Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques
Conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques
[edit]- Conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
17 July 2013
Resolved in part, improvidently filed in part. The sources which have actually been used and discussed at the article talk pages are clearly non-reliable. There has been insufficient discussion of sources 4 & 6 and how and for what they will be used at the article talk page to engage in further dispute resolution in regard to them. If thorough discussion at the article talk page does not resolve those issues, then a new dispute about them can be filed here. — TransporterMan (TALK) 18:08, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Closed discussion |
---|
Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already. Location of dispute
Users involved Dispute overview I have found about 6 reliable sources regarding the information that "Kaaba" was the hindu temple before, and a ruler had made mosque in front of a temple that is from varanasi. Thus i added on the page "According to some sources, Ka'aba used to be a hindu temple." By adding the 3 references, and reverted the lost data of the page back, which was regarding varanasi, as it was removed by some random. Now i see a editor who would first claim that "i don't think so about varanasi temple", and also refuting the information about Kabaa as well. I presented about 3 more sources, one of them highly recognized, still the editor doesn't seems to be agreeing. 6 sources:- [1](Regarding varanasi temple), .[2], [3], [4], [5], [6](about Kaaba). References
Have you tried to resolve this previously? Discussed in both talk pages, for about 4 hours. How do you think we can help? Let me know, how such sourced information can be added, or not. Considering rest of the information in the whole article have share similar type of sources.
Opening comments by Roscelese[edit]Please limit to 2000 characters - longer statements may be deleted in their entirety or asked to be shortened. This is so a volunteer can review the dispute in a timely manner. Thanks.
I've already explained this to the user, but there's obviously a language barrier and I'm not sure a) what he's trying to say or b) if what I'm saying is getting across. For the Varanasi thing, the issue is a disagreement over what the article's scope should be (does "conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques" mean "former temples and churches that became mosques," or also "mosques built on the same ground where other things used to be") - I have one position and I would be delighted if he would articulate another. The Kaaba issue is separate; it's a wildly WP:FRINGE claim and the sources he's adding for it are self-published books from iUniverse and Trafford Conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques discussion[edit]Please do not use this for discussing the dispute prior to a volunteer opening the thread for comments - continue discussing the issues on the article talk page if necessary.
Welcome to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Though I am a regular volunteer here, I am neither "taking" this case or opening it for discussion at this time, but merely offering this recommendation: @Capitals00: It would very much encourage a volunteer to open and take this case if you were to list in your opening statement the 6 sources to which you refer, preferably in the form of inline references so that a volunteer doesn't have to go searching for them in the articles. If you use inline references, then put {{reflist-talk|close=1}} on a line by itself at the bottom of your opening comments so they'll show up. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|