Jump to content

User talk:Emir of Wikipedia/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Mina Stampede

Hi Emir, I actually have been editing here for a while but this is a new account. I actually wrote that section about the Mina Stampede and then erased it today for reasons that shall remain nebulous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.163.240.98 (talk) 23:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Your userpage

I've semi-protected your userpage for 2 weeks. I can make it as long as you like. Let me know if you wish me to change it.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:19, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Thanks very much for that. It completely slipped my mind that semi-protection could be applied to my userspace, so I'm grateful for that assistance. Let's leave it at 2 weeks and see if it gets vandalised again before you make it longer. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

RfC for page patroller qualifications

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:03, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

SAUD

My edit on king Saud page was not a test edit so I I'd appreciate it if you didn't remove it. What made you think it was a 'test edit'? Nothing did. I believe you are being insincere when you state this and you do this to remove edits out of hand which you dont like 62.205.122.213 (talk) 12:46, 7 October 2016 (UTC).

@62.205.122.213: I thought it was a test edit because Wagner has his own page and his religion isn't relevant on the page of someone else. I was sincere when I stated that, and it doesn't have anything to do with whether I like the edit. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Hmm Ok, It is relevant when that page wrongly identifies him as a jew to 'beef up' Saud's credibility as a someone who opposed Zionism.clearly Wagner is not Jewish, I added the references from his fathers page. the Saud page reeks of propaganda and unfounded facts, somebody probably translated the horseshit they feed saudi citizens as fact. 62.205.122.213 (talk) 13:02, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting the information about him being a Jew. Furthermore your original edit lacked references, but you fixed this. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 13:35, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dr. 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) 11:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Ireland

As I tried to reply to you before being censored (yet again) - Ireland is both the common name and the official legal name of the country I was born in and live in. Its capital city is Dublin. Sarah777 (talk) 19:07, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@Sarah777: Is that the primary Ireland though, or is Northern Ireland the primary one? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
If Northern Ireland was the primary one they wouldn't call it Northern Ireland! Sarah777 (talk) 19:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
@Sarah777: They call the other one Republic of Ireland! More importantly is the Republic more important or the whole unified nation? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Whole unified nation does not exist, nor has it for more than a century or two at this point. Ireland was partitioned in 1921, the Republic of Ireland a sovereign nation and Northern Ireland a constituent of the United Kingdom (sort of like Wales). Mr rnddude (talk) 19:16, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Who are "they"? Anglophone Wiki editors! In the State called Ireland and officially recognised as Ireland "they" simply call it Ireland! As for primary; Ireland has a population of nearly 5 million and covers 83% of the land area; Northern Ireland has about 1.8 million and occupies 17% of the island. Sarah777 (talk) 19:18, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
It does not exist as a state, but it exists as a cultural and geographical nation. Take a look at Draft:New York, and tell me if you think we should do something similar for Ireland. Population and land size are irrelevant in being primary. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Simply wrong. It does exist as a State and the name of the State is Ireland! Sarah777 (talk) 19:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Complexly wrong. It does exist as two states, Northern Ireland, and the Republic. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Alright, hang on, WP:RS. According to article 4 of the Irish constitution the official name of the Republic of Ireland is Ireland. Further, section 2 of the Republic of Ireland act declares that Republic of Ireland is a "description of the state". Refer to note a on Republic of Ireland. It's all there. Emir I think you're referring to the Kingdom of Ireland which ceased to exist in 1800. If not, is Ireland and isle or an island. I honestly don't know which one. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
The Kingdom of Ireland is dead; their is no doubt about that. Long live Ireland!. I'm asking if we should make an article for the island, like with the New York concept I presented to you. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
New York concept you presented to me? I think you're confusing me with someone else, I came upon this by chance. Should an article exist for the island, hmm.. I can't answer that. Has there been attempts at it before, discussions about it, or has nobody bothered? if the former, refer to those discussions, if the latter than by all means feel free to create an article on it. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Just scroll up for the New York concept; I haven't confused you with anyone just perhaps written it unclearly. If I partake in the latter and create an article for the Island at the page Ireland would you be interested in helping create it? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Emir, I think somebody beat you to it here. There already exists an article on the island of Ireland. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Look at my New York draft. I meant an article in a similar style to that. It would be a broad concept index about the Ireland and the countries on it. Nobody has beaten me to it yet. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I've started work on it here Draft:Ireland. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I see, a broad overview of Ireland and what it is. I see you broke New York up into sections with history, city, state etc. I presume a similar thing with your draft on Ireland; history, nation, island, etc. This is far outside of my knowledge and work. I work around WP:MILHIST dealing with specifically ancient Rome and its neighbours. I know tidbits about Ireland, not nearly enough to help write an article. I'm not sure how you can go about advertising for collaboration except perhaps to see WP:Wikiproject Ireland and posting a comment in the talk section and seeing if anyone is interested in helping. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Please do not proceed with your plan to create an Ireland (overview) article. Ireland has an article, at Ireland. The lead of that article is an overview of Ireland. It states clearly that Ireland is divided between the Republic of Ireland (officially named Ireland) and Northern Ireland. It has a hatnote that points to Ireland (disambiguation), which contains every use of "Ireland" in WP articles. There is no need for a new article to say the same things. It won't clarify anything, only add layers of confusion, and possibly add a new opportunity for edit-warring.
I am copying this to Draft talk:Ireland. --Scolaire (talk) 11:31, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for deleting it. I said thank you on the talk page but of course it was deleted as well. Scolaire (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

"The Kingdom of Ireland is dead; their is no doubt about that. Long live Ireland!" - ummm, Irish Unionists (example) would not thank you for saying that. Take a look at the Shankill Road, Belfast, which has a huge mural of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. If that's not strong patronism to the United Kingdom, I don't know what is. Basically, Irish politics is complicated and extremely contentious to the point that people have been killed over it. You really don't want to go there. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:02, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Thanks for the advice Ritchie. I also spoke to Scolaire who advised me that I really don't want to go there. I deleted the idea. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Bumbling buffoons on both sides of the border. Peter Andrew Nolan (talk) 10:34, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

You can think that but the discussion is over. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:37, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Well, if you are smart, try Senegal. There is a Senegalese proverb: "An intelligent enemy is better than a stupid friend." The Senegalese suffer enemies gladly, as long as they are not stupid. And so do I. 2607:FB90:1E06:637D:0:3C:3594:5F01 (talk) 13:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
@2607:FB90:1E06:637D:0:3C:3594:5F01: Do you know @Peter Andrew Nolan: ? And be glad I'm not stupid then. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 13:54, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
@ So you are an "emir" of Wikipedia?That does sound unreasonable.2607:FB90:1E06:637D:0:3C:3594:5F01 (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
You could say that, but it's not as unreasonable to me as being called Doc Love. So do you know the account or not? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Crown Prince Hussein

Please stop reverting the infobox. We have a royalty infobox for a reason, and as Hussein is a crown prince, the royalty infobox should be used on his page. His education is mentioned within the article, so it's not necessary to replace the infobox with the standard person infobox just to include this information. Piratesswoop (talk) 23:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

@Piratesswoop: I am not replacing it with standard infobox but embedding it a module so all information is easily available to the reader. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 09:11, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookies!

Yum. I'm a new user. What wikipedia knowledge should I know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satkinson3 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

@Satkinson3: You should take a look at the links I sent you, and remember to sign your comments. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:15, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Edits to the article entitled: Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud

Dear Emir of Wikipedia,

I am surprised that you found the version I edited to be "good". Three of the four sentences I removed all link to the same NYT news article. The NYT has a track record (if you check their archives) of criticizing Saudi Arabia, albeit in a rather subtle manner. For example, this is a paragraph from the same article: "Others have been popular. After Prince bin Salman called for more entertainment options for families and young people, who often flee the country on their vacations, the cabinet passed regulations restricting the powers of the religious police. An Entertainment Authority he established has planned its first activities, which include comedy shows, pro wrestling events and monster truck rallies." [1]

Notice the use of the word "flee". The definition of "flee" according to Merriam-Webster is: to run away from danger. It carries a negative charge. People flee danger; no one flees on vacation. This is but one example of the subtle use of words by the NYT in attempting to influence its reader's biases and perceptions. I believe Wikipedia should be a source of information free from political undertones associated with journalism. Wikipedia should be a source of facts backed by evidence, and free from propaganda and political score-settling.

The Independent on the other hand, is not so subtle in its coverage of Saudi Arabia. It is clearly and heavily biased against Saudi Arabia. And no person should take its coverage of Saudi Arabia as neutral or even factually correct. These sentences, as they stand, impart a biased, negative account of the subject which is not proven to be true. In the interest of keeping Wikipedia articles as a reliable source of accurate information, I hope you would reconsider those recent changes.

Regards, Himura Kenshin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himura Kenshin (talk • contribs) 15:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

@Himura Kenshin: If you truly believe this then put it on the talk page of the article and my talkpage. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:59, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/world/rise-of-saudi-prince-shatters-decades-of-royal-tradition.html?_r=0

Thank you

Thank you for accepting the request and moving the Page 'Empire loyalism' to 'Imperial loyalism' — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamKingstonCox (talk • contribs) 10:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Radio Cairo is another thing and currently redirects to Voice of Arabs

Dear Emir. You reverted my edit which aimed at deleting the wrong redirect of Radio Cairo to Voice of the Arabs. Both are different radio stations and can't redirect to the same page. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 11:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

@Mahmudmasri: Do you have any proof for this? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
If this is an appropriate response, then you ought to have asked, did user:Trust Is All You Need have proof that they are the same station to create the redirect from the first place?
Check the official website of the Egyptian Radio and Television Union. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
@Mahmudmasri: I did not ask user:Trust Is All You Need, and this proof should be given on the deletion discussion not here. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:47, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Then why haven't you opened the discussion? --Mahmudmasri (talk) 11:50, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
@Mahmudmasri: Too late it was a recently recreated redirect so it's been closed. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

You should probably change your username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Emir of Wikipedia", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it gives the incorrect impression that the account may be officially affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation or one of its projects. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. —swpbT 14:04, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

@Swpb: Please see my archive. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I see opinions both ways (and Ed is frankly wrong), so the name is clearly controversial. The fact that multiple people have independently complained should be impetus enough. You may be required to change it, but even if you are not, it would be a very, very good idea to do so: it costs you nothing and will settle the matter for good. —swpbT 17:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice, however as Ed is not only a Wikimedia Foundation's Communications department but also an admin I will stand by his judgment unless I am required to change it. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:13, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not satisfied with the infallibility of admins, so I've asked for broader input here. —swpbT 18:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
No problem. We'll see what the comments say. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:48, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
You don't accept the doctrine of administrator infallibility? No cookies for you, then. Seriously, the user name "Emir of Wikipedia" isn't likely to fool anyone into thinking we actually have such an office. Jonathunder (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Whoa now, let's not bring my job into this. My determination there—which I still hold—is in my volunteer capacity only. Quote: "Edits, statements, or other contributions made from my volunteer account (this one) are mine alone and do not reflect the views of my employer. I am first and foremost a Wikipedian, and I still have my own personal thoughts and opinions about the movement." Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:54, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Apologies for bringing your job into this, I only meant to highlight that you are probably very knowledgeable about Wikipedia. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:RFC/N closed

Hello, Emir of Wikipedia. The result of this discussion was to allow your username. The discussion has now been closed. If you would like to see what concerns were raised, you can find a link to the discussion in the archive. You do not need to change your username. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Ahmed bin Saeed Al Maktoum copyedit

Galala city

Thank you Emir for your message

We can help togather

Best regards

Kurdistantolive (talk) 22:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
@Kurdistantolive: I'll try. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
GREAT Kurdistantolive (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Ashura


Hello, Emir of Wikipedia -- As you can see, I have completed a copy-edit of Ashura. I did the best I could. I hope you'll read through the article and check to be sure I did not introduce any errors in content. Just a few concerns:

1) I notice that the word "Shia" appears in two forms throughout the article: "Shia" and "Shi'a". There needs to be some consistency. I think you have two choices:

(a) Make all of them "Shia" or all of them "Shi'a", or
(b) Make the first one "Shi'a" and all the rest "Shia" (easier for Western readers). It's really your choice, but the one thing you don't want is going back and forth between the two spellings.

2) I saw quite a few different spellings for "Husayn". Since I saw "Husayn" first, I tried to make all of them conform to that spelling. There may be a few that do not have that spelling, particularly in links that I left alone. (I think the spelling in a link should probably reflect the spelling of the title of the linked article.) You may want to check to see of those few could be changed to "Husayn". Related to this, I believe "b." may be an abbreviation for "Ibn". I'm not sure I would use "b." as an abbreviation without explaining or giving the complete name next to it at least once. Not every reader will know what "b." stands for.

3) There were several sentences that were ungrammatical. I fixed a few of those, but there were a few more that I could not be sure what was intended, so I left them for you to fix. I'm trying to find them now (most were toward the end of the article). Here is one. It is near the end of Ashura#Violence during Ashura:

  • Khusrin said all the Shia mourners who were detained were to be charged under Section 12 of the Selangor Syariah Criminal Enactment 1995 which are insulting, rejecting, or dispute the violation of the instructions set out and given a fatwa by the Salafi religious authorities. ABNA.

4) The section Ashura#Significance for Sunni Muslims could be better organized. There also seems to be some repetition. For example, you mention Muhammad's seeing the Jews marking the 10th day of the month at least twice, if not three times.

5) Near the beginning of the section Ashura#Commemoration of the death of Husayn ibn Ali, you have two images, one on the left and one on the right, at the same height. At 100% and 110% screen resolution, this appears all right, but at higher resolutions the text between them becomes squeezed into a narrow column. I'm wondering if you would consider moving one of the two images to lower down in the section or moving the left-hand image from to the right, so both images are on the right.

I'd be glad to re-read the article once you have worked on it a bit more. Just let me know.  – Corinne (talk) 17:26, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

6) In the second paragraph in the Ashura#Etymology section, you mention Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani. I don't understand why you change "Gilani" to "Jilani" after the pipe. I see in the linked article that the name is Al-Jilani in Arabic, but he was Persian. Are you using "J" because some or all of his writings were published under "Al-Jilani" rather than "Gilani"? Or was he primarily known under the Arabic version of his name? If not, why not use the Persian form? I'm just curious.  – Corinne (talk) 19:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

@Corinne: I didn't write the who article; I requested a copy edit for it. I'll make sure to bring up this problem at the talk page though. I personally think it should be "Al-Jilani" if that's what matches his page. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:23, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
@Emir of Wikipedia: Thank you for your reply (but I don't quite follow your first sentence). The title of the linked article shows "Gilani".  – Corinne (talk) 22:07, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
@Corinne: Sorry, I meant to write whole not who. The linked article is entitled Gilani, but it appears to be inconsistent. Thanks for your help copyediting the article anyway. I might have to raise this issue on the Gilani page too. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Dubai Airport problem

I removed the template bacause there was a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.61.145.18 (talk) 13:33, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

You removed an image not a template, and what was the mistake? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for welcome

Thanks, will have to think about creating a new account. I have much prior experience with Wikipedia in the past, but if my talk post that you mentioned leads to positive things, as these are the kind of topics I have been heavily discouraged against aiding previously, I may decide it might be helpful to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.162.33.175 (talk) 18:50, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Emir_of_Wikipedia/Archive_2&oldid=803567481"