User talk:Arms and stuff

Answer
Even if you say the truth, I haven't found any damages in Shia articles by him except adding some images. Furthermore, his edits is more useful and he is more trustworthy than many other Shia and non-Shia guys which I know here. Can show me some articles which he has damaged.-- Seyyed(t-c) 03:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you're not familiar with wikipedia. I may disagree with him about adding Usuli in each case, but in wikipedia his style is acceptable. We have such problems here that these issues are not important. However, I add my view wherever it's necessary. Please go and and read Fatima Zahra article and look at its history to find out how editorial wars and controversial issues destroys that article. Then you will consider adding Usuli in every case as a minor difference in style. You can mail me through wikipedia. Just find "E-mail this user" in my talk page.-- Seyyed(t-c) 04:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In brief, I prefer to have knowledgeable Ismaili as an editor instead of dogmatic Twelver. I believe you're sensitive approach is good but not in the wikipedia. We are here to edit article and try to compromise and build consensus in every controversial case. Just in this way I could improve Imam Ali article. I should reach consensus over controversial issues with Sunnis and non-Muslims and would be impossible, if I thought like you. -- Seyyed(t-c) 04:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, you're not familiar with wikipedia. If you had an editorial war with a POV-pusher, then you accept Enzru as he is. -- Seyyed(t-c) 03:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)