User talk:JohnsAr

Hi, JohnsAr, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place — I sure do — and want to stay.

You may want to read about the Five pillars of Wikipedia and simplified ruleset.

If you need help on how to title new articles check out the naming conventions.

For help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style.

If you need help look at Wikipedia:Help and the FAQ.

If you can't find your answer there, check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)!

There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library.

Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal.

Feel free to post questions on my user talk page or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will be by to help you shortly.

If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you. You can sign your name using three tildes (~). If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Five will get you the datestamp only.

You may want to add yourself to the new user log.

If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

On IRC, check out the Bootcamp. It's not what it sounds like, but it is fun and can help you with your editing skills.

If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.

Happy Wiki-ing. —Kf4bdy ^talk ^contribs

PS: This is not a bot and you did nothing to prompt this message. This is just a friendly welcome by a fellow Wikipedian.

Click here to respond to this message!

wikiFFI

"squealing and screaming"? that's not a very nice way to characterize legitimate opposition to your poorly-disguised advertising now (as confirmed by your FFI posts), is it? i do hope you consider being more civil in future, especially if we are to work collegially. ITAQALLAH 22:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiislam

Please do not add links to this website again. Seems like yet another Islamophobic campaign by FFI users rather than a reliable source. BhaiSaab ^talk 22:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"This is not the case as you can see. Is anyone else on Wikipedia protesting about links to a wiki site? NO. Only you guys are, because its a site critical of Islam."

Really? Then you should ask an admin. The admin will tell you precisely the same thing. BhaiSaab ^talk 00:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I see now. People say wikis are not a good reference however I disagree. Any website can be changed for that matter at any time - its not just wikis. There are other ways a website can be introduced on Wikipedia. A page can be made on WikiIslam, e.g. like this one here. You guys are welcome to help out on the construction, whenever people start making that page. --JohnsAr 00:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather work on the deconstruction of a page dedicated to Wikiislam until it has some notability. In the future, please assume good faith. BhaiSaab ^talk 00:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, please take this to an administrator so they can tell you the exact same thing I have been telling you. If you look at this section of WP:RS it explicitely states "Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as sources." BhaiSaab ^talk 16:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The exceptions are already spelled out on the page - they include self-published reports by reliable journalists and such, not websites like wikiislam. BhaiSaab ^talk 19:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John... Re: your question about wikis as "external links" that you made on my talk page... That is sort of a grey area, and there is some debate about it on WP:RS. My feeling is that ALL links should be to reliable sources of information... and that includes those listed in "External Links". So by my understanding of the guideline, wikiislam can not be linked at all. However, some other editors do disagree with me. You can try asking at the WP:RS talk page, (with the understanding that you will probably get conflicting information.) good luck. Blueboar 21:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't noticed yet, your argument doesn't really follow. You say "the link to the external wiki...is not against WP:RS because it is not self-published." So what exactly is the purpose of the following sentence in the policy: "Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as sources." This seems like just another to get around what is a pretty clear statement. You're essentially saying that all wikis are not self-published, so their inclusion in that sentence is null and void. Makes no sense to me. BhaiSaab ^talk 00:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said I will wait for others to respond and tell me why the Opea Sea Killer shouldnt have a link to the external wiki. And they will also have to explain hundreds of other external wiki links. You are only opposed to including the link for WI, obviously because it is different from your views of religion. Had I wanted to include Islampedia (its a wiki on Islam), you would have been happy that I did so. Maybe I would have done that and gone that route to prove my point.

Again, including a wiki in the External Links is not against policy. Why are there 100's of links to other external wikis? Do you see other people complaining? No, but you are because WI has a different point of view on Islam than you do. Please dont continue the debate here. I'm talking about it on the other main Discussion page. If Wiki admins agree with you, I will request them to start a campaign which takes out all external wiki links.--JohnsAr 00:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someones been spending a little too much time at the F.F. forums. See WP:AGF. BhaiSaab ^talk 00:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AGF has nothing to do with this case. In simple terms, external wikis are being linked on WP and this is not against policy. --JohnsAr 01:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please refrain from personal attacks

a personal attack includes the following:

"Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme. "

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ITAQALLAH 13:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't let itaqallah bully you. He applies inapporiately strict interpretations of wikipedia rules to people who disagree with him, but has no problem using sources that are not reputable, and never enforces wikipedia rules when they are blatantly violated by his fellow Muslims. Arrow740 04:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suppport. Yes I even saw Muslims call him a deletionist. They definitely have something going on, these guys. In Criticism of Islam, BhaiSaab took out a link to Faithfreedom calling it "polemical", when the link has been there since long and other Muslim sites are no less polemical than that, niether are other Islam-critical sites less 'polemical' than FaithFreedom.org. They want to censor criticism of Islam at every chance they get. Then after doing these kinds of vandalisms, they accuse others of "personal attacks", or "POV", or "Unreliable sources". Interesting. I've also seen that when our anti-vandalism measures are aggressive and quick and when we keep a close eye on their activity, the vandals dont return and keep away from the topic because they know the article is being actively protected against the vandalism. --JohnsAr 13:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps because faithfreedom is a bunch of nonsense. BhaiSaab ^talk 00:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you ask me, I think Islam.com is a bunch of nonsense. --JohnsAr 05:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christian wikis

BhaiSaab, the notability will come with time. The site is new. Watch out for a page on "Wikis on Islam" and good luck on the "deconstruction" of that page because a page Christian wikis already exists. --JohnsAr 00:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that you'd like to know that this article has been deleted. BhaiSaab ^talk 15:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And you can certainly count on me being here when WikiIslam tries to make a reappearance. Good night. BhaiSaab ^talk 05:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of the Quran

This is a somewhat new article that we're having problems with. Help with it would be great. Check out the history to see what's going on. Arrow740 00:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]