falah wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 12:06pm:


All of the ones I have heard about so far. I realise he always blamed the Jews, of course. Do I need to rephrase the question for you to be able to answer it, or would it be a pointless exercise anyway?

Soren, thanks for the details. They paint a very different picture to what Falah has been putting forward. Falah, if this is all in the Koran and Hadiths then surely you have no reason to cover them up or misrepresent them? You are not ashamed of them are you?

Perhaps it is time for you to explain the Islamic principle of Hudna, rather than constantly deflecting.

falah wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 8:35pm:



Yeah, we know what that means - rape. 

Falah
The oldest source of knowledge that I know about regarding the 1066 massacre in Spain is from Maimonides the Jewish scholar. He was born in Spain in Cordoba 1135 (somewhat earlier than 1906) the family fled Almoravid Spain and he wrote of that time “never have the Jews been so persecuted” I suggest falah, that you do more reading on this subject .

“If you read the whole Wikipedia entry it says this of the dubious Jewish claims of a massacre:

Many articles are under threat from supposed “Muslim scholars”. Islam has very few historians and even less of note. The present day Islam revisionist agenda is trying to sugar coat all Muslim slaughters so that your murderous cult will appeal to even more of the mentally afflicted.

“The Church is used as propaganda by Christians. Ottoman historians said that the bones were collected from the battlefield and came from the 1300 Italian soldiers who took part in the battle.”

I would like to know the source of this lie. Turks have lied about the Armenian genocide for almost a century they have no credibility. Be honest though Falah you had no knowledge of this discusting act untill I told you and jan about it.

I believe a relation of George Bush was a missionary in part of the Turkish Empire when the Christians were annihilated, he wrote a book on the persecution of non-muslims. Why don’t you find it for us so that we can both learn about the lies of the Turks.  It is in the open source arena.

"That is obviously a pretty dodgy statement. It is well documented that Jews and Christians lived peacefully and prosperously in Islamic Spain."

No it is not please check it out. The Rocky Place is still a Rocky Place.

I am sorry that at present  I offer no further links to the truth, it is due to the pressure of work.

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 9:48pm:


What we learn is that Muslims uphold their side of agreements.

Adamant wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 12:31am:



This is a crucial point among a lot of important ones.

Soren look at how the muslims are trying to change history.

Islam, Science and the Problems at Wikipedia From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam

This article discusses the problems faced by Wikipedia with its Islam-related articles.

Contents
[hide]  1 Introduction
2 Wikipedia Report 2.1 Cause of Concern
2.2 The Islamic Golden Age
2.3 Western Achievements

3 Jagged 85 Returns
4 Other problems at Wikipedia
5 Conclusion
6 See Also
7 External Links
8 References


[edit] Introduction

At Wikipedia, Islam-related articles are severely compromised by Muslim editors. An example of this is a 2010 incident where an editor with over 67,000 edits was caught intentionally inserting false information into articles. Jagged 85 had been editing there for 5 years, and his/her inaccurate edits and articles have been reproduced all over the net by other websites which use Wikipedia as a source.

[edit] Wikipedia Report

[edit] Cause of Concern

The following is a quote from the report that was filed on him:

A summary of the above is that, despite repeated requests from other editors, this editor has continued over several years to: 1. Misrepresent a source by quoting material utterly out of context; for example, see [1] or [2].
2. Report that a source supports a claim that it simply does not and sometimes explicitly does not; for example, see [3], [4] or [5].
3. Claim that a certain figure invented something or was the first to do something, when the cited source simply says that they made or did that thing, without any suggestion that they were the first to do so; for example, see [6], [7], [8], [9], or [10].
4. Take a passing comment about some connection to a modern theory and claim that the Islamic thinker being discussed invented that theory or is an important forefather of that theory; for example, see [11] or [12].
5. Report only one point from a source, even if a minor one, and ignore the contrary position it reports, even if that is the majority position; for example, see [13].
6. Rather than withdraw a claim, if it is pointed out that the cited source does not support the claim, find a source of any quality to use instead, even when that may be of much lower quality than the original source, which made the opposite claim; for example, see [14].
7. Invent claims and cite sources connected with the issue but which simply do not support those claims; for example, see [15]

In addition to such misuse of sources, this editor has also continued to:
1. Use questionable, inappropriate and unreliable sources; for example, see [16] or [17].
2. Use exceptionally poor sources for exceptional claims; for example, see [18].

The links above are just a selection of the problematic edits collected at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85/Evidence, which contains more material gathered by myself and other editors. There are yet more examples collected by another editor at User:Spacepotato/Examples of original research in Wikipedia and User:Spacepotato/Misuse of sources.
Most of the material gathered is from the history of science and technology, as that is the area in which we have tended to work but I have also collected four problematic edits from just the seven days after 11 April 2010, and mostly from current affairs and general history articles, at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85/Recent evidence.

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85

[edit] The Islamic Golden Age

Jagged 85 concentrated most of his efforts on the history of science and technology, but more specifically, his efforts were focused on the so-called Islamic "Golden Age":

as I started perusing more history of science articles, I noticed that articles such as Astronomy in Medieval Islam, Science in medieval Islam, Islamic Golden Age, and many others were utter POV-fests, essentially claiming that all modern scientific discoveries were anticipated by medieval Muslim philosophers. Articles about these philosophers (e.g. Abu Rayhan Biruni, Avicenna) read like extended hagiographies. I also noticed that the main contributor to these articles was Jagged 85.

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85/ View by certifying user Athenean

I first came into detailed contact with Jagged's edits when I looked at Timeline of historic inventions in the fall of 2009 and noticed that many of the entries in the list were facially absurd; for example, the p-n junction was said to be invented by Isamu Akasaki in 1989, and the funnel was said to be invented between the 8th and 10th centuries CE by medieval alchemists. I then noticed that over 20% of the list had been contributed by Jagged, and that although his edits were well-supplied with footnotes, the sources he gave did not verify many of the claims made in the list. This was a problem with the rest of his work as well, which has been extensive (he has over 60,000 mainspace edits on en.wikipedia at this time, as alluded to above.) I would like to emphasize that, although this problem is very noticeable in the medieval Islamic period (as this is an area which Jagged has concentrated on), it's present elsewhere as well and has afflicted e.g. List of Japanese inventions.

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85/ View by certifying user Spacepotato

[edit] Western Achievements

Unfortunately, this users edits were not limited to only the Islamic portions of articles. A lot of his efforts were also concentrated on downplaying the achievements of the Western world in various topics, and once again, focused primarily on Science:

Jagged first came to my attention through edits such as these [19], where he sought to play up scientific contributions of non-European cultures while at the same time downplaying European, and especially ancient Greek contributions [20]. At the time, I was new to wikipedia, and moreover assumed good faith [...] Following his latest burst of activity on these articles beginning in December 2009, I scrutinized his track record more carefully and came to the following conclusion: This user is on a two-fold mission on wikipedia, the first of which is to promote scientific achievements on non-European cultures while downplaying and hedging those of European cultures, and the second of which is to promote a positive image of Islam, whether through scientific achievements or social reforms. In addition to competent editing, the following problematic methods are employed: 1. Misusing a source by either completely falsifying it or else extending it completely beyond what it says.
2. Using low quality POV sources.
3. Not giving page numbers when citing a source .
4. Tendentiously re-inserting material removed by consensus long ago without discussion using misleadingly bland edit-summaries, and then edit-warring over it.
5. Pasting the same text all over wikipedia, including articles where it is not really relevant.
6. Presenting minority views as majority views.

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85/ View by certifying user Athenean


[edit] Jagged 85 Returns

Following the original report, the user had apologized (claiming the inaccuracies were unintentional) and had agreed to adhere to Wikipedia rules, only to return without his old user-name to continue his vandalism:

Athenean, I'm afraid that the person behind Jagged_85 is actually still editing, albeit no longer with that account. It doesn't look like he is planning to clean his mess up. Like: Forced conversion
Rashidun Caliphate
Reciprocating engine
Bombay (film)
Mexican standoff
Can I leave this with you to touch base with the other users from the RfC/U to do the required follow-ups, and coordinate how this can be cleaned up?
FWIW, there is a tool used by the copyright violation cleanup people, the Contribution surveyor, that might be helpful here to create a list of articles and diffs that need to be looked at (like e.g. this). You could ask one of the regulars there to create it for you.
Amalthea 08:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Athenean - Jagged 85

[edit] Other problems at Wikipedia

Besides Jagged 85, other problems at Wikipedia include the use of some very suspect and pro-Islamic secondary sources, such as Paul Vallely's "How Islamic inventors changed the world", which is used as a source to validate false (and often absurd)[1] claims of Islamic inventions in over twenty separate articles,[2] and the use of a fraudulent translation of Muhammad's 'Farewell Sermon', along with a second version, without a primary source. Attempts to add the authentic version taken from al-Tabari, Vol IX, next to the other two at Wikipedia, were met with resistance and was ultimately unsuccessful.

[edit] Conclusion

From this incident we've learn't that Jagged 85 is the main contributor to the many inaccurate Islam/Science/Golden Age articles which are still being copied and pasted all over the internet by Muslims, and that more than 20% of Wikipedia's "Timeline of historic inventions" was provided by him.

With contributions to over 8,100 separate articles, it is unlikely that all of Jagged 85's edits will ever be fixed. And even if they were, these Wikipedia articles have already been reproduced all over the net by other sites which use Wikipedia as a source.

While Wikipedia can be a great resource for general knowledge and a decent starting point in the research of Islam, this and the other examples cited above, highlight the constant problems that Wikipedia faces for Islam related articles.

This page is featured in the core article, Islam and Propaganda which serves as a starting point for anyone wishing to learn more about this topic

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam,_Science_and_the_Problems_at_Wikipedia

Yes well all this is very interesting but meaningless. Isn't it strange how god sits back giving directions as if he's making a movie or something. Do you really expect people to believe that god has a private chat with his deputy dawg where no one else can see  or hear it, no witnesses, and the mugs suck it down? More fool them. Religion is bunkum.

falah wrote on Jun 4^th, 2012 at 10:07am:


Quotes from Falah:

Quote:


Quote:


Quote:


How should we interpret this Falah? Would the southern aborigines have been better off if they knew about and used more violent strategies?