User talk:Vice regent/Archives/2012/September

Recent edits

I just reverted some of your edits re the film "Innocence of Muslims". You had deleted a specific quote from a highly reliable world wide source, Reuters, in favour of a long list of adjectives from a number of sources, with a waffly introduction like "recent media sources..." or some such.

I want to point out to you than in successful reporting, sometimes "less is more". The more sensational newspapers are naturally going to emphasise what the Western World's readers are going to buy: sex, paedophilia, homosexuality.

Reuters, on the other hand, put their finger precisely upon those things that are offensive to Muslim men. Homosexuality and what the Western World would regard as paedophilia are widely practised and unofficially condoned in many Muslim countries. Muhammad taking a 10 yr old bride would not be offensive in those parts of Africa where girls mature young and are married at puberty.

The impact of the Reuters statement is that it summed up in three words those things that were really offensive.

Amandajm (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

"Homosexuality and what the Western World would regard as paedophilia are widely practised and unofficially condoned in many Muslim countries." You're stereotyping rather blindly here.VR _talk 02:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

You noticed that I used the words "unofficially" and "many...countries". Not "officially" and "in Muslim countries". And that the wording is "what the Wsetern World woud "regard" as paedophilia. I'm not blindly stereotyping. In fact, I'm making well-informed statements.

• Homosexuality. While it is generally denied that it takes place in Muslim countries, in fact, chartered planes full of wealthy men from Arabic nations regularly fly to the Philippines to visit the "Lady-Boy" brothels.

How do I know?: I have family in Manila. The Saudi/Lady-Boy business is flourishing and a big source of income.

• "What the west would describe as "paedophilia" takes place across most of Africa as well as Pakistan and Afghanistan, i.e. Girls are married at 12, or younger.

How do I know?: Everyone knows this, unless they never read a newspaper. But if you are not in the habit of reading about women's rights issues, then maybe it hasn't come to your attention!

A relation-by-marriage, Catherine Hamlyn, established the Addis Ababa Fistula Hospital which deals with almost exclusively with the injuries caused to young teenage girls who give birth before they are full-grown. Unfortunately specialist hospitals are needed right across Africa as the vast majority of girls are unable to get to the hospital.

Now, with regard to deleting material:

If you don't like the reference, but the material is appropriate to the article, then be prepared to do the hard work and search for a source, rather than simply deleting what is not well referenced. There are sources out there. As an experienced editor, that is what I do, when someone drops something pertinent but unreferenced into an article that I have written or am watching. (Yes, I also have more interesting things to do than the boring hackwork of tidying other people's messes)

However, I have to sleep sometimes, so I put in the first reference I found, with the anticipation of returning in a few hours to find a better one.

The result of your deletion was that you left the section with no lead sentence or paragraph, just a statement that blasphemy is punishable by death. No information as to what constitutes blasphemy.

You need to be considerably more thinking before you do a thing like that.

Think CONTEXT

Think BALANCE

Amandajm (talk) 03:03, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

You should start thinking original research, because that is what the material is. Let's discuss this at the article's talk page. Thanks,VR _talk 03:09, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Watch out for Hasdi Bravo. i have just checked that person's user history. He/she has contributed almost nothing except persistent suggestions that pages should be moved. It looks very much like trolling. Amandajm (talk) 16:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

And thank you for resolving that messy sentence. Amandajm (talk) 17:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Collingwood

Not to mention the fact that the snide remark is completely wrong. I would have also suggested that the comment was idiotic, but some might suggest that would be uncivil, so I won't. Ditto for the other comment about me being against the article when the day before I voted "Keep" on the AFD. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 02:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)