Talk:Al-Kindi

message: Al-Kindi isn't persian .... and Al-Kindi is drived from Kinda a great arab tribe.
----
since when Al-Kindi become a persian? he is from an arab tribe in yemen ... so please check this link before making any changes on the article: http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/kindi/default.htm--212.138.64.176 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: What is meant by this term where it appears in this article?  Is it about a particular numeral system (in which case it is mis-directed and should be changed to numeral system) or about something else (what?)? Michael Hardy 01:10, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "number system"?

message: The complete name of Al-Kindi in Arabic characters is أبو يوسف يعقوب ابن إسحاق الكندي . It was wrong in the previous edition ("abu ya'qub yusuf" instead of the correct form "abu yusuf ya'qub").
Very accurate name and ancestry information (34 generations) is in the following Arabic page: http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/kindi/kindi-bio-ayun.htm
--Filius Rosadis 23:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct name of Al-Kindi 

message: The exact words of what Ibn al-Nadim said about al-kind is not repeated. Why in the world do you keep deleteing it??!!! Jidan 18:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mel Etitis, I really appreciate your effort in maintaining the qualtity of this article. In this article,  al-kindi, is mentionend as the "philosopher of the arab" (by arab is meant arab-speaking not arab ethnic, this should be mentioned in the article), but by whom? and when? I have other qoutes on al-kindi from german and english scientists on al-kindi, will you keep deleting them? Jidan 20:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact the article says: "he was often referred to simply as 'the Arab philosopher'" (by which was meant, according to all my sources, ethnic Arab — another reason that calling him Persian is anomalous).  That's the point, of course — he was often referred to in that way; I know of no reason to suppose that Ibn al-Nadim was the first person so to refer to him.  If he was the first, though, then that is better mentioned in the article.  Generally speaking, it's much better to add important material to the article than to stick it into a quotations section. Would you mind placing the quotations you have in mind here, so that we can discuss how best to incorporate them into the article? --Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 22:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes on Al-Kindi 

message: TheGrappler nominated this article for Good article status, & I must sadly write that while it is better than many articles on Wikipedia, it fails to pass the bar for being considered a "Good article". The reasons include:
# The article states that he is "the greatest philosopher of Arab descent", yet the explanation for this value judgement only gets one short paragraph. More space is devoted to his accomplishments in medicine.
# This article needs a more clear attribution of claims. In one passage, this article states that "al-Kindī was the first pharmacologist to determine and apply a correct dosage for most of the drugs available at the time" -- an important point, yet this statement needs an authority to confirm it. Although there are 2 sources cited at the bottom, it is not clear how their writings relate to the details given here; even to say "John Doe believed that X" -- then list the publicaiton where John Doe made this claim under "References" would be an improvement.
# A glance at this Talk page shows that the accuracy of the article is still under debate.
# And lastly, for such an important person, the article is surprisingly light. I'd really expect to find a more full discussion of this interesting person. -- llywrch 01:08, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article nomination 

message: Hi everyone, 
When I came across the al-Kindi article, I thought it would benefit from some attention. 
My initial assessment of it was that what was already there was good. However, I considered two things: 
1) What needs improving: it needs referencing and in places correcting (if you read Richard Adamson, he says Kindi actually set out to merely introduce Greek thought to the Islamic world, but ended up reinterpretting alot of it in a very original manner - the article says he was unoriginal!). 
2) What needs adding: more work needs to be done on his contributions to Islamic Philosophy and his specific ideas in certain areas. It would also be good if we could do likewise with his contribution to the sciences.
This should hopefully get al-Kindi recognized as a "good article"! 
If anyone has any ideas, please feel free to post them up.
Alexander.Hainy 19:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, lots added to both philosophy and scientific contributions, references from no less than three seperate academic books (although if anyone could add some more it would be great!), I think this article is on track to becoming a "good article". After I add the sub-section on optics to the section "Contributions" I think I might try to get it put forward. Alexander.Hainy 10:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restarting the work on al-Kindi 

message: Thinking of submitting the article for a peer review, any thoughts/suggestions/objections? 
Alexander.Hainy 01:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review 

message: I recently flagged the statement that "Al-Kindi stated his law of terrestrial gravity" with the template that "this source's reliability may need verification," since the only source was the historical introduction to a physics text which.  In areas where it was possible to check this book's other claims, they turned out to be historically inaccurate.
I have since checked the article on Al-Kindi by Jean Jolivet and Roshdi Rashed in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography and found no mention of al-Kindi's teaching on gravitation.  George N. Atiyeh, in his Al-Kindi: Philosopher of the Arabs, (Rawalpinidi: Islamic Research Institure, 1966), p. 85 presents a description of al-Kindi's view as the conventional Aristotelian one in which heavy bodies, such as the Earth, move downward toward the centre and light bodies, such as Fire, move upward away from the centre.
I will remove the claim here and in other places where it appears.  --SteveMcCluskey 19:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al-Kindi and gravitation 

message: I'm deleting the section on relativity. The only source brought is from an evangelical religious website which seems quite biased, including claims that the theory of relativity is is found in ancient religious works, and dubious claims about Einstein's religiosity.  If anyone wants to find a scholarly source for the claim that Al-Kindi's theories were a precursor the theory of relativity, they can reinstate it.
Zachen3 (talk) 15:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relativity 

message: The claim in this article about al-Kindi's work on the tides references MuslimHeritage.com (which has reliability problems) but I think the material comes from:
:
Next time I'm at the relevant library, I'll check this and replace the reference as appropriate.
The article also uses the History of Science and Technology  in Islam website, which is self-published by Ahmad Y. al-Hassan. My memory of the relevant discussion at WP:RSN is that this site can be used but with qualifications, i.e. if the claim is at all exceptional, note its source; otherwise the author is an accepted, if perhaps heterodox, authority in this area.
All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 17:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problematic sources 

message: The introduction is somewhat 'loaded.' 130.225.236.92 (talk) 21:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV introduction 

message: I've removed the GA tag. With a POV header on it for the last 9 months, it can't be a GA William M. Connolley (talk) 22:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not quite sure who listed this. TT added the tag  but saying This article was linked from WP:GA, so it is having  added per Wikipedia:Bot requests#GA symbol, using AWB. The actual discussion seems to be years earlier Talk:Al-Kindi/GA1 William M. Connolley (talk) 22:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The review is there in the article milestones if you care to look.  AS you will also see further up a reassessment has been started and you are encouraged to post your specific concerns there. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have addressed a couple of issues in the article and have commented on the reassessment page. I encourage members of this wikiproject to participate in the article's improvement to preserve its status as a Good article. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Al-Kindi is credited with inventing the pinhole apparatus which was an early form of the camera obscura. He used it as a research tool. Using a ray model, al-Kindi also described the formation of shadows and images in the camera obscura.
but a glance at the camera obscura page shows that it far predates Al-K William M. Connolley (talk) 09:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

text: I didn't write, or at least didn't intend to write, that he invented the camera obscura or he invented the first form of the camera obscura. From memory, the source for the first sentence mentions Ptolemy had used it before him. Like I had stated in the reassessment page, I don't know much about this topic. However, I provided the exact url in the source. Could you please read it and then clarify the info in this sentence. Also, I don't know why you removed the second sentence which says Using a ray model, al-Kindi also described the formation of shadows and images in the camera obscura. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The problem is that the CA page says it was invented earlier (who knows, it may be wrong, but then we have much more to clean up). So saying that he invented an early form of something invented much earlier is a problem. You have to be careful: apparently reliable sources say wrong things, sometimes William M. Connolley (talk) 23:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

text: So, this looks like classic Jagged misrepresentation of sources. He takes a source that basically says Al-K revived something, and makes it say he invented it. That is wrong. The second sentence isn't obviously wrong, but with the first sentence removed it isn't terribly interesting in itself: it just says he did something others had previously done. Now that, integrated into a coherent view of his work, might be worth saying. As a stand-alone factoid it is odd William M. Connolley (talk) 08:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a GA 

message: For background information, please see RFC/U and Cleanup.
With 128 edits, User:Jagged 85 is the main contributor to this article after May 2007 by far (2nd with 22 edits is William M. Connolley who did clean-up work). The issues are a repeat of what had been exemplarily shown here, here, here or here. I restore the article to the first pre-Jagged version on  2 May 2007 which seems fairly good plus the usual update on categories, templates, infoboxes etc. etc. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub and rework 

message: The optics section looks dodgy, if
: Thus, the De Aspectibus shows that al-Kindî favored an extramission view of vision, in which rays extend from the eyes to make contact with an object, enabling a person to see it.[2] Following Euclid's Optics ultimately, al-Kindî offers geometrical demonstrations against both the alternative “intromission” view, and the view that fuses extramission with intromission; views identified mostly with Aristotle's De anima and Plato's Timaeus, respectively. In other treatises, however, al-Kindî may be more sympathetic to Aristotle's understanding of vision, mixed with possible familiarity with relevant treatises of Ptolemy and John Philoponus. 
is to be believed William M. Connolley (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Optics 

message: The informations in this paragraph are wrong.
There are a lot of music theorists who are supposed that they added the fifth string to the oud, among them also Ziryab, the student of Ishaq al-Mawsili. 
Concerning Al-Kindi, this is a pointless and not very plausible speculation. His music treatise, not the ones which we do not know, but one of those which have survived, describes very clearly a four stringed oud. Based on his treatise, it has even been reconstructed by the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at Frankfurt am Main (I recommend the publications by Eckhard Neubauer who studied Al-Kindis treatises and published their facsimile). Concerning music therapy, Al-Kindi also mentions in another book that these four strings had been coloured according to the four elements and its humours. This is the reason why Al-Kindi is explicitely associated with a very simple and early oud which has just four simple strings, not the five double strings as they are used today.
Another characteristic is that Al-Kindis terminology can be easily recognized as an Arabic translation of Greek terms and he mentioned explicitely his admiration of the Byzantine Octoechos system. This is astonishing, because most of the Ancient Greek treatises had been translated later into Arabic dialects, between the 9th and the 10th century. Al-Farabi's contributions clearly profited from them. Platonykiss (talk) 11:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al-Kindis Music Theory 

message: "He was born and educated in Basra" (opening paragraph)
"Al-Kindi was born in Kufa [...] received his preliminary education there" (opening line under the chapter "Life")
Which one is correct? Ben tetuan (talk) 19:29, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The former, according to Peter Adamson; the latter, according to Henry Corbin (or so I read the cited sources). Why, how do you understand them?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Born in Basra or Kufa? 

message: Substituted at 05:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: He was a Jewish. I don't know why some people trying to Hide that ?? Nizami Aruzi said  he was jewish.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gholaghabijan (talk • contribs) 17:01, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Please use an accurate source. Aruzi is known to be a contentious source. Vedissasantu (talk) 09:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion and Ethnic 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Al-Kindi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071026091801/http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Al-Kindi.html to http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Al-Kindi.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521055213/http://www.bendykes.com/forty.php to http://www.bendykes.com/forty.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:42, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: F would like the article to say:
: His book entitled "Manuscript on Deciphering Cryptographic Messages" gave rise to the birth of cryptanalysis and devised several new methods of breaking ciphers
It can't: "gave rise to the birth of" doesn't parse properly. But even with that infelicity rephrased, it still can't be true, because of "devised several new methods of breaking ciphers" which implies the obvious: that previous methods of breaking ciphers existed. And therefore, this was not the "birth" of cryptography William M. Connolley (talk) 17:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  gave rise to the birth of 

message: Farawahar Al-Kindi and Persian are incompatible things, He's from noble Arab family of Kinda tribe. Being an Arab is both explicitly stated by medieval biographical accounts and reliable modern historians respectively (It's not matter of dispute). please stop your historical distortions by the deliberate nitpicking of invalid material. 
Your source states: But that he was also said to be one of only two famous Arab philosophers -the other is Al-Kindi- P.123.
Thus, I will remove your source. Unless you could provide reliable materials to support your point. Otherwise, distortion will get us nowhere. Best regards. Nabataeus (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al Kindi Background  

message: This never-ending edit-war is all but constructive, so i warn you two about that, if you keep going in this way, i'll ask for a block for both of you and page protection.
Now try to solve your dispute calmly and ONLY IN THE TALK PAGE.
For my part, i think that both of you provide legit sources, but N has far more than one source, this is why i have a proposal:
1)   If F can't provide another source supporting the Persian claim, then we should write something like "The vast majority of sources list him as Arab, but he also has been described as Persian".
2)   If F can provide another source for the Persian claim, then we can write "Arab or Persian".
Wikaviani (talk) 02:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The article on the encyclopaedia is a poor thing, with only one (affiliated) source, but the book itself has run to three editions with a mainstream publisher, so although it is tertiary and not secondary it should be OK, provided the ethnicity is not a matter of controversy. If it is controversial then I'd recommend additional sources. Guy (Help!) 23:30, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to solve this issue ? 

message: It seems that tertiary are reliables when they qualify as reliable sources (publisher/author/content)...
So the source i propsed above is a reliable source.
Farawahar (talk) 08:00, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnicity 

message: I have deleted the body of the article which was a copyright violation of http://www.traditionalarabicmusic.com/The%20Old%20Masters/al_kindi.htm, http://www.muslimheritage.com/article/al-kindi and http://www.muslimheritage.com/article/al-kindi Flat Out (talk) 04:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure?  Prima facie, it looks like these are copying the WP page. You need to investigate the history of the page.  Johnbod (talk) 14:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  It appears to be as you describe, traditionalarabicmusic is clearly copying from Wikipedia. See  and compare to Ibn Bajjah. On the other hand I see no similarities/copyright violation with the source Muslimheritage. If it exist, then those identical parts should be deleted and not the entirety of the article. Nabataeus (talk) 15:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, I ran the first url through the wayback machine and it appears you are right. Flat Out (talk) 00:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of copyright material 

message: Concern 103.164.48.12 (talk) 13:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contribution of yaqoob Al Kindi in physics 

message: @Iskandar323 please maintain the consistency of the Avicenna page in accordance with MOS:ETHNICITY, here and on Averroes. If you are unable to, unlock the Avicenna page. شاه عباس (talk) 15:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: and Ibn Khaldun! شاه عباس (talk) 15:24, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: MOS provides an exception based on whether the ethnicity is related to his notability.  Makeandtoss (talk) 12:33, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: it was ruled that Avicenna's ethnicity is not related to his notability as he worked within an islamic milieu. Not a very sound argument but that's the ruling. For the sake of consistency it should be the same here. شاه عباس (talk) 03:59, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency regarding ethnicity in lead