Misplaced Pages

User talk:RiskAficionado: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:52, 10 November 2006 editTruthspreader (talk | contribs)3,002 editsm →New article you may want to edit← Previous edit Revision as of 05:20, 12 November 2006 edit undoArrow740 (talk | contribs)7,908 edits →Criticism of the QuranNext edit →
Line 36: Line 36:
:there is justification which you are deliberately ignoring: . you are inserting original research: claims must be attributed to the critics, not the evidence they use. pickthall does not say resting place: you replaced the Y Ali translation to make it seem as if the argument was not a straw man. attribute the argument to the one who makes it. thank you. ] 22:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC) :there is justification which you are deliberately ignoring: . you are inserting original research: claims must be attributed to the critics, not the evidence they use. pickthall does not say resting place: you replaced the Y Ali translation to make it seem as if the argument was not a straw man. attribute the argument to the one who makes it. thank you. ] 22:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
::your attempted revert-baiting through repetition of the same faulty argument (despite it being established that SKM is not a citable critic, and that you are inserting original research) is not an indication of any intention of collegial editing on your part, sadly. ] 22:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC) ::your attempted revert-baiting through repetition of the same faulty argument (despite it being established that SKM is not a citable critic, and that you are inserting original research) is not an indication of any intention of collegial editing on your part, sadly. ] 22:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

:::You have not shown that SKM is not notable. As far as criticism of Islam goes, he is. I didn't insert any original research. It is SKM (among others) who wrote that the sun has a resting place, and I no doubt used the correct phrase "critics claim." In any case the hadith makes it clear that there is such a place.
::::So now you've made the shift to "not citable." Well he is citable. The fact that your religion forces critics to use the internet as their medium does not mean that you can censor such criticism because it is only (as far as I know right now) to be found on the internet. Again I'll ask you not to remove the reference to the hadith. You have no justification for doing so as I am not the one making the connection (as the links make clear). If you wish to respond please use my talk page. ] 05:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


==New article you may want to edit== ==New article you may want to edit==

Revision as of 05:20, 12 November 2006

This is RiskAficionado's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Archive
Archive
Archive

Talk:Qur'an#Criticism of the Qur'an

salam alaikum

I need your help to complete this part and achieve consensus in this debate. Of course I write something on the basis of Shi'a viewpoint and it may different with Sunni one in some cases. So please participate in this debate.--Sa.vakilian 03:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting Article

Itaqallah, have a look at this . It is written by another scholar of Islam who respects(and even loves) Muhammad so much (like Watt) but explains why these Islamic scholars don't convert to Islam. --Aminz 10:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Please don't vandalize

I recognize you are probably doing so in good faith, but please do not restore POV vandalism at Little Green Footballs again. We have enough problems keeping the article neutral as it is.RunedChozo 22:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

could you please explain to me what "POV vandalism" is? thank you.ITAQALLAH 22:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
POV Vandalism is the deliberate insertion of commentary or writings into articles that are in violation of the official Misplaced Pages:Neutral_point_of_view policy. But since you are using Popups, you likely already know this, and you reverted the material anyways. I am stretching to assume good faith on your part and for now am doing so.
If necessary, I will file a Request For Comment in reference to these additions, but I hope that it need not come to that.RunedChozo 22:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I also offer a helpful suggestion that you change your username. It has been noted in the past that usernames containing "Allah" are offensive to many.
NPOV violations are not vandalism. i am glad you like my username. ITAQALLAH 22:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of the Quran

Do not remove Syed Kamran Mirza's name. You have no justification for doing so. Criticism of Islam is largely internet based and as such he is notable, trying using a search engine. Do not remove the refence to hadith. The wording is a matter of debate but the link itself must stay. I used pickthall's because you asked for "resting-place." Arrow740 22:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

there is justification which you are deliberately ignoring: Mr. Mirza is not notable. you are inserting original research: claims must be attributed to the critics, not the evidence they use. pickthall does not say resting place: you replaced the Y Ali translation to make it seem as if the argument was not a straw man. attribute the argument to the one who makes it. thank you. ITAQALLAH 22:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
your attempted revert-baiting through repetition of the same faulty argument (despite it being established that SKM is not a citable critic, and that you are inserting original research) is not an indication of any intention of collegial editing on your part, sadly. ITAQALLAH 22:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
You have not shown that SKM is not notable. As far as criticism of Islam goes, he is. I didn't insert any original research. It is SKM (among others) who wrote that the sun has a resting place, and I no doubt used the correct phrase "critics claim." In any case the hadith makes it clear that there is such a place.
So now you've made the shift to "not citable." Well he is citable. The fact that your religion forces critics to use the internet as their medium does not mean that you can censor such criticism because it is only (as far as I know right now) to be found on the internet. Again I'll ask you not to remove the reference to the hadith. You have no justification for doing so as I am not the one making the connection (as the links make clear). If you wish to respond please use my talk page. Arrow740 05:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

New article you may want to edit

Hello Itaqallah, I've started a new article about Saudi Arabia's first feature film: Keif al-hal?. I invite you to contribute to it if such an article might interest you. Thanks. :-) (→Netscott) 02:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Did the prophet order to chop 400 trees in the battle of Khyber: Talk:Muhammad#Kindness_to_the_Children_and_the_Happy_Animoos. TruthSpreader 03:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)