User talk:Abanima

Welcome...

Hello, Abanima, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome! Startstop123 (talk) 17:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any interest in dermatology? I am always looking for more help ;) Regardless, thank you for your work on wikipedia! kilbad (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear merciful heavens! I didn't realize there was anybody out there more crazy than Holocaust deniers; but these people are even more serious fruitcakes than the deniers (albeit less harmful, I guess) or Young Earth creationists. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I thought I'd welcome a fellow parasitologist. If I can help out in any way please drop me a note on my talkpage. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I felt I should remove your recent edit Vector (biology) because I wasn't sure if you are aware that Vector exists. Please see Talk:Vector (biology)#Merge disambiguation pages for what I think is a problem that needs to be fixed. Johnuniq (talk) 02:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Abanima, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of M. Haroon Abbas Qamar - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. NW (Talk) 21:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Arabic Wikipedia is in certain respects a very strange place, but my Arabic language skills are really not good enough for me to understand all the politics that apparently goes on there, and I'm not sure I have any strong opinion on the general current edit war on the article page (just made a reply on one partcular subject on the discussion page when I thought I had something useful to say). AnonMoos (talk) 01:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

London Buses route 72, an article you contributed to, is now up for deletion, you are welcome to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 77. Okip 15:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

not obsolete: just click and see yourself

That's what I did. The background is white/pale color, just like here.--Ancient Anomaly (talk) 11:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is how it looks in my browser: [1]--Ancient Anomaly (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article ثالوث seems to have been completely taken over by disapproving Muslims (even though they could have used لاثالوثية instead), while Christians seem to have been forced into a corner at تثليث (since الثالوث الاقدس was previously disallowed)... If your Arabic is better than mine, maybe you could do something to unravel this tangle... AnonMoos (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article ثالوث has not been "fairly stable" at all, but was very very different only a month ago, before "Rafy" began taking a heavy hand: [2]. For five years before the advent of Rafy, it was continuously mainly about the Christian Trinity, as can be seen from the history listing. It's really rather ridiculous that currently Christians are not allowed to have ثالوث, not allowed to have الثالوث الأقدس, and not allowed to have تثليث, but are forced back into a minor obscure corner at تثليث (مسيحية). It's also somewhat ludicrous that article ثالوث is exclusively about religious uses of the word, yet Christianity is given very short shrift, only mentioned briefly at the end. Also, the idea that the main meaning of the word ثالوث is "tritheism" really does not accord with the meanings of this word which are listed in my dictionary. It's things like this that some people probably have in mind when they complain that Arabic Wikipedia is "dominated by Islamic fundamentalists". Unfortunately, my Arabic is really not good enough for me to understand the various currents at Arabic Wikipedia, but it sometimes seems to be a very strange place. I kind of gave up on my very limited attempts to edit Arabic Wikipedia when a user who is apparently very respected there (though he tries to maliciously confuse people about his username) insisted on excluding a perfectly legitimate image from القوة الجوية العراقية without giving any real reason why (I see that the image is now on the latest version of the article), and when I was discouraged by not being able to find any Arabic translation of "naval jack", no matter how big and comprehensive the dictionaries that I searched in...[3] -- AnonMoos (talk) 15:39, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also semi-strange that a basic mistake like this one [4] was not noticed or fixed for six months! -- AnonMoos (talk) 15:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to wear out your patience more than I already have, and I don't blame you personally for anything, but Rafy really did not "improve" anything at all, but rather hijacked article ثالوث to be completely about something else, based on a premise which is rather dubious at best (i.e. that the main meaning of the word is supposedly "tritheism"[sic]). The current situation, where Christians are excluded from all the main articles on the main Arabic-language words and phrases which are commonly used to refer to the Christian Trinity, and instead have been forced back into an obscure minor disambiguation title تثليث (مسيحية), is really not at all satisfactory or adequate, and is the kind of thing which convinces some people that Arabic Wikipedia has blatant crude biases and strange internal politics. It wouldn't be of any use for me to attempt to fix the situation myself, because my Arabic-language skills are not up to the task, and I already wore out my welcome on the "Embassy" forum there trying to get a very simple and blatantly obvious problem with القوة الجوية العراقية fixed (which turned out to be of no use whatsoever), and Aram33 does not appear to have been able to change anything, so I thought I'd mention it to you... AnonMoos (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

لماذا تحذفون تعديلي في القرن 13 ه ؟ ابحث في جوجل و سوف تجد الديوان و تاريخ إنشائه موجود فيه GhiathArodaki (talk) 05:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

هل تقوم بمحاولة إغاظتي أيضا ؟ لقد سألتك و لم أتهجم عليك أو أزعجك حتى هنا تريدون إلغاء تعديلاتي و مقالاتي لقد قرفت شئا اسمه ويكيبيديا GhiathArodaki (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]