User talk:Lexismaximus

October 2016
Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Religion of peace seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:34, 30 October 2016 (UTC)


 * You have added that the Obama administration created ISIS. You have no reliable, verifiable source for that. If you really wanted to say that some non-reliable source alleged that the Obama administration created ISIS, you could perhaps phrase it that way. If you are basing this proposition, as a fact, on the theory that the Obama administration's lack of action, or misguided actions, created ISIS, you will have to provide a reliable, verifiable source to prove that. Otherwise, by making the statement as a fact, Wikipedia appears both biased and foolish. The creation of ISIS may have been helped by a vacuum or lack of stability or law enforcement in the area but to attribute its creation to the Obama administration without more direct evidence is simply a conspiracy theory, a fringe theory at that. Maybe that will change but pending any future disclosures, it is not a viable assertion as a fact. Even if it were, this is not directly related to the subject of the article and this article is not the one in which to put forward that theory. I don't have time tonight to check the ISIS article but it would not surprise me if this is already covered in that article. I will mention that I think this is not worth an edit war, especially since it is tangential to the article at best. Also, I am signing off now so I will not be available again until tomorrow night, at the earliest. Donner60 (talk) 04:10, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

You are right that this is tangential to the article and that this is not worth an edit war. Therefore, in the name of relevance I ask that you remove the original citation from the ISIS source. The only reason I made the edit in the first place was to disabuse readers that ISIS speaks for Muslims or that ISIS comments can be taken at face value. Thanks.


 * I did not take issue with the statement that ISIS does not speak for all Muslims or their statements cannot be taken at face value, as I think you have surmised from my comment. (I can only speak for myself, not other editors/users.) My problem was with the assertion, as an unqualified fact, that the Obama administration created ISIS. If one starts to try to explain that in this article, as possibly contrasted with the ISIS article, it becomes tangential and not really related to the topic or to the point of the rest of the quotation and citation. I am not sure how removal of the citation affects the point about the Obama administration, nor does the removal of that phrase affect the rest of the content - as much as I can determine. If you make the next edit, without the Obama administration phrase, you may be more likely to end up with the content you are suggesting. Thank you for your response. Donner60 (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2016 (UTC)