"Ben McIlwain" <cydeweys(a)gmail.com> wrote in
message news:441F19FC.3010801@gmail.com...
Fastfission wrote:
> True, but I think one should consult secondary sources *first* for our
> project, and primary sources *second*. You cannot consult a primary
> source without an interpretative framework, and you should be deriving
> that from a secondary source, in my interpretation of [[WP:NOR]].
[snip]
Strongly agreed. I'm doing mediation right now on
some Islamic-related
articles and one of the disputants is sourcing everything directly from
the Quran :-(
Well...IFF the dispute is over what the Quran says on a certain subject,
then this is entirely justified.
OTOH interpreting the Quran seems to be a full-time job for near enough
every single Muslim, so if they're arguing over interpretation, they need to
be sourcing those different interpretations.
I know we have the Quran at Wikisource: do we have the various
interpretations that have appropriate licences also?
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]