Talk:Abbey Mills Mosque

Category

This seems to fit, but in case I'm wrong remember it's important to be reasonable and civil when using Category:Anti-Islam sentiment or any such category.--T. Anthony (talk) 20:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

absolutely not. That is pure POV. The opposition is not discriminatory. Yahel Guhan 05:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Image

The image is Mangera's, and he is no longer associated with the project. There neither a valid claim of fair use nor a valid reason for that image to be here. -- Avi (talk) 18:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

GA on hold

• Newspapers in refs (eg. The Daily Telegraph) need to be in italics
  •  Done
• "as a plan for a “mega-mosque.”" - why bold?
  • Because it is the most common reference to the project in the press. -- Avi (talk) 16:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• "The Daily Telegraph reported that it was expected" - again, needs italics?
  •  Done
• "did not choose Mangera's design for the final plan, deciding on a scaled-down structure.[11] Instead, the mosque's trustees appointed the firm of Allies and Morrison to design the mosque." - this gets confused half way through about who was rejected and who was accepted.
  •  Done
• "Concerns have also been raised" - "also" not necessary
  •  Done
• Tablighi Jamaat only needs to be wlinked once or twice in the article; same with common words like Islam, Alan Craig, etc.
  •  Done
• Not sure where the Public relations section fits in...(just personally)
  • I thought it was interesting that the mosque decided to engage a PR firm which has set up a professional website and YouTube page. So did the press :) -- Avi (talk) 16:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Makes sense. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 05:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
• "In July of 2007" --> In July 2007, "In September of 2007" --> In September 2007
  •  Done
• "until November of 2007" --> until November 2007
  •  Done
• "when the link was removed" - this is evident as you provide an "until" date, so you can remove these words
  •  Done

An interesting read. Please leave a note on my talk page when done with this. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 07:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Passed. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 05:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 02:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

I would like and try to take this to WP:FAC, so I have opened a peer review request as shown above. There have been some excellent suggestions already, and I'm looking forward to more constructive criticism on the article. -- Avi (talk) 00:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:FAC

Thank you, everyone, for the constructive criticism and help. The article is now at FAC as Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Abbey Mills Mosque. -- Avi (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Removal of HMG petition site

I am applying to the spam whitelist board for its return. Hopefully the source will be allowed soon. -- Avi (talk) 01:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I forgot, I could do it myself. -- Avi (talk) 01:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Guy's edits are even better. -- Avi (talk) 14:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Saudi links removal/balance tot he staement

"The allegations were based on Tablighi Jamaat's being a Deobandi Muslim organization that has close links with the form of the religion practiced by the Saudi royal family.[5]"

Links between Deobandis and Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia is Wahhabi (Wahhabism) not Deobandi, this is very inaccurate as Deobandis have far eastern origins (India) and Wahhabism originates in Saudi Arabia, either this should be removed or the statement needs to be balanced to show the origins of the two as this does highlight the doubt of Saudi Funding which is a major allegation of this mosque.