User talk:Mikka85

Hello, Mikka85 and a belated welcome to Wikipedia! I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help one get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions, you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are interested in learning more about contributing, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Red Director (talk) 18:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Alexander the Great in the Quran

Hi. The article is actually Alexander the Great in the Quran. If you have content concerns you should raise them on the article talk page, but briefly, I reverted your edits because your sources don't support them. Incidentally, are you using multiple accounts?PiCo (talk) 00:28, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

What? No I'm not using different accounts. Mate really, with respect, Wheeler ibid p 19 supports exactly this, just look at the proposed theory (the simplistic drawing). He is stating that Q83-101 may very well developed differently then initially anticipated. Needless to say Gerö verifies the eclatant weekness in Nöldeke's "Pahlavi-origin"-theory by his own findings: The Gog & Magog-apocalyptic narrative interpolation in late byzantine recension, but absent in early recensios. I don't want to brag about this but this belongs in there mate, really. This comes from someone who, not counting ottoman-turkic literature, studies this. Entire paassages in Gerös work (esp. p.4-5 Memra and Neshana on Alexander and the Alexander romances comparison with Q83-101) are dedicated to this. It literally supports a new approach to the causa, which Wheeler further elaborates. I'm asking again, why was it reverted? I don't care for apologetic scholars or their approach, if this is what you fear (judging on what I saw on your talk page). What I care for are facts. And when these facts are there, they should be mentioned, otherwise the objectivity goes down the hill. By the way you even deleted the Rabbi Levi editation. This hole section esp. the Khidr-narrative uses quotes and sources from the 19th century, and some of these are long outdated and refuted/ re-worked ever since. Mikka85 (talk) 01:13, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Wanted to ask whether you're still active and willing to contribute to this article with the alternate conclusions content you previously included. I believe those edits were unilaterally and wrongly reverted. -- AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 04:52, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Editing Alexander

My own opinion is that Alexander the Great in the Quran should be deleted and its content merged into Dhul Qarnayn wherever it would add to that article, but I doubt I'd get that past other users. If you want to edit the article in the direction of shortening it, go ahead, but be sensitive to the views of those others.PiCo (talk)

@PiCo: I see. This would then mean that Cyrus the Great in the Quran should also been merged into Dhul Qarnayn, as the word "two-horned" is mentioned in the Old Testament attributed to Cyrus/Dariush. I don't know how this would fit or look like, since I'm pretty new to Wiki. I would leave this to others. My intention in Alexander the Great in the Quran is not shortening it, instead adding some sources to show the current state of research. I don't know if you read the hole pdf-article by Stephen Gerö. In short: As you pointed out he supports the overall concensus among western scholars and identifies Alexander the Great with Dhul Qarnayn but he, due to current manuscripts, admits that these (namely the syriac Alexander Neshana, Memra and the Romance itself, the only ones that have the Gate/Endzeit Narrative) "do not qualify as a direct source for the Quranic Narrative". The argument is, as he further points out, based on the chronology: The Neshana on Alexander was written between 629-636, the Memra(which was based on the Neshana) was written between 630-640, the Romance was written between 630-(open) and finally Ps-Methodius was written in 692. But according to almost all western scholars (one of which beeing the important Quran chronology of Nöldeke) the Surah with Dhul Qarnayn, named Surah Kahf (Surah 18), was revealed between 615-620, from the muslim perspective it was 618 and according to Nöldeke it was 615/616 (second meccan period)Meccan surah . I would like this to be mentioned in an objective way possible. My first attempt was not objective, I left out Gerös concensus. The question is: How should I proceed and where, in the article, does it belong?Mikka85 (talk) 14:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)