Talk:Meccan surah

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles

Saudi Arabia

	Saudi Arabia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Nice stub, we should try to add further contents. --Bhadani 15:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to try to get a list of the Meccan Suras , and also get a list of the Medinian Suras too for its page. The Fear (talk) 00:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose that Medinan sura be merged into Meccan sura. Having looked at both pages, these two types of suras are broadly defined only against one another (Meccan is shorter than Medinan, and so on). Both articles are very short, and have some content overlap. It appears to me that one cannot understand either article without looking at the other for context, and therefore it would make sense to merge them to have a better and more complete article. I've chosenb Meccan as the target because not only is it first alphabetically in English, but these verses are chronologically older. All that being said, there would likely need to be a subsequent rename of the article, and it will affect the Quran template.MSJapan (talk) 15:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC) medinan surah pogchamp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.98.211 (talk) 21:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Using analogies

Analogies should be used, rather than saying "earlier" or "later", which is INCORRECT by the way, if you want to speak strictly, since the Mecca suras although CHRONOLOGICALLY earlier are placed LATER in the qu'ran. And although Meccan suras are peaceful, Medinan suras are NOT. So the analogy that should be used is peaceful Meccan sura = New Testament, violent Medina sura = Old Testament, and this IS the placement, i.e. Old -> New Testament, and Medina -> Meccan sura. HOWEVER, the CHRONOLOGY (i.e. the writing order of these) were New Testament (i.e. Meccan sura) first FOLLOWED by the Old Testament (i.e. Medina sura), i.e. Muhammed became more VIOLENT over time, as he became a warlord 134.148.66.143 (talk) 04:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Meccan surah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:52, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]