|WikiProject Islam||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
This article reads more like an instruction book than an encyclopaedic examination of the topic. This article is very much in need of revision.
—Sowlos 08:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Ibrahim vs. AbrahamEdit
The names Ibrahim and Abraham were used throughout this article, but refer to the same figure. I'm not sure which spelling is more appropriate when discussing topics related to Islam, but Ibrahim redirects to Abraham on Wikipedia. I suggest that Abraham be used here. Captain Schmetterling (talk) 17:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
I made some edits to the The sacrifice of Abraham section, replacing referneces to "Ibrahim" with "Abraham". I'm still not sure this is the best method for referring to the character from the Quran, but at least it makes that section conform to the rest of the article and to the redirect to the Abraham article on Wikipedia. It may become problematic when using quotes from the Quran which use "Ibrahim".
Ibraheem vs AbrahamEdit
When referencing Abraham from a Muslim perspective, Ibraheem (or a variant should be used, e.g. Ibrahim, etc). It is acceptable to link to the Abraham article, since Ibraheem and Abraham are the same historical figure. However, the Arabicized version of the name is proper in this context here. As an example, one would likely not use the Arabic name for Jesus ('Issa) in an English article within a Christian context.
References and citationsEdit
This article does not reference or cite the texts from which the rules are taken, and thus could be taken out of context. More than the attention of a Muslim scholar, this article needs to be written in the normal Wikipedia way with citations, not just a list of references at the bottom. It should also clarify where there might be differing Islamic scholar opinions, etc. As it stands, it is basically one view from one perspective, which may or may not be valid in a broader Islamic context.
In October 2013, this article was tagged for possible copyright violation without any url to compare with. June 2016 saw the addition of a website containing a paragraph identical to the lead section here. However, upon closer inspection of the revision history, Wikipedia already had this lead section before said website published its blog post in May 2014. I am therefore removing the falsely identified url from the copypaste tag.
It still remains to be seen which website is the source of the copyvio. According to the tagger's edit summary "at least some of the recent edits are copyvio." I assume that the copyvio was added somewhere in this diff, where one editor almost doubled the amount of text. --HyperGaruda (talk) 06:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)