Anti-Islamic article on Wikipedia!

[Fishman]

:sl:
I just saw this anti-Islamic article on wikipedia! Can you refute it please?
:w:

[DAWUD_adnan]

ITS SO STUPID o dont even wanna click on the link it is just crap

[Fishman]

:sl:
Can someone like Ansar please refute it?
:w:

[muslim_friend]

I read it, i didn't like what i read.. It must have been an attempt to brainwash masses in those days, pretty much what's happening today..As for the contents of the Doctrino or whatever, it's total nonsense and doesn't deserve any sort of refutation..

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Hijrah]

I don't get it? Just looks like typical nonsense used as a response to Islamic history, I wouldn't bother

[Fishman]

:sl:
Found an answer here! Alhamdulilah!
:w:

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl: bro,

:sl:
Can someone like Ansar please refute it?
:w:

:uhwhat

I prefer if people just ask questions rather than link to articles or post writings requesting a response. Most of the allegations against Islam you will find are simply rehashed old material that has long been refuted, so it is unncessary to respond to them over and over again. Just ask the question or mention the topic and someone can always direct you to the Islamic response, inshaa'Allah.

Anyway, I see you've found an answer so that is good alhamdulilah.
:w:

[Asyur an-Nagi]

it's just another crap

[SirZubair]

it's just another crap

As bad as it is (i dont know how bad it is,the link has been removed),im sure it cant beat allahuakbar.net at being unislamic..

[Fishman]

As bad as it is (i dont know how bad it is,the link has been removed),im sure it cant beat allahuakbar.net at being unislamic..

:sl:
It is basically claiming that the whole of Islamic history is wrong, that Muhammad was actually Judeo-Arab preacher and that the Jews and Arabs were allied against the Byzantines. It is rediculous really, as three biased non-Muslim sources do not refute thousands of possibly biased Muslim sources.
:w:

[SirZubair]

Akhi,could you please PM me the link ?

[Daffodil]

Asalamulaikum fishman.

Ur only 14 if i remember correctly but ur so intelligent u sound like ur 35. are u sure ur 14

[wilberhum]

:sl:
It is basically claiming that the whole of Islamic history is wrong, that Muhammad was actually Judeo-Arab preacher and that the Jews and Arabs were allied against the Byzantines. It is rediculous really, as three biased non-Muslim sources do not refute thousands of possibly biased Muslim sources.
:w:

I disagree. Wikipedia has an article about some writings that “basically claims that the whole of Islamic history is wrong”. Wikipedia makes no judgment on whether the writings are correct of not. Wikipedia makes no claim except the fact that the writings exist.
Hardly Anti-Islamic.
That would be like calling Wikipedia Anti-Christianity because they have an article about the “Gospel of Judas”, and making no judgment about it.

[muslim_friend]

^I dont think fishman was trying to discredit wiki.. He just didn't like what he read.

[Muslim Soldier]

It is ver easy to take care of wikipedia articles.

Just edit them!

[Fishman]

It is ver easy to take care of wikipedia articles.

Just edit them!

:sl:
You have to edit them properly and carefully though. If you are not an expert then it is a bad idea to try.
:w:

[Woodrow]

wikipedia is a good source of finding what has been written about a subject. As long as it is used simply as a tool to find out what has been said, it is handy.

However, the fact that something that has been written does not mean it is correct.


To use wiki as a resource for fact, anything a person finds should be verified through other sources, before accepting it as being accurate, correct or true.

[muslim_friend]

One good thing about wiki is that they ban people responsible for vandalism.

[afriend]

well.....What is this anti islam article....I have had just abouts enough of winkipedia....Thanks to them, I got a 'X' all over my work.....

If you are ever using Winkipedia, always cross check with other sources too ;)

[wilberhum]

wikipedia is a good source of finding what has been written about a subject. As long as it is used simply as a tool to find out what has been said, it is handy.

However, the fact that something that has been written does not mean it is correct.


To use wiki as a resource for fact, anything a person finds should be verified through other sources, before accepting it as being accurate, correct or true.

I don't understand, again we are in total agreement. One should always check out multiple sources. Also check out if there primary purpose is other than supplying unbisas facts.

[Skillganon]

:sl:
Found an answer here! Alhamdulilah!
:w:

And it mentions the university that I went to. Yepeee.

[MahmoodShariff]

Aswrwb,

I guess "They dont fear the blame of the blamers"

if we search the net, its already filled with anti-islamic articles and documents. Can any bro/sis give any suggestions how this in whole can be stopped.

JK.

[جوري]

aslaam
isn't it our duty as muslims if we see wrong to change it? anyone can write for wiki... I think we should forward this to a scholarly person to challenge and write a rebuttal

[جوري]

we should also contact cair.... we can't let this go on... they are brain washing people 24/7 I hazard say if they can get into your dreams they would... can the mods of this forum please contact cair and islamic institutes.... btw anyone can write for wiki the time is now...

[Skillganon]

well.....What is this anti islam article....I have had just abouts enough of winkipedia....Thanks to them, I got a 'X' all over my work.....

If you are ever using Winkipedia, always cross check with other sources too ;)

I didn't use wikipedia for my project, and I got 87% for my project yepee, mostly it was my work (lab-based) but my intro was a stunner.