Talk:Ali Sina (activist)/Archive 1

message: Yuber removed quotes, I reverted because it was a rather arbitrary move.  I don't think they're necessary (the quotes) but I don't think Yuber, who is often accused of being very pro-Islam POV should just remove a disparaging quote without discussion.  So, discuss if you're planning on doing something like that please. gren 01:31, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what the problem is.  I just removed a quote that was repeated twice...Yuber(talk) 01:33, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I was reading about your injuction and was slightly annoyed that you were editting still so I didn't read.  You did a good job on this.  I have had some problem with your POV in the past but I was looking through your recent edits tonight and they were all pretty useful, so I urge you to please not violate that ruling so that they don't take more offense to your action so you can stay for at least all of the good work you do.  Once again sorry, I was in error. gren 02:54, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes 

message: since "Ali Sina" is just a pseudonym, not used outside the context of his website, this article is actually an article about a website. So I propose it be moved to faithfreedom.org to reflect that. I have my doubts about the notability of the website, and maybe there should be a vfd about it, but since we have GNAA and Time Cube, I suppose it should stay. dab (ᛏ) 12:02, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good point.  The only information we have about Ali Sina is that given from his website, which makes the topic inherently POV... but, if we can have similar cases like Ibn Warraq... I'm not sure.  I can't give what I think is right but I hope more people reply to this. gren 19:12, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: article title

message: The link to Edip Yuksel's refutation article is leads to faithfreedom.org(Ali's site) ionstead of 19.org(Edip's site) and this is biased because it is supposed to be an OPPOSING VIEW and that can not possibly come from a site which favorsthe article. I had changed the link but somebody is insiting on bias. Please refrain from such. -- user:idmkhizar
* Edip Yuksel has not published his debate with Ali Sina in his site. The link you gave was a link to Mr. Yuksel’s site, not his debate with Ali Sina. If Mr. Yuksel decides to publish his debate with Ali Sina, we can point to that debate in his site.  -White Knight
THIS IS SICK!!!
THIS IS SOOO BIASED!!!
YOU PEOPLE ARE EVIL —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.167.241.112 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 31 July 2005.
This article seems a lot more like an advertisement for Mr. Sina's website than an encyclopedia article DigiBullet 17:25, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I showed his IP (as I just did yours) because it is proper to use Template:Unsigned if an anoymous user does not sign his comment with the date and time.  If you would or the previous editor would not like your IP shown (it's already in history) then I recommend making a username.  Also, I don't believe anyone will will track down and hurt someone for saying this article is sick -- at least I should hope not. gren グレン 18:14, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias detected in the "Opposing views" section of the article 

message: criticism implies subjectivity - comments such as "His critics have alleged that he has been using inflammatory language" as opposed to "He has been criticized for the use of inflammatory language and inciting hatred" attempts to discredit those that have opposed Sina from the onset.
Also it is fair to say that historical perspective will be based on academics and not Ali Sina's view on history. It is fact that Ali Sina is an intellectual nobody. Until Sina establishes his history as fact his take on history will remain fringe.
Please learn to write with the correct grammar.
::No, they are there to make it clear that the criticism raised against him is positions and not a facts, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Both Sina's views and the criticism that has been raised against him should be presented as positions, so that we leave the decision about who is right/wrong, to the reader of the article. Try to read Wikipedias policies about Neutral point of view. Also, If you are concerned about the grammar in this article, please feel free to fix that.  -- Karl Meier 15:16, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism Implies Subjectivity 

message: Substituted at 21:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment