Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Sampharo

Call For Action

Recommended Posts

Dear all,

 

Wikipedia is known to be not the most reliable source of information, but still is a source for many, and to see the beloved Sahaba's biographies get written by non-muslims and "seculars" and hacked by those of other sects and cults is saddening. I am still cleaning up Abu Bakr's page though it still has secular guesses and worthless remarks, and unfortunately I am fighting just to make sure that the Shia views of Umar Ibn El-Khattab are not pressed onto the public as general muslim knowledge. Ali Ibn Abi Taleb on the other hand is being biographied based on Ismailiyya and Shia views, and I need help.

 

I need those who know about the sahaba to go and clean up. To remove the Shiite and secular thoughts and myths into at least sections of their own that say these are unsubstantiated Shia views. You will be opposed and it will be hard, but if you are persevere you can do something. There are limits to what a single editor can do per day (things about three edit reverts and such), and page edits are also highly determined by consensus on the discussion page, an attempt by wikipedia to arrive at knowledge through majority voting. So I need you to guys start helping. Just check pieces of information, divide the work and the sahaba amongst you. Right now Ali Ibn Abi Taleb according to their page has been cursed in Masjids by hateful Sunnis until just a few hundred years ago and Umar is responsible for Fatima's miscarriage and death.

 

Go to these pages to see for yourself, and whatever you edit, mention why and what in the discussion pages so that it sticks, and prepare for those who will reverse it and defend their views. You'll need to defend yours too. Use numbers if you can:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Umar"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Umar[/url]

and..

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Ali"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Ali[/url]

 

..are just samples, go to (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Category:Sahaba"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Category:Sahaba[/url] to find access points for most of the sahaba.

 

Would you answer the call? Consider it Jihad.

 

Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

:sl:

 

I've activated the above link for you brother, jazakum Allahu khayran.

Very important topic. Hopefully insha'Allah some of our members take part in correcting those pages.

 

:sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl: Dear Muslims

 

Hmm, Good reminder bro, Insha'Allah we'll help anyway we can, even it if means asking and providing answers and help here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: So far, the argument has been settled in Umar Ibn El-Khattab's page, but it was very reluctant from the sectarian's side. I fear sockpuppetry (assuming several aliases in a forum to create false multiple support for an opinion, used in wikipedia sometimes because many articles are driven by consensus or majority agreement) might kick in though to reverse it.

 

Here is what you can do: Go to wikipedia and register an account. Go to Umar's page as per the URL in the first post, click on the tab marked "discussion". You will find a long argument between myself and this sectarian separatist called Pashtun Ismailiyya regarding illegitimate claims of Umar -Radiya Allaho Anh- attacking Ali Ibn Abi Talib and Fatima daughter of the prophet - PBUH -, that this imaginated Shia story has been corrobarated or validated by books of Sunna. Post a comment that supports the exclusion of such drivle without having an exact page to the proper Sunni book, and VALIDATING that it is indeed a Sunni book that belongs to the "mother of books" category of correctness. Additionally, improve on the article as much as possible if you have the knowledge.

 

Ali Ibn Abi Taleb page and Uthman Ibn Affan page (find them by search) are abysmal and still need attention. Be calm and precise in your edits and always mention in the discussion page what you did and why so that administrators do not think it's vandalism and revert it. Use the help section and you'll learn how to do everything in 15 minutes.

 

If you go to the Sahaba page as mentioned in the post above you will find that the "Shia view" divides Sahaba into what they consider truthful and hypocrytes. What they consider Hypocrytes include 6 of the 10 foretold of their entry into paradise!!! Anyway, those Sahaba's pages are there and linked, and those under that specific section you will find that their biographies are vandalized by wackoes. Correct as much as you can and persevere if opposed.

 

Do what you can to honour the Sahaba and their legacy, these are men who fought and died next to the prophet, the one we cry at night for the chance of seeing on judgement day and praise his name everyday. These are men who persevered against their own innermost desires and embraced most fearsome of changes to their lives to protect the message and its messenger and to be in the ultimate path of God as it's intended. We're still a little bit more than nothing in comparison if we do everything we could from behind our keyboards and firewalls to keep away maniacs and sectarians from sullying their name. Let's not be less than nothing.

 

Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats ur handle by the way? I see an Ismaili handle repeatedly on the discussion in pink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whats ur handle by the way? I see an Ismaili handle repeatedly on the discussion in pink.

 

Yes the pink signature of Pashtun, that is the vandal of Umar's page that I was arguing with. My handle is the same as here "Sampharo".

 

Please however remember that we need to "debate with the better argument ÌÇÏáæÇ ÈÇáÊí åí ÃÍÓä" so if you get into a heated passionate argument, maintain your cool and try not to bash any of the people directly or their individual beliefs. I am just giving you a reminder because some of them are really frustrating and will attempt to trigger a reaction from you.

 

Thank you for your support of the Sahaba.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes the pink signature of Pashtun, that is the vandal of Umar's page that I was arguing with. My handle is the same as here "Sampharo".

 

Please however remember that we need to "debate with the better argument ÌÇÃáæÇ ÈÇáÊí åí ÃÃÓä" so if you get into a heated passionate argument, maintain your cool and try not to bash any of the people directly or their individual beliefs. I am just giving you a reminder because some of them are really frustrating and will attempt to trigger a reaction from you.

 

Thank you for your support of the Sahaba.

 

I have added my input. I think he is going to desist after the last exchange. Let me know if my input was what you needed, and lets keep this open for other situations where Wikipedia gets used for ulterior motives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×