User talk:Grenavitar/Archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
- The following discussion is an archived user talk page. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
[edit] BioCOTW Project
You voted for Pope Shenouda III of Alexandria, this weeks' Biography Collaboration of the weeks. Please come and help them become a featured-standard article.--Falphin 4 July 2005 01:01 (UTC)
[edit] Image
Ooops, I did that by mistake --Hottentot
[edit] Jonadabs
Hi, you voted for keep on that VfD and I was just questioning why. I agree that it seemed notable but there were no sources and upon an online search I found nothing and the original author of the page continuously added links that did not even contain the word Jonadabs as sources. I would ask that you abstain (I'm sorry if this is presumptuous) if you don't know sources and are just voting because the concept seems notable. I agreed and that's why I did nothing since my first edits but this article needs sources. Can you comment back? Thanks. gren 05:10, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
- Personally, I feel that this is a somewhat important religion (it got 652 hits on a google test), and unless you can prove to me that it should be deleted, I personally feel it should be kept, as it would be important for someone researching the topic (it's the top result on google, too). I can understand your position, and as someone who is unfamiliar with the Jonadabs themselves, I feel more must be written to convince me otherwise. It probably will not take too much work to sway me, but I think this should be kept, unless there's a pretty good reason. I'm going to change my vote to a week keep and state my reasons. Sorry if I was unclear, mysekurity 05:18, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
- That's understandable. The user who created the article slightly irked me first by citing the sources as "The Bible" and "reasoning" or something like that. When I asked for referenced I got the sites now listed the first one mentions "Jonadabs" twice:
- The other sheep – called Jonadabs, are the great multitude who associate with the anointed, rendering them aid and if faithful they will live through Armageddon which is very near.
- For 1900 years now the Royal family of 144,000 is now about completed.The Jonadabs are those who are in sympathy with Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Wise Servant Class.
- That was the only one that seemed to mention the word... This all seems very tenuous to me and those are not sources that signify a significant movement (and my tolerance for insignificance is rather great) nor does it signify there being any available facts on "Jonadabs" as a movement, rather than just a one word concept. as the books on google print seem to show. gren 05:29, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
- Hmm, tough descisions.... you did well in getting my vote. for that, I am now changing it (to a weak delete, but still a delete). Congratulations, and thanks for worrying about what I think :) -mysekurity 05:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Jonadabs
Gren, I believe it's for real. See: [1] or [2]. However, the article is written so strangely that I myself can't figure out whether it's written by an actual Jehovah's Witness, or whether it's some kind of subtle parody. It should be kept, but radically changed. Which I can't do, because I have to go to my zendo tomorrow morning, and then migrate my computer to a new case. Zora 06:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
- I still haven't started the computer migration. Myself, I think that the best way to handle it would be to merge the Jonadab and Jehovah's Witness article, and then have an entry for Jonadab that simply redirects to JW. I don't want to hang on to the article just because I wrote it and frankly, it seems like a very minor point. However, someone who ran into the term Jonadab would not know to look under JW, so the redirect, or the "See", would be useful. Zora 00:48, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't answer earlier, my Talk: page is very active and I missed your comment. It looks somewhat real to me, but very few Google links (relatively speaking). I suspect the article should be a redirect to Jehova's Witnesses, with a subsection there. Jayjg (talk) 04:36, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] List of Muslims
I was wondering if you could come up with a way for adding a section on the List of Muslims for founders of organizations and movements. Some of the people who would fit into this category wouldn't necessarily be theologians. Also, feel free to send me an e-mail at my talk page. --JuanMuslim 04:43, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] EU Commission Presidents
Your proposal for deleting the template is perfectly fine, and is acceptable to me. -- Emsworth 12:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] That VFD
You are likely to have a relevant comment to add to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Melissadolbeer, which currently discusses similar behaviour on another article, also involving numerous sockpuppets. ~~~~ 22:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Fatima Zahra
Ok, so who do we solve it?
are we supposed to represent that event in every single biograhy of the partisipants?
What is your solution?
--Striver 13:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, you where correct in that it was not righ of me to revert to the misspelled version, i have corrected that now.
I hope well come to a good solution with the "Events" articles.
Just a few questions:
- Do you agree that its in acordance with wikipedia policy to report as much details as possible?
- Do you agree that it cant be repeated in the biography of every single individual?
I would also like to inform you that im planing to greatly expand the number of events to report.
Peace!
--Striver 13:32, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Than you for your detailed answer, i appreciate it much!
Now, as you self stated, if the Dog poop girl event is worthy of a article, then so should a event that billions of people use to derive their behavior from.
As for making a story, im not doing anything original, i just copy paste the hadith as it obviously is describing the event. One says Muhammad (as) was harassed by Abu Sufyan, and does mot mention Fatimah (as). The other mentions Fatimah (as), but not Abu Sufyan. one does not exlude the other, and if anyone thinks so, I'm more than happy to remove it or change it to a disputed event. But as long as nobody does that, i don't see why there is a problem. I mean, its standard prosigure to use many sources to write a article, no article gets all of their sources from the same book. Acualy, im doing just that, pringing all facts from the same book.
Now, its not original research, since I'm not doing any research except for googling for the events. And thats standard as well.
I mean, do you think ww2 got all the material from the same source? Of course not. Is it a problem? Of course not. Is it original research since they put it in cronologiacal order intead of just alphabeticly stating "this book says this" and "this book says this".? No of cource not, putting together a evident cronological event is not original research. Is there controversies? Well, we will deal with that when it comes, no point in saying "no sahaba events since it can lead to controversies". try changing "sahaba" in that sentence to "war". Or why not "poop".
I actually do find non-primary sources that discus the hadith, that his how i put together Events with the Sahaba 1. Is that more deserving a article than poop girl? Is it original research?
Those links you gave me are great, ill make sure to use them to find better second hand sources!
wow, while searching i found a non-primary source about event 3 that basically was agreed with mine in most details. i put it the external link section.
You are completely right when saying that all websites are not serious, but building a site like answearing-ansar.org takes at least as much work as publishing a book. If the source is found i a random "one owner one conributer" site, then i could agree its week, but that is not the case with prominent sites like "islamic q and a".
regarding event 3, as i told you, i just found a non-primary source coming to the same conclusion as me, although they omitted some smaller details that where obvious in the hadithes.
If one source says "mike ate a burger, then went to work" and another source says "mike went from work to home", is it original research to state "mike ate a burger, then went to work and then went home"? No, of course not. If i where to introduce a alternative view on the relativity theory, or start a new religion, that would be OR. My basic argument is that a random search on google brings several cites that put together the event in the same manner i did.
I mean, shouldn't poop girl be wikisource since its just something from some newspaper? Why does it get a article and not x wikisources, one for each newspaper that reported it?
regarding the title, i have a hard time believing that all the events that the sahaba when trough have a separate name. Do you think that all those events are named? If you don't aprove of the name for the article series, pleas contribute with a alternative name, i would love a name that does not make people think twice.
As i said, the event i not fully described in a single hadith, several hadith describe some aspect of the event, and its not more origibal research to put that together than to read several books and make ww2 on it.
I have followed your advice and saved all the articles.
I eagerly anticipate you response, explaining to me if any of my conclusions are incorrect, and why they are.
A pleasure sharing thoughts with you, excuse my lousy spelling.
Peace!
--Striver 00:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
Salam!
- Hi, just for the record, I don't particularly find dog poop girl worthy of entry, but, wikipedia as a whole (through VfD) does.
Well, if WP says thats ok, then... you get me.. or no, it was actually your who brought it up, so i mean: I agree with you :)
Conclusion 1: Less relevant events deserve get attention on WP
- Now, it doesn't exactly seem kosher, but let's compare events with the sahaba # with dog poop girl. Dog poop girl is something strictly documented. There are photos, an apology from the lady, etc.
If the point is to say that the event does not deserve a article since its not properly documented, the we should also scrap the Muhammad article, since it has the exact same source: Hadith.
Conclusion 2: It has been documented in the same way as the Muhammad article.
- This was all reported in the news and Korean bbs world as dog poop girl, thus giving name to the article. Events with the Sahaba does not have that same clarity. It's some nameless event that doesn't appear to be important enough to be named in the literature. No source outside of striver seems to call it "events with the Sahaba #". So, whereas dog poop girl has a verifiable title that they can source others using, your title was made by you.
I agree totaly. If you have a better tittle, we'll change to it in no time! Im tired of having the article bullied (no offence) cause the title sucks. Bu it can come upp with a better alternative :(
Conclusion 3: I also think the title sucks.
I know you are not making anything up in the sense of new material but any time you add report on something you add a degree of POV. I am not sure if you are familiar with the school of thought, but... well, the basic idea is that all history is un-objective. Some facts can maybe be objective in themselves but, in the scheme of things they cannot be because of selective reporting. So, just the fact that you chose that case adds a sense of bias to it.
I agree that i can be a problem. But does that mean that the article should not be written?
I mean, Jihad i a POV nightmare magnet, put nobody puts it upp for Wfd, do they? I mean, realy should we delet a article since it its hard to NPOV? And anyhow, the article is telling that it IS pov, it says it IS presenting Muslim POV of the event. Maybe whe sould rename it to "Muslim view of things Sahaba did" ? I mean, dosent The Holocaust have the same issue, isnt it non-nazi pov? Whould a Nazi agree that its NPOV?
Conclusion 4: Lets handle POV issues when they arrive.
- Now, this probably won't convince you, but the fact that it appears like you are arranging the hadith into a story (and people will argue that hadith are not a NPOV source to report on) and therefore it's not exactly original research in the typical sense, but it still counts.
About hadith not being NPOV, see Conclusion 2
About reporting a single story, how is that NPOV? I mean dog poop girl is also a sinle story, but does it make NPOV? I realy dont get that argumetn, you maybe need to expand on it?
I mean, sure, somebody might think "o poor Abu Jahl, Striver only bringing the hadith that portrays him in a bad manner", but they can alwyas make event #5 where the good side of Abu Jahl is reported... I mean, dosent the Hitler article have the same problem, why arent all the cozey stuff he did reported? Like the time he smiled to that random girl or bought some flour to his mother?
I dont get that, of cource im only presenting the parts i like, but so what? If anybody thinks i missed something, lett them add it, it shouldent stop me from describing A event, they can always describe ANOTHER event. And that is the MAIN issue, This is A SINGLE event per article, how can describing a single event be pov? If the single event is pov, then whe can fix it, but somehow you seem to imply that the whole series is going to be Muslim pov, and hence NPOV.
Well, firstly, that dosetn work, for in that case you should have deleted all the "rightly guided caliph" referens befor i helped to non-sunnifie them.
Secondly, the article it self IS sayng that it IS represnting Muslim pov!
Conclusion 5: The article itself is sayng it is reporting Muslim pov of the event.
Did i miss your point?
- Because you are putting together primary sources.
Brother, Bukhari isnt primary sources, its a cholars work. His name was "Muhammad Ibn Ismail Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Mughirah Ibn Bardizbah al-Bukhari".
I just didnt go for random hadith in random book, the Bukhari and Muslim collection are supposed to be all authintic, so its not a primary source. Im quoting his collection and puuting it together, something he didnt bother to do, he put one her and one there.
Bro, i mean, its like quoting five newspapers in a article to make a complete story, what is the diffrense? What is the diffrens bettwen quoting five newspapers or quoting five Bukhari books?
Conclusion 6: bukhari is like a newspaper, its published by Bukhari, what the problem with quoting five newspapers to make a article?
- If you were Peter Sells and you wrote a book about it then we could quote your book and add it. But you're striver and you are supposed to have no opinion about the primary source material.
Actualy, manny times i dont even quote Bukhari, i quote a prominent website like www.al-Islam.org!
Conclusion 7: I even sometimes quote 3:rd party sources (website) that have worked on the material of the second hand source(Bukhari).
- I was reading the sources you gave (for Event 1) and I'm not sure. They seem to be the kind of source that some have questioned your use of before. They aren't really of encyclopedic standard.
Bro, have you taken a closer look at what you are criticizing?
Take a look:
Events_with_the_Sahaba_1, the source i gave is
http://www.alinaam.org.za/fazaail/umar.html
there is 926 hits on OTHER sites that link to it: [3]
as for the other one
http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/seerah/0019.htm
there is 1650 hits on OTHER sites that link to it:
But that doesnt matter, that story generaly accepted, it was on the Umar article for a long time and nobody complaind. Here are some other sources for the same event:
http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/companion/01_umar_bin_al_khattab.htm http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/companion/02_umar_bin_al_khattab.htm
Bro, nobody complains about that event.
Conclusion 7: It was in the Umar article, nobody complained. Even tough, that only justifies the removal of that event, not the whole concept.
- So when you combine that without being able to use a real name for the article it creates a problem. Have you found anything in libraries or on google print? Do these events go under any name? I think that will be important. gren 21:25, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
No bro, they dont all have a name. Of cource not. Do you name every event in your name? Do you name even the important events in you life?
I mean, you know when Bush meet that random important president, did that have a name?
Of course, whe could invent some name, instead of Events with the Sahaba 1, whe could rename it to "when Umar beat upp her sister" or "when Umar made Kabbab run away" or "Umar's firs Quran recitation" or "Umar's first ablution" or whadever... I have no problem with that, whe can do that if it would make people happier... i personaly see two objections to it:
- Its up to POV how it will be named
- Ill need to justify every single event to everybody that dont get that even small events matter in the life of the sahaba. And infor everybody that poop girl, and... drag this whole argumentiation all over again. I wont have to to it if the concept is justified.
My idea is a simple soulution to a simnple problem:
Wikipedia can go inte small events. Like poop girl. or Colonsay. Actually, every five times you push this special:random link you gett something realy small and worthless in most peoples eyes.
Given that, im justified to retell the WHOLE life of the Sahaba. Now, here commes two problems:
1: Am i supposed to duplicate all events that involed several persons in all those perons article?
2: Does it all fitt in one single article?
The best solution is to have it in smal articles that are linked to.
And onther added benefit is that you can categorize the articles afterwords.
For example, you can take all the event when some Shaba got tortured by a Umayyad and link the it ot the "persecuted Muslims" article. Or link every vers of the Quran to the article that was associated whit its revelation, and so on... I mean, it has sooo many benefits to put every event in a separat article that i don get why everryone hate the idea!
I mean, C'mon, im trieng to benefit Wikipedia, not harm it!
Peace!
--Striver 20:39, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Authentic Matthew
Perhaps I've been a bit patronising with my 'this is complicated' attitude. But it is. I'm going to sit down this evening (GMT), if I can and set down my thoughts on the issue. I tend to think the topic is invalid itself. 'Authentic Matthew' is not a common scholarly term - and what it could denote (a source specific to Matthew distinct from Mark, Q or Luke) is better discussed under Matthew's gospel or The Synoptic problem. This article is connecting some important debates that are discussed elsewhere in order to push a non-notable theory. In short, I think this article should be deleted and not ammended - it is not needed in any form. --Doc (?) 18:32, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Need your help on Sari
Gren, I'm having problems with Vagab, who was apparently the author of the old sari article. He doesn't like me messing with his precious prose. He doesn't seem to visit Wikipedia all that often, but when he looks, he reverts to HIS version. I've rewritten it several times, trying to incorporate as much of his prose as I could, but he seems incapable of compromising at all. We seem to be in a revert war. I'd appreciate some help with the reverts, if you could. Zora 11:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
- Dear Gren, thanks for the look at the article. I will try to rewrite using some of your suggestions. Also, I think I can incorporate more of his material re the Kerala two-piece sari, actually having found pictures of one online. His version is so confusing that I just cut it out. Also, I think I can set up a section for "history of the sari" which might incorporate some of his material. But ... I think it's his clunky prose that he's protecting with all his might. I hate that. I've noticed, in working with various writers, that it's the good writers who are much more open to criticism and change. They want their work to have a certain effect, and if they're told that it isn't working, they rewrite. There's a feeling that "there's more where that came from". When it's harder to write, it's harder to jettison the product.
- Sorry not to get back to you right away. I was offline for two days while I disassembled my computer set-up, reconfigured the desk, coiled and secured the mass of cords, cleaned and reorganized, and then took my computer to pieces and put it into a new case. A larger case, because my old case was so crowded that connections were working loose. The new case is uber-geeky -- all brushed aluminum with eerie blue LEDs. Zora 09:01, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
-
- Hi, I'm a SHE. A mom. I cook, sew, and clean house, among other things. I'm guessing that Vagab is a he, because he seems to have a kinda Hindutva attitude about the sari expressing Hindu culture and philosophy, and apparently no interest in buying or wearing saris. That may be part of the problem, because I've got the sari wearer/user POV. No, I don't wear sari -- I sew and wear salwar kameez, because they're elegant and comfortable -- but I buy saris just because they're beautiful as cloth. Then I sew them into wall hangings or salwar kameez. I could spend thousands of dollars on handwoven saris in a flash!
-
- I haven't had time to rewrite yet, but I will. You made some good suggestions. Zora 00:05, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Qiyamah
Any expertise you could lend to the Qiyamah page would be much appreciated. Thanks. freestylefrappe 03:12, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Yes, the Islamic articles are insane
Sigh. People have completely lost sight of the goal of making a useful encyclopedia, and want to use Wikipedia only for a soapbox, or to score points off someone or something they dislike. Nickbee is enjoying the thrill of arguing with REAL! LIVE! MUSLIMS! on whom he can take out all his venom, Striver and Ya Ali and Zereshk can release all their pent-up hatred of the evil Sunni oppressors (I think there's got to be more to Shi'a Islam than that!), the Salafis and Quran Aloners want to make converts or get rid of disgusting pictures of Muhammad and women in shorts contemplating the Qur'an ... aargh.
The Bollywood articles are much less contentious, and the clothing articles are almost entirely up for grabs. PKM, a new editor, is just a dear and we've been working well together on articles like Victorian fashion. I am often soooo close to bolting out of here. Zora 02:56, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Jihad
Can you please take a look at the editor's poll I posted at the Jihad talk page here? BrandonYusufToropov 14:37, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Jihad page
IFaqeer is on indefinite wiki-vacation -- though he'll come back for any controversies related to Urdu poetry <g>. Mustafaa is probably overwhelmed.
I haven't intervened in the jihad page because all I have to contribute is my own views, which aren't encyclopedic unless I publish them -- or find a published author who shares them. I see current-day Islam as being torn between:
- Secularists and modernists -- who basically want a nice, comfortable go-to-the-mosque-on-Friday religion that doesn't rock anyone's boat, contradict any modern Western shibboleths, and is as controversial and exciting as being an Episcopalian.
- Sufis -- who see Islam as self-discipline and mystical insight, and have completely shut out the ugly world of politics.
- Salafis -- who want to return to the glory days of the first three generations of Islam. They were all warriors, including Muhammad, so shouldn't we be warriors too? Salafism-Wahabism slides all too easily into Islamism.
The first two groups are interested in interior jihad and basically block out and deny any evidence that Muhammad and his followers might have engaged in conquest for the sake of conquest, power, loot, slaves, etc. They want a prettied-up version of the first few centuries of Islam, with all the blood expunged. The last group glories in the blood.
If I were a Muslim, I'd probably be in the second group -- but I wouldn't want to tidy up the early history. I think the early Muslims made dreadful, bloody mistakes, that they should not be imitated, that Muhammad made mistakes, that the Qur'an is a human invention, and basically, that there's nothing to save from the original but the Sura of the Lamp in the Niche, and the ideas of Tawhid and Shirk and submission. Not that everything else should be thrown away -- we can pick and choose. Later Muslims may be right on something where Muhammad was wrong. Well, all that would have me killed in a few places ...
Given that I have some extremely individual thoughts on the subject, I'm reluctant to intervene. I think the people who see nothing but blood and conquest in Islam are wrong, and the people who are trying to whitewash the early history are wrong. If they're going to say that people shouldn't do jihad NOW, then they're going to have to admit that Muhammad made a mistake. I'm not sure any living Muslim could do that. Zora 03:24, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
- Have you read any Krishamurti? He was raised as a child saint by Theosophists, and ended up preaching rejection of all organized religion. I think he's wrong -- we're social animals and without some kind of social support and feedback, we can turn into monsters. Anyway, Krishnamurti tells this tale:
-
- God and the Devil are walking down the road. The Devil stoops and picks up something. "What is it?" says God. "It's the TRUTH!" says the Devil. "What would you have to do with the TRUTH?" questions God. "Ah, but I'm going to organize it!" says the Devil.
- Religion can be pernicious because it's TRUE (which attracts people) and because it's always skewed by human ends, misunderstandings, organizational struggles -- which is the DEVILISH part. True even of my Zen, I think. But I couldn't get on without someone to kick me in the butt occasionally. Zora 03:59, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Sorry to interrupt, but I'd like to request your opinion on the splitting of the article Jihad into Offensive Jihad and Defensive Jihad and the putting of these articles in the category "Islamic justifications of Violence". I want to redirect these articles but I am met with opposition from Zeno of Elea.Heraclius 22:41, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Islam
No problem, understood. It's quite disconcerting from my end too, both the anon IP editing and the fact that so many people want the wacky conspiracy theory nonsense to remain.
I think it's pretty evident that Farhansher's accusations of a conspiracy against a litany list of editors both indicate bad faith on his part and fall under the Wikipedia: No Personal Attacks policy and the whole thing ought to be removed, but I'm not going to be the one to do it as he or one of his friends has already vandalized my user page once, and expressing anything other than utter love for Islam seems to bring down Admin Wrath Upon One's Head. Ni-ju-Ichi 03:49, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, but you are wrong. He accused specific people of being part of a conspiracy and cult. This is expressly forbidden by the rules of WP:NPA and even given as an example in the page itself. If he had proof, then it would be different, but he has presented no trustworthy proof. Ni-ju-Ichi 03:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] question
I have a question. I know the band isn't notable and most people probably never heard of them but can I atleast finish the articles or do I have to stop now to keep it all from being deleted? Wikipedia Username 06:19, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
Okay I'm putting what you told me to put on those pages now. I kind of thought it was going to be a bad idea to put member pages, but I just put it anyway, so now they're gone. Wikipedia Username 06:32, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
One last thing, how do I make a backup of the page? Wikipedia Username 06:50, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Response
I agree that all Muslims should not be portrayed as violent animals as some Wiki editors are trying to do. There is really no point in trying to demonize an entire religion, the only solution to extremism in Islam is to give support to those who wish to moderate it . Here on this encyclopedia we see people who'd rather that all Muslims convert/die instead of reforming their religion. It is really quite sad.Heraclius 15:12, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Your Conversion
Are you a Muslim? If not, you should convert. Otherwise it is intolerant to make changes to any Muslim related page. I look forward to you converting to Islam. I forsee that you will marry a great Muslim man and make him happy. Only then will you be free from chains of oppression. Saduj al-Dahij —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saduj al-Dahij (talk • contribs) 11:50, 27 July 2005
- This has got to be a joke...Heraclius 15:53, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- I'm suspecting an islamophobe masquerading actually.--Tznkai 17:13, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
Whatever it is, it's funny. gren 19:16, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- She would make a wonderful Muslim bride! I forsee it! Saduj al-Dahij 20:26, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Germen's list
I do think it is inappropriate. I suggest you ask him politely to remove it, or at least your name. If he refuses, make a note on his rfc. If nothing comes of it, I suppose you'll have to file for arbitration. dab (ᛏ) 19:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- It's strange being put on a list. It's somewhat of a complement. He said that I have a "well-developed feeling for fair play" which puts me in the "probably Muslim" category. Gren is in that category too.Heraclius 21:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sidrat Al Muntaha
I started a stub, and hopefully in the next few days will go around to outputting something useful there, but I put the stub in case someone wishes to contribute. This is in reply to your "I want" --GNU4Eva 04:03, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Islam
I see your point, though before I changed my vote I'd want to know which more important critic should be linked to instead. Simply removing the link seems to be part of a drive to remove critical references; I agree with you on the first part of the poll, but this part seems to me to be a step too far unless some other, more notable critic is mentioned in his place. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] RfA for Germen
Please be aware that, in light of the RfC against Germen, I have raised an request for arbitration for him. Axon (talk|contribs) 10:12, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] new vfd
The prior VFD that you voted at ended with no consensus, a new VFD has been opened at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Historical persecution by Muslims. ~~~~ 18:57, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The prophet
Dear Gren, I think I STARTED this whole brouhaha, when I changed a few instances of the Prophet Muhammad to just plain Muhammad. IMHO, capitalizing prophet is pietistic. However, just using "the prophet" is just descriptive. But ... there are times when it can sound like an insistence on the reality of the prophethood. I think this would have to be on a case by case basis.
For comparison, I looked at the articles on the Hebrew prophets Isaiah and Amos. They didn't use "prophet" much, interestingly, but they were also extremely pious, in a Christian mode -- probably because they'd been copied from a hundred-year old Bible dictionary in the public domain. They need some WORK.
I got major egoboo when I looked at the blog alt.muslim today (it's a blog for liberal muslims, and good info). The author of one article used the word "fitna" and linked it to ... the Wikipedia article I mostly wrote. Wow cool! Zora 04:23, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Idiocy
Being a humble idiot is better than being a pompous idiot. If you keep on being a humble idiot, you may end being a holy fool someday <g>. Then you can have followers. Wouldn't that be fun?
Actually, it isn't. The installation ceremony for our zen center speaks of taking on the "iron cangue" -- taking care of other people's spiritual well-being is the most onerous task there is. Stay a humble idiot just short of holy fool. Zora 05:33, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Distributed Proofreaders
Hullo Gren, I got your email, and replied. As for Distributed Proofreaders ... the main site, affectionately called "The Mothership", uses Latin-1 coding at the moment, which limits the languages we can use. The European site, being smaller, can experiment with the basic site code. They're running on Unicode, and they can handle Greek and Cyrillic characters, Arabic, Urdu, and presumably, Chinese and Japanese. I believe there have been several Urdu projects, no Arabic projects, and NO Chinese or Japanese. I'm sure they'd love to do the Lane dictionary BUT ... they desperately need steady dependable volunteers to do the work. Plus they're going to need one dedicated editor to pull it all together at the end. Possibly the people at the web forum who are offering money would be willing to pay the person who puts it all together at the end, because that's the part that's going to take real expertise.
Any donors would have to be willing to play by the Project Gutenberg rules, which, like Wikipedia, are generous to a fault. The end product must be free, free as in beer, which means that it will be exploitable by the sort of bottom-feeders who advertise POD texts of newly-published Project Gutenberg books at a price that guarantees them a tidy profit. The instant the dictionary is out as a free e-text, someone is going to put it through POD and try to sell it for $100. The only way to fight that is to make sure that people know that they can get it for FREE. Zora 21:56, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
- Ah, POD is "print on demand" and that's for people who want physical versions of e-books (don't like reading on computer or PDA). I'm told that lulu.com does a reasonable job of POD printing. Yes, there are companies who will take a newly released Gutenberg e-text and advertise POD copies for the lulu price plus a hefty markup. There are also companies who try to sell the free e-texts, believe it or not.
- If you have an e-text that you really really want as a paper book, lulu might be the way to go. Zora 20:59, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Stop by sometime
(CC'd from User talk:Grenavitar/College courses)
- Well, since I placed out of Econ 151 and 152, Cisc 181, and took POSC240 in summer college, I'm going to guess you attend the same institution I do :P
- You should visit my office on the third floor of Dupont Hall sometime :) →Raul654 20:26, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
gren let us go visit him together at some point, I can find his office since I work dupont everday. rydia 14:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] A Personal Attack?? =
- Who did I make the personal attack? Saying "do not erase my comments" is not a personal attack. Saduj al-Dahij 18:16, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
- There's no point in trying to reason with a strawman sockpuppet but thanks anyway.Heraclius 19:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestions for the Islam page
Gren, I think oppostion to Islam is an awful idea because it is akin to raising a flag for extensive and uneding bickering. The example should be the "Allah" page on wikipedia, for if you read it, it is well crafted and sticks close to the NPOV and I bet has far less attacks than the Islam page. Islam page really does need cleaning up. I would like to help out. I do not see making changes on the page itself and having them rejected out of hand because of a lack of consensus and having it turn into a fight. My suggestion is that we do make an outline of the Islam page, and then take it one section at a time and involve the people who wanted FFI link on the page as well, if possible. A sentence here and there will address the concerns of the secular and modern muslims as well. I can start with the outline. Where should I put the outline, and where do I find the page on editing instruction used at wiki? Brittanica is not only more oderly but it is very "tight", they make every word count. There does not seem to be much slop, and they do tip toe through many a controversial points. About the christian opinion on trinity, the point is not that christians or jewish views are a digression, but one can give the same fact without it being specified as a "muslim" view, because as you keep saying that there are many varities of muslims and you will always have some muslim who will tell you that it is not his groups view at all , and you will have christians and jews telling you that their views have been neglected and muslims views are not facts at all. I do not think it is quibbling. Facts are facts, but th e presentation style is the difference between a particular POV and NPOV. Again using Brittanica as an example, this is what you find under "Creed": "Creeds in the major religions > Religions of the West > Islam Islam
The intensely anti-polytheistic faith of Islam is summed up in the shahadah: “there is no God but God; Muhammad is the Prophet of God.” This is proclaimed in the daily calls to prayer from every mosque, and every Muslim must recite it aloud with full comprehension and assent at least once in his life, and profess it without hesitation until his death. Doctrinal disputes have contributed to the development of additional creedal formulations called 'aqa'id (singular, 'aqidah), but these do not divide Islam into clearly marked confessional groupings or denominations such as exist in Christianity."
Notice the word "intensely" which captures the fervor and the intensity of the doctrine of "Tawhid" without going into details and states it without raising the ire of the muslims or the non-muslims. And notice how they side step the issue of which beliefs are central by shunting it to a detailed discussion under Aqidah. Read the Wiki section on beliefs and see that it is repitious and is a result of editing by different schools of Islam. The influence of the Submitters is very obvious, followed by those of the Salafis. The Shia's are totally ignored. Ismaili and other smaller sects are not even under consideration. Nickbee 20:23, 3 August 2005 (UTC)Nickbee
[edit] Minor articles fixed
Gren, I saw your note to the anon, and fixed up Luakini and then, for the heck of it, Heiau. It's strange how I spend so little time working on the subjects that I really know -- Hawai'i, Tonga, Polynesian history and anthropology, Zen Buddhism, Victorian literature, textile arts -- and muck about with subjects I'm still exploring. I think I just like learning things. Zora 10:26, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Islam
Hey, I'd like your input on what should be included in the "see also" section.Heraclius 16:33, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your advice, I guess I can see how Islam as a political movement is a better choice. Saduj's comments are always strange. He said that I'm "masquerading" as a Muslim although I never claimed that I was one. In reality, my father was a Muslim and my mother a Christian so I guess that makes me a Muslim officially. Although, living here it is very difficult to follow all the rules/traditions.Heraclius 04:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Islamic feminism
But she does come from it from a theological point of view. Her film submission is a good example since it uses language from the Quran directly. It's very contraversial, of course, but that is no reason for NPOV. I'm not sure though, do you think the article should only contain information about people who are still Muslim? One of her main functions in Dutch politics is to speak up not just against abuse but also for emancipation of Muslim women. Jacoplane 13:15, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- I think I see your point. She is more a secular feminist who uses the Quran in her movie to claim that there is no such thing as Islamic feminism. Perhaps this should be inserted into the article under a "Criticisms" section. I agree that the article needs to be worked on as right now it's very poor. In the mean time, remove her from the article if you wish. I'm going to do some research to find some more contempary Muslim women advocating this. I'm starting here. Jacoplane 17:04, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs
Grenavitar, first of all thanks for helping me with the United States Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs articles [Susan E. Rice] instead of deleting my work before I had a chance to complete it. BTW the position is interesting because it would have been the one to coordinate political travel to Africa .. i.e. Valerie Plame case.
Also, thanks for your help with converting to succession boxes. They are much easier.
I copied the original syntax from the Robert Zoellick page and modified it to suit my needs. Maybe we have the same style issue there.
Now I am left with a category at the bottom called U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs instead of United States Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. Is that a concern? How do we fix it? Kgrr
[edit] Template:WivesMuhammad
I change "wives" to "consorts" for the simple reason that they were not all wives. In addition to his countless wives, Muhammad also had at least one slave girl (please see Maria al-Qibtiyya). Thus "wives" is not accurate. "Consort" is a very generous phrasing. "Wives and concubines of Muhammad" would be more appropriate, but that was reverted by an anonymous user. "Consorts" does not generally mean what we mean in this case. Also, the marital status of some of other of Muhammad's wives is disputable. For example, one of Muhammad's "wives" was Safiyya bint Huyayy, a Jewess from the tribe of the Banu Nadir. The Banu Nadir were Jewish a tribe from Medina. One day Muhammad supposedly had a "revelation" telling him that the Banu Nadir were plotting to kill Muhammad. The Banu Nadir denied this, and there was admittedly no actual evidence (since Muhammad was relying on his "revelations"). Nevertheless, Muhammad expelled the Banu Nadir from their homes in Medina, and stole their property. The Banu Nadir then sought refuge in Khayber, a small Jewish town north of Medina. A few years later, Muhammad was expanding his empire and decided that he would take Khayber for himself. The Muslims besieged Khayber for days, until those Jews who survived the attack had to surrender to Muhammad. Khayber became the property of Muhammad, and its inhabitants became his indentured serfs. The most beautiful woman in Khayber was (allegedly) Safiyya bint Huyayy, whose husband the Muslims has killed during their attack on Khayber. Muhammad decided that wanted Safiyya bint Huyayy so he forced the weeping widow to become his "wife." Is that a legitimate marriage? Does this deserve the titles "husband" and "wife"? Apparently it does in Islamic culture, though it is clearly disputable. But I digress, we already have the case of Maria al-Qibtiyya who was a Christian Coptic slave girl sent from Egypt as a tribute to Muhammad when Muhammad threatened the Roman governor of Egypt with war and demanded that he convrt to Islam. Maria al-Qibtiyya was most certainly a slave, and the traditional Sunni belief is that Maria remained a slave and was not "married" to Muhammad. So "wives of Muhammad" is clearly inaccurate. --Zeno of Elea 10:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yabbut there are other Muslims who believe that Muhammad married Maria. It's debateable, and the debate is noted on the proper page. Zora 10:27, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Um, Gren, I don't like harem. The term reeks of "exotic sex" and evokes all the stereotypes of libidinous Arab sheykhs and Indian rajas. Wives is neutral. Zora 10:36, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- I dont think wives is neutral. --Zeno of Elea 13:15, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] A thank you
Thanks for the welcome and fixes to the Bishr al Hafi article, and other help and other things and exuding chivalry of a knight, etc. :) Sorna_Doon
You are kind. I mainly listen to The Clash when working on the farm. I especially enjoy, "Straight to Hell." Now I'm going to nap, since I have to be somewhere in less than three hours involving a few of my friends and a friend. Sorna Doon
[edit] Islam and fascism
Sometime ago there was a long debate over an "Islamofascism" article. The eventual decision was to merge it into Neofascism and religion, covering the relation between fascism and various religions. An alternate approach, as you mentioned, would be to have an article covering Islamism and its relations to other ideologies. Such an article would be useful, and fascinating, but only if it was based on the actual scholarship done in this area rather than the uneducated speculation that the Internet is rife with. - SimonP 21:13, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Manisha Koirala
Hey Gren, I'm in no way related to her. She's from the same school as me so I was setting a few things right ! Manik Raina 14:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Islam
Gren, the situation on Islam has gone on for too long and it's time to sort it out. Judging by your recent comment on the talk page, you know what's what, so could you tell me which editors seem to be causing the problem, and in which direction? Feel free to e-mail if you'd rather by using the link on my user page. Any information pointing me in the right direction would be much appreciated. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:15, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
- I got it, thank you Gren, and have read it through once. It's extremely helpful. I want to read it again before getting back to you, which I will later today. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:11, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
at least the edits are by a true newbie for a change. Just ask for sources I'd say. We have to be careful not to become excessively vigilant what with all the anti-Islamic crap. Some critical material is certainly permissible, and important. It just has to be attributed to a rock-solid source, otherwise, we are getting nowhere. dab (ᛏ) 17:22, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Apostasy in Islam
Gren I have been editing that page. Please take a look at it and the discussion page. I have tried to give all the secondary sources. Any suggestions? Nickbee 20:19, 9 August 2005 (UTC)Nickbee
[edit] Islam sites
gren, about the Islam sites, I actually did post in the discussion section about them first but NO ONE responded. I'm open to discussion of the links and I would appreciate it if anyone would respond to me in the talk sections.
- Sorry about not signing my name, the link is [5] and you can let me know where you feel it is most appropriate to place such an article. Muwahid 23:03, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
- Gren, I need to make a couple of pints. First of all, the article we are discussing By Dr. Ahmad Shafaat does not describe only one Islamic position but explains ALL the positions of various groups and puts them into perspective, and THAT is what refutes the mysogynist impression. We are not debating whether some Muslims feel idribuhunna means to hit or not, but whether the verse is mysogynist. If you read the article you will notice that by presenting authentic narrations alongside the Qur'anic verses he places verse 4:37 into perspective, and yes it does refute any claim that the verse is mysogynistic. The trouble I have with wikipedia is that there are several editors who censor access to some of the outstanding Islamic articles we have out there, which clarify misconceptions, yet they do not hesitate to embed links to islam-bashing websites of Spencer, Pipes and AI. Also, its not about contesting the meaning of the verse, since he explains all possible interpretations in perspective. Furthermore, you ask me to label him, yet he does not subscribe to any Muslim sect and has only presented himself as a Muslim writer. It is also irrelevent what his background is because wikipedia often links to several people who are just "guy[s] writing on the internet" like AI etc. I only introduced him as a Muslim writer, and he fills that qualification. However, he is a well known Muslim writer having published a vast amount of Islamic articles since the '80's. Again, I emphasize that he is not presenting a single view but he presents all Muslim views and explains why they are not mysogynistic. I'm not sure how to do the footnote part yet. Thanks for your advice. Muwahid 05:55, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Birthday bidah
If you think that early Muslims celebrated birthdays, or that the point is that celebrating MUHAMMAD's birthday is bidah, do some copyediting. I think you've made a valid point. BTW, what IS the history of Mawlid? When did Muslims start celebrating it? Zora 08:35, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, OK, I'll rewrite. I think you're right. First I have to finish rewriting the Academy of Gundishapur article, which someone turned into a paean to Persian culture. Zora 10:06, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
P.S. Good luck on the tests. Just remember that you're learning MORE at Wikipedia. Zora 10:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
- The optimum study strategy obviously is to write or rewrite all the articles dealing with your subject of study <g>. Zora 11:58, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] RE:Admin.
Thanks for your comments, and they are very fair criticism. My personal feelings on RfA is the candidate should fully disclose everything useful, and I have tried do do that. Whatever you do, vote your consience. I can do little but stand by my record and try to explain things as they come--Tznkai 15:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Have you seen these?
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of Catholic Actresses and Actors and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of Catholic Criminals Doohickey 16:24, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Question on Cindy Sheehan page
Gren, ohh Mentor... This one guy recently edited the Cindy Sheehan page and removed entire sections of an unfolding political event from the page. I believe, for now, that what is happening on each day is relevant to the article. How do I get those sections restored? Kgrr 16:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Look at the colors now
So I played around in Photoshop. I'm not up for a big fight today, but I agree that some of the specific items in the template are debatable. Esp the Shi'a section. It is very hard to defend Shi'a when the only Shi'a in evidence on WP are so dang aggravating! Zora 22:58, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Interpretation of hadith
Gren, I think we have to distinguish between hadith as the basis of Muslim law and theology, and hadith as historical artifacts. I would in no way presume to use hadith to tell Muslims what Islam "ought" to be. I do think that I've studied enough history, however, to try to make some sense out of hadith as historical records. This may have implications for Muslim belief, but that's not my business. My business is to call it as I see it. (Just as Near Eastern archaeology isn't about proving or disproving the Torah/Bible, but about finding out what happened.)
Zeno and his ilk want to jump directly from Islam as it was, and the basic texts, to saying that this is what Islam MUST be, and therefore it's bad. It's an extremely fundamentalist attitude. If they were Muslims, they'd be Salafis. Since they're not, my guess is that they have an evangelical Christian background, whether they're currently Christians or not, and that they have absorbed without thinking the notion that believers MUST follow the letter of the scripture. Zora 13:15, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re:Template:Album
I know, it wasn't on AMG. I used a calculator and added up the times of each of the tracks. :) Jaxl | talk 14:47, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Islam
sorry gren, I've decided to take a break from Islam for a while, it annoyed me too much. I am sure it will need constant effort to keep the gutter stuff out of the article. Germen can be reasonable, but he is just too wound up in his pov most of the time. It is a pity, since there could be a lot of really pertinent, deep criticism of Islam, but I suppose once you are at the stage of just hating anything Muslim, you don't care about that difference too much. dab (ᛏ) 16:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
- hey, I said "break" -- I'll be back for some cleanup. I have plenty of endurance, it's just that I have taken on serious tasks in other parts of Wikipedia, too. pointy hat, for example, brooks no delay :o) dab (ᛏ) 16:33, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Al Andalus
Looking for a third party's opinion on the revert war at Al Andalus, wondering if you could drop on by? --Irishpunktom\talk 19:11, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
- Regarding Sufis, I don't know of any ONline Source. I read it in a book I'm reading on Louis Farrakhan and the Nation Of Islam. ISBN:1850652899 .. Swarms of Black Sufis fled what was to be the Mali Empire and ended up in Iberia.
- Regarding haven, isn't that the simplist way of explaining that ? --Irishpunktom\talk 22:19, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Din
Can you take a look at this article? Nickbee added huge quotes and originally researched sections.Heraclius 22:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Islam
you have a point. You could ask him politely to fix his format first, though. I haven't even read what he wrote, the gist seems clear (death penalty etc.). But I would argue that if death penatly is fair game on Human rights in the United States, the same should apply in the "Criticism of Islam" article. dab (ᛏ) 13:07, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi. Islam should be widely regarded as patent nonsense. Not only that, but extremely dangerous and a thorn in the side of any progress towards world peace. Therefore, please do not remove any nonsense tags I add, it is considered vandalism. Thankyou.--80.47.240.88 13:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Opposition of islam
OK, I decyphered the Perl script and used it to clean up the Ethical criticism section. --Germen (Talk | Contribs 
) 16:39, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Asra Nomani's 99 precepts
Do you think we can post her 99 Precepts on wikipedia rather than have a link? I do not believe they are copyrighted and I believe they are her gift to humanity.--CltFn 23:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Shia ranking of the Sahaba
I agree. "Ranking" in either case falls short of being encyclopedic. I like your idea of changing it to Shia Views of the Sahaba and Sunni Views of the Sahaba. Hopefully others will see that as well and vote accordingly. Sorna Doon 17:47, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 3 New Hit Songs From Bright Eyes
I moved 3 New Hit Songs From Bright Eyes to Drunk Kid Catholic before I saw the proposal to move it to 3 New Hit Songs. I documented my reasoning (i.e. this is how Amazon.com lists it) and removed the move template and your question (because it didn't make any sense without the move template). RJFJR 22:02, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Pearle cleanup
I replied on User talk:Pearle. -- Beland 19:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- (Again.) -- Beland 03:59, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Bangla Desh
Hi,
I also noticed the discrepancy in the spellings, but the album and single were released with that spelling (check the album cover closely and you'll see the space), so I think it's best to leave it as Harrison and his label wanted it. I think the album page is necessary, as is the article on the concert itself, so I don't see why both can't remain separately.
Thanks, BGC 16:20, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the additions... BGC 16:46, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Islamic feminism
Hi Gren, I only reverted there because Toshiba is trolling me. Feel free to adjust as you see fit. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 02:11, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Yes, I'm on a bit of a wiki-vacation
Yes, I've been pulling back a bit. After 7-7, defending the Islamic articles from anti-Muslim bigots is just getting to be a grind. Especially since IFaqeer has left, Mustafaa seems to be gone, Brandon is gone ... I'm gritting my teeth (literally -- I have to wear a plastic thingie at night to keep me from grinding my teeth) and forging ahead, but I haven't had the energy for any big rewrites. Zora 02:51, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] E-mail
Gren, I replied to your e-mail but it bounced back saying "relay access denied." SlimVirgin (talk) 10:58, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] DO_ =
I can't make edits without your precious directions my arconian friend... rydia 02:09, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] ?
I am afraid that I can't figure out what you mean? Why is that? -- Karl Meier 07:59, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Album stubs
Well, to be honest, the album-stub removal spree was not backed up by any policy. I just happened to be of the opinion (which is WP:BOLD) that if an album article has a complete infobox, a tracklist, some categories and a few introductory sentences, it is fairly complete. Not "done" of course, but also not a stub anymore. In any case, there is not that much to be said about albums in most cases. Also, there were clearly too many album-stubs at that time. You have to decide yourself if you can agree to that or not. -- grm_wnr Esc 15:22, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- If you think that there is still much more to be said about an album, you can always readd the stub tag - I have no problem with that. But I think it is not wise to duplicate the content of the infobox in the text, and that leaves little to be said about many albums. So, in my opinion, it was better to remove the stub tag to focus the attention on articles that were lacking even the basic information a infobox provides. -- grm_wnr Esc 15:30, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Wikiproject Albums/Needs infobox conversion
I'll help you with this and i think it is a great idea. Plus i was getting very annoyed about the differences of infoboxes. Jobe6 18:33, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
does this have to do with that ugly info box whose existence I did not understand? rydia 19:59, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Well as you know i was doing the infoboxes for Pearl Jam and Mirror Ball is by Pearl Jam AND Neil Young and i didnt know what to do with it so i left it as is. Ya the albumbox template talk ppl havent gotten an answer for me yet. Jobe6 06:13, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
- Also G3: Live in Concert is by 3 different guitarists. Jobe6 06:15, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
- Sweet i found it out. This is an alternative for more than one artist. Check out G3: Live in Concert to see how i used it. Jobe6 08:07, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Need help at Abu Bakr
I'm dealing with combustible material at Abu Bakr, since it concerns Abu Bakr's succession to Muhammad. The editor AladdinSE is darn sure that the first four caliphs were all properly elected by shura, as ordained by Muhammad, and he's not accepting any version that doesn't say that. That is, he's insisting on the straight Sunni party line. He doesn't see that he's being POV -- he insists that "all the scholars" support him, yet can't give any references save Will and Ariel Durant. He is a persistent reverter and he has had his way for months. Could you help out there? I'm trying to refer all controversy to Succession to Muhammad, where there's room to spread out and give all views. Zora 06:31, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Category:Millennial Wikipedians
Category:Millennial Wikipedians has been listed on categories for deletion. Since you are using it on your user page please weigh in on the vote and that of the other generational categories here. Thanks. -JCarriker 20:14, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Nikah
Thank you for informing me of your contributions, i appreciate it. --Striver 09:12, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] db and translate
I added the db tag because the original user blanked the article. I figured, whether it was in a foreign language originally or not, the fact that it was blanked by the original user trumped its original language. This may go against policy, and if it does, I'm sorry, but to me, it makes more sense this way. ral315 02:31, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Conference
are you sure the words get merged together like you put it? Before they were separate display.Kyle Andrew Brown 19:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Thanks looks good. Whatever you said you did to the "external" links thanks for that too. I'll study it.
BTW can you tell at afp.com http://www.afp.com/english/links/?pid=copyright&item=3 they have fair use of photos. I cant understand what they say. I want to use a photo of Bush on Air Force One looking at New Orleans. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050901/photos_pl_afp/050901155931_hc7pmpn4_photo0
Thanks I sent request.Kyle Andrew Brown 20:06, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- Please check Current Events deletion by Mr.Billion. I would yield on amount of quote. However, what I selected I believe indicates not just info but his "state of mind."
- Right, it wasn't very clear. I sorta thought it was representative of the entire interview without stating a POV. It was kinda tricky placement. Read this reaction: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/09/01/BL2005090100915.html ...I couldn't comment on that. On the network news shows the anger at the government from down there was incredible.
[edit] Hi
Thanks for your nice note! Good to be back. BrandonYusufToropov 10:23, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Succession to Muhammad
I finally did a complete rewrite, check it out for errors and POV, please. Zora 23:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Need help at Clothing
Article is under attack by Christian fundies, who want to have Biblical account of the origin of clothing included in the article. Low-key revert war going. Help! Is there an atheists guild I can ask for support? Zora 02:45, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- I don't want to have the Christian version put front and center. If it's to be there, all the other religions should be represented, which would then be a LONG LONG section. As I keep saying on the talk page, if those guys want to write an article on theories of clothing origins and then link that to the main article, that would be fine. Zora 06:53, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Can you please take a look ...
... at this? Many thanks. BrandonYusufToropov 10:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism
Well, I am an inclusionist, so I think if it's a real book it should be kept. Only keeping the article will cause no harm at all (and will be beneficial), but I think it could be a problem if somebody starts to represent it as more than it is. That's no basis for deleting an article though. - ulayiti (talk) (my RfA) 11:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- I don't know Klonimus, but his comment on the AfD debate is not at all 'venomous'. And we shouldn't be judging contributions by who made them. Besides, the article itself doesn't portray Islam in any way at all, it just describes a book that does so. - ulayiti (talk) (my RfA) 13:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- They do, but you can't condemn every single edit a user makes just because they've done something you didn't like before. Vandals and such are another thing, but that's not really relevant here. You can't argue that certain users' contributions would be less 'valuable' than others', because it's arbitrary and doesn't follow Wikipedia's principles. Sure they might have an ulterior motive behind what they're doing, but doesn't everyone? It's unavoidable, because there's no such thing as a completely neutral human being.
-
- And what comes to The History of Love: A Novel not having an article, it's not really Klonimus's fault, is it? Anyone could create it, it's just that they haven't. There should be an article about it, and the fact that there isn't is no reason to delete every single article about a book that's less 'notable'. - ulayiti (talk) (my RfA) 21:31, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mbahrami
I know Mbahrami, and I am his friend. you better know that he is a university lecturer at philosophy department of Pittsburg university, US. so be sure that he know philosophy much better than you.
About the rules, I agree with you, but be sure that he is professional in his writings and he wrote many articles on http://www.muslimphilosophy.com.
Thanks for your honesty & I hope you help him & me for well-done editing.
[edit] Thanks for the note
No prob, I understand your position. (Respect it, too -- though I hope you'd agree the article would smell a little less sulfurish if it had the word (book) in the title.) Peace, BrandonYusufToropov 13:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] CSDs
Heya, could you add the speedy deletion template to pages you tag for speedy deletion instead of replacing them with it? Wikipedia is left with a slightly uglier page for slightly longer that way, but it does make it easier to see what the original content was for whoever deletes it. Thanks in advance. --fvw* 00:10, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
- Hmm, not sure what you mean.... can you show me the example of what I did? I typically do add it and not delete the page content. gren グレン 00:12, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
- Ehmm, well I deleted them (I can undelete though if you want to check). The two articles tagged by you I came across (One In Ten and Buckley Meyers) had the problem; Still as long as it's just accidental there's no problem. Thanks for helping out on RC patrol! --fvw* 00:16, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
- It wasn't an accident, I was probably doing something wrong... maybe I wasn't paying attnetion when I did it. One page I deleted some nonsense... from it... hmm, sorry for belaboring this but I'm not sure what I did. If the page was
'''Fish are cool''' is a mean person made of cottage cheese.
-
- I would change its content to
{{db|nonsense}}
'''Fish are cool''' is a mean person made of cottage cheese.
[edit] Copyvio
pardon, i didn't understand.i didn't violate copyright law.i've just changed Sirnak province.i am new in wikipedia so i don't understand these things.how can i write something about a topic?can i give a reference?is it ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Little firefly (talk • contribs) sometime
thanks for your recommendation.i m not gonna add other articles from the internet anymore.i didn't know exactly about the principles of Wikipedia.im sorry.thanks.
[edit] Please Change Joe Hornung Article
I have expanded the article on Joe Hornung and cited sources. So please remove the references that make the article seem "incomplete". I'd do so myself, but as a fairly new user I don't know how. Thank you. Felix Frederick Bruyns 04:19, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JDizzle Comics
Do you have the wrong article linked there? Zoe 07:14, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
Not a problem. I thought that was what you were trying to do, but I didn't want to mess it up. :) Zoe 19:40, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Tyers
Many thanks for fixing Charles Tyers page Eric A. Warbuton 07:13, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Lunch?
Would you like to have lunch sometime this week or next week? I always love meeting other Wikipedians in person. For this semester, I'm in my office until late at night on Tuesdays and Thursdays. (You can reply to me privately using the email-this-user option on my userpage) →Raul654 06:38, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Constance Berry Newman
Thanks for your fixes on the article. It reminds me that I need to do some more research on this interesting woman. Kgrr 15:04, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] no :(
Why hello again my fellow farmer. I just got settled at school, but I shall be coming back to the farm slowly but surely. Sorna Doon 01:35, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Abu 'Abd Allah ash-Shafi'i
See my reply on my talk page. As far as I can tell, everything should be OK if you just eliminate the line breaks and make the entire paragraph one line (and the browser editor will automatically word-wrap, of course). -- Curps 09:41, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
It looks like User:Yodakii has come up with a solution for that first paragraph. From the edit summary, it seems he's using the Unicode left-to-right mark (‎)... embedding it into the text. That may be a solution. Another solution (instead of ‎) would be to embed an HTML comment that has a Latin alphabetical character in it, like <!-- c -->, and for ‏ the solution would presumably be to embed an HTML comment that has an Arabic or Hebrew character in it.
The reason the text jumps back and forth when you delete and replace the "c" in your example is because of the way the Unicode bidirectional algorithm works. I'm still trying to figure out exactly how it works, but in general it seems there can be a problem when a non-strongly-directional character (eg, punctuation) is embedded between two strongly directional characters of opposite directionality (eg, Latin letters and Arabic letters)... it doesn't know which directionality to take, which of the the two surrounding characters to attach to. Using the ‎ and ‏ marks can solve that problem, or embedding . I don't really have a good way to explain it... maybe you can read this: [6].
The explanation at User:Curpsbot-unicodify is very muddled, when I first wrote it I didn't fully understand what was going on. I'll have to rewrite it. -- Curps 10:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
If you have time, please see the comments I wrote at Village pump (technical)#Arabic.2FHebrew: a proposed solution to Unicode bidirectional algorithm woes in the text editor and let me know what you think. -- Curps 12:23, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Imam Hanbal
- Hey, thanks for the support... I moved your vote down since I changed the request from "Ahmed" to "Ahmad" which is how Britannica has it and which is how I think I see most transliterations now (like Muhammad over Mohammed or whatnot). If you disagree it's not a big deal and I still like "Ahmed" better than what we have now. Do you think we should change all four of the main ones now? and if so what are the full names exactly? gren グレン 19:58, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Oh! I didn't notice the "e". Actually I prefer the "a" in Ahmad or Mohammad, as it's closer to the standard Arabic pronounciation. I think its approriate that all the "Imam" articles be moved. ...I'll get on that right now. Another thing that needs work is fixing redirects to the former "Imam" pages so they aren't redirected more than once. --Yodakii 13:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- Imam Abu Hanifa - "Abu Hanifa" is fine. The Arabic Wikipedia's entry is, transliterated, "Abu Hanifa an-Nu'man" (أبو حنيفة النعمان), and I'm leaning towards that. The full name (as full as I could find) is "Abu Hanifah an-Nu'man bin Thabit al-Kufi". Note that this name is also often transliterated "al Nu'man", and "ibn" often used instead of "bin", but thats not how it's pronounced, and there is no official wikipedia policy on Arabic naming yet.
- Imam Malik - "Malik ibn Anas" is the transliteration of the Arabic Wikipedia entry, and how its usually spelled everywhere else I've looked. The full name, transliterated, is "Malik bin Anas bin Malik bin Abu 'Amir bin 'Amr al-Asbahi", though its usually written without "bin 'Amr".
--Yodakii 15:34, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] On mosques
Dear Gren:
On the Women in Islam Talk page, I've posted "some answers" to the general curiosity about masjids (mosques). It appears to me that you are not Muslim and therefore not practised the process of (congregational) prayer, and so it's understandable why you'd think a separate door for women in masjids is a sign of negative discrimination. I have given some insight into the affair. If you are a (new) Muslim, do excuse my misjudgment. Regards. TheProphetess 13:48, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- Interesting response. I did notice that the Islamic articles are horribly lop-sided and some perspective, when put politely, is needed. I do agree with some issues about the masjids, especially when the segregation is taken too far. TheProphetess 20:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Jilbab
I dont feel particularly strong about removing any of these terms, feel free to re-add Jilbab. freestylefrappe 02:14, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Keep an eye on Bhangra
Harprit, who seems to have a history of disruptiveness in other articles, has decided to rank the list of Bhangra artistes into those who are very good, good, and not-so-good. I put them all in one alphabetical list again, and how he's reverted back to his preferred version.
I think I've seen your edits in the Bhangra article. Please help me keep up the reverts. It's absolutely outrageous for one editor to set himself up as the judge of aesthetic merit.
Besides, schlub that I am, I like Daler Mehndi. Zora 03:27, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Fair Use.
Howdy,
That particular image is widely used, It was I think originally published December 15 1941 by the Helena Independant, It is an official photo taken by the nazi government. As such if anything I beleive it is public domain, as are all official nazi works.
[7] Has a noisy scan with a cite.
I think if you go googling you might be able to find a better picture.
Klonimus 07:19, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] uhhh
Don't you like 2Pac? How did you even notice that? rydia 18:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Caliph template
I just realized -- we need a caliph template that can be slapped on each caliphal page. Not an Islam template, but something more specialized. A small one. Let's do that in our copious spare time! Zora 09:20, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism of Islam
Zeno's replacing 95% of content and violating 3rr. Check it out. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 11:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks, a.n.o.n.y.m t 18:02, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Modern Islamic philosophy
Thanks, I've restored all pre-copyvio revisions. ~~ N (t/c) 15:40, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Chevrolet Apollo
I have added this to Afd, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chevrolet Apollo -- Curps 16:40, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Im trying hard to "be bold" but evidently my edits arent up to standards. SOR-RY!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Thank you for visiting wikipedia! (talk • contribs) 23:41, 2 October 2005
[edit] Nitro page revised
Fixed the damn thing. Hope your happy now. talk
[edit] whatever
Your just doin your job. Shit happens.
[edit] Thanks for moving the comment, Gren
Oh cool, I get to be a Muslim lady now! Very apropos -- I just got back from my zendo's quarterly meeting, where I enlivened things by falling asleep during the meeting and starting to snore.
Saw Serenity again today. You MUST go, to up the box office totals, so that they'll make a sequel, so that I get more Nathan Fillion (aka "Captain Tightpants"). Zora 04:46, 3 October 2005 (UTC) (dirty old lady)
[edit] Interwiki fixes
Hey, thanks for fixing lost interwikis.. I noticed on Bassoon that you fixed it after it had already been fixed.. It is no harm, but you might want to check your script if you are doing it in an automated way..--Gmaxwell 21:45, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The 12 Shia Imams
Thank you for your suggestions regarding the Shia Imam articles. Zora also raised similar points. I explained to Zora that I wished to apply a standard format to the 12 Shia Imam articles.
I know that the inclusion of the word "His" before every subheading is unnecessary. I guess it was a result of habit, because many of the detailed books written about a particular Imam present the subheadings with the inclusion of the word "His" in order to clarify what exactly the chapter is discussing. For example, Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (the 6th Shia Imam) delivered numerous sermons about "knowledge"; another Imam may have delivered numerous sermons about "death". These sections would therefore be entitled "knowledge" and "death". However, a chapter giving an account of the Imam's knowledge or death would have to be entitled, "His knowledge" and "His death".
In relation to the concept of Persecution, I saw that the major article, Jews, included the subheading Persecution. I therefore did not see why Persecution should be excluded from the articles on the Shia Imams, who were nearly all undeniably persecuted for most of their lives. Adamcaliph 14:37, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, that makes sense. I have already changed them, nonetheless, and I will try to add more content to the subheadings. Adamcaliph 23:05, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] freedom fighters
Name may be wrong ("Pakistan freedom fighters"), but fact remains, that there are many people who fought for indepedence of Pakistan. It is similar to India, where many people fought at different levels. May be some of them were not fighting with arms, but they were contributing. Evern if we delte this, there should be category which deals with people who took part in indepedence movement of Pakistan. Please suggest.
[edit] Category:Leaders in Pakistani independence
(Category:Leaders in Pakistani independence) I think it is good. Point is that there were many people; most of them were political leaders, who demanded separate state for Muslims of Sub-continent. There were many who knew from the start that their region can not be part of Independent Muslim region, but they still ask for independence. So, I think they deserve category which identify them. This fight is different from Indian efforts for freedom, because they were fighting for independence from British. They wanted British leave whole sub-continent, without dividing it, on the other hand, Muslims wanted separate homeland with in sub-continent. They wanted British to divide sub-continent and give Muslims their independent country.
[edit] Thank You
I was trying my best to find instruction and help to list the SOnya Maesta page for deletion when I came back and saw that it had been done. The help and instructional pages are hard to navigate to someone not used to them.71.28.243.246 06:59, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Dhul-Qarnayn
Gren, you may not have noticed, but I wrote a revision of the article which I placed on my talk page User talk:Zora/Dhul. I asked for opinions and the only opinion I got was Zeno's, which was of course that his text was infinitely superior and I was an idiot. Sigh. No one else has weighed in. If I put my revision up instead of his, we're going to have another revert war.
Zeno has zeroed in on problems that are really FATAL to a fundamentalist reading of the Qur'an.
One is the identification of Dhul-Qarnayn and Alexander, which I think is indisputable. It's of a piece with other problems in the Qur'an, such as the reliance upon Christian and Jewish legends rather than sacred texts, which force anyone save a Muslim to conclude that the Qur'an is no divine and perfect text, but was filtered through what Muhammad knew of his world (which was in some cases quite limited). For a liberal Muslim this is no problem, but for the rest ...
Also a problem are the passages in the Qur'an, the Dhul-Qarnayn story included, which seem to imply that the world is flat. Again, for liberal Muslims this is no problem, but for fundamentalists, this is a difficulty. Hence the fuss about Ibn Baz, the Saudi grand mufti who solemnly declared that the earth is flat.
Now Zeno, as is his wont, believes that that all Muslims are fundamentalists and that his wonderful essay blows Islam to smithereens. He just doesn't seem to UNDERSTAND that there are millions of Muslims who believe that the earth is round, frex.
His urgency to annihilate Islam is matched by his infatuation with his own prose. I'm proposing that the flat earth stuff be spun off into its own article, and he's resisting. Now, the flat earth material would be just as embarrassing for Salafis if it were in a second article, so there can't be any reason save ego for resisting a reorganization of the material.
It's probably going to come down to a revert war, as it usually does with Zeno, and I would appreciate your support. Zora 02:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- U can always BYT , AE or me for help
- I am not sure if its available on the net or not , but a lot of muslim scholars identify dhulqarnain as cyrus the great . Identification of dhulqarnain is a modern problem , in the times of Muhammad people actually asked him about the life of Dhulqarnain , & in reply these verses werte revealed .
- Qarn also means time . And there are some tafsirs that explain his name in this context . But I really dont remember much right now . May be IFaqeer could help here .
- Until Quran clearly says that the earth is flat , no body can say that it said so . Tafsir is not Quran .
- Flat earth is not associated with Dhulqarnain , neither are bibilical stories . The article is about Dhulqarnain , so it should start with Quran , hadith ( if available ) & end with tafsir . Associated judo-christian mythology isnt dhulqarnain , neither is flat earth , nor the propoganda from FFI . Farhansher 20:51, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Farhanser recently requested that I look at this article. I am sorry to say that I am not very knowledgable on the issue, but I find Zora's version to be shorter, cleaner, more precise and more neutral than Zeno's. I propose that the article be replaced with Zora's version and any smaller edits can be done later. Thanks, a.n.o.n.y.m t 21:15, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
![[7]](http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/jerusalem/mufti.gif){kind=link}