User talk:Mumtaz muhammed

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Mumtaz muhammed, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! ````

You're invited to the Teahouse.[edit]

Hello! Mumtaz muhammed, Thanks for your contributions to Islam-related articles. You are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 18:20, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kerala[edit]

You have apparently re-entered the material that was earlier edited by me. Let me try to give you the specifics of why some of them were changed, as best as I can remember them:

"Islam is one among the major religion in Kerala." - This had no encyclopedic value. The demographics are already given above objectively. Subjective wording is not useful.

"Along with Hinduism and Christianity ,Islam has contributed to Kerala's culture and it's tradition." Section is about Islam. Material is supposed to state WHAT specifically was contributed by Islam. Saying it is mere WP:BOOSTER. Like me saying "I am the greatest editor." I have to prove it somehow. Also, it would belong in history, not in present day section which this is.

"From the very invent of Islam in Kerala , Muslims have take part in various roles." This says nothing. There is no content here. No value for a reader of the encyclopedia. Again, history. I realize that you are working in a second language here, but Islam was not "invented" in Kerala. Nor is the remainder of the sentence good English. I don't mind changing something like this once. I do mind when it gets mindlessly re-entered.

"Many of them where even loyal commanders to the native kings[21] Notably Kunjali Marriakkars who were credited with organizing the first naval defence of the Indian coast, to be later succeeded only in the 18th century by the Maratha Sarkhel Kanhoji Angre.[22][23]" This sounds more strange, than anything. It lacks context. History, not present day Islam. Again, you are having slight problems with English. Again, I don't mind once. Twice is annoying.

"The very first work based on the history of Kerala authored by a Keralite(albeit in Arabic)was Tuhafat Ul Mujahideen by Shaikh Zainuddin Makhdum who was a malayali muslim and was a renowned scholar of islamic theology and was widely revered in islamic world[24][25]." I think I kept this, but in history. Again, I changed capitalization which probably differs from other languages you have studied. I don't mind doing that occasionally, just not the same material!

"During the struggle for independence many muslims in kerala also took part in the struggle for freedom[26].Prominent among them are Vakkom Moulavi[27] who was also one among the front runners of Kerala’s reformation movement that paved the way for the spread of progressive ideas in the civic community and strengthened their self-confidence.[28]" Again, history. Also, the phrase "self-confidence" lacks context.

"Muslims are generally referred to as Mappilas in Kerala. They share a common language (Malayalam) with the rest of the population and have a culture commonly regarded as the Malayalam culture of Kerala with an Arabian blend.[29]" - seems current

"Kerala's Muslim population is the fastest growing religion in Kerala. Muslims formed 20% of Kerala population in 1971. It increased to 24.3% in 2001.[30]" Sounds current, more or less

"Muslims in Kerala enjoy a better social and financial security when compared to Muslims living in other parts of India.[citation needed]" This has been inserted in this section for years without any citation. It is useless without WP:RS.

It would be useful to other editors to explain WHY you are inserting material on the "edit summary" line.

I must ask you not to reinsert this material without first discussing it on the article's talk page. If you do, I will have to treat it as vandalism. Please look at the welcome page above and try to familiarize yourself with the 5 pillars of Wikipedia. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Claims to be the fastest-growing religion may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

“The Crusades and the Christian World of the East.” University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007.)</ref>.
in Austria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Holland, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway ), Poland, Portugal peacefully.<ref>http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2790/europeans-converting-to-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Claims to be the fastest-growing religion[edit]

I just revert your edit at Claims to be the fastest-growing religion. You can write it down here Muslim population growth (there is an external link to that article, just right under ISLAM section), not there because we only write SHORT SUMMARY of each religions. BTW! Are you a new sockpuppet of User:Rajputbhatti? Angelo De La Paz (talk) 16:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Claims to be the fastest-growing religion shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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. See BRD for how this is done. 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. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 16:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Mumtaz_muhammed reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: ). Thank you. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 17:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fringe sources[edit]

Hello Mumtaz muhammed,

The fringe http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/ (formely http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/ formely http://www.hudson-ny.org/ ) can be used to source "According to far right gatestoneinstitute.org, Muslims are this and that.", but can not be used to source "Muslims are this and that.". See WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV, WP:FRINGE, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 134#Gatestone Institute and Taybeh, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 142#Quality of sources. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation[edit]

Hello Mumtaz muhammed, and welcome to Wikipedia. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm Oddbodz. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Religion in Kerala, with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Oddbodz (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to History of Indian law may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

encyclopedia.com/topic/dharma.aspx#1 The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, ''Dharma'']</ref>}}<ref>http://www.cbseacademic.in/web_material/doc/Legal_Studies/XI_U3_Legal_Studies.pdf</ref>.Dharma

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]