| Revision as of 03:48, 9 June 2006 editFairNBalanced (talk | contribs)557 editsm →Email: sorry, forgot to log in, fix sig← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:03, 10 June 2006 edit undoKarl Meier (talk | contribs)5,456 edits rm old finished conversationsNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <center><span class="plainlinks"></span></center></big> | <center><span class="plainlinks"></span></center></big> | ||
| == thanks == | |||
| Thank you. ] 18:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == check it again == | |||
| Z | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Thanks Karl. ] 11:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Welp, looks like another that needs reverting. :-) ] 11:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Seeing as your commented out part of the "Freedom of speech" section was reverted, you might want to use ] <nowiki>{{or}}</nowiki> on for now. Be sure that you add to the article's talk page if you do use it though. ] 14:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :There was a reasoning for it not being a redirect... review the history of ] and you'll probably understand. ] 08:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::You're probably right although editors should never have to rely upon the violations of others to ensure their edits... it seems that he (she) has subsided such activity.... so the whole issue may be based upon a moot point now. ] 08:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Greetings Karl Meier, I was wondering if you might express your editorial view on ] of talk on this article? Thanks. ] 14:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Greetings again Karl, I understand why you want to add ''alleged'' to the section title and article wording but such wording is not logical. I'm guessing that you have a ''feeling'' that as Irishpunktom's version of the article stood it did not conform to NPOV. It is for this very reason that I made the changes that arrived at of the article section titles. I would recommend that you in fact edit in that direction to correspond to that logic. Thanks. ] 21:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::It isn't logical because the individuals aren't alleging but in fact are using the term in their discourses. The word ''allege'' tends to be appropriate however in the ''references in connection to Islamophobia'' section. ] 21:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *Karl, thanks for writing me about your concerns for the intro of this article. To be perfectly honest with you I believe that what is there is common to nearly ''all'' recognized definitions of the word. If we look at <s> as an example</s>(bad example) of definitions then the intro doesn't seem off. ] 20:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :*I have seen a definition or two that was sooner from a neutral and reliable source (ie: like a known dictionary) but I'm not sure where they are right now (I'd have to re-research them) but from what I recall the intro as it stands wasn't too far off from what I previously read. ] 20:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::*The Oxford Dictionary of English (ODE) (copyrighted 2003), included on the Casio XD-H9200 electronic dictionary says: "''Islamophobia > noun a hatred or fear of Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.''" ] 21:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::* You had better cite the date in your editing because it is possible that their definition has changed since then... I really don't know. ] 21:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::* Please revert back to the ''Examples of use in public discourse'' if ] tries to remove it... It's essential that Misplaced Pages maintain its ''distance'' from the term if it is ever to remain neutral about it. ] 23:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Karl, in terms of supporting your editing relative to the "islamophobia" neologism please be aware of these guidelines and cited them as necessary: ]. ] 08:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Karl, I see edit warring with Irishpunktom is happening now. You both should stop immediately while bearing in mind ]'s warning to both of you. ] 08:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Karl, I'm inclined to agree with you but now the time has come for us to make attempts at dispute resolution. How would you feel about asking ] to try and help us come to some agreement on these issues? ] 09:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, I've just put in for ] while we engage the dispute resolution process. ] 09:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I understand but remember no one's prevented from editing until it's protected. ] 09:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::As ] has just demonstrated. ] 09:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Karl, I appreciate your report but unfortunately it's not going to help. Would you kindly (and in good faith) remove your 3RR report as ] has in ''good faith'' agreed to ]?Thanks. ] 10:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Based upon Irishpunktom's use of the word ''racist'' in your regard I will understand if you do not decide to remove the above 3RR report but still think that it would help. Please know that I've responded to Irsihpunktom's use of the word on his talk page (Under the "islamophobia" section). He's defintiely '''very wrong''' in his utilization of that word. ] 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :In accord with ] I have struck ]'s personal attack utilization of the word "racist" in your regard on my user page. ] 10:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| === WP:PAIN === | |||
| Short and easy: Go to dispute resolution. I've told IPK that he should avoid mentioning you ''at all'' outside some very narrow confines, but from his comments elsewhere he's ready for mediation. Take him up on it. - ]<span class="plainlinks"></span> 13:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Can you look at this == | |||
| http://en.wikipedia.org/Amin_al-Husayni and pass on to anyone who might be intersted. check talk and history pages. Tnx. ] 12:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Joturner == | |||
| Thought you might be interested to have a look at . --] 08:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for mentioning this to me. I appreciate it. -- ] 09:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Reminder... == | |||
| When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to ] by adding '''subst:''' to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. <!-- Template:Subst --> — ] <small>]</small> 15:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for mentioning this to me, because I wasn't aware of that. I'll make sure to remember it. -- ] 15:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Template:Islam== | |||
| I guess you missed the reason I gave for including the image. Please read ], if you disagree with the points I have given in the talk page, please indicate it below the comments I have made. I again qoute from the wikipedia policy page, "Note that consensus can only work among '''reasonable editors''' who make a '''good faith''' effort to work together to accurately and appropriately describe the different views on the subject." If you want a vote count (which is considered evil according to ])I had equal number of editors "for it" and "Not for" and two editors who doesn't mind either. if you assume good faith on your part we can consider these neutral users would be fine with the changes as longs as the new image is not compromising any of the required traits of a logo. So still in the grounds of assuming good faith the majority of the editors are fine with the image. Even the editors who have said the image change is not okay, agree that the image is aesthetically better than the current one. This is only a kind reminder and request. ] <sup><font size="-2">]</font></sup> 17:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == 3rr == | |||
| Do your definition of good faith efforts towards dispute resolution include calling people racists? Irishpunktom is obviously trolling, and is surely not making any good faith efforts as it is also obvious from the diffs provided in the 3rr report, and the following personal attacks against me. -- ] 10:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :If you want to make a disruption report, please use ] or ] for vandalism. ] (]) 16:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Mediation on ]== | |||
| Karl Meier, please review ] and ]. Thanks. ] 17:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == FYI - are you a party ? == | |||
| http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#Parties.27_agreement_to_mediate_3 | |||
| ==Agree, or not... no conditional agreeing== | |||
| Karl, on the mediation please remove your conditional agreement and just agree... you can make that condition (to continue to participate based on it) after the commitee accepts the case. Thanks. ] 09:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, well this mediation looks set to die then. ] 09:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::First you agree and then you make conditions once the mediation is accepted. Honestly Irishpunktom won't be making anymore personal attacks on you for he now knows he'll be blocked for it. ] 09:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::I'm not placing blame on you and I completely agree that Irishpunktom should agree to not personally attack you in the future (which I doubt he'll do) but at this point it is a bit irrelevant as ] is ] that if he makes personal attacks against you he'll be blocked. ] 09:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::That's very fair. Thanks. ] 09:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for <s>striking</s> your conditions (to be re-addressed later). Hopefully the mediation commitee will take the case. ] 09:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Your Recent comment on Ali Sina Talk page == | |||
| I thought it was very good. Thank you. --] 18:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Criticism of Islam Links == | |||
| How many other religion articles have links to their criticisms in their main article? ] <sup>]</sup> 00:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :"Another thing is that you should quit stalking me. It is not allowed, and If you continue your current behavior I'll report you and make sure that you get blocked." | |||
| ::Ah, perhaps you should consider stopping your stalking of Irishpunkton as well. Your edit wars have gotten you in enough trouble already. ] <sup>]</sup> 17:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Looking at my edits of articles, you won't really be able to prove any stalking. I've done work on most, if not all of them, using other user accounts or IP addresses even before you edited them. ] <sup>]</sup> 17:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Please don't insult my and other editors intelligence with such silly responses, BhaiSaab. This is the last warning, that I give you regarding this. If you follow me to one more article, then I will report this unacceptable behavior. -- ] 20:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I guess I'll see what comes out of your threats. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Alleged lack of reciprocity== | |||
| Just a web link to a criticism like this is not sufficent, is Ali Sinai an expert on Islamic theology? Is this argument of his been published by anyone as a peer reviewed publication? | |||
| These criticisms will only make the undermine the credibility of this article and wikipedia as a whole, especially when there are hundereds of hadith supporting the so called "Golden Rule" I quote some hadith from Sahih muslim here. | |||
| ===Chpater 18=== | |||
| :Book 001, Number 0072: | |||
| It is arrested on the authority of Anas b. Malik that the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) observed: one amongst you believes (truly) till one likes for his brother or for his neighbour that which he loves for himself. {{muslim|1|72}} | |||
| :Book 001, Number 0073: | |||
| It is narrated on the authority of Anas that the Prophet (may peace blessings be upon him) observed: By Him in whose Hand is my life, no, bondsman (truly) believes till he likes for his neighbour, or he (the Holy Prophet) said: for his brother, whatever he likes for himself.{{muslim|1|72}} | |||
| ===Chapter 19: CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION TO HARM NEIGHBOUR=== | |||
| :Book 001, Number 0074: | |||
| It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace and blessing be upon him) observed: He will not enter Paradise whose neighbour is not secure from his wrongful conduct.{{muslim|1|74}} | |||
| also see | |||
| *{{muslim|1|75}} | |||
| *{{muslim|1|76}} | |||
| *{{muslim|1|77}} | |||
| *{{muslim|1|78}} | |||
| These hadith prove beyond doubt “Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you” is there in Islam, Adding nonesense sections to this article will seriously undermine the credibility of wikipedia. So keep away nonesense from it.. ] <sup><font size="-2">]</font></sup> 19:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == MILF Image == | |||
| You have royalty-free and non-exclusive license to reproduce, modify, adapt and publish the content found on worldpress.org. The Library of International Affairs runs on a separate disclaimer found in http://www.worldpress.org/library/terms.htm. In this case, Getty Images has reserved rights and permissions for most of our photos. | |||
| <div> Regards, | |||
| <div> Ms. Teri Schure | |||
| <div> Founder | |||
| <div> www.worldpress.org | |||
| <div> 516-791-6788 | |||
| <div> The article nor the image are included in the Library of International Affairs therefore the material is available under a free license per ] -- CST 22:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Critics of Islam== | |||
| Your input on Critics of Islam is appreciated. http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:List_of_Islamic_scholars#Critics_of_Islam ] 04:48 June 01 2006 [UTC} | |||
| ==Barnstar== | |||
| ]] 06:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == user page == | == user page == | ||
Revision as of 20:03, 10 June 2006
user page
It's his user page, editing it is vandalism. Ask him to remove it or get another opinion, but don't do it yourself. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- That's bullshit. I'm warning him not to put that reference back on his page. --Tony Sidaway 20:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Conversation with Anonymous editor
Can you explain to me, why you keep restoring a personal attack me on Irishpunktom's userpage? -- Karl Meier 19:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- It's his user page, editing it is vandalism. And I don't keep reverting; I reverted once. Ask him to remove it or get another opinion, but don't do it yourself. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I ask you again to please quit harassing me, by restoring personal remarks regarding me on Irishpunktom's userpage. Nobody own any pages here on Misplaced Pages, and personal attacks can be removed on sight. If you keep harassing me, and insist on restoring these personal remarks/attacks on Irishpunktom's userpage, then I'll have to make a complaint on the administrators noticeboard about your and Irishpunktoms behavior, and bring it to the attention of a broader range of Wikipedians. -- Karl Meier 19:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- You think that reverting someone's edits to a user's page is harrassment even if if it's done once?
- About four other editors have also reverted you. I remember you had a very racist link on your userpage once that you absolutely refused to take off even when administators warned you. You can not edit his page, please ask him to remove it. I have nicely responded to your answer. Good bye. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- It is true that there is several members of the "Muslims Guild" that has insisted on readding the personal attacks against me, but until now you are the only administrator that has done it. In my opinion it makes it much more serious, as administrators should be expected to be experienced users, that didn't engaged in such behavior (harassment/personal attacks and remarks). Regarding the external link, I have already agreed to remove it from my userpage a long time. In my opinion it wasn't racist, it was just an angry response to the violent attacks that happend just because of a few cartoons. This being said, I have already admittet that it was wrong that I placed the external link on my userpage, and it surely doesn't give editors such as you and Irishpunktom the right to harass me months after I removed the link. Please end your insults against me. -- Karl Meier 19:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- You aren't allowed to edit another person's page and that's it. Don't do it because if he reports you will be blocked for vandalism. And please stop exagerrating one revert by me as harassment. I might have prevented you from being blocked. --a.n.o.n.y.m 19:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- You don't own any pages on Misplaced Pages, and personal attacks can be removed on sight whereever they are. If you feel that I vandalize Irishpunktoms userpage by removing a personal attack against me, then please file a report on "vandalism in progress" or quit your false accusations against me. It's bad enough that you restore these personal attacks. -- Karl Meier 20:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think it should be removed but me reverting one of your edits to someone else's user page is not harassment even if you are biased enough to think so. You should have asked another editor or admin to remove them for you. Not do it yourself when three or four different editors have told you not to do so. --a.n.o.n.y.m 20:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- If you where not "biased" as you call it, and if you really believe it should be removed, then I don't think you would have restored it. The plain and simple facts are that Irishpunktom made a personal attack against me on his userpage, and that you insisted that it should stay there. You even used one of your admin tools (the rollback feature) to insist on having this personal attack against me on Irishpunktoms userpage. -- Karl Meier 20:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Another Barnstar
--FairNBalanced 07:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
I tried the link "E-mail this user" ... but you don't have one set up. Any chance you'll put one in? Just curious --F.N.B.A.K.A.Effin' Bee 17:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Did you get my email? --FairNBalanced 03:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)