This is an archive of past discussions with User:SA 13 Bro. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The article is clearly biased and presumes that the author's selected represent the overwhelming view of scholarship which is completely false.
For instance:
the quran quote they use to justify their claim that islam only encourages forgiveness for other muslims directly contradicts their statement:
And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Surah 9:5-8
And if they break their oaths after their treaty and defame your religion, then fight the leaders of disbelief, for indeed, there are no oaths [sacred] to them; [fight them that] they might cease.
The very next verse makes it clear that this is not a conversion but a treaty wherein they change.
this is very poor scholarship with deep bias. Get a real scholar
Quran 42: 36- 39 which is used to assert the quran says it is best to forgive fellow muslims makes NO claim regarding who they should forgive and is general - and yet the author's evident bias persists.
So whatever thing you have been given - it is but [for] enjoyment of the worldly life. But what is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who have believed and upon their Lord rely
And those who avoid the major sins and immoralities, and when they are angry, they forgive,
And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.106.2 (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Lastly, this is false:
There is a sharp differentiation between forgiveness that is recommended for Muslims in Islam and for those who convert to Islam, and impossibility of forgiveness for non-Muslims who refuse to accept Islam, a shirk or anyone who has insulted Islam.[23][35][36]
Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again) and (again) reject faith, and go on increasing in unbelief,- Allah will not forgive them nor guide them nor guide them on the way.
— Quran 4:137
The issue here is that it refers to God not forgiving those people for that particular sin, not muslims not forgiving them. This is clear but again the author's bias and agenda in making it seem like muslims cannot forgive non muslims perists. This is obviously nonesense and hurts wikipedia's credibility. Claims that strong need to be substantiated or removed - you do the article a disservice by allowing such weak and biased arguments to persist.
THe artcile and scholarship was harsh, lazy, and myopic - I responded in kind.
I explained why above - the proof given to substantiate the bias claims is inadequate. Making a claim, and sourcing it does not an article make. I removed anything that wasn't supported by the sources - or adequately substantiated. The claims were too broad and poorly sourced, and the source materials themselves were cherry picked and not representatitve of the scholarly view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.106.2 (talk) 17:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I noticed that a message you recently left to a newcomer may have been unduly harsh. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see others making a common mistake, consider politely pointing out what they did wrong and showing them how to correct it. It takes more time, but it helps us retain new editors. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by O1lI0 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I just noticed that User:Serols was temporary blocked as edit warring, but the User:Crazymonkey120 contributions seemed to be disruptive editing. SA 13 Bro (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Twinkle - Thank you!
Many thanks for the heads up! I'm aware of Twinkle, but have only been editing since yesterday so sadly I'm not auto confirmed yet and so don't have access. Dorintosh (talk) 19:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. needs footnotes, but passes review
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Thank you for your reviewing, I created the article page because there was some quality notable on that show event in China and certain part in SE Asia. Regrading about the footnotes sources issues, this may let those advanced English editors from China or SE Asia to modify it in the future, while I'm not too familiarize on that show event. SA 13 Bro (talk) 17:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Sorry about the mistake. I saw the vandalism and thought I was reverting it but you got to it first. Thanks for that. Again, I am sorry that my mistake in not keeping all the changes on my page in order resulted in the above message being left on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 02:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
It's ok, when I patrolling the recent changes, I saw that user was making the obscene edit at your talk page while I've remove it. Just forget about the mistake, cheers!. SA 13 Bro (talk) 03:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for moving this page to the correct title. In future, however, please leave this sort of procedural maintenance to the SPI clerks. It's quite easy to get this subtly wrong, and in doing so create create more work for the clerks in the long run. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for the move, I'm patrolling for deals whether any master accounts that has global locked at SPI, then I saw the new case which OP has wrote about the mistake so I just help. I will heed on it, cheers too. SA 13 Bro (talk) 01:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Quick note
Just as an FYI, it is never required to notify a user that an SPI has been filed. I typically never do when it is a case that involves a previously CU blocked user or one where I have reasonable grounds to believe that the notification could make the case more difficult to process. While there is nothing wrong with you notifying a user after the case has been filed, in the future, would you mind checking with me first if I am the party that has filed the case? I typically have a reason not to notify if I haven't done so, but am also fine with notification if someone else thinks that there is a good reason. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:11, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
@TonyBallioni: OK, I'm patrolled at SPI for dealing any new reports of user master account that has been global locked, the user DrStrauss that I seemed on recent changes are quite frequently in the past, so I make the notification. Sorry about that, thanks for your FYI. SA 13 Bro (talk) 00:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Note: Your signature would go over the 255-character limit if I had used the usual markup like <span style="color:red">S</span>, but your signature is bold anyway, so using <b style="color:red">S</b> saved a few characters. Thanks to Redrose64 for showing me how to combine HTML markup to save characters; I don't see any other way I could have got this to fit!
I'm waiting for news articles like this one [1] about fellow voice actress Xanthe Huynh. If the IP editor can find some like that for Cristina Vee, then that can be considered. But for now the AMA log indicates it is a passing mention. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:11, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Banned Wikipedia user Abd
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax (a.k.a. Daniel Lomax or User:Abd) is a Muslim, conspiracy theorist and crank who is a proponent of pseudoscientific cold fusion.
Lomax has a history of being banned on forums and wikis for trolling. Why do you support a guy who has been banned all over the web?
I use the IP to remain anonymous. How is it trolling? The User Abd has been banned all over the web and on Wikipedia. He has been supporting a known sock-puppeteer Ben Steigmann, a known pseudoscience promoter. He also stalks and harasses a number of skeptical Wikipedia users in his stalking project here. He is not an admin or checkuser on metawiki yet he is hosting a libellous stalking project about several skeptical Wikipedia users that I know, he then claims they are all one person without evidence. He also claims he knows where people live and who their families are. Do you think that is acceptable? It is the oddest thing I have ever seen but Meta-Wiki does not even look at what he is posting. Maybe you can put a word in. Why is he aloud to slander innocent Wikipedia users and get away with it? He has an axe to grind against skeptics.
Also scroll to the bottom of his 'project' [2], he defends his friend Ben Steigmann a blocked Wikipedia editor and encourages him to continue to join Wikipedia. Ben Steigmann was recently blocked on four disruptive sock-puppets [3]. Yet Abd in his case study describes Ben's edits as 'harmless'. If you are un-biased and a neutral observer please look at this. Don't just blindly believe everything Abd says. Abuse is happening here. 117.20.41.9 (talk) 03:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, SA 13 Bro. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
My edits to Richard Hatch page - I'd like your advice
SA 13 Bro,
This is CaptainMarc (with some help from his parents). I am 21 years old and a Survivor and reality show superfan. I am just starting to try to become a Wikipedia contrbutor so please excuse some mistakes I will make. I am trying to be careful and will be more careful from now on. I made some edits under the IP address ID 2601:646:8101:CFA8:FC19:B9AD:A286:DA86 which you reverted because I did not have sources. I should have been logged in to make those edits but didn't notice that I was not logged in.
I did not think I would need to add a citation to change the name of the person since I did not see any citation for the original name and birth date. A few questions:
- Should I indeed put a citation in for the name? If so, how do I determine when to add a citation and when not? Is it ok to add citations to everything I do? The list will get very long.
- Would this web.nacva.com/JFIA/Issues/JFIA-2017-No2-9.pdf serve as a good citation. It certainly appears to be from a non fly by night source
I would like to make this change and get it accepted as one of my first edits but will wait to hear from you to make sure I do it correctly.
Well, the Journal of Forensic and Investigative Accounting certainly appears to be a legitimate academic journal affiliated with Louisiana State University, and with an editorial board. The "open access" part is a little worrisome, but the magazine says, "Each article will be published electronically as soon as the editor, based upon advice from referees, determines that the manuscript meets the objectives and standards set forth by the editor and the journal's editorial board." And the author of this particular article is an assistant professor at the College of Business and Economics at West Virginia University. The section on Hatch's personal background is based, he says, "the indictments, exhibits, motions, notices, transcripts, supplemental records, responses, and orders in the Richard Hatch case, spanning the period September, 2005 to July, 2014...." I'd say this is actually a pretty good find. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I'll try the legitimate academic journal source citation, if got any issue about the "open access" by other users, they can editorial on my talk page at any time. SA 13 Bro (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
I think you should like this cute little cat, since you shared me some of your souvenir cats image and also a cat lover in the past. Hope everyday will be going well for you, my friend.
Yes, probably him. I'll now try calm down and not attacking him in edit summary (even though he does have "dog" in his user name and he's from Taiwan).--170.78.75.25 (talk) 02:52, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
@TVGarfield: Yes, thank you for reverted those IP disruptive editing, some of the articles that I request for protection was vandalism by the Geo-locate IP from Taiwan, NCD is one of the most popular LTA vandal from Taiwan, I maybe get shakes. Anyway, those IPs now have been blocked, so we just ignore it, any further persistence disruptive editing, it can be report to WP:AIV or WP:ANI. SA 13 Bro (talk) 07:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
I am not too confirmed the situation, but there was some couple of IPs Geo-locate is came from the Taiwan, possible neither is maybe or may not. SA 13 Bro (talk) 04:55, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Could you help me submit a CU request at WP:SI? Since IP users cannot do it.
I suspected those IPs, apart from being similar to User:Nipponese Dog Calvero, might actually be User:O1lI0. These are all Taiwan mobile IPs, and they all engage in edit disputes with Chinese user/IPs, like User:O1lI0's behavior; also they all speak poor English, accused other users of sockpuppetery often using the word "sock". IPs used for check would be 49.217.4.143, 115.82.194.252, 101.13.0.0/16 and 101.12.194.0/24.--170.78.75.25 (talk) 04:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
I found that there are IP tracking my editors these days, it seems that I do not want to be found that this is the same person. But apparently all have the same edit attribution -rollback..--O1lI0 (talk) 11:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
In short, I suspect someone made an original study, and this one seemed to use IP to start attacks on my other editors, and even went to Japanese and Malay wikis.Look at your talk page, and it seems like a lot of IPs that he or someone else can use at the same time.--O1lI0 (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
@Iggy the Swan: Thank you for your barnstar, My Royal Young are the most active vandal from Philippines, he usually like to use dynamic IP ranges to vandalize projects for personal amusement, one of the Tagalog Wikipedia admin WayKurat also familiarize about him as well. BTW, wish you have a prosperous of Happy New Year! Cheers! :) SA 13 Bro (talk) 00:28, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Yes hopefully there will not be any more from My Royal Young this year. I have kept an eye on all the pages (added to watchlist) this user has vandalised (USS ships, Ybarro etc.) since early December when I've noticed the user vandalising certain pages when ClueBot NG reverts them seven months ago and they come in waves of five or more. Iggy (talk) 00:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I know that if iam going to blocking by using Multiple accounts sockpupeet is only my fault and iam accepted this. I think that iam blocking that the reason is using Multiple accounts sockpupeet and also I going to creating similar but defferent accounts. With sole propose of self publicity. Please if other reason I have been so I don't know that reason please give me one chance and unblock me soon please don't decline my request thanks please sir also I promise you I can doing this again thanks please unblock me sir, Than you
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The IP was clearly Shivam, as he posted the same unblock request on a recent sock's page. Posting that here probably led the blocking admin to suspect this was yet another sock, but Shivam posts similar things to user pages who he think can help unblock him. I guarantee that if SA 13 Bro was a sock, he would have already made the same edits as the master; Shivam doesn't do sleepers. CrowCaw19:27, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
I have left a message on Jpgordon's talk page (on top of the truck load of pings he's received). The only factor that prevents me from unblocking SA is that Jpgordon is a CheckUser and may know something we don't. It's unlikely in this case, as the block would then have been marked explicitly as "checkuser-block", but still. Favonian (talk) 19:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.
I see nothing that connects SA 13 Bro to the IP address that made the fraudulent unblock request above, so I have decided to unblock. Jpgordon, if there is something you saw that I missed, by all means reinstate the block without consulting me, but I do believe that this was a simple mistake. —DoRD (talk) 22:05, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
HappyNewYear, SA 13 Bro
theinstantmatrix (talk) — is wishing you a HappyNewYear! Welcome the 2018. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2018 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2018 go well for you.
@Ronz: Oh sorry for that, you let me recalled that one day I had also make the DOB source citation by using Famousbirthdays.com, but Dr.K. didn't post the general consensus noticeboard link to me, so I have forget it. Thank you for your advice, much appreciate it. SA 13 Bro (talk) 02:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Sources needed for Days of the Year pages
I see you recently accepted a pending change to January 26. I looked for a source for this date of birth in the Kees van Dongen and it was unsupported by any source there too.
You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.
@BrandenburgG: Thanks. Me too as well sometimes, that's why I also became one of the recent changes patroller on Wikipedia. I am quite busy in real life time and may not respond very swiftly, feel free to leave me a message if I can help. SA 13 Bro (talk) 03:02, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
About my edit ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indiana&oldid=828036245 ), you implied my edit was inaccurate. Rather than verifying it, you assumed that just because I referred to firefies as "the one with the glowing ass" that my entire edit was devoid of merit. The article I linked to and information contained within are, to the best of my knowledge, accurate. Rather than reverting my edit outright, a better idea would have been to see if there was any merit first. Chao 104.145.108.86 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
@104.145.108.86: The article Indiana is written about relevance topics on the section, such as like "Etymology", "History", "Geography", "Indiana counties and statistical areas", "Demographics", "Law and government", "Culture", "Economy and infrastructure", and "Education". Not writing about WP:UNDUE topics such as like "official insect" that you had make this edit and get reverted by other IP editor. If you are interested about relevance of insect topics, feel free to question the specific certain topics at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science instead. SA 13 Bro (talk) 07:18, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
ESEAP Conference 2018
Hello,
I’m Punchalee, a member of the Communication Committee of the ESEAP Conference. ESEAP Conference 2018 is a regional conference for Wikimedia communities throughout the ESEAP region: ESEAP stands for East, Southeast Asia, and Pacific. Taking place in Bali, Indonesia on 5–6 May 2018, this is the first regional conference for these Wikimedia communities.
East and Southeast Asia and the Pacific are the most under-represented regions within the Wikimedia community. There is a significant number of Wikimedia contributors in our regions, yet we continue to struggle in establishing a well-managed community. This conference will bring participants from various ESEAP communities together in order to better understand the issues and to look for solutions. It also aims to connect people of the Wikimedia movement within ESEAP regions, to share ideas, and to build regional collaborations that are impossible to achieve through online communication.
We’ve got a lot of participation from several countries, but we’re lacking from your country. As we need more participants from your country, we believe that your contribution and participation would be a valuable asset to the success of this event. If you would like to participate in the conference, please do fill the form as soon as possible (by April 5, 2018) and we’ll inform you if you get selected for the conference.
Yeah, but why now? I just recently noticed the affair because I was editing an article on a Nichiren Buddhist topic and was pinged when one of the IPs attacked an edit I had made, and have been snooping around for other ban-evasion IPs since, but you've been involved with the affair since at least January; you wouldn't have had the SPI page watchlisted since I only created it the other day. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 00:48, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
@Hijiri88: I am actually tried to provide and comment some of his behavior evidence on that day you have created the SPI page, only the thing is the factor have prevented me to involve the stress in wide affair that is related to the Nichiren Buddhism topic, so I has been miss out. SA 13 Bro (talk) 01:25, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I can understand that, but how did you know I created the page in the first place? Do you have a script running that tells you when a new entry appears on Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Catflap08 or something?
Anyway, I find it really concerning that Catflap08, who was site-banned by the community (and his being banned was used as a reason for removing some sanctions from me), is evading his ban via semi-dynamic IPs, and apparently doing so with impugnity because the IPs go stale before anyone who could block them notices. I'm seriously considering pinging User:Bishonen or someone else who's good with these IP issues to ask if there's anything that can be done long-term.
@Hijiri88: I went to WP:SPI for dealing any users master account whether that is globally locked and tag the LGA template are quite frequently, this user is a example that I have tagged the account. Yes, you are welcome to invite the admins that is familiarize about his behavior and monitoring via from those IPs. SA 13 Bro (talk) 03:53, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Ah, okay. Makes sense. Honestly, I was kinda hoping you would answer "yes" to my question about you having a tool that would automatically notify you when someone creates a link to a page. That sounds frickin' awesome. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:41, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
@Hijiri88: I have no any tool that can be automatically notify me about anything else, sometimes there are some users was also cross-wiki socking, some of the users report it to WP:SPI and meta:SRG as well for request those sock accounts to get locked by any global stewards, I am also a patroller at Meta-Wiki site, Vandyrandy case and ROXELANA22 case this 2 users is the good example. SA 13 Bro (talk) 22:58, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm fine, and yes I keep contact with him but that's mostly because I've been unable to talk to him on-wiki. For transparency's sake I prefer to talk to people on-wiki, as I'm in Paris I won't be on Wikipedia that much until Monday so feel free to reply on my talk page. Was there anything in particular you would like to discuss? --Donald Trung (talk) 19:42, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@Donald Trung: Thanks for your e-mail back. :) Artix and I also realize that people are weird on Wikipedia. Artix and I don't have any plan on this moment, we will let you know if we have any particular discussions on Commons in the future. SA 13 Bro (talk) 19:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@Donald Trung: We both having the communications on Email are usually in English language, although I am not a native speaker. Chinese is my native language, I can use both Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese as well. SA 13 Bro (talk) 20:10, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@Gingerale35: I have no any relationship with those persons from Toronto, by the way, beware of WP:COI and be WP:CIVIL as well, feel free to consult me at any time if you need my help, I will be assist that I could. SA 13 Bro (talk) 03:04, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I've reverted here. The en.wiki CU block is currently in place and they need to be the ones that appeal it themselves or the blocking admin or another CheckUser needs to unblock them and remove the tag. The status of a block or lock on another Wikimedia site does not affect its status on en.wiki. I don't have an opinion either way on the case, but messing around with this stuff is disruptive. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi there! I am so confused to contribute a biography of a living person and every time I submit my article it is always declined. Please do me a favour and that is submit the following article..... If you need photos just search google for Eyu Kassa Prosforcoins (talk) 07:50, 17 June 2018 (UTC) Further extraneous draft content removed. TheDragonFire (talk) 10:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@Prosforcoins: Also, please note that the biography of living persons quality must meet to the Wikipedia:Notability (people) guideline, lacking of significant coverage is unable to write in neutrally on Wikipedia, and your draft works are likely going to be declined by any WP:NPR editors. Yes, the WP:BLP guideline is quite complicated for those new editors, but after proficiency for a long time, it definitely were be fine for you. SA 13 Bro (talk) 13:04, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
July 2018
So you give me the reason why my edits in the Đồng Tháp have been deleted for no reason. While I cited the specific source, why after a while it was deleted again. If you think that what I edit is not appropriate, please send me a message, so I do not have to find materials, take the time to update information for a site do not want to develop.
Thank you!!(talk) 23:40, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@Junes1994: You seemed to be remove the content without adequately explaining why in H:ES when I patrolling the recent changes and reviewed your edits, can you please provide me what specific source that are you tried to cite? SA 13 Bro (talk) 17:00, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
@CoolGuyCool219: Based on your contributions history record have indicated that you didn't seem any constructive edits, except for you has created that WP:drafts page at behind, be caution and responsibility when you engaging an edits on any articles and Wikipedia pages. SA 13 Bro (talk) 22:56, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, SA 13 Bro. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
