User talk:Airtiza14: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:24, 30 July 2017

Recent edit to Hasan ibn Ali

Hello. I noticed that you made an edit that introduces praise or promotional language to the Hasan ibn Ali article. On Wikipedia, we adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid promotional language or puffery. Please read the NPOV policy page, as well as this page of language to avoid to better understand how to expand this article in a style suitable to an encyclopedia. If you have questions, please see the Help Desk page. Thank you! Telfordbuck (talk) 23:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uthman

I agree most Islamic pages are sectarian because they present the views of one group as perhaps the only view. There is usually not even an admission that there is diversity.

And the clarification on source: https://ar.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/إنسان_العيون_في_سيرة_الأمين_المأمون

It is a Sunni source and contains the statement by Aisha asking people to kill Uthman.

On the page Uthman your edit was reverted by Ectomorfer with this edit. They said terrible attempt at trying to add a fake source which is not accessible I suggest you stop trying to misguide people with your school or thought or read NPOV guidelines. You may wish to revert them as the fact that a source is not online but just a book doesn't mean it isn't accessible. Read Wikipedia:Published#Accessible for more information. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try to team up that book has no mention of the said incident and comes from a Shia source you both need to read Wikipedia:NPOV. Ectomorfer (talk) 15:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ectomorfer: How do you know that book has no mention if it is a "fake source" that you say "is not accessible"? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have read it. Plus its a Shia source hence is a minority view. Tagarayen4 (talk) 15:59, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So you admit is not a "fake source" that "is not accessible"? Would you like to undo the edit then? Perhaps adding a clarification that it is a Shia source and/or minority view? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plus you guys should not be ganging up on a Ectomorfer tag teaming is not a good idea. Tagarayen4 (talk) 16:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The original person who added it can re add it but they obviously do not know the meaning of NPOV and will omit the fact these are Shia fringe sources. I have no intention to undo or add to that article in fact all these Islamic articles are infected with a very nasty sectarian vibe. Tagarayen4 (talk) 16:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you just readd it and clarify about the source? What is the point of being here if you are not going to help improve it? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:17, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no interest on that page thats why.....Views of Sahaba will always vary when shia sources are used hence its pointless. Ectomorfer will deal with it even though he is a bit unforgiving on pov edits by Airtiza14. Tagarayen4 (talk) 16:22, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-tilde --> --[[User:SineBot|SineBot]] ([[User talk:SineBot|talk]]) 18:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
-== Edit warring ==
-[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, and [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome to Wikipedia]]. You appear to be repeatedly [[Help:Reverting|reverting or undoing]] other editors' contributions at [[:Uthman]]. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "[[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]]" and is usually seen as obstructing the [[Wikipedia:Editing policy|normal editing process]], as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] on the [[:Talk:Uthman|talk page]].
-If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-ewsoft --> [[User:Eperoton|Eperoton]] ([[User talk:Eperoton|talk]]) 21:15, 30 July 2017 (UTC)