User talk:Faizhaider/Archive 19

rchives	Sep`06 - Aug`07			→ present
	Sep`07 - Dec`07	Jan`08 - Apr`08	May`08 - Aug`08
	Sep`08 - Dec`08	Jan`09 - Apr`09	May`09 - Aug`09
	Sep`09 - Dec`09	Jan`10 - Apr`10	May`10 - Aug`10
	Sep`10 - Dec`10	Jan`11 - Apr`11	May`11 - Aug`11
	Sep`11 - Dec`11	Jan`12 - Apr`12	May`12 - Aug`12
	Sep`12 - Dec`12	Jan`13 - Apr`13	May`13 - Aug`13
	Sep`13 - Dec`13	Jan`14 - Apr`14	May`14 - Aug`14
	Sep`14 - Aug`16

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Faizhaider. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

←

→

Archive From MAY 2013 to AUGUST 2013

Invitation to vote on an article

hello. since you are an editor of the article Ammar ibn Yasir, would you be interested in voting for it to make it a featured article or not? thank you for your time Grandia01 (talk) 12:59, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:FOOD Needs You!

Hi there Faizhaider! I've noticed you have yourself listed as a member of the Food and Drink Wikiproject. Unfortunately it looks like the project has been slowly sliding into inactivity except for a couple of people. That makes me a sad potato, and nobody likes a sad potato amirite?

If you'd like to turn my frown upside down, can you do two small things?

First off, go here and add {{Tick}} (Y) next to your name if you're still part of the project.

Second, go to the project talkpage and participate in a discussion about how to make the project more active, and how to go about making articles in our area of interest a lot better.

You don't want to make me cry, do you? Potatoes have a lot of eyes you know. So come on, join in! :)

— The Potato Hose 18:34, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Faizhaider! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editors are welcome! (But being multilingual is not a requirement.) Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 22:24, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Inglish

89653242 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.232 (talk) 08:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sufi Comics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Better idea

Hey man, I think Sa.vakilian had a better idea than AfD for sorting out the hadith article mess. Check out my talk page - I think his suggestion might be the way to go and given that you're active and take an interest, we will need your help if we go that route. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Requesting Your Mediation, Please

As Salaam Alaykum,

I would like to formally request a respected WP editor (such as yourself) to mediate in the Muawiyah I article page between my own personal efforts at improving the article to give it a three-dimensional, and above all, an ACCURATE historiographical presentation of traditional (mainly Sunni) standard Islamic literature. I have, as of recently, been under what seems to me, unfair double standards being applied by fellow WP editors Toddy1, and just within the past 24 hours, MezzoMezzo. I would sincerely like if you can find the time to read through the discussions in the Muawiyah I Talk Page (I know they are rather lengthy), between myself (Flagrantedelicto) and fellow WP editors/users Johnleeds1, Toddy1, and now MezzoMezzo. I feel that there is unfair accusations and implications toward me, while I feel that there is a clear double standard being applied in the way the article has been presented. I am now involved in, what appears to be, an unwanted edit war with MezzoMezzo. But please READ the discussion in the Muawiyah I Talk Page first and foremost, so that you may get a clear picture as to what is transpiring and my own serious concerns in regards to this matter.

I am concerned with the misrepresentation of predominantly Classical Sunni literature being labelled Shi'ite POV and being rejected even though they are bonafide cited sources. What has been happening is that what is essentially Salafi/Wahhabi-influenced POV of Caliph Muawiyah I is being misrepresented and misleadingly labelled as SUNNI perspective. Again, if you read through the discussion in the Muawiyah I Talk Page, you will get a clear picture of why I get the impression that WP editors Toddy1 and MezzoMezzo are really not manifesting an impartial participation toward the subject of Muawiyah I. Will much appreciate it if you mediate in this matter. Flagrantedelicto (talk) 05:33, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I am a declared SUNNI. And I would like if you could carefully read through the Muawiyah I Talk Page of the current archive. I know it is a lot of material, but it is essential for you to fully understand the nature of the obvious double standard and partiality being applied by both the above MezzoMezzo, as well as Toddy1. Both of whom are essentially voicing the same positions. As for Johnleeds1, we did come to a mutual understanding which has common ground after differences of perspectives and some attrition. MezzoMezzo and Toddy1 (whom I get the strong feeling are together on this), appear to be a different matter. I would highly appreciate it. And thanks for responding. Flagrantedelicto (talk) 09:33, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Brother Faiz, could you maybe remind the other three editors you contacted that the stalemate is ongoing? Perhaps they're busy with real life issues, in which case we could look at WP:CONTENTDISPUTE. It's also possible that they're already checking out the talk page in question, but I was just wondering what's happening with that. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mir Babar Ali Anis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hyderabad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit war on Muawiyah I

I was just going to let you know that I had posted over there but got distracted. When I wrote out the reply I typed your name using the {{user}} template but with a ":" rather than the "|". Doing that sets of the spam filter for two websites that use variations on your user name. Using the "|" works, Faizhaider (talk · contribs), though. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. If you use {{User:Faizhaider}} which should show your user page you get a spam filter warning saying that I'm trying to link to http://www.smfaizhaider.co.nr and http://www.faizhaider.co.nr. Strange. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

See User:CambridgeBayWeather/Sandbox for how it should work using your talk page as an example. Try remove the two nowiki marks at your user name and save. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

And now there is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Three solid days of bullying, insults and incivility by User:Flagrantedelicto. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 12:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

These two edtiors Toddy1 and MezzoMezzo are really on a campaign to get me blocked. This MezzoMezzo has contacted WP Admin Dianaa, and then editor Someguy1221. He seems to be on a campaign to round up as many people as he can to accomplish God knows what. I hope you had a chance to read my last two responses in the Muawiyah I Talk Page under the Edit Conflict section. In my perception, both those editors have lost a lot of credibility just by the way they are handling this and the unfounded acccusations they are hurling. Please look into this and see if a neutral WP Admin can put a halt to this rather petty campaign of maligning my contribution and effort in the Muawiyah I article. --Flagrantedelicto (talk) 02:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll leave the request for protection as is for now and let a different admin look at it. If it looks like the others are going to start removing material then I will protect it. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 20:04, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

There was apparently some private email exchange between the guy and some admins which resulted in his block becoming indefinite. You've been incredibly helpful and have even pointed out on that page that I misunderstood certain key policies. Could you sort of fill a double role as representing the other position on the article's content? MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Central Command (India) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

|current_commander= Lt Gen Anil Chait<ref>[http://indianarmy.nic.in/Site/PressRelease/frmPressReleaseDetail.aspx?n=bniEtbbo9LN7kb4q3kupGg==&

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Interested?

I was wondering whether you'd be interested in mentoring Johnleeds. He has frequently misrepresented sources and also violates due weight and riginal research. Pass a Method talk 07:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

First Fitna and Muawiyah I

While I did not cite any references for editing the First Fitna, I did add references for the editing I made for Muawiyah I. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.195.9.142 (talk) 09:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

This is a replica of an entry posted in the Muawiyah I Talk Page. It most likely will be deleted there by the WP editors, so One of my concerns is that some of the citations on this article and the one on Yazid I are really second-hand (though claimed to be first-hand). If the editor who put them there does not really know what is in the sources, he/she cannot know whether he/she faithfully represents what they say. For example, on the page on Yazid I, Flagrantedelicto added a bit saying that Tabari Volume 19 said that Yazid was a tyrant - but when I checked Tabari Volume 19 it said that rebels being besieged by government forces referred to Yazid as a tyrant.

This comment by Toddy1 is a complete lie because in this link to the excerpt to Tabari’s Volume 19 (which is a cited source in the Yazid I article), there is unequivocal documentation that Yazid I was indeed thought of as a tyrant by the chronicler Tabari. Right from the Foreward, it is stated that Tabari wrote this piece in opposition to the persona of Caliph Yazid I. See link below.^[1]

And this comment by MezzoMezzo in referring to Toddy1’s original lie, is consequently a worthless conjecture based upon a bald-faced lie.

--since you already uncovered at least one instance of academic dishonesty - will take forever.

Toddy1 further did not inform anyone of the slight edit that Toddy1 did by adding a brand new link to the Shia Pen website, when the old link to Answering-Ansar.org was dead for some time now. This was to obviously plant supporting “evidence” to assist MezzoMezzo’s BAD FAITH accusation that there are copy-pasted citations in the Muawiyah I article. Granted if one does internet research, one will discover (as I had) that Answering-Ansar.org has since become Shia Pen. But the fact that Toddy1 entered this link to support MezzoMezzo’s suspicious suppositions is questionable in itself, as it was done very discreetly and Toddy1 didn’t deem it fit to inform anyone of it.

Here is a bibliography of references:

Is from al-Tabari, Abu Ja'far Muh. b. Jarir, ---, Ta'rikh al-rusul wa 'l-muluk, Ed. M. de Goeje, Leiden, 1879-1901.

Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, Ahmad b. Nur al-Din (d. 852/1449) Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, 12 vols., Hyderabad, Deccan: Da'irat al-Ma'arif al- Nizamiyya, 1325-27/1907-10. Volume 5 page 110 Lisan al-Mizan, 7 vols., Hyderabad, Deccan: Da'irat al-Ma'arif al-Nizamiyya, 1329-31/1911-13.

Ibn Sa'd, Muhammad (d. 4 Jum. II 230/16 Feb. 845 C.E.), Kitab Al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, 9 vols. in 15, ed. by E. Sachau, Leiden, 1905-1940. Volume 4 page 134-135

Ibn al-Athir, 'Usd al-ghaba fi ma'rifat al-sahaba', in al-Matba's al-Wahbiya, ed. and compiled by Moustapha Wahbiar, Vol. V, 1920

al-Tabari, Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. Jarir. Tarikh al-Rusul wal-Muluk. 5th edition. Edited by Muhammad Abu al-Fadl Ibrahim. Cairo, Dar al-Ma'arif, 1977.

Ibn Athir, 'Izz al-Din Abi al-Hasan 'Ali b. Muhammad. al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh. Vols. 1 & 3. Beirut: Dar Sadir, 1965.

Ibn Athir, 'Izz al-Din Abi al-Hasan 'Ali b. Muhammad. Usd al-Ghaba fî Ma'rifat al-Sahaba. Vol. 1. Cairo: al-Sha'b, 1970.

Ibn Hisham, Abu Muhammad 'Abd al-Malik. al-Sira al-Nabawiyya. Vol. 1, edited by 'Umar 'Abd al-Salam Tadmuri. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-'Arabi, 1987.

Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad. The Life of Muhammad. Translated into English by Alfred Guillaume. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955.

Ibn Kathir, Isma 'il Abu al-Fida'. al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya. Vols. 1, 2 & 3, edited by Ahmad Abu Muslim et al. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyya, 1985.

Ibn Kathir, Isma 'il Abu al-Fida'. al-Sira al-Nabawiyya. Vol. 1, edited by Mustafa 'Abd al-Wahid. Beirut: Dar Ihya' al-Turath al- 'Arabi, 1980.

The cited sources in the Muawiyah I article which do not portray the Umayyad caliph in an unfavorable light are not so much copy-pastes, but widely circulated bibliography of Classical Sunni literature. Names of authors and works whom neither Toddy1 nor MezzoMezzo can pronounce. MezzoMezzo is not only a tinhorn “editor”, but a two-faced, underhanded, deceptive liar. One who proved to be arguably the biggest wimp in WP. Rather than accepting an invite to a debate to substantiate his arrogant claim of knowing the Arabic language better than most native speakers, he evaded and eluded the debate. Knowing full well that his bluff was called out. The following statement by MezzoMezzo could imply that his “In-Laws” are native Arabic speakers and his sources for his knowledge in Arabic—

Between my in-laws and I, we have original Arabic copies of many of the sources listed; many more are available with reliable English translations on Google Books

This article seriously needs the full participation and involvement of a WP editor such as Faiz Haider, Seyyed, and some active members of the Shi'a Islam task force. Since there is truly an absence (of not only Old School/traditional Sunni Muslim WP editors), but a genuinely neutral, objective team of editors who are working on the Muawiyah I article. The efforts of Toddy1 and MezzoMezzo are essentially worthless, as not only are they latent pro-Muawiyah POV pushers of the Salafi/Wahhabi ideology, they are unethical, deceptive, and unscrupulous. What is also evident with the editors Toddy1 and MezzoMezzo, is that there exists in them this irreverent breed of “converts” to Islam of Western culture who do not have Eastern sensitivities when propagating Salafi ideology. Who knows what ethnic hemisphere Johnleeds1 belongs to, but this editor seemed to be broadening his scope in understanding the authentic Classical Sunni Islamic literature. However, a Faiz Haider and the neutral CambridgeBayWeather are seriously need to keep the deceptive hypocrites Toddy1 and MezzoMezzo in check.

As mentioned earlier in this talk page, the biggest masquerade and charade by proponents of Salafism, is that many conceal it under the label of Sunni Islam. Since the Sunni are the majority, there has been an unrelenting effort to convert mainstream Sunnis to Salafism. And due to the slow but steady awakening of mainstream Sunnis of the methods and tactics of the Salafi ideology, the Salafis disguise themselves under the Sunni label. Consequently, they are relentlessly misrepresenting Sunni Islam and deliberately misleading the public into thinking Salafism is Sunni Islam…When this is most certainly not the case. Wikipedia has been the victim of this deceit and encroachment. And if there are any WP Muslim editors who have any sense of integrity, self-respect, and personal honour, then they should at least try to rectify this misleading representation.

In Saudi Arabia, the homeland and birthplace of Salafism, most all published works of Classical Islamic authors are censored and edited. Anything that does not fit in with the Salafi/Wahhabi aqeedah or religious conviction, is edited out. This is a fact to which anyone who is a non-Salafi, and who has travelled and lived in KSA knows. The Salafis have spent the past half-century vigourously establishing publishing companies all throughout North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Arabian Peninsula (including the Persian Gulf states), Syria, Jordan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, India, and Pakistan, to publish their edited (i.e., tampered) versions of Classical Sunni literature so it fits in with their aqeedah. That is why the earlier publications of Classical Sunni literature from the first half of the 20th Century (not the latter half), and the 18th and 19th Century publications carry the authentic, untampered works.

The indefinitely blocked editor Flagrante Delicto was blocked for the specific reason by the underhanded, unscrupulous, and cowardly efforts of Toddy1 and MezzoMezzo. MezzoMezzo is counting on this very statement he made to deceptively manipulate the Muawiyah I article—

Remember, most Wikipedia editors have never heard of any of these books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.150.223.177 (talk) 00:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Muawiyah I Article

This is a replica of an entry posted in the Muawiyah I Talk Page. It most likely will be deleted there by the WP editors, so I replicated it in this talk page. Please don't mind. There will be no further posts in this talk page by me after this.

One of my concerns is that some of the citations on this article and the one on Yazid I are really second-hand (though claimed to be first-hand). If the editor who put them there does not really know what is in the sources, he/she cannot know whether he/she faithfully represents what they say. For example, on the page on Yazid I, Flagrantedelicto added a bit saying that Tabari Volume 19 said that Yazid was a tyrant - but when I checked Tabari Volume 19 it said that rebels being besieged by government forces referred to Yazid as a tyrant.

This comment by Toddy1 is a complete lie because in this link to the excerpt to Tabari’s Volume 19 (which is a cited source in the Yazid I article), there is unequivocal documentation that Yazid I was indeed thought of as a tyrant by the chronicler Tabari. Right from the Foreward, it is stated that Tabari wrote this piece in opposition to the persona of Caliph Yazid I. See link below--

The History of Al-Tabari: Vol. XIX (The Caliphate of Yazid bin Muawiyah). Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. (English Translation by I. K. A. Howard). State University of New York Press. http://www.scribd.com/doc/114186278/Karbala. (Pg. 7). http://www.alsunnahfoundation.org/Academy/Karbala.pdf.