Talk:Sexism in the Qur'an

Missional?

So far, I see sexist excerpts from the Qua'an. Is this non-missional or am I missing something?—€h33s3βurg3rF@€3  (talk • stalk) 23:28, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I think this is missional, there's already a page on Sexism in the Bible.-ᎠᎥamᎧndᎠᎥᎦᏣ1(talk) 23:57, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

The text at the top is what makes it missional for that article. Listing excerpts is hardly missional unless you are actually refuting claims about sexism not existing or something.—€h33s3βurg3rF@€3  (talk • stalk) 00:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Listing excerpts is missional — indeed, so-called list articles have a special place in RW's heart. And missionality is high here, especially with the Qur'an, as the Qur'an was not just inspired by God (as with the Bible), but is instead God's actual dictation. This is not a trivial difference (between the edginess of Qur'anic and Biblical literalists), mind you — and the weight of the dogma is that much greater in the Qur'anic literalist camp. And regardless — Christian and Muslim alike — all theist apologists like to whitewash their particular holy book. So part and parcel of what we do here is to point out that, even if any of this was to be considered "legit holy scripture", then God would be a sexist pig. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

-ᎠᎥamᎧndᎠᎥᎦᏣ1(talk) 00:43, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Stop confusing missional topics with missional articles. I will call you outright and say you confuse these constantly, please stop. An article can cover a missional topic and still not be missional by the way it's written. For example, let's say I make an article on apple pie recipes. The article is a literal list of apple pie recipes, no context whatsoever. However, what if I wrote that there are apple pie recipe deniers out there who deny the existence of said recipes (with reliable sources). See my point? An article's missional status is not decided on the topic, it's decided on the fact that you analyze ideas and explore them. The wiki's goal makes it clear with action statements: "Analyze", "Document", "Explore", and "Analyze". What does this article do? It dumps information with little context. I am arguing that the only thing that this article has to do to be misisonal is to have a sentence or two stating that writers transcribed sexism into the Qur'an. It's not about "omg lists", it's the lack of context.—€h33s3βurg3rF@€3  (talk • stalk) 00:59, 3 January 2017 (UTC)