Talk:Waseelah

Changes/merge needed[edit]

This article needs attention. The honorifics after the names of the various people need to be removed in conformance with wikipedia policy. Also, it sounds more like an excerpt from a pamphlet than an encyclopaedia article. I also think that since its discussing the same subject as the Tawassul article, they need to be merged.--Nkv 17:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Need[edit]

There is no need to merge it with Waseelah as the information represented at Tawassul is contradictory to the information under Waseelah.

Well then obviously only one of them is correct. There is a need to discuss which one is and then merge the two articles. Anyone searching for information on Tawassul/Waseelah will get completely different information depending on the term he searches for which is not the way an encyclopaedia should be. I'm putting the merge request again. Please don't remove it unless you can clearly state why two articles that discuss the same subject (although from seemingly opposing viewpoints) should remain separate rather than be merged into one that presents either side of the issue. (PS. It helps dicussion if you inline your comments with mine rather than create new sections for every response). Peace. --Nkv 10:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since the information present in Tawassul is nearly not doing any justice to the topic. How do you suppose we merge it ?

A lot of the content in the Waseelah article is original research. They draw on quotes directly from the Quran and then there is an interpretation by the author of the article followed by a conclusion. That's not how an encyclopaedia article should be. It should just present facts. Something like Defintion (with reference), Statements from the Quran and other texts describing it (if needed), viewpoints about Tawassul by different groups (either many of them or none. Not just the Deobandis). References. Right now, it looks like a fatwa on what Tawassul is and it's permissibility rather than a secular encyclopaedia detailing the facts. --Nkv 10:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honorifics[edit]

Give me a direct link to the Wikipedia rule of Honorifics.

Here you go. --Nkv 10:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link. I tried searching for it but i could not find it.

i'll delete the Honorifics soon.