User talk:Cunado19/archive5

Your edit to Jehovah's Witnesses

Hi, there! Check the WT resources section near the bottom - Office of Public Information holds membership statistics; therefore, your tag was unnecessary. - CobaltBlueTony 20:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Thanks for picking up on that. I've revised the statistics and added a reference. It is good to be consistent with references. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony 21:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)~~ ... Okay, so maybe you got it first. :-( - CobaltBlueTony 21:03, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to revert Sayyid back to Syed...

Dear Cunado, you may be the master of English of all times. But Sayyid or Syed is not an English word nor it has been Anglicized yet. Its just a Proper Noun, a name, that too from a language not much to do with English, not a European language nor Nordic. We cant just give English all the phonemes in Arabic. Alhough Sayyid or Sayed or Sayyed or Syed doesn't contain any extra-ordinary phonetic discharges, the particular name is used extensively around the globe with all those spellings depending on the geographical distribution of its usage.

In Hyderabad, India, and almost around in India since the times of English was established there. Syed has been written Syed. Almost anyone just instinctively writes it Syed. Syed will always be read Syed and if written Sayyid wont do harm to the language but the people will feel uncomfortable.

The name of Syed Mohammad of Jaunpur is a respectable name for some. It may not be harmful to change its spellings to Sayyid but the people who would be reaching there by searching for Syed Mohammad, as it is written in all the books of the past related to that name, never reach Sayyid Mohammad. And if by some chance they manage to find the wikipedia Sayyid Mohammad Jaunpuri site, the first impression it would have upon them is that they would feel if the name has been not spelled correctly then surely the whole article must have be tampered with.

I am Syed, its my surname, its the name of my forefathers all the way up. We have ever been writing it that way. Sayyid Mohammad comes in the series of my family ancestors. The name has always been written Syed. Its not English. ITs no Language. Its a name. We are attached to it not because of any language the name holder used. Its just a name and we like to have our name our way.

Hence my dear wikipedian friend, I take your consent to revert the spellings of the name of my family to what we like to spell it in English. Syed. Thank you for you creative approach for giving it a new colour. OR Color. Doesnt matter English or American. The meaning has no hue. It's just one shade.

Thanks again. Lets keep up the good work.

Azgs 14:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for the prompt response. Azgs 17:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert the changes to the Sahaba articles.

I've already asked you to revert the changes to the Sahaba articles, as I've created a better template. I'm going to ask you again - replace the sahaba templates please. Thanks. MP (talk) 10:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Article

Hi,

I think it's impossible to improve this article unless use of original text in Arabc and persian. But I do my best to use English source.--Sa.vakilian 08:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, is there a wikipedia policy that forbids the use of foreign language sources? I'm just wondering cause I'm having the same kind of issue at the Abbas ibn Ali article...--aliasad 22:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick reply. There are certain people who are only given importance by Shia muslims (for the most part). Things written about them tend to be mostly in arabic or farsi because Iran is the main center for Shia thought. Also, because of the prevailing political climate for the past few decades, many things written in Iran have not been translated, and if they have, do not conform to western standards. Its a tough one, and I agree that a foreign language source is quite useless to most people. --aliasad 12:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malay royalties

Hi Cunado,

Why do you change the article names to funny spellings with apostrophes? The previous names were more commonly used in Malay and English. Maybe your spellings might conform to Arabic.They are Malaysian articles and should be spelled the in the way Malaysians do--Wai Hong 14:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's just a certain way that a name is spelled. It might not conform to the international standard for Arabic transliteration but it's the way it's Romanized. I just like to say that u should be familiar with the real romanized version of a person's name before making changes.

It happens all the time. Chinese names with the same character maybe Romanized differently but it's someone's personal name so it shouldn't be changed.Hope u understand.--Wai Hong 16:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The references

Those r sunni's references we have u find a neutral one. Salman 00:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conceptions of God

See Template_talk:ConceptionsofGod AnonMoos 16:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode characters

Hola, Cuñado. I saw your table of Unicode characters, and I would like to say that IMHO isn't usually a good idea to use any of them. In some cases the best option is to use the HTML named entities because they are more readable than a NCR or the character (it's OK to use &lrm;, but not the invisible Unicode character). In the and in the case the underscore or the dot below a better approach is to use CSS. Best regards. --surueña 21:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand any of what you just said. I don't really understand character encoding. You can edit the table on my talk page if you want, and I'll use whatever you put in. Cuñado

- Talk 23:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'll start again. Those special characters of your table can be needed in Wikipedia, but instead of writting directly the Unicode character, IMHO they can be easily confused with other "normal" characters, therefore editors are encouraged to introduce the character entity reference, or when it doesn't exist the NCR instead (see List of XML and HTML character entity references). For example, an en dash ('–') is used for ranges (e.g. '1991–2005', '2000-01-01 – 2001-12-31', 'January – June'), but a new editor can easily confuse this character with a normal dash ('-'). Therefore, instead of writing directly '–' it's better to write '–' instead. Other examples are the times symbol ('×', × which isn't a simple 'x'), or the prime symbol, em dashes…

PS: Feel free to reply in your talk page, I always watch talk pages when I leave a message and this way the discussion flow is not broken. --surueña 09:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religion

Hi, I was just looking at the Baha'i faith and saw that you are a follower of this religion. I have never heard of this faith before so I was just wondering if you could tell me about this religion's role in the United States. Are there any Baha'i churches in America (besides the one in IL)? Do you have any famous church members who I might recognize. Please let me know if you have anything to tell me. Thanks, (LonghornJohnny 03:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for answering so soon. I will also look on Wikipedia to read more about Baha'i stuff. (LonghornJohnny 01:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Persian names

Could you review the newly-minted "Persian names"? Appreciate any contributions you see need to be made. I think, if we're going to add diacritical marks, we should keep them to the current academic standards. Mille grazie, MARussellPESE 03:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eva LaRue

Actually, it does say her Religion on that page. Scroll down and look at the area titled "Religion" Zazaban 18:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New world order

Could you take a look at the New world order (Bahá'í) page. I've added some content to it, after it was started by another editor. -- Jeff3000 17:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely wouldn't delete it. It's a valid encyclopedic article, plus deleting it would just piss off the people who started the article. -- Jeff3000 17:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

three-revert rule

You have already violated the three-revert rule. Since this is not your first time, you are aware of what admins do. Please stop modifing the islam template. --Islami 06:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I only reverted twice. Thanks for being so diligent Islami. Cuñado

- Talk 06:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi could you help (mediate) on Muhammad bin Qasim and Cheema Article?

Please see the talk-pages of both articles, and help out if you can. Or if you could find someone who can it would be much appreciated thanks. --Street Scholar 11:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Hi Cunado. As nice as your signature is, I'm going to ask that you consider removing the image from your signature, per the rationale listed at WP:SIG#Images. Thanks. —Mets501 (talk) 03:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:)

No problem man! I appreciate that. If you need any help, you know where to find me. ;) Take care my friend. --Anas Salloum 14:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Thanks for asking, and sorry that i did not favor your proposal :( --Striver 06:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Islami

I just lost my temper on user:Islami. Bad move. What is your opinion of this? --Striver 09:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted him on the template and gave him a detailed argument on why. Could you take a look of his blatand removal of the Shi'a view at Ibn Taymiyyah and his removal of articles he is not comfotable with at Zubayr ibn al-Awwam? Tell me if you need a revert at Salafi. --Striver 09:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Divine philosophy

I need material for each religion and taking off Islam removes a starter on what Islam developed in the way of divine philosopy. Can you put it back and find out some good references to go under Islam on divide philosophy.RoddyYoung 10:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit cout

Thanks, but the edits mostly come from the disambiguation work that I've done. If it was real edits, I'm sure you would be above me :) -- Jeff3000 22:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time for a mini-chill pill?

You don't seem to be currently playing a very constructive role on either Salafi, Ibn Taymiyyah, or Template:Christianity. If the stress is getting to you, maybe you should take a little break... AnonMoos 02:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK maybe I didn't have to say that the Christianity template sucks, but I'm not sure what you mean about the other two. Cuñado

- Talk 03:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On Ibn Taymiyya, you're advocating for a transliteration style which is more characteristic of early 20th-century scholarship than early 21st-century scholarship, on Salafi you're insisting on amalgamating the articles about two movements which have very distinct historical origins (and only really began to significantly align maybe 50 years ago), while on Template:Christianity you're being deliberately obnoxious. Hope your "wikistress" level isn't rising too far... AnonMoos 07:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All those issues are where you disagree with me, not that I'm being un-constructive. I made a suggestion on the transliteration because I happen to be familiar with Arabic transliteration, and I wasn't insisting anything; just offering my opinion. I think you're upset because my suggestion didn't agree with what you wanted. On Salafism, I added the merge tag because the articles themselves claimed that they were talking of the same movement, and I explained it on the talk page in a reasonable way. I'm sorry that you think I'm not a constructive editor, but as I recall, on both of those pages I contributed a significant amount of formatting and cleanup. Cuñado

- Talk 08:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for chaning my User page. I really appreciate it. -- ابراهيم 16:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Template might be a good idea, but let's wait till there are pages for all the holy days, and then make the template. Red links in templates would look ugly. As to where to get references for the pages; For Ridvan, Ayyamiha and Birth of Bahá'u'lláh I was able to find some info after searching through bahai-library.org. I don't know if there's enough info for the other pages. Maybe the Hatcher/Smith book would have more info, but I don't have it. -- Jeff3000 00:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry?

I've a sense that Truthpedia and Islami may be the same user. Several lines of evidence point to this conclusion. Have you any reason to believe this to be, or not to be, the case?Proabivouac 08:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Going through the contributions, it seemed obvious enough to go ahead and make the report.Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Islami Proabivouac 11:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salafism Page

I have been noticed that there is something of a revert battle going on regarding the Salafism page. I think both versions have problems, with some conclusions drawn. The article was locked before and I think we are heading to it being locked again soon if this pace continues. I noticed that you mentioned in the message regarding the most recent revert that people should use the talk page regarding changes. Given that your version is newer, the onus is on you to make your argument on the talkpage and have it agreed to there than just say others must use the talkpage to question the newer version. I think this is the best solution to prevent locking of the page again. ZaydHammoudeh 18:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shi'a view of Ali

Hi, I want to know why do you revert this part.[1] I think it clarifies Shi'a view well. --Sa.vakilian 09:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in responding, I have been very busy. If you disagree with any of my edits on Ali, I suggest you change them back. I very rarely actually write information into the article, but I always check it and often revert because over time Shi'a editors tend to make it drift into a very biased article. Sometimes extremely blatant POV gets inserted and I seem to be the only non-Shi'a person watching the page. You don't need to talk about your re-addition of my reverts, because I expect it to go around a few times before we use the talk page. If we discussed every edit in detail it would become a ridiculous situation. Cuñado

- Talk 04:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guardian

Added a comment to the Guardian talk page regarding Guardian (title) that you reverted - any thoughts on what I said? Pixie2000 21:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change of wikipedia history

Cunado19, I have found the history of wikipedia has been changed. I know that around the 9th of August 2006 I wrote the Baha'i comment on the Israel site. It has gone from my history and I found that a person on the Israel site wrote it instead along with about 10 paragraphs of material. Have you heard of history being changed in this way? RoddyYoung 12:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cunado19 I found that on the Israel site religion first appeared as a title 9 August 2006 and the Baha'i words were already included. Here is what I wrote and when.

The Bahá'í Faith has its administrative centre in Haifa on land it has owned since Bahá'u'lláh's imprisonment in Acre in the early 1870s by the Ottoman Empire. Pilgrims from all over the world visit for short periods to time. Apart from a few hundred volunteer staff, and in agreement with the Israeli government, Bahá'ís do not live or preach in Israel. 22:48, 8 July 2006 (hist) (diff) Religion in Israel (→Religious breakdown - pic) Baha'i Faith has a world headquaters in Haifa on land it has owned for over 100 years. Pilgrims from all over the world visit for short periods to time. Apart from a few hundred staff Baha'is do not live in Israel. 15:35, 7 July 2006 (hist) (diff) Religion in Israel (→Religious breakdown - Universal House of Justice) 15:32, 7 July 2006 (hist) (diff) Religion in Israel (→Religious breakdown - Baha'i Pilgrimage) 15:27, 7 July 2006 (hist) (diff) Religion in Israel (→Religious breakdown - Baha'i) The Bahá'í Faith has its administrative centre in Haifa on land it has owned since Bahá'u'lláh's imprisonment in Acre in the early 1870s by the Ottoman Empire. Pilgrims from all over the world visit for short periods to time. Apart from a few hundred volunteer staff, and in agreement with the Israeli government, Bahá'ís do not live or preach in Israel.RoddyYoung 12:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canado 19 - I realise what has happened. It was a restore or rtv from a vandal who must have deleted those 10 paragraphs. This was the first time I have seen this. I did not go back all the way before I lost the trail. Hence my confusion. I relised now my mistake and I have found the real date of addition, it was on the holy day 9 July or a few days before when I first wrote Baha'i and Baha'u'llah and this link to Baha'i was put in. Here are the history entry now found from the Israel site that confirms that history does not change on wikipedia. I was so worried wikipedia had been corrupted and the pain of all those deletes on my contribuitons came flooding back to hurt my heart.

(cur) (last) 08:49, 9 July 2006 RoddyYoung (Talk | contribs) (→Religion in Israel - expand reason for visting) (cur) (last) 15:41, 7 July 2006 RoddyYoung (Talk | contribs) (→Religion in Israel - Baha'i) cur) (last) 22:46, 8 July 2006 222.154.132.56 (Talk) (→Religion in Israel - pictures) (cur) (last) 22:24, 8 July 2006 222.154.132.56 (Talk) (→Religion in Israel - link to youtube Haifa) (cur) (last) 08:49, 9 July 2006 RoddyYoung (Talk | contribs) (→Religion in Israel - expand reason for visting)RoddyYoung 12:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

canado19 - below is how it reads today- 27 Novermber 2006 - I turned to you first in my fright of angush when I needed answers about wikipedia.

The Baha'i world centre, which includes the Universal House of Justice, in Haifa attracts pilgrimage from all over the world.[citation needed] Apart from a few hundred staff, Baha'is do not live in Israel.

RoddyYoung 12:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

This is a message I left you in October. Perhaps you didn't notice it? —Mets501 (talk) 04:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cunado. As nice as your signature is, I'm going to ask that you consider removing the image from your signature, per the rationale listed at WP:SIG#Images. Thanks. —Mets501 (talk) 03:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]