User talk:Germen/Archive

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the coolest online encyclopedia I know of =). I sure hope you stick around; we're always in need of more people to create new articles and improve the ones we already have.  You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox.  When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines.  First, write from a neutral point of view, second, be bold in editing pages, and third, use wikiquette.  Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.

Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me at my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;.

Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! --Spangineer (háblame)  16:03, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! Hope you enjoy the place, and don't hestiate to ask if you have any questions. --Spangineer (háblame)  18:23, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Misuse of minor edits
Please be aware that you should not mark controversial edits such as reverts as minor edits. You should also comment all such edits clearly. Axon 17:15, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ma malakat aymanukum and Sex slavery
I am not going to revert again on Ma malakat aymanukum... I do not know enough about the issue and you do have a point although I think it needs some smoothing out. When you equate the ma malakat aymanukum to sex slavery there is a problem. The context is very different ans the ma malakat aymanukum are a product of war and have a means of getting freedom through sex/children. Also, there is the implication of forced sex... which, it is not clear is allowed with ma malakat aymanukum... sex is permissible but slavery implies a certain amount of control and force. You cannot directly equate the two like that. A link to the article with further explanation is needed to make the issue clear and not leave the reader thinking something that is not true. There is a link between the two... but ma malakat aymanukum is complex and should be fully explained on its own page, not as an equation with sex slavery. gren 13:23, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Gren, OK, I added a separate heading 'ma malakat amaynukum' as the concept is central in understanding sex slavery in islamic countries.

Hope this is alright. --Germen 14:01, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Umm, how you did that I think still oversimplifies and gives a biased view to anyone who doesn't read the full article. For instance, "allowed to have sex with" -- there are different forms of allowance... in terms of Mahram I am allowed to marry someone not in my family, but that doesn't mean it will be allowed by them or will happen.  Allowed (in terms of sex outside of marriage) can mean that the act is permissible, or it can be used to imply rape... that is a huge difference which is not fully explained in your little blurb. gren 23:48, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vandal
Reverting POV and undiscussed edits made by you does not constitute Vandalism. --Irishpunktom\talk 14:48, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

3RR
Please be aware that Wikipedia has a rule called the Three-revert rule. The rule, essentially, maintains that a user can not make the same revert for the same article three times in 24 hours. This rule extends to parts of the same revert.

Just make sure you are aware of it, so it does not sneak up on you. --Irishpunktom\talk 15:06, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism/3RR
You keep using "vandalism" in edit summaries (and elsewhere) for things that are content disputes. Please read Vandalism, and only use this term when it is appropriate.

Also, you have been reported for violating the 3RR (see above). Please do not violate the 3RR - you can (and will) be blocked from editing for violating it. Noel (talk) 20:44, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Islamophobia
As has been stated above, reverting POV, uncited edits and undiscussed and poorly commented edits is not vandalism as we define it here. You have yet to provide any dicussions or citations for your inexplicable redefinition of islamophobia and your edits have not only been reverted by me but by other editors. Please note I have also listed you for breach of the 3RR again Axon 16:50, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

3RR
You've been reported for a 3RR violation at Islamophobia and have been temporarily blocked from editing. If you feel this block is unfair, feel free to e-mail me using the link on my user page. SlimVirgin (talk) 14:22, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

You've been reported for a 3RR violation at Islamophobia and have been temporarily blocked from editing. If you feel this block is unfair, feel free to e-mail me using the link on my user page. Jayjg (talk) 19:39, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reverting
Germen, you've been reported three times and blocked twice recently for 3RR at Islamophobia. Directly after each block, an anon IP has turned up to revert to your version. I asked you by e-mail whether this was you, and you said it wasn't, but it happened again after your recent block, and the IP address resolved to the country you had e-mailed me from, a country not many editors on the English WP post from. This is to give you fair warning that if it happens again, whether the IP address resolves to that country or not, you and the IP may be blocked for another 24 hours for block evasion. I know it's frustrating when edits you regard as correct don't stick, but please try to gain consensus on the talk page, or try to get other editors involved rather than reverting so much. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 14:36, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * SlimVirgin, as I told you by e-mail, I was not responsible for the reverts after my first block. Nevertheless, I did and do still consider this block partial and biased, as you blocked only me and not the team of my opponents which cooperated to press their POV. Are you Muslim as well?--Germen 1 July 2005 13:07 (UTC)

VfD tags
You are not allowed to remove someone else's Votes for deletion notice on top of a page you are editing. If you want to argue for the article to be kept, wait until the nominator has completed nominating the article by writing the reasons why they want it deleted, and add your keep vote (with reasons) below. David | Talk 10:15, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

This note was added without discussion. So I removed it. --Germen 10:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Anyone can nominate an article for deletion - they do not need to discuss it with the person who created the article. David | Talk 10:18, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

OK, I will solve the problem. --Germen 10:20, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * You've removed the notice again. This is considered vandalism and if you continue it, you may be blocked from editing. Please go to Votes for deletion/Prejudice (islam) and make your case there rather than removing the VfD tag from the article. David | Talk 10:27, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * That is a lie. I did not remove the notice, I moved it. I would like to remind you of the 3RR rule.--Germen 10:30, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * The notice must go above the page content: see WP:DP. David | Talk 10:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Please stop moving the VfD tag for Prejudice (islam) from the top of the page. It is considered vandalism. David | Talk 10:42, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing. David | Talk 10:48, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

3RR
You have been reported. (unsigned from Germen)


 * The 3RR does not cover reverting vandalism. David | Talk 10:57, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Block
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia by insisting on moving the VfD tag for Prejudice (islam) contrary to deletion policy. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. David | Talk 11:12, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Please see Undeletion_policy. There is no template. Thanks. -- BMIComp (talk) 18:00, 13 July 2005 (UTC)