User talk:Al-Andalusi/Archive 3

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Women in Islam into Sexual Violation in Islamic Law. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * my edit summaries already note the fact that the content has been copied/moved. Al-Andalusi (talk) 00:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That's not true on the edits the bot picked up, which were and . — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:30, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Hijra has been nominated for discussion
Category:Hijra, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:08, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

1RR vio
Note you violated 1RR with this. I urge you to self revert.Icewhiz (talk) 16:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * My last change on the page was on Dec 10. Can you explain why is it 1RR? Al-Andalusi (talk) 17:23, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * My understanding of 1RR is that it applies on a per-article basis. Correct me if I'm wrong. Al-Andalusi (talk)
 * per If an edit is reverted by another editor, its original author may not restore it within 24 hours of the revert..Icewhiz (talk) 18:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks. Al-Andalusi (talk) 14:45, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You again broke it.Please rv yourself --Shrike (talk) 08:18, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I strongly suggest you self-revert this.Icewhiz (talk) 08:22, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

1RR vio
Note - original authorship and revert - is a violation of the original author provision in ARBPIA's 1RR (and this paragraph is clearly ARBPIA). BLPCRIME is not a valid exemption to 1RR here as per BLPCRIME: This section (WP:BLPCRIME) applies to individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by WP:WELLKNOWN. - and Bishara is clearly a public figure and well known.Icewhiz (talk) 07:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Azmi is a "relatively unknown" person. You'd have to look for him to find him, as opposed to say Mandela. In any case, your revert gives undue weight to what amounts to mere speculations and accusations. Somehow, with all the serious accusations on his head, Azmi managed to slip out of the country after he promised the authorities that he'd come back for interview! So this is a show put on by the Zionist regime and they're milking it to pass discriminating bills against Palestinian citizens...it does NOT belong to the lede. Azmi is known for a lot more things that what happens or is said in that shithole Knesset. A user recently made additions to wiki page to illustrate that.
 * Looking at the history, it seems you violated 1RR on that same page. Al-Andalusi (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * He was a member of Knesset and party leader - definition of a public figure.
 * How did I violate 1RR? I performed exactly 1 revert (in 2 consecutive edits, with no intervening edits by other users, which counts as 1 per WP:3RR A series of consecutive saved revert edits by one user with no intervening edits by another user counts as one revert.). Earlier I added tags, which is not a revert. If you tell me what I should self-revert, I will.
 * I respectfully request you self-revert.Icewhiz (talk) 17:15, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You made 2 sequential reverts to the page, but the reverts undid different content added by 2 different users and thus are completely independent from one another. Al-Andalusi (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's a single revert - per the relevant policy (WP:3RR) I quoted above.Icewhiz (talk) 15:59, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It appears that 1RR supersedes 3RR policy. Show me an example of your behavior being allowed in am Israeli-Arab conflict page. Al-Andalusi (talk) 16:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Per WP:1RR: The one-revert rule is described like the three-revert rule above, except with the words "more than one revert" replacing "more than three reverts" - so the cited clause from 3RR is not superseded, the sole difference is three being replaced with one.Icewhiz (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

1RR vio
this revert on Irgun is a violation of the original author clause in ARBPIA 1RR. I urge you to self revert.Icewhiz (talk) 21:53, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Al-Andalusi (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Azmi Bishara's article
Dear Al-Andalusi, hope this finds u well. Can u plz help me in reviewing my edits for Azmi Bishara article? I have done the edits at my sandbox as per Number 57 advice. If my edits are OK, plz move it to the article if u accept helping me in that. Thanks in advance.--Zeidan87 (talk) 21:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

1RR
You violated 1RR with and  - besides removing well sourced material (which is beyond guilt by association - these organizations are in the same building and some of the senior staff has positions in both). Kindly self-revert.Icewhiz (talk) 08:11, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Nope, I did not. Al-Andalusi (talk) 18:34, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Al-Andalusi, this does appear to be a 1RR violation on an article covered by WP:ARBPIA. You are still under notice for ARBPIA. It is in your interest to undo your last change. EdJohnston (talk) 19:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , I'm seeing 2 reverts on different articles. How is that 1RR? Al-Andalusi (talk) 19:23, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * To clarify, you violated 1rr in both articles with those diffs. You also violated 1rr in another article, with this diff - however I did not ask you to self revert as others had edited since.Icewhiz (talk) 19:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Al-Andalusi, you removed from Middle East Monitor twice on 25 February. The first time you were reverting an addition by User:Zakawer from 30 January, so both edits were reverts. EdJohnston (talk) 19:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , I respectfully disagree. I understand that you came here from a WP:Canvassing call, but since you made the effort to go back in time and review the edits, then I was hoping you'd see that the context of my changes (on both articles) had nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict, but with the Qatar–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict. The organization does not profess its Brotherhood affiliation, and it would be a violation to label it among the "Muslim Brotherhood" because of a accusation from a critic. Yes I removed twice but I will say that only the second removal counts as a proper "revert", although of a user with less than 500 edits (ARBPIA 30/500), and what you refer to as the first revert...well technically any change to an article can be classified as a revert if you look deep into the article's history with the intention to stir problems from nothing, which Icewhiz is doing here. What should be made clear here, is that Icewhiz arrived at those two pages and brought "Israel" and ARBIA into this only because he is stalking my contributions page, and found his questionable additions reverted. Al-Andalusi (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Without regard to the merits (which EdJohnson has under control), I will just say that it is NOT canvassing when someone asks an admin to get involved. We volunteered and were specifically chosen by the community to do this, on behalf of the community, so framing it this way is flatly wrong.  Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 20:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I had watchlisted both pages after discussing (the inappropriate in my eyes) use of MEMO as a source with you on a separate article. Both organizations cover the Israeli/Palestinian conflict intensely, and the edit of mine that was reverted was clearly ARBPIA in that it involved Hamas. Some of the previously reverted content by you also involved Hamas and not just the wider brotherhood - and some of it was recently restored by NeilN who is extended comfirmed. Also - I did not canvass anyone to here.Icewhiz (talk) 20:37, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the earlier edits mentioned by EdJohnson when I said they are not ARBPIA-related. So I believe that my revert of your additions would constitute the first ARBIA-related revert. You mention that the previously reverted content by me also involved Hamas, which is not quite right (unless you're referring to this, which on a normal day, would not bee seen as a "revert" but a normal edit). Al-Andalusi (talk) 20:51, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Which is a clear revert of - a 30 Jan 2018 edit by an extended confirmed user on ARBPIA.Icewhiz (talk) 20:57, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Like I said, any change to an article can be framed as a "revert" if one wants to push a certain narrative. Here, you are referencing an edit made a month ago, which tells me how ridiculous this revert claim is. I can go back to some of your edits and demonstrate the same, and claim you've been reverting and violating 1RR on articles. As an editor, it's not expected of me to review an article's history and check each and every edit made to an article, before I can make a change to it, and hope that I'm not "reverting" and violating 1RR. Al-Andalusi (talk) 21:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I posted a friendly request here assuming this may have been an honest mistake, despite user:Zakawer's edit being the last major edit prior to your own edits (which incidentally added "Category:Media coverage of the Arab–Israeli conflict" apropo ARBPIA relevance of the article). I understand, however, that you see things differently.Icewhiz (talk) 22:03, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Tariq Ramadan
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

AE
Please refer Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement to a report filed against you in regards to the 1RR thread above.

1RR in ARBPIA
Hi. Here are some suggestions about the 1RR remedy in ARBPIA.

The simplest way to not run afoul of the remedy is to follow both these two practices:
 * Only edit the page once in 24 hours (a consecutive series of edits counts as one edit).
 * If you're reverting any edit, make sure that the edit is at least 24 hours old.

In addition, if someone still asks you to self-revert due to 1RR, just do it whether you think it's right or wrong (you can still discuss with them on your talkpage). This has been my practice for many years, and I have had zero problems.

Use the extra time to discuss on the article talk page (this is the point of the remedy). Kingsindian &#9821; &#9818; 23:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Islamophobia
Hi. I have reverted an edit of yours on this article, as you restored material against a consensus on the talk page, which included the opinion of the editor who originally added the material.

I addition, I would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I remember you. You are that Islamophobia-denialist who thinks he owns the article and set himself up as a mufti to speak on behalf of Muslims, getting to decide what is Islamophobic and what is not. Wait till I compile my sources and come back to it. Al-Andalusi (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

1RR
You broke the "original author provision in ARBPIA 1RR with this edit, in relation to these reverts, of content you originally authored on 22 Oct. Kindly self revert.Icewhiz (talk) 19:28, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Efraim Karsh
Regarding your edits to the Efraim Karsh article. I find them suspiciously POV: you remove many things that review him and his work positively, add many things that are quite the opposite, and seem to be using the word "Zionist" in the most peculiar places, making it sound almost like a pejorative. Please consider your next edits to this article carefully. Debresser (talk) 23:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You're overreacting. Al-Andalusi (talk) 23:25, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I just gave you a kind reminder. Asked you to consider your edits carefully. I didn't slam you with warning templates, or threaten to report you. How am I overreacting? Debresser (talk) 23:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I can see that you became angry all of a sudden. Too bad that I probably don't care about what you just wrote here. Al-Andalusi (talk) 23:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You can see (?) that I got angry? Are you a prophet? Well, I didn't, sorry.
 * It is actually too bad that you don't care. You should. Debresser (talk) 01:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
Your addition to Daniel Pipes has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:38, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , looks like a bug in your bot. Please review the changesets in question. Al-Andalusi (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The removed content is here Contending Visions of the Middle East: The History and Politics of Orientalism By Zachary Lockman, page 255. The overlapping content is also visible at this webpage. The material I removed was "Although Pipes claimed that he was not against Muslims or Islam but was only opposed to Islamism, Lockman observes that the tone and often the content of much of what he had to say" which was wedged between two quotations. I replaced this with " He stated that Pipes's remarks... ". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk)

Discretionary sanctions notice: post-1932 politics of the United States
—Sangdeboeuf (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Canary Mission, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BDS ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Canary_Mission check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Canary_Mission?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People
Copying the text of an article word-for-word without an in-line attribution, as you did from Al-Jazeera with these edits constitutes WP:PLAGIARISM. Just to show a comparison of what you wrote versus what appeared in the source you referenced:

Your addition to the article:
 * Critics compare it to apartheid, saying it promotes ethnic superiority and further marginalises the 1.8 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship and other smaller minorities.

Text from the source:
 * Critics compare it to apartheid, saying it promotes ethnic superiority and further marginalises some 1.8 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship and other smaller minorities.

If you think this is a worthy addition, you may want to start by WP:PARAPHRASING the content rather than simply copy-pasting it into the article.

Wikieditor19920 (talk) 00:15, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * There is an in-line attribution to Al-Jazeera in my edit. Are you blind? Al-Andalusi (talk) 01:21, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No, there wasn't. Do you know what an in-text attribution is? Even so, you must know that we're not permitted to simply copy-paste content from third-party sources. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 02:32, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Comment by ImmortalWizard
Just so you know, removed your content here. THE NEW  Immortal  Wizard  (chat) 17:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Al-Andalusi/Al-Subki


Hello, Al-Andalusi. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Al-Subki".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. EggRoll97 (talk) 18:09, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Scholars of the Abbasid Caliphate


A tag has been placed on Category:Scholars of the Abbasid Caliphate requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Scholars of medieval Islamic history


A tag has been placed on Category:Scholars of medieval Islamic history requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Category:Christians of medieval Islam has been nominated for renaming
Category:Christians of medieval Islam has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Scholars of the Abbasid Caliphate


A tag has been placed on Category:Scholars of the Abbasid Caliphate requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:10, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mozarabs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dar al-Islam ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Mozarabs check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Mozarabs?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Rape in Islamic law
There is currently a discussion on Talk:Rape_in_Islamic_law. I am contacting you because you have engaged in discussion on that page before. One of the points of dispute is whether marital rape is allowed in Islam. If you have time please give your thoughts.VR talk  17:35, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Christianity in Al-Andalus has been nominated for merging
Category:Christianity in Al-Andalus has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:56, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Book
Do you have a copy of Sexual Violation in Islamic Law?VR talk 01:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Category:History of medieval Islam
Please see Categories for discussion/Log/2020 November 17, re Category:History of medieval Islam. – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 31
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Madrid Accords, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sahrawi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
Your edit to Proto-Berber language has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. Austronesier (talk) 20:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Artists of medieval Islam


A tag has been placed on Category:Artists of medieval Islam indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 13:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Category:Prophets in Islam has been nominated for renaming
Category:Prophets in Islam has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Category:Islamophobic publications has been nominated for deletion
Category:Islamophobic publications has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mvbaron (talk) 11:35, 24 October 2021 (UTC)