Jump to content

Talk:Abdul-Qādir Bedil

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Abdul-Qader Bedil)

POV issues

[edit]

Here is some discussions from our talk pages. Please help in resolving the conflict:

Bidel Dehlavi

[edit]

Shayan Azeemi (DK)

With all respect, i want to say that, Abdul-Qādir Bēdil isnt from Iran, in real Iran didnt existed in that time, Iran was under Afghanistans hands, so people please stop talking about that Abdul-Qādir Bēdil was helped by Iranien or have been studied pretty well in Iran, because Abdul-Qādir Bēdil was an Afghan and will always be an Afghan in the History of world, you guys cant change it. And let me remind you Iranien people something, Afghanistans´s language is Dari/Pashto, stop calling it Persien or whatever u guys call it. Thank You Very Much.

This comment was postet by Azeemi@live.dk (Shayan Azeemi)



Hi Ariana

Just a comment on Bidel:

Iranian experts have been working on Bidel over the last three decades. We have hundreds of persian poets and I think Bidel is among those that have been studied pretty well in Iran. I don't see any point to disrespect Iranian experts. Persian literature is our common heritage. You know that most research works on Hafiz, Ferdowsi, Rumi, ... have been done in Iran. But I think it is not fair to say that Firdawsi, Rumi and Hafiz are unknown in Afghanistan because Iranian worked more on them. Sangak 07:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment by an Afghan researcher:

ظرف چند سال‌، بيدل چنان موقعيتی در اين کشور می ‌يابد که بيش از بيست هزار نسخه غزليات او به چاپ می‌رسد و چندين کتاب معتبر درباره اين شاعر نوشته می‌شود


Regards. Sangak 07:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no doubt that there have been recent works in Iran on Bedil's poetry, in the last 5 to 10 years. By saying that Bedil is more famous in Afghanistan than in Iran, is that in Afghanistan Bedil has a status like that of Hafiz and Sanayee next to Iranians, and it has the same status as Rumi and Hafiz for Afghans; used in everyday life and largely used in Ghazal Music. The only reason is the language style of Hindi poetry and its expressions, which differs widely from the Iraqi school (western Persia).
Iranians state that Bedil's poetry contains a lots of Gholo in its Tashbehat and Iste'ara, and of course is true. But for Afghans, it adds more in is delicateness. So what I have written, was meant to express the status of Bedil among common people and not how much work and researches done.Ariana310 10:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am familiar with these arguments. In any case one can not ignore that Iranians were behind Bidel's international recognition and the majority of books written on Bidel were published in Iran. I agree that Bidel has a stronger presence in Afghan music. I can understand this. On the other side Rumi has more presence in Iranian music. One can not argue that Rumi has a higher status in Iran than in Afghanistan. Here we can only talk based on evidence and statistics. Sangak 10:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can also have a look at THIS.

In contrary, I removed your part of sentence (he is respected in Afghanistan and Tajikistan), because he is respected equally all over the Iranian Cultural Continent as being a great Persian Poet and founder of Indian school.Ariana310 10:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have already read Kazemi's article. The above quote is from him.Sangak 10:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mohammad Reza Shafiei-Kadkani who is perhaps Iran's leading literary critic and distinguished professor at Tehran University has conducted a long-term research project on Bidel. Sangak 10:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, no doubt much researches done on Bedil's works from 1990's onward in Iran, since Afghanistan suffered from civil war and lost the majority of its great scholars. Remember, I did not say anything about the researches and works, only about his familiarity among people.Ariana310 10:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what you mean by being "more famous":
  • He has more presence in Afghan music. (agree)
  • He has a higher status in the heart of Afghan! (disagree/ subjective/pov)
  • He has a language (relatively) unaccessible to ordinary Iranians (disagree/As an Iranian I can tell you that ordinary Iranians can not digest the language and style of most of Persian poets including Saeb Tabrizi and even Simin Behbahani!)
  • He has a language unaccessible to Iranian experts (strongly disagree)
  • If you ask a random normal Iranian, there is more chance that he/she has heard the name of Bidel than Saib Tabrizi. (my personal idea)

Finally I don't like such arguments and I think if you try to enter this game you will be the loser as I can easily provide statistics to show that almost all of these persian poets have a higher status in Iranian research Institutes than anyother country. I don't like to enter this game though. Sangak 10:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you are calling it a game?! Neither, I would like to start such a thing.
  • I did not use any personal feeling as saying "in the hearts of Afghans". May I call it your personal understanding?
  • I never said that His language is unaccessible to Iranian scholars and Iranian people, did I? I said: "his language is not easily comprehensible for Iranians (do not include personally the Iranian schoars) as the language of Hafiz, Sadi, Khayam or others". I see a great difference between "unaccessible" and "incomprehensible".
  • Saa'eb Tabrezi is also a poet of Indian school, brings no importance in your point. And for your second point, Iranians heard more of Bedil than Saa'eb, I strongly disagree.

You are insisting on researches and works done on Bedil in Iran, and I have no objection. I agree. And you have already added it in the article. So I do not see any further argument. Thanks Ariana310 10:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At this time, I replaced the term with the term User:Ariana suggested (incomprehensible). I don't care which one is used incomprehensible or inaccessible. To me it is just playing with words. The main message is the same. Sangak 12:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Playing with words?! .... and that would be in your arguments?! Should I take "lazy" and "stupid" as the same meaning?Ariana310 10:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I am not an advanced English speaker like you ! The main message is there.

  • Look-up in dictionary:
    • Inaccessible: not capable of being reached only with great difficulty or not at all
    • incomprehensible: impossible to understand or comprehend

The message is there. Sangak 10:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here I replace the words as you prefer. Sangak 12:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No negative intention dear Sangak. It was just to give an example.Ariana310 10:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Saa'eb Tabrezi is also a poet of Indian school, brings no importance in your point." Ofcourse it makes a difference. Read Kazemi's article.
"And for your second point, Iranians heard more of Bedil than Saa'eb, I strongly disagree."(Are you Iranian? They have similar status.)
  • "his language is not easily comprehensible for Iranians (do not include personally the Iranian schoars) as the language of Hafiz, Sadi, Khayam or others".
Iranians are either expert or non-expert. I discussed both above. What is your problem with it?!
Also your argument leads to the following: "the language of Sadi, Hafiz, Rumi, etc are not easily comprehensible for Afghans as of Bidel."

Sangak 11:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also your argument leads to the following: "the language of Sadi, Hafiz, Rumi, etc are not easily comprehensible for Afghans as of Bidel." - That's your personal conclusion from my statements!! Sorry, I am done with this nonobjective discussion. Ariana310 11:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great logic! So you are bilingual! Sangak 11:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also please do not replace "Bidel Dehlavi" with "Bedil Dehlavi". Both are used and must be included. Sangak 12:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I still insists on my point that the positions of Saa'eb Tabrizi and Bidel in today's Iran (since 1980s) is quite similar (or perhaps Bidel is more famous as he is more in the news).Sangak 13:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I arranged our discussions here. Both of us (me and Ariana) are going a bit emotional. I think it is better that others continue this discussion. Hope it will come to a conclusion in future. Thanks. Sangak 13:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

I see when users cannot defend their point, they go on and ask other users (this), who share the same point of view as them, to "have a look at this". That's why I did not respond you since we were getting emotional.

It is a clear fact that Bedil is more famous in Afghanistan, whether you accept it or not. And for me, it would not have that much importance, since we all share the same Persian literature and culture. I personally could only avoid mentioning Iran from that sentence, not any further.

Dr. Sidiqyan, a contemporary famous Iranian scholar, writes in the preface of "Diwan-e Makhfi", 1381 Tehran, page 12:

به علاوه بعضی تعبیرات و تشبیهات، رنگ محلی دارد و برای ما نا آشنا و نامانوس است. ازاین رو همه اشعار شعرای بزرگ فارسی زبانان هند نشین چون امیر خسرو دهلوی و غنی کشمیری و بیدل به نظر ما شیوا نیست. حال آنکه افغانی ها و فارسی زبانان پاکستانی و هندی از خواندن آنها غرق در لذت می شوند، چه با آن طرز بیان و آن نوع استعمال و آن قسم ترکیب و آن جنس سخن آشنایی دارند.

Moreover, the Iranian scholars were not the first who introduced Bedil to the International cultural community. It was the Afghan scholars who first started their research and works on Bedil's poetry even before the 1950's. The first scholars who edited Bedil's Diwan were Ustad Khalilullah Khalili, Ustad Betab and Mawlana Khasta. And then the same edition was published in Tehran. Ariana310 13:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Here's a wide article published in Mehrnews (itself an Iranian news Agency) which focuses on this disputed point: Reasons for unfamiliarity of Bedil in Iran دلایل گمنامی بیدل در ایران

It explains very well all the reasons and points, both the views of Afghan and Iranian scholars. You can see very well that the first copy of Bedil's Ghazals were published in 1364 in Iran by Mirshekak based on the Manuscript of Kabul (edited by Khalilullah Khalili and Khal Moh. Khasta, two Afghans scholars). The first complete copy of Bedil's Kulyat was published in 1371 by Yusofali Mirshekak, again based on the Kabul edition. Even the later publications of Bedil's works were based on the works of Dr. Salahuddin Saljoqi, a well-known Afghan scholar. The first publication of Bedil's Kulyat based on Independent research of Iranian scholars is published in 1385 by ٍElham Publications.

So the first attempts Iran about Bedil's works were in late 1980's, never before that.Ariana310 14:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just added two sources from Iranian units, the first is the above link and the second one is written by Dr. Aaref Pazhman. However, here's another article published in BBCPersian.com LINK, written just after the first publication of Bedil's Kulyaat in Iran. I did not add this in the article, since there were already two.Ariana310 14:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response:

I have read all these sources long time ago. Nothing new. Bidel was not a famous poet before 1980s in Iran. Since then he is as famous in Iran as it is in Afghanistan. This is what user:ariana do not want to understand. The very fact that all those sources that you provided exist prove my claim. There were two international conferences in Iran. I have to disagree with you [1] again. Sangak 16:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The sources I provided, they all directly prove the point that Bedil does not have the same status as he has in Afghanistan. Whatever you try to turn around the point, you cannot deny those sources, they are all from the Iranian units. Moreover, When did I say that there weren't any International conferences in Iran about Bedil??? I think that's your own innovation in argument.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from all these, the sources that you provided are against your claims.
  • 1. You put Iran and india in one category (lower status) and Afghanistan in the other (higher status). This is against the source you provided.
Yes, but the situations in Iran and India are completely different. Bedil in India, because there are very and very small number of people who speak in Persian. While in Iran, that's the matter of language style and Indian/Iranian school in Persian literature.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2. You said Bidel's language is incomprehensible to Iranians. This is again a claim that Kazemi does not buy it.
I clearly stated that the expressions and language style of Bedil (not the Persian language as a whole) is incomprehensible for Iranians, please do not try to change my statements. It is already in the article, read it once again.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Bidel has a higher status in Iran for the very simple reason that Iranians wrote more about him and organized several international conferences on him. Even many of Afghan experts on Bidel live in Iran. Sangak 16:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why has Bidel been forgotten in Iran before 1980s (13th century till 1980):

Shafiei-Kadkani:

گويندگانی مانند بيدل،كه تمام كوشش آنان صرف اعجاب وايجاد حيرت وسرگردانی برای خواننده است، فراموش مي‌شود واين خصوصيت در مورد بيدل كاملاً روشن است زيرا با دگرگون شدن فضای شعری ايران در قرن دوازدهم واوايل قرن سيزدهم،بيدل در ايران فراموش ميشود وحتی شاعرانی كه اعتدال بيشتری در كارشان بوده (مانند صائب وكليم) آنها نيز فراموش ميشوند و چون اين تغيير جوُّ هنری،ودگرگونی موازين پسند ودريافت زيبائيهای شعری در افغانستان وتاجيكستان وهند وپاكستان مانند ايران نبوده است، مي‌بينيم كه نفوذ بيدل در ميان شعرای اين سرزمينها ونيز مردم عادی اين جوامع همچنان باقی است وچاپهای متعدد ديوان كامل او ويا منتخباتش در تاشكند وكابل شهرهای مختلف هند منتشر شده است.

عدم موفقيت بيدل در ايران، با آنهمه خيال‌ های نازك وانديشه ‌های باريك، درس عبرتی است برای گويندگان جوان امروزی كه آگاهانه مي‌كوشند سخنان خود را بگونه ای ادا كنند كه هيچ كس از آن سر درنياورد ومي‌پندارند كه ابهام،آن هم ابهام دروغين وآگاهانه،مي‌تواند شعرهای ايشان را پايدار وجاودانه كند ودر كنار آثار گويندگان بزرگ زبان فارسی برای نسلهای آينده محفوظ نگاه دارد. اما تجربه ای كه از وجود بيدل،با آنهمه شعر وبا آنهمه تصويرها وخيالهای رقيق وشاعرانه – اما دور از طبيعت زندگی وحيات – داريم بهترين درس عبرتی است كه مي‌تواند آيندة چنين گويندگانی را پيش چشم ايشان مجسم دارد. براستی كه تمام نقاط ضعف شعر بيدل را بگونه‌های ديگر در آثار اين دسته گويندگان جوان امروزی بخوبی مي‌توان دي

Yes, that's what I already stated. But what does it prove for your argument? Here, Shafiei-Kadkani states that "Bedil is being forgotten in Iran since the 13th century because of its complex and implicit meaning of his poetry, while such type of poetry is much welcomed in Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Pakistan. We can observe that the influence of Bedil's poetry is very significant on the later poets of those countries and even it is much regarded among their common people. Numerous publication of his Diwan have been published in Kabul, Tashkent and in different cities of India." So it directly proves my point. Here he does NOT says up to 1980's. That's your own addition.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Proof for what? There is nothing here that shows Bidel has lower status in Iran than in Afghanistan today. Kadkani is discussing what happened over the last few centuries. Kadkani recommends young Iranians who take the path of Bidel to be careful about Bidel's mistakes. Sangak 20:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kazemi: Due to nationalism in Iran.

اگر کمی عميق ‌تر بنگريم‌، در اين امر دلايل ديگری هم می‌ يابيم‌. صاحبنظران‌، تا جايی که من ديده‌ ام‌، بعضی علل ديگر هم برای گمنامی بيدل در ايران يافته‌اند، همچون‌:

۱. از رواج ‌افتادن مکتب هندی و غلبه مکتب "بازگشت" در اين کشور. (بنابراين‌، حفظ سنت ادبی مکتب هندی در افغانستان‌، می‌تواند دليل خوبی برای حفظ شهرت بيدل در آن کشور باشد.)

۲. پيچيدگی بيان و دشواری سبک شاعر. (اين همان باور مشهور است و البته چنان که گفتيم‌، با شهرت بيدل در افغانستان ناساگاری دارد.)

۳. دوری زبان شاعر نسبت به زبان گفتار در ايران‌. (طبق اين باور، زبان بيدل گاه برخوردار از اصطلاحات و تعبيرهايی است که در حوزه زبانی ايران کمتر کاربرد دارد و در حوزه زبانی افغانستان و ماورأالنهر بيشتر رايج است‌.)

۴. گرايش عرفانی بيدل که از سوی معارضان مکتب وحدت‌ الوجود ابن عربی همواره نکوهيده بوده است‌.

ولی هيچ‌ يک از اين دلايل به تنهايی نمی‌تواند گمنامی بيدل در ايران را توجيه کند. مجموعه اينها البته موثر بوده است‌، به اضافه يک يک عامل بسيار مهم ديگر که از چشم بسياريها پنهان مانده يا پنهان نگه داشته ‌شده است‌، يعنی نگرشهای ملی‌ گرايانه در ايران‌، به ويژه بعد از مشروطيت

I don't know whether you have a problem in reading Persian, or you are doing so in order to turn around the point. Can you please tell me under which point (1, 2, 3 or 4) does Kazemi brings up the Nationalism in Iran? It is at the end that he mentions the Nationalism as one of the reasons, not the main and single reason.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly! Also "incomprehensibility of his language" is only one of the reasons. And all these are viewpoints of the researcher and not facts. Your version of the article is pov as it addresses only one reason and summarizes every thing in that. Sangak 20:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seddigi:

به علاوه بعضی تعبیرات و تشبیهات، رنگ محلی دارد و برای ما نا آشنا و نامانوس است. ازاین رو همه اشعار شعرای بزرگ فارسی زبانان هند نشین چون امیر خسرو دهلوی و غنی کشمیری و بیدل به نظر ما شیوا نیست. حال آنکه افغانی ها و فارسی زبانان پاکستانی و هندی از خواندن آنها غرق در لذت می شوند، چه با آن طرز بیان و آن نوع استعمال و آن قسم ترکیب و آن جنس سخن آشنایی دارند

Yes, that's what I reported to you already. It directly says that Bedil's poetry along with other poets of Indian school are not that much delicate for Iranians, as they are for Afghans.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He puts Indians next to Afghans, while you put indians next to Iranians. (pov) Sangak 20:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also Yahaghghi do not agree with you about indian style (your own source [2]) Sangak 20:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zabihollah Safa:

‌، به اين دليل ساده که از شدت افراط در ويژگيهای سبکی خويش و ويژگيهای کلی مکتب هندی‌، به ابتذال و انحطاط گراييده است و پيچيده ‌سرايی

No need to say that we should not compare Shafiei-Kadkani to any of the others mentioned above. All these stories refer to Iran before 1980s. Situation of Bidel in Iran after 1980: According to Kazemi (an Afghan researcher):

ظرف چند سال‌، بيدل چنان موقعيتی در اين کشور می ‌يابد که بيش از بيست هزار نسخه غزليات او به چاپ می‌رسد و چندين کتاب معتبر درباره اين شاعر نوشته می‌شود


Sangak 16:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Another controversy: "اگر بيدل در حوزه جغرافيايی ايران‌... غريب افتاده است‌، شايد هم لختی از آن روست که اينان از نوع وطنی آن صائب و کليم و طالب آملی را دارند، با ذهن و زبانی مانوس‌ تر و تصويرها و آهنگ ‌هايی دلپسندتر و جاافتاده‌تر".[reply]

This expert believes that Bidel lost its popularity in Iran not due to his "indian style" but for other things.Sangak 20:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, even your own sources directly prove my point. Because to me, they all say that Bedil is not that much famous in Iran as he is in Afghanistan. And none of them mention "up to 1980's", that's your own addition. So all your sources were empty and they even prove the contrary of your viewpoint. The statements of Dr.Sidiqyan is of 1381 (only 4 years ago) and those of Kazemi is of 2 or 3 years ago, NOT BEFORE THE 1980'S.Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is no proof here. These are all contradictory speculations by some minor and major researchers. The way you wrote the article is pov. Sangak 20:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the pov tag as long as the issue is not resolved.Sangak 16:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added two sources, both Iranian, and which both directly prove the point. It is already wikified. Then where's the POV?Ariana310 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Personal attacks/WP:Faith:

  • "And none of them mention "up to 1980's", that's your own addition."
  • "do not include personally the Iranian schoars"
  • "I see when users cannot defend their point, they go on and ask other users (this), who share the same point of view as them": I invited User:Jahangard as I knew he is from Afghanistan.
  • When I said A > B is equivalent to B < A: you responded: "That's your personal conclusion from my statements!! Sorry, I am done with this nonobjective discussion."
  • "When did I say that there weren't any International conferences in Iran about Bedil??? I think that's your own innovation in argument." When did I claim in the first place ?!
  • "I don't know whether you have a problem in reading Persian, or you are doing so in order to turn around the point. "
  • "So, even your own sources directly prove my point. I wonder if you ever read them once."

And finally I found this also interesting:

  • "It directly says that Bedil's poetry along with other poets of Indian school are not that much delicate for Iranians, as they are for Afghans."
  • The article is pov.

Sangak 18:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response
  • The points which you presented as "Personal attacks": from 1st to 5th, they are NOT attacks. They are rational statements, nothing insulting is mentioned.
  • The sixth point, I present my apologize.
  • The last point, I removed it before your edition. Here look at this and this at Revision as of 18:17, March 1, 2007.
Here are some of your attacks, if you are bringing such issue:
  • Finally I don't like such arguments and I think if you try to enter this game you will be the loser
  • What is your problem with it?! (reply: an ordinary question)
  • Great logic! So you are bilingual! (reply: an ordinary reaction to your personal attack)
And finally, please do not personally conclude that this is a POV, I provided reliable references, all from Iranian sources. Ariana310 18:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "And none of them mention "up to 1980's", that's your own addition."

وقتی به حدود سه دهه پيش بر می‌ گرديم‌، عبدالقادر بيدل را در محافل ادبی و مجامع و متون دانشگاهی ايران‌، شاعری گمنام و حتی گاه مطرود می‌ يابيم‌،

(taken from your own source)

If you need another source: [3]

  • "do not include personally the Iranian schoars"

I divided Iranians to experts and non-experts and discussed both of them. What was "do not include personally the Iranian schoars"?

  • "I see when users cannot defend their point, they go on and ask other users (this), who share the same point of view as them"

How do you know that User:Jahangard and I have similar viewpoints?

  • When I said A > B is equivalent to B < A: you responded: "That's your personal conclusion from my statements!! Sorry, I am done with this nonobjective discussion."

This is equal to being bilingual. Both (language of Saadi, Hafez, Rumi etc) and (language of Bidel etc) are comprehensible to Afghans.

Sangak 18:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Finally I don't like such arguments and I think if you try to enter this game you will be the loser"
    • I believe it. Just see above and see how much criticism Bidel has recieved. In principle one can include them all. As I said I don't like the way you compare Iran and Afghanistan. I would like to treat them equally as much as I can and avoid such comparisons. That was just a friendly advice. I understand that Bidel is an iconic figure for Afghanistan and I want to be respectful to both Bidel and Afghanistan. On the other side I expect you not to ignore the strong "presence" of Bidel in today's Iran. Sangak 19:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make some progress: I copyedited the article to make it a bit neutral. Feel free to revert, please. Bye! Sangak 19:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Potrait

[edit]

@Amayar: please provide more information about the portrait. Did you draw it yourself? --NearEMPTiness (talk) 08:28, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Abdul-Qādir Bīdel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abdul-Qādir Bedil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:53, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abdul-Qādir Bedil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abdul-Qādir_Bedil&oldid=1258454520"