Heya, welcome to Wikipedia, thanks for helping with the vandalism cleanup. Two hints (on just a single edit, I'm very picky, I know...): You don't need to VfD vandalism removal, just stick a {{del}} or a {{db|Cleanup of vandalism}} on it and it'll get deleted quickly and cleanly. Secondly, if you think a redirect should be deleted, use WP:RFD instead of WP:VFD, they have separate deletion pages for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me either.
Oh, while we're at it: Have a standard welcome template:
Welcome!
Hello Grenavitar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
As it says, don't hesitate to ask questions at my talk page. Good to have you on board! --fvw* 15:32, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)
hey men u sent me a message concerning papaflessas page.what seems to be your problem ?
it seems there has been a misunderstanding.sorry
Dimfless had previously said on my userpage "my article is original.i just used capital letters for names of towns and persons to show their significance.it is insulting to imply that i copied something that belongs to my anchestors' history" which means I suck. :(
Thank you for thinking me worthy.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 19:12, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
User:High speed Willy on Wheels moved a lot of pages to gibberish names, I was one of the people moving them back. Moving a page creates a redirect at the old name, this is unavoidable but that junk is being deleted by sysops. Goplat 01:21, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hi Grenavitar! I appreciate what you have done by creating basic stubs for all quranic suras. However, did you note my Template:Sura? The idea is that you just have to say {{Sura|Nr|preceding|following}}, and you get:
| 1–20 | |
|---|---|
| 21–40 | |
| 41–60 | |
| 61–80 | |
| 81–100 | |
| 101–114 | |
| Types | |
the advantage is that the navigation thingie in all Sura articles could be updated with a single edit to the template. Sorry for not telling you this earlier :o\ dab (ᛏ) 19:26, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
"Né", "née", and "nee" are all English words, appearing in English dictionaries. - Nunh-huh 03:54, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Yeah it's perhaps a waste of time to change Muhammed->Muhammad. My concerns were that
I figured that it would be easier to maintain consistency within articles by mass changing everything to Muhammad. I don't see that this causes any real harm, as I a) didn't change anything within a quotation, and b) didn't change the names of anyone else. As I see it, Wikipedia benefits from consistency in spelling across its articles. When the same name is spelled 6 or 7 different ways, it can be confusing. I also changed instances of Koran to Qur'an, and instances of Moslem to Muslim, as both are more accepted spellings, with the alternatives considered not politically correct or archaic. I realize that there is no inherent superiority of one spelling over the other, but I think that consistency is to be valued. --Jacobolus 00:44, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It looks like you nominated this for VfD back in December, but it didn't get listed. Do you still want a VfD on it? Joyous 05:15, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations on the most excellent pic of Paternoster Square in the Paternoster Square article. Lovely lighting and very good focus. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 10:20, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Gren,
The subject of Aisha's age at marriage is given extensive coverage in the article on Aisha. We have one set of traditions, all stemming from the same fellow, saying that Aisha in her old age was claiming to have been only nine years old when married. On the other hand, we have the first biographies of Muhammad, which point to Aisha being much older when married. It is a complicated matter, which really can't be covered in the Muhammad article without throwing it out of focus. That's why we have the reference to the Aisha article. It is covered in Wikipedia, in great detail, just in a separate article.
The "Muhammad was a pedophile" charge is a great favorite of anti-Muslim bigots (at least these days) and it gets thrown into the Muhammad article on a regular basis. I really do think that the Aisha article is a sufficient consideration of the matter. Zora 18:04, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for finding that photo and fixing the link! Please feel free to delete the duplicate. - Lucky 6.9 22:04, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for offering help. But as it was the notion of parity with the Islam template (fair is fair, right?) that was my impetus for doing it at all. And where would we be without suchsame impetus? So, for now the design of the Islam template is working, and redesigning it in the way you suggest would be like changing the design plans of, for example a bridge in the middle of construction. If you want to help it appears that the template lacks a closing tag, which causes the article text to be nested within the template. -==SV 04:05, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
"...Equality is nonesense because differences do not bring in a POV to the article." ~ Fairness is nonsense because variations are not biasing. Variations are biasing, and the approach of basing one template on another has little to do with colors as it does with structure. I think your point is that a template is a neutral entity, and brings neither bias nor equality. In that case, whats the difference? The structure of the Islam template (or any religion template for that matter) is sufficient enough to foster the development of a new form, for whatever reason. Mistakes and cross paradigm relationships also seed article develoment, which is quite inline with our goals. Regards, -==SV 04:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
"In response 2 - bah, why is this argument toned and all. LOL. We both want a good template yes! And to that ends it is necessary to know what goes on the template before we can know how it will best look No! By that reasoning, we all would know how all of the articles should look before they actually look that way. ;) I have no problem with it looking like the Islam template Good. however Christianity might not be so easily fit into that style template. why assume differences where there are none? Seeing the jihad linked so prominently in the Islam template was my sole motivation for creating an equivalent with the crusade link. Not only does this base the newer on a precedent, it allows for a reflection on the order and choice of terms represented - structure shows no bias, but prominence does. I only wish that since you have done more for this template than I that you look at the talk page for it and help to decide the nesting and what belongs on the template itself. I am just trying to say we must formalize what will go on it before we make it. Its there, now kid - just edit it. If i dont like something you do, Ill complain. ;) Because... as of my last check Salafism was on the Christianity template... So was the fatwah - still looking for an equivalent. -SV
Jihad and Crusade are not equivalents by any means. Your distinctions are obviously very well informed, but nevertheless ignore the basic fact that in terms of common usage, they are functionally equivalent - so much so that translators use then interchangeably. Their historical context, nuantic differences, and internal spiritual aspects are tertiary to their commonalities. That said, if "jihad" becomes an English word, which makes "crusade" not such a general (though maybe just-depricated) term, but a literal referent to a historical (and perhaps current) event, then yes, we can say that between these two English words exist some common semantic differences. All that said, I very much like the progress that people other than myself are making on template:christianity, and I think its ready to go live now - some 18 hours after I started it. "Mediocre" or not, I'll still take credit for starting that particular ball rolling - if not by my perfect planning, then by planned imperfection: Dont forget to leave a misspelled word in all your edits. ;) Regards, -==SV 00:30, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
You are quite right on what must happen, the picture must work in M$ IE even though it may be sh!t. I did all the picture editing on MS apps (MS Paint and MS photo editor ). Yet this doesn't work with MS IE, ...figures. All this serves to illustrate much of microshaft's brokenware. I was completely oblivious to this fact as I use firefox.
Upon your message I did load the picture up in IE, to find that the wikipedia file comes out with a blue background. However, loaded locally, the same picture (save right from wikipedia) will have the transparency. So this leaves two possiblities, A) wikipedia screws with transparencies or B) Microsoft has a really weird bug in their code. Both are possible but I have not the time right now to fix it. It might get looked at in a few days.--metta, The Sunborn ☥ 07:20, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Heres to progress. Nice work. -==SV
I notice that you "correct" "born" to "né" and "née" in biography articles. You are quite right to say né is not incorrect; however, it is an unnecessary little genteelism, redolent of small-city newspapers' wedding announcements, one that good writers avoid— except at Scrabble. If you'll try mentally substituting "né" whenever you meet "born", you'll soon understand. No issue, though. --Wetman 15:13, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi! I, too, noticed you reverting my change of "né" to "born". I wasn't aware that it was a proper English word: I thought it was forgotten to be translated from French. Anyway: wouldn't it be more consistent if all pope articles use this? The newer popes (from Pope Pius VII on I believe) use "born" instead of "né". Phaunt 07:16, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You had asked about which is the common term:
Well, I am not a linguist and don't quite remember the technical term for it, but the last "consonant" in that term is a common Arabic form that is soft sound like an "h" when the word is used alone and becomes a "t" (actually a "th") sound when used in compound form. Thus "Salah", but "Salat-ul-Maghrib" (the Sunset Prayer).
However, "Salat" is used alone, but usually in Urdu and by Urdu-speakers speaking English, for example. The complication there is that most second generation speakers, converts, and a lot of first generation American/Western Muslims sometimes, in my humble opinion, over-compensate and use Arabic forms, often to a ridiculous extent. Problems include using Arabic forms in grammatically inappropriate places--and even over-using formulations. An example of the latter is the ridiculous over-use of Insha Allah (God Willing; the Islamic equivalent of Deo Volente) in places where a) there is no element of uncertainty or chance or b) where something has already happened and the correct Islamic formulation would be Masha Allah (By Allah's will).
Hope I am not further confusing you.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 19:04, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
Looks like someone fulfilled your request for a translation of the article on John Fox Burgoyne, but didn't notify you. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:55, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
Dear Gren,
I would need to think about this for a while. It concerns the aspects of Islam that most disturb, even revolt me: the anger, the violence, the blind worship of human creations like the Qur'an and the Hadith. I started learning about Islam after 9/11, because I wanted to understand why someone would want to KILL me. For me, as a Buddhist, this means trying hard to understand what is right about Islam, to put myself inside rather than outside of it. But the mindset that stones adulteresses is beyond me. I'm flattered that you would consult me on this topic, but I think you may have over-estimated my neutrality. Zora 13:41, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've removed the NPoV tag. Notices like that disfigure Wikipedia, and shouldn't be used unless things have got really bad (there can be intense disagreement on Talk pages without NPoV templates being considered). If you're unsure about what you've written, then calling for other opinions is a good idea, but until someone actually disagrees (and perhaps not even then), I don't think that the article should be marked.
Have you though of asking for peer review? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:02, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You ask:
In one word, no. I wish it was different, but I am not surprised or think it is crazy. It is just a function of human nature, I guess.67.118.240.18 17:49, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey,
When i uploaded it i thought it was under a free license (i took it from wikipedia, cause we needed an image for wikinews) - but it would seem that i was wrong, and that it is in fact fair use. Feel free to deleate it. Sorry about that.
btw, re: your user page, and stable versions. I would like to see a stable version which all un-logged-in users would see. It would be a version of the article which is 1 to 24 hours old (depending on how busy the article is - so for example back in january the asian tsunami article would have had a lag of one hour (or maybe it could have had it's lag completely turned off by an admin?) where as jabberwocky would have a lag of 24 hours. How busy an article would be measured by some formula which would take in to account how many edits there are by users with more than 100 edits each every 24 hours, and also how many active users have it on thier watchlist. I dont know what the exact formula would be, but it wouldnt be too difficult to tweak to find the right balance.) Any edit by an admin however would show up straight away. A normal logged in user, can mark any edit as vandalism which means that it will not show up when the lag catches up, then only an admin (or the user who origanaly marked the edit as vandalism) can unmark that edit as vandalism (once an edit has been unmarked, it can only be remarked by another admin). Misuse of marking things as vandalism would be a ban.
Obvoiusly all markings of vandalism, would go in to a recent changes style list, for admins to peruse. If an admin agrees with the marking of a particular edit as vandalism, there could be a little button, which would bring up a list of options for the admin alongthe lines of "yes this is vandalism ban user for 48 hours" or "no this is not vandalism ban reporting user for 24 hours". After this button has been clicked by an admin, a little tick would come up next to the edit on the list saying that it had been checked.
I think this is much more in keeping with the wikiway. The problem is that it requires some additions to mediawiki.
The bellman 06:00, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you changing the link text for Army for the Liberation of Rwanda back into the original French. Wikipedia convention is that articles should have the commonly used English version of a name, if there is one. I had to move about four articles I had made on Congolese rebel groups when this was originally pointed out to me. The RDR seems to be the only group that hasn't attracted a consistent English transliteration. At some point I will get around to starting the AliR article and will note its original French name in the text before making sure that the links to it in other articles are English, unless someone beats me to it. It's obviously not a big deal, especially since the article isn't made yet, but I thought I'd let you know beforehand. Cheers, BanyanTree 03:52, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Been meaning to e-mail you for a while. Will. Soon. I hope.
In the mean time, I thought you might be interested in this: I have just finally got to publishing my thoughts and translations on Sufi Poetry in Urdu. For now, it will be mainly on the following page:
http://urdu-ke-naam.blogspot.com
The blog's not really "mine", but a collaboration with some folks who are mainly in Hyderabad (Deccan) (see Hyderabad, India and Hyderabad state), one of the homes of Urdu.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 20:02, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Nice, thanks. I was reading the entry about Sanam because I've seen enough Indian movies to have run into that word. The lyricists like to attempt to match Sufi poetry I think. Thanks again :) gren 23:12, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Gren, please take a look at the hadith article, which I have spent ten hours revising, and fix any typos, unclear phrasing, and errors of fact. Zora 05:39, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Gee thanks. I'm not at sure that you really want to imitate me, however. I'm a terrible social klutz. Zora 04:50, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the commentary. — Rickyrab | Talk 18:00, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
You voted for Culture of Ancient Rome, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.
Well ofcourse , it will be nice to list someone , some scholar , authentic people ( of any school of thought or religion ) . I dont think giving his name under the word humanist is a good choice . He is just an average guy , claiming to be more than he is . And humanist ?? I would say buddhists R the biggest humanists of all times . He doesent look to be a humanist at all . Farhansher 21:11, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi Gren. You might find that {{NowCommons}} makes life a little easier. Cheers, dbenbenn | talk 03:29, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, when I saw the page, all it contained was an interwiki link. You way want to fully write the article before creating it. Evil Monkey∴Hello 07:43, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
This should be at Laotian art. RickK 09:06, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
That's exactly what I'm trying to do. There is no standard format for Saudi cities and provinces. I have finished moving all cities (removed the initial "al", even the Arabic Wikipedia discourages the use of "al" in titles and names, it's as awkward as naming an article "The White House" instead of "White House"). However, I was unable to move the Al-Khobar page to Khobar, same applies to the Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia article. I think an administrator is needed to move those pages. -- Eagleamn 19:23, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
OK, I see your point. It's a good idea. - Mustafaa 22:07, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hi. I'm thinking of removing the photo from the abovementioned template for style reasons; I thought I'd drop you a line since you've worked on the template. There are comments and a preview of the revision at Template talk:Rwandan Genocide. Cheers, --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 03:02, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hullo Gren. I think Klonimus is venomous, Carpediem is thin-skinned, the current Islamofascist article is fine, and the old Islamofascist article (preserved on Klonimus' page) is partly informative, partly ... venomous.
I've been wondering if the kind of behavior Carpediem is manifesting is of the same ilk as shown by the Quran-desecration rioters, and also by honor-killers, etc. etc. That is, a kind of hyper-vigilant machismo that views any slur on the male's religion, or the male's nationality, or the male's family, or the male's women, as an attack on the male's HONOR, which must be wiped out with blood, or the male will be seen as weak and dishonored. I think Ernest Gellner discusses this in one of his books, as a widespread adaptation to life in stagnant agricultural societies, where there is only so much land or power, and all competition is zero-sum. Truculence is adaptive behavior under these conditions. Gellner doesn't see this as specifically Islamic behavior -- he points out that various Mediterranean Christians act like this as well.
My mind does wander, doesn't it? Anyhow, I'm staying away from all of this. I don't see that I'd do any good by getting involved. Unless I see a good editor being picked on, I'm going to let those involved fight it out. Gosh, there are times I get so weary of Wikipedia. It's a constant mano-a-mano battle with the ignorant, prejudiced, and malicious. Zora 08:45, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Gren, I would appreciate if you would refrain from continuously censuring edits inserted in the Islam article that do not conform with your image of Islam. I know that generally you try to be fair and impartial, but nevertheless you have been reverting a lot of my edits. Wikipedia is not a selective presentation of information that only cater to one POV. Maybe a refresh read of wikipedia NPOV policy would help. Thanks for you cooperation.--Urchid 10:47, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You're listening to A.R.Rahman? Cool! You might want to go to and listen to a few samples of Jamshid, the L.A. Persian rocker. He's a marvelous combination of Persian traditional music and hard-hitting rock. He deserves to be much more widely known than he is. I have his two CDs. Zora 18:58, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
HI.. I havebeen listening to Junoon & A.R.Rahman for a long time ....but never heard about Jamshid , I think I should give him a try..thanx . Farhansher 19:36, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your vote in favor of keeping the article about Saint Stephen. I terminated the vote for deletion process due to the anonymity of the nominator and his or her lack of substantial grounds to make such a nomination. Your comments however have been archived in the Saint Stephen talk page. Thank you! --Gerald Farinas 21:13, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I should probably check up on that. :-/ If the image were copyrighted, would it be concretely listed as such on the source webpage?
Alright, I read up a little, and I should be including those tags. I imagine the portraits, etc. wouldn't need that sort of thing? The Vatican stamps, however; any idea how I would go about finding out if those are public domain? I had these images saved on my computer before I uploaded them. (User:Aljodasch)
And thanks for the pointers. --Aljodasch 19:41, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for copy editing me :)
My primary source for information was this. Ishallah, i will soon add that to the article, im am currently reading this
Have grear day! :)
--Striver 16:32, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I took them out specifically to make pruning easier. Because then you can copy and paste the list into excel, then delete them in that by comparing the numbers, rather than searching through the lists. It is much quicker that way. Bluemoose 12:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Gren, OK, I added a separate heading 'ma malakat amaynukum' as the concept is central in understanding sex slavery in islamic countries. Hope this is allright. --Germen 14:15, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm dropping you a note to let you know that The Seventies, which you voted on, became a Collaboration of the Week! You are highly encouraged to contribute whatever you can to the topic! Mike H 01:26, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
The Rotten Library has grown extensively lately, and the articles I am adding are fully fleshed out articles with significant information relating to the topics I've added them to. I haven't added the minor template-esque articles relating to any of these topics and so none of these links violates Wikipolicy regarding external links, or anything else for that matter.--TheGrza 02:38, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
External links almost always violate the POV ideals cultivated here at Wikipedia. That's why they're external instead of internal links, and it's not an argument for their removal.--TheGrza 02:46, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
I noted that you made an edit to the Stephen Downes article in the past and thought you might be interested to know that I have listed it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems#June 18 because the website it is largely copied from has a CC-nc-sa licence which is incompatible with wikipedia. Please respond to the WP:CP page if you have any comments. Cheers, DoubleBlue (Talk) 15:18, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Your welcome. Angry faces: these are all parts of maintaining NPOV and from my POV you have done it effectively. --Anonymous editor 22:05, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
== Sources == +
- Reasoning from the Scripture
- The Bible
Why did you have trouble wiht these two sources?
~~Melissa
Anyone who is interested in voting one way or the other is invited to the discussion here. BrandonYusufToropov 17:08, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I saw that you voted yes and I was curious about what you thought. I have found that he is sometimes oriented towards a strong Sunni view. Do you see this or... I'm just curious. It seemed to me that such a demeanor (which could have gotten better) and not that many edits (nor that many of great size) and the circumstances of an rfa from an argument seemed a little odd... I typically trust your opinion, so I more or less want to know why you voted the way you did. gren 01:01, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
PS: In a curious coincidence, one User:Edip Yuksel has just turned up. If you want to work on an article on the Qur'an-only guys, he would probably be worth consulting with. - Mustafaa 22:56, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
could you, please, upload Angelica Kauffmann's Cornelia Pointing to Her Children as Her Treasures().
Yeah, well, maybe you are right, and maybe I should be more careful with such actions when editing a battlefield like Ali Sina. In general though I oppose these "quote" sections. As I see it, in an article, we're supposed to be telling the reader about a subject, not just compiling an unstructured list of quotes about it. Wikiquote should be the only place for such lists in my opinion. -- Stereotek 19:29, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've added my explanation for deleting the "quote" section on the talkpage now. I'm not too sure though if the anon will actually oppose my edit, because nothing has been deleted, it has just been moved to a more appropiate place. Anyway, re your suggestion about a reduced "quote" section. What worries me about it is that if we reduce it now to say, 3 quotes, I am almost sure that when I get back to the article in a few months, the section will just be expanded again. -- Stereotek 20:21, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
You asked me several questions about Arabic alphabet on my French user page (Utilisateur:Vincent Ramos).
Yes, you're absolutely right. Thanks, I appreciate this gren. I took out my previous message, but you can read what I wrote about it in the edit history. Thanks again and I will keep watch. Drop me a message if you need any "help" of this sort. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 05:39 (UTC)
Pro-sina zealot has some concerns about "criticism" of Sina that he wishes to discuss with you. Check it out. Thanks. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 06:30 (UTC)
Gren, take a look at the Edip Yuksel article. No citations given, all personal promotion without any balance and still classifies as vanity. I think they took your statement that "perhaps the article should not have been deleted" over the limit. Still, just check it out. The article is massive and rallies support for Khizar and Yuksel. I just can't get through to these guys. :) --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 18:42 (UTC)
If Edip Yuksel is noteworthy, someone besides Edip will put up a page for him. Any page put up by the person himself (or herself) is sheer vanity.
Gosh I'm tired and feeling cranky. Check out my new sari article and give me some props! Zora 29 June 2005 12:45 (UTC)
Edip is certainly notable, and I agree there is an article here. You and Anonymous are definitely right to object to these editing methods. I suspect someone working on Edip's behalf is operating on the assumption WP is basically like a chat board. Better analogy might be a combination board meeting and group therapy session? :) BrandonYusufToropov 30 June 2005 19:31 (UTC)
ARTICLE IS DELETED????? Uh oh, Edip/Khizar won't like this at all. --Anonymous editor June 30, 2005 21:50 (UTC)