User talk:Diamondbuster

Welcome!
Hello, Diamondbuster, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * Getting started
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=599661123 your edit] to Fashion may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:26, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Moorish Spain the famous musician Ziryab introduced to Córdoba in [Al-Andalus]{{Citation needed|reason=source needs to be found and verified, outside of 1001|date=

"Outside of 1001"
Hi, can you explain the summary behind your swathe of recent edits removing references to books on Muslim heritage? All you say is "Untrustworthy interpretation" but can you be more precise about what exactly is wrong with the source? What does "outside of 1001" mean? Plus, the removal of the one in Fashion also killed an extra reference to a French-language source, which seemed possibly accidental, so I have reverted it for double-checking. Thanks so much, Mabalu (talk) 02:56, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please stop wholesale removal of material and sources from articles before discussing on the talkpage. &Lambda; u α  (Operibus anteire) 04:31, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I trust you think it is a reliable source, I don't blame you. Instead of fighting and accusing me of bad edits, it can just be banned completely. Reliable_sources/Noticeboard.--Diamondbuster (talk) 09:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a very problematic area. I agree that muslimheritage.com is not a reliable source as it is essentially an advocacy site and it's hard to tell which parts are factual and which are interpretations from facts chosen to support a point of view. Unfortunately, the matter needs to be handled slowly and with great patience. The most irritating feature of the case is that anyone can spend a few minutes mining the website for factoids to add to articles, but demonstrating that an article at the website fails WP:RS may take days of careful research with multiple scholarly sources. I'm afraid I don't have anything helpful to say, but good luck! The two links you provided at WP:RSN (debunking of 1000 Inventions and similar for exhibition) are very interesting, thanks. One problem is that most people are still exhausted from WP:Jagged 85 cleanup so you may not see any support for quite a while. I guess that progress would require focusing on just one or two articles and showing how the reference is unsuitable for them. Feel free to alert me to any discussion on that, but I have to warn you that these days I do little other than tweak code and I'm unlikely to be much use. Johnuniq (talk) 04:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)