User talk:RiskAficionado/Archive 3

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Talk:Qur'an#Criticism of the Qur'an

salam alaikum

I need your help to complete this part and achieve consensus in this debate. Of course I write something on the basis of Shi'a viewpoint and it may different with Sunni one in some cases. So please participate in this debate.--Sa.vakilian 03:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting Article

Itaqallah, have a look at this [1]. It is written by another scholar of Islam who respects(and even loves) Muhammad so much (like Watt) but explains why these Islamic scholars don't convert to Islam. --Aminz 10:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Please don't vandalize

I recognize you are probably doing so in good faith, but please do not restore POV vandalism at Little Green Footballs again. We have enough problems keeping the article neutral as it is.RunedChozo 22:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

could you please explain to me what "POV vandalism" is? thank you.ITAQALLAH 22:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

POV Vandalism is the deliberate insertion of commentary or writings into articles that are in violation of the official Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view policy. But since you are using Popups, you likely already know this, and you reverted the material anyways. I am stretching to assume good faith on your part and for now am doing so.

If necessary, I will file a Request For Comment in reference to these additions, but I hope that it need not come to that.RunedChozo 22:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I also offer a helpful suggestion that you change your username. It has been noted in the past that usernames containing "Allah" are offensive to many.

NPOV violations are not vandalism. i am glad you like my username. ITAQALLAH 22:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me rephrase what I said earlier: I do NOT like your username, and as friendly as possible, I would like to encourage you to change it. The names of pagan deities as a portion of usernames are offensive to me. RunedChozo 15:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

nah. but thanks for the offer. ITAQALLAH 16:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of the Quran

Do not remove Syed Kamran Mirza's name. You have no justification for doing so. Criticism of Islam is largely internet based and as such he is notable, trying using a search engine. Do not remove the refence to hadith. The wording is a matter of debate but the link itself must stay. I used pickthall's because you asked for "resting-place." Arrow740 22:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

there is justification which you are deliberately ignoring: Mr. Mirza is not notable. you are inserting original research: claims must be attributed to the critics, not the evidence they use. pickthall does not say resting place: you replaced the Y Ali translation to make it seem as if the argument was not a straw man. attribute the argument to the one who makes it. thank you. ITAQALLAH 22:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

your attempted revert-baiting through repetition of the same faulty argument (despite it being established that SKM is not a citable critic, and that you are inserting original research) is not an indication of any intention of collegial editing on your part, sadly. ITAQALLAH 22:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

You have not shown that SKM is not notable. As far as criticism of Islam goes, he is. I didn't insert any original research. It is SKM (among others) who wrote that the sun has a resting place, and I no doubt used the correct phrase "critics claim." In any case the hadith makes it clear that there is such a place.

So now you've made the shift to "not citable." Well he is citable. The fact that your religion forces critics to use the internet as their medium does not mean that you can censor such criticism because it is only (as far as I know right now) to be found on the internet. Again I'll ask you not to remove the reference to the hadith. You have no justification for doing so as I am not the one making the connection (as the links make clear). If you wish to respond please use my talk page. Arrow740 05:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

i'll reply here for the sake of continuity. SKM is non-notable, per the ongoing afd where community consensus seems rather obvious. you are touting a virtually unknown individual, with seemingly no qualifications or expertise, who is non-notable as the ghits show, as someone who is an authority on wikipedia. your attempted straw man that i am shifting my position has no bearing on the fact that he is non-notable, which is something i have been consistent in maintaining. ITAQALLAH 15:12, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

One encounters his writings quickly and often when one goes in search of criticism of Islam. For that reason alone he is notable. It is not a straw man because notable and citable are not necessarily the same when it comes to this article, as you know. I don't believe he deserves a wikipedia article, but as Sefringle pointed out on the talk page for the article (which you should check out), that doesn't mean he can't be quoted in other articles. Arrow740 22:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Syed and Mirza

This is an interesting debate. I am amused. Syed family is descendant of Imam Hussain, hence of Arab blood lines. Mirza family is descendant of Mongols who later became muslims. Obviously this person is a fake. He could not even come up with a logical fake name. LOL. Maybe he should have named himself Mirza Cohen, Pundit Singh, or something like that. LOL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hassanfarooqi (talk • contribs)

.. and an amusing pseudonym it is indeed. ITAQALLAH 13:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

New article you may want to edit

Hello Itaqallah, I've started a new article about Saudi Arabia's first feature film: Keif al-hal?. I invite you to contribute to it if such an article might interest you. Thanks. :-) (→Netscott) 02:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Did the prophet order to chop 400 trees in the battle of Khyber: Talk:Muhammad#Kindness_to_the_Children_and_the_Happy_Animoos. TruthSpreader^Talk 03:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

Greetings Itaqallah, could you take a look at User:JustAnIdea's edits for similarities with User:Nodekeeper and User:Proabivouac? Thanks. (→Netscott) 15:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Islam as this week's WP:AID winner

Dev920(Mind voting here?) 15:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Hm

You seem frazzled. Why don't you take a short wikibreak? It might help you become more centered. Arrow740 00:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

They don't give you two weeks paid vacation a year? Arrow740 01:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Well if the So'audiyoon were to hire someone he would act like you. Arrow740 03:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I feel refreshed. You guys probably missed me, though. Arrow740 10:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Prose

Salaam! Can you please re-write this in prose, as requested on talk page? Talk:Islam#Customs_and_behavioral_laws. TruthSpreader^Talk 01:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Itaqallah, my world view has changed. Now, I don't get angry at big lies as much as I used to. I'll probably post something on my user page. I feel comforted now. --Aminz 04:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Itaqallah,

What do you think of requesting a mediation on Criticism of the Quran? --Aminz 08:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

If you'd like to help end the edit warring you can respond to these proposed guidelines [2]. Arrow740 10:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedia of Islam Online is now available :) --Aminz 03:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Need some assistance regarding Ottoman Muslim Casulties.

I saw your name under the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ottoman Muslim casualties. I was wondering if Ottoman Muslim casualties article can be an improvement drive article for the Islam or other related projects, or find people from different countries to feed information. I would like to integrate what happened during this period. Western (Christan) sources are really weak on this issue. And there is a big bias against it. Thanks. OttomanReference 15:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

User:DAde heading for a community ban

Hello Itaqallah, my advice is to formulate documentation demonstrating this user's pattern of behavior. Essentially this user is being repetitively disruptive and is beginning to "exhaust the community's patience" which is bannable. If this user's chronic disruption can be clearly demonstrated there will be stronger support for a ban on his editing on Wikipedia. (→Netscott) 20:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you do that for me please. I am not familiar with user:Dade. Cheers, --Aminz 18:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Itaqallah, you might want to endorse this call for a "community patience" ban if you agree with it. (→Netscott) 21:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Abusing the popups

Youre not supposed to use popups for reverting except for vandalism. Youre doing this for a long time now.Opiner 20:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

could you please explain what you are alluding to? ITAQALLAH 20:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Sealed

Your tone has changed but the edge remains. You are essentially correct about my manner of referring to the material in question. I and other people who approached Islam with an open mind and heart (in my case considering it for myself) are dumbfounded that people could follow a man who committed the atrocities Muhammad did, let alone believe that he was in direct communication with and had a mandate from the source of morality itself, God. I keep emphasizing the scientific contradictions because the internal contradictions can often be rationalized (though it is very hard to do so and maintain the belief that the Quran is perfect, doublethink is clearly not an exclusively Muslim phenomenon), and the moral and ethical problems can also be sublimated as personal morality is highly malleable, but when it comes to saying that semen comes out of the lower back, and mountains prevent earthquakes, there's not much you can do. If you care to know why a person with no religion spends so much effort doing the things I do, then I will tell you, but I assume you won't ask, and will delete this, though I would prefer it if you didn't. Arrow740 14:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll assume you believe what you're saying. If the external contradictions are easily explicable, could you explicate them for me, or tell me where I can read such an explication? Arrow740 23:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

All four "explications" of the semen from the lower back verse are utter nonsense. Only someone with an overriding desire to acknowledge no flaws in the Quran would be comforted by them. You would admit that, I hope. In any case if this is the kind of stuff you think about there is little point in a further exchange of ideas between us. Arrow740 06:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

CltFn

Salam Itaqallah. Since you have dealt with user CltFn in the past, I would appreciate your comment here. Thank you. BhaiSaab ^talk 20:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Indian caste system Mediation

Please take a look at Talk:Indian caste system/Mediation (December 2006) and begin populating the "issues to be mediated" regarding the Indian caste system article. Also, please sign below Parties' agreement to mediate stating that you "agree" to mediate or "recuse" yourself from the dispute resolution process. Thanks in advance. -- tariqabjotu 22:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

3RR at Muhammad as a diplomat

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Arrow740 03:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you're a little confused here. I replaced "the" with "his" to make it clear whose objectives they were, that's it. Arrow740 03:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking of it as "his (objectives of prophethood)." Arrow740 03:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't trolling, it was a response to your post. You have a strange fastidiousness about your talk page. I'm not sure its kosher (or the derivative halal, if you prefer) for you to delete my posts like that. In any case there has to be some explanation for statements such as "equally as worse." Arrow740 23:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

FYI

Image talk:Qana massacre.jpg --Striver 04:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Kaaba wiki page

Salam brother,

I was looking at the kaaba page and there is some very humilating and derrogatory pictures on there that shouldn't be...I cannot seem to take them off, so if you could please take them down?

Wlksalam —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.131.226.129 (talk) 01:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Islam banner parameters

I was pretty much thinking of making the banner resemble the Military history and Biography banners in terms of having possibly one standard quality assessment parameter and (hopefully :) ?) one importance parameter per article. The Project Guide gives some of the more obvious reasons quality assessments in particular would be useful, as knowing the current status of an article makes it easier for members of the project to know which articles are closed to achieving either good-article or featured-article status. One potential way to draw attention to the assessments is to actively invite the members of the project to collectively discuss which articles in particular are of the greatest importance to the project with the objective of placing the consensus choices in the top-importance category. However, to my personal awareness, this is still a somewhat new and untested technique, so I can't personally attest to whether it is effective in the long run. Anyway, if you would want the banner to include assessment parameters and have reservations about including them yourself, please let me know and I will include them, and set up the various other related parephenalia for it to function as the other project's assessments do. If I were to do so, it would be useful to know whether the individual subprojects have specific images they would like included on their individual "tabs", so that I could include them. In any event, good luck with the project. Badbilltucker 16:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

For the template to work correctly, the various categories indicated in the project banner have to be created as well. Then the bot (when it's working) automatically tallies the various articles in each category/section. But it needs the categories (I think) to be able to do that. If you want me to create the specific categories, given the current setup of the project, I'd be happy to do so. However, given how long it's taking to get me to get the Project Directory updated, it may not be for a day or so. Badbilltucker 16:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Kaaba wiki page

salam again brother,

Sorry it seems to be gone but there were derrogatory pictures of girls on the page and couldnt seem to have taken it off. If you please just as always look over the pages related towards Islam as it is well aware to bring enough critics and of that sort. but thankyou for taking the time to check it out!

Wlksalam —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.131.226.129 (talk) 21:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

indian caste system mediation

hello Tariq. you invited a number of users to a mediation case quite a few days ago. two of the main participants (BhaiSaab and Hkelkar) have been blocked per a recent ArbCom ruling. the other user has not agreed to participate... so it seems to be just me. in the light of this, should the case be closed or what? thanks. ITAQALLAH 04:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure. However, it was not through some formal process, so I'm not sure what could be down to close the discussion. -- tariqabjotu 05:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: hello Luna

About replying to threads, much easier than it looks (fortunately). Once you start getting the mails, you can just hit reply (it should go to the same address the mailing list sent from). The list is all sorted by subject line, so be careful about changing that. Sounded like you wanted me to copy-paste your post on my talk page onto the mailing list, but I should ask to be sure -- that's what you want, yes? :) Luna Santin 23:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'll have that done in a moment. Luna Santin 23:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Other topical biography subarticles

Hey, I see that you mention there are other topical biography subarticles-- do you have any you could point to off the top of your head? It's okay if you don't-- I just thought might be helpful to look at those articles and draw inspiration from how they did it-- particularly if they're featured articles.

As I say, I take a different stance than Beit Or-- I'm not sure that topical subarticles are absolutely forbidden or inherently unencyclopedic-- it just seems like the general/diplomat/religious figure is making things more difficult than they need to be. Muhammad's marriages, for example, isn't causing any problems at all, so in at least some cases topical may be the best way to do things, but diplomat/general doesn't seem to be working out too well. --Alecmconroy 03:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

List of Former Muslims

I knew you voted for the AFD for the List of former Muslims when I placed that list on the WikiProject Islam list. I didnt see you delete that list when there was just ONE list there. You never had any problems with it. You had the problem when I included List of former Muslims. If you deleted it because there were just TWO, you should have deleted it even more if there was just ONE item in the list, but you didnt. These lists are important and I will find a way to include them on the project main page. Now, can you care to explain why you didnt delete the list section before? --Matt57 14:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I have restored the lists. They are significant to the project and again, I did not see you deleting them when there was just ONE item in the list. I can bet $33,000 that you wouldnt have taken the lists out had I included "List of Muslim scholars" in the list. The whole Islam Wikiproject is not nuetral in my opinion and I will do all I can to make this page more nuetral. This is not the Muslims Guild anymore. It is a project page that will now be used for members of all faiths.--Matt57 14:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

That list with one item had been there since forever. You never saw it? Thats hard to believe. The list has been there since Sep 3, 2006 and you edited the page on October 21 and Dec 4 so you definitely knew the content of the page and were familiar with it. To add to the evidence, just after I inserted the list of former Muslims, you nominated the list for deletion and after you saw it wont get deleted, you wanted to take out of the project page. I dont think this was all just coincidence. In any case, I wont do petty arguments. The lists are here to stay now and this is just the beginning to make the Wikiproject Islam more NPOV. It used to be the Muslim guild, so I understand it was maintained and used by only Muslim members before. That will change now. The project is to be a place where all members, Muslim or non-Muslim are felt welcome. None of the parties should feel that the project is only for one side of the team. You should also take some steps to make it more nuetral. --Matt57 14:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Responding to your message on the project's page at the bottom: Which articles are of "extremely trivial" importance that I'm working on? Please provide the titles.--Matt57 15:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes ofcourse they're not trivial to me and not to others who are interested in Criticism of Islam. No article is ever trivial. "there are far more core-topic essential articles demanding our attention." - can you suggest some that are related to Criticsm? --Matt57 11:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Cresent

I am aware it is not the official symble of Islam, but nor is the star of david that i made for project Judaism an official symble of Judaism. Symbles are used as way to promote a creed graphicly. I propose you keep it as it promotes the project. frummer 07:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Salaam, i think it would be fair to say to let it sit for a day or two to see if anyone besides yourself has a problem. if they do it would be a great oppertunity to bring up this issue and arrive by a consensus as it's not good for it to be lingering in the air as you say it is now. frummer

frummer has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

pleasure. let me know anything of interest happening on the project. frummer

Women in Muslim societies

Any reason why you didnt put the WikiProject-Islam tag in this article's talk page as well, or do you plan to tag them all when you have time? --Matt57 17:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Salam

Thanks for your invitation to me to join wikiproject islam. I can't promise to be very active due to various commitments, but if you have something urgent, please write to my wiki page =) --Djihed 18:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, will help when I can

Thanks very much for your message and kind comments. I am not going to be able to edit much in the next couple of weeks, due to Christmas holidays, but after that I will start to work through the citations, as you suggest. In my opinion, getting the right range of sources for the article is the key to improving it. In particular, Albert Hourani's History of the Arab Peoples is a good scholarly text and has much detail on the establishment of the Islamic polity. I've got a copy and will try to add material from it.Itsmejudith 19:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking at the referencing on the Islam article, I was wondering if you had views about the referencing style. I'm remembering the dhimmi article, which has footnotes but also a list of references. In the footnotes only the author surname and date are given, while the usual bibliographic details is given in the references. Having a list of references allows a reader to skim through to see how wide a range of sources has been used, whether they are mainly scholarly, whether they include any dodgy ones etc. (I'm not recommending anything else about that article as a model, BTW ;-) ) I was also wondering whether there is a way that such a list can be generated automatically using templates - you seem to know much more about such things than I do.Itsmejudith 12:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Islam

With all due respect to your tireless contributions, I must point out that your manner of editing is costing wikipedia a fortune and stretches out the history thread of the article unnecessarily. I made this mistake too until someone explained it to me. I think you should use the show preview button more often instead of continuous edits. In this way we can see how the article evolves and expands etc clearly. Salaam. frummer 08:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

also, if you dont like the new talk page template, say so, instead of reverting. that is rude. If you want the quality scale in the new look, no prob. frummer 08:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hope you understand me about the edit issue, also try to use the edit tabs at the begingin of each section as apposed to "edit this page" tab, this too reduces costs... All the categories that where in the old tag, are in the new tag too, there is even a new one, which is Category:WikiProject Islam articles. As for the quality tags, there has been allot of talk on the village pump about leaving them out since there is a different tag for its quality rating, see Wikipedia:Good articles. I think this matter needs to be looked into. As it stands now, talk pages with tag overloads receive far less participation as editors feel overwhelmed. In fact the quality tag has come under fire for the same reason, editors feel intimidated by them when they could really be contributing to it significantly. frummer 09:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted and as i said you can open a discussion on the talk page. Please may I also remind you of Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. Back to the point, we're not talking aesthetics, we're talking about templates and their single purpose role on talk pages in encouraging more contributions. The template may also indicate its quality rating if you so wish, but as it was it depicted poor grammar and choice of words, colour and size. Furthermore I am revamping all the talk page templates (and various portals) here on wikipedia and trying to make sure they are all consistently phrased. In the meantime please open a discussion about what you would like changed because I know nothing about your assessment department. Thanks. frummer 09:32, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised an editor of your standing would actually loose his cool and break the 3RR rule. It is a very serious rule and were I to be annoyed you with your experience could get into allot of trouble. Also about talk, there is no way to bypass talk, once someone has changed something with or without a consensus, you must either refer back to a consensus that was reached or reach a new one. As for the future of the template, I will try to include the two scales when i get around to seeing to it next. Your behaviour though has been improper, and void of good faith. As a Muslim you must keep your cool for the sake of glorifying the name of your God. frummer 10:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

About the meta crawlers, your fears are unfounded, the meta tags remained so no bot would have snagged any list. Remember that I'm not deciding that you should not have quality scales, i simply proposed for it to be left out, you could have simply put it back in the new one. In the meantime, chill, I'm only meaning for things to look neater, and I so happened to have started this monumental task here. Most other wikiprojects don't update their quality ratings and def not their importance ratings. I've had no complaints in leaving them out elsewhere. I understood you didn't want the crescent, but you latest moves made me think you're not interesting in cooperating with interests that contravene yours. Bye for now. frummer 11:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Existence of dispute in Antisemitism article

Some editors are disputing the very existence of a dispute on the Antisemitism article. Would you please have at the evidence provided here [3] and see if that testifies existence of some dispute over the neutrality of the article. Please sign your name if the evidences prove the existance of some sort of dispute over the neutrality. Thanks. --Aminz 12:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Al-Islam.org

Bro, can you take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-islam.org (second nomination) and see if notability have been established, and if not, why? Thanks. --Striver - talk 16:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What do you think about my 16:26, 30 December 2006 message there? --Striver - talk 17:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok... how about this and more specifically this and this? --Striver - talk 18:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Bro? --Striver - talk 15:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks for the tip. --Striver - talk 18:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Prophet of Doom

All of the changes recently posted regarding Prophet of Doom are pertinent to helping those wanting to learn more about the book find its various online versions and helps inform them about the book's supporting material.

If you insist on suppressing this information due to your bias as a Muslim, I will have no choice but to submit your efforts to the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee. Slipperybeans 22:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

hello, i'm not certain exactly what bias you're talking about. you are link-spamming and excessively advertising for the website through skewed prose (tainted with editorial commentary). it is assumed that anyone who wanted to know more would have enough intuition to visit the website, the URL for which has been provided in the external links section. adding a link for every page you feel needs mention necessitates the assumption that readers are unable to navigate the website for themselves. ITAQALLAH 23:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

With your theory, there should be nothing more than a link to the web site and nothing else. I will now update the site again to reflect the changes that help describe the online and offline book - Prophet of Doom. If you still consider links to the online version of the book, its audio version, its printable version, and things like a link to the feedback section being included in the Response section, then feel free to revert the content again. I will then submit the issue to the Arbitration Committee as promised, and have them post the content. Ideally, they would also ban you from any affecting any Islam-centric listings as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slipperybeans (talk • contribs)

you have not justified its inclusion in the light of the policies i have provided above. linkspams are not to be tolerated, neither are skewed advertisements for websites where you have provided no independant, third party sources discussing the sites content or establishing its notability. you may wish to consult WP:DR on the correct way to resolve disputes. ITAQALLAH 17:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Standard Qur'an

The portion of mizan related to "Principles to Understand Qur'an" has been translated in English. You can access it here. Regarding "Standar Qu'ran" article, which I think we should have, is discussed under "Variant Readings" heading in this article. I think it has alot of references of classical works as well, which can be used. Cheers! TruthSpreader^reply 03:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit List_of_former_Muslims with respect to Ali Sina has been reverted.

Regarding your edit [4] this has been effectively reverted as it failed to use the talk page on this entry where the notability of Ali Sina with respect to apostacy has been established (via the contribution by Ali Sina to the book by Ibn Warraq called Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out). Please use the talk at, [5] before reverting text in this article to argue that he is not notable with respect to this subject. Ttiotsw 13:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

responded on talk page. ITAQALLAH 16:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Why do you restore personal attacks against me on the Muhammad articles talkpage? -- Karl Meier 16:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Accusing me of wanting to murder him is a very, very serious issue, and Wikipedia's policies regarding no personal attacks makes it clear that personal attacks can be removed on sight by anyone, whereever they are. -- Karl Meier 16:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

That was not what he said, he asked me if I would like to kill him. Another thing is that he brought up a old solved issue to troll against me on this specific talkpage. That is not what I would expect after posting a relevant and polite question in that section. -- Karl Meier 16:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

You removed this picture on the Kaaba

Please explain why you deleted this picture of the Kaaba, from the Kaaba page: [[:image:Mohammed_kaaba_1315.jpg|thumb|Image made in 1315 of young Muhammad re-dedicating the Black Stone at the Kaaba. From Tabriz, Persia and can be found in Rashid al-Dins Jami' al-Tawarikh ("The Universal History" or "Compendium of Chronicles"), held in the University of Edinburgh.]] As for the external links which you removed, I will take it up on the Talk page. --Matt57 17:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

basis for removal had already been explained on the talk page. ITAQALLAH 17:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)