Talk:Quran (Progressive Muslims Organization)

Information about this edition
Edition:
Source:	http://free-minds.org/quran/
Contributor(s):
Level of progress:
Notes:	Released under an "attribution" license: "Articles and materials on this site may be reproduced, or copied and posted to other sites as long as a link is provided to www.free-minds.org or www.progressivemuslims.org"[1]
Proofreaders:

If it does not violate any of Wikisource policy, we are building an index of it and establishing Internal Quran Relationship (IQR) to link terms and its definitions across Quran semantical units. IQR use openburhan.com for research and verification of the quranic terms relationship.

We believe that IQR is the best way to read and understand terms in the holy text. With IQR we can be less dependent on words that were chosen by a particular translator and more on the usage and relationship between transliterated arabic terms across quran. Therefore with IQR we can use any translation from any translator as it is and unchanged, but still get a complete understanding of each quranic terms related to law (muhkam verses) and approximate understanding on the other quranic terms or stories (mutshabaha verses).

To conform the wikisource policy, we are allowed to make links, but should not change any text either in the translation nor the transliteration except for spelling correction purpose.

IQR can be applied to any translation in any language, because IQR index only contains numbers so there is nothing to be translated nor authored. Here is how to do it in a printed version of a translation:

1. drop any on existing index, footnotes and words inside brackets in the translation.
2. put any quranic terms covered by IQR into bold font
3. add IQR index at the end of the translation

IQR index contains the translated terms and the transliterated/real arabic terms. Each arabic terms in the index has definition, synonim, antonym and usages in a form of numbers representing the related verses/semantical units.

For online version, those quranic terms can link directly to the transliterad arabic terms definition page. 82.210.106.134 06:44, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• hr:Kuran

• bs:Kur'an

• fr:Le Coran

Index

The index should be arranged into sections

1. About (Tafseel): verses about Quran and The Book/Kitab
   1. The Essence of The Book: verses about the book
   2. Quran: verses about the reading
2. Message (Risalah): imperative verses
   1. Roles: the audience of the message
   2. Actions: the do and don'ts
      1. General humankind: The straight path (Sirathy Mustaqiman) and wisdom (Al-Hikmah)
      2. Believers-only: The Pillar of Islams
      3. Family
      4. Commerce
      5. Criminal
      6. Politic
      7. Diplomatic
3. Facts (Haq): stories from the past, nature and future events
   1. Figures: character with names
   2. Places: places with names
   3. Misc: supporting objects or abstract concept
4. Alfabetic index of those above

212.123.21.178 08:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Sections

Many thanks to Bookofjude for re-arranging the Wiki Quran into 114 chapters. In addition to that he also cleans up the navigation. But at the same time he made the pages bigger (over 114KB) causing:

1. Some browser corrupt content when editing the whole page
2. Slow loading time, when we just need to go to a certain section
3. Breaks links from pages of sister projects (such as: wikibooks)

To remedy this problem, I suggests:

1. Keep the sections! so editing can be done on sections
2. Loading time can be ignored, since there is no solution
3. Rename "Chapter x:yy-zz" into "yy-zz", since it is not logical to have chapter inside chapter.
4. Update those links on sister projects to use new convention. for example: s:Quran/2#1-7

212.123.21.178 09:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Request Protection Measure

Peace onto you,

I am an ordinary muslim and concerned about one issue that I think is very delicate. It is about editing the Qur-an.

First, I am no scholar so please excuse my amateur writing and lack of supporting material.

('According to Muslim belief') The Quran is the word of God Al-Mighty, the essence of its last message to Humanity. Thus, it is most important. God has promised to protect it from corruption. "015.009 We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption)."

Nevertheless, muslims have immediately (and continuously) put forth effort to protect Quran from corruption, that by proceeding to the compilation of the text and by learning it by-heart (synonyme of to guard/preserve in arabic).

Wikisource's initiative to provide an online copy of the Quranic text is to my opinion a very welcome effort to let the word of God be known to many people thanks to the internet technology. However, the other side of it is that any one (intentionally or not) can edit the text and thus may corrupt the word of God.

I would like to request, if possible, to limit editing of the actual text of the Quran to trusted administrators; if not possible, at least a disclaimer clarifying the above matter.

Thank you for your time. Looking forward to it,

All thanks to God. Al-Mighty, testify that I have transmitted. —unsigned by Khonsali 02:44, 8 March 2007.

Hello Khonsali. I appreciate your concern. Ironically, we do not protect it from editing precisely because it may be incorrect or incomplete. Once several users have proofread the entire text and ensured that it is correct, it can be permanently protected and featured on the main page through the Featured text process. —{admin} Pathoschild 02:53:17, 08 March 2007 (UTC)

And peace upon you.

I understand your apprehensions with leaving the Quran so freely editable, since many people turn to sources such as ours to find texts, and would be dismayed or misled if a vandal decided to change the wording. However, Wikisource policy is only to protect pages from open editing once we are certain that they are "absolute" - something that is going to be unlikely any time soon with a text the size of the Quran.

From a secular perspective, we would run an equal risk of saying "This is absolute" and presenting a text that still has errors in it, and at least now we are able to forewarn readers, by not allaying their natural healthy skepticism of any passages that appear "suspect". You'll notice our text even prefaces by stating that this is not accurate or sacred, as it has been translated from the original Arabic.

From a religious perspective, the sacred Word of God was revealed in Arabic, and only the Arabic text is "absolute", and English (or otherwise) translation is naturally flawed because it has been written with the mind of Man, not God. You might be interested to read the Wikipedia article w:Translation of the Qur'an. The Arabic text of the Quran is hosted at ar:أَلْقُرآن أَلْكَرِيم, but unfortunately it also is in a state of incompleteness - which is why we cannot yet protect that work. Once that original Arabic text is faithfully transcribed to the Arabic wikisource, it will most definitely be protected from editing by all but a few trusted Arabic administrators.

As you say, God himself has charged that he will protect the scriptures from being corrupted (as a point of interest, this is also fundamental to Christians, as God makes the same promise in Matthew 5:18) - this does not mean that God, or we, are obligated to watch every website to make sure no vandal or hacker ever damages a translation of the Quran, I have always taken it to mean that He, and we, are obligated to protect people from studying incorrectly from an incorrect or vandalised copy of the Quran. And I'm glad to say that although it will never be impossible for somebody to vandalise an online translation, that I have never seen an example of this disrespect on Wikisource - and there are many people who watch vigilantly for it, and would immediately revert it as soon as it was done. Sherurcij ^{(talk) (λεμα σαβαχθανει)} 03:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

The introduction isn't particularly NPOV (not everyone agrees that the original text of the Quran is sacred) Is it required to be NPOV? (please forgive me, I'm new to wikisource, I'm mostly just on wikipedia!) --130.216.30.233 10:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

That's not what the intro says. Anyway it's a copy from WP. So if it's not neutral, complain there. ;o) Yann 10:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Delete this translation

"Free minds" is not an authority on the translation of Quran. Why is not the big 3 here? I mean Shakir, Pick thall and Yousaf Ali. --Matt57 14:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Are those translations in the public domain? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

At least, there needs to be a license. Yann 08:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with deleting this translation because it appears to be as good as any other. Their authority rests not on their reputation but on their effectiveness, and there is nothing wrong with their work. Remfan1994 (talk) 01:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Moving to The Holy Qur'an (Free Minds Translation)

There are two sources of the qur'an on wikisource, therefore the name of the translator has to be mentioned in the title.--Diaa abdelmoneim 09:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Remove copyvio

Free Minds has granted permission to WikiSource to copy the work with certain conditions (see the footer on Free Minds website). Aburizal (talk) 21:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

That isn't a release into the public domain. —innotata 15:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)