User talk:Edward321/Archive 6

Ghassanids

Dear Sir, again, you're not being fair with your deletions. I'm not using "Youtube" as a reliable source. The videos from Youtube belong to the News agencies official channels. And still, you're disrespecting the second most respected news agency of the Vatican, The Zenit News agency. You didn't explain why you're discrediting it. Since there are no valid explanation from you about the latter source, I can only understand your actions as a prejudice with the Christian Arabs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.247.72.196 (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

What about a reliable article from a reliable news agency translated to 4 languages? Wikipedia doesn't mention that more than one source is needed. Zenit is enough to fulfill guidelines 188.247.72.196 (talk) 16:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Youtube used in any capacity is not a reliable source. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:24, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Again Sir, you've made the new edits without even checking the new presented sources. You've wrongly assumed I was just repeating my edits but every time I was changing the sources. If you check my last edit you'll see that there are 2 news agencies from Jordan. Again, only Zenit would be enough to keep the reliability of the edit. Please, kindly revert your edits and keep only Zenit, if you deem fit, but to simply delete is arbitrary and against Wikipedia rules. 188.247.72.196 (talk) 04:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Medupi response

Hi Edward Again I can see you are not a South African and do not understand the context. This power station is the most expensive project in SA history, and the interest amoungst the general population as to where their taxes has gone is overwhelming, hence the details on who has gained in terms of the contracts. Secondly the debate on climate change and dirty electricity is also huge, hence the criticism both positive and negative to this project.

You only mention the comments from the financing part of the discussion, not the environmental, the carbon and water reducing technology that had to be retrofitted to meet some of these criticisms. This power station is in our newspapers daily and the expectation for it to come on line is enormous, I believe you should look at this article again to understand what I was attempting to do and not just blow off every suggestion I have made. Kind regards.

Equality is not impossible, and didn't cause torture

Improper reversion of my edit to remove the absurd, uncited allegations that the search for equality has led to widespread murder and torture under dictatorships. At least have these cited if they are to remain, otherwise let a more neutral comment take its place. Thanks. VelvetCommuter (talk) VelvetCommuter

Sorry hooperag but Mr Edward I would like to talk about you and your theory on esotericism and I have been digging of how this things could become a realty please contact me when possible

Why the removal?

You recently removed a change of mine saying it was linkspam... I'm not sure I understand. It was on the Bible consistency and criticism pages and linked to BibViz which is on-topic, relevant, uses multiple sources of data and provides a novel way of exploring consistency and other issues. In my opinion it's just as useful as the infidels.org link, and even uses data from infidels.org. I don't understand why new links are considered linkspam but the infidels.org one is allowed to stay... 166.248.130.217 (talk) 00:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

About quick revert

Hello Edward321, I appreciate your contributions. However, I noticed that you generally quickly revert edits/additions by anonymous users in articles like Aisha, Abu Bakr. Yes, most of such edits are wrong and need to be reverted, but not all, for example, this one. This edit is sourced and valid. It needs to be copy-edited, not reverted. The reverting policy also says this. Hope, you will be more careful. Thanks. -AsceticRosé 15:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Note

Hi, Edward321! As you can see, I reverted category spams, overcategorizations etc which Erim Turukku did today. In most cases, he reverted your version of an article and put his instead. I think you should keep an eye on his edits, and if he continue this way consider to report him at ANI. He will be blocked anyway if he continue with edit warring and attempts to push in his versions of articles. Cheers! --Sundostund 20:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

As you can see, Edward, today he continue doing exactly the same things as before - category spams, overcategorizations, Turkic/Turkish POV, edit warring, etc... Do what you think is the most appropriate in this case. As you may assume, I have other things to do here than to constantly follow around a category spammer, Turkic/Turkish POV nationalist or whatever he is and to revert his nonsense edits. --Sundostund 15:12, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Edward! I'll do that. By the way, according to what Kansas Bear said on Erim Turukku's talk page, it may be possible that Turukku and User:EMr KnG are the same person. If that's the case, would it be a WP:SOCK? As you know, in most cases its illegal to have two accounts on WP. And, edits of both Turukku ([1]) and EMr KnG ([2]) look really similar... --Sundostund 00:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

After some looking into how to do it, I just opened an SPI on EMr KnG / Erim Turukku, you can see it at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EMr KnG. If you have something to add, etc feel free to do it. --Sundostund 19:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, Can I ask why you have received new changes back? Erim Turukku (talk) 12:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Greensboro Massacre

Hello, Edward 321. Sorry to revert your recent edit at the above referenced article, but I believe that it was wrong for two reasons. First, if you review the definition of Commission, you will see that it is a group with some degree of official authority. The Greensboro "commission" was just a private group trying to cloak themselves in this official robe. I left the word "commission" in the section, because that was the name they gave themselves, but did not Capitalize it, as if it was an official authority. The Starbucks reference is not as obvious, and I can see why you would want to trim it. But it goes to heart of the "private group/private protest" nature of the "commission". It demonstrates a pattern of activity on the part of the organizers that is neither local nor spontaneous. Again, I hate to revert a seasoned editor with good intentions, I probably should have left this message first. Hope to cross paths under better circumstances, in the future. Gulbenk (talk) 17:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Preston Brooks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Crittenden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Preston Brooks

Please stop including BIASED information against Preston Brooks on his wikipedia page. I have included both sides/points of view in the Brooks-Sumner Affair aka The Caning of Sumner.

If you wish to add to that (although I assume you'd be bias there too) edit that page.

I have correctly cited all sources! Preston Brooks never once in congress voted to expand slavery, yet you say he is a huge advocate of slavery. While it is true that he defended states' rights to own slaves he also supported the rights of states to outlaw slavery- this always shined through. Even after some internal struggles, Brooks called for Kansas to be admitted as a free state. One can only assume he would of voted as such if he had not died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CECD:AF90:93:64EC:DB89:6019 (talk) 00:46, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Preston Brooks, again

Hello Edward,

This is the same person that messaged you before. Now I have a username. I have the same problem with you as before. I am getting frustrated because I am added the information in the 2 books I read that were listed as REFERENCES in the page.

Would a fair compromise between us be me adding an addition Southern Views section? I am a non-confrontational person and I do not wish to get in a silly online battle that would embarrass us both.

Can we get to a fair resolution between us, friend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CivilWarBufftradition (talk • contribs) 01:35, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

James Hanratty

Hello. You reversed my recent edit to this article as being unexplained, and I accept that you made a fair point. I have now provided the explanation on the article's Talk page. To expand a little here, I had myself originally drafted the text saying that no other male DNA had been found (aside from Hanratty's), and that this undermined the argument for "contamination". I made the recent changes for two reasons:

(1) On recently reading the decision of the Court of Appeal in full, I found that I had made a factual error in stating that no other male DNA had been found. This was true for the handkerchief but not true for the panties, where one other male source was found (attributed by the Court to Gregsten). I have corrected the factual statement accordingly.

(2) I had recently been challenged to provide a citation for my statement that a second male source would be expected if the contamination argument was to hold up. While this seems fairly obvious to me, I could not find a statement in so many terms in the Court's decision, or other sources immediately available to me. So for the moment I have dropped the inference that I made before. I still think the statement is common sense. If you can find a source making this statment, please re-insert the statement into the article and provide a citation for it.

Many thanks, Nandt1 Nandt1 (talk) 17:36, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Watch list

Please could you add List of casualties in Hussain's army at the Battle of Karbala to your watch list. There is an editor who keeps deleting mention that Hussain ibn Ali's father was 4th Caliph. The editor gives different explanations for the deletion. You may wish to express an opinion on the subject on the talk page.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:07, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Saraiki language

It is confirm that Saraiki is a language. Also Jhangvi dialect is dialect of Saraiki. This article is redundant with the Riasti dialect, Shah puri dialect,Multani dialect, Multani language, Thalochi dialect, Thalochi ,Derawali dialect articles. I suggest merging these articles , as the all these are same. And also be Redirected to Saraiki language. Kindly See these External Links

• http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=skr
• http://globalrecordings.net/en/language/16338
• http://votebits.com/sweet-and-interesting-languages-of-pakistan/
• http://www.ankarascene.com/haber/pakistan-823.html
• http://thepolyglotexperience.blogspot.com/2011/01/pakistan-language-map.html

File:Map of Saraikistan.jpg

Map of Saraiki Speaking Areas

Department of Saraiki, Islamia University, Bahawalpur was established in 1989 and Department of Saraiki, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan was established in 2006. Saraiki is taught as subject in schools and colleges at higher secondary, intermediate and degree level. Allama Iqbal open university Islamabad, and Al-Khair university Bhimbir have their Pakistani Linguistics Departments. They are offering M.Phil. and Ph.D in Saraiki. Five T V channels and Ten Radio Stations are Serving Saraiki language.16:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)182.186.101.221 (talk)

References

GURPS

You might be interested in this thread given your past activity in the subject area. BOZ (talk) 05:09, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Hi Edward321,

Would you mind taking a look at this discussion. In case you have a different opinion, I encourage you to discuss it there. Thanks.--Kazemita1 (talk) 01:03, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Notability issue

Edward 321: I noticed you deleted 3 citations from Cristina Patwa, yet you placed a Notability tag asking for more references. Why is there an issue of notability given all of the citations, particularly the ones from LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-fi-ct-factorymade-20130910,0,1723531,full.story#axzz2n7egzYJa) and Variety (http://variety.com/gallery/showbiz-strategists-variety-dealmakers-impact-report/#!3/executives-john-fogelman-and-cristina-patwa/) and Cable Fax (http://www.cablefax.com/cfp/just_in/A-Whos-Who-Channel-Guide-of-New-Cable-Networks_60858.html). These are now several, independent, reliable sources. Why would you delete sources? And why do you still have issues with notability? Seems personal.

Edward, your response does not make sense. You simply keep deleting citations that help to establish notability which are precisely about Patwa. Why would you delete those sources when they are secondary sources like the LA Times, Variety and CableFax? And why do those sources not establish credibility? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.197.248.178 (talk)

Turkmen People

i just added the right figure because here https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/af.html it states that turkmens are about 3% of total afghanistan population and total afghanistan population in 2013 was 31,108,077. The calculation works out to be roughly what i added. You can use this reference to modify the article in the best manner. Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saladin1987 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Reverts

Why did you go through my list of recent edits and revert them (Paradigm City)? Most had nothing to do with the Greene military strategy book. 174.22.15.64 (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Why do you keep on deleting "elite" and "prestigious" on Phillips Exeter Academy's Wikipedia page Edward321?

I understand why you took the words down last time. I didn't have ample sources to reference the words elite and prestigious. But this time, I had plenty of sources. It's as if you sit there and wait to take the words down. Why? I simply don't understand. Please tell me why you took the words down, because I put sources. I don't know if you didn't see them, and just deleted it anyway, thinking I didn't cite my sources. I did cite my sources. Please stop undoing it, or at least tell me why you keep undoing it.

Ok, I see that you think it's the "better version," but why? If Andover can say they're prestigious than Exeter certainly can as well. It's not like we're being arrogant here, it is true! Both schools are incredibly good schools, and other people should be able to know that.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by LLotteDaae17 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC) 

The 33 Strategies of War

Please note Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive825#The 33 Strategies of War.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I have notified our problem IP editor that he/she is edit-warring and adding unsourced personal commentary: User talk:174.115.9.138. I have also started a section on the article talk page Talk:The 33 Strategies of War/Archives/2016#Personal commentary. If the IP editor does another revert, I suggest that you report him/her to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Special:Contributions/99.232.11.148 and Special:Contributions/174.115.9.138 are no doubt the same person, with the same objective: removing or debunking Adair's book review.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:36, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

The IP editor has made two more reverts, so it is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:174.115.9.138 reported by User:Toddy1 (Result: )

In regards to Checkuser

Hello, I would like to point out to you that I am just as annoyed about the current edit warring and sock-puppetry as you may be. I have been dealing with this annoyance for over 10 years. Please see my history of edits and contributions at your own interest. I would never endorse meaningless sockpuppetry myself as I am highly against this idiotic behavior and I myself have been a target of such caliber of foolishness over the past decade. I believe the person you are dealing with is the very same that has been harassing me within this long period of time. Additionally, the user does have a tendency to attempt to infringe my name and pretend to be me. I assure you, this user has been doing this for a very long time and that is not an exaggeration. He has created over 300 accounts on not only the wikipedia primary but on all the wiki sister projects. Any help would be greatly appreciated on your part on maintaining a constant checkuser of suspicious activity. I myself would greatly prefer to halt the threat at a sooner time. In regards to the recent reverting of the article you mentioned, I did revert twice myself, and I acknowledge that, but that doesn't make me related to anyone else. I still believe that if an article exists without unsourced material, then there shouldn't be an exclusion of additional unsourced material. I even brought that up on the article talk page for discussion. I highly recommend that some names be expelled from the list or the article itself merits no inclusion when it is, suffice to say, a half-truth. You will find that I would like to aid the wiki and its related projects but would not go through the hassle of sourcing every tidbit. Regardless, I find that one checkuser will not be enough as you will need to forward all the most recent harassment activity to my talk page by this same sockpuppet in order to halt future activity from this user. I highly recommend that my talk page be protected from new users as this might help alleviate further vandalism. Thanks in advance. - Zarbon (talk) 01:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Kirk Sommer

Perhaps wp:afd? Seems rather promotional. I'd avoid wp:proposed deletion. It hasn't been addressed for awhile. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirk Sommer Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 11:32, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Monsters, Inc. characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ashleigh Ball (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions 2013 review: Draft v3

Hi. You have commented on Draft v1 or v2 in the Arbitration Committee's 2013 review of the discretionary sanctions system. I thought you'd like to know Draft v3 has now been posted to the main review page. You are very welcome to comment on it on the review talk page. Regards, AGK [•] 00:16, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Someone else nominated this, but didn't alert you.

[3]. 41.132.48.255 (talk) 05:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Why did you revert my last edit

You Know I'm the original contributor of the article Shahudin and i'm trying to improve the biography with time. But everytime when i made some contribution after proper research you don't take a minute to revert without any comments.I didn't make this story while sitting back at my workstation every line i have contributed is from reliable reference. Books published here in our country don't have ISBN number. Try to understand and give due respect to the writer. I would like an explanation; my addition totally abided by Wikipedia's policies and that articles standards. Please in the future try not to tweak every little thing you can. Thanks Leotassawer (talk)Leotassawer 4:00, 29 April 2014 (UCT)

Undo your last revert of page named Khawaja Shahudin

Edward321 Kindly undo your last revert of Khawaja Shahudin as my addition totally abided wikipedia's policies and this articles standards.Leotassawer (talk) 04:31, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lauren Tom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mr. Jones (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Edward321. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:43, 15 May 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:43, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Edward321: Content you posted and posted to page of John Fogelman has been deleted again. The cited reason is that the news media article and organization is not credible, though the article is question is, as you said, is "no worse" than others in the article. The article in question is published by a publication (The Wrap) with its own Wikipedia article, and written by a former NY times journalist. Curious why someone has deleted content citing what appears to be a viable source (The Wrap) while leaving intact citations from its competitor, Deadline Hollywood. Your point that the sources someone deleted "are no worse than the positive sources about the subject" seems right on. Now a new user JSFarman has again deleted the content you posted and reposted. JSFarman appears to be professional fixer of unwanted content in show business Wikipedia articles, and a creator of PR articles, and her service has been described in a NY Times article. Calls herself a propagandist in some posts. I guess that doesn't matter if her articles are accurate. Curious to know why your postings were deleted. Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waxmanchecks (talk • contribs) 22:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Shahudin Biography

Edward dispute of updating Khawaja Shahudin was settled, but today again, you reverted without comments. I'm in the process of completing the biography.Leotassawer (talk) 14:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Ant Farm may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

The Ant Farm

Your "01:35, 23 May 2014‎ Edward321" edit of the article "The Ant Farm" is very rough.

Garbled English:

the "Transformers" franchise to and sensations

Multiple poorly formatted invocations of templates:

{[cn}}

Will you fix your edit, or should I just undo it? --LukasMatt (talk) 15:12, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

What sources say that Timurid was a Mongol state? "at the time of Timur's reign the Barlas had become thoroughly Turkicized in terms of language and habits." Was Kazakh khanate a Mongol state? Galdaa (talk) 15:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Source?Galdaa (talk) 09:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Image for The Sound of Music: Music from the NBC Television Event

I'm asking anyone who has edited on The Sound of Music Live! if they could please post an image of the soundtrack cover on The Sound of Music: Music from the NBC Television Event on the page? It would be most appreciated. Thank you ahead of time if you do! Bigpolesmokerfromoh (talk) 02:56, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Message

I can't thank you for this: "rv unsourced" on Massimo, January 29, 2013‎. TheGGoose (talk) 05:17, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Veggies "Better As A Redirect"

Hi - I've just gotten done reverting all (I think) of the edits you made on Veggie video pages to delete the content and make them redirects. I'm not sure of your reasoning, since your edit comment was the same and it clearly doesn't make anything "better" especially when you are redirecting to an existing redirect, so I simply rolled back the original. To be honest, I've appreciated your edits over the last several months, since previous to this I was somewhat alone keeping "the wolves at bay", so I was surprised to see this. If you had something in mind when you did this, I'd be happy to hear as I'd prefer to work with you (as a well experienced fellow editor) to improve these pages. I'm not on Wiki as much as I used to be, but I'm looking forward to your response. Again - not trying to be a jerk - just a little confused. Yours - Ckruschke (talk) 19:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Southpaw (comics) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• the energy hands fingers; this forced Southpaw's fingers open and caused Southpaw great discomfort).{{Issue|date=January 2010}} The energy hand was certainly strong enough to twist [[Ironclad (

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sheerluck Holmes and the Golden Ruler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matthew Ward. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Mizzou Arena

I don't understand your removal on Mizzou Arena. It all seems very tame to me. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 20:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Zoe Quinn

You recently reverted my edit on Zoe Quin which was restoring the consensus pending dispute. I'd appreciate it if you would join the discussion on that page and help come to a consensus on a "better version" SPACKlick (talk) 13:52, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Charlotte de Berry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• included in the story have parallels with other events and stories of the early 19th century.{cn}} Since 1836, de Berry's story has appeared in print in a number of books, but in every case it is a

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits

Hello Edward, I 'd like to thank you for some of your edits in my article Illuminati symbolism, I completely agree that some of my parts were too much of an opinion. I just wanted to say that the part which I wrote about the Simpsons was not an opinion but originated in fact from the newspaper which I referred to here. I think though that the other parts of the article currently used have more relevance and as this Simpsons episode is only mentioned in one newspaper I think that it's better to use references to the illuminati which can be read in multiple sources. I have improved the article and added references to several books, newspapers etc. which aren't from conspiracy theorists. I also think that the links indeed weren't good, so I thank you for this too. Bokareis (talk) 17:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Comparison of the Amundsen and Scott Expeditions may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *Fatalities: Scott lost five men including himself returning from the Pole, plus another man {{Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration|drowned]] out of a team of 65. Amundsen's entire team of 19 returned to Norway safely.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

List of companies of Pakistan

No worries at all, easy to do when there's been a few changes quickly! Thanks for stopping by to let me know. Melcous (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Reverting Shia Islam to Shi'ism

Hi Edward321

I saw that you reverted my edit in the titile of one section of Mahdi from Shia Islam to Shi'ism . What is wrong with Shia Islam ? Please explain.

Thanks Smhhalataei

Thanks for the clarification

Thanks Edward321 for your reply. So the problem isn't with Shia Islam rathletting me know with the usage of word "imam" in Imam Hasan al-Askari. I will fix this. I didn't know that I can't remove anything from the talk page. Thanks for the reminder.

Best Smhhalataei

-Thanks for your new comment on my page. I just saw it. Thank you

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Wonderful World of Auto-Tainment!, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ron Smith. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Fantasy

Hi! You undid my edit of the Fantasy article. Yes you are right, it was nothing but an unsourced opinion, but so is the whole first paragraph. I don't see why anyone else's unsourced opinion should be treated differently from my unsourced opinion. It's also troubling that both the Mahabharata and Ramayana are listed, but not the Bible. This is clearly a Western bias, since the former are sacred texts of Hinduism. We either take out all religious texts, or none.95.150.255.119 (talk) 18:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. While I understand your reasoning, the premise of your assumption is wrong. I do not feel that religious texts shouldn't be mentioned. I think they should if it is relevant and I very much regret that they are treated differently. Seeing that the first paragraph had not been significantly changed since 2008, I imagined there was an editorial consensus that such an unsourced listing was ok. Therefore, my approach was not conterproductive, since it wasn't my aim to exclude religious texts. Accusations of bias may in most cases be inaccurate, but considering RLetson's reply here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fantasy#Religious_Texts , they were certainly appropriate. In 2008, a user had complained that the Bible was not included, while other religious texts (Hinduism) were. He also mentioned apocryphal texts such as The Odyssey. RLetson's response defended the exclusion of the Bible, rightly pointing out that The Odyssey is another kind of text, but omitting the user's legitimate concern about the different treatment of the Hinduist texts.95.150.255.119 (talk) 20:40, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Editors like you

Hey, thanks for removing the unsourced "and viewers like you" funding content from various articles, like this one. Though I think there might be some value to this information, we are relying too heavily on the primary sources (the episodes) for this content. Anyhow, thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppet?

I have noticed certain IPs[4][5] and editor[6] pushing an "Uzbek" POV over a couple of articles. Starting to smell like sockpuppetry. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:53, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Baloch people

In regards to your revisions here, are you actually reading the sources? The first source here says there are 8.8 million. I put that in myself. I don't know where you're getting the 20 million number you're putting in. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

The edit summary of "reverted falsification of the sources and fixed vandalism" seemed pretty clear to me. My apologies though. The article has been a repeated source of all sorts of editors screwing with it. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

hi

Arsaces I of Parthia is not turkmen?:/Turkic_ Warrior 14:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

I have noticed an increase in sockpuppets pushing an Uzbek POV over numerous articles, including Siktirgitir. Would now be the time to file another sock report? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I have filed a sock puppet investigation. If you were interested in adding evidence. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:24, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Information regarding umar

Hi edward, you deleted some information i have added on the umar ibn khattab page due to sourcing my information from another wikipedia article. Apologies for that

i have sourced my info direct from sunan abu dawood which is one of the six books of hadith for sunni muslims. I have also added ali muhammad as sallabee book on umar for further information.

Finally there is someone who edited the page after me doing alot of changes and he took out bits from of umar's intoduction. (most powerful/influential caliph?) Tried undoing it but to no avail. Just letting you know edward

cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betrayerofhope (talk • contribs) 08:34, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, say to me please why do you think that they are not Uzbeks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexUzb (talk • contribs) 13:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Uzbeks in Bukhara 82% on reference it is so written — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexUzb (talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Edward321 you by nationality Persian? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexUzb (talk • contribs) 05:03, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

I feel its unfair

Respected Sir,

Greetings,

I am new to editing Wikipedia.I found out that my initial edits were rolled back for lack of references and improper formatting. I totaly agree with those rollbacks and am really grateful to you for your help and valued guidance.

I have done a lot of research on Abutalib bin Abdul Muttalib and feel really sorry when few people quote politically motivated and fabricated narrations about this Holy Personality. A personality who sacrificed what ever he had for the sake of Islam. It was only Abutalib bin Abdul Muttalib who came forward when Islam needed help and all the blood which was shed in the way of Islam belonged to Abutalib his children grandchildren and his family.Islam would not have moved an inch ahead without his help and support.

Beleive me I worte the post not for the sake of any monatary or social benefit.I felt that it was my duty to present the truth in front of the world. The duty of a slave towards his Master.

There can be two view points to any given topic. For Eg: The Christans beleive Jesus Christ to be the son of God, while the Muslims beleive him to be a prophet of God.

Some people beleive that the United States actually went on the moon. While some people beleive that the entire sequence was shot in a studio.

Both have their own reasons and arguements, a fair deal would be to allow both the sides to pesent their arguments and let the readers decide. It was fair when my edits were rolled back for lack of references or for Improper formatting, but rollbacks stating that the previous version was better without going into the depth of the matter is against the laws of natural justice.

If you are a muslim you might be knowing that there are two view points regarding Abutalib bin Abdul Muttalib, If you are a non-muslim then undoing my edits without knowledge is unfair.

Every one is answerable on the day of judgement only upto the extent of his ability.

It was within my capacity to study the personality of Abutalib.........which I did, It was within my capacity to consult scholars to ascertain my findings....... which I did, It was within my capacity to argue with people and present the truth in front of them.......... which I did, It was within my capacity to spread the truth using all possible ways including the Internet ..........which I did (my website www.abutalib.info), It was within my capacity to discuss the matter with you and improve my posts........ which I did.

But to undo your rollbacks life long.......... is beyond my capacity.......this I cannot do

I did what ever I could...... and I am not answerable for what is beyond my capacity.

I am open to discussions and debates but just rolling back my edits stating that the previous version was better is unfair.

I would repost the data one last time after two days. If you feel you still perfer to roll back I would not try again. Allah is the best of all the judges.

I end my post with a pray to Allah : "O Allah ! To present arguments was my job, to change hearts is yours. I might be incompetent but you are not."

Regards

A slave of Abutalib bin Abdul Muttalib

Ajani Abbasali — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajani Abbasali (talk • contribs) 19:22, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Global account

Hi Edward321! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 18:03, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Dele Serom of Zynab Bint Ali in Yazid's Court in the Battle of Karbala Article

Hi! Why you deleted this chapter from Battle of Karbala? that is historical and unsourced and all of that is quote! Hananeh.M.h (talk) 06:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Karbala

I am rather concerned that you and anther editor may be about to engage in an edit war over the section on Sermons during the journey from Karbala to Damascus in the article on the Battle of Karbala. It looks as if each of you have done one revert already. Please could we discuss this on the article talk page, where there is a discussion - see Talk:Battle of Karbala#Aded the Sermons and separate.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:42, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Lists of fantasy novels

Edward, although I appreciate your pruning out the redlinks from the lists of fantasy novels, the general principle is that an entry must have a bluelink for the title or the author. DS (talk) 13:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I was thinking that based on the editnotice in list of science fiction novels; it's certainly reasonable to apply it equally to SF and F. DS (talk) 01:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Reporting Harassment / Wikihounding" OTRS ticket 2015011510021553. Thank you. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 02:31, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Article: Husayn ibn Ali

Hi Edward321, this is Ialiabbas!

I just made some changes in the article of Husayn ibn Ali. The changes were only the correction of some spellings so that it would be easily understood by anyone. Kindly, do not delete my changes, its a request! Ialiabbas (talk) 13:44, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Edward321, I've spent at least 4 hours in correcting the spellings and making it appropriate but, you just did undone it in just a click. Kindly, before making any changes, make me aware. Secondly, I'm making the article easier for the people to understand it. Ialiabbas (talk) 15:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Ialiabbas, please discuss your proposals on the article talk page at Talk:Husayn ibn Ali#Spelling of names and Talk:Husayn ibn Ali#Peacock features.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I hope you do not mind, but I have placed a link to the above discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Ialiabbas reported by User:Toddy1 (Result: )-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ialiabbas.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hasan ibn Ali

I have suggested to User:Hadi.anani that he paste his revise of the article on the article page. I will have comments on it in due course, but I have not had time so far. I think it is much fairer to Hadi.anani to go ahead with his revision that to keep him waiting.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI-notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:79.97.222.210_-_Persistent_disruptive_POV_pushing_and_edit-warring. Thank you.

This notification is simply because I make mention of you in my report about an IP you reverted. Mabuska ^(talk) 14:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Declined A7: Lynne Hermle ‎

I think PROD, or perhaps better, AfD would be more appropriate, there are claims and sources which press toward significance. Sorry for the extra lap. --j⚛e decker^talk 19:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

TWL HighBeam check-in

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Ismah

Would you please help me to made this article a FA? With thanks.Salman mahdi (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Circassians

Hello,

I've reverted this edit of yours as the article explicitly states she was a Circassian and born into a Circassian family. The lede only states "Safavid Iranian noblewoman" as she was simply born and raised in Safavid Iran.

- LouisAragon (talk) 17:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Watch list

Please add Sayyed Ibn Tawus to your watch list.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:25, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Mr Potto (talk) 18:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ahmed ‘Urabi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• their mothers gave birth to them as free living people [Kanz ul Amaal, Volume No. 4, Page No. 455]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:44, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Anya Beyersdorf

Hello Edward321. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anya Beyersdorf, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: won an AWGIE Award - looks like a credible assertion of importance to me. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 12:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

As you were involved in the earlier AfD

Sending this to all active editors who were involved in that AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Kapisa (2nd nomination). Doug Weller (talk) 11:42, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Greensboro massacre

Hello Edward321. I though I would post comments here, since we seem to be talking past one another in the edit comments section of the above referenced article, and you are about to max out on 3RR. My objections to the wording that you continue to re-insert are as follows:

• A panel was appointed by whom (another panel it seems, who were they?) Using what criteria? How were the local community organizations solicited, and were organizations with opposing views represented? Was there any attempt to represent all views of the metropolitan community, and (if so) how was that done? The reference you cite for all this is a speech given to a convention, which was not subject to peer review or comment (like a published academic paper - see WP:Scholarship) which cites among its references another speech by the author given to another convention. It is not as authoritative as a newspaper editorial. The information cannot be cited as fact, but (at best) as the singular opinion of the author.
• The group took testimony only from those who were willing to appear before it. It had no subpoena power, no method for compelling testimony, no way to sanction false testimony (such as perjury), and no demonstrated expertise in legal procedure. You say the group was based on other Commissions (like the one in South Africa), but aside from the phony "commission" name, it bears very little similarity to those official bodies and proceedings.
• You inject a strong POV into the article when you state: The very fact of city officials rejecting the effort of the community to reveal the truth and seek restorative justice is cited in the commission's report as evidence of the resistance to the process within city government and from police officials. Is this your opinion, the opinion of the private organization, or both? It is not a "fact".
• The self-styled "commission" is not a commission, anymore than they are a "judicial council", if they called themselves that. In both cases one would not call them a Commission or a Judicial Council (without quotes). They are an organization, and that label is the best, factual, and unambiguous way of referring to them.

I hope you will respond with your comments, so that we can resolve this issue. Gulbenk (talk) 04:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

List of works based on Arthurian legends

If you revert my edit about Once Upon a Time (TV series), then for consistency you have to do the same with the episode about Hercules and the episodes of Stargate SG1. Which would mean throwing out the entire section. The entire episode may not have been about Arthur, but there will be more and they will likely be about him at least in part. At some point this season I think Once (for these two seasons) will be as much about Arthur as Stargate was.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I was actually being sarcastic. I feel all three of the items that were in that section should be on Wikipedia somewhere. Perhaps others would agree. The name of that list suggests these might be more like trivia, but obviously these can't go in a featured article.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:11, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I noticed the last edit did not add information about Once Upon a Time but made it neater and more up-to-date. So what I added was already there, without some of the details. I suppose that's enough. Now if we can only get the other edits re-instated.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

And as I looked for potential supporters I notice you did in fact revert the dit about Hercules at one point. I would disagree, as an episode could be called a "work" just as surely as a series.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:50, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Forgot Something?

	Forgot Something?
	Hi i am rusherduckie i have watched paul blart 2 multiple times, and you forgot the ending. but you do have a good summary written, just add a few parts Rusherduckie (talk) 21:37, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Death of Mary Jane Barker

Hi, Edward321. I saw your recent edit in List of unsolved deaths regarding Death of Mary Jane Barker. I've also made a couple edits to the latter in which you may want to double check. Cheers! - Location (talk) 03:12, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Alhazen

Would you interested in giving your opinion on some sources on the Alhazen talk page?--Kansas Bear (talk) 18:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib

Please provide Reliable source for your claim, that this Puppet belongs to Amir Hamza (R.A). SpyButeo (talk) 05:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

User:SpyButeo

Judging from this "new user's" animosity towards Encyclopaedia Iranica references, I would suspect a possible sockpuppet. Your thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Aisha

Please could you use the talk page to explain your thinking about original research. Talk:Aisha#Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2015.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Your name has been mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:80.42.122.69 reported by User:Toddy1 (Result: )-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Meen Kozhambum Man Paanayum

Hello Edward321. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Meen Kozhambum Man Paanayum to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. -- GB fan 15:56, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Your Request about Abu Bakr's Daughters

Edward, thank you for thinking of me. I actually have quite a lot of resources on this topic. But in my time-zone it's currently the end of a long day so I don't have time to do justice to your request immediately. And please note that I can't read Arabic. I knew from a secondary source where to look for the Dhahabi quote, and it's pretty clear when it's run through Google Translate, and if matters become really, really explosive around here, I have Arab friends who will happily confirm the translation. But I don't want to set myself up as an expert when I'm just a person who can read - let's be clear about that. I'll write back when my brain is in gear.Petra MacDonald (talk) 12:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

First response - just the facts

Al-Dhahabi has his own Wikipedia article, which links to the text of his book Siyar a‘lam al-Nubala’ (The Lives of Noble Figures). His article about Asma bint Abi Bakr is number 143 and it is in volume 2. The full text is here. https://ar.wikisource.org/wiki/%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B1_%D8%A3%D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%A8%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A1/%D8%A3%D8%B3%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%A1_%D8%A8%D9%86%D8%AA_%D8%A3%D8%A8%D9%8A_%D8%A8%D9%83%D8%B1

The article begins with her name, then a long list of the people who narrated hadith from her. The next words are:

وكانت أسن من عائشة ببضع عشرة سنة

This means something like:

She was older than Aisha by ten years plus a few.

The word "few" is precise in Arabic: it means "three to nine". So it could be translated:

She was thirteen to nineteen years older than Aisha.

Then he goes on to talk about her emigration to Medina and her participation at Yarmouk. There is no reference for any of these basic facts about Asma. Probably Dhahabi assumed them to be so well attested that no reference was required (similar to "Muhammad was born in Mecca and he died at Medina"). From our point of view, of course, we are left with the disadvantage that we don't know what the source was.

However, he does cite sources for the less well-known information later in the article. After a narration from Asma on another topic, we read:

قال عبد الرحمن بن أبي الزناد كانت أسماء أكبر من عائشة بعشر

This means something like:

Abdulrahman ibn Abi’l-Zinaad said that Asma was older than Aisha by ten.

Then he moves on to the next narration. He makes no comment about the contradiction with the previous tradition, let alone on the reliability of either narration.

One fact should be obvious to us without further research. It is not true that "all the historians agree that Asma was ten years older than Aisha". Dhahabi does not agree with it because he cites two contradictory narrations with no comment on which one to prefer.Petra MacDonald (talk) 06:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Second response - the other two historians

I double-checked the other two references. Long story short, our friend 5.107.81.93 has shown absolute good faith in providing valid sources. It's only his use of the sources that I would question.

As the user says, Ibn Asakir writes:

قال ابن أبي الزناد: وكانت أكبر من عائشة بعشر سنين

This means:

Ibn Abi'l-Zinaad said: "She was older than Aisha by ten years."

Although the wording is not identical to Dhahabi's, it is still sourced to the same narrator (Ibn Abi'l-Zinaad) and the meaning is the same.

Ibn Kathir writes:

وهي أكبر من أختها عائشة بعشر سنين.

This means:

She was older than her sister Aisha by ten years.

He does not cite his source. The wording is a third variant (addition of the word "sister" as well as "years" and using a pronoun instead of "Asma"). Either he is citing a different tradition or he is giving a paraphrase.

Note that Ibn Kathir also wrote this about Aisha's age (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya, Le Gassick's translation, vol. 2, p. 94):

His statement, "He contracted marriage with 'A'isha when she was six, thereafter consummating marriage with her when she was nine" is not disputed by anyone, and is well established in the sahih collections of traditions and elsewhere.

Therefore to claim Ibn Kathir's authority for the tradition about the sisters' age-difference to "prove" that Aisha was any other age would be to misrepresent Ibn Kathir's conclusions.

Third response - general observations

These three historians are authorities: unlike, say, Discovering Islam, which just seems to be someone's blog and an unsuitable resource for Wikipedia, they should be taken seriously.

However, it is not correct to pin a whole case on two citations of a single source plus a third anonymous citation that may or may not be independent while ignoring the body of evidence that states something different. The overall case seems weak when we consider that we are dealing with three claims, one of which must be false.

1. Asma was born in 595.
2. Aisha was born in 614.
3. The age-difference was ten years.

The assertion most likely to be correct is the one about Aisha because it is multiply attested and derives from Aisha herself. It could only be wrong if Aisha were mistaken or lying; it is not possible that so many different witnesses all misrepresented her identically. The assertion of Asma's age is not as strong because (as far as I know) there is only one tradition, deriving from Asma's son. If there is a mistake about either sister's age, it is more likely to be Asma's than Aisha's. The weakest assertion is that of the ten-year age-difference because it derives from a weak narrator who was not a contemporary. It also contradicts an alternative tradition that the age-difference was 13-19 years, although that is only important if the strength of this tradition can be established.

You can cut and paste any or all of this to Asma's talk page if you think it would help.Petra MacDonald (talk) 12:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Bangladeshi people may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[Khwaja Salimullah], first to propose the creation of the [[All India Muslim League]] (AIML), later

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Princess Ozma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oz. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Indoctrination, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Custom. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Your Kind Guidance Would Be Helpful

Respected Sir, I refer to the page Abu Talib ibn Abd al-Muttalib the link of which is given below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Talib_ibn_Abd_al-Muttalib

There are two historical views of Abu Talib Ibn Abd al Muttalib. One that he was a believer other that he was not.

I have previously tried to put my views on the page but the edit was undone citing reasons of non citation. Later on even after giving proper citation my edits were undone.

I have seen that people have given websites (duas.org) as their references. Are websites allowed.

I would like to quote the below given matter for which I will give proper references. Who He Was

"He was one of the Supporters, who stood in the fore front. He was one of those who supported the true principles and supported the prophets and the guides of humanity.

A man, who supported the straight belief while all the hearts turned aside for him and all the eyes looked askance at him. Those hearts and eyes scattered grudge, quivered with serious enmity, warned of resistance and disobedience to put out this fresh burning torch.

Some hands stretched to do away with this (new prophet), whose light had cured the sore-eyes, but this strong fort (Abi Talib) stood up to them towering, showing his powerfulness and challenging, their reckless will, and then they turned back empty-handed. Grudge increased in the hearts against this supporter but it was as the grudge of the horses against the bridles.

A man, who watered Islam when it was a seed in a barren land, guarded it against the wind whet it was soft and tender and then took care of it when it was young, It grew and became strong, and the light of guidance spread from it. No enemy would achieve an aim until the loyal guard of this flowing spring left to the better world and until the flowing spring dried."

Can u please guide me how I should put it so that it is not undone.

Best Regards Abbasali — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajani Abbasali (talk • contribs) 14:31, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

The Wiz

Other than keeping the page "concise", did any good reason exist behind removing all information about Andre De Shields and Queen Latifah from Wizard of Oz (character)? I'll admit that maybe my entry about De Shields needed trimming, but it seems unfair to imply that the first African-American Wizard and the first female Wizard (at least as far as I know) have no notability at all. 108.199.223.177 (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

you edit summary "rv to better version

Here. I agree it is better version, but in the future please indicate to which exactly version you are reverting, for easier verification. Thank you, Staszek Lem (talk) 02:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Remotion of Brazilian company of Wicked

Hello.

I sae that your edition has done the job of deleting the Brazilian company due to a "more concise version". I can't see any good reason why the Brazilian cast shouldn't be there. Do you care to explain? Rodrigo-hp (talk) 09:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Meliservet Kadin

She died 20 october 1891 Sources: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~royalty/turkey/i170.html#I170

Death of Starr Faithfull

Hi, I noticed you removed some info from the Starr Faithfull article, which I just created today, as unsourced. I noted on the talk page for the article that I am still in the process of adding sources to the article, as I probably have between 30 and 50 more to put in, but due to my work I can only put in about 2 per day and I wanted to get the article out of my sandbox and onto a page as it was getting very large/ long. Therefore, I'm going to replace the information about the Loschiavo play that you removed, and will add the source for that as well, which should resolve any issue. Cheers, TheBlinkster (talk) 04:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC) Edited to add, same for The Love Thieves deletion. There is a source for that too. If there is anything else you think is unsourced, could you please just tag for citation needed so I can put the source in for that first or immediately? Thanks by the way for removing the duplicate sentence. TheBlinkster (talk) 04:16, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of historians may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hermann Georg Scheffauer

Hello, Edward321. You have new messages at Procureur2014's talk page.
Message added 17:57, 27 February 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ali's Revert

Hi. All extra information in the page are referred to valid sources. If there is any problem with this comprehensive editing, let's discuss to improve this page. Mahda133 (talk) 07:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Muhammad al-Jawad

Hi Edward. In the page of Muhammad al-Jawad occurred some edits which could enhance the quality of the page and clarify the life of this person. Please describe your reason about your reverting. In addition, Al-Ma'mun was the seventh Abbasid caliph who is named in the page, I don't know why you have reverted this name to a wrong name (Al-Ma'mum). If you check all historical references, you will find out "Al-Ma'mum" is completely incorrect. Mahda133 (talk) 08:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Can you contribute to the page I made?

I made a page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_mythological_or_fantastic_beings_in_contemporary_fiction

It could use more contributions.

Much appreciated... Tamtrible (talk) 08:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

You are invited to discuss a controversial article you edited previously

You are invited to comment on the article "List of expeditions ordered by Muhammad" in the Wikipedia Administrators Notice Board. Your input is highly valued as you edited this article previously.

Click here: Controversial Islamic Article-90% of page wiped out by Muslims, possible bias to comment--Misconceptions2 (talk) 03:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I require some help. The nominator Xtremedood has actually removed lots of data from several articles claiming it does not say what is written in the source, when it does. Just like how he claimed "Muhammad Prophet and Statesman" does not state what I said it does. What do you propose I do? If I revert him do you think wikipedia will be on my side? I feel it is just censorship --Misconceptions2 (talk) 13:17, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Ancestry of Muhammad

An article that you have been involved in editing—Ancestry of Muhammad —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 89.240.87.162 (talk) 20:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Family tree of Ali

An article that you have been involved in editing—Family tree of Ali —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 84.13.126.205 (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Strike Witches Characters

In March I did some edits tot he Strike Witch Characters. Linking them to the real people that the names are based from which you removed claiming undocumented opinion. It already states in the Strike Witches Article that the names are based on real people. You can tell just by the names these are who the author of Strike Witches used. Mostly he feminized the names for the characters. Under your reasoning then the archetype for Erica Hartmann need to be removed as well. Even though it is very clear that Humikane Shimada used Erich Hartmann (Germany's Ace or Aces). As he did for rest of the characters. I did leave the first three alone because there is no clear source on who he used for those characters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revcoyote (talk • contribs) 21:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

List of Fictional Deities

Why did you delete Manon (deity from the film,'The Craft') from the list?--Splashen (talk) 14:32, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I deleted redlinks - things not notable enough to have their own article. Did I accidentally delete a bluelink? Edward321 (talk) 01:52, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

You need to do more research before nominating articles for deletion

You'll probably revert this as is your right, but Picomtn was clearly right in suggesting you need to do more research first. I see that most of your recent nominations (not all) are either failing or failed. I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed this yet, but we have banned editors from nominating articles for deletion in the past and it would be a shame if it were to happen to you. Doug Weller talk 09:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
In a reviewing of your WP contributions, it appears (at least on the surface) that you may not fully understand the creation of articles and article content processes here, and which I’m able to assist you with if you’d like me too. Believe me, I know how hard it is to create new things, but I can, also, assure you it is much more satisfying then deleting content. So what I’m suggesting is that you find a subject/person/etc. you would like to create an article for and I’ll be more than happy to show you how to build it from scratch, and find others here willing to help you too. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 17:27, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Picomtn, while I'm sure that you mean well, and I agree with Doug's message above, for an editor who has been here for a couple of months to offer such advice to one who has been around for a decade comes across as more than a little presumptious. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I’ve been contributing to WP content for many years, but only registered this year when my class size got lowered (semi retirement) and was able to devote more time. Besides, WP is all about cooperation, no matter what the skill level. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@86.17.222.157. By your logic, you have never been here at all. Pot meet kettle. LOL. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:18, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

But I wouldn't dream of offering to assist an editor of ten years' standing with the basics of Wikipedia editing. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 06:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

@86.17.222.157. (cc Checkingfax) Longevity does not equal expertise, and is, perhaps, best exampled by this editors lack of knowledge about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Procedure for non-administrator close (nominator withdrawal) as anyone can see evidenced at Talk:Sylvan Muldoon#Request for AfD withdrawal. With this being so, and without assigning intent, all I’ve chosen to do is offer help where I see it’s needed. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 07:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

We clearly have different opinions about this, which is all well and good and part of life's rich tapestry. I'll withdraw from this conversation now and get on with editing the American Wikipedia. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 08:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC)