Editing Talk:Proof of the Truthful (section)

== Merge proposal ==

I disagree with the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=778999325&oldid=777880524&title=Proof_of_the_Truthful&type=revision merge proposal] by {{Userlink|ZxxZxxZ}}. That article briefly surveys several arguments, proposed by different philosophers under the same name, while this article is specifically about Avicenna's (and discusses it in detail). Given the different length, level of detail and specificity, it would be weird if this article becomes a section in that article. Also, that article really contains little more than long, direct quotation, as opposed to this article which have passed the GA criteria. [[User:HaEr48|HaEr48]] ([[User talk:HaEr48|talk]]) 00:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
: {{ping|HaEr48}} Both of the subjects of this article and the other one have the same name in Arabic and refer to a concept similar to each other. In fact, this article is a subset of the other one. So I think this article should be moved to "Seddiqin argument (Avicenna)" or something like that to avoid confusion. — [[User:Obzord|<span style="color:#4B0082">'''ObZorD'''</span>]]<sup>[[User Talk:Obzord|<span style="color:#DC143C">'''T'''</span>]]</sup> 04:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Obzord}} I don't know "Seddiqin argument" feels like a worse name to me because 
::# "Seddiqin" is a non standard way to romanize صدیقین . I think the first vowel is usually romanized as "i"
::# "Argument" is not a common translation for "burhan". From the sources I read, it should be "Proof" or "Demonstration"
::# Why does the title translate one word (burhan) but kept the Arabic for the other word? It's like saying "King of España" instead of "King of Spain" or "Rey de España". 
::Besides, I don't understand the basis of combining the three entries in the other ([[Seddiqin argument]]) article. True, they are all arguments for God's existence by Islamic philosophers. But they seemed rather different, and also there are other arguments by Muslim philosophers, such as those classified as [[Kalam_cosmological_argument#Historical_background|Kalam cosmological argument]]. Is there a common thread for combining those three? That article doesn't do a good job explaining it. [[User:HaEr48|HaEr48]] ([[User talk:HaEr48|talk]]) 05:11, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
::: {{ping|HaEr48}} My point was not the name. I'm not really an expert, but from what I saw, the original "Seddiqin" argument is from Avicenna, and these other guys just redefined what they themselves considered a variation of the original argument. So having these two articles, with these different names, is pretty confusing. I invite [[User:Mehdi ghaed]] and [[User:Sa.vakilian]] to give their opinion, if they are willing to. — [[User:Obzord|<span style="color:#4B0082">'''ObZorD'''</span>]]<sup>[[User Talk:Obzord|<span style="color:#DC143C">'''T'''</span>]]</sup> 15:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I think the article should be merged.--<span style="font-family:monospace;">[[User:Sa.vakilian|Seyyed]]([[User talk:Sa.vakilian|t]]-[[Special:Contributions/Sa.vakilian|c]])</span> 15:16, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
: {{re|Sa.vakilian}} In your vision, how would the structure of the merged article look like? [[User:HaEr48|HaEr48]] ([[User talk:HaEr48|talk]]) 07:26, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
They can not be merged... this article should treat the inner experience and it's manifestation, while the other ([[Seddiqin argument]]) should emphasis on the inner aspect. [[User:Yahya Talatin|Yaḥyā ‎]] ([[User talk:Yahya Talatin|talk]]) 21:30, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''' Per the reasons given by HaEr48 and Yaḥyā, I disagree with this merge proposal. [[User:Applodion|Applodion]] ([[User talk:Applodion|talk]]) 22:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)