Talk:Abdullah el-Faisal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Photo request It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.

Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.
Maintenance An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
Islam
Islam Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Islam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
"The Albert Memorial" - the London Portal's current "Showcase Picture" This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Neutrality and cleanup tags

This article is in serious need of NPOV-vetting and cleanup. The cleanup is simply so that it will adhere to Wikipedia's quality standards. The NPOV is so that the article doesn't appear to attack the man - while he is most contemptible, and quite guilty of hate crimes, there are a number of uncited assertions in the article and Wikipedia isn't the consul for the prosecution. I've cleaned it a bit, but someone who is more familiar with the matter really should check it out. Michaelbusch 01:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

I removed Image:UndercoverMosquekill.jpg, because there is no source saying that he said the words ascribed to him in the image. Unless we come up with a reliable source that attributes to him those words, the image should not be in the article, nor on wikipedia.Bless sins (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

It is a snapshot from the Undercover Mosque documentary. Unless you are accusing the BBC of deliberate mistranslation (which would not be accepted, as no one accused them as such), this is adequately sourced and should remain. -- Avi (talk) 14:50, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
From the article, the source cited is google video.This is the link that has been provided. It leads to google video, not BBC. Find a link to BBC that says this.Bless sins (talk) 20:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
regardless of the source, my concern is more the neutrality of the presentation. we would only be using a non-free image in the first place if it wasn't replacable with a licensed image of el-Faisal (is it?), and if that was the case then a neutral depiction should be favoured over a loaded or controversial one. while many will rightly find some of his views unpalatable, it doesn't mean he shouldn't have a neutrally presented/written article. also, the material from the wordpress blog is also obviously not warranted. ITAQALLAH 20:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Itaqallah, I agree that the lead image would be better served by a neutral picture, with this picture under controversies. If anyone can supply a more neutral picture for the infobox, that would be great. However, this picture is extremely relevant to the controversies section, and should be placed there. -- Avi (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Avi, what about the (reliable) source for the image? I keep asking you this and you keep not answering this question. I know you said that BBC was a source, but you provided only a google video link on the article. Last time I checked, BBC is not google video. Bless sins (talk) 05:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

So what is your accusation; that Google is misrepresenting the BBC? Seriously, Bless Sins, this is the BBC documentary hosted on Google video. No one is denying that, so please stop with the semantics and focus on real issues. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 18:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Who said it is a BBC documentary? You? I'm sorry but I don't consider you a reliable source. Nor do I consider google video, where anyone (including me and you) can instantly upload a video, to be a reliable source. I've asked you repeatedly to come up with a reliable source.
This is an article about a living person. Nothing is more serious on wikipedia than poorly sourced (and highly contentious) content on an article about a living person.Bless sins (talk) 20:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Bless sins, the video is from the Channel 4 Dispatches programme (not sure where BBC has come into this). Other sources corroborate on some of the statements attributed to individuals in the documentary, including this quote. So there is little doubt that El-Faisel's words here have been attributed to him by reliable sources, some of which can be seen in the Undercover Mosque article. Despite it being a screenshot from a google video, I don't think anyone disputes that the video itself is an upload of the documentary. Hope that clears any confusion. ITAQALLAH 20:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Itaqallah, I confused the BBC with Channel 4. Please ascribe that to my being a hick American -- Avi (talk) 21:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Pardon me, but I believe my objection is more fundamental than you guys think. Google video is this site, right? According to the website, anyone (including me) can upload videos onto the site.[1] Do you agree so far?
Ok then, if I can simply upload a video, I can also call it "Dispatches - Undercover mosque". Correct? Now how do we know that whoever uploaded that video and called it "Dispatches - Undercover mosque", uploaded the real video, and not a fake or modified one?
It appears that users are being offended at the fact I'm asking a question. This is completely unnecessary. I don't want to offend anyone, but only want them to answer my questions.Bless sins (talk) 08:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I suppose one could cross-check with the other uploads provided by different users, on that website, as well as other websites. ITAQALLAH 14:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
That would be helpful. But this brings up a new question: If we have several unreliable sources, can they, together be a reliable source?Bless sins (talk) 16:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biography section

I re-wrote the biography section bringing reliable sources for whatever I could. The Controversy section needs serious work, including possible renaming. -- Avi (talk) 02:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)