Talk:Qisas

message: Qisas and Diyya are two sides of the same idea.  Qisas is the idea of exact retribution (eye for an eye) and diyya is the idea of compensation instead of exact retribution.  both articles contain much of the same material and might therefore benefit from merging. Misheu 18:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I retract the request. Misheu 15:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: merge request

message: A reference to Pan Am 103 and IR655 has been placed on this page.  I defy the CIA to remove it.Tarannon103 (talk) 16:43, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Bugger the CIA, that's completely unprovable (the Iranians knew in advance how many victims there would be, did they?), factually incorrect (324 Iranians died in a crash where 290 people died in total, according to Iran Air Flight 655, which supposedly matches some subset of the 270 total people who died in the Lockerbie crash according to Pan_Am_Flight_103#Victims), uses a citation from a random blog rather than a decent source, and is apparently added for the sole purpose of being in incredibly poor taste.  Removed (by a non-US national).  Feel free to put it back if you can find Wikipedia standard sources for your claim. --82.72.123.240 (talk) 12:06, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pan Am 103

message: The section doesn't even the word "honor crime" anywhere. It only mentions Qisas isn't applicable if a parent or grandparent kills their children. The section should talk about honor crimes only or the Qisas not being applicable should be linked with honor crimes using sources. KahnJohn27 (talk) 20:11, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Read 3rd para. RLoutfy (talk) 20:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm talking about any kind of Islamic ruling or Sharia ruling on honor crimes. KahnJohn27 (talk) 23:34, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand you. Please restate your concern in light of the cited sources. RLoutfy (talk) 01:41, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

text:  I meant the section isn't talking anything about what Islam says of honor crimes. KahnJohn27 (talk) 07:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The section only says that due to Sharia not punishing parents for killing their children, it has been alleged that Sharia encourages honor crimes. It isn't talking anything about what Quran, hadith or any kind of sharia law says of honor crimes. That's what my comments meant. KahnJohn27 (talk) 04:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qisas and honor crimes 

message: This section includes two hadiths, can anyone verify their authenticity? 20:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qisas and blasphemy 

message: While working on article Islamic advice literature I realized that word 'Qisas'  is appearing in different meaning at Qisas Al-Anbiya it comes as story/anecdote telling (alternative spelling Kissa). And in article named Qisas seems to come as revenge. Need support in creating proper disambiguation page and links so reader do not end up in unexpected pages. 
Of course  article Islamic advice literature too needs support in update and expansion since lot of scholarly references are available in books and google scholar too. 
Thanks in advance and greetings
Bookku (talk) 07:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation support request  

message: There should be more primary sources concerning the ahadith and Fiqhi issues related to the Qisas on Muslims in the Case of non Muslims and the differentiation between someone who is and isn’t under the protection of the state (Dhimmi). A good place to start is Fath ul-Bari 6517 93.112.194.126 (talk) 07:23, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qisas, Harbis or Dhimmi? 

message: Peace be upon you, I have a question: I edited a section to provide context for a verse, and that was not accepted. Why is that? I provided a source for the quotation, and anyone can go check it if they want. The context is very important so the reader could understand the meaning of it. Leaving it without context means that it is likely people misinterpret it, and I do not see the mistake in providing a view from authetic Islamic sources. Anwar Jihad (talk) 17:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit was reverted because you deleted a valid cited secondary source without any explanation of why, and you replaced it with a long quotation cited to a primary source. Secondary sources are preferred on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the difference between a primary source and a secondary source? Would giving a different source for the same quotation give it more credibility? Thanks! Anwar Jihad (talk) 19:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, would saying that a source is incorrect because it disagrees with authentic islamic sources, which are definietly more correct in terms in explaining Islamic matters count as an explanation? Anwar Jihad (talk) 19:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, last one! After I replaced the pervious writing, it was put back. Then why was mine removed? The verse is now left without any context or explanation.  Anwar Jihad (talk) 19:50, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

text: See Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources for an explanation of sources. The context was already in the text you removed. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:17, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Context for verse