Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:49, 20 June 2006

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Israeli Apartheid debate

The Israeli Apartheid debate continues at WP:ANI#Admin protecting, then editing article.Timothy Usher 01:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

And now on Talk:Israeli apartheid, Talk:Israeli apartheid/RS.Timothy Usher 07:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

CrazyRussian's RfA

User:FairNBalanced

Based upon your commentary on User:Timothy Usher's talk page it seems safe to say that you didn't actually see the image. Netscott 17:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I see, well I suppose I have less doubts about your bias now. Thanks for the discussion. Netscott 18:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Anti-Semitic people

Not sure if you've been following the talk on Talk:Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but while I agree with his inclusion in the Category:Anti-Semitism it is presumptous of editors to include him in Category:Anti-Semitic people. Netscott 19:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

If your "whitewash" comment was true I surely wouldn't agree with his inclusion in the Anti-Semitism category now would I? Netscott 19:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

There's only one individual of note that I have seen referring to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as an anti-Semite and that is Ehud Olmert who's anything but neutral on the matter. Is there some other notable sources referring to him that I should be aware of? Netscott 19:26, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

They do count that is for sure but neither have actually come out saying "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" is an anti-Semite... they referred to him in terms of anti-Semitism which explains why the anti-semitism category indeed makes more sense for his inclusion over anti-semitic people. Netscott 19:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if it was pro-jewish sophistry related editing I engaged in when I made this first edit, this second edit and this thrid one to counteract whitewashers relative to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Not sure what to think at this point. Netscott 20:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Reversions to Mosque

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing.

I'm sure you are familiar with the three-revert rule and so this comment may not be necessary. Nevertheless, the mosque article is volatile enough as it is; we don't need any revert warring. And using pop-ups to make revert warring faster and easier is a definite no-no. joturner 20:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Muhammad

Seems to me like there are enough people murdered at Muhammad's specific instruction that we could have a category for them. What do you think? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• See Category:People killed by or on behalf of Muhammad and prepare for the inevitable demands for deletion of the category. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The discussion continues . I wonder who will be the first to put it up for deletion? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Banu Nadir

Nice work on this article. I've made a few minor changes. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Israel Shamir

Please see the AN/I entry on User:Israel shamir here. Homey 19:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Anti-Islam sentiment

Why are you removing this category? BhaiSaab 14:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC) Are you kidding me? Lovelace - wants people to flush the Qur'an down the toilet. ibn Warraq - why do I even have to explain? Pat Robertson - Robert Spencer - read his books. Johnson - go to his website. BhaiSaab 14:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I noticed it and I am working on undoing their obvious POV editing. -- Karl Meier 16:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On June 16, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Banu Nadir, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Banu Nadir

Your article is coming under some heavy attacks. Someone even slapped a cleanup tag on the Expulsion section. Also see the comments on the talk page. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-16 17:56

Delightful. It's funny that the article is "intended to defame the Prophet" when the sources are virtually all Islamic texts that viewed Muhammad as the perfect exemplar. Clearly the authors of those sources weren't at all uncomfortable with the idea of wiping out the Banu Nadir; they regarded it as quite admirable. Funny, I went through the same thing with Banu Qurayza. Several editors wanted to insert material in there to the effect that the Banu Qurayza men and women were guilty in their own murder and rape- basically "they had it coming". Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of section title: "Relationship between religious and racial anti-Semitism"

Please take a look . --Doright 19:37, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Exact Phrasing of Source

What's the exact phrasing in the Encyclopedia of Islam that leads to the conclusion that Islamic law bans non-Muslims from entering mosques. And perhaps a bit of context before and after would be nice. joturner 21:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, unless you have further objections, I'm going to remove the {{disputed}} tag from the style section of the mosque article (or perhaps you could do it). See Talk:Mosque#Styles section. joturner 22:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

A big pixelated WikiThanks for the Resilient Barnstar! That's probably the longest I've held it together on a talk page in quite a while :) — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-17 00:59

Banu Nadir and NPOV

Please stop removing the neutrality tag from the article... it really is disputed (since... the talk page is full of arguing) and just because you don't agree with their basis doesn't mean that it isn't. So, give it a few days? Thanks. gren グレン 17:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Flummoxed

Say, I'm flummoxed about something. I just stumbled on the Misplaced Pages:Iranian Wikipedians' notice board? I was wondering if there are more boards like that. It struck me as a deck-stacking mechanism, similar to other notice boards that have been deleted, but maybe I am mistaken. What's your opinion?--Mantanmoreland 23:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't even know there were noticeboards until the other day. Can anyone set them up? Maybe there can be a "tolerance issues" noticeboard, for people like myself who believe in tolerance. --Mantanmoreland 11:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I hear you. But what we have here is a notice board devoted to people of a certain nationality, not to a particular topic. Why not an Jewish Wikipedians' notice board or an Irish Wikipedians' notice board?--Mantanmoreland 11:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for clarifying. Well, it is too bad these boards are not policed.--Mantanmoreland 13:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Some More Changes to Mosque

From Talk:Mosque#What About Now?:

I made some changes to the article, using only the Qur'an to present the idea that polytheists are prohibited from mosques but letting the information about Omar II speak for itself. Essentially, I wanted to not make a conclusion on whether Islamic law prohibits monotheist non-Muslims from entering mosques (as we can't seem to make that conclusion clearly ourselves) and instead let the facts speak for themselves. What does everything think of this version? joturner 02:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Your comments would be appreciated. joturner 02:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/728863.html

can you help

I want to write an article on red dawn but need to create a disamb page first since an article by that name already exist

see this for background:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3264921,00.html

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=%22red%20dawn%22&sa=N&tab=wn

FYI suggest you read all of it

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3265297,00.html