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Missing 3:40
There is a link to 3:35-37, 3:38, 3:39 and 3:41, but there is no link to 3:40. I would expect this to at least be somewhere under Other references in the Qur'an. Van der Hoorn (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I added it to the link of 3:39. I still don't like the Other references in the Qur'an part though. It splits up the links, which makes it in my opinion less clear to read the story. I can imagine that it is interesting to see which parts of the story are coming back on several locations in the Qur'an, but I guess that would be part of a more deeper analysis _after_ linking to the complete parts of the Qur'an where the story appears. Just my 2 cents; tell me what you think. Van der Hoorn (talk) 14:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)