User talk:Hassanfarooqi/Archive 4

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Jeff3000 15:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

link to Persian
Hello, when you want to link to the article about something Persian, please do not link to Persian, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as Persian people, Persian language, or Iran, by writing out Persian or Persian. Regards, Jeff3000 15:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Signing talk pages
Welcome wikipedia. When you leave a message on a user or article talk page, please sign it with four tildas ( ~ ). That will help facilitate conversation as the user can know who he is responding to or on whose talk page they should leave a message if appropriate. ZaydHammoudeh 17:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Hassanfarooqi 19:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Please sign your talk pages. Mapetite526 16:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Abu Hubairah Basri
Please do not remove delete notices from articles that you created. If you disagree, add the hangon tag as instructed. Mapetite526 16:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This 8th Century Sufi Saint was a link in the Chain of Chistiya. It should not have been remove.  None of the item was copyright and can be found in many books and many websites.Hassanfarooqi 16:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Not everything that is deleted is because of a copyright violation. In this case, the article did not demonstrate the individual's notability, which is required for inclusion in Wikipedia. Mapetite526 18:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You can find his name in many chains of Sufi orders that are mentioned in Wikipedia. A little info e.g. when and where was he born and some famous quotations would have helped people.  Others (including me) would have added serious stuff later on. Hassanfarooqi 19:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Then I would encourage you to add the article again, but this time with more information. Articles often get deleted because the editor did not include enough information at the beginning. For instance, I don't recall reading anything that said "Abu Hubairah Basri was an 8th century Sufi saint." Had that been the first sentence, I would not have tagged it for deletion as non-notable, and I doubt anyone else would. You might also want to add at the end, so that it is obvious that you intend to add more later. Mapetite526 18:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Ilw Mumshad Dinwari
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Ilw Mumshad Dinwari article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! FreplySpang 16:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears that many of the articles you have contributed are copied from other places. You must not do this. FreplySpang 16:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * This 8th Century Sufi Saint was a link in the Chain of Chistiya. It should not have been remove.  None of the item was copyright and can be found in many books and many websites.Hassanfarooqi 16:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Just because the information can be found on websites and in books does not mean it is not copyrighted. The problem they are having is that you copied them word for word. You should always write the article in your own words. Mapetite526 18:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Dude, nobody can copyright thousand year old history such as names, dates, and chain of events. As for exact words, they can not copyright the thousand year old exact words of the saint.  They can copyright their opinions/view/analysis which I did not quote from anyone anyway as it was against Wikipedia.Hassanfarooqi 19:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * First off, I'm not a dude. Second, I didn't create the copyright laws of this country. Mapetite526 19:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well you did not make copyright laws but you are interpreting it and enforcing it, and that is the problem. Refer to the copyright case of "Davinchi Code" and you will know.  History can not be copyrighted, fiction and opinion can.Hassanfarooqi 19:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * But the exact wording of another article can be copyrighted. You can avoid all of this by simply putting it into your own words. Mapetite526 21:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Mapetite526 is exactly right. The problem is that you used the same exact words as another website. Wikipedia does not accept articles that have been copied word-for-word from other websites. FreplySpang 22:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Mapetite526
Please stop accusing Mapetite526 of bigotry. You are jumping to conclusions based on only a few facts. One of the most important principles in the Wikipedia community is "assume good faith".

For one thing, she does not have the ability to delete articles all by herself. An administrator has to agree with her reasoning and actually do the deletion. The proposed deletions that you see as evidence of bigotry are fully in compliance with Wikipedia policy. "Poor Wedding Guests," at best, was a very short article with no hope of expansion. And, I understand that the Chistiyya chain of Sufi Saints is something very important to you and something that you know a lot about. But many, many people do not know about it. When you write a Wikipedia article about a person, the article needs to make it very clear why that person is notable, right up front. If you want, you can work on a rough draft in a subpage of your user page until it is ready to release as an article.

You said, "A quick look at the profile of the editor shows he/she is a religious bigot." Nonsense. A quick look at the profile of the editor shows she is Christian. If you insist that all Christians are bigots, you simply will not be able to work within the diverse Wikipedia community.

You are welcome to rewrite articles like Abu Hubairah Basri (in your own words) in order to show the importance of the subject. It would be great if you wrote an article about the Chistiyya chain, so that all the individual saint articles can refer to it. If you want to get more opinions about an article that you think was wrongly deleted, the right place to discuss it is Deletion review. Making accusations against an individual editor is not an effective way to defend your articles, and it is arguably a violation of Wikipedia's civility policy. Either find some way to be more polite to Mapetite526, who is also a more experienced editor than you, or ignore her. But these accusations of bigotry are not acceptable. FreplySpang 12:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Your argument with me were technical upto now and I had taken your point well. However in this one you have some very wrong assumptions that I must refute.
 * The most embarrasing one is, "If you insist that all Christians are bigots". Insist?  Boy! I never even said that once, or even implied! Wikipedia claims to be secular and if some editor has her religion stamped over the profile, and has a history of getting articles tagged for speedy deletion because it offended her as a member of that religion, than it is bigotry.  Plain and simple.


 * There is already a very old article about the Chishti Order and I was trying to fill the missing links, one being Abu Hubairah. Sufis are secular and their works are found in all major religions e.g. Ibrahim Bin Adham (Abou Ben Adham) is found in English/Christian literature, much of Ibn Rush (Averroes) can be found in Jewish/Hebrew literature.  Works of Baba Farid are found in Punjabi/Sikh and that of Moinuddin Chishti in Balmaki Hindu literature.  If Mapetite526 did not know who Abu Hubairah was, then she should not have tagged it for speedy deletion.  There is no justification for such a speedy deletion (it happened before I could finish tagging it) other than bigotry.


 * "is also a more experienced editor than you". Really? How much more experienced?  My first contribution came in 10-Jul-2006 and her came after one month i.e. 11-Aug-2006.  In September she complains about her deleted articles and then goes on a spree of tagging articles for speedy deletion herself! Wow!Hassanfarooqi 14:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You're right about experience, and I apologize for that mistake. I went back and checked, but forgot to remove that comment from the message I left you. You and I will have to disagree about the implications of your comment about Mapetite526's profile; to me it does read as if "Christian = bigot". The Chishti Order article does not explain what the chain is. " If Mapetite526 did not know who Abu Hubairah was, then she should not have tagged it for speedy deletion." That's not the way Wikipedia works, actually. We get many, many articles about non-notable people, and the expectation is that an article author will make it clear why the subject is notable. In any case, my main point is this: continually accusing Mapetite526 of bigotry is not a productive thing for you to do on Wikipedia. If you feel that you have a serious dispute with her, take it to Dispute resolution. FreplySpang 15:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * 'it does read as if "Christian = bigot"'. Really?  Re-read all my arguments, it is about "faith-based" actions and not the faith itself, and certainly not the entire community.

refrain from personal attacks
Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you.  ITAQALLAH  15:48, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You need to apologize for calling me a "meathead" a blatant personal attack. If you don't stop putting wahhabi POVs on Sufi sites, you will not be called a vandal which is NOT a personal attack.


 * Wikipedia also has a claim that it is secular. You are constantly vandalizing the pages that do not subscribe to your own narrow view of Islam.  Islam is not Wahhabi terrorism, it is Shia, it is Sufi, and it is much more.  You people are a mere few percent and can not claim the entire Islam.Hassanfarooqi 16:49, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove legitimate warnings from your talk page or replace them with inappropriate content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. If you continue to remove or vandalize legitimate warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. (aeropagitica) 08:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you will be blocked for disruption. Calling people bigots or terrorists is completely unacceptable; it is also important to understand that you shouldn't call someone a vandal simply because you disagree with their edits. Please find ways to discuss articles without discussing the contributors in such a manner. Shell babelfish 14:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't give a damn about being blocked. I shall not stand defmation of my faith by anyone, let alone by the Wahhabies. Hassanfarooqi 19:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for disrupting Wikipedia by making personal attacks. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Shell babelfish 11:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * How come you have not taken similar action against User:Itaqallah who started this by attacking article of my faith by putting his POVs. He also called me names which I did not.  Why did you punish the reaction and not the action? Hassanfarooqi 15:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Observe how he gets what he wants and learn from that. Then you will be more effective at keeping Wahabi bias out. Arrow740 09:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Barelwi
Please avoid a revert war Barelwi page. Siddiqui 21:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for being the only fair person who posted warnings on both sides. Hassanfarooqi 15:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Bu Ali Shah Qalandar
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Hello32020 15:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

What? I am a practicing Sufi and a follower of Bu Ali Shah Qalandar. I have added authentic material to the article Hassanfarooqi 15:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I saw the note you left for Hello. I'll just note a few things. You may wish to read WP:V and WP:CITE (and linked, WP:NOR) - three important guidelines and policies to Wikipedia. If what you added was authentic, there surely are sources around available on the internet you can cite, which you should. Secondly, about the point you made about him moving your message on his talk page, all new, unrelated messages on discussion pages should go to the bottom, not the top - this includes user discussion pages. There is nothing wrong with what he did, there is no reason for anyone to apologise. Instead, just remember to cite your information from reliable sources, and all this can be avoided. Cheers, – Chacor 15:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not confuse things. I did not object to his moving my message anywhere.  I objected to his falsely accusing me of vandalism and putting a warning sign.  I DEMAND AN APOLOGY FOR THAT.  His instantly moving the message is simply a proof that he read my message instantly but has not replied for two days. HE NEED TO PROVE VANDALISM OR APOLOGIZE.  All citations you have asked for were already there.  I merely added from it.  Hassanfarooqi 15:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You should still re-cite them. Bear in mind that given your history, any incivility from you could result in a long block from Wikipedia, so please stop typing in all caps. – Chacor 15:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * My history that you are refering to, is the history of contribution to Sufi Saint's bios and Sufi Concepts. I am under attack from people who hate the peaceful Sufis.  These people do the following:
 * Delete the bios of the Sufi saints citing them unimportant
 * If proved improtant, they would still delete them citing historical facts like date and palce of births as copyright
 * Would put non Sufi POVs in Sufi related articles and revert the defence as POV. Calling it vandalism is taken as personal attack and I am blocked
 * The most ironical is, reverting the contribution to Sufi saint's bios as vandalism and putting warnings on my page to discredit me.Hassanfarooqi 15:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * My revert was partly due to the poor formating as you said "There seems to be too many legends about his title." Also, you did not follow the guidelines of WP:V and WP:CITE, and the statement could potentially be proven false. It appears now that it was not vandalism, but I do not apologize for the revert. (I have scratched it, don't take it as an apology for the revert.) Hello32020 20:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You did not even see that the original paragraph was added by me. You called my changes to my own paragraph as vandalism.  Last time I called someone's POV over an article of my faith, it was called personal attack and I was blocked.  Now you say your hasty accusation of vandalism is not a personal offence?  I maintain my demand for an apology for this false accusation of vandalism. Hassanfarooqi 20:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I appologize for the, as in your words, "false accusation of vandalism." But as you can see was changed by you into "There seems to be too many legends about his title." (I maintain no apology for the revert itself, just for the warning. Hello32020 22:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, no hard feelings. I now understand that while your decision was hasty, it was not ill-intended and not anti-Sufi like the "serial speed deletionist" (as one victim named her) or the jihadist whose jihad against Sufism I suffer a lot.  All I want is to be let alone in my quest to add NPOV bios of Sufies and Sufi concepts to wikipedia.  I even allow different POVs but with the caption "Criticism".
 * The reason I said, "There seems to be too many legends about his title." was because I had not heard the first legend, let alone find it in any credible book. Then I added legends as I read, only to discover there were just too many of them.  The only credible one that turned out was that he was not a student of any master and was dubbed "Fragrance of Ali" for his absorbness in Ali.  The logical analysis that Bu Ali was short of Abu Ali was illogical as he had neither a son called Ali, nor his name was Hassan.Hassanfarooqi 22:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, on hard feelings. Just remember WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:OR, and also review WP:WIKIFY. For future reference if the list is incomplete use Listdev with { { and } } (no spaces just so I can post it) around it. Hello32020 23:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Archiver
The talkpage archiver is explained at User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Howto. Hello32020 01:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)