Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Islam appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. NeilN talk to me 14:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi; Your comments are strange as I refered to a neutral person in my additions. If you have a point then it had been better to be more specific instead of deleting all the content ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wienerish ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I accept that I had been a little Islamic in my additions (if you judge it from a view point of European authors of the middle ages). The reference you are mentioning is itself not neutral and there are thousands of other references stating a TOTAL bloodless invasion of Mecca (e.g., Karin Armstrong). As far as the terms religious, political, and military leader are concerned then these are missleading. If you want to keep with those, then it will be appropriate to expand the list e.g., by adding Businessman, Preacher, Philosopher, Orator, Reformer, Refuge of orphans, Protector of slaves, Emancipator of women, Law-giver, Judge, Saint (list given by Prof. K. S. Ramakrishna Rao who was a non-muslim). Was it not better to only state "prophet" (see the page on Mosses). Regarding the Jewish Clans of Madina, there is only one historical reference about killings of one Jewish clan (there are many references against it). But historicaly, there has never been a claim about the enslavement of jews. The exile on the other hand is a well accepted fact by both muslims and non-muslim authors. But again that has been known to be a result of "not adhering to the peace accords" by Jews. So I thought it was better to avaoid confusions and adhere to the things generally agreed upon!
Dear, I have already given you some references which are from published literature (Karen Armstrong - Mohammad a Prophet of our Time). OK, the terms, "who did not fullfill their peace accords" appear to be a bit harsh but is a fact recognised by many modern day European writers (the aforementioned writer for instancec gives a detailed account). The source of all the references about killings of one jewish tribe is in fact the first biography of Muhammad by a Jewish convert and it too mentions the betrayal on the part of Jews. You are right that Jewish tribes of madina opposed Mohammad but this statement does not explains the actual senario. I will think about an alternate sentence - or otherwise it may be appropriate to have section on controversies. P.S. I will appreiate if you can paste this disccussion on my talk page under your section.
It has been very nice of you. Thanks
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Islam, you will be blocked from editing.
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to
History of the Qur'an, you will be
blocked from editing.
Ari (
talk) 15:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
May you kindly indentify which "worth reading" reference I deleted? Of ourse there is no point of content among muslims about the preservation of Quran and this is well referenced. I agree that part of my addition was not well-referred to, and as you have mentioned may be classified as an apologetic effort. However, there was no need to revert everything as you did in the first instance - examples I have already given in my first response. And this shows that you yourself are doing vandalism and furthermore discouraging new comers. Regarding your reminder: It seems that you are a certain group of experienced editors who do not want to see editing of "us" contribution. This certainly is a violation of the core policy and specificcally falls under the category of sockpuppetery. My humble request is to stop reverting without review and also stop threatening new comers. ( Wienerish ( talk) 16:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC))
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to History of the Qur'an appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Ari ( talk) 16:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ari ( talk) 16:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ari ( talk) 11:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Islam appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. NeilN talk to me 14:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi; Your comments are strange as I refered to a neutral person in my additions. If you have a point then it had been better to be more specific instead of deleting all the content ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wienerish ( talk • contribs) 16:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I accept that I had been a little Islamic in my additions (if you judge it from a view point of European authors of the middle ages). The reference you are mentioning is itself not neutral and there are thousands of other references stating a TOTAL bloodless invasion of Mecca (e.g., Karin Armstrong). As far as the terms religious, political, and military leader are concerned then these are missleading. If you want to keep with those, then it will be appropriate to expand the list e.g., by adding Businessman, Preacher, Philosopher, Orator, Reformer, Refuge of orphans, Protector of slaves, Emancipator of women, Law-giver, Judge, Saint (list given by Prof. K. S. Ramakrishna Rao who was a non-muslim). Was it not better to only state "prophet" (see the page on Mosses). Regarding the Jewish Clans of Madina, there is only one historical reference about killings of one Jewish clan (there are many references against it). But historicaly, there has never been a claim about the enslavement of jews. The exile on the other hand is a well accepted fact by both muslims and non-muslim authors. But again that has been known to be a result of "not adhering to the peace accords" by Jews. So I thought it was better to avaoid confusions and adhere to the things generally agreed upon!
Dear, I have already given you some references which are from published literature (Karen Armstrong - Mohammad a Prophet of our Time). OK, the terms, "who did not fullfill their peace accords" appear to be a bit harsh but is a fact recognised by many modern day European writers (the aforementioned writer for instancec gives a detailed account). The source of all the references about killings of one jewish tribe is in fact the first biography of Muhammad by a Jewish convert and it too mentions the betrayal on the part of Jews. You are right that Jewish tribes of madina opposed Mohammad but this statement does not explains the actual senario. I will think about an alternate sentence - or otherwise it may be appropriate to have section on controversies. P.S. I will appreiate if you can paste this disccussion on my talk page under your section.
It has been very nice of you. Thanks
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Islam, you will be blocked from editing.
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to
History of the Qur'an, you will be
blocked from editing.
Ari (
talk) 15:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
May you kindly indentify which "worth reading" reference I deleted? Of ourse there is no point of content among muslims about the preservation of Quran and this is well referenced. I agree that part of my addition was not well-referred to, and as you have mentioned may be classified as an apologetic effort. However, there was no need to revert everything as you did in the first instance - examples I have already given in my first response. And this shows that you yourself are doing vandalism and furthermore discouraging new comers. Regarding your reminder: It seems that you are a certain group of experienced editors who do not want to see editing of "us" contribution. This certainly is a violation of the core policy and specificcally falls under the category of sockpuppetery. My humble request is to stop reverting without review and also stop threatening new comers. ( Wienerish ( talk) 16:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC))
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to History of the Qur'an appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Ari ( talk) 16:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ari ( talk) 16:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ari ( talk) 11:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!