Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
User talk:Saggy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Rain/miraculous
| Line 175: | Line 175: | ||
::Strong errors are long since covered so we have only these. We can rearange them within their section as I think i said. Another site "islamfrominside.com" says everything is about Badr but Wikipedia does not say so. Apologists have four effects of rain to explain infact. The last "feet" one differs in translations. Anyway, The whole miracle about Badr is wrong. The error began with "Allah caused the rain" itself. He cannot cause it, it just happens. If he caused it, what was he doing in much bigger battles in future? Testing believers? How long will he do this? [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 00:05, 18 April 2014 (PDT) | ::Strong errors are long since covered so we have only these. We can rearange them within their section as I think i said. Another site "islamfrominside.com" says everything is about Badr but Wikipedia does not say so. Apologists have four effects of rain to explain infact. The last "feet" one differs in translations. Anyway, The whole miracle about Badr is wrong. The error began with "Allah caused the rain" itself. He cannot cause it, it just happens. If he caused it, what was he doing in much bigger battles in future? Testing believers? How long will he do this? [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 00:05, 18 April 2014 (PDT) | ||
:::Although you do great finding interesting verses/hadiths I have to say this: | :::Although you do great finding interesting verses/hadiths I have to say this: | ||
:::''"Strong errors are long since covered so we have only these."'' - then I would rather not weaken the article with less stronger verses. The problem is when people post the article somewhere and someone points out the excuses like I showed, its discouraging for the person who posts the link. If the errors are strong they cannot be refuted in any way. This page is one of our most popular pages and its critical for it to be a good page. In fact, you see the under construction template at the top. The article needs to be reviewed and fixed so we can get rid of the template. | :::''"Strong errors are long since covered so we have only these."'' - then I would rather not weaken the article with less stronger verses. The problem is when people post the article somewhere and someone points out the excuses like I showed, its discouraging for the person who posts the link. Then they have to work through the rebuttal and point out things like you did - many people are not as committed or may not know what to say. If the errors are strong they cannot be refuted in any way and it makes it easy for the other person who posts our link. This page is one of our most popular pages and its critical for it to be a good page. In fact, you see the under construction template at the top. The article needs to be reviewed and fixed so we can get rid of the template. | ||
:::''We can rearange them within their section as I think i said.'' - sorry I forgot about what you said earlier. So what did you say, how should it be arranged? Lets see how we can do this and keep the stronger errors in one place and the weaker ones in some kind of "misc" section. Should each section have its own Miscellaneous section, or do we collect all of them at the bottom in one section? I'm thinking about the latter. | :::''We can rearange them within their section as I think i said.'' - sorry I forgot about what you said earlier. So what did you say, how should it be arranged? Lets see how we can do this and keep the stronger errors in one place and the weaker ones in some kind of "misc" section. Should each section have its own Miscellaneous section, or do we collect all of them at the bottom in one section? I'm thinking about the latter. | ||
:::I made a link on your user page: [[User:Saggy]]. | :::I made a link on your user page: [[User:Saggy]]. | ||
:::One of the most critical goals we have to take care of is to increase the quantity of good-quality editors. If you have any suggestions let me know. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:16, 18 April 2014 (PDT) | :::One of the most critical goals we have to take care of is to increase the quantity of good-quality editors. If you have any suggestions let me know. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 17:16, 18 April 2014 (PDT) | ||