Jump to content

Talk:Rúhíyyih Khánum

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

Move

[edit]

Any objection to moving this page to Rúhíyyih Khanum? I think unless there is a disambiguation issue it's better to use the simplest, most widely recognized name. That's why we have an article named Badi', instead of Mirzá Áqá Buzurg-i-Nishapuri. Cuñado - Talk 17:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. We'll have to cleanup the authorlinks or add a redirect. Or both. MARussellPESE 18:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts

[edit]

I would like to add a small section on her as an author. Specifically Prescription for Living. Are there any objections to this before I give it a shot. Thank you for the feedback.

--Rangercarr 10 April 2006

Go for it. Baha'i literature could use these titles too. MARussellPESE 14:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Amatu'l-Baha"?

[edit]
Sounds like a great start for doing some research - do please and share refs.Smkolins (talk) 23:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Added the meaning, which I got from here. JuJube (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cool - thanks! Smkolins (talk) 11:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct Punctuation

[edit]

Greetings all,

I'm currently working on a trade book about the Baha'i Temple, and working on my "watch words" for Baha'i punctuation. Using the "Dawning Place" as a guide, because BPT publications have the highest standard of accuracy, Rúhíyyih Khánum's name should be written as:

Rúhíyyih Khánum , with a dot under the first h which even I can't figure out how to do. I'm going to correct this through the article, but I'm finding that throughout the online world there's little standardization. The World Center surely tried, but this is what I found: Amatu'l-Baha R h iyyih Khanum

Have I not seen a Wikpedia list somewhere that lists our standard agreed upon Baha'i punctuation?I'm Nonpartisan 18:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia doesn't like the underlines. I don't think we can easily change the title of the article. Did I catch all the Khánum's?
According to the Manual of Style, the only place were non-standard characters such as dots or underlines should appear is in the lead sentence as part of the strict transliteration. They shouldn't appear in the titles or in the body of the text. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 19:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mary Maxwell (Rúhíyyih Khánum).jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Mary Maxwell (Rúhíyyih Khánum).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Rúhíyyih Khanum. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 06:52, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First Guardian

[edit]

Regarding this edit by User:Asad29591 that I reverted... WP:RS, a core content policy, states: "articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views."

You changed references to Shoghi Effendi from "Guardian" to "first Guardian" to support the view of fewer than 100 people that there were Guardians after him. To a few million Baha'is, and the majority of sources, Shoghi Effendi was the first and last Guardian, and the views of the tiny minority are not excluded from Wikipedia. Per policy, the views are on pages about them, like Baháʼí divisions, Mason Remey, Orthodox Baháʼí Faith, Baháʼís Under the Provisions of the Covenant, Leland Jensen, and others. Including the point of view of a tiny minority across all Baha'i pages on Wikipedia is undue weight.

But here's what you can do: 1) edit the article using a neutral point of view based on reliable sources to describe Ruhiyyih Khanum's role in the transition from Shoghi Effendi's death to the election of the Universal House of Justice. 2) Add Baha'i divisions to the "see also" section. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 17:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation you have given for removing First Guardian is really kiddish and vague. However to reach a neutral point lets stick to wife of Shoghi Effendi - The Guardian of the Baha'i Faith. Asad29591 (talk) 07:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Announcement of Guardianship being Badah in Kampala Conference

[edit]

Hi. Cuñado Gazelle55 Serv181920

I would like to put the below point in this article. Need your advise on the same.

Ruhiya announced in Kampala conference that Guardianship has become Badah and then later said it was a slip of tongue. Reference: Bahais in Exile by Vernon Elvin Johnson pg number: 24

Actual text from the book: Remey tells how on one occasion, Ruhiyyih Khanum went down to Kampala for the 1958 conference there as planned by the Guardian [five years before the 1963 election of the UH], which could reexamine the guardianship question] and there at one of the meetings, she announced that the guardianship was BADAH and ended. Then later in a meeting of the Hands here in Haifa [Remey was still in Haifa as one of the custodians], she explained herself saying that she spoke on the spur of the moment and without thought and should not have announced this. This slip of the tongue proved to me her inner conviction and thought for those who speak without thinking always say what they really think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asad29591 (talk • contribs)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rúhíyyih_Khánum&oldid=1203269240"