User talk:Farah: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
(→Rewrite: new section) |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
{{Quote||According to Warner, there are two key principles that underlie [Islam’s political system]: duality (particularly moral dualism) and submission (to the hierarchies Islam imposes).}} [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 06:06, 15 January 2014 (PST) | {{Quote||According to Warner, there are two key principles that underlie [Islam’s political system]: duality (particularly moral dualism) and submission (to the hierarchies Islam imposes).}} [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 06:06, 15 January 2014 (PST) | ||
== Rewrite == | |||
Hi Farah. I only had a quick look through so far, but your changes look great. Thanks a lot. You've listened to the points I made and edited it accordingly. I will take a proper look and clean it up ready for the mainspace soon. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 12:39, 1 February 2014 (PST) |
Latest revision as of 20:39, 1 February 2014
New pages
Hi Farah. You cannot create pages for all Warner's short booklets (even if you did, you'd need to look at our other pages for books and bring them up to their standard). I would suggest creating a single page with a list of books available there, accompanied with a short description. --Sahabah (talk) 04:53, 9 January 2014 (PST)
- I've deleted those pages you created for the booklets and moved the list page to a sandbox for you (see: User:Farah/Sandbox). You've no doubt viewed many of our articles, so do you really think what you created was an acceptable standard for us? Take a look at our Tabari page[1]. In comparison, the page you created was pretty useless, consisting of a copy/pasted bio and a few links. Wiki formatting was even largely ignored. You are free to carry on working on that page in your sandbox. --Sahabah (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2014 (PST)
Hello again Farah. I don't mean to be a pain but we are trying to keep opinions, sensationalism and politics out of our pages. This means that there are multiple problems with your summaries. They do not read like summaries but opinionated, sensationalist and politically driven essays. There should be no talk of "political correctness and multiculturalism" or calling Islam a "supremacist political system". Or you should not be providing your own take on each booklet's subject matter. These are not essays or book reviews. For example, take a look at this book summary. It's old, so it is not perfect. But it is a lot closer to what we are aiming for. It is not us making claims. We are simply describing what the author says and what the book is about.
Conversely, let me quote what you wrote for Self-Study Course on Political Islam, Level 1, 2 and 3 and see how many claims you make and how opinionated and sensationalist it sounds:
There is almost nothing there we could save. Or look at what you wrote for the introduction:
The bolded text is really all that would be acceptable. So all we would be left with is:
If the "Two key principles" is a major thing in Warner's writing, they should be mentioned somewhere, but not in the way you did it. You wrote:
What you should have wrote is something like:
--Sahabah (talk) 06:06, 15 January 2014 (PST)
Rewrite
Hi Farah. I only had a quick look through so far, but your changes look great. Thanks a lot. You've listened to the points I made and edited it accordingly. I will take a proper look and clean it up ready for the mainspace soon. --Sahabah (talk) 12:39, 1 February 2014 (PST)