This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Islam High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

For the sake of maintaining NPOV, I have removed two instances from the "Nation of Islam" section where rather fervent assertions against the group's status as Muslims were made. This seemed to me to be a case of apologetics.--TheBrigand 10:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this be merged with/re-directed to Jacob?--iFaqeer 01:20, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

• No, because the Jacob article is based on the way Jacob is known in the Book of Genesis, but Yaqub is entirely re-interpreted by Islam and the Nation of Islam so as to have almost no similarity with the original character. IZAK 03:08, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Nonetheless, Yaqub and Jacob are really the same person. It is only Yakub under the Nation of Islam that takes a curve. I think Yaqub and Jacob should be merged, including a brief explanation and link to Yakub --Eliyak 23:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan of the NOI but the current article suggests it had nothing to do with Islam, which is of course not true. Perhaps it should say "the NOI (cult based on Islam)..." or something similar? --AYBGerrardo 20:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yakub and Jacob are the same people, the translation of yakub in english is jacob, so shut up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.98.94 (talk) 01:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to move this article to Yaqub as it was form inception. As Islamic view of Jacob depicting the Prophet Yaqub in Islam so i believe the name of the page should also be depicting the way it is spelled and understood in Islam. Please provide your opinion regarding the move with justification whether positive or negative. -- Ibrahim ebi (talk) 08:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Islamic views on Abraham which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:14, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Abraham in Islam which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lead paragraph says "Yaʿqūb is mentioned 16 times in the Qur'an," but later the same paragraph says "Jacob plays a significant role in the story of his son, Joseph, and is referenced around twenty-five times throughout the narrative." It's clear from context that the latter refers to the Qur'an as well, not the Bible or any other text. Obviously the number of times he's mentioned in one particular story in the Qur'an can't exceed the number of times he's mentioned in the entire Qur'an, so presumably this reflects an error or a serious inconsistency on what counts as a reference. Can someone please determine which is correct and make the appropriate edits? 153.31.112.21 (talk) 16:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Change "The Quran further makes it clear that Allah made a covenant with Jacob" to "The Quran elaborates that Allah made a covenant with Jacob" in order to maintain a more neutral stance on the topic. The implication that "The Quran further makes it clear" takes the stance that other religions are incomplete. While from an Islamic theological point of view, it is certainly true that the Quran is intended to make clear ideas from other Abrahamic religions, Wikipedia should take a non-partial stance on the veracity of religious topics. Especially as the other Abrahamic religions do not necessarily view themselves as being incomplete. LiquidSurfaceEnergy (talk) 04:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]