User talk:Merzbow

Welcome!

Hi Merzbow! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! gidonb 23:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NYT editorial page

thanks for jumping in on that debate. those people are VERY dense... it's amazing they know how to turn on their computers...--FairNBalanced 06:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't kept up on it since that guy who seems to be an uber-admin jumped in and said that we could use quotes from conservative papers after all... if the NYT quote is still there, someone should add a contrary opinion from TWS or Washington Times or something. Merzbow 21:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestion

Hello Merzbow,

The thing is that I am not sure if Tabatabai's view is a "modern view" or not. I find it unlikely that people in the past hasn't made this point. Please let me know what you think. Thanks --Aminz 23:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the pertinent point is that he's a modern scholar. It may be true that his view is what some scholars in the past have held, but unless you have sources to the effect, Tabatabai's quote probably belongs in a section about modern Islam. The section can start out real short, for starters I can see it having just Tabatabai's quote along with a paragraph about any modern Islamic states practicing dhimma (are there any - does Iran consider its religious minorities as dhimma, does Pakistan, etc.) - Merzbow 00:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aminz, see my latest post on the Talk page... I think now that the Tabatabai quote isn't really relevant and neither is my proposed section. Can you find similar quotes from the past? - Merzbow 00:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merzbow, I honestly don't have time to do research. I removed the quote from the article till we can find where we should add it. Maybe Pecher's suggestion of making an article on the verse 9:29 would be good enough for the moment. --Aminz 01:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why you revert my edit in Dhimmi article

First you, yourself said that But this paragraph certainly is too POV . But then if I tried to correct it then you had reverted my change by saying do not removed reference material. Even if in that reference there are serious problems because it makes a conclusion based on SOME scholars views (instead from majority view). I cannot understand this. --- Faisal 19:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed my mind. If that paragraph was quoting Freidmann's book correctly (and I have no reason to think otherwise), it deserves to stay. And it is a scholarly book, so it's a legit source. The way to balance this out is to add another quote from another respected source with a different perspective. - Merzbow 23:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know what you do. But my profession is research and I write papers. Lots of research papers that get published is world class IEEE conferences like IEEE-ICC, IEEE-Globecom etc. Even a school going guy can tell that there is problem with this paragraph and the book has problem too. How a generalized conclusion can be made based on minority scholar view. I think the writer that has written it i.e. Freidmann is biased and everyone that is support it is biased. Sorry, once I regarded you an extremely fair guy and was exited to find you. I cannot keep that opinion about you. --- Faisal 19:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion of the source is irrelevant. The source is reliable and verifiable according to a mechanical application of Wikipedia policy - Verifiability. Therefore, you have no right to remove quotes from that source. You do, however, have the right to introduce other quotes from other reliable sources that may have a different opinion. NPOV is maintained by adding additional opinions so that all major POVs are represented, not by deleting POVs. Why don't you go and find some book written by a Muslim scholar published in a reputable press on this subject and add quotes from there? - Merzbow 22:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]