Instructable

How does she look like? (incorrect--in my opinion)
What she looks like is a dream. (correction in the answer)

I hear this a lot: "That (something/-one) is how (it or s/he) looks like." This construction is substituted for or confused with "what it looks like."

To remember the two expressions--"how does she look" or "what does she look like," but not a mixture of the two: Never "how does [something or someone] look like."

Now, just to be fair, the questions of how and what are not necessarily the same. How does she look might have the answer given above. It could also mean the same as the what-question which asks for a description in order to recognize someone as opposed to another person.

Let's take a thing instead of a person to illustrate.

"How does it (the situation) look?"
"Fine. You can proceed safely."
"But what does the road look like up ahead?" (Or, how does the road look ahead?)
"All clear."

Who is making this mistake? In my casual observation, it is speakers of other languages who are using the English they have learned or heard somewhere. Or am I mistaken? Perhaps I am. I heard this on the (vererable) BBC TV last evening.

. . . how it (the busy train station) looks like . . .

Followed by showing the busy train station. So what is going on? The BBC, known for its presentation of an English everyone can understand, and I, a native American English speaker not unfamiliar with BBC and British English, arrested every time I hear what I believe to be an error?

The train station, what it looks like--description or comparison with something else. How the train station looks like--for in this case, what it looks like--description.

If you run ngrams on the two phrases, "how it looks" and "how it looks like," you get the following.

how it looks

how it looks like

And if you run a frequency count on an American English corpus, you get the following.

how it looks

The number of instances is huge.

how it looks like

This is it, the total number of instances, four.

What to make of these? My reading is that the frequency over time favors "how it looks," without like. There have been periods that have come and gone where the addition of like has taken place, but only to be "corrected" somehow through editing, highs and lows in literacy rates . . . you guess. As for such a dramatic difference in the corpora counts, the difference might be sample sizes and/or characteristics of populations? Clearly, something is or is not going on. Regional differences? generational? types of English (native vs. other) used? As more and more people learn English from non-native speakers not well versed in how the language sounds (not "sounds like"), or is used, we get this, what I call, an  error.

I confess, a small bit of a bite of difference when in most instances we think we know what the user means regardless.

Rant, recant, resolve

RANT

From AD 623 to 632, we have

This list of [100] Battles by Muhammad, [which] also includes a list of battles by Muhammad's order and comprises information about casualties, objectives, and nature of the military expeditions ordered by Muhammad, as well as the primary sources which mention the Battles. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_expeditions_of_Muhammad)

1. If fifty percent of this information is correct, Muhammad authorized or took part in "battles" at a rate of two plus per month.  (Although the word battles does not strictly apply to all offensive/defensive acts listed. Consult the source above for a fine-grained analysis.)

What then does the "injunction" mean to do as the prophet did? which derives from the following:

YUSUFALI: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.
PICKTHAL: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
SHAKIR: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.
(Source: http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/033-qmt.php#033.021)

2. I say unto thee, take serious note of any movement claiming such categorical (divine) correctness about inflicting pain, suffering, death on others. Was there no such thing . . . is there no such thing as diplomacy and peacemaking? Or something better, such as live and let live and let God sort us all out.

YUSUFALI: And thou (standest) on an exalted standard of character.
PICKTHAL: And lo! thou art of a tremendous nature.
SHAKIR: And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality.

YUSUFALI: Soon wilt thou see, and they will see,
PICKTHAL: And thou wilt see and they will see
SHAKIR: So you shall see, and they (too) shall see,

YUSUFALI: Which of you is afflicted with madness.
PICKTHAL: Which of you is the demented.
SHAKIR: Which of you is afflicted with madness.
Source: http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/068-qmt.php#068.004)

Nice irony. Whose madness?

3. Increased numbers will also become deluded and miss the messages of what Islam says and does and stands for. For example, the soon to be released film, "Muhammad: The Messenger of God," will beget converts, as well as controversy. According to "Sami Yusuf, who is one of the Islamic world's biggest musical stars and who sang the soundtrack for the film. . . ."

You cannot study Mohammad's life and not fall in love with him and his character. If this film makes people of the world know our prophet better and see how kind he was, we have done our job.
(Source: http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran/Sunni-Muslim-clerics-furious-over-anticipated-Iranian-film-about-Muhammad-413587)

Kind? Kind of an antithesis as seen by other than the chosen. No war is without human suffering. No human is immune to suffering if a loved one is taken for words not uttered under duress. Convert or die? (This from other parts of the holy book. Have a look if interested.)

RECANT

I have been a pacifist all my life. Cooperation and mutual understanding have been my lived principles.

Given the clear and present danger in the face of Islam and its origins in and adherence to the words of Allah, I reject the choice to convert or die. He, and I do mean _he_, has a gun as should I. My choice is for me and my family and my friends and my acquaintances and my fellow nationals and my fellow world citizens. I will shoot.*

RESOLVE

It is not difficult to look into the matters of Islam, from its founder to its teachings and scriptures. Without deep scholarship and based on cursory examination, anyone can learn enough to dismiss the religion, especially its political and missionary intentions. To volunteer to become a missionary or more for the cause, read and learn if ever so lightly as is here demonstrated. To board boat, train, or plane and head for the battlefront before doing so, well, consider yourself lost.

While living in or visiting a more secular state, to protest in public and demand the heads of unbelievers or to claim that the western nation-states are violating the word of Allah, these are life-and-death threats and therefore can be strongly censured--deportation will be among the next responses from  awakening democracies and other civilized corners. Back to wherever you who so speak can consort with other like minded delusionals.**

--
* Containment-isolation is a humane (evolved?) alternative, if you have the opportunity and luxury for implementing same.
**For more on the battles of Islam, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im0IisZ77QI. IMPORTANT STUDY, NOT TO MISS.