Talk:Ahbashism campaign

Reliability of sources
has removed key phrases in the lead of this article with the argument that the source (this article at OnIslam.net) is not reliable. Would Babboon43 (or any other editor) care to comment on the reliability of this source? What exactly about this source is unreliable? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * actually i said this source is unreliable and for the onislam article i didnt say it unreliable but there is no actual proof that the government installed several ahbash leaders that onislam article is taking the word of protesters so if its included it should say protesters claim that ahbash leaders were installed or something like that. Baboon43 (talk) 20:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Dear User:WikiDan61, I have been dealing with since the day he showed up on Wikipeda and have had quite lengthy and extensive discussions with him. Under the light of his own edits,  can be and will be found on almost all the Al-Ahbash related pages pushing the POVs of Al-Ahbash. He does not shy at all from misrepresenting and/or even twisting the sources [Here is an example of his POV / edit on Abdullah_al-Harari page. Despite the fact that both of the sources, which he provided by himself upon my insistence AFTER making the edits, he insists that Abdullah al-Harari was a "Professor" - contrary to the sources (first source identifies Shaykh 'Abdallah al-Habashi as a lecturer (without quoting his degrees, tenure or subjects he taught) and the other one indicates that he "was licensed as a shaykh by al-Azhar University's branch in Lebanon."] and a stretch of his imagination in order to propagate his agenda of sanitizing and marketing the Al-Ahbash on the internet via Wikipedia pages.) Having said that you are quite right that  has not only removed key phrases (As per his mindset no critical information about the Al-Ahbash should be added to Al-Ahbash-related pages as he considers it necessary to bring "Wahabis vs. Al-Ahbash" fight to the Wikipedia pages and thus all that information which is critical to the Al-Ahbash must have been written either by the opponents of Al-Ahbash or the Wahabis. He further claims that "there is no actual proof that the government installed several ahbash" WITHOUT providing ANY source at all. McKhan (talk)
 * McKhan, it's helpful if you talk about the content, rather than use the talkpage as a wp:battleground. Penyulap  ☏  08:02, 11 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Some sources about Ahbashism campaign in Ethiopia
This Reuters's story highlights the following facts (EXCERPTS):
 * ''"Also known as the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, Al Ahbash was founded in the early 1980s by Sheikh Abdullah al Harrari, an Ethiopian cleric who was forced to leave his country for Lebanon in 1950."


 * "The protesters accuse Meles' government of interfering by seeking to impose the beliefs of a little-known sect as doctrine. They say the government is promoting the Al Ahbash, an Islamic movement that opposes ultra-conservative ideology and rejects violence."


 * "Since the beginning of the year, demonstrations have taken place on an almost weekly basis in mosques throughout the capital, and more are expected. The London-based Control Risks group said this week Ethiopia's security forces might come down hard on any further protests, based on the government's past responses to unrest."


 * "According to Abubeker Ahmed, an Ethiopian Muslim activist and head of an independent Islamic arbitration committee, the protesters are lamenting what they see as efforts to impose the sect, rather than the sect itself."


 * "He says the appointed leadership of Ethiopia's Islamic Affairs Supreme Council was not representative of the country's Muslim community." "It (Al Ahbash) has the right to exist in Ethiopia, but it is unacceptable that the Council tries to impose it on all members of the Muslim community," Ahmed told Reuters. He said the government wanted to prevent a vote to elect a new council and replace the decade-old one. "They (the government) want to keep them because they agree to whatever orders," he said.

Jimma Times, "an international independent news media outlet run by reporters both in Ethiopia and the Ethiopian Diaspora," reports the following it its news story,"Ethiopia's Muslims in row over Ahbash ideology's link with Meles" (EXCERPTS):


 * "Followers of Abhash say they practice the original Islam that promotes tolerance and protects Muslim youth from harmful radical and political Islam. But critics of Abhash say it is anti-Islam, a blasphemy and it weakens the empowerment of Muslims worldwide."


 * "Under pressure from western organizations and due to some religious violence in Muslim dominated towns of Ethiopia, the government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has reportedly began a new indoctrination program to persuade some Ethiopian Muslims to accept the moderate Abhash ideology. While the intention of the Meles government is to reduce violence and regulate foreign extremist ideologies, many Muslims are blaming the government for its interference. In Jimma city and Bahir Dar, there are already rumors of government harassment of Muslims who oppose the Abhash. In a country where media is suppressed and false rumors spread like wildfire, mistrust is expected to grow further between government officials and the Muslim community."


 * "Critics also accuse the Meles government for ignoring radical evangelism imposed on Ethiopians by western Christian groups. Political analyst Kemal Abdisa told Jimma Times that the Meles government’s favoritism and undemocratic policies contribute to the existing problem.  “In a democratic society where traditional media flourishes, facts would have won over gossips and rumors. But the one-party Meles regime has de facto outlawed independent media,” according to Mr. Abdisa. He said Ethiopian Muslims are already moderate and the government should not impose another version of Islam on Sunni Muslims in Ethiopia."


 * "Ethiopia Muslims Reject Gov’t Interference"


 * "Ethiopian Muslims and the Ahbash controversy" -by Muhammad Ali Alula al-Hashimi (Magazine article)

McKhan (talk)


 * I'd say that the Reuters source is sufficiently reliable to restore the lead text to the version before Baboon43 came along. I'll wait for objections before reverting Baboon's changes, but I think that, in the end, the version I had written (after cleaning up the original, blatantly POV article) was fairly neutral and properly sourced (given that the OnIslam article presented the facts pretty much the same as the Reuters article).  However, given its better reputation, I'll uses the Reuters article.   WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Protestors accuse" must be added or it shouldnt be put in the article because the government has denied enforcing ahbashism on the population as stated in the article in reuters story. Baboon43 (talk) 22:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * fair enough. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * An article, "Is the specter of the Arab Spring haunting Ethiopia?", written by Alemayehu Fentaw (an Ethiopian-born academic) highlights the following in lieu of Ethiopian Government's involvement in the matter:


 * "The Ministry of Federal Affairs is said to have allocated more than 11,000,000 Ethiopian Birr, or 800,000 USD, to the programme, bringing in trainers from the Al-Ahbash headquarters in Beirut. The continued public engagement of the Ministry of Federal Affairs in promoting Al-Ahbash, at the expense of the prevailing schools of jurisprudence of Sunni Islam such as Hannafi and Maliki is not only a clear contravention of the constitutional principle of secularism, but has also turned out to be unacceptable to the Muslim community."


 * Another article, "Muslims accuse Ethiopian government of meddling in mosques", written by William Davison (Correspondent) and published by the Christian Science Monitor echoes the similar points.


 * According to a news story, "USA/Ethiopia: Ethiopian-American Muslims to protest against Zenawi government on May 31", published by the International Islamic News Agency (IINA) reports the following (Excerpts):


 * *"The First Hijrah Ethiopian-American Muslim community in the Washington metropolitan area is gravely concerned about the Ethiopian government’s forceful imposition of a religious sect which violates the constitutional rights of its citizens freedom of worship."


 * *"Medias such as Al-Jazeera and ESAT have also been covering the peaceful protest of the hundreds of thousands of Ethiopian Muslims. For the last three months, they have been protesting throughout the country, demanding an end to the government’s meddling in their religious affairs. The protesters have remained peaceful although the government has completely disregarded their constitutional rights by forcefully imposing the “Ahbash” sect on the Muslim population."


 * Since the Al-Ahbash topic is extremely controversial, thus, any NPOV version of ANY Wikipedia page related to Al-Ahbash must include the information written by the Ahbash as well as its opponents objectively under the light of pertinent sources and Wikipedia's NPOV guidelines. Thank you.


 * McKhan (talk)


 * Those are all speculations unless there's a reliable source that states the government admitted bringing in ahbash it should be regarded as hearsay accusation etc..the major RS reuters says government denies. Baboon43 (talk) 04:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * These ARE reliable and verifiable sources as per the Wikipedia guidelines and must be incorporated with-in this article in order to keep the essence of NPOV otherwise this article should be deleted. McKhan (talk)


 * FYI: In your own words not in the so distant past, (See here. I already know what course of action you are going to take.), "Ahbash doesnt take any mosques by force they are SUPPORTED by governments..do you actually think ahbash can get away with stealing mosques when there is a government in the country?" AND now you are saying, "Those are all speculations" and that the involvement of Ethiopian Government (Isn't the Ministry of Federal Affairs considered to be part of the Government?) in bringing in the Al-Ahbash from Beirut, Lebanon "should be regarded as hearsay accusation etc." It is about time that some Neutral Wikipedia editors get involved who will help with a version of this page and other Al-Ahbash related pages presenting the information written by the Ahbash as well as its opponents objectively under the light of pertinent sources and Wikipedia's NPOV guidelines. McKhan (talk)

Lead rewritten using chiefly the Reuters source. Clarifications made to indicate that any government campaign is alleged by the protestors and denied by the government. Can we call that particular discussion closed? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * If you are going to quote Meles Zenawi then it seems fair that you should also quote the people who claim to represent thousands of protesters who have been protesting against the Government for the past several months. This version is still not NPOV but I think you have made a good effort. Thank you. McKhan (talk)
 * The quote I have added from Zenawi actually supports the protestor's claim that the government is acting against the Muslims. I have presented information that can be cited that presents both sides of the argument, without (I believe) giving undue weight to either side.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:53, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Any changes done by to any Al-Ahbash related page should be discussed on the Talk page first.
is at it again. In the name of "rearrangement", he has deliberately replaced Reuters source with another source and brought the "moderate" Ahbash on the top. Given the history, any changes done by to any Al-Ahbash related page should be discussed on the Talk page first. Thank you. McKhan (talk)
 * your the one with the history of disruption not me..so its better to take your own advice. everything that has to do with protests must belong in the protest section and the article says ahbash is moderate so its not my original research Baboon43 (talk) 00:03, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * One wonders why have the history of pushing Ahbash POVs and promoting Ahbash in all the the Ahbash related pages. The Ahbash being "moderate" is debatable and countered by several verifiable sources. In any case, this article is about a campaign against Ahbashism, thus, the protesters part must be in the lede as well. McKhan (talk)
 * Who has replaced the Reuters' article with CSM article? It is you. Why would you do that without even discussing it? And the CSM article has not used the word "moderate" for Ahbash. Here is the complete paragraph: "Those on trial say the state is leading a coercive campaign, pushing the nation’s 31 million Muslims towards identifying with a more moderate strain of Islam called Al Ahbash. They allege the government is fearful of a perceived new radical Islamic impulse and is attempting to strengthen its control of Ethiopia’s main Islamic national council." So, according to your perception and POV, Wikipedia readers should ignore the sentiments of the protesters and simply take Ahbash as "moderate" because you or other say so. You are simply cherry-picking the source again as per you own history. McKhan (talk)
 * no the protestors part must be in the section where its headlined "Protests"..what is the point of a section named protestors if its not used?? your anti ahbash spewing is irrelevant to this article seeing we had extensive discussions all to no avail on article ahbash..it really doesnt matter if your ex wife married an ahbash..dont bring your personal issues to wikipedia..csm has used the word moderate you even quoted it. Baboon43 (talk) 01:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * As usual you keep on beating around the bush. You have NOT answered any of my questions either. I have no "personal issues" with the Al-Ahbash. All I want to to make sure that the Wikipedia readers know what Al-Ahbash is all about and what are the differences between mainstream Jamat Aha Wa Sunnah and Al-Ahbash. As usual, the CSM article was INSERTED by you - replacing the Reuters' article - to highlight the "moderate" part on the forefront of this article. The same strategy which you have used over and over again in the main Al-Ahbash article. You are making the Wikipeda a battleground for Al-Ahbash vs. Wahabis. Anything which goes remotely against the Al-Ahbash must be related to Wahabis or "terrorism". And all those who don't follow the Al-Ahbash agenda must be "inciting" terrorism or "Wahabis." You keep on cherry-picking the sources. I have invited other editors to look at this article and if needed, I will take this article to NPOV noticeboard. McKhan (talk)
 * really you have no personal issues? so now you are a neutral editor is that what your saying? admit the fact that you were not neutral before if you cant admit that then there is a serious problem..ahbash is mainstream its time you understood that..i didnt replace the reuters article some issues arose when i was trying to site the csm article and it was displaced but the reuters quote is still in the article..& ever since i entered discussions regarding ahbash you have given me wahabi websites so thats your own doing..the people are on trial for terrorism you can take a look at the csm article yourself if you dont believe me. Baboon43 (talk) 02:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have always been a NEUTRAL editor as I have NOT written a single version of Al-Ahbash page or its pertinent pages. The Al-Ahbash is not part of mainstream Sunnis otherwise mainstream Sunnis would not be having differences with them all the way from Australia to North America. Let the RfC decide the fate of this and Al-Ahbash page. McKhan (talk)
 * your paranoia of every edit possibly becoming POV of "ahbash" has made you a POV editor..how are you neutral?? when you revert edits under "discuss before making changes"..this constitutes wp:own behaviour as previously discussed by other editors. Baboon43 (talk) 20:04, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For the record, I have NOT written the version of this page either, thus, your accusation of "paranoia" about WP:Own is categorically frivolous. Quite the contrary, I am NOT the one who has "Al-Ahbash vs. Wahabish" mindset and yet "present" myself to others as an "expert" on Wahabism just to prop up the Al-Ahbash by hook or crook and I am certainly not the one who, in the name of "cooperation" with other editors, is inserting POVs like "Wahabis sect" (the very same tactic you used on the Al-Ahbash page but the major difference IS that on that page you fought tooth to nail to NOT to have Al-Ahbash considered as a sect) or trying to portray Al-Ahbash as "moderate" when the Al-Ahbash: indulged into the "war of mosques" with the Muslim Brotherhood (As per your convenience, perception and discretion, sometimes you consider Muslim Brotherhood a "Sufi Salafi" movement and sometimes a movement which was banned by the Western governments thus a "militant" or "terrorist" in nature), had street battles with Hezbollah, has been opposed by the mainstream Sunnis in Australia (It is VERY IMPORTANT to note that the Al-Ahbash or AICP is NOT part of mainstream Muslims' Islamic Shura Council here in the United States nor in Australia where the mainstream Australian National Imams Council accused the Muslim Community Radio Incorporated as being associated with Al-Ahbash and made public announcement for government officials not to renew its broadcasting license.) and just recently has been protested against by the Ethiopian protesters. I regret to say - in the light of my extensive and long discussions with you - when it comes to Al-Ahbash or anything related to Al-Ahbash, you certainly are NOT Neutral as in the case of this page. It is about time that the essence of NPOV should be restored in the Al-Ahbash related articles. Should you like then you are more than welcome to participate in the following RfC. Thank you. McKhan (talk)
 * you don't need to edit an article to be considered non neutral...all you did was censor edits on all ahbash related articles for close to 9 years..your statement about me commenting on another article talk page is in itself frivolous. Baboon43 (talk) 00:05, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * , Your own edits speak for itself and anybody can see them. McKhan (talk) 02:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

RfC
As per the kind suggestion of Magog_the_Ogre, I would like to use RFC as the initial process. I admit that this is the first time I am using this process.

With reference to the Talk page of this page (Ahbashism_campaign) and Talk pages of the Al-Ahbash page, it becomes abundantly clear that the subject of Al-Ahbash is extremely controversial, thus, few Neutral Wikipedia editors who would kindly help with a version of Al-Ahbash page and Ahbashism_campaign page which presents the information written by the Al-Ahbash as well as its opponents objectively under the light of pertinent academic sources and Wikipedia's NPOV guidelines would be really great and helpful. Please, feel welcome to read the Talk pages of Al-Ahbash and this page (Ahbashism_campaign). Thank you. McKhan (talk)
 * Has the RfC been opened yet? MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually before this RfC starts, was Third opinion tried? MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no experience with the RfC but I have followed the steps listed under RFC. I intend to gradually extend this RfC (or open a new one) to the main Al-Ahbash page. Thank you. McKhan (talk)
 * You have not posted the RFC as yet, would you like me to do so if you are unsure how? Darkness Shines (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. Please, go ahead. Thank you. McKhan (talk)
 * McKhan, please use ~ (four tildas) and not (three tildas) to sign your posts on talk pages. You lose credibility when editors cannot see when your posts were made. In the process of reviewing this dispute I found it very difficult to judge your motives without the date attached to your signature. I had to rely on the edit history of talk pages to compare your article edits to your posts to determine if your edits were motivated by edit warring or actual concern about content. This is very difficult compared to having dates in the text of talk pages.
 * I would like to thank both of you for your recent adherence to WP:CIVIL. Can I get either one of you or both or three to list what is actually still in dispute. Please use a list format to detail what about these two articles you disagree with. Or is this RFC only for "help with a version of Al-Ahbash page and Ahbashism campaign page which presents the information written by the Al-Ahbash as well as its opponents objectively". If so what statements would each of you like to be included and what are the best sources for that statement. That way other NPOV editors can evaluate their reliability and best placement in either article. In my humble opinion, if the statements are included in the form "According to X, ..." then the actual POV of the statements are inconsequential. The goal should be to reach a NPOV by including varies POV. But first we must determine if the sources can be relied upon to present the statements accurately without influence.&mdash; አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * , Thank you very much for kindly coming forward to help with the Al-Ahbash and Ahbashism_campaign pages. First thing first, since you are from Ethiopia [ is also from Ethiopia but based in Canada and actively contribute to Ethiopia and Al-Ahbash related pages)] and the leader of Al-Ahbash, Abdullah_al-Harari, is also from Harar, Ethiopia, I sincerely hope that there will be no conflict of interest and you will be able to remain neutral. Having said that I hope that you have already gone through the  Talk pages of Al-Ahbash and Talk pages of Ahbashism_campaign if you have not done so then please feel welcome to do so as it will greatly help to understand what are the main NPOV issues with these pages. Is this RFC only for "help with a version of Al-Ahbash page and Ahbashism campaign page which presents the information written by the Al-Ahbash as well as its opponents objectively"? Indeed, it is.


 * Regarding this particular page, Ahbashism_campaign, this was the version which was written by . Please, feel welcome to compare 's version to 's version under the light of 's following edits:


 * 00:02, 16 February 2013 (diff | hist) . . (+246) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (really perhaps wp:own again? Undid revision 538485402 by McKhan (talk))
 * 20:51, 14 February 2013 (diff | hist) . . (+252) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (re-arrange + recent news)
 * 20:20, 14 February 2013 (diff | hist) . . (-7) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (this is what it says)
 * 04:32, 27 January 2013 (diff | hist) . . (-1) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (you follow my contributions ill report u for hounding Undid revision 535108529 by MezzoMezzo (talk))
 * 05:13, 30 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+14) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (→‎ Protests )
 * 05:11, 30 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+15) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (→‎ Protests )
 * 04:08, 30 November 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+413) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (add - →‎ Protests )
 * 21:58, 9 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-37) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (no mention of tear gas)
 * 21:46, 9 October 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-12) ‎ . . Ahbashism campaign ‎ (sufi not sunni Undid revision 516894894 by 71.114.93.232 (talk))


 * succeeded to highlight the "Saudi funding" as per his "Al-Ahbash vs. Wahabism" mindset, reduced "Ethiopian Muslims accuse the government of recruiting Ahbash imams from abroad to take positions in the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the ruling body over Islam in Ethiopia.[2]|undefined" (by propping up the Al-Ahbash and by replacing the Reuters' source and cherry-picking the CSM soruce) to "Those currently on trial for inciting terrorism, accuse the state of driving muslims towards the moderate Ahbash [2]".


 * Thus, I cannot stress enough that we need few Neutral Wikipedia editors who would kindly help with a version of Al-Ahbash page and Ahbashism_campaign page which presents the information written by the Al-Ahbash as well as its opponents objectively under the light of pertinent academic sources and Wikipedia's NPOV guidelines. Once again, please, feel welcome to read the Talk pages of Al-Ahbash and this page (Ahbashism_campaign). Thank you. McKhan (talk) 01:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

, :With reference to your recent edit, what "rationale" are you referring to? You replaced the source, inserted your favorite statement and when I opened the RfC you didn't even participate in that. Please, feel welcome to elaborate. Thank you.McKhan (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * as mentioned in the above discussion no source was removed all i did was insert a new source. Baboon43 (talk) 20:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * , Thank you for finally participating in this RfC. Here is the evidence that you DID replace the Reuters' source with the CSM soruce. McKhan (talk) 00:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * a few technical issues did arise but reuters quote remains in the article thats all that really matters. Baboon43 (talk) 10:37, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This statement "Those currently on trial for inciting terrorism, accuse the state of driving muslims towards the moderate Ahbash [2]" is not NPOV nor it is substantiated FULLY by the the CSM soruce neither by the the Reuters' source. McKhan (talk) 11:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * reuters has nothing to do with that input..the csm article says the following "Those on trial say the state is leading a coercive campaign, pushing the nation’s 31 million Muslims towards identifying with a more moderate strain of Islam called Al Ahbash".& the article says they are on trial for terrorism "Currently, 29 leaders of a Muslim protest movement, and representatives of two Islamic charities are on trial in Addis Ababa, facing charges of plotting violence to create an Islamic state". ..last time i checked using violence in politics is considered terrorism..so my input is not NPOV thats what the article says. Baboon43 (talk) 11:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * , Why did you have to insert the CSM source in the first place? Is it because that the CSM article is using the word / term "moderate"? Why didn't you also include the terms like " coercive campaign " or " pushing the nation’s 31 million Muslims " towards the Al-Ahbash which identifies itself "with a more moderate strain of Islam."? Why would you use the term " moderate Al-Ahbash " when the CSM source doesn't outright imply that but carefully use "more moderate strain" of Islam? Why would you bring it to the top? Why don't you support the merger of this article with the main Al-Ahbash page? You know exactly that this subject is extremely controversial and yet you keep on marketing the Al-Ahbash which is categorically against the Wikipedia policies and that's exactly why I put those tags which you removed claiming that they are "stale." What exactly do you want? Do you want the free-hand to insert whatever and however and whenever you want to all the Al-Ahbash and Wahabism-related pages? Please, feel welcome to elaborate. Thank you. McKhan (talk) 11:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * personal attacks, accusations & going off topic is typical behaviour which you have not adjusted..so basically if i dont have your approval or blessings then i shouldn't edit? why are you dictating to me what i should have done regarding my edits to this article..it is the anniversary of our meeting on wikipedia, have some courtesy..why are you going off topic about topic merger and how i edit other articles on wikipedia??..either stick to the topic or close the rfc. Baboon43 (talk) 12:18, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * , You always tend to forget that your own edits speak volume about your own editing behavior. Given I have had very long and extensive discussions with you on almost all the Al-Ahbash related pages, my comments doesn't and shouldn't come across as "personal attacks" or "accusations." Having said that - as usual - you haven't answered any of my questions at all. Thus, I am still waiting for the answers. McKhan (talk) 12:29, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * aside from the mumbo jumbo you wrote..sticking to the edits, it basically wouldn't make any difference if i added "moderate strain" rather then just moderate or if i had added coercive campaign..my input just sums up what was reported..i brought it to the top because it sums up the campaign, it certainly doesnt belong in the protest section. Baboon43 (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Let me remind you that one of the purpose of this RFC and my extensive and lengthy conversations with you is to help with a version of Al-Ahbash page and Ahbashism campaign page (and all other Al-Ahbash related pages) which presents the information written by the Al-Ahbash as well as its opponents (i.e. "Wahabis", "Anit-Ahbash", "Kafirs", "Infidels") objectively. I don't agree with your "rearrangement" (As I indicated above, you succeeded to highlight the "Saudi funding" and intentionally reduced "Ethiopian Muslims accuse the government of recruiting Ahbash imams from abroad to take positions in the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the ruling body over Islam in Ethiopia.[2]|undefined" (by propping up the Al-Ahbash and by replacing the Reuters' source and cherry-picking the CSM soruce) to "Those currently on trial for inciting terrorism, accuse the state of driving muslims towards the moderate Ahbash [2]") nor I support the insertion of such an unsubstantiated statement in this article. Since the subject is extremely controversial and you and I don't see eye to eye, thus, we need a Third Opinion. In the meantime, it is only fair that the article remain being tagged. Thank you. McKhan (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * its all RS and thats what wikipedia accepts if you want original research inserted then wikipedia is not the place to do it..if you make your own blog you can rant about anything you like. Baboon43 (talk) 13:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It is NOT only about RS but it is also about the essence of Wikipedia which aspires to be NPOV and your edits - under the light of your own edit history - does not come across as NPOV specially when you keep on cherry-picking the sources and continue to insert favorable POVs to the subject of Al-Ahbash (and its related pages), which is extremely controversial. I am NOT interested in blogging. Thank you for the suggestion. McKhan (talk) 13:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * merge- I'm a randomly-selected-to-comment editor, and based on a quick look the Ahbashism campaign article looks like a good candidate for WP:MERGE. It's pretty insubstantial and could make a subsection of Al Ahbash with some rewriting. BoogaLouie (talk) 17:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind comment. I also support the merger as do others. Thank you. McKhan (talk) 23:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * why do you have to confuse editors by opening an rfc thats so broad..you have listed two articles al ahbash and this one..my advice is you stick to an issue at a time. Baboon43 (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Given the votes for merger, I will be merging these two articles together along-with migrating this RfC to the Al-Ahbash page. McKhan (talk) 14:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Guys, just merge the two articles. This one is short already and seems related to the movement's spread. The main Ahbash article needs a lot of work as it is, and a lot of the material there could be trimmed down, making a merge even more appropriate. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

'''This RfC (along-with the above comments) has been migrated to the Al-Ahbash talk page as it falls under the scope of Al-Ahbash. Should you like then please feel welcome to contribute further on the Al-Ahbash talk page. Thank you. McKhan (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)'''