User talk:Zora/2006archive12

Hindi scripts

Hello Zora. Today, I noticed that all my additions of the Hindi script to various articles were removed by Szhaider. While I respect his work on Wikipedia, I disagree with his position. I feel that it is alright to include Hindi scripts in Tere Bin, Fakir, Azad (disambiguation), and some Pakistani bands. I feel that the scripts are relevant in the articles as the terms are found in Hindi. Also, Pakistani bands are very popular in India. The language in which the Pakistani singers sing (Urdu) is readily understood by Hindi speakers and the songs are often included in Bollywood films. In fact, Wikipedia Bollywood articles (i.e. Fanaa, Rang De Basanti, Anupam Kher) include both the Hindi and Urdu scripts for the same reason (popularity across the border and language intelligibility). I don't know if I was in the wrong by adding these scripts. I just wanted to get an opinion from another respected Wikipedia editor. Could you please intervene here. I really appreciate it. Thanks for your time, Anupam^Talk 20:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice Zora. I totally agree with you about limiting the Devanagari to bands popular in India (Basawala recommended the same thing). Like, we discussed in Bollywood articles with the Urdu script, and you said, the purpose of the Devanagari script in the Pakistani band articles is for the many Indian fans who might not be able to read the Perso-Arabic script. (Not to mention that many of the songs by the Pakistani bands appear in Bollywood movies and that several bands have toured all over India (i.e. Jal tour dates)) Obviously, the Urdu script would appear first and then the Hindi. My intent was never to be nationalistic. I love both the people of Pakistan and India and have a few Pakistani friends! Thanks again for all your advice Zora. Once again, you have been very helpful to me. I hope that if I experience any tension in my discussion of this topic you will be willing to help me. Thanks again! With regards, Anupam^Talk 05:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Kuch Kuch Hota Hai

Hello, Zora, I included role descriptions in the Kuch Kuch Hota Hai article, like in the featured articles. Could you have a look? --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 22:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Zora,

personally, I'd rather go for the table, too, but all the movie articles that got featured have them. I took [Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace] kinda as a role model - and didn't want to take Blade_Runner, because that's a free ride for any kind of fan glorification. I hoped for one SRK/Kajol movie to get featured some time in the future (either KKHH or DDLJ) and I'm not sure if a table is enough. What do you think? --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 01:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Bollywood

I wasn't sure about Switzerland myself (which is why I tagged rather than edited the sentence) but I'll be surprised if the reason is to imitate Kashmir. What I heard was that permission to film is becoming increasingly difficult in many parts of the world (including at exotic locations in India itself) and the countries typically offering a free hand are the ones that end up getting featured in the dream-song sequences. Anyway I have no good source for that either. Though the article reads much better now, I'll be happy if more POVs are taken away; but entering the editing game might be opening up a can of worms :) Still, I'll see what I can do. I appreciate your interest in Bollywood-related articles. Cheers. - Cribananda 07:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Bindi (decoration)

Hello Zora! I looked at the talk page and left some comments. I hope they help out the situation. Once again, I really appreciate you and the effort you put forth to make Wikipedia the best it can be. Thanks! Anupam^Talk 20:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

How's it going?

So, have you thought about how to classify notable roles? It's complicated but the thing is we don't need to list successful film as notable roles since those can be talked about in the career section. I think notable means when the actor had a really important role in the movie and it left an impact. The film can be critically successful but the actor must be praised by the critics or given an award for it. Anyway, I also gave you the exact ranks for Filmfare on that page. Are you going to delete it? If so, then I should keep the no.1 fact on Rani's page. I won't mention any other actress unless you want to put the fact in their article. Secondly, I don't know what's wrong with Bipasha's page? She is one of the upcoming superstars and I think we should work on that page too. Plus, I was thinking of dividing the trivia section on Rani's page: 1) Accomplishments, then polls can go there and it will be very minimum, I won't clutter it. Just like on JLo's page. I really like the idea. And then 2) Trivia which is not about accomplishments. It's about trivial things: Her favorite actress, the fact that she has never played a villain whereas all her contemporaries have: Priyanka, Kajol, Ash, Preity, Bipasha, Tabu, Mallika, Shilpa... the list goes on and on. Other trivial matters, nothing about sizes though, coz I agree with you, they keep changing. It will be short. three things for trivia and then five for accomplishments, small sentences. It will look better? What do you think? I don't want to do unless I get an approval coz what's the point if you revert! Well, take care. Bye. User:shez_15

You're right

That's easier! But do you think we should put notable roles then. We should put top earner movies maybe. I don't know how to make a box for that. You do it. I'll try to put top five in my opinion and then you can look up the facts and fix them in order. Thanks. For Rani, the top earners according to box office india with inflated adjustments were: kkhh, k3g, kank, veer-zaara, bunty aur babli. But that's not right. Coz she had a cameo in k3g. I think we should then not do top earners since the role can be small then there is no credit to the actor. We can do the top three highly praised performances over the years but that can be biased. Not for Rani, though, coz then it's Black, Veer-Zaara and then Saathiya. But it can be biased to other people. I don't do. Do whatever you think is fit. I'm out of here. Bye. -- User:shez_15

Muhammad picture mediation

May be you would like to join the mediation about Muhammad pictures dispute http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/Mediation . --- ابراهيم 09:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You had contributed a lot in the Muhammad article (more than most of us) and spoken about this issue in the past too. I will really appreciate if you could give your opinion in the on going mediation. The result could apply in future picture insertion in the article. Thanking you in anticipation. --- ابراهيم 17:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

re

Actually, I'm on the road now ... and will be back to my town in about 1 day. I just logged on from the hotel and checked my watchlist ... and did the change, but I'll have to log off the wireless right now. I'll look into it on Sunday ... sorry about this. --Ragib 06:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Advise, please

I have posted some questions and comments on Riya Sen talk page. I need your advise. - Aditya Kabir 08:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC) - please, reply on my talk page

Kamal Haasan

Please vote for the Kamal Haasan article to become an article to be improved to be featured here, Wikipedia:Article Creation and Improvement Drive#Kamal HaasanThamizhan 15:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The page looks good except a few things

What I meant by: she was the new success story of the Yash Raj Films was that Yash Raj Films made her popular and in demand. All her biggest hits have been with Yash Raj Film and the campaign put her on the map. Her career was going low-profile before Saathiya. Yash Raj Films have done a lot of films with her. Plus, Yash Raj Films is all about quality over quantity. They produce 3 films per year or so. Rani had MDK, Saathiya, Hum Tum, Veer-Zaara, Bunty Aur Babli with Yash Raj Films and now Tara Rum Pum. That's 6 films when Yash Raj Films have selective work. Plus the campaign distributed Black, Mangal Pandey and KANK. That's 9 films already. It's a big part of her career. We must mention Yash Raj Films. I'll just put them on there. So, don't remove the fact. You can word it differently, I'm not a writer but Yash Chopra gave her Saathiya and from there, it all started. You can word it better and elaborate. Thanks. And what's wrong with the beautiful Indian women list? It's great I think because it's not mostly Bollywood on the top ten. only 2 of them on the top ten. Plus, Hema Malini is on it. A 60 yr old woman. So the poll is not all about external beauty but also internal beauty. It's unbiased and just something fun to see as a whole list with the reference. I think we should have that there. It's on Zinta's page, why did u remove it from Rani's page? I'm okay with no notable roles but again, it's on Zinta' page, why not on other actresses then? And the Filmfare 5 nominations fact, what's with that? It's on Zint's page, why not here? I thought you did no favoritism? And I added that poll because you are deleting the page, if you keep the page then I'll remove the poll. And I added a reference to prove popularity in the intro. Don't remove it! What's bad about the Casablanca Film Festival in filmography? The rest is fine. I don't mind what you did. --User:shez_15

Hey!

Thanks for everything. I'll keep this one short. I know you're a busy person. I just added media appearances to Rani's page as you suggested earlier that it's not personal life. Just see it. Fix the grammar and shorten the length if you can. Thank you so much for your help. You really work hard on wikipedia. And you deserve a full ten pages of awards. God bless! -- User:shez_15

Editing Standards

Zora, once again thanks for your I am better than you post on my talk page. And once again I point out that you did not edit, you simply reverted by throwing away changes. For me your actions speak volumes more than anything you say in your messages to me. If you think your editing skills are really good as you claim, then why do you think you have offended a long list of people? Please learn to accept other people's contribtions on wikipedia or otherwise get a life.

And yes, I am organizing a regional meeting for those interested in setting up guidelines and standards for the wikipedia pages related to Indian topics. I would like to invite you, but I don't think you would make any positive contributions except for negating efforts of others. Pratulka

Bollywood articles

Hello Zora! I hope you are doing well. Despite our references and time spent on discussion at Bollywood talk, Bharatveer is still removing Perso-Arabic scripts from articles (see Bharatveer's contributions). I already reverted his edits twice. Could you please intervene if possible? Thanks for your help Zora. I really appreciate it. With regards, Anupam^Talk 07:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance Zora. It means a lot. With regards, Anupam^Talk 02:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

*Sigh* Bharatveer is not only reverting two pages but has gone through many of my script edits and has removed the Perso-Arabic (all of which I spent much time adding). He has already violated 3RR on the Anupam Kher article. How can this vandalism go unoticed? All of us had a lengthy discussion evinced in Bollywood talk about scripts with a large majority for both Devanagari and Perso-Arabic. I don't see why he doesn't understand this. Thanks again for trying to help me out here. I'm not quite sure how to deal with this anymore. I've faced nationalists on both sides! With regards, Anupam^Talk 05:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Pls stop saying lies.-Bharatveer 06:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Khomeini article

Hi Zora. I understand you're very busy and a little burnt out but would you be interested in taking a look at the Khomeini discussion. We have a major difference of opinion on what is NPOV. (i.e., I fear someone is creating extremely demanding criteria for NPOV as a pretext for deleting whatever they don't like.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ruhollah_Khomeini#Continued_deletion_of_sourced_material_by_Marmoulak

If you don't have time or inclination could you recommend someone else for mediation? Thanks --Leroy65X 18:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Sri Pada

Hi Zora. If you have the time, could you perhaps check out the article Sri Pada which makes various claims about this place being a multireligious pilgrimage site (including Buddhists and, in particular, Muslims - I came across the article when I saw it listed in Category:Islamic Pilgrimage). I've never heard of Sri Pada as being a 'pilgrimage' site for Muslims. Thanks. MP (talk) 21:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Zora, hope everything is going well with you.

Please have a look at this article [1]. It is written by an scholar of Islam. :) --Aminz 11:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

New article you may want to edit

Hello Zora, I've started a new article about Saudi Arabia's first feature film: Keif al-hal?. I invite you to contribute to it if such an article might interest you. Thanks. :-) (→Netscott) 02:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Islam in the United States

Information you removed earlier today was reverted back in to the article Islam in the United States by CltFn. Most of which is simply untrue, for example, he added that "According to the Jerusalem Post 80% of all mosques in the United States are funded by the Saudi Arabian government" - which is not true, the JPost did an interview and the interviewee,Yehudit Barsky of the American Jewish Committee, said that "80% of all mosques in the United States have been "radicalized by Saudi money and influence"" (apparently having someone from Saudi Arabia in attendence makes a building a radical building- That could explain the goings on in white house) - anyway, I changed it to reflect the source, but cannot remove it, per my RVP. Further, he added that "The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security also reports an alarming Wahabi influence in mosques and Muslim organization in the US." - Which is incorrect, it was a sole US senator, Charles Schumer, though how much knowledge this Jewish senator has on the subject seems debateable, as he seems to be quoting about the dozen or so Mosques and Masjids that the King Fahd organistation funds in the US, none of which, it must be noted have ever been linked to anyone convicted of any terror charge, nor have any of their respective imams or alims been accused by any reputable person or harbouring or inciting radacalism or hatred. Apparently just getting money, which the kingdom of Saud considers dawah, from the Sauds is all he needs to convict the respective Mosques of said "militant Wahhabist influence". Anyway, I'm not correcting the info because I think it should stay, I'm correcting it because it is flatly wrong, and I still think, even now its accurate to what its source states, it should be removed. --Irishpunktom\^talk 19:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

About revert

Hi Zora, the word I edited in the article Yusuf Estes "revert" from "convert", has the following explanation: 1 The word has not been given in a religious sense, rather its a descriptionary word that is used more than convert 2 The said Mr. Yusuf always uses this word instead of convert 3 After research from Muslim scholars I have come to understand that the term the majority uses is this one

I'm not a muslim but it seems however that the proper terminology was not easy for you to accept as compared to myself, I didnt use it because of my own choosing but rather what the information I had gathered had described.

I hope you dont mind such an improper way of explanation as mine.

and so on

Hi, thanx for the "G" tip, thats a good one but I'm not sure if it can be a "yardstick". Anyways, hope to "hear" from you. (And why would people call you a Pakistani)

Rajesh Khanna (2)

Hi Zora, that was quick work on Rajesh Khanna! But I didn't certainly expect that you'll delete the whole stuff. It just needed to be cleaned up, and POV to be made NPOV, not deleted, unless it was copyright violation. Anyways I notice that you're keeping a good watch on Indian cinema. Jay 19:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see you're stressed out, and pulling your hair about the quality of articles. I see many people with similar symptoms checking into the Clinic for Wikipediholics. I agree with your contention on the deletion, although I didn't go through the sections you deleted. But someone has obviously put in a lot of effort and you would have to answer their questions. Jay 19:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Ziarah

I think i might have inserted the poor mans haj comment - a very long time ago when it was a very small article - I have left a comment on the discalimer persons talk page - to mediate - but I have no idea what the response might be. I remember readding it in non-islamic anthropolgists comments about the north africcan countries - oh well, thats my bit SatuSuro 07:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Indian Biographies

Pls see Mahatma Gandhi,Jawaharlal Nehru,Adi Shankara etc. and understand what I am trying to say. -Bharatveer 12:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Anti Shi'a

this is a best name to describe ur believe - i give it as a gift for u to add it to ur collection (89.148.41.41 03:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)).

Zora, are you pro-Sunni? LOL (→Netscott) 05:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

See you on Arrakis where maybe we can talk story.  :-) (→Netscott) 05:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Angry Bahraini

No problem! BTW, please archive your talk page... Khoikhoi 06:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hkelkar Arbitration

Hi Zora - you've interacted with with Bakasuprman and Hkelkar, I think, as you said on the Rfar. Would you care to further comment on the the evidence page? Thanks. BhaiSaab ^talk 01:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, I archived your talk page up to and including October. I hope you don't mind. BhaiSaab ^talk 01:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

RfArb

A request for Arbitration has been opened against Hkelkar (talk · contribs) that has expanded to include several other users responsible for the sprawling mess that are South-Asia related political articles on WP. In the course of presenting evidence, I fear I used your disquisition on motivation [2] as it summarised what could be believed about the overall motivation of a subset of users being scrutinised. This has caused your name to be raised elsewhere on the page as well, as my 'incivil friend', for some reason. If you are interested, please do have a look. This is perhaps an opportunity to do some good for the project that will not come again. Hornplease 05:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

This diff[3]. I fancy a defence will not be necessary, and apologise again for mentioning you if you have such bad memories of ArbComm. I am not sanguine myself, but you must agree that an effort must be made. Hornplease 06:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Your fan User:89.148.41.92 ?

All of his edits are revert of your edits.[4] -- ALM 10:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

His edit on Islam in the United States‎ does not make me thing he is a Muslim or even like Muslims? He had revert me twice when I changed to your version. Can you please ask some admin to stop him. --- ALM 10:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

If he comes back, give us a quick note at WP:AIV, I can watch it the next hours if necessary. Just say:

"*{{Ipvandal|xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx}} Angry Bahraini. ~~~~"

Will be glad to be of help. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

'Lo

Hi,

Nice to hear from you. What brought me back was the change of guard for the post of the Sultan of Sokoto; by my count the Amir al-Muminin for the 6th or 7th largest ethnic/geographical community of Muslims in the world, and one whose territory I was born and therefore have some bond with. And in my book, one of the very few offices in the world today to hold that title. And a community you won't hear anyone talk about--Muslim or non-Muslim--except when it comes to Sharia laws and the like.

I guess I was working off my wiki addiction (what?! there's no article on that?!!) by staying cold turkey for a while. Resolving now to make strategic interventions on topics and issues once in a while.

Hope all is well with you. You might want to take a look at http://TheMuslimCenter.wikispaces.com, a project I am toying with at the time...come to think of it, it needs a Wikipedia page...

Salam, Peace, and Best Wishes,

--iFaqeer 01:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The Angry Bahraini

I have reported the Angry Bahraini multiple times at WP:ANI. He operates from many different anonIPs. The last time I did so, the editor Future Perfect at Sunrise assured me that if I put up a notice at WP:AIV and labeled it Angry Bahraini, he'd take care of it. But the notice has been removed.

How am I supposed to handle this? It's been going on for days. Every day my edits are attacked from a different set of anonIPs. It has nothing to do with content. He is supposedly a Muslim, but he's reverting my reverts of patent vandalism to Islam-related articles. The whole panoply of warnings and discussion on talk pages doesn't apply. He doesn't talk. He just accuses me of being a Salafi Muslim (weird, since I'm a Buddhist who lives in Honolulu) and attacks. I think he's deranged.

If WP:AIV won't take care of this, do I continue reporting at WP:ANI? Zora 09:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it seems sensible and appropriate to do so. Sorry that the rules of AIAV didn't apply to this. Thanks, Ian Cairns 10:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Bot edits

Zora, I have put up an FAQ section here. There is nothing imperialistic about it. Its not as if the govt of India is claiming an article to be owned by it. This is an effort to give articles more visibility and hopefully make them better. The bot makes the article list from categories. If you find that the bot has made a wrong edit (known as false positive), please feel free to revert. Regards -- Lost^(talk) 17:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Haabet

Hi, I see that you have run into User:Haabet on the article Corset. The story behind him is that he was part of the Danish Wikipedia for several years until we finally banned him forever. He is unable to write anything coherent - even in his native tongue. In addition to that he has all these strange ideas, which has no connection to the real world. I don't think a writer of such poor quality belongs to Wikipedia, so if he causes to much trouble I would suggest to try and get him banned here as well. --Maitch 22:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Please Help

Hi Zora, This is Mystìc here, I've been blocked as a sockpuppet account of user:Lahiru_k, you've known me and you know for sure that my account is not a sockpuppet account. Please help me please.. 222.165.157.129 08:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

bunty aur babli

i am slightly surprised at the two major accusations in ur comments at my discussions page regarding bunty aur babli. my replies:

1. u say that they comments are not improvements. sorry, u r wrong. the plot on the page is WRONG. i corrected it to a factually correct version. i suggest you look at the movie before writing the plot synopsis.

eg. they do not come from a village. they come from their separate towns. the movie is a sociological comment on india, and there is a lot of local difference between villages, towns and cities.

they do not marry and then adopt the names. they adopt the names and then start to swindle. they get married much later.

they do not become famous in mumbai. much less. the movie has been predominantly set and shot in UP...and is in fact a way to promote UP tourism, since the chief minister of the state is a close friend of the two lead actors of the movie. towns like mussorie, nainital and cities like kanpur and lucknow are all in UP.

and as you have asked, Dashrath Singh is not a commissioner, he is actually a DCP (deputy commissioner of police) - he is best referred to as "DCP Dashrath Singh" which would be a very common way of taking his name in India. commissioner is the person who changes his duty in a scene just before a dance number by aishwarya rai.

2. my english has found an unfavourable assessment with you. i request specific grammatical "faux pas" instances be pointed out. grammatical deficiency or proficiency does not preclude a person's capacity to write an article. edit, yes; but not write. my grammar is stiff-upper-lip propah british grammar.....and if you have problems with that, well best-of-luck. incidentally, i teach grammar to grammar teachers, and therefore, your comments are unintentionally below-the-belt.

3. i do appreciate your desire to keep the plot short and sweet. if u want i can re-correct the synopsis to meet the twin objectives of factual accuracy and brevity.

regards
Ankur Jain 07:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

i would like to end the discussion on english with a single point. what is good for you is not necessarily good for me and vice-versa. how does one choose style for an international audience? does one go by UK o American English? it is "He and I" or "He and me" is a debate that is certainly outside the scope of this small article on bunty aur babli.

i appreciate ur point about hereon....i guess that was indeed uncalled for..apologies!

i would prefe that u watch the movie before u write the synopsis. e.g. in general i stick to my sentence "However, once they reach there, realising that their ways separate from hereon, they decide to return to their con ways." lemme explain

a. they realise - u gotta see the movie to realise that...trust me - i have a dump of the movie in the PC i am writing from....they "realise" - they have never given a thought till now..and then realisation dawns upon them, there.

b. their ways do separate - they are choosing different lives...and a slightly ambiguous word like "ways" can add to the enigma of the synopsis. i believe i am adding to the charm of the movie by letting in a word like this....this is purely a point of opinion, not language.

c. con ways is acceptable in modern english - if con artists uses the word con as an adjective, i am sure con ways can easily be fit in the same category.

appreciate ur point about UP/Uttar Pradesh

my passive language was more an outburst than anything else......a hint of sarcasm if u may :D

english/English - immaterial - this is informal discussion, not the encyclopedia....capping is a pain in general.

of/with - ok. that was essentially a sample of hasty replying than anything else.....i notice now that i had a few spelling mistakes too - <grins sheepishly>

u seem an old hand at wikipedia and therefore passionate - appreciate that...but u have more mindsets than are useful - instead of helping a person like me who is genuinely interested in expanding wikipedia to be the biggest source of information on the earth...ur tone of writing drips more of sarcasm...which is offensive. i had to say.

Islam in the United States

Listen Zora , I have asked you before to stop the covert personal attacks and snide remarks about my edits on the talk page of various articles, yet you continue. We may have different ways of seeing things in writing articles , but there is nothing to be gained by making demeaning remarks about editors' contributions. Thus I am urging you in good faith to cease the snide comments and adhere to Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Consider this your final warning Ok?--CltFn 14:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Titling sections with snide remarks as "CltFn's favorite links" or such, you know what I am talking about. You have made many such comments in Wikipedia over the past year--CltFn 01:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Indian scripts

You may be interested in this. I thoought it best to get this on the village pump forum for wider input. - Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 05:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

S'up

Hey, why did you revert my edits saying "no references for this brand-new theory"? I had two references in there!! And this theory is not brand new either, it is common knowledge that Sumerians used Crescent-star combinations for religious and social purposes. In any case, the version that you reverted to had absolutely no references!! In fact the version you put in had a fact tag in place. Contact me if you have any questions.. Baristarim 02:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I read your post on the talk page. I won't revert. I will also try to see what I can come up with. Unfortunately I never had the time to make a search for more refs because these refs came up in a debate much earlier in another article. So let's see what comes up. However, the current state also has some flaws and needs serious references like "In addition, the five-pointed star is believed to have been added later as a symbol of the Virgin Mary upon Emperor Constantine's conversion to Christianity". So I will just put two facts tags, and wait until more sources can be dug. Cheers! Baristarim 04:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Nasibi is nice name for you

I give you this name you love too much nasibi - keep it in your collection

Riya Sen

I'm sorry, but it seemed that the last message was a threat. I hope that was not the case. As for your twin assertions, let me deal with them separately - the model infobox is not offensive, and as I have said before, the fact that you find it offensive is evidence of bias on your part against modelling as a profession. Secondly, as for the scandals being against WP:BLP - let me point you to this section on the article on Lindsay Lohan. If you will notice, this is a Featured Article. I could be wrong, but my impression was that featured articles represented the best of Wikipedia. Would it then be accepted as such, had it included such blatant "violations of WP:BLP"? I realise that you are a longstanding contributor, and have done stellar work in writing/improving articles on Indian Cinema, but you have been known to err on the side of prudery. Not everyone can be right all the time. Perhaps you need to let this pass and not make it a prestige issue. Gamesmaster G-9 15:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Islam in the United States

Thanks, that public opinion section was just out of control. I traced the meat of it back to an IP editor who I believe made only those additions (the original public opinion survery post). Always suspicious on an entry with alot of edit warring / arguing. Anyway I think people have a tendency to believe that just because someone provides a reference the use of the reference is correct so they don't bother checking. The Pew survey has alot of interesting information in it actually, including a direct correlation between knowledge of Islam and approval of Islam, for instance. If one reads through it. But I'm not interested in getting into edit wars over what should be included from the survey, so you wont see me adding anything like that. Of course then I noticed some other things that could stand improvement. Hope it helped.PelleSmith 20:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently my copyediting wasn't appretiated by everybody.PelleSmith 23:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Indian culture

Why are you so interested in Indian culture? Just curious.--D-Boy 08:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Userpage protected

Hi Zora, I've taken the freedom of semiprotecting your userpage for you. The Angry Bahraini wouldn't quiet down. Just give a quick note when you want it lifted. Best, Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

CltFn

Hello Zora. Since you have dealt with user CltFn in the past, I would appreciate your comment here. Thank you. BhaiSaab ^talk 20:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Zora, I have added a new outside view to this request for comment that you may be interested in.PelleSmith 15:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Vernacular scripts

As you must have seen, there was some kind of rallying call for all proponents of using vernacular scripts. Could you go and add your two bits there. Gamesmaster G-9 05:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Kaaba

hello Zora, i have outlined why i think using the term Judaism in the relevant passage is not a faithful representation of the comparison the EoI is trying to illustrate. your feedback would be greatly appreciated. ITAQALLAH 16:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Islam in the United States

Your commentary that my addition of the word Muslim to describe the commentator who is Muslim is dead wrong. You stated: "Use of "Muslim" in that sentence is subtly POV - implies that only Muslims resent Pipes, Spencer, and their ilk - more cites needed)". No, you are dead wrong. The commentator is Muslim. Who is accusing people that he does not agree with with racism. His is discussing Islam as a Muslim, therefore, he has a bias. It needs to pointed out. Now, your wording, "their ilk" is subtly derogatory. What is ilk? Wikipedia does not currently have an article about "ilk" but I can tell from its subtle throwaway manner that is not good. If you want to quote a critic of Pipes, Spencer, et al and you do not want me to refer to that person's religion as Muslim then find someone who holds this, IMHO, absurd position. Could it be that there aren't many non-Muslims that hold this position? Probably because their are very few or zero folks who are non-Muslim that hold that position and are notable.--Getaway 22:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Vernacular scripts

Just do you don't feel left out.--D-Boy 03:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

comments needed!!!

Being fan of your impartiality, I would like to request you to comment at Talk:Criticism_of_the_Qur'an#Answering_Islam_and_Faithfreedom.org_website, which seems to be a gross violation of WP:RS, which says very clearly that: Widely acknowledged extremist organizations or individuals should be used only as primary sources; that is, they should only be used in articles about those organizations or individuals and their activities, and even then should be used with caution. TruthSpreader^Talk 15:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi

I saw your "Go Gren" comment. Thanks, I always need encouragement in complaining about the way wiki is :)

I saw this edit on Criticism of the Qur'an and was amused. Patricia Crone is now being amused because she belongs in "apologetics of the Qur'an". We certainly are a scholarly bunch. Hope you're doing well. gren グレン 19:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Before reporting a vandal, please make sure they have had some kind of final warning, as per the instructions on the page.They are unlikely to be blocked without it. Viridae^Talk 11:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

84.255.151.48

Content disputes aren't vandalism. Discuss the matter with the user, or bring it up at the village pump. --Slowking Man 11:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I have replied to your message at my Talk page. --Slowking Man 12:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Getaway

I removed the fact tags on Sikh (of course they're not Muslims, as you'd find out if you read the Sikh article) and the shooting of Sikhs (the linked article gives all the details). I also rewrote the intro. As it stood, the intro was merely about demographics. I tried to rewrite to give a more nuanced picture of American Islam. I don't have cites, at the moment. All that comes from just reading American Muslim blogs and news sites for the last few years. I am not a Muslim; I'm just interested. I'll supply refs when I have time, which I don't right now. You seem to me to be interested in painting a black picture of American Muslims. Perhaps this would spur you to do some research on the Disaffected Muslims section? It's just a matter of googling and getting references. There was one young man from Lodi, California, convicted on charges that he had attended a jihadi training camp in Pakistan and lied about it. There were also a few people from upper New York state convicted on similar charges. Also, we need something about the US shoe bomber guy -- Padilla? You might also track down Islamic Thinkers Society and Anwar al-Awlaki. In fact, if you want to scuffle with Islamists, that last article would be a good place to start. Right now it's hagiography. Zora 22:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Zora: I'm glad that you made this misguided comment: "You seem to me to be interested in painting a black picture of American Muslims." It points out many, many things, which I won't go into, but to keep the discussion relevant to this article I will point out that you do not know me personally. I have only become acquainted with your editing in the last week. You do not know anything about my politics, my religion, my race, my age, my family, where I live, where I went to school, how many children I have, how many dogs I might own, etc. You really don't anything. However, you have felt the need to comment on what my motivation is concerning my editing of the article. I want to thank you for this misguided comment because it provides me an opportunity to enlighten you. I made a series of edits to the article. That's ALL you know about me. You do not have enough information about me to make a comment on me personally or ANY of my motivations in life. Also, as a Wikipedian you are supposed to comment on the edits, comment on the article, comment on improvements to the article. You are NOT supposed to comment on me or my motivations. This is a Wikipedia policy for many, many but two are common sense. One: we are colaboratively working on the article, we are not commenting or discussing your misguided analysis of my personal motivations. Two: you really don't know a single thing about my motivations are quite honestly my motivations are irrelevant and your analysis of my motivations are also quite irrelevant, but at least comical. Now that we have dealt with that issue (please don't make me waste everyone's time going forward by having to repeat myself), let's talk about the edits to the article. You don't like my edits obviously. But Wikipedia is not all about you. You will make changes and others will come along and make others changes, wiping out your previous work. If you are not happy with that then Wikipedia might not be right for you. Now I made several changes to the introduction. I don't know who originally wrote it and frankly I don't care. It was a mess. The article is entitled, "Islam in the U.S." but all the intro did was ramble on about there might be 1 million American Muslims or there may be 2 million Amer Muslims or there might be 7 million Am Muslims, etc. It was a certifiable mess. I tried to clean it up. Now you did not like me taking out that info. But it had to be done. It was a complete mess. I tried to sum up the topic of demographics by focusing on the only real fact that we know: WE JUST DON'T KNOW how many Am Muslims there are. I was trying to leave the numbers for the body of the article. That is the way that the intro is now written and it has earned a grade "C", which is better than before when I first read it and it deserved a failing grade. Now to sum up. Don't comment on me or my motivations. You don't know what you are talking about. Focus on the article because damn well don't know a damn thing about me or what motivation me. Try to focus on the article, not me.--Getaway 19:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

My novel available

The Temple Dancer--Nemonoman 20:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Ps. Last March you asked me to tell you when it was available.

Hello Zora

How are you? You had created article Depiction of Muhammad. May I ask you, that why that article was created. There is no Depiction of Jesus , Depiction of Moses etc. I want to ask this question becasue I am in the middle of mediation about Muhammad pictures. I want to convince them that Depiction of Muhammad was a compromise to begin with so that Muhammad article has only one or so picture and those who want to see depiction can see them in Depiction of Muhammad article. However, you might tell us the real story. Please feel free to give your comment at Talk:Muhammad/Mediation directly so that we can end this mediation. You comment might help us a lot. You had created article Depiction of Muhammad may I asked that why that article was created. There is no Depiction of Jesus, Depiction of Moses. I want to ask this question becasue I am in the middle of mediation about Muhammad pictures. I want to convince them that Depiction of Muhammad was a compromise to begin with so that Muhammad article has only one or so picture and those who want to see depiction can see them in Depiction of Muhammad article. However, you might tell us the real story. Please feel free to give your comment at Talk:Muhammad/Mediation directly so that we can end this mediation. You comment might help us a lot. I am hopeful about your help. --- ALM 13:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Problem

Hariharan wants to cast people according to films and not IMDB. I said no! Cuz we guys had a big fight on this and I agreed on the IMDB format although I so don't want to. But the decision has been made. Now just bcoz Zinta is casted at the bottom on IMDB for jhoom barabar jhoom, we are not changing every movie's format. And if so, I demand Rani to be before Zinta on Veer-Zaara page then. Thanks. -- shez 10:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Types of Hajj

Your edit on Hajj involved removing an extraneous section called 'Types of Hajj'. Is it really extraneous ? I think the information is useful and doesn't seem to be mentioned elsewhere in the article. Also, there is another type of Hajj called 'Hajj Badal' (see this site) that I would like to mention in the article. May I suggest that the section be reinstated for the above reasons ? Thanks. MP (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad

Hey Zora, if you have time want to check out the reformer section? TruthSpreader is... spreading truth... and, well. See if what I say in general makes sense. He's going for the great man theory of history where anything that happened from 610 until sometime in the 700s is ascribed to Muhammad... not because we really know that but because he was the prophet. He is the reformer and because secular scholars don't believe God wrote the Qur'an then Muhammad did. I think the whole reformer idea is crap since we have no clear delineation between legacy and what the man himself actually did. Oy. gren グレン 11:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion: Ajith Kumar

Hello, Zora, I noticed that the article Ajith Kumar is in a really bad shape and kinda "possessed" by a bunch of editors, most notably King Dracula and Prince Godfather. However, Kumar seems to be a pretty notable actor in the South, so here's the suggestion: I do some revisions, provide references and remove all that stuff from the filmography, you do the final tweaks or change whatever I may have forgotten or messed up and in the end, we try to keep the article in a more or less neutral state, because frankly, I'm not sure if I'm able to keep the article tidy all alone. (Of course, you can do the major revision, too - I just thought, since you always seem to be so busy, I'd do it, but - I'm open to all kind of suggestions.) What do you think? Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 19:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Request

Before I make the request, please, let me tell that I agree to you on the model infobox issue (i.e. they must adequately sourced), and don't on the advertising issue, at least not wholesale (i.e. advertising campaigns can and should be included in case of people who derives much notability from the campiagns, but may be not when it's the other way round). I do this because I have been embroiled in dirty debate between both of us along with many others, and I don't want any bad blood here. Besides, I am sorry if I've hurt you in any way.

Now for the request. I've been stubling on to the article on Jayne Mansfield, which is in a bad shape, but am scared enough to see the amount of crap accumulated there to make substantial contribution in cleaning it up. Can you lend a hand there, may be along with some suggestions? - Aditya Kabir 16:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

reason of moving salwar kameez to salwar kamiz

Saree was analogically renamed to sari. I simply done analogically from salwar kameez to salwar kamiz. All ee and oo in foreign words should be change to i and u respectively. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wikinger (talk • contribs) 21:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

Mecca

First, I'm glad you agree that this is not a religous article, but instead is an article about the city. I've nominated this article for the Wikipedia:Article Creation and Improvement Drive. Would you please vote on it?--Sefringle 21:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Substituting warning templates

Hi, Zora, I noticed you recently warned a user using just the {{test3}} template- I just wanted to remind you that to make less server load for the substitution bots, you can easily substitute any template using the code {{subst:nameoftemplate}}- for example, {{subst:test3}}. Didn't know if you were familiar with this practice, but I just thought you might like to know, since using this will reduce server stress by allowing fewer template calls and less automated work for the bots. Cheers. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 18:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Partition

Thanks for the heads-up. I've replied on the talk page. It's so hard to keep track. Hornplease 07:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Dhoom 2

Hi Zora, thanks for the message about the Dhoom 2 synopsis. I agree that the synopsis wasn't very good, but I noticed fairly long synopses in other articles such as Don - The Chase Begins Again, so I just reverted the section to an older version that was deleted earlier by anonymous editors. Maybe we could expand it to two paras just as you suggested, and include some of the main highlights of the plot because the present article contains almost no information about the plot. Hope that's OK. :) --NithinBekal 11:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Werdnabot

Would it be okay if I configured Werdnabot to autmatically archive your talk page when the discussions become old? Your talk pages are rather long to read. Cheers! — Nearly Headless Nick ^{{C} {L}} 16:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Request again

Dear Zora, please, take a look at the Jayne Mansfield article. Even if you can't put your copyediting talents to use onthe article, at least make some suggestions. I am probably suffering from a block here. I know you're active elsewhere on WP. Please, please, take some minutes to check that article out. Yours - Aditya Kabir 16:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

RFCs

You don't need to sign your RFC's.[5] ==Taxico 17:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Al-islam.org#Full online books

Hi, Zora ... Would you take a look at this, please? It survived an AfD a year ago, but the current version has a whole new set of problems. (They'll just call it vandalism if I edit the article.) --72.75.72.174 00:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Peerreview

Zora, I have put Akhtar Hameed Khan up for peer review. Thanks for throwing some comments and opinions on the article.--IsleScape 01:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Shalwar Kameez

Dear Zora, the tag is legit, since shalwar kameez is the national dres of Pakistan and a topic very much related to it. Please don't remove it.Omerlives

How is putting a tag of Pakistan on shalwar kameez natinalism when it is the national dress of Pakistan? I don't deny that it is popular in othe countires as well. I have not bared anyone from putting any tag that are also releant. Please don't delete tags which are relevant.Omerlives 09:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Dhoti and the tags

Well it is quite laugable to even claim that Dhoti is worn in people of all religions. It is GENERALLY not worn my Muslim South Asians... You may be on this lil' anti-'Imperialist'-India crusade here, but you are taking this a touch too far... अमेय आर्यन DaBrood^© 18:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

PN Oak

well i was just going thru your contribs (no i'm not stalking you!). Anyways i saw your edits to PN Oak. Do you think this Hindutva nutjob is even notable enough to be mentioned on Wiki? अमेय आर्यन DaBrood^© 19:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Partition_of_India#Causes_of_Partition

Hi Zora, I have some questions waiting for you where I hope to settle the futile arguments that are occuring. Please provide your opinion. Thank you Gizza^{Chat ©} 01:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

In Him was life, and that life was the Light of men. John 1:4 KJV

Dear Zora,
Love came to a stable on that very special night to bring us out of darkness into His glorious light. May Jesus touch your life with gladness and warm your heart with love as we celebrate His birth. I hope you have a Blessed Christmas, Anupam^Talk 06:14, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34 KJV

Dear Zora, at this season of THE WINTER SOLSTICE, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven, no hell. There is only the natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that harden hearts and enslaves minds.
--Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 23:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

hehe, it had to be done. =) --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 23:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Bot tagging

Zora, The bot was adding Indian cinema project banner to the Indian actor pages. There is no nationalist aggression or imperialist intentions here. The bot was auto-tagging "Stub" class to the actor articles that have stub templates. Since I am having trouble making you understand why we do this, please reach folks at WikiProject Council who could better explain this. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 00:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't mean to poke into other people's affairs,but Ganesk has been doing this for along time now.The last dispute ganshk had(along with an edit war) was with user:Szhaider when he put Indian tags on Pakistani history articles.Again i don't mean to come in uninvited or anything,but Ganshk why not inform other editors of what you're about to do before randomly tagging other countries history pages with indian tags?You seemed to have upset more than just Szhaider and I by continuing this random tagging.If more than just Szhaider and I are complaining about this to you,then shouldn't it mean something?Please think about it. Nadirali 02:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

zen books

You ever read:

1. zen and the art of archery
2. zen in the martial arts
3. zen mind, beginners mind?--D-Boy 01:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Controversy?

Hi there Zora, hope you're doing OK. I noticed your mentions about a "controversy" most recently at Talk:Preity Zinta which apparently prevents you from deeper involvement with WP. Just curious, would you mind telling me what the controversy was all about? Thanks, Ekantik ^talk 07:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC), And have a good Christmas too. ;-)

please re-read your complaint.

Zora,Please re-read your complaint about Gansk and see what else has been posted since then.It seems people like you or Nadirali are lablleled "Indophbic" or "racist" if they happen to disagree with Indian nationalists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.98.241.189 (talk) 03:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

Re:Caste

Zora,

You've got it all wrong. We are NOT being casteist. Needless to say caste is used as more of an ethnic term rather than varna. Caste system as layed down by Manu has been all but dead expect perhaps in remotests of places. More of your insinuations that I am a Hindu nationalist is comical... I've published work critical of the movement [6] at a popular British blog (we are a sister blog of Sepia Mutiny).. whats more, Hindutavdis themselves are OBCs...

Mentioning caste carrys no racist/casteist connotations. अमेय आर्यन DaBrood^© 17:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

template

lolz! I saw your passionate response. I agree with your rational. Actually this template was created by someone else, and I thought that if that has Hijab in it as an entry, then it should be on Hijab article. There is nothing more. Cheers! TruthSpreader^reply 02:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way, deletion might not be a bad idea! TruthSpreader^reply 02:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi Zora. It's been a long time! How have you been? deeptrivia (talk) 07:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Rani Mukherjee

Hi Zora, you just reverted a template I added to the article (with a CAPITALISED out, which seemed pretty rude to me) Any particular reason why, seeing that it is a navigational aid, and relates to other articles? CheerioDudewheresmywallet 20:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, first of all, Rani Mukherjee has acted in some Bengali films, and the reason why I put the link there is because the movie was a notable one and she (as far as I know) is working in some more. The template, as I said, links navigation with on topics relating to Bengali films. And could you please stop capitalising, it seems rude (which I am sure is not your intention). CheerioDudewheresmywallet 20:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

All right, now I think you're just being petty. There's nothing about regional glorification here. The template says it relates to Bengali Film History, and I have explained why I think her films are notable(ie, that they are a part of resurgence in Bengali cinema). I am not trying to push a POV here.Dudewheresmywallet 20:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

It is my creation, yes, but I can't understand why that affects anything, since the reason it was created is given in the Main article. But as for Rani,fine, I am going to tale of the template for the time being til WP gets a bit busier. CheerioDudewheresmywallet 21:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:Good call on salwar kameez

Well thanks for your encouragement and affirmation Zora! I also feel that alphabetizing is the best way to go. Hopefully it will prevent a massive edit war. =) I hope things have been fine with you lately. Enjoy the holidays. With regards, Anupam^Talk 04:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess the plan backfired. Oh well, Anupam^Talk 22:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and New Year

With best wishes for you in the coming year! --Aminz 08:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Best wishes!

Hello, Zora, hey, no prob - after after all, Wiki is something we do in our free time, right? Enjoy your holidays and have a great, happy New Year! (We say "Guten Rutsch", meaning a "Good slide" into the new year.) and if you need any help with anything, maybe I can do something - though I'm not exactly very "knowledgable" with Islam-related articles. Some are war zones, I'm told. Anyway, still, all the best, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 12:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Salwar kameez

the cresent offends me as nationalistic....--D-Boy 12:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Vivah

Hello, Zora, I spend some time at the Vivah article and took the Lage Raho Munna Bhai article as role model. Could you have a look and tell me, what you think? --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 19:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC) PS. Have you seen it? Made me cringe at times, but Shahid Kapoor's and Amrita Rao's past movies showed that they had quite some screen chemnistry, IMHO.

Hello, Zora,

uhm, about the length of Viva's summary: I checked all the featured articles on movies (really, *all* of them - phew! ;)) and most summaries are even longer than Vivah's. If you'd like to cut it or rephrase it, go ahead. BTW, I put Vivah up for peer-review - let's see what happens. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 22:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Please leave salwar kameez article alone

I have seen your discussions and edits, and I have to say I really respect you for your neutrality. In my opinion, putting {{WP Pakistan}} tag in salwar kameez talk page is valid because it is a national dress of Pakistan. If you ever visit Pakistan, you'll find more than 90% people wearing it. In India, only Sikh and Pathan population wear this dress. In Middle East, this dress is the first and most recognized identity of Pakistanis. I always wore this dress in Middle Eastren countries and I never had to tell my nationality. I am Pakistani nationalist to the extent of stopping Pakistan and Islam related articles from Indianizing. I have never tried to Pakistanize any articles which have nothing to do with Pakistan. Szhaider 17:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)