Talk:Imposter messiah

This is not a specifically Jewish, Christian or Islamic term so it needs to redirect to an article covering all relevant religions. List of messiah claimants covers all sorts of people claiming to be the Jewish, Christian or Islamic messiahs so that seems reasonable. It also links to the more generic articles about the Antichrist, Dajjal etc so anybody looking for that will get to where they want to. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * This is specifically an Islamic term. The Arabic (المسيح الدجال transliterated as al-Masih as-Dajjal) roughly translates as "the Imposter Messiah". On the other hand, "Anti Christ" is specifically a Christian term.--Religions Explorer (talk) 16:16, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * DanielRigal is perfectly right, and Religions Explorer is mistaken to think that 'Anti Christ' is a term used only for a false messiah. Jeppiz (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not going to feed you.--Religions Explorer (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You are making a lot of WP:NPA violations against several users. You don't need to discuss with me, but you do need to improve your bad behavior, and a lot. Several users have already warned you that your current behavior is unacceptable, I suggest you listen to them. Jeppiz (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

When this all started Religions Explorer possibly had a valid concern that these redirects were not getting people to the article on the Dajjal, which is definitely one thing that they might have been looking for but also definitely not the only thing that they might have been looking for. I added a link to the Dajjal, Antichrist and Armilus to List of messiah claimants so that anybody who wanted those articles would find them. I think that this has addressed any legitimate issue and that there is no urgent need to change things any further. I am not 100% against having a simple disambiguation page for these terms, although the case for it has yet to be made. I am 100% against redirecting to the the Dajjal article as that is just plain flat-out wrong.

We can continue to discuss this, if anybody wants to, but if Religions Explorer is going to misinterpret all good advice and discussion as trolling then I fear that we won't get very far. He would do well to calm down and listen to the good advice he is being offered. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:20, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * @DanielRigal, that user didn't come here in order to offer a good advice. All this started when he posted a warning on my talkpage accusing me of edit-warring. I removed that warning simply because I didn't edit-war. As a result, he decided to check my contributions and revert them out of revenge. This is how he came to this page. I think you yourself have noticed that his comment here didn't address the topic of dispute at all.--Religions Explorer (talk) 06:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)