User talk:Sa.vakilian/Archive1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Sa.vakilian/Archive1, 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  —Khoikhoi 15:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

note

We have some WP Iranian admins if you ever need help. User:Mani1 and User:Roozbeh are working on the Farsi WP. User:Refdoc and User:Pouya do visit once in a while. User:Aytakin is getting voted. User:Pasha Abd and User:Amir85 and User:Babakgh help out regularly too. We have a lot of western editors that have taken the responsibility of protecting our pages (and even helping out with them) too, like User:Jpbrenna, User:Hottentot, User:Jonsafari, User:Fishal, and others.

But we still lack many things. We have some provinces like Yazd province and Kohkiluyeh BoyerAhmad that are still literally empty, and our cultural pages are still largely empty. Im trying to work on the literature pages in the next month or so. I just finished organizing the Iranian architecture page and its related pages to a minimally acceptable level.

I usually like to be contributing to the cultural pages. But sometimes we have editors here that come around and start making lots of trouble.

As youve probably noticed by now, editors like Zora are quite problematic. She has a long history of edit wars against Iranian editors. See this page for example, where she engaged in an edit war for a long time to try to delete any connections between Iran and the Elamites. She supports British-Arab Ahvazi separatists, has been trying to rewrite The Islamic conquest of Iran and Academy of Jundishapur pages constantly, and basically has a big problem with Persians. And that perhaps explains her enmity on the Shia pages as well. Her edit wars can be read here and here and here and here, ad infinitum.

Kheili kerm mirizeh. Movazebesh baash. 18:26, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

re: please help me

salam.

I saw this {{islam}}

Part of a series on
Islam
Beliefs
Practices
History
Culture and society
Related topics

in the islamic articles. I want to make sth like it in persian wikipedia, but I can't find its structure. Please tell me the adress of {{islam}}.

I'm glad to meet you. ya Ali.--Sa.vakilian 00:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It's a template at Template:Islam (code here). joturner 05:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Islam

Hi there, The Islam template is used in all Islam related articles and it carries an image of the mosque, if you take a close look at the other religion templates they all carry an icon that actually symbolizes the particular religion. The question is what symbolizes Islam? As a muslim you would agree that we cannot Idolize any symbol as sacred as it would be Shirk. So the next question is what kind of icon would correctly represent Islam and Muslims? It is undoubtedly the Shahada, because without it we wouldn't be muslims. So I have suggested to change the template image from a masjid to a Masjid with the Shahada in it. In order to have the image in the template I need build some consense, could you kindly visit the talk page (Template_talk:Islam) and make your suggestion, lets have the template change so it will correctly represent Islam. (You do not have to support it if you dont like it). thanks in advance.  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  (T) 10:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  (T) 17:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Islam

Hi, and thanks brother for the link. However, as you might have noticed, im not very involved in that template. But thanks for your commet. Peace! --Striver 17:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Shahada

Actually, some Shi'a Muslims do add a phrase to the standard Shahada, recognizing Ali as the successor of Muhammad. But I gather that this is considered optional. Zora 06:46, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm a shi'a and I know that, but shahada is the words that you say when you want to become Muslim and repeat it in each pray(salat). Absolutely there isn't anything but I believe to one God(Allah) and Mohammad is his prophet. So there isn't any difference betweeen shi'a and Sonni.--Sa.vakilian 07:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Salam

Daastaan e een khanum e زُرا sar e deraazee daarad. eeshoon osoolan baa editor haaye shia ziyaad miyaaneh ye khoobee nadaarad, va sa'i dar hazf va kam ahammiyat jelveh daadan e e'teghaadaat e Shi'i raa daarad. زُرا osoolan e'teqaadaat e Shi'i raa "academic" nemidaanad. masalan tamaam e nazaraat e Hozeh elmiyeh Qom raa mardood midaanad. Hameentor nazaraat e Nasr, Tabatabaei, va digaraan.

eeshaan dar maqaalaat e marboot be Iran ham be sheddat baa'es e jang va "edit war" haaye faraavaan shodeh ast. eeshaan az tarafdaaraan e par o paa qors e jodaayee talab haaye "al-Ahwaz" dar khuzestan hastand. mitavaaneed be Talk:Ahvaz Talk:Khuzestan, Talk:Ethnic politics of Khuzestan, va ....moraaje'eh koneed taa khod bebinid. moddat e 2 saal ast ke eeshaan baa maa editorial war daarand.

email me and I will explain more, if you like.--Zereshk 01:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Salam Sa.vakilian,

Lotfan shoma ham comment man rou rooye safheye Zereshk bebin. Manam mesle shoma ham iraniyam va ham shia va kheyli kheyli tooye wikipedia vaseye maghalehaye Islami zahmat keshidam. --Aminz 03:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Re:Your Comments

Thanks for your compliments brother, Regarding nominating Zora as an Admin user.. I have no objection regarding this, she is a very knowledgeable person, but only thing is she tends to loose her temper alot in the past (at least with me :). Infact I had difficulties understanding what she is saying, most of the times.. My personal feeling is, in the past she has assumed that she is the final authority in some of the Islam related articles, I think she would've changed now, specially after the ArbCom case, what I am saying here is only my personal opinion and you should make your judgement based on your own findings.. Regarding the Template:Islam could you help me build consensus on the talk page? I would need some more muslims to vote there.. The difficulty is finding Muslims who's got a backbone to make such a brave decision..  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  (T) 03:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

More information

eenjaa ro ham yek sari bezan va bekhoon :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Aminz#dobareh_salam.21

just in case youre interested about the question you asked me earlier. Thanx.--Zereshk 03:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Salam,
Dar morede oon "olgoo",
I was thinking about making one in English about Shias. nazaret chiyeh?--Zereshk 20:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Badbakhtee eene ke dorost kardan e olgooye jaame'ee dar morede Islam dar WP engeleesee mostalzem e jalb e nazar e movaafeghe kheili aadam haast, choon yek cheezee hodood e 15-20 nafar betor e saabet 24 saa'at rooye article haaye Islam kaar meekonand, va lezaa momkene ke reseedan be tavaafogh baa een joor aadamaa moshkel baasheh. valee tasavvor mikonam ke dorost kardan e olgooye "Shi'a" kaar e asoon taree basheh, because it is only me, Striver, khaled, and 2 or 3 other users. What do you think?--Zereshk 16:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


Salam Seyyed,
This is the address of the template you were asking about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Islam

Knowledge gap hypothesis

Hi. My only edit to the article was to fix a disambiguous link to [[medium]], which I linked to mass media, if that's not correct here is the medium disambig page so you can find an appropriate link. Thanks! - Dreadlocke 04:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Raas meegee

Salam,

Man taa jaayee ke havaasam boodeh sa'i kardam ke "hokoomat haa", "rahbaraan", va "afraad e raast garaa" ro moqasser neshoon bedam. Na a'raab e ma'moolee ro. Man zoor ham az A'raab e sadr e Islam, afraadee mesle Umar, Yazeed, Bani Umayyeh, va amsaalohom hast. Hadaf e man "Arab seteezee" aslan naboodeh va neest.

Ammaa een bi sharaf haayee ke daarand aziyyat meekonand (ke esmeshoon ro nemeebaram), faqat va faqat hadafeshoon "irani seteezee" hast. va een khoon e mano joosh miyaareh. maa 8 saal jangeedeem, 1 million koshteh daadeem taa eenhaa haalaa biyaand yek mosht dari bari beneveesan o jang ro taqseer e maa bendaazand? Be maa migan racist? man mikhaam bedoonam ke aslan tooye Evin maa Arab daareem? een bisharaf haa faqat daaran ahdaaf e tajziyeh talabi e Iran ro donbaal mikonand. Man ke khoonam joosh miyaad kesee Iran ro badnaam koneh.--Zereshk 03:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

man ghablan een mataaleb ro ezaafeh kardeh boodam. User:Ahwaz har do ro paak kard. But I will edit your additions. No problem.
esm e maqaaleh ro emrooz avaz kardam: Anti-Persian sentiments. Ammaa eenhaa hanooz dobaal e bahaaneh migardan.:)--Zereshk 04:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree. All along, for 2 years now, I have been trying to point toward the Umar, Uthman, the Umayyids and their ruling oppression as the source of the mawali and ajam hatred.--Zereshk 23:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Sobh bekheir seyyed,

Here it is. Bebeen nazaret chiyeh:

After the Islamic Conquest of Persia, many Iranians (a.k.a. "mawali") came to despise the Umayyids because of their policies of discrimination and and Arab superiority. The Shu'ubiyah movement was a consequence that followed, illustrating that Iranians had adopted Islam and yet retained their identity. Furthermore, in spite of whatever sectarian affiliations they would adopt, they exhibited strong sympathy for the progeny of Ali and Fatima Zahra, the daughter of the prophet of Islam. Hence numerous shrines of the prophet's household built by Iranians today dot the vast lands of Iran, Iraq, and Syria.

baa ejaazeh.--Zereshk 02:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

aks az haram

I tried taking pics of Haram Emam Reza, but as you know, doorbeen haa ro migiran.

The only pics we have are:

We need a pic of Imam Reza, Shah Cheragh, and Shabdel Azim.--Zereshk 03:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

bahat movaafeqam: een kaar laazemeh. Ammaa az nazar e copyright baayad motma'en baasheem, choon maa ghablan 2-3 taa aks az haram Emam Reza rooye Mashad daashteem. "WP Image Police" paakeshoon kard. Gomaan mikonam agar aksee maghbool e WP Farsi qaraar begireh, maqbool e WP engeleesee ham hatman qaraar migireh.
We can try using those pics you showed me. But they might get deleted by the WP Image Police, unless they are: PD, GFDL, or something similar.--Zereshk 04:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Albatteh ke mitooneem.--Zereshk 04:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

RE:Salam

Wasalaam, Welcome to wikipedia, your help would be greatly appreciated. It's nice to have another Shia member who could help make the Islamic articles NPOV. --Khalid 09:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid many articles concerning the Shia denomination (see Category:Shi'a Islam) are in bad shape. What is really sorely missing for many is a citable reference. --LambiamTalk 16:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Medal

Medale chist? Tala, silver ya bronze?! Hehe. Most active Iranian editors at the moment seem to be Zereshk, me and Amir85 as far as I know --K a s h Talk | email 15:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Salam,

Man kesee ro dar Wikipedia farsi nemeeshnaasam. Ammaa dar engeleesee pishnahaad e man: Kash, ManiF, and Ali doostzadeh. Motasefaaneh SouthernComfort deegeh eenjaa neest. vagarneh oon ham kandidaye khoobi meeshod.--Zereshk 11:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Fatimah

Regarding, Fatimah, see Genealogy of Khadijah's Daughters and point 274 here --Striver 11:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Salam Sa.vakilian. As far as Shi’as are concerned I think we believe that Hazrat Mohammed SAW had one daughter (Bibi Fatima Zahra (AS)) and one son (Qasim ibn Muhammad AKA Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad). Unfortunately Hazrat Mohammed SAW’s son (Qasim ibn Muhammad AKA Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad) died in an early age. And because of that we the Shi’as believe that Hazrat Mohammed SAW’s family extended from the family of Imam Ali AS and Bibi Fatima Zahra (AS) children. But Sa.vakilian you know what just to be on the safe side and to find out the real truth, why don’t you contact a Shi’a mosque and ask them this question and if they disagree with what I just told you then please please don’t hesitate to tell me what they told you, Okay. Thank You Salman
Yeah, i have also have heard that from numerous sources. --Striver 11:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Are Qasim ibn Muhammad and Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad the same persons? Source? --Striver 18:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Salam,

It is a bit odd. Tabatabaei's book "Shia Islam" p. 191 calls Fatima, the prophet's "sole beloved daughter". The online edition at Howzeh Elmiyeh Qom has taken out the word "sole".

So I looked in other sources. I found this passage:

"Khadija gave birth to several children of whom only four daughters survived: Zainab, Umme Kulthum, Ruqiya, and Fatima-Zahra who was the youngest and most exalted of them all.
There is a difference between historians regarding the first two daughters, for some claim that they were the Prophet's step-daughters; but the fact is that they were his direct daughters."

It is located on p.32 of "Fatima (A.S.) The Gracious" by Abu Muhammad Ordoni. Published by: Ansariyan Publications, Qom. Balagh.net has an online edition here.

Another source here says:

در تعداد فرزندان حضرت خديجه ، ميان مورخان اختلاف است . به‏گفته مشهور : ثمره ازدواج رسول خدا و خديجه ، شش فرزند بود .

1- هاشم . 2- عبدالله . به اين دو «طاهر» و «طيب‏»مى‏گفتند . . 3- رقيه . 4- زينب 5- ام كلثوم . 6- فاطمه .

رقيه بزرگترين دخترانش بودو زينب ، ام كلثوم و فاطمه به‏ترتيب پس از رقيه قرار داشتند . پسران خديجه پيش از بعثت‏پيامبر (ص) ، بدرود زندگى گفتند . ولى دخترانش ، نبوت پيامبر(ص) را درك كردند .

گروهى از محققان معتقدند : قاسم و همه دختران رسول خدا (ص)پس از بعثت‏به دنيا آمدند و چندروز پس از پيامبر خدا (ص) به‏مدينه هجرت كردند .

So I think you are right. But I think we should just be inclusive and mention all theories. Like for example "X says this and Y says that".--Zereshk 20:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

What copyright violation is our brother Grenavitar is talking about

I encourage each and every single wikipedian to go and visit the website[1] our friend Grenavitar posted. He blames me for copying the information from that website about the Sahaba and cousin of Hazrat Mohammed SAW (Abdullah ibn Abbas). The truth is, when I don’t know much about something or someone, before I start writing anything about it I always go to other neutral websites and absorbs information from then and after doing that all I starting writing on wikipedia.org. Grenavitar has blamed me for violating the copyrights of wikipedia and he also blocked me from editing any pages. After taking and explaining this matter to wikipedia representatives, hey allowed me to edit again. Grenavitar blocked me from editing any article and at the same time he was saying things about me that were not true, I had no way of defending myself since I wasn’t able to post my responds. But now I encourage each and every single wikipedian to go and visit that website and decided for themselves what really happened. Thank You Salman

Saman?

Im not sure I know Saman. Is he in English WP or Farsi WP?--Zereshk 04:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahan. Salman o migi?
Ziyaad baahaash moraavedeh nadaashtam. Nemishnaasamesh.
Raast o pooskandeh meegam: Shi'eh hast? Agar Shi'a baasheh, va yaa agar edit haaye zedde Shi'eh nadaashteh baasheh, man behesh ra'i meedam. That is my opinion.--Zereshk 04:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Misconceptions about the Shia

"Sheikh Mahmud Shaltut, who declared the Shi'a as a legitimate Islamic school of thought"

een qesmatesh ro man naneveshtam. I dont know who wrote it.--Zereshk 05:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

"Among the different groups, the Shi'a have in particular been harmed more than any other Islamic denomination due to lack of sufficient reliable references that are readily available to foreign researchers. In the words of Edward Browne, "we still have no access to any detailed, sufficient, and reliable works on the Shi'i school of thought in any of the European languages."

I think after Corbin efforts and Islamic revolution this problem reduced very much.

I wrote this part based on the article in: Message of Thaqalayn, Vol 3, No 1-2, p.121-122.
Even with Corbin's contributions, the number of studies on Shias is much much less in comparison to studies on Sunnis. It is as if Sunnis define what Islam is. Motevajjehi chee meegam?

Why don't you refer to story of "abdollah ben sabba" and the responce of allame askari to it.

We can add it of course.--Zereshk 05:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

We can also tell the history of distortion of shiite view like call us rafezi.-

een ham fekr e khoobieh.--Zereshk 05:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Salam,

nemeedoonam chera bargasht mikhoreh. Did you type in nima53@yahoo.com ?

I think pluralism is a good thing. It's the closest thing to a compromise that keeps as most people happy as possible.--Zereshk 22:43, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Salam Seyed,

I got your email.

Rastee, baa man mitooni farsi harf bezanee. Motevajjeh misham. But I will answer you in English. because my speed of typing in farsi is eftezaah. Maybe 5 kalameh dar daghigheh. :( Anyway. Take care. man beram khooneh deegeh. I will answer you tomorrow.--Zereshk 04:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Salam

Thanks for the message. Ive already used Mehr-e Taban. Im looking for other sources. Preferably Shia. Farsi sources are OK too. mer30.--Zereshk 23:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

la aqal mitooni yek nazari dar (talk page) bahs e maqaleh -e Tai al -Ardh bedee. Komak e khoobi misheh. choon POV tag daareh. Rastee, to ba User:Striver ashnaaee daaree? Mikhai behesh mo'arefeet bokonam? He is very good guy.--Zereshk 23:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the greetings my friend. It's nice to know I have Shiite brothers in the wikipedian community.--Jaber90 04:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC) I'm only active in English and French wiki.

Salam!

Salam barada Sa.vakilian, khobi?

So, Zereshk told me you want to help? Is there any special article you had in mind, any special topic you prefer, or would anything do? I managed to fill in a bit regarding Tabarra, but i have very little information and imagination regardin Tawalla, any ideas on how to expand that? Forbidding What is Evil and Commanding What is Just are some important articles that could use some expansion... but all three are prety hard articles to expand, would you prefer some other area? Peace! --Striver 12:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Kubam, emrci :)

No problem bro, take your time and tell me when you need help! --Striver 13:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

There are several reasons for Hezbollah's continued conflict with Israel. Hezbollah is still contesting Israel's control of the Shebaa farms region. While Lebanon and Syria support Hezbollah's claim, Israel do not and regularly enters its troops and plane in Lebanese territory.

How about that? --Striver 13:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If you want, I can help you in articles concerning Lebanon and Hezbollah. I am very close to Hezbollah. Just tell me how I can help you. --Jaber90 16:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Salam

Sa.vakilian, I hope you are well and doing fine. Unfortunately, I've never got a chance to closely study the Lebanon, Israel, Hezbollah. All I know is based on the information I've gained through media. I think those articles can help me learning more about these issues. I'll contribute to those article once I got the confidence of doing so. --Aminz 22:23, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: removing some part of begining

سلام علیک

نعم, اننى اعرف

The information is certainly necessary to provide context. I believe it should be in the last paragraph of the "Hezbollah raid" subsection, where the naming of the operation is explained. You may want to find another source that actually says that is the reason for the name, which shouldn't be to hard. I already included a citation from The China Daily which says that Hizballah planned to capture Israelis to free prisoners (eg Samir Kuntar), which would be better than the source you provided, which only quotes a supporter, and not a Hizballah member, so perhaps you should use a {{ref name=whatever}} to back up your statement. Mersi, TewfikTalk 07:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello,
Unfortunately, I have not been able to commit much time to the 'pedia recently, so I was not yet able to effect any of the changes that you had brought to my attention. If you still see any issues, please let me know. Cheers, TewfikTalk 00:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I think everything was dealt with, if you still see issues, let me know. Cheers, TewfikTalk 06:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry for the late answer, im not going to be so active in in the following days, mostly holding an eye. peace.--Striver 07:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Salam.

The only muslims I know here are striver and khaled. AminZ also helps out. there are others too (but I dont know them personally).--Zereshk 19:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Israeli casualties

Salam

Could you be more specific? I didn't understand from your comments what problem you have recognised or what to do about it. Cheers, TewfikTalk 21:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Urgent

Please vote here. Thanks--Zereshk 00:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The above message was spammed to over a dozen talk pages. As this is against policy, all spam messages were removed. --InShaneee 02:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter. Policy states that you cannot copy and paste the same message to several talk pages, especially if it is an attempt to 'rally' them to a discussion. --InShaneee 02:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Dont worry Seyyed. I'll email you next time. Inshanee's just trying to give me a hard time :)--Zereshk 02:56, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Misconceptions

We can merge them, no doubt. But after we merge, we wont be able to address the problem of accumulating misconceptions in the media about Iran. It will be left unaddressed.--Zereshk 02:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Arab/Isreali Conflict

I don't know if you noticed that the title at the top got reverted to WWIII again by someone. If you could revert it that would be great. Looking at the history it looks like that unregistered IP did that not you.

I'd revert it by my computer is running really slow today. If anything needs to be shot, it's my computer. Davidpdx 02:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Reversion

I just reverted an uncharacteristic edit you made. Perhaps you meant to put it in Talk? Cheers, TewfikTalk 06:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Certainly, but it was both written in an unencyclopedic fashion and included in the wrong area, as well being slightly repetative. Cheers, TewfikTalk 16:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


Hello,

I reverted you again. If you want to include some claim of disproportionality, then it should be WP:Notable. Sorry again, TewfikTalk 19:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC) PS Such claims are already represented from human rights organisations in the critiques of Civilian casualties.


Hello,
With the exception of the Lebanese minister, the reactions belong to the "International reactions" section, and I believe that they are already represented with direct sourcing. I am moving the Lebanese minister's comments to the "Positions of Lebanon" section. Cheers, TewfikTalk 02:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Haram - No edit war, but the claims that you are adding are already included. Read the "International reactions," "Lebanese position," and "Civilian casualties: from Israel" sections. If there is anything that is both WP:Notable and reliable then we should include it. TewfikTalk 04:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe that what I removed would have been removed by anyone else as well had it stayed up for the reasons I mentioned. If you like, I will not touch your next attempt - maybe after I all I am mistaken. The issue until now, beyond the method in which you authored the passage, is that the general second hand claims of EU and UN critique had no reason to be added in face of the directly sourced and extensively quoted passages already included in the article. I again refer you to the sections I mentioned above. I think you will find that they mention what you want included. If after that you still believe something is missing, then please try to add it and myself, or anyone else would be glad to help. Cheers, TewfikTalk 05:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC) PS Some examples:

  • Arbour called for Israel to obey a "principle of proportionality"
  • You know if they're chasing Hezbollah, well go for Hezbollah. You don't go for the entire Lebanese nation, and that's the difference."
  • UN Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Jan Egeland has said that one third of the dead are children


Like I illustrated above, I think it is already included in the words of all these important people. I'm not exactly sure what you want to do. We cannot simply insert this statement, but if someone else of stature says something to that effect, then they should be included. Could you clarify if I misunderstood? TewfikTalk 23:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed your addition. Good job on pursuing what you want until you get it, and for taking the time to work through all the correct formulations. Sorry that I couldn't be of more assistance, but I haven't really been around the page recently due to administrative issues. Cheers, TewfikTalk 01:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed

Hi Sa.vakilian,

Thanks for your message on my talk page. You are right, the article needs some modifications. I'll try to do my best whenever I am free. Best regards, --Aminz 09:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Trouble

YOu mean that Zeresh got blocked? Its not much i can do about that... He will be back soon, it was not a very long block. As for the Shi'a articles, you can always take a look at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:The Shia Guild to see what articles that could need some help, also, take a look at the vote for deletion of it, some whant to delete it: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:The Shia Guild (3rd nomination).--Striver 16:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Iran related articles noticeboard/Incidents

Please watch this page and post your messages on this page so that everybody may have access to it. Thanks --Aminz 05:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Please look at talk page first

Hello SA. valkilian, the vandalism remark wasn't directed at you, if you look at the anon's post a couple before mine you will see what I was referring to. I was however, blaming you for pov and I think that it is applicable. Honestly, I can be guilt of it myself sometimes, it happens to the best of us.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 12:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Spam

Regarding edits such as this: This is your only warning. Spamming users about a vote or discussion is not tolerated as per WP:SPAM. If you continue, you will temporarily lose your editing privilages. --InShaneee 03:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

While, indeed, changing your message does mean that it does not fit the traditional definition of spam, our Spam policy forbids repeated messaging of users to direct them to a discussion. So, as I said, please don't do it anymore. --InShaneee 03:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Moved from my talk page: Please vote

Salam

yak maghale POV alayhe ma neveshte and. Lotfan baraye hazfe an ray bede va be bagheye ham begoo ray bedahand.[2]--Sa.vakilian 15:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey Sa.vakilian, can I please, please ask you to post your public comments on Wikipedia:Iran,shiite and middle east related articles noticeboard/Incidents. Spamming is against the wiki policy. If you don't wish to follow it, may I beg you not to post your message at least on my personal talk page. I really get disturbed by that. Thanks you so much in advance for your considerations. --Aminz 18:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

P.S. if you are not sure that the people you would like to inform are watching this page (i.e. don't have this page on their watchlist), feel free to give them such note whenever you posted something there. --Aminz 05:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

No, don't do that. Spamming to bring people to the notification of a notification about a discussion is STILL unacceptable. --InShaneee 22:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Why? It is not spamming anymore. Can you please cite a policy for that? --Aminz 22:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it is spamming as notifying a mass amount of people about a discussion, and you know where the policy is for that. Consider both of yourselves warned now about this. --InShaneee 22:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

But the policy (well actually guidline) say that it should be used together with common sense. I think spamming once at the time being (just to notify people about the new address of the page) is fine. Am I right? --Aminz 23:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Nope. And if either of you would like to test that, I'd be more than happy to block for violation of said policy. Simple as that. --InShaneee 23:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:What is your idia

We used to have that section, but it was removed as being to much of a crystal ball. You can bring it up on Talk if you like. TewfikTalk 05:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I understood that you wanted to have a section with viewpoints on the Lebanon article, like on the 06 ME conflict page. There used to be a section like that (and as a matter of fact, since the two pages diverged from a common ancestor, this may be its refined vestige), but it was removed for predictions, which editors thought had no place there. If you think that we should have such a section (for which a case can be made (as must have been made on the 06 ME conflict), then perhaps see if other editors would agree with you on this. All the best, TewfikTalk 20:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Please describe your edition

I haven't seen that in Talk (I try to scan it before editing), but feel free to point it out if I did miss it. The reason claimed for the attack should (and is, I believe) cited in the article, but it should not go in the WP:Lead, and certainly not in place of a description of what actually happened. Cheers, TewfikTalk 15:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Why Hezbollah asserts they did this is of secondary importance to what they did, just like in any other conflict, we discuss the basic action (x attacked y; y responded against x) and only then the context (y had been very mean to x for a long time). TewfikTalk 15:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I made the addition, though if you want it to survive, I suggest you discuss it on Talk. Otherwise, it is more than likely that someone will return the page to its status quo. Cheers, TewfikTalk 15:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I already added it is what I was saying :). TewfikTalk 16:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

اشكر - is there still a problem? TewfikTalk 19:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
That is not exactly NPOV, as whether you like it or not, Israel is an internationally recognized state who only gets a (relatively large) part of its funding from the US, while Hezbollah is considered a terror organisation by most states in the West, and receives its support from Iran in contravention to a UN security council resolution. It'll probably have to go. TewfikTalk 04:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You misunderstand: I'm not claiming they are or aren't terrorists. I'm saying that the status of Israel and Hizballah is not equivalent. One is an independant state, entitled to whatever aid from whoever; one is an organisation considered by many Western states to be terrorist in nature and subject to limitations on funding there, and more importantly, is subject to a UN security council resolution demanding its disarming. Iran's supply of weapons to Hizballah is in contravention to the UN policy. Cheers, TewfikTalk 05:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

A difference in perception is fine. The point I am trying to make is that there are no legality issues that make the US's 2.5 billion annual to Israel any more unique than the 1.8 billion to Egypt, or the other billions that it dispenses. Iran's aid to HizbAllah is frought with diplomatic complications, specifically the Security Council resolution. That is what makes it notable. Cheers, TewfikTalk 05:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Rajab

Thank you bro, inshalla it will be a good month for all of us. --Striver 20:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:London-beyrut.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:London-beyrut.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Please help me

من این مطلب را اینجا گذاشتم، تا اگر روزی کسی گذرش به اینجا افتاد و فکر کرد دارن به یکی - حالا هر کی که هست- تهمت می زنند و او مظلوم واقع شده، برای جلوگیری از این تهمت کمک کنه. بی توجه به هزینه ای که این کار می تونه برایش داشته باشه.

man dar maghale hezbollah baksh idealogy[3] ba yeki az karbaran digar ekhtelafe jeddi peyda kardam[4]

an matlabi ke dar maghale be naghl az nasrollah hast be nazar men yek tahrif ashkar ast. ama alave bar chand moshkel digar ham vojood darad. manba asli khabar yek roozname lobnani ast ke dastresi be arshive an vojood nadarad. amma manba dovvom yek manba kamelan jahat dar ast.[5][6] va chizi ra be nasrollah nesbat dade and ke vey nagofte. manabe digar niz bar asas in do manba kar karde and. moshkel bozorgtar an ast ke dar archive site hezbollah yek sokhanrani ba tarikh 1 rooz ghabl (22-10-2002) az in khabar neveshte shode ke mozooye yeksan amma matne motafavet darad. [7] va baraye rooz bad (23-10-2002) az hich sokhanrani nam borde nashode. [8]

Hala an karbari ke mikhahad matn ra be shekl gomrah konande feli negah darad migooyad in didgah chand roozname motabar ast.Be nazar man in kar mesle in ast ke kasi az chand site motabare vahhabi matalebi biavarad ke neshan midahad maraje shie gofte and ali ra beparastid vali dar manabe va maraje shie hich matlabi ke an eddea ra tayeed konad dar dast nabashad. an vaght ma biayim an ra dar bakhshe eteghadate shie bogzarim.:) --Sa.vakilian 05:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Oh, some user was just being a prat, and posted loads of stuff all over everyone's pages, then started copying my warnings message I gave to him. Ignore it all, the warnings don't count and eerything is how it should be :-) HawkerTyphoon 02:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


Article

What do you think about this article? --Striver 03:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's NPOV policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you can be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Furthermore, reinserting the same commentary multiple times may cause you to violate the three-revert rule, which can lead to a block. Among the other biased information you've added, "The haughty representative" is clearly not a neutral tone. Thanks. --Iorek85 09:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:Where is the history

Its back; it was temporarily deleted to deal with maintainance issues. Cheers, TewfikTalk 18:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:Targeting of civilian areas

I would be very cautious about what you suggest and would discuss it on Talk first. I believe that any journalist reports should go in the subarticle, and the main page should only have the NGOs and the parties (Lebanon and Israel). TewfikTalk 19:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The sections I removed were redundant at the time. TewfikTalk 23:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope that this day and the legacy of Ali motivates you to many kind acts and pursuit of knowledge. TewfikTalk 22:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

For the congratulations, may you be blessed as well :)

I dont know why Zereshk has not answered, just give him some time :)

peace. --Striver 19:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Bor, i did'nt receive any mail, and i dont know about the main page, sorry. --Striver 19:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! congratulations to you also. --Aminz 22:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

welcome

Thanks for the welcome! --Coolintro 19:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ameer Al-Momeneen

I would also like to congratulation (for the birthday of Ameer Al-Momeneen) you and other Muslims brothers and sisters that are working day and night to make sure that the Muslim and Islamic ideas are well presented at wikipedia.--Salman 01:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Imam Ali

Okay Sa.vakilian, I add some references and citations to the section that talks about the grave of Imam Ali (AS), “Grave of Ali ibn Abu Talib”. You can go back to the article. Thank you for allowing me to take part in this project.--Salman 02:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Bro, since the Shi'a guild needs to be more active, i moved your comment to the guild. I also answered you there: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam:The Shia Guild/Historical articles. It would be great for the guild if we could keep our communication there! Peace. --Striver 15:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah Introduction Joke

I hope my little joke in my entry about the Hezbollah Introduction didn't offend you - there was none intended, I assure you! While you're clearly sympathetic to H, at the very least, you've kept that out of your posts and have challenged me to consider just what I really know about the subject, considering that prior to getting interested in this article the only thing I knew was what I read in Canadian newspapers.

So for purposes of illustrating my argument, I thought of how one would write an intro that would attract the POV-pushers like bees to honey ... clearly Labenah would write half ... and your name simply occurred to me first for the other half. JiHymas@himivest.com 04:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Rooz-e- Tawalud-e-Muhafize Hareem-e-Tauheed o Risalt Giramibad

Rooz-e- Tawalud-e-Muhafize Hareem-e-Tauheed o Risalt bey waliul Asr Arwahana Fidah, Rahabar-e- Moazaamm-e- Inqilab-e-Esalmi wa be hameye Ashighan-e- Wilayat Giramibad. Abulfazl 08:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Care to comment?

There is a discussion on Roles of non-combatant State and non-State actors in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict talkpage about the inclusion of detail for Israel. I am of the view that Israel should be included but the detail is being continually removed by User:Tewfik.

Tewfik's argument is what he considers the illegality of Hezbollah under UN 1559 as the reason he removed the detail. However, Tewfik has not removed recent requests of arms sales to Israel such as jet fuel and GBU-28's. I believe he is pushing the POV that aid to Israel is only in response to the current crisis or the illegality of Hezbollah under 1559. US aid to Israel is in fact a long standing agreement responsible for the size and makeup of the IDF. Without the aid they would not have a military capable of engaging in conflict. If you can take a look and support my position (was working under 82.29.227.171) that would be great. RandomGalen 11:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Well just say if you agree that it should be included in that article or not and include your reasoning. This is an agenda on Tewfiks part. Tewfik does not run wikipedia. That aside i'm of the view that to exclude the detail on Israel would be extremely unbalanced and also complete unencyclopedic. Please let him know in that thread- appreciate your help. RandomGalen 12:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

non-english sources

Hi, I found some references about non-english sources on WP. Check out verifiability and Reliable sources.

One says:

"English-language sources should be provided whenever possible, and should always be used in preference to foreign-language sources (assuming equal quality and reliability). For example, do not use a foreign-language newspaper as a source unless there is no equivalent article in an English-language newspaper. However, foreign-language sources are acceptable in terms of verifiability, subject to the same criteria as English-language sources."

So I guess Arabic sources can be used, but I would heed the caution in here that English sources are preferred, and I am sure any sources about early Muslims have already been published and translated into English. The sources have to be verifiable, and non-English sources are meaningless to most people. Cuñado - Talk 00:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

salam

Im good,thanks, i trust you are good to. Does that hapen every time? wtb, hear this one out :)--Striver 02:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

sallam

seyyed, saat wiki be vaghte gmt ast??? --ALLAH bless you 12:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Salam

I answered your comment on my talk page. Hope what I've done is a bit improved. Take care, Elizmr 15:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I tried again and you deleted what I wrote without specifically criticizing it. You moved it to the talk page again with the note about gaining consensus, so please participate in this process. Please consider leaving it in or telling me what is wrong with it rather than just taking it out as you have done. I appreciate your collegial tone, but am getting frustrated with the edits. Elizmr 23:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Length was not an issue that you mentioned before. A lot of the length is due to adding stuff to reflect many viewpoints. Hez is an organization that is based on resistance against Israel. Isn't this true? The issue of views and goals re: Israel belongs in the lead, as does something about where these views come from, what methods have been used to achieve the goals, and viewpoints about the methods. What do you suggest we cut out? I would be willing to do a one or two sentence summary of my paragraph for the lead and then place the whole paragraph in the intro, but you keep deleting it entirely. I just can't find this acceptable. Elizmr 02:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your cool tone, but I feel that you are being obstructive with the edits. We are supposed to show all sides of an issue on Wikipedia, not only the side that any individual might feel is the correct side. I have my own POVs, but I feel very strongly about all POVs being aired. Is this something you can work with? Elizmr 03:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah Talk/Edits

No major problem, Sa.v, but remember: if you want people to support your view on required edits, you have to talk to them and convince them. And too much carelessness in editing is not far removed from vandalism. JiHymas@himivest.com 15:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:London-beyrut.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:London-beyrut.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ZsinjTalk 14:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Boston Tea Party

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [9]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

History of Hezbollah

I'm at work now, but will look at what you wrote and write my idea when I get home. Take care. Elizmr 13:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

al-islam

Thank you brother, i have already made an article about it: al-Islam.org. Peace! --Striver 10:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Hezbollah/Archive lead

Hi Sa.vakilian! I moved rather then copy, by editing the section on the Talk:Hezbollah page and cutting all the information from there, then pasting it in under Talk:Hezbollah/Archive lead. I used Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page for help when needed! I hope that answers your question. Mceder 12:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyright status of the two pictures in Shia article on P. Wiki

Hi:

Hope you are doing OK. The first picture in that article is OK. I couldn't find the copyright status of the second one. I shall look more into it.

Behaafarid 22:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi bro

Yes, i am online. Im sorry for not having answered to your previous messages, i was bussy with other issues. How can i assist?--Striver 18:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

If I don't answer you on the talk page

I have to go to sleep, but will answer everything in the am. I think everything you are saying is reasonable and we can get a version that pleases both of us (until someone else comes along and hates that version and wants to change everything) :=). Thanks for assuming good faith. Elizmr 05:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sa.va. I looked at the talk page but didn't see any new comments there from you. Please put your comments there and I will go there later and look. About the intro section, could we discuss what you feel the purpose is for the section? Maybe we can figure out a compr0mise based on that. Elizmr 15:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyright situation of the First Picture in Shia Article on Persian Wiki

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/usage_statement.html?maps=yes Behaafarid 19:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Salam

Eid e to ham mobarak Sa.Va.

As for your proposals, as you can see, I have given up editing on WP.

And frankly, I think WP is hopeless. Magar eenkeh:

  1. (as AminZ said), the policies change so that admins go through re-elections every once in a while. Man aslan haal o howselehye sar o kalleh zadan baa admin haaye ahmagh ro nadaaram.
  2. we need an Iranian Admin(s) to help out with the constant surge of vandalism that has plagued the Iranian articles.

And even then, I'd still be reluctant. Some articles must be locked up once in a while. Too many ignorant editors ruining too many good articles, va man khoda vakili kaar o zendegi ham daaram. I cant spend more than 30 minutes a day on the computer. And even that is damaging my studies.--Zereshk 15:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Shia Map

Hi: You still can't use the map, (even mentioning demography) that is because the map is not controversial or the subject of the article. if it were for example the National Geographic map that had called Persian Gulf "Arabian Gulf" then you probably could.

About the Medal, I thought you are going to do it. Behaafarid 23:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

re: Ghadir

What do you mean? I don't understand. As I said you before for example a Sunni historian and theologian (Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari) quoted this Hadith from 70 ways. Is there any hadith which has narrated more than Ghadir.The chains (asnad) of narrations of Ghadir Khum--Sa.vakilian 17:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

i have already stated before: nobody is denying that the actual event of ghadir is mutawaatir. what was actually said (i.e. the matn) is what is differed over, and i can guarantee you that many of the refs given in the links differ in text, and the fact that sunnis and shi'ites differ over the actual matn attests to this. what tabari says (and i cannot seem to find that book except on shi'ite websites) is of no consequence as he may merely be relating asaneed for the event and not the precise matn. therefore the certain parts of the account are seemingly not of the level of tawatur. to say it is must be proven by a reliable, authoritative source and not an amateur library project. ITAQALLAH 19:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

ok. i think that either i am having trouble explaining this to you properly or you are having trouble undersanding. when you quote so and so sunni imaam saying "ghadeer is mutawaatir", this does not prove what you are trying to say. i too say that ghadeer is mutawaatir. however, this says nothing about which version one accepts, as they may be accepting the bukhaari version or the muslim version or whatever. similarly, when al-islam.org notes every book where ghadeer is mentioned, it does not clarify whether what is being referenced contains the exact same version. just because people say they accept ghadeer as mutawaatir does not mean they are saying that they endorse the shi'ite version. what al-islam.org is doing is saying "here is where ghadeer is mentioned and here are all the sunnis who say it is mutawaatir, that means they accept our riwaayah!" and this is a flawed approach. what must be done to prove this is first show that every book quoted contains the exact shi'ite version and declared saheeh, as well as showing that when the 'ulema say ghadeer is mutawaatir, that they are talking about the exact shi'ite version which has a lot of dubious extensions to it. and when sunni works are quoted it does not mean they are saheeh or that these are part of what is mutawaatir. a lot of versions do not mention the latter half of what is in shi'ite versions, such as the muslims allegedly making bay'ah afterwards and umar making the congrats. so one cannot claim that the latter parts are mutawaatir and sunni imaams accept it because they say ghadeer is mutawaatir and they quote ghadeer in their books. do you get what i am trying to say? ITAQALLAH 07:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

yes i have already read that, and i already stated that this is just a compilation of everything regarding ghadeer, many of the sections not reaching a level of tawatur as is clearly observable. when sunni sources are quoted, the relevant tasheeh has not been made and it is not clear whether the actual sunni authors mentioned them as something sound or mentioned them as an example of a weak narration related to the event. you will be suprised how many times i have seen people reference a narration to talkhis al-mustadrak when all that means is that dhahabi probably thinks the narration is weak!ITAQALLAH 07:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

i don't know if that book is attributable to at-tabari, as i am having difficulty finding that book except on shi'ite websites (it's like blindly collecting tabari and ibn sa'd to justify the satanic verses incident). again, collecting sunni narrations mean nothing until they are properly authenticated. as for the statement, again this is differed over according to minhaaj as-sunnah (فليس في الصحاح لكن هو مما رواه العلماء، وتنازع الناس في صحته، فنقل عن البخاري وإبراهيم الحربي وطائفة من أهل العلم بالحديث أنهم طعنوا فيه وضعفوه، ونقل عن أحمد بن حنبل أنه حسنه، كما حسنه الترمذي، وقد صنف أبو العباس بن عقده مصنفاً في جمع طرقه), although most authorities have no problem in accepting as saheeh when it is put into context (when i mean context, see [10]) ITAQALLAH 08:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

again, i'm having trouble finding this book attributed to dhahabi on a mainstream website.. too bad the tahqeeq has been done by tabatabaa'i :) ITAQALLAH 10:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I will, Sa.Vakilian, but probably later. Cheers --Aminz 08:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

re: Advice

thank you for your advice,

shi'ite resources are notable for shi'ite opinions only, except when there is no disagreement amongst the groups in islam. tabatabaa'i is a good resource for telling us what the shi'ite opinion is, not necessarily what the majority opinion is. you bring forth a book attributed to adh-dhahabi, whereas you have produced no sanad for this book and you have not explained why it has not been printed elsewhere. i did not claim it is fabricated, i said it is dubious, and i would just like access to a version which has not come out of an iraani press.

what evidences did you produce? you produced a list of books mentioning ghadeer in general to support it being mutawaatir. then i told you that yes it is mutawaatir but that does not mean that every related narration is also mutawaatir. you then produced some sites which produced a narrative by joining up all narrations related to the event. i argued that this does not stop certain parts from being weak if weak narrations have been used. you accept the entire narrative presented, on the premise that ghadeer is mutawaatir, although i have already stated that yes ghadeer is mutwaatir but most of the versions do not contain parts of what shi'ites claim to be included.

here, you then said "OK here are some links which use sunni sources for the certain additions", although i said that using a sunni source does not matter, it must first be authenticated per mainstream hadeeth scholars. that responsibility is upon you, not me. the passage regarding 'stick to book and ahl al-bayt', this is accepted. the passage regarding mawla, this is disputed (per minhaaj as-sunnah) but i already researched and there are credible opinions saying it is sound. regarding the other extra additions of what happened, then they are generally rejected by most. the context, about what was said and why, then this is differed upon also. therefore, it is not suitable to give a one-sided view of the event.

i also stated that you cannot produce the writings of a shi'ite scholar or a shi'te website and declare it as absolute fact (as you did in the Ali article), it is a reliable source for giving us the shi'ite viewpoint only. when opinions differ on a subject, you cannot declare the version of one side as fact, and there are certain parts of your proposal which are one-sided POV as i said before. websites like al-islam.org.. you may use it as a reference for the shi'ite version, as per WP:NPOV. it is not thought of as a reliable, academic, objective source in and of its own self. you are stating that WP editors should accept sources without question, although we are required to evaluate the sources when building a neutral and inclusive narrative.. thank you. ITAQALLAH 12:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sa.vakilian/Archive1&oldid=1143281332"