User talk:Nodekeeper
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nodekeeper, yes, Muhammad started the institutions of what is now Islam. However, as Muslims see it, he couldn't have founded Islam because Islam is the true part of all religions. It is always there for all humans; it can't be founded. For Muslims, it is something like perennial philosophy. I'm not a Muslim, but I understand their point of view here. Please don't insist on imposing your limited understanding of their religion on Wikipedia. Zora 23:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- Zora, please differentiate between 'imposing [my] limited understanding of their religion on Wikipedia' and stating historical fact that you can find in countless dictionaries, other encyclopedias, histories, books, and widely accepted common knowledge.
- It's wonderful to 'understand' (i.e. accomodate?) their point of view. But you should not do so to the point of committing intellectual suicide. Which they are trying to do as they venerate their prophet on the pages of wikipedia. To the point that it throws in doubt the intellectual honesty of all edits made in regards to Islam (or anything else their cabal cares to visit). It really degrades any value that Wikipedia might have in the free-thinking world, a culture that they want to oppress by censoring and replacing with their own. That much I do understand.
- I stand by the edits and comments I have made.Nodekeeper 03:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Your agenda
I don't know who you are, but regarding your comment on Bluerain and Muhammad's talk page, may I ask you what your agenda on wikipedia is? --Aminz 07:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Would you please read the previous discussions.
Encyclopedia of Islam (EoI), an academic source writes :"Still Muhammad was not thinking any more than before of founding a new religion, but only of restoring the true religion proclaimed by the prophets from the beginning. On this point a distinction needs to be made between religious beliefs and later theological formulations on the one hand, and the conclusions reached by modern historical and sociological research. For instance, in traditional Muslim belief Muhammad is the “last and greatest of the prophets ” , a concept that is most likely based on a later interpretation of the expression “ seal of the prophets ” ( khatam al-nabiyyin) that is applied to Muhammad in sura XXXIII, 40. Also, he is regarded not as a “ founder ” but as one who confirmed and restored the true, ancient monotheist faith that was established by the prophet Abraham. It should not be surprising that it was at the very time when these concepts were being proclaimed by the Qur'an, during the early years after the Hijra, that historians see the emergence of a new religious community and tradition founded by Muhammad, a man of extraordinary perception and skills."
Please refrain from making the article POV by avoiding the distinction that not this source but I can show you many other sources clearly, flatly, unambiguously ... make. Also, please do NOT summerize Islam in what happened during the early years after the Hijra. At least please have the attitude of the historians who: "Nor will he be satisfied with a purely supernatural explanation, whether it postulates aid of divine of diabolical origin; rather, like Gibbon, will he seek 'with becoming submission, to ask not indeed what were the first, but what were the secondary causes of the rapid growth' of the new faith". Thanks --Aminz 23:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] May I ask you
to not to go on my nerves? I don't really have the energy to discuss this point any further. Please read my sources and if you were not convinced then come back? Thanks --Aminz 03:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- Nodekeeper, just in case if you don't know the policy: you should comment on edits, not on the people. Your comments wouldn't lose their values if you focus on the points, I assure you. I hope you revise the approach you have taken and this would be my last comment on your talk page. --Aminz 02:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: You're right
Haha. I'd expect you to do the same for me. :) —Aiden 00:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re Ibrahimfaisal
Hi, I just saw your request for participation in the discussion re 3RR of Ibrahimfaisal - IMO, there's everything said so far, I could barely add anything beyond "Me 2!!!".
Plus, I'm passively involved by a) having come up with one of those explosive pictures and defending them and b) having been blocked once at the instigation of Ibrahimfaisal - I don't want this to look like I'm searching for cheap revenge.
The deeper problem with Ibrahimfaisal is a general one: He has the warm heart but lacks the cool head that Dzerzhinsky allegedly demanded. Until he accepts Wikipedia's preference of Western values over religious beliefs, there'll be no calm around here.
--The Hungry Hun 08:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
- Don't worry, I'm not one to give in easily... there's just no positive contribution I could make to that specific controversy surrounding the user. When support is needed & I can contribute, I'll do so, rest assured... Keep messaging me whenever you think I can be helpful. --The Hungry Hun 11:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
One additional point, though: Looks like vandals getting active again - I'll revert those ungrounded deletions whenever I'm around. If I should be falsely accused of 3RR violation - it happened before - I might need your help (and that of others who might be helpful). --The Hungry Hun 14:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please remain civil
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ITAQALLAH 15:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sockpuppetry case
 |
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nodekeeper for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. ITAQALLAH 14:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Nodekeeper, if you are not a sockpuppeteer, then naturally you have nothing to worry about. the RFCU will in fact vindicate you (if it goes ahead) if you believe that you have no sockpuppets. ITAQALLAH 23:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
-
