Talk:Inshallah

message: If we have this term, we certainly ought to have an article on the similar Arabic term "Hamdullah." Better spelled as Al-hamdu lillah - Thanks be to God.  And there is an article which could be used/expanded - Al-hamdu lillahi rabbil 'alamin Badagnani 06:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an article Alhamdulillah, but it doesn't seem to be in great shape right now (parts of it were better previously). AnonMoos (talk) 01:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamdullah 

message: I wonder if both words are capitalised or if it is in fact correct to write "insha'Allah"? 78.149.217.1 (talk) 15:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hard for Allah to always be capitalized in Latin script, since in Arabic grammar its initial vowel is frequently overwritten with the i'rab of the preceding word.  That's why so many names end in -ullah. AnonMoos (talk) 15:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization

message: I'm a student of the Spanish language and I've never heard it used in the way indicated by this article.  In my experience it's used exactly like Insha'Allah to express a hope or wish, "Ojala que no llueva" (God willing it won't rain, I hope that it won't rain).
*You are correct. Please see: Ojala (que). --Mlenoirh (talk) 01:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish

message: I really miss a pronounciation tag for this phrase. Could someone who knows how to pronounciate Insha'Allah add it? 62.210.228.209 (talk) 07:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto here. I'd really like to see the correct pronunciation transcribed. Agateller (talk) 00:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: The introduction section lists a Christian Bible verse in relation to an Islam saying. God Willing (In relation to the Christian God) and Allah Willing (In relation to the Muslim God) are two wildly differing sayings. The same background meaning, but it's like praying to Kali or Hades, you're not going to call it the same thing. Specifics, I know, but important for a site that prides itself on being factually correct.
Group them under divine supplication by all means, but quoting the Koran to back up a Christian saying or the Bible to back up an Islam saying is just not "right", so to speak. 124.168.120.141 (talk) 20:44, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Cross Contamination/OR

message: This article has recently been substantively revised by an IP editor. There were comparatively few references in the first place, and neither of the two citations have so far as I can tell been changed, but it does seem to me that a lot of material has been removed and at least a few sections of the article rewritten, almost to the point of removal. Not knowing that much about the topic myself, I am not sure that the recent changes weren't in some way an improvement, but I do question the change in emphasis and the removal of material, even if a lot of it wasn't directly cited. With no additional citiations in the revision, it is, comparatively, still no better referenced than it was before. I would welcome any indications from better informed editors whether the changes were beneficial or otherwise. John Carter (talk) 17:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also bothered by a re-write involving a 25% reduction. I'm familiar with, but not an authority on the phrase. The structure of the article is much better now except that the lede has almost disappeared.  I believe the following material has disappeared.  I don't see any other specifics that might be really significant.You might get some quality feedback from a note to AnonMoos or to Lesgles who have each contributed to this article in the past.  SBaker43 (talk) 18:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent revision of article 

message: The Ip user is correct, Allah is NOT specific to Muslims it is just Arabic for God as opposed to god. So it is God willing not Allah willing. Christians who believe in Jesus and spk Arabic say Allah just as Muslims who spk English say Gods, without diminishing their God concept. in Israel Arab Jews will say Allah also. ref. No where have I seen Allah Willing, I have seen "If Allah wills it" --Inayity (talk) 07:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allah Willing 

message: In colloquial use some of Mogametaneren the word   "Insha'Allah"            in the sense - I admit (forgive) See this as a friendship gift. Is that also correct to the classical language Arab? And, which can be assumed to be a  "Insha'Allah"           ? Gestohllene counter Tende e.g. Which may be as "Insha'Allah" ?Bis23 02 2015 (talk) 13:01, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second meaning. 

message: My understanding is that Inshallah commonly means "not likely."  Shouldn't this be brought up in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.90.132.26 (talk) 21:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish to register my amusement that, years later, the prominent use of the phrase in precisely that context ensured that the above was finally recorded in the article. RexSueciae (talk) 02:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colloquial Arabic meaning of "Not likely?" 

message: The article itself is badly written but worse the people who made a move from above could not grasp the basics of the Arabic grammar. The second word is the verb shāʾa "(he) wished", while the word ʾAllāh(u) (the isolated form) does lose its initial vowel as well as the glottal stop. The verb cannot lose its final vowel and the noun cannot not have A- (it is a part of the former definite article, so it's regularity elided). It's ungrammatical. So the proper (simplified) name is "In sha'a llah", or much better if we stick to a more scientific ʾIn shāʾa llāhu and create any possible redirects.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 13:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Google Ngram and the British National Corpus also agree.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 13:55, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper name 

message: Please ScrapIronIV, could you explain the deletion of the sections on Portuguese and Spanish and In Christianity? They made the article much more rounded.
You refer to WP:NOR and WP:SYNTH, but I fail to see any "improper editorial synthesis" at play here. The additions were a mere accumulation of equivalences in other languages, all rather factual and all referenced. No "original research", nor any intention to "reach or imply a conclusion".
I can see you had already once deleted the section on Spain. Perhaps you are unaware of the intimate linguistic relation between the history of Arabic and Spanish and Portuguese? There is indeed a particular interest of such an Arabic expression existing in two Romance languages, especially as it is the only case within Indo-European languages, probably excepting the Indo-Iranian branch (it would be worth adding the Persian version of inshaLlah to the article too). You see, ojalá has to do to with all the historic and religious factors which relate to Al-Andalus.
The Greek and Latin equivalents are of interest because they illustrate the usage of such an expression right at the heart of the Christian scriptures. I added no idle or fanciful material, nor any original ideas. All I meant to do was to "collect and organise material from existing sources within the provisions of the relevant content policies." If you think I did something else, I would much appreciate some orientation.
I suspect you were a bit uninformed about the particular subject of the article. I for one would hesitate before modifying an article on aircraft, which seems to be your expertise, so I would suggest you too pause for a moment before deleting valuable content outside your ken—I say this quite respectfully. Sure enough, "to be bold" is recommended, but so is also "to do something which improves the contents of the wiki." 
Kindly explain what's wrong with the additions, or just undo your deletions if you please. If I don't hear from you within a few days, I shall undo your deletions for the article's sake. 
Thanks, Desde la Torre (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other languages 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Inshallah. 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/20120310201443/http://www.ahya.org/amm/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=149 to http://www.ahya.org/amm/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=149
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) 02:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified