User talk:75.15.204.215

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising in articles. For more information on this, see

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! —— Eagle 101 (Need help?) 23:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page User:Eagle 101 on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. ≈ The Haunted Angel (The Forest Whispers My Name) 00:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] No personal attacks!

With regards to your comments on User talk:Eagle 101: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; 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. -- Aylahs (talk) 01:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC

Sorry about the personal attack I did not mean to, however I think that what i wrote on the article was true

75.15.204.215 02:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsigned comments / username advice

When posting comments on Wikipedia Talk pages, please sign your posts by typing four tildes (~) at the end of them, like this: ~~~~. Note that signing your posts is an official guideline on Wikipedia. Adding a signature will allows your fellow wikipedians to know who wrote the comments and the date/time when they were written.

Also, please consider creating a username and logging-in when making your contributions. You will find other users more willing to take your contributions seriously, and discuss any issues that may arise. In addition, your good faith contributions will not be lumped in with malicious edits of others using this IP address. Regards -- Aylahs (talk) 15:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate edits

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Wahhabism. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

Whatever your personal feelings about the Wahhabi sect of Islam, messing up the article doesn't do anyone any good. --Eliyahu S Talk 22:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pattern of Vandalism

A user appears to be using this IP address to systematically vandalize articles relating to minority Muslim communities, ethnic groups or notable individuals. The vandal adds untrue statements, distorts facts, and uses pejorative language. In addition, the vandal also spams articles with links to web-sites that seek to persecute the targeted groups. This user also appears to use other IP addresses to do the same thing - see User talk:75.15.203.99. The articles targetted by this user include:

The user has also been known to resort to personal attacks and leave unsigned comments on Talk pages. It may be useful to track this user's trail of vandalism, especially since the user appears to hop from one IP to the next. -- Aylahs (talk) 23:57, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] vandalism

I reviewed all of the posts above and none seem to fit the criteria of vandalism, therefore clokcing is not allowed under Wikipedia policy guidelines. Rather than blocking one should use the discussion page to discuss the edits and come to a conclusion. If there is a problem with any of the edits done by the user than discussion and dispute resolution should be used.

trueblood 01:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Multiple editors have reviewed the edits by an anonymous user at this IP and have judged them to be vandalism. Is Trueblood786 the actual user behind these anonymous edits? -- Aylahs (talk) 01:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

You should check the facts before making statements. This is not the wikipedia policy to make up facts, every fact that I placed on the articles is true. All you have to do is check the Wikipedia article on Aga Khan himself and cross reference the statements about Imams etc they match. For example the statement that there are Nizari Ismailis in Saudi Arabia is not true as Saudi Arabia does not allow prayer halls for anyone other than mosques. Than the section about the first Aga Khan leaving Iran is true, he left before of his problems with the Shah, this is stated under the article on his as well as his service to the British. So tell me which of the statements did you think was not true, than I will check it out

75.15.204.215 02:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

One example is this edit on the Wahhabism article, which I reverted. According to a comment left on my Talk page, this anonymous user justifies the insertion of the text “Wahibis [sic] is a cult.” because “Wahabism fits the defination [sic] of cult”.
Another example of an edit that I reverted in the Aga Khani article is the addition of the (wikilinked) word “Cult” at the end of the article's opening sentence “An Islamic Shia Ismaili sect.” (I.e., rather than replacing “sect” with “cult”, the edit changed the sentence to read “An Islamic Shia Ismaili sect Cult.”)
Even granting that the (mis-)identification of these groups as "cults" is factual (which I disagree with but will not debate here,) the edits themselves are pathetic. There is little regard for grammar and the spelling is totally inconsistent and risible. For that reason alone they need to be removed. These edits contribute nothing to the articles in which they are placed; in fact they detract from and degrade the quality of those articles.
Should 75.15.204.215, Trueblood786, or any other editors or sockpuppets wish to discuss the question of the status of the various Islamic groups as cults, they should post on the respective articles' Talk pages and not simply add graffiti to serious, well-written articles. As to whether or not this constitutes vandalism, only the editor's good-faith, as demonstrated by future actions, will allow a final determination of that question. --Eliyahu S Talk 08:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalism

I have read your comment above and I think calling the edits vandalism is not correct the good faith edit is correct. I think that if one is to look at the defination of a cult and all you have to do is do a google search on Aga Khani you will have the facts, obviously not every of those article writers is from the same source. There are cults and to list them in one section seems proper to me.

Also your comment in reference to Wahabism as a mainstream Islamic organization and not a cult or sect is in my opinion not correct. How do you explain all the high jackers on 9/11 being from Saudi Arabia and being Wahabis ?

trueblood 03:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)