Talk:Baháʼí Faith/Archive 4

message: The current photo of the Indian temple shows little more than an outline of an award-winning design. Can someone please replace it with an image that shows users what it really looks like? --Occamy 17:42, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe the one in Wilmette Illinois? Its a bit churchy, but people may find it interesting that theres a temple in the US (rather than the Bahá'ís being a "third world cult") -- Tomhab 23:15, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: In response to my inquiry if the images of Bahá'í sites are licenced or copyrighted, the owner of the [] website writes "Ok for the use of the photos for your site. Thank you for your work for the open knowledge of human being. Eric Louvet". Is this sufficient to use some of the huge numbers of photos on in Wikipedia? Occamy 20:28, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Temple Photograph

message: "The majority of Bahá'ís live in the "Thirld World" " 
actually, the majority of the world population lives in the Third World.... should this be here? - --Cyprus2k1 08:40, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: probably not, unless the proportion is much higher than expected. I woudl also struggle to call India a Third World country,nowadays. Refdoc 08:44, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am curious to know what is the source of this statistics?  If it is the Bahá'í  headquarters, naturally, like all other religions and ideological organizations, they would have a tendency to overstate their membership. My own feeling is that the actual number of Bahá'ís in the world is probably about 50% of what the official Bahá'í claim is. Martin2000 08:59, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Bahá'í faith keeps extremely accurate records on membership.  Virtually all Bahá'ís sign a "declaration card" when they accept the faith.  In some nations, such as Vietnam, signing a declaration card can draw problems with the government and in these nations no accurate records exist to my knowledge.  Anyone formally withdrawing from the Bahá'í faith is similarly supposed to advise the administration of this, but some people simply become "inactive" as is the case with any religion. Robertbrockway 20:59, Mar 17 2005 (UTC)
As most countries do not register the religious affiliations of their citizens,  and as some countries of those who register such data, deny the legality of conversion , e.g. Iran, it would be difficult to find alternative sources of numbers. Under these circumstances numbers provided by a religious body are as reliable as anything else floating about and simply need to be acknowldeged ("acc Bahai sources..."). Refdoc 09:03, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: "...they simply need to be acknowldeged" -- is this a Wikipedia rule or are you stating your own opinion?  Martin2000 09:13, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: I just notice there has been a wholesale cull of this article recently.  It seems you did it Doctor. Are you aware that this is breaking a Wikipedia rule? Did you discuss it first and then cull massively or you just decided to do it on your own?  Martin2000 09:17, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: really, what is a "wholesale cull"? :) - --Cyprus2k1 09:25, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: btw, wikipedia "rule" (etiquette actually) : Dont flame..
A cull is a mass slaughter of e.g. a cattle herd in the face of a danger - e.g. an illness or risk of starvation. You kill many to ensure the survival of the herd. And Wholesale cull is the same a bit bigger.... :-)
The need for a "mass cull"  in this text obviously was twofold - firstly continously dublication of discussion and secondly frequent messages form the software that the page is too big. So sometrhing had to go tto satsify the software and I do think dublicated stuff is the first to go. Refdoc 09:36, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographic Extent 

message: yesterdays edit war betwen anonymous, were probably the same user using proxies (my guess)... how ridiculous.. :\ - --Cyprus2k1 08:08, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: heh left hand versus right hand? -- Tomhab 14:41, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  yesterdays edit war 

message: This is about Ariadoss's recent edit including details about the international bahai council etc.
Is this really necessary given that we go into it this much detail. Isn't it covered in the Orthodox Bahai Faith page enough? Certainly not trying to discourage Ariadoss - it looks all correct and the more we can add to Wikipedia the better, but if its covered by other passages I'd say the best plan would be to have a small summary of events. -- Tomhab 23:38, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the article is too big, i think the "The Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh and division" section should be more short and then with a link to a article talking about it in more detail (as is being done with the biographic articles. what are everyones else opinion? - --Cyprus2k1 09:13, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with you Cyprus -- Tomhab 10:43, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remeyite details 

message: What exactly are people protesting against??? This just seems to be pedantic and for the sake of it.
If there is a specific part you don't like revert that one bit. At present we are adding and removing a whole day's worth of small edits (almost all of them negligible to any POV, just including grammar and URL corrections). It's unlogged-in IPs too...
Also the pictures come back now........ -- Tomhab 10:41, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just got to add that non-discriminate reverting IS vandalism. -- 144.32.177.119 11:34, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: Oh and for the last few edits 144.32.177.119 is me. -- Tomhab 12:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert revert revert 

message: Due to continuing edit wars I have protected this page.  This does not represent any opinion on the situation. violet/riga (t) 19:41, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh fun. Is there anything that can be done to at least reprimand the IP that keeps reverting (more than the 3RR rule)? Also can it be classed as vandalism (since its long been agreed by Bahá'ís and others alike that the photo doesn't belong). -- Tomhab 21:07, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: nope I'm pretty sure that the IP is a set of open proxies and due to a flaw in the wiki software we can block them all all you can do is push them over the 3RR rule then get them banned (yes this is the kind of edit warring that is officaly dissaproved of).Geni 21:49, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am entering the fray here, having gotten involved a little earlier on the Bahá'u'lláh page. I believe an image towards the bottom of that page, or a link to it should be there, and have placed links to the 2 available candidate images on the talk page myself, but agree that there is no need for any image of Bahá'u'lláh be on this Baha'i Faith page at all. It was posted here by someone who seems intent on offending Bahá'ís, and most of the users involved here seem to be far more respectful of their practices. ~ Achilles 22:38, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: Damn the Wiki and its open ethos malarkey -- Tomhab 00:18, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: Check out Bahá'í timeline. Just added it. Feel free to add in new things or expand stuff. Please don't provide lots of detail though - the page is getting pretty long already. Besides thats what other articles are for. -- Tomhab 15:45, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Bahá'í pages 

message: Similarly, I've just added a page on Bahá'ís in India on analogy with Islam in India, Jews in India, and Christianity in India. Please look it over and add and emend – and once the page is un-protected, would it be possible to insert a link to Bahá'ís in India from here? Cheers, QuartierLatin1968 03:35, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: India

message: We're at 39kb which is double the maximum target size of 20kb Wikipedia:Article_size. This section is for people to discuss what needs to be converted into a new article.
I suggest much of the history, and backing up of the history. Example of the history of the covenant, and chunks from the Bab, Baha'u'llah and Abdul-baha pages. Basically most up until (but not including) restrictions on publishing would go under my knife. I'm happy to do much of the work (although I'm sure others will put back in sections they believe were inappropriately removed). Opinions? -- Tomhab 15:14, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Any opinions? I don't want to do this just for someone to tell me I'm wrong and revert it all. -- Tomhab 02:43, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles size 

message: Please note that WP:3RR rule applies to everyone, however "good" his/her motives are. Please also note that continous edit warring can lead to page protection, invariably on the "Wrong Version" Refdoc 01:17, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert war 

message: Damn.  Why is the page protected?  I want to make some changes.  Can someone unprotect the page? I am getting impatient with the Bahai censorshipmeisters and the incompetent low-IQ admin who has made a career for himself in Wikipedia by hanging around the Bahai articles where he doesn't even have the slightest qualification on the subject matter.  Martin2000 22:05, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah leave it for a while and let the mysterious person who was using the proxy IPs chill off don't you think Martin? I mean no-one wants an edit war right? By the way, calling the admins low-IQ doesn't generally help encourage them unprotect it... -- Tomhab 22:08, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: I protected it and I'm not gonna unprotect it tonight, thanks to that comment.  violet/riga (t) 22:14, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotect the page 

message: While we wait for the disputes over the Bahá'í Faith page to settle themselves, can we please change the top photo of the Dehli Temple? It is a poor photo of the building and it seems to have a numbing effect on the brain (mine at least). This temple is probably the most recognisable Bahá'í thing after the shrine of the Bab, and I therefore recommend [] as a replacement image. The site owner has given his permission (see his message under Temple Photograph section above) and I could not find a more interesting image of the temple on the site. Alternatively we can follow the pattern of most of the religion articles by using the nine-pointed star; but I can't find a suitable image. FYI, here is the list of images on the pages of the major religions.
*Juadaism: Star of David, Menorah
*Hinduism: OM symbol, old temple, new temple, symbol on woman's forehead, young boy brahmachari , huge gathering of Hindus, temple, Hindu ascetic, yoga practioners, dancer, Hindu god Shri Ganesh, cow, symbol, ivory statue of Lord Rama
*Zoroastrianism: temple
*Buddhism: statue of Buddha; statue of Buddha, engraving of the Buddha's first sermon, Buddhists praying at temple, Buddhist monk, statue of Buddha; statue of Buddha, painting of a monk, young Buddhist monks, Buddhist flag, hallway in Calfornian temple
*Christianity: Cross, Ichthys symbol, chart of main branches
*Islam: Masjid al-Nabawi mosque in Medina, Kaaba
And while we are at it, can we have something other than the photo of the Book of Laws? Occamy 19:21, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ignoring the fact that we can't change this for a while, I think the change looks good. And yes if we can get a Bahá'í logo for the top that would be good. Nine-pointed star, greatest name or something recognisably Bahá'í would be a good idea. -- Tomhab 22:06, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading through Wikipedia copyright guidelines. I am unsure whether it would be appropriate to use images from www.bahai-biblio.org. How paranoid should we be about appropriate/fair use of images? --Occamy 17:32, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos Revisited 

message: As I'm bored and the main page is locked, I thought I'd do a bit of spring cleaning. Taken out a few topics and archived them (bits about the biographies and the vote). A little tidier. Needs a lot more doing, but I'm not that bored. If you're worried about where they've gone they're in the relevant archived bits up top. -- Tomhab 22:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving 

message: We seem to have a problem. 
The one (or two) people most opposed to forming concensus and compromise and getting the page in reaosnable form, are not posting or participating in the discussion. 
Martin, in particular simply deletes everything posted to his talk page. and does not comment here. 
What do we do NOW? Rick Boatright 06:53, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've lost track has there been an RFC yet?Geni 14:47, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: I made a point of personally inviting Martin2000 and Amir1 to the party. So it's not as if they don't know about it, unless their ISP(s) crashed just like mine did today. Occamy 18:58, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Errr sorry if this is a stupid question but 24 or 245 hours? I'm just wondering if he's waiting for his ban to run out, or if he's lying low for a couple of extra days -- Tomhab 18:37, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: 24Geni 08:45, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Martin in his Nitro000x is not reverting THIS PAGE too. on subjects which we had reached a consensus on. Rick Boatright 17:15, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  lack of progress on dispute resolution 

message: Eleven days is long enough. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:14, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotected

message: 69.160.150.226 has deleted whole sections without explanation or justification. After all the sweat and tears that have gone into them, do other users agree that they should be restored and then edited as needed? --Occamy 17:26, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Too late its gone. That was enough deletion to be vandalism. -- Tomhab 22:52, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 69.160.150.226

message: There seems to be an ongoing revert war related in some way to the one on Bahá'u'lláh.  Protecting because it's getting a bit pointless.  In the meantime, please discuss edits and I'll perform those that gain consensus. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:14, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected

message: :"The Bábí Faith has its own scriptures and religious teachings, but its duration was very short. According to the Báb, His primary purpose was to prepare the way for "Him whom God shall manifest," the one promised in the scriptures of all of the world's great religions."
would perhaps be better phrased thus:
:"Although the Bábí Faith has its own scriptures and religious teachings, Bahá'ís believe its duration was intended to be very short.  In their reading of the Báb's writings, he declared his primary purpose was to prepare the way for "Him whom God shall manifest," the one promised in the scriptures of all of the world's great religions."
There is still a small community of Babis / Azalis / Bayanis who obviously read the Báb's writings differently, which makes it a little un-NPOV to phrase a comment on the Báb's dispensation being short as if it were fact, I think. Arvind 23:46, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. If anyone can actually point to a community of Azalis that would be interesting. There are definitely none in Cyprus and haven't been any for decades. -- Tomhab 09:32, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I knew one some years ago, and he said there were a few thousand of them in Iran and a few families in Famagusta, aaround the places associated with Subh-i-Azal / Mirza Yahya.  They tend to call themselves Bayanis.  Juan Cole makes a small acknowledgment of their help in his translation of Subh-i-Azal's treatise on kingship. Arvind 19:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Well... I lived for several years in Cyprus and from what I've heard from the local Bahá'ís in Famagusta, they know all the relatives of Mirza Yahya (its a small place) and they all consider themselves no different from other muslims apart from they had a "Muslim holy man" of a relative. Take that how you will - I personally have never met any of them. I guess that could be just a sweeping statement. -- Tomhab 21:26, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I put the links on the Talk:Bab page, but there is always www.bayanic.com and Nima's yahoo group Bayan19.   You might go look at those for modern Azali's, but on the Bayan19 group at Yahoo she clearly admits there is not CONTINUITY to the older Azali groups, and that this is her attempt to RESTART the Bayanic movement. Rick Boatright 22:29, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In the 1960s, the Azalis published an edition of the Panj Sha'n , so there clearly is a community which has some continuity.  It's interesting that Azal's family said they were Muslims - it's possible that they're practising some form of taqqiya which apparently survived amongst the Azalis.  The bayanic.com website (thanks for the link, Rick!) seems to have a piece about Subh-i-Azal written by his granddaughter. --Arvind 16:39, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Errrrm I'm not sure, maybe its just a case that the younger generations associate themselves less with someone who died so long ago... Thats always been my hunch. Then again the same could be said about Bahá'ís... -- Tomhab 17:17, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Learn something new every day.  I've been reading that name since his publication of his translation of the primal points will and testiment back in ??2002?? - but never saw a gender term.   Oh well.  Thanks for clarifying.  I'll need to re-wrap my brain on that one.  Rick Boatright 17:39, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Hmmm The number 500-5000 that I've read in Peter Smith's Concise Encyclopedia could be counted as "few remaining Babis" - There may have been millions or at least 100,000s during the time of the Bab. Interesting that we've just had a visit from the friendly neighbourhood Bayani by the looks of things. Check Bahá'í and Universal House of Justice history pages. -- Tomhab 21:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOVing the section on the Báb 

message: For those who haven't noticed, I've started up a lot of new articles (see Category:Bahá'í-related stubs). Although not the greatest reason I found out that whilst there were only a handful of Bahá'í stubs there were several hundred Islamic ones and wanted to get more Bahá'í stuff on wikipedia. Ends justifies the means I hope. Anyway, with the aim of making this more of a community project if people would like to read through it and make any edits they feel, go for it. I really should be doing more work though... 
Oh just to add. I've started using the terms Bayani where normally I'd use Azali (as they seem to prefer that term) and Subh-i Azal where some might use Mirza Yahya. Any commentry on the decision would be nice. If poss, I'd like to get a set standard to be used across wikipedia as using one then the other gets confusing. -- Tomhab 23:39, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lots of new articles 

message: The chronology has been deleted from the article but I think that the article needs a short chronology to provide a sense of perspective to developments in the Bahá'í Faith. This would be in addition to the detailed chronology listed elsewhere. --Occamy 13:09, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah well - go ahead and revert it -- Tomhab 13:16, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Others may agree with the deletion; there is no need for a hasty revert and it is a minor issue from my POV. --Occamy 20:32, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology 

message: I've been doing a kind of copy edit on the article today - and I came across the point where the article talks about Abdu'l Baha's death, then jumps straight into talking about schisms, covenant-breakers and Guardians before mentioning Shoghi Effendi.  I think it read better this way - it goes from Abdu'l baha's death to ABs Will, the appointment of Shoghi Effendi, then him dying without leaving a will, and then all the sections about Bahá'í controversies come in.  If anyone disagrees with me - feel free to be bold in your edits!  PaulHammond 12:45, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
It's not clear why the link to Minor Bahá'í divisions has been removed from the article. --Occamy 20:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A (minor?) restructuring