Hey, I recollect a small touch on the subject of Qur'an recitals with you (female Qurr'a in particular) on some article's talk page (I think t'was Talk:Allah probably...(?)). Was wondering if there's any article here on WP dealing with the the various styles of Qiraat, thought maybe you'd be able to say for sure. 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 07:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
you clearly do not know history if you reverted my defintion on who hyksos were. you really need to do your research. and im very upset that you are simple minded. thank you
I read your discussion with I forgot his name. But in that conversation you made references to me being a bigot, excuse me? First I'm Jewish and Persian. I don't think I mean to rag on myself, but most Jews are Ashkenazi. Oh and that video I posted is not a White Power video, it is called Ring of Power and it doesn't focus on Jews its focus is on the illuminati and how it started and where it is at now. Ymay have some knowledge on semitics, but your clearly not in tune with Hyksos, and that is fine, because I'm sure you have made some great edits elsewhere, but keep out of something that you don't know, I'm going to find some sources and cram them in there just for you and people like you. Let me give you a piece of advice- you have been taught to get sources from where?? if your smart and I think you are, than you should know that alot of our history books are biased and incorrect and have been adjusted for a "cause" who's sources. If you have ever taken Journalism courses than you should know that its only correct to get sources and opposing views. this type of incorrect logic makes for biased news in favor of "those" who make it, because as a good journalist you need your sources to appease the masses. well let me tell you then that we have brains and we have a right to make a judgement based on facts and the just course of those facts that lead to a just answer. and people like you are only inciting the status quo of an undermining design, conceived before you or me were born, so stop being so closed minded, because you come across as such and that is so not kosher. your brainwashed by someone telling you that what you have accomplished is correct and that is not healthy, you need to leave that behind and help it help you grow. and i love ranting and raving because people can be so close-minded its funny and scary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Binkytheclown2 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Pleased to meet you. I agree with you that Din-i-Ilahi is a Persian word not arabic as this Anonmoos has been saying & vandalising the page with. I've added citations and all the citations and britannica says its a Persian word. Please revert any changes made by this Anonmoos or any other vandal on the page and put it in your watchlist and revert if he strikes again. As a last resort, if vandalism continues, get the wiki admins involved. Best regards.--James smith2 (talk) 19:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Emily, the vandal has struck again with his POV nonsense and put Arabic instead of the correct title of Persian. Please get an Wikipedia administrator to solve his nonsense and protect the article from this mindless vandalism.--James smith2 (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good day Emily, need to know why is my comment being deleted? You claim that I am vandalising the data on this site. Aren't Islamists vandalising the world? Well leave aside the argument. The account of my content is true according to old Hindu scriptures which state and history also agrees that Muhammad destroyed 360 idols that pagans (which is actually Vedic era people worshipped). If he vandalised those people's religion which was, is and will be the truth why is posting truth vandalisation. Need an explanation for this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh7798 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
my name is Syed Ansar Ali ,live in Karachi,Pakistan.i have passed B.com exam.,and have handsome knowledge in Arabic language.my idea was{about giving a name}that the names of Allah the God,we know are a few of His uncounted names.first i ask you why we human name a person or thing?.. undoubtly for his quality, characters like..beautiful,ugly,deaf,blind ext. and his actions like speaking,killing,writing,publishing ext.Now we can drive or give names after above mentioned words,{ beautiful:a beautiful boy},{ugly: an ugly dog},{deaf: a deaf man}{blind: a blind woman}all these words beautiful, ugly ,deaf, blind are characters of human being and also are names of human being similarly we can drive from [killing: killer],[speaking:speaker],[writing:writer]and [publishing:publisher] now i think you have an idea about naming a person or you can say to give a name to a person.conclusion is that the same mechanism{of giving names}is applicable for Allah' character and actions{deeds} now i will give an example from Quran..
'second chapter,verse no.07'from Arab.[ الختّام" ختم "]Eng.[stamping"stamper"]'second chapter,verse no 17 from arb.[التارك "ترك "]Eng.[leaving"leaver" or one who leaves]from above mentioned examples you better understand how we can give a name to a thing, person or Allah the God. Ansarhashmi (talk) 08:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I remember when that was posted. Good times, but after the fact it just seems blasphemous. Anyway, I am still stirring up controversy, please see this:
They are trying to take my precious redesign away from me, and looks like I am going to lose. Vote to keep it. --Enzuru22:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you have time to listen and help, please listen to me read the Twelve Imams article right here, thank you. My pronunciation needs lots of work, and I'm guessing you are probably alot better off than me when it comes to pronouncing things. --Enzuru07:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Salam alaykum dudette. Odd, a Mac running Safari or Firefox should have no issue with it, I have a Mac at work. Anyway, you're at a café? That's so, I don't know, nineties. Do you blast the Rage Against the Machine in your car too? Anyway, as for the Ahl-e Haqq, I can't help much, this is one of those heretical groups I have little knowledge of. However, as with all heretical communities, I still got connectionz and maybe can get one of them to help us. I'll see what I can do. --Enzuru19:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have a couple Alevi friends, but of course their faith is completely unrelated to the Ahl-e Haqq, contrary to this Kurdish nationalist trash of the Cult of the Angels myth. However, it is one of those Alevi friends who knows the Ahl-e Haqq. I tried getting both Alevi on Wikipedia and they weren't very interested. As for Ali-Ilahi, I believe that's a pejorative, much like Wahhabi. I don't think you'll see any shirts with "Ali-Ilahi pride" anytime soon. As far as your cosexualists, I suggest mutah with People of the Book in general. Issue is in the LBGT community you'll find very few people who identify themselves as Christians or Jews in the religious sense of the word. One of my homosexual friends who is thinking of embracing Islam is starting to become more monogamous himself, though he doesn't necessarily need to be, nor do you through mutah. I am unsure of women who cannot give birth need to have an 'iddah period however. --Enzuru20:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't worry at all, things will change, they have to change. As far as legal rulings, you can easily adapt many, but you're somewhat of a Sunni (unfortunately) so you deal with a myriad of texts that point in hundreds of different directions, with narrators who had homosexual relationships with their slaves and liars under the payroll of the Ummayad government. But, to each their own. As far as taqleed goes, using any marja it becomes pretty easy. For example, while a heterosexual male cannot touch a female, a homosexual female cannot touch a female as well, that would be simple logic. The only thing that I do not understand legally is if there would be the need for one individual to legally act as a husband and the other to act as the wife, which I don't think is the case. --Enzuru21:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've posted a comment on Matulchandra... I don't think it's plausible to post it for translation, but I defer to your more experienced judgment if, given the state of the page in question, it is in fact necessary. I commented under the deletion discussion about this but wanted to just poke you for input. ناهد𒀭(dAnāhita)𒅴15:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, generally, I think that articles that are obviously couched in a foreign language ought to be at least offered the chance to be translated on the page. They may also be not notable, or otherwise unsuitable, but if the text is in Sanskrit I cannot tell. For much the same reason as I commented on the article on the author, English language web resources may not be the best sources of information on Sanskrit poetry. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This may be able to help you. As for this group, I have had difficulty in finding information about specific Kharijite sects, but there is a funny coincidence in history that like the three major branches or something were named after colours. Straight as a rainbow I guess. --Enzuru22:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know if I should converse in Persian or not.
I'm here to ask you for your help, since I know you know more than I do, about a problem I'm having on the Ahvaz talk page:
User "Zora", has been constantly trying to attach the origins of Ahvaz to Arabs (in support of the recent unrests of Arab separatists in Khuzestan in the news).
She claims Ahvaz is an Arab name, and claims that Elamites have no connections to the Persians, hence invalidating any claims of Iranian-ness of the Khuzestan province, from a historical perspective. She says there are no etymological connections between today's Iran and the pre-Arab one.
The Persians, Medes and later the Kurds are from the Aryan Race that Originated in Afghanistan. Elam existed before the Persians and the Medes crossed into the Iranian Plateau. Assurbanipal of Assyria destroyed Elam in 640 BCE. He poured salt on the fields of Susa so nothing would grow. the Elamite kingdom died. Cyrus the Great of Persia did not reign until 559 BCE, long after the Elamites. Persia absorbed Media, Assyria, Babylonia and the Iranian Plateau. --Zaidi02:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you have time and are so inclined to get involved, I would like to request your continued input in the discussion pages of the Khuzestan and Ahvaz articles, for the same reasons as Zereshk has outlined above. Zora has persisted and has once again declared her intention to rewrite the articles to fit her pan-Arabist agenda (drawn from propaganda websites naturally). Thank you. SouthernComfort21:56, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't referring to that as speculation (although, if one were to be pedantic, Augustine actually says they call themselves rather than their language Chanani, doesn't he?); I just moved it from the text to the infobox, and didn't think it should be in two places. And incidentally, thanks for your improvements to the article! I love it when an article I've been feeling guilty about not expanding gets expanded by someone else. - Mustafaa 04:04, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I was looking at Uzza and become confused; I found there the same question I was about to ask, without clarification: Talk:Uzza#3?. Can you explain this? Cheers, Hv20:53, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In the text of the article Sahaba, you substituted for the letter "s" in "sahaba" a character which doesn't display properly on my screen; it just looks like a square. (See here.) What is that character supposed to be? Is it in Unicode? --Metropolitan9002:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You've been making some interesting transliteration changes. For instance you made Shafi'i into Šāfiˤǐ which is a transliteration I have never seen before. Most academic articles I ahve read use something close to Shafi'i. I know linguistically that's correct... but we must refer to it how they would encyclopedically. You've also made many drastic changes without edit summaries or explanation. I don't want to discourage good work but I do want to encourage communication... grenグレン?05:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For instance, on this diff why the semi-colon after Turkish (unlinking language) and Azeri? The Azerbaijani language? You also added "Constantly being prosecuted and massacred by the Ottomans on account that they followed Shi'a Islam, the Kızılbaş fled to Iran." which seems like a very strong statement to make. Constantly persecuted? Can you explain this all some. You've been making a lot of substantive changes and they may all be for the better... but it's a good idea to be wary of such changes. grenグレン?05:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For Tabriz you changed it to Tæbriz which I have rarely seen used. Täbriz is much moreso used but still we must place some importance on common English renderings. What do you use to decide these renderings? grenグレン?06:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, thanks for this edit which makes clear to me what you were trying to do. I completely agree with you on transliteration (I may have thought some of the content was original when it wasn't). I hope you realize I greatly appreciate your fixing things up but I think every editor needs to be on the same page. I was wary of using 'æ' and 'Š'. It gets complex because for easy the Muslim holy book is transliterated "Qur'an" most often here... although there should be a macron on the A and a superscript c looking character instead of the apostrophe. I don't know if we are going to impose that scholarly standard or not. I am all for macrons and I base my transliteration on the type used in Fazlur Rahman books which uses macrons, the dots under H, S, T, etc. , and the supercript C and backwards C (is that representing ayn?). Sorry for not being able to give proper names for these things. The C is usually just made an apostrophe for the sake of easy I suppose. What do you think we should do? (I've never seen the sh like that in tranliteration... only in the original Turkish). We have some basic stuff here on Arabic names. Nothing about standardizing transliteration that I know of. Think we should try to get that started? Also, how do we judge what is common? Qur'an is common in English... not Qurʾān (presuming I got that right)... so which wins out? Scholarly or common? It's hard... I know for many European cities the diacritics have been removed from the titles in preference for more Anglicized spellings. grenグレン?22:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the 'æ may work for some but Ayatollah is pretty firmly in English spelled just like that. I'm really not the right person to ask. I've also seen Fatima (or Fātima) a lot more than Fatema. I also have no idea with Farsi spellings... I'm not sure who we should talk to about this... there should be some degree of standardization... I completely agree... but, I'm not exactly sure how it should be done. I just know that one of the main goals is recognizable forms... adding macrons doesn't make a word less recognizable and help pronunciation. However, changing characters completely from what is normal can. I'm not sure whom we should ask about this. Try User:Zora... she's read some academic texts and should have something to say about common spellings. Do you use any specific romanization format? (like Pinyin would be for Chinese... is there such a thing for Arabic/Farsi/Urdu?). If so what is the romanization standard you're using? I know I'm just used to seeing diacritics on standard Latin characters. I'm only speaking from what I've seen and what I think most people will be able to recognize. But, we really do need to create some type of standard. (Which books use the spellings you're talking about too?) grenグレン07:27, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your page says you're a linguist and your transliterations reflect that well (it seems to me). The thing is... I'm not sure people will be able to recognize it all... I mean, we could write them out in IPA... that'd probably be the best in some ways... but, probably not too accepted. grenグレン07:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter what you think "is correct", what matters is what the most common name is. Also, what's with the æ's and Ħ's? This isn't Old English Wikipedia... --Khoikhoi05:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but how common is this method? I've never seen it used on Wikipedia. --Khoikhoi
Hi Emily, no offense intended but I have noticed that you have substituted common name spelling in the Alaouite Dynasty for instance, with what I understand is a phonetic spelling, do you think this is really judicious ? while this may appeal to academic circles, Wikipedia's intended audience is rather the general population ! this might bring some confusion, I am not talking about search engine failing to find those spelling !--Khalid hassani13:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for experimenting with the page Plato on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Scott Grayban21:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could you add more edit summaries? with saved fields in the box it won't be too much effort pasting in "change diacritics" or something... but, it could be useful on edits where it's not as clear. Just to differentiate between copyediting and content change or removal would be useful. Thanks. grenグレン09:21, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why have you changed all that spellings?! a quick google search [1] shows no other page on internet with that spelling. Please do not change it back. Thanks, -- - K a s h Talk | email11:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm using the loosely phonetic transliteration scheme from all of the Farsi courses and books I've used (c.f. Thackston's An Introduction to Persian and Stilo, Talattos & Clinton's Modern Persian). The only other "system" I've encountered involves English-based "phonetics".
I'm trusting that you're right and Chaldean is wrong on the etymology. You want me to back you up with reverts? I've generally stayed out of that article, but I'd like to keep it accurate. Zora05:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you can help me a bit with a series of articles on Punic Carthage. I'm involved in the milhist project and so my focus is on the Punic Wars and Punic military forces(Carthage had a low level of power centralisation and was more an agglomeration of powerful dynasties. Carthage's nobility could and did have private armies operating on their own. So this was the best name I could think of.)
Perhaps you could help me with a bit of background information on the subject. For example the tin supply(the Atlantic route seems to have lost importance with the advent of Celts in Gaul, Hannibal possibly tried/established a traderoute along the Garonne River and Auronne River, leaving only Massilia's Rhone route not under Carthage's control) would be interesting for the Second Punic War. For the First Punic War and Mercenary War the rural economy of Northern Africa would be of interest and perhaps some info on Canaanite tax system, etc.
At the moment I have read some books and continue reading some and it clearly shows that more non-milhist background could really help to better understand these subjects. For example I try to find out more about legal forms such as the Berkit which was possibly Hannibal's treaty with Macedon and Hasdrubal the Fair's with Rome. It would have discontinued with the end of the respective strategus office, unless ratified by a supreme state authority(This way Polybius version about the Roman envoys travelling back and forth between Iberia and Carthage would make sense and there is a dispute of historians about this, but I feel not safe enough to throw it into the article without more background checks. The Punic Wars and Carthage's forces seem to attract a special clientel of editors who almost rape the sources to push a POV but they don't dare to touch well sourced material.)
Yes, I know that' lots of detail, so simply if you have any idea how to help me highlight the background of these things or improve information on the Punic culture I would be very grateful. Wandalstouring15:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I was just wondering why you paced a welcome template on User:Jeeny. The user isn't a new user, and is in fact, a user who has been indefinitely blocked. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I noticed you've been making good contributions to some Islam related articles. I also noticed your comment regarding the aqidah article regarding the Ismaili movement. Amongst the majority of Muslim scholars, the Ismailis have always been regarded as being a separate religion from Islam - this is actually one of the few things both Sunnis and Shias seem to agree on. I believe though that by the standards of Wikipedia they are generally included in discissions on Muslims. Hope that helps! MezzoMezzo (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Druze, you will be blocked from editing.
well the IP address 63.216.113.124 is getting on my nerves.So while looking at "its" contributions I found out that "it" dropped you a silly vandalism warning, so after looking at his note I wrongfully pasted the vandalism warning addressed to "it" on your talk page but undid it later.
Anyway I would like to take the chance to thank you for your hard work and contributions. And I hope that malicious users like this IP address would get a hobby soon.My best regards for you and all the serious editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiram111 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Emilyzilch, I noticed this edit to your user page from an IP. Out of curiosity, is that you, or a vandal? I couldn't tell very easily, hence my question. Thanks. Acalamari22:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. If you've been given a false warning, you may remove it from your talk page. Editors are allowed to remove comments from their talk page if they wish. It's not vandalism to remove messages from your own talk page. Acalamari23:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the compliment. I'm pleased you enjoy the article. If you feel it needs improvement, please contribute. -- Fyslee / talk06:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey i put my reason up for my views, im 99 percent sure there is no muslim assyrians, the ones that got converted during the invasion of arabia into mesopotamia have no assyrian blood they are arabs and dont consider them selfs assyrian, there is no assyrian muslim group that has its own flag,not enough reliable sources to prove that there is such thing as muslim assyrians —Preceding unsigned comment added by 55yy55hh (talk • contribs) 17:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I repeat my comment: DO NOT USE THE WIKIPEDIA PAGE AS A TALK PAGE. It is totally inappropriate to blank the entire page and replace it with your Talking points. Those are for the Talk page, never ever ever for the page itself. em zilch (talk) 05:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When I was active I used to do tons of work on heretical groups, and defending them from the mainstream, which is kind of odd since I'm jaw-droppingly orthodox Twelver. I pretty much wrote the Ismaili article, as well as organized the articles on that branch. Anyway, I see you are doing the same. Just some pointers:
I know some of the inside stuff in the Druze faith (where, in their holy books they actually do denounce the idea of them being Muslim), but since that's not mainstream it doesn't count. Basically, according to the sources we need to use on Wikipedia, some Druze say they are Muslims, some don't, some Western sources say they are Muslim, some don't. We need to use those sources. Instead of insisting they are either Muslim or non-Muslim, mention the controversy.
The term, Ithna'Ashari, or Twelver, doesn't refer to groups that believe in just the Twelve Imams, but rather, groups that believe in that and follow Jafari fiqh. It's an important distinction.
The beliefs of the Nizari branch of the Ismaili will make any orthodox Muslim, Sunni or Shi'a, cringe. We Twelver have esoteric beliefs (which are closely aligned with what you'll find within the Sunni strains of Sufism), but their descension into panentheism and divinity of the Imam is a little much. However, there is not much that is heretical about the Mustaali, so recall that you can't use the term Ismaili as an umbrella term, like unfortunately we have fatwas that do. So, handle this like you handle the Druze situation. Basically, almost all Nizari and Mustaali say they are Muslims, while there is a contention mainly with the Nizari and Druze that they aren't. Don't try to prove on Wikipedia they are or they aren't, it's a long running debate for the lack of better words.
If you have anymore questions, feel free to ask sister. And on a personal note, commenting on your userboxes, my two best friends are 'LBGT' themselves. --Enzuru03:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've had similar issues with the editor on other articles. I filed an incident report on the Administrators' noticeboard, but apparently they were all too busy at the time to go through my diffs and reply. I'll try to get involved on this page and help resolve the disputes. ← George [talk]23:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, sorry for the delay in responding. Your best course of action is to either file anther post at WP:ANI, seek out mediation in your dispute, or seek out an admin who might be willing to help and more knowledgeable about what to do. I've had similar issues, but nothing has proved fruitful yet. Good luck! ← George [talk]11:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what can be done, but I'm assuming the 3-minute window will be ignored due to his consistent (and recent) history of revert-warring. I've linked to one of his 3RR warnings. I'm not an admin, so you'll have to wait until one reviews your request. I'm expecting a block, though.--KojiDude(C)22:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed your defense of that article against the recent POV it's been slapped with by some anons. You're doing a good job, sometimes it's good to hear that from fellow editors. :) MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't notice your edits to these articles. The depiction of the Imams is being discussed. Next time, be more civil or I will report you. En Netalk02:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I explained there, the MOS is a style guideline, not a basic cornerstone policy and BLP is a cornerstone policy, most definitely outweighing any cornerstone policy Nil Einne (talk) 06:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I didn't read your original question in WP:BLP/N properly at the time. I was just trying to point out that BLP is a cornerstone policy while the MOS a style guideline so in a clearcut case, BLP will definitely outweight the MOS since I thought you said the MOS was a cornerstone. (The bigger problem is deciding whether something is a BLP issue or not.) I now see you were only refering to a cornerstone of the MOS so my comment was unnecessary. I wasn't really addressing the specific issue and to be honest, I'm not that interested in looking into it now since it's resolved but in general, if an individual is barely noteable I would think twice about mentioning his/her birthname if it's not well known regardless of what the MOS says. If the birthname is to be mentioned, it should be sourced to a good secondary source. If you're interested in the wide issue, you may want to read the section Wikipedia:BLP/N#Porn actors' birth names where there has been quite a lot of related discussion (I appreciate Sonja isn't a porn actor but IMHO the issue applies whoever the person is). Hope that helps, cheers! Nil Einne (talk) 19:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
biruni was a persian man that you must know that persian peoples and even non persian peoples like turks living in iran now and uzbekistan is a modern country that established from 1921 and in 1991 became an independent country. russian created this country after the russian occupiation and tajik populated locations such as bukhara, samarghand , khawrezm and etc forcibly combined to uzbekistan for political reasons that russians dont want an tajiki-persian-iranian power in that region. this location first named bactriana and then became a permanent part of persia until russian conquest. do you know after the islamic conqust of persia(iran) , iran became a part of abbassid khalifate? do you know whole people of that region in that time identified them as iranian? do you know persia is a western word for the region of iran? do you know iranian atleast before the islamic conquest at the time of sassanids called their region iran(eeraan). do you know you could not calling saint persons like imam ali as vampire. you can respect to these persons. even you dont like them you cant affront them. if you are a sunni or christian or jew or zoroastrian,i cant affront to saint people of all religions.i like all of the religions and prophets. specially i like zoroastrians , zoroastrianism originated from iran(persia). at the end thank you for your good message.(Kanowini (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Err... kind of a mess, but I'll try to respond to them all: yes, Persia(n) is from Pārs (modern Fars), Ērānshahr was the name of the lands of the Iranian peoples, but Iran links to the Islamic Republic of Iran. He weren't born in Iran. He weren't born in Uzbekistan, either. He was born in an area called Kwarezm that was under the control of the Abbāsids. Also, someone else created an image of Ali-the-Vampire to argue that representations of Ali are not the same as what he really looked like, and I laughed so hard I had to keep a copy for myself. It's hysterical, it is okay to laugh sometimes... ناهد/(Nåhed)speak!14:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The request has been declined by Alison, who suggests that it is unnecessary (the account you named is already blocked). If you still need checkuser assistance, you'll need to explain why/how. If not, I'll assume the matter is resolved for now. Thanks for your time. – Luna Santin (talk)07:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think we lost that one, I'll just use the template for Islamic Art/in India (or do you have another idea?) Anyway, when you find Yazid to be an upright caliph, how the hell can you expect to get your colours right and arrange furniture? Bad taste is bad taste, no matter what area in life it is. Metrosexual Shi'a FTW. --Enzuru03:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To : emily zilch or nahed sarvy, read this lined very good u seem to be very ignorant of irans history
You are not iranian and you dont know the least about the history of iran, the word and the nation of iran has existed since 3000 years ago, thats why in shahnameh, the national epic of iran, which is writen 1100 years ago the name iran is mentioned more than 1500 times, and you say rumi or mowlana predates iran and he livd before iran? rumi lived 800 years ago, iran and the name iran has existed for 3000 years. but the western name of iran until 1935 was persia until western world decided to call the country by its native name WHICH HAS BEEN USED BY IRANIANS FOR 3000 YEARS.Do u understand NOW???????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cilbup (talk • contribs) 22:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck off. WP:MOSISLAM mentions "pbuh" and "as", not titles, you idiot. Are "king", "prince" and "duke" honorifics? Again, fuck off.
RUMI OR MOWLANA WAS IRANIAN AND BELONGS TO IRAN, AND YOU ARE SAYING HE LIVED BEFORE IRAN AND HE WAS NOT IRANIAN, HAHAHA, YOU ARE AN IGNORANT OF THE HISTORY OF IRAN
No, Rumi was born in contemporary Afghanistan. The term Afghani has been used for over one thousand years, especially by Persians. --Enzuru00:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To : emily zilch or nahed sarvy
Search for shahnameh on the net, shahnameh is the national epic of Iran, it was writen for 1100 years ago, in this epic the word iran is mentioned 1500 times to refer to the country.Why did you say mowlana or rumi was not iranian and why did u say he lived before iran? u should learn more about the history of iran.but Now u know that iran as a name and as a nation has existed for 3000 year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cilbup (talk • contribs) 22:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
'Aql a real article? That's sweet. And that's a pretty cool add-on, right now I am using Opera for no reason, I should switch back to Firefox. --Enzuru04:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To Emilyzilch from Soleado (talk) 21:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC):
I don't understand in what is wrong in having Aqidah spelled as Aqeedah. The reason I moved the page was that the word Aqeedah is not pronounced as Aqidah. As I've read about you on your Wikipedia page, you are a linguistic. I assume you know that Aqidah and Aqeedah are pronounced two different ways if read in Roman-Arabic.
[reply]
Thanks. And as long as I can be a bigot to other denominations of Muslims I can live happily. But, conversely because of the stress of the situation, I refuse to be with anyone orthodox, so I'm going to Turkey or Albania and picking up an Alevi-Bektashi there (all we have in Los Angeles are Armenians and Shah-supporters). And wow, yurts, that's pretty hardcore. --Enzuru08:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do listen to Alevi music, but I sadly prefer Utada Hikaru still (and no other Japanese artist). Actually, it was under Khomeini's shahada definition that they got alot more recognition. One of my Alevi friends on the Turkish Wikipedia was telling me that his friends recently went to Sistani he told them that "they" (Usulis?) learn love of Ahl al-Bayt from Anatolian Alevi. It touched them, as well as me. --Enzuru09:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually aiming for the longest, most annoying, and least efficient talk page on Wikipedia, but some people apparently are getting peeved at it. Have I gotten to you too? --Enzuru09:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at work, but I'll check all that when I get home. And pssst, honestly, this is the best thing I've ever done, I don't think I've ever been so happy (at least in one part of my life!) So much wasted time! --Enzuru22:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For your achiving efforts, both on a personal level and a level that has changed the face of heretical Islamic talk pages throughout Wikipedia. But really, it's cleaned things up, especially my talk page. Eick. --Enzuru09:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
Either they saw it long ago and are previous members who raises their concerns, or were just checking history/talk pages. But, once in a while, I do of course search Wikipedia for "vampire <insert religious figure here>". --Enzuru22:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Removing racism/religious prejudice from your page. Wikipedia attracts a large Shia community as well and your comments could be of great concern to them (I don't know about Sunnis). There's already enough garbage present around us in this world. So pls don't litter Wikipedia with some! Let it remain that clean as people think of it. Pls help promote a MULTICULTURAL environment on Wikipedia. Read the guidelines section once again to see what Wikipedia expects from the users.
The man in discussion was not an ordinary person who served his whole life for the preaching's of Islam and made significant impact on the life of Muslims to lead their life for peace and love with the human kind.
There are more than 100 books he has written down during his life for the welfare of humanity to learn exactly what islam is.
So in no way a page from Wikipedia can be deleted which provides information about a person with such contribution to his religion where millions of people followed his teachings to lead their life according to what exactly islam teaches to its followers.
He also started free healthcare camps for eye treatment at his place Darul-Ehsan where thousands of poor people got their eyes treated twice in a year. This year on 16th of Ramadan there was his 11th death anniversary which was attended by around 1 million people.
You are requested to make this page available for people to find firsthand knowledge about this legend of islam.
Azam Ishaque 09:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azamishaque (talk • contribs)
I usually correspond with Klakky via e-mail, I've been trying to make him a respectable member for quite sometime. Despite this, he still calls me an Ismaili. Anyway, we need to get admins on this, or maybe run for adminship or something. --Enzuru21:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, there is one vandal who literally dedicates around half his editing to just reverting whatever I write, no matter what it is about. It makes me feel kinda special, that someone's life is so centered around me. I guess this is how love feels. --Enzuru21:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think that's my stalker I told you about. The reason I don't think it's Klakky is because he is infinitely more patient than Klakky, Klakky gives up real easily. But perhaps they are the same person, I just didn't think so. --Enzuru18:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at what the IP wrote makes it almost 100% it's not Klakky. Klakky is a bit more sophisticated in his speech like he uses correct grammar, doesn't use multiple exclamation points, and so forth. --Enzuru18:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks sis, I just, want to feel right again. The happiness of realization hits first, and then the realization of how awful the situation hits second. --Enzuru07:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At least we're a couple now. I actually thought Klakky was going to give up this time, oh well. Did I ever tell you about the time I told him to go to hat dancing with Punjabi mullahs? Good times. --Enzuru03:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This may not have been your intention, but what you recently did at Talk:Geber was de-archiving, not archiving. You essentially moved all the previously archived discussions from the archive page back into the main talk page. You probably just made a mistake, so I've reverted your edits there. -kotra (talk) 00:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know what happened to my talk comment on the Dorset/Sadlermiut question. Seeing you're from RI, I wonder if you are aware that a couple of the more important archaeological collections pertaining to Eskimo prehistory (Cape Krusenstern and Onion Portage)are actually at the Arctic lab at the Haffenreffer Museum in Bristol (now closed pending relocation), though they rarely go on display.
I'd really like to see the whole Dorset article rewritten, but preferably by a Canadian archaeologist since they would most likely be up-to-date on recent unpublished finds.
Surprisingly, while there are entries on, e.g., Independence I and Saqqaq, there is no entry on Pre-Dorset, though it is the earliest culture in most of the Eastern Canadian Arctic and probably ancestral to -- but clearly distinct from -- Dorset. Wonder why?
Could you check what you might have been thinking when you duplicated the {{islam}} template in Hajj? I see you were reverting vandalism just prior, and maybe you thought it had been deleted? Problem is that previously it aligned with the TOC, as seen here, but now after someone deleted "the wrong duplicate" it looks weird, or at least "less good". I think I'm going to reverse back to the way it was. Could you check it out? Shenme (talk) 04:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your message [4] on my talk page. I have blocked all of the IPs recently used for vandalism and also temporarily protected both Shia Islam and {{Shia Islam}}. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to help. --Kralizec! (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Emily. What's up with that picture of Nosferatu on your userpage. I have noticed that it tends to be a lightning rod for vandals. As one also interested in Shia Islam, especially Alevism, I am having a some trouble understanding the caption. Could you explain it to me. Your colleague from the other side of the Muddy Water, Aramgar (talk) 18:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Emily, Now that you explain it, it is funny. I remember looking in on that very discussion for a few moments a while back. I too can attest that those very images of the Twelve Imams are in fact common: I have seen them in Turkey, Syria, and once in Albania. You are also right about humor. Humor is halaal. Keep up the good work. Aramgar (talk) 14:44, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Malang is a very interesting phrase. You can only find it mentioned by Shi'a, primarily youth I believe, like if you go to any Shi'a forums or things like that. I have never found it in scholarly literature, but it is a term that really needs to be defined. A malang is often confused with an Akhbari (sometimes they call themselves Akhbari to be more legitimate). Basically, a malang is a Shi'a who is Punjabi, Sindhi, or Seraiki (maybe some other ethnic groups of this exist). These ethnic groups for some reason have a form of Shi'a Islam that is more like Alevism than proper Jafari (Usuli, Akhbari, or Shaykhi). They make up I think a majority of Pakistan's Shi'a population, with the proper Shi'a groups generally being muhajir from India. They don't have any formal fiqh or anything that I know of, I believe they were introduced to Shi'a beliefs by Shi'i missionaries (Sufis), but perhaps like the Alevi, did not get the fiqh and other things that generally goes along with orthodox Shi'asm. They have beliefs taken from Hinduism such as a sayeda cannot marry a non-sayed man, but a sayed man can marry a sayeda women. They have hadith (in Urdu from what I've seen, maybe they took it from Arab sources originally) stating that whoever mourns Husayn (AS) during Muharram their sins will be forgiven by Fatimah (AS), and I believe this is sometimes used to justify their lack of prayer and other fiqh laws. Since they do not have formal fiqh they don't have any formal banning of self-hitting, so it is prominent among them, and may tie in with being forgiven for their transgressions. I believe they also share the Ismaili book of hadith that is in the Urdu language, Qalam-e-Mowla.
What is absolutely startling to me is that I have never seen scholarly sources pinpoint that these ethnic groups, which make up a bulk of Pakistan's Shi'a population, have a form of Shi'a Islam that is completely different from orthodox beliefs that can be found among Arabs, Iranians, and Indians. Most Shi'a in the West understand this important difference among South Asian Shi'a. Apparently the name malang, no one even knows why they use it, not even South Asians (my dad I think told me it was an insulting phrase, but I know they themselves use it). Nobody mentions the beliefs of these groups nor the fact they exist. I have no idea why this is to this day, though I've speculated that most scholars just see it as a folk understanding of Shi'a Islam rather than a separate sect (and that might be true). It's almost as if an entire sect of Shi'asm has been lost to scholarly literature. --Enzuru21:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I've seen at least one deify Ali (AS), but I think that's common among them too (remember, most if not all of them claim to be sayed, so, they are in turns descendants of Allah). --Enzuru21:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And last but not least, unlike other heretical groups, they are not cool or beautiful or anything at all. It's a really gross faith. --Enzuru21:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello :)
Good to hear from you. The quote that i edited might be considered offensive by some readers, therefore instead of removing the whole quotation, i modified it so that it doesn't sound offensive, as no one will like his/her religion being dubbed as "drama". It actually affected the neutrality of an otherwise very good article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pirateofmars (talk • contribs) 13:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if I might persuade you or someone you know to take a look at a caption which probably needs to be tweaked a bit?
Italian Admiral Ernesto Burzagli was honored with the Order of Ouissam Alaouite; and an image of the paper which accompanied the award of badge and ribbon was posted at Wikicommons. I've posted the image of that certificate/diploma in both articles, but I'm a little uncertain about the caption. I wonder about the word dahir and its somewhat unsatisfactory link to a disambiguation page. This somewhat inadequate wiki-formatting choice was informed by the first paragraph of Berber Dahir.
Another trivial point: I just want to double-check that it is correct usage to refer to the Order of Ouissan Alaouite as the Alawid Order? --Tenmei (talk) 14:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
one of the sections is clearly blatant misinformation, and can be pointed out easily since the articles creater is a korean. apparenlyl almost one year ago a korean said hed find a source on the talk page. he did not, so im deleting that section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.151.117 (talk) 03:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I made my Chinese friend on it! And it hasn't been deleted as overly racist yet! Go me! I'm Enzutwo on it by the way (in one of the strangest experiences ever, not only was my very rare nick taken for one of the first times in my life, it was taken on the first day the game came out). But, I kinda got out of it after I got to the space stage like most people. I need to justify that fifty dollars, so I'll get back into it. I'm going to try to make a Salafi. --Enzuru03:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The pre-Islamic link between Kaaba and Hinduism is subject to extensive debate and even Muslims do not deny it. The Pagans referred to as using the Kaaba before Islam are most probably Hindus. Any rudimentary search on google will tell this. Please keep my update and add references as I dont know how to do the same.
Hi, I think we have a mutual problem with the above IP who is aggresively pushing his/her POV, and has broken the 3R rule. Any ideas what to do next?--Sikh-history (talk) 08:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, like Sikh-history, we have the problem of the IP address who basically censors everything, calls us sockpuppets and fundamentalists. One of the admins locked the page for discussion, and I'm hoping that we can get this all fixed. Deavenger (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's on the bottom of the page where they try to convince themselves about the conspiracy that Sufism is not really Islam just took the guise of Islam and now after one thousand years a bunch of old white men have discovered spirituality free from the bonds of evil man-made religions. And dude, that contest is cool. I might enter. --Enzuru17:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Muhammad already existed! I only partially created that one (ie, it was my idea to put calligraphy in the template, someone else put the beautiful piece that is in it now). So, I edited that calligraphy and put the names of the other Ahl al-Kisa and made their templates match his. --Enzuru22:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check this edit, I just finally moved Ismaili to Ismaiism, which is the more common term in scholarly literature. Now I just need the correct phrases for it, I mean, are there any in Urdu/Persian/Arabic? Ohh, I think I need to reorder those too. --Enzuru19:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are different images, but I believe they may be copyrighted. Second, until we find the new images, what he did constitutes vandalism practically, it was deletion of content, not for the purpose of improving the article, but for some fringe Shi'a viewpoint. We're keeping the images as they improve the article until we get nicer ones, or perhaps calligraphy for each person. I may be working on calligraphy for the Ismaili Imams, but that's partially because we don't have any images to work with for them in the first place. --Enzuru22:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First off, LOL. Second off, it looks like Chri, and my stalker may be the same person, they struck at around the same time today. --Enzuru08:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice name change, and second, I don't know where it went, but I added it in again. Lastly, I failed the novel, because I hated how it was turning out. I'm just going to start writing racy Tehrangeles club stories. --Enzuru01:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Smear? I didn't you say anyone in particular was a "deletionist." That's your interpretation I was talking about you. You're engaged in Original Research!!! --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I just misused "smear." I probably should have written "characterization." As for your claim of OR, I'll ignore it since it doesn't appear constructive, to say the least. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 18:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Violating the spirit of the rule would be, for example, adding a {{fact}} tag to a caption describing this as a baby turkey. A baby turkey[citation needed][original research?][dubious – discuss][neutrality is disputed] This is quite different from opposing the inclusion of your own dubious analysis of two scholarly items that even you admit are not necessarily in opposition to each other, and it is clear from your last response that even if we don't use the word "controversial," your original research remains the true reason you wish to keep these items (why else would you defend them by defending your claim that they are "very different" takes?).
Before you continue this incessant soapboxing of your original theory, and your attempts to present it in the article in one way or the other, let me be frank with you: your OR sucks.
Wow, that is so scary. I'm not going to Uzbekistan anytime soon. Ever. I'll stick with my Uzbeks in Afghanistan, thank you very much. --Enzuru02:00, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please join me in two things. First, join the discussion on my talk page if ethnicity clashes with MOS saying we should not emphasize ethnicity in the opening, like all Persian scholars on Wikipedia presently do. I'm right now just trying to get a vote for people to change the userboxes so even if it says Persian in the opening, it doesn't say it in the huge userbox next to it, like in Avicenna. Pan-ethnic wars are a pain. Second, see Template:Islamic Culture, someone is claiming Bengali language should not be under here. --Enzuru06:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"wild ass of persia", colonel h. smith. published in 1841 in the naturalist's library, vol. 'Equestrian' (sir william jardine, ed.), geez, I think I have a title for my next renegade work. By the way, your friend hasn't contacted me at my mevboob address yet. --Enzuru08:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I thought you were going to e-mail him my address. It's kinda weird introducing my self like "I AM THE PERSON YOU SPOKE OF" and etc. --Enzuru08:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Those two IPs you mentioned on Klakky's page, for now, have been mentioned here. Let's continue our assumption that the IP and Klakky are two different characters for now. They are completely different in their other vandalism not concerning us, it just seems they share a common interest in some points. --Enzuru04:33, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will revert his actions if you or someone else hasn't already to keep it neutral. You should make it a point in the case that he vandalized the case, that may help speedy up the process. Thanks DJS --DJS2420:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm all for noting Ibn Sina and Rumi's cultural heritage as Persian, it seems many editors try to hide the fact that they were born (or from) what is today Afghanistan, so they go through great lengths saying, "Persian Empire in what is today Iran even though it was called Persia, Shahu akbar," and so forth. The Afghani editors, the ones that haven't fallen prey to Pan-Iranism yet at least, are generally more correct in calling them Afghani, except that is against scholarly consensus since if we look at the entry on what Persian technically means, the Tajik and other Farsiwan of Afghanistan are included. So... it's a tough issue. Just remember, any edit made in good faith isn't vandalism, or so Elonka told me to keep in mind. So, those people who change the Shi'a article and say we're kaffir, that is being made in good faith, unlike the ones who just delete the article and link to pictures of penises. --Enzuru00:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it is, they are trying to improve the article. One is obvious vandalism in which they know what they are doing wrong, like deleting the entire page and replacing it with Shi'a are kaffir for giggles. But like, if someone goes through the entire article and deletes the phrases Muslim and Islam so it just says "Shi'a", that is in good faith, they are honestly trying to improve the article. --Enzuru20:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1. ibn sina was not born in today afghanistan. 2. balkhi (wrong name rumi) was born in balkh in today afghanistan. 3. they were persian like muhamad was arab but not born in saudi arabia. you seem not to see the difference. 4. being persian or iranian does not have much to do with being from what is today iran.--خنیاگر (talk) 04:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1. Avicenna was born in present day Uzbekistan, yes. 2. Rumi was born in present Afghanistan. 3. I agree, the definition of Arab in Muhammad's time was different. 4. And yes, Tajiks are Persian, you don't seem to understand that. Yes, my point is being Persian and being from Iran are two very different things. --Enzuru09:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well i am not sure why you placed back in what i had taken out in the first section. there are absolutley no citations with it and the second paragraph of the intro seems to be quite single minded to me with out have supporting material.
I am not sure however why you deleted my infomation about Umm Waraqa? there is nothing really writen on the hadith in this article, they just briefly mention it with out giving any explanation to the possibility...isn't that not giving both sides of the story?
Is this NOT the most depressing edit ever? I want to cry, and his writing style is like how my dad's writing style is on the computer too. --Enzuru06:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And do you this this individual was an anti-Shi'a Sunni, or an anti-pictures Shi'a who didn't know how to delete just the pictures? --Enzuru22:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is why I usually try to use the longer (and more correct) Shi'a Islam instead of Shi'asm. I'm not sure if other editors do the same, but I know I'm anal about it. --Enzuru21:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LOL, that's pretty funny. I want someone to do that to me! And, that macron-title think is practically BDSM, I have no idea what they're thinking. --Enzuru22:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
User:Redappletree reported you to WP:AIV a few hours ago. I declined the report, as you're obviously not a vandal. I suspected Redappletree is a sock of some kind, but in reviewing his edit to Alevi, it appears you've done something puzzling, and his revert of your last edit there might actually make sense. At first you reverted an IP removing a lot of text, but lately you've been deleting it yourself, reverting back to the IP's version. Is this what you wanted to do? Is it a Twinkle goof? I think re-adding the material was correct. If you delete it again, please explain in the edit summary or on the talk page. Thanks. --barneca (talk) 17:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
hi. i have edited again the women as imams page and tried to take into consideration my writing style. i found it interseting that you thought i was going against women leading women in prayers because i was trying to look at it objectively, and i don't think i added my own opinion in there becuase your perception does not match up with my opinion. if you could give me anyother suggestions i would really appriciate it! thanks.
Sigh, Emsters, do you remember the good old days, when vandals would spell, and think out their vandalism? =( Things ain't like they used to be, hun. In the meantime, I'm thinking about changing my signature to IsmailiVandal. --Enzuru10:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh yes, the Tehrangeles New Year, good stuff. I feel like playing Sonic Mega Collection Plus and Bioshock but I have to leave my room for the former, and I played the latter too much. By the way... back when I used to work near Tehrangeles I used to go to this Tehrangeles Irooni masjid. Apparently it was like the movie star Tehrangeles masjid, where all the Tehrangeles actors and musicians go. Ironically, it rarely had people in it except on the Night of Destiny during Ramadan when there were chauffeurs because of all the Iranians there! And geeeez, this is gonna sound bad, but I had to pay five bucks to have my car parked so I went to a Sunni masjid instead. I hope that doesn't screw up the rest of the year. --Enzuru11:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen that documentary about how Lebanese Shi'a look for husbands and wives during Muharram (with all the shirts off and everything)? I think it's mainly the semi-practicing ones, not the truly religious ones, but it's pretty upsetting, even the Lebanese members of Shiachat were upset. --Enzuru20:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Happy new Year, May you get many more in the coming Year. GOD Bless You, Wishing All your Dream Comes True Azam Ishaque 09:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azamishaque (talk • contribs)
Hi there, Ogress. Regarding the Druze Islam category issue, what I meant was that the Islam category page has a tag at the top of the page saying that articles should be moved into subcategories as appropriate. Reason: Everyone dumps any article whatsoever to do with Islam in the main category page. This results in too many articles on the main category page (not to mention the problem of which articles deserve more preference than others). Only the most important articles such as, Allah, Muhammad, Sunnah etc. should be place in the main category page. I have been battling with this ongoing problem for a few years and, as the tag rightly says, the page needs constant maintenance. I hope this clarifies the issue. Thanks. :) MP(talk•contribs)18:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I kept forgetting to tell you, I took beginning Arabic (I already know the alphabet) with a Baha'i Mexican-American, last semester (he's super-fluent in several languages including Persian). I got close with this Khameneist Iranian girl (who said that she was sure I was one of the 313) in the class but then decided to come out that I'm a cranny Ismaili. There goes that. --♥pashtun ismailiyya22:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
salam
How on earth did you come to be so good at spelling? Mashallah! Btw, should the ya at the end of Tabataba'i have the double dot below? PinkWorld (talk) 02:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]
assalamu `alaykum
*major-league huge blush* It has a gazillion typos. By the time that my ancient browser loaded this page with my ancient computer on the ancient modem, I forgot what I was actually going to say. PinkWorld (talk) 14:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]
I just wanted to let yo know that the information on Salman Fars is Fradulent on wikipedia. I have original proof written in Farsi/Tajiki about his biography. I had already edited the page, but yout took off my edit. I really do not think its fair. The book i have is not in english but is very old. I demand that the correct information about him being processed. See my firend, Salman was a zorastrian, he scaped from his temple in balkh. Then he went to Saudi Arabia, He knew Arabic, So he became a translator there. Think about it. Who better than him to translate a religion to persian, where the persians trusted him so much. I want youto think about it, Mohammed was smart, now if you were mohammed and you wanted to promote your religion, wouldnt you need a translator and a translator with a previous knowledge of a background religion (zorast) with lots of scientific support from it. yeah you would. now what hurts is that all of us got killed, tortured, and mass murdered by islam, and now we can even face the truth. Salman knew the weakpoints of zorasts, think about it, deeply. Peace was our weakpoint, peace. ask anyone who is 50 years of age or older from afghanistan of iran, they know, cause they read the correct history backhome. the problem is that these books were burnt, all our books so that the truth doesnt come out. Thank yo very much for yout consideration —Preceding unsigned comment added by Motlagh (talk • contribs) 14:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there is something i need to know. Regarding the article Muhammad's wives, its more appropriate when one includes Prophet before his name because thats how his name is to be pronounced. Please look forward to the issue —Preceding unsigned comment added by Syedatif (talk • contribs) 17:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I do not know how long this game of switching lights on and off will go on. There is not a line of originality in my edit. A link to the site from which the information is taken is given as a reference.
Please read carefully before jumping to conclusions. I wonder what the smash! is for, I did not know that Wikipedia had a queen bee that refered to herself in plural.
Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an expert on language nor on theology or Indology or for that matter any logy.
There is not a word which I have invented and I am not referring to dasni but the similarity with Murugan, I have not put one and one together as you allege. To make it easier for you here is the link which is from a Yezidi site which compares the Peacock king with Murugan or his vehicle.
The views under question make fair enough sense to me, Pinkham has definitely neither invented the Peacock King nor Murugan. I am an Indian and many Yezidi practices like the ritual hygiene habits seem familar to me as opposed to the Islamic practise of sharing the same containers. The Yezidi's are not Muslim. See the Yezidi talk page we have a few yelling to get this point across.
Perhaps after over two thousand years of gagging and propaganda which included the Yezidi's disguising their faith to look Christian or Muslim, in which they invented the Adi Shaikh, (Adi means first in Sanskrit) we can have another look at the Yezidi religion.
It is said that most of Jesus Christ including his birth day Christmas is an invention, Christmas for that matter coincides with a pre - Christian ritual (it is said), we can never be very sure about the authenticity of what has happened long back.
To me as an Indian the information (in the Yezidi site you attribute to Pinkham) seems to be easy to believe and not far fetched or fringe as you allege. I can relate to and find familiar a few Yezidi practices, particularly those which are non-semitic. The civilisation which is now identified as Indian had foot prints from the eastern Pacific shore, into Mongolia and Japan, see Garud and Swastik and into the middle and near east, statues of a man with an elephant head (Ganesha??) have been found in Central America and Europe.
Mithraism the religion of sun worshippers could be related to Mitra one of the names of the sun god the name is invoked in the first pose of Surya Namaskara, please read the link.
I have written to a Yezidi from Egypt wishing to know more about his religion and practices, but perhaps because of his discomfort with English he has not been very enthusiastic about the communication.
The temple at Lalish looks very much like an Indian temple.
assalamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah, sister
Some guy thinks that he is going to take over the restructuring of the article. Can you have a look, please?
PinkWorld (talk) 05:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Pink[reply]
It seems that either I am a dumb idiot or I am talking to a wall
Synthesis is putting two or more things together to make a new product or a new idea, if I write that the Yezidis have castes and the Indians too have them so the Yezidi are originally Indian or vice verse or that they have common roots that would be synthesis.
Any Indian who reads about the Yezidi's or sees photographs of their temples is bound to be struck with their similarity with India. Then he would get interested and do further reading. This is what I have done. The more I read the more sources I find which point to the Indianness of the Yezidi faith and the people.
About Adi Shaikh, here is what a Rev. Badger has to say
The origin of the name of "Yezeedee," by which they are more commonly known, is referred by some among them to Yezeed ibn Moawiyah, but this is only a stratagem to secure their toleration by the Mohammedans. For a like purpose one of the tombs in the temple of Sheikh Adi is ascribed to Hasanool-Basri whereas I have been assured that the Sheikh who is said to be buried there was a different individual, and one of their own sect whose descendants are still living at Ba-Sheaka. The quotation from the Koran near the tomb was also admitted by several Kawwâls to have been introduced as a blind, and in order to prevent the Moslems from desecrating; their sacred shrine. We have already noticed a similar subterfuge as practised by the Christians of this district, and hence the convent of Mar Behnâm is commonly called "Khudhr Elias," and that of Mar Mattai "Sheikh Matta."
I think it cannot be doubted that the term "Yezeedee" is derived from Yezd, one of the titles applied by the ancient Persians to the Supreme Being. "We are Yezeedees," said Sheikh Nâsir to me on one occasion, "that is, we are worshippers of GOD." But a difficulty then arises as to the person of him whom they designate "Sheikh Adi," and who there is every reason to believe also represents the Deity in their theology. The conversation which I held with the guardians of the temple clearly leads to this conclusion, and the same has been declared to we again and again by many Yezeedees.{fr. 1} In that case his tomb must be regarded as a myth, and the prefix "Sheikh" {fn. 1. May not the Yezeedee "Adi" be cognate with the Hebrew {hbw AD} Adh or Ad, the two first letters in the original of Adonai, the Lord, and its compounds Adonijah, Adonibezek, &c.? This derivation is open to objection on the ground that the Yezeedees write the word with {hbw O} and not with {hbw A}. Little weight, however, ought to be attached to this fact, since they write it so only in Arabic, of which they know but very little, and not in their own language which they do not write at all. Moreover they may have assimilated the mode of expressing the title of their Deity in by-gone days to that of Adi, one of the descendants of the Merawiyan caliphs, with whom from fear of being persecuted by the Mohammedans, they sometimes identify him. It is supposed by some that the "Sheikh Adi" of the Yezeedees, is the same with "Adi," one of the disciples of Mani; but this, I think, improbable, since there is no proof that even Mani himself was deified by his followers.} {p. 113} as another artifice to throw dust into the eyes of the Mohammedan persecutors. Or it may be that "Adi" was a supposed incarnation of Yezd, who appeared on earth only for a season. This opinion receives support from the fact that several buildings are erected near his shrine to commemorate the places on which he is said to have sat. The above hypothesis receives support from the subjoined translation of an Arabic poem, which I obtained after much trouble from the Sheikh already alluded to. "THIS IS THE EULOGY OF SHEIK ADI; UPON HIM BE PEACE! Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please understand that English is not my first language and I am not trained in creative writing. Also Wikipedia is new to me. The above is no excuse for not being civil. Please understand that we belong to different cultures. I however unconditionally apologise if anything I have written has caused personal affront, intentional or otherwise.
Yogesh Khandke is my real name, and I am not using an alias I do not want to take the advantage of anonymity. Apart from all this please see the latest edit. It is you who is indulging in vandalism. I am not indulging in reverts. I did not know about the AIV report, I will try to file one against you unless you desist from frequent revert.
Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Since you are there we can correspond face to face, shoot!Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My policy on the matter is stated on the discussion page: The edit protection will expire soon however I will not resume the game of editing. This section will be included only when there is a guarantee that it will be safe from vandalism.
The wikipedia policy is verifiability and not truth. I have given sources, the argument is whether the sources qualify as the verifiability standard. I have written to a Yezidi acquaintance of mine who lives in one of the Arab states, (the vagueness is to protect his privacy, if you are interested I will email my correspondence with him, we started on the wrong foot, it doesnot mean we can never be friends.
Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry about your illness, please get well soon. I am not reading books as I do not have access to a library. I am corresponding with Yezidis. I hope something comes out of it. I hope one day you understand that the moment I read about the Yezidis I could identify with the practices. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I too was tempted to write that given a choice I would rather not be in the shoes of the girl who was bludgeoned to death, to put it most mildly. I did not do so as I did not wish to make more antagonists and that was besides the point. Another thing you should mark is the kind of background a person must come from to be able to sympathise with a perpetrator of such a gruesome act. Mankind is a funny species. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reverts on Prohibitions in Sikhism. There appears to be consistent POV and propogation of extremist views by this editor. A few years ago we had a similar situation where an editor from banned Sikh Terrorist groups like the Babbar Khalsa were pushing a POV on many articles on Sikhism. Thanks for being so vigialant and your input is always welcome. --Sikh-history (talk) 09:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have again deleted this as Unintentional nonsense, This sentence does not make sense in English; According to a famous controversy,thus virtually introduced pseudo-Geber has been considered as the unknown author of several books in Alchemy.
I will try to assume good faith. If you can make the point in English please do so and add a citation.J8079s (talk) 17:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I didn't know titles couldn't be added. Makes sense from an encyclopedia perspective though. So won't do that. However the names need to be fixed. My citation is that I'm a nephew of Fatehali Huseinuddin Palejwala, so that's family. Following list of people who's names I had fixed inorder to keep the information factual was:
Fatehali Huseinuddin Palejwala, internal link
Badruddin Tyabji, internal link
Azim Tyabji, internal link
M. F. Husain, internal link
Dr. Salim Ali, internal link
Idris Hasan Latif, internal link
Links have been added since their pages are currently present on wikipedia. I'm a distant relative of most of the above mentioned, and work as a community geneaologist and researcher.
I'll have an administrator move it to Ali al-Sistani, and then make every possible other variation a redirect. This means that it can't be easily moved without an administrator doing so, and the administrator will duly note that people are trying to move it to a name with a title. Similiarly, I have yet to move the Aga Khans to names, so far their articles are still Aga Khan IV, Aga Khan III, and so forth. --♥pashtun ismailiyya04:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've done this countless times before, I don't know why panties are getting tangled on their end now. Too tired to go through this mess right now, though. I still have to restore Afghanistan and Pashtun articles to their rightful places! Sigh. --♥pashtun ismailiyya08:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion the whole page should be rewritten, you are right, we should keep the emotional baggage off our backs, let us start one by one, the articles describe the Yezidis as a devil worshiping cult, it has over 12 instances of devil worshipping, you may say that most of the time it is written that they are wrongly called devil worshippers, do we need 12 instances of occurrence then. What if some body writes that xxxx prophet and founder of a particular religion has been wrongly accused to have sex with minor children or xxxx holy book has been wrongly accused to have condoned crimes on prisoners of war including rape of captured women after murder of their prisoner husbands in front of them, and have it repeated over and over on the page?
We need to have a reduction in the wrongly devil worshipper attribution part, as you say to start with? Are you ready to do that?
Don't you think that it is necessary to de-sensationalise the whole article to start with?
Thanks for telling me about the username thing, how upsetting. The link should state Nizari Ismailis are the only Ismailis that don't believe in the Occultation, which is how it was originally written. Mustaali believe it for al-Qasim, and the Druze for al-Hakim. The reason I originally wrote it was to initially distinguish between the "Seveners" and the Ismaili (which is often a confusion, even in Sistani's fatwa!), as well as putting it in there because the Seveners were a historically significant religious community. I believe it should stay in there, because obviously when you click on the Seveners it clearly states that they are most likely extinct. To say he simply died is flying in the face of a very prominent historical religious opinion, I think. --♥pashtun ismailiyya02:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please comment on the points discussed on the talk:Yazidi page
Dude! I used to have Simple and Clean by Utada Hikaru on my page till today, remember? That was breaking copyright, hence why I changed it today to this! What has ARABIC DONE TO YOU?! And I have put off studying for Physics all weekend and might fail the class and my parents might be mad. *cries* --♥pashtun ismailiyya05:51, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Following quotaion is being removed continously by few users(especially one):
“
One morning Muhammad went out wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying).
The first anonymous IP on Template:Ismailism tried replacing the Mustaali Imams with Nizari Imams, and then this one just straight out deleted them. Just like Twelvers come out on Muharram, Nizari Ismailiyya come out around Narouz! --♥pashtun ismailiyya22:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Few of us have concluded that this article needs severe cleanup and revamp. Intial steps of this have been started and as of now are underway one task.
We'll take one task at time, have a review after its complition and move to another,
One or two members will do the actual task while others can do periodic review and correction,
Group of editors can take a task and devide it section wise between themselves
During this process any major revamp or re-writing of article will be avoided.
I still don't get it. Twelvers do not, "acknowledge Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq designated his second son, Ismā‘īl ibn Ja‘far "al-Mubārak, as heir to the Imamate." And I think some flexibility about Ismail predeceasing his father is needed since his house is a site in Syria today. I think even Western sources give flexibility regarding Ismail's death, I'm not sure though. --♥pashtun ismailiyya04:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why it was stated that it seemed he predeceased his father. All groups will agree to that. It's just now whether what seemed to be true actually was. Also, many Twelvers still don't believe he was ever the heir to the Imamate, badah isn't so popular anymore methinks. --♥pashtun ismailiyya04:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Most" still bothers me, not one hadith I know of in Twelver books say he was specifically the heir to the Imamate, just that most people expected it, even that Jafar as-Sadiq wanted Ismail to be his heir. I know, that spits in the face of the idea of what an Imam obviously knows, but the hadith go along those lines from my knowledge. --♥pashtun ismailiyya22:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fix it, then. I was just making a stab at it using wording from another page. At that time, there were neither 12ers nor 7ers, though. It was first Mubarakiyyah v. non-Mubarakiyyah, and then the Mubarakiyyah split amongst themselves. Ogresssmash!03:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I am new to this kind of work
I apologize for making such changes without consulting. Some of the comments where irrelevant to the purpose of the post, and some where taken from mis-translated sources that draw incorect conclusions.
As I had a previouse contribusion to this page, it was removed completly without previouse alert.
I thank you for your time, and humbly request to be guided through this procedure of editing this page without breaking any rules or offending any one.
--A.H.Gaylani (talk)--A.H.Gaylani (talk) 13:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you revert my edits? The introduction to the article was poorly written. Shia disputes with Umar should be put in a single paragraph for the sake of coherence. And for God's sake, it needs to be mentioned that he oversaw the conquest of Persia, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. That's what's most important by far! --Aghniyya (talk) 09:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a Muslim and have no stake in Umar as a figure. I'm an atheist. But he's extremely significant... And, in terms of writing, "however" always needs to have a comma next to it when it interrupts the flow of a sentence. Plus, the introduction to the article includes details that better fit the body. For example, the incident with Fatima could be alluded to in the introduction, but it should not be fully explained. Likewise, his conquests should be alluded to as a reason for his importance, but then explained in the body. Right now, this article seems to be more about religious conflict than history and scholarship. --Aghniyya (talk) 09:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And yes Virginia, most the important early Islamic conquests happened under Umar: Jerusalem (638), Ctesiphon the Persian capital (637), Egypt (640), the last great battle with the Persians at Nahavand (642). It would be misleading not to mention these events. Plus, something else in the introduction should allude to his political policies (eg, taxation). Religious controversy is not all that matters here. --Aghniyya (talk) 10:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I now included a scholarly source about Umar in the introduction. I moved the detailed episode about Fatima to a section called "Shia views of Umar". You can alter that any way you like, or include it in a different section of the body. It's just too specific for the introduction. --Aghniyya (talk) 10:22, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vogels make up an important Iraqi minority community. Estimates of the size of the Iraqi communities vary significantly, between 70,000 and 500,000. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 06:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know how life functions at the rarefied altitude of scholarship, from down here Rajeev's dilema is an unenviable but unavoidable paradox. The said article is wordy. The relevant excerpts which mirror my frustations when confronted with White Christian Scholarism are quoted below.
The implication here is that those who are not licensed by their academic system should not be allowed to argue with their positions, and certainly not as equal partners in dialog. This attitude is, in my view, part of a larger problem in academic discourse, especially in anthropology, sociology and the study of religion, where it is assumed that (i) the non-academician can only be positioned as a native informant, and (ii) the native informant should not talk back.
and
Indian writers and journalists, being mostly from English Honors, are awed by those who have mastered this use of "theory." Many Indians’ menu of theories includes what I called The Anti-India Grand Narrative in an earlier article.
and
(Imagine, by way of analogy, a Chinese anthropologist who learnt only one year of English in his life, and is sent to America to gather data in a bar, at a football game and at a barbeque, and upon his return to China, becomes promoted as the expert on American culture in their higher education system!)
and
They have been reluctant to raise certain human rights problems that are being caused by Western culture around the world. For instance, while a serious set of allegations have been made against Henry Kissinger for atrocities in Latin America and other places, this kind of topic is often kept off-limits to the human rights scholarship sponsored by the Ford Foundations, churches and Ivy leagues. The Western origin of many human rights problems is a major area of silence.
and
One of my pet ideas was (and still is) the dis-intermediation of publishing (such as Sulekha is attempting) and of certain academic fields such as anthropology. My collision with Prof. Ann Gold in the 1990s (whom Vijay cites as a glorious example of anthropology) was essentially over my public challenge to experiment with dis-intermediation in her work. I proposed that (i) a neutral team should summarize her 20 years of study of Ghatyali village women (in Rajasthan), and present to the villagers in their own language what she had published about them in USA; (ii) the villagers would then have feedback sessions led by their own community leaders to evaluate how authentic Ann’s depictions of them had been, and also to do reverse-anthropology on Ann and her culture; and (iii) the feedback would be videotaped and presented at subsequent AAR conferences as an evaluation of Ann’s work by the very people she was studying. This would be a review by the peer culture.I also offered that The Infinity Foundation would pay the expenses incurred, and that we would then try to use video-conferencing to bring people in India and American students into direct dialogs as peers (with simultaneous language translation). All this, I proposed, could be an exciting experiment to firstly validate Ann’s work, and to secondly advance the field to a new plane of equal interactions between cultures. At a later stage, we would also bring Indic representation systems as lenses into discussions with Western theories.
Unlike Sokal’s Hoax, my proposal was entirely above-board, and I honestly feel that it would have served the field of anthropology had Ann not felt so threatened by the novelty of my proposal. I wanted to test a new kind of anthropology as a dialog of cultures rather than as universalizing the West’s theories. Because I was unwilling to accept Ann Gold’s conclusions about Ghatyali women as being the final word, and because I insisted that the real peers must be the women of Ghatyali (regardless of the fact that Ann has a thousand times more money and power), I was hounded for "attacking" her. This is not the place to describe the furor that resulted, other than mentioning that there were some intimidating moments from some of her aggressive friends who closed ranks against me to defend the fortress
I think "claimed" should be reinserted, just as we would say, "Muhammad claimed to start receiving revelations from the angel Gabriel." Saying "claimed" doesn't imply it is truthful nor that it is incorrect. The Aga Khan's lineage is of some academic scrutiny as well, I think Farhad Daftary denied its validity in fact for sometime. --Afghana[talk]22:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't really been paying attention, but I'm guessing Enzuru is now Afghana? in any case its good to see that you guys are always here.. I was actually hoping you could help do something about this guy.. he's been wreaking havoc and I get the feeling that this is an alternative account. ~ Toushiro「 話 」05:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Salaams~ been a while, hoping things are ok with you.. just checking back here and already found trouble - any chance of helping me out here.. he keeps reverting to a page that is inaccurate and is missing half of the relevant content.~ Toushiro「 話 」02:11, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would like you to read my edit reasoning and why I reverted Ogress which you falsely branded as Vandalism. Otherwise I will try to get third opinions involved and try to gain a consensus. Someone65 (talk) 11:27, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
