Talk:Islamic Texts Society

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Islam Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a logo be included in this article to improve its quality.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images. The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Copyright issues

The initial paragraph has been modified to steer clear of any copyright infringement. It must be noted however that the original publishers are aware of the creation of the article and have no qualms about the use of excerpts from their website. Because their approval is not formalised, the contents have been edited. Now I proceed to remove the copyright warning. Desde la Torre (talk) 12:19, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues

I have tried to address the "multiple issues warning", which seem to me to have been added in haste, and rather unjustifiably. Please see below.

Notability

In the notability guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), we read about “Factors that have attracted widespread attention: The organization’s longevity, size of membership, major achievements (...) to the extent that these factors have been reported by independent sources. This list is not exhaustive and not conclusive.”

Another criterion seems to be that the article “only includes information that can be verified through independent sources.”

This UK registered charity is 30+ old, collaborates actively with respected academics worldwide, publishes the best biography of Muhammad in English and yet its notability comes into question somehow. Before placing the top warning, please discuss in this page what exactly is the concern. We are talking about a respectable academic organisation, and the WorldCat entries and the Elma Harder article should speak for some notability.

Advertising

With a catalogue of 60+ books to sell, and book sales being the only commercial activity of the organisation, I don't see there is any advertising on the page. It is rather succinct and informative. Please be more specific about this concern.

Primary sources

It is a mistake I avow that I published the first version of the article without sufficient refs. I have now added the citation of Harder's article, which is important, and should look for other refs. I am thus temporarily leaving the "primary sources" warning, until more refs are added.

Special thanks to noq, for helping improve the article,

Desde la Torre (talk) 14:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Charity Commission number

The following had been deleted from the 1st par., presumably on grounds of advertising style: "Registered as an educational charity in the UK (no. 283832), it produces English translations of Islamic classics and also contemporary works on Islamic subjects by scholars from all over the world, with the explicit aim of promoting a greater understanding of Islam among both Muslims and non-Muslims."

Please be more specific as to any "advertising style" charges. In any case, the Charity Commission number is an important reference to independent sources and should stay, as the CC has stringent controls on UK charitable organisations, and it guarantees, in our particular case, that this organisation is not for profit. I have added a ref. with link to the CC overview page.

The rest of the quote above is descriptive. It gives information that is nowhere else in the article.

Desde la Torre (talk) 14:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you added are still not sufficient to establish notability. A passing mention of the name in the Idris Mears ref does not back up the claims made, and we would need much more coverage about this organisation. The link to the charity commission is just a directory entry. Similarly, the atla.com entry is just a directory listing rather than talking about this organisation. The circle of one board member reference does nothing to establish notability and neither is the zoominfo one. The freelibrary.com source is a good one but is not sufficient on its own. The edits to the lead were because they were a copy/paste from the website about page and as such a copyright violation. The charity number itself is not a significant enough thing for the lead anyway. You cannot rely on that to show significance as being a charity is not in itself notable. noq (talk) 18:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Islamic Texts Society. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130916114911/http://www.muslimsofnorwich.org.uk/article/stranger-than-fiction-idris-mears/ to http://www.muslimsofnorwich.org.uk/article/stranger-than-fiction-idris-mears/

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 10:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]