Jump to content

Talk:The Idries Shah Foundation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 13:00, 15 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Organizations}}, {{WikiProject Education}}, {{WikiProject Religion}}, {{WikiProject Culture}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


Charity's title

[edit]

Please note that the charity is officially registered as "The Idries Shah Foundation" and not "Idries Shah Foundation". Esowteric+Talk 20:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon Kindle editions

[edit]

Have temporarily commented out (hidden) the Kindle edition details, until I can find out why only there aren't separate British English and American English editions with their own Amazon Standard Item Numbers (ASINs). Esowteric+Talk 19:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Publications table

[edit]

If you use AWB to remove BR linebreaks in the dates column, the dates will be thrown out of vertical alignment. Esowteric+Talk 20:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation website problem?

[edit]

I got a response warning me of an insecure site when I tried to open the Idries Shah Foundation website. JohnBuuseue (talk) 11:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, John. I'll message them at Facebook. In the inspect element tool, I'm getting lots of warnings, eg: "Blocked loading mixed active content ...", which means that the connection is secure (SSL, https) but some of the active content is insecure (http). Regards, Esowteric+Talk 12:11, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So things like style are being blocked, and hence not rendering. Esowteric+Talk 12:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Have messaged them. The problem occurs if you use https://idriesshahfoundation.org/ but not if you use http://idriesshahfoundation.org/. Esowteric+Talk 12:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My internet provider (in Israel) blocks http://idriesshahfoundation.org/ as well saying it is a fake site.JohnBuuseue (talk) 10:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strange. I wonder if that is technical or political? I'll pass on this message, thanks. Esowteric+Talk 12:34, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 August 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED the proposer appears to have withdrawn support for the move (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


The Idries Shah FoundationIdries Shah Foundation – Per WP:THE. Chicbyaccident (talk) 19:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 12:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The title of the institute is "The Idries Shah Foundation", not "Idries Shah Foundation". See the web page and the charity commission entry:
Why else would we need defaultsorts like "Sufis, The" for The Sufis if we omit "The" from official titles? Esowteric+Talk 10:13, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Naming companies with official names starting "The ..." Esowteric+Talk 10:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Chicbyaccident: What are your thoughts? Esowteric+Talk 10:42, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I maintain my opinion. Chicbyaccident (talk) 11:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding. Could you perhaps explain your reasoning? The official title of the charity is "The Idries Shah Foundation" (see the web site page top banner, and the Charity Commission entry linked above), so why have the following company-related articles not been moved?

along with thousands of book, television and film titles such as:

If we are deadlocked on this, perhaps a third opinion might be sought, or a request for comment might be made? Esowteric+Talk 11:58, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Then I reluctantly give in to your consistency arguments above. Chicbyaccident (talk) 15:14, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.