User talk:Savior59

Savior59, you are invited to the Co-op!

Hi there! Savior59, you are invited to The Co-op, a gathering place for editors where you can find mentors to help you build and improve Wikipedia. If you're looking for an editor who can help you out, please join us! I JethroBT (I'm a Co-op mentor)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 15:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Islam

Hiya. I saw your page at Wikipedia Co-op Based on what you said there, particularly your interest regarding Shia Islam, and content related to it, I think a few early hints which might be useful would be perhaps looking at the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Encyclopedic articles and the pages they link to (where the print is blue) or they don't link to, in red. The plain text after red or blue links are in general the named subarticles in the specific reference books listed. Potentially, if the pages linked to before them get too long, those topics could perhaps be made into subarticles. Yeah, I know, there are a lot of other very good reference books, some probably better than the ones listed, which might well have coverage of the same basic topics under slightly different names. And I know a lot of them don't relate particularly to Shia Islam either. But it is at least a starting point, and at least some of the articles list sources which could be used in developing the articles. Also, maybe going to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam and asking for some specific help regarding specific extant or potential articles might be useful as well. John Carter (talk) 18:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I just now (actually, for the first time, surprisingly) found that one of the old "Encyclopedia of Islam" works is now available in the public domain here in its entirety. Being in the public domain, that means that, provided we attribute the text to the original source, we can use the material presented in it verbatim if we wanted or with changes in the text to reflect changes in grammar or phrasing or whatever. One thing that could be done with it is to add .djvu files or .pdf files, although .djvu are preferred, of the books to wikimedia commons, which could then be used to set up pages at wikisource which could, on completion of the proofreading of the texts, make the full text of the individual articles in those books freely available as separate pages on the internet, as well as potential sources for content in wikipedia. I know from experience of wikisource proofreading can be a bit of a problem if the original sources use diacritical marks not found that often in English, which is pretty much my only language, or characters from other scripts, like Arabic, but that might not be as much of a problem for individuals familiar with those scripts. John Carter (talk) 18:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @John Carter:. Thanks for your description, but i can't get some thing and have some question. I do not know exactly what to do in this page Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Encyclopedic articles. At this page i see some pages that some of them have page in en-wiki and some of them don't. but you explained some points about references, which reference? is your mean the reference in articles?

This Dictionary is so great. It was much times that i was looking for this book. You are right. finding variable source is so important at wiki and it is so useful that we can use it as source. Thanks again!Savior59 (talk) 08:25, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The lists on that page are basically the list of articles in the books whose titles start the separate sections, "Islam A to Z" and the "Encyclopedia of the Qu'ran." Actually, now that I think about it, the first of those two doesn't as I remember include at the end of its articles any bibliographies indicating which other works can be consulted for further information. I think the second one does. Where those bibliographies for individual articles exist, the sources they include can be used as the required proof of notability for the subjects of those articles and also be the secondary sources (rather than tertiary sources) as per our policy at WP:PRIMARY. Those encyclopedias are themselves tertiary sources, but the sources in their bibliographies are generally functionally secondary sources, which are the kind we prefer. And believe me when I say that it feels great to see newer editors exhibit the enthusiasm you did above, and thank you for that.