This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
The title of the page fails to follow Wikipedia:Neutral point of view guidelines. Desecration implies that it is sacred and that is adopting a particular point of view. Many people view that there is nothing that is sacred particuarly a fictional historical text. From the OED desecration, n. The action of desecrating, deprivation of sacred or hallowed character, profanation; also, desecrated condition.
Hence the title should simply describe the act. Koran Burning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:2040:7F:2:59C:EF75:4BB7:A693 (talk) 18:10, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Cut from article:
What was confirmed was "mishandling". Whether or not that constitutes "deliberate desecration" is POV. The whole issue is discussed at length in the article on Qur'an desecration by US guards (see also Qur'an desecration by US detainees). -- Uncle Ed (talk) 00:12, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
The idea of merging these articles is a bit silly -- obviously, the Quran was desecrated before 2005, and that is not the only instance of such desecration being discussed or being significant. I don't think they should be merged, and I do think the history section should be expanded. csloat 04:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I have modified the account of the St Ethelburga incident, which I have personal knowledge of. The account given previously seems to have been written by the person who made the accusations. Liskeardziz (talk) 17:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
The desecration allegation stands in relation to St Ethelburga's Centre. That allegation was made is simply a historical fact, and questions around unethical behaviour which prompted the concern remain unresolved by any Islamic juridical authority, because the other party have refused such Islamic juridical judgement. The previous editor appears to be a collaborator with St Ethelburga's.--Scripturalreasoning (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm removing the misleading sentence "The Pentagon accused the prisoners of Qur'an desecration as well." The reason is that it is misleading and incomplete and unreferenced. The main article on the 2005 incident much more clearly and accurately summarizes the pentagon report, which was not an "accusation of desecration," and which found instances of mishandling the quran on both sides of the prison wall. If someone wants to summarize that report here too, I don't think it's necessary, but it can certainly be done more accurately and completely -- whoever does so should take the five minutes or so necessary to read (and cite!) some news reports about the Pentagon report. Thanks. csloat 03:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
i removed Christianah Oluwatoyin Oluwasesin incident because:
I will update the article if and after the event takes place.
-- Gabi S. (talk) 06:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
They should be greatly expanded upon, the article does not mention the effects of the Quran Burning — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.54.68.69 (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Terry Joned Burned a Koran again on April 28, 2012. Should that be included in the article? 214.13.69.132 (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
These get mentioned in the news occasionally. Do they count as desecration? Worth a mention at all? Equinox ◑ 19:50, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
I think the article should be more clear that translations are not the Quran and thus do not need to be treated with the same reverence. My worry is someone reading a translation and doing something ordinary like putting it on the floor could be accused of disrespecting the religion when they are not. My (secular) Islam teacher explained this when passing out the books, but I don't have a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:989:4401:3830:0:0:0:CBE7 (talk) 01:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
Let us update. Zezen (talk) 12:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
The lead sentence emphasizes that Quran desecration is about the original Arabic form. The picture shows the burning of an English translation. This is contradictory, so, what goes? St.nerol (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
The recent incident in Stockholm where that man burns the Quran should be included in § 2020–present Sweden. It's notable. The Old Macintosh (talk) 08:17, 5 July 2023 (UTC)