Talk:The Origins of the Koran

Hi User:CltFn, I'm surprised you blanket reverted my edit (including simple formatting changes). I think it needs to be written in a style that doesn't appear to assume that the author's argument is correct (even if it is). Also, I think including a copy of the Contents page is not suitable for a encyc article.

If you have any specific objections, could you outline them, or at the very least edit them one by one and include your reason in the comment.

Lastly, please assume good faith. I don't know who you think I'm a sockpuppet of, but I've never edited wikipedia as anything other than this user (except for the other day when I accidently edited while not logged in). Regards, Ashmoo 04:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If you have not done any research on this book then you should not delete material from the article just because it does not suit your POV . When you have researched the book then come back and make some helpful contributions. --CltFn 04:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I only intended to do style changes to the article, wikipedia has no requirement to be an expert in order to edit for style, as far as I'm aware. If I make any factual errors please correct them, but I do think the article needs to be tweaked to as not seem to give tacit support the thesis made by the book.


 * I don't know what POV you think I have, but by all means, if I write something that seems to push a POV, I won't get upset if you modify it to be more NPOV. Ashmoo 05:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Cmon CltFn, do you honestly think that version is NPOV? It states as fact the things the book sets out to prove. I'm just trying to get an acceptable article here, I'm not interested in either POV.
 * Also, please don't mark wholesale reverts as 'minor edits'. And unless it is a vandalism edit, you should use talk to explain your revert. see (WP:REVERT explain revert & Minor_edit) Ashmoo 04:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Koran vs. Qur'an
The article varies between using Koran & Quran. I think the best solution is to use Qur'an as this is the spelling used by wikipedia's Islam article and is becoming the standard form generally. Of course, when quoting the book we should use whatever term is used there. Ashmoo 05:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Explanation of edits
These are the reasons I removed these bits:

falsehood perpetrated  to state this as fact is quite POV.

by advocates of Islam  aren't advocates of Islam commonly called 'Muslims'?

who seek to hide how does the encyclopedia know that they are seeking to hide, rather than just being incorrect, indoctrinated or some other motive?

its many errors and contradictions from the general public again, the 'errors and contradictions' is what the book is trying to prove. So to state it as fact is adopting the POV of the book.

On the other hand, if the book actually says that the 'advocates of Islam seek to hide the errors...etc' than it would be good to include that, noting that it is an argument made by the book. User:CltFn, you seem to have expertise on this matter, could you provide some insight?

Regards, Ashmoo 05:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:OriginsOfTheKoran.jpg
Image:OriginsOfTheKoran.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)