- This is an Archive page of past discussions that should not be edited to incorporate new conversations. For active discussions or to start a new discussion , see the appropriate main Discussion page.
Do we have anything on the Muslim Brotherhood? How about Rifqa Bary?--Natassia 20:00, 9 October 2009 (PDT)
- Nope, nothing on either. --Axius 20:21, 9 October 2009 (PDT)
Think someone with an understanding of the Arabic language could do an article on Iblis? The etymology of its name? About how it lives in our noses and is made of fire, smokeless fire which would imply some reaction resembling the powder used in modern firearms, yet the worst a human body apparently gets from this is suggestive whispers instead of a deafening, burning, ripped to pieces explosive death? About, "The God" throwing Iblis in hell, which is described as fiery in the Qu'ran and how that is supposed to be punishment for a creature that is made of fire? An Arabic fluent user could probably come up with a lot more.
- Thanks for the suggestion, yes that would be a good article. Currently we dont have any arabic editors active on the site. --Axius (talk) 10:43, 17 March 2013 (PDT)
This is idea will be unpopular with Wikipedia die-hards, but it is well established in the psychological research.
Publish everything with a serifed font (Times, Garamond, Cambria, Bookman, Georgia, etc.).
Studies keep on showing that it is easier to read a serifed font. Those little flicks at the end of each letter seem to glide onto the next letter more easily than a blank space. Although the clean, childish appearance of Arial or Geneva looks superficially as if it should be clearer, in fact people are much less likely to finish reading something in an unserifed font.
If you want readers to finish the major articles, presenting them in a serifed font could make the difference.1234567 (talk) 21:26, 1 August 2012 (PDT)
- Thanks for the suggestion! --Admin3 (talk) 02:57, 2 August 2012 (PDT)
- Some interesting comments on Wikipedia's page for serif fonts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serif#Readability_and_legibility. Basically says "scientific study on this topic has been ambiguous". --Axius (talk) 01:51, 3 August 2012 (PDT)
Quranists "right hand possess"
Quranists claim that "ma malakat aymanuhum" in 23:6,70:30 and others are not "right hand possess" but it means "maintained by oath". They confuse "aymanuhum" with "aymanihim" and "aymanukum" with "aymanikum". It would be great if someone can write a complete refutation using Arabic. I have some dictionaries but Quranists refuse to accept them by calling them "influenced by hadiths".
If someone can use Lisanul quran and Lisanul Arab it would be awesome. --Azdahaexm (talk)
Watch this video
I would like to tell everyone to watch this:
This guy make a historical argument about the destruction of classical civilization via Jihad.
Someone could create an article basead on this video.
Sorry about my english. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs) on 23:19, 12 October 2012
I noticed recently that wikipedia now has a Ref hover system where you hover over the ref number and it shows you the reference in a little popup and you dont have to go down to the references section. (, hover over ref #10). So here you see a popup and you can click on the source there. I've thought of this feature before. Hopefully we'll have this in the next software upgrade. --Axius (talk) 10:02, 1 December 2012 (PST)
- That would be an awesome addition. Though I doubt that will stop the trolls from their false protests. --Sahabah (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2012 (PST)
Is there any chance in the future that we could make a book of the articles in WikiIslam in PDF similar to Wikipedia? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs) on 23:18, 4 January 2013
- Hmm. Sounds like an interesting idea. I don't know about what kind of pro's and con's will be involved for us. --Sahabah (talk) 07:22, 5 January 2013 (PST)
- hi 126.96.36.199, thanks for your suggestion. Currently there's no plan for this. The best way to read the content is on the website directly because if a PDF is compiled, it will become outdated as changes are made on the website. Our articles also contain links and the PDF experience is less user friendly as compared to a website (where all activity happens within the browser, as opposed to switching between Acrobat and the browser). Its an extra feature but its not a high priority right now. --Axius (talk) 08:19, 5 January 2013 (PST)
Editing disabled temporarily
I have to disable editing on this site while we move. I would say, watch out for the new site . Once the edits have been transferred over, edits can be made on that new site. I'll post a discussion message there at some point. --Axius (talk) 14:08, 10 February 2013 (PST)
- Ok, this new IP site is active now. Editing can be done here instead of on the old site. Thanks Claustrum! --Axius (talk) 17:43, 10 February 2013 (PST)
I want to help you!
hi! I have a suggestion for you: I'm an active user on Facebook and I have some pages about Islam that are similar to your website. I could not find any page related to your site on Facebook. I suggest you to open a page there. for instance I made one and now it is ready to use: 
it may help you to have much more visitors and many new people to find you website and read your ideas. I'm ready for any kind of help and waiting for your permission to start or stop the page activities. Best Wishes!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sepehr (talk • contribs) on 04:31, 19 April 2013
Hi Sepehr. Thanks for taking the initiative. But I don't think we'd be interested in that. We did have our own page and it was deleted. Maybe Axius will think differently (he'll probably comment later when he logs in). A fairly recent addition to the site is the Translation Project, so how would you feel about translating a few of our articles into the Persian language? Also you could create a sandbox: User:Sepehr/Sandbox and work on/submit some of your articles if you think they would be suitable for the site.--Sahab (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2013 (PDT)
- Sepehr, thanks for making that. I'll think about this. We need a new URL though. I'm assuming its possible to have multiple admins on a Facebook page. I'll get back to you here or by email.--Axius (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2013 (PDT)
Abu Jahal, Ikriban Ibn Abi Jahl and /or One Islam Productions
One Islam Productions's "4 Stories That Tell Us Who Prophet Muhammad Really Was! Emotional Video" starts off by saying that Abu Jahal had killed Muslims for no other reason than because they were believers. The video then goes on to talk about the kindness of Muhammad to his son, Ikribin Ibn Abi Jahl. I have come to be skeptical of Muslim claims that in Mohammad's time there were people who killed Muslims without provocation. It would be interesting to see an article addressing this claim about Abu Jahal.
- Wikiislam certainly requires an article on Abu Jahl - the accusations made against him and similar characters in the Sira certainly merit analysis, particularly from a historical-critical perspective. Would you like to get started on it? You could address the topic from either a traditional or historical-critical standpoint, whatever you prefer, or both. Not sure what your editorial privileges are at the moment, but I can make a sandbox for you to get started on a draft if you'd like. IbnPinker (talk) 16:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree that it's quite reasonable to ask someone making a suggestion if they would be able to do it. After all, ideas are always more plentiful than volunteer sweat. However, I am over-committed at the moment.