User talk:Shabiha

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


Barelvi dispute[edit]

  • Shabiha, please, calm down. I've worked hard to get Msoamu and MezzoMezzo to be able to collaborate - you're undoing that work by letting yourself get too wound up by the process. MezzoMezzo has marked out every single proposed edit individually, in sections, so if you have issues with it, feel free to discuss it. Ironically, he's the only registered editor in this dispute that HASN'T edited the article since it was unprotected, so he's hardly POV-pushing. Remember, I'm neutral in all of this, and I'm the one trying to evaluate how neutral all the proposed edits are. Lukeno94 (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am waiting and watching the ANI,then I will be there to cooperate. Shabiha (talk) 05:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sunni Sufis and Salafi Jihadism for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sunni Sufis and Salafi Jihadism is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunni Sufis and Salafi Jihadism until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:36, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Due to recent developments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunni Sufis and Salafi Jihadism, I'd like to request that you add another comment. MezzoMezzo (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am discussing this Article. Shabiha (talk) 05:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sufi-Salafi relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Visitation (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) 11:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of content[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to JoAnn Hackos, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfC's[edit]

I have a number of questions/concerns about the RfCs you opened, that I've now closed. You can see on the pages themselves why the RfCs had no value, because they merely asked, "Should we follow policy", to which every editor is obliged to answer yes; however, that wouldn't tell you anything about how to edit the page. So if you want to actually get help, you'll need to restart those with actual questions.

But before you do that, however, you need to be sure you've at least seriously attempted discussion among involved editors. On Talk:Wahhabi, you started a discussion, and within about an hour, you started the RfC. You need to wait and listen to what other involved editors have to say first.

Third, how did you decide which editors to notify of the RfC discussions? Since the discussions are now closed, there's no lasting harm, but I'd like to make sure that you are at least aware of WP:CANVAS, which places some pretty strict limits on who you can contact. The way you notified editors was correct in that your message was neutral, but since you seemed to have notified a limited number of people, I'm concerned about how you chose those people. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I requested for RFC to you and to User talk:BoogaLouie#Your_Assistance, actually I understood his replies as advise to open RFC.User:Baboon43 is involved in editing these pages and I selected User:Tanbircdq,محمد افضل :User on the basis of my watchlist,I found them editing Islam related pages.That was my bonafide understanding of RFC.I am aware of canvassing but I understand that it is relevant in garnering/attracting support against user in case of complaints like ANI.I still don't know asking for comment in RFC will meant canvassing.I will try to grasp it by studying more. Shabiha (talk) 08:50, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A good plan for RfCs is that you never notify any individual editors; instead, notify relevant WikiProjects. If you are going to notify editors, the only really fair way is to look at the history of the article, and invite every single editor who's edited in the past few months/past several hundred edits. I'm still more concerned about the actual question you asked, however. Do you now understand why it wasn't helpful? Qwyrxian (talk) 09:58, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Explain this edit please[edit]

Also, I would like an explanation of this edit. I can't find a good faith rationale for that revert, and absent an explanation, consider it to be almost blockworthy. But perhaps I'm missing something, so please explain why you made that revert. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:59, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not believing the explanation Shabiha gave in this comment on my talk page. He reverted eighteen edits to this version by VIAFbot from before I performed any of them. The ONLY way this could have been done was by intentionally blanking the page and then copy-pasting the version prior to my eighteen edits. I don't know of any other way it can work out. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:39, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It was done mistakenly through Rollback Vandal link.I am really sorry for that. Shabiha (talk) 08:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salafi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sahwa (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) 09:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns[edit]

MezzoMezzo has just alerted me to some problematic editing on your part. On Sufi-Salafi relations, you have reverted a number of removals. That information was removed because the claims were not in the sources provided--specifically, that the sources did not mention Salfi/Salafiyah/etc. You reverted, saying it was in the sources, but I've spot checked three already, and MezzoMezzo is completely correct. Could you please explain why you are making obviously false statements? Are you just reverting on principle and not checking the sources? Are you checking them and misunderstanding them? Or are you somehow interpreting the sources to mean something they don't actually say? For instance, please look at this and this, and tell me where Salafism is mentioned at all. If you cannot point to a specific use in those articles, you're reverts are either mistaken or in very bad faith. There are other concerns, but these are the most important. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:21, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Qwyrxian,non neutral edits are basically point of concern.I have clearly replied MezzoMezzo on all talk pages and just now on Sufi Salafi relation page that what Saudi Salafi connection is there.He is just removing any valid sourced content from that article to which he has tried to delete in recent past unsuccessfully.Read official announcement from the Saudi government here.*“My brothers, you know that true Salafism is the path whose rules derive from the book of God and the path of the Prophet…This blessed state (Saudi Arabia) has been established along correct Salafi lines since its inception by Imam Mohammed bin Saud and his pact with Imam Mohammed ibn Abdul Wahhab.Saudi Arabia will continue on the upright Salafi path and not flinch from it or back down,” Prince Nayef told the conference participants.[1].[2][3].As Saudi govt.officially follows Salafi religion,all their actions will come under Sufi salafi relations.You will not find any country associating themselves with Salafism except saudi Arabia.He should prove other wise. Shabiha (talk) 10:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shabiba - please read WP:SYNTHESIS. This says: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources."--Toddy1 (talk) 19:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All of the sources are very much clear and apparent about Saudi govt following Salafi ideology.They are explicitly stating please read any of the source.It does not come under WP:SYNTHESIS. Shabiha (talk) 06:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It follows absolutely under SYN. The sources which MezzoMezzo removed do not say Salafi. You're taking information from another source (wrongly, I might add), combining it with the removed sources, and making them together mean something that neither one said individually. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok,I agree,I will not combine them with removed source and will clear the picture with the help of new sources. Shabiha (talk) 07:16, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for continuing to edit war on Sufi-Salafi relations. You explicitly said you would stop edit warring to re-introduce that info, and yet you've done so, again. Furthermore, your edits are blatant violations of WP:NPOV, in the way you use praise for one group and criticism for the other. Several of the sources you picked don't say what they claimed;, and several blatantly violate WP:RS. This has to stop. I've only blocked you for 48 hours, because I'm hoping that you'll see that we really are serious about our core policies and values. You clearly have a lot of knowledge, and I want you to be able to contribute that, but you have to do so within the confines of our policies.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Qwyrxian (talk) 12:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yanabi آن لائن[edit]

Hi, I added a couple of English sources to YaNabi.com, they were all I could find. If the site is still active can you perhaps add a print source in Urdu? It must have got a mention in Urdu books? Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 15:19, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hello[edit]

looking for your input on current discussion at Talk:Al-Ahbash. thx Baboon43 (talk) 14:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm McKhan. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Al-Ahbash seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. McKhan (talk) 08:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is your personal view and I have read the whole story .How that point is biased or Non neutral I am unable to understand. Shabiha (talk) 19:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

discussion about disputes[edit]

Hello.There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.This is related to the disputes at the Barelvi article.user mzzomezzo is discussing about you.Dil e Muslim talk 16:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion was archived at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive795#Long-running disputes at the Barelvi article, and similar articles.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:46, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

its just been brought to my attention you had sent me an email a while back..i havnt checked it as i dont remember the password. Baboon43 (talk) 18:20, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of YaNabi.com for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article YaNabi.com is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YaNabi.com until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MezzoMezzo (talk) 11:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Yanabi.gif[edit]

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Muslim Students' Organization of India[edit]

The article Muslim Students' Organization of India has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:04, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sunni Students Federation[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Sunni Students Federation, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:19, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Muhammad Madani Miya Ashrafi al-Jilani[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Muhammad Madani Miya Ashrafi al-Jilani requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Waris Ali Shah[edit]

The article Waris Ali Shah has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

All that can be found are websites founded by admirers of the subject, all of which appear to fail WP:IRS. The subject, in this case, fails WP:GNG - whether or not they really were of any status in South Asian Sufi chains is unclear. The only thing clear is that the subject existed. Article creator was a now indefinitely blocked sockpuppet account with a history of creating articles on non-notable (in some cases possibly fictional) subjects.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:05, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jamia Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jamia Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Barkatiyya[edit]

The article Barkatiyya has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The only proof that this Sufi order even exists it the official website and one citation with no page number or author which is supposedly published by the subject of the article. An obvious fail of WP:GNG as an organization cannot establish its own notability through self publishing. Additionally, I'm concerned as to whether the historical claims here are even true - I don't know of any mentions of this order in authentic chains of Sufism.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:32, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Al Jamiatul Ashrafia for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Al Jamiatul Ashrafia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Jamiatul Ashrafia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:25, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ameen Mian Qaudri[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ameen Mian Qaudri, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Summichum (talk) 16:52, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mustafa Raza Khan[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mustafa Raza Khan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Summichum (talk) 18:27, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mustafa Raza Khan[edit]

The article Mustafa Raza Khan has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Summichum (talk) 17:01, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mustafa Raza Khan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mustafa Raza Khan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mustafa Raza Khan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Summichum (talk) 17:02, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Swalath@ramdan13.gif[edit]

Notice

The file File:Swalath@ramdan13.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

orphaned image, no encyclopedic use

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.globaldefence.net/artikel-analysen/20715-saudi-arabia-embraces-salafism-countering-the-arab-uprising.html
  2. ^ http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2011/12/religion/islam/kingdom-of-saudi-arabia-will-continue-to-follow-salafist-ideology-prince-naif
  3. ^ http://www.arabnews.com/node/402266
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shabiha&oldid=1139112691"