User talk:Zeeair

Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya
It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Nazli 05:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced edits
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Tabercil 22:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. Continuing to add unsourced or original content is considered vandalism and may result in a block. — E ditor at  L arge  ( speak )  09:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Stop
Stop deleting stuff like this or you'll be blocked. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 13:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

S.A.W.

 * Read this before continuing to add "S.A.W." after Muhammad's name in Wikipedia articles. JuJube 22:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * For better or worse, it is in violation of wikipedia rules. --BoogaLouie (talk) 13:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Mirza Tahir Ahmad
Please do not vandalise pages, as you did with Mirza Tahir Ahmad. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. --Maurice45 (talk) 10:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your edits to the Muhammad article
Hello, my name is Peter. I'm sorry to inform you that I had to revert your edit to Muhammad. In accordance with the Manual of Style for Islam-related Articles the addition of the term "Prophet," regardless of its spiritual factuality, is considered POV and thus does not coincide with Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Similarly, in the future, it is only necessary to link a specific term once in an article at its first mention, per the Manual of Style on internal linking policy. I hope this has been helpful and that you continue to contribute to Wikipedia. May you go in God's care!

Sincerely, Peter Deer (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:NPOV is NOT optional
Adding islamic "honorifics", as you did here is not compatible with a neutral point of view. Please, read about the Five Pillars. -- Wasell (T ) 17:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)