This article was nominated for deletion on 15 February 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 May 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This   level-5 vital article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Islam Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Invention Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Invention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Invention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InventionWikipedia:WikiProject InventionTemplate:WikiProject InventionInvention articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Lists This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

The main article is so blatantly wrong on almost every point, I do not know how Wikipedia can print such lies.

I have been through the list and found fault with almost everything. Others have too:

https://wikiislamica.net/wiki/How_Islamic_Inventors_Did_Not_Change_The_World

Time to dump the lie sheet. It makes Wikipedia look bad. ( 185.239.56.135 ( talk) 21:40, 2 November 2020 (UTC)) reply

wikiislamica.net is a user-edited site and not a reliable source. Almost all entries in the current version of the article have inline references to sources that have been assessed as reliable per WP:RS. If you have WP:RS references that show an alternative source for any listed invention, we can discuss those references here, and potentially change entries based on those refs. Dialectric ( talk) 01:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC) reply

You are completely right. Most of the so called islamic investions were actually done by the people they conquered. This article is exactly what fake news are. It is a shame that English wikipedia so blatantly spread misinformation. -- Pliers123 ( talk) 22:42, 30 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Is it okay to add orthinopter to this list? https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA349903599&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=19950772&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E1f7a4f8 Hu741f4 ( talk) 16:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Yes, but not with the source you cited, which is not written by reputable historians and therefore not reliable in context. I suggest taking a look at Vernet, Juan (1981) [1970]. "Abbas Ibn Firnas". In Gillespie, C.C. (ed.). Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Vol. 1. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. p. 5. (plucked this from the Abbas ibn Firnas article; there will be much better sources out there, but this may provide a good start). ☿  Apaugasma ( talk  ☉) 16:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC) reply

I believe Chemical synthesis shouldn't be in this list because synthesis of inorganic or organic chemicals pre dates islamic civilization. Hu741f4 ( talk) 16:23, 6 March 2023 (UTC) reply

The writings attributed to Jabir ibn Hayyan are widely recognized by historians of chemistry as marking a shift towards experimentation with organic substances. The synthesis of sal ammoniac from hair or blood is widely cited in regard to this. Can you cite a reliable source that describes the chemical synthesis of an inorganic compound from organic substances in a pre-Islamic author? ☿  Apaugasma ( talk  ☉) 16:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Oort1: Why have you taking the approach of deleting large tracts of sourced content on the pedantic basis that they were "not inventions", when they were clearly notable scientific discoveries or achievements? The obvious solution in this context would have been either to split the content or rename the page. Iskandar323 ( talk) 04:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply

That's fair, I guess I was being rather pedantic. If you'd like to restore the discoveries that would be fine. Hi! ( talk) 05:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I reverted [1]. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 15:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the work, but I think we need a more selective approach here. I'm ok with including scientific discoveries, but not things that failed verification. You also removed a few citations I added for legit discoveries. I re-added my changes, except for now including the entries for discovery of metabolism and inheritance of hemophilia. Hi! ( talk) 23:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply

In that case, can you undo all your own removals that you no longer dispute? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Ok, I added back optic chiasm just now, which was the only one left that I removed as a discovery but had a source. Hi! ( talk) 23:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I accidentally deleted the stuff on Mysorean rockets. But I realize that Mughal and post-Mughal Muslim states are hardly "medieval". They are also somewhat geographically and politically disconnected from the Islamic golden age. speaking of which, would this article include the Timurid Renaissance within its scope? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 15:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC) reply