User talk:Barastert
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have noted that User:Wikipidian is deleting stuff from your contribution. His pattern shows he is a typpical Wahhabi who would not tolerate any Sufi as Muslim or any Sufi concept as Islam. He has a creepy style like User:Itaqallah and I suspect he may be the same person. I advice you put a watch on all articles you contribute to, and check for "legal vandalism" that these people are expert of. Hassanfarooqi 02:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Tradionalist Islam
Assalamalaikum Barastert,
Just came here to ask if the Traditionalist Islam article if the article should be renamed to tradionalist sunni islam or other variation as User:Striver has voiced concerns over the pov nature of the article title. Also, would I be correct in understanding that the current version of the article represents the views of views of sufis? If so would it be out of order to consider a merge with the sufism article. Thanks. Wikipidian 01:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- PS - by all means check my contributions, hopefully not to creepy for you. Also, User:Itaqallah seems very nice personality to me (though I have had no contact with him) for example he wrote the majority of this article Muhammad as a diplomat, which I like very much - not sure what Hassanfarooqi has against him. Wikipidian 01:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- W'Salaam,
- No I don't think the article should be renamed. I am not inventing the term. It is an accepted term among scholars in English-speaking academia -- refer to Muhammad Zaman, Souroush, Olivier Roy, Esposito, Metcalf, etc. If I have a chance I'll include the necessary references in the article. There are alot of terms which on the face of it are POV, but it isn't Wikipedia's business to rename accepted terminology. For example, the name Salafi is POV as all Muslims would claim to be followers of the Salaf al Saliheen, so why should only one specific group of Muslims get the monopoly on its usage? But the word has obviously taken on this meaning in the academic world as well as in the media, so it would be wrong for Wikipedians to step in try to rename an accepted term. Get my point?
- Wrt Shias, I think there is fair argument, as the traditionist vs fundamentalist divide is present in the Shia world also (though not as prominent), so a section should be added explaining this. However, for the most part when English-speaking academics talk of "traditionalist" Islam, it is usually referring to Sunnis.
- Does the article represent the views of the Sufis? No. There are plenty of people who call themselves Sufi who are Sunni, Shia, both or neither. The traditionalist Islam refers to a group of people who primarily consider themselves to be Sunni muslims, but who regard tasawwuf as one of the disciplines of Islamic knowledge. The traditionalist regard the Sharia (as they define it) to be essential, while other groups who call themselves Sufis may not do so. Sufism is just one aspect of traditionalist Islam, and not the defining aspect. --Barastert 16:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'm sorry I have to disagree and have voted for deletion. The current version of the article resembles very much the views of sufis/barelwi's, therefore content should be moved to those articles. I have also had to correct errors in the article, some of which still remain (for example, you imply that madrassahs, the ijazah system and learning from scholars are a "tradionalist islam" concepts contrary to salafi ideals - again not true). Wikipidian 01:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jali or Jaali?
Thank you for creating the article Jaali. However, I have always believed that Jali is the preferred English spelling. I'd like to suggest that Jali be the main article, and that Jaali redirect to it.
I may be selfish, because, I would wish to have Taj Mahal and Tomb of Imatudalah consistent with the article, and these now use Jali, not Jaali. (In the case of articles where the word appears in a title, such as Sidi Saiyyad Ni Jaali, I think it's perfectly OK to keep the Jaali spelling. In the Taj and Imatudalah articles, where jali is just being used in the text, I would want to use a consistent and preferred spelling.)
In any case, your wikilinks now point half to Jali and half to Jaali. Please pick one or the other (my vote: pick Jali). Then let's dab the links to the other, and correct spelling in articles if necessary.--Nemonoman 23:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hey I have no probs with either one, so go ahead and make the change you want. --Barastert 07:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Phajje_ke_Paye
Hello, I noticed you recreated an article deleted under an AfD. I have deleted it again, please do not recreate it as that decision to delete currently stands. The is a review of the deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_December_16#Phajje_ke_Paye, you are welcome to comment there if you think the deletion was unwarranted. Thanks. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hosay
I removed the info per WP:NOR because Neil SookDeo wrote the book. It may be a secondary source for us, but it's his own research.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- NOR relates to unpublished work, not published work. Guettarda 14:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Salam alaykum
|
I'm happy to meet you and apologize you because other wikipedians should have put this "welcome" in your talk page sooner.I invite to participate in Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam.--Sa.vakilian 03:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Shaykh Nazim al-Qubrusi
An article that you have been involved in editing, Shaykh Nazim al-Qubrusi, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaykh Nazim al-Qubrusi (2nd nomination). Thank you. -N 07:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
