User talk:Lightyears: Difference between revisions

Dear Lightyears I have completed the rough draft of 'Iddah article (https://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1). It is requested to please have a look at it and advice the necessary edits and what to further do with it. Thanks.
Lehrasap (talk) 23:03, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Mecca article

I have revised my proposed additions, mainly to standardise the references.

Thanks Fernando, the ref formatting looks good, though a few extra tips will be useful: When you use the visual editor it seems to be adding the <nowiki></nowiki> tags to external links, which are not necessary (it's better if readers can click the link). I'm not sure why that's happening, but these tags can be removed via the source editor when you update the article itself if the same happens there (please feel free to go ahead and add your updates when you are ready).

Quran verses should be cited using the {{Quran||}} or {{Quran-range|||}} templates so they can be conveniently clicked by readers to check for themselves on the Quranx website. Wikipedia pages (which we sometimes cite for general overviews) can be linked using another tag in a format like this [[w:Petra|Petra]], ‘Climate’ and ‘Byzantine Period’ - Wikipedia.org [where the first parameter is the wikipedia article name and the second is the display text you want to use). I don't use the visual editor myself, but there's an option to insert templates and then search for quran or quran-range. If there's no means to use the [[w:]] tag in the visual editor it's fine to just use the normal linking feature instead.

For Crone's article you currently only have a short version of the reference. This seems to be unintentional as your first revision on 10 September removed what was the full reference from your initial comments. It would be better to have the more complete version of the Crone reference for your page update. Similarly, for Tesei's article it's great to link the freely accessible academia copy but as well as giving the full reference. An example of a better format is the Tesei reference in the Prophecies in the Quran article.

Also, feel free to add the points you mentioned on the historical attestation of Muhammad talk page, though it should also be mentioned clearly that Ohlig is considered part of the Revisionist school of thought in Islamic studies, specifically the Inârah Institute who are considered a fringe group by other academic scholars. It looks like there is an intention to flesh out the empty sections at some point but it's fine to make those changes now. Lightyears (talk) 14:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I've added more on David A. King. Thanks for the technical advice, I'll go over the whole thing tomorrow. I'm not sure what you mean by a full reference. To include 'https://www.'? The examples you give don't seem to have this. Regards Fernando I can't work out how to edit footnotes. I suppose it's possible to delete and then add

Hi, I'm away for a few days with only my phone, but I recommend the source editor if anything doesn't work well with the visual editor.

By full refs I just meant this

Patricia Crone, How Did the Quranic Pagans Make a Living? Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 68, No. 3 (2005), pp. 387-399. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/20181949, and in her Collected Studies (2016).

Instead of simply Patricia Crone, How Did the Quranic Pagans Make a Living? , also in her Collected Studies (2016).

The first time a journal article is cited we need to give the full ref. The short version would be fine if it's cited again a 2nd time in the same article. I imagine that was your intention originally.

Similarly this would be better:

Tommaso Tesei The Qurʾān(s) in Context(s) Journal Asiatique 309.2 (2021): 185-202

Instead of just Tommaso Tesei

Lightyears (talk) 22:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)