This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Birmingham Quran manuscript article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 28 days |
Birmingham Quran manuscript was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
August 31, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the newly discovered
Birmingham Quran manuscript (pictured) comprises fragments of an ancient
Quran that may date to near Muhammad's lifetime? |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
t alif (ألف). Arabic script at the time tended to not write out the silent alif.for non arabic speakers to read easier Allah hu Akbar you can stop Islam 82.20.80.153 ( talk) 18:43, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
The contents are important. This manuscript contains what is possibly the earliest attestation of full basmala. What do the sections talk about? Simply referring to ayat doesn’t help because of the need to go to non-Wikipedia sources to find out. 74.96.7.2 ( talk) 23:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
This article states, “They determined the radiocarbon date of the parchment to be 1465±21 years BP (before 1950), which corresponds with 95.4% confidence to the calendar years CE 568–645 when calibrated.”
Im quite a bit confused here and would appreciate clarification. If the radiocarbon is dating parchment to 1465 years BP (before 1950, + or - 21 years), that would give the parchment a date of 485CE (1950-1465 = 485CE, NOT 568), + or - 21 years.
Could someone help me out? What am I missing?? D2west26 ( talk) 00:53, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Birmingham Quran manuscript article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 28 days |
Birmingham Quran manuscript was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
August 31, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the newly discovered
Birmingham Quran manuscript (pictured) comprises fragments of an ancient
Quran that may date to near Muhammad's lifetime? |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
t alif (ألف). Arabic script at the time tended to not write out the silent alif.for non arabic speakers to read easier Allah hu Akbar you can stop Islam 82.20.80.153 ( talk) 18:43, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
The contents are important. This manuscript contains what is possibly the earliest attestation of full basmala. What do the sections talk about? Simply referring to ayat doesn’t help because of the need to go to non-Wikipedia sources to find out. 74.96.7.2 ( talk) 23:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
This article states, “They determined the radiocarbon date of the parchment to be 1465±21 years BP (before 1950), which corresponds with 95.4% confidence to the calendar years CE 568–645 when calibrated.”
Im quite a bit confused here and would appreciate clarification. If the radiocarbon is dating parchment to 1465 years BP (before 1950, + or - 21 years), that would give the parchment a date of 485CE (1950-1465 = 485CE, NOT 568), + or - 21 years.
Could someone help me out? What am I missing?? D2west26 ( talk) 00:53, 16 February 2024 (UTC)