User talk:RamyIbnSamir

August 2016
Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Al ash-Sheikh have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. CAPTAIN RAJU ( ✉ ) 19:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I contribution was constructive, this man will say he is a salafi, that he is upon Salafiyyah. Wahhabism is not what he will say, infact he will claim it doesn't exist, it is a derogatory term made up by other sects. It is a bias claim to say he is wahhabi, rather it is proper to put his religion as what he says he is.
 * Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. I moved your discussion from the STiki talk page to the  article talk page. More editors who edit that page will see your discussion there, and you can work out any disagreements you have with them on that page. –  FenixFeather  (talk) (Contribs)  05:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Rabee al-Madkhali has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Rabee al-Madkhali was changed by RamyIbnSamir (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.861109 on 2016-08-27T01:49:16+00:00.

Hello, I'm MezzoMezzo. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Rabee al-Madkhali without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

MezzoMezzo Hello, no this is not an experiment, I just wanted to correct a biased view off the shaykh's page because it is slander. He did not create idea Madkhalism, he doesn't have a book called Madkhalism, and doesn't quote it, rather it is a slander against him and the people the see him as a scholar.


 * Sir, I recommend that you visit Teahouse. That's a page for new users to learn about how Wikipedia works. Your edits have violated the Neutral point of view and What Wikipedia is not policies, which are related to the wider Editing policy. It would be good for you to read up on those before deleting sourced content again, though the volume of policies and guidelines you'll need to brush up on are such that a visit to the Teahouse might be the easiest route to learn about this site.
 * It goes without saying that deleting content which offends your beliefs isn't something that should happen again. Please do your best to learn about policies and guidelines and you'll be fine. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:24, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Sir, I recommend you leave out your biases, Call the Shaykh yourself, his number is known online, he will tell you what i am telling you. If people start calling followers of Shakespeare, shakepsearians as an offensive term because they didn't like them, and then they said he made up Shakespearianism, would that be fair to put on Shakespeare's page that he invented Shakespearinism because some other people made it up as an insult?

You're not being neutral, because you're attributing to him what he doesn't attribute to himself, he doesn't have a book on anything to do with madkhalism nor does he push it.


 * Actually, it would not be neutral to only attribute what he attributes to himself. Wikipedia prefers to base articles on secondary sources. There are three sources supporting the statement about "Madkhalism", so you'll need to refute those sources—with other, better secondary sources—if you want to remove the statement. —C.Fred (talk) 23:57, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

It is absolutely ridiculous to say someone came up with an idea, when he didn't.


 * Multiple reliable sources, from political scientists in Europe to security analysts in America to official representatives of religious officials in Arab countries refer to al-Madkhali as the founder of Madkhalism. You disputing that claim doesn't change academic consensus about the man. Please understand that before editing again. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)