User talk:Sanskit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MfD nomination of Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions[edit]

Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. RL0919 (talk) 21:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category & template discussions[edit]

These Templates & Categories were created by Sanskit (talk · contribs), a WP:SPA who has been suspiciously MIA since their creation:

Happy Editing! — 71.166.147.78 (talk · contribs) 13:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Sanskit[edit]

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ message • changes) 02:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G10 deletion request for User:Sanskit[edit]

--NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:25, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions[edit]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

This warning refers specifically to the text, separate to your comment in a second bullet-point that began: "Christians: He who sacrificeth unto any god...", which I have removed as per WP:NPA. I have, however, left your objective comment on the MfD unaltered. Please feel free to contact me to discuss this if you wish. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:47, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions[edit]

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


My comment[edit]

  • My comment: The believers of semitic one god religions (Christians, Moslems...) have rights (see Category:Wikipedians by religion) to express their beliefs in semitic one god religions whose doctrines not only dislike the people who are not their believers, but also stigmatize, demonize and persecute the people who are not their believers, while the unbelievers of semitic one god religions have no right to simply express their opinion, feeling an attitude of dislike. The suggestion of deleting the templates is so ridiculous and despotic. Is the suggestion equitable, fair, just and persuasive? -Sanskit (talk) 04:25, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note:

    • Christians: He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. (Exodus 22:20)
    • Moslems: I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

There're numerous such creeds in the books of Christians and Moslems, the Bible and the Koran. Such creeds of Abrahamic religions show that they not only dislike, but also patently and overtly claim to kill their unbelievers, several billion people in the world today, including me. -Sanskit (talk) 04:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disscusion: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions

Blocked from editing Wikipedia for 24 hours[edit]

You have been blocked from editing, for a period of 24 hours, for repeated reposting of religious personal attacks in an MfD despite warnings (diffs: [1] [2] [3] [4]). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. NicholasTurnbull

--NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 05:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC) Correction, for the record: first diff in that above list is incorrect and was not a personal attack. It should have read as this diff: [5]. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 05:44, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions[edit]

I have removed your posting of negatively-framed Bible and Koran quotes (which could be interpreted as threats and/or slurs to other users) once again from this MfD. All of your other comments stand, as you can see for yourself on the MfD page.

This is the final warning you are receiving regarding your disruptive comments.
If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 21:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Are the creeds of Bible and Koran actually threats to others or could be interpreted as threats? Every rational man with basic intelligence will understand that they are actually threats. It's so simple. If not, so how we interpret them and how we interpret every word and every thing? If I create a religion with creeds advocating killing all human beings (except the believes of this religion), would you think oppositions against this religion are personal attacks? I never attack any individual. I just want to fight against evil religion and evil creeds of evil religions. I don't think any people believing in Christianity, Islam, Nazism or Communism are evil themselves. In my view, the evil is not those people, but the faith and ideas of those people, the creeds of those beliefs, which are against human beings, disturb human beings, bring segregation and hatred among human beings, and bring conflicts, wars and balefulness to human beings. Without those Abrahamic religions or the beliefs originated from Abrahamic religions, human will better recognize each other, better trust each other and live better with each other. Disruptive comments? Are my comments disruptive, or the creeds of Bible and Koran disruptive? I would absolutely disagree to create a religion with faith that only the believers of this religion have privilege to go to heaven while others have to fall into hell. In my view, such religions are evil religions. Abrahamic religions are such kinds of religions, right? I cannot imagine a man or woman with conscience would support and believe in the Semitic one god religions. -Sanskit (talk) 15:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]
I agree that it is acceptable to criticize religions that you disagree with, but this is not the place to do it. There are many other forums where your comments will be more well received.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, edited by lots of people with many different beliefs and backgrounds. We don't always agree with each other. Sometimes we do genuinely hate each other. But at the end of the day, we do have to work together if we want to build a high quality encyclopedia.
I understand that you do not like Abrahamic religions. That's perfectly acceptable, and you are more than free to express this viewpoint in a concise userbox. Our editors have lots of different point of views that they feel very strongly about, and it's generally good that we recognize this in ourselves and others.
However, I also understand that you feel that those who follow Abrahamic Religions hate non-believers, and wish to kill them. While there is nothing we can do to stop you from holding this viewpoint, it is generally not acceptable to express it here, especially in a dramatic userbox. The reason for this is that with this belief, you stray from criticizing the religion into criticizing the practitioners of it.
We have a policy on wikipedia of no personal attacks, and I think it's a good policy. You are encouraged to disagree with what others say, and even what they believe. But when you start giving negative opinions about the editors themselves, it becomes uccacceptable. Personal attacks do nothing to help build an encyclopedia, but rather deter others (in this case, believers in Semetic, One God religions) from contributing here.
If you'll notice, I did vote to keep your userboxes at MFD, because I felt they were about the religion themselves, and not the believers in it. However, others here have felt that these userboxes are too insulting to those who hold the beliefs you dislike. Admittedly, the userboxes are quite over the top, and I can understand how someone might feel personally insulted by them.
If you'd like a userbox that expresses how you feel, try making one that only expresses your feelings, and doesn't get overly dramatic about it. I understand that the one I suggested at MFD isn't strong enough for your tastes, so perhaps this would be acceptable to everyone involved:
This user strongly dislikes Abrahamic Religions because he feels that they promote hate and violence.
That might be a little strong for some people here, but I would certainly defend it in a deletion discussion. I think the main problem with your userboxes is that they are over the top: they feel like your belaboring your dislike for Abrahamic Religions without telling people why. Instead, your userbox should be a short and to the point expression of you Point of View.
As a side comment, I think you'll find that the vast majority of editors here, including practitioners of Abrahamic Religions, neither hate you, nor wish you dead. While religion has certainly been used to justify violence, most believers are a bit more pragmatic about how they practice. We do not live in a hegemonic community, and so we are forced to accept people who believe different things, despite what our holy texts might say.
I cannot speak for everyone here, but as a believer in an Abrahamic Religion, I neither hate you, nor wish you dead. I do not know what religion you do practice (or whether you practice any at all), but I can accept your choices. Depending on what you believe, I may disagree with you or your religion. There are certain religions that I vehemently disagree with. But I don't hate you as a person, or as a Wikipedia editor; I recognize your right to believe what you wish.
I think that you'll find this attitude common on Wikipedia. There are many fundamental disagreements that arise between our editors. In some cases, people actually have historically hated and killed each other in very recent memory, making the discussions extremely contentious (I can refer you to pretty much any article relating to Eastern Europe). And sometimes, people do genuinely hate other editors, and wish to kill each other. But these cases are a tiny minority. Most editors recognize that they must work together with people they don't agree with, and will generally try to be civil.
I suggest that you Assume Good Faith on the part of other editors. Not all Christians, Jews, and Muslims wish to kill you. Some might. If you do ever encounter anyone who threatens you, because of their religion or for any other reason, report it immediately to an Admin, who should deal with it quickly. But by preemptively accusing others of wanting to kill you, you yourself are making an unacceptable personal attack, and must stop. Buddy432 (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Actually I love all people. Since I love all human beings, I dislike and fight against those bad ideas, religions and beliefs which obstruct the happiness of all human beings. As you say you are a believer in an Abrahamic Religion, actually I do not dislike and fight against you, but dislike and fight against your related ideas and religious creeds. And I'm very curious why you believe in such kinds of religions with so many such kinds of evil creeds against human beings, including the faith that Heaven only belongs to the believers of your god and religion while other people have to fall into hell? Can you belive in some universal faiths that treat all human equally without discrimination? -Sanskit (talk) 16:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's the thing, though: why I believe what I do is completely irrelevant to Wikipedia. I don't edit articles related to religion, and I don't edit the way I do because of my religion. My religion is none of your business. I don't mind that you state your own opinions about religion, but don't criticize me for mine. That being said, some people do edit in a way that's influenced somewhat by their religion, so it is more acceptable to question it and their motives. It's never OK on Wikipedia to tell someone that they're wrong for holding a belief, whether it be religious, political, or otherwise. If you want to debate the merits of different belief systems, do it elsewhere. Buddy431 (talk) 23:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your suggestions of adding the reason of dislike is very good. It can mininize misssunderstanding and at the same time remind people like you to self-examine your religions. No hatred and harm to others, to the people who do not believe your gods and religions. Treat all people equally with goodwill. -Sanskit (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One question[edit]

And what about "Semitic one-god religious" groups such as Reform Judaism, Quakerism, Anglicanism, and other such creeds with a semi-liberal or liberal bent? How about Baha'i? Tenrikyo (not Semitic, but, still...)? Just something to think about. And there's any-theism-goes Unitarian Universalism, of course. — Rickyrab | Talk 23:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any improvements are welcome and encouraged. The essential point is, human is more important than any gods and religions. No religion should have dogmas that harm human beings, firstly no harm to the people who are not believers of the religion, secondly no harm to the people who are believers of the religion. -Sanskit (talk) 15:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User dislikes semitic one god religions closed[edit]

--NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 01:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sanskit&oldid=354651175"