Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam/Other wikiprojects discussion (2005–2006)
Here goes comments relevant to other guilds and WikiProjects:
interreligious
editPlease comment: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Religion#interreligious --Striver 05:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject_Islam:SIIEG have their own agendas, and we analyze them here.
- Should we delete this link since the SIIEG page has been deleted? The talk page is still online.--JuanMuslim 1m 15:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Manual_of_Style
editWikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(Islam-related_articles) - Please see the article's talk page for relevant discussion. This link can also be found in Standards section of this page.
I should have figured... [1] We need to keep this guys under survailance. --Striver 13:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Quote from there:
- I do not think so, and I believe that Emile123 raises a valid point; furthermore, I do not support unilateral changes in a way or another.
- Also, I find it regrettable that some people are so eager that the word "muslim" be present in the introduction that they do not even take the time to make grammatically correct sentences -- not to speak of discussing their views here. Rama 07:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Talk:2005_civil_unrest_in_France#Influence_of_Islamist_thought_on_riots.2C_characterization_as_an_.22intifada.22 --Striver 13:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
User talk:Jimbo Wales
editSee this [2].
- First point, a rant is made about "i was Muslim, but i discovered Islam is EVIL"
- Second point, it talks about a Muslim cabal that censours Wikipedia.
- Third point, strong allegations are made against a prominent Muslim administator.
- Fourth point, the allegations are expanded to other, or all, Muslim administators.
In effect, the allaegations sums up to the existance of a Muslim cabal here in Wikipedia. He says:
- (Striver edit: The consequence of this Muslim cabal) is that more people like me, Muriel and John Walker will be fooled and more terrorism will take the lives of innocent people. I did not become a terrorist, but I can say that without knowing, I started hating everyone who was not a Muslim. The brainwashing is so intense and subtle that you will certainly become affected by it. I lost a lot, including the woman I loved because of these leis.
- This is not fear mongering, but harsh reality. It seems that even the government of the USA has got the message that the engine of Islamic terrorism is Islam itself.
Among those named in the letter are:
I know nothing about this issue, but i want people to be awar of it. I dont know if the allegations of the third point is correct, but i belive that the first, second and fourth points are non-sense. I feel alarmed. In my view, this could be a calculated propaganda attack to influnce the founder of Wikipedia. I dont know if that is the case. But if it is, we need to be awar of it and be able to respond to it in the best maner. The last thing we need is to let islamophobia propagetors to get a hold of this unique medium by influencing the founder of it with un-answered statments. Everyone that does not belive there is any risk for that can ignore my feeling of alarmedness.
A stong word of warning to all Muslims: do NOT in ANY WAY confront the person, he SEEKS to become a martyr, so the wrath of Jimbo Wales is invoked on the Muslim comunity here in Wikipedia. Of course, i belive to much of Jimbo to belive he will fall for such a plot, as perceived by me, but let us not give them any fuel.
Those involved, Please give your version and statmen of the even here, for the benefit of the guild members. Thanks. --Striver 17:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Responses to the letter
editI was on my way of adding this to the end of the message on Jimbos page:
- Hi Jimbo. I am a Muslim editor. I really like how he summed up his message: "Stop the Muslims, or someone you love will die"
But luckily, i stopped myself. I suggest that we work on something we can send to Jimbo, something that shows that the letter is in the best case, biased and alarmist. --Striver 17:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I feel it is probable that the letter sent to Jimbo is not the work of one person, rather that it is a coordinated work. How should we respond?
- Everyone that feels for it gives him his own view
- We send a message that reflects the sentiments of multiple editors
- Just trust that Jimbo can spot non-sens when he sees it? --Striver 17:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I didn't pay a lot of attention to it.--Jimbo Wales 21:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it Jimbo :) --a.n.o.n.y.m t 21:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Weee! Jimbo sees me, therefore, i exist! *having fun :)*--Striver 17:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
- Anyway, I read the letter, and I must admit I found it laughable. Muslims don't have to respond to each instance of ignorance whether committed by non-Muslims or Muslims. However, we should try to support any of the editors that may be hurt, etc by the letter. If someone is in the right then go with what is in the right. --JuanMuslim 1m 17:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
USer:The Anome gave a respons to User talk:OceanSplash on his talk page.
I thanked USer:The Anome. --Striver 17:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think Jimbo is smart enough to know what to do. He can just look over OceanSplash's messages and attacks through his contribs. And the fact that OceanSplash blanked his talk page before [3] so that warnings about his vandalism and pov pushing vanish magically, does not change anything. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 21:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
SIIEG members
editThis is a copy from User talk:SlimVirgin:
- Would you be willing to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:SIIEG, which is in need of some idea of Wikipedia's concept of NPOV ? --Victim of signature fascism vote for the arb com 18:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Wow - I didn't realise we had WikiProjects dedicated to opposing the election of Muslim editors and to doing things like de-capitalising "Companions". Is there also a WikiProject dedicated to de-capitalising "Apostles" and opposing the election of Christian or Jewish or Hindu editors? Now I see where all the organised opposition to Anonyme's RFA came from. Terribly disturbing. Guettarda 18:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Not only that but several of its editors were blocked for openly vandalizing articles and sockpuppetry. Many of them are probably still sockpuppets. And it's probably the only group in which 90% of it's members have been blocked at least once. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 20:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I think it summs up my view of that guild. --Striver 21:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Name and mission
editFrom Revision as of 06:14, 27 July 2005:
- The acronym SIIEG (pronounced "siege") stands for the Secular Islamic Information Editors' Guild. SIIEG is a writers' guild specifically intended for Wikipedia editors of Wikipedia information relating to Islam.
- SIIEG Policies
- SIIEG members must:
- # be adequately famaliar with one or more subjects related to Islam
- # not have an apologetic point-of-view towards Islam
- # abide by the Wikipedia code of conduct
--Striver 21:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
deletion
edit- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiProject Islam:SIIEG
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WikiProject Islam:SIIEG (2nd nomination)
lol --Striver 03:22, 16 December 2005 (UTC) bigger lol --Striver 03:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
In the discussion of the 2nd nom, Babajobu mentions not being comfortable joining a project where he has to add his name under non-believers. I was wondering why this distinction is made on this page, and if it wouldn't be better to remove the distinction. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:42, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
- First of all, we do not have any "non-Beliver" section here, its "non-Muslim". For the second, there is a "Others" section - he is free to use it if he does not like to share his belief, in the same way the two other members under that section. --Striver 23:35, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Strange
edit- Isn't this strange? Compare Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam with
Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity and Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism. --JuanMuslim 1m 21:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- What is strange?--Striver 01:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)