"I look upon all creatures equally; none are less dear to me and none more dear." -- Bhagavad Gita
Anti Gay remarks stay on the bill o'reilly's controversy page
Look, unless somebody can dismay these FACTS, then it will stay on the article, do you understand? -The Bird — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.97.150 (talk • contribs)
OH don't give me that, you told me to not add "nonsense" to the bill o'reilly controversy article, Now about 2 min. before you sent me the message I added his anti-gay remarks, which were the following: "On the December 8 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly offered a Factor jacket to radio "shock jock" Howard Stern. After Stern said, "I won't wear it, but I will give it to a crack whore" and handed it back, O'Reilly told him: "I'm not having this on some lesbian somewhere. It's not going to happen."
Now look, here is what is going to happen, you are not going to send me another message regading the info I provided you as "nonsense" understood? Now if you do have a problem with this info feel free to discuss it on the discussion page.
-The bird
I noticed on the Action (comic) and Crisis (comic) talk pages that you'd dropped a note in about cancelling the move. It does need doing - the guy who made the mistaken initial moves has been trying to correct them and run into problems fixing those two back to the original place (see discussion here). I have largely left him to tidy up the last loose ends so it might be worth dropping him a note explaining the format of a successful move request. (Emperor15:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]
How does this page work? Are admins only supposed to deal with technical issues, e.g. when a history merge is required, or with all of thE requested moves? Most of the requested moves are at this page because discussion/consensus is needed rather than for technical reasons. Are we supposed to "close" these discussion by performing or not performing the page move, or aren't the editors involved in the discussion expected to do that, or what? Herostratus07:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Both admins and non-admins, as far as I can tell, are able to close move requests. The editors involved in the discussion could theoretically close the move request, but a third-party would probably be better in order to minimize bias. As you said, we are supposed to close the discussions by either performing the move or not performing the move. Normally, when I close a request, I add {{subst:polltop}} '''move/no move/no consensus/etc''' at the top of the Move Request section, add {{subst:pollbottom}} to the bottom, and remove the {{move}} template from the top of the talk page. Some moves can simply be performed by any user (i.e. moves to non-existent pages, moves over redirects with no history) and so I help perform those. However, there are other moves, where the target article has a history, that I cannot perform myself (as dealing with that, of course, requires being an admin). More information on the process is available at Wikipedia:Moving guidelines for administrators; I don't want to provide superfluous information in my explanation here as I don't want to appear condescending, but if my response was insufficient, feel free to contact em again. -- tariqabjotu16:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This was a trivially obvious move with no possibility of controversy, which I would have done without asking if the target was unobstructed. The template was posted on the talk page and attracted no comments. What is the benefit in discarding such a request because of a tiny procedural deviation, especially when it is already 12 days old? – Smyth\talk21:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and did the move, because I saw it there, and checking Amazon, it's easy to see that we're just correcting an erroneous title here, and that nobody seems to be opposing it. Feedback is welcome; it seemed to me like a good corner to cut. -GTBacchus(talk)02:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, this article has been languishing in cleanup for over a year. It's a subject I couldn't begin to address. You are the most knowledgeable person on Islam that I can think of. Can you give it a look? Cheers, and happy editing. :) Dlohcierekim13:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at school right now, but perhaps I'll take a closer look at it later. However, at quick glance, I question whether the article is really needed in the first place. The listing of and commentary on hadiths do not appear to have an encyclopedic benefit. For the time being, I have endorsed the {{prod}}. -- tariqabjotu16:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would have to say the hadith article answers your question best: Hadith are traditions relating to the words and deeds of the prophet Muhammad. Essentially, most things Muhammad advocated or did are considered hadith, and advocated in Islam (especially Sunni Islam; the Sunni refers to the Sunnah, which is supported by the hadith). So, the examples of hadith in the hadith article, like Modesty and chastity are parts of the Faith., would be a encouraged guideline in Islam. That's basically it; the hadith article really does a good job of explaining it, so you should look there if you want to know more. I suppose they could be considered encyclopedic as they are sort of like sources supporting certain rulings and practices in Islam, but I feel the article up for AfD is excessive.-- tariqabjotu08:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to this comment [1] I mean that I don't want other Muslim Wikipedians whom might be in favor of keeping that article to think that I voted transwiki/delete on that article solely because of Striver's contributions to it so I thought it would be better just to keep out of it.--Jersey Devil05:50, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Highlights --> Headlines
Thanks for making this change on the Current Events page. I don't know if you are an admin or what position you hold, but I do feel strongly about the change. It looks much better now, and sounds more credible. Thank you doktorbwordsdeeds11:40, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote: "I agree with your opinion the reactions from the Muslim world on this are quite ridiculous. However, the problem is we don't have too many people saying this is ridiculous loud enough in the real world to get a place in the article. As far as I can see, it's some in the Muslim world protesting, the Vatican trying to defend the Pope's statements, and the rest of the world, save Angela Merkel, staying out of this. -- tariqabjotu20:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)"[reply]
So, ahem, I searched news.google.com in the vain hope that somebody of weight would have called this affair ridiculous. Somebody did: [2]Azate21:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely agreed that it was trolling, and as the rants spilled over to my talk page and back to the article's talk page, I've blocked the user for disruption. I note that it's not his first block. Take care -- Samir धर्म23:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here in Wikipedia there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go unappreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go unnoticed. As Esperanzians we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. This is where the Barnstar Brigade comes in. The object of this program is to seek out the people which deserve a Barnstar, and help them feel appreciated. With your help, we can recognize more dedicated editors!
What's New?
September elections are upon us! Anyone wishing to be a part of the Advisory Council may list themselves as a candidate from 18 September until 24 September, with the voting taking place from 25 September to 30 September. Those who wish to help with the election staff should also list themselves!
Appreciation Week, a program currently in development, now has its own subpage! Share your good ideas on how to make it awesome there!
The Esperanza front page has been redesigned! Many thanks to all who worked hard on it.
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.
The September 2006 Council elections will open for nominations on 18 September 2006. The voting will run from 25 September 2006 until 30 September 2006. If you wish to be a candidate or a member of the elections staff, please list yourself!
The new Esperanza front page design has but put up - many thanks to all who worked on it!
TangoTango has written a script for a bot that will list new members of Esperanza, which will help those who welcome new Esperanzains greatly!
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
Many happy returns - I hope you're not alone in fasting. A Muslim friend of mine once explained how his elders coached him into fasting successfully for long periods of time. All the best, Rama's arrow00:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the greeting. I am alone, in some regards, with my fasting, but at the same time there are many with me. In all honesty, fasting for me is not an especially taxing ordeal; after day three or so, food doesn't even cross my mind during the daytime. However, perhaps I'll be retracting that in a few years when Ramadan falls in the middle of the summer, resulting in fasts that last nearly seventeen hours (as opposed to the current thirteen). -- tariqabjotu02:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fiddlesticks! Hehehehe... My Bombay friend kept the fast at the height of the Indian summer. I expect its prolly tougher in the Mid-east and Africa. Rama's arrow02:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We Hindus do fast periodically, but I want to build my physical and mental constitution by doing it regularly. Its not all that "wow" - I do have many failures and hard moments. Check out tapasya - its somewhat close to what I'm "trying" to do. Rama's arrow03:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that food isn't so hard to abstain from - water is a different issue. If you exercise regularly, or better yet are a bodybuilder, you can get through it easier. One must do work that one is most passionate about, or else he/she will get distracted and suffer. God is a great motivation, but I try to think of Him even when I'm gorging, so... Anywayz, all the best. Rama's arrow03:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ramadhaan mubaarak!
السلام عليكم
ramadhaan mubaarak, Tariq! we haven't spoken before, but i thought now would be a nice time to extend my warmest greetings and congratulations to you. ان شاء الله you'll find this month very rewarding both externally and internally, both in this life and in the Hereafter. a pleasure to meet you, and i look forward to working with you in the future to help improve articles on wikipedia. thank you, wa jazaakallahuma khairan! ITAQALLAH12:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I am from St. Petersburg which is 6 degrees south of the arctic circle. The longest day of the year is about 20 hrs sunup 4 horus sundown, and even when the sun is down, it never gets dark. And there are oodles of Muslims from the many Muslim provinces of Russia. What are they to do there? What about north of the arctic circle where some days don't end at all? - CrazyRussiantalk/email00:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The ruling on those cases differs, but all basically end with "you have to fast for a very long time". If you're truly interested in the matter, I would suggest (mainly page four of) this article (note sahur refers to the time before the fast, and that the end of sahur coincides with fajr, which means dawn, when fasting begins). -- tariqabjotu03:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh... Dude has a fine string of titles after his name. Almost runs into a second line. Sounds a lot like Judaism, only more complicated. We pray three times a day - you five, we fast five days a year - you thirty. Thanks for the link. - CrazyRussiantalk/email08:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I have a question regarding the current events page you redesigned. I've stolen most of your design on Portal:Current events/Video gaming, but I was wondering if you knew of a way in which I could get it to only display the days Monday-Friday. Since this is a very commercial area, nothing tends to happen on Saturday or Sunday, and if there is some big event, I can always add that page manually. Thanks! jaco♫plane00:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that! I'll try to figure out the template, so that I won't have to bother you in the future :) I'll take a look at the month archive page question you posted and let you know what I think. Cheers, jaco♫plane16:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907
About changing the blurb - I meant to add the info about the wreckage having been found to today's section (September 30) and edited the original blurb instead. Could a September 30 section be created? Fvasconcellos15:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad to see you are keeping these up to date :). FYI, the May number seems to be off a bit (we had it at 929, but it appears the correct number is 925), all the other months check out exactly so far. I have been reviewing the meta and en.wiki user rights logs to go backwards and track the numbers more exactly (see the bottom of my page User:NoSeptember/admincount). Small numbers changes don't mean much, but I figure why not see how accurate I can get. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Nelson nyc has been adding this link to ban ki moon's page without any regard to NPOV principles. Firstly, as you may know, the article he had added is biased and not a reliable source for wikipedia. BTW, my last account's password is lost; just to let you know im not a sock puppet. Login to earth20:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tariqabjotu! Since I've seen you around WP:RM a lot, you've probably noticed that {{WP:RM}} has changed quite a bit in the past week or so. Would you like to comment on the talk page about which format you like best? Thanks. —Mets501(talk)13:49, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... even though my time is being freed up, I'm still going to wait for my semi-wikibreak to conclude. However, that makes you, CrazyRussian, Blnguyen, Aguerriero, Chacor, Yanksox (offered in August), and possibly Kingboyk (offered in August but suggested I wait until six months after RfA 2). Even if all of you don't go through with your co-nominations, I am quite honored so many offers have been made at all. -- tariqabjotu02:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 52/6/1 (~90%). It was an interesting process which gave me a chance to learn a bit about myself and about the community. My intention now is to slowly ease into using those additional buttons on my page. No use being over eager and mucking up the works. The support of all those who went over my record and/or rallied to my defense after the big oppose vote was instumental to the success of this review. Again, thank you! --StuffOfInterest11:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would take the initiative in getting the List of Muslims articles deleted, but I was criticized quite strongly when I did just that back in February (although there were additional factors that led to that criticism). Perhaps, however, it might have been better if I had co-nominated fewer articles to appear less drastic. -- tariqabjotu 20:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I personally can see no reason to have any page that is called List of Muslims (or Brahmins or Christians or sun-worshippers) because it must, of necessity be selective. I mean, if List of Muslims is to be entirely accurate, how many thousands of millions of people will be in it? "List of notable Muslims"? Who's to say. "List of Muslim athletes"? Pointless. (And in all of the above, Muslim can be replaced with any other religion, belief, whatever.)
There is probably need for a much wider debate within Wikipedia on the acceptability of such titles, but I am very new here and would not know how to start it, though I would happily support sucj a move. Emeraude20:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking care of the collateral damage. I often would take care of only a couple double redirects – if any – because manually correcting double redirects, especially for articles with many of them (like Saint Andrew's Cross) could be quite tedious. Now that I see AWB takes care of double redirects (I'm sure I knew that at one point), I'll make sure I use that in the future when performing a move. Nevertheless, thanks again. -- tariqabjotu02:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Image:Texas Flag at DKR - North Texas vs Texas 2006.jpg
Hello Tariqabjotu - thank you for your messages and for your help with the situation. Yes, I agree with you, the Image should not have been used on the second page. That was my mistake. Most images I upload are free because I have either taken them myself, gotten permission for them, or gotten them from the US govt. I forgot that image had a non-commercial license. I have removed it from the article where it was not fair use. Thanks again, Johntex\talk22:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I closed the move request. Note also you can close a move request by just removing the {{move}} template from the top and, optionally, adding {{subst:polltop}} '''some result'''. ~~~~ before a section and {{subst:polltop}} after it. -- tariqabjotu05:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, administrators are not the only ones allowed to close move requests. I'm not an administrator, and I've been doing it for a couple months now. No one has stopped me yet (most likely because WP:RM often gets backlogged and so the help is appreciated). I have gotten at least one complaint regarding a move request close, but that got resolved. -- tariqabjotu05:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I commend your decision; I would have done the exact same thing had I had the ability to do so. Score one for the discussion team. -- tariqabjotu04:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's not true. If used on an experienced editor it's a clear and calculated insult which says (at best) "You are too stupid to understand the rules, so I am spelling them out to you like a newbie". There is no reason to use {{3RR}} on anyone who is familiar with the rule unless you want to insult them. Guettarda02:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well... I'm not sure if I'd go so far as to say it's a "clear and calculated insult." However, I do wish alternate templates that don't go over the basics of the rules like that could be written. {{sofixit}} is by far one of the worst. (I used {{sofixit}} as an example, so you wouldn't respond to that wish for alternate templates with precisely that template) Nevertheless, I will often use the standard templates in the rare situations I need to post them on the talk pages of longtime editors not because I want to insult the recipient, but rather because it's simpler (custom messages end up saying the same thing usually). That's why I was so alarmed by your response to Serge. -- tariqabjotu02:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Using a template to communicate with someone amounts to making the decision that they are not worth the effort of actually writing them a message. That's great for things like {{welcome}} (people don't expect any welcome, so boilerplate is appreciated). This is also true of the {{tl|test} family of templates - more often than not, a vandal isn't worth your time. Beyond these (and perhaps some that I am unfamiliar with) boilerplate is fairly rude. Using {{3RR}} to inform a new user of the 3 revert rule really isn't the best way to communicate with a new editor, but the benefit of informing someone of the rule may outweigh the fact that it's rude. Using {{NPA}} has the benefit that it may save you replying to the insult.
Using one of these templates on an established user does nothing but insult the person. It's safe enough that any established user knows the 3RR. It takes a couple seconds to figure out whether you are dealing with an established editor or a newbie. If you say "FYI - you're at three reverts" and the person actually doesn't know what you are talking about, they will say "what are you talking about". There is no way an admin can try to argue ignorance of the 3RR, and since Serge had responded to a comment of mine in which I had discussed how wrong it was for Mets501 to have move-protected the page when he moved it (I hadn't realised that it was move-protected initially), there is no way that he couldn't know I was an admin (unless he claims to be ignorant of the fact that only admins can move move-protected pages).
Any established user should at the very least know the 3RR. Spelling out the rules s..l..o..w..l..y and in great detail is an insult. Including the diffs is aggressive. Serge's actions were clearly unacceptable. If you want to call someone stupid and threaten them, then you should be brave enough to call them that openly and deal with the consequences. Insults like Serge's are unacceptable, clear violations of WP:NPA. I see no reason to tolerate the sort of behaviour. Guettarda20:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. I've seen references to "Tariq's proposal" but when I scanned, I found JohnK's proposal that you supported (move 27 AP cities). Can you point me to the most recent statement of your proposal? If your proposal is inactive, I intend to oppose the current proposal in favor of reopening the discussion around a proposal I can support.
In the name of antidisruption, I am willing to support some such proposal, even though I otherwise support the comma convention. These debates are just a PITA, and the AP list provides a sufficient backstop and rationale as to which cities to include. Thanks for your contributions to this discussion. --ishu04:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal they are referring to is this one. Serge closed john k's proposal and my proposal because people were complaining there were too many proposals open concurrently, not because there was anything wrong with the other two. -- tariqabjotu04:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tariqabjotu. I closed a move discussion for the first time (here). Could you please verify if it was done properly? Should a copy of the discussion be archived somewhere? Regards.--Húsönd23:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Admin Coaching needs coaches!!! If you are an administrator, or even a generally experienced user, do consider signing up to be a coach.
Admin Coaching, now being coordinated by HighwayCello, is a program for people who want help learning some of the more subtle aspects of Wikipedia policy and culture. People are matched with experienced users who are willing to offer coaching. The program is designed for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
What's New?
The Tutorial Drive is a new Esperanza program! In an effort to make complicated processes on Wikipedia easier for everyone, Esperanza working to create and compile a list of tutorials about processes here on Wikipedia. Consider writing one!
A discussion on how Esperanza relates to the encyclopedia has been started; please add your thoughts.
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.
The list of proposed programs has been updated, with some proposals being archived.
There is now a new program: the Tutorial Drive! Consider writing a tutorial on something you are good at doing on Wikipedia.
The suggestion of adding a cohesive look to all the Esperanza pages is being considered; join the discussion if you are interested!
In order to make a useful interlanguage welcome template, those involved in translation projects will be asked what English Wikipedia policies are most important and confusing to editors coming from other language Wikipedias.
Shreshth91 informed everyone that he will be leaving the Esperanza council as life is rather busy; his spot will be filled by the runner up from the last election, HighwayCello.
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
Before marking images as {{no source}}, please take minimal effort to trace the source yourself. When dealing with images of some company, for example, please check that company's web site. Eli Falk08:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I suppose I should do that in the future, as it appears several of the images you tagged were quite easy to find (although, for what it's worth, I was tied up doing some homework and didn't have a whole lot of time on my hands). Anyway, my apologies, and thanks for taking care of the sources for those images. -- tariqabjotu11:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jotu, I'm curious... I seem to recall durinig editing on Muhammad that you were inclined to remove the see also link to the Seal of the Prophets article which as I recall you did because it was a bit too glorifying. Can you tell me why the Seal of the Prophets article is so contested as it appears to be? Thanks. (→Netscott)16:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't made substantial edits to the Muhammad article in a very long time; I don't remember removing the link, let alone why I removed the link in the first place. -- tariqabjotu16:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the prompt response, I invite you to respond here if you'd prefer. How do you like to be addressed on Wikipedia now, as Tariq? I researched the phrase Seal of the Prophets and I better understand it now. Thanks again. (→Netscott)16:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Tariq, I've started a new article about Saudi Arabia's first feature film: Keif al-hal?. I invite you to contribute to it if such an article might interest you. Thanks. :-) (→Netscott)02:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi!
Sorry about uploading those files without specifying where I took them from. I did my best to fix that. However I still have a problem with the image Image:Yair Lapid.jpg. I took it from the Russian Wikipedia and I don't know which license it is under.
