User talk:SpidErxD/Archive 1

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Shia Islam. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Pass a Method talk 18:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Shia Islam does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 01:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Help Me

Shia_view_of_Fatimah is showing Fatimah istead of Shi'a_view_of_Fatimah.

 Fixed - I have re-targeted the redirect. JohnCD (talk) 16:07, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Templates

The templates should link to the main article rather than a view on. If the Ali article is showing a Sunni view then it is too far in that direction. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 17:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

In response to your feedback

If you find any bias in articles, try to bring it up on the talkpages of each. this way you can worth with other editors to help the articles with neutrality. good luck

Ryan shell (talk) 19:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

 

Tabari citation about the Battle of Karbala casualties

Either next week or the week after I will try to check Tabari volume 19 to see whether it really mentions this figure of 78. I hope the index is useful, as I do not have time to read the book from cover to cover in search of 78.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:57, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Dome of Fatima Masumeh Shrine.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dome of Fatima Masumeh Shrine.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:20, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Help me (2)

I found File:Dome of Fatima Masumeh Shrine.jpg photo in many public domain e.g. Facebook,Flickr. And this photo is of a public place every one can take photo of this place.Cant we use photos which are found in Public Domains and there owners are missing?SpidErxD (talk) 13:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Just because a photo is on Facebook or Flickr does not mean that it is in public domain. Just because you can view it from a public place without asking permission, does not give you the right to take it. The same applies to things in your house that passers by can see through your house windows. They can see them, but that does not give them the right to take them.

If you look at this page on Flickr,[1] it contains a section entitled "I'd like to use a photo I found on Flickr. How do I do that?". Please read it.--Toddy1 (talk) 13:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok i got it. Tell me how to delete File:Dome of Fatima Masumeh Shrine.jpg??SpidErxD (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I think this will help you Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. The tag I would choose is {{db-filecopyvio|url=URL of source}} --Toddy1 (talk) 14:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you File has been deleted.SpidErxD (talk) 22:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

List of casualties in Hussain's army at the Battle of Karbala

Thank you for your contribution to the List of casualties in Hussain's army at the Battle of Karbala. Please could you discuss the reason you believe that the article should list all the names you added. A discussion has been started at Talk:List of casualties in Hussain's army at the Battle of Karbala#Who should be listed.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I have put some work into this article, correcting typographical errors such as missing spaces, capitalisation, names being spelled in two different ways, etc. I also experimented until I managed to get the casualties numbered. Having them numbered makes the article a lot more useful in understanding how many people in the rebel army were killed.

I have got rid of honorifics. This is partly to make the article neutral, and partly because of policy MOS:ISLAM.

In addition, I have made the wording neutral point of view. Where it said that people prayed/asked to be "martyred", then I have left the word "martyred" in place. Where it merely said that they were "martyred" - the word merely means "killed" - killed is neutral point of view word; "martyred" is not.

I think this makes the long list of names in the article more useful, and also defensible.

The next thing we need to do is to justify the notability of the names. I note from a page entitled The Martyred Ones in www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia, that different names appear on different lists. There is discussion on that page of the different numbers in different lists. Note that the list on www.al-islam.org The Martyred Ones includes eight people killed (executed?) by the government in Kufa.

Please could you go through the sources, and check the information against each name, and add citations for each name.

I do not know if you how to add multiple citations to the same source. In case you do not, the way to do it is as follows:

First instance,<ref name = TMU>[http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/ www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia], [http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter5b/5.html ''Chapter 5b: The Martyred Ones''].</ref>

Second and following instances.<ref name = TMU/>

TMU is a name I chose for that source. Each source or page of source should have a different name.--Toddy1 (talk) 13:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

2013 Ghouta attacks

You removed the part about the Syrian government originally denying it - however its in the LA times source. Your doing good work but can you please self-revert that particular edit at 19:45. Sopher99 (talk) 19:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Rebels claim 1700 casualties. Syrian Govt. denied Rebels claim not the attacks.SpidErxD (talk) 19:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

• Warning. Your edits to Asma al-Assad are a violation of WP:BLPCAT. If you persist, you risk being blocked. If you wish, you can take this issue to the article talk page or to WP:BLPN.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok.SpidErxD (talk) 14:00, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Compromise

Hey, we made a compromise so could you please revert this by re-adding Sunni" and "Shia", Thanks Pass a Method talk 16:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Popular Nasserist Organization are not Shias. So, Syrian Govt. and its allies is correct title.SpidErxD (talk) 12:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but after you made that edit anoter editor made this edit in response. We are speaking in general, without going into details Pass a Method talk 13:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC) Pass a Method talk 13:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok, revert it. Rebel Mujaheddin is general and right term,But 99% of Mujaheddin are Sunnis.SpidErxD (talk) 13:56, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

He did it again here Pass a Method talk 17:57, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Mean

What do you mean by "divide correctly? here Pass a Method talk 19:10, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

FSA are freedom fighters(According to US media "They are non-sectarian and they want democratic govt. in Syria"), FSA use this flag. Whereas Many Rebels are Sunni-Jihadist(sectarian) and they want Islamic Shariah in Syria and they use black flag of Jihad. Both (FSA and Sunni-Jihadist) want to overthrow Assad Regime but FSA want demcratic Govt. and Jihadist(sectarian) want Islamic Shariah in Syria.

FSA and some Jihadist are fighting with each other, See [2] [3] [4] [5].

In this revision they were divided on the basis of Flags but User:FutureTrillionaire merged them in this revision because they all are part of SMC.

At least divide them on the basis of Flags or Goals or do not divide them.SpidErxD (talk) 14:12, 23 September 2013 (UTC)