User talk:BigCoolGuyy

Islam v. Sunni Islam at Malcolm X

If Malcolm X was Sunni Islam specifically, rather than just general Islam, then the link provided needs to point to Sunni Islam, not Islam piped to look like Sunni Islam. If the information about Sunni Islam in the Sunni Islam article is not good enough, then it's the Sunni Islam article that needs to be amended, not the article on Malcolm X. -- role^player 12:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We're supposed to use secondary sources, not primary sources, when writing Wikipedia articles. According to secondary sources, Malcolm X was a Sunni Muslim. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 14:42, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

African American#Religion

Instead of edit-warring over the chart, please discuss it on the article's Talk page. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Muslim American

Template:Muslim American has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 17:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caferi

Why did you remove information regarding Caferis from Turkey page? Caferi are not Alevis, so it is not true that all Muslims except Sunnis are Alevis in Turkey. Aksiyon magazine published a good article on Caferis, why is it not reliable? Kavas (talk) 21:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Salafi

Please stop removing salafi as not a Maddhab, if you read history of the Salaf and Salafis you will see that the word Salafi means someone who follows the maddhab of the salaf Bazel (talk) 07:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

I have reverted your unconstructive edit here . This is the 3rd time you made this same deletion in 2 months. Its against wikipedia policy to delete cited material.Someone65 (talk) 18:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Please do not remove sourced, as you did [1]. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You have already been warned several times.Someone65 (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you have not replied back to my message at all, stop sending me these warnings and discuss it first, and that reference is already mentioned in the religion article. BigCoolGuyy (talk) 17:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Ali

Please stop reverting the section in the Muhammad Ali article about Ali being Sufi. It doesn't matter if you think it's a legitimate sect of Islam or not, he self-identifies as Sufi; we have a reliable source so that's what the article should say. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this topic further please reply on the article talk page. Voiceofreason01 (talk) 16:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Muslim Brotherhood logo.png

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Atlanta Masjid of Al-Islam

The article Atlanta Masjid of Al-Islam has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable building and associated local religious community, neither of which meet any of the relevant notability guidelines.
Despite being presented as separate references with different dates the three citations are all the same source (in fact, the same exact web page); all redirect to one page. The Pluralism Project, aside from being the sole source, is not an indicator of notability. The HPP is essentially a directory/listing of various religious communities. No apparent criteria for inclusion/listing except submission, and verifiability of its organisation's existence. It may also be relying on self published material in this case, given the paucity of secondary sourcing. None of this is enough to demonstrate notability.
A good faith search (Google News, Books) turned up no independent or secondary sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 04:17, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]