User talk:Diabolos/Desk

Not sure if this the right place for this so I may post to a few ones to make sure I get it right. The Idea is that I had posted a general idea of what the United Nation of Islam is, and what it is doing. Giving a brief general description of its activities and then links to the website for those interested in getting more information on the UNOI. However the page had been edited from a user who calls himself masonuc with insults and slander being put forth as fact based on some "information" from blogs, and one very clearly slanted article. So I filed for this advocacy seeking help, I have included links to UNOI website as well as other websites that provide information from anonymous third parties (Kansas city star, the Christian science monitor, the city of Hamden, ct). I agree that wikipedia is not the place for our opinions, thoughts, political views or propaganda of any sort, so any information about the united nation of Islam should be based entirely on what it is, a federally recognized non profit organization based in the teachings of the honorable Elijah Muhammad, whose purpose and track record has been based on community redevelopment and education. Our aim and purpose is clearly stated in our registered bylaws and charter (available at your request), and our success in this is clearly outlined in said articles written by those who are familiar with what we are doing. Once again hope this helps. TBK
 * I don't know why this is here, but anyway it is further confirmation that the people reverting/advertising on the UNOI article are in fact followers of this cult. Wikipedia is not a place for religions to advertise or recruit followers.  There is nothing non-neutral about pointing out that Royall is uneducated, barely speaks English, shows absolutely no qualities of being "Allah" let alone a functioning human being -- except for a scam artist using naive followers for money and sex. I am all for a neutral article where followers can state a few facts about their religion, but you have to allow an opposing viewpoint.  Neutrality does not mean turning a blind eye to reason and obvious frauds.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.114.135.84 (talk) 19:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)