User talk:FayssalF/Archive B

Have a very happy Ramadan. Salaam, a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 23:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

First off, no need to apologise at all - I think it's a mistake everyone in and around snooker made at the time based on his interviews. Secondly, I want to clarify that the unsigned comment in Talk:Ronnie O'Sullivan was not written by me. I just realised that the exclamation mark must have looked quite rude, and the last thing I would want would be to insult a fellow Wikipedian. RMoloney 00:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'm fully in agreement with your reverting the recent POV edits to Napoleon, and I've posted a message on User_talk:Wallie to that effect. Watch out for the three-revert rule. If Wallie doesn't get the message, let me or another editor revert him the next time.  :-) --Russ Blau (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Some help would be needed here .Farhansher 20:59, 11 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

See response on talk page...thanks! KHM03 19:32, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Incidentally, feel free to restructure or help with the "main" article to make it more palatable and NPOV...thanks! KHM03 19:42, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'll try to do my best. Thanx KHM03. Svest 19:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

HI . I have added some links to the page . If any of you have time , that article needs to be expanded . With the passage of time , it has been shrunk to nothing. Thanks . Farhansher 01:01, 14 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

salaam. thank you for the funny picture. peace – ishwar  (speak) 02:37, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Fayssal, would it be alright with you if I moved Filmography from the Muhammad article to a seperate one ("Films about Muhammad") and then linked it? Although it is good to inform people about movies, filmography takes away the greatness of the prophet somewhat and mainly it is just another section to watch for vandalism and POV pushing. Thanks, --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Also is it really necessary because we don't really have a Jesus movies or Buddha movies, etc. I am just saying this because there are editors who will abuse this section even though it is a good idea to list informative NPOV movies. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:06, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

No problem with me AE as long as it is going to be linked to. Anyway, there was only one movie ever produced (The Message). I dunno if you watched it. The 2 others (the documentary and the Walt Disney style one) are ok according to the critics and they are not biased. -- Svest 03:10, 16 October 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™ Reply

Thank you very much Fayssal, I will get right on it. The message sounds like a good one. Er, what should name article? "Informative movies about Muhammad"? < -- This one guarantees NPOV. ;) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:12, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Lol. So "Informative movies about Muhammad" is fine? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:18, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Informative is a POV word. It means Wikipedia is approving those movies. Movies about Muhammad is better. I dunno if there are any anti-Muhammad bias out. If there are, we'd better be prepared to add those to the list. (I'm thinking of a French film about Saint Therese of Lisieux I rented thinking it might be a religious film. It was a militant atheist's take on St. Therese, depicting the convent as a hotbed of thwarted maternal longing, hysterical mysticism, and lesbianism.) Zora 04:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I agree. I suggested Muhammad in Cinema also. It's up to you guys. -- Me.

Well Zora, you could have told me this an hour before; before I created the article. :) Besides the objective is to give movies that have information about Muhammad, not ones that idolize him or ones that criticize him. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 15:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

If I did know who you were, I'm sure I'd like it. Anywho, thank you very much for your support - my bid (as you probably know) went swimmingly. I couldn't have asked for a better one. Thank you very much and I just hope I don't mess up! --Celestianpower ^hablamé 13:25, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Fayssal, take a look at Talk:Criticism_of_Islam#Hindu_criticism_of_Islam. Same editor as before is trying to add this material, which at first was a copyright violation. I think that editor wants this to advertise for hinduism rather than criticise Islam. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 15:34, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to disappoint, but I'm in the same position that you are; I don't really know enough about it to judge, though I think that you're right about the current situation. If you think that things are getting out of hand, let me know, and I can protect the article until things cool down. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:44, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hey Fayssal. Two Oceansplash Sina sockpuppets have come to Sina article. User:Aleverde and user:Halabi who edit at the same time as one another. some confirmation here [1]. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 23:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Er, how exactly is 'black nationalist' vandalism? - 143.167.21.177 18:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I apologize. I was reverting User:163.153.27.11 vandalism not your edits. It was a misunderstanding. Instead of reverting his edits, I reverted yours. Me

I'm trying to keep ahead of them; glad somebody noticed! -- Essjay · Talk 18:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I agree completely--actually I just left a note there for you to the exact same effect. You want to try to make the split, and I'll proofread after? You're probably better qualified for it than I, if you're up for it... --Dvyost 02:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I found the following text on Goddess. I think it would look better (and more wikipedia-like), if we had the actual Arabic as well as the transliteration. I just picked a random native Arabic user, so that's way I'm asking you.

tilk-al-gharaniq al-'ula wa inna shafa'ata-hunna la-turtaja - p.340 Viking, New York [These are the exalted females whose intercession is to be desired.]

--Taejo | Talk 15:29, 22 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Done. -- Me

Thanks. Just the bare translit looked kinda ugly - and many English speakers drool over foreign scripts. --Taejo | Talk 15:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Email for you. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:17, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks I replied too. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Another one. :)--a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 19:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction! I'll make sure and look before I do something like this again. I also wanted to thank you for your coments on the discussion I posted regarding Classical, Literary, MSA.

Carmen 23:29, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the barnstar and your patience! May I ask you a couple of questions regarding Arabic? I'm in the process of translating a short (pro bono) biography of an author and I have a few questions about how to translate a few very specific phrases, dealing with the Boy Scouts and educational degrees)?

--Carmen 00:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Marhaban ya Fayssal:

Thanks again for helping me :) When you get some free time (ha!ha!ha!), here are my questions:

1. This seems very simple, but how would one translate "too" in Arabic (not "very"), as in: The weather is too cold. Here is my suggestion: الطقس بارد أكثر مما ينبغي.

2. How would one translate Eagle Scout (the highest rank a Boy Scout can achieve)? My suggestion: رائد الكشافة ذو (في) الرتبة الاولى

3. How would one translate Master's of Divinity? I came up with something: الماجستير في علم التوحيد\علم اللاهوت

4. How would one translate Interfaith Contemplative Minister?

5. How would one translate Boy Scouts' Nature and World Brotherhood Merit Badges?

Salaam,

Carmen

Hi Svest, on the map in question the Arab League states are colored green and Israel - blue. AFAIK, Western Sahara is not a member of the AL. What do you think requires fixing? ←Humus sapiens←ну? 03:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Humus. Replied on ←ну?. -- Me

Two Iranian nationalists (with whom I've had numerous run-ins, telling you just to be fair) started an article on the Islamic conquest of Iran, which I felt was extremely anti-Arab. However, it was just me against them and I gave up after a while. Now a new editor has entered the fray and has added some even more inflammatory material. It's very late here and I need to sleep, don't have time to try to sift through it, but I'm wondering if you could back me up in trying to restore some balance to the article. Zora 12:20, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I didnt start that article. Zora has a habit of spreading misinformation.--Zereshk 20:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

You comment that the section is original research but then go and delete the one part that is actually referring to a source. The primary source for this paragraph is public mailing lists that may or may not have been archived and which might be time consuming to search.

Generally it does concern me that the whole risks section has a large amount of "original research". I really put it in to try and counter the non-neutral point of view section I deleted, to try and avoid it simply being reinstated.

The whole article is not very rigorous in my view. It comes across more as a fan written article. I think it is written by the www.seti.net web-site person, and was probably text from that web site. I'm surprised he hasn't re-instated the vanity link that I deleted!

The sources for network adminstrator concerns are numerous postings to sci.astro.seti and alt.sci.seti.

One of my concerns about the article is over use of links. Links have been put in when they are too vague, and sometimes refer to the wrong definition. As such, I'm not sure that I would have linked netowrk administrators, and I wouldn't have linked Search for Extra.... in the preceding anonymous edit, as the acronym was already linked.

"who" in the network adminstrators refernece makes it seem as though it is the very adminstrators that have reduced user rights who also run it themselves. The intent was to refer to the generality of network administrators.

If you delete "essentially", you have to qualify in other ways, e.g. by making it clear that it is new allocations of US funding (Phoenix got time that was allocated during the original funding of the Arecibo upgrade and I don't know for certain that the Lovell telescope doesn't get some government grants for SETI work.

As a warning, I intend to try and document the true processing by the software in some technical detail. I will claim the source code (and some Berkeley technical papers, as source for that.

--User:David Woolley 19:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hi David. Sorry for the misunderstanding. The good news is that I share with you most of the comments you left on my talk page:

• The whole article is not very rigorous in my view - Correct and maybe I was too lazy or busy for not dealing with that since a long time now. I am a fan of the project myself but I still see the article full of vanity!
• The sources for network adminstrator - I agree again after checking.
• One of my concerns about the article is over use of links. Links have been put in when they are too vague, and sometimes refer to the wrong definition. - Yes indeed. I can help in this.
• I don't know for certain that the Lovell telescope doesn't get some government grants for SETI work. - As I am aware of is that the Novell telescope got a grant in 2001 and think it's been renewed by 2003 (but not sure it all that was related to SETI). Also, as heard in the news recently, that Britain is keen again to invest on Space technology but not sure wheather Lovell telescope has been granted a budget.

I think that the article needs some revision (facts, references, pov, etc...) What I suggest, David, is that it would be better later on to have a balanced article in terms of positivism and sckeptism. (having maybe both sections) -- Cheers -- Svest 19:35, 24 October 2005 (UTC)  ^{Wiki me up&#153;}Reply

One problem I have with getting sources is that Berkeley move links, and they also prune out old history. That means the best source that may still exist is likely to be groups.google! This tends to apply to the history and the more user visible aspects of the project, that don't get documented in journal papers.

In the section on unofficial clients, I wanted to mention cheating, but I can't actually find a reference on Berkeley's own site, even though this was well known at the time as being one reason for securing the client. It is mentioned in the reference I quote for BOINC, although in terms of a BOINC specific tactic (false credit claims). The release notice for the version 3 client is a broken link even after fixing their domain name move to seticlassic. I'm afraid most of the Berkeley links are going to rot fairly quickly.

I also know, by references in the mailing list, that there is a formal way of identifying an unapproved BOINC S@H client, but I can't find the details on their site and, haven't the time to read all the developer documents.

--David Woolley 20:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your help!!

--Carmen 23:56, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note. Eventually that anon will get tired of this game. Glad to see there are other people keeping an eye on the article. I am rather busy with other things these days. -- Viajero | Talk 05:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, for the congrats. Now I get to see what thise little tools look like. Thanks for the support. gren グレン 22:58, 26 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanx for the support by the way the other day.--Zereshk 19:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I thought you might be interested in joining The Muslim Guild. --JuanMuslim 03:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Now that the voting has officially closed, I would like to thank you very much for supporting my candidacy for adminstrator and as of 18:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC) I am an administrator. I will make sure to use the additional power judiciously and I welcome any comments you may have. --Reflex Reaction 19:39, 28 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hi Svest, thanks for your support and very kind words on my RfA! I'm not sure I can quite live up to that billing, but I will certainly try, wielding my mop with honor and righteousness. Cheers! --Dave 14:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Very nice to meet you Svest. ;) Perhaps you would also like to see this. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Yes, so did I. I'm keeping away from it this time. ;-) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 13:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I hope I never sound condescending. At times, my tone may seem a bit nationalistic, I agree. But that is not my intention. I apologize if I did.

In my view, every culture and nation is a proud one. And every culture has its dark sides. Persians were treated very badly during the Conquest of Iran. But look at how Iranians treat their own cousins the Afghans with humiliation. (See the movie "Baran" to see what I mean). All cultures are glorious, and have contributed to humanity in different ways. And all have their shameful records.

If needed, I can give a full list and account of things shameful done by Iranians in their history. Shaytan acts regardless of ethnicity.

Thanx again for your support.--Zereshk 22:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Youre cool.--Zereshk 22:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Svest!

Great talking with you on the Islam page re. the Aramaic and Alaha.

Would you do us Wikians the favor of looking at this section of Laws of Form? I'm hopeful that you know of a Qur'anic verse that would resonate with the other religious quotes that are listed, effectively regarding the topic "...in the beginning..."

With all of the other major religions having put their best foot forward here, I'm hoping the same for Islam.

Many thanks,

--AustinKnight 23:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the consultation AK. Instead of Qur'anic vesrse, I made some additions about analogies that Islamic philosophy deals with. Please check. -- Svest 23:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC)  ^{Wiki me up&#153;}Reply

That's perfectly fine -- nicely done, and thank you! --AustinKnight 00:38, 1 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Svest: The Laws of Form page has evolved a bit...much for the better, I think. Please check it out again and ensure that your good input has not gotten scrambled, and edit as desired. Thanks again! --AustinKnight 03:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Svest: Yes, thanks...but look again at the Judaism section: does the last sentence go more appropriately with the Islam section? You had them both together originally, and I just wanted to be sure. Thx! --AustinKnight 03:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC) err.. did that work?Reply

Me ha gustado especialmente ese detalle acerca de cuidar más a tu novia.

pls look at this [[2]] BrandonYusufToropov 15:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hi, How are you? Just for information A poll about the WS infobox has been opened Here, Cheers. Daryou 20:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Did you receive my last Greeting card about the Aid? Daryou 20:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Eid Mubarak to you and best wishes. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

The reason that I had stated that any sort of alien contact would initiate a rebellion is that the reasons are many. Those that are religious may believe that the aliens are,"The Devil, and his demons are here to destroy pious people,so we should go after them and their collaborators.", while others may revolt in reaction to the alleged campaign initiated by the world's governments to make people who has had UFO/Alien encounters look like fools and idiots, while some other people may revolt to cause trouble. I've actually seen people who actually believe that UFOs,aliens are "of the Devil" and people who are in contact with these things should be killed to keep others from being influenced by the Devil. The others who may revolt in reaction to alien contact due to the alleged campaign of ridicule will do so to expose the alleged govt. sponsored "debunkers","skeptics" AS people who are collaborating with HOSTILE aliens, while some people will always be making trouble, as they're doing now.Martial Law 06:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC) :)Reply

Do YOU believe that the people all over the planet will actually REVOLT ?!Martial Law 06:36, 3 November 2005 (UTC) :)Reply

And all the best to you and yours, BrandonYusufToropov 17:26, 3 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Eid Mubarak and best wishes from my side . F.a.y.^{تبادله خيال /c} 18:57, 3 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'm holding a discussion about the article:"Flying Humanoids".

What do YOU believe these things are ?Martial Law 00:39, 4 November 2005 (UTC) :)Reply

Another reason I had wanted to hold a discussion on this is to keep lies,errors out of the Wikipedia format.Martial Law 09:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC) :)Reply

{moved our discussion here)

Lol! I am still glad that you are keeping aware though. Keep it up - I think it was a quick 4 seconds before you replied to him. ;) If needed just check their contribs. If they have vandalized my user page, the test is positive. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:35, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I was busy editing alien articles and many weird stuff tonight. -- Svest 02:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Take it easy or you might get abducted. :) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:51, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hahahhaha! I was also follwing a weirdo debate at Daniel Brandt (the guy behind googlewatch.org and wikipedia-watch.org and maybe many to come. SV is in the heart of the story! Svest 02:57, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yuber, Rhobite, and FayssalF,

There has recently been a conflict over a article, Samira Bellil, that you were involved with, involving user CltFn. I have tried to negotiate a compromise over the article that I believed was fair, but CltFn has rejected part of that compromise (which involved him adding inline and in-text citations to many of his contributions.) I believed the compromise was very fair and that it was strongly consistent with wikipedia rules.

I've been involved with a few recent content disputes over other articles, and both of them were resolved to everyone's satisfaction after lots of work. I really don't have the energy to do it all over again right now. I would appriciate it if you would attempt to find a solution to the problem of NPOV, bias and what I think is anti-Islamic and racist material, that exists in the article any way you can. If you end up having an "official" dispute with CltFn, either about this article or in general, please contact me on my talk page, and I will be happy to provide any comments to any official dispute process. Sdedeo 04:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I will look at Samira Bellil and try to see what is going on. I really don't know too much about the subject but I shall see. gren グレン 18:44, 6 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Since the Collaboration of the Week folks are known for preferring Military Histories of countries, I nominated Military history of Sudan. It has been six days since then, and I have only received one more vote. Unless I get one more vote supporting this nomination, it will be closed tomorrow. Please add your support at WP:COTW/Military history of Sudan. Also see WP:COTW/Languages of Sudan. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-7 14:56

What dialect of Arabic do you know? I'm trying to learn Egyptian Arabic, and want to know if there is much difference between it and Eastern (Damascus) Arabic. I know how to write and say the alphabet, and some other general vocabulary, but there isn't much help for learning more than that. I've tried several diffferent programs, but none of them even discuss the sentence structure or verb/noun forms in detail. Thanks. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-8 08:49