Jump to content

User talk:Zora: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Aucaman (talk | contribs)
→‎Siddiqui RfC: Kurdish category
Line 616: Line 616:


[[Image:England_flag_large.png|20px]] [[User:AMbroodEY|अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey]] [[Image:India_flag_large.png|20px]] 08:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[[Image:England_flag_large.png|20px]] [[User:AMbroodEY|अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey]] [[Image:India_flag_large.png|20px]] 08:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

==Kurdish politician category==
Hey thanks for you keeping an eye on the [[Persian people]] article. I also thought you might be interested in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7BKurd-politician-stub.7D.7D_.2F_Cat:Kurdish_politician_stubs this]. Seems like another attempt to limit the expansion of Kurdish-related articles. [[User:Aucaman|'''Aucaman''']]<sup>[[User_talk:Aucaman|Talk]]</sup> 13:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:22, 16 March 2006


Language

If my language is not encyclopedic then change my words don't revert my work. We need to make pages longer so it defines wikipedia's hard work.

Rani Mukerji

I knew i would find a source where they call Rani the QUEEN OF HEARTS. Actually, whenever they interview her, they call her the QUEEN OF HEARTS which was referred to Sridevi in her days. Aishwarya Rai is called the Queen Of Bollywood and so is Rani Mukerji again. It's a bit confusing. But usually they call her Queen of Hearts as she is a very nice person. Here's the source: [1] By the way, Zora, i found another new fact, Rani didn't change her last name bcoz of numerological reasons but because ‘Mukerji’ is the name on her passport and birth certificate. Here's the source for that: [2] Read the whole interview and find it for yourself. Thanks for your time. You rock!

DID Edits

Thanks for giving me feedback on my discussion. I tried to look at the history page and got completely confused (I'm new). It seemed from the discussion that people were confusing the concept of the disorder (a group of symptoms that appear together and impair functioning)with the idea of causation. Hence the "DID is caused by abuse -- I was abused and I have DID" vs. "I have DID, too, and I wasn't abused so it can't be caused by abuse" argument, which seems to have nothing to do about whether or not people's symptoms are genuine. I'm somewhat of a subscriber to the iatrogenic-socialization theory myself, in the sense that people in the US with certain therapists tend to use DID/MPD as a way to describe the symptoms of the distress they're feeling. It's real distress, the question is just what construct you use to describe it -- if you're a victim of war, you're told it's PTSD; if you're a victim of child abuse and/or you go to certain therapists, you're told it's MPD/DID. So could people agree that there is a specific set of symptoms that is labelled DID? And then discuss theories of causation and appropriate therapies? Or is that too POV?JenniSue 02:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your efforts.

I for one thank you for your efforts in sticking with the Rajput page and although a lot of baseless unpleasantries were focussed on you by the extremist Hindus, I am sure the real Hindu brothers and sister on Wikipedia saw through the real genuine effort you displayed in trying to resolve this difficult issue. The arbitration is over and Im glad the result was seen for what it was, a bunch of childish bigots not prepared to work with others for the betterment of enlightening others on our culture and traditions. Unfortunately, I think Rajputs are now seen more as a quarelling bunch rather than what we try and say we are, lol. In fact I think this is an example of whats been going on between Rajputs for the past few centuries, they never unite and probably never will.

Thank you once again and keep up the good work friend. :) Raja

Zora, your efforts as always are appreciated and I can only thank you for your troubles. I have done some language cleaning up which I believe was very unencyclopedic such as 'treacheerously' and 'crushed' etc which I believe was left over from the previous 'editors'. I want to keep the feel of this article essentially Hindu which I dont/havent disputed, just that the reference to Muslim Rajputs be mentioned fairly and without bias or agenda that they do exist and still retain their ancetral pride and zeal. It took an arbcom to have this seen,lol! --Raja 22:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle of Karbala

Okay Zora I agree but according to Shias there were only 72 people with imam hussain but I am naming atleast 100 people. I you want u can move around all hundred names but please do not delete them. You can format anyway you want but please do not delete them. Thank You!

Links in Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) article

I must confess that I am now totally disappointed with wikipedia, with its inconsistancies and biases. Earlier, I had some hope in its success as a useful intellectual resource but now I feel that specially in reference to Muslims its only a new orientalist instrument. On one hand you are preaching me the manners of references, on the other hand when I asked you to check wiki/israel for 'Annotated list of Israeli media sources' which contains references to other languages resources, your consciounce didn't stir. Similarly, by only looking at the head lines one can guess the so called non-sectarian or unbiased pearls of wisdom. Anyway, I no longer want to deal with wikipedia and beleive that as Muslims we don't need its reference concerning Islamic articles. Thanks(Falcon007 08:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Islam and veneration for Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)

Certainly Iqbal is dear to me, so is he to all the muslim world. As countless poets have praised prophet (pbuh), similarly counless people have written biographies of Prophet (pbuh). Why references from only two? Or why only a handful so called "non-sectarian" links. Please, do as you wish and be happy. I should get going and don't want to disturb your concentration.(Falcon007 08:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Rydia and I just watched this today. Thanks for the suggestion.. first Tamil movie I've seen (I think). All the others have been Hindi. In any case, I quite enjoyed it. Not as good as Devdas (2002) but good. Thanks for the recommendation... we started to watch Tampopo but the VHS quality in our library was horrible... so, I'm going to try to find the DVD. gren グレン ? 23:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

STOP ERASING MY WORK FROM THE BATTLE OF KARBALA

ZORA, PLEASSEEE STOP ERASING MY WORK FROM THE BATTLE OF KARBALA IT TOOK ME A LOT OF TIME TO DO IT. IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT, I AM TALKING ABOUT THE NAMES OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO SCARIFIED THEIR LIVES FOR IMAM HUSSAIN! I THINK I KNOW ABOUT THESE THINGS MORE THEN YOU, OK N THERE R OTHER ARTICLES THAT U CAN EDIT IF U LIKE TO. THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING!

Robert Stanek

You recently left a comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruin Mist about articles related to the author Robert Stanek. You may like to know that the page on the man himself is now up for deletion; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Stanek. I avoided merging the two together as I felt that the arguments for deleting the pages on the fiction didn't quite apply to the page on the writer, but thought it best to let you know in case you wanted to participate in this related discussion. Shimgray | talk | 01:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AIV vs VIP

Hi Zora. I noticed you added an entry to Vandalism in Progress. That page is only for very specific cases, as described by the page's guidelines. Your alert would be better placed on Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV), where it will usually be processed within minutes. Many alerts that are incorrectly placed on Vandalism in Progress are never dealt with, simply because they become old before an administrator gets to them. Thanks for your efforts. :) As a side note, the user has since been blocked. --lightdarkness (talk) 04:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, but it looks like the admin I asked to do the block ran off somewhere. I've listed it now on WP:AIV, so it should be taken care of shortly. --lightdarkness (talk) 04:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There we go! Now they've been blocked. Although, the admin that took care of it only blocked for 24 hours, but I'll be sure to watch the user for all edits. Cheers! --lightdarkness (talk) 05:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I understand much better now. If I could figure out how to award you a hand-dyed alpaca lace star, I would. JenniSue 05:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aishwarya Picture from Devdas

Hi, Zora. :) About that Ash-Picture which is distorted: I checked it and it looked completely fine to me. Not really print quality, but okay, sooooo ... this may sound a little bit weird, but what do you see when looking at it? I see her in her blue saree from Devdas sitting on a chair. The large version of it is a tiny mit pixel-ish, but quite fine and the small pic of it in the article itself is absolutely okay. --Plumcouch 00:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elongated as in "stretched"? (You see English's not my first tongue as you have probably noticed). We *are* talking about this pic of her, right? -->Ash I mean it's not perfect (see certain parts of the background), but one can see and identify her, right? And I used CTRL-F5 to load the newest version of it after emptying my cache and it still looking fine. I uploaded it this afternoon after that Dell-guy vandalized it and it's the same Devdas-picture that has been in the article earlier. --Plumcouch 00:20, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it looks okay to you, too, I'm going to add it again. Maybe it's a Wiki problem, dunno. --Plumcouch 00:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't issue a legal threat. I made a statement that comments by Zeraeph and JenniSue were bordering on liable. That's not a threat. --Mjformica 00:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Liablous statements and legal liable are two different things. I thought you were a wordsmith? --Mjformica 00:16, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Article

Hi Zora,

The sentence "Nowadays, Ali's legacy of courage and valor lives on with Muslims, naming Pakistan's top military award of courage and valor as 'Medal of the Lion' (Pakistani: Nishan-E-Haider)" is a truth. Muslims concede this. Whether Ali was courageous or not is another story. Of course, Muslims love to praise (and sometimes exaggerate about) their beloveds. I don’t care if this passage is added to the article or not. But be sure that “Pakistan's top military award” is just one simple example. One can show you a huge list of such things. Good night --Aminz 02:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, Nishan-E-Haider may be an exception. But in general what I said is true I think.--Aminz 02:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Better to say "Nowadays, Ali's legacy of courage and valor lives on with Muslims" is true :D --Aminz 02:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Quoting Iqbal

Thanks for your concern. I didn't only quote Iqbal, but also Saadi and Al-Busiri to show that a whole mode of poetry exists to praise Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh). The quotations are from a translation of Iqbal's work and is available for research purpose without copyright protection. And its historical text which for quotation purposes don't require copyrights. These books were published in 1920s --Falcon007 04:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't see how quoting one or two verses make it a copy right voilation, if this is the case then perhaps every history or scholarly work is illegal. We quote people and give references. This is the whole idea of citing references. If this is not the case there wouldn't have been any education at all. --Falcon007 11:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • You were right. Actually I took your comment that I am determined to quote Iqbal's poetry a little seriously. It is true that I am his fan but this was not my base to quote him. He was unarguably the greatest Muslim poet and philosopher of the 20th centuary and thus was most relevent for the purpose. I will check with Iqbal Academy if his books and the translations could be made available at wikisource. But the problem with this is that what if we quote from wiki source and thing is not there :-) --Falcon007 11:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • One could indeed argue that he ISN'T the greatest poet and philosopher. That's your belief, not a fact accepted by all people. Suppose I think that Fazlur Rahman is the greatest philosopher? Zora 12:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure, we can't convince people to accept facts. Its freedom of expression. If some one beleives that Canda is in Africa, what can you do about it? He might tell you some interesting geophysical theories about the validity of his arguments. --Falcon007 14:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think its fuitless to discuss this issue any further. I am hungry let me get some Tandori Chicken. --Falcon007 15:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh by the way, you seem to enjoy reading, this is the poem for today Mosque of Cordova [3]. Its a translation from Bali-i-Jibril. --Falcon007 15:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OpenIslampedia

Salams/Greetings,

As a member of the Wikipedia community who has contributed to articles related to Islam, I thought you might be interested in a project I am trying to get going: OpenIslampedia. Please visit the site for more information.

While it is permissible to re-use content from Wikipedia (as long as it is cited appropriately and released under their GNU Free Documentation License), it is my hope that we will be able to develop new content for OpenIslampedia, more in accordance to the needs and desires of our community and audience.

Interested? Please consider joining us! As you probably know from working in Wikipedia, every contribution counts, no matter how small.

Ulises Ali Mejias

Imitation is the highest form of flattery

See User:Zora1. Pepsidrinka 21:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I was actually looking for the Austrian politician Jörg Haider when I came accross it, but it looked like it could use some TLC! I've fixed all the inward redirects and added any other Haydars I could find on Wikipedia (no red links though, I guess I could go back and fix that :) I'm not sure that Heydar Aliyev is actually the same name, but someone else can remove him if necessary. As for the shi'as, I deliberately didn't state whether Ali ibn Abi Talib was the first or the forth caliph... but you have at least explained why the page is in Category:Islam. Physchim62 (talk) 01:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora, How are you doing? I have a request. I would be thankful if you allow me to quote your beautiful law somewhere: "There is no belief so pure or so rational that it can't be degraded into utter nonsense by fuggheaded supporters". Thanks --Aminz 06:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would be grateful if you could ask. I really liked the law. THANK YOU SO MUCH. --Aminz 09:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora this refers to article Nishan-e-Hayder & Imam Ali.

I edited both pages with text that Nishan-e-Hayder is associated with Imam Ali but it was removed. i dont think so that i have done something wrong or misguided the people. This is fact. Of course with out any doubt Nishan-e-Hayder is assiociated with Imam Ali. T The word 'Hayder' is one of the name of Imam Ali. His mother Fatima binte Asad named him Hayder which means Lion.

I am mentioning two links below for your review.

I am Pakistani National and you can ask any Muslim (Shia/Sunni) group for confirmation.

View the following links:

http://www.pafcombat.com/misc/gallantry-awards.htm http://www.geocities.com/salman4paf/Operational_Awards.html


Please take notice and do the required so that proper definition is made over wikipedia. Zaidi 16:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I haven't given you a barnstar yet

A Barnstar!
The Editor's Barnstar

So here it is, in recognition of tireless editing, fairness and righteous anger on Islam-related articles. The first I have ever given, by the way ;) Palmiro

Jamshid

apologies for my accidental deletion of the link to Jamshid (musician). It was a copy-paste oversight. Sorry again. - Fullstop 08:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your opinion por favor?

could you please take a look at this mediation case if you get a second? Thanks - Fullstop 08:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bounties

Greetings! You recently helped get the Battle of Badr article featured - thanks! I wanted to make you aware that I have bounties out on several other articles pertinent to Muslim history: Al-Nahda, Akbar, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Mohammed Mossadegh, and, tangentially, Bank of Credit and Commerce International. All these articles are in relatively good condition, but just need a little push to get them featured. A total of $130 is on the line. Are you up for it? – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 13:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jamshed page

I agree to your proposed changes to Jamshed page. You can delete the existing info in that page. You should point to Jamshed Town page. Siddiqui 14:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Allah2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Allah2.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|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 want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 05:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics of Islam

I simply re-instated the template which says that the content of the page is not supported by the references. And it's true. I have made my position very clear on the talk page - the facts reported are simply not verifiable and are very misleading. I hope to address each of your particular points later, and work towards a constructive resolution to the serious problems the article faces. I've already made my initial suggestion on the talk page. In the meantime you have failed to address any of the points I have made about verifiability and POV. I asked you to provide a source for the 103 countries whose Muslim populations the article says are constituted entirely (to the person) of Sunnis. You haven't because you can't. This breaks a fundamental policy of this encyclopedia. I'll also ask, does the lack of a mention a figure for Sunni constitute a fact? -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does. If the CIA World Factbook says that (just to make up a case) the population of a country is 72% Roman Catholic, 23% various Protestant, and and 3% Jewish, there's no reason to believe that there's some huge population of Hindus that the Factbook is covering up. If it says that the population of Algeria is 99% Sunni Muslim (I just looked this up), then there's no reason to suspect those figures.
That's why I suggested rounding off the figures, so that it's clear that they're exact only to the nearest (whatever) and that groups with less than that (whatever) are going to appear nonexistent. That's why we explicitly have that caveat about the Shi'a being undercounted -- if there are minorities in every country that are too small to appear in the "by country" statistics, overall they might add up to another percentage point. Zora 17:50, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There has been an edit war between CltFn and Garzo here. As I can tell Garzo's version is more accurrate and doesn't needlessly use long quotes from sources that don't say anything profound. If you have time could you look at this and at least weigh in a little on the talk page? Thanks. gren グレン 19:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaii Sovereignty

I'm sorry, but can you enlighten me as to which different individuals governance passed to after the Commitee of Safety? Is there a differnt roll call for the Commitee of Safety, Provisional Government, and Republic of Hawaii? Also, can you tell me why including the fact that the same people that instigated the Bayonet Constitution overthrew the Queen isn't pertinent? If you insist on keeping the current version, I'll have to insist on a complete revision of the paragraph. Jerekrischel insists on detailing the events, I maintain that the events shouldn't be on the page to begin with. Perhaps a rough allusion to the overthrow as under "questionable circumstances" will cure the neutrality issue. Also, since you're claiming that I'm the one with the POV issue, which majority of the islands was discontented with the Monarchy? With the Ku'e petitions that rules out the majority of Hawaiians. The constitution that Liliuokalani was overthrown for wasn't exactly kind to asian rights, which by logic, would exclude the asian majority. So who's left? The europeans? The white settlers? M.ana 02:18, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there was a different roll call between the Commitee of Safety (13 members), the Provisional Government (including Dole who was not a part of the Committee of Saftey), and the Republic of Hawaii. The Provisional Government included an advisory council that the Commitee of Safety did not, and the Republic of Hawaii also had changes in positions, roles and people (although Dole remained President). --JereKrischel 03:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, It just seems like you're stretching a point. The basic structure of members did not change in order to justify the phrase "change of hands". In effect, there was no "change of hands", just a gradual change in names to solidify recognition with the US.M.ana 03:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uhh, ok. Do I need to cite NPOV documentation? According to the NPOV rules that assertion is opinion based and should be backed up with credible references. If you fail to cite references, I will push the issue. M.ana 09:31, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the reference. I'll thank you ahead of time to include it in the context of the text as Mr. Dawes is a controversial author.
While I haven't made up my mind on Mr. Daws, there are others that believe him to be controversial. If you want a specific answer, I'll inquire for you. However, I still think it prudent to cite the source of any adverse views, one way or the other. Case in point, would you mind if I quoted Trask or some other radical and tried to pass it off as fact, all without citing it? BTW, I'm sorry for my edit summary. I wrote it before I saw your reference. M.ana 10:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure

Yeah, I blocked the IP for 48 hours, too. You might want to check his recent contribs, as he made a slough of edits to articles before. I'm fine, except that I apparently managed to spend hours on Wikipedia today, and totally neglected Tacitus. Ugh. Off to bed with me. :) Dmcdevit·t 09:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

zora really i do not know how big ur ass is but the term rafidi came more than 100 yrs after the dead if imam Ali so why u lie a big lie like this and salafi themselfs was not able to proof it so be a nice salafi and learn how to play nice ,, regarding nasibi it is the prophet who told that who hate imam Ali is nasibi so shake the ass baby and play nice --217.17.252.126 12:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: main article-ism

Actually, I was willing to work with you all. I was the one that suggested the information on the overthrow be kept to a minimum so as not to stray too far off topic. I've suggested to you and Jere that we keep that portion short of details. However, if you two insist on maintaining the current article, I feel compelled to explain certain nuances. I'm all for a complete revision of the paragraph in question.M.ana 10:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DP

Just a barrage of questions you may or may not be able to answer:

  1. Have you heard anything else about DP updating the old classics which are for now mostly only in ugly text?
  2. How come there are so few Islam-related texts on Gutenberg (and thus so few coming through DP)? Same goes for religion texts.
  3. How can that change?
  4. How come Gutenberg doesn't display edition numbers, ISBN, or LOC # for many of its texts? You can search per LOC section... but not the specific LOC number for the book--that isn't displayed. Some show the edition inside the text itself. (I know you said the older ones didn't do this so much).
  5. Is there a better resource than Gutenberg at the present time? That's more methodic, perhaps, in its organization?

I think that's all? I really should do more with DP since wiki is semi-fruitless but the work you do preserving texts keeps them in a readable format... if not forever, well, at least for the forseeable future. gren グレン 04:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That dang Michael Hart. The metadata seems pretty important to me. He hasn't struck a compromise in allowing that data but also preserving it in simple ASCII? Apparently not. I might go to the DP boards and try to see what's going on.
I saw something by Edward Sell in P2, that's a good sign. DP-EU has a lot of crazy stuff going on. I have not so eloquently been trying to get some work done on the Lane Lexicon at this thread on their forums. They said "[w]e'll see what will be the easiest way to do this, but we're definitely doing it!" That seems like a good sign but I don't know what they're doing about it... or what I should be doing about it to make them do something about it. I'm quite the newbie when it comes to DP process and think I'd likely only be useful in P1 gruntwork. Which, I don't mind so much.
There are some really great books like Topsy-Turvy Land: Arabia Pictured for Children which has tons of nice old pictures that could be used for Wiki. I want to see more of that kind of thing. If some good Arabic speakers (or at least Arabic script readers) got involved then all of the great old Persian/Arabic/Urdu works could be preserved or, probably more importantly in the short term, accessible. The new html books are actually readable online which is nice... the old ASCII texts are a quite a struggle.
Thanks for the update gren グレン 06:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


That vandal appears to be working from an open proxy which makes it difficult. I checked through his contribs again and I think I got a few more that others didn't get. Just add something to my talk page if you ever seen any more like that and I'll take a look and see if it all merits blocking or reverting or whatnot. Thanks.

I saw a really interesting thread about Google Print harvesting and it linked to a page that linked to Qanoon-e-Islam. That is really neat that they can do projects like that. I am quite a fan. It seems they have a ton of content provided so that looking into things from that end is superfluous unless something is specifically needed. Then again, since I was reading a thread about the weak Islamic output maybe some old books on that are needed. There are only 7 books from LOC category BP! Which is really surprising. gren グレン 07:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article

It'd be something to get on http://english.aljazeera.net/ but http://www.aljazeerah.info/ made me feel special enough :O Hope you didn't mind me using your username (well--I didn't expect he was going to publish it). I have to give him a follow up. He got to Din after Itold him that Deen wasn't proper. However he didn't see Din (Arabic term) which is a lot more than the 13 words he gave us credit for. I won't vouch for their quality though. The only thing I remember about that article was an edit war a while back. It is difficult to try to get my point across. Having that kind of belief to the exclusion of everything else might not be the best thing. He calls Wikipedia "a tool for expediting the clash of civilizations" and he may be right... but, it'd only do that to those who can't take their ideologies cast in doubt. I'm not really sure what would be the ideal encyclopedia to him. gren グレン 08:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google Print harvesting is very exciting. My search for full text books between 1200 and 1920 on Islam yields tons of interseting results. Like Zwemer's "Childhood in the Moslem World" since it has nice pictures (although there are some gaps with pages). There is no dirth to the sources for DP now it seems.... which is really cool since some of the formts they're coming in as are almost unreadable. So, they really do need a DP-like process to make them useful e-books. Just rambling--it's kind of exciting since I think having a lot of good stuff in the public domain is nice. Like archive.org having full feature films is a really cool step--I can see some of the classics now even though the copyright extension act means nothing new is coming into the public domain. gren グレン 21:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movies

Out of your list I've seen Kandukondain Kandukondain and Tampopo so far. Both were good but the latter was much more unique to say the least. I should see Chunhyang at some point since it's on DVD at our library. Waiting for Guffman and some of the Ang Lee stuff shouldn't be too hard to find... but, well, despite your recommendations I'm not so sure I know if I want to see some of that. My reasoning being: I saw Best in Show which was a pretty good film... but it was horrible too... the characters were all very creepy in this odd subtle way... which, might have been the point but... I suppose I don't react so well to that type of movie. For Ang Lee Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was a great movie and the Hulk was not so great. I don't have much interest in Brokeback Mountain for some reason... I think I may be equating it to Rent which I saw in NYC a few years back. From what I've heard it seems like it's about being gay... which, really doesn't interest me in the least. If there's a reason I should see it tell me and I will at some point and tell you what I think. If not, tell me which of the Ang Lee I haven't seen you'd recommend. None of the others (and I've listed them here btw) seem to be in my library or anywhere that I know. So, I'm not sure how I'll get around to seeing them--but they'll remain on my list. Thanks... as of now you're 2 for 2 :) gren グレン 08:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Babel?

Hi Zora, this question is just out of curiousity since you obviously are an Indian films fan. Do you know any Hindi? DaGizzaChat © 09:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol

"new age woo-woo entrepreneur" =D --Syrthiss 19:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Iran

Please keep an eye on ths Open Tasks template, and make use of it. deeptrivia (talk) 03:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I've been creating movie stub articles for these and I wanted your input. Here is my scheme:

  • Devdas, general page about the story... like Beauty and the Beast is about that story. Not specifically about the novel even though it camse first because I think the movies and the novel together share as all being important... the novel is not the most important of the works. I didn't make the main page a dab page because all of the story lines are similar (or so I hear) and the generalities and impact of Devdas as a whole concept can be discussed.
  • Devdas (novel), specific in depth stuff on novel
  • Devdas (XXXX film), for all of the films.

How does that sound? Or do you think Devdas should be about the novel? I just wanted to check on what you thought. gren グレン 07:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I kind of just threw in the info from Devdas to the 2002 version. I will clean it up at some point. I'll take a look at that page right away. gren グレン 07:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, I read it and reverted... no source and horribly formatted and it didn't seem to be going in any direction. I also left something on the anon's talk page. I added to the talk page that a notable source is needed in any case. gren グレン 07:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RDB

Hi! I did not make the edits on RDB synopsis.It was an anon user , I just added links (intra-wiki).You can check at the history.Do not jump at conclusion so quickly. Thanks.--Dwaipayanc 07:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that was a nice coincidence!! Well, do you think you really need to revert the whole edition by the anon?It contained NPoV language.But I think we could have retained poetions , or , at least modified.1 month has passed since the release.The story is known by this time.And now we can add a few more points perhaps! What do you think?--Dwaipayanc 07:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! That was what I was proposing. Please start such a section.However, such a section has a potential to grow long.So only reviews from good and professional magazines should be included.We already have links to some reviews in the External links.Choosing some remarks won't pose much problem.--Dwaipayanc 08:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Zora! I've become quite accustomed watching you revert the synosis of RDB!! I wonder why everybody wants to give away the story.There has been so many attempts to tell the ending through the synopsis!Thank you for your alert watchfulness.Bye.--Dwaipayanc 05:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rajputs again

could you pop over to troubled Rajput if you have a moment? I am really not enjoying discussing the article any more, but if we just let it be, things will fall apart again. I do believe it should be easier for admins to keep focus now there is an arbcom decision about the case. dab () 09:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again

Unfortunately the issue here won't seem to go away. Can you log into meta and add your comments here to help lock down the issue with the least additional wasted time? Thanks. - Taxman Talk 14:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to note that on the talk page on meta though. That's the only way to end the issue quickly it seems. - Taxman Talk 16:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quran Alone talk page separated from article

Talk:Quran Alone got parted from Qur'an Alone, is there any way to rejoin them? Schizombie 06:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you fixed it! Schizombie 06:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!!

Thanks Zora, it was a great gesture from your side, especially me being made the first recipient. In fact, I was thinking along the lines of getting one made, either by Ganeshk or Miljoshi, but you beat me to it and how!! Thanks again, and at the risk of sounding repetitive, you may want to archive your talk. btw, you may be interested in having a look at this and this - all the more the reason you should be archiving your talk. --Gurubrahma 11:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is perfectly fine, I love it and I want it to be reatined that way - reminds me of all the colours of action, sentiment and romance in Bollywood - simple but great idea, aided by brilliant execution. btw, I have added it in the topic-specific awards to WP:PUA - you may want to check it out. --Gurubrahma 11:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linkspamming?

Sorry, but what are You talking about? I do not sell anything - so what is commercial on this site www.shahrukh-khan-world.com? Please explain.

Wikipedia is for all and everybody has the right to contribute to this encyclopedia not just for You personally, I guess.

So please be fair and show me what on that site is commercial.

Thanks

If I want traffic to that site, I list it on search engines. Howewer, You can remove all my contributions and delete the account. It makes no fun to be a member on Wikipedia under this suppositions. I know I'm just a member and not a webmaster like You, but I guess this is not a indication to be considered as a good or a bad judge.

I'm sorry for the inconveniences and that I waste Your and my time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jen L. (talkcontribs) 01:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry not to have replied before; I'd gone to bed. I can see from the above what the problem was. I'll check the current status, and if it hasn't been sorted out yet, I'll do what I can. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Jen L.'s onctrinutions list, it seems to be OK now. Let me know if it flares up again. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Re:Women In Islam

Hiya,

I am not denying the fact that there are imams who preach that men have the right to beat their wives (as much as they please) if they wish; I removed it because if we put that in there, then we also need to put every other imam’s, at every mosque, POV about the subject in the article. The article isn't an archive for what imams' view on the topic. If it were, the article should then include every interpretation of every view point for it to be fair and that is not what Wiki is about. Also, the sentence sounds very random and unprofessional in the sense that it is just a claim without proof. As you pointed out, not all imams represent what Islam really is. Since there is a lot of argument about the many aspects of the matter, I am not naïve enough to claim that there is one correct, final word about what the mufti's say about men beating their wives. The next best thing is to provide only the facts; not what some random imam preached in his sermon. After all, anyone can say anything that they wish at a sermon, and this should not be taken as the representation of the facts about the subject.

I hope this explains why I removed the sentence from the article and not simply for the sake of sugar-coating the matter.

I apologise for the babbling ;). Stoa 19:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Morgan Report

Hey Zora, me and M.ana have been working on Morgan Report, and I was wondering if you could offer an opinion on how to lay out the controversies in an NPOV manner - I'm advocating a single section with each particular dispute, and he seems to like splitting it into "arguments for" and "arguments against". Since it's really "arguments against" and "rebuttals to arguments against", i'm not sure if that fits, but it may just be an issue of limited vocabulary on my part. Anyway, your opinion, and help in NPOV washing would be appreciated! --JereKrischel 02:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of notable Muslim reports

It's a well-organized list, and not all the "reports" (hadith) linked therefrom are stubs, but quite a lot of them are, and their notability isn't established. "Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article" would seem to apply IMO, possibly warranting merges, but what a big project that would be. Often the usual bad spelling and lack of categories. Adding scores of hadith when the articles on the collections of hadith and other important texts are mere stubs seems to me to be a grossly misplaced priority. Sigh. I see it had been up for AfD before. Шизомби 08:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that makes sense in some twisted way. ;-) Шизомби 18:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haydar

Looks like he is going to keep reverting, using his three per day, if need be. And if there are a bunch of us reverting against him, I'm sure he'll call upon the many Shi'a editors he always calls on when there is an AfD to help him revert. Perhaps you should use an article RfC, perhaps at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Language and linguistics. I don't think this would apply for WP:3O as I've already been involved, as have a couple of other editors. Pepsidrinka 12:04, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki hell

Hey, I don't know about the issues with SouthernComfort but from a preliminary look it seems like there's definite reason to want to keep up a POV tag. Haydar is a dab page and I don't even have to really know about the content to know it should be short and sweet. gren グレン 12:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx

Hi Zora, thanx for the barnster... Pa7 13:08, 06 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Props

You know more about Islam than many Muslims do, and I don't doubt that you've spent a greater amount of time studying some topics than I have. For that, you have my props. lol Zain 19:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham

Zora, no one claims that he FOUNDED Christianity or Islam ( where did you read this????) its not in the bible and its not in the Qu'ran. He is claimed as an ancestor , but not as a founder of those religions. --CltFn 05:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Zora, which verse in the Qu'ran claims Abraham as the founder of Islam? And where in the new testament does it claim Abraham as the founder of Christianity. As for Luxenberg , my statement is based on English interviews he gave which I included in the article.--CltFn 05:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok inspirational figure works for me .--CltFn 05:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My edits

re: My edits.

Zora, it is not preaching Islam. While Muhammad is known for his claim of prophethood, the aticle is silent on this issue. --Aminz 07:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, where should I add the Christian-Muslim debates? Thanks. --Aminz 07:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your suggestion, I am thinking of something like prophethood of Muhammad, something that one can find all the arguments made in order to support the prophethood of Muhammad. How is that? Thanks --Aminz 08:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to "prove" Muhammad's prophethood. I just want to write all the facts and opinion of the different sides of the debate. That's it. I am sure this will save the precious time of many researchers. When there is an article called "criticism of Islam"; there should be an article called "Defending Islam". What is wrong with this reasoning? --Aminz 09:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
:D Interesting story! But I am not satisfied with that article. My hands are tight up. By the way, several thick-skin non-muslim editors have joined me there. I want my own article :( What happens if I make my own article with the title "defense of Islam"? I will then be quite for awhile. :D --Aminz 09:40, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Zora! If I make my own website, then I'll miss valuable feedback of Non-Muslims. Moreover, I have been a good boy so far. I think I deserve to have an article. By the way, this guy Abu-Lu'lu'ah doesn't deserve that I spend my time for :) I never heard any shia talk about him. --Aminz 10:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, fine! why are you beating me? I just wanted to serve people by gathering an unbiased source of information for them. Fine. Btw, never heard of Quaker meeting house. It seems weird and a bit funny that the Holy Spirit wants to speak through people. By the way, I think the flavor of Hinduism and Zen are different from Abrahamic religions. The only thing I know about Hinduism is that they believe in Reincarnation and are vegetarian. I have a question: Why people should become Hindu? What is the advantage? I am already a vegetarian and have troubles understanding reincarnation. Will I be doomed to hell if I don't believe in Hinduism? Thanks--Aminz 10:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am reading about Hinduism. Seems we have a lot in common. --Aminz 10:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perry's Article

The only source I cited was "Encyclopaedia Iranica".Heja Helweda 13:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The Perry writing was from a book by the title Le Monde Iranien et L'Islam, volume I. I made the WP edit back when I was at U of Tenn. I dont have access to their library now. (and I dont think it was even from their permanent collection). I had to go thru the ILL dept.

I bet however our library at Austin has the item, but I'm currently stuck with a tight schedule and I wont be going to the PCL building any time soon (at least until late May).

But I did a search on WorldCat. This is what I found:

The Banu Ka`b : an ambitious brigand state in Khuzistan / John R Perry

1971 English Book p. [131]-152 : map ; 25 cm. [Genève : Droz,

Get This Item 

Availability: Check the catalogs in your library.

Connect to the catalog at your library

External Resources: Check for text @ UT

Find Related 

More Like This: Search for versions with same title and author | Advanced options ... Find Items About: Perry, John R. (1) Title: The Banu Ka`b : an ambitious brigand state in Khuzistan / Author(s): Perry, John R. Publication: [Genève : Droz, Year: 1971 Description: p. [131]-152 : map ; 25 cm. Language: English

SUBJECT(S)  

Descriptor: Ka`b (Arab people) -- Iran -- History. Geographic: Iran -- History -- 16th-18th centuries. Khuzestan (Iran) -- History. Note(s): Cover title./ Extract from: Le monde iranien et l'Islam, t. 1, 1971./ Includes bibliographical references. Class Descriptors: LC: DS269.K25 Other Titles: Monde iranien et l'Islam. Responsibility: John R. Perry. Document Type: Book Entry: 20010906 Update: 20010906 Accession No: OCLC: 47918613 Database: WorldCat

Hope that helps.--Zereshk 17:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Muhhamed Picture

Would you mind if I added a picture of Muhhamed made by Muslims (if any exists)? Also, Islam should not be imposed on all Wikipedia users. Not everybody knows Muhhamed's likeness.--FelineFanatic13talk

Rashad Khalifa criticism chop

Hi Zora. I had hoped to just fix it up, but I couldn't work out what the 'pattern finding' refered to. Are you talking about his thing with the number 19? Also, my understanding of WP policy would require a 3rd party to link human pattern matching to R.K. , making the link would be considered OR. Keep up the good work anyway ! Ashmoo 04:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rv of Fatema Al Zahra (Sunni view)

Hi! How does the inclusion of the hadeeth in the Sunni view make it "reflect Shia POV"? I, personally, don't think it does since it's providing facts (the statement by Muhammed is recorded in Al-Bukhari) and not and opinion about anything. I only provided what is believed by Sunni Muslims and moved the text around a bit for grammatical purposes (if you read it closely you will find that little is change except the hadeeth). I'm not one to place a POV in an arictle, regardless of what side I follow, and I hope this isn't just a revert as to keep the original article for whatever purpose that would benefit. Stoa 06:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the Sunni's do not just ignore the hadeeth. I should know, I am one, not that any of this should matter on Wiki. I doubt a Muslim can simply "ignore" a hadeeth (the idea seems a tad rediculous), we hold any hadeeth sahih in reverance (that's why we have 3 levels of ahadeeth, due to importance of each one). The hadeeth mentioned is one that is viewed by both Sunnis and Shias: they both believe that she was a very important woman and a role model to muslims women.
And ...Umar (according to Shias), caused Fatima to miscarry her unborn child, there is no mention in the article of how Shias viewed him after he did that (whether they "ignored" his actions or what), so why would I downplay it in the Sunni side if a)Sunni's don't even believe the story happend and b)it wasn't even an issue for Shias.
As far as I can see, there is nothing wrong with my inclusion of the hadeeth, and nothing that indicates a POV.
All in all, please do not assume that every Muslim wikipedian is wanting to change the facts to make it suit what they believe. I believe that presenting the facts alone is all that is needed, no sugar-coating required. Stoa 07:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I moved the sentence about Sunni's not believing the story about Umar, etc. It wasn't intentional for me to give the impression that this is of little importance, so I guess moving it out of the parentheses will make it stand out. I do feel "weird" though since it makes a passing reference to the story without any explaination of what the story is. Also, I added "Sunni" next to scholars to make it clearer that Sunni's are the ones who disagreed on the location of her grave. Shiaa claim to know the exact location of her grave (I believe they think it's on a mountain in Medina). The hadeeth was added to show how Sunni's also believe that Fatima was an exceptional woman. Shiaa's aren't the only ones to feel that way, though they involve a lot of agruable methods in the way the revere her and her story, and that's where the debate begins. Also, Shiaa disregard a chunk of ahadeeth and usually stick only to the one narrated by Fatima or Ali, so adding it alone (since it's narrated by the Prophet) shows that it is a Sunni view. Stoa 16:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persian people

I had to revert as he archived while dispute was on going, feel free to add your 2 cents back in again, it looked like an interesting theory. However, you can't deny that it was never-and is not current used as referring to an ethnicity. Perhaps wrongly, but it has been the case mainly at the begining of the Persian Empire, and at Sassanid times and especially at and since Pahlavis, as I said in the text books at schools it is still referred to as an ethnicity and my friends have quoted Iranian history and Iranica to say that it is still used. However, yes perhaps it is used wrongly, but this isn't the case is it? if the main sources agree on the matter, then one or two small-scale genetic studies which were probably carried out on a few Iranians in America or something, do not really question it. These studies may refer to current genetics of central asia, but since the Persian empire controlled much of the central Asia at some points, then it is not really relevant to even suggest that this proved anything against the origins of Iranians as Indo-Europeans, etc. --Kash 12:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DP Irc

Does DP have an IRC channel? I tried #dp and #eBooks on irc.freenode.net which both had 0 users... do you know? Thanks. gren グレン 19:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you. Another question... how come some DP texts are still released without html versions? It's rare but I saw one the other day that wasn't math... I really need to understand the system better.... how much control to post processors have? gren グレン 03:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psst

I'm trying to build support for this nomination in its last few days. Please check out this page. Pass it along. Nudge nudge. -- evrik 20:18, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I wanted to apologize for my last comment to which you took offense . You're right, I don't know you but I wa taken aback by the abruptness of your response. I have noticed that most of the people who make decisions about who gets awards are men, as are the recipients. I went to the userboxes to find who had publiclay identified as a woman to encourage them to support this nomination - the first wikihalo to go through the nomination process. Sorry if I offended you. evrik 21:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora! You removed a few words from the intro of al-Khwarizmi. This basicly puts it back to the state it was be fore the dispute on his etnicity began (the really long talk page). This one (the one before you shortened it) seems to be going towards a consensus. I hop you don't mind that I will restore it, but you comments are of course greatly appreciated on the talk page. Cheers, —Ruud 00:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV, Piety in Depiction of Muhammad

Can you explain what exactly you considered POV and pious tone in the version of the article before you reverted it. If there really is a a POV or pious tone expressed in the article (which I'm not really seeing), it can be rectified without reverting the article. joturner 03:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You used Abdul Wahhab instead of independently verifying the hadith. The second one I could not verify through the MCSA search engine. I would not send ANYONE to Abdul Wahhab for a neutral depiction of pictorial representation.
You said that most Muslims agreed that depiction was wrong -- that is clearly not the case. Not only do Shi'a allow it, most moderate Muslims do too. Howling mobs whipped up by Islamists are not evidence for majority opinion.
You wrote, "Muhammad, being the deliverer of Islam's holiest book, the Qur'an, is revered by Muslims more than any other person in history". There are people who believe that Muhammad created the Qur'an, not just "delivered" it; there are people who believe that he didn't create it at all. Nor can you speak for all Muslims when you say that they revere Muhammad above all other people. Some might not. Some might think that he's in an entirely different category, and not to be compared with anyone else.
If you asked a Christian, "which historical figure do you admire the most?", he or she might say "Abraham Lincoln" or "Einstein". If you say, "What about Jesus?", you might get a blank state. Jesus is another category entirely. I think that this might hold for Muslims. But we can't be sure, can we? In which case it's better not to make claims for all Muslims. Zora 03:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have taken your comments into account and reinstated information from the version before the revert. I reworded the intro (which seemed to be where most of your issues were) and omitted the additional hadith. joturner 03:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

censorship?

Why don't you want to include "US-occupied"? IMHO it is quite interesting, that the only fatwa that allows the depiction of Mohammed, is in US-occupied Iraq. Raphael1 05:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled upon this and... well, I have no idea if it's real or not... but I know it has been an issue... you see anti-Islamic forums saying it's real and Shia forums saying it's made up.... I tend to think the latter and there are no sources... but in all honesty I really don't know... if you know one way or another please tell me... if nothing is done I'm going to get rid of it for being an attack with no sources but I'd rather have it deleted with an authoritative reason.

Also, I was reading some of Hagarism and I saw that Crone uses "the Prophet". I just found that interesting that she, of all people, would use it. gren グレン 06:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Zora, this page is an attack page for sure. I am not Khomeini's fan. and I do know that the regime lowered the age of marriage. I also know about Islamic rules on sexuality. But these issues has nothing to do with this book. Marriage age were always 9 for girls in any islamic textbook. This book did not initiate these ideas. I do think that the book exist. Those who are interested in this very ordinary book are fanatic anti-clerics whose main aim is destroying Khomeini by any means. I am a neutral Iranian. I do think Khomeini did some good things and some bad things in his life. I am neither a fan of him nor a hater. But User:CltFn is a muslim hater for sure. Just look at the list of his contributions. Thanks.--Mitso Bel11:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You should quite you personal attacks Mitso Bell , did you not notice how many articles I wrote on Muslims which I support and defend like Asra Nomani , Azar Nafisi ,Ghada Jamshir and many many others. But that is besisdes the point , Tahrirolvasyleh is a real book that deserves to see the light of day . --CltFn 13:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CltFn! I definitely appreciate your support for islam by supporting very well known Islam-haters as Azar Nafisi who is also an agent of your favorite US neoconservatives. Don't say these things to me. I know you quite well. You may find it hard to believe that I am an atheist Iranian. Remind yourself of calling your critics including me as Mutaween. I try to be sympathetic to fanatics like you as much as I can. --Mitso Bel
Very strong stamenents for an alleged neutral Iranian. If you knew me so well , then you might know that I do not believe a single word you are typing and you would not be wasting your time with the pretense.--CltFn 13:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care whether you believe in what I write or not. You can't distinguish between Persian and Arabic or Islamic philosophy and fiqh, let alone knowing a word about Islam and Iran (except for propaganda). Fanatics are blind and any discussions with them make no sense. --Mitso Bel13:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Fanatics are blind and any discussions with them make no sense",Couldn't have said it better myself.--CltFn 14:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sinlessness of Muhammad

You are right Zora. Unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge to be able to write a good article. Moreover, I don't have enough time right now to read the book you suggested. It seems to be interesting. But I agree that "That's getting into a lot of detail for an article that's already too long." For now, can we make a new section for the article and put the detail there? --Aminz 09:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is an NPOV title for the article : "Doctorine of Sinlessness of Muhammad"; "Sinlessness of Muhammad"; or "Sinlessness of Prophets"; or ? Thanks --Aminz 09:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Shia does not believe that Muhammad was more than human. Quran 41:6 " Say thou: "I am but a man like you: It is revealed to me by Inspiration, that your God is one God..." They do not mean that their Imams are not human. They mean just that their Imams are very special humans. The "pre-existence" refers to the early creation of their souls. They do not believe that their Imams are eternal. What is your opinion? Thanks --Aminz 10:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So, I'll start an article titled "Doctrine of the Fourteen Pure Souls". Actually, I myself don't believe in the doctorine. Anyway, I'll start the article soon. Thanks --Aminz 10:31, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"AIT"

wow, good news, we can certainly need patrollers at the "Aryan Invasion" front, although the topic seems to be plagued by (again) Indian rather than Iranian nationalists [befuddle those nationalists, what are they all doing online, shouldn't they be marching in parades or something; Wikipedia would be so much more enjoyable without quite so much of this atavistic mindset]. Are you sure Witzel suggests Afghanistan as the Proto-Indo-Iranian homeland (as opposed to the origin of the Rigveda, or the Indo-Aryans)? Afaik, their commonly assumed origin is further north, in Kazakhstan (Andronovo culture). dab () 10:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sari

Why thank you Zora, it is a nice pic, izzanit? One of RRV's best-known paintings. I shall try to find some of Coorgi and Maharashtrian styles also -- more snaps are certainly needed, esp. since it is so difficult to describe the matter. Page needs serious copyediting. Will become one of my "quiet" projects. I had no idea you were involved on that page, but I now see you are. But then, what r u not involved in? Regards, ImpuMozhi 14:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to intervene in a personal exchange, but wrt your comment: IMO, the ubiquity of those types on the internet is a function of their relative marginalization in Indian civic society; their occasional public successes have wheels within wheels. Not that they are not shrill enough, but they generally lack a receptive audience -- which does not dissuade them, as we see. One cannot project, on the basis of sundry louts, our potential membership in an "axis of insanity". All said however, everybody in India is minimally "nationalistic" enough to ask why, if we openly develop it ourselves (not steal, smuggle, subrosa proliferate), we should not have the bomb. Even armed-to-the-teeth protectors-of-the-free-world are now seeing the light on both this and the general-civic-society point. Apparently.
Hardcore nutheads are few and marginal in India; witness the fact that we have had only a single recalcitrant on Rajput, but a greater population from the other side, who have been equally stubborn, over an extended period, with less cause. What, I daily ask myself, would I have done if faced with unremitting insistance for large-scale mention, on main pages, of "Muslim-brahmins", "Confucian-arabs" and whatnot?? So let us not condemn, even now. Peace on earth! (and in cyberspace) ImpuMozhi 20:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not so much nuclear weapons, but that a society is not to be judged by its nutheads -- not even when they occasionally get elected, as in your country and mine. ImpuMozhi 20:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hey thanks for your help on Talk:Persian people and (especially) here. Make sure you keep an eye on Persian people as they might try to remove the dispute tag. Another article of interest: Parsi people. There was a study done on Pakistani Parsis that showed some relation to Iranians. I tried to point out that the study was done on Pakistanis, but my edits (and someone else's edit which seemed useful) were maliciously reverted. I thought you might be interested. AucamanTalk 08:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You made a good analogy with the right-wingers in America, except that these people are the clear minority - most of them were kicked out of Iran. As for Parsis, I'm not sure if we're on the same page. I don't really have a position except that I don't want people to be engaged in original research and making statements like "All Parsis are the same, so if Pakistani Parsis are close to Irarnians, so must be the Indian Parsis." Look at the history page. AucamanTalk 14:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Greetings. --Bhadani 13:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, you are most welcome to have a Holi with my wife. I will just watch. --Bhadani 14:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR rule

No, I will continue to revert on this matter of principle as I have bothered to seek a genuine discussion on the talk page and the anonymous user has not. This is a matter of blatant vandalism, which I am reverting. Go ahead, report me if you like. If people can get away with behaving unreasonably, I have have no interest in your rule books. This problem has gone on long enough with the Ahwaz-related pages. If I give way on the population issue, then there is little point in making any constructive contribution elsewhere for it will be dominated by Persian ultra-nationalists.--Ahwaz 14:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But this user won't get banned. He is anonymous. This is the frustrating thing. If Southern Comfort had done this, we could have had a debate and no matter how strongly we felt we would have reached a compromise. I have compromised in the past with others and have not been threatened with this 3RR rule. But there is no debate with someone who hides behind anonymity, so why should this one be privileged over others who make an effort here.--Ahwaz 15:50, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabs of Khuzestan

I wrote to Elton Daniel on the issue of his estimation of the number of Arabs in Khuzestan. He says that he no longer has the notes that he used from the book he wrote, which he says was "for a popular series instead of an academic one with full documentation." So he is relying on memory. He states that he "relied on the U.S. Congress Area Handbook for Iran for most statistical data ... The edition then available stated that the estimated Arab population in Iran was 530,000 in 1986." But he adds that there are a number of factors to bear in mind, including "a lack of any really relilable official statistics since around 1956 (which could conceivably be what the Area Handbook actually used), exactly how one defines "Arabs" in this context, whether those numbers were affected by population displacement because of the Iran-Iraq war, etc." He is not certain himself and is fully aware of the difficulties involved in estimating figures. I think it would be worthwhile looking at the latest edition of the US Congress Area Handbook for Iran to see exactly what it states now. I do not know where this can be accessed. On the US Congress website, it repeats the 3% figure quoted by the CIA (which puts the Arab population at around two million), although I am not sure where this percentage originally came from: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/profiles/Iran.pdf

The reason why this is a heated battle is about Persian nationalist ideology. The fact is that ethnic Persians are 50% or less of the Iranian population. If Persians are a minority, it means that Iran can no longer be said to have a wholly Persian culture. Also, Khuzestan is a very inflammatory subject as non-Persians - ie Arabs - are in an overwhelming majority there. It is a fact that annoys Persian nationalists and this is why they continually under-estimate the facts. Two to four million is a reasonable range - I would suggest around four million personally. But one million is an absurd estimation made by those with political motives by those who wish to eradicate Arab culture from Iran. This is why the population issue is so important.--Ahwaz 21:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Please comment on my rfc Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil--Jersey Devil 21:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ja'far al-Sadiq

Zora, why did you decide to completely delete the Sunni Imams from the students list of Jafar al Sadiq? It is accepted by most educated Sunnis, as well noneducated Sunnis, that they were taught by him. Zain 02:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, but the current article does not give such an impression. I think it would be alright if I reinserted their names. Zain 23:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh peer review

Hi, I've started a new peer review for Bangladesh, please express your opinions at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Bangladesh. Thanks. --Ragib 05:32, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Striver (or that other guy) RfC

You know what annoys me most about all of those AfDs and the RfC? It seems that some people aren't evne thinking about hadith titles. Take "Hadith of Umar's speech of forbidding Mut'ah" for example. Google search it. You get only wikipedia for results. Even these titles are being pulled from Striver's minds. The inclusionist idea of "if Bible verses get articles then why can't hadith" is getting enough keep votes for no consensus when people don't even realize that the titles are not used in scholarly discourse. *annoyed face* Anyways... is there naming for hadith? Are any of his titles correct? If they were I could stomach more cleanup tags and fewer deletes... but, you can't get more wrong than an original research title. (pardon the letting off steam) gren グレン 09:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help once again

Hi, Zora, it's me, Plumcouch again. I have a small problem and hope you can help me with it. I created a new article für Diya Mirza's new movie Alag and noticed a Vinod Khanna having a role (he's possibly cast opposite her, so I can't just drop him from the cast roster given the importance of his role). Anyway, we already *have* a Vinod Khanna here at Wiki and it's not Alag's Vinod Khanna. Is it custom to create a disambigation (sp?) page in such cases? Or do you write on the top of an article Not the Vinod Khanna you're looking for? or something like that? I hope you can help me. --Plumcouch 20:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC) Ps. And something entirely else: Certain people (not naming any names) are really, er, focused on Rani. I thought it had gotten better, but apparantly passion re-ignited as of late ... can't you do something about it? Like some almighty administrator ban or something? All those copyvio pictures that appear there time and again and the fangush and the counting ... *shudders*[reply]

Hmm - I checked Vinod Khanna's IMDb biography. He's 60. And Diya Mirza is about 24. ... ... besides that being really gross and just urgh - I think this and those are pictures of the guy being cast opposite Diya Mirza. Is it Vinod? He doesn't really look as if he's 60 - or, from my point of you: is someone who could be her grandfather allowed to look like this? Maybe I mixing something up. --Plumcouch 21:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I think the guy on the pix is Akshay Kapoor, some newcomer, listed at IndiaFm.com's article in Alag after Diya Mirza. I just got confused and mixed them up. Sorry for bothering you and for the inconvinience. --Plumcouch 21:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iran

I thought you might be interested in some of the latest develpments in the Iran article. My edits are being reverted again - without much explanation in the talk. AucamanTalk 03:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Important - Emergency

Zora, please let me know how I can delete some article. surat al-wilaya, surat al–nurayn are absurd claims attached to Shia's. These articles should be removed. I was only able to remove the content of them. Thanks, --Aminz 09:25, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the most offensive thing that I have ever seen in wikipedia!!! :( I am really angry and offended. Can anybody create any kind of article??? --Aminz 09:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I now think it would be good to keep the article, since people can then come and see that it is a forgery. THERE ARE verses in Quran that Shia Muslim use in their debates with Sunnis. I can let you know about some of them if you are interested. I think some of them are good evidences. I have also heard from a shia fundamentalist that there were some changed verses. The example I have in my mind is something like the following: There is some verse in one of the last sura's of Qur'an saying: (The unbelievers will say) " I wish I was dust". They say it has been "I wish I was with the father of dust(that is ali)" their arguments are kind of funny to me. But I don't think they believe the original Quran has some more Sura's, maybe some additional words. Regarding the controversy, yes. That would be a controversy. But maybe some shia fundamentalist like it. But please avoid it. We don’t want to incite enmity between Shia and Sunnis. Thanks. --Aminz 10:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parsi revert war (and debate)

The edit wars at Persian people et al has spilled over to Parsi. I've opened a discussion on the talk page there (Talk:Parsi#Revert_wars) in the hope that at least the spillover can be damned, but perhaps (hopefully) the parties will come to some general consensus that will benefit other articles as well. -- Fullstop 17:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Fatima vs. Fatimah

Well, since someone moved the page yesterday to "Fatimah Zahra", and no objections arose then, I wanted the rest of the article to be consistent spelling-wise. The "h" at the end is added due to the Arabic letter (the letter with the two dots on top) "مة" at the end of her name, which translates to the closest thing in English: an "h" sound. We can create a discussion on the Fatimah Zahra user page about the name spelling since one was not created prior to the spelling change, but I still believe that correctness should take precedence to familiarity in Wiki. Stoa

Peace treaty

I'm trying to negotiate a peace treaty with the Shez15 or rather his IP. Maybe it's working. If it's not and he/she isn't happy with the way Mukerji's article currently looks (I changed it again since your last change) and *you* are happy with the way it looks, maybe he/she gives up and leaves it the way it is. It's just a compromise, I know, but maybe it works. What do you think? --Plumcouch 01:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of my friends lent me the DVD but it's horrible VCD-ish quality (DEI release). Do you know if there's a good quality release anywhere? I failed to see anything on froogle, Amazon, or linked from IMDB that looked like it had any quality. gren グレン 05:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks... my has subtitles... and no glitches like the Eros releases tend to... it's just all very soft and blurry. I'd rather have the occassional line running down the screen with relatively decent film from Eros. Oh well.
By the way you may want to look at the Smithsonian collection of Islamic art. Pretty nice and I managed to get a great image for Maghribi script. I also found Image:Abbasid Koran folio from Egypt.jpg and Image:Qur'an folio 11th century kufic.jpg which I found nice for the commons. gren グレン 08:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I now know everything I do about Odissi from the Wikipedia article :) It must be neat to see live dances like that... I've never been exposed to such things... at least not yet. Also, does your copy have an ASIN # or some form of identification so if I see a copy for sale I can compare it to the DEI version? Thanks. gren グレン 10:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hi Zora, If my memory is good this is the first time I am looking at your talk page and now I sure understand what you mean,,, Its the world war III in your page.. I wonder how you are keeping up with all this, keep up the good work.. this is even more reason for you to have the barnstar!! Mystic 07:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Siddiqui

Well this guy User:Siddiqui has been taking down India-related articles and impregnating them with a distinct POV by dozen a day! He has been unilaterally editing wahtever he percieves to be "misinformation" and has started psedo-historical articles like Sakastan and completed hogwash like Kashmiri Freedom Movement (even though Pakistani POV is articulated on terrorism in Kashmir article). See this for some of his subtle vandalisms. I've tried to be as polite as possible but this guy simply deleting all criticisms from Talk page! history of his talk page. Do tell advise me on how to tavkle this, some articles are trhreating to decscend into Rajput-article mode all over again.

File:England flag large.png अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 07:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

I would like your advice. On the Talk page for Arabs of Khuzestan, user Dariush4444 has called me a liar and propagandist.[[4]] He has called the Arab population "refugees", which is not true, and he claims that I know nothing about the Middle East. He also denies that the Arab population has any ethnicity or culture distinct from the Persian culture. I want to know whether any of these comments breach Wikipedia rules and what I do about it if they do. However, as I have been reprimanded once by Wikipedia administrators, I do not think they will take anything I say seriously any more.--Ahwaz 18:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please...

Hi Zora! Could you please see this and help enhance the section? Thanks.--Dwaipayanc 19:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora! Yes I saw the two long lists of books and films at the end of the article.Even then I thought to add this section because I had plans to incorporate not only books and cinemas, but also other cultural aspects like cuisine, language, performing arts etc.However, your suggestion of moving out the long lists and start a break out article is really good.Just 2 or 3 sentences in Partition of India, and a separate article on Cultural impact of the partition of India would give a scope to discuss the effects widely , and without much concern to the size of Partition of India, which is already pretty large.Thanks for the suggestion. And please help me when the break out article is started.I will inform you soon when I/ anybody else starts the break-out article.Thanks a lot ! Bye, --Dwaipayanc 06:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! As per your advice, I have started the discussion in the talk page of Partition of India. Hope wikipedians will help to start and enhance the article.Thanks a lot.--Dwaipayanc 08:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Upset user

User:Zmmz has apparently been so disturbed by some of your edits that he has requested I "remind people to be civil to each other". I feel a bit reluctant to step in with such an obvious, yet potentially condescending request in what most likely is a heated debate where more than one part is pushing the civility border. But since he is upset by your comments I don't feel I can neglect his request. And after all, we can all do with a reminder to be nicer to each other. I'll tell Zmmz the same, and hope I'm not dragged into a who-said-what debate here. Thanks! Shanes 04:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Siddiqui RfC

I've filed an RfC against Siddiqui. Please support it by endorsing the RfC at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Siddiqui

File:England flag large.png अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 08:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish politician category

Hey thanks for you keeping an eye on the Persian people article. I also thought you might be interested in this. Seems like another attempt to limit the expansion of Kurdish-related articles. AucamanTalk 13:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]