User talk:Shaad lko

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anybody can edit, including idiots.

 Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Shaad lko! My name is Σ. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or press the "Request Help" button at the bottom of this message. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

You can also have the people at Motto of the day create a motto for you to live by on Wikipedia at the Motto Shop.

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 press the "Request Help" button below. Again, welcome!


 * ! --The Σ ★msg★ 07:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact I saw your Star sub-page late!  Shaad's space   talk  09:06, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * In any case I like to have a record of awards on my talk page, so... -- The Σ talkcontribs 01:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Al-muwatta
Dear Shaad, I'm not at all sure that your additions to Al-Muwatta are as even-handed as they could be. You added a LOT of material praising the book, which could be taken as an endorsement of the Maliki school of shari'a. I'd hate to blanket revert all your work. Could you perhaps tone it down yourself? Zora (talk) 21:27, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message, but I have only added verifiable material. Could you please point out specific sentences which endorse the Maliki school? For instance a sentence like this "Over one thousand disciples of the Imām have transmitted this work from him. This has resulted in differences in the text in various instances." - cannot be called an endorsement. It rather points out a weakness in transmission of the text. Please feel free to discuss further Shaad lko (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Manav Rachna College Of Engineering
Taking care of the concerns raised by you, i have added 10 new third party references to this article which are verifiable. i respect the concerns raised by you but it is very difficult to get online references for Indian Colleges. Still i found them after spending a lot of time. it would be nice of you if those templates are removed from the article.Garvitkamboj (talk) 10:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * actually, you dont need all online references. I have gone through the list of citations on the article. Why don't you try and have more references like the Business Standard citation? You may like to see these guidelines:
 * WP:ORG
 * WP:THIRDPARTY
 * WP:IRS
 * I've left just the notability tag since the other two are subsumed within it. Shaad lko (talk) 11:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I have done some more editing in this article. i have omitted all those words which points towards exclusiveness of something. The article has been cut-tailored according to wikipedia guidelines. I guarantee you that the TERI certification is genuine and is displayed on college achievement board. and IEEE- is an active community in the college. and me and my friends are active memebers of this club. So, as you can see i have removed every word that points towards any special achievement, you should remove the notability template from the article. If you are still not satisfied I, on behalf of my team invite you to edit or add parts which are controversial for you. ThanksGarvitkamboj (talk) 07:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I have removed the template, though I would strongly suggest that you get good third-party refs for the article, similar to the Business Standard one. The problem is that sooner or later someone else may point out this lacunae- I suggest to remove refs like facebook and blogspot which will only cause the article to lose value. Kindly follow this line meticulously- WP:GNG
 * Shaad lko (talk) 08:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:23, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories of Hadith
Hello. Have a look at the Islam category page and read the top. We are trying to minimise the number of articles that appear on the islam category page. Only the most important/prominent articles shouls appear on that page. That's why we have subcategories. MPatel (talk•contribs) 23:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the update. Shaad lko (talk) 06:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Reply
I invite you to this discussion  Pass a Method   talk  01:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Reply by Mhakcm
Hi, I noticed your comments on few alterations are made on Muslim Marriage article. Whilst I believe that the citation policy is correct and should be given, but I am still learning to do it, I should perhaps clarify to you certain points which you may not be aware because you are a contributor prior to me.

The reason why I mentioned heterosexual was simply to ensure that any idea of civil partnership or any sexual relationship between wives (in a polygamous marriage) is contrary to Islam. As far as the legal and contract and non-sacrosanct nature of the Islamic marriage, I put that in because Christianity (and some other religions example Hinduism) regard marriage as ‘till death do us part, forsaking all others’ as being for life, and is treated as sacrosanct. Admittedly 21st century adherents may dispute it! As we are giving the Islamic, religious viewpoint in the article I felt it was something that should be emphasised, and it is to be found in many law books on Sharia, which you will know is derived form the Qur’an and Hadith.

Marriage contract itself was to be found in the commercial law section of medieval Ottoman law treatise. The emphasis on it being more then any contract or agreement was necessary to point out, because the obligations which are mentioned in Sharia are actually very few and what public understand as Muslim marriage is mainly cultural. The conjugal rights are of the man (although I agree wife also has similar because she can seek divorce due to lack off sexual fulfilment) because the prophet Mohammed said in relation to the obligations of the wife that should she abandon the husband’s bed the guardian angels would abandon her. In another Hadith it is stated, a woman should not refuse her husband's advances even if he wanted to copulate whilst riding a camel. Therefore, the Islamic viewpoint is a wife can not refuse the husband’s conjugal rights, because she is sinning as well as not pleasing her husband; whereas if the husband refuses the wife then that is his prerogative, although as I have said she is entitled to seek a divorce. I have also done extensive revision of Islamic Sexual Jurisprudence article, which you may also like to look at and let me have any comments.

As you are aware, I am quite new to this and I presume you can see on my talk page what things I have done and what problems or issues I have in becoming better stop. If you can assist I shall be grateful. However, unlike many Wikipedians I don't have much time to source the citation or search books as I have mentioned on the twinkle, but I feel that my level of knowledge is quite extensive on these matters for the reasons mentioned therein. However, I feel you or administrators who have such power switch some of the articles or consolidate them, as there is much partial duplication in the following articles: Marriage in Islam, Islamic Marital Practices, Nikah, Zina, Islamic Sexual Jurisprudence, Sex in Islam, Islam and Sexual Technique, Ma Malakat Aymanukum and Sex, Islamic Views On Anal Sex, Islamic Views On Oral Sex. Subsequently a more encyclopaedic result should emerge.Mhakcm (talk) 11:49, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I will make a few comments here.
 * The fact that marriage is between a man and woman is a sufficient explanation of heterosexuality. It is elsewhere clarified that Islam is against homosexuality, so the case of polygamous marriages that you mentioned is an outlier and certainly not warranted in the lead section. If you wish, we can add it in the main text of the article, or on some other article related to Islamic sexual ethics.
 * It is true that. in Islam, marriage is not a do-or-die institution. But at the same time, it is not a purely legal matter like a sale or barter. The human element cannot be taken out and it does involve emotions. In this respect, we have already specified in the lead that divorce remains an option. To stress the matter further, is to use Christian practice as a base from which to explain Islam. Ideally, Islam should be explained on its own basis - again if you find it prudent, we can have a section on the contrast between marriage in different faith systems, but certainly not in the lead.
 * Regarding conjugal rights, I am unaware of the authenticity of the Hadith you cited. But we have to look at things in totality, and not use standalone narrations to decide one way or the other - the two reasons mentioned in the article are directly based on the verse 4:34 of the Quran
 * A discussion regarding streamlining the various topics is going on here, in which you are welcome to post your comments.
 * Shaad lko (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Ok I see your point. I didn't realise that there was so much discussion about streamlining. I think your suggestion on that page is acceptable and certainly the situation has to be sorted as it is becoming increasingly ridiculous.Mhakcm (talk) 16:37, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit
As you may know, the Counter-Vandalism unit is inactive. So for reviving the WikiProject, we will need to sort out the members. So if you are active, please put your username at the bottom of the list at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit.

You are receiving this message as a current member of the CVU.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Counter-Vandalism Unit at 00:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

Mughal/Maratha
Saab, i have less knowledge in this subject. Wasif (talk) 10:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

MOTDs (This space for rent)
You may have noticed over the past few days that the MOTD that you link to on your user page has simply displayed a red link. This is due to the fact that not enough people are reviewing pending MOTDs here. Please help us keep the MOTD template alive and simply go and review a few of the MOTDs in the list. That way we can have a real MOTD in the future rather than re-using (This space for rent). Any help would be appreciated! –p joe f (talk • contribs) 13:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit Warring in Prophets of Islam
I would like to encourage both you and Nafsadh to stop reverting each others edits and consult policy before proceeding with edits to Prophets of Islam. Both you and Nafsadh have been around long enough to know edit warring is against Wikipedia policy.

Now, as for the inclusion of the term "paraclete", it does not seem appropriate in light of Wikipedia's neutrality guidelines to include that right next to His name without qualification or context. On the other hand, I do see it as entirely appropriate to include cited sources including the notable position of belief that Muhammad is the paraclete. Peter Deer (talk) 05:55, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The edit you undid of mine had nothing to do with that discussion. Please be careful to actually look at what people are editing before reverting it on assumption. Peter Deer (talk) 23:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Paraclete discussion had ended with my comment that we should link the Prophets' names to the respective sections which give their Islamic views, so I did not undo your edit due to any confusion. Let us discuss this further on the Prophets in Islam talk page. Shaad lko (talk) 02:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014
Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


 * This message has been sent by p joe f on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers
Hi ,

In order to better control the quality  of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for inputs
A Peer review request has been made for article Islamic marriage contract to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved.

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 10:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)