Talk:Islamic holy books

message: Anyone have a citation for "In Islam, it is believed that the Quran is the only Holy Book that was not altered over the course of the duration of time."
EnglandUser (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation needed

message: Editor2020
please revert the text of Al-kitab as it has arabic text references of ayats of Quran.
thanksFarrukh38 (talk) 14:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is your question relevant to the article? If it is please elaborate. If it isn't then take your question to a chatroom. Green Giant 00:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: request

message: I think this article was created after Kutub, but that article is too short so I suppose it should be merged into this one. Also, perhaps it would be better to have little sections for the main Islamic holy books: Quran, Tawrat, Injil, Zabur and Suhuf-i-Ibrahim with a brief summary and significance of each with a little 'main article' at the start of each section. MP   (talk) 08:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a merger would be good and little sections would improve the layout Green Giant 23:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Dear Mokhtar Stork, I understand that you are concerned with maintaining what you believe to be the true doctrine of Islam.  However, it is wikipedia's policy when substantial differences of opinion exist to show all the various viewpoints.  Therefore, although you believe that the books referred to in the Qur'an no longer exist, the fact that many Muslims believe that they still exist must be mentioned in the wikipedia article.  However, I am currently working my way through the article and will try to make sure that your beliefs are given the respect they deserve throughout it. Mitchell Powell (talk) 07:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganisation of article + merger tag 

message: The top level category :Category:Islam belongs in the article as it is a fundamental of Islam. In trying to cleanup the Islam category page, I've deliberately left some articles on that page (such as this article) that are extremely important. We don't want to pollute the top level category page with too many articles, just the really important ones. Thanks. MP (talk•contribs) 10:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top level category 

message: referece for kutub as previous scripture needs reliable source to improve the article because the reference cited is of Aqida and Aqida is referring to Islamic Holy books. please check because on both places there is no any reference ....thanks.Farrukh38 (talk) 21:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: referece for kutub needs reliable source

message: It is perhaps appropriate to ask 180.234.16.195 why he/she thought it necessary to transfer the "Book of Yahya" to the "Scrolls" section. The Qur'an describes it as a book ("kitab"), not a scroll ("suhuf"). Nevertheless, if the majority of editors support that transfer, then I will of course accept it. --DLMcN (talk) 04:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: JohnChrysostom - Regarding the explanation for your truncation: "improper use of primary sources to support WP:SYNTH interpretation, and POV sentence: please use reliable secondary sources that analyze the primary sources" ... > it could, however, be argued that the deleted material does at least throw useful light on the subject; i.e., the Qur'an really does mention the Sabians.--DLMcN (talk) 11:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kitab of Yahya 

message: The case used in the title is irrelevant. Titles often capitalise words that aren't capitalised in ordinary text. Look at the text itself rather than just the title; it does not capitalise "tafsir" even in "tafsīr al-Qurʾān bi-l-Kitāb". For example, in the preface you linked:
Your own source does not capitalise it in this context. – Scyrme (talk) 00:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tafsir