User talk:SharabSalam/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Wish you safety and health

Dear fellow editor. The world is struggling to stay safe from the harms of a some tens of nano-meters sized virus. I wish you and your dear ones full safety from the dangers of this unilateral love! Regards. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Mhhossein, thanks Mhhossein.

I hope you are safe. I didn't have time for that article, sorry. When I have time I will add content and participate in the discussions. BTW, there are endless discussions there and there are always RfCs with very little attendance from editors outside the discussions. If this continues, it's going to be hard to improve the article.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 07:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome SharabSalam. No worries, I can understand that. Yes, there would be little improvement in this way. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Your revert at Biden allegation

You asked "how is this UNDUE, it is sourced?" Please read WP:NPOV. Not all Verified well sourced content goes in every article. The WP:ONUS is on you to justify inclusion, per WP:WEIGHT. I have stated why it's UNDUE. Please undo your reinstatement and use the talk page to gain consensus, if you feel strongly about this. SPECIFICO talk 02:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

SPECIFICO, the fact that the victim praised AOC comment is definitely noteworthy. That's how the content was since it was added. You need consensus to remove it. It's the long-standing version of that paragraph.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 02:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Please. Longstanding? The article is only a week old. That content was added today. The shorter version, which I restored, was the "longstanding" version -- at least several days of age. Verify this if you wish, but please restore the shorter version. SPECIFICO talk 02:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

SPECIFICO another editor has editwarred and removed the longstanding comment by Raeda in response to AOC.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 02:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Your advocacy of blocked sock User:SeriousIndividuals

Given your conduct in the recent ANI discussion of strongly defending User:SeriousIndividuals, who has now been indefblocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of an abusive editor, as well as your pattern of agreement with the blocked sock, I suspect you of being complicit in the conduct of the blocked sock. Have you ever edited under any other account? Have you engaged in offwiki communications to coordinate edits with others? BD2412 T 00:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

BD2412, I have no idea who that user is. I just think your repeated SPA name-calling was provocative. I wonder why is the sockpuppet investigation empty and closed by the same filler.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

These inquiries happen from time to time. Nobody's filed a formal investigation for you, SharabSalam, so I hope you won't get too concerned and will just answer BD2412's question. SPECIFICO talk 13:52, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

SPECIFICO, I have already answered. I don't know that user and I have never "engaged in offwiki communications to coordinate edits with others". I have edited under another account and I have made that clear and asked that my other account gets blocked as I am no longer going to use it. I used it just because I got logged off and then I forgot the password. I haven't used it wrongly and I have explained that. I don't necessarily agree with the blocked editor but I think that repeating the SPA name-calling was unneeded and provocative.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Also, I was wondering about this sockpuppet investigation. It's empty. I have never seen a sockpuppet investigation empty and then closed by the same admin.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 14:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

You appear to be implying that ST47 has misbehaved in some way. If so, you should say so directly. However, perhaps more importantly, you should be more careful in the future about who you associate yourself with. Those associations can affect the way people perceive you, and the weight they give to your judgment, for quite a long time. BD2412 T 15:06, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, BD2412. Yesterday I was a little bit angry. I could have said what I have said in a nicer way. I now think that I should have toned down the rhetoric. Also, I am not implying that ST47 has misbehaved. I am just curious. Also, I don't think I associated myself with anyone. I was just making comments just like the other editor who filled the report against you. I am involved in that discussion about Joe Biden.-SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 15:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week

Hello there. This is an invitation to join the 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week. £250 (c. $310) is being given away in May, June and July with £20 worth of prizes to give away every week for most articles destubbed. Each week there is a different region of focus, including one week dedicated to South-South East Asia, though half the prize will still be rewarded for articles on any subject. There's a potential £120 to be won in total for destubbing on any subject or region of your choice. Sign up if you want to contribute at least one of the weeks or support the idea! † Encyclopædius 11:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 13:54, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is IP personal attacks. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Just a courtesy notification, as you warned the IP in question as well. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hi, SharabSalam. Do you happen to know what ingredients are used to make Saluf (صلوف) bread in Yemen? If you can please give to me a link showing how this bread is made and baked in Yemen, I will be greatly appreciative. Thank-you.Davidbena (talk) 19:50, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena, I have never heard of it. Most of the stuff that I know are from my village. I will ask friends from Sana'a and see if they know about it. I assume that the bread is from northern Yemen?. Google doesn't give me an answer either, I found sources in Israeli language, no Arabic or Yemeni sources so I am not sure I know this bread. There is a type of a bread in my village that is called ṣulaʿh (sing.) and ṣulaʿ (plural) I was not able to find a source about this even in Arabic except this this which makes a passing mention reference to it. They could be related to Saluf since they sound similar but I doubt.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 20:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I think that saluf is the Sana'ani dialect for regular flatbread (about 2 cm. thick and 20-30 cm. in diameter) that is baked all throughout Yemen.Davidbena (talk) 08:04, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena, maybe it is Khamir (yeast based bread). It is known as "Iraqi bread" or "Yemeni bread" in the Arab world. In my village we call it "Khamir". Maybe the name Saluf is the old name of it. Here is a video--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 18:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is the bread that I'm referring to. How is it made in Yemen?Davidbena (talk) 19:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena, It's simple. It's made out of salt, yeast, white flour, dark flour and water. Here is a video [1]. Maluj is the same but they add fenugreek to the mix. I also want to note that we have very different names for the same thing in Yemen. For example, in Sharʿab we call it Khamir/khameer while in Ḥaḑramout Khamir/Bakhmr is a different thing. The Khamir in Ḥaḑramout is Zalabiyah or Muqasqas in North of Yemen. It's complicated. Unfortunately, there are no books about Yemeni food.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

That was very helpful. Thanks, SharabSalam.Davidbena (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Abrahamic religion

"a monotheistic Abrahamic religion" add in the short description? Your opinion? Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:00, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

"An Abrahamic monotheistic religion" Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:02, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Ndnenvjde, Sorry I removed "Abrahamic" accidentally. please go ahead and readd it.--SharabSalam (talk) 00:04, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

No problem :) Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, in the Jesus article I see "He is the central figure of Christianity." add that Jesus is an important figure in Islam as well? Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I think it's very important considering Islam is the only non-Christian faith that believes in Jesus and makes it an article of faith. What do you think? Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:17, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm also aware he is mentioned below in the article in the section, however I think it's important to refer this fact in the first sentence. Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:18, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Ndnenvjde, I don't know what you mean that Islam "believes in Jesus". You mean like worship Jesus? Think that he was the God? Or you mean that Islam believes Jesus was a prophet/a good man?.

For adding "Jesus is also an important figure in Islam" to Jesus article, I think it is fine

I would advise you to edit boldly and if you get reverted go to the discussion page which is Talk: Islam for Islam and discuss. You can read more about this in WP:BRD.

Right now it's too late here, tomorrow I will respond further to you. Good night.--SharabSalam (talk) 00:36, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

As one of the most important prophets in Islam.

Thank you :) Ndnenvjde (talk) 00:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019

Hello, I'm You Persian. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. You Persian (talk) 14:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. You Persian (talk) 14:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

​I feel sorry for you.--SharabSalam (talk) 14:16, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

feel sorry for me? It is you who support the Islamic Republic of Iran to killing Iranian children and women, not me. You Persian (talk) 14:18, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Tabun oven

Hi, Sharab Salam. I have just expanded on several sections in the article Tabun oven. I have translated excerpts taken from a book entitled Halikhot Teiman. I have made use of a Arabic words, which I transliterated into English. Perhaps, if you can find the time, you can add the real Arabic script alongside of these transliterated words, such as the splinters of wood, called in Arabic: luṣwah; or the cakes of sheep dung, called in Arabic kibe; or the small tree that grows in the Yemen called in Arabic jiʿdin, and from where they took small splinters of wood for lighting the tabun. Your assistance here is much appreciated.Davidbena (talk) 02:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Davidbena, I don't know most of these words, I will add what I think I know. The other words seem to be in a different dialect of mine. There are lots of words that I don't know from Amran, Sana'a and South Yemen dialects.

I have a question. The Tabun and Tandour are the same thing?.

I guess Tabun is mostly used in Syria and Lebanon because they use it to make Pita. It is also used to make Pizza in most countries. While Tondour/Tanour is the one that is used in Yemen. In Yemen it is sometimes called Tabun but mostly it is called Tanour. I think it could be mistakenly called Tabun.

The Tandour/Tanour is what we use in Yemen. This Al Jazeera 6 mins video shows a woman from Taiz using Tanour https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZb8kQuX0jU. It looks different from the Tabun (judging from the Tabun images that I saw in Google image).

In where I live in Taiz we use Tanour, it is made of burned clay. After we buy it we also add lots of clay around it so the heat don't go out and it become strong. I think, and I am not sure, that the Lwsiah is a think piece of wood. We put it inside the Tanour(Mafi). It helps make the Tanour stay in heat for long time. There is a hole at the bottom of the Tanour(Mafi), it is called "Ayin al-Mafi" the Tanour is called "Mafi" in rural areas of Yemen.

I don't know about the cakes that are made of sleep dung. There is something called Ṣirdad (in Arabic:صرداد) which is dried cow dung that is used to fire the Tanour instead of using wood. Only few old people do that. Most people don't do it anymore. I think Kibe could be old thing and only old people know about it. I currently have no idea what it is.

For the tree that is used to lighten the Tanour, I don't know what "jiʿdin" is. Are you sure about your transliteration?. I think the tree could be Acacia sensu lato or Leptadenia pyrotechnica.--SharabSalam (talk) 09:46, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Davidbena for your work in Yemen-related articles. I will do more research and see if I can add more things and if I can find the Arabic script for your transliteration..--SharabSalam (talk) 10:06, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Salam, asalam aleikum. I do not know if the tandour is the same as a tabun. My source was referring to the tabun (also called tanour), and it is made of burnt clay. There are different ways of making it. As for my transliteration of the Arabic words into English, they may not be accurate. I transliterated them from the Hebrew, using the equivalent Arabic-English letters. Yes, the Lwsiah is what our author was referring to. It's a piece of wood. As for the tree, I'll try to find out its scientific name the next time I visit the University in Jerusalem. There is a botany book which I saw there, describing the flora in Yemen. In the dialect of Arabic spoken in San'a in the early 20th-century, they called Ṣirdad (in Arabic:صرداد) by the name kibe (in Arabic: كِبة). Be well.Davidbena (talk) 13:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena In my personal opinion the Tannour (also called "Mafi") is the one that is used and was in Yemen. So the content you added about Yemen might be about Tandoor not Tabun article. The Tabun term seems to be misused at some point. In Yemen the word "Tabunah" (Arabic: طابونه) means wheat flour so some people used the term "Tabun" to refer to Tannour. The reason why wheat flour was called "Tabunah" is because there was no wheat flour in Yemen. The corn flour is the one that was mostly used in Yemen then a foreign company came to Yemen and produced wheat flour. The company brand/product was called "Tabunah" and so Yemenis called the wheat flour Tabunah. This is just my theory.--SharabSalam (talk) 04:56, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Actually, the Rabbi from Yemen (Yosef Qafih) who wrote the article about the Yemeni tannour calls it by two names: He wrote in his book: "Every house is used to stoking the oven twice a day; once for the morning meal in a smaller oven, called ṣuʿṭah, and once more at noon time in the larger oven, called simply tannour." (End Quote). Here, in Israel, we are accustomed to calling such clay ovens by the name tabun. I have never heard a person here, in this country, call the clay oven by the name tandour. In your place in Yemen, they also use a different name for the tannour, where it is also called "Mafi," but even here we're speaking about the same thing. In this country, they call it tabun.Davidbena (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena I was thinking about the "ṣuʿṭah" it is actually called "ṣuʿ'dah or ṣuʿ'd (صُعد). The basic example of ṣuʿ'd is just three stones together and some wood and fire. You probably have seen it, where a group of people sitting in the desert or somewhere alone and cooking meat at night. The ṣuʿ'd is the same or very similar. I don't know what it is called in English.

The Tabun and the Tandoor are different things, it's not about whether they are made of clay or not, it is about how they look like and how they work.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, you can't make Pizza with Tandoor.

This is Tabun

Tabun

This is how Tandoor looks like

Tandoor

Notice how the way you put the bread inside it, is different. The Tabun is the one that is used in North Arabia to make Pita and also in the West to make Pizza.

You can't make a Pizza with Tandoor.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Your photographs were helpful. To clarify matters, the older Yemenite Jews here, in our country, still make the tannour. Bread is stuck on the inner wall of the oven; it is not used to make pizza, but if they wanted to they could do so. The people here call the same oven "tabun". They do not use the word Tandour. The words tannour and tabun are used interchangeably here, in our country.Davidbena (talk) 18:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I hope the pictures helped. The Tannour has a cylindrical shape. If you searched in Google images for "Pizza oven" you would only see the Tabun not the Tandoor. You don't usually make Pizza with Tandoor because as you said you put the bread in the inner wall of the Tannour, vertically not horizontally, everything on the pizza will fall to the Tannour if you put it vertically.--SharabSalam (talk) 19:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Precisely. Here, too, the tannour has always a cylindrical shape, and they call it here, in our country, also by the name "tabun." The "tabun" may actually be a generic word for primitive oven.Davidbena (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Your edit here is not true. I know it is called Tannur but thats not the true name.. The Tannur and the Tandoor are the same thing. The Tabun is completely a different thing. The Tandoor/Tannour is the one that is cylindrical the Tabun is not. Please Google "Pizza oven" and "Pita oven" then click on images, what you see is Tabun. It is not cylindrical.

Do people in Israel in general call the oven that makes the Pizza, Tannur? (I am not talking about the Jews from Yemen).

Some people in Yemen do mistakenly refer to the Tandoor/Tannour as Tabun which I think happened because what I said above, a foreign company made a product called Tabunah, which is wheat flour –in Yemen wheat flour was not known back then– then the term meaning expanded to also refer to the Tandoor by the term Tabun. Su'd is not Tabun. It is a small fire that was used to cook things back in old times there was no gas in most of Yemen.--SharabSalam (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

@SharabSalam: So, it all comes down to semantics. I was not so much concerned about the original meaning of the word "tabun," but rather the connotation or usage of this word TODAY, here, in Israel. Perhaps a side-note can be appended to the article, making note of its varied meanings. Today, if you look on YouTube or even in other articles entitled "tabun" (Hebrew: טאבון), you will be shown the cylindrical shape, and one that is usually made of clay. Again, the shape is not critical. There can be other shapes as well. Jews in Yemen did not call their cylindrical oven "tandour," but rather "tannour." Some may have also been square-shaped. Today, the cylindrical oven is called by them here, in this country, "tabun." I wish to call your attention to the fact that the dialect of Arabic spoken in Yemen often differs from the dialect of Arabic spoken here, in the north. If you'd like, I can put you in touch with an Arab PhD who either taught or studied at Haifa University, and you can ask him personally about this one word "tabun" and how it is used here. Davidbena (talk) 03:26, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, see what it says in Tandoor#Etymology, the word "Tanour" is the same as "Tandoor". I didn't say Yemenis say "Tandoor", they say "Tanour" which is the same as Tandoor. The Tabun is not cylindrical, I mean most of the time not cylindrical, the trip as traditional ones looks cylindrical. I don't know how to explain it but when you cook a "Tabun bread" you don't put it in the wall of the oven but in it's floor. The Tanour bread is in the wall of the oven not in the floor. Also, the modern Tabun is the same oven that is used to cook Pizza. I will start a discussion there soon and see if we get more opinions about it.--SharabSalam (talk) 05:29, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

So, the problem arises with the word "tandoor" which I am no expert on. I do know that there is a separate article on the word Tandoor. I will write the Professor from Haifa University and ask him about the words. To the best of my knowledge, today, here in Israel, "tabun" is also used for the clay oven in general, whether the bread is baked on the floor of the oven or stuck to its inner wall. If I am mistaken, I will come back to you and apologize. Often, words have a tendency to change in meaning, and since "tabun" is not a pure Hebrew word, perhaps we, in this country, are using the word incorrectly. The word "tannour" is, both, a Hebrew and Arabic word. The Hebrew word is not bound by its shape. Even if one sticks the bread to the inner wall of the clay oven, or lays the dough on the floor of the clay oven, it is STILL called by us "tannour." The word "tandoor" is NOT used by us here, in Israel, and rightly so. The article says that the word "tandoor" is derived from the word "tannour." We already use the word "tannour," and it has a broad meaning.Davidbena (talk) 17:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

By the way, have you not heard of words like this in Yemeni Arabic = كِبيِة / كِبِى? I might be spelling it wrong. It is the name given for cakes of processed sheep droppings, one in the plural and the other in the singular.Davidbena (talk) 19:01, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, I know a word that might be related. Again, in Yemen there are lots of dialects and I speak the Ibbi dialect. The word is Makbi مكبي which means smoked, smoked with a small tree that grows in the mountains, we call that plant, (Ḥumar) حمر. There is Makbi milk, Makbi ghee etc. Note that the term Ḥumar also means Tamarind in Yemeni Arabic. The word كِبيِة / كِبِى could be related to the word Makbi which means smoked but I have never heard about these cakes. I have heard about Surdud which is Cow dung--SharabSalam (talk) 19:45, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, Are you sure that these cakes are like the cakes that we eat or is it a metaphor, like Dung cakes??--SharabSalam (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam, My understanding from what the Rabbi wrote is that he was referring to "dung cakes", but even so, he writes specifically that they were processed (prepared) by the Bedouins for selling in the market places, and used as tinder.Davidbena (talk) 20:30, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, So what you are talking about is called Surdud in my dialect. The word you gave Kibi might be its name in Sana'a. I also noticed that your book says Su'tah instead of Su'dah which shows that it is using Sana'an dialect like Ali Abdullah Salah used to say Sa'tah instead of Sa'dah.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:46, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

I see. So feel free to write the correct Arabic spelling. You are more expert than I in the Arabic language of Yemen. By the way, the late President, Ali Abdullah Saleh, was a great man. He was merciful. When I was arrested in Yemen, back in 1980, he gave the order to release me from the prison. I will always remember him for good.Davidbena (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam, I just received a reply (in Arabic) from the Arab who holds a PhD from the University of Haifa, answering my inquiry about "tabun" and "tannour." He searched a well-known Arabic lexicon (لسان العرب), and I will paste it here for you to read:

لسان العرب

وَطَبَنَ النارَ يَطْبِنُها طَبْناً: دفنها كي لا تَطْفَأ، والطّابُون:

مَدْفِنُها. ويقال: طابِنْ هذه الحَفِيرَة وطامِنْها.

تنر: التَّنُّورُ: نَوْعٌ مِنَ الْكَوَانِينِ. الْجَوْهَرِيُّ: التِّنُّورُ الَّذِي يُخْبَزُ فِيهِ. وَفِي الْحَدِيثِ:

قَالَ لِرَجُلٍ عَلَيْهِ ثَوْبٌ مُعَصْفَرٌ: لَوْ أَن ثَوْبَك فِي تَنُّورِ أَهْلِكَ أَو تَحْتَ قدْرِهم كَانَ خَيْرًا؛ فَذَهَبَ فأَحرقه ؛ قَالَ ابْنُ الأَثير: وإِنما أَراد أَنك لَوْ صَرَفْتَ ثَمَنَهُ إِلى دَقِيقٍ تَخْبِزُهُ أَو حَطَبٍ تَطْبُخُ بِهِ كَانَ خَيْرًا لَكَ، كأَنه كَرِهَ الثَّوْبَ الْمُعَصْفَرَ. والتَّنُّور: الَّذِي يُخْبَزُ فِيهِ؛ يُقَالُ: هُوَ فِي جَمِيعِ اللُّغَاتِ كَذَلِكَ. وَقَالَ أَحمد بْنُ يَحْيَى: التَّنُّور تَفْعُول مِنَ النَّارُ؛ قَالَ ابْنُ سِيدَهْ: وَهَذَا مِنَ الْفَسَادِ بِحَيْثُ تَرَاهُ وإِنما هُوَ أَصل لَمْ يُسْتَعْمَلْ إِلَّا فِي هَذَا الْحَرْفِ وَبِالزِّيَادَةِ، وَصَاحِبُهُ تَنَّارٌ. والتَّنُّور: وَجْهُ الأَرض، فَارِسِيٌّ معرَّب، وَقِيلَ: هُوَ بِكُلِّ لُغَةٍ. وَفِي التَّنْزِيلِ الْعَزِيزِ: حَتَّى إِذا جاءَ أَمْرُنا وَفارَ التَّنُّورُ ؛

قَالَ عَلِيٍّ، كَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَجْهَهُ: هُوَ وَجْهُ الأَرض

، وَكُلُّ مَفْجَرِ ماءٍ تَنُّورٌ. قَالَ أَبو إِسحاق: أَعلم اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ أَن وَقْتَ هَلَاكِهِمْ فَوْرُ التَّنُّورِ، وَقِيلَ فِي التَّنُّورِ أَقوال: قِيلَ التَّنُّورُ وَجْهُ الأَرض، وَيُقَالُ: أَراد أَن الْمَاءَ إِذا فَارَ مِنْ نَاحِيَةِ مَسْجِدِ الْكُوفَةِ، وَقِيلَ: إِن الْمَاءَ فَارَ مِنْ تَنُّورِ الْخَابِزَةِ، وَقِيلَ أَيضاً: إِن التَّنُّور تَنْوِيرُ الصُّبْح. وَرُوِيَ عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ: التَّنُّورُ الَّذِي بِالْجَزِيرَةِ وَهِيَ عَيْنُ الوَرْدِ، وَاللَّهُ أَعلم بِمَا أَراد. قَالَ اللَّيْثُ: التَّنُّورُ عَمَّتْ بِكُلِّ لِسَانٍ. قَالَ أَبو مَنْصُورٍ: وَقَوْلُ مَنْ قَالَ إِن التَّنُّورَ عَمَّتْ بِكُلِّ لِسَانٍ يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَن الِاسْمَ فِي الأَصل أَعجمي فَعَرَّبَتْهَا الْعَرَبُ فَصَارَ عربيّاً على بنار فَعُّول، وَالدَّلِيلُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ أَن أَصل بِنَائِهِ تَنَرَ، قَالَ: وَلَا نَعْرِفُهُ فِي كَلَامِ الْعَرَبِ لأَنه مُهْمَلٌ، وَهُوَ نَظِيرُ مَا دَخَلَ فِي كَلَامِ الْعَرَبِ مِنْ كَلَامِ الْعَجَمِ مِثْلُ الدِّيبَاجِ وَالدِّينَارِ وَالسُّنْدُسِ وَالْإِسْتَبْرَقِ وَمَا أَشبهها وَلَمَّا تَكَلَّمَتْ بِهَا الْعَرَبُ صَارَتْ عَرَبِيَّةً. وَتَنَانِيرُ الْوَادِي: مَحَافِلُهُ؛ قَالَ الرَّاعِي: فَلَمَّا عَلَا ذَاتَ التِّنَانِيرِ صَوْتُهُ، ... تَكَشَّفَ عَنْ بَرْقٍ قَليلٍ صَواعِقُهْ وَقِيلَ: ذَاتَ التَّنَانِيرِ هُنَا مَوْضِعٌ بِعَيْنِهِ؛ قَالَ الأَزهري: وَذَاتُ التَّنَانِيرِ عَقَبَةٌ بِحْذاء زُبَالة مِمَّا يلي المغرب منها.

I hope this will help clarify matters. If the lexicon brings out anything that is new, and which we have not covered in the article [[Tabun oven], please let me know and feel free to make the necessary changes in the article.Davidbena (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, most of the text isn't about the oven. You know... Arabic language has lots of meaning for one word.

Nevertheless, I will translate the parts that are about the oven.

First "Tabun": The word Taban' means "to bury something" and “Taban' al-Nar” means "buried the fire" so it doesn't extinguish. “Tabun” is where the fire is buried.

Secondly Tanour which is a lot of content. Most of what you wrote is about Tannour. It seems like if it is the word that was used in the old times in the Arab world. So the author tell a story to illustrate the meaning of Tannour. He says that there was a guy who was wearing a type of clothes that is stained by an expensive stain. While he was walking, some people told him, "If you put your cloth in the Tannour or in the stove(Su'd), it would have been better for you" end of the story. They meant if he brought food and fuel to his Tannour oven by the money he used to buy his expensive clothes it would have been better for him. Then the author says that the Tannour is an oven that iused to make bread.. the other content is about other things that are unrelated. The stain that is mentioned in the book is called Al-Mu'asfar. I was reading a book about ancient Yemen clothes (mostly about Yemeni cloaks) and I found this name. BTW, I know this Arabic lexicon but it doesn't offer a clear-cut answer--SharabSalam (talk) 22:13, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

I checked the book but the name of the stain, it is 'Asba. It sounded similar in Arabic so nevermind what I crossed above.--SharabSalam (talk) 22:33, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Okay. So I will write him again and make my question to him more direct, and ask him what is the difference between "tabun" and "tannour," and is there any difference in its shape or usage.Davidbena (talk) 22:19, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam, I received another reply from Dr. Ibrahim Basal, who replied to my questions by sending to me the name of a book and author who has written about this subject: شكري عراف، الارض الانسن والجهد, pages 53-54. Unfortunately, I could not find this book at our University library. The author has a Wikipedia page which you can see here. I'll continue to ask elderly Yemenite Jews here, in our country.Davidbena (talk) 21:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, I think someone whos from India, Pakistan, Iran could help more because they also have it there. For me, I didnt know what Tabun means. What we use is called Tannour which is also called Tandoor--SharabSalam (talk) 22:17, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam, I see. Hopefully, I'll be able to sit down in the coming days with a few older Yemenis who recently moved here to our country from Yemen and who have built for themselves these earthen ovens in their courtyards. I'll personally ask them what they called them in Yemen, and I'll ask them about their shape and design. Yesterday, while visiting the University library in Jerusalem, I saw an interesting book (of many volumes), entitled Arbeit und sitte in Palästina, written in German by Gustaf Dalman. In volume 4 he describes the ovens made by the Arabs in Palestine. He also has a section of black-and-white photographs of these ovens; some are made of stone, and others of clay. No two ovens are alike. The larger ones shown in the photographs he calls by their Arabic name tannur, all of which have an opening in the top, rather than in the side. They appear to be made of clay. The ovens with an opening in their sides and which are completely closed at the top except for a small air hole in its middle for ventilation he calls by the Arabic names ʿarṣa (furn). They too seem to be made of clay. One is made with a fire-pit beneath its side opening. What I found most helpful is that in the same book he shows a diagram (drawings) of two kinds of tabun. In one drawing, he writes for its caption "the West Palestinian tabun," which was made in a circular shape (presumably of clay) but with only one opening at its top, and which opening had a removable clay door, used for sealing it and preserving the heat. The fire was lit on the inside of the oven's floor, made of stone. In the other drawing, the caption reads "the East Palestinian tabun (furn)," and it is entirely made of clay, including its floor bottom, and it has two openings, one on the top and one in its side. Both openings are made with a removable door, used for sealing the oven and trapping its heat inside. In one photograph, he shows what he calls tabun, a large structure made of stones, and with an opening in its side. Another photo shows a smaller tabun made of clay, with an opening at its top, concerning which tabun the author writes that it was bottomless, meaning, it was portable and could be placed on any flat surface for building a fire. This book is an eye-opener for me.Davidbena (talk) 23:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, does the book "Halikhot Teiman" say Tabun or Tannour?--SharabSalam (talk) 23:23, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

The book "Halikhot Teiman" mentions only two types of ovens: tannour (which Qafih says was large) and ṣuʿṭah (which Qafih says was small). He does not mention tabun at all.Davidbena (talk) 23:33, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, See etymology section in Tandoor, basically Tannour is one of the names of Tandoor. I understand that in Israel they call Tannour, Tabun but thats where the content that you added about Yemen should be, in Tandoor. In a section called "Yemen Tannour". If I was in my village I would have provided images from there. I have one in our home in my village. The ṣuʿṭah is just a traditional Wood-burning stove.--SharabSalam (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

The problem with moving the content to Tandoor is that "Tandoor" is only a provincial word, not used by Jews in Yemen, nor by Israelis, nor by most Westerners. Moreover, in the Etymology section of the article "Tandoor," it clearly states there that the word's derivative is from "Tannour," a word which is used already, both, in the Arabic language and in the Hebrew language. The Hebrew word "tannour", by definition, is not limited to any size or shape, so long as it has the basic shape of an oven. Where the oven's door opening is situated is irrelevant. The modern-Arabic word "tabun" is now used in Israel to describe a "tannour" made of earthen material. This article is about a tabun oven, and from speaking with Arabs here, one has told me that he understands this word to mean any clay oven where bread can be baked by sticking the dough to its inner wall. Perhaps it would be better if we'd make this distinction early in this article, namely, that the tabun has different connotations for people in different places, just as Gustaf Dalman has written about in his book, and has even illustrated and photographed in his book. It is important to note here that the general term "tannour" is not bound by the Arabic word tabun and its definition, nor does the Arabic word tabun change the intrinsic meaning of the Hebrew word "tannour." The word "tannour" is inclusive.Davidbena (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

One more thing: The major problem that I have with the article Tandoor is that it shows images of their "tandoor", which images show forms and basic designs that are TOTALLY ALIEN to people here, in Israel and in Yemen. Our "tannours" and our "tabuns" are NOT made in that way at all, but rather like those images shown in the Tabun oven article. To apply our content to that article, judging by the design of their ovens, it would be grossly misleading to our readers. Davidbena (talk) 00:16, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena No, the photos in Tandoor article is what we use in Yemen. It doesn't matter if the photos look alien to Israel. We are talking about what is used in Yemen not Israel. To me what looks new is the Tabun. We use Tabun in Yemen but for making Pita which are not traditional Yemeni breads. See these photos from Sana'a [2], [3] they look like the photos in Tandoor/Tannour not Tabun.--SharabSalam (talk) 09:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

So, you are talking about the modern-designed tannour, one that is pre-fabricated. The idea is the same as the older ones built of clay and stubble. The YouTube link that you sent me shows a similar tannour, though older. My point is this. We already know the meaning of "tannour." The word is also used in our own language. We do not need a "Tandoor" article to teach us what a "tannour" is. The "tannour" is cylindrical, for the most. They put bread into the "tannour" from the top. Dalman's book also shows the Palestinian "tannour," and they seem to be built more thick. Some are not entirely cylindrical. My suggestion would be for you to add another section in the "Tabun oven" article, and in it describe the Yemeni clay oven used in villages.Davidbena (talk) 12:32, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena, the photos that I showed you, are the same Tannour that is used in villages but before they are installed. When they are installed in a home, people put additional clay or cement around it then they become like the one you saw in the video of Yemeni Tannour.--SharabSalam (talk) 15:08, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I see. That's very interesting.Davidbena (talk) 15:28, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Check Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

Please check Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. You Persian (talk) 14:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Assalamwalakum

Assalamwakum Talat parvez (talk) 06:11, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Va Alaikumusalam brother. I came to ask you a favour. Could you please edit and change Muhammed (SAW) nabi's wiki page in which its mentioned that he founded Islam. Isn't it more correct to say that he bought Islam to humanity? Avaiting your response. Thank you Luckyasif (talk) 18:10, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Awaiting =D Luckyasif (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Luckyasif,Wa alaykum Al-Salam, the problem is that there will be a lot of editors who would not allow me to do that. They argue that the Western non-Muslim academics believe that prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, founded Islam. I am so sorry for that. I myself, feel that it needs to be changed and attributed instead of just stating it in Wikipedia's voice. However, there is an article called Muhammad in Islam which is written in the point of view of Muslims.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Ahed Tamimi

Hi, the date in both articles is September 2018, and not 2019, as you wrongly wrote in the article. Even if it is updated to 2018, there was no travel ban. See, for example, here for her visit in London in May 2019. Please revert yourself. Noon (talk) 18:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Noon, I found this today in my Facebook timeline and I thought it is from this month. I think the Israeli authority banned Ahed from a specific travel that she was planning to Europe per the sources which I didn't make a deeper look to them,

They had planned to leave on Friday morning, but the Palestinian Authority liaison committee informed the family that Israeli authorities refused them permission to leave. Bassem Tamimi told Anadolu that authorities did not provide any reason for the ban.

--SharabSalam (talk) 19:54, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Dear Mr SharabSalam,

Recently, I have edited pages such as Ibn Haytham, and changed it from Arab to Iraqi. I did this as many of the other Wikipedia pages I have seen label the person: Persian, Phoenician, Egyptian, Syrian etc. I do not understand why you constantly reverse my edits, as I am not writing anything rude, or factually wrong. An administrator's job is to make sure there is no false information and to prevent any problems, however as an administrator you seem intent on getting rid of my edits. I am not in any way attempting to argue with you, I am just genuinely intrigued in why you keep changing my edits,

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazygalll12 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Dear Mr.Crazygalll12,

The vast majority of sources use the term Arab when describing Ibn al-Haitham so the the term "Iraqi" is non-defining. And the term Iraqi is not an ethnicity but a nationality. Also we already stated the he was born in Basra which is in modern day Iraq.--SharabSalam (talk) 21:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Actually, that's not correct. Ethnicity=nationality - the word you were needing is CITIZENSHIP; there are still "nation-states" - such as Japan - states made up of basically or overwhelmingly a single nation/ethnicity. Citizenship refers to political borders - which sometimes change often. Just FYI. 104.169.37.72 (talk) 01:32, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

thanks for this information.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Self-publishing and Books on Demand at Queen of Sheba - this ia an 1813 book accessible only this way but needs proper referencing

The author has been dead for over a century. The book isn't self-published. It's actually Zweytes Fläschchen, oder Sagen und Kunden des Morgenlandes aus arabischen, persischen und türkischen Quellen gesammelt (Stuttgart und Tübingen, 1813), 166. 7 Johann Heinrich Zedier, Grosses vollständiges Universal-Lexicon, Bd.\

The fact that you can get it at BoD doesn't make it self-published, it makes it accessible. What I'd appreciate your doing is to source it properly so that won't happen again. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 09:10, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

And did you really think I'd revert to allow a self-published book to be used as a source? Doug Weller talk 09:12, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Doug Weller, I thought you didn't notice. How can I source it properly?--SharabSalam (talk) 09:15, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Actually this is better.[4] Rosenöl: Erstes Fläschchen und Zweytes Fläschchen. Oder Sagen und Kunden des Morgenlandes aus arabischen, persischen und türkischen Quellen gesammelt.Joseph Hammer-PurgstallISBN 10: 3487126095 / ISBN 13: 9783487126098

Published by Olms Verlag, 2004 but you need to add the first publishing date of 1813. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Put 1813 in the date field and 2004 in the Edition field.Doug Weller talk 09:24, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

1RR Violation

Houthi movement and its talk page, Talk:Houthi movement are pages subject to a 1-revert limitation, as you no doubt saw when you edited them. Your recent reverts on these pages broke that restriction. Please revert them, so I won't have to report you. Here come the Suns (talk)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thanks for help with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jeremy_Corbyn#Antisemitism_accusations%3A_claim_with_irrelevant_source

Aingotno (talk) 22:59, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Aingotno Thanks!! and you are welcome.--SharabSalam (talk) 17:59, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry

We apologize for writing in your profile, but I was prevented from writing on the original article discussion page The answer is in the source on the right side of the royal order on the photo page, where the names of people who met at a house in Taif were written and suggested that if someone is fluent in Arabic, he will see the following headings:

• بدء تكوين الفكرة
• عقد الإجتماعات
• نشر الفكرة في الوطنيين

Ms.3hooD (talk) 20:09, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing of Racism in the Palestinian Territories

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Racism in the Palestinian territories, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

It appears you may have misunderstood what I said when I referenced consensus in my edit summary. I understand English may not be your first langauge, so this may explain the discrepancy. When I was referring to consensus in my revert edit summary, I was referring to the fact that there had not been a consensus for the revert that the user Nableezy performed. I did not claim that there was consensus for my revert, rather I was claiming that there was not a consensus for a revert to be done in the first place (I reverted the page back to what the user RodW, and also Zero0000 had last edited, because it had reverted by the aforementioned user. Due to the 1RR rule I am unable to revert the article back to the state it was in after edits by several editors, including myself. After the 24 hour period is up, I intend on reverting the article. If other editors would like the article to be improved, referenced more, more content added, etc, I would be happy to oblige and I would like this article to be edited constructively as I and others have done here. I wanted to make you aware of the error, and I do not intend to pursue this any further. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter, and have a nice day. Yallayallaletsgo (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Yallayallaletsgo, as far as I am concerned you are the one who introduced the bold edit. You got reverted multiple times for many reasons as mentioned in the talk page so per WP:BRD you are the one who should seek consensus. Even if your additions are sourced, per WP:ONUS you need to seek consensus first.--SharabSalam (talk) 23:03, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Are you part of the Houthi movement?

Hello. I have noticed that you tend to attack Saudi Arabia and defend the Houthis in wikipedia, or through adding or removing information such as adding information that Saudis are allied to Al qaeda, adding picture of bin Salman butchering yemenis, and adding that the coalition against Houthis are supporting ISIL/ansar Al Sharia. You also said Houthis treat Jews better than the Saudis and trying to remove anti-Semitism from Houthi group page etc etc.... I don't mind if you belong to a particular group in the middle east (Houthi/Iran or w/e), I just want to ask you to please remain neutral and edit wikipedia in a neutral voice instead of whitewashing/defending/attacking a certain group and reading between the lines into sources.

If I am mistaken I apologise, but I simply noticed your activity in Houthi related articles/edits and my observation could be wrong. Hope you have a wonderful day. Graull (talk) 19:30, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

@Graull: this speculation as to an editor's real-life affiliation is just not appropriate. If you have concerns regarding neutrality, just focus on that. El_C 19:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I am 100% neutral!.--SharabSalam (talk) 19:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I apologise. Please remove my inquiry since it is not appropriate. Best wishes. Graull (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

In talk pages I introduce my rational point of view and others introduce their point of views. Just because you found my point of view different than yours doesn't mean I am being biased. I edit in the main space with total respect to neutrality.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Al Hamdulillah!

Padewasab (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Padewasab, whats happening? Why are you saying Al Hamdulillah!? SharabSalam (talk) 19:46, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Egyptians

Hello, if some user keeps edit warring me, and falsifies citations to support a specific opinion. What can I do? I can prove that he is falsifying references because we discussed multiple time and i don't think he doesn't understand anymore. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sefarat90 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Sefarat90, I will see if I can resolve this problem when I have time. No need to stress yourself out. If you dont want to wait then read this WP:DR. You can request dispute resolution from here Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard or you can start a request for comment in the talk page. You can find the instructions in these pages Wikipedia:Requests for comment and Wikipedia:Writing requests for comment.-SharabSalam (talk) 05:58, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Hello Sir, the section is already added under the Ottoman Rule [5]. Treannmust (talk) 12:07, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

A question about your username

Hello.

I was wondering if I could ask your a question of personal nature, just out of curiousity. You've mentioned that your username is blocked in the Arabic Wikipedia. What's wrong with it? flowing dreams (talk page) 12:27, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Flowing dreams, in Arabic wikipedia usernames of places like "New York city", "Saudi Arabia", "Mecca" are not allowed. My name is the same as Shara'b As Salam District so they blocked me. I wrote the fact that I am blocked because of username in my user page because some editors in English wikipedia think that I was disruptive in Arabic wikipedia so that I got blocked.--SharabSalam (talk) 12:33, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! It was a useful piece of info! 😊 flowing dreams (talk page) 12:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

You might want to put a better (even if brief) explanation there - I too guessed that you were blocked for some reason (which seemed surprising), but I happened by curiosity to browse your talk page and found this item. :) My suggestion: "(blocked there because my username matches a city district name)". Boud (talk) 20:58, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I did what you suggested. I wrote that because I got reverted by an editor just because I am blocked from Arabic wikipedia. I felt that there might be some users who are going to find out that I am blocked in Arabic wikipedia and they would assume that it is because I was doing bad things there. Especially that the username rule of Arabic wikipedia is not in English wikipedia, so they wouldnt think I was blocked because of my username. Thanks for your suggestion.--SharabSalam (talk) 21:25, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

BLP

Before advising editors to contact legal about a BLP violation, they should be advised follow the guidance as described in the BLP policy(WP:BIOSELF) Legal is more for matters of libel and defamation, not BLP violations. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

331dot, thanks for this information.--SharabSalam (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Tunisia

I reviewed and accepted your edit at Tunisia. Indeed, the spelling that was there formerly was correct for French, but not for English. Since this is en-wiki, your change is an improvement. Thanks for your contributions! Mathglot (talk) 02:02, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!.--SharabSalam (talk) 05:16, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

United Nations

Hi SharabSalam. I know we got off on the wrong foot, but I do appreciate your work on wikipedia. I want to make you aware that the issue on the United Nations page regarding that map is still going on. Your input on how to resolve this is much appreciated. Wadaad (talk) 08:57, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

I have started a new discussion on it here.[6] Your input is much appreciated. Wadaad (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Wadaad, sorry I was a little bit busy. I suggested before that we remove the maps from the article. I don't really remember when we got off on the wrong foot?. If you are talking about Ilhan Omar, it was just a debate.--SharabSalam (talk) 14:18, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Tribes of Arabia

Sharab, can you explain why your removal of reliably sourced information was based on WP:weasel, as you stated in your edit summary? I see no weasel wording. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 15:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

You don't see the word "some" yet even the source doesn't state that in its voice and says "it is even believed that" blah blah. And it doesn't say historians. I have added what the source says again with attribution.--SharabSalam (talk) 16:14, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

WP:ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.142.216.106 (talk) 14:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

North and East Syria

I'm wondering: what did you mean with: "Failed verification that North and East Syria is Rojava"? That assertion is/was not made in that lead section, the assertion was: "The Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (NES), sometimes referred to by the name Rojava...". I have a problem with that statement too, and have today (after you) requested a precise citation for it. Ofcourse I don't have those books of Zabad and of Allsopp, so I can't check in those books. But what did you mean with : "failed verification"? Did you check in those books (and find something else), or did you just wonder, like me, what those books exactly write on the issue? --Corriebertus (talk) 16:52, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Sources for medical content

Please read WP:MEDHOW, WP:WHYMEDRS, and the sections of WP:MEDRS. You can ask questions here concerning aloe vera products or other herbal compounds. --Zefr (talk) 21:51, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Aloe vera. This mobile IP editor seems to be you. A request to admin for blocking you will be made if you vandalize this article again. Zefr (talk) 23:27, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Zefr, thats not me. I just watch that article. I was just asking a question why the IP sources are not reliable. It is too late right now, I receive emails whenever I get notified. I understand that you are upset from the IP behaviour but I saw the sources and they seemed fine to me. I will read the policies you cited tomorrow.--SharabSalam (talk) 23:39, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert reminder

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

O3000 (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi SharabSalam. I have closed the ANI report with no action. I do understand that the user was being difficult and combative towards you so I don't blame you for being a bit too aggressive at ANI, however I do have to warn you against making accusations of sockpuppetry. Even if you believe a user is not "new" or is a sockpuppet, accusing them is a personal attack. Either you're wrong, and you're hassling an innocent user, or you're right, and you're broadcasting to them directly that they need to do a better job of evading scrutiny. If you think a user is a sock, report them at WP:SPI with evidence, or don't make the accusation at all. Also, just because a new account does not appear to be "new" does not mean they're not allowed to edit here. It could be a fresh start, it could be a valid alt, it could be an experienced IP who just registered, or you could be wrong and they're just a competent newbie. Again, unless you have evidence that they're a malicious sock, it's irrelevant, and demanding that they explain themselves to you is harassment. Thanks, ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 18:23, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Swarm, Alright. I understand. I will never accuse anyone again of being sockpuppet unless I have strong evidences.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I think you are not being objective.

You have erased my entire edition of synthesis from the header supported by sources.

The Spanish language has an 8% Arabic influence (I already gave you a source), that very little compared to the other languages that are on the list.

Your argument that it should be on the list because there is an article on Wikipedia:

1- Wikipedia is NOT a source nor can it be used as a source or argument.

2- There is also Wikipedia on Arabic influence in languages that are not listed.

I have started a Talk, I will wait if someone participates and then modify again. SmithGraves (talk) 22:19, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

SmithGraves, We cant create articles about things that are not notable but fine. Here is a source that says Arabic in particular contributed many isolated words and expressions to the Spanish vocabularies.[7]--SharabSalam (talk) 22:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I think you're still not understanding me. I do not say that there is no Arabic influence in Spanish, I say that this influence is very minor in relation to the other languages on the list. 8% is significant compared to other European languages, but very little with respect to those in the article.

And I repeat, you can not use Wikipedia articles as an argument, it is prohibited, it is not a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmithGraves (talk • contribs) 22:29, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Matrilineal Arabs

I shouldn't have muddied the waters by stating my rejection of the norm, and ancedotal/speculative evidence that it may be changing in parts of the Arab world. The fact is that the norm exists however. Should it affect our editing of the page? (I.E. should we have a different standard for counting a patrilineally-descended Arab as Arab--doing so as a matter of course for those with Arab fathers--while only counting a matrilineal as such with RS?) GergisBaki (talk) 10:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

GergisBaki, let me first say that I have no interest whatsoever in the article of Arab Americans so if you do add a name there I will not bother and revert you.

Secondly, I think what you are trying to do is wrong in Wikipedia. We don't have a standard related to patrilineally-descended or matrilineal-descended Arabs. We need a source that explicitly say that the person is Arab whether his mother or his father is Arab is irrelevant (this is per WP:OR and WP:SYNTH which I recommend you to read). However, we can say that his mother or his father is Arab but we cant say he is an Arab unless we have a source that explicitly says that he is an Arab.

For saying that Arab tradition is offensive, don't worry, I already forgot about it. Let's just focus of what you are suggesting.--SharabSalam (talk) 12:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Again, let's leave aside my views on this norm as that's really obscuring the point I was trying to make.

Generally on Wikipedia, with respect to ethnicity classifications, we don't rely on explicit sources saying "Sam is black" or "Sam is Hispanic." Rather we infer this from their parental ancestry. Maybe this is OR, but it's become the norm on Wikipedia.

This practice is currently occurring on the "Arab American" page as well. If you go there you will find a lot of people who are listed as Arab Americans because of maternal ancestry, without an explicit source, based on matrilineal ancestry. (The same thing is happening, of course, for people with a paternal ancestor.)

My point was that this practice is questionable when it comes to a person with only an Arab mother, because the vast majority of Arabs would not consider that person to be an Arab. I know you, unlike most editors on the page, are aware of this norm because of your name. So I am curious to see what you think. GergisBaki (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

GergisBaki, I get what you are saying. I think this should not be the case. We shouldn't say someone is something unless we have a source that explicitly describe them as such. Obama had a white mother and his father was black and we only say that he is African American or Black American, we dont say he is mixed or that he is white, we only say what reliable sources say. This is what I think. You can ask other editors or just be bold and add the names and see if someone is going to revert and see what they would say in the talk page.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:58, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I think that makes sense. Actually, there is no reason why the Arab understanding of who is Arab should inform Wikipedia's classification of "Arabs," any more than the Chinese understanding of who is Chinese (similarly patrilineal) should inform us. We should go off of RS only. Those RS will obviously tend to reflect a Western (bilineal) understanding of ancestry, but so what? We go off of RS on Wikipedia.

I still need to brush up on some of these policies to be honest but this makes sense to me. GergisBaki (talk) 15:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Sétif and Guelma massacre

There is literally nothing NPOV about calling the french "terrorists" every time they're mentioned. There's no "gaming the system here". 2604:6000:FFC0:54:5D97:40B6:3599:6C13 (talk) 02:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Arabic article, et. al.

You might be interested in knowing about this. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Apologies

Sorry for putting it on the article instead of here. I was just fooling around, but now I know better. I will make useful changes instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.209.246 (talk) 22:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

• Speaking of apologies: SharabSalam, you owe Bbb23 an apology for that nonsense on ANI about Bbb having "survived" a report that alleged they were abusive. You know that report was total BS and if you didn't, you should read it. Come on now. Drmies (talk) 03:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

  Bbb23 disrespected Selfstudier work by making a patronising comment. I didn't say something rude, I said something factual. I probably didnt have to say it but it was an innocent reaction because I already wanted to report AuH2ORepublican but I didnt have time, and selfstudier did a great job but Bbb23 totally dismissed the report and said that no one is going to read it, simply because it is too long and that it is a mess. The selfstudier report wasnt actually long, it was full of diffs(links) in a table, I assume that Bbb23 read the number of bits (<10,000) and assumed that it is a long report. Regardless, Bbb23 shouldn't just dismiss reports like this, and if Bbb23 doesnt want to read then there is no need to response with that type of tone, Bbb23 could have said, "Please read WP:TPG, long post are ignored" or anything, and just without calling someone's work a mess.--SharabSalam (talk) 09:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

User page edits

I think it's best to wait until the MfD is concluded before starting to edit userpages to remove the contested userbox. That userbox has been there for years, waiting another week seems sensible. El_C 17:38, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

El C, according to WP:UP#NOT, "Extremely offensive material may be removed on sight by any editor." a user calling a terrorists designated as a terror groups by 28 European nations and the US as well as Turkey, freedom fighters, is without any doubt an extremely offensive material.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:20, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Why are you splitting this discussion in so many places? El_C 18:22, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

El C, I am not splitting the discussion, I went to your talk page after I found out that you have reverted me, I wasnt aware that you have sent me a message.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, let's just pick one venue to discuss this, because it's becoming confusing having all these forums. El_C 18:30, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Four venues, even. We have the MfD discussion, we have the AN discussion, we have the discussion here, and the one on my talk page. El_C 18:31, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019

Please be careful about what you say to people. Some remarks, such as your addition to User:BarcrMac can easily be misinterpreted, or viewed as harassment. Wikipedia is a supportive environment, where contributors should feel comfortable and safe while editing. Thank you. ——SN54129 18:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on User:BarcrMac; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ——SN54129 18:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, WP:UP#NOT, "Extremely offensive material may be removed on sight by any editor." a user calling a terrorist group designated as a terror group by 28 European nations and the US as well as Turkey is without any doubt an extremely offensive material--SharabSalam (talk) 18:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

YOU do not not dictate to Wikipedia, an nor does the Turkish (or any other) government. ——SN54129 19:03, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, terrorism and advocating for violence should never be tolerated in wikipedia. Also no need to shout.--SharabSalam (talk) 19:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:SharabSalam reported by User:Serial Number 54129 (Result: ). Thank you. ——SN54129 19:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Even though I agree with you about the userbox

SharabSalam,

Even though I agree with you on the userbox, I want to ask you to dial back the commentary. I disagree with the box and as far as I'm concerned, it's a straight-up TOS violation (specifically, "Illegal acts"). That said, others disagree. It might be a good idea to not be disagreeable about this.

For example, a certain sysop protected the userbox and left it up, now I disagree with this, but won't say a word about him or to him on his page. An MFD is running, I say let it run it's course, it it remains, it remains. Necromonger...We keep what we kill 20:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wekeepwhatwekill, You want me to dial back the commentary? Is this an idiom? I am not a native speaker and I couldn't understand what exactly you want me to do. Could you say it in an explicit way? Thanks. --SharabSalam (talk) 13:20, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Got it! "Dial back" is an American idiom, it refers to older volume controls, to dial back the volume control means to make the music (or the speech) coming out of the radio, lower or softer.

In short, I'm asking you to be calmer when speaking with people. For example within this discussion Vanamonde93 referred to me as a "wiki lawyer". Even though I consider that a pejorative term, I'm not going to continue to engage him. I'll stop and let others vote and see where it goes.

If I try to defend myself, I already know I'll get worked up (I'm a researcher by hobby and I love a good spirited debate, to be sure, but that doesn't work on Wikipedia ). Just calm down, you've already made your point at the deletion discussion, ok. Necromonger...We keep what we kill 13:25, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

​Alright. I will dial back the commentary. Yesterday I was a bit upset, because as you know this is a terrorist group and someone is calling them freedom fighters, but I get your point. I will try to be calm from now on.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Tulsi Gabbard

FWIW: Both of you (SharabSalam & Here Comes the Sun) are in violation of both of the special DS on Tulsi Gabbard's BLP. (1RR + "enforced BRD") Please consider discussing on the talk page if you think it is important, and please try to avoid getting yourselves in trouble with the wikipolice. Best, 🌿 SashiRolls ^{t · c} 16:35, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

SashiRolls, the BRD is with me and there is no 1RR on that article as far as I know. Also the article explicitly says that Assad is a suspect and therefore it is still an accusation--SharabSalam (talk) 16:37, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

(watching) It's on the talk page: WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES with lots of red font  :) ——SN54129 16:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Serial Number 54129, yea I just noticed that. I usually see the notice in the article not in the talk page.--SharabSalam (talk) 16:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

No worries, US politics articles are a minefield. ——SN54129 16:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Use of chemical weapons in the Syrian Civil War

Your last edit there violates the 1RR restriction. i suggest you undo it, as you risk being blocked. Here come the Suns (talk) 18:57, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Here come the Suns, it doesn't. I made one revert.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Here come the Suns (talk) 19:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Unexplained reverting on Ilhan Omar page

You reverted my edit that restored the material about hate speech against Ilhan Omar sourced to the NY Times. That material was discussed at Talk:Ilhan Omar#Article in NY Times. Two other editors agreed with me that it was appropriate to include it, and no one opposed it. If you believe it should be removed, please take the matter to the talk page for discussion. The edit that originally removed that text was not a minor edit, and should not have been marked "m". According to Minor edit: A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions. Examples include typographical corrections, corrections of minor formatting errors, and reversion of obvious vandalism. A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Also, what are you referring to by "recommendations" to remove the material? Whose recommendations and where? The normal place to find discussion and recommendations is on the talk page. Please restore the material (self-revert) until the matter has been discussed on the talk page and a consensus to remove it has been reached. Thank you. NightHeron (talk) 12:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

NightHeron, sorry?. all what the editor did is that he named a reference and removed a repeated reference. He was recommended that he does that especially that the quote inside one of the references was not important. That's all what I see he removed. He only removed a repeated reference. Could you check again the edit?. Thanks.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

And he was recommended in the help desk or the tea house. I don't remember where exactly.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:28, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

You're right, the removal was limited to the quote inside the reference. I apologize for jumping to conclusions and over-reacting. But let me explain the background to what was removed. The reference was repeated because I don't know how to use "ref name=/" when the second footnote includes a quotation. The sentence in the footnote was originally in the text. An editor removed it as unnecessary but told me on the talk page that I should feel free to restore it. As a compromise I restored it in the footnote but not in the text. My reason for thinking the sentence was helpful is as follows. The previous sentence makes an allegation that some readers might find difficult to accept: "A large proportion of these trolls were likely bots or automated accounts run by people, organizations or state actors seeking to spread political propaganda and hate speech." The sentence that was in the footnote shows that this statement was not idle speculation, but rather was based on scientific analysis, namely: "That's based on telltale iconography, naming patterns, webs of linkages and the breadth of the postelection scrubbing." If you agree with the other editor who didn't think that sentence is helpful or necessary, then I'll accept that and won't put it back. In that case just tell me that you disagree with my reason for including that sentence in the footnote. Thank you. NightHeron (talk) 14:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

NightHeron, well... At first I thought that the "quote" was not needed. I think the sentence is needed but it doesn't seem that the purpose of the |quote= parameter in the citation template is to provide notes. Its purpose is to provide a quote from the reference that verify the content not add additional content or information. I think it is a note. I have added it as a note. Is this okay? If it is not okay then I will self-revert to the one before the reference was removed because if you think thats how quote parameter works then I might be wrong. And if the quote is needed then we can repeat references even if the links are the same.--SharabSalam (talk) 14:46, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam The only problem with that way of handling it is that it's not clear that it's a direct quotation from the source. It looks like it's the words of an editor. NightHeron (talk) 15:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

NightHeron, so what about, According to the study, this was based on "telltale iconography, naming patterns, webs of linkages and the breadth of the postelection scrubbing."?--SharabSalam (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam Sure. Perhaps replace "this" by "this conclusion". Thanks. NightHeron (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Done.--SharabSalam (talk) 17:48, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey all! To @NightHeron:, sorry for stepping on any toes regarding the section you started. Thanks to both of you for working this out. In fact, the final version is almost exactly what I hoped to produce! I'm fairly new, so this conversation was quite instructive. On re-reading, I have one last question regarding the article: is there a reason not to include the quoted details in the article itself? Anyway, thanks to both of you for your help. Jlevi (talk) 20:27, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Jlevi No problem, but thanks for the message. When we discussed this material on the talk page last month, an editor I much respect, User:Gandydancer, trimmed the passage by omitting that sentence, but told me she wouldn't object if I insisted on having it. So I compromised by putting it in the footnote. NightHeron (talk) 20:35, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

If you and Jlevi both feel it should be included in the wording that is fine with me and perhaps that is the way to go. Gandydancer (talk) 02:22, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. NightHeron (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:EmptypagesMedia bias against Bernie Sanders

Please note that I do not need to be the author to place this tag. Per WP:G7, "If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request." Hug^syrup 13:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

China's size

As it is itself stated in Wikipedia with the reference of Britannica that USA is third or fourth largest country in the world. Thus the same logic will apply for China or make correction in USA page also. Satyabrat Shanu (talk) 03:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

And in the list of countries by area it is stated as third largest country, not second. Satyabrat Shanu (talk) 03:09, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Satyabrat Shanu, oh yea, I meant by land. I made some mistakes in the edit summary. China is the second by land which means area excluding the water. I will see which one is right and which one is wrong tomorrow. I get your point about the U.S.. However, I still haven't checked the sources in the US article. I will do that tomorrow.--SharabSalam (talk) 03:17, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Your recent editing history at Tulsi Gabbard shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:SharabSalam reported by User:Muboshgu (Result: ). Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jihad Watch; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by TVC 15 (talk • contribs)

It's not harassment to point out that you're edit warring. It's part of the process required in reporting edit wars. So, stop edit warring, and you'll stop being warned. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:12, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Muboshgu, 1-I have already been warned minutes before you warned me. 2-You are not involved in this dispute.

I cant think of any other reason except that you are trying to retaliate for the editwar report that I filled against you.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Other users keep removing properly-sourced information from the article to push their viewpoint. Reverting POV-pushing is not edit warring. PopesTouch (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:36, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

PopesTouch, I have replied to your dispute resolution. In case you havent seen my reply, you were editwaring with the photo of Ian Smith. You kept changing it even though there have been 3 editors not agreeing with your proposed photo.--SharabSalam (talk) 22:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Also, Smith's line "the more we killed, the happier we were" is a reference to guerrilla terrorists, not Black civilians, so it doesn't prove a thing. PopesTouch (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

PopesTouch, they were freedom fighters not terrorists--SharabSalam (talk) 19:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Shortly after we had a passing disagreement on a Talk page

I received a notification that you added something about me on the Arabic language version of Wikipedia. I cannot read Arabic, so I don't know what it said.

Since then, I have received an email via Wikipedia, also written in Arabic.

I have no idea what this is about, but I would appreciate if you would immediately remove all references to me on ar.wikipedia.org, as I have no involvement in that space.

Thank you soibangla (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, I am blocked in Arabic wikipedia. I can't make any edit there. Could you show me what appears in the notification?--SharabSalam (talk) 00:37, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately the notification disappeared, which they tend to do for no apparent reason. But I noticed the addition very shortly after we disagreed on the Putin Talk page. You had nothing to do with it? soibangla (talk) 00:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, Yes, I have nothing to do with it because I have done nothing in Arabic Wikipedia since July. Does the notification say my name? How can a notification disappear? Do you see 99 notifications when you get notified? Click on the notification bottom and click on the "mark all as read" bottom, keep doing that until they all be marked as read then you will see all the notifications sorted by time..--SharabSalam (talk) 00:52, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Well then I apologize, it just seemed an odd coincidence. I can't seem to bring that notification back, sometimes I briefly open one to preview, go do something else, then return and find it's gone, while others I've read are still there. Muboshgu, do you have any theories as to why I got mentioned on the Arabic site? If someone seeks to communicate with me, speaking Arabic won't work. Quite odd. soibangla (talk) 01:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, Why did you tag Muboshgu?. This sounds like canvassing in a dispute.--SharabSalam (talk) 01:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, Anyway, you got notified because you entered Arabic wikipedia while logged on for the first time since you created your account and that automatically created an account for you in Arabic Wikipedia(before that you didnt exist in Arabic Wikipedia). There was probably no mention of me in the notification.(your Arabic account says that you joined one day ago.)--SharabSalam (talk) 01:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Huh, well that's kinda odd. Nevermind then. Cheers. soibangla (talk) 01:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, not odd at all. You also received a welcoming message in your talk page by صالح which is probably why you got an email.[8]--SharabSalam (talk) 01:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

But you see, the only reason I went to the Arabic site was because of the notification I received. But anyway, thanks. soibangla (talk) 01:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, I think there is a way to know who mentioned you, for example here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Soibangla is where you are mentioned in English Wikipedia and for the Arabic version you will change the "en" to "ar" like this https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Soibangla though it appears that no one mentioned you.--SharabSalam (talk) 02:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Also you can't be mentioned before joining Arabic Wikipedia because as I said earlier your account didn't exist there until you entered the Arabic Wikipedia while logged in. So when someone mentions you there he will receive a notification saying something like "your ping wasn't sent because the user doesn't exist".-SharabSalam (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Soibangla, are you sure you didn't visit the Arabic Wikipedia first? I've gotten notifications and emails from other language WPs when I've clicked a crosswiki link. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Muboshgu: That's entirely plausible, maybe I was moving so fast I didn't notice where a link went (or which link it was, or why I would click it) but I don't recall looking at an Arabic page, which I'm pretty sure I would've remembered. I only remember viewing an Arabic page after receiving the notification, which then vanished. The subsequent email simply said "New Message" in the subject, with some Arabic, rather than "Welcome," which would've tipped me off that I had somehow created an account there, so to me it appeared someone sent me an email. Weird. Apologies to SharabSalam for my error. soibangla (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Rollback

Just a quick note, I see that you have rollback, which is useful when a vandal makes more than one edit in a row (like here, when a single undo wasn't enough [9]). Wikiacc (¶) 16:37, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice the previous vandalism.--SharabSalam (talk) 21:50, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

common.js

Your common.js file at User talk:SharabSalam/common.js is certainly not going to work while you have non-JS text in it. Please blank the file and place your {{help me}} request here on your user talk page. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Silly me, I failed to distinguish between user and user talk space.

Nevertheless, you'll want to keep your {{help me}} request on your user talk page, where you'll get notified of responses.

As for debugging your common.js file, it's pretty hard for someone else to fix it when it stops working. About the only suggestion I have is to blank it and add the scripts back in one-by-one, checking after each that it's functioning correctly, until you find the one that is misbehaving. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:56, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

jmcgnh, I removed all of them and only left one script and that one script is not working.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 15:44, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I could not get that one script to install, so I'm not able to tell you what I found. Try a different script? Somehow you have to get back to a status quo ante where things are working properly. Try a different browser? Try on a different computer? It's a divide and conquer strategy and you have to assume that the battle line is somewhere closer to you, your browser, and your computer than it is to Wikipedia's servers. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:39, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

jmcgnh, I don't think the script is the problem. It might be as you said, my browser. I am using my phone most of the time. I will try using another phone or I will open my laptop. Thanks for your help.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

jmcgnh, yea. The problem is from my phone. I am using my friend's phone and the script is working.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 20:06, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

SharabSalam, As much as I'd like to help further, I don't think I can. Be sure to try from your laptop, since that may give additional clues as to where to look for the problem. Scripts in common.js are not required for editing Wikipedia, they just make things easier or more customized for the way you like to do things. But if scripts aren't working, there may be other aspects of Wikipedia that won't work for you, either: if your phone is set to disallow JS from Wikipedia, for instance. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

wp:v

Please read wp:v, a source has to show the picture is is being sourced too.Slatersteven (talk) 18:04, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

- MrX 🖋 15:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

TBAN violation

SharabSalam, your participation here constitutes a topic ban violation. The TBAN is from Iranian politics, not from pages related to Iranian politics. You are welcome to write about Camel urine in general, but where that topic becomes relevant to Iranian politics, you may not write about it, nor participate in talk page discussion, nor discuss the behavior of other users with respect to this topic. Please read WP:BANEX very carefully, and consult an administrator beforehand if you're unsure if a given topic is covered. I'm not sanctioning you this time, because I'm assuming you made this mistake in good faith, but you may be blocked without prior warning, next time. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Vanamonde93, that is not related to politics. It's related to Islam. Read the topic again.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Vanamonde93, please explain to me what is the scope of this ban. I believe the topic about camel urine usage in Iran is about Islam. It's not related to politics. Is Islam topic also covered in this topic ban?--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The group that calls itself "prophetic medicine society" is founded by a private person. It has nothing to do with politics. And this topic is absolutely not related to politics. It's all about usage of camel urine.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

You are correct, this content is okay. I have struck my formal warning above; please accept my apologies. The rest of my advice still stands. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Vanamonde93, no problem. I also deeply apologize for what happened and what I said to you in the past. And by the way, I am trying to avoid politics in general because politics makes me say or do things I wish I haven't said or done even outside Wikipedia. The topic ban has actually benefitted me.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Glad to hear it; political articles are difficult, and keeping a sense of perspective is a challenge. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)