48,466
edits
Changes
no edit summary
What do you think about the reliability of sunnah.com? I havent looked into it. Their [http://sunnah.com/about About] page doesnt say much about who is behind the site etc. Its still a nice site though. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:59, 22 April 2015 (PDT)
:I've never had a problem with it, but some people say they soften translations don't they? They even say on the About page that the text has gone through two stages of "cleaning". They mention one stage is correcting typos, but they leave you hanging on what that second stage is. However, it's an Islamic site so anything we use from there won't be accused of being "fake". So I think it's okay as a backup or when nothing better is available. We already use it for the hadith collections that are not on USC-MSA. Our FAQ says "The English translations of Al Tirmidhi, Al Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah are all taken from Sunnah.com." Obviously I archived every single page for each of those hadith collections and our templates link to these archives (this way they cannot delete or alter hadiths). It's come in quite handy for me actually. The set of Ibn Majah hadith they copy/pasted include the hadiths grading and I [[http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#There_is_1_hadith_that_says_Aisha_.22never_saw_the_private_parts_of_Muhammad.22|used it to debunk]] an apologetic argument against Muhammad's pedophilia and simultaneously pointed out how those who use this argument are knowingly propagating false information. [[User:Sahab|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab|talk]]) 03:37, 23 April 2015 (PDT)
