Template:Pictorial-Islam-options: Difference between revisions

From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam
Jump to navigation Jump to search
[checked revision][checked revision]
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>Also see: [[Template:Pictorial-Islam]]</noinclude><!-- HELP NOTES: Each option tag handles one random story --><choose>
<noinclude>Also see: [[Template:Pictorial-Islam]]</noinclude><!-- HELP NOTES: Each option tag handles one random story --><choose>
<option weight="1">{{Pictorial-Islam|1=Qur'an and Semen Production (Qur'an 86:7)|2=[[File:Hippocrates.jpg|190px|link=Quran and Semen Production]]|3=This article analyzes the various attempts to show that the Qur'an correctly describes semen production from between the “sulb” and the “tara’ib” in verse 86:7.
There are at least seven distinct classes of explanations, and none of them are supported by modern scientific knowledge and are frequently conflicting. For example, Ibn Kathir refers to tara’ib as a female organ, while other tafsirs claim it belongs to the man. Another conflict is the definition of sulb to mean either the backbone or the ‘hardening’ of the loins. ([[Quran and Semen Production|''read more'']])}}</option>





Revision as of 21:20, 9 February 2014

Also see: Template:Pictorial-Islam

Islam, Science and the Problems at Wikipedia
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination

At Wikipedia, Islam-related articles are severely compromised by Muslim editors. An example of this is a 2010 incident where an editor with over 67,000 edits was caught intentionally inserting false information into articles.

Jagged 85 is the main contributor to the many inaccurate Islam/Science/Golden Age articles which are still being copied and pasted all over the internet by Muslims, and more than 20% of Wikipedia's "Timeline of historic inventions" was provided by him.

With contributions to over 8,100 separate articles, it is unlikely that all of Jagged 85's edits will ever be fixed. And even if they were, these Wikipedia articles have already been reproduced all over the net by other sites which use Wikipedia as a source. (read more)