User talk:Vice regent/Archives/2012/April

List of Afghan security forces fatality reports in Afghanistan(Update)

Please add below information this in this article.article.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_security_forces_fatality_reports_in_Afghanistan

Afghan security forces losses in other time periods

2010

In 2010, 22 policemen and 16 soldiers were reported killed.

• January 14, 2010 - A police officer was killed and six others were wounded Wednesday in a roadside bombing in Ghazni province.

• January 17, 2010 - Various taliban attacks in country killed 2 Afghan soldiers, 5 policemen and an Afghan district chief.

• January 18, 2010 - Two policeman killed in a taliban attack in Afghan capital, Kabul.

Afghan private security guard losses

• January 13, 2010 - An Afghan PMC killed by a gunfire during a protest.

• January 18, 2010 - An Afghan PMC killed in a taliban attack in Afghan capital, Kabul.

Please read this and update the article.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:War_in_Afghanistan_%282001%E2%80%93present%29#Casualties_in_Afghanistan.28Update.29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.163.14 (talk) 00:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Badawit naqib.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Badawit naqib.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --MGA73 (talk) 14:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Muhammed Tantawy Azhar Sheikh

Some guys have a special vendita against Muhammed Tantawi and they keep deleting my well referenced contributions. Please check the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Sayyid_Tantawy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr eng x (talk • contribs) 08:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Dead links

I've reverted your "remove dead link" edits on Brandbergen Mosque and instead tagged them per WP:DEADLINK. DMacks (talk) 09:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Editing on Wiki

Dear VR,

I am a new Wiki editor and I was following the talk page that you engaged in on the CAIR profile. I see a lot of hate directed against Muslims from many different personalities such as David Horowitz but I need some help or tips on how to proceed to edit their pages with neutrality and without my edits being flagged, taken down or limited completely. I have accumulated an extensive amount of quotes and sources from unbiased channels. I have some free time currently and would like to devote myself to this project, any help in this regard would be much appreciated.

Viola Clay (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC)Viola ClayViola Clay (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Israeli–Palestinian history denial

I really think that you're going to have to come up with something other than mentions of the Qur'an in order to be able to add a "denial of Muslim connection to Jerusalem" section to that article, because it's a simple fact that there are no clear references to Jerusalem in the Qur'an (i.e. references which are apparent without the necessity of rather extended and convoluted interpretation or the support of semi-dubious hadith) except for Sura 2, verses 142-143. Everything else is really quite obscure from the Qur'an itself and/or available reliable history. From the Qur'an itself, there's no evidence of any connection between the "night journey to the most distant mosque" of Sura 17 and the "outermost lotus tree near the garden" of Sura 53, or any indication that either involves any kind of ascent and/or reference to Jerusalem. See article "Mi`rādj" in the Encyclopaedia of Islam for available information as to how the "ascent" story changed and evolved over time. The fact that the early Umayyad inscriptions in the Dome of the Rock contain absolutely no reference to any form of the "ascent" story (though they contain lengthy anti-Christian polemics made up of paraphrases of Qur'an verses) strongly indicates that any story connecting Muhammad to Jerusalem (beyond as the first qibla) was not either not yet in existence ca. 700 A.D., or was not then accepted by official Muslim authorities. AnonMoos (talk) 00:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

First off, I am NOT an Israeli, so your mention of "made by other Israelis"[sic] on my user talk page is a factually incorrect assertion which you made up out of whole cloth without any meaningful evidence being available to you (certainly you didn't get that idea from viewing my user page!), and which is not constructive or conducive to setting the tone for future productive collaborative discussion.

Second, you should examine the article "Mi`rādj" in the Encyclopaedia of Islam a little more closely. There you'll find that the idea of an "ascent" arose when al-masjid al-aqsa was first interpreted as being a reference to heaven. Later on, an interpretation of al-masjid al-aqsa as meaning Jerusalem arose, yet the ascent from the first interpretation was kept in this interpretation, so that there was conflation and "harmonization" between the two interpretations to form an overall folkloric narrative which ends up being quite remote in some ways from the literal words of the Qur'an (of course there's nothing about an ascent in the words of verse 17:1 or the first part of Sura 53). If you knew a little more about the general academic study of religion, you would recognize that the word "harmonised" is a red flag that extended interpretation -- which leaves the basic words of the original text far behind -- is taking place.

You'll also find that the Jerusalem interpretation of the "ascent" story is omitted from the first extensive Qur'an commentary (by Tabari), as well as the inscriptions in the Dome of the Rock. There are plenty of Muslim connections to Jerusalem, but for the purposes of article "Israeli–Palestinian history denial" you'll really have to find them somewhere else than in the Qur'an (excluding verses 2:142-143). AnonMoos (talk) 09:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

---

I don't know either Arabic or Hebrew well enough to conduct a conversation in them, but I have academic linguistic training, and I've studied both languages from a linguistic point of view (see article Semitic root, which is mostly based on the articles "Triliteral" and "Quadriliteral" which I originally created), etc... The templates at the bottom of my user page claim knowledge of the Arabic and Hebrew alphabets. AnonMoos (talk) 04:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I edited Arabic Wikipedia in a very minor way for a while, until I was discouraged by several factors, such as encountering a poorly-behaved person (who seems to have been promoted to be an admin there, despite taking steps to deceptively conceal his identity) who insisted on including the wrong image of the roundel of the Iraqi Air Force, and frustration with my own inability to come up with any Arabic translation for "Naval jack", no matter how many reference works I consulted. There seems to be some very strange politics going on at Arabic Wikipedia, but I don't know the language well enough to really understand them. AnonMoos (talk) 04:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

JDL

I provided several sources and arguments for the inclusion of the JDL to the List of designated terrorist organizations. O Fenion is using legalize arguments based on only Homeland Security designations of terror groups. He refuses to allow for prior to 2001 CIA, FBI, DoE designations of terror groups. You brought up the original question of their inclusion. Could you weigh in? Thanks. 97.85.163.245 (talk) 19:35, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Qur'an article

Thank you for your comments, VR. Please enter your vote in the poll that is being conducted for Qur'an to return to the long-standing spelling. Best wishes, Abdullajh (talk) 04:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Nice work on creating File:Terro.jpg ; would You consider changing the word wikt:seperatist to wikt:separatist and/or placing it on, say, Wikimedia Commons? Warmest Regards, :)—thecurran Speak your mind my past 15:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Borreliose1.png

Thanks for uploading File:Borreliose1.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:06, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Indus protest.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Indus protest.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Son of God (TV series) DYK nomination

Hi there VR. Thanks a lot for reviewing my DYK nomination for the Son of God (TV series) article, it's much appreciated. I think I have now addressed your concerns, and I just wanted to check that everything was okay by you. Thanks again. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 00:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Environmental Barnstar
		I, SarahStierch, hereby award you, Vice regent, the Environmental Barnstar for your impressive contributions to the Indus River Delta article. Great job and thanks for being a contributor to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 06:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Emergency Committee for Israel

Hi. Yes, I think that personal criticism of prominent members and leaders isn't relevant to the organization. Perhaps we should start a discussion on the article's Talk page to see what other editors think. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

It appears that Elmasry was appearing as president of the CIC, so I'm not sure that the criticism in question is personal criticism.

A situation I think may be closer to ECI is going on at J Street concerning whether to include criticism of a board member who made a personal trip to Gaza and visited Hamas members. See Talk:J Street#Kathleen Peratis. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 06:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Terro.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Terro.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Indus River Delta

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

How long is indefinite?

{{admin help}} (full disclosure: I've had a conversation with Bless sins over this) I'm not sure what is more disappointing: that I've been blocked indefinitely or that some users believe I don't exist. But I won't appeal the block right now, I was meaning to take a break anyway. In any case, I do realize the errors on my part, so maybe a break is for the best.

WP:TIMEOUT refers to a process of resolving issues via discussion. I just want to know the order of magnitude of time (weeks/months/years?) before I can engage in that. Let me know here, or email me (hopefully that still works).VR _talk 04:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Essentially, nobody believes that you are actually two different people - and the evidence that you are both the same person does seem pretty compelling (especially as one of you replied in the first person to a comment aimed at the other one). So I see little chance of this account ever being unblocked, unless you can provide a convincing explanation that explains *all* of the evidence -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

No, strike that and reinstate the request for admin help - I'll leave it for people who have invstigated it more closely than I have -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

• In response to the question, indefinite is undefined. There is no specific time attached. In the context of Wikipedia, an indefinite block is one that remains in place until the matter can be resolved and assurances made, which indicate and convince administrative staff that the block is no longer necessary to protect the project. There is no time limit before you may engage in discussion. However, until these assurances are in place, the block will remain in effect. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 17:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

AN/I

There is a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive828#Block review/unblock proposal, in which you might have an interest. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I've unblocked you. Please read the aforementioned discussion for advice on how to avoid such confusions in the future. Best regards, Max Semenik (talk) 19:52, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Per above, please add {{User shared IP address|Bless sins}} to your user page. Nobody Ent 21:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I have done that now, but probably should have done it a lot earlier.VR _talk 03:45, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources question

I am too busy/lazy to look up the talkback template just now, but that's not exactly what I said ;) I tried to clarify below your question, but perhaps my original statement was unclear. In any event, let me know if you have further questions about what I said or what I believe the Wikipedia policies to be (because I have no special authority on the matter, you realize, right?) Elinruby (talk) 06:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal

Hi there. I have offered to mediate a MedCab case you are involved in here. If all involved parties accept this offer, I hope to be able to bring a reconciliation on the issue. I would appreciate it if you could read the statement I posted on the page and let me know if you accept my offer of mediation. Thanks. Whenaxis about | talk 02:12, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

It appears that you two are the only ones still interested in this mediation. We could continue this mediation and if there is a dispute later about this topic you can redirect the parties to this page. Also, the parties who are involved can contribute to this mediation later if they would like—if you have a problem with this, please let me know, otherwise I will assume that my proposal is okay. To carry on this mediation in a timely manner, I kindly request that you add the mediation page to your watchlist (you can do this, by clicking the star icon next to the searchbox in the top right corner) and when you are available, please add an opening statement to the mediation page outlining the key issues that you think need to be discussed. Thanks, Whenaxis about | talk 21:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

You asked if I was interested in participating in this mediation. I don't want to because I don't have the time and the issue is essentially a content dispute, which Wikipedia is not well set up to deal with. Thanks. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 16:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

List of the oldest madrasahs in continuous operation in the Muslim world

Hi. I would appreciate if you stop totally redesigning a Wikipedia:List to an Wikipedia:Article, fundametally changing its scope and subject in the process. If you feel, your pet topic should receive an individual article, create one but don't seize an existing list and change its name and contents beyond recognition. Such practices are really unheard of in Wikipedia, and other users may feel taken aback by such an aggressive line of action. Thanks Gun Powder Ma (talk) 15:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Universities, Madrassahs (sp?) and Mediation

I am still pretty preoccupied IRL and having to pedal pretty hard to make things work with, uh, stuff. But, hmmm, if this goes to mediation, I have no objection to saying essentially what I have been saying. I think the articles have real problems and while my hands are too full for me to address these particular problems myself, I am nonetheless an uninvolved somebody who does see them. Shrug. If that helps you. I suggest that if you need to notify me of some proceeding, you should post on my user page until I answer you, as I somehow missed this query a couple of weeks back. I do have email notification set up, but I also get a lot of email, a lot of it work-related.

It may make a difference that I think I have had some minor dealings with Gunpowder Ma on the Taliban page as well... I never got back to Darkness Shines over his review. I think. I may just know the name from the University kerfuffle. Elinruby (talk) 03:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I'll continue to ask for mediation. Thanks a lot!VR _talk 03:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Wikiquette Assistance discussion

Hello, Vice regent. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Eleventh1 (talk) 13:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings

While I agree source attribution may be a a good suggestion, can you please discuss your objections to the current text before making drastic changes. Thank you
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 17:56, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I am basically satisfied with the paragraph, however, it was not just paris match that made this assertion.

Warning

Your recent editing history at 2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 19:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Messages like these distract from the constructive discussion we're having.VR _talk 20:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Edits like this which delete sourced content and relocate material without any discussion are not considered part of a constructive discussion. For the umpteenth time, can you discuss your specific concerns on the Talk before making such amendments. I urge you to work in a collaborative manner.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 10:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You clearly are set on eliminating any religious connection to the killing, and find my editing too partisan for your liking. Would you like to involve a third party or an arbitration to help resolve these issues?
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 12:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Olivier Roy

Augmented reality (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Real-time

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. When you recently edited Americans for Peace and Tolerance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William A. Graham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)