Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:02, 4 June 2006

thanks

Thank you. Zeq 18:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

check it again

Z

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Thanks Karl. Netscott 11:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Welp, looks like another asinine edit that needs reverting. :-) Netscott 11:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as your commented out part of the "Freedom of speech" section was reverted, you might want to use Template:Or {{or}} on this section for now. Be sure that you add to the article's talk page if you do use it though. Netscott 14:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

There was a reasoning for it not being a redirect... review the history of Ayaan Hirsi Ali and you'll probably understand. Netscott 08:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

You're probably right although editors should never have to rely upon the violations of others to ensure their edits... it seems that he (she) has subsided such activity.... so the whole issue may be based upon a moot point now. Netscott 08:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Islamophobia

Greetings Karl Meier, I was wondering if you might express your editorial view on this bottom section of talk on this article? Thanks. Netscott 14:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Greetings again Karl, I understand why you want to add alleged to the section title and article wording but such wording is not logical. I'm guessing that you have a feeling that as Irishpunktom's version of the article stood it did not conform to NPOV. It is for this very reason that I made the changes that arrived at this version of the article section titles. I would recommend that you in fact edit in that direction to correspond to that logic. Thanks. Netscott 21:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

It isn't logical because the individuals aren't alleging but in fact are using the term in their discourses. The word allege tends to be appropriate however in the references in connection to Islamophobia section. Netscott 21:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• Karl, thanks for writing me about your concerns for the intro of this article. To be perfectly honest with you I believe that what is there is common to nearly all recognized definitions of the word. If we look at the two non-Misplaced Pages defintions as an example(bad example) of definitions then the intro doesn't seem off. Netscott 20:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• I have seen a definition or two that was sooner from a neutral and reliable source (ie: like a known dictionary) but I'm not sure where they are right now (I'd have to re-research them) but from what I recall the intro as it stands wasn't too far off from what I previously read. Netscott 20:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• The Oxford Dictionary of English (ODE) (copyrighted 2003), included on the Casio XD-H9200 electronic dictionary says: "Islamophobia > noun a hatred or fear of Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force." Netscott 21:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• You had better cite the date in your editing because it is possible that their definition has changed since then... I really don't know. Netscott 21:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• Please revert back to the Examples of use in public discourse if User:Raphael1 tries to remove it... It's essential that Misplaced Pages maintain its distance from the term if it is ever to remain neutral about it. Netscott 23:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Karl, in terms of supporting your editing relative to the "islamophobia" neologism please be aware of these guidelines and cited them as necessary: Misplaced Pages:Avoid neologisms. Netscott 08:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Karl, I see edit warring with Irishpunktom is happening now. You both should stop immediately while bearing in mind User:Tony Sidaway's warning to both of you. Netscott 08:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Karl, I'm inclined to agree with you but now the time has come for us to make attempts at dispute resolution. How would you feel about asking User:Tony Sidaway to try and help us come to some agreement on these issues? Netscott 09:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've just put in for page protection while we engage the dispute resolution process. Netscott 09:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand but remember no one's prevented from editing until it's protected. Netscott 09:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

As User:Tasc has just demonstrated. Netscott 09:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Karl, I appreciate your report but unfortunately it's not going to help. Would you kindly (and in good faith) remove your 3RR report as User:Irishpunktom has in good faith agreed to dispute resolution?Thanks. Netscott 10:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Based upon Irishpunktom's use of the word racist in your regard I will understand if you do not decide to remove the above 3RR report but still think that it would help. Please know that I've responded to Irsihpunktom's use of the word on his talk page (Under the "islamophobia" section). He's defintiely very wrong in his utilization of that word. Netscott 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

In accord with WP:NPA I have struck User:Irishpunktom's personal attack utilization of the word "racist" in your regard on my user page. Netscott 10:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:PAIN

Short and easy: Go to dispute resolution. I've told IPK that he should avoid mentioning you at all outside some very narrow confines, but from his comments elsewhere he's ready for mediation. Take him up on it. - brenneman 13:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you look at this

http://en.wikipedia.org/Amin_al-Husayni and pass on to anyone who might be intersted. check talk and history pages. Tnx. Zeq 12:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Joturner

Thought you might be interested to have a look at . --Aminz 08:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this to me. I appreciate it. -- Karl Meier 09:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Reminder...

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. — Ian Manka Talk to me! 15:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this to me, because I wasn't aware of that. I'll make sure to remember it. -- Karl Meier 15:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Islam

I guess you missed the reason I gave for including the image. Please read Misplaced Pages:Consensus, if you disagree with the points I have given in the talk page, please indicate it below the comments I have made. I again qoute from the wikipedia policy page, "Note that consensus can only work among reasonable editors who make a good faith effort to work together to accurately and appropriately describe the different views on the subject." If you want a vote count (which is considered evil according to user:Squell)I had equal number of editors "for it" and "Not for" and two editors who doesn't mind either. if you assume good faith on your part we can consider these neutral users would be fine with the changes as longs as the new image is not compromising any of the required traits of a logo. So still in the grounds of assuming good faith the majority of the editors are fine with the image. Even the editors who have said the image change is not okay, agree that the image is aesthetically better than the current one. This is only a kind reminder and request.  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  17:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

3rr

Do your definition of good faith efforts towards dispute resolution include calling people racists? Irishpunktom is obviously trolling, and is surely not making any good faith efforts as it is also obvious from the diffs provided in the 3rr report, and the following personal attacks against me. -- Karl Meier 10:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

If you want to make a disruption report, please use WP:AN/I or WP:AIV for vandalism. Stifle (talk) 16:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Mediation on Islamophobia

Karl Meier, please review this request for mediation and agree to it. Thanks. Netscott 17:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

FYI - are you a party ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#Parties.27_agreement_to_mediate_3

Agree, or not... no conditional agreeing

Karl, on the mediation please remove your conditional agreement and just agree... you can make that condition (to continue to participate based on it) after the commitee accepts the case. Thanks. Netscott 09:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, well this mediation looks set to die then. Netscott 09:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

First you agree and then you make conditions once the mediation is accepted. Honestly Irishpunktom won't be making anymore personal attacks on you for he now knows he'll be blocked for it. Netscott 09:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not placing blame on you and I completely agree that Irishpunktom should agree to not personally attack you in the future (which I doubt he'll do) but at this point it is a bit irrelevant as User:Irishpunktom is now aware that if he makes personal attacks against you he'll be blocked. Netscott 09:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That's very fair. Thanks. Netscott 09:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for striking your conditions (to be re-addressed later). Hopefully the mediation commitee will take the case. Netscott 09:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Your Recent comment on Ali Sina Talk page

I thought it was very good. Thank you. --FairNBalanced 18:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of Islam Links

How many other religion articles have links to their criticisms in their main article? BhaiSaab 00:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

"Another thing is that you should quit stalking me. It is not allowed, and If you continue your current behavior I'll report you and make sure that you get blocked."

Ah, perhaps you should consider stopping your stalking of Irishpunkton as well. Your edit wars have gotten you in enough trouble already. BhaiSaab 17:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Looking at my edits of articles, you won't really be able to prove any stalking. I've done work on most, if not all of them, using other user accounts or IP addresses even before you edited them. BhaiSaab 17:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't insult my and other editors intelligence with such silly responses, BhaiSaab. This is the last warning, that I give you regarding this. If you follow me to one more article, then I will report this unacceptable behavior. -- Karl Meier 20:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I guess I'll see what comes out of your threats. BhaiSaab 03:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Alleged lack of reciprocity

Just a web link to a criticism like this is not sufficent, is Ali Sinai an expert on Islamic theology? Is this argument of his been published by anyone as a peer reviewed publication? These criticisms will only make the undermine the credibility of this article and wikipedia as a whole, especially when there are hundereds of hadith supporting the so called "Golden Rule" I quote some hadith from Sahih muslim here.

Chpater 18

Book 001, Number 0072:

It is arrested on the authority of Anas b. Malik that the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) observed: one amongst you believes (truly) till one likes for his brother or for his neighbour that which he loves for himself. Template:Muslim

Book 001, Number 0073:

It is narrated on the authority of Anas that the Prophet (may peace blessings be upon him) observed: By Him in whose Hand is my life, no, bondsman (truly) believes till he likes for his neighbour, or he (the Holy Prophet) said: for his brother, whatever he likes for himself.Template:Muslim

Chapter 19: CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION TO HARM NEIGHBOUR

Book 001, Number 0074:

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace and blessing be upon him) observed: He will not enter Paradise whose neighbour is not secure from his wrongful conduct.Template:Muslim also see

• Template:Muslim
• Template:Muslim
• Template:Muslim
• Template:Muslim

These hadith prove beyond doubt “Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you” is there in Islam, Adding nonesense sections to this article will seriously undermine the credibility of wikipedia. So keep away nonesense from it..  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  19:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

MILF Image

You have royalty-free and non-exclusive license to reproduce, modify, adapt and publish the content found on worldpress.org. The Library of International Affairs runs on a separate disclaimer found in http://www.worldpress.org/library/terms.htm. In this case, Getty Images has reserved rights and permissions for most of our photos.

Critics of Islam

Your input on Critics of Islam is appreciated. http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:List_of_Islamic_scholars#Critics_of_Islam OceanSplah 04:48 June 01 2006 [UTC}

Barnstar

user page

It's his user page, editing it is vandalism. Ask him to remove it or get another opinion, but don't do it yourself. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

That's bullshit. I'm warning him not to put that reference back on his page. --Tony Sidaway 20:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, a bit of background. Karl did put that material on his user page, but Doc glasgow removed it and Karl acceded to that. I was also involved in that and persuaded him to stop putting provocative material on his user page. It's over and dragging it up now does not help us to write an encyclopedia. --Tony Sidaway 20:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Conversation with Anonymous editor

Can you explain to me, why you keep restoring a personal attack me on Irishpunktom's userpage? -- Karl Meier 19:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

It's his user page, editing it is vandalism. And I don't keep reverting; I reverted once. Ask him to remove it or get another opinion, but don't do it yourself. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I ask you again to please quit harassing me, by restoring personal remarks regarding me on Irishpunktom's userpage. Nobody own any pages here on Misplaced Pages, and personal attacks can be removed on sight. If you keep harassing me, and insist on restoring these personal remarks/attacks on Irishpunktom's userpage, then I'll have to make a complaint on the administrators noticeboard about your and Irishpunktoms behavior, and bring it to the attention of a broader range of Wikipedians. -- Karl Meier 19:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

You think that reverting someone's edits to a user's page is harrassment even if if it's done once?

About four other editors have also reverted you. I remember you had a very racist link on your userpage once that you absolutely refused to take off even when administators warned you. You can not edit his page, please ask him to remove it. I have nicely responded to your answer. Good bye. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

It is true that there is several members of the "Muslims Guild" that has insisted on readding the personal attacks against me, but until now you are the only administrator that has done it. In my opinion it makes it much more serious, as administrators should be expected to be experienced users, that didn't engaged in such behavior (harassment/personal attacks and remarks). Regarding the external link, I have already agreed to remove it from my userpage a long time. In my opinion it wasn't racist, it was just an angry response to the violent attacks that happend just because of a few cartoons. This being said, I have already admittet that it was wrong that I placed the external link on my userpage, and it surely doesn't give editors such as you and Irishpunktom the right to harass me months after I removed the link. Please end your insults against me. -- Karl Meier 19:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

You aren't allowed to edit another person's page and that's it. Don't do it because if he reports you will be blocked for vandalism. And please stop exagerrating one revert by me as harassment. I might have prevented you from being blocked. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

You don't own any pages on Misplaced Pages, and personal attacks can be removed on sight whereever they are. If you feel that I vandalize Irishpunktoms userpage by removing a personal attack against me, then please file a report on "vandalism in progress" or quit your false accusations against me. It's bad enough that you restore these personal attacks. -- Karl Meier 20:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be removed but me reverting one of your edits to someone else's user page is not harassment even if you are biased enough to think so. You should have asked another editor or admin to remove them for you. Not do it yourself when three or four different editors have told you not to do so. --a.n.o.n.y.m 20:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

If you where not "biased" as you call it, and if you really believe it should be removed, then I don't think you would have restored it. The plain and simple facts are that Irishpunktom made a personal attack against me on his userpage, and that you insisted that it should stay there. You even used one of your admin tools (the rollback feature) to insist on having this personal attack against me on Irishpunktoms userpage. -- Karl Meier 20:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Another Barnstar

--FairNBalanced 07:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)