User talk:Neutron Jack

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:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Esperanza

If you are having a little trouble at getting used to Wikipedia, I can help you with any problems with the Adopt-a-user scheme. Just add  to your user page.

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! --Leon2323 (talk)

Non-Prophets Radio
A template has been added to the article Non-Prophets Radio, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. B. Wolterding 09:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Dhikr
While normally the honorifics are removed they should remain here. Most of those were direct quotes and sourced. The others were not sourced but looked to me like direct quotes as well. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 13:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Quotation marks in Hadith quotations
Hi the quote marks do properly surround both the outer and inner quotations on Hadith. The quotation is from a book of Hadith compiled by a scholar, which begins by stating the isnad, or lineage of transmission of the saying. This is followed by the "inner" quotation", which is the actual saying being related by the chain of transmission. This is also a quotation.  So we have a quotation within a quotation.  This means the honorifics and dhikr remain within both the inner and outer quotations, along with their respective quotation marks.

I'm going to undo your changes on those however many articles you did this to, and assume you were acting in good faith. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks Aquib (talk) 01:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Having reviewed and corrected many of the other edits you made in a similar vein today, I would suggest you keep in mind that complex quotations can be represented in more than one way. When presented in blocks, as many of the ones were which you altered, they are actually more readable than they would be if the quotation marks were nested.  Nesting, by the way, was what threw you off on at least one of the articles you changed.


 * Also, changing a quotation is not constructive editing. Since these appear to have been direct quotations, it caused potential misrepresentations of the sources.  It would be far more helpful if you improved on the manner of quotation next time, if you know a better way.


 * In addition, please try not break links in articles in order to remove honorifics. Please take a moment to repair the link if you really need to remove the honorific.


 * Thanks Aquib (talk) 03:09, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Sani0346
Hey dude, tell me one thing ! Have not you any other work than editing the articles of Islam and molding them to your own wish. Removing PBUH all the day & giving reason of neutrality. So editing the the article of Riba as well. If someone has included the verses of Quran forbidding the Riba or writing the authentic concept of Islam about Riba as this is very high rank sin then why are you removing those materials all the day. Are you a Muslim ? If not then how can you edit the concepts of Muslims according to your brain. You are making articles Devil friendly communities like Zionists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sani0346 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

"Devil friendly"--that's adorable. Neutron Jack (talk) 00:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Sum.H.2013
I think that there is a lack of understanding in this situation, which I would like to clear. The meaning of PBUH is 'Peace and Blessing of Allah be Upon Him'. Muslims say this whenever mentioning the name of the Holy Prophet of Islam. But we also say similar phrases for all Prophets of all other religions, such as Prophet Jesus (Peace be on Him), Prophet Moses (Peace be on Him), or even companions of the Prophets (May Allah be pleased with them), etc. We say these phrases as a sign of respect and to remove any space for arrogance in our hearts.

Similar words are used for any person in everyday life who is spoken about after they have passed away, so in their case you might say: Jane - may God rest her soul, or Jane - May God have mercy of her soul, or Jane - May she rest in peace. It is said with the same intention and so I request that you understand this sign of respect and not remove the PBUH. But if you prefer, you could write out the full meaning, so that it's meaning seems less ambiguous to the general public.

Thank you.

Sum.H.2013 (talk) 10:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sum.H.2013, I indeed understand what PBUH means. I understand that this is a thing that Muslims traditionally say and write. However, using PBUH (except for quotations) is against Wikipedia's rules. I recommend that you follow this link: MOS:ISLAM, which is part of the Wikipedia Manual of Style (MOS). Particularly, read this link: WP:PBUH, which is the section about PBUH.

I follow the rules of Wikipedia, and therefore I remove PBUH when it occurs outside of quotations. I am sure that you will understand this once you read the links provided above. If not, and if you keep undoing my changes, then I will summon aid from Wikipedia authorities.

If your religion doesn't permit you to follow Wikipedia's rules, then you should refrain from editing Wikipedia.

Neutron Jack (talk) 05:09, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing that link to my attention. You would've seen that I am a new user so was highly unlikely to have known about those specific rules yet, but I have read them all now. I believe Wikipedia also says that if you correct someone's work then you should tell them why, so that there is not this repetition of edit-undo edit-edit-etc, but never mind. My religion does not in any way stop me from following rules, on the contrary it strongly encourages it, and I personally have nothing against following rules either. I would just kindly request that you provide explanations on user's talk pages for your edits so that we can all help each other to learn and co-operate more as a community of learners and educators. I would like to refer you to this link, which is what I kept in mind during my edits: Help:Introduction to policies and guidelines/Conduct. I hope that you will understand my good faith. Thank you. Sum.H.2013 (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
Please give thoughts here. --Peace world  20:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for Edits
Dear friend, I am so thankful for your kind edits in the article Molvi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi. Regards --ڈاکٹر محمد علی (talk) 04:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Jack, thanks for the edit to Al-Fatiha as well. I'm working on improving the article gradually. From your talk page I understand you're part of the NPOV patrol, and from your contributions, I note your specific interest is to patrol Islamic topics :). That's some thing nice! But I also noted from this talk page that u like getting the articles "Devil friendly" and that's not nice! :)

BTW, u'll have to spend a lot of effort in removing PBUH, AS, SAW, Holy etc. cuz Muslims / other religious ppl usually would not type Prophet Muhammad PBUH's name / their Prophet's name without SAW / PBUH or the like (just like I did right now :)). But you shouldn't remove this one since it's not a WP article, so the MOS:Islam doesn't apply :). But of course, you would :). After all, its YOUR talk page :). Happy patrolling! :)

I suggest you make your user page as well, and tell a little about how your neutrons revolve around the Jack in you, so the WPean community would know a bit who they're talking to :)

By now, your friend might have forced you to think of a nasty reply to me, but seriously, I was just kidding above... No offense meant!

On a serious note, now that u've been to Al-Fatiha, do you think it'd be better to remove at least the POV issue from it? If not, can you pls identify specifically what in the article is not following NPOV, so it can be improved further. Of course I won't be able to critically assess the NPOVness of the article, since I'm one of the contributors... HQEditor (talk) 11:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=558358707 your edit] to List of ziyarat locations may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

Hello Jack
Warning!: I wanted to let you about the edit you performed on this Wikipedia article Syed Noor Zaman Naqshbandi Shazli. As a description you wrote (It is not the encyclopedia's place to state the such things as demons actually exist, or that he can heal them.) I just wanted to remind you that Wikipedia is a collaboratively edited, multilingual, FREE Internet encyclopedia. Anyone and especially notable personalities have a right to state their expertise on their Wikipedia article with references. Your statement that It is not the encyclopedia's place to state the such things as demons actually exist is your own personal opinion. And you can NOT force your own opinions and beliefs on others. Wikipedia is FREE OPEN public encyclopedia. If you want to state your opinions and belief to the public please create a NEW article for it with references. Any other opinion driven nonsensical edits will be undone. Thank you.

I LOVE THIS N POV
I very much appreciate your edits on my article, saying: Referring to the Quran as "holy" is not a neutral point of view. What I love most about Wikipedia is this great achievement, i.e the Neutral Point of View. This, is ONE thing which has stopped ALL from hurling slanders (even if they very much like to do so) at others. Be well and blessed Jack. Cheers !--Drali1954 (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=573299614 your edit] to Ali ibn Husayn Zayn al-Abidin may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Sayyid as-Sajjadīn wa Raki‘in'' (Leader of Those who Prostrate and Bow). A great-grandson Muhammad , he embodied the same virtues as his great-grandfather such as knowledge, eloquence, courage,

Harry the cat at CCLR
Hi Neutron Jack, I noticed your continued meddling with my contribution to Wikipedia. I am still trying to track down the publication that the cat is in and will pursue his inclusion to the entry. He is worthy of the five words and photo I contributed and you deleted, and may be the only station cat in the UK in a 15" railway station and that makes him notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpacarter (talk • contribs) 19:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

"meddling"? Nice attitude. Here's how this works: if it's in Wikipedia, it must be documented as notable. Note the use of the present tense. It's not good enough to say that you're trying to "track down" the publication. A promise of documentation is not good enough. When you have adequate documentation, then add the entry. If you don't have adequate documentation, then the entry will be removed. Neutron Jack (talk) 03:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Akram ut tarajim
You removed Versatility section of the book. Why?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsami (talk • contribs) 11:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

It was what we call "Original Research". This means that it contained YOUR ideas. That's not how Wikipedia works. It should contain the ideas of recognized experts, backed up by citations. Read this: WP:OR. Neutron Jack (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I think its fairly easy to verify this. Just take a couple of random Urdu translations of Quran, and see what they have translated the word 'taht e hal anhar'. It will be easy for you to find that its different in Akram ut Tarajim. Rsami (talk) 00:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

BTW are you native Urdu speaker? Rsami (talk) 06:10, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't matter that your original research is easy to verify. The point is, it's your research, not that of a recognized expert in the field. This encyclopedia refers to experts, not the conclusions of amateurs like you and me. No, I'm not an Urdu speaker. Neutron Jack (talk) 13:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

If you are not Urdu speaker, its better to ask an Urdu expert to check this. Can you undo the change and ask an Urdu expert to verify? Rsami (talk) 17:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Whether I am an expert is not the point. Whether you are right or not is not the point. You are not a recognized, published, expert. Therefore, your original research does not belong there. This encyclopedia uses the work of experts, not amateurs. Neutron Jack (talk) 00:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

In this case not a doctorate level expertise is required to judge this. Its very simple language translation of a book which is very easy for a language speaker to check the difference in meaning to a contemporary translation. If you are asking for an expertise, yes I am Urdu speaker and also checked other Urdu translations of Quran. Here is the national TV coverage of the event, (it had experts of the field) http://www.frequency.com/video/ptv-report-on-akram-ut-tarajim-ceremony/171375982 Rsami (talk) 10:29, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

You are invited to discuss a controversial article you edited previously
You are invited to comment on the article "List of expeditions ordered by Muhammad" in the Wikipedia Administrators Notice Board. Your input is highly valued as you edited this article previously.

Click here: Controversial Islamic Article-90% of page wiped out by Muslims, possible bias to comment--Misconceptions2 (talk) 03:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Family tree of Ali
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Family tree of Ali &mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 84.13.126.205 (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Ali-Illahism
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Ali-Illahism&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. MiguelMadeira (talk) 22:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC) --MiguelMadeira (talk) 22:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Non-Prophets (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Non-Prophets (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
 * disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
 * is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 14:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)