"Three faiths" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect Three faiths has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 13 § Three faiths until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 03:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Honors World Religions[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 8 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Trisandejarnatt (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Trisandejarnatt (talk) 00:25, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Islam not an Abrahamic Religion[edit]

Islam is not an Abrahamic religion. It uses a different scripture, it has a different god, it has a different god name, it has a different pilgrimage. It only claims and mimics the judaistic and ishmaelic claim that these religion is of Abraham. Mohammad is more of a leader but not a prophet216.247.57.47 (talk) 03:59, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:SOURCES? tgeorgescu (talk) 04:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
1. The name of god differs in both Christianity (God) and Judaism (YHWE), but still they are both Abrahamic religions.
2. What do you mean by different god?! Both Judaic and Islamic gods are supernatural unseen deities.
3. Where is the pilgrimage site of Christians? What about Jews?
4. Based on multiple sources, Muhammad is a descendant of Abraham's son Ishmael. Aminabzz (talk) 09:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Destroyed the article[edit]

An editor completely changed the article as per his/her point of view.removed/moved stuff as per their own liking.I understand this page is supposed to be attacked by apologists of all three religions not just one so its harder here to maintain neutrality but are there no unbiased editors/admin left here to challenge this stupidity?not gonna engage in edit war with stubborn fools. This editor has a history of pov pushing in islamic pages.dosent have a good track record and for exampke has several times tried(failed) to showcase homosexuality as part of islamic doctrine.heavy pov pusher. @VenusFeuerFalle please try to understand you can not just remove stuff you dont like.you completely destroyed the lede. Only the abrahmic religion page out of indian,iranian and east asian religion is full of apologetics.all others lede is academic heavg.why is it only here your personal feelings triumph over scholarly studies.who are you to decide how to group abrahmic religion? And what the hell with the first sentence "irenic category". I mean seriously? Who writes like that in encyclopedia

What is this? A love letter.

Pleae understand christianity and islam are directly linked to judaism. Jesus is the messiah of hebrew bible not of avesta or vedas.there was no concept of abraham in pre islamic arabia.they dont have their independent origins.without judaism they wont be here.have u ever even read any theological doctrine or comparative studies on them? But i guess these things are beyond you.you know why you are here.maybe if other editors want to yive some input they can but if editors like you can have a free run here like this i dont think i want to pour any more knowledge to useful idiots.this is sad 2409:40E3:406C:330E:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings,
I want to answer your responds and the unfortunate accusations. Let us go directly to the accusation, since this seems to be of the major concern here. My intention is not to "destroy" anything. I made by decisions clear in edit summaries for the sake of transperency. As you can see on the top of the article there is an "Essay-like"-tag since August 2022. My edits attempt to remove the necessity for such a template, since such templates indicate a lack of encyclopedic standards of an article. I did, in the last day, some research for more reliable citations to improve the article. I do not plan on leaving it "naked". If I should have, by accident, removed reliable sources feel free to add them, but beware not to fall under Original Research , including avoiding synthesis of material. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On behalf of my recent edits, I want to announce that I d not plan accomplish further polishing. The article is still far from a GA status and I do not plan to do more than making the article acceptable for an encyclopedia. I think this purpose has been achieved. I hope the article will still improve other time and that remaining issues will be fixed some day. However, there is no hurry since the article can now be largely consdiered as academically accurate. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
furthermore, the term "irenic" was used in the source itself, maybe you go and complain to both the author as well as the reviewers who seem to disagree with you (and probably also the rest of your writing-style). with best regards VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 00:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories