WikiIslam:Frequently Asked Questions: Difference between revisions

Unless otherwise stated, we use the respected and widely accepted translations of Yusuf Ali, Marmaduke Pickthal or M. H. Shakir. All Qur'an quotes are taken from the widely referenced [https://quranx.com/About quranx.com] and are properly sourced and linked with the context of three preceding and subsequent verses.

If a misquoted Qur'an verse is brought to the editors' attention, it will be corrected immediately. Most claims of "misquoted Qur'an verses" consist of an apologists using an obscure translation of the Qur'an and pointing out that the translation on the wiki is different from theirs (e.g. see [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmybroadband.co.za%2Fvb%2Fshowthread.php%2F607524-I-am-islamophobic%3Fp%3D12428900%26viewfull%3D1%23post12428900&date=2014-04-07 here]). If someone fails to check the sources, they may assume that it is a misquotation on the part of the editors. However, the wiki's policy is such that it relies on the most widely accepted and established translations of the Qur'an (i.e. Yusuf Ali, Marmaduke Pickthal or M. H. Shakir).   

Wikipedia's policies have also allowed for the use of some very suspect "reliable" secondary sources. A prime example of this would be Paul Vallely's "How Islamic inventors changed the world". And they also host a [[List_of_Fabricated_Hadith#Muhammad.27s_Farewell_Sermon|fabricated version of Muhammad's farewell sermon]] which was created by an Indian/Pakistani author in the 80's, simply because the version often features in Islamic propaganda, all while ignoring the authentic version of the sermon found in Tabari.

Wikipedia discourages the use of primary and "non-notable/reliable" sources. WikiIslam, on the other hand, encourages the use of authentic primary religious text and the rulings of authoritative Muslim scholars who may not be notable to people outside of the Muslim world but who are giants within. This is in addition to permitting the citation of critical, academic scholarship, which, while also allowed on Wikipedia, is almost invariably suppressed due to the abundance of editors seeking to cast Islam in a favorable light.

Wikipedia focuses on "[{{Reference archive|1=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_truth|2=2012-02-10}} verifiability, not truth]". In essence, this means that anyone who falls under Wikipedia's classification of "notable/reliable" can make a statement about any subject, and regardless of its factual accuracy, it can be used in their articles. In regards to Islam, it has meant they accept what "notable/reliable" western commentators and apologists claim about Islamic scriptures and Muslims over what the religious text and Muslims actually say themselves.

 

These commentators who speak about Islam and who fall under Wikipedia's classification of "notable/reliable" tend to be apologists, because serious scholars, for instance Bart Ehrman, are scared of violence against themselves or of being accused of bigotry if they criticize anything Islam-related. Thus, Wikipedia often uses notable apologists like Karen Armstrong (who is not a qualified historian or Islamic scholar) whilst ignoring some giant figures from the Islamic world and Islamic history as well as world-renown academic historians and scholars of religion, such as Michael Cook.