User talk:Rukn950/Archives

May 2014
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abusing multiple accounts. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 06:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

The zeetvasi's pov may be same so are all the editors related to dawoodi bohra group. that doesnt make me sockpuppet. User summichum is hard bent on getting me block and he has succeeded. One week block doesnt make any difference to me but being falsely accused is what concerns me.I have been good faith editors for more than eight years and I was active in stopping user summichum's disruptive edits and vandals.please reconsider. Rukn950 (talk) 14:12, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I see no "Inconclusive" result on that SPI, and "Possible" is enough to justify a block if the behavioural evidence is also a good match. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 22:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I respect the decisions of all the Admins. There is no other way of proving myself of being innocent. still I thank all the Admins for their valuable time they have taken to review this case. Me being a Dawoodi Bohara and few other editors have been active in maintaining Integrity of Dawoodi Bohra related article from an editor whose SPA was clear to us, who indulged in vandal and disruptive editing.In the process I was almost gone to the brink of edit war but by the advice of few good faith editors, I restrained myself.after that I had been very cautious and followed the Wikipedia guidelines in all the matters. therefore I was shocked to find myself being reported for sock-puppetry and being blocked for the same.I have accepted the decisions of Admin yet I am concerned that I may again be reported for this sock puppetry because many dawoodi bohras who reside in same city as my own or same country, may do editing and I would be held responsible like now.I hope you would advice me on this matter.Rukn950 (talk) 10:59, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Neutral POV on various Bohra articles.
Hi, In our discussion regarding the deletion of Mufaddal Saifuddin article, you said that " facts have been misrepresented. and my citation for delete is absolutely valid. as this is a biography of living person. media tend to exaggerate facts in order to sell their papers. so they cannot be a reliable source " As you seem to be a person who seeks reliable sources, why don't you help me to establish the truth about this article : Qutbi Bohra. The entire article is based on gossips from public forum. Thanks Ftutocdg (talk) 13:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Mufaddal Saifuddin shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. ''If you think something needs to be removed from the page, please take it to the article's talk page. CSD G10 criteria does not apply to the article, for it is neither wholly negative nor unsourced.'' Smtchahal (talk) 13:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have come to notice that article Mufaddal Saifuddin is constantly under attack and vandalism and used for propaganda against the person whose baigraphy this article is about. so I was not able to clean without breaking 3RRR rule. be neutral and modify to Wikipedia's standard.Mufaddalqn (talk) 11:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
Hello, I'm Summichum. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Mufaddal_Saifuddin because it did not appear constructive. 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. Please refrain from indulging in edit wars and adding biased blog sources to the article. Summichum (talk) 08:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I am sorry to say that but it is you who have been indulging in edit war. my edit is relevant and i have cited proper source. you seem to be persistent in reverting whatever edit I have done or done by anyone which do not comply with your point of view. Stop using this article as propaganda against Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin. That is what you are doing. regarding khuzaima qutbuddin nass you can use the arguments in his site. their is no need to discredit other editors.your edit is libelous and defaming Syendna Mufaddal Saifuddin. Mufaddalqn (talk) 09:53, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Nuvola apps important.svg Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. GiantSnowman 12:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Please specify what disruptive edit have I done?Mufaddalqn (talk) 12:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Removal of another editor's comments. GiantSnowman 12:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * if your are talking about Biograpy of living person that issue has been resolved and it is currently at edit warring notice board. for further discussion plz discuss on Mufaddal Saifuddin talk page.Mufaddalqn (talk) 12:39, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * and if you can read bottom line of the article you are referring, you will find "The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * It is not your place to remove otgher editor's comments, see WP:TPO. GiantSnowman 13:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I am sorry about that I will refrain from doing that again.


 * No problems, thank you for the apology - happy editing! GiantSnowman 20:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=601020558 your edit] to Mufaddal Saifuddin 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:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:09, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * name is Mohammed, Mohammed Burhanuddin, I have placed the crown of Nass upon Mufaddal bhai.” cite web|author=by DBNet Editor (sp) |url=http://akhbar.mumineen.org/2011/06/20/photos-huzurala-tus-

Mufaddal Saifuddin
Hi Mufaddalqn.

Thank you for your clarifications in Mufaddal Saifuddin with regard to Amirul Hajj, Roza, and Aqeeq-ul-Yemen etc. If there is an Amirul Hajj article on Arabic Wikipedia, maybe you could translate it to English? I see lots of hits in Google books and would gladly follow up by adding references if you create it. Roza I wil change to rauza, ok?


 * Thank you for interest and efforts. I don't think there is any article on Amirul Hajj yet I may may be wrong. It is good Idea to create one.Mufaddalqn (talk) 05:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

In BLPs on people with names in the pattern   we refer to them by their last name on subsequent use in the articles, cf. WP:LASTNAME. I tried to read WP:AMOS and have a look at several articles on people with Arabic names to figure out what convention (if any) we can use on Mufaddal Saifuddin. Per WP:SUR he is default sorted to "Saifuddin, Mufaddal". Saifuddin being his laqab. Would it make sense to refer to him as "Saifuddin" on subsequent mentioning in the article? Best, Sam Sailor Sing 16:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think there would be any problem if we refer him by his laqab on subsequent mentioning of the article.Mufaddalqn (talk) 05:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Regarding "27 Zilqaa’dil Haraam 1385 AH": Is Zilqaa’dil Haraam the same as Dhu al-Qi'dah and can we change it? If I Google "Zilqaa’dil Haraam" it seems to mainly or only come up in connection with Mufaddal Saifuddin, and the source say 17 March 1966 CE. Have a look at it. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 16:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Zilqaa'dil Haraam is same as dhu al qidah, but generaly dawoodi bohra follow (misri calender) and refer the month as zilqaa'dil Haraam. we can do further research before doing any changes.Mufaddalqn (talk) 05:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your feedback. And congratulations with and thanks for Amirul Haj. I will try to follow up with formatting and adding a reference or two. Since we transliterate حج Ḥaǧǧ to Hajj, don't you think it would make sense to move Amirul Haj to Amirul Hajj?
 * If I understand the little I have read about Tabular Islamic calendar and Islamic calendar, it does not make perfect sense to link Zilqaa'dil Haraam to Dhu al-Qi'dah. Or what? Maybe it does not matter now. In the long run it would be nice to have an article on Zilqaa'dil Haraam or a mention of it in Dhu al-Qi'dah, whatever you and other editors think would be befitting.
 * There is obviously a lot going on in Dawoodi Bohra related articles due to the succession issue. If the following four articles, Qutbi Bohra (also up for AfD), Mohammad Burhanuddin (49th Dai), Abdul Husain Husamuddin, and Taher Saifuddin are not already on your watchlist, you may consider adding them. Khoda hafez, Sam Sailor Sing 17:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I have redirected Amirul Haj to Amirul Hajj, I have maintained Zilqa al haraam and refered to Dhu al-Qi'dah for clarification. I hope you agree to my edits.Mufaddalqn (talk) 09:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I trust you know what you are doing in regard to Arabic month names, as you can hear I'm blank on the subject. As anyone can hear amirul sounds a lot like admiral which is not surprising as admiral has its origin in Arabic, cf. Admiral. Maybe you want to work that into Amirul Hajj one day (no hurry). Hope you find editing here satifying, if there's anything I can do, just let me know. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 12:40, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Amirul Hajj
Hello Mufaddalqn,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Amirul Hajj for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. JamKaftan (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Mufaddalqn.
 * From what I can see, this term appears to be limited to Nigeria. Is that correct?
 * Peter in Australia aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it is used in nigeria officially. But head of the muslim community in india such as dawoodi bohra every year appoints the Amirul Hajj. and has great significance.Mufaddalqn (talk) 10:40, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * There is reference of Amirul hajj of Egypt and Baghdad by Akbarshah khan najeebabadi in his book History of Islam. Mufaddalqn (talk) 10:47, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Mufaddal Saifuddin
May participate at talk page if you have any value addition.--Md iet (talk) 06:40, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Sincere request
Hello Mufaddalqn,

I know your are extremely convinced by Mufaddal Saifuddin claim. As is your right, i will never deny it.

You've succeeded to block me and entrained me on an edit war. But as far as I see, I was just only trying to give a neutral POV on some bohras artcile.

I believe you have a minimum intellectual honesty, and you can act properly on this kind of hoax / fake artcile : Qutbi Bohra.

I'm not supporting nor Mufaddal Saifuddin, nor Khuzaima Qutbuddin. As a former member of Dawoodi Bohra community, I've closely followed the succession issue of Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin since 2-3 years.

I hope you understand, and will help me to do something with Qutbi Bohra article for example. I do not think this kind of fake article does any credit to Mufaddal Saifuddin followers.

Best regards, Ftutocdg (talk) 19:46, 19 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I have treated the article of Mufaddal Saifuddin on neutral POV. I have tried to present proven and well referenced edits in its true light. I have also tried to prevent any edits which are libelous / defaming, violate Blp policies and used as propaganda. I have no intention to hurt any of my fellow editors feelings. As per your request I have nominated Qutbi Bohra for deletion.Wish you happy editing Mufaddalqn (talk) 12:11, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Qutbi Bohra (3rd nomination) at AfD
Hi Mufaddalqn. I trust you are well. You may have noticed my comment in Articles for deletion/Qutbi Bohra (3rd nomination): I find that when we have had two No consensus-closings within 3 weeks, a 3rd nomination less than 48 hours after closing of the second is too quick, read Renominating for deletion. I ask you to give consideration to WP:AFD. In regards to the contents of Qutbi Bohra I stand by what I said at the second AfD: the sources directly supporting the subject are so few, that the article should basically be rudeced to a stub and the elaborate amount of WP:OR be cut away. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 09:41, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * - Agree with . In addition, I've made several edits, actually re-written article. All possible problems, unsourced, original research, unreliable sources, etc. has been removed and involved editors are invited to comment on article's talk page. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  14:24, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Dawah and dawat
I have a couple of times come across sentences like "His period of Dawat was from XXXX to XXXX", e.g. in Ali Shamshuddin Bin Abdullah. Judging from this there is at least some connection between Dawah and Dawat, but as you know, I do not speak Arabic, so the details escape me. Can you explain the difference to me? As always on English Wikipedia, we need to make sure that the average reader can understand terms that are not commonly known in English. Either by linking to them (e.g. Amirul Hajj) or if we don't have an article then put in a short parenthetic description like in "He delivered his first waaz (sermon)". The question what to do with dawat. Does it make sense to link it to Dawah retaining the spelling like this: dawat? Wikicode: dawat. Should it always be capped like Dawat also in midsentence or is dawat fine? Best, Sam Sailor Sing 12:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Further, what does it mean when I read the phrase "the Dawoodi Bohra Dawa"? Best, Sam Sailor Sing 13:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * (Reply)In terms of terminology by what I understand is Dawah and Dawat are same. but there is major difference in term used by dawoodi bohra.The Call of Dai al Mutlaq to fold is called Dawat. The Fold itself is called Dawat.It is used both as verb and noun.The Main Difference from tablig is that there is no Dawat without Raza(Permission) of Dai al Mutalq.It is Dawoodi Bohras deep faith that no Dai Passes away without appointing his successor.hence the period from which Dai Al Mutlaq is appointed to his demise is termed as that Dai's period of Dawat.Mufaddalqn (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * If I understand it correctly then Dawat is roughly equivalent to "term of mission". In lack of better, I will for now redirect the word to Dawah. If you think otherwise, let me know. Speaking about "appointing his successor", the article Nass (Islam) has seen a lot of unsourced rubbish added to it, assumeably just as much original research as we have seen in other articles by the same user. I especially notice that it is claimed that Christianity and Jewism (a disparaging word for Judaism) should be a result of nass. Very hard to think that any Islamic scholar should have applied the concept of nass here. If you have any knowledge about it, let me know. Sometimes some words in one culture will be applied to matters in another culture. And maybe not make sense in both cultures. I don't know if that is the case. As I said, I sure doubt it. It gets outright idiotic when the bulleted list has Hebrewism mentioned. And The idol worshippers. I am going to stub the article, and if you want to give a hand with expanding it, you are welcome. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 17:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding continued genre changing without discussion or sources. If you choose to continue, as you did at Mufaddal_Saifuddin, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Summichum (talk) 07:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Summichum (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)