User talk:Imadjafar/Archive 1

Welcome
Hello, Imadjafar, 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 messages on discussion pages using 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! Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 18:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Template:Prophets in the Qur'an
I'm not sure what you were trying to do but your edits broke the template so I restored the original. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 18:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure I can fix it. The list right now is, Adam, Idris, Nuh, Hud, Saleh, Ibrahim, Luth, Ismail, Is'haq, Isaac, Yaqub, Yusuf, Ayoub, Job, Shoaib, Musa, Harun, Dhul-Kifl, Daud, Sulaiman, Ilyas, Al-Yasa, Elisha, Yunus, Zakaria, Yahya, John, Isa, Muhammad.
 * And it should be ,Adam, Seth, Idris, Nuh, Hud, Saleh, Ibrahim, Luth, Ismail, Is'haq, Isaac, Yaqub, Yusuf, Ayoub, Job, Shoaib, Musa, Harun, Luqman, Samuel, Dhul-Kifl, Daud, Sulaiman, Uzair, Ilyas, Al-Yasa, Elisha, Yunus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel Zakaria, Yahya, John, Isa, Muhammad. Is that the correct order? Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 18:50, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes thats right! Thank You! Oh, and is there a way the title can be made Prophets in Islam?


 * OK I see that you got most of them already. I'm at work and it just got busy so it may take a while. Moving it may not be a good idea as there are a lot of pages linked to it. The prophets not listed in the Qur'an can be marked so people can see that. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 19:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

June 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Isra and Mi'raj, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Falcon8765 (talk) 20:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Stand Up Great Britain
A tag has been placed on Stand Up Great Britain, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Top Jim (talk) 10:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Your edits
You said here that muslims consider daniel a prophet but a minority do not. This is false as he's not mentioned in Quran or the major hadith collections. You created the majority of this Islamic view of Jeremiah page which says that muslims consider Jeremiah a prophet. This is also false as he's not mentioned in any major hadiths or Quran. Here you have linked Dhul-Kifl with ezekiel even though there is no evidence that they are the same person at all. Please be more mindful of your edits and clean up any other undue weight edits you've made. In the Yusha ibn Nun page you also claim he is a prophet. This is all nonsense. To give high importance to such fringe views is unlike an encyclopedia. Thank you. Someone65 (talk) 18:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Qur'anic People
Template:Qur'anic People has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 07:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Warning
You are by far the worst Good Faith editor i have seen in all my time on wikipedia. And that's saying something. You violate several Wikipedia policies including Identifying reliable sources, Citing sources, No original research, Manual of Style, a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion.


 * You created Islamic view of the Torah which is a duplicate of tawrat
 * Here you add a template about islam on an article that doesnt mention islam
 * Here you do the same thing.
 * you repeated these mistake in this template
 * You've added a host of other names to [Template:Honoured women in Islam| this] islamic template; figures who have absolutely NOTHING to do with islam, for example;

- Jochebed has absolutely nothing to do with islam

- Zipporah has absolutely nothing to do with islam

- Saint Anne nothing to do with islam

- Elizabeth nothing to do with islam


 * you created Islamic view of Elizabeth even though elizabeth is mentioned NOWHERE in the Quran, nor sahih hadiths
 * you created Islamic view of Sarah even though sarah is mentioned nowhere in the Quran, nor sahih hadiths
 * you created Islamic view of Hagar even though hagar is mentioned in no quran nor sahih hadith
 * you created Islamic view of Cain and Abel. Individuals who are not mentuoned in the Quran, nor sahih hadiths, and you use bible references. You used a wikilink as a reference on the same article. This article is ANSOLUTELY NONSENSE
 * you added Miriam to the template. another person whos not mentioned in Quran nor sahih hadiths.
 * how is this article She-Camel of God notable for an encyclopedia?
 * you edit mysteriously anonymously here even though you have an account
 * User:CambridgeBayWeather had to revert you over several articles where you incorectly link christian saint infoboxes with islam i.e.
 * most of your edits are either unreferenced or improperly referenced.

etc. etc.

I mentioned such problematic edits to you a month ago but you are still going in the same direction. Your problematic edits are way too many, and its hard for me to keep up with them. It seems like most of your edits are some sort of novel test-drive. Most article you created should be deleted. Someone65 (talk) 03:59, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Islamic view of the Torah


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Islamic view of the Torah. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Tawrat. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Tawrat - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Someone65 (talk) 04:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Islamic view of Cain and Abel


The article Islamic view of Cain and Abel has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No primary nor secondary references are properly cited. One reference is a wikilink. 2 references are bible verses. The Quran references dont have the names cain nor abel. In other words, this is an uncited article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Someone65 (talk) 05:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Islamic view of Sarah
The article Islamic view of Sarah has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This article violates Wikipedia:Notability policy. There is nobody named sara in the Quran nor sahih hadths. This article was created 2 days ago by a disruptive editor who is notorious for his disruptive edits. Also he uses bible verses for an article about islam as his main points of reference. There are no secondary nor tertiary references either.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Someone65 (talk) 05:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Islamic view of Elizabeth


The article Islamic view of Elizabeth has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This article violates Wikipedia:Notability policy. There is nobody named elizabethin the Quran nor sahih hadths. This article was created 2 days ago by a disruptive editor who is notorious for his disruptive edits. Also he uses bible verses for an article about islam as his main points of reference. There are no secondary nor tertiary references either. This article is a blatant case of original research, and is completely false

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Someone65 (talk) 06:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Islamic views
Please see Administrators' noticeboard. Thanks. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 11:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Weasel words
I recommend you to read | Weasel word policy. For example;


 * here you said "God, in the Qur'an, mentions" even though many people dont believe the Quran was written by God. Wikipedia is not an islamic site. To make it Neutral you should say "the Quran mentions".
 * Here and here you say that "Most Muslims consider..." but you dont speak for "most" muslims. Instead you should say "ibn kathir considers ..." because some muslims do not regard Ibn Kathirs work as authentic. Someone65 (talk) 20:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Hadith
When it comes to hadiths, Sunni muslims accept Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim as authentic. Shias make up 20% of the muslim population who reject this hadiths; they accept Kitab al-Kafi, Nahj al-Balagha, Man la yahduruhu al-Faqih etcetera. Please dont ignore the opinion of other denominations of Islam. Shias dont accept the Sunni Hadiths Someone65 (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I know you are a Sunni, but remember wikipedia readers come from all religious backgrounds. So dont be biased please. You should be neutral and represent the views of all muslims. Some muslims completely reject hadith; they're called Quranists; (See Qur'an alone). So you have to be fair to all viewpoints; including Shias, hadith rejectors, ahmadiyyas etc. Someone65 (talk) 18:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Do you speak for all Islamic sects? DO all Islamic sects agree with Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Samuel being muslims? I would say no

Ibn Kathir is not accepted by all sects. You should take all the following sects under consideration;

-ijtihadi

-shias

-ibadis

-quranists

-Mu'tazili

-Sufi

Please take note next time. Someone65 (talk) 21:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Islamic view of Daniel. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 22:00, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Merging issues
You will need to take it up with the person that did the merging,. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 20:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Islamic view of Elijah
All that needs to be done is turn it into a redirect and I've done that. Cheers. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 17:02, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Both are done. Cheers. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 14:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * All three are redirects now. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 15:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Both the Sarah ones are now redirects. I haven't done anything with the Biblical figures in Islamic tradition. I think that it might be an idea to move it to something like List of Biblical figures in Islamic tradition. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 11:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Lot
I have reverted you unexplained merge of Islamic view of Lot into the article about Lot. Such a major restructuring requires a talk page discussion. Favonian (talk) 15:09, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Lot
All the information in Lot (biblical person) was removed so I have left Islamic view of Lot alone for now. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 21:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Al-Yasa/Islamic view of Elisha
Fixed they redirect to Elisha now. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 22:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Jonah
The Jonah you are editing is not the 19th century Saint Jonah but a biblical prophet, please don't call him Saint Jonah. Dougweller (talk) 17:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Aaron. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. ''Any editor can revert you simply because you don't explain your edits. If I don't understand an edit I often revert. Especially when you change the wording of quotes without explanation.'' Dougweller (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I've replied on my talk page but want to thank you here. Did you want to discuss my comment above about Jonah? Dougweller (talk) 09:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Maybe I posted too soon, I note that you then reverted me with still no explanation. A very bad idea. 06:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

ANI notification
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiantSnowman 13:06, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I am 100% uninvolved in any editing issues the two of you may or may not be having; I merely notified you out of courtesy. ANI is the appropiate forum to defend yourself against these accusations. Regards, GiantSnowman 13:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

nomination of one of your articles for deletion
See Articles for deletion/Kenan (son of Noah). --Enric Naval (talk) 18:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Final warning
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

You have a pattern of adding tendentious falsehood to wikipedia and violating WP:Verifiability, WP:NPOV and WP:PSTS policies. You never provide third party references for your edits.

Some examples of your inappropriate edits include:


 * most of your edits include honorific language and words such as "great man", "highly moral", "chaste", "extremely virtuous", "truthful" etc. which is unneeded for an encyclopedia to describe prophets.
 * Deleting text from religions you disagee with.
 * Deleting text from denominations you disagree with.
 * removing wikilinks ,
 * using bible verses as refs for a non-christian article
 * Original research, and
 * Major deletions
 * deleting refs
 * disproportionate WP:HEAD and layouts
 * Here you change quotes from the notable Abdullah Yusuf Ali to an unknown translator called Ahmad Ali. (violating WP:Notability policy)
 * undiscussed major revisions
 * here you give a wikipedia article as a reference
 * saying something that doesn't match the reference.
 * you have a habit of adding non-islamic biblical figures to Islamic templates. The following names play no role in islam:

Rebecca, Rachel, Jochebed, Zipporah, Saint Anne, Elizabeth (biblical figure), Kenan, Potiphar, Saul, Zuleika (legendary), Goliath.

But for some reason you feel the need to add these biblical names to templates called women in islam, or Quranic people. You forget that Muslims reject the Bible. Therefore, just because the Bible says 'Elizabeth is the wife of Zacharia' does not mean Islam accepts Elizabeth as the wife of Zachariah. Thoroughly read about adding references before editing again. If you continue your pattern you may be blocked from editing. Stories of the Prophets is fictionally dramatized, thus is not a reliable source. Someone65 (talk) 23:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Reference, reference, references
When you edit remember to have references before. Read WP:Verifiability, WP:NPOV and WP:PSTS policies if you're unsure. If you cite references, make sure to add the page number on that book or article, and make sure to give a link. Someone65 (talk) 07:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Once again I ask you to always use these. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 14:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Infobox:Islamic Prophet


Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:36, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Timeline of 1st century B.C.E. Muslim history


The article Timeline of 1st century B.C.E. Muslim history has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Muslim history starts in the 7th century. Not 1st century.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PassaMethod (talk) 03:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Islamic view of angels
Hello, Imadjafar. Your edit here removed a maintenance template. Since the edit also added an infobox template to the article, perhaps the removal was inadvertent. If so, don't worry; I've restored it. If the removal was intentional, please be advised it is important to use an edit summary announcing what you're doing, so that other editors aren't left guessing. Specifically in this case, a "refimprove" template shouldn't be removed without either improving the references or noting on the talk page why you think the template is unwarranted. Thanks! Rivertorch (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Timeline of 1st century B.C.E. Muslim history for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of 1st century B.C.E. Muslim history is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Timeline of 1st century B.C.E. Muslim history until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Jayjg (talk) 00:49, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Your Muslim Saints template
Hi. There was something peculiar about the Template:Muslim Saints you created: for a reason which I do not understand it was expanding to give a box which talked about motorcycle racing (Moto GP). There was already a Template:Muslim saints, with a small "s", and I have put that into the article Hasan of Basra in place of yours, at the bottom, where it shows as a green bar "Prophets of Islam‎ outside the Qur'an". If that was not what you intended, leave a note here - I will watch this page. I have also asked a question at the WP:Village pump (technical) to find out what was the problem with your template. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I have removed the Template:Muslim saints which I added to the bottom of Hasan of Basra, as you said it should not be there. I don't know what the problem with the capital "S" version was - something to do with the way Infoboxes work, which is complicated, and which I don't understand, see Help:Infobox - but I have left it as a redirect to the small-"s" version. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Qur'anic people
Hi Imad,

Great job with creating and developing the Qur'anic people template. I notice that you reverted my edit that removed the duplicate links. I'm thinking specifically of the "people of" links that link to the same articles that are linked in the section above. I don't believe that they should be included on the template because navboxes are for linking between related articles, not for conveying information; that is what articles are for. The "people of" entries would be more appropriately placed on the List of Qur'anic figures. Would you object to my removal of the duplicate links on the Qur'anic people template?

Neelix (talk) 14:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Imad,


 * Navboxes are complete when they link to all the articles that exist about a particular topic, not when they list all of the different things associated that topic. List of Qur'anic figures should be complete in the way you suggest, but the Qur'anic people template should not. If you want the families to be included on the navbox, I can see two solutions. The first is to combine the links with their duplicates so that they read "Abraham and his people" rather than "Abraham" in one place and "Abraham's people" in another. The other option is to create individual articles about the families. Do you find either of these solutions acceptable?


 * Neelix (talk) 16:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Imad,


 * It might be helpful for me to understand what it is you want these links to signify. By "People of x," do you mean the family of x, the people x preached to, the followers of x, people associated with x, or something else?


 * Neelix (talk) 17:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Imad,


 * I believe I misunderstood your suggestion; I thought that you were suggesting that the targets of the links be changed while the visible words of the links remained the same. If you are suggesting that the text of the links themselves should be changed, that would appear to be an acceptable solution.


 * Neelix (talk) 19:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Enoch and Ezekiel
Hi Imad,

That makes sense; Enoch and Ezekiel should stay on the template. I have switched the "Hanzalah" link back to Companions of the Rass so that it will be bolded on that article. Is there any reason you don't want the link to target the article directly?

Neelix (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

PS - I also fixed the Enoch link; it used to link to the article about the name rather than the person. Neelix (talk) 19:41, 10 April 2011 (UTC)