User talk:Mbcap
|
|
ibn taymiyyah dog
wahhabi filth. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 04:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Vietcong nuturlizer what do you mean? Mbcap (talk) 07:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
are you not a follower of wahabism? why did you revert my edit? Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 23:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Vietcong nuturlizer firstly please read WP:CIVIL which is one of the five pillars and learn how to interact with your fellow editors. You cannot go around calling people Ibn Taymiyyah dog or Wahhabi filth. I ask you to withdraw those comments. Regarding the revert, it was done because the two references in the infobox said that the Islamic State adheres to a Salafist ideology. Finally regarding your question as to what or whom I follow, that is none of your business. Please do not ask other editors personal questions. Mbcap (talk) 23:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
your still a dog and if you are a wahabi then ur not a muslim. ibn taymiyyah was an idiot kufar. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 00:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- You know dam well ibn taymiyyah was sent to jail for his views. Mass media support by the puppet state of Saudi Arabia will not decimate the truth about this man. I know you hate to admit it but the terrorist groups all admire this idiotic man and call him "shaykh of islam". If it wasnt for the oil backing the brainwashing would not have occurred. Ibn taymiyyah took advantage of the chaos that endured after the fall of the caliphate at the hands of the mongols. I know for sure you have some sort of association with the Wahhabis seeing that you pounced on my edit on the ISIS article. if your so adamant in writing about Ibn taymiyyah, why dont you write in the article about how ibn taymiyyah's so called fatwa was the basis of burning a man alive by isis Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 04:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- Vietcong nuturlizer See this is much better. Thank you for the reply. You are correct that terrorist groups admire him, they quote him endlessly. Yes I am aware that he went to jail for his views. He went to jail five or six times for his view in fact. Please read the Ibn Taymiyyah page for more information but keep in mind that the article is not yet complete. You are also correct that the Saudi's follows this man and his ideas but they fail to admit the truth because they Saudi ruling establishment show one face to the west, and another to their people and the scholars who have such a massive hold over their internal policy. There was a Saudi TV presenter who was sacked because he criticised Ibn Taymiyyah. This is unfortunately the sad state of affairs. However what I do not understand is, why would you take out your frustration on me by calling me a "ibn taymiyyah dog" or "wahhabi filth"? I would kindly request that you withdraw those comments. Your edits on the Islamic State article are welcome and it was not my intention to pounce on them. The references said something and the edit said something else so I was obliged to correct it. Regarding my association with whatever party, religion or person, frankly that is not your business, unless I choose to divulge that information. My own experience has shown that people who hate Ibn Taymiyyah are mostly Shia or Sufi's because of the harsh rebuke Ibn Taymiyyah gave to these people, so I do understand why people do not like him.
- Regarding the burning, all I know is from a blog in the spectator which mentioned they did it via Qisas which was a reason also echoed by Moazaam Begg. I am not sure what Ibn Taymiyyah has to do with that. Mbcap (talk) 05:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- I apologize. I was having a bad day. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 06:37, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- Regarding the burning, all I know is from a blog in the spectator which mentioned they did it via Qisas which was a reason also echoed by Moazaam Begg. I am not sure what Ibn Taymiyyah has to do with that. Mbcap (talk) 05:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
No problem, we all have those days. Mbcap (talk) 09:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@User:Vietcong nuturlizer, we do not tolerate such personal attack in wikipedia. Be careful. --Seyyed(t-c) 12:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I dont believe it is a matter of being shia or sufi although it seems that way because those two groups have been attacked by the wahhabis. That logic would therefore persume that all of the past Sunnis were indeed Sufis including the Ottomans and muslims of the Saladin era. The majority of the modern "Sunnis" are ignorant of their religion so they are easy prey for wahhabis that call for the destruction of sunni schools . One can not call himself a Sunni when he does not follow one of the madhabs. Al Azhar has pointed out clearly that wahhabism is satanic. Ibn taymiyyah was exposed by one of his students for believing God has hands and legs like a human. This is why the terrorists all follow this man. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 01:12, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Vietcong nuturlizer I hear you and what? Mbcap (talk) 02:13, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- User:Vietcong nuturlizer, do you realize beside terrorist groups "admire, follow and quote" ibn taymiya endlessly, actualy that groups also "admire and quoting endlesly" form Hadith of prophet Muhammad, Al-Bukhari's and Sunni imams works too. then why ibn taimiya have special treatment?. then, if one can not call himself a Sunni when he does not follow one of the madhabs, so what is the madhab of Al-Bukhari? or the madhdhab of Anas ibn Malik? isnt Ibn Taimiya himself is following jurisprudence of Hanbali madhab?. Please stop spreading private opinion, especially misleading one. ibensis (What’s the Story?) 03:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ibn taymiyyah is known for pushing very dangeorus fatwas. Ibn taymiyyah himself said that one shouldnt follow a madhab blindly. Go and watch the ISIS video of the Jordan pilot, it is there they quote Ibn taymiyyah to justify burning someone alive. You can not simply compare yourself to the likes of "Al bukhari" who spent his entire life learning. If everyone proceeds to compile the hadiths collection on their own and interprets it thier way, eventually the results are fringe terrorist groups such as ISIS and others who follow the way of Ibn taymiyyah's "ignore consensus ways". Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- honestly i'm not really interested to talk about this theme, but you keep on coming with your opinion. i dont know who is ISIS exactly, suddenly they pop up to media in recent years, and i dont have any access to the video about Jordan pilot, i only read the incident from many articles headlines, so i dont know its true or not about the quote. but luckily they aren't quoting from Bukhari's this [1] or Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57. otherwise Imam Bukhari and Imam Ali will face same accusation from you. And i think we should stop this prolonged and unbeneficial argumentation. ibensis (What’s the Story?) 08:32, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- It is not my opinion it is the opinion of scholars. i have seen you try to censor information on here to boost wahabism. I suggest you stop that and if you dont want to discuss this issue then dont respond to me. You obviously dont know much about the subject to have a discussion. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- honestly i'm not really interested to talk about this theme, but you keep on coming with your opinion. i dont know who is ISIS exactly, suddenly they pop up to media in recent years, and i dont have any access to the video about Jordan pilot, i only read the incident from many articles headlines, so i dont know its true or not about the quote. but luckily they aren't quoting from Bukhari's this [1] or Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57. otherwise Imam Bukhari and Imam Ali will face same accusation from you. And i think we should stop this prolonged and unbeneficial argumentation. ibensis (What’s the Story?) 08:32, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ibn taymiyyah is known for pushing very dangeorus fatwas. Ibn taymiyyah himself said that one shouldnt follow a madhab blindly. Go and watch the ISIS video of the Jordan pilot, it is there they quote Ibn taymiyyah to justify burning someone alive. You can not simply compare yourself to the likes of "Al bukhari" who spent his entire life learning. If everyone proceeds to compile the hadiths collection on their own and interprets it thier way, eventually the results are fringe terrorist groups such as ISIS and others who follow the way of Ibn taymiyyah's "ignore consensus ways". Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- User:Vietcong nuturlizer, do you realize beside terrorist groups "admire, follow and quote" ibn taymiya endlessly, actualy that groups also "admire and quoting endlesly" form Hadith of prophet Muhammad, Al-Bukhari's and Sunni imams works too. then why ibn taimiya have special treatment?. then, if one can not call himself a Sunni when he does not follow one of the madhabs, so what is the madhab of Al-Bukhari? or the madhdhab of Anas ibn Malik? isnt Ibn Taimiya himself is following jurisprudence of Hanbali madhab?. Please stop spreading private opinion, especially misleading one. ibensis (What’s the Story?) 03:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Why has this turned into a discussion on Wahhabi's? The talk page is for content related discussion so please cease your posts. Mbcap (talk) 22:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- You are the one that reverted my edit and started this. Dont act like your not aware of that. Ibenesis here has been caught red handed by me. He tried to change the wording of a source used for boko haram article. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 04:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Freedom in Iran
Salam Alaykum, regarding to your edit here, please read Edward Said's book Covering Islam. The case you mentioned[2] relates to what happened after Iranian presidential election, 2009. I mean, the government oppressed the opposition. However, even at that time the ideas of Marx, Max Weber, Durkheim, Freud, etc where studied freely in the universities. Whether you believe me or not, The German Ideology and The History of Sexuality is taught in the university which is directed by the Shia seminary in Qom. I do not want to say everything is OK. Of course, there are some restrictions, particularly when somebody wants to speak about some Islamic issues such as Jinn, the westernized scholars can not tolerate it. I hope you travel to Iran and check the issues by yourself.--Seyyed(t-c) 12:36, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Seyyedوعليكم السلام - All those things being taught are well and good but the crackdown and silencing of academics and the press are undeniable. I gave an example of Fars news agency which stated they had built a time machine, among other things. If a source is willing to do that, then how can you trust it? The sources originating from the press, educational institutions are generally unreliable. You only need to search the number of students and teachers that have faced problems. However, I should make clear that I am not calling for a blanket ban on Iranian sources, because that would be demonstrably unsatisfactory. If a an Iranian source is verifiable reliable then no one can stop that source from being used. Mbcap (talk) 20:53, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- How can you conclude "educational institutions are generally unreliable"!!! The problems relate to their political activities not their intellectual ones. For example, if Mostafa Malekian had been in country such as Saudi Arabia or even Egypt, his philosophical ideas would have never been tolerated. You can compare him with what has done against Nasr Abu Zayd. While you said "However, I should make clear that I am not calling for a blanket ban on Iranian sources, because that would be demonstrably unsatisfactory. If a an Iranian source is verifiable reliable then no one can stop that source from being used.", the proposal was different. Please check the discussion again. As Feder clarified: " I consider practically all media which are subject to Iranian media laws unreliable. The same goes for media under North Korean law, Belarusian law, Syrian law etc.--Anders Feder "--Seyyed(t-c) 03:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Seyyedوعليكم السلام - All those things being taught are well and good but the crackdown and silencing of academics and the press are undeniable. I gave an example of Fars news agency which stated they had built a time machine, among other things. If a source is willing to do that, then how can you trust it? The sources originating from the press, educational institutions are generally unreliable. You only need to search the number of students and teachers that have faced problems. However, I should make clear that I am not calling for a blanket ban on Iranian sources, because that would be demonstrably unsatisfactory. If a an Iranian source is verifiable reliable then no one can stop that source from being used. Mbcap (talk) 20:53, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Please read the Clarification of the claim. As Andres Feders said above he means "practically all media which are subject to Iranian media laws unreliable" which means an Iranian magazine about life style or fauna is unreliable because it can not criticize the leader!!! You also has a general claim "The sources originating from the press, educational institutions are generally unreliable." As I understand this lead to ban all of the Iranian academic journal in every field such as medicine, philosophy or physics.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- I disagree about such generalization. Is this hypothesis falsifiable? --Seyyed(t-c) 17:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Seyyed Where are you going with this? Does epistemology only encompass inductive reasoning? There is big diference between the beauty of falsifiability and the ululating impropriety which is practised by Iranian news sources. Mbcap (talk) 17:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- I know there is a lot of problem in Iran, however I can not accept such generalization. Logically, we can not make general conclusion based on Inductive reasoning. this is an obvious Fallacy. Let me make an analogy which may help me to explain the issue. There are a lot of terrorist attacks which are made by Muslims. Can we conclude that every Muslim is a potential terrorist or every terrorist is Muslim. Or even Islam leads to terrorism? Your generalization is logically wrong as all of these ones.--Seyyed(t-c) 19:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Seyyed firstly logic and inductive reasoning are two separate fields of Epistemology. It is not entirely clear how you have synthesised the two together. Yes you are right, there are a lot of problems in Iran and your comment above which suggested Iran was more tolerant than Saudi and Egypt was laughable to say the least. All three spew out unreliable news sources. Regarding your analogy, it is completely devoid of reality. It does not in any way explain how it applies to our discussion regarding the unreliable news sources in Iran. Let me remind you about the time travelling machine story or that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was trained by Mossad or that the US is run by aliens. Give me one reliable Iranian news source. You wont be able to because the idea of a free press has not been invented yet in Iran. Regards Mbcap (talk) 20:24, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
- I know there is a lot of problem in Iran, however I can not accept such generalization. Logically, we can not make general conclusion based on Inductive reasoning. this is an obvious Fallacy. Let me make an analogy which may help me to explain the issue. There are a lot of terrorist attacks which are made by Muslims. Can we conclude that every Muslim is a potential terrorist or every terrorist is Muslim. Or even Islam leads to terrorism? Your generalization is logically wrong as all of these ones.--Seyyed(t-c) 19:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank for your answer. We have different ideas and even different approach. However, I seldom use Iranian media so this issue does not make any problem. Wa Salam--Seyyed(t-c) 09:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
User:Vietcong nuturlizer
I reported this user's personal attacks to the admins. I mentioned your name as another case of his attack. Therefor, you can refer to WP:ANB#Personal attack by User:Vietcong nuturlizer and participate in the discussion.--Seyyed(t-c) 14:48, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks Mbcap (talk) 17:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
How to attribute posts to other people
Hi, Mbcap. You recently tried to mark a post by someone else as being done by them, which is good as it avoids confusion. Template:Unsigned2 can do that for you, easily if you copy the information from the history. Hope this helps and keep up the good work editing and discussing. Banak (talk) 20:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks I made a total mess of it and ended up undoing it. Will keep the template in mind next time it comes up. Mbcap (talk) 20:53, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Invitation
Hello, Mbcap,
The Editing team is asking very experienced editors like you for your help with VisualEditor. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and fix these small things, too.
You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.
More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.
Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:2015 in spaceflight
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2015 in spaceflight. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Special Barnstar |
Your work is most focused on Islam. MashaAllah A.A.Wasif | Talk 09:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC) |
Help
On Depictions of Muhammad I added references to Hadith books like this:
cite book|last1=Sahih Bukhari, Hadith no. 7.834, and Jeppiz reverted it saying that it doesn't meet WP:RS. Please help A.A.Wasif | Talk 11:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- A.A.Wasif have you tried speaking to the editor who reverted it. He may have a good reason for doing so. Generally speaking, we do not use primary sources such as Sahih al-Bukhari. You would need a secondary source like Fath al-Bari or a tertiary souce, from which to use information from. I would recommend you have a read of WP:PRIMARY. As to the revert, it looks like it is about the prohibition of depictions of the Prophet Muhammad which I am sure you will be able to find in secondary or tertiary souces, if you search google books or scholar. Let me know if you need anything else. Regards. Mbcap (talk) 22:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
POV
here you have presented a political scientist in regard to "expert opinions" in connection to faithfulness to religion and have presented people like the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia in the context of laymen. I very honestly begin to despair. GregKaye 14:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
- Greg I am not aware of a publication or a news story authored by the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia. Reliable sources do say that most Muslims reject the group, including the Muslim Scholars. These are news stories which are reported by journalists. I was speaking about the expert analysis on the group, Graeme Wood being one of those who has offered such. Mbcap (talk) 19:12, 28 March 2015 (UTC)Mbcap (talk) 00:33, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Greetings. I just changed my recommendation on the article, based on a careful reading of WP:N, its predecessor WP:IMPORTANT, and the discussion that accompanied the change. The article is backed by 2 reliable and extremely different sources--a strong criterion for inclusion. I urge you to give it some attention. Regards Tapered (talk) 02:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Tapered and thank you for informing me. However I still think the person is not notable enough to warrant an article. Regards. Mbcap (talk) 19:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Regarding voting in article AfD
Hello. Could you please add your opinion to the AfD vote for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of the succession of Abu Bakr. I only ask this because i noticed you voted on a similar hadith issue. Thanyou.--58.106.235.75 (talk) 04:22, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks 58.106.235.75. The article is a way bigger problem than you might think. I do not think it should be deleted but I completley understand why other's may want it to be deleted. The issues with the article are the following:
- The narration is one that comes from Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jama'ah.
- It is not a hadith but a narration. A hadith can only be from Muhammad. Since this came from Abu Bakr, it cannot be a hadith and no two sources disagree with this.
- It probably has extensive coverage in classical Arabic works.
- The vast majority of the commentary on this narration paints a very different picture to the one illustrated in the article at the moment.
- The narration has nothing to do with the Shia. They discount the validity of all Sunni sources and use the ones they agree with to create these POV pushing articles. Let me give you an example. The Muslims use a certain quotation from Deutronomy in 18:18 to prove the prophecy of Muhammad was laid down in the Bible. If you went to create an article on that quote from Deutronomy on Wikipedia to push this POV without reliable sources, it would be instantly deleted. This particular article on "Hadith of the succession of Abu Bakr" is the same. It relies on primary research and no reliable sources.
- It is extremely difficult to delete such article because a very deep understanding of Islamic works is needed to see the subtle game which is being played with these articles. There are many such articles, for example; hadith of the pond and the hadith about the cloak. Some old deletion discussions which I have gone through, revealed editors who commented that they did not have enough knowledge of the topic to make a decision, and therin lies the problem. We really need to attract more editors into Wikipedia who have expertise on these subjects.
- Despite these concerns I do not think it should be deleted as it does have coverage. The problem is all the information on that page comes from a Shia viewpoint, even though it is a Sunni topic. Imagine a catholic article being written from just a Mormon viewpoint. Someone who has a fully competent understanding of Arabic would need to go through the sources and make the article NPOV. As it stands it is atrocious but we really cannot do anything.Mbcap (talk) 21:01, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
SCW&ISIL notification
Please read this notification carefully:
A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. PBS (talk) 08:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Ismah
May I ask you to help me in copy-editing this article and making it a FA. Thanks.Salman mahdi (talk) 07:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Salman mahdi I would love to help you but I have exams at the moment. I will have more time after May so please do let me know if you still require assistance. Regards. Mbcap (talk) 14:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I try to find another copy-editor because we are in hurry, but if I could not find any one else until that time, I will ask you again. Really thanks for your kindness.--Salman mahdi (talk) 16:49, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Any Reply?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Islamic_economic_jurisprudence --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:23, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- BoogaLouie My apologies for not replying yet, I will try to at a more suitable time. My hands are tied at the moment. Mbcap (talk) 20:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
For the man
Extended content
|
---|
|
- Thank you Greg. It was Banak who spotted it. Mbcap (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
New question raised regarding Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton/April 2015 move request
Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:37, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
- I am sorry but the opposer's have no legs to stand on. Any name other than Hillary Clinton is just wasting peoples time. This page should have been renamed years ago. Mbcap (talk) 05:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Death of Freddie Gray
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Death of Freddie Gray. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Mail-message-new.svg/40px-Mail-message-new.svg.png)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
- Thank you P-123 for letting me know. Mbcap (talk) 08:56, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Institute for Justice
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Institute for Justice. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Thomas Piketty
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Thomas Piketty. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Umm Kulthum bint Ali
Your undo of my edit was extremely unfair. I simply wanted to let wikipedia readers know that the marriage of Umm Kulthum bint Ali was an issue disputed among various sects of Muslims (and certainly not 'fringe' sects). I provided sources for a competing point of view and DID NOT delete the work of the original article (stating that she was married to Umar) which I could have done under the pretext that it was not reliable or a 'fringe position'. Please allow readers to engage with both points of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaztrack (talk • contribs) 00:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- On the contrary it is a very fringe view and this is not a sectarian polemic chat forum to entertain such discussions. You have been reverted for the third time so I would encourage you to read WP:3RR. Maybe reading this[3] may help as well. Mbcap (talk) 01:13, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Excuse me. Wikipedia is not your personal blog to entertain what you may or may not define as fringe or to present an unbalanced view of the issue. In my edit I made it clear that the position that Umar ibn Khattab was not the spouse of Umm Kulthum bin Ali was a view held by SOME Muslims. I did not vandalize the page or attempt to hide pieces of information as you seem to be doing. Please do not allow Wikipedia to be a forum for your personal opinions. I am not interested in getting into an editing war, so it would be apt to agree on a compromise where both points of view can be presented. I suggest that the position of Umm Kulthum bint Ali being the disputed wife of Ali be labelled as a 'minority position'. Would you have objections to this? Kaztrack (talk) 05:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Kaztrack Absolute rubbish, I suggest you re-read the sources again. Mbcap (talk) 18:17, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Absolute rubbish? That is certainly an excellent argument for dishonestly attempting to hide certain pieces of information that do not fit your seemingly sectarian views. I offered a solution to resolve the problem and you have belied it. Kaztrack (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Kaztrack There are eleven sources for the information in the article, I suggest you read them. Lastly you do not know me so I suggest you focus on the content. Mbcap (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Take care on ISIL talkpage
A number of users have ended up blocked, interaction banned or page banned after opposing Legacypac and making uncivil or borderline uncivil comments. Don't become another such person. StanTheMan is already at ANI. Banak (talk) 09:30, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
- Banak I always try to treat fellow editors with respect. Please have a look at the first section in this page where a user called me filth and a dog but I still engaged in a friendly manner or at least I hope I did. However what I do not appreciate is the ISIL talk page being used as a forum and causing disruption to normalisation between policy & the mainspace. I respect that there are opposing arguments and I always appreciate coherent and consistent debate in light of policy that is content related and appropriate. One example is RGGlouster (I may have spelt the name wrong). His/her arguements I can respect because they are coherent, consistent, policy based and related to content. As to those who have made the page their pet project for the war on ISIL then that is something I have had enough of. If they get me or even StanTheMan banned, then that is OK. I will just follow a long line of editors that have been silenced, such as Technophant, P123ct, DocumentError. Mbcap (talk) 11:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)