Talk:Muhammad Said Ramadan al-Bouti

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

Deleting[edit]

Deleting is not a game always to press , if you see a mistake just edit it .GhiathArodaki (talk) 16:50, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] 

I have corrected some books' titles in English as I found the original translation was wrong. Ali  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.200.33.177 (talk) 08:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GhiathArodaki's edits[edit]

Editor GhiathArodaki has reverted edits describing Al-Bouti as
known for his outspoken supporter of President Bashar Assad[1]
and
Islamic scholar of Syria (rather than a "Shaykh of scientist of Levant", which is what GhaithArodaki prefers)
here
and later here with this edit summary:
(Hey, Listen Up , He is not known for suporting , he is the shaykh of scientis of levant , Talk good on him , because we don't let anyone say bad things on him , Get it ?)

I think virtually every non-Syrian regime news source has described al-Buti as a supporter of Assad. Examples:

--BoogaLouie (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[the following is pasted from GhiathArodaki talk page as he is currently banned]

Sorry, I can't replay on else where except here, as you see i'm blocked, Now ,
First , When taking a source you musn't take from a non-syrian news only , the second , Yes he supported The regime , but he isn't known for supporting the regime , he is the shaikh of scientis of levant , "The great islamic scientist of scientists of levant" , He is a well known shaikh , so that what should be written , not an islamic scholar and a regime supporter , this is insulting to talk a regime supporter, espicially for a scientist like him, third , if you want to say he supported assad regime , it can be discribed in the 2011 protests , but in a good way, That's why i always delete it, so your mistakes :
1.He is not known for supporting assad regime.
2.He is the shaikh of scientists of levant. GhiathArodaki (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no wikipedia policy saying editors must not take from "non-syrian news only". But if there was the article would read something like:
"According to _____ source Al-Buti was a regime supporter. However Syrian news sources deny that he was."
But where are there sources denying he was a regime supporter? Not mentioning it yes, denying it, no.
Fourthly, you are editing on English language wikipedia. In English Al-Buti is not a "scientis" as there is no such word, (only "scientist" and "science"). But he is not a scientist either as that term is reserved for people practicing Science (the systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. In Arabic -- scientist, ulama, trained Islamic scholar -- all share the same root, but not in English.)
"shaikh of science" is also incorrect because "Shaikh" in English (usually corrupted to sheik) does not identify someone as a religious scholar, but is an Arabic honorific term more likely to be used for head of a tribe. --BoogaLouie (talk) 15:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In short, when you say "Shaikh of Scientis of Levant", readers won't know what you are talking about. --BoogaLouie (talk) 15:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Scientist in Islam , not a scientist in real , You (again) said he was known for supporting the regime , this can be post on the Syrian 2011 protest not in the introduction, and he is not known for that. he is not a simple Scientist , he is the Great Scientist Of Levant and that should replace the Islamic Scholar — Preceding unsigned comment added by GhiathArodaki (talk • contribs) 17:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no consensus on this issue. I'm going to do an RfC --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ KARAM, ZEINA. "Sheikh Mohammad Said Ramadan Al Buti, Syrian Pro-Assad Cleric, Killed In Damascus Bombing". Huff Post. Retrieved 23 March 2013.

RfC: Description of slain Islamic scholar Ramadan Al-Bouti in the lede[edit]

Should it be noted that Al-Buti was a supporter of the Al-Assad Syrian government against the insurgents in the lede and under notability in the Infobox?
Should Al-Buti's notability in the Infobox be "Great Islamic Scholar of Levant" or an "Islamic scholar, supporter of government" ? --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:28, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some stories about his assassination. Note 5 out of 6 of them mention in the headline that al-Buti was pro-government or pro-Assad (Bashir al-Assad is the president of Syria).

Survey[edit]

*Support for reasons given above. --BoogaLouie (talk) 01:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are two questions in the RFC. One of them is an either/or question. Please could you clarify what it is you are supporting? --Stfg (talk) 09:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me. I was originally supporting a revert of these revert revertreverts by GhiathArodaki ... which all involve the same two issues.
  • Support
    • mention of Al-Buti being a supporter of the Al-Assad Syrian government against the insurgents in the lede and under notability in the Infobox
    • that Al-Buti's notability in the Infobox be "Islamic scholar, supporter of government" and not "Great Islamic Scholar of Levant" --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:52, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opinion: there are several issues here:
(a) the phrase "supporter of the Syrian government against the insurgents" is much too strong in the light of the fatwa "prohibiting the killing of protesters".
(b) the main reason for al-Bouti's notability is his scholarship. The phrase "supporter of the Assad government" would be acceptable in the lede, and I weakly support including it there. But it this detail should not be included in the infobox. The notability in the infobox should read "Islamic scholar" only.
(c) the phrase "Great Islamic Scholar of Levant" (or anything similar) should not be included anywhere in the article. "Great" is a peacock term (as is Shaikh, with any spelling); "of Levant" is simply a lie -- all his work was done in Syria. This seems like part of GhiathArodaki's attempt to push a Greater-Syria POV. The word "scientist" should not be used either. Al-Bouti's expertise was law, history and philosophy, none of which are sciences. --Stfg (talk) 09:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed there are several issues.
(a)With "supporter of the Syrian government against the insurgents" I was trying to make it clear who he was supporting -- i.e. the Baathist government -- in case someone was thinking "which government? the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces are as legitimate a government as the Al-Assad regime".
(b)"the main reason for al-Bouti's notability is his scholarship" If he was a distinguished but apolitical Islamic scholar in .... Jordan and was killed, would he have anything like the press he has had in English language sources?
(c)The scientist thing comes from "scientist" being عالم in arabic and the singluar of Ulama being عالِم ʿĀlim. I tried to explain that's it difference in English, he seems to have accepted it I think. .
(c2) "all his work was done in Syria. This seems like part of GhiathArodaki's attempt to push a Greater-Syria POV". Don't know enough about it. Might Al-Buti's influence be "Sham" wide? or Arab world wide? I was assuming he was known to his supporters as "Shaykh of scientist of Levant" and that's why GhiathArodaki was so adament about it. --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC) --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your replies. Very briefly: (a) "supporter of the Syrian government" seems fine, but "against the insurgents" doesn't, unless it's clear in the sources. I didn't think it was. (b) Hypothetical question, surely? In any case, the infobox should be brief, and I don't see the sources enough to include it there. In the lede, no problem. (c1) OK. (c2) What do the sources say? Anyway, the Levant includes Israel. --Stfg (talk) 22:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
changed "Syrian government against the insurgents" to "Al-Assad Syrian government" --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:44, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "Great Islamic Scholar of Levant" is more important that support for a government. Faizan (talk) 14:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see my questions in the "Please clarify ..." section below. Can you help with any of those? --Stfg (talk) 17:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is Al-Buti known for his support of the Syrian regime?[edit]

According to GhiathArodaki:
Yes he supported The regime , but he isn't known for supporting the regime , he is the shaikh of scientis of levant

We've established that western media journalists and scholars think his support for the regime is notable but what about the arab world? Arabic speakers undoubtedly having access to much more information on al-Buti. Do they blow off the trivial matter of this great scholar supporting the Assad regime?

GhiathArodaki started the article on al-Buti 22 March 2013 with this, which appears to be pasted from the Arabic wikipedia article on al-Buti. Nothing in the lede about support for the regime:

Mohamed Said Ramadan Al-Bouti (1929-2013), Was a higher class islamic scientist,One of the most important religious leaders throughout the Islamic world, chosen by the Dubai International Holy Quran in its eighth session in 1425 to be the "personality of the Muslim world". Influenced by his father, Sheikh Mullah Ramadan, which in turn was a religious scholar, received formal religious education and schools Damascus and then moved to Egypt to study at Al-Azhar and earned a doctorate from the Faculty of Sharia. He has authored more than sixty books on various Islamic issues, and is considered the most important of a conservative approach on four schools of Sunni doctrine of the Sunnis according to Ash'aris method.

But was there something about regime support in the Arabic article lede now? Below is the third paragraph from the arabic language lede as copied today 1 April 2013, and below that a translation from google (it's a crude translation but you can certainly tell whether or not they deal with his support for the regime. Checking the history, it was not in the article 22 March )

في فترة أحداث سوريا 2011-2013 أصبحت مكانة البوطي في العالم الإسلامي مثاراً للجدل والخلاف بسبب موقفه الرافض للثورة السورية، ودعمه لنظام الرئيس بشار الأسد، انتهت بتعرّضه للاغتيال يوم 21 مارس 2013، الذي اتفقت المعارضة والنظام السوري على إدانته، وأثار موجة تنديد كبيرة على مستوى العالم،[4] وقد اتهمت المعارضة النظامَ بتدبير الاغتيال بعد ورود أنباء عن عزم البوطي على الانشقاق وتغيير موقفه من الثورة السورية، والهجوم على النظام.[5] بينما اتّهم النظام السوري المعارضةَ باغتياله واصفةً إياهم "بأصحاب الفكر الظلامي التكفيري".[6]

In the events of Syria 2011-2013 became status Bouti in the Muslim world has been controversial and controversy because of his rejection of the revolution, the Syrian support for the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, ended the existence of the assassination on March 21, 2013, which was agreed the opposition and the Syrian regime on conviction, and sparked a wave denounce large levelworld, [4] The opposition accused regime of masterminding the assassination after reports of torque Bouti on dissent and change its position on the Syrian Revolution, and the attack on the system. [5] while accused the Syrian regime opposition assassinate him, describing them as "owners obscurantist ideologies takfiri". [6]

--BoogaLouie (talk) 20:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC) --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because I'm araibian , so I Understand arabic , It was said , in the syrian protest period 2011-2013 , The place of Al-bouti in the Muslim world got in a Controversy because he supported the regime, That is what written in the first of the paragraph, Telling you his not known for his supporting , i think you can use google to read about him before the protest.GhiathArodaki (talk) 12:47, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you have written. What grounds do you have for objecting to including the text
known for his outspoken supporter of President Bashar Assad
in the lede? -BoogaLouie (talk) 23:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify the status of this RfC[edit]

At present no progress is being made. This RfC is having no effect other than to force us all to hold back from neutralizing the heavy POV in the lead and infobox. The two subsections above are obscuring rather than elaborating who thinks what here. How are we going to get closure of this? Perhaps the questions have not yet been adequately separated. I think they are:

  1. Should the fact that he supported the Assad government be mentioned under notability in the infobox? (I think it shouldn't. Several people support the Assad government -- it doesn't make them notable. al-Bouti is notable because of his religious scholarship.)
  2. Should the fact that he supported the Assad government be mentioned in the lede? (I don't care, but I think it's OK to mention it.)
  3. Should the word "Great" be used anywhere? (I think not, as it's a subjective value judgement.)
  4. Should the words "of the Levant" be used anywhere? (I think not, as the Levant is a geographical region that includes Jewish (Israel) and Christian (Cyprus) territories, as well as Muslim territories.)

--Stfg (talk) 14:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry the RfC is such a dud. I thought all would see the simple logic of my suggestions and flood the survey with support votes. I will, however, reply to your questions.
  1. Should the fact that he supported the Assad government be mentioned under notability in the infobox? support
  2. Should the fact that he supported the Assad government be mentioned in the lede? support
  3. Should the word "Great" be used anywhere? oppose peacocky
  4. Should the words "of the Levant" be used anywhere?
comment: The arabic article mentions رئيس إتحاد علماء بلاد الشام
or "Head of the Federation of Islamic scholars (ulama) of the Levant (as-shams)" in the info box, but I have not been able to find this in English language sources. --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine if sources are in Arabic, or any language. They don't need to be English. What I'm trying to understand is whether the words "Great Islamic Scholar of Levant", or Ghiath's "Shaykh of scientist of Levant" are attempts to translate a real title, of if they are just puffery. If the words you quote above are a real title, then all we need to do is to find the best translation, and of course we should include it. I don't know Arabic. Is there an official Federation of Islamic Scholars of the Levant? Does it have a web site? (If not, do the web sites of other official bodies mention it?) Does it have a preferred translation of its name into English (or French, or any other language)? Was al-Bouti its President? If we can find the answers to some of these questions, we may be home and dry. If we can't, the Career section lists many other notable titles he held. --Stfg (talk) 17:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My knowledge of arabic is rudimentary. The problem with "Federation of Islamic scholars (ulama) of the Levant" is not only is that organization not found googling in english (About 661,000 results in arabic though, but google won't translate), but the section of the info box it's in translates not as "memberships" or anything similar but as "Notable ideas" (أفكار مميزة) which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. So I think we may need a qualified arabic reader before proceeding with that. One thing I can tell you is that the word shiekh (شيخ) does not appear in the arabic language info box and appears in the lede only in connection with his father. --BoogaLouie (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
--BoogaLouie (talk) 19:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.culture.gov.jo/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=695&Itemid=50&lang=ar http://www.syrianawkkaf.org/ministry/eitehad_oulamaa_bielad_alsham/ http://www.masrawy.com/news/MidEast/General/2013/March/21/5564441.aspx translate the tittle in the last link GhiathArodaki (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 178.61.35.103.
I propose we put Head of the Union of (Islamic) Scientists of the Levant as a title or membership in the info box using this as a source: اغتيال البوطي رئيس اتحاد علماء بلاد الشام في تفجير انتحاري وسط دمشق Assassination of al-Bouti, President of the Union of (Islamic) Scientists of the Levant in a suicide bombing in Damascus| masrawy.com --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome GhiathArodaki (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) (twice!). Thank you Ghiath. Google Translate isn't very good from Arabic to English, but here's what it gives: the first mentions "Scholars Association Levant"; the second mentions "Union Levant Scholars"; the third says "President of the Union of Scientists Levant". Also ref[2] (onislam.net) equals ref[7] and says specifically "holding the presidency of the Scholars Union for the Levant region"; ref[6] (alarabiya.net) also uses the same phrase. On the basis of these, I would suggest President of the Union of (Islamic) Scholars of the Levant, as I think this is more accurate than "head of" and "scientists". Another good option might be to give the Arabic name of the organisation (transliterated into Roman characters), and then put the translation in parentheses, but this might be a bit too long for an infobox. --Stfg (talk) 17:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer my translation but President of the Union of (Islamic) Scholars of the Levant is OK with me. --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm willing to be persuaded, but it seems to me that "scientists" is wrong for the reasons you gave above about two weeks ago (at 15:19, 26 March 2013), and "head" is colloquial, whereas "president" is a real title. --Stfg (talk) 18:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ya, I guess I'm contradicting myself but you do see references to "Islamic sciences" a lot reading about Islamic scholarship. Apropos "head" and "president", see http://translate.google.com/#en/ar/head%0Apresident and http://translate.google.com/#ar/en/رئيس or http://translate.google.com/#en/ar/head . "President" is kind of a western word, with its own traditions and connotations. "Head" seems more universal. While translating president into arabic gets you رئيس translating رئيس into english might get a bunch of different terms, so it seems quite conceivable that if asked Union of (Islamic) Scholars of the Levant might say "Oh we tell english speakers our head is the chairman" or first secretary or what have you. Anyways that's my reasoning. --BoogaLouie (talk) 22:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC) --BoogaLouie (talk) 22:30, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another correction I have to make of my statements is that there was something wrong with "sheikh" as a title. see [1]here -BoogaLouie (talk) 22:43, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Sheikh" is not a title, it's an honorific, and we should not be using it, any more than we should call an Englishman "lord of the manor". See MOS:HONORIFIC. You were doing fine :) --Stfg (talk) 22:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Should the fact that he supported the Assad government be mentioned under notability in the infobox? Support So long as it can be referenced properly, I don't mind making that fact easily found
  2. Should the fact that he supported the Assad government be mentioned in the lede? Oppose: I'm not sure this fact is essential to his significance to this audience. When there's actual proof his death was because he was an Assad supporter, then I consent to include it in the lede.
  3. Should the word "Great" be used anywhere? Oppose
  4. Should the words "of the Levant" be used anywhere? Oppose: I think these Arab-language sources are doubtful. I don't think any such organization exists and even if it did, I think an attempt to portray it here without an English-language description of that group would simply lead to confusion.

I'd also like to mention that this RfC was targeted to the subject of history. This article is journalism, and far too recent to be history. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Oppose - Support for Assad is sourced and relevant to the article, but I don't get the impression this is his primary notability suitable for inclusion in the infobox. Of course he was killed in the Syrian civil war so news reports of the death are going to highlight his affiliation when reporting his death, but this is a biographical article about the man and his whole life. See for instance this source:"Born in 1929, Al Bouti rose to become one of Syria's most highly regarded Islamic scholars....Once a bestselling author, with hundreds of thousand of copies of his books sold each year..."
  2. Comment- In terms of his whole life, support for Assad seems to be of main significance during the last 2 years after 2011. There is a section in the article on his pro-Assad position on the Syrian protests, so it could legitimately be summarized in the lead per WP:LEAD.
  • I can't say anything useful about the other two points because the discussion seems to be largely based on analysis of Arabic sources. Dlv999 (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Comment : Reply to Dlv999 and Chris Troutman. (mostly pasted from above, March 26),
Below are some stories about his assassination. Note 5 out of 6 of them mention in the headline that al-Buti was pro-government or pro-Assad (Bashir al-Assad is the president of Syria). For pious Arab-speaking Muslims he is no doubt famous for his scholarship, for English speakers/readers -- mostly non-Muslim -- who read English-language wikipedia, he is famous primarily for being assassinated in the midst of the Syrian civil war. --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BoogaLouie. I don't think there's any doubt that we can source a statement that he was pro-Assad. This is just a question of due weight, isn't it? --Stfg (talk) 16:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The articles are not cherry picked. Surely 5 out of 6 headlines mentioning a fact in the headline signifies significant notability --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi BoogaLouie - All the sources you present are discussing his assassination. My understanding is that RS see his support of Assad as of primary importance to the reporting of his assassination. However, this article is not "the assassination of Mohamed Said Ramadan Al-Bouti", it is a biographical article of the man (which of course will include a subsection covering his untimely demise). My feeling from the sources I looked at was that his support for Assad was of primary importance in the context of his life (the topic of this article) after 2011 - that is to say the last two years of his life, and of course in the events around his death. I don't get the impression that support for Assad is his primary notability, although of course it would be of primary importance for a news report that was covering his assassination as part of the Syrian Civil War. Dlv999 (talk) 15:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with that. --Stfg (talk) 15:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would see your point if I was suggesting the lede deal only with his being pro-regime and exclude the number of books he wrote and how much he was on TV, etc. I not. I'm talking about adding one sentence. However I am outnumbered and not persuading you folks, and so will drop the issue. BoogaLouie (talk) 21:23, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, my own comments were made in reference to the idea of putting support for Assad under notability in the infobox (which I oppose because I think it would be overly reductive). Personally, I wouldn't be opposed to one sentence in the lead on this matter. Dlv999 (talk) 07:18, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's my position too (see my original opinion near the start of the RfC). OK in lede, prefer to exclude from infobox. --Stfg (talk) 08:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shiekh al.bouti wasn't famous for the assassination , he is a high rank Shiekh known in the islamic world , you know , i don't know why you want to give a bad image on him to the world , the assad supporter regime if it will be put in the context , then go to al-qaradawi article and but a revolt supporter, and to your knowledge , before his death h said he isn't with assad regime or with revolt people , he is not biased to anyone and i'm ready to bring the video to you .GhiathArodaki (talk) 18:38, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GhiathArodaki, nobody here is trying to create a bad image for him, so stop throwing such accusations at everyone you happen to disagree with. We're trying to figure out the best way to represent what the reliable sources tell us. So if you want to point to another reliable source, go ahead and give us a link, and we'll look at it. But stop trying to bully us all. --Stfg (talk) 19:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://naseemalsham.com/ar/Pages.php?page=readResearch&pg_id=16773

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8xiKNPrTRE

the sources in araic , I Don't like lies , or creating articles for opinions , you can read my main page , so you can know what i'm talking about.GhiathArodaki (talk) 06:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the first of those has an English version. There's a button near the top of the page to get it. Yes, GhiathArodaki, I've read your talk page, where you complain about lies and POV-pushing. We aren't lying or POV-pushing, we're trying to represent the reliable sources in a balanced way. But you know what? I think I'll just leave you to it. There are gazillions of articles in Wikipedia just like this, and it doesn't matter much, because everyone can see what they are. Sorry BoogaLouie, it would've been nice to help if I could, but it's beyond my power, and I'm not really interested enough in the subject to stay around and have insults spat at me and at other contributors here every time we try to use reason. Dropping this from my watchlist now. Cheers. --Stfg (talk) 10:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mohamed Said Ramadan Al-Bouti. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:03, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mohamed Said Ramadan Al-Bouti. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:39, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Muhammad_Said_Ramadan_al-Bouti&oldid=1206397000"