Jump to content

User talk:Zora: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Khalidkhoso (talk | contribs)
Duke53 (talk | contribs)
warning
Line 334: Line 334:


[[User:Khalidkhoso|Khalidkhoso]] 08:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[[User:Khalidkhoso|Khalidkhoso]] 08:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

==Deletion of material at [[Undergarment]] article==

{{uw-notcensored3}} <font face="raphael" color="green">[[User:Duke53|Duke53]] | <sup>[[User talk:Duke53|Talk]]</sup></font> 12:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:14, 29 January 2007

NAL


Thanks

Thanks Zora. Great to hear from you. I've just started getting active again on wikipedia after a particularly hectic semester. I did see Lage Raho Munna Bhai, after hearing a very favorable review in an introductory course on nonviolence at UC Berkeley. Wishing you kshanti and good luck with your arthritis, and lots of success with everything in the New Year. Regards, deeptrivia (talk) 03:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Zora, just giving you a heads-up - The Shilpa Shetty article could probably do with a spring-clean as she is reported to be appearing on Celebrity Big Brother 2007 soon. I've cleaned it already as best as I could, including references and stuff, but these thigns always need expansion. I'll be keeping a heads-up in the media also for reliable info to go in this article. Hope you're well. Ekantik talk 03:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Karbala

Hi, I added a new part in this article and put a comment in the talk page. Please don't remove it before any discussion. --Sa.vakilian 09:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qur'an

Happy New Year! I hope that next year for you will bring new happiness and joys in your life. I was just reading an article by Ghamidi on Principles of Understanding the Qu'ran in mizan and I found it very informative. It can be accessed from here. It includes topics like classical arabic, its languistic style, variant readings, thematic coherence, and generally other principles which are required in understanding Qur'an. You may find it useful. Cheers! TruthSpreaderreply 22:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism in Islam

Hi Zora, given your interests I thought I might ask you to have a look at the section on Islam and antisemitism in the Antisemitism article. There is lively disagreement on Talk:Antisemitism as to how to approach this, what sources should be used etc and I think it could do with an outside eye.

Aside from that, I hope you're keeping well and I wish you all the best for the New Year. Palmiro | Talk 13:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Kaaba

In this edit of yours:

  1. You brought back all links except the non-Muslim link which is: Believe - Christian site with information on other beliefs. Please explain why you did not bring in this link back as well.
  2. You deleted pictures of the Kaaba - on what grounds? Please explain.

thanks, --Matt57 17:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: the second point, did you check the talk page? ITAQALLAH 17:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm checking the talk page now and dealing with the matter there. --Matt57 17:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zora, please see the talk page here on Pictures of Kaaba: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kaaba#Pictures_of_Muhammad . --Matt57 17:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!!

Hello, Zora, a Happy New Year to you! Best regards --Plumcouch Talk2Me 18:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, hope you had a good one. :) Ekantik talk 16:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year/ Our discussion

Hi Zora, wishing you a Happy New Year. I was on wikibreak the last couple of days and the thread on ANI got archived in the meanwhile. May I know your current stand on it? If you still have objections to the template on Indian actor pages, please let me know. I intend to start my bot in the next few days but dont have any intentions of edit warring over it. Hence I thought I'd check with you. In case you havent seen my last few replies on the thread, here they are for your reference — Lost(talk) 06:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zora, we can take this through formal dispute resolution if you want. However, I would like to discuss it with you first so that we can understand what the other is saying. Can you tell me what it is that you are against. I ask because I get a slightly different response every time I approach you:
  • Are you against all wikiprojects based on nationality? You say that we should follow US and UK and since they are not tagging by country, we should not do it either. Well, for one, I question that logic. But even the statement is faulty. Not only US but many other countries do have their own projects. Each of them has their flag on the template. See Template:WikiProject United States, Template:WP Australia, Template:WikiProject Iran etc. etc.
  • Are you against talk page templates of wikiprojects in general?: As I keep repeating, thats a separate technical discussion. If there is consensus to keep project templates out of talk pages altogether, then I have no objections. But if it is only against specific articles and specific projects, then I do have objections.
  • Dividing Wikipedia along national, religious etc etc lines. I think we can get into a long philosophical discussion on this whether nations and other identities were created to separate people or join them, but the fact is that all of these are realities. Crusading against a wikiproject is not going to take the reality of nations and religions away. But I think you have got the concept of a wikiproject wrong. They exist to give related articles some organisation, not to ignite religious or nationalistic passions. Plus the WP1.0 team is involved in something very noble. They bring out cds for distribution where there is no internet access. How do they decide which articles to include? Through the wikiproject assessments. That is how the project templates help. See Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Specifically Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Status. They encourage use of bots so that articles that are of importance to the various projects can be improved and included in the cd. The core topics get included on priority. These are generally articles that a project tags as top importance. What may be top importance for one project may not be so for another. The task is a very noble one, I think. I myself keep assessing articles when I get time. If you want, you can go through my contribs but rest assured that there are actually people working on the importance and quality of articles that can be included for WP1.0.
  • Finally, it is not nationalism that has killed millions. Its the inability to accommodate others' point of view. Nationalism/religion etc. are double edged weapons. We can use them to create a better world or to kill millions. Even the so called Indo Pak war ended when editors managed to accommodate each others' point of view.
Phew, that was a long discourse. Anyway, let me know what you think and we can take this through the appropriate channels. — Lost(talk) 09:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Kidman

Just so that you don't lose any sleep wondering why she was in Project Hawaii, Kidman was born there. You're right in that it wasn't really notable enough to be listed though! --Steve (Slf67) talk 08:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My POV and some other issue

Hi Zora,

  • Please remind that not only Shi'as know Yazid as an unjust ruler but also Sunnis know him as the cruel one:Sunni view of Yazid I. Even who do not agree with uprising against such ruler and recognize him as legitimate one like Muhammad Al-Ghazali . I don't know whether you are familiar with his governance or not but please read what he did in Medina and Mecca in Tabari's history. Thanks God in these events Shi'a didn't suffer but the rape and pillage of Mecca and Medina's Muslims(you can read people) and setting the Kaaba on fire was nothing but tyranny.
  • Another issue, I don't know where you're from and what your religion is but as Iranian Shi'a student I live with these issues. These are part of my history and today's life. So I get deep knowledge about them during my life. When I said them I don't mean just Shi'a POV but also Sunni and Persian POV.
  • I suffer a lot when I see some poets in my country tell lies about Imam Hussain(PBUH) to cry people. Also I know Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we should write "Al-Ghazali oppose Hussain because of uprising against legitimate caliphate and on the other hand abula'ala Mududi opposed Omavids as ilegitimate rullers so he had different POV about Hussayn's uprisng. " in Sunni POV part. --Sa.vakilian 11:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we shouldn't write anything about history because there isn't any historical text which show Umavid POV. Absolutly later historians use Abi Mekhnaf thus others like Tabari are biased and we don't know anything about reality:))--Sa.vakilian 12:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About epithets and long plots

Hi, and sorry to refer you to a project you are already part of. I hadn't checked your contributions. Cbrown's introduction in WikiProject Films somehow reminded me of my favorite "Indian", i.e. Peter Sellers in The Party and his "In India, sir, we know who we are. We don't need others to tell us who we are." So visiting your user page with this still in mind, I found the epithet section very relevant and amusing. :) Hoverfish Talk 23:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About long synopsis. I happened to be checking Beattles related films, when I came to Alice in Wonderland (1985 film). The plot was writen from a young person, or at least it was written so and then tagged for grammar. It was the scene by scene description you mentioned. You are a mother, so how would you feel if your (say) 11 year old had made a good effort on writing about a film? I am no father, but I was moved from the effort and didn't even want to take away its childish style. I checked in other sites for plots and I noticed that what was given here was by far more informative. So I did my best to keep it as given and corrected as much grammar and phrasing as I could. I agree that there could also be a plot summary (synopsis) which would be 1/10th of it, given in one ot two paragraphs. Maybe this should happen to many films. But if we do have a more detailed version, we shouldn't just scrap it. I agree, some users could be on an ego cruise, but I try to see it rather as information gathered. So I got this idea of sub articles for extended plots that may not be desired or needed in the main article. I would appreciate any reply on this. Hoverfish Talk 08:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I meant just the extended plot to be a subarticle. I will ask if we can get statistics for articles. I am only 4 months a wikipedian. I have tried myself with plots, but have done only a handful from scratch. I naturally tend to give the whole story, in a way that is as brief as I can, but without feeling I left gaps. If I try to make a very short version, I have the feeling it's not informative enough, or what I said was just the part that was important to me. Maybe such a brief summarizing but still sufficiently informative is a talent I don't have. So I end up with plots like The Favour, the Watch and the Very Big Fish. And I don't feel I was egoistically motivated, because I was simply doing my best to describe the film without including too many details. It is true that I am using my sense of being thorough but not vain. We have about 10.000 stubs to bring to class start. Maybe not all of them are really worth it, but even so still LOTS. If I give up trying to make plots (because of my lengthy results which I wouldn't like to impose if I know they are not welcome) and if more users are discouraged (because they would exceed 500 words) and since more stubs are comming in with time, are there really enough good brief-plot ("plot summary") editors to achieve this in the next few years? Hoverfish Talk 12:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way here is imdb's plot summary on the previous film: [1]. If I hadn't seen the film, this would tell me only a fraction of what I would like to know. It certainly doesn't answer to the question "what is the plot of this film?" Hoverfish Talk 13:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I quite sympathise with the party bore parallel. I also sympathize with people who want to find an objectively given extended plot. I am very selective in viewing films, so I want to know what I will get into. Some elements in the extended plot can switch me either way. Even without statistics, and being a not very social person, I still know a few people like me in this, including my wife. That's why I want to suggest the sub-article solution. Also I wouldn't start a competition in how many visited the main article vs. the extended plot version. Even one in twenty would satisfy me. But I do not claim that the extended version should be recommended or any priority. If the data is there and it conforms to encyclopedic requirements, let's just not delete it. Even so, if one starts getting on tangents about details it should be cut off, even from the extended version. Ok, and I will move this issue to the project's talk so I don't get to be a party bore here. Hoverfish Talk 15:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our discussion

Hi Zora, I am not sure if you read my reply above as there have been more threads added after that. Hence I am writing this at the bottom. I request you to go through and let me know if my comments make sense to you. Else please suggest a way forward. I am willing to be assisted by third party mediation or any other form of resolution that you think will solve the problem. Rest assured I take your edits in good faith, else I would not have done so much explaining... Its just that I dont agree with your viewpoint and would like this resolved amicably — Lost(talk) 10:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora, since I have not heard from you, I am assuming and hoping that there is no issue any longer. I assure you that I will not be tagging articles that I think will create controversy. If you are still opposed, you are welcome to let me know of course. Regards — Lost(talk) 08:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zora, Here's another related link that I came across — Lost(talk) 10:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora, as I said I have no intentions of edit warring with you. If you think some sort of dispute resolution will help, I will welcome it. Just for the record, the project is not about the government of a country. I am no fan of governments. The project is about the country and everything related to it which definitely includes its cinema and citizens. Frankly, my advice is to assume some good faith about others' intentions. — Lost(talk) 16:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Karbala

That's true, I was paraphrasing, in order to get rid of copyvio. And it is of course not well written (maybe you can help :)) Would you please have a look at the source here [2]

It seems to me that it distinguishes between what Shias believe and what secondary academic sources believe. I don't claim that this source is the consensus of academic scholars but it is a source.--Aminz 11:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the end of the first paragraph on page 13 (..and countless descendents). It is definitely not a very Shia friendly source. :| --Aminz 11:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Halem

Zora, Bernard Lewis also sometimes uses the term matrydom. The academic sources are not NPOV. They say "Prophet Muhammad", "Jesus Christ"... I was searching about Halem in google. He really seems to be a notable scholar. For example, he has written articles on "al-Mansura" and "Rawk" in Encyclopedia of Islam. Here [3], Michael Bonner Professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University has translated his work from German to English and published it through Brill Academic Press. And if a recent source quotes a source published 100 years ago, then that would still be of use I feel.

But I agree with you that he has a POV, but everybody has a POV. Being NPOV doesn't mean denying Shia POV. Esposito is famous for being sympathetic towards Islam but nevertheless it is "a" POV. I think in any controversial topic there are people who are sympathetic towards one or the other group.

And I am not dismissing your sources. That's also a POV. All POVs can be covered.--Aminz 12:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zora, I agree with you that it is not the area of expertise of Halem but I don't find it fair to say that all he wrote is not an academic POV. While writing the Shia account of the story, we can say that these academic scholars accept it (in order to remove redundancy). Why should we put the academic POV in contrast with Shia POV? --Aminz 12:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Abu Mekhnad: Abu Mekhnaf(d. 157/774) is a primary source and thus it could be used only when used in secondary sources. If an academic secondary source quotes a passage from it, then that passage should be reliable.
Re Academic Sources: Your point regarding the existence of pre-assumptions is valid. If enough scholars have worked on this topic, I think there must be a lot of controversy in academia. Some agree with some assumptions and some don't. In some cases it is possible that the consensus of opinions tend to reject an assumption or accept it. In that case, we can put academic POV in contrast with Shia POV. Otherwise, Shia POV would be one out of several academic POVs. Halem's usage of the word "matrydom", I think, is adding the POV that the death of Hussein was sacred but I don't think that makes him an unreliable academic source. I feel it is not more POV as saying "Jesus Christ". Regards, --Aminz 03:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you comment on tilak page about merging them? Mlpkr 19:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eureka

Hi, Finally I found several dicuments which shows reliablity of Abi Mekhanf(Thanks God) . But they're in Deutsch, Arabic and Persian. Now it's your turn.(It's like chess and I enjoy a lot.)--Sa.vakilian 07:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zora I found an academic study about Abi Miqnaf in American university of Beirut and copy it in the talk page of that article. Also I've found this:[4]. You may say that he's Shi'a and Iranian so he's not reliable but if you remind that most of historic books in this issue are in Persian and Arabic and some of them don't introduce to west then you'll admit that such research is so valuable - I don't mean certainly correct. And also you admit that we -Iranian Shi'as- aren't some partisans which should be neglected to avoid POV pushing. I'm certain you'll lost too many things if you neglect Shi'a researches. Also I should remind there are some researches in Persian and Arabic which are more correct than this one. I want to speak with one of the professor of history in Tehran University to help me with this issue.--Sa.vakilian 12:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why you said "You seem to me to be working from a very black and white model. Sources are either trustworthy, and to be accepted in toto, or untrustworthy, and to be rejected. It's more of a spectrum, with most sources in the middle." Maybe I couldn't describe my intentions correctly. But I made historiography section in that article to remove this idea exactly.
Also the state of "Freedom of speech" in Iran is confusing. It depends on who, where and when says something. Thus you can say something but the other one can't. You can say something in university but not in public. And it changes from time to time. For example in the case of battle of Karbala since 20th century some religious scholars -Ahl Hadith and Mutakkalems- and then academicians have started to criticize the story and tried to remove distortions. I'm sure that there isn't any other issue in our ancient history which has been criticized more. The result of this trend is some careful narrations which have published publicly in Persian and Arabic. But we can't speak in public easily not because of the government but because of public faith.
But I insist that you should show some academic references which support your untrustworthy in some issues.--Sa.vakilian 11:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please look at Battle of Karbala#Examining Abu Mikhnaf. And there other references in Duech, Persian and Arabic. --Sa.vakilian 11:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honor killing and wife beating

Recently I downloaded a few scholarly papers from library on Honor killing and interesting all of these journals don't quote Qur'an or hadith rather they deal this problem purely from cultural point of view. Secondly, I read this article on Domestic voilence in Muslim societies (a scholarly journal article), and the author concludes:

The Qur’an offers Muslim men who are justifiably upset with their wives’ conduct ( as defined above), a graduated solution to deal with their frustrations and anger. At its final stage, the solution is similar to that Job was shown to release him from his oath. But the Qur’an also shows Muslims the way to become better Muslims and human beings by living in accordance with the ideal of marital relations, or end the relationship amicably. The Qur’an states very clearly: “ The parties should either hold together on equitable terms or separate with kindness.” (2:229) Thus, the Qur’anic approach to the problem of husbands hitting their wives aims at eliminating such behavior altogether, but it takes into account the very nature of human beings, the complexity of their emotions, and the need for “a gestation period” for them to achieve a higher stage of development. It also helps them reach that higher stage through a series of prescribed behavior aimed at self-control and anger management, and by describing and exhorting by words and the example of the Prophet that blissful higher stage of marital life.

What are you comments? As we have had this discussion before as well. TruthSpreaderreply 00:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Devanagari Aum

The symbol Aum in the Tamil script

Hi Zora. Please see the article mantra. There's a section that describes a dubious theory (see para starting with "The symbol of Om contains of three...") for the meaning of the Devanagari symbol for Aum, and my request that it be verified with additional sources has led to all kinds of misunderstandings. Such a theory could be notable only if held by a majority or a significant minority or even a single notable person. The article sounds as if the Aum symbol was designed keeping this in mind, while the symbol clearly comes from merging the devanagari "अ" (A) "ऊ" (U) and "ँ" (M) characters and not by joining semicircles and dots symbolizing various things. Besides the devanagari symbol, we have symbols in various languages, like the Tamil symbol on right (and Tibetan, Chinese, Gurmukhi, etc). The theory of semicircles is elegant, but is not given by a scholar or a religious leader, but a Nitin Kumar, an employee of an online store that sells these Aum motifs [5]. Aum derives its importance from the three syllables, the vibrations they generate, not its notation used to denote it in Devanagari script (which is less than 800 years old.) Read also the introduction of the very same article, which is very well written. It mentions how mantras like Aum are all about sound symbolism. It also says:

For many cultures it is the written letters that have power -- the Hebrew Kabbalah for instance, or the Anglo-Saxon Runes. Letters can have an oracular function even. But in India special conditions applied that meant that writing was very definitely inferior to the spoken word."

I see this semicircle hypothesis in direct contradiction of all this. It's one of those elegant theories I'd love to believe too, but certainly doesn't conform to the facts. deeptrivia (talk) 08:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am getting ready to insert stuff there relating to his pseudointellectual claims of prophet Muhammad being in the Vedas and the fact that this is unsupported by mainstream scholarship. Did you ever add this before and it got deleted by Islamic Fundamentalists? Rumpelstiltskin223 19:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well neither is Oak very important. He is mostly a fringe lunatic and nobody really listens to him anyways. Even most Hindutvavadis consider him flaky.Rumpelstiltskin223 04:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody's defending Oak. Maybe if Oak's so-called critics spent more of their energy debunking Oak instead of attacking Hindus and laughing at them when they get blown up by terrorists then this problem would not happen. Rumpelstiltskin223 10:44, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About this -your comment about "piling on". I'm sorry that you felt that way, that wasn't my intention. I just figured that given the debate, Getaway might have a problem with adherents.com so that's why I asked about it's reliability. Sorry, I didn't mean to stress you out. <<-armon->> 23:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Battle of Karbala

Dear Zora, Would you mind removing POV from the article. Farhoudk 19:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you indeed. Please see its talk page, my answers in "POV tag". Farhoudk 14:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Partition of India/ Personalities

Dear Lady,

I have given glimpses to your contributions and presumably is convinced that you are definitely a great contributor and as such objectivity is innate in you. But then again, for what reason you are deleting Suhrawardy's name from the list of personalities in the history of partition? Don't you believe that he, as the Chief Minister of Bengal, played a vital role in securing Pakistan from the Britons???. Well, his role was indeed crucial and without his infamous pioneering role in the Direct Action Day in Calcutta as well as in whole of Bengal, creation of Pakistan would have been difficult, if not a distant dream.

A second thought is poping up in my mind. Are you suffering from Anti Bengali cognitive dissolution? If so, I have nothing to say. I wish you could and would correct me if I am wrong.

Warmest regards,

Hossain Akhtar Chowdhury 10:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora,

Thanks a lot for your long clarification for which I was awaiting. I am, indeed, very sorry for labeling you as anti-Bengali, which I am convinced now, you are not.Please pardon me for the mistake.

For keeping the list short, we can definitely go upto top 10, right?(...and what is the big difference between 9 and 10?)As such I am again inserting Suhrawardy on the list. I sincerely wish you will not move and argue against it.

Best wishes,

Hossain Akhtar Chowdhury 05:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regadring the Edip Yuksel article

Dear Zora, why did you delete the part with "Pima Community College". Although this was not put on by me before you just remove it because his website yuksel.org doesnt mention it aint the right way. There are many details of his lif not placed on tht website. Have you actually written to the "Pima Community College" and asked them? If after that you wldve found tht the info is wrong, then everything wld be fine. Thnx.

Collapsed (-ible) long synopsis section

Hi Zora, since we last discussed about it, my suggestion became technically possible and is now to see and discuss in WP Films talk. If you care to comment, it would surely help us. Hoverfish Talk 22:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A short history of Pakistan

Hi since you insisted on letting this book in Partition of India reading list.. me and Rumpelstiltskin checked up on the book on JSTOR. It has been torn to shreds by peer reviewers for virulent anti-Hindu hate see A Short History of Pakistan. I hope you agree to removing this book from Partition of India reading list... Amey Aryan DaBrood© 14:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zora if millions of people buy into the book's POV then god save Pakistan... balancing out one POV with another isnt the best way to go about getting to NPOV. Wikipedia articles shouldnt be POV dumps... By your own arguments, it is possible for Rumpelstiltskin or some other guys to cite Voice of India books everywhere. Hindutva POV is suscribed to by over half the voters in India! Amey Aryan DaBrood© 18:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this post of yours to Ambroodey [6], I find it puzzling that you defend biased Pakistani nationalist books so assiduously, yet constantly revert Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947 from Partition of India. If you claim that both Hindu and Muslim POV's belong there then both these books must necessarily belong there. Why such persistent double standards? Rumpelstiltskin223 02:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's got a point there.--D-Boy 19:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khalid bin Walid Discussion

You said:" As for POV pushing -- yes, the Islam-related articles are in bad shape. We have Sunni-Shi'a wars, Salafi-traditionalist wars, rabid anti-Muslim bigots, and Muslims who don't even take usernames, just delete anything critical of Islam or Muhammad and add PBUHs and RAs everywhere. Sigh. It's very hard to keep things neutral, and to keep one's own balance. It's a daily struggle for me to keep my temper and I don't always succeed. "

Heh heh, yeah it is completely beyond me; why some people are emotional about their beliefs! But I did notice that you are the sound of reason in many articles. Hope you continue to be so. I did not want to write this on the discussion page, since it is personal. I think. Oh, there is something you should know about Arab culture (yes ARAB, not Muslim, culture); they are hot-headed <-> very, very, very, extremely, shockingly, stupidly, terribly, stunningly emotional about their beliefs. No excuse, its true, but at least an explaination. So...you stay cool XD Unflavoured 11:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to notify that mediation has renewed at the Muhammad article, after a delay due to Ars Scriptor's leaving, in case you still wanted to participate. I'll be the mediator, but I may call in help from someone more experienced later. | AndonicO Talk · Sign Here 13:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Indian films

I have started compiling the entire list of Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Indian Films please help out. Other missing lists can be created by industry in India e,g List of missing Bollywood films etc. The lists are accessed from imdb and each one can be checked for notability or suitability for wikipedia levinga finely tuned list of missing films. Existing film articles should be removed from the list. Soo I will get around to compiling an entire list of Indian feature films ordered by year of release as you have done with the Bollywood films as with List of Argentine films etc. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 14:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC

OK as yet I won't make a list of the Indian films in chrono order but the missing film articles are essential and fit in with my other work. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I was going to create the Indian filmogrpahy in year and date order I guarantee you it would not document every one of the 2000 films every year. I bet not even half of those are of particular notability - only the most notable films would be documented anyway. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I am just about to add a film from the list which a member of your project suggested. The idea of missing films is to root out what is missing and add them to wikipedia. I see plenty of point in contributing missing articles to wikipedia Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey please give me a chance! I am not compiling a missing list for the sake of it. I just started Ab Dilli Dur Nahin. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aag (film), Aao Pyaar Karen and Zameer: The Awakening of a Soul was started yesterday sorting out Shilpa Shetty's films.

"its better to do work"? I have't contributed 35,000 edits to wikipedia and not done any work mate! Work and contributing new articles to the project and provinding info is what I am about Category:Argentine films was empty and Category:Argentine film directors when I started. It looks as though I'll have to to show you who I am and my capabiltities. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There we go. Film number 1 started from my "pointless list". Aa Ab Laut Chalen. I hope it is cateogrized appropriately for Indian cinema Ernst Stavro Blofeld 20:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content Removal

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Shilpa Shetty, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you.
Sorry to have to do this, but after discussion at Talk:Shilpa Shetty and several requests to find rationale in WP policies, this CR could be seen as vandalism. Ekantik talk 04:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a number of films for Shilpa Shetty Zameer: The Awakening of a Soul Auzaar, Chhote Sarkar, Himmat, Hathkadi and Aao Pyaar Karen. I will start the remainders in the coming days. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 14:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Vijay

Hello Zora,

I am Sai, the administrator of Actor Vijay's Official fans site (http://www.vijaynet.com). I see that you deleted the site from the external links of Joseph Vijay page. And the reason u've given is there is no evidence that it is recognized by the actor and an irritating flash promo. Well, what proof do you want that its recognized by the actor? Check this this page http://www.vijaynet.com/mul/svideos.php . The videos at the end have the actor himself officially launching the site (Video), the second last video is that of his father officially announcing the site to the fans assembled and in one of the videos, the actor himself says that Vijaynet.com provides all the latest news about him, his functions, etc. If you want evidence, ask a Tamil friend of yours to check the site again and its videos and then come to a conclusion. We are officially recognized by Actor Vijay and no one can deny that! I felt since you guys are doing a good job of creating an encyclopedia, the presence of the link to our official site would do good.

For info

You might or might not have something to say on Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Aminz. Best, Palmiro | Talk 23:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ekantik

Hello, Zora, I commented over at the Village Pump. Best regards, --Plumcouch Talk2Me 00:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tongan

Hello Zora. I have seen you can speak Tongan. Can I ask you for help? User:Grutness recently created several stubs about islands of Tonga, I helped him with that. Next day anonymous IP from New Zealand have written to us some stuff in Tongan we do not understand. :) Can I ask you for translation? Thank you. - Darwinek 15:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for response. Mysterious materials follow:
  1. KO HAI E TE'EPILO KO ENI. HEHEEEEEEEEEEE? Tuku aa 'e fie me'a he wikipedia moe fakalangata'aki, okay (lol)... Ka ke mafuke o talangofua hoiiiiiiiiii.
  2. HOIIIIIIIII..... lahi etau lea he puaka ofu ko eni he fa'a fakatonutonu. lmao Vava'u wahhhhht.........

Thank you very much. - Darwinek 10:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salman01

I keep on telling him to stop adding honorifics and he just continues. He also seems to be adding copyvios to multiple pages - Zaynab bint Ali included. KazakhPol 04:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Zora, Thanks very much for commenting on my RfC page. I appreciate it very much! Thanks! --Aminz 22:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


(If you have time) Please vote in the survey on this proposed move

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Valiyat-e_faqih_%28book_by_Khomeini%29#Survey

Valiyat-e faqih Hokumat-e Islami : Valiyat-e faqih

Thanx--Leroy65X 23:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Vijay

Sorry for that, Zora. Well, we will try to have him officially recognize the website. For your information, no actor ever has exclusive control over a website. Most of the official websites of actors are those which are officially recognized by the actors. And the actors dont go on recognizing a lot of sites like that! They pick one site, and back it all the way! Anyways, we will try to have our actor "Vijay" officially endorse the site through a video and then get back with you!

Joseph Vijay

Well, thats ok. The site gets good traffic from Google (for the most important keyword related, it is the #1 site).. But since you guys are building an excellent encyclopedia, I thought that adding it here would make people know more about it. Well, thanks for the time taken to reply to the messages. I have made some other changes to a movie featuring my actor. Please check out my history and say if I have done the right changes.

Sari as part of WikiProject Bangladesh

Hi Zora, I added WikiProject Bangladesh tag to Sari so that members of this wiki project can put effort to improve this article and make this a "Featured Article". This is by no way an attempt to "Nationalize" this topic - this is just an improvement drive.

Sari is the main clothing of Bangladeshi women and it is an integral part of Bangladeshi culture - not to mention some of the most popular sub-class of shari (eg Dhakai, Jamdani) are originated from Bangladesh.

So, I see absolutely no harm in keeping it within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh. If WikiProjectIndia or WikiProject Sri Lanka want to include this article as well - they are very much welcome.

I agree with you that this is not primarily a "Bangladesh related" topic. Hence I have moved the tag to the bottom of the page.

- Arman Aziz 07:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your second comment: You are making a mistake by considering WikiProject tags as "Nationalist" tag - these are tags made by a group of people who want to include the article in their "improvement drive". Please note - the tag is NOT added to the main article - rather it is added to the discussion page. The sole purpose of this discussion page is to facilitate wikipedians to improve the article.

If there are tags of several wiki projects at the discussion section I don't see any problem with that what so ever - it will only help improve the article. - Arman Aziz 08:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zora, I think tagging talk pages with project tags has become a standard part of Wikiproject maintenance. Of course, if you are concerned about visual aspects (or territorial marking aspects :) ), there are markups in the tags which can render the tag to a minute version of it. These tags actually help maintain projects ... there is a bot that updates project statistics, to do lists etc. with the help of these tags. So, I guess the project tags, perhaps in a smaller, less visually irritating format, are ok. Thanks. --Ragib 04:52, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Get Your Facts Straight

Look it up again, Zora. I was the one who was taking out the personal opinions. Why would you accuse me of something so immature, when if you had actually checked, you would have noticed that I clearly removed other people's crap. You're really a jerk for accusing me of vandalism when I am only trying to help an article that has nothing to do with me. I expect an apology.

--130.113.39.171 10:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

Hello, im sure your busy but I need some advice. Shez is back to editing and if you look at these [7], [8], [9], [10] you'll see that he has been calling me all sorts of things.

Also just to prove his stupid point he changed the credit order on the Veer-Zaara page so that I would change it back. Frankly I feel this is wasting my time as well as other editors, cuz I think we've got better things to do then to chase Shez around. I mean that's literally messing about with the articles. I feel he is attacking me by calling me a hypocrite etc. For me its quite shocking because no one has said that to me since I've been on wikipedia. What do you think of this? Can I complain about his behaviour because to be honest I've been quite orderly with him and I don't think I can be bothered to talk to him about this. I don't see why I should have to answer back to someone who is that rude to me. Need some advice. Thanks. -- Pa7 10:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zora, thank you for your reply. For now I might just ignore him but if he does carry on then yes I will have to go for admin help. Oh yes, thanks for your really nice compliments. We'll talk some more on this issue. Thanks again. -- Pa7 18:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

People

People, stop talking about me behind my back, I don't like this one bit. Confront me please but stop spreading news that I don't know how to talk. Pa_7 was the one who started it and now somehow, it's my fault. She was the one who changed the cast order for HDJPK. Witnessed it. Go in history even though we agreed on IMDB format which I don't like but I thought we had an agreement. If only we could use the cast as by film but no, you guys want to be ridiculous. But if you do, then do follow the imdb rule. Why didn't Pa_7 changed rani over preity when it came to that page but if i change the opposite on veer-zaara page, she wud've quickly responded. How clever? Is this not Preity favoritism or what? She added 30 references on that page in one day. 50 now. And if I add two on Rani, it's called favoritism. You guys are funny. Anyway, I have to report this one guy or girl User: 84.229.180.85 has been violating wikipedia rules and regulations. He or she has been adding to the Lux Filmfare Chart which was an old award. He/she believes, female actresses won two years because they were new, a Lux Award and a Debut Award, but mind me, I hav Filmfare '98 and Preity Zinta won a Debut Award, not a Lux Filmfare Award which was last given to Sonali Bendre. Maybe he's confused with the Lux Zee Cine Award. Anyway, just tell him/her he/she is wrong. I've tried. Thanks. -- shez 10:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

K3G

I'm not sure what you're talking about. They pretty much add three or four more informative sentences to the article which aren't a bore to read. The English isn't as bad as you are going on about. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 05:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

INCINE bios

Hi Zora, can you take a look at Ajith again please? BTW, I have put an anon lock on that Rajesh Khanna page and will do the same for Abhishek Bachchan if this goes on. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rv - pious edits by Khalidkhoso, inappropriate

Dear Zora i wrote source too but still clean up my material ? wat is wrong?

Khalidkhoso 08:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i think you should have talked then revert my artilce and there is nothing i have add from my side?i come with source and i have books and still if you want to reveart then talk before it. Please

Khalidkhoso 08:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do u mean by unreferenced? and why should fallow Haleem, from the Oxford University Press? I given source ,yes i did copy paste to prove my point.2nd thing those verse were taken from this, www.harunyahya.com ,i know wikipedia is not islamic site neither it is christanic or jewish.I have source and i am writing from source so there is no point that i will let you revert it.i am reverting ur artilce back as u did mine.if u reach any conclusion then lemme know .Before 3rules of edit was

Khalidkhoso 08:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of material at Undergarment article

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to censor or remove encyclopedic content based on the fact that it is offensive to some readers, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not censored, and attempts to censor encyclopedic content will be regarded as vandalism. Duke53 | Talk 12:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]