User talk:Afghana~enwiki/Archive 1

Image:Alishia.gif[edit]

Can you put up a description of the image, something about what is written in the Arabic calligraphy and what the image is meant to depict? --Bluerain ^talk 16:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Salam Afghana~enwiki/Archive 1! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Don't worry about following lists of links. It's not necessary to read all of them immediately. You can get information whenever you need. Happy editing! Sa.vakilian(t-c)--14:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basic information
What wikipedia is What Wikipedia is not The five pillars of Wikipedia Statement of principles Explore wikipedia Contents articles about wikipedia
Getting Help
Help:Contents Help Desk Reference desk Where to ask a question Frequently Asked Questions Request administrator attention
Editing an article
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page Starting a new page Edit toolbar Categories reverting Moving a page Footnotes upload an image Manual of Style Be bold in editing Build the web Cite your sources How to write a great article
Getting technical
backlog Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump Resolving disputes Resources for collaboration Deletion of articles

Policies and Guidelines
Policies and guidelines Policy Library Guidelines Library Attribution Neutral Point of View Copyrights Biographies of living persons Talk page guidelines
Wikipedia Community
Glossary of wikipedia Community Portal WikiProjects Wikipedians Administrators Bureaucrats IRC channels Mailing lists Community noticeboard Administrators' noticeboard Mediation Committee Arbitration Committee
Wikipedia Ethics
Assume good faith Etiquette Civility Avoid Harassment Consensus building Prevent Profanity Ownership of articles Sign your posts
Wikipedia 7 Sins
Blocking policy Wikipedia:Disruptive editing Vandalism 3RR Edit war Abuse sock puppets personal attacks Copyright violation

In addition I invite you to participate in Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 14:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to meet you. You can help us to make more NPOV articles about Islam. I can introduce active Muslim wikipedians to you.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 19:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 2007[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. An article you recently created, Aql (Shiasm), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new articles, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do and please read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. You may want to cover a wider area of the subject at first, and see if it deserves splitting into subpages only once you have enough material to warrant it. Coren 21:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it. I see you're hard at work. Never take a speedy delete request personally, it's a new page patroller's way of saying "Hey, this is inadequate". Fleshing out it is one of the best ways of fixing that. :-) Coren 22:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your articles on Ismailism[edit]

Thanks for working on our information on Shi'a Islam, particularly Ismailism. I don't know much about the topic, but I am interested and I am happy to see it being worked on more. I have a few suggestions on formatting. Try to add categories, as I readded to Ismailism and added to your reincarnation in Ismailism. Also, you should add more links to other articles in your articles. Most good Wikipedia articles are pretty heavily wikified, and it helps readers to find more information on related topics. Let me know if you need any help or have questions about Wikipedia. Academic Challenger 21:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you need to add the Islamic sects category to articles that are not actually about Islamic sects. You don't need to add the Islam category to everything either. The reason that the Shi'a Islam and Ismailism categories are there is so that the Islam category doesn't get overfilled. Academic Challenger 22:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation of why the Ismailism article is the way it is right now. Your ideas for future improvement make good sense, and I hope you or someone else can make those changes as time allows. Good thinking, and good work! Timotheos 18:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other wikipedians[edit]

Salam alaykum. You can speak with User:Striver about Shia-related articles, with Itaqallah about Sunni-related and Islam-related articles and with Aminz about Islam-related articles. You can find in which field other wikipedians are expert in Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Expert Wikipedians in Islamic issues--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 02:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism[edit]

considering the high level of vandalism on the shia and twelver templates, I think a request for full-protection of the templates is required! Wikipedia:Requests for page protection--Gerash 77 04:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Please request protection of these templates. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 16:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that your submission was erased by a bot because you didn't sign your name! --Gerash 77 00:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Shiachat3.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Shiachat3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dont delete content or you will be blocked[edit]

Do not delete content like you did here. Repeatedly deleting content like this can get you blocked. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting a relevant picture is deleting content. The picture is of a black dog, as mentioned in the hadith, and is not "silly". --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Enzuru, the gratuitous cute dog pic is a longstanding unresolved issue. As are the pics of geckos and flies. Very silly indeed, but i think making things look silly is the intent of the pics, although their supporters will never tell you that. Merbabu 04:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

En, "RV for deleting "black dog is evil" hadith" was for the anon IP not for you. No, these pictures are not silly, Merbabu. Articles are improved by havig pictures, that is it. We're here to improve the website. Please AGF. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 11:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Batiniyya[edit]

Salaam Aleikum Enzuru...

Is Batiniyya a term that predominantly applies to Ismailism? Before your recent edits it sounded like it was a general term for religions/sects with esoteric views... if the term applies to all of them equally, I'm wondering if the changes you just made are appropriate. I don't know, and I'm a pretty new editor, so... just asking. – cacahuate ^talk 01:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merging Ismaili and Druze seven pillars[edit]

Hi Enzuru. Apparently you're mistaken, as I didn't create any of the articles, not for that matter have I even edited them. :-) Maybe Striver is the one you might be looking for. I honestly can't help much because I'm not very knowledgeable in these matters. Cheers, Anas ^talk? 11:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Birth[edit]

We could change the structure of the template to first have events of Jesus life shared by all and then the particular concepts first of Christianity, then of Islam. Placing VB, as I did, under Christianity is not ideal but it is way better than to place it under Islam. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 20:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

You're welcome. But you should have kept the Quran in 'books'. If you need any help, let me know. ^Klak_Sonn^Talk 10:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind, I reinserted Qur'an because the Sunni template includes Qur'an in "books" and not including it in the template gives the impression that Shi'as don't have a book. ^Klak_Sonn^Talk 09:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Can you get an admin to protect Template:Shi'a Islam? Someone is getting on my nerves and reverting my edits. Thanks. ^Klak_Sonn^Talk 22:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salam, I saw you've got into trouble in the template. I can ask an admin to semi-protect it for a while. Also I can help you with it as a third opinion. Please put a comment in my talk page if you'd like it.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 05:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Almahdi.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Almahdi.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sulayman bin Hassan[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sulayman bin Hassan, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.globalguide.org/index.html?title=Sulayman_bin_Hassan&PHPSESSID=eeaeab930530057651bc09e4a0a51174. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 20:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usoolism[edit]

What I took out in the Twelver article I moved to the Usooli one, because it only applies to Usoolis. Thanks. --Enzuru 02:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and sorry, I didn't mean to undo your revision. It was the revision right before yours I was attempting to undo, and you changed the page right before I got the revision before yours undone. Thanks for alerting me of that. jj137^Talk 02:37, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mirza.gif[edit]

Why are you insisting on putting this picture? The only real pictures of this person in existance are in B&W. Note he died in 1908. The coloured ones are made up, so for the sake of originality and fairness to the person, original black and white image should be used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik07 (talk • contribs) 08:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of Hazrat Ahmad[edit]

Dear sir, Thanks for the message on my page. Its just a short message for clarification regarding the picture of Hadhrat Ahmad in Ahmadiyya info. box. As a member of the Ahmadiyya muslim community, we feel that any re-touched photographs of the founder of the community should not be used or published for the sake of authenticity. The other smaller Lahore Ahmadiyya movement faction did published the colorized photo, but for the majority of the followers of Hadhrat Ahmad, this is not appropriate. The imposed colour on the photo does not correspond to historic descriptions of the founder of the community. This policy of not altering the relics or photos from that time is to ensure that no additions are made to the items which may influence the impression made by those images/relics. I hope this clarifies the situation. SK —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaifullahKhalid (talk • contribs) 14:40, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear brother, thanks for your kind message. As far I am aware, there are 4 or 5 pictures of Promised Messiah available. I think you can find them in the alislam.org galleries. SK —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaifullahKhalid (talk • contribs) 10:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your creation of Hindrellez[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have modified a page that you have created. The page is Hindrellez. I changed that page to a redirect to Alevi so when people type in "Hindrellez", they will be sent to the Alevi page instead. The reason I did this is because there was no content on Hindrellez other than 1 sentence which said it was a holiday. I then removed the wikilink of the word "Hindrellez" on Template:Alevism because it would just lead to a redirect back to the original page. If you have any further questions, please ask them on my talk page, as I will not monitor your page for replies. Thank You. - Rjd0060 22:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that information can be added to Hindrellez until there is enough information that can be broken off into a stub of Alevi. The page would have been tagged for Speedy Deletion, which is why I acted quickly to do a redirect. - Rjd0060 22:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, working in the Shi'ah articles alot, I often create stubs and usually they tend not to be deleted (even after being marked by someone) because of the importance of the matter. You can see this alot in Ismaili and Alevi templates. All that is usually done is a little mark is added that says it is a stub relating to Islam, such as in the Aql (Shiasm) article. --Enzuru 22:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was no stub added to that article. Feel free to revert my edits if you would like, and see if anybody else tags it. This time be sure to add {{stub}} to the bottom of the page. - 22:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Adding {{stub}} really does make a difference.- Rjd0060 22:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sunni Islam[edit]

Man, I checked out those templates and they are some major pieces of work there. You've given me a lot to think about...my mind isn't totally swayed yet, but I tell you, if you're willing to help with the reformatting of the Sunni template like you did with those it might be. Good job, i'm going to go check out the template's talk page for now. MezzoMezzo 02:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmadiyya Fiqh[edit]

Dear Brother, AoA, Ahmadiyya fiqh is indeed based on the Hanafi principles. Although there is much more room provided for Ijtehad in interpreting the Shariah. The Ijtehad is based on principles elaborated by Hz. Ahmad and his successors. You can see the copies of the Fiqh books here...http://www.alislam.org/urdu/fiqah/ SK —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaifullahKhalid (talk • contribs) 12:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmadiyya fiqah accepts the many logical components of other jurists apart from Imam Abu Hanifa. But we consider Imam Abu Hanifa to be the most valid and reasonable among the four. As for Shia Imams, we do consider them to be learned men of the highest order who followed their noble ancestors with great care. Although we have fundamental difference of opinion with Shia view of Imamat, but we view historical events around the original disputes as unfortunate man made errors and not deliberate attempts to sieze power from any party. wassalam. SK —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaifullahKhalid (talk • contribs) 10:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shia template[edit]

Salam. I think I will be a good tewmplate if you remove Theology of Twelvers . Please pay attention to Fatima article. We need your help.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fatimah[edit]

The article structure as it currently stands conforms to the basic WP:Biography format. It could certainly do with some expansion. We're currently trying to get the article to GA status and if you have suggestions for improvements, feel free to discuss them in the talk page. Thanks. → AA ^(talk) — 21:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: comments[edit]

I'll see if I can get on the talk page tomorrow. Where do you train out of? I might know of them, depending on where you live. MezzoMezzo 04:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Azadari[edit]

Hi, Please write your idea about Merging Mätam, Azadari of Muharram and Majlis-e-Aza to Commemoration of Husayn ibn Ali(here) and Imambargah to Hussainia (here). Thanks--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 03:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please merge the articles. My English is not so good to do it.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 16:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmadiyya Template[edit]

Thank you for your message. I have posted my comments on the relevant discussion page. Best regards, Nazli 03:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Enzuru: Thanks for the message. Point taken; though I cannot totally agree with you about aesthetics over knowledge! Please see the discussion page for my suggestions. Regards, Sufaid 09:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for informing me of the discussion. My comments are on the talk page. Best, Nazli 05:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is Ali article good?[edit]

Salam alaykum.

A lot of effort has done on this article and I want to nominate it as good article after adding some other sources. Please check it and tell me your idea. Thanks--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 18:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please write it in Talk:Ali.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 06:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You?[edit]

Selam,

i would ask if you really are of pasthun ancestry?

You wrote that you are kemalist? Do you live in Turkey?

If you are Alevi, from which tribe ar you?

Send me a mail: westberlin85 AT gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.127.93.56 (talk) 22:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

On 26 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mourning of Muharram, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 13:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alevism[edit]

I have to ask why you put Ataturk on the Alevi template. I have specifically checked if it was you, but you did design parts of it and you are a kemalist, the evidence points to you. I recommend you remove it, being that the man wasn't even a muslim. Not to mention he is hated in many parts of the islamic world for good reason (hijabs in Turkey, look it up). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ishvara7 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ahmad.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ahmad.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, your fair use rationale does not fall within policy. The license itself reads "...to provide critical commentary on the film, event, etc. in question or of the poster itself, not solely for illustration". You are using it soley for illustration. It's not necessary and is against Wikipedia policy. See WP:NFCC#8 and WP:NFCC#9. Lara❤Love 03:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Right after I undo everything. Give me a while to perhaps find a better license. In the meantime I'll undo my undo-ances. --Enzuru 03:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So that your time spent is not in vein, realize that NFCC#9 does not allow for the use of non-free images in templates. So you'll need to obtain a freely licensed version. Lara❤Love 03:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I looked over the rest of the image page and noted that the link provided as the source does not include that particular image. If it's somewhere within that website, the exact link needs to be provided. Lara❤Love 03:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I don't think I can combat it then, but I'll see what is possible. And yes, the image seems not to be available at that link anymore. --Enzuru 18:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Islam[edit]

Thanks for the information of Mustafa Kemal. I will drop any critcism of your template. I was also kind of wondering if you would help me with the criticism of Islam section under Islam. For some reason Christianity doesn't have a criticism section, yet the main article is equally as long as Islam's. It's only fair someone add a critcism section to all religions or none of them. User: Ishvara7

VikiProje Türkiye'ye davet / Invitation to join WikiProject Turkey

Merhaba, sizin VikiProje Türkiye'ye katılabileceğinizi düşündük. Ayrıca yalnız başınıza ya da diğer kullanıcılarla birlikte Türkiye ile ilgili maddeleri düzenleyip geliştirebilirsiniz. Eğer projemize katılmak istiyorsanız lütfen katılımcılar sayfasını ziyaret edin ve adınızı yazın ya da projenin tartışma sayfasına tıklayın. Eğer herhangi bir sorunuz varsa benimle ya da bir başka VikiProje Türkiye üyesi ile bağlantı kurabilirsiniz.

Hi, I was thinking that maybe you would like to join the WikiProject Turkey. There you can also find and contact users who are trying to improve Turkey-related articles. If you would like to get involved, just visit the participants page and/or inquire at the project's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or other member of the WikiProject Turkey.

Baristarim 07:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Twelver's Imams[edit]

Salam

Please help me with List of Twelver's Imams. I want to nominate it as a Featured lists on the basis of the WP:WIAFL. Please write your review o the talk page. I would be grateful if you cleaned up the list.--Seyyed(t-c) 16:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you agree with nominationg it now.--Seyyed(t-c) 15:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Twelvers[edit]

Salam. I think we should seperate the third one and call them Jafari's sects. All of them fallows Jafari jurisprudence . The other ones differ fundamentally. And I guess Yazdanism is an offshoot sect. I guess in Iran people know them as Satanism. Do you have any good reference which show they are Twelvers. What's your idea about 12 Qutb Sufism. As I know there were too many of them in Iran before Safavi dynasty. --Seyyed(t-c) 15:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There were several Sufi orders which considered 12 Imam as 12 Qutb. They agree with the 3 first caliphs but also believe in Ali as Wali. As I know Jami and Shah Nimatullah belonged to them. --Seyyed(t-c) 15:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a good magazine in Iran and I hope you can read it.[1] Also you can read this History of Iran#Shiaism in Iran before Safawids. You can read Nasr's work.--Seyyed(t-c) 15:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modertn Irfan in shia[edit]

Can we call some Shia clerics like Allame Qazi, Allame Tehrani and some others who believe in Irfan and follow Jafari jurisprudence, Sufi. Can we put them in Template:Sufism. I want to make a separate part in this template and call it Irfan of Shia.--Seyyed(t-c) 15:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you let e I add your comment in the talk page of relevant articles.--Seyyed(t-c) 16:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Islam-response[edit]

I have looked over criticism of christianity articles. I would have to say Christianity still deserves a criticism section. Not only does it have a main aticle, but it has a criticism article for nearly all of its sects. There is just too much criticism written on Christianity for it to merely be placed in the "See Also" section. Ishvara7 022:49, 17 Nov 2007 (UTC)

History of Islamic philosophy[edit]

Salam, I find an online version of the part one of History of Islamic philosophy. I believe we can use it to improve articles about Shia, Twelvers and Ismaili faiths. In fact I understand the meaning of "Imam of time" when I read this book.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Imam Ali[edit]

Salam, Can you please write your idea here.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similar Userbox[edit]

Salam Aleik!

It seems as if we made almost the same userbox Enzuru...
User:Oren neu dag/my userboxes/User:Richard0612/Userbox Archive/Secular Turkey

This user is a Kemalist and supports secularism.

My userbox was made in September 9th 2007, while your userbox was made in October 1st 2007 and so my question is: Were u inspired by my userbox to create yours?
I have no doubt that yours is certainly very beautiful (although not as beautiful as mine) but since it is very much the same i'd like to ask u to give me some credit for the idea behind your Userbox and show it on your userpage. - Oren neu dag (talk) 01:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irani Userbox[edit]

I have also a Shah Supporting userbox if u want to use it

This user believes that there is only one legitimate regime in Iran.

feel free to use it. Oren neu dag (talk) 03:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, don't be lame[edit]

What ever happened to fixing Sunni Islam? MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Alevi.jpg[edit]

Merhaba, Türkçe biliyor musunuz?

The image you created is really nice. Thanks for the good work. But I think that you should add the crescent to whole image: http://www.al-islam.org/gallery/photos/ali2.gif. Your work looks.. a bit "cut". :) Can you do that? Kaygtr (talk) 14:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rewriting Husayn ibn Ali[edit]

Salam alaykum This article was too weak and violated copyright as well as WP rules. Therefor I rewrote it. I hope you can help me with it.--Seyyed(t-c) 17:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ijtihad[edit]

Can you help me with Sources_of_sharia#Aql_and_Ijtihad. I'm not exactly sure how to go about writing this.Bless sins (talk) 18:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The major concern is lack of sources. It is also that I don't understand the concept very well...so I may write something wrong. Finally, the article will benefit from diverse writing styles.Bless sins (talk) 05:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAL:Twelve Imams[edit]

Salam Alaykum

I've nominated Twelve Imams as a featured list (here). Please pay attention to it. Thanks. --Seyyed(t-c) 04:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to meet you again. I put my answer there.--Seyyed(t-c) 07:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put image of Imam Ali shrine until we reach consensus. Please check Imam Ali. I've nominated it as a good article. In addition I have question. Can you please send me a email.--Seyyed(t-c) 09:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

I see you're making the "Shia" and the "Twelver" templates hideous and keeping the Ismaili one intact. What sick reason is behind this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.216.114.80 (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but they look much better now than the Ismaili article. I have reverted your changes, if you have a strong issue, please take it up on the talk page and we can take a vote. They templates are unique in their look. Are you familiar at all with artistic design, in both colours and patterns? And for your kind information, I am an Usuli Twelver under taqleed of Sayed Khamenei, though long ago I had a something falsely saying I was Ismaili, perhaps that caused the confusion. --Enzuru 02:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, templates are not just about looks. I had to reorganize important information between the two templates in particular. Some things could be somewhat applied in general for Shi'ahs, hence needed to be taken out. I also added lots of more Twelver specific information. --Enzuru 03:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review:Imam Ali[edit]

Salam, Somebody began to review the article. Please check and help s with it. God bless you.--Seyyed(t-c) 10:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

Please stop editing the Shia and Twelevrs templates. They look extremely hideous. How would you like it if I did the same with the Ismaili template and replaced the calligraphy image with that of the spoiled Karim Agha Khan? Stop it. It's irritating. FiveRupees (talk) 11:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for what you wrote above, lying about being a Twelver is disgusting and saying it while hiding behind a computer screen doesn't make you more respectful. Almost all of your earlier edits show that you are an Ismaili. And someone who says he's a follower of Khamenei wouldn't say he's a Kemalist and a supporter of secularism. I don't you what you and your people's policy about lying is in the outside world, but please refrain from doing so in Wikipedia. We're trying to spread knowledge, not vandalize pages about rival sects. FiveRupees (talk) 11:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't have taken it too far by insulting me. I suggest you revert your own edits to the templates and wait until consensus is reached. Also, I am not Punjabi or South Asian. Are there many Twelver Pashtuns? Just as many as flying pigs. FiveRupees (talk) 22:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't bother replying. I shouldn't be wasting my time with pathetic people who spend their lifetime editing this biased "encyclopedia". FiveRupees (talk) 22:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nusairi[edit]

Salam Alaykum. Can you please tell us your view about this issue. Thanks.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shia lead[edit]

Salam Alaykum, Please add your viewpoint about the lead of Shia Islam here.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:ImamAli.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:ImamAli.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --John Bot III (talk) 20:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the image violates wikipedia's copyright policy.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

There is no need to monopolize the Shi'a Islam template and assume its ownership, and show complete disregard for the many Shi'ites who do not want the picture of Ali to be displayed and who believe that Ali or his picture do not symbolize Shi'a Islam. Better to leave the template as I last edited it and avoid hurting the feelings of many people by reinstating it. FiveRupees (talk) 18:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Wafi Ahmad[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Wafi Ahmad, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Oo7565 (talk) 19:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Fiverupees.[edit]

Thank you for your compliment on the matter, if there is any way I can help out please don't hesitate to ask. May you go in God's care. Peter Deer (talk) 05:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:PersonalBrain.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:PersonalBrain.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 21:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Imamalsadiq.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Imamalsadiq.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright situation of 12 Imams pictures[edit]

Salam, Excuse me. I recently read your comment about 12 Imams images. I couldn't find anything about their copyright situation. I checked this site and think their copyright situation are unknown.--Seyyed(t-c) 06:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to use calligraphy instead of those factious portrait. --Seyyed(t-c) 08:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the template is very nice, but using the factious picture is problematic. --Seyyed(t-c) 04:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salaam[edit]

I would like to thank you. It means a lot to me that you care about my opinion on the matter, and even more that you consider me impartial. I worry, however, that it is not entirely so, because as a Baha'i I do ascribe to the Shia mode of thought and believe that Ali was Muhammad's legitimate successor. Still, I shall do my best to set my personal beliefs in the matter aside and focus on the encyclopedic nature of the template. Peter Deer (talk) 01:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been of the opinion that the Azali movement will see somewhat of a rise in later years because of the Bab's fairly clear appointment of Subh-i-Azal as leader of the Babi movement until the arrival of Him Whom God will make Manifest, and also because of persons who are predisposed against following the mainstream of any movement.

From my investigation I find his later claims to be preposterous and his actions to have been nigh-unspeakably treacherous, but I can see the reasoning by which people might assume his authority. Quite frankly, he seems historically to parallel Abu Bakr in many regards, with the exception that he wasn't successful and that he later claimed a loftier station.

Suffice it to say, I became a Baha'i for a reason. Peter Deer (talk) 04:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Insofar as translations goes, it is quite true much of the writings of the Babi dispensation differ greatly from the writings of Baha'u'llah, but it bears noting that the Baha'i dispensation abrogated the vast majority of those laws (specific ones are generally referred to in the Kitab-i-Aqdas) and even the Bab Himself considered His dispensation and His laws to be beneath those of Baha'u'llah.

"For all that hath been exalted in the Bayan is but as a ring upon My hand, and I Myself am, verily, but a ring upon the hand of Him Whom God shall make manifest -- glorified be His mention!" (The Bab, Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 168)

I think generally the majority of concerns regarding the Baha'i Administration come from people who are upset that the Universal House of Justice does not abrogate laws laid down by Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha, or Shoghi Effendi, specifically the laws outlining that the members of the House be men and that homosexual relationships are forbidden, not taking into account that the House does not have the authority to abrogate the Law of Baha'u'llah. I'm sure there are others who have other objections and concerns, but those are the more controversial ones.
Another reason why many things have not been translated is the translation of Baha'i scripture is a very careful and meticulous process. By my understanding, it is seen to be preferable not to present the religious texts than to misrepresent them and pervert their true meanings. As Shoghi Effendi was the authorized interpreter of Baha'i scripture, his translations are used as models for future translations, both in their interpretations and in their presentation.
The Bab's work is being translated, but slowly, partially because of the meticulous translation process, and partially because of the meticulous authentication process. Much of the work of the Bab was dictated rather than written in His hand, so much work has to be done to make sure that the source is authentic, as Covenant-Breakers and hostile Muslim authorities have made attempts to pass off things as being written by the Bab before. Most of the authenticated and translated works have been compiled into Selections from the Writings of the Bab.
In conclusion, I have confidence in the good faith of the institutions who are translating the holy scripture. The primary objective so far seems to have been the complete, faithful, and accurate translation of the works of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha, as they pertain directly to the laws and ordinances of the Baha'i dispensation. The Persian believers, however, do have the benefit of access to the Bab's writings in their original form and, largely because of the persecution of Baha'is in Iran, are now spreading and disseminating throughout the western world and bringing those teachings and modes of thought with them. And no, I do not mind talking about it outside of an article, in fact I enjoy talking with Muslims in particular because they are often more familiar with certain concepts pertinent to the Baha'i faith than I am (ask most Americans what Mahdi means, or who Husayn Ibn Ali is, or what the Qiblih/Qibla is, and they'll just stare at you) and frankly it's a privilege to speak with a Shia Muslim as, sadly, almost all of the few western Muslims are Sunnis. So I welcome your questions and even your opinions and commentary, as I am also personally interested in what the sane Muslims who aren't trying to kill us think of us. Peter Deer (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in how you think that the persecution of Baha'is has been exaggerated. And do not worry about offending me, you are speaking honestly of your perceptions and I would be disobedient to God if I judged you for that.

I see you have been reading the Kitab-i-Iqan. Truly a marvelous book. I think you would also find "Some Answered Questions" to be of interest, particularly Abdu'l-Baha's explanation of the eleventh chapter of the Book of Revelation and how it pertains to the Umayyad dynasty.

Now as you are probably aware, we consider the occultation to have been a pious fraud for the noble intent of preserving the unity of the religion, but that the Bab was, in fact, the hidden Imam Al-Mahdi. I suppose that's the main difference between the Twelver point of view and the Baha'i standpoint.

(Also, do forgive me if I do not use appellatives, such as SAWS, PBUH, AS, and so forth. I mean it not as a sign of disrespect to God or His loved ones, or to persons who choose to use the terms)

But I am indeed quite interested in your opinions regarding the Baha'is. You seem to have read the Iqan (or part of it at least) and you seem to be firm enough in your faith that you are willing to subject it to tests, and you have been courteous and respectful of my faith despite not believing. I am quite interested in your impressions and frankly your questions and concerns regarding Baha'u'llah's claims, if you don't mind sharing. I certainly am no hafez, and I do not have the works of Baha'u'llah memorized either, but I will do the best I can and look up things where necessarily. Peter Deer (talk) 00:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your numbers are accurate. 206 Baha'is, to be precise, including Baha'is who died in prison. their names and the dates, locations, and causes of death can be found here; you will notice that the majority of them were executed. Certainly the death tolls under the Islamic Republic cannot be compared to the tens of thousands of Babis and Baha'is massacred during the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasties. And you are absolutely correct that the numbers of political prisoners killed in Iran are greater numerically (not counting of course the Baha'is who have been executed on charges of being 'zionist spies')

But a few things that should be considered instead of the death toll. The small number of Baha'is in Iran are (in far greater percentages than any other religious group) being arrested, tortured, killed, deprived of education, their homes burned, their jobs taken away, baha'i children abused by teachers, expelled from schools, and/or slandered in front of their classmates. Baha'i holy places are destroyed, Baha'i cemetaries bulldozed so that families will not even know the resting place of their loved ones. Because Baha'i marriages are not recognized Baha'i men are arrested as lechers and Baha'i women as prostitutes.

These things are temporary and shall pass away. I am certain that just as the persecutions of Christ and Muhammad and Moses that these persecutions shall strengthen and exalt the faith and that those martyred in the name of the faith shall be rewarded by God.

But what truly is an abomination is that these atrocities are committed in the name of Islam! Baha'is are called 'apostates' though if asked any Baha'i will willingly testify "There is no god but God and Muhammad is His Messenger" and while on one hand calling Baha'is a perverse heretical sect they are on the other hand called a zionist political movement, not a religion, thus circumventing the law of the Quran in Sura 2:256.

I am an American, and here in America there is a great deal of hatred towards Islam, from Christians, atheists, and racists (who think all Muslims are Arabs). When I argue to them that Islam is a religion of peace, a beautiful divine religion, they point out to me the violent actions of some so-called Muslims, usually referring to terrorism, as their argument. They remain completely ignorant of the violence committed towards Baha'is, however.

I have in, two separate conversations, been called a zionist pagan by a Muslim for teaching the Baha'i faith and in the same day been told to "go back to your mulla paymasters in tehran" when I was defending Islam in an argument against what I suspect to have been a Zoroastrian. Not too long ago I was accused of being a Muslim and when I denied it I was met with the reply "I think you're a Muslim, you defend them way to much, you even defend the evil acts their pedophile profit committed. Islam is a religion of hate not peace."1 Muslims call me an infidel, infidels call me a Muslim.

On the corpses of Baha'is who have been murdered it is often written "enemy of Islam." I find the irony of it so confounding and maddening that I can scarcely find words for it.

But I'm sorry, I've gone off on a bit of a tangent there.

You ask about common ground upon which we can debate. I figure I should let you set the terms for the most part. Tell me, how and why did you come to follow Islam?

I am afraid if you want to talk Hadith I only currently have Hadith Qudsi and volumes 1-9 of Bukhari at my disposal. Quite frankly most of my knowledge of Islam comes from the Quran, I'm not really very studied in Hadith. I was raised agnostic, became atheist out of hatred for religion and zealots, and then ironically the Baha'i faith won me over to all the religions I had despised before out of ignorance and prejudice. I was so skeptical of religion but the evidences provided (usually compiled very nicely by a Mr. William Sears, one of the foremost Baha'i theologians and authors) was too convincing for me to reasonably ignore (I honestly tried.)

So I suppose I'm lucky, because if it weren't for that I would have been deprived of the teachings of God and would have continued on being a nihilist hedonist atheist.

But I suppose you have your own story, if you're willing to share with me. Peter Deer (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Salafism[edit]

Hey salaam man, I saw your edit on the Salafism article. The criticism was well sourced, but the thing was none of the articles were criticizing Salafism; in fact, only one of the articles seemed to mention it and it was passing. I think the sources might be quite relevant, though, on the Wahhabism article or perhaps the First Saudi State, as they all seemed more specifically to be criticizing those than Salafism. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Twelver[edit]

Salaam, I actually changed all the pictures of the Shia Templates. The picture of the sword is not appropriate for there and it shows violence in Islam which Shias are not violent.َAnd Also, the picture has the name of 12th Imam in the middle and should be used for Twelvers. َ-- BigDevil ^Talk 20:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting for the answer!-- BigDevil ^Talk 00:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's been on your own talk page silly! --Enzuru 02:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern, thanks for addressing what you felt was right. However, the Zulfiqar is still a n important symbol of Shi'a Islam, and I don't think we need to censor that. You will see many Shi'a youth with it around their necks (including myself). We can strive for diversity however, both templates are fine. --Enzuru 21:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see you in the history of my talk page. Anyway, not so important. I know that Zulfiqar is one of the important symbols of Shi'a Islam, but the image that I use is the image that fits the best for the Twelvers. In the middle of the image, you'll see the name of 12th Imam (Muhammad al-Mahdi), which is one of the believes of Twelvers.-- BigDevil ^Talk 19:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahl al-Bayt[edit]

I have been working on fixing the broken POV quagmire that is the Ahl al-Bayt article. I wanted the help of reliable and dedicated people from both Sunni and Shia backgrounds to help work on this. If you would be up for it I would be much indebted to you. Peter Deer (talk) 08:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to forgive, my friend. Take as long as you need, Wikipedia will be here when you get back :) Peter Deer (talk) 19:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PersonalBrain.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:PersonalBrain.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of The Brain Technologies[edit]

A tag has been placed on The Brain Technologies, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Bstone (talk) 22:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Template:Twelvers2[edit]

Salam Alaykum,

Thanks a lot. You've made great effort, but I think it may confuse the reader. You see, A lot of information packed beside each other. --Seyyed(t-c) 01:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review:Muhammad[edit]

This article is nominated as a good one. Can you check it please.--Seyyed(t-c) 01:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twelver template[edit]

Hello Enzuru! In regards to the template, I have a few suggestions. and comments

It could be a lot smaller. As in, less wide, and also with fewer links. I think that second part applies to both versions though.
I think it's redundant to include the sufi schools right next to the sufis the schools are named for, one or the other seems sufficient. Perhaps a link to Sufi schools within the Twelvers? (I don't even know if that exists but hey if it doesn't we should get on that anyway.)
I liked the aesthetics of the first template a lot, but I think its structure could do with some changes as well. I also think you had the right idea replacing the Arabic terms with the English equivalents.

I am interested in knowing what you are going for so far as improvements over the first template. If I get an idea of what you have in mind I think I'd know more how to help. Peter Deer (talk) 06:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I think the Judaism template could be improved as well, in a lot of the same ways. Peter Deer (talk) 04:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like it! It looks good, I particularly like the inclusion of the images (well, image) within the collapsible panels. Peter Deer (talk) 04:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. I would convert that image to an SVG myself, but the program I used to be able to do it with was downloaded illegally, and when I started adopting that pesky "stealing is wrong" mentality I couldn't keep it in good conscience anymore. Peter Deer (talk) 19:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard good things about GIMP, but back when I first heard about it was when I just pirated stuff so I didn't see the point. I'll give it a shot, thanks. Peter Deer (talk) 21:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjectIslam Collaboration[edit]

Salam bro,

Don't you want to participate in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Islam#Collaboration. Please participate in collaborative improvement of Sources of Islamic law, which is nominated as GA.--Seyyed(t-c) 09:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

I really appreciate how have been creating templates on Twelvers, but I the depictions you added of the Imams take so much of their value, especially when the depictions are bad ones. Hopefully, Enzuru, you will view how this is offensive to many, mostly because the depictions are bad and the Imams all look like each other, but also because depictions, though permissible, are not representative of the Imams and make them look less infallible. FiveRupees (talk) 14:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't know about the pictures. Maybe we should ask the other editors what they think. Again, I really appreciate how you're working on the templates, but I think they looked much better before your last edits before they were collapsable, especially Template:Shia Islam which is now too big and overwhelming. I don't want to undermine your effort, please consider reverting them back to the last version. FiveRupees (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Imams' templates[edit]

Salam Alaykum,Thanks for your effort.

I think you should add the name of the Messenger of Allah under Panj Tan picture in Imams template like Template:Ali.--Seyyed(t-c) 02:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

I'm interested in seeing what proposals you have. In my opinion, all we need to ensure we deal with issues sensitively and in a neutral manner can be found in the core content policies, especially WP:NPOV. Same with hadith guidelines etc., I simply believe that WP:N should be applied to them just as we would any other article. I have applied precisely the same principle to needless 'pro-Sunni' 'Hadith of ...' articles too like the successfully deleted 'Hadith of Abu Bakr leading the prayer'. As long as we stick to neutrality policy, insist upon only the highest quality sources, ensure that article topics are notable and of independent significance, then I think we have most bases covered. But if we want to just restate those things in terms more relevant to Islam related articles then I'm happy with that. I'd recommend a blander name for the guideline instead of 'One Ummah', as WP:ISLAM is for both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. ITAQALLAH 23:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Setting the foundations for future Islamic articles[edit]

Thanks you for inviting me. It looks like a great initiative, will pitch in as and when I can. Best regards, Nazli (talk) 01:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks pretty good so far, thank you for taking the initiative with this. I think it will help everyone streamline and organize things better, I know I for one could use a guideline to keep myself in check. Is there anything in particular you need help with? MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in the reason for the orthodox/heterodox distinction, though I can imagine some possible reasons. I think another thing should address the issue of images and icons, which are appropriate in which situations, as well as establishing formally things that most project members are aware of informally, such as regarding images of the Prophet. Peter Deer (talk) 06:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's some issues I have with what you're developing. The page should have nothing to do with dictating content issues, so discussion about the 'Muslim Points', for instance, is inappropriate. These kinds of decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, not using arbitrary criteria wherein we effectively decide who shouldn't be given the Islam-tags/categories treatment (ultimately implying who is and isn't Muslim) - neither is it appropriate at all for us to define what orthodoxy or heterodoxy is (which again, is something that differs). This isn't the purpose of a guideline, which should decide stylistic and notability issues, not content or theological issues. Regards, ITAQALLAH 14:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should we make, like, a separate talk page maybe for discussing the contents of the constitution? MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Otter?[edit]

Must...resist...adorable charm....I've got to be....a macho...man... Peter Deer (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Occultation[edit]

Certainly, I will gladly help. I'll be cracking a couple books I haven't touched in a while. Peter Deer (talk) 23:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TheBrain Technologies & PersonalBrain[edit]

Thanks for your note. I'd be happy to restore either/both these articles to a sandbox page for you so that you can add the references to articles in magazines that you quoted. The sandbox page will let you work on the articles without having to worry about their immediate deletion, as frequently happens to work in progress. If that would be acceptable, just leave me a note. (Sorry for the delay; I was on vacation.) Accounting4Taste:talk 02:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you requested, the deleted contents of both pages have been moved to User:Enzuru/Sandbox. Let me know if you have any questions or problems. Accounting4Taste:talk 13:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Award[edit]

		The Islamic Barnstar
		Thanks for your contribution in Twelve Imams list and making nice templates. Seyyed(t-c) 17:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kisa[edit]

Hi Enzuru. Yes, I think listing other Ahl al-Kisa and providing the devotional image slants it too much to one perspective. ITAQALLAH 21:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salaam![edit]

I shall certainly carry out your request. It saddens me that you are leaving, it was nice to have a friend here. May you go in God's care! Allah-u-Akbar! Peter Deer (talk) 09:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Twelver Shi`ism move[edit]

Hi, and i'm sorry that i'm coming by only to find that you've just left. When you get back, i need to talk to you about the move of what is now Twelver Shi`ism back from the Ithna-'Ashariyya title; i have no doubt that it was an innocent mistake, but it is important to prevent repetition. Drop me a line, or, if you prefer, read up on WP:cut and paste move first. Thanks,
--Jerzy•t 20:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of TheBrain Technologies[edit]

A tag has been placed on TheBrain Technologies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 01:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the speedy and gave you advice on the talk page. --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 01:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:PersonalBrain.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:PersonalBrain.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 01:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image after you edited it still wasn't wikipedia worthy, so I fixed it up. I am not an expert on free use, so you might still have a problem or two with it. I dit the best I could. --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 01:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved article[edit]

Just out of curiousity, why did you maove The Brain Technologies back to TheBrain Technologies? --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 01:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Imam images[edit]

In case you are around, GreenEcho (the 12-headed sockpuppetteer now known as User:Enforcing Neutrality) has decided to delete all images from Shi'a pages. I would ask you to investigate as it is against consensus and I cannot revert against him. Naahid بنت الغلان ^{Click to talk} 02:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

Calling me edits vandalism, now? En Ne talk 23:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

Salam Brother,

I'm happy to meet you again here. Don't you think you waste your time by participation in endless discussions on using Imams' pictures. God bless you.--Seyyed(t-c) 02:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sufism[edit]

Why are you deleting about this individual, who is a well-reputed modern sufi, it is mentioned only because it discusses about modern sufis. Please let it be there. --Asikhi (talk) 11:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Walaykum Salam Brother, If you are entrenched in Sufism then you must be aware that most of the Sufis were not accepted by everyone, but you can't deny that they were sacred people. Even some were executed like Hallaj but still people consider them as sufi and respect them alot. So, this is my request to please let it be there. After all, he is known worldwide with a circle of Hundred thousands of followers. --Asikhi (talk) 13:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All I want is that His Holiness should be mentioned as one of the modern sufis in sufism. Because all modern sufis are mentioned in this article.--Asikhi (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Islam[edit]

		The Template Barnstar
		For the amazing redesign of Template:Islam. Probably one of the best-looking templates I have seen on Wikipedia. Veggy (talk) 05:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Islam[edit]

Hi there I really like your design of the template, looks really great. But I don't think the color was the right choice, which was black. It does not suit the religion of Islam, but I think if you done it in a type of green color then it will look better. Good work. M Miah (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC) Actually it sort of looks alright if I look at it again, not really sure because it looks great? [reply]

LOL Ya Ali Suckmyblood[edit]

I found this on a discussion page about images of the Imaam and I thought it was so rad I modified it and thought you might want to stick it up on your userpage. I certainly did. :-) [[Image:Schreck.jpg|left|thumb|[[Imamah (Shi'a doctrine)|Imam]] ‘Alī was a VAMPIRE!]] Image:Schreck.jpg Yours in Peace, ناهد^𒀭(^dAnāhita) ^𒅴 21:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Twelve Imams.ogg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Twelve Imams.ogg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:14, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Hi Enzuru, Thank you for your message and the kind words. My affinity for using assembly has more to do with a lack of options than anything else!! Best regards, Nazli (talk) 02:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Close, but not exactly - its mostly embedded stuff. Nazli (talk) 02:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose old habits die hard !! Nazli (talk) 09:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Help me with my pronunciation[edit]

Salam Alaykum, You've done a nice attempt. God bless you.

Unfortunately I'm too busy and my PC has some problem. Thus I can't help you with it.--Seyyed(t-c) 07:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salaam alayka Ya Enzuru,

I have a software problem because I'm on a Mac... I keep trying but I can't get the file to play. I'll keep working on it, though. Also, have you seen my edits to Yaresan? The ghulaat Ahl-e Haqq are waaaay confused with the non-Muslim types, and they all need editing. Maybe you can help? -Nahed (Em0 at the café) 19:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL whatev, it's where fellow cosexualists work and go, this woman is too old to be single... Here's one for Elastic Sheikh, can I marry a woman of the Book without her being what my right hand possesses? ;-) Maybe I'll write to Khaled Abou el-Fadl and give him a nasty headache...

If you do know any Alevis or Yâresân-Kaka'i, please let them know. I have books on the subject, but I can't read Arabic original sources and the ones in English are pretty poor and the locations and theologies are mostly obscure.

I also think we need a redirect page for "Ali-Ilahi", because it is a term used for a huge list of groups, from non-Muslim Yaresanis to highly Sunnified Alawis and for modern groups as well as long-dead ones. ناهد^𒀭(^dAnāhita) ^𒅴 20:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ali-Ilahi is absolutely pejorative, but it's also common to find in books - way more common than correct terms are. And Wahhabism is an actual wikipedia page... one separate from Salafi.

There's a lot of nationalism in Kurdish movements, but there are also indigenous Persianate groups directly parallel to the Persian-speaking Khorramdin etc. that survived while melding with extremist Sufism... the idea that they are a single group is crap, historically they didn't get along at all, but the Yaresan, Kaka'i and Yazidis were treated as "pagans" and not Ahl-e Ketab (unlike Zoroastrians, which in medieval and later periods embodied the same religious notions of dualism, seven emanations, secrecy, purity and cultic centres).

Jokes aside, we need modern scholars. There is no legal way to deal with my potential mates. I try to live by the spirit of the Law since there's no actual text. What's that hysterical scene in A Jihad for Love when the French immigrant lesbian learns that same-sex acts are mentioned only once in Sunni lawbooks, and the ruling is that "if there is no penetration, it doesn't count"? She's been such a neurotic mess, but when she reads that, she starts laughing and crying at the same time, because she realises scholars have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. 1400 years and it's still uncharted territory... Gah. ناهد^𒀭(^dAnāhita) ^𒅴 20:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Haroriya"[edit]

I'm working on Haroriya right now... if you have some information on the assassination of ‘Alī, it would be great if you would look at the page. It is ironic that that page is such a disaster given their fairly crucial role in Muslim history... or if you can recommend other editors who might want to lend a hand? I can't access Arabic script, only cut and paste, so I can't even write the name.

And yes, I'm going to move the page to Harurism or something similar (gotta check Wikipedia:MOSISLAM for how to appropriately name sects, I think it's -ism name these days). Who named that page? Gah. ناهد^𒀭(^dAnāhita) ^𒅴 21:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Islam[edit]

Salam Brother,

Can you please choose another color like dark blue for the background of the Template:Islam. --Seyyed(t-c) 13:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pashtuns[edit]

Sure. I've reverted the template to yesterday's 22:45 version but retained the added category and reduced the relatively large gaps between the sections. Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer something like the 2:05 version, i.e. no (or more discreet) dividing lines and a consistent white color for the text. Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the difference should become apparent when a pointer hovers over one and then the other. Alternatively, the line could become "" (or Durrani Empire). Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about [[Hotaki dynasty|Hotaki kingdom]]<br/> [[Durrani Empire|Durrani {kingdom/Empire}]], i.e. one line for each..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me too. Thanks for keeping me posted. Sardanaphalus (talk) 22:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Pashtun Vandal[edit]

The vandal who keeps switching the images on Template:Pashtuns is the indef banned User:Beh-nam. He is a radical Shia Farsiwan from Toronto, Canada, who is engaged in bashing ethnic Pashtuns everywhere on Wikipedia. His latest sockpuppets are Special:Contributions/PashtoonEditor and Special:Contributions/User:Mohammad777. You may report these sockpuppets to User talk:Alison, she is very familiar with Beh-nam and will be able to block him from future vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.67.129 (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me about this, wonderful job. --Enzuru 23:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on Template:islam[edit]

You are edit warring. Stop now or be blocked.--Tznkai (talk) 02:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its clear to me from the article's edit history that the two of you, and the two of you alone, have been fighting over this issue. There is no consensus, there is an absolute loss of good faith, borderline incivility, personal attacks, and fighting over the definition of policies over common sense I suggest you both visit WP:DR, but first take a multi hour wiki break. This message is cross posted to both of your talk pages.--Tznkai (talk) 03:31, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears there is some discussion at Template talk:Islam. I suggest you participate as calmly as possible. Consider recruiting extra voices from WP:Islam.

Sup G[edit]

Hey Enzuru, I updated 'aql to a real article. Woot.

Also, the real reason I came by was to recommend Zotero. It's a Firefox add-on. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 01:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL I do not use inappropriate tonal accents (á, â) where the macron belongs. This is why I would never, ever consider the Bahá'í faith. I just mark macrons where they belong. :-) ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 03:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet Template[edit]

Awesome template... and yah, I know what it's a parody of. (And thanks again - I hate that thing.) ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 01:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Enzuru/Whatever[edit]

Resolved

– Nominator withdrew nomination

User:Enzuru/Whatever, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Enzuru/Whatever and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Enzuru/Whatever during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I screwed up. Sorry. --Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 17:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I always before, during, and after that Mfd agreed with the contents of that UBX. I Mfded it on the grounds of Wikipedia policy and justification for my Mfding of anti-LGBT UBXs. Again, sorry. --Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 18:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re[edit]

No problem. Of course, it's much easier with Huggle.:P The IP has been blocked for 24 hours.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 04:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who has returned?(Keep further discussion to my talk page if you don't mind, your talk page is somewhat long)--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 04:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

O hai[edit]

Congratulations, and don't be so negative... besides, you can still be orthodox. Ooh look, you can buy yurts! ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 04:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yeah. I understand what you mean. Me, I am a Believer, but I do not ascribe terms to myself. And Alevis... they are fun and at least the respectable Sadr (namely Musa) listed them as non-heretical back in the 60s. Besides, they dance and sing at communal prayer meetings. How awesome is that? ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 09:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, have you considered adding {{tl|werdnabot}} parameters }} - or perhaps {{Werdnabot|age=# where # is the number of days you want to keep on the main page - to your talk page? It autoarchives. Saves grief like whoah. (The bot only runs once a day, so don't expect instant changes...) ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 09:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have a gorgeously Zen user page - but Burroughs threw up on your talk page. Does that sum it up? Also, how on God's green earth can you not like Yoko Kanno? She's a certifiable musical genius. Ever hear her little Arabic jazz pieces like Musawe? Rends your heart.

The Cowboy Bebop Soundtrack - helpfully unified with the release of the C.B. film a few years ago - is the best way to go. The best-known song is, of course, the title track, Tank!, but songs like Whose Planet is This? and Pumpkin will leave you floored. I promise. That album was performed with The Seatbelts (her band), so you can find things under their name sometimes. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 09:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Dog, No Biscuit!

Hamduche makes me want to cry...

Hello, Afghana~enwiki. You have new messages at Jayvdb's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ma3a salaam[edit]

I'm interested in minority groups on Islam, although I am jaw-droppingly unorthodox in my practice. Friends with the khaa6ibaat and imaamaat and female prayer initiative, don't "veil" (traditionally, I mean: I cover the juyuub with cloth and between navel and above the knee as commanded), think Michael Muhammad Knight single-handedly brought me to Islam, love taqwacore music, cried watching A Jihad for Love, am not only trans but also a dyke, mourn 3Ali, Hasan & Husayn during 3aashuuraa but adore 3ayishah, think the the harūriyyah were right about picking the best person as Imaam...

In any case, thanks for your kind words. God bless you and ease your troubles, I will say al-idyaa' for you (duas). (God listens to sinners, so it should get through.)

I never dated this. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

رمضان مبرك![edit]

& رمضان مبرك to you too!

Or this. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

I was thinking the same thing. But for now, I do not have the possibility to work on many articles. I will ask you when I need your help. Thank you. Tājik (talk) 20:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW: please use the talk pages. I won't revert your edits, but please do not delete other sources. Especially the Encyclopaedia Iranica is a widely recommended sources, often considered to be authoritative. Tājik (talk) 20:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just one question: are you a Shia Muslim? Tājik (talk) 00:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool. I am also Shia ;) Tājik (talk) 00:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me[edit]

Salam Alaykum, I hope you've had good Ramadan, Recently, I've edited Ali's caliphate up to here and need your help to correct my lingual mistakes. Thanks a lot and God bless you.--Seyyed(t-c) 07:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hee hee[edit]

OMG I just got my userpage vandalised for that picture of Imam 'Ali as a vampire... TWICE. Hahaha. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 17:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Afghana~enwiki. You have new messages at Emilyzilch's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey, can you talk to User:Prince Phoenician on his talk page and reassure him that 1. humour is halaal 2. he should stop vandalising my user page and 3. I'm a Muslimah and I'm not engaged in some kind of anti-Shi'ah warfare (he thinks I am). <3 ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 08:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eid Mubarak![edit]

Eid Mubarak!

I wish you and your family a blessed Eid.
Mohsin (talk) 11:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

S/A and Eid Mubarak~

I was wondering if you could adjust the Template:Infobox Imams for me.. adjusting it to: having the name of the Imam at the top, moving "Twelve Imams of Shi'a Islam" to the bottom (above the pic - Almahdi.png), and changing the 'Rank' to a label (this way it would be more fair for Ismaili's, Eg. Status: Twelver 4th Imam, Ismaili 3rd Imam, etc). I have no idea how to work with those templates.. lol. (er.. and im a twelver in case its not yet obvious)

Many Thanks~ Toushiro (talk) 04:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, the templates look great~ salaams. Toushiro (talk) 19:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry to have to bother you again, but I just realised that none of the 'wives/wife' labels are showing.. >__< —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toushiro (talk • contribs) 03:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Klaksonn's been spam-reverting them. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 08:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re[edit]

Sure, you're quite the Twelver. Man, it's pathetic. You spending all your time in this place thinking you're some kind of secretive Ismaili James Bond, sent to spread the Ismaili message and sabotage the Twelver one. Do what you want, I'm out of this place. When I find myself arguing with a pathetic delusional prick and a transsexual lesbian freak of nature, it means I'm taking this place way too seriously. Regards, 77.42.182.239 (talk) 01:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha child, I already explained the Ismaili thing to you, I love how you think you're some detective Salafi who thinks we're all doing taqiyya. And I explained why the hell it is important to differentiate Twelvers from the Ismaili and Zaidi. And you said you were going to leave several times already, and I tried to keep you because you're not a dumbass, but I guess I was wrong. XOXO --Enzuru 03:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for the dumbass comment actually, that's no way for one Shi'a to speak to another. I apologize. --Enzuru 03:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo[edit]

Don't be depressed as hell. Rent something good like 800 Bullets (800 Balas) or Nightwatch and get cheered up. :-) ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 06:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The pictures of the 12 imams[edit]

Could you please upload the pictures on Wikimedia Commons too with a proper license, so they can be available for other Wikipedias else well? It would be very nice. With kind regards, --Auc (talk) 23:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

Girl, I really hate the Fall. All the morons go back to school. All my watched pages are showing up - and all of them are showing up as reverted vandalism or as vandalism needing reverting. Plus User:Klaksonn's got a hard-on for me again and is spam-chaining IPs and spewing nasty epithets at me. *sigh* ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL he calls me "you dirty fucking fag tranny whore".

A lot.

So good luck with that. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 02:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's back. [2] ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 03:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Religion section of Turkey[edit]

Please vote at the Religion (2) section of Talk Page of the article Turkey, viewing Version 1 (my re-edited version for a neutral prospective) and Version 2, and decide which is the preferred version for the Religion section of Turkey at the below of the page, Agree or Disagree for Version 1, Thank you!!! Mohsin (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have an alternative version for the section, please view again, Thanks! Mohsin (talk) 22:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I have tried to do, but secular extremists really don't accept the 'why?' business for some reason. Mohsin (talk) 22:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you depressed?[edit]

New, concerned...and you're a girl? (BentAlBatoul (talk) 05:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

{{werdnabot}} parameters |showheader=no

HALP[edit]

Hey, can you help me with an image issue? I have no skillz0r. I need to rotate an image that someone uploaded b/c it's totally screwing up a page format. If you could take a look at the top image in Falcata - I was hoping to turn that huge picture vertical, do I have to import a new version of it? (It's not my upload... I just found that mess.) I know how good you are with pitchers, so I figured I'd ask. There must be a format command to turn a photo somewhere... ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 18:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should have titled this section "Ya Enzuru, madad!" Intercede for me, Enzuru!

<3 <3 <3 for the halping. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 18:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yazidi[edit]

Hi, I'm curious why you keep making this edit to Yazidi.[3] It seems to just be a formatting issue, and isn't in accordance with our Manual of Style (WP:MOSDATE) Is there something I'm missing? --El on ka 05:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I wanted to check, because I was getting concerned, not just that it was a small issue, but also that we have a rule on wikipedia called WP:3RR. 3RR is a "three revert restriction", and means that anyone who reverts more than three times in a single day, gets their account access blocked! So I wanted to make sure you knew about this, so you would not get into trouble. :) --El on ka 06:34, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

-) Tājik (talk) 22: 42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Please think again[edit]

Even though you might consider Indonesian and Javanese culture to be entirely islamic - that is a serious mistake for an encyclopedia article to have such a blanket claim - it is not NPOV and potentially provocative - do not be suprised if it is not moved Satu Suro 00:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are significant issues arising from the issue of what constitutes the themes of culture in something as large and as complex as indonesian culture - I am sure that India or China do not have single cultural templates for any of their cultural expressions - similarly Indonesia is not any one label - thank you Satu Suro 00:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So for that reason again it is provocative to actually place the template on expressions that have complex external and homegrown influence - Islam is not the predominate early influence in Javanese culture and should not be templated on to those cultural expressions - the logical extension would be to have up to 4 or 5 templates - and end up a mess like the sriwijaya article with more boxes than article - no thanks - there is virtually no part of either of those articles that actually discusses the issue which you are templating either - so the template placement is indeed provocative - so please do not Satu Suro 00:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are too accommodating - which can be both good and bad here on wikipedia :(

I am not the slightest bit offended - I am concerned for any one 'claim' for any aspect of Javanese or Indonesian culture - despite the overwhelming demographic weight of claimed allegiances to religious or political allegiances in Indonesia the actual ethnic complexity might seem to an outsider - the problem for an encyclopedia to have an even weighted and well constructed NPOV stance - (and may you never meet the nastier dark corners of this weird goldfish bowl where every single corner is well lit :( ) - the application of the islamic template on the literature of the country should in all fairness have the hindu template and a separate javanese template as well as a sukarno template as well as a modernist template and a sectioned template of european, american, communist, captialist, right wing conservatism, catholic, influences as well - Indonesian literature cannot be so easily plugged with one major factor of influence - if from my living there and conducting post grad fieldwork and looking at the evidence of my wifes phd work there - I had thought there was one single influence over the literature of the country I would not bother you in the slightest and let it stay - but I am very sorry the story is a lot more complex - regardless of what simplistic over-generalisations of the current cultural expressions of the country at the moment are created by media from outside of the country for their own purposes - so may your stay on wikipedia be a good one - but please expect to meet an ed like self - every now and then - who is prepared to try to explain why an issue might have more to it than simply a revert without comment Satu Suro 00:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am very concerned that you are in a territory that has been seriously compromised in the past in this particular wiki - many eds went to a separate wiki following the incessant bad faith editing by a number of anti eds - please take care - the scene might have changed but they gave this wiki a bad reputation while they claimed to be neutralising POV in various edit styles within your area - I am not sure the current state as my editing in the area has been minimal - so insha allah your journey in this strange place is not as bad if you had tried a year ago or so Satu Suro 01:09, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic culture[edit]

The Template:Islamic Culture you created is breathtaking! Wow! Well done! Chesdovi (talk) 13:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I love it, but it makes the text in it hard to read, and having a big black bar going down the right side of the screen makes it distracting when I'm trying to read the article. Thoughts? klosterdev (talk) 22:48, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A brighter shade of blue might work. The Buddhism template seems like it incorporates it the best. A darkish color and a lightish color alternating to divide the sections seems to work. Changing it to a dark blue might cause a problem though, since the clickable links would be a medium-dark blue. Don't get me wrong, the template you made is beautiful, but the major contrast against the white of the page and the difficulty to see the links in the template doesn't make it a practical one. I'm not sure what else would go well with the picture if you want to do the flowey manner. Template:Islam does what it needs to do. It visually divides the categories, doesn't contrast with the white of the page, and has very readable text. My first thought was to base it off that, but you may not have to completely wipe the spirit of what you made. If you were to include some lighter colored boxes around the text in the template, then lighten the black around it, the blue might still work. What do you think? klosterdev (talk) 03:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mallang[edit]

WTH is a Mal(l)ang? Some kind of Ali-extremist who tortures himself? ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 21:13, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know some people who identify as malang but most have adopted 12er practices (they find the sayyid thing nonsense) albeit some of them remain of the Akhbaari school. They identify themselves as martyrs for/like Ali-Husayn and do body mortification and often smoke weed.

There are also the Sayyidist ones - they dominate Shi'ah boards with their caste crap and drive everyone insane, mostly because they can't write in English and just keep posting the same crap over and over again. They often chase me down and post long cut'n'paste articles about veiling and how homosexuality is a sin when other 12ers just don't discuss it. Talking with those guys is exactly like being on every single Sunni board I've ever visited (except I don't get banned the moment someone suspects I'm not muhajjabah).

On another note, I can't figure out the etymology of the word malang and it's driving me crazy. It's gotta be Persian, but I don't know it. I'm seriously considering contacting Ask A Linguist [4]. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 22:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warn[edit]

Did you think about maybe giving them a Sockpuppet warning? ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I use a program to automate it. Twinkle. Search for a "(TW)" link in one of my edit summaries and then once it's installed, just click "arv" and, I believe, you can find the accusation of sockpuppetry as one of the three choices from the drop menu. Fill in the blanks and wahoo! Reported as a sockpuppet.

Twinkle automates lots and lots of things, like if you use the "revert-WARN", it opens up a second window containing the contributor's talk page so you can click a warning. It's sexy. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 20:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reported Chris-Alawite here: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Chri 2000#User:Chri 2000. Please add any other suspected socks he might have used such as IPs. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 21:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

		The Template Barnstar
		Awarded for doing what was previously thought to be impossible: Making a truly beautiful template. Your work at Template:Islamic Culture is truly to be commended. A ni Mate 00:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It really is beautiful. From the choice of the graphic, the background color, and text color it all just really works. Most templates are... boring and functional. The Islamic Culture template is striking and still functional and easy to navigate. A really well done job. I must echo the user on the template talk page: I never thought I'd be saying this about a template. Amazing job. A ni Mate 00:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spore[edit]

is the devil. CAN'T STOP PLAAAYINGGG~ ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 03:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a huge fan of the space stage, me. You're playing for yourself and not the culture, but at the same time you have to suport the culture, and I can't earn any money. Plus those "hunt the sick animals" game - I cannot find them. I had 15 minutes to find five, and only found one (and I found it right away). SO AGGRAVATING. How do you track animals? I'm clearly doing something wrong. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple & Clean[edit]

Ouch, my ears
Your link appears to be broken, what section was revisionist?
Ironic that the "Ismaili vandal" vandal isn't around, isn't it?
I have nothing else, but I like the auto-list function
O wait, yes I do, crap I'm going to do NaNoWriMo ggaaahhh - see The Website of Doom

<3 ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 07:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there[edit]

Hello, please don't vandalism my work as you did on the whabbism article, id you suspect someone is lying (i.e. that is technically what you are accusing me of) then at the {{fact}} tag, don't do reverts, its considered vandalism. --James Wanten (talk) 23:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've used the citations, thank you. Are you familiar with some ahem whabbis, who consider women to have half the intellect of men, and consider shias infidels? --James Wanten (talk) 23:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

OMG girl those templates are hawt. FABULOUS job.

The Muhammad one is just amazing... ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

great work with the templates, cant think of anything to add.. and I dont mind adding the infobox, but it wont be till around wednesday, have a midterm on tuesday >__< Toushiro (talk) 03:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hey~ just noticed that the picture captions are gone x_x ~ Toushiro (talk) 04:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

actually, if you get time, could you tweak the infobox to be added to Al-Abbas ibn Ali page? ~ Toushiro (talk) 03:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback request[edit]

(copying from my (Elonka's) talkpage)

I recently read about Rollback. Aside from my recent stalker, on the Islam articles, from day one of my contributions with this account, I have seen tons of vandalism, both intentional and unintentional edits breaking NPOV. This is especially visible in my areas of concern in Islam, primarily where different branches and schools intersect and diverge. Within the overall Islam articles, I have to stop NPOV-breaking where the Sunni majority opinion takes over an article, and within the Shi'a Islam article stop vandalism where the Twelver majority opinion takes over the article. My improvements in these areas have been my most proud achievements, especially since I have never been involved in changes the wider community disagreed with, usually just fringe editors, most of whom are banned now.

The other issue I deal with quite often is the censorship of pictures I have introduced throughout the Shi'a articles. At least once a week I see vandalism in this area.

Aside from one very unfortunate incident on Template:Islam where I and another editor argued over jurispudence being put in the article (all my other edits I have handled wonderfully on that template), I've never done anything that would be considered abusive. What is the procedure for me to get the rollback right? --Enzuru 10:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. To be honest, I am not comfortable granting the request, because I have some concerns about how you would use it. Though you have done a lot of good work on Wikipedia, I am concerned with how you define vandalism, which does not appear to be in accordance with the Wikipedia definition (see WP:VANDAL#NOT). In looking through your contribs, Enzuru (talk · contribs), I see that you sometimes revert other edits as "vandalism", even when they could be construed as content disputes.[5][6][7] I also don't see that you really need rollback privileges, since you do not appear to be engaged in frequent vandal-fighting. My recommendation is to keep on with the good work that you are doing, but try harder to distinguish between what is and isn't vandalism. Also, try to be more consistent about using edit summaries. You can get a reminder for this in your preferences, by clicking on the "Editing" tab and putting a check in the box that says "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary." You might also want to look into helping out as a new pages patroller or Recent changes patroller for awhile, to get involved with project work outside of your normal topic areas. Then ping me again in a couple weeks, and I'll take another look, how's that? :) --El on ka 17:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tajiks: Massoud[edit]

The bit about Massoud has been archived. It was by Tājik dated 22 July 2006. Here is the comment (my highlight):

Begin quote:

Biruni is certainly more important than Hammasa Kohistani who is hardly recognized as "Tajik", or Ahmad Shah Massoud who himself has never considered himself "Tajik" or any important for the Tajiks as a nation. al-Biruni is the father of modern geography and historgraphy, he is considered as one of the greatest scholars ever, and even certain asteroids and certain regions on the moon are named after him. The term "Tajik" has for centuries been a synonym for the cultured and educated urban population of Central-Asia ... therefore, these scientists and scholars have to be shown in the picture as a symbol for the Tajik people. And since Rumi, Khwarizmi, ibn Sina, and Biruni are the most famous among the Tajik scholars of the past, their pictures are an absolute necessity. Tājik 10:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

End quote.

I agree that we need a modern figure, but I have doubts about the appropriateness of Massoud. Couldn't we find a better choice? --Zlerman (talk) 04:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More of the same. I appreciate your detailed and thoughtful reply on my talk page. What would your reaction be to the suggestion to replace Massoud with Ghafurov (as an historian) or, say, Ayni (in any of his roles)? Both are modern and both are indisputably Tajik. Moreover, both fit better with the other Tajiks in the infobox. Regards, --Zlerman (talk) 05:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should bear in MIND that Afghanista houses by far the largest population of Tajiks in the World and to us Massoud is more important than any of the people mentioned. And this article of Tajiks is not about the Tajiks of Tajikistan ONLY it talks about the ethnic group tajik as a whole. I had never before heard of Ghafurov or Ayni nor has any other Afghanistani Tajik or Irani Tajiks and Persians heard of them. Replacing Massoud with someone is a silly Idea —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.105.34 (talk) 15:02, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, thank you. Now get an account and start helping us out. --Enzuru 22:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find the tone and style of the last two comments by anon User:92.3.105.34 and also by Enzuru offensive and totally inappropriate. If either of you have not heard of Ghafurov and Ayni, then please look them up in Wikipedia under Bobojon Ghafurov and Aini Sadriddin. You should also "bear in mind" (and I am sure you know this) that, just as Afghanistan has the largest population of Tajiks, Tajikistan has the second largest population of Tajiks in the world, so the content on Tajiks does not end with Afghanistan (and Iran). I suggest we stop the discussion on Massoud here, because it is turning into silliness. --Zlerman (talk) 02:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tajiks[edit]

Hi Enzuru, I hope you are doing well. I have reverted your latest edit in Tajiks. I do not think that your edit was wrong, but I think that it is too much and too specific for the intro. "Tajik" is just a name for a wide range of Persian-speakers in Afghanistan. The Persian-speakers of Herat, for example, are quite distinct from the Persian-speakers of Kabul, in dialect and culture. And the "Tajiks" of Afgahnistan in general are quite distinct from those in Central Asia.

All in one, all Persian-speakers are still closely related to each other in respect of language and/or history, or maybe even ancestors. As such, I think it's too much to say that "Tajiks are distinct from the Persian-speakers of Iran", because the Farsiwan, for example, who are one section of the "Tajik" population of Afghanistan, are totally identical to the "Persians" of Eastern Iran. They even speak exactly the same dialect as those in Nishapur and Tus.

Take care. Tājik (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Of course, we could try to improve the wording of the intro. But saying that ""Tajiks are a distinct group from other Persian-speakers" is not really correct. I can send you the article "Tajik" from the Encyclopaedia of Islam (written by C.E. Bosworth). The article's intro is:

"... TĀDJĪK, the later form of a word Tāzīk or Tāžīk used in the Iranian and Turkish worlds. In Islamic usage, it eventually came to designate the Persians, as opposed to the Turks. ..."

The most important part of the article, however, is:

"... In Afghānistān, to the present day, it is the Persian-speaking, traditionally sedentary, and in no way tribally-bound population that is called Tādjīk. As a self-designation this term, which earlier on had been more or less pejorative, has become acceptable during the last twenty years, particularly as a conscious and comprehensive delimitation of Persian-speaking Afghāns. The self-designation of Persian-speakers in Afghānistān had been for a long time most commonly Fārsīwān, Fārsībān, or Fārsīgū(y). However, even today Tādjīk does not comprise all Persian-speaking groups in Afghānistān; it has obviously preserved a socio-cultural semantic component. The Uzbeks in northern Afghānistān, mostly bilingual and thus also Persianspeaking, consider themselves, as can be expected, clearly distinct from the Tādjīk, and so do the Persianspeaking Shī'ī Hazāra and some other tribes. Until today, under the influence of the ethnographers, a meaning of the term Tādjīk has been preserved in scholarly literature on regions outside the Republic of Tajikistan, one which corresponds closely to the concept of the Russian colonial administration. This may be helpful as a convention among scholars, but has little to do with the historical and the modern meanings of the term and the self-understanding of the Tādjīk. ..."

Your claim that my edit was "Pan-Iranist" is quite unfair. One could flip the coint and say that your edit is "anti-Persian" and "propagation of Soviet colonial models". But that would be wrong and unfair as well. Tājik (talk) 22:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. Please keep in mind that both articles, Tajiks and Persian-speakers of Iran, are part of the "super-article" Persians. I would, for my part, rename the article "Tajiks" to Persian-speakers of Afghanistan, and turn the article "Tajik" into an etymological one, simply explaining the meaning of the name.

It is very important to note that "Tajik" is not a self-designation of the Persian-speakers in Central Asia and Afghanistan, but was imposed on them for various reasons. As such, you are right that they are "distinct from the Persians of Iran", if we take ancestry and genetics in consideration. But in terms of language and culture, they are absolutely identical to the Persians of Iran. Tājik (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Twelve Imams[edit]

The Twelve Imams had the modern images removed from the table by Wayiran... ironically, I actually think it's an improvement, because they all look the same. I wonder if there's different images we could use there. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 19:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In regard of the 12 Imams: I think the Turkish expressions should be listed separately, as they are only used by the Alevi community and are not to be confused with historical (= recorded in history books) titles of the Imams. The best solution would be creating another column only for the Alevi titles. What do you think? Tājik (talk) 19:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Avicenna. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. لenna vecia 15:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Recent Reverts[edit]

Dear Enzuru,

1) please be respectful in your comments.

2) I see that other people have been complaining about your recent edits and reverts. Maybe you are not vandalizing, but you have started removing any Iranian/Persian designation from articles which are clearly Iranian scholars like Nasiredin Tusi and Mulla Sadra. Maybe you think Persian or Iranian means citizen of the present country of Iran or related to the Twelever Shia? Then you need to read more reliable history books.

Some of these scientists are now being claimed by other groups for political reason and that is another reason which makes it significant to mention that they arised from the Irano-Islamic civilization. In the West, some sources claim all Muslims as Arabs, so it is important from an Encyclopedia's point of view to distinguish it. If all these issues were not present (but unfortunately they are), then I would have supported your edit. But usually a concensus is needed. BrokenMirror (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 20:20, 21 November 2008 (UTC). [reply]

140.174.9.7[edit]

One dubious edit isn't enough to justify a block on an IP, but I will keep an eye on them. If they begin vandalising again, reporting them to WP:AN might result in a faster response. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Ah, fair enough, didn't know about that. Blocked for 72 hours, although I will investigate to see if it's an abusable proxy. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Username[edit]

Okeh I've put in for a Username Usurpation for User:Ogress. <3 the artist formerly known as Em0. the Ogress _smash! 00:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where did your {{tl|werdnabot}} parameters |age=31|showheader=no go? Also, I reported Phonelabel. the Ogress _smash! 00:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How is this even possible?[edit]

ZOMFG this is effing terrifying.

Nikolai Dzhumagaliev (Russian: Николай Джумагалиев, born 1952), a serial killer operating in 1980, known as "Metal Fang" (for his unusual false teeth made from white metal) in the Soviet Union republic of Kazakhstan.
A cannibal, he would often kill his women victims with an axe, carve the meat and serve it to his friends at dinners. He was eventually caught when friends whom he had invited to his house for "snacks" found a human head and intestines in his fridge. They immediately reported him to the authorities and Nikolai was arrested.
The total number of his victims is not known, although he was charged with a total of seven murders. Some sources put the total number of victims at 50 - 100. Found to be insane, he was sentenced to a psychiatric hospital in Tashkent, which he escaped from in 1989 while being transported to another facility. He was caught in 1991 in Fergana. Dzhumagaliev was released from a mental institution in Uzbekistan in January 1994. He is a free man, and is currently living with relatives in Eastern Europe.

Note the last sentence.

Also, that OR discussion is fabulous. the Ogress _smash! 01:30, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Ethnicity[edit]

Dear Enzuru, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Opening_paragraph says that "Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability." "Subject" in the quote means "Personality" and not the scientific or else contributions. As to "Confusion", please see this: Medieval Islamic Economic Thought, By Shaikh M. Ghazanfar, Published by Routledge, 2003, Page 5. which reads:

""Further, the chapters interchangeably use terms such as "Arab" scholars, "Arab-Islamic" Scholars, or simply "Islamic/Muslim" scholars. While in some sense the distictions may be appropirate, our reference throughout is to the Islamic (or Muslim) scholars, whether Arab, Iranian or Persian, who wrote their discourses in the early Islamic civilization.""

--Raayen (talk) 21:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These two pages are about Persian personalities: Mahmoud Hessaby, Hossein Elahi Ghomshei. The ethnicity haven't been mentioned either. The above quote says: "Arab", "Arab-Islamic" and "Islamic/Muslim" have been used interchangeably, and not "Persian" and "Arab".--Raayen (talk) 21:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, nice to meet you. In order for us to mention the ethnicity in the opening, we need a citation that it is often confused they are not Persian. But even then, I don't see anything that confusion makes it notable. For example of how we should do biography, please see this. --Enzuru 21:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I don't believe the subject means that. Can you please look at the FA and see how many articles mention this? Does Bill Clinton mention he is caucasian? Also, it says it uses those interchangeably, but it doesn't necessarily say it applies the Arab-Islamic label to Persians. I know this was done in the past, but this source is kinda vague about what is happening. Does elsewhere in the book it refer to a Persian as an Arab? How old are the articles included in the book? If so, go ahead and revert me and put that as the Persian citation. (Look at my contributions to see which articles I edited). --Enzuru 21:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we need a source talking about the confusion, not demonstrating that they are ignoring the differences, or technically that would be Original Research on our part. Once we have that source we should be able to do the reverts correctly. --Enzuru 21:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that, but it doesn't specifically say it'll use the Arab-Islamic title on a Persian, it may just use the Islamic one. Also, it says they will be used interchangeability, but it doesn't mention a confusion that we need to fix. I think we need a better source, this one is a bit vague, and I feel using it is a bit of Original Research. And I'm glad that those articles don't say they're Persian. Now, we need to fix these ones, which is our primary concern. Also, perhaps we can talk to someone more familiar with applying the MOS. For now, I am following the MOS as well as how FA biography articles are done. --Enzuru 21:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not vague at all. That is clearly being inferred. The book says:

"Arab" scholars, "Arab-Islamic" Scholars, or simply "Islamic/Muslim" scholars are used interchangeably." (nothing here about Persian)

but (inferred)

I use "Islamic (or Muslim) scholars, whether Arab, Iranian or Persian."

Yes, using Muslim scholars for a Persian is not neccessarily incorrect, often it is correct. I don't feel this source cuts it, we need a better one specifically stating that there it is often mistaken that these individuals are Arab or another ethnic group. --Enzuru 02:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, "confusion" is your word. I said "mistaken". Besides, look how this encyclopedic article [8] is written. Please look at this too: [9]. And the articles like Goethe and Shakespeare. --Raayen (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, it doesn't matter how they do it. We need to follow the MOS. --Enzuru 02:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the people you listed made huge contributions to literature and specifically to their language and country of origin. I kept Persian in Rumi for a reason. Ibn Sina's contribution was philosophy, not literature, hence it was not confined to a language or country in the Islamic world. --Enzuru 02:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As it has been mentioned in Manual of Style, in Opening paragraph , the Nationality should be mentioned.The word "Persian" does not always show ethnicity and it may also show a nationality of the ancient time (Please read Iran naming dispute).(Please continue the debate here , because it maybe difficult to find the answers from diffrent pages) --Alborz Fallah (talk) 22:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality is something else, if they were members of the Safavid Empire, or Ottoman or Abbasid, we put that, not their ethnicity necessarily. --Enzuru 02:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please discuss this more ? I mean due to fact that Iranian (Persian) nation is among the identities that has been continuous from the 5th century BC , then in contrast of many ethnic groups , the word Persian both shows a historical nation and ethnicity ,so I think as an alternative suggestion , there can be a vote on this too .I mean to use the word "Persian" in the opening as a nationality ,different from ethnicity.As an example , in the article Sargon the Great do we use the ethnicity (Semitic) in the opening or we use the nationality(Akkadian) ?--Alborz Fallah (talk) 10:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Summing it all up. For you late to the party, I have been taking out ethnicity from many scholarly articles from the Muslim world. Why? Because Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Opening_paragraph mentions that it should not be mentioned unless it makes the person notable. Not only do we mention it, we put things like Persian scholar in huge letters in the infobox, even though they are notable as philosophers are scientists, not as Persians. None of these individuals are notable for their ethnicity like Martin Luther King Jr. and would have been just as influential if they weren't their ethnicity. The main argument is that these people are often confused as other ethnic groups. So, I said if we can bring a source to prove this, we can consider it, but I am still not sure if it'd qualify for tge opening. I noted that most of the Featured Article Biography articles do not include ethnicity in the opening, hence we should follow both the MOS and the FA style. --Enzuru 02:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: Don't put the ethnicity in but do put the city/country or region of birth, or where this person spent moft of his/her life. That seems like a reasonable compromise.Bless sins (talk) 02:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the people we're dealing with travelled alot, like Avicenna. --Enzuru 02:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that mentioning the ethnicity in bold letters with a clear POV (somewhere along the lines of "we in the middle east are better than those barbarian crusaders look at our science") is not ideal. Nonetheless, look at the page for example at Descartes, or John Locke. Their French and English ethnicities have very little bearing on their philosophies, except that perhaps Locke's british nature put him towards political philosophy and Descartes more towards metaphysical philosophy. The information obtained from ethnicity is important but should not be used as a platform to promote any religion or nationality. Mentioning what countries they have travelled to and what religion they subscribe to is an interesting and necessary fact to include. But let me just cut to the chase here:make it neutral; don't bold it but quickly mention it like "he was an Arab scholar" or "Descartes was a French Philosopher" etc. Since religion plays a small part in even the philosophy of these scientists, it should have a smaller yet existent place in the article. This is my opinion, I thank User:Enzuru for their invitation. Respectfully, Gabr-el 02:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for coming! In general, we were both mentioning it vaguely but also in big letters in the infobox we had things like Persian Muslim Scholar. So, we were halfway there. Second, neither Locke or Descartes were FA biography articles, so they are prone to mistakes too (I linked to FA biography articles above), and Locke probably should change English to British in order to specify nationality rather than ethnicity. --Enzuru 02:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

my two cents, The issue needs a discussion on all topics and we should not make such changes unless discussed. For example Isaac Newton and Carl Friedrich Gauss have their background. Newton wrote exclusively in Latin. So there is no reason to choose a small set of articles for this way of editing unless discussed for all such topics. Also this is the normal pattern in Encyclopedia Britannica for many of the authors. Also it does make a person notable in terms of showing which civilization and culture he came from, since majority of people not from those cultures do not know that information which within itself is notable. So notable here should follow patterns of other Encyclopedias. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 02:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are discussing things now, and since my primary areas are Islam, those are the articles it has been easiest for me to tackle. But you're right, we need a consensus. Second, we have FA biography articles to check for ethnicity (are those two FA? they can make the same mistakes as us), and second, nationality can be mentioned by not ethnicity. And as for it being important, it is, but not in the opening which is against the MOS. We have our own MOS which differs from other encyclopedias, we don't follow their standards. --Enzuru 03:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, Isaac Newton is a Featured Article. I will discuss it with someone from there why it has been mentioned in the opening. In the meantime, let's keep discussing. For the meantime, I believe the best thing we can do is take out the big bolded Persian from the infoboxes and leave it in the opening until we come to a further understanding. Does everyone agree with this? --Enzuru 03:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your effort. I think the format in Britannica is good, since the background/culture of these scientists make them notable in terms of showing the civilization they are from. Also the name Iran has been used continuously: [10]. For example I am not British, but Isaac Newton to me is known as a English Scientist. Nationality by itself is a vague term by the way and can include origin [11]. ("The status of belonging to a particular nation by origin, birth, or naturalization."). Of course it has the meaning of citizenship also, but modern nation state is a new concept which for example did not exist during the time of Leonardo da Vinci. Virtually most famous Western scientists have such an opening and if there is wide wikipedia consensus, that is one issue. But nationality also implies origin besides citizenship. So mentioning origin (nationality/background) for famous people is a norm for any Encyclopedia (Britannica, Encyclopedia of Islam..). --Nepaheshgar (talk) 03:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 03:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you too, you make a good point. Should we consider the nation-state which people lived under as the precursor to the modern idea of citizenship (which appeared with the Roman Empire), or ethnicity? I'm going to see what I hear from the Newton people, it is an FA and they should give a good reason why it should be included. Nonetheless the outcome, I think we need to take out the huge Persian word in the infoboxes, since most of them specialized as scholars of Islam, not as Persian scholars. --Enzuru 03:28, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rumi's contributions are universal to the world, so why not deleting his ethnicity or nationatily too?! The essence of his poems are more important than their language. I think the above quote is enough to show that according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Opening_paragraph, mentioning ethnicity/nationality is relevant for the "subject". However, here is another source: Lands of the Cross and Crescent, By Cyrus Herzl Gordon, page 132 : "Avicenna and other famous men of Iran, who wrote in Arabic, are often mistaken today for Arabs." But It seems we don't need any sources at all, because we clearly see the mistakes and pushings: You remember your discussions in Al-Khwarezmi article and you may see the recent edits [12]. Or look at this: tr:Birûni. These are wrong and prevalant presumptions or fabrications that should be cleared noticably which according to the Manual_of_Style_(biographies) the nationality/ethnicity can be there or is relevant. Newton is not alone, look also at Celine Dion and Joey Santiago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raayen (talk • contribs) 03:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, his contributions are universal, but his writings also represent a great height in Persian literature, which we can't say for Ibn Sina. Since we see these prominent articles mentioning ethnicity, we will too, however, does everyone agree that the userboxes should not mention ethnicity in the big header? That seems to be emphasizing it way too much, none of the FA biography articles not concerning ethnic figures do that. --Enzuru 03:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last year I made a template for Muslim scholars and this is the style which I support. You can find it in Alhazen. I tried to do the same infobox in Avicenna, but some wikipedians reverted my edits. I don't have time to participate in such pan-ethnic editorial wars.Seyyed(t-c) 04:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes of course the userboxes should not mention ethnicity in the big header but that need a policy --Bayrak (talk) 04:49, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I generally concur that an individual's ethnicity need not be emphasised if it isn't of pressing relevance to the subject topic. What may be more useful is referring to the nation or dynasty which he/she lived under. In modern times, we'd say American or British for instance. Perhaps this could be applied broadly so scholars could be referred to as Mughal, Ottoman, Almohad, and so on. As opposed to their original ethnicity, which could of course be mentioned later. The only problem I see with this is that many scholars travelled all over the globe and lived in different places, and notions like registering 'primary citizenship' probably didn't exist for much of Muslim history. ITAQALLAH 13:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vote[edit]

Should the template at Alhazen become the standard template for prominent influential scholars in Islam? This will fix one of the ethnic issues which three of us agreed is an issue, ie, a huge heading stating their ethnicity in the infobox, instead of just having a slight mention in the introduction. --Enzuru 05:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now I am a little confused. Are you actually trying to say that these folks were not ethnically Persian, and should not be referred to as such, but should be referred to as "Muslim". I am not sure that I follow you, but it does seem to me that your intent next further explanation. If they were Persian, they should be labeled as such. Are you going to say that Sun Tzu was not Chinese, now? Why? The Scythian 09:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to move the ethnic part to the mainbody of the article. I thought this was MOS, but FA biographies such as Isaac Newton don't do this. Now, see the huge infobox on the right for Avicenna? I think that can say something much better than Persian scholar, since it wasn't him being Persian that is important in the article, but his philosophy and etc, mainly contributions to Islam, but significant contributions outside its sphere as well. Muslim scholar could work, but even that might be limiting. --Enzuru 22:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe we should adopt this userbox. I will also make it look nicer. --Enzuru 05:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it will help alot in the ethnic issues --Bayrak (talk) 05:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here is not the right place for voting on anything. Alefbe (talk) 19:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rostam & the Akun Div[edit]

I thought you might appreciate my illustrated retelling of "Rostam & the Akun Div".[13] the Ogress _smash! 07:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you email that guy? (I don't know him, he's not my friend.) *shrug* Oh well. the Ogress _smash! 08:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merboob, lol! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alirezaabbas (talk • contribs) 22:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Complement[edit]

Heh, thats the best complement I have had in a while! My hat is off to you! You got a pretty iron pair yourself, if I might say so...Pashtun or not! The Scythian 09:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

God in Ismaiilism[edit]

I got your message and I do appreciate the feed back. You are a good person to have a civilized discussion with. I was looking at some of your contributions and I find them very interesting in the spread of knowledge.. Yusayr (talk) 01:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

خنیاگر[edit]

LOL @ User:خنیاگر. Yes, that's his actual Wikipedia name. the Ogress _smash! 03:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment[edit]

Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 November 29#Image:Jyllands-Posten-pg3-article-in-Sept-30-2005-edition-of-KulturWeekend-entitled-Muhammeds-ansigt.png-akhwandk (talk) 13:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So...[edit]

Should we take him to the treatment center? I think so, provided disruption continues after the ultimatum. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 23:38, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If he even attempts to even change the article once more, we'll do it. --Enzuru 03:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, though we might want to give him a general message on his talk page to this end so that he cannot claim that simply did not read Talk:Khomeini. I think it should happen if he disrupts other articles too. By the way, you should undo this because the Ismaili Shia Fatimid caliphs made use of Mamluks taken from the Africans and the Europeans in addition to some Turks. Jawhar is a particularly notable slave in Fatimid history. So, neither the caliphate nor mamluk slavery are exclusively Sunni institutions. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 19:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted my edit on slavery and I'll post a warning on his talk page, thanks. --Enzuru 21:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just posted a warning calling into mind the ultimatum at Talk:Ruhollah Khomeini and mentioning that continued disruption elsewhere can also lead to consequences. See User talk:Bayrak#FYI. Hopefully he will stop his behavior, but somehow I doubt that he will, so it may be wise to be prepared for the next step. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He removed it without remark, thus indicating that he has seen it. For now we wait. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 17:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

I want this elder's tattoos.[14] Ogress _smash! 13:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Enzuru[edit]

I noticed your comments in Sikh extremism. I really liked reading your level-headed response to all the drama on that page. I've started a section for cleaning up the article. I notice that there is POV from both sides and so I've gone ahead and cleaned up a little bit of it. We don't need turning into a propaganda platform for either side. I would appreciate it if you could contribute! --vi5in^[talk] 22:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ismailism[edit]

Hi Enzuru, thanks for your comments and help, Im an inexperienced, and struggling editor most of the time. I have a substantial collection of material on Isma'ilism, and in particular the Nizari.

I since I moved all the material regarding the previous Agha Khans to pages specifically dedicated to each, so that the page retained a section that devoted to the current Imam; however I am having some difficulty deciding where we should place him, as originally when I first started editing all of the history section was largely devoted to just the the Aga Khans, since then I have added numerous parts to the "History" section, and added a section "philosophy" that deals with beliefs, and I have also added a section "community". I would appreciate your input; and overall impression of what you believe the page Nizari page needs. (Water Stirs (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

ANI[edit]

I've now posted the Bayrak case at the ANI because he continued the Sayyid issue at the Khomeini article despite being warned otherwise. Please feel free to add your opinion of the disruption and possible measures to take at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption from User:Bayrak along ethnic lines. Thank you. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh extremism/Sandbox[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Sikh extremism/Sandbox, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Sikh extremism/Sandbox is a test page.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Sikh extremism/Sandbox, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Afghan Div[edit]

I agree with the need to mark historical figures properly. However, that editor has been just changing things to "Tajik", "Afghani" etc. without paying attention, thus breaking all the links and formatting. the Ogress _smash! 00:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, changing a page to indicate someone else is a kafir is Good Faith? Seriously? Takfir is, like, a way bad sin. the Ogress _smash! 19:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well, I meant more like if he committed takfir directly rather than changed an article to include only one perspective. I mean, changing an article to say the Shi3ah are kafirun seems no different than calling women "bitches", which is vandalism. But changing something from a sectarian perspective isn't vandalism, true dat. the Ogress _smash! 03:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with above, Lashkar-e-Janghvir are responsible for much of the terrorist rhetoric. It's ironic that In Saddam's Iraq, Shia and Sunni intermarried, you can work out the rest ! Satanoid (talk) 14:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Islam and Sikhism[edit]

Hi Enzuru, your correct in identifying the lack of understanding displayed by the Sikh fundamentalsts. I do think some degree of prosetylization is at play here, plus without the correct comparisons being made. The various confusions by fundamentalists is the inability to differentiate Sikhism with Sufism with Sunni Islam or Shia Islam Satanoid (talk) 11:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the reality is that the latter part of Sikh history or more specifically the Khalsa was almost and entirely in direct confrontation with the Islamic Mughal Dynasty. The Sikh gurus were in all but name purely dynastic themselves, the last eight gurus were from the same clan/caste ie the Sodhi family. Oddly enough much of this is not mentioned, but it is actual fact. it may be worth putting up Sikh guru family tree.

The Sikh dynasty/guruship ended when Aurangzeb defeated Gobind Singh plus any potential successor. The assassination of Gobind Singh by Wazir Khan is usually considered bad for Sikh morale, hence it won't be surprising if it has either been heavily edited or subject to intense alteration.

As for converts, most if not nearly all of its adherents are of Indian origin, although Nanak did travel both East & West which were either Buddhist (Tibetan) and Islamic (Iraq & Middle-East) but his message had none or little impact (again this is not mentioned)

The recent converts are essentially New Age Americans 3HO started by Yogi Bhajan who advocated kundalini yoga which is essentially Neotantra, Buddhist or Hindu in nature and format. It occupies one end of the spectrum whilst the more Orthodox authoritarian other wing advocates the opposite and is purely political.

If one reads the works by Professor Jurgensmeyer, one gets a better understanding. Satanoid (talk) 10:14, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with you, Nanak was a pacifist, but so was Mahatma Gandhi or the Sufi Saint Shirdi Sai Baba whereas Gobind was pretty much the antithesis. Nanak the pacifist and Gobind the activist had more in common with Jat King Prithvi Raj Chauhan, its not possible that all the Gurus were divine incarnations of each other considering the latter eight kept it in the family. Thats my criticism of Sikhism. Satanoid (talk) 12:33, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Enzuru I must correct you on a few points. You are assuming Guru Nanak went East and West on a mission of conversion. Sikhism has no words or methods for conversion. There are no Crusades, and no Jihads and no forced conversion.

Yogan Bhaji is considered a maverick and in some quarters not even a Sikh, because he expressly traveeled to America for the purpose of conversion and missionary status. Again the term "missionary" for Sikhs is not something Sikhism epouses or carries out.

The Guru's were not a dynasty, infact many were from different families. The two clans however, were Bedi and Sodhi, and this probably relates more to the clans of their followers.

Actually the failed assasination of Guru Gobind Singh is something that IS openly discussed, and their are Persian accounts of how one of the assailants was slain there and then. The actually death of the Guru occured when he had not allowed the wound to heal sufficiently when stringing a bow. Iwould like to point out many Muslims fought and died for Guru Gobind Singh and most of his battle were against the Hindu Hill Raja's.

The Sikh struggle continued under Bandha Bahadhur after the 10th Guru's demise and the Guruship passed to the Adi Granth. The struggle continued under Nawab Kapur Singh, then Jassa Singh Ahluwalia the 12 Misls and culminated in the Kingdom Under Maharaja Ranjit Singh.

Before making an assumption that Guru Nanak was a pacifist read his writings. Also understand why Angad (who was appointed in preference to the Guru's own sons) set up wrestling arenas for the fledgling Sikh community.

Was Privi Raj Chauhan a Jat? That is interesting. I am writing a paper on him at the moment but all my research shows him to be from Kshatriya lineage and not Jat. I know many Jats have copied the surname Chauhan but this is news to me.

Thanks and Regards.--Sikh-history (talk) 15:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to make a lot of things up SH ? Of course his followers are going to make out he died of 'natural causes' LOL

He was defeated by Wazir Khan, period. There's no need for this wishy washy "oh well he was going to die anyway so lets just make out it was a wound :kinda thing"

Anyway on guru Gobind Singh there's no mention of what happened to his sons ? Did they get run over while shopping ? Just curious ? Satanoid (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhs don't hide what happened to them, Sikhs themselves have told me quite a few times. I'm sure you could put it in there without being edited. --Enzuru 22:15, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have tried, but they refuse to accept he was assassinated. See here http://www.answers.com/topic/aurangzeb. The Mughals faced down the Persians, The Marathas and The Sikhs Satanoid (talk) 14:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You do not need to rely on Sikh sources (or tenous internet links, or articles from dodgy journalists) but Dabistan e Mazhib and other records of Persian chroniclers in the Mughal court confirm what happened. Professor Irfan Habib has done extensive research and translation of the correspondence in the Mughal Court.Regards --Sikh-history (talk) 15:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Respected Editor Enzuru, Please Hold on - Hold on, I just had a chance to read all the Anti-Sikhism hate which Satanoid is spreading. Please do not get driven by any of his lies. Let me come back, I will present you the facts. --Singh6 (talk) 04:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thats is equivalent to the Sunday Sport amongst Persians, ask any Persian what is that ? In fact the word Mazhibi's are a sect of Sikhs meaning low caste, but the word in Persian means 'religion' which was probably adopted by the out caste-sikhs

But the issue here is that your all your Guru(s) faced defeat in the face of the Mughals. The Mughal Emperor annihilated the Sikh dysnatic tradition to a book Satanoid (talk) 14:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dearest Satanoid are you saying "Mazhibi" from "Dabistan e Mazhib" comes from Mazhib? --Sikh-history (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh Extremism[edit]

Don't bow out friend. Yourinput is invaluable, and I think if we can get the initial definition correct the rest of the article will flow. Sikh Extremism is indeeed and very complex issue and the "Sikh Terrorism" article seems to simplify it. The only reason I know so much is that I have followed it in the media since the 1980's, where the media (especially) BBC seemed to treat Bhindranwala, not as a terrorist, but almost as some sort of Robin Hood. If you analyse the beginings of the entire problem you will find the answer lies purely in politics. If it was purely religious, so many Hindu families would not have the custom (in Punjab), of having at least one member of the family baptised as a Sikh.--Sikh-history (talk) 11:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that; I feel your pain![edit]

Hey Enzuru,

I know what you mean. It's intensely frustrating. The problem is that none of them want the article to exist in the first place. I couldn't even get a personal definition of "Sikh Extremism" from Roadahead. He continually links to his overly pedantic critique as if that's an answer to everything. Frankly, he overanalyzes everything on purpose simply to try and invalidate every single source. I agree, their watching of your userpage is pretty creepy. I'll try and request mediation in the matter; I'm not sure if I will have enough time to do anything more - pre-holiday crunchtime is going on at work. Good luck, and hopefully we can collaborate on other articles in the future. --vi5in^[talk] 15:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Enzuru, it may help to report to admin or user admin Ioeth Satanoid (talk) 06:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh Extremism is being propagated on Wikipedia[edit]

Thats why they want it deleted.

1. Roadahead is deleteing the references I make on his vandalism on the discussion page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASikh_extremism&diff=256501557&oldid=256255980

2. Initially they conspired with each other to get it deleted - THEY FAILED

3. They refer to major news websites as POV

4. The section on Sikh pro-terrorist websites has been deleted

5. The Islam and Sikhism article puts down Islam and is Proselytism Satanoid (talk) 06:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The Five Martyrs" on Twelvers Template[edit]

Bro, I think these martyrs should get a place on the Twelvers Template. My reasons are:

These martyrs are representative ulema of Twelver Shia, who sacrificed their lives for the cause of Shi'ism. No Twelver group (Akhbari or Shaikhi) denounces them due to their Usooli stance, e.g.
1. Shahid Awwal's al-Lum'ah and Shahid Thani's Sharh al-Lum'ah are of equal significance for Akhbari's and Shaikhi's, as for Usooli's.
2. Qazi Noorullah Shustari is equally respected by all Twelver groups, and it is doubted if he was an Usooli due to his too much dependence on the preceding Akhbari ulema.
3. Mirza Kamil Dehlavi is equally respected by all Twelver groups, and it is not clear whether he was Usooli or Akhbari, as was common with many of Indian Shia ulema of his times.
Even if these ulema represent the Usooli school of thought, even then they are candidate for inclusion, as Usooli's represent the majority of Twelvers. If Usooli concepts like Ayatollah and Marja are included in this list, why not the Martyr Ulema?

NEDian (talk) 18:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

discussed[edit]

I see no consensus on talk page to change Persian to Persian heritage or Persia to Abbasid...the only consensus I see, is in the archives and corresponds to the current version. I am however discussing the matters on talk now. --Sina111 (talk) 06:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And see the discussion here User_talk:Elonka#al-Khwarizmi. Persian stock = Persian, the wording of the lead had been place for years from what I can see on history of the page, and it was apparently the broad consensus of a dozen editors, it can't be overrided by 2 people. I provided another source there that explicitly says Persian. Bayrak is putting false information into the article too, the Kharazm region was under the rule of a local Iranic dynasty, not Abbasids. I provided sources to that effect too. --Sina111 (talk) 08:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apology[edit]

l am sorry for the misunderstanding from the begining..and I hope you forget it

regards --Bayrak (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL[edit]

A troll imitated me as User:Ogresss and even made his pages redirect to mine so I got reported for vandalism on articles I normally protect.

Luckily an Admin recognised me and was like, "Whaaat? She's not a vandal" and contacted me and I figured it out right away. Then they instabanned the jerk for malicious impersonation.

What a jerk eh.

Yeah, I'm totally anal about Shia Islam - it's actually in that exact form, not just "Shia" - and then I add the form with the macrons and stuff.

One thing that's becoming problematic is that people are making the macron-using versions of a WHOLE LOT of articles the official ones. Does no-one know that we aren't supposed to use any extended character sets in the official titles? They're not typable! Ogress _smash! 22:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work Enzuru[edit]

Your a great editor, I could learn a few things from you. Thanks for your input. Satanoid (talk) 10:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a party to this action by Satanoid?[edit]

At user talk:sinneed: "If you can acknowledge in fairness what I and Enzuru and Vivin have said I think we can comply with your demands ?" I am concerned this editor may be using your name in this without permission. sinneed (talk) 21:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd double check user:sineed as a sockpuppet of another user too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Satanoid (talk • contribs) 14:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi again...now i am satisfied on the article and that is all what i want to mention from the begaining that he was (according some sources)from persian stock you can see this link (18 novembre) --Bayrak (talk) 01:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting an account[edit]

Unfortunately I don't think I'm allowed to use my IP as the name of the account. I'm thinking of getting an account because I'll go on break soon and will not have the same IP address. Do you have any other name suggestions? 67.194.202.113 (talk) 05:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alive[edit]

Yes I've been real for a while now. Hope to stay that way for a bit longer. Thanks for the chuckle. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your fighting style![edit]

you keep inviting certain people with the same idea as yourself (based on my impression) to participate on this issue. i don't appreciate this way of performing a jadal. should i invite iranians?--Xashaiar (talk) 21:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Numbering[edit]

I included the numbering because it is mentioned in Info-boxes, and when we mention Ismaili numbering in general it does not represent boyh Mutasali & Nizari numbring as they differ right after Hazrat Ali a.s. Actually I think specifying the numbering clears that there are two numbering schemes in Ismaili's even for initial Imams after Hazrat Ali a.s. If we agree to remove Nizari numbering then it is better not to specify any sect i.e. twelver, zaidiya, ismaili, etc for common Imams and just mention xth Imam of Shias. By the way I myself belong to Twelvers.
--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 06:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! So will you remove the numberings or I should do this?. But we will have to include the split -|-|= format.

--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 07:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! I'll do it you may have a look once it is done(I'll put a note on your talk page).

--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 09:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The job is accomplished, you may have a review. Was'salam!

--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

idea of changing Shia to Shi'a Islam:

I don't have any issues or objections against this change, you may proceed with the alterations; or should I do it? Thanx for your review. Was'salam!

--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 05:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"WP:Original Research"[edit]

This is from WP:OR: "Our policy: Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source (for example, by a university press or mainstream newspaper) may be used in Wikipedia"

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 03:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For clarities sake, I have checked the IP, and it is not AzureFury. Neither of you have broken 3RR, as you are both on your third revert. Obviously, please dont revert again. With the 3RR aspect out of the way, I will look deeper into the content side of things, and the comments. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daemonette[edit]

This is off-topic, but I noticed that you mentioned that you used FreeBSD. That's awesome! I had no idea that you were a daemonette. I prefer FreeBSD over Linux as well, although my current development machine runs Ubuntu Linux (which I think, holds its own remarkably well and has made Linux very user-friendly), because of a lack of drivers for FreeBSD. I've run Plan9 on qemu, but I haven't worked on it extensively. For graphical distros of FreeBSD, have you checked out PC-BSD? Very stable and friendly. If it wasn't for a lack of drivers on my XPS 1530, I'd be running that, and not Ubuntu. --vi5in^[talk] 17:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currently I only have one windows machine that I keep around for games (more specifically, I'm waiting for Starcraft 2 to come out). I have four other boxes at home; two run Vanilla FreeBSD, one runs PC-BSD, and the other runs Ubuntu. The vanilla ones are fileservers and webservers whereas the PC-BSD is a media server, and the Ubuntu machine is a media machine hooked up to my TV. My laptop runs Ubuntu. Perhaps eventually I'll move to minimalist desktop environments, but right now I'm at the point where I just want things to work. When I was in college I had a lot more time to tinker around, but now I'm just happy if things work. And that's key with what I do; I want to spend more time debugging and fixing my code, and not fixing issues on my box. So for that reason Ubuntu seems to work just fine for me. I used to run fvwm once upon a time, and I've played with aterm and urxvt on Cygwin (when I was forced to run windows at my last job). Never really played around with Slackware (I've always been a BSD guy - got into Linux very recently - like, early this year!), but I've heard (just like what you said) that it's similar to FreeBSD. As far as coding goes, I've been using IDE's only recently (seems good for largescale projects), but for my own stuff I'm at home with vim and the commandline. Do you write any code at all? --vi5in^[talk] 23:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heretic!! Haha, vim just happened to be the first editor I started with and I never really got into emacs. What made you switch to emacs? Coding is one of my hobbies; I think I'm decently proficient at it. I started off many, many years ago with LOGO when I was in 5th grade, closely follwed by BASIC. I then taught myself C, and after that started learning C++ in highschool. Java was all the rage when I started college and it wasn't too hard to pick up after C++. Lisp, Prolog, and ADA were part of the school curriculum (lisp is fun, prolog is fun (in a masochistic way)). I also had to do some assembly (which I still like). I then ended up teaching myself Perl (must give you the shivers, because you use python ;)) and PHP. I hear you about JSP's - they are very annoying. Never got into C# or any of the other Microsoft stuff like ASP's and VisualBasic (bleah). --vi5in^[talk] 23:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never got into Diablo, but wasted countless hours on Starcraft. I got really good at it - not so great now, though! I play Spore from time to time, but it has lost some of its initial charm for me. Right now I mostly game on the consoles (seems more cost effective to me - I don't have to keep upgrading my machine). --vi5in^[talk] 23:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

Very good idea. Though I am quite busy in the coming few days. Do you want go ahead and give it a shot? I'll join later. Just tell me what sources you need for it. Tājik (talk) 01:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A new title is not needed, neither is a source needed for such a title. The article is meant to give a broader overview regarding Afghanistan's Persian-speaking population. Tājik (talk) 01:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, to avoid any future confusions: the Encyclopaedia Iranica does use the phrase.

Although Paṧtō has enjoyed official favor, it is little propagated among Persian speakers. First, it is difficult to proceed from a less complex (more analytical) language such as Persian to a more complex (more synthetic) language such as Paṧtō; and second, Paṧtō has been poorly taught, despite the efforts of the Ministry of Public Instruction. The tendency is, rather, for Paṧtūns to learn Persian in the course of their movements or during their military service, while the number of Persian-speakers who can express themselves in Paṧtō remains stationary. Tājik (talk) 02:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have put a note for you on User talk:Tajik#Persian-speakers of Afghanistan. --Zlerman (talk) 02:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that time most of them speak Arabic as mother tongue Despite of their different origins --Bayrak (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mother tongue? Tājik (talk) 04:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His English isn't good, so don't take it that way... --Enzuru 18:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

about What exactly..?? I know that Arabs Captured Kabul in 651 and people of Balkh were Surrendered On the condition to pay 400,000 Dirham in the same year --Bayrak (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Afghan-stub}}[edit]

Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 23:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know much, In fact I still do not know the specific question ,They were not Kuwaitis :) --Bayrak (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wahhabis - in answer to your question - sortof[edit]

I regret that I made that off-topic remark in response to your off-topic posting. I keep a very very very firm line between the world out here and the world inside the discussion areas where I speak through "Sinneed". I know of no way to maintain the privacy of friends and coworkers if I discuss them and their beliefs here, and (by firm personal rule, broken in the past only to cause sorrow) will not try. My apologies for mentioning them, as I know that is frustrating. I erred. sinneed (talk) 05:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

i saw on talk one of the reasons this account was blocked was cause someone did bad thing. this is a computer lab computer at my elementary class in Centennial, Colorado. how did person do bad edits with many computers? my teacher told me that this computer was blocked from here before last week or stuff. does you know what happen? thank you! (signing for them so this gets archived) --Enzuru 01:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Durrani Empire[edit]

Hi, I was wandering if you could complete the initial article of our discussion where the Durranis defeated the gheens ! (signing for them so this gets archived) --Enzuru 01:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ali al-Hadi[edit]

I've full-protected this article for three days to give you guys time to discuss this on the talk page. Blueboy 96 01:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a sockpuppet of myself? Kjgugh (talk) 02:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PAKHTUNS![edit]

Okay, so I actually found a Pakhtuni thing that needs attention. I am working on a disambig page, Uways - there's a mutliply-referenced Pakhtuni ruler of Swat with that name. Check it out eh! Write it up eh! Ogress _smash! 23:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shi'te part[edit]

This is Malik al Assad. About ibn Saba', what wrong with my edition ? It is better looking no ? Sorry I am new to wikipedia. Regarding Shi'i origin, I did not state opinion as fact if that was what you were thinking and I didn't do it in any bias, I only quoted sources for it. And by the way, I am pretty sure some artciles are allowed to quote Sunni or Shia sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Al Assad (talk • contribs) 05:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's two parts I don't udnerstand. The first is ibn Saba' part. Why did you change from the blockquote style to the non blockquote style? It's like, only a style change, nothing of the actual substance is changed. Plus, doesn't the blockquote part look better ? The second is the Shia origin part. I quote Professor Heinrich Graetz, who is secular, why did you change it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Al Assad (talk • contribs) 05:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

XD. I am sorry for the misunderstanding there. As for Shia origin, I think you missed it, but I repeat, I quoted Heinrich Graetz, separate from jewishenyclopedia, and is secular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Al Assad (talk • contribs) 05:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can read about Heinrich Graetz right here, as you can see, he wrote about history from a Jewish perspective. --Enzuru 05:31, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry for not replying yesterday. Anyway, before you delete the updated section of the origin of Shia, let's talk first. All those that I quoted are secular. Do you have a problem with that ? Also when Professor Heinrich Graetz says "jewish perspective" he mean the race, not religion. Can we talk about this on the Shi'a Islam page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Al Assad (talk • contribs) 06:55, 29 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Heroic Heroism.[edit]

It's the arrival of Muharram that makes the e-mujahiddeen fly their kamikaze IP addys into Muslim pages on Wikipedia. (Wow, say that one three times fast...) Vulpem pilum mutat, non mores. A fox may change its fur, but not its ways. Ogress _smash! 00:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Almost 6am and it's 0 Fahrenheit. And I'm editing Wikipedia because of the onslaught of, um, enthusiastic Shi'i-IPs and because I don't feel like sleeping yet. I should try, though. Hoppy Nude Cheer (again). (And we get a third one in March, complete with fire-leaping!) Ogress _smash! 10:46, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, cos of Sarah Shahi and the other half of the L-Word cast ennit? They couldn't find Latinas in Southern California so they had to cast Tehrooni-Amrikans instead? (Okay, so Janina Gavankar is Indian, but still... wut?) Also, to commiserate, there's like a 10-page flamewar on every Shia website about whether or not to "allow" non-frocked women to go to the Hussainiyyas... *sigh* Cos you know it's so freaking crucial. Ogress _smash! 14:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

I'm not the one who wrote about that article about Islam (I think) since this is a shared IP, but anyway after looking at the changelog seems to me that the one who modified it made a mistake, not vandalism as you assumed. Keep in mind that sometimes ppl makes mistakes and you should not always take it as evil since is not always like that.

Regards Waldo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waldoalvarez00 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

William Muir[edit]

Mind explaining exactly why Orientalism is not avlid for Islamic Scholarship ? secondly, Muir is considered probably the most valid source on Islamic Scholarship by non Muslim wikipedians. There are so many Islam related article which still use him as a valid source. thirdly, you detailed Muir's belief, which is ad hominem (logical fallacy). If we take Muir's belief's as a variable to determine whether he should be cited as reliable, then we might as well reject non Muslim scholars because they never had formal Islamic education under certified scholars. I do not disagree with you that he is unreliable, but so is non Muslim scholars who never had formal Islamic education, therefore, by your logic we should only use source's which have an Islamic degree in Islamic history and an ijazat for his authority on relating it.Malik Al Assad (talk) 10:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is wrong for you to display pictures of ahle bait. As far as the Fatima article is concerned i think it should be written in such a way that both sunnis and shias can accpet it. whats written there at the moment is unncessary.

ps: what gives you the right to tamper with the deobandi section??? i am deobandi and know more about them! so stop tampering with that page please and ill stop tampering with yours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Source at the lead-in Sikh extremism[edit]

I suspect that it, like so much else, was lost in the edit wars. I chewed through the edit history trying to spot the "good stuff" that was killed in the crossfire. The article was littered with broken bits of work... I restored the pieces I spotted that I could understand. :) Hopefully, things will be better now. Thank you for restoring that bit. Cheers! sinneed (talk) 16:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 313[edit]

Didn't you know that most of the 313 are like that? Little did they know Khomeini's reasoning for his fatwa... taqiyyah, taqiyyah! LOL Ogress _smash! 02:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flagged Revs[edit]

Hi,

I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk) 07:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input[edit]

I'll like to help wherever I can, but I can't understand why some people would want to basically lie about things, like they have no shame, anyway, the stuff on forced conversions is crap, I've seen first hand sikh ladies like Kiranjit Ahluwalia break free from the shackles of some Sikh men. Khalsaburg (talk) 23:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dear There I am sorry but i am not so good in Wikipedia, and therefore i don't know how to join, or do things that you guys can, however i tried and thanks for the invitation. Alishah85 (talk) 05:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bye

Abdullah Ibn Saba[edit]

Can you help with Abdullah Ibn Saba? The page is... well, let's just say it's a horror. If you could lend a keyboard, I'm sure Wikipedia would be most appreciative. Ogress _smash! 03:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, 20 credits? I'm in awe, I'm just doing Arabic and it's kicking my ass. Hokay, I waded in a bit (sometimes I see a page and I'm like, "gaaah where do I start?") Ogress _smash! 15:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was busy teaching (plus, um, 'Ashura) so I haven't had time to do it. I did hit the Harvard liberry but am waiting for some books. I think my Heinz Halm book is also going to be useful, but I haven't assembled my strike craft yet. But it's totally going to be like me headshotting zombie-quote after zombie-quote like an anti-Orientalist/Wahhabist John McClane/Beatrix Kiddo. Peow peow peow! Ogress _smash! 17:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I dropped a note on the ibn Saba' page... I'm not sure what to do with that header that I initially tossed off as "The Anti-Shi'i View", because clearly emending it to "The Sunni View" is just plain wrong. The "Judaising" notion is just not the majority Sunni opinion and they shouldn't be conflated. Ogress _smash! 09:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Best Edit Evar[edit]

In addition to the above comment about ibn Saba', I add in "the best edit evar": [15]. (I assume you know who Melek Taus is, but if not, read the page quickly.) Ogress _smash! 10:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help?[edit]

I have been trying to work with the rc (unreliable source?) tag in the sandbox, and it always seems to force its own little line break on me. I don't want to junk out a Wikipedia article just because I think that some of the references are trash.

Another Q: If a 12er Shia scholar has reached the upper ranks of scholarship, like becoming an Ayatullah (though not necessarily marj`a), is it possible that he could sitll be considered a secular source? I am wondering about Ayatullh Shahid Sadr with his text on Economics, Ayatullah Tabataba'i and his work on `aqidah, etc. Also, if the most recent edition of Britannica (paper & ink) that one can access is 1998, is it too ancient to use as a reference for Wikipedia?

Thank you much. I am at my wit's end on on some of these questions. Look at me not signing again for the gazillionth time. Oyy. But I remembered another Q: there was talk a while back on the Shia page about making it look more like an encyclopedia article and basing it on the same style as the article on Ismailism. Has that much already been done? What is left to do? PinkWorld (talk) 09:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I have been using the "sandbox" to check anything that I do to a Wikipedia article before I actually do it. When I tried to ^{[unreliable source?]} something last night, the [unrelable source?] tag was followed by a line break, even though I had not writted a br tag. Of course, now that I have tested it again, it works just fine. *rolling eyes* I live, I learn. I might just have figured out how to reference in this proces, btw.

Thank you so much for your pointers on sources and your notes on the progress of the Shia article. What kinds of specific things do you hope to see? My interest is very biased: I want to try to reference 12er Shia beliefs and practises according to sources authentic to the religion - not just secularist or non-Muslim academic perspectives. That is why I am trying to find out which Ayatullahs have been accepted in the academic world and on which topics.

Btw, how do I do this talkback thing? The more popular way of sending messages seems to be to reply on one's own page and send someone some sort of trackback, but I have no idea what on earth a trackback is, how to use one, and how to find and respond to one. I don't even have trackback enabled on my blog because I am so behind the times on this.

PinkWorld (talk) 04:28, 14 January 2009 (UTC)sister Pink[reply]

Sources: I think that Ayatullah Shahid Sadr might have written some books related to `aqidah. Would he be accepted as an academic source for SHia Islamic theology? Also, when referring to fiqh, are the risalas of maraja` accepted? I think that they might be considered in the same views as the Qur'an (primary source texts for religion) and therefore need to be referred to and analysed by academic scholars? I'm not sure on this one.

PinkWorld (talk) 06:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

In the case of the Shia Islam article, I just wanted to get information from the sources that are as close to the sect as possible. I don't actually have any complaints about the article. It's just a challenge that I put out there for myself to see if I could do it.

:::Progress of article: I do not feel that I know very much about the similarities among the various sects of Shia Islam. What sections are left on the Shia Islam areticle that are specific to one sect or another?

un-indent: Sounds good. Not sure how much longer I will last tonight, but am already looking at Islam article. From what you have mentioned, reducing some sections might be necessary? If so, it might be necessary to ascertain that information from those sections is already in some other article or is completely necessary. See, my brain is already shutting down - redudancy is setting in. When I do have to call it a night, I will try to give you a head's up. PinkWorld (talk) 07:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

To revert, does one click "undo" from the history section? PinkWorld (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Omigoodness I did it, wow. :) I think that Hertz beat me to another one, though. PinkWorld (talk) 06:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Shia Islam Article[edit]

The "Branches" section does indeed seem too expansive. I would be more inclined to have only an introductary summary of each branch. I can already see from cross-referencing some of the subsections of the Twelver section with other articles that "Shia Islam" has more information in some of these sections than is in those other linked articles. Some transfers might be in order. How does the Ismaili section match up with its linked articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by PinkWorld (talk • contribs) 07:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC) :p @ sinebot hmf PinkWorld (talk) 08:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

In addition to loss of information and necessity of transferring information to external articles would be the treatment of beliefs and practises in the article once those lists of beliefs and practises are deleted or shortened in the "Branches" section. Should a discussion of beliefs and practises precede a discussion of branches? PinkWorld (talk) 08:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

At this point, I have to follow your lead and let me know what I might be able to do. I can tell you that I have access to next to no resources, being in a small town in the US with a small-town library. The one time that I donated a Qur'an to our library, it "disappeared" within a year or two, so there are currently no decent books on Islam there. We have the 1998 Encyclopædia Britannica and another reference book dealing with religions (Oxford or something reliable like that). There are some Tabataba'i academic-type texts online, though the page numbers are not necessarily marked. Beyond that, I would have to rely on Google Books for references. I am something of a grammar geek, though, and usually able to spot a typo or spelling mistake. My Wiki-code is still very, very shaky. I am getting better at it, though. Let me know what the next move is. PinkWorld (talk) 08:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

What to do first: compose new section(s) on beliefs & practises, or send pieces of information to other articles, or some other thing that I have missed? It looks as if the section "Concept of Imamah" will end up *inside* a section on beliefs? Me so clueless! PS I did not know that LA had so many Iranians! But I have heard that there are not many practising Shia Muslims throughout California and that there is something of a lack of decent resident `alims. It is only word of mouth, though, so I have no idea what the real deal is. PinkWorld (talk) 09:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Sounds good. I have had my night and should retire for the night. PinkWorld (talk) 09:22, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

m`a salama and fi aman Allah from the white chick PinkWorld (talk) 09:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Egads! I'm ok with dropping in at Shiachat to ask a question, answer someone else's question, or test myself by challenging someone else; but even when I used to clickity clack away all day at that site some years ago, I felt as if I were surrounded by teenagers. There's nothing wrong with teenagers, mind you, but trying to understand text lingo and having to wade through nonsense one-liners to get at a real dialogue was frustrating. I migrated to RevertMuslimsAssociation. It is insanely late. Why have I not gone to sleep yet?? :s PinkWorld (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Primary Sources: Forty Ahadith by Iamm Khumayni? Tafsir al Mizan by `Allamah Tabataba'i? *not sure* PinkWorld (talk) 09:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I don't have too much trouble with men of any type, actually. I mention my age and weight, and they drop off like dead flies. I've been to AIM and like what I can get from it. These days, though, the Gaza situation east up a lot of my time, so I only go to one or two places before I jump right back into newsy sites. If I don't call it a night, my body will force me to. See you tomorrow; khuda hafiz. PinkWorld (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Any progress in terms of organising the Shia article? I feel stuck because I am so unfamiliar with the beliefs and practises of Shia sects other than the Ithna Ashari. This means that I owuld have no idea how to generalise the beliefs and practises of Shia Islam in terms of what is common to us all. Also, will the layout of the Shia Islam article need to be changed? PinkWorld (talk) 07:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

You mean that you plan to make an archive of the article, right? I am transferring material from the twelver section to various other twelver-related articles so that it will not be lost. I know that the article Twelver (and other Shia/Twelver articles) are a complete mess and hope to get stuff done on them, as well. By the time that I get done with some of these things, the material that I transferred might evaporate. But I am a methodological purist and just want to get the stuff over there before I work on it. PinkWorld (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

taqlidi ≠ usuli? PinkWorld (talk) 08:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I have copied everything that I want to from the Twelver section to other articles. PinkWorld (talk) 08:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I almost wonder if one could swipe the history from Ismailism through section 2.1 and past it into the Twelver article. By sheer coincidence, my brain has just shut down. I need to hit the sack. Naturally, just when I wanted to move from tagging stuff to fleshing out articles. *sigh* PinkWorld (talk) 09:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I finally found something that I have been looking for. I fact, I think that I had been searching for it for years. Momen's book has a listing and description of the usual ad-din and furu ad-din, all within a few pages. I scratched a mangled reference onto the Twelver article and plan to retire very, very soon to bed. Tomorrow, I want to make all effort in spite of our nasty midwestern freeze o get to the library where I have modern amenities such as javascript, Adobe Acrobat, flash, shockwave, etc. so that I can read the Google book for myself instead of just googling phrases from the book and piecing them together. How much material might be left on the Shia Islam article when you have finished re-organising it? Will it be worth the time to try to find references for various assertions made there? PinkWorld (talk) 08:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I saw places where I Wanted to drop a tag. I shal sleep on it, inshallah, and see how I feel about it tomorrow. Inshallah I Can make it to the library. PinkWorld (talk) 09:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

ChitChat[edit]

Egads, I know! This salafist nonsense has really torn the Sunni Muslim world apart. I is really sad to see them fall away from traditional scholarship just because these new Qur'an thumpers are so charismatic. Charismatic? Or perhaps just well-funded enough to drown out the voices of traditional Sunni Islamic scholarship. PinkWorld (talk) 08:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

The Athari thing was new on me. I wonder if it has nto become popular within the past five years? That is how long I was out of hte loop. It wasn't until just a few months ago that I realised that Athari is just a fancy way of saying Salafist. Btw, what has been your biggest complaint wth Ghazzali? PinkWorld (talk) 09:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

sillyQ: I saw some people in Texas who wore uniformly variant headscarves - they were all the same, but definitely distinctive from most twelver headscarf styles. Is that particular to Ismailis in general, or to a particuar subset? PinkWorld (talk) 09:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I met some brothers from among them, then, when I did the college thing several years ago. They are very cool folk. I wish that there were some way of strengthening fraternal bonds between them and the Ithna Ashari. Th fraternal vibes that I got off them were very heartwarming. You are very likely the first Nizari Ismaili towards whome I have felt sisterly, mashallah - though that could simply be lack of previous significant exposure. Must sleep. Take care; khuda hafiz (nothing wrong with m`a salama, no?) PinkWorld (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Ya Allah, I miss my books!! :`( Nothing that I want has been scanned online! PinkWorld (talk) 05:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Actually, I have been googling the heck out of books and authors that I have been seeing in the references section of the Shia Islam article. I think that I have found a hit. My computer is a dinosaur, but I can use the sesrch function on Google Books to ontain text that I want to a certain extent. I am in "An Introduction to Islam..." by Mojan Momen right now. Trying to get access to `Allamah Tababai's Overview of Shia Islam (or similar) has been hell. I actually own that book, but it is in another state hundreds or thousands of miles from me. PinkWorld (talk) 06:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Haan, ji, I have it (ye mera pas?) saved to my computer. It is a very fine text alhamdulillah that perhaps I can use after I fill out these lists of usul ad-din and furu ad-din inshallah. PinkWorld (talk) 06:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Oops, my bad. I forgot that jaan is both Farsi and Urdu. PinkWorld (talk) 08:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

You know that I have turned into a zombie when I forget that the first half of your ID actually refers to your ethnicity/language. Big phat duh moment for me. My apologies for being half blind. One of the things that Western converts to Islam go through is a sort of mixing o various cultures until they come out with something that works for them. I know one lady who now adds curry to her spaghetti sauce; and I enjoy wearing shalwar khamiz *but* under an abaya. And, of course, being a language fan, I like to pick up little words and phrases from around the world. PinkWorld (talk) 09:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I wondered about Ahmadinejad: why can't he wear respectable Iranian clothing? I'm not sure if he is properly Hawzified to wear robes and stuff, but he could at least don the traditional shirt & pants. I miss President Khatami in a big phat way, can you tell. I have indeed seen some people swing radically Desi after converting. However, I did attend a mosque where I saw a lot of mixing (including of American and even Asian culture), and another where even converts to Shia Islam jumped into Arabic culture and looked down on converts who did not as if we were somehow not Muslim enough. I was surprised to get that kind of attitude from Shia Muslims. You are totally right about the salafists. Ugh. But what about Afghanis? Don't they do a decent job of preserving their culture? Does it help not to have us converts diving all up into it like the latest fad?

Must Sleep. Khuda hafiz, see you tomorrow inshallah. PinkWorld (talk) 09:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Have you done work on the Wiki article for Afghanistan? Your post on my Talk page was a very interesting read. Is Afghanistan covered in *any* news source such that one could keep abreast of Western crimes against humanity there? Wires? Local media sources online in English? Something? When Palestine falls off the mainstream media radar, I use an indy media source and a news outlet based on Gaza that has a decent English service. Btw, I finally got to see the pic that you have on your front page, and I like. Any background to it? PinkWorld (talk) 21:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Shia Islam Article Renovation[edit]

Allahumma Salli `ala Muhammad wa Aale Muhammad! I have got such texts! I did some Google Booking and copy-pasting, so I have a bunch of stuff alhamdulillah; and now I am writing my hand off copying whatever little tiny bit our backwoods library has (and has not been tossed in the trash by extremists who "borrowed" certain books). I really should go now and get back to work. PinkWorld (talk) 17:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Holy Cats you did a bunch! I need some help. Can you explain/summarise for me which beliefs are held in common among all Shia Muslims? I don't need anything long (yet), just a mention of the names/titles/IDs of the doctrines that we all hold in common. Imamate comes to mind, and not much after that. I feel helpless not knowing this bit of information. Thank you for all of your hard work. PinkWorld (talk) 17:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

I have copy-pasted/typed in everything that I was able to get from the web and out bitty library. How might I share that file with others who are interested? Also, do you mean that tawhid, `adl, nubuwwah, imamah, and qiyyamah are all common to the various sects of Shi`ah Islam? PinkWorld (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Perhaps those beliefs (and, in time, practises) that are in common with Sunni Islam could be mentioned in passing as a lead to the beliefs section? I cannot stay to do anything significant - I have to get offline to free up the phone. Be back later, inshallah. PinkWorld (talk)Pink —Preceding undated comment was added at 22:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

txt file @ http://www.geocities.com/pinkownworld/TemporaryArchives/WikiShiaIslamSrcTxt.txt couldn't figure out other site with dino computer; khuda hafiz jaanu —Preceding unsigned comment added by PinkWorld (talk • contribs) 22:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL[edit]

Why'd you remove the comments on that talk page? Ogress _smash! 02:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ya ukhti![edit]

Hey sister! (ey håkhar, rite? In Dari, I mean. What is it in Pashto?) Guess who started the mass revamp of the Qarmatian article? ME! Woot for new sources (which I haven't finished sourcing yet). Ogress _smash! 02:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Umar at Fatimah's house[edit]

Do you mind re-writing the article yourself? I can't write it any other way. Dhrh (talk) 14:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason why the Sunni sources should be removed. Dhrh (talk) 13:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updated article[edit]

Hello I have up-dated, an article Nainawaz Request to Afghan members please keep an eye and also see if you guys can expand this article.

Thanks.

Bye.

Alishah85 (talk) 07:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The source provided on article Sarban[edit]

The source provided in article Sarban singer is fully made up and it does not exists. There is no such book written by Professor Enayatullah Shahrani (Dean of the Fine Arts Faculty of Kabul University) (1999). Bazmeh Ghazal, that mentions Sarban. Its all lies. My source is not youtube but rather RTA National television of Afghanistan which is famous and it was this same TV which made him famous, and he also sings in both Pashtu and Dari. He is Afgan. Alishah85 (talk) 09:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alishah85 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Re:[edit]

Unfortunately, I'm just passing by. I won't be able to monitor or edit much. However, I hope you can check this out. There must be something I'm missing because it's getting absurd. Dhrh (talk) 14:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anas ibn Malik died when Abu Hanifa was 10 years old. How is he supposed to have transmitted hadith from him? Dhrh (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:from Hiram111[edit]

Hey Pashtun Ismailiyya well yes I am, and sure anytime. t.c « Hiram111^{ΔTalK Δ} 19:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ZOMG[edit]

Teleportation in Islam. End of comment. *googly eyes* Ogress _smash! 04:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to ride it out, but finally I couldn't resist hitting the "AfD" button. It's just too much, I can't have that on Wikipedia no more, it's embarassing. Ogress _smash! 08:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent Work[edit]

The Barnstar of Diligence

for your excellent work on articles pertaining to Islamic and Iranic studies.

--Nepaheshgar (talk) 04:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You deserved it. By the way I have contributed a little bit to Nasir Khusraw. He was indeed a great intellectual. I think the article can one day become featured if the right time and energy is expended on it. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 05:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nasir Khusraw's poetry is widely read in Iran. So is his safarnama. His philosophical works are unfortunately less known, but I have some of them as well. Interestingly enough, unlike most works of philosophy, all of his philosophical works are in Persian and they use a fairly clear and straightforward Persian. Overall, I appreciate anyone with spiritual and moral depth regardless of sect or religion. Nasir Khusraw is very unique in the sense that he was an expert not only in poetry, but also in mathematics and philosophy. His book on mathematics has been lost. His works, specially poetry have printed many times and also are thought in Iranian schools. I am not sure if they mention he was Ismai'li or not in the school age, but everyone knows it once they reach a college age. I added one of his poems to the wiki article and found an interesting translation too.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is his poetry online [16]. Actually in terms of style, he is the only Persian poet that is very very unique and no one has dared to imitate his style. For example Ferdowsi (who could also be possibly an Ismaili and was definitely Shi'i), was copied by later poets who try to imitate him. Same with Nizami (who followed Ferdowsi and then had lots of imitators), Attar/Sanai who were followed by Rumi, Hafez.. but Naser Khusraw for some reason has created a very unique style (Sa'adi also) and no one has tried to imitate his poetry. This is one of my favorite ones: [17] --Nepaheshgar (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re-ordering of Living Marjas without discussion/references[edit]

Dear All, it was agreed upon by the authors of the article List of Marjas:

The list would not be re-ordered, and any names will not be removed without giving references or discussions.
The order of the list for living Marjas would be alphabetical, and for deceased Marjas would be reverse chronological, until all agree on a better standard.

The two things which require discussion are:

The list has been shrunk from 24 to 18 without any discussions and references. The removal of reputed marjas like Nasser Makarem Shirazi, Qorban Ali Kaboli, etc requires some justification. Please discuss on the article's discussion page.
The list has been re-ordered with apparently no standard at all, e.g. Ali Khamenei was moved to last. Please discuss on the article's discussion page.

NEDian (talk) 23:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

25 January 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC) Salamz. weve contacted eachother before as you may remember. i was woundering if you could do me a favour and block this user:[reply]

Ar-Rumi Al-Baghdadi

he keeps editing the deobandi page and putting up a lot of nonsense up. id be grateful if you could help me with this. please do reply back thanx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asadakhtar26[edit]

25 January 2009 Salamz. weve contacted eachother before as you may remember. i was woundering if you could do me a favour and block this user:

Ar-Rumi Al-Baghdadi

he keeps editing the deobandi page and putting up a lot of nonsense up. id be grateful if you could help me with this. please do reply back thanx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs)

Revision Progress of Shia Islam[edit]

assalamu `alaykum I keep forgetting to go to the library so that I can GoogleBook more sources for the section on Occultation. I will make it there, honest. PinkWorld (talk) 01:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Deleting Ar-Rumi Al-Baghdadi [edit]

walaikum asalam. sorry it was the ashraf ali thanvi page he keeps editing and putting up a load of nonsense. he told him many times but he just doesnt listen. BLOCK HIM! lol thanks!

where u from by the way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool . how do you do that? excuse my ignorance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hey, thanks for adding the references to the talk page at Talk:Discrimination against atheists. I'm a little curious how you responded so quickly. Have you been observing the dispute? AzureFury (talk | contribs) 01:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bism.gif listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bism.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. JaGa^talk 19:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alishah85[edit]

Hi Pashtun Ismailiyya,

I do not trust checkuser and I am sure that Alishah was not Beh-nam. But he was certainly a sockpuppet (as one can tell from his edits, writing style, etc), and telling from what he had posted on certain talk pages, he was not a big support for the project. He propagated racist and pseudo-scientific theories without giving any reliable sources. He even pushed ofr the Joshua Project. Tājik (talk) 15:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gah[edit]

I don't know, but there have been so many of them recently. Srsly. Happy Jum3ah. Ogress _smash! 21:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we have to move niqāb to niqab, etc. Someone keeps moving plaintext to macron-marked ones and I'm not sure how to fix it. How do you mark for speedy-delete so as to move those pages? Otherwise I'd have already done them. Ogress _smash! 21:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

Hi Pashtun Ismailiyya. I was wondering if you had any time to spice up Template:Sunni Islam in the same way you did with Template:Islam and others because that one in particular is looking a bit run down. I was also wondering whether it's a good idea to have the basmala on templates as with Template:Shia Islam, as it's not something that has been applied consistently and I'm not sure as to the need for it anyway. Regards, ITAQALLAH 18:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shia Islam Article[edit]

assalamu `alaykum, sister Long time no login :s but I finally have been able to get some more copy-pastes from Google books. When I get home, I will try to get them to you. PinkWorld (talk) 19:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

salam I am now encountering many things in which I disagree with the author. Right now, though, I am exhausted and care more about getting everyting online and over to you. http://www.geocities.com/pinkownworld/TemporaryArchives/IntroShiiIslamMomen.txt PinkWorld (talk) 05:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

assalamu `alaykum
Are you ok? If so, then mabruk! :) I have been wondering if the article should cover beliefs not so much in an exclusionary fashion but in an inclusive fashion - but only for core beliefs, not the tangentals or incidentals that belong in spin-off articles. Thoughts? PinkWorld (talk) 08:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah
Just curious - how does an Afghani wedding differ from Iranian, Pakistani, etc. weddings?

Why tragedy? I have heard less than rave reviews from people who did a Pakistani-style wedding, but after some counselling, they recovered ;) PinkWorld (talk) 06:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah
Sister, there is some guy who thinks that he is going to restruture the Shia Islam article. Can you have a look, please? PinkWorld (talk) 05:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]

Your eye, please[edit]

Hello PI-yya, can you keep an eye on Ruhollah Khomeini please? Some IP keeps removing stuff he doesn't like, including the idea that Khomeini learned mathematics when he was young, which is directly sourced from Moin, or that Khomeini was really popular. It is silly, but alas, until he tires of it or gets blocked the information might get removed again. I do hope you can help, thank you. A baby turkey ^{[citation needed]} 01:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam[edit]

This Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam if you can.

Signing so this gets archived. --♥pashtun ismailiyya 23:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A-Class discussion[edit]

Hi, we're starting the discussion on A-Class here today, thanks for signing up! I hope you can present your views. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 07:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Sistani[edit]

Thanks for the assist in re: Wikipedia:MOSISLAM issh on Sistani. Now for the hard part: getting it moved to "Ali Sistani" instead of "Grand Ayatollah...", which is warranted as well. Some of them have been moved by others, some by me, but Sistani is going to be a pain. Ogress _smash! 04:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't flag it, I just asked for move-deletion on that page. Go ahead and ask for an admin move... Ogress _smash! 04:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Err... they declined to fast-delete the redirect so I could move the page. "No consensus on talk page". Um, what? I gave them the reason that honourifics are not used in page titles. Grr. I told you this would be a pain... Ogress _smash! 07:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I managed to get it done by listing it on Admin Uncontested - which it is, of course - and having someone else do the work for me. I wish I knew when it got moved back and by whom... it was actually originally relocated to Ali al-Sistani as far back as 2006 for the explicitly listed reason of no titles. Ogress _smash! 12:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... aaaand we're back[edit]

... to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. *sigh* Ogress _smash! 09:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Occultation[edit]

Hey, I removed that bit about the Occultation because no living Ismaili group believes it. The Qarmatians did, true. In light of your point, is there a way to restructure the sentence to make it clear it is an archaic belief? The sentence reads as if "Ismailis" believe it, but the link is to an article that starts by saying that Ismailis and Zaydis don't believe in Occultation! I ran into the sentence and it was like a brick wall, I was like, "Whaaat? That's totally wrong!" Opinions? Ogress _smash! 13:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some Jerk is Impersonating You[edit]

User:Pashtun lsmaiIiyya. I've reported and stuff, but you should keep tabs. Ogress _smash! 01:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pashtun people[edit]

Why are you removing the pic of a Pashtun man from the article? You have doubts about him being Pashtun? Well, the article is about people and not about history,,,, to be having only historical pics. We need some "good quaity" pics there. I am a photographer and I'm not in love with people in pics but the quality of the pic or shots. Please control yourself this is just article building. Everything that people want to know is available online so POVs are just waste of time. As a Pashtun myself, I'm not here to make my people better than others. It's not like Wikipedia is the only place to get info.--Omidirani (talk) 07:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that anyone can put their pic up. We could always determine which pic is ok and which is not. But how long do we have to wait in order to find a good quality pic of a prominent young Pashtun? Also, I'm not the guy in the pic.--Omidirani (talk) 07:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll accept the pics as they show now but please if you can keep eye on them because there is this one guy who has a habit of trying to bash Pashtuns. I find him every site I visit, including Youtube. I just laugh at his dumb ass. Anyway, are you ugly that you wouldn't put your pic in Wikipedia? J/k, you should put your pic on your page, haha.--Omidirani (talk) 07:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

...for noticing me. I've seen some of your work, as we have edited several of the same articles, and I'm very flattered that you took the time to leave me a message. In fact, I do already have an account and username (with over 5,000 edits) but I haven't logged in for several months and am embarrassed by my absence, so now I'm hiding behind an IP. I will make a point of logging in soon, and when I do I will introduce myself properly. Until then, please keep up your most excellent efforts on behalf of the encyclopedia! 67.173.185.224 (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That didn't take long. Several pages I'm interested in are locked against IP edits, and your invitation was enough to push me into logging in. First, it's a pleasure to "meet" you. Second, please don't let my username mislead you, I don't actually have a doctorate in any subject, "Doc" is just a nickname I've had for decades. I noticed the RfC at Iran, regarding the Middle Ages section, and I'm in the process of reviewing all the material before making comment. It seems you are on the right path regarding some sort of balance between the two sides, and I look forward to more in-depth discussion with you on the talkpage. Doc Tropics 17:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on Islam[edit]

Thank you for taking note of me (and for stepping up to my defence at, that!) and my edits. I'm glad to help out Wikipedia insofar as I am able.

I actually know very little about Islam, as it were, and primarily came across those pages in my attempt to learn more; after all, how can an educated man—as I like to consider myself—not be at least somewhat informed on a religion which has so many followers worldwide and which is at the centre of so much of today's news? That is how I came to make my edits: I've noticed so much vandalism on this site that, my general hatred of POV down-throat-forcing notwithstanding, it's become nearly impossible for the uninformed (like me) to make heads or tails of the whole thing. How are we, for example, to be able to distinguish genuine Shia doctrine from propaganda planted in an article by overzealous Shia Muslims... or from Sunni propaganda, for that matter?

Would that we who are parched for knowledge would be able to quench our thirst from an unpolluted stream! Am I too naïve for thinking that that may someday be possible?

On second thought: don't answer that. RavShimon (talk) 00:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]