Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:59, 18 January 2008

Archives

2005 — 2006 — 2007

Polymath

Hi. I noticed you added Mohammed as a polymath. While I tend to agree with you that he was, by long convention to avoid POV fights and edit warring, (believe me, there was a lot of argument about including/excluding people prior to this, which was all subjective and rather unpleasant) the article only includes figures described by RS as a "polymath". Do you have a reference for Mohammed being a polymath? If not, the inclusion should be removed, or perhaps "commented out" until one is found. --Dweller (talk) 12:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

jagged, I'm repeating Dweller's request here. We need a reliable source calling Mohammad a "polymath". It is OR to conclude ourselves that he was one. I'm putting the fact tag back in. Please find a source for this if you can. --Matt57 21:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007)
Project news The Intelligence task force has been created. The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries. Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome! {{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Albuera Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081) Battle of the Gebora Constantine II of Scotland Francis Harvey Vasa (ship) Wulfhere of Mercia New A-Class articles: 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing Evacuation of East Prussia
Current proposals and discussions A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.
Awards and honors Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic. For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.
Tag & Assess 2007 Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows: 1. Bedford — 7,600 2. TomStar81 — 5,500 3. Parsival74 — 5,200 4. FayssalF — 3,500 5. Roger Davies — 3,000 6. Ouro — 2600 7. Kateshortforbob — 2250 8. Cromdog — 2,200 9. BrokenSphere — 2000 9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000 9. Maralia — 2,000 12. MBK004 — 1,340 13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250 14. Sniperz11 — 1100 15. Burzmali — 1000 15. Cplakidas — 1000 15. Gimme danger — 1000 15. Raoulduke471000 15. TicketMan — 1000 15. Welsh — 1000 15. Blnguyen — 1000 Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-particpants alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Asian pride

An editor has nominated Asian pride, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Asian pride (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

London Meetup - January 12, 2008

Hi! There's going to be a London Misplaced Pages Meetup coming Saturday January 12, 2008. If you are interested in coming along take part in the discussion over at Misplaced Pages:Meetup/London7. The discussion is going on until tomorrow evening and the official location and time will be published at the same page late Thursday or early Friday. Hope to see you Saturday, Poeloq (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

It appears I did break the 3RR rule, and it is my fault for not being careful, so I don't really see any point making excuses for my own carelessness. But I do have one question: Arrow704 also reverted my edits four times, so how can it be that only I get blocked and he doesn't? Jagged 85 (talk) 07:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

No, twice. Aminz reverted twice as well. Arrow740 (talk) 07:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like we both made three reverts, and then I made one more to Aminz. Never mind then. Jagged 85 (talk) 07:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I made two, you made five. Arrow740 (talk) 07:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted Aminz only once, not twice. And yes, I just counted three reverts on your part. But like I said, never mind. It's pointless arguing any further over something trivial like this. Jagged 85 (talk) 08:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say you reverted Aminz twice, and you miscounted my reverts again. The removal of "medieval" directly followed the previous edit; I meant to remove that word when cleaning up the intro. Consecutive reverts count as one. Arrow740 (talk) 08:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Byzantine-Arab Wars template

Please donot remove red links. They are there to show the reader the number of battles. They may not have articles, but that is something that you and I as editors should remedy with time, not simply delete them.

respectfully

Tourskin (talk) 21:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Muslim psychology

I'm doing new page patrol at the moment and just wanted to say what a pleasure to come across your article. So many of the new pages are either vandalism, advertising or experimentation that it was a real treat to come across a fully-formed, well-illustrated, properly referenced article. Thanks! Kim Dent-Brown 17:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		For making a new page patroller's day with a proper article! Kim Dent-Brown 17:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I came across your new article Muslim psychology entirely by chance, but I'm very impressed by the quality of work you've produced, especially given its size. Well done. ITAQALLAH 20:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I also nominated your article to feature on the "Did you know..." section. ITAQALLAH 22:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Alphonse de Lamartine

You cited his quote to www.cyberistan.org on Muhammad, and when that produced quite an uproar you simply stated that the reference was directly to his book. Have you verified that the book makes the statement you claim? Arrow740 (talk) 20:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Polymath

Please see this. --Matt57 22:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

A polymath "is a person with encyclopedic, broad, or varied knowledge or learning." Arrow740 (talk) 04:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Question about Kaukab ali Mirza's book on Ja'far al Sadiq

While trying to track down who it was who added the citation to the above book to the article on Heliocentrism I noticed that you seem to have put in an enormous effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Islamic astronomy. Congratulations on all your great work.

Unfortunately, it appears to me that Ali Mirza's book doesn't satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for reliable sources. I have voiced my concerns on the Ja'far al Sadiq talk page and, in more detail, on the Heliocentrism talk page. Nevertheless, while Ali Mirza's book itself shouldn't be considered reliable (in my opinion), the French thesis on which it's supposedly based may well be. As I indicate on the Heliocentrism talk page I have tried to track down this thesis without any success. I therefore have a question for you. Does Ali Mirza give a traceable citation to this thesis in his book? If so, could you please post it?

On further investigation I have found that you were also responsible for posting the citation to an article "Light and Disease" in a journal called The Minister in the article on Ja'far al-Sadiq. I have been unable to find any details at all about this publication, and am therefore also concerned about its use as a source on Misplaced Pages. Could you please let me know who the publisher of the journal is, or if you no longer have the issue you cited I'd be grateful if you could at least let me know where you obtained your copy of it. —David Wilson (talk · cont) 08:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the reference. It's not a thesis, it's an article in the proceedings of a conference (the Colloque de Strasbourg). Unfortunately, there is no library anywhere near me (in Australia) which holds a copy of those proceedings, and Worldcat tells me that the only ones listed in its database which do hold a copy are in Europe and Canada. I'm afraid I don't have time to pursue this any further. In any case, the article contains only 11 pages, while Ali Mirza's book contains 275 (according to its entry in the New York University library's catalogue). So even if some of the material in the book does come from this article, there must still be a huge amount that doesn't.

You should be made aware of one of Misplaced Pages's guidelines on the citing of sources. This says that when you cite sources they should be ones you have checked personally. I acknowledge that you did in fact try to indicate that you were citing The Minister indirectly, via the islamonline web site, but it was not at all clear (at least not to me) that that is what you were doing; and in the case of Ali Mirza's book you gave no indication at all that your information had come from anywhere other than the book itself (simply placing a link to a website in the external links section of the page doesn't constitute such an indication, in my opinion).

—David Wilson (talk · cont) 08:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Muslim psychology

Salam Alaykum,

Thanks for your wonderful article. Do you agree to nominate it as a GA article.--Seyyed(t-c) 18:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ibn al-Haytham

Salam Alaykum.

The picture in not necessary for Good Article. At present I'm too busy and working on Day of Ashura. I'll tell you my idea about these two articles next week, God willing.--Seyyed(t-c) 04:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)