User talk:Abu Ayyub

Provide sources in the Sylhetis article

The way you arranged the infobox was what I wished to do(like Punjabis and Bengalis) but for the lack of data could not. By the way from where did you get the stats:-

"Bangladesh: Islam (81%), Hinduism (18%)
India: Hinduism (50%), Islam (48%)"

Provide Verified sources. If there isn't any, we can put it as following ....for now.

"Bangladesh: Majority Islam, Minority Hinduism
India: Majority Hinduism, Minority Islam"

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:15, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, yes I found those information on Sylhet Division and Barak Valley, for India there is however for Bangladesh I couldn't find one so we would need to find that information. Abu Ayyub (talk) 11:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey there, Abu Ayyub

I admire your passion for pushing Sylheti as a separate language. However, I must say, that both sides of the argument must be respected. I am a heavy contributor to Sylhet-related articles, recognised by other users here and here. I have created articles such as Sylhet region (originally it was a mere redirect to the Sylhet Division article), the History of Sylhet article (which took me months to work on and on the side I created related articles such as 1782 Sylhet uprising, tons of articles on the pre-colonial rulers of Sylhet, a lengthy article on the Gour Kingdom amongst others), List of works written in Sylheti Nagri, Sadeq Ali (Sylheti Nagri poet), Ashraf Hussain and Asaddor Ali (Sylheti Nagri researchers).

I hope that you understand that this dialect-language issue is not Sylhetis vs. mainstream Bengalis. Many of us Sylhetis are proud to be a part of the wider Bengali language and our writers have never considered Sylheti to be a completely separate language. This is a modern issue initiated by Western Christian researchers to separate us. I repeat, I admire you for your passion for Sylheti and hope we can work together peacefully. UserNumber (talk) 19:51, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@Abu Ayyub: "a modern issue initiated by Western Christian researchers to separate us" Wow! I think we don't have to bring this to community attention, since it is otherwise a very friendly and civil post, and the diatribe not directed at you. But personally, I am quite baffled to see that "dialect"-advocates resort to conspiracy-theory-like arguments to strengthen their point. –Austronesier (talk) 10:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

It is a common conspiracy theory, that these 'missionaries' wish to cause disunity by reviving a script that mainly has Islamic poetry which will inevitably reinforce that Muslim identity(?) Or seperatists wish to create their own country and are using this script as their bandwagon. Abu Ayyub (talk) 11:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds familiar in a way and no less weird. But seeking logic in conspiracy theories doesn't do justice to their intrinsically irrational character. I wonder whether SOAS is seen as a tool of western missonaries too... Anyway, thank you for your thoughful and sober comments in the Project talk page! –Austronesier (talk) 13:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Well I did come across someone refer to it as a 'seperatist organization' :| ...you are most welcome, too much passion and flames for human terminologies, not worth it. Abu Ayyub (talk) 14:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I mean these non-native "language"-advocates are linked with missionaries who have completed a translation of the entire New Testament into Sylheti (in three scripts; Latin, Bengali, and Nagri) and currently working on the Old Testament. I've done my research and realised this is a real conspiracy to jeopardise the British (and wider) Sylheti community. UserNumber (talk) 11:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Austronesier:, if I provided evidence would you take back your claim that my words were a "diatribe" and "conspiracy-theory-like argument"? P.S. check out Christian mission, this isn't something new. UserNumber (talk) 11:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@UserNumber: Well, diatribe was an unnecessary exaggeration, I admit. And apparently, I have to revise "conspiracy-theory-like" into "flat out conspiracy theory". Certainly I know that SIL engages in Bible translation; to know this doesn't require research. SIL is primarily catering to existing Christian communities, but to say that they do not ever proselytize would be naive; I fail to see the jeopardizing part, though. SOAS doesn't not engage in Bible translation or proselytizing. They are very active in the documentation of endangered languages (thanks to Peter Austin (linguist)). There might be a cross section comprised of individuals affiliated to both in some way or the other; but attributing the motives of SIL to SOAS is a fallacy. –Austronesier (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Austronesier: I agree with you, SOAS have good intentions with their works in Sylheti, they work very closely with the local community in Camden and they have created a story book (I own a copy btw and is amazing) which I find astonishing that it has come from the efforts of a group of mainly non-native's. I find it very hard to believe that these researchers or students have ill intentions to divide the Bangladeshi community, they are just language-geeks. Many Sylheti speakers do see their language as slang or a corrupt version of Bengali, to add to that the next generations are only speaking English (in Bangladesh/India many are adopting standard Bengali) so I am not entirely surprised with SOAS taking this stand with an academic or scientific approach in preserving Sylheti. Whether we see it as a threat to our identity is a whole set of connotations, but it is all about seeing it from a different angle or viewpoint that removes that perceived threat, there will always be differences of opinions and in it are the good intentions which we should support and allow to flourish. Abu Ayyub (talk) 17:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@UserNumber:Yes I was actually offered a New Testament written in Sylheti in a bookshop, it was so beautifully written in my mother tongue I must say, of course they have a right to proselytize just like any other faith but it is startling to see that this is the only well translated book available. Well, Ethnologue was created with that mission of spreading the bible in various languages, so yes does raise some eyebrows I must say. Abu Ayyub (talk) 11:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Abu Ayyub:, indeed it is very well-written, but it's clear that it is written particularly for the Sylheti Muslim community - not other religious groups (bare in mind Sylhet Division has one of the higher Hindu populations in the country), as it's more-so Sylheti with a Quranic influence (the type one would normally hear from a religious public speakers). This arouses confusion, and shows that @Austronesier: was not entirely correct to say it's primarily catering to existing Christian communities. Anyways, it was nice to have a civil discussion with both of you - whom I believe I have gotten along well with for the past months. And @Austronesier:, I understand these sort of arguments aren't allowed in Wikipedia hence I never use this "conspiracy theory" on Article Talk pages, rather this was more of a personal message to Abu Ayyub. I will always maintain my professionality when it comes to Wikipedia. UserNumber (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@UserNumber: I am sure we will continue to cooperate in an inspiring, friendly and constructive way as we have done before. Disagreement is healthy, and if we didn't have personal points of view we would be spineless chameleons. The best articles are written if contributors approach the topic from all angles. A complex/controversial topic is like a big rock lying on the ground. We won't expose it by pushing, dragging, or rolling it back and forth, but by jointly lifting it up from all sides.

I maintain that SIL primarily caters to existing Christian communities, but that's often not by their choice, but due to external pressure in many countries where they operate (and sometimes also due to the sensibility of individual field workers—many are die-hard evangelicals, but some aren't). So where they can, they often do engage in proselytizing. When it comes it to the prose-style of their translations, we can only guess why they imitate the style of e.g. religious public speakers. Dunno, it may be the only lexical choice available in Sylheti to evoke "sacred" language (the same was e.g. the case with the first Malay Bible translations by the Dutch), or they deliberately speculate to impress laypeople by that (this is what some sly US-funded local missionaries in modern Indonesia do with Christian pamphlets using Arabic-looking calligraphy). –Austronesier (talk) 07:44, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Missing cite in Sylhetis

You have added a short reference to "Lawson & Sachdev 2004" but no such source is listed in bibliography. Can you please add? Also, suggest installing a script (explained at Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors) to highlight such errors in the future. Thanks, Renata (talk) 01:22, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know just added this, and will check this script thanks again! Abu Ayyub (talk) 06:41, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Sylheti language

I am afraid I had to revert your revert. "Language variety" is even less supported than "dialect", I have not found a source that says Sylheti is a variety. Have you? There is a reason why we went to WT:LING, to get independent comments. Let us respect them. Chaipau (talk) 22:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Chaipau:, well it is up to you, good luck on the edit warring that is to come, enjoy. Abu Ayyub (talk) 13:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I wish—There is no joy at all. Chaipau (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

RfC notice

This is a neutral notice sent to all non-bot/non-blocked registered users who edited Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics in the past year that there is a new request for comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics § RfC: Where should so-called voiceless approximants be covered?. Nardog (talk) 10:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)