Revision as of 01:27, 18 December 2023 editMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,162 edits →Invitation: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:48, 20 December 2023 edit undoPolar Apposite (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,330 editsNo edit summaryTag: New topicNext edit → | ||
Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
Sent by ] using ] (]) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC) | Sent by ] using ] (]) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC) | ||
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:New_pages_patrol/Coordination/Invite_list_3&oldid=1190429361 --> | <!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:New_pages_patrol/Coordination/Invite_list_3&oldid=1190429361 --> | ||
Greetings. I see from your user page that you are interested in the anthropology of religion. I am too, and also in cognitive science of religion (CSR). | |||
In this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Divorce_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1190769371 you said in the summary: "true, but doesn't need to be inserted into the lede". I inserted it because I thought (and still think) it made the text better. Even if true, not needing to be inserted is not a reason for reverting it once it has been inserted. | |||
IMHO, without that info, readers unfamiliar with Islamic law will likely think that this is a one man one woman situation, as it normally is in English speaking countries, and indeed, most countries. So it is unclear, or even misleading to have "the husband" and "the wife" as if there is always only one wife per husband, as in most countries. | |||
I see that after reverting my edit, you made another edit, changing it to "a wife" and "a husband". The intention is good, and it goes some way to achieve what my edit did, but it is IMHO not a satisfactory substitute, because the reader who is unfamiliar with Islamic law will still likely assume that there only one wife allowed in Islam. These readers need to have that misconception dispelled IMHO. | |||
Readers, such as myself, who *do* know (or have heard) that a Muslim man may have more than wife at one will be distracted by the absence of any reference to this, and likely will pause, wondering whether the law has been changed, or he or she was mistaken about this. Or, as I did, he or she may wonder whether the article is about a particular subset of Muslims, perhaps in a particular sect, or those in the US (who are presumably bound by US bigamy laws), who are *not* allowed to have more than wife (if that is the case - good question, that). ] (]) 20:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:48, 20 December 2023
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Deorphaning articles
Hello, Pepperbeast. I believe we've met before. I've seen your efforts to decrease the backlog of orphaned articles. In that matter, I'd like to give you a quick thanks for doing so. I have never met an editor as willing as you. Let's kill that backlog together, Tarantula (speak with me) (my legacy) 14:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC).
- Gosh, thanks. I really appreciate the support! The backlog must go! PepperBeast (talk) 14:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay
Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.
Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.
Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Invitation
- Hello Pepperbeast, we need experienced volunteers.
- New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
- Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines; Misplaced Pages needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
- Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, it basically boils down to checking CSD, notability, and title). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us.
- If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions. You can apply for the user-right HERE.
- If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message at the reviewer's discussion board.
- Cheers, and hope to see you around.
Sent by NPP Coordination using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Greetings. I see from your user page that you are interested in the anthropology of religion. I am too, and also in cognitive science of religion (CSR).
In this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Divorce_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1190769371 you said in the summary: "true, but doesn't need to be inserted into the lede". I inserted it because I thought (and still think) it made the text better. Even if true, not needing to be inserted is not a reason for reverting it once it has been inserted.
IMHO, without that info, readers unfamiliar with Islamic law will likely think that this is a one man one woman situation, as it normally is in English speaking countries, and indeed, most countries. So it is unclear, or even misleading to have "the husband" and "the wife" as if there is always only one wife per husband, as in most countries.
I see that after reverting my edit, you made another edit, changing it to "a wife" and "a husband". The intention is good, and it goes some way to achieve what my edit did, but it is IMHO not a satisfactory substitute, because the reader who is unfamiliar with Islamic law will still likely assume that there only one wife allowed in Islam. These readers need to have that misconception dispelled IMHO.
Readers, such as myself, who *do* know (or have heard) that a Muslim man may have more than wife at one will be distracted by the absence of any reference to this, and likely will pause, wondering whether the law has been changed, or he or she was mistaken about this. Or, as I did, he or she may wonder whether the article is about a particular subset of Muslims, perhaps in a particular sect, or those in the US (who are presumably bound by US bigamy laws), who are *not* allowed to have more than wife (if that is the case - good question, that). Polar Apposite (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)