User talk:Grenavitar/Archive 3



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.

Re: Boo

The farm has had a lack of boogers in its harvest these past few weeks... who knows what the future will hold for production. Sorna Doon 18:37, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sabri Jiryis

Hi, I see that you have copied (not moved) the "Arabic needed" template from the article to the discussion page. I have, frankly, not that much knowledge of where these templates should go (I was happy just having learned how to insert one! :-) )..please educate me: should these "Arabic needed" templates go in both article + discussions in all articles? Regards, Huldra 05:08, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually; now I´m a bit confused: it seems as if you added it to the discussion-page..before I added eit to the article! -Huldra
Thanks for the clean-up and the info! Huldra 01:07, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Source

Where do i get Source tags?--Irishpunktom\talk 09:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Harprit attacks

Gren, in addition to Harprit vandalizing my userpage, he's been methodically reverting my edits. I would appreciate some help at Bhangra, Wahabbism, Salafi, Bollywood, and Islam and clothing. Also, I've set up Islam and flat-earth theories. Ack. I'm going to go lie down and read a bad mystery novel with lots of GEOLOGY in it. I find geology soothing. Zora 08:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't play war games, begging for allies in aiding your view so they may help your maintain your biased viewpoints that hold no basis.---HaRpRiT

"Criticism"

Hey Gren. Please check this out Talk:Criticism_of_Islam#Hindu_criticism_of_Islam.--a.n.o.n.y.m t 15:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Interested?

Are you interested in becoming an admin? I'm in the process right now, and it isnt much fun, but the benefit is worth it. If you're interested, I'd like to nominate you. freestylefrappe 01:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No pressure(to vote). I dont really see it as stacking Muslim admins...i cant think of a single one (Mustafaa?).

When it comes to voting on rfas...I factor in a lot more than edit numbers and dates. If a user demonstrates reasonable understanding of policy and the workings, and relative neutrality then I tend to lean towards support.

I dont entirely understand your reluctance...at the very least, it would generate discussion... Is there a particular incident that would make you reluctant (edit wars, contentious topics, etc.)? Feel free to email me - for confidentiality purposes (danofalltrades7@hotmail.com). freestylefrappe 23:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Freestylefrappe would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Freestylefrappe to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Grenavitar/Archive 3. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
freestylefrappe 02:01, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Success! 23 in support and 0 in opposition is pretty good. :) freestylefrappe 22:32, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

edit summaries

I noticed on your RfA, that Redwolf24, in his support, he also mentioned that he would like to see you use edit summaries more often. Looking over your contributions, I see that you use edit summaries most of the time, but I would encourage you to use them 100% of the time, especially since I suspect that you will soon be an administrator, and will set an example to the community. I also am supporting your nomination, but did not want to mention this in your RfA, since some will use any excuse to vote against an RfA. Good luck. --Rogerd 04:20, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, but I usually do (I am sure you can find examples where I didn't). Then again I am a software developer who is meticulous about putting comments in my code, so I just try to stay in that habit. --Rogerd 04:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox cleanups

Infobox 2 template is pretty much disapproved for non-fair-use display of images. See discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums

Even the person who designed the template is now inclined against its use. I'm just putting back whatever preceded the disfavored box. Monicasdude 20:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gren, let me know if Monicasdude persists in what seems to you unfair editing/reverting. He has caused no end of trouble for other goodfaith editors and we have a sort of loose network going to counter his usually unfair and/or ill-considered and/or spiteful reverts. Thx, JDG 22:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the improvement you suggested for the Jovanovic article I started. I made the same changes to the other surname articles I started. By the way, how do you make a smiley-face in Wikipedia? Natalija 02:50, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Demetrio H. Brid

I have made modifications to the Demetrio H. Brid article to maintain a NPOV as per your recommendation. Look forward to your eliminating the NPOV banner. Thanks, --Knight 6305 04:10, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the changes made and removing the NPOV banner. --Knight 6305 04:41, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RE:VFA

The answers to the general question posed to you have led me to the conclusion that you are unqualified for administrator privileges. Good/Popular editors do not equal qualified admin candidates. --Boothy443 | comhrá 04:44, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive Cirticism: Withdraw you nomination. --Boothy443 | comhrá 04:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Change you Philosophy and see above, though i doubt you will, and if you dont like my archiving then condisder the conversation over. --Boothy443 | comhrá 05:26, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Saw your comment on Raul's talk page. Not that I necessarily see him as negatively as most people, but you should know that Boothy's oppose votes are commonly known about RFA. I would take it with a grain of salt, and take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Boothy443 for more. Dmcdevit·t 06:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

This is very brave of you. I hope it doesn't backfire. ;-D I think you've walked it by the way, and you'll be great and you deserve it, so congratulations in advance. SlimVirgin (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Congrats in advance . Can U send a mail at sherfarhan@gmail.com . thanks for your work btw .F.a.y.تبادله خيال /c 20:56, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can Al-Zubair ibn Abd al-Muttalib stay

Hi, I've modified AFD:Al-Zubair with facts and references. It would be nice if you can spare some time to read it, and hopefully to reconsider its deletion (or make some comments on my talk page). -- Goldie (tell me) 22:42, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hajj Image

Do you mean the image I added then removed? I removed it because I don't think it might be during Hajj. The man praying isn't in an ihram, so I am just speculating. The older image was removed by another user because the image was removed from commons. Also, I added my image to the Kaaba page. You may add it to the hajj page too if you think it's accurate.--a.n.o.n.y.m t 10:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, gren. Yeah I really don't know about the image. Can you take a look at this. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 17:56, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Gren, I have no intentions of abusing the revert button. You know that I am strict but fair. I am willing to relax and become more tolerant against particular constant pov pushers. Furthermore, yeah the comments by some of the particular pov pushers kind of shows you that my stance was probably effective against them. I am also willing to relax my vandalism criteria, although it really has gotton relaxed in past weeks. :) I hope you will trust me to carry this trend. Thank you very much, a.n.o.n.y.m t 10:13, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What will the question be? Can you give it later because I will be unable to answer it right now (going somewhere)? --a.n.o.n.y.m t 10:31, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick fix, I would remove Pakistan from there. The reason is that my edits to Pakistan or military of Pakistan articles (the only Pakistani ones I edit) are not disputed; only ones to the disputed territory of Kashmir. In those, there were only two or three disputes and they have been solved now and I pretty much just fix charts, grammar and revert vandalism on those articles. Aside from that I would be happy to answer your question. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 10:41, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Swastika

Oops..I don't even remember where the image was from. Sure, you can delete it if it's not used elsewhere on wikipedia. deeptrivia 02:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sysop

It's my pleasure to notify you that, consensus being reached, you're now a administrator. You may wish to read the reading list and how-to guide at your convenience. Most sysop actions are reversible, the exceptions being history merges and deleting pages (but it's a good idea to be careful with all of them). Again, congrats on becoming an admin. -- Pakaran 19:21, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

I am very pleased to hear the news. Congrats mate! -- Svest 19:30, 26 October 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™[reply]

/.\***CONGRATS***/.\ . F.a.y.تبادله خيال /c 20:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also congrats from my side. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 22:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Gren certain personal details about me probably did influence decisions. :) I am still contemplating on what to do about the question. I have set aside some time for it as I need time to think of my answer, however I don't really think that posting the question is going to make a difference in voting influence. About the premature concern, many editors running have edited for way less time than I have and have fewer contribs. I am almost at the six month mark.;) I will get back to you on your question though. I still need some time. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 23:14, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats from me too, gren. I'd leave you a card, but the image police keep deleting them, so the best I can manage is a smile. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise congrats Dlyons493 Talk 02:06, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seattle University Law School

Sounds good to me...and I'll join in on the congrats in becoming an admin.--Jfurr1981 01:34, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Responded

I add your question and responded to it. I really hope it is the answer you are looking for. :) I made it short and simple. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:59, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you gren. I knew I could count on you. Thanks :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 02:09, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your query

Hi gren, go ahead and delete ARRY bONDS (lol), and I think you were right to delete the category. It's a question of using common sense, and you have lots of it, so trust your good instincts. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 02:54, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Negawatt

You're absolutely right - this was this first time I had come across a reference to this CSD criteria, and I should have read it more carefully. Sorry, JPD (talk) 10:59, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Harriet Miers

Re: Sources for Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States:

---Aude 13:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Admins using speedy tag

Gren, usually admins will use the speedy tag rather than deleting if they want a second opinion, or are otherwise unsure if something meets the criteria. The article you referred to is quite close to being just an ad, and I thought it was borderline to not asserting notability. I see now that that guideline has been changed in any case now to refer only to people. Thanks for checking. Fawcett5 13:38, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tracheoles

I moved this article to Wiktionary from Wikipedia. It was my belief that the orginal was deleted after a transwiki.WAvegetarian 19:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, n00b question

RE these Pauline Pantsdown photos, how do I change the license of an image after it's been uploaded? I'm fairly sure I could find a reason to keep them up being publicity shots for a musician/politician. M.C. Brown Shoes 20:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Gren!

Now that you're an admin, and you're my good bud, that means I can do anything I like, right? <g>

Congrats, or, as we say in rec.arts.sf.fandom, a long line of dancing congra rats to you. Zora 23:08, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Qareen

Thanks for the info , actually the stuff that was present there was what you can say , non-sense . It said something like "Thanks for allowing me to put this here , I had to write something you know , yada yada , JOHN BALLS ". So I thought no reasons should be needed for its deletion , since any admin can see this . Secondly I came to that page through some Jin , or Iblis page , ( I dont remember exactly ) , & it was stated there that Sura al naas discusses this Qareen things . Now, there is no such thing as Qareen in Sura al naas . May be it meant something else , Fayssal might help on that . But for me it was a second reoson for deleting it .

Regarding category muslim scientists , again thanks for reminding . Most of the scientists I have added there , I have tried my best to see if the article says anything about them being a non muslim ( except for Khawarzmi ) . But if you see any name that is of a non-muslim feel free to remove it . F.a.y.تبادله خيال /c 03:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for informing me about the 'Image.Parayana Urai.jpg'. It was the cover of a book and I've scanned it and uploaded. Now, take a look Image:Parayana Urai.jpg. Thank you - Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja

Happy Diwali

Re: Scientz's pictures

What do you mean "tag" them, lest they be deleted? I was under the impression images had to be identified unless they were free use... Those images were recently scanned from my family's collection of old photos... And the album covers, well, I am the copyright holders to those... Can you clarify for me? Scientz 9:07, 1 November 2005 (EST)


I understand that requirement for images used in articles. But these are personal images for my personal page to which no copyright exists. Are you suggesting someone would delete my personal images because I didn't list a copyright when there is none available? I checked the tags, and all tags assume the picture is copyrighted. Seeing as how mine have no copyright at all, I want to know how to protect so no one deletes them. Scientz 9:19, 1 November 2005 (EST)

Grad school

The professoriate is overstocked. Competition is fierce, and you're likely to end up as a gruesomely underpaid adjunct rather than a tenured star. Have career plans outside academia.

You should figure out which scholars in the field you admire, and see where they teach. You should make sure that you aren't going for just ONE person, who may turn out to be a schmuck in F2F interactions, or a bad teacher (my mistake). You should visit first, if at all possible, and be ready to switch programs if you're unhappy. Go by people and offerings, not by prestige. The prestigious schools can be hotbeds of backstabbing and snarky competition. You can get just as good an education at a lower-ranked school, and it won't be as hard to get in or get a scholarship.

You could figure out your PhD dissertation topic early and use it to apply for a National Science Foundation Fellowship or a Fulbright (both of which I got).

If you're going to specialize in Muslim-majority countries, you might want to get out in the world, do an overseas stint and learn Arabic first, THEN do grad school. Ditto if you're interested in Hindi, or Chinese, or whatever. If you've been in school all your life, an intermission for real life might be salutory. Plus it might help you figure out what real-life careers you might like, as opposed to just continuing on going-to-school autopilot.

HTH. HAND. (Hope this helps. Have a nice day.) Usually said on Usenet after totally eviscerating some hapless newbie, but in this case I'm not being sarcastic. Zora 00:13, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fatwa

Salam!

Thanks for raising your concerns regardin the "fatwa" secion in the "see also" section. I copied your concerns to the Muslim guild and addresed it there. I await your reply, and wish you the best!

--Striver 03:09, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Salam

I read your comments on my userpage, and I take your concerns seriously. I will take a closer look at them later and ask you to specify some points further, so that we can cooperate in correcting the problems.

I will not creat new articles until we are done with the issues of the existing ones. Thanks for your time and Salam!

--Striver 22:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Samira Bellil

Hi Gren. Could you please have a look at what's going on at this article? You'd better have a look at the talk page briefly to understand that one user is trying to push against the will of 4 notable wikips. Cheers -- Svest 23:07, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad

Gren, this has been discussed on the author page, I suggest you check it out there! --Irishpunktom\talk 11:33, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nikah

The usual people are trying to add a link to a Daniel Pipes article. The Pipes article only mentions Nikaah twice and he doesn't even use it in his own words. Could you please take a look at this page? Yuber(talk) 16:27, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Esoteric interpretation

I could source some of it -- I've been reading an interesting book by Carl Ernst on Sufism. I'd been completely staying OUT of the Sufism article and the debates on orders, etc., because I just wasn't ready to deal with it. I'm not sure that I am now.

!!$%$#!! There's too much to read! Zora 08:13, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Districts of Gujarat

saw your dab help. maybe you can look throught the districts/cities alphabeticly after Patan and split/move the articles. My buggy Fujitsu-Siements laptop screen finishes right now and my eyes too ;-) Districts should get {{Districts of Gujarat}} [[Category:Districts of Gujarat]] regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 08:14, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I still didn't say it: Thank you! :-) Tobias Conradi [[User_talk:Tobias Conradi|(Talk)]] 06:53, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Protection

Not necessary gren. The edits just happen occasionally from what I have seen. Occasionally Karl or others like CltFn come and present unverifiable info as fact. I think that my edits to the intro were reasonable as I compromised the "self proclaimed" for "claimed". This separates the known info from the not known. See edit history. Both Karl and later CltFn took it too far. But if this escalates then use protection if needed. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 02:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay please protect. CltFn just came back and reverted. Also same situation at Walid Shoebat--a.n.o.n.y.m t 02:45, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous User Closed TfD Discussion

An anonymous user has closed a TfD discussion. (Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Not deleted/November 2005#Template:Philosophy (navigation)) Is this proper? — RichardRDFtalk 16:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Spirituality

Template:Spirituality has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Spirituality. Thank you. — RichardRDFtalk 17:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Zora is actually Jewish...she said it herself

Firstly, she has called me worse things (such as "uneducated, mentally psychotic,..." etc). Would you like me to give you a list? Please stop taking sides when you dont know this vicious racist. She has had clashes with other Iranian editors as well. Would you like me to contact them for you? They are editors here.--Zereshk 01:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly. She is not Buddhist. Buddha would turn in his grave to see such people abusing his name. She is Jewish.

User:Zora 21:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC) said:

I often tell people that I'm an ecumenical Bundist (Bundists were anti-Zionist Jews).see her very last sentence

And Im getting sick and tired of dealing with her erosional tactics. She knows she has no case against me, but just debates and debates and debates.

And finally, what do you expect from me? She actually insulted the Shi'a. What is this? You tell me.--Zereshk 01:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your opinion. Nobody goes around saying things like "I like to tell everyone I'm a bundist" if theyre not one. You dont even know her, yet you accuse me of being judgemental.
And you ARE in fact taking sides. Ive heard all of what youve said before. You ignore the fact that she has probs with other Shia/Persian editors too.
peace.--Zereshk 02:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Negawatt

Can you clarify why you removed the "db" from the copyvio tag on this article? [1] The article in that revision was clearly in copyright violation. Your edit summary stated "I see no assertion that the site makes money from that content.". I am not sure why that opinion is relevant, if the article is a copyvio, it is a copyvio, regardless of the financial gains or lack thereof of the copyright holder to the information. Could you please clarify? Best regards, Ëvilphoenix Burn! 03:55, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:French

Hi Gren. I've started the translation and in order to avoid edit warings for the time being (it is tagged NPOV at the french version), I am doing it on my comp. I'll than start the article here. That would take a few days as I am a bit busy lately. Cheers -- Svest 22:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up&#153;[reply]

Ibn Hazm

Hi - I'm not sure the anon user has a point, but I found the dates on an Encyclopedia Brittanica article on Ibn Hazm. I left a note on the anonymous user's page to discuss this on Talk:Ibn Hazm. Thanks for helping revert - hopefully we can get this sorted out! --FranksValli 21:45, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Samir Qassir

I actually changed it back, after another user changed it to reflect a unilateral, undiscussed and (since then) controversial page move. "presence" is accurate and NPOV, "occupation" reflects a certain point of view and while I feel somewhat constrained in discussing the matter, let's say that lots of people have taken the view that it wasn't an occupation, and seem to have plenty of reason for that. I'm not talking about Syrians, the Irish govt, to take one example I happen to know about, was quite clear that it didn;t consider there was an occupation. Using a contested and in at least some respects inaccurate term instead of a neutral and incontestably accurate one is indeed a breach of NPOV - that's my view anyway. By the way, the subject of the article is someone for whom I have the utmost respect. Palmiro | Talk 21:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'm not really in a position to discuss it in detail, though! Palmiro | Talk 22:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn Harqawl

Thanks for taking a closer look at that instead of deleting out of hand, Gren--I looked at it again myself and must have been blind stupid when I marked it. I owe you one! --Dvyost 07:25, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Salam/peace!

Thx for the warning on Abu Turab, ill try to follow your guidlines before reverting. I hope we both get satisfied.

regarding Zora, i support everything Zereshk says about her, maybe the Jewish thing not included. --Striver 08:58, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ill take a look. I am totaly unintrested in Zoras nationaloty or belief. It is her behavior and personality i have a problem with.--Striver 09:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that you put a speedie tag on Articles containing fatwas by Suyuti. How/where should i have a list of wikipedia articles that contain fatwas made by him? Thanks for your cooperation. --Striver 10:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You are very right. Thanks for the information, and thanks for giving a good alternative sugerstion! You have my support in deleting the article. Peace! --Striver 10:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamofascism

They are trying to reinstate this really offensive article. Can you please take a look? Yuber(talk) 16:06, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If Bush mentioned it as "radical islamism" or "islamofascism", then the article should be a redirect to Islamism, nothing more. There are already 100000000000 articles about militant islam, radical islam, islamism, islam as a political movement, we really don't need one more. Yuber(talk) 05:52, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs and cats

I have very limited time in constructing pages. So I prefer to make the page itself than to spend time searching for its proper category or stub. Other people who follow behind me can take up that noble task.

For the case of Persian literature, until this morning, we didnt even have a proper page and list of authors. There was no quantity to assign quality to. And there are literally hundreds of biographies missing. If I dont do it, nobody will. As you can verify, I am the only active editor of Persian/Iranian pages. So Im doing the work of 10 people here.

Also, I think youre being a little too picky on referencing and sourcing. The fact that so and so wrote a book called so and so, is considered common knowledge, and does not require referencing. The fact that so and so was born in the year *** does not need referencing. Im sure you intend to argue with that, otherwise you wouldnt be following me around slapping reference tags on every biography page I make. If we were to source every single thing written on WP, then you should be consistent and go around slapping such a tag on all WP pages: I can give you a sentence on any page you show me that has a sentence that hasnt been referenced.

However if you so insist on having a source to satisfy your doubt and skepticism about what I'm writing, then you can follow me around and paste the 2 books as reference for verification at the bottom of every page:

  1. E.G. Browne. Literary History of Persia.
  2. Jan Rypka, History of Iranian Literature. Reidel Publishing Company.

I wont give you page numbers however, because the info is extracted from multiple pages. It will clutter up the article, and take way too much of my time. The WP reader can go and look up the index of these books.

Please, let me finish what I'm doing and stop throwing obstacles at me.

I appreciate your scrunity in my edits.--Zereshk 03:51, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for being curt with you foremost. It's just that Zora is really getting on my nerves these days. And I know that she goes out emailing people to lobby support against me. On the contrary, I have never followed her (or anyone else) around picking fights. I'm only here to accomplish one goal: to publish and make known information that has been ignored, and to help others make informed decisions on who and what Shias and Iranians are. Once youve seen and felt the stereotype, then it hits you so hard, you cant ignore it anymore: I see a vast gap of missing information about issues related to Shi'a and Iranian topics. Not that I defend them. In fact, I'm against some principle Shia doctrines. Same for Iran. And I'm only half Persian anyway. But I also think that people should know "their" perspectives; they should know what Shias think, not what westerners think what Shias think. For someone like me who knows the background and history, the gap is startlingly evident. Unfortunately, Iranians are very hedonistic people in general. That's why you hardly find someone like me willing to put aside precious work time to volunteer to make known the unknown history and aspects of a culture that is increasingly under attack by the west, even if it's their own. OK, Im babbling again. But I just wish that people like Zora would lay off their selective assaults on me trying to present this badly needed information. She keeps driving me into this reactionary mode, and I dont appreciate that. My time is very very precious. I'm part of a reserach team that does research on novell MRI imaging methods. You can imagine what responsibilities I have. And yet a great considerable amount of my WP time is spent on quarreling and childish debate, instead of fruitful contribution. And that frustrates me a lot. It's a very low return on my temporal investment here.
I'll add the references to those pages. Thanx again.--Zereshk 02:05, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for the detailed reply. I fully agree with your point about sourcing. And I understand your concerns about Striver. That is why you never see me editing Sunni pages. I like to respect their space, and let them represent themselves as they wish. A pluralistic society will go long ways in achieving great accomplishments. But I expect the same thing in return, and Zora refuses to give us that respect. When she flatly rejects all sources from Qom or Najaf on pages about Shi'a beliefs (Qom being equivalent to The Vatican for Shias), she puts herself in a very difficult and controversial position. Notice I used the word belief. If we were to write on a page that merely discusses objective history, I'd let her roam freely all over the place and do as she wished. I respect her editorial skills after all. But when one wishes to report what a group of people believe in, referencing the group itself makes sense, not referencing second hand western sources. And she refuses to even accept Shi'a "academic" sources like Nasr. And that's when things get heated. I think she is unable to differentiate on "reporting the truth" vs. "reporting events from all (sourced) POVs". The latter is what we strive for on WP. Truth, by nature, is subjective at its core. Even scientifically.

Our clashes however are not really on Shi'a pages though. She gets people really agitated (including myself) when she repeats her forceful editing style on Persian related pages. There, she plays with fire, because sources are not scanty and potentially dubious like in the Shia debate. When someone openly says they dont believe in "Persian culture", and bases their editorial conduct on such an ideology, it's basically a declaration of war against Persians. Take a look at Iran's main page. It says there: "Farhang (culture) has always been the focal point of Iranian civilization." And that is true, even though it sounds a bit pompous, as if others are not cultured. One cannot hope to understand (and claim to know and write about) a civilization that has a history as deep, enigmatic, and twisted as that of Iran, by just reading 4 or 5 books. That's why all western Iranologists have actually lived in Iran. They have tasted the culture. Academics alone is incapable of touching such depths. Zora (un-knowingly) has been disregarding this reality. Zora has chosen an editorial position in which she inherently has declared war on Persians: Culture is EVERYTHING to Persians. EVERYTHING. And Im not exaggerating this. It's their most precious part of their identity. She should know this. And the fact that she goes around on Persian/Iranian pages, trying to re-write things on Persian historical/cultural pages, shows that she isnt exactly aware of the scope of this matter. When one simply ignores these things, one should then expect an intense series of reactions. You cant just go around saying things like "there was no such thing as Iran several hundred years ago", and hope to get people to agree with you.

My focus in fact on WP, isnt really the Shi'a pages, but Persian cultural pages. It's where I can contribute the best. Literature, architecture, history, art, calligraphy, those things. As you can verify, I rarely, if ever, contribute to the Iranian political pages. The faces of politics come and go. They are transient phases. But culture stays, and it defines the Iranian.

Zora does try to adhere to academic standards in editing, but Im afraid she sometimes submits to a mode of antagonistic partisan style editing (just to get back at me). And that is problematic. I dont get angry and snap at people for nothing. She does have a long history of edit wars, just for the heck of it. See this page for example, She engaged in an edit war for a month even though there were a myriad of academic sources against her. She tried every excuse to delete the article. Same here and here and here and here, ad infinitum. Just look at how much of my time she has taken. Now you might perhaps understand why I am vexed at Zora. It's not natural for someone to piss me off this much. I'm a pretty easy person to get along with.--Zereshk 23:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi gren. I emailed you so please check if you received my message. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m t 17:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of server errors but sent again. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 19:09, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ten copies? :D Yeah like I said, lots of server errors. I replied. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 21:47, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Walid Shoebat

Hi Gren, I have sourced the pictures of that site, I hope we can now put this matter to rest. --CltFn 22:22, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks , Gren , I have now emailed Walid Shoebat for permission to use those images. As to why anonymous is making a fuss about the image , the Mutaween comes to mind.--CltFn 23:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Debate between Islamists , Moderate Muslims, Ex-muslim and Europeans captures the nature of the beast

Gren , You will need broadband to see this remarkable exchange of views but I think you will find this very interesting indeed. Video: Debate between Islamists , Moderate Muslims, Ex-muslim and Europeans --CltFn 04:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hi!

Hi! you reverted the edits of anon on Women in Islam , did you find them POV pushing or otherwise wrong? Hmm.I used to think they were good.Pasha 00:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah , I agree , thank you so much for the book , I am actually interested in this article.Living in Iran I think I can provide some good information for this article.Pasha 01:14, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Religious NPOV Dispute

Yup, thanks for the headsup, I had already noted that problem on the Category:NPOV disputes talk page, and hopefully somebody will either create new religious/political/conflict template ((warning))s, or else I will once I get my next fixed up a bit. (Just reformatted, everything's slow as heck atm) Sherurcij 11:54, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Replied and sent. Please check. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:34, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Kasidiya

A new editor with a degree in Islamic studies made some changes to the article, and I went to look at them. In the course of doing so, I realized that I had seen the text on the web. I checked and found it was another one of Amir85's copyvios. I don't think he does anything BUT copyvios. I put on the tag -- and immediately afterwards, the new editor, dgl, who wrote his MA thesis on the battle, produced a shiny new article. However, I'd already put up the copyvio tag, and the rules seem to be that it stays in place a week. Can an admin hurry things along? Can we replace the old article with the new without waiting a week? Zora 02:23, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oho, I think dgl moved it to Battle of al-Qādisiyyah. If it's OK then, I will make the changes. Zora 08:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

help

Please vote to merge and redirect Islamofascism to Neofascism and religion...

... which is where it belongs. Vote here: [2] BrandonYusufToropov 21:33, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Translation from English to French

Read your user page etc. Very interesting indeed. Seen also about Gir Forest National Park article. Myself visited the said place as well. Read about your French translation as indicated below.

Hmm, I just translated from French Canton in France... if you really want anything translated I can try, I'm not good and I use aids but I think understand enough for non-complex subject.

Why not try translation of my articles and edited ones, connected also with Gujarat, to French.

--Dore chakravarty 07:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Translation from English to French

Thanks very much for your frankness. Please see my user page. I have roamed enough in Gujarat. Gir is a very nice place even from the olden days. To day more fecilities are available.

--Dore chakravarty 19:18, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gutenberg texts

Heya Gren. We are engaged in discussion, at DP, right now, on the subject of upgrading texts to full academic usefulness. That means having the original scans available, edition information, list of errata, Unicode so that all the accents are right, page markers, and formatting in TEI, an academic subset of XML. We have gone part of the way in that all our editions now have version information and come in XHTML, at least. But it's been a long struggle against both inertia on the part of some DPers, and the abysmal management at Project Gutenberg. PG is in many ways a one-man project, run by an eccentric character named Michael Hart, who despises academics. He was the one who imposed the requirement that all texts be ASCII -- which we finally got overturned. So that's why some of our earlier efforts had to be mangled to fit his procrustean bed. If we ever get the new academic-friendly regime going, we may redo some of our older work.

So there's more than you ever wanted to know about PG and DP, I'm sure. Zora 04:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your tag

Hi Grenavitar, I noticed that you've tagged the image Image:WalidshoebatFOX.jpeg as "no source|21:55, 20 November 2005 (UTC)". The summary clearly indicates the source: "screen-shot of a fox news recording". There are anons who argue that Shoebat is not a real person, therefore having this image is important. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 05:02, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1 BC

I am reverting your changes to 1 BC pending an explanation. 1 BC is not in the 1st century, nor is it in the 0s. The complete deletion of all interwiki links looks like vandalism. Furthermore, the death of Herod is not an event, it is a death, and even the year is questionable. — Joe Kress 22:07, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Niqab

Dear me,


Please look at http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/niqab/ for possibly replacing that old and bad non-free image you uploaded a long time ago.


Thanks,

Me. 128.175.87.90 01:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


CSD / Economic facism

Thanks for the heads up regarding the Speedy tag I put on Economic facism. Peyna 08:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islam categories

Peace!

Thanks for your long letter, i appreciate your co-editing!

As you noticed, i hade made a "Books about Muslims" and a "Islamic books" for a reason. The first is about Muslims, for example their role in the political world and such, while the other is about the faith. How about this:


  • Islam related books (main category)
  • Islamic books (Qur'an, hadith collections and non-argumentative sources such as "Sahih Bukhari", "Nahj al balagha" and History books)
  • Islam studies books (Argumentative sources such as Books critical of Islam and Theological Books of Islam such as "then i was guided", tafsirs and commentaries of Hadith collections)
  • Books about Muslims (Books about Muslim, for example social analyses, population numbers and political analyses)


Lets have "Islam related books" as a subcategory to "Islamic scholars", since Islamic scholars is a category including both Muslim and non-Muslim scholars. The alternative is "Muslim Islamic scholars" that only includes Muslims scholars of Islam. I was thinking about adding it as a subcategoty to a "Books" and a "Islamic scholars" category, since they are books, and the work of the scholars.

Have a good day :)--Striver 12:38, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your conclusions. Lets do it the way you suggested!
Peace, --Striver 00:49, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WivesMuhammad

Hello. I see that the revert warring appears to have commenced once more. However, it's still very early days and I'm hesitant to protect the template unless it continues. I'll keep a very close eye on the template and slap a protection on it if it becomes clear the revert warring is not about to stop any time soon. Thanks for drawing my attention to this. - Mark 12:48, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Giselle Littman

I've unprotected it, Gren. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 18:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Screenshots

Actually Gren , screenshots are very easy to make. What I do is I find an online video that features the individual that I need a shot for and I watch the video using a viewer like say, Windows media Player, then I pause the video at a place that looks good for a screen shot. Then I simply open up a screen capture program , I use Print key pro but there are many such programs out there. I simply make a rectangular selection right over the paused image of the video , crop it and save it as an image and voila, done. Yes I will try to improve the quality .--CltFn 21:45, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamonazism

I revived this article because the information is encyclopedic and should be covered in Wikipedia. If you read the article you will see that this a very legitimate , sourced and notable article. Indeed I realize that this article was deleted in the past as some editors objected to the connotations it had on a certain unnamed belief system. That being what it may , it seems that wikipedian editors have now taken a different tack on such topics , as evidenced by the willingness to have articles such as Islamofascism and American Terrorism etc.... So I believe we can now make a very good case for reviving an article which should have never been blanked out in the first place.--CltFn 21:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


See my comment on the Islamonazism talk page. --CltFn 22:06, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteion review

Thanks for you help on this. I am sure this will resolve itself at some point. --CltFn 04:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Feminist Activists And Theorists

The reason I stuck the 2 together was to seperate the random purportedly-feminist celebrities from the people who have made feminist scholarship and/or activism their life's work, with a sort of intermediate subcategory for artists whose major ouvre is feminist in nature (for instance Ani DiFranco or Anne Sexton) Is there a better way to do this?geeksquad 17:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't necessarily agree with you. Activism is about DOING something to further a movement, not just being famous and outspoken about your political opinions. That's not NPOV, it's fact; check any dictionary and any book on activism and activist movements. I think that by lumping together celebrity supporters and people who really are involved with movements for political change, you greatly cheapen the work real activists do. Joss Whedon is not a part of the feminist movement, avowed supporter of women's rights though he may be. In contrast, take someone like Eleanor Smeal, who has made a career out of feminist activism through organizing, founding and running feminist NGO's and foundations, coordinating feminist actions, speaking at rallies, etc. I'm sure there's a way to reflect this in the category and subcategory listings -- I'd really appreciate any input you could give me on this. geeksquad 17:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds good to me. Further note: I'm going with 'Feminist Scholars' rather than 'Feminist Theorists' to be inclusive of people who may not necessarily be theory-oriented (for instance Gerda Lerner, who was a historian and not a theorist per se) geeksquad 17:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Muslim reformers

Getting rid of the majuscule , sure no problem, yes indeed the category can be ambiguously interpreted , and even more so if we blend in the idea of liberal Islam with it as you point out. CltFn

Lazy kat image

Thanks for taking the time to inform me. What is the point of being asked for the source at the upload image page when the image source will be re-checked or confirimed anyway? I took the photo and recreated the 'TheLazy Kat ' logo. I mentioned something like this at the page for uploading images.--Jondel 02:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, my Fair use images...

Well, the two FIU logos are used promotionally by the institution, and not a source of revenue for anyone - and I'm simply using them to indicate my own ties to the University. Hence, even on my user page, I can make a strong argument that the use is fair use - indeed, since I'm president of the College of Law Alumni Association (which, as a recognzed alumni chapter is authorized to use FIU's logo's promotionally), I could also make a good argument that this is an authorized use. In any event, the possibility of litigation is zero. As for the AmeriCorps logo, that one is a U.S. gov't work, ergo public domain. BD2412 T 13:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your message on my talk page

I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't upload that image, AFAICT. anthony 01:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Oy, oy, oy

In addition to Striver "re-organizing" the Ali talk page, he decided today to "re-organize" the Ramadan article. He split it up into several articles, without consulting anyone. I only saw it because I looked at his contribs, as I didn't have the Ramadan article watchlisted. He is also merrily continuing on his career of creating stubs, often with inane names. I reverted the edits to Ramadan, but I haven't put all the other articles he created up for deletion.

I think you would have more credibility if you headed the Arbcom action. I'm too vehement, but I'll support you. So would BrandonYusufToropov, though he has been less active lately. Of course, you may not have the time to do anything until winter break -- and you may feel that admins shouldn't start arbcom actions. Something has to be done. Zora 04:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Striver has already had an RFC. He was chastened for several days afterwards <g>. Doesn't that one count? Zora 06:02, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until you're done with school. Let me know. We can do it together. I really don't want to do it alone. I guess I need to start assembling evidence. Aargh. Zora 07:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure

Yea, you can delete the images. It was nice to ask though, so thank you. Chooserr

Intrusion

You edited my page, so here we go. How can you explain the islamic hyprocisy that they says Jesus is a 'great prophet' and so on, but completely call all his claims of divinity in the NT lies? Do islamics claim the NT is a lie? You realize that cults, such as islam and scientology tend to claim older scripture as 'lies' in order to push their beliefs I hope. monty2

I have to agree with monty2 on this one gren, Islamic cultists are a major problem. I think some extermination is in order rydia 01:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Striver again

We had two articles on the same subject -- my preferred version, Birthplace of Ali ibn Abi Talib, with presentation of all POVs and refs, and Strivers' version, People reported to be born in the Kaaba. Without any previous discussion, he deleted all material in my version and turned the page into a redirect to his article.

If Wikipedia lets him get away with this, I'm leaving. I can't take this. Zora 00:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, i was wrong in doing so. I apologise to both you and Zora (that i know is reading this). I did that as a reaction to the, IMHO, very POV and bad faith name and context of that article, and also to the way she linked to it. However, that was not a excuse. After a while, i occured to me that maybe it was not the besy good faith thing to do, but my conflict with her blinded my better judgment. A VFD whould have been the correct way. Yet again, im sorry and apologise. --Striver 02:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i am very "bold", and sometimes do cross the line. I see it as a cost of draging a heavy load in the Islam realted articles, but i try to adjust. My bad edits tend to get lots of attention, but i have done many, and i emphaciece, many, "bold" moves that where very good. Most of the marriage section is made or created by me, for example, and take a look of Islamic scholars, almost entirely done by me.

As for Zora, trust me, i try. Look at the talk page of the Ali article, screen after screen of both of us trying. --Striver 02:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Being bold

I am working on the Hijra (Islam) article, and the material i collected made it clear that it was to much to include it in one single article, specialy when it is about two different things: one event and one way of counting the years. So, in the same way we have a Julian calendar and a New Year's Day and January 1, i splitted the event and the way of counting into two different articles.

I mention this to you, since you warned me regarding the half-bad faith thing i did with the Zora article. If you have any problem with this, im happy to hear, but i didnt want to waste several houres waiting for your approval, in worst case senario, you can undo it in 2 minutes. --Striver 06:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your feedback. You are correct, i have reverted to a pree-me version, and ill do just as you proposed: present a complete revision instead of a half-done revision, since it already had a article done by someone else. Peace!--Striver 13:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image galleries

You have in the past commented on Image Galleries nominated for deletion. Most galleries are nominated because the nominators feels that galleries violate WP:NOT. The William-Adolphe Bouguereau gallery has been nominated for deletion (here). A proposal to modify WP:NOT is here. Please join either or both conversations and comment as you see fit. Dsmdgold 16:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome for the heads up. This is an issue I feel pretty strogly about, and I want as broad of a discussion as possible. One note, you mention that you "there can be some fair use rationale for putting things in image galleries". For many image galleries (including the Bougereau gallery) fair use is not issue since the underlying images are PD. Dsmdgold 17:49, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Could you give me a example of bad double spacing? You do know that single spacing in code does not give any space in "real mode"?

i have did not get any comment on the village pump, except from some guys that missunderstood the whole idea. I did not get any negative input from anyone that got the idea, and no input at all after i straightened out the missunderstading, so... --Striver 09:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No stub below categories? Ok, no problem. --Striver 09:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, stubs above categories, will do that. I live in Sweden. --Striver 09:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok, now i get you :) Its 10:56 Am here. Good night :)

Re: vandalism

Apparently grenavitar has accussed me of vandalism. I dont know if this is the right place to reply but i will anyway.. If i had deleted some parts of some articles it is indeed not because i am vandalising them. There is great inaccuracy and reliance on some media sources which do not give very clear images. I would not remove any peice of information unless i was completely sure it was incorrect. IP:198.166.248.143

Image tagging, Lazy Kat

Thanks for warning me a few weeks back. How do you tag an image? I should know but I don't . I faithfully stated that I took the photo and created the image when it was uploaded.Thanks.--Jondel 04:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Would you be willing to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:SIIEG, which is desperately in need of some idea of Wikipedia's concept of NPOV (also note the "you don't have to be secular or islamic to join" bit) ? --Victim of signature fascism vote for the arb com 18:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lenna images

The images were for discussion purposes only--I hadn't put them on any article page. You should have told me before the deletion. You left my reply in my talk page unanswered. I don't consider this good policy. If those images were fit to be deleted, then so are the three Lenna images that appear in the main article, Lossy data compression. If you look at them, you'll notice that they too have no source attribution. I recommend deleting them, so that I can put my own images (the dog photos, which I took myself and licensed under the GFDL) in the main article. --Shlomital 20:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Islam:The_Muslim_Guild#User_talk:Jimbo_Wales --Striver 21:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, yeah, the Big Boss knows your name :P --Striver 21:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Roop

Hi, you speedied Bob Roop a couple of days ago, I've replaced the deleted article with one which hopefully will make it clearer why Bob Roop was the most requested article on WP. An Olympic wrestler, championship pro wrestler, championship amateur wrestler who is a published author is fairly noteable, I think you'll agree. At any rate, before speedy'ing again, please contact me if you have questions. Article is sourced, could use some work but is a decent start I hope. Thanks! KillerChihuahua?!? 21:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Salam

I would appreciate a specific answer to the questions i made on the Ali talk page. Thanks and ma Salam. --Striver 08:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unacceptable

I did not make any personal legal threats. I reported what I saw as a potential crime. It is my civic duty to do so.

The ban on me needs to lifted as soon as possible or I will pursue a full investigation of this administrative abuse.

Haizum 09:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Legal Threats"

I have reviewed the policy article on legal threats. The entirety of that article discusses personal legal action, not the reporting of a crime.

This situation is no different than me discovering what I believe to be child pornography on a user's page, only to have an administrator ban me for reporting it to the authorities.

I will not tolerate administrative abuse.

If you want to enforce policy, understand that policy.

Haizum 09:14, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I dont know why he was blocked, nor do i care, support or reject it.

BUT: I did get scared, having a conspiratorical worl view, i dont appreciate beliving "big brother is watching me". Peace. --Striver 09:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer Striver. I'm watching a movie but since Haizum removed it from his talk page I'm posting the link so I can read it when the movie's over. I didn't really think that this would blow up like it seems to. I wonder who blocked him? Maybe I'm just incompetent at using logs. gren グレン 10:23, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

COTW: Culture of Sudan

This article is now the Collaboration of the Week! Thanks for your support. — 0918BRIAN • 2005-12-18 21:33

Striver's hadith binge

I think some hadith material, the hadiths continually cited by name by our Shi'a editors, may be appropriate. But Striver is hiding his polemic purpose (replaying the Sunni-Shi'a hadith-hurling wars) behind a fuzzy facade. It's very easy for him to create these articles, since Shi'a websites have it all laid out. All he has to do is copy and paste. He gets the thrill of being powerful, of "organizing" Wikipedia, at next to no cost.

All we can do is keep putting articles up for deletion until more people get upset at this waste of their time.

The revert wars at Ali continue. Striver kept insisted that I had never given any reasons and that therefore it was OK to revert. This was driving me nuts, since I had written answers to all his points. Now he's claiming that he didn't SEE my answers. He says he expected me to copy his whole posting and then intersperse my comments. Apparently he's been on Wikipedia for more than a year without realizing that interspersing comments is OK. Of course, he now says that it is NOT OK by his rules and I should play by his rules.

This is like arguing with someone with Alzheimers. Zora 04:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zora should remeber this: Talk:Ali/Archive3#Hypocracy --Striver 12:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New article

I created List of Hadith just for that reason, since i noticed that "notable" poluted the entire voting proces. When considering a afd, isnt the article name the main issue? A good article name, but a bad content gets the content deleted and changed to a stub, but the article retained. This proves that in a afd, the important is the article name, and not content.

And i feel there is such a big diference between List of notable Muslim reports and List of Hadith that i created the second and gave it to afd. There are different premisses for the voting consideration of the different afd, two actualy voted "delet" only due to the word "notable". That will not happen in the other afd. Said that, i expect you to restore the article, its not good to make a redirect of a aritcle that is up for afd, and please vote as you feel for the other article. They having the same content is irrelevant, just think of the birth in Kaaba issue, they have the same content, but different names. Thanks for the personal comments, i also see you as a friendly and reasonable editor, in contrast to some other.--Striver 12:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


So, does that mean that if either mine or Zoras article gets a delet, both get delet? Never mind, i get the point, you are right. I wont repeat that.

As for biased, in what manner is the list biased? If you are reffering to content, why dont you contribute to it? Its not in good faith to delet a entire list only since you belive your view is not addequatly represented in it. In that case, you contribute to the list. You should delet a list only if you belive it should not exist in any form. --Striver 13:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image Tagging Image:ForRobin.jpg

Thank you for your message. The image should be deleted, as it was only meant to be temporarily online (so that we can develop a new map of Slavic languages). Best regards! Boraczek 13:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hadith

You wrote:

I say it's biased because there is no systematic way of judging what hadith deserve pages.

Its a case-per-case judgment of notability, just like any article on WP. There is no "systematic way of judging" if a artist can be deemed "notable", but that does not stop WP from having Micheal Jackson.

Basically, as it is now it's whatever hadith you and Zereshk think are important... and you may have some legitimacy... but in the end that's not an unbiased list.

So help out and make it unbiased. POV does not warant deletion, it warants NPOVing.

I don't even know how you named them... who uses those names... what sources have you cited.

Many of the name are standardized, the hadith of the ship, of Ghadir, of the verse of rajm, a simple google search shows that.

We need a systematic method for judging what hadith are important.

Is there a "systematic method for judging" the notability of singers and artisist? Of politicians?

I suppose Hadith Qudsi are important (is that only for Sunnis?).

There you go, it wasnt that hard, was it? If it gets to a judgment call, then we will judge it then, just like with artists.

I also don't like you organizing them into discrete sections. Many hadith may seem to be about one thing but are used for many purposes.

Thats why they are in multiple sections, like Hadith of Qur'an and Sunnah being in both the Qur'an and Sunnah sections.

I'd be happy if you started citing some real, scholarly sources for what belongs and in each hadith article instead of pasting text.

Ill try.

You also need to start a more organized citation system. Do you think your material reads like something Britannica would accept? Wikipedia suffers from a crippling optimism that any article adding information is good... when many times the skew the representation of the discourse. I really would like to see some hadith scholars opinions on these pages.

I dont get what you mean by "scholarly sources". Isnt Bukhari and Muslim "scholarly sources"

--Striver 15:28, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Greek Propaganda

Hi Gren, no doubt you are yet another Muslim who believes in his ludicrous theories about 'Science originating from the Arab Caliphate', and that Muslims kept the knowledge of the Ancient Greeks safe, but in regards to your idiocy on the Criticism of Islam section, I must point out that what I posted is common knowledge, if you would care to cite the instances in which you need me to source it, I would be glad to. ALLAHU (BESLAN) AKBAR! --GreekWarrior 03:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ijtihad

Regarding Ijtihad, it is disputed among the Shia sect of Islam rather than the Sunnis and I am unable to find a single reference to a Sunni scholar saying that the door of Ijtihad is closed. The names you mentioned don't seem like Islamic either and I have never heard of them before. I think we shall go by the stand taken by the known scholars of Islam (Sunni version off course) to decide upon this fact. Don't you agree?

خرم Khurram 16:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please mention the Sunni schools of thought that say that the door of Ijtihad is closed? I admit my ignorance since I don't know of any but being a Sunni myself, I have confirmed it that this statement has not been made by any Sunni scholar of repute. I have never heard of Schnact before but if you can tell me the title of his work, I might be able to gather some information about his authenticity and credibility.

خرم Khurram 16:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Islam

Heya Gren, I took a look at the article, and someone else reverted Greek Warrior's essay. I'm not sure how I feel about dropping the article and replacing it with a bunch of articles. Hmmmmm ... how about starting work on those other articles and if they get big enough, then turning the Criticism of Islam article into a summary, with links to the more detailed articles? No, wait, that's wrong-headed -- just relentlessly expand sections on the criticism article until they're ready to bud off. The problem is coming up with sources. It would require a lot of reading and research. Zora 21:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the Toshihiko Izutsu article and then checked to see if any of his books were available at ABEbooks. There are but ... I'm not so sure about someone who writes about Zen philosophy. Ten whacks with a stick for that! Zora 00:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance with a move

Ok so I see that your an admin, so I'm asking you for your help. I moved Shaikh Rafi Usmani to Muhammad Rafi Usmani, but rather than using the move feature, I just copied and pasted. Then I realized I should have just used the move feature but by then it is too late. Any suggestions? Pepsidrinka 00:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Early Muslim conflicts

Hi Gren -- I thought I completed all the steps necessary to put the template up for deletion, but I may have messed up. I think that was the first time I tried that procedure.

You're on vacation now, ne? Enjoying a break? How did the last semester go? Zora 21:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Haizum RFC

I see no other course of action. Since you're involved please feel free to add your own view or edit mine (until users start endorsing). Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Haizum. freestylefrappe 05:20, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


My imags

They all already have the copyright listed in them. They're all GDFL o.0 Lyo 18:14, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islam in the United States

Can you please take a look at this article? I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who thinks the sections that are being added in about "Muslim disloyalty" are xenophobic and unfit for an encyclopedia. Yuber(talk) 05:46, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would remove the slave thing altogether but obviously that's not the dispute as the editors want to keep a link in to a video listed on a right-wing hate site that shows "Muslims" desecrating an American flag. There is no proof that the Muslims are American or if the video is even recent but somehow it's fit for an encyclopedia in their view. Yuber(talk) 06:05, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gren. Don't worry I have alerted a few admins who are already working on proving it. I usually don't put stuff like that in an edit summary. I guess I forgot or was slightly angry at the quick revert. Right now your help is needed at the article.  :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 06:17, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Majuscule

Majuscule? What does that mean...? freestylefrappe 07:08, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]