User talk:Fixislam

words to live by on your user page, far as I'm concerned.

and before I forget: Welcome!

Hello, Fixislam, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Acebrock 18:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

3rr on Muhammad[edit]

Hi; Please do not characterise other editors' contributions as 'pov fundamentalist muslim nonsense.' Also, let me draw your attention to the three-revert rule, which you are already in violation of on the article Muhammad. Please stop reverting and try to work with the others on the talk page. This is the standard warning about the three-revert rule:"Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you." Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A further note on edit summaries: Please just use these to narrowly describe your edit. "Corrected mother's maiden name" is useful; "reverted pov nonsense" (for example) is not useful, and is uncivil as well. The edit summaries are not a good place to try to carry on a dialogue. The talk pages are the place for discussion. Thanks, Tom Harrison ^Talk 17:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your considered reply. Please let me point out that you still may not violate the three-revert rule, even from noble motivations. You still should not be uncivil, even if (especially if) you feel provoked. I'll say too that on Wikipedia, POV is like sin; we are all against it. You want to clean up bias and let the facts speak for themselves, and that's great. Our encyclopedia will be better to the extent that we can all do that. But you will be less able to do that if you get yourself blocked for violating the rules. Thanks, Tom Harrison ^Talk 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war Muhammad[edit]

Your deleted edit: "As least one, Safiyya, was married directly after Muhammad had her family put to death": Why don't you substantiate this edit, pointing to sources? --tickle me 17:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that it comes directly from muslim scripture, I didn't see the need, but I have put the scriptural reference in place. Fixislam 17:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, so I advise to stop doing wholesale reverts, as mostly you won't succeed like that - Zora for instants is unbiased indeed, besides it's not proper wikipedic procedure. Should your last edit/revert as per Joturner not prevail, you might want to stick to the Safiyya issue for now, giving reasons on summary and/or talk. After all, as Muhammad's wives after Khadijah's death are mentioned, Safiyya is a legitimate issue to be mentioned as well: her family's death illustrates a novel aspect to his personality, views and action to the outside reader. I won't do it myself now, as I don't see the point in enganging in ongoing edit wars: it's a waste of time and energy. As a rule, prepare your edits, give reasons and sources even when it doesn't seem needed, do things step by step. Be efficient - avoid arguments if possible.

Among other things -should they be deleted- these topics can be dealt with later on, there's no hurry:

the same name as his tribe's patron pagan deity
established a small sultanate for himself complete with harem (unencyclopedic wording...)

btw, technically, it's practical and customary to stick to the talk page where a thread was begun, ie. yours. --tickle me 18:25, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]