User talk:Mujeerkhan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Pashtun

Hello Mujeerkhan! Your contributions to the Pasthun article are very much appreciated. I had a concern I would like to inform you about regarding this article. It seems as if the population statistic of Pashtuns in India is being repeatedly deleted. From my knowledge, I know that a large number of Pashtuns live in India. In some cities such as Pathankot and Rampur, Pashtuns are a majority ethnic group. I feel India should be third on the list as it was in the past. There have even been a few comments in the past regarding the lack of mention of the Pasthun in India on the talk page. (see Pashtuns in India and Population of Pathans-Archives). There used to be a picture of Shah Rukh Khan (an ethnic Pashtun) under Pashtun_people#Performance_art that was removed as well. I thought this picture was great as it gave mention of an Indian Pashtun in the article. I would really appreciate if you could get back to me on this issue. I thought I would inform you since you seem to have much knowledge on the subject and have made such great contributions to the article. Thanks again. Jdas07 22:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fact and cn tags

Hi, I left a comment [1] which I would appreciate your taking a look at. Thanks --BostonMA 14:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mohammeean vs Musil-leem (Muslim)

Well the term "Mohammedean" is generally used by scholars to refer to Muslims/Musil-leems so I used it also. There was no insult implied, nor did I make any claims that Muslims/Musil-leems "worshipped" Mohamed. Plus, I'm sure that Jews, Hindus, christians, and Baha'ii would feel the same way about being routinely called "Kaffir" or "Dhimmi" of "Dar-al-Harb" yet the terms are frequently used by Muslims/Musil-leems.Hkelkar 13:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Can you give me a proof as why scholars agree with the term, I want to have verifible reasons and also dont discuss this here its better to make a discussion in islam talk page..i think you are going too far by making this statements. there was no point to compare with the relegion or the words but yet you mentioned them...how would Hindus feel if called kaffir and christians as infidels and what if Nehru, bush etc be called as kaffir. perhaps you should study articles on islam before commenting on this words

Mujeerkhan 22:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Will Durant,"The Story of Civilization". He does use the "Mohammedean" term. Usually one distinguishes between historical Muslims and current Muslims by referring to historical Muslims (particularly rulers etc) as Mohammedean.Current Muslims are called Muslims only, not "Mohammedeans". That's all. Again, no insult is implied as the meaning of the word is fluid. Had somebody said "Worshippers of Mohamed" then it would be factually wrong (as you pointed out, Muslims don't worship Mohamed).Hkelkar 21:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you go by that way then christ is for Christainity, Buddha is for Buddhism, Mahaveer Jain is for jainism and the list goes on. The point is simple if you use by this way then mohammeddian is for muslim, which is wrong. Infact people due to ignorancy, misinterpret the term as they are not aware as what the term means.The term "mohammedian" is term to be "offensive" to Muslias Mohammedan, [[2]],[[3]], [[4]], [[5]], [[6]],[[7]] universities [[8]], [[9]] coutrs [[10]] Islamic views [[11]], [[12]], Though you said "not workship" is true but I am just trying to educate you on these "offensive" terms

Mujeerkhan 11:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dalai Lama

By your reasoning, the Dalai Lama is "offensive" and "ignorant":

http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2003/10/9_5.html

as he calls Muslims Mohammedeans only. As did several popes and several scholars such as this:

Stanley Lane-Poole, Medieval India under Mohammedan Rule, 712-1764, G.P. Putnam's Sons. New York, 1970. p. 9-10

plus I already mentioned Will Durant and Serge Triflovich before.Hkelkar 09:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

"Buddhism is the only truth for me, the only religion. To my Christian friend, Christianity is the only truth, the only religion. To my Muslim friend, Mohammedanism is the only truth, the only religion" u know what that means mohammedanism is the only truth and the only relegion..tries to say mohammedanism is a relegion how akward! i am quite puzzled that dalia lama ever said this.

The site which is referred is a propoganda site and violates WP:Reliable Sources which spreads the word for freedom in tibet from the chinese.just like sabrang and pakistanlink and various others.Can you please rectifying your proof by showing more reliable sources (like you said pope).

Shezaad786 14:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] quran

I am no expert in translating quran. Are these your translations, or sourced translations? By the way, Isnt it true that all those who worship idols or are polytheistic will burn in hell according to Quran or is it just about the context.--nids(♂) 19:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No Caste system in India???

While I agree that the Caste System in India has weakened considerably over the course of the 20th century it's hardly nonexistent.Plus, apart from Hindus, Muslims in India,Pakistan and B'Desh have a smooth well-oiled caste system based on the Islamic Fatwa-i-Jahandari, which divides Muslims into Ashraf (those descended from Mohamed) and Ajlaf (those not). Plus, the Qomiyat of Swat, Pakistan and Bengal are pretty Caste-y. As well as the Jajmin/Kamin divisions. For Sources, see the following:\

Aggarwal, Patrap (1978). Caste and Social Stratification Among Muslims in India. Manohar.

Imam Ali, A.F (1993). Changing Social Stratification in Rural Bangladesh. New Delhi: Commonwealth Publishers.

Ahmad, Imtaz (1978). Caste and Social Stratification Among Muslims in India. Manohar.

http://stateless.freehosting.net/Caste%20in%20Indian%20Muslim%20Society.htm

The Caste System is legitimized by the Indian Islamic Ulema.

Caste System among Indian Christians (which is partly based off of the Hindu Caste System):

http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9360711/Christian-caste http://www.dalitchristians.com/Html/CasteChurch.htm http://www.dalitchristians.com/Html/arulappa.htm http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9360711/Christian-caste http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9082413 http://indianhope.free.fr/site_eng/article_5.php3

Hkelkar 05:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tipu Sultan

Hi - as I'm sure you're aware, there has been some edit warring going on at Tipu Sultan, which has, from what I've seen, lead to some nasty accusations and personal attacks. Of course, these are things that we don't want in Wikipedia - we're building an encylcopedia, not making an informal forum for arguement. I have been called upon to mediate for, and provide my opinion on the article in question by User:Hkelkar, and am sending this message to all those to whom I feel it pertains. What I am looking for are reasons for the reversion (or, as I could be seen by some, content blanking) of edits by Hkelkar, which were well sourced (WP:CITE) verifiable (WP:V) and presented in a neutral point of view (WP:NPOV), in the hope that with this reasoning, I can turn the article back into a peaceful editting area. As part of this request, I would like you to consider that Hkelkar's submissions were well sourced, and that if there is a counter arguement against them, then that should be included too - the whole contribution should never be deleted. Thanks for taking the time to read this, and please place your reply in a new section on my talk page. Thanks again, Martinp23 13:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

If you wish to participate in the issue (since you seem to be a single purpose editor) of Tipu Sultan's crappy article then plz cooperate with Martinp23 and do as he says. Otherwise don't whine when I start following his final recommendations.Hkelkar 06:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:DSC00320.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:DSC00320.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

[edit] Socks

Checkuser Confirms your sockpuppetry:

Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Mujeerkhan

Hkelkar 04:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

No. it has not because user martin has made a mistake, check with him....what about your case....dont trouble me again,

[edit] Removing Sockpuppet Tag

It has been proved that you're a puppet master. Please refrain from removing proven sock tags. If you disagree with the findings of the Checkuser, please ask administrators to check again. But before that don't remove tags --NRS | ^T/_M\^B 04:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Hkelkar

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. (aeropagitica) 05:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Sockpuppetry

Hi - your checkuser case was carried out by User:UninvitedCompany, who used IP evidence and the prescence of similar editing patterns to determine the presence of sockpuppets. Of course, this could be a case of the university IP being the same, and yourself being a different person to those who it was confirmed that you were a sockpuppet of. In this case, we can only come to such a conclusion by the similarities of your editing patterns, which UninvitedCompany felt were close enough for you to be determined a sockpuppet. However, the process is not infallible, though it does provide some pretty conclusive evidence. I can't really do anything about this ruling, but you may wish to leave a message outlining your concerns here - be sure to provide a link to your case. Thanks, Martinp23 11:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tipu Sultan

I shall try to expand and improve the other sections of the article, as the "Religious policy" bit now far outweighs all the others. I know that you and User:Hkelkar have a bit of history - I am not interested in starting an edit war against either him or you provided your edits use appropriate language and are properly referenced. I've noticed you have a tendency to use a rather triumphalist tone, and the website you're referring to doesn't appear to me to be a terribly good source (the spelling is appalling). If you could find some more reliable, published sources for Tipu Sultan's military victories (by far the best monograph about him is that by Mohibul Hasan) then it would be better to use those. That said, nothing you've added so far is objectionable or departs from fact - you just need to be careful about maintaining NPOV in the tone of what you write. Sikandarji 11:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion, I shall try using other verifible journal and articles. As I have a day off from my work I shall go to my Uni library and find them. Mujeerkhan 19:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Keep making rubbish edits and I will revert them.Hkelkar 09:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

see, i have provided the para from a reliable source. If you want to edit then prove that the source is not reliable Mujeerkhan 05:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Problem is that the source is absurdly partisan and out of touch with reality (the useless tipusultan.org website).Plus, the Kate Brittlebank book does not say anything about "Freedom fighters" and you know it.Tipu Sultan was a Freedom Fighter? Whose freedom was he fighting for?Hkelkar 11:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok! just tell why tipusultan.org is useless and partisan.The point is not with the site but with you as dont like what the site and you want things the way you want.One more thing i will email Kate Brittlebank REFERENCE directly to email...and one more thing I made a mistake on the reference where it should have been vol 58 and not vol 5.

Mujeerkhan 22:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

You can even have a look at BOOK REVIEWS: South Asia., By: Llewellyn-Jones, Rosie, Asian Affairs, 03068374, Feb99, Vol. 30, Issue 1 and AN ANATOMY OF COLONIAL PENETRATION AND RESISTANCE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY: THE ODYSSEY OF SIRAJ-UD-DAULA AND TIPU SULTAN , Culture and Customs of Pakistan - Page 33 by Iftikhar Haider Malik - 2005 (Just search in google books).I can give you several website links including government sites(also remember there was a stamp issued saying him as a patriot and freedom fighter) but you will reject them as baseless...well dont vandalise the article and pls dont remove my sourced references.this is my last warning to you.

  Mujeerkhan 23:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block

[edit] Regarding reversions[13] made on November 14, 2006 to Tipu Sultan

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. William M. Connolley 19:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You've been blocked indefinately for your creation of sockpuppets to evade blocks. If you are unwilling to serve your time then you will not be allowed to continue to excercize your editing privliges here. Further sockpuppeteering from you will result in serious consequences. You have been warned. // Pilotguy (Cleared to land) 00:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Sania_Mirza_46.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sania_Mirza_46.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. pfctdayelise (talk) 11:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taj Mahal RFC

I've filed an RFC relating to the Taj Mahal at Talk:Taj Mahal#Request for Comment: Inclusion of minority points of view. Your comments would be most welcome. --Joopercoopers 13:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)