User talk:Raqib nizami

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Raqib nizami, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 08:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 08:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -- MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 08:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance on footnotes

Footnotes can be added inline to the body of your text using <ref> tags. An example looks like:

JavaScript is used on webpages today.<ref>Smith, John (2005), ''JavaScript 101'', ISBN 938223445333</ref>

And the resultant text would look like: JavaScript is used on webpages today.¹

With the superscript 1 being a link to a footnote at the bottom of the page automatically created by inserting the code: {{reflist}}

An easy to follow standard guide is at Referencing for beginners with citation templates, an online video demonstration can be played at Footnotes demo.ogv and a primer for general editing is at How to edit a page. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 11:25, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Circular references

For the last time, please stop citing Wikipedia as a reference. I urge you to read Wikipedia:Verifiability especially the section on "Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it". Claret Ash 11:51, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Claret Ash 08:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Claret Ash 12:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not support your edits with unreliable sources, as you did to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Claret Ash 12:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:khateeb88: The citation I used was using neutral language as stated in the textbook. Your revision to the earlier version reverts back to very inflammatory language, which Wikipedia is not meant for. Simply mentioning Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab's stated goals is enough for his intro, there is no need for opinion there. Maybe under "Assessment by Muslim Scholars" we can add whether he intended to form a new sect. Also, I do not doubt the authenticity of your sources, but they are all in fact biased towards one side. We do not want to debate about visions of Islam, only to provide an unbiased, neutral pov article about Wahhab.

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Claret Ash 12:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the message you recently left to User:Sanoseattle. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you. Claret Ash 06:44, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Muhammad, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Claret Ash 06:48, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copying

Please do not copy my words when giving advice to another user, as you did here and here unless you are confident it is completely relevant to the edits of the user you're advising. Claret Ash 08:20, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Claret Ash 23:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits show that your are in an edit war - not a violation of WP:3RR - but still disruptive editing. Since multiple editors are concerned about your recent edits, I suggest you take this to the article's Talk page, here - because I fail to see your edit stand, with so many editors expressing concern. Thank you, -- MST☆R ^{(Merry Christmas!)} 00:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, you may be blocked from editing. Claret Ash 10:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's you who is more likely to be blocked, for edit warring, unless you stop reverting the other editors.Jasper Deng (talk) 21:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Raqib nizami. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 22:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jasper Deng (talk) 22:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protected

The page is now protected from editing. Please discuss.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copying

As I advised above, please don't copy my words when giving advice to another user, as you did in the last sentence here (apparently copied from here), unless you yourself are familiar with the policies I mentioned. Claret Ash 23:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding your pattern of unconstructuve editing. The thread is POV at Wahhabi related articles.The discussion is about the topic Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Thank you. —Claret Ash 05:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability, not truth

Hello there. I saw your comment here and decided to comment upon it. Regardless of what The Truth might be, we live in a material world, and as long as we are in a material world the rules, regulations, and laws of that material world apply to us. Wikipedia is not where The Truth is accepted, not without verification - or "verifiability, not truth", as we put it. That means that whatever is placed on a Wikipedia page must be verifiable, using reliable sources, and it must be addressed in a neutral fashion; in addition, it should reflect the consensus of editors working on the article; consensus is established through civil discussion among those editors.

Regardless of what The Truth might acutally be, Wikipedia must only report on that which can be verified, and edit warring otherwise, and refusing to abide by Wikipedia's policies, will result in your not being allowed to edit at all. You have strong views - and that's good, Wikipedia needs editors who don't back down from their position when challenged. What Wikipedia also needs, though, is editors who will back down when they realise that their challengers are right to challenge, or when they realise that their position clashes with policy. What Wikipedia does not need, to use the applicable metaphor, are tigers loose in the museum.

I'd suggest you read the links I've provided in the above note, consider them, and agree to follow Wikipedia's policies as outlined there, along with the rest of the Five Pillars. If you can do that, then you have a long and productive editing career ahead of you here at Wikipedia. No editor is expected to be perfect; we've all been slapped with a trout a time or two for mis-steps. However we are expected to learn from those mis-steps; editors who can't, or won't, learn are not here to help and wind up being blocked or banned.

Ultimately, the choice is up to you - I hope that you will take this experience as a learning experience, and that your time spent on Wikipedia will be an enjoyable one. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	For having the courage to listen to and learn from criticism. Claret Ash 01:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! You earned this Barnstar : ) Doc Tropics 21:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

talkback

Hello, Raqib nizami. You have new messages at Coercorash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Coercorash^{Talk^Contr.} 10:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Assalaamu alykum. I've seen your efforts have cleaned article ibn Abdul Wahab more clean. And the translation of verses you posted have made me more confident. JazakALLAHu Khairah.

Now our next move should be to clean up the deobandi article. There are many nonsence statements like: Deobandi beliefs, like those of other Muslims, are based on the Quran and Sunnah.

And like deobandis are in majority in UK. Let's clean up it.

Coercorash^{Talk^Contr.} 18:16, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

Your addition to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Dougweller (talk) 06:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. It is your opinion that he was not Islamic, but as sources say he is, and we follow the sources, not editors' opinions, you must not remove this again. It isn't as though you haven't been warned about this. Dougweller (talk) 06:52, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]