User talk:Mcvti

Mcvti, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mcvti! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Bop34 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

mcvti

Just wanted to thank you for putting all this information about mandaens i learned alot about my religion. Dsabr2 (talk) 11:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

You are most welcome, you can check the revision history of the Mandaean related articles dated up to Jun 1, 2022. I will no longer be updating Wikipedia articles. Mcvti (talk) 03:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

oh what happened, why stopped editing on wikipedia? Dsabr2 (talk) 23:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Mcvti was blocked, see below. I myself have no knowledge about what exactly happened, but the user was accused of pushing some point of view or whatever. --89.204.153.33 (talk) 22:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Cullen328 (talk) 01:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I reverted Wikipedia:Tendentious editing on Mandaeism article, repeated info about scholars in the Mandaeans article, and religions that I added in the Sabians article that don't fit the criteria for People of the Book. I am the lead editor for all these articles and it is my area of expertise. If you think that is disruptive, that's fine with me. Mcvti (talk) 03:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

The disruptive aspects of your editing have been discussed at great length at WP:ANI. Some editors have said that you have expertise that can be useful to the encyclopedia. But you seem inclined to push your own point of view rather than editing neutrally, and that you seem disinclined to do the work needed to build consensus. Please feel free to post an unblock request that addresses the substance of what your critics have said at ANI. Another administratrator will then evaluate your unblock request, and that person may or may not ask for my input. Cullen328 (talk) 04:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Could you please link to the discussion(s?) about the, quote, disruptive aspects, of their editing? --89.204.153.33 (talk) 22:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

@Mcvti: Sorry to see that you've been blocked. I would love to see you come back and contribute to Wikipedia again. Hopefully everyone can work out a compromise and you can start editing articles on Mandaeism again. Nebulousquasar (talk) 04:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Mcvti (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, so one and the same post mentioned Mcvti got blocked and can contribute again once, and I quote, the block has expired. Makes a lot of sense.

Becoming serious again, I was surprised by the news. I am the one whose edits (Mandaic language article, related languages) were reverted and then discussed, and I learned due to that discussion, which therefore was worth it. --89.204.153.33 (talk) 22:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

The ANI discussion that lead to the indefinite block can be found here. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 09:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Sabians article

Hello @Chuck Haberl: @ReligionProf: I have been editing Mandaeism, Mandaeans and Sabians articles for over a year now. I like to add weight to sources from scholars that specialize in Mandaeism, such as yourselves. This is the last version of the Sabians article that I edited [1]. I have been accused of pushing a POV and blocked from further editing mainly because I did not include religions to the article representing Sabians that don't meet the basic criteria of People of the Book such as polytheistic or dualistic religions like Sabaeans and Manichaeans. Frankly, the only religion that ticks all the boxes of being the Sabians of the Qur'an are the Mandaeans. I would appreciate any help regarding this since the Sabians article in its current status includes religions that have no chance of meeting the criteria of being the Quranic Sabians which would only muddy the water as to the true identity of the Sabians of the Qur'an. This may be detrimental to the remaining Sabian-Mandaeans in the Middle East. Regards, Mcvti (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, in my latest book, Häberl, Charles (2022). The Book of Kings and the Explanations of This World: A Universal History from the Late Sasanian Empire. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-800-85627-1. I outline the linguistic argument for Sabians as Mandaeans, namely that the Arabic name must have been borrowed from Babylonian Aramaic, if we follow the sources that identify the Sabians with a baptizing sect from lower Mesopotamia, since the third radical is not congruent with either the Syriac or Arabic cognates of the putative root underlying the Arabic name. I don't find the other proposed etymologies (from lexicographers both ancient and modern) convincing at all, nor do I believe that there must have been another group, in the same general area, speaking Babylonian Aramaic and practicing ritual immersions, other than Mandaeans, since that just unnecessarily multiplies entities. In the same book, I outline the evidence for Mandaean literature in late antiquity before Islam with our earliest securely dated Mandaean text, the Book of Kings. Chuck Haberl (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Mcvti (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm just a regular editor and know nothing of these subjects. But ya'll might find value in studying the essay WP:Expert editors, which in this topic means you. This will be hard to do, maybe, because when you're producing your professional works you might take people with other opinions (e.g those lexicographers Chuck mentioned) to task. But this venue isn't a scholarly journal nor a filter of truth, so you have to include their opinion (and criticism of yours) if its in WP:RS. And you can include your side's criticisms of their views, if its in WP:RS. Another helpful read to function here is WP:Writing for the opponent. Best of luck, and Mcvti, I hope you try to come back with these thoughts as your compass at this venue. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Zahroun Amara

Hello, Mcvti. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Zahroun Amara, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Zahroun Amara

Hello, Mcvti. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Zahroun Amara".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Sabian Scholars from the Abbasid Caliphate

Category:Sabian Scholars from the Abbasid Caliphate has been nominated for renaming to Category:Mandaean scholars from the Abbasid Caliphate. Please see WP:CFDS. – Fayenatic London 08:46, 26 November 2022 (UTC)