User talk:Esowteric/Archives/2009/August

Wahhabi: thanks
Hi are you admin of some sort?

Thankyou for your suggestion. I need help regarding wahhabi myth. Its a very biased article so rather than me changing it and then someone else changing etc etc like table tennis, Id like it to be locked and for a n admin to aggree the changes with us and then implement the ones we aggree on so if you can help me organise that it woudl be great. Thankyou David.Baratheon (talk) 12:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC) 20:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Will reply on your talk page, David. Thanks,  Esowteric + Talk  21:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi thankyou for your help. Regarding wahhabi myth, its a little more complictaed than that. Because the point is that although its not a main stream book, its very much widely accepted by the salafi community. for example, if you go to the salafi headquarters in teh UK you can find it on their website. But it was not really a book review I wanted to write. It was a writeup of the whole phenominon of the media attributing terrorism to "wahhabi's" and this is a global phenominan that is proved to be grossly inaccurate in teh book the wahhabi myth

http://www.thewahhabimyth.com/

this is the official site and they give references and proofs that this is huge ignorance on the media's part but it unfortunately means that salaafi's are being branded as terrorists even though it is PROVEN in thsi book taht it is an incorrect view and that the salaafi are very much against terrorism. Its quite an important topic and so I wished to create it. Unfortunately people didn't want it up, but they did not want it up because of their bias against salaafi (rather than a genuine reason regarding notablity etc). You can see the same sort of bias in teh wahhabi and salafi talk pages and people wish to push their point of view. If you could help me out or at least look into what Im saying it would be hugely appreciated bro because wikipedia itslef is part of this contraversial issue (because they have articles relating salaafi's and terrorism) and they themselves said get NEWSPAPER articles as evidence ot back up what Im saying but how can the media be a source of information regarding Islam when the whole point im making is that th media are completely ignorant and are getting it massivle wrong. I think they call it being stuck between a rock and a hard place ;-)

David.Baratheon (talk) 12:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC) 21:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

thankyou for your help, you've been very helpful. I think its some hypocrocy on wikipedia's side seeing as the wahhabi myth has alreday been used as a source in mnay places (incl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarian) but never mind, guess this is going to be an uphill struggle but I know for a fcat that the information regarding wahhabi's and salaafi's is grossly inaccurate and these things have to be corrected and non bias so the reader can decide for himself or herself ya know. Anyways thanks again, may Allah reward you for helping a muslim brother out and lets hope we can get somewhere with this. Cheers, all the best

David.Baratheon (talk) 12:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC) 21:40, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi David, regarding the wahhabimyth web site (an unreliable source, alas) and also to show how you can use the Wahhabi "Myth" book as a reference in the Wahhabi article, see The_Wahhabi_Myth_book_as_a_source (a new section on the Wahhabi talk page). Hope this helps,  Esowteric + Talk  09:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Appreciation

 * If you're having a hard time finding articles to work on, feel free to do more. :D But no pressure. Even the one you've done is a great help! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, my very first barnstar :D  Esowteric + Talk  15:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Wahhabi
I have made edits off and on to the Wahhabi article over the last couple of years and if there is some kind of mediation I would be happy to participate as an interested party. --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not responding to your generous offer, BoogaLouie. As I say, I'm really "just passing through", but the editors at the article could do with some help, imo, Have added a note to the talk page. Many thanks.  Esowteric + Talk  14:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Facilitation
That was a good find. I suggested similar ideas at the Village Pump a few months ago and was never aware of that page's existence ...  JN 466  12:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Husayn ibn Ali‎
There has been no indian martyred with Housyn ibn Ali in Karbala. This is pure a fabrication. the names of all of those who were killed is known and is available for research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.182.151.151 (talk) 15:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

neither India nor Pakistan are a shia majarity country Azerbijan and Lebanon are much better examples of Shia dedication —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.182.151.151 (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * If you have a valid point, all you have to do is go to the article and click on the "Discussion" tab. Then discuss the matter with other editors, rather than simply deleting the text without giving any indication as to why you object to the content. Thanks,  Esowteric + Talk  15:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

No indians were martyred with Housyn ,this is a lie. The names of all of those who were killed is available for research at the tomb of Zeynab in Syria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.182.151.151 (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll copy what you've said to the article talk page and see what others say. Thanks,  Esowteric + Talk  16:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Have added your comments at Talk:Husayn_ibn_Ali. Please discuss there. Thanks,  Esowteric + Talk  16:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

First wave of edits involving Enneagram
You might want to take a look at them, you seemed interested. Irbisgreif (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your efforts, I can see the moves and will have a look tomorrow (UK time) as I'm really bushed after a load of html validation twiddling. Am about to turn in for the night.  Esowteric + Talk  21:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Javad Nurbakhsh
Hi, I have used Wikipedia on a daily bases as a quick and reliable source of information and usually take the information as accurate. Today in reading the page on Nurbakhsh,Javad and after spending some time I realized that the information is mostly or entirely from an obituary or a page from his institution,Khanaghah Nematollahi. Ofcourse we know that such an information is heavily tilted in favor of the subject. My question and concern is that in the future how can I rely on Wikipedia if the source of material is not being labelled in an outstanding manner? In fact many people may use the Wikipedia information as a reference source and propagate the misinformation.Thanks. Peerooz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.76.94 (talk) 12:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm sorry I'm not an expert on Javad Nurbakhsh, so I can't usefully add to the article. But I did notice that most of the information was copied from the official web site, possibly a copyright violation, so all I could do was remove that information (I removed a lot of information) and leave a notice on the page that the article is now missing that information. That's the only involvement I've had with the article. Cheers,  Esowteric + Talk  12:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Umar
Thanks for seeing that. I've moved it back, after I found Talk:Umar/Archive 3, and I see you removed the cleanup and I got the other honorifics. I left Olikawala a message about getting consensus for moving the article and I hope I was able to explain why they need to do so. Cheers. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 23:07, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Enneagram
I thought the old version was better, especially since it had included the isogonal enneagram faces of the final stellation of the icosahedron, which wasn't in enneagon and had good reasons for not doing so: I doubt icosahedral stellations have much to do with enneagons at first sight! Anyway, I reverted back to the old version by 1ForTheMoney. If you have any objections to this, you can discuss it at my talk page. Thanks! --Professor Fiendish (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Prof, you need to talk to Irbisgreif‎ about Enneagram, Fourth Way Enneagram and Enneagram of Personality. I only changed to a disambiguation page because Irbisgreif‎ had taken over and changed to a redirect to nonagon, leaving Fourth Way Enneagram and Enneagram of Personality out in the cold. Please read the recent talk entries on the pages in question. Many thanks,  Esowteric + Talk  12:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ All sorted out.  Esowteric + Talk  13:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

But...
But why Nonagram rather than Enneagram (shape)?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a possibility. Please have a word with Irbisgreif‎‎ and Professor Fiendish‎ (both are into maths).  Esowteric + Talk  18:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Was successfully moved to Enneagram (shape); then another user moved it to Enneagram (geometry) for consistency, which is also okay.  Esowteric + Talk  13:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi, i just wanted to thank you for pointing me to the WP:Areas for Reform discussion. I've enjoyed contributing. Catherineyronwode (talk) 03:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Admin Coaching request
you wrote ''"Hello, Fngosa. Sorry, this is going to be a long read. I recently came across a request on a non-admin's talk page (which was temporarily on my watchlist) asking if they would coach you to become an admin. I also took up your user page invitation to see your contributions as an editor. As you only have 149 edits, plus 21 deleted edits (which is a high percentage), with respect I would say that it is far too early to consider going for admin.

My advice to you would be to gain more experience as an editor by observing others. Rather than concentrating on "policing tasks" such as patrolling new pages, recent changes and vandalism -- and moving on before you've had a chance to see whether other editors revert your edits or pass comment -- you might consider the following, which worked for me:....read more on user_talk:fngosa"''
 * REPLY Thanks for your advise. deleted count does not necessarily mean my contribution ve been deleted. deleted articles are mostly articles i nominated for deletion, and admins have since deleted them. it can be confusing to most people. commas on references ve now been corrected. Thanks for your time..... Freshymail-user_talk:fngosa--the-knowledge-defender 10:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the correction. And good luck,  Esowteric + Talk  11:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You are welcome... 13:52, 31 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fngosa (talk • contribs)