Talk:Arabic Wikipedia

Wikipedia Stub‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on February 18, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Shouldn't there be a note that the Arabic Wikipedia has a different background than the other Wikipedias? BirdValiant 04:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is User:Meno25 a bot? If not, it isn't necessary to be updating the article count every other day. Once a month would probably be enough. BirdValiant 00:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, somebody updated the article count 7 hours after the last article count update. It moved up five measly articles. Please refrain from updating the article count at least for a month or two, not 7 hours. Or if it increases a substantial number, like 2,500, or 1,000 at least. Not 5. BirdValiant 14:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's the harm. Someone is enthusiastic about the article count, and, AFAIK, is not breaking any rules. --Djihed (talk) 13:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im doing a report on Arabic language wikipedia and umm, I need aloooot more informations, but the thing is I dont speak arabic. So, does anyone have any sources I could use? -- 20:10, 4 August 2006 User:Elatanatari

Out of curiosity, what was the 20,000th article? AnonMoos 20:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Arabic Wikipedia has been trumpeting its hitting the 30000 mark, but my Arabic is rather poor, especially reading, and I can't make heads or tails of what exactly is going on. Can somebody take a look? Meanwhile, I'm putting Template:Update, just in case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lockesdonkey (talk • contribs).

• NOw it s blocked in syria...only the url that start with http://ar.wikipedia.org ,,it will be a disaster if they blocked wikipedia entirely

Unsigned-for security purposes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.6.1.51 (talk) 16:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Why not, if the editors of the Arabic wiki themselves are biased toward its content, it's not a free wiki --Stayfi (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have seen (English Wikipedians) how OsamaK (a very very very proud muslim), an administrator in the Arabic wiki, and a wikipedian on the English one, how he has spoiled this discussion page, just to ban the freedom of speech. You can imagine his doings in the arabic wiki... --Stayfi (talk) 22:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stayfi wikipedia is not a blog, and this page is about Arabic wikipedia, not about your ideas about the admin who blocked you due to your in-constructive behaviour. Please do not repate the same behaviour within the en wiki. --Tarawneh (talk) 22:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stayfi, since you have joined Ar wiki and you are making troubles. Please do not make trouble here also. --Qadsawi (talk) 09:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Ar Wiki is restricted, nd under heavy survillance by the 3 SUNNI BROTHERS, qadsawi, blame ur admins more than me, nd try to put a picture of mohamed in the Ar wiki, since u defend wiki nd it.s freedom. --Stayfi (talk) 21:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• stayfi have you discussed that with other wikipedians in ar wikipedia? if you want to put a picture of prophet mohammad in ar wiki, disscus it in the Village pump الميدان then do what the community decides to do --Osm agha (talk) 00:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• It was discussed but outnumbred by UR community, banned by a heavy islamic view (AS I've SAID) i'm blaming this orientation, look simply to the persian wiki, nd how they represent him. Again, this Ar wiki isn't free, not respecting the NPOV i mean. --Stayfi (talk) 01:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about the Arabic Wikipedia. It is not a WP:SOAPBOX for complaints about the Arabic Wikipedia. It seems that some editors (who may be the same editor) think differently. Accordingly, I've fully protected this article until a checkuser can be run to find the source of these edits, and appropriate blocks issued. This may take a little time. Thanks. --Rodhullandemu 04:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Mr Rodu, i hope i'll not be forced to ask the removing of the protection to other admins, i'm contributng to this article by facts, not complaints, ND I THINK THAT THE SECTION ABOUT BLOCKING THE ARABIC WIKI IN SYRIA IS A REAL COMPLAINT.

So, let me add references to the sunni wikipdia, as soon as possible. regards --Stayfi (talk) 09:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a sunni wikipedia, if you have problems with the sunni Administrators make a complaint to the christian Administrator LordAnibus --Osm agha (talk) 10:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm a Sunni my self, nd i saw its management, i've no less than a year on it, one christian admin isn't enough, this is a sunni wiki, see for example the persian wiki, nf if u consider shia as muslims or no, how they put pictures of mohamed there, the vagina also for detailed explanation, i'm speaking about the NPOV, not about the religion of admins, they've made the Ar wiki, simply, a SUNNI wiki. --Stayfi (talk) 10:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the place to complain about it. Nobody is going to do anything about the Arabic Wikipedia from here. The sooner you realise that and agree to stop adding those complaints, the sooner the article can be unprotected and be edited properly. And I think you'll find it difficult to find an admin who disagrees with me. Bear in mind if you continue pushing this, you can, and will, be blocked for disruption. --Rodhullandemu 10:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• This is a place for facts (I'm writting about them), see my contributions, in the Ar wiki, any article by me, not related to Islam, or the Arab politics, was not restricted, only, when i write on sensitive subjects, that people of Sunni Wahhabi background came, I know what i'm talking about, rod, nd i can read arabic...

Also, there isn't just one admin, if the majority choose to ignore it here also, it's just fine, i'll turn to the french wiki, nd the Spanish one. Regards --Stayfi (talk) 11:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stayfi, the supreme cabal denies the Truth™. What matters here is V. Rather than wiki grief add the Sunni Cabal^SC here. Санта Клаус (talk) 18:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• it's not a sunni cabal, it's stupidity cabal, which brought ar wiki to become a sunni wiki, what's the difference between the persian version nd the arabic one, since, they r 2 run by a majority of muslims, it's a sunni view simply that doesn't respect the NPOV.

i'm waiting the reply of mr rodhull, nd i'll post a new in the admins section if he doesn't. --Stayfi (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not up to me to judge the adequacy of these sources, it's up to your fellow-editors here, and I'm happy to leave it up to them. --Rodhullandemu 21:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• for the prophet mohamed pictures, it's easy to show how the block is on this article, nd compare it to the Persian wiki, the shia majority in the persian wiki, is more open minded, with less restrictions, like it's sister in the arabic one, nd it'll show that the arabic wiki, is but a Sunni wiki for fanatics, not for all arabs (christians, shia, or even sunni)

• the english article of mohamed is blocked in the UAE, but it's hard to give a reference, we'll put need citation instead

• For the Caliph othman, it's hard to put a citation, since there's no a major study about the arabic wiki in english language.

• for the medical imagery, i'll put a link to vigina's article in arabic wiki to compare it to the english one.

• Please do take a look to this website's:

Wiki Wars

Wikipedia defies 180,000 demands to remove images of the Prophet

--Stayfi (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So far no serious discussion about adding sourced content has taken place. Not to repeat the flurry of socks (and a user editing without loggin in) I'd appreciate a partial protection when the full one expires. Санта Клаус (talk) 21:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]