User talk:Waz79

Please will the editor explain how Islam gets a special negative introduction compared to the rest of the religions mentioned, with the same old lazy stereoptypical 'conquering muslim armies' treatment when all we want to know is the statistics. Every other religion referenced gets filtered through a statistical sieve so why not Islam. Does the truth bother you?
 * First, you wanted to put this on Talk:Criticism of Islam. Second, Islam isn't getting special treatment. The question is, are the sources provided reliable and of due weight. If they are, they should probably be in the article. Please discuss specific problems with those sources, and or suggest other sources that could be used in addition. As for other religions, discuss those on those articles' talk pages. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, you also had removed a bunch of info from Growth of religions. Again, you need to justify why the info was removed--it was verified by high quality sources. You cannot just assert that it's "wrong"; you'll need to explain more than that. As with the above, please go to Talk:Growth of religions and discuss what you think is wrong with that info, noting that you need to base such a discussion on sources, not on your opinions. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)