Talk:ʻAbdu'l-Bahá

message: It is strange that  is removing a correct news. There was fire at the Shrine of Abdul Baha which has also come in news and also videos and photos of the same are available.--Asad29591 (talk) 08:19, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't strange. It's covered elsewhere and it linked. Smkolins (talk) 11:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Fire in Shrine of Abdul Baha

message: Replaced removed link, Baha'is all the time come in and like to do that, but is is a very frowned upon and also if the removal takes away an alternative view then it messes witht eh neautral pint of view that is required in wiki articles both of which can definately cause problems.
: such "alternative" groups are very very small and are already mentioned in the main article, mentioning OBF everywhere is like mentioning "Potters of God" on every Chrstian related article - --Cyprus2k1 07:59, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: no, the comparison is not the same. Potters of God don't exist anymore. Orthodox Bahais still number in the thousands, which is approximately 0.1% of the Bahai community worldwide.-Mavaddat 01:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no evidence that the OBF has anything remotely resembling these numbers of adherents. And if it did manage thousands, then WP:Undue weight would still apply. MARussellPESE 06:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed link

message: This is one of my two favorite photo's of Abdu'l Baha.  Please leave it.  It's one of only two I know of where he is smiling.  Thanks Martin!!!! Rick Boatright 22:19, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quite difficult to find good pictures of Abdul Baha smiling. The truth is that he was really happiest when talking with the believers, but the majority of his ministry was spent suffering from the disunity in the world and the disloyalty of the covenant-breakers. Dr. Youness Afroukteh speaks a lot about this matter in "Memories of Nine Years in Akka" (an incredible book) that when Abdul Baha would come in to speak with believers that came to visit him he was visibly heartbroken and weary, but that when  speaking with the believers he would warm up and begin to smile and laugh and even joke, because being around the believers who he loved and loved him never failed to warm his heart and gladden his spirit. Peter Deer (talk) 15:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nitram Photo edit  - Please leave it 

message: Can we change the title to take away the dash? So... change the title from `Abdu'l-Bahá to `Abdu'l Bahá Cuñado  - Talk 00:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the Bahá'í usage is with the dash, see http://reference.bahai.org/en/ -- Jeff3000 00:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  naming 

message: I thought it was odd that his wife and children are not mentioned anywhere in the article, so I added a bit.  But it would be more useful if someone could fill in the details better.  Also maybe a new page just for his wife or something.  Not sure how much detail exists on her. Wjhonson 23:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I too am interested in this particular topic, especially regarding Munirih Khanum, who I notice there has not been a wiki article written regarding. Peter Deer (talk) 15:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  His wife 

message: There is a very long article by or about Abdul in the Washington Post about 1911/2.  When I get a minute I'll try to transcibe it.
 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wjhonson (talk • contribs) .
:I can't get to the link, it goes to to a login screen. -- Jeff3000 16:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a subscription-based service.  I think a few months ago we had a discussion on WP:RS or on WP:V about whether fee-based services could be cited, etc.  But at any rate, this service provides actual photo-images of old newspaper pages, so I'd have to read it and transcribe it, which takes a while.  The service itself is about $300 to $400 a year iirc. Wjhonson 01:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What kind of copyright is related to those? I think they would be interesting. Would you be able to post the image as a reference? Cuñado  - Talk 02:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Wjhonson 02:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for posting it. -- Jeff3000 04:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newspaper 

message: "Abdu'l-Bahá's given name was `Abbás Effendí, but he preferred the title of `Abdu'l-Bahá (servant of the glory of God)."
This is not historically correct.  Effendi is just an honorific, like Khanum.  Abdu'l-Baha took that name upon the death of his father, when members of his family objects to some provisions of His Will.  Does anyone else want to work on making this paragraph more accurate?  Balyuzi would be a good place to start.--I'm Nonpartisan 02:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, my understanding is that Effendi is his "family" name. Last names came late to the region, so people got to choose. MARussellPESE 23:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

text: This is a wonderful and interesting topic. Actually, is there a wikipedia article regarding honorifics and titles in Arabic, Persian, Turkish, and further into worldwide Islamic society? I have yet to find it but I think that it would be exceedingly informative, especially to western individuals such as myself who are seeking to understand more about eastern society, either for the purpose of better understanding one's own religion or for simply promoting unity between the peoples of the world. Peter Deer (talk) 15:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abbas Effendi 

message: In the second paragraph, it states that the Tablets of the Divine Plan spread the faith beyond their persian roots. This seems rather inaccurate to me, as at the time the tablets were published the Baha'i s had already spread from Iran, to Iraq, to Turkey, to Israel, and all throughout the middle east. I'm going to make a minor change to this (Middle Eastern roots) but I'd like to see it rewritten by someone else. Peter Deer (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. The Faith had already spread to India prior to `Abdu'l-Baha's tenure. MARussellPESE (talk) 00:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Persian Roots" 

message: The page says Munirih Khanum is the daughter of Mirza Muhammad Ali; that name is incomplete, and gives the impression that he is the same person as Abdu'l-Baha's half-brother. The correct name of her father was Mirza Muhammad-'Ali Nahri. There is more information about her easily obtained in the Ocean program, just type the word "Munirih" into the search box and it brings up her memoirs. Brent Poirier  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.117.7 (talk) 10:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Munirih Khanum 

message: The article says that He married Munirih Khanum in 1872, this is incorrect as Abdulbaha married in March 1873. He was 28, she was 25.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrjames 9999 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage 

message: I'd like to once again address the term Effendi. This was, as far as I am aware, not part of `Abdu'l-Baha's given name. As mentioned by I'm Nonpartisan, Effendi is an honorific. It was particularly used in Turkish areas such as Turkish Palestine. I believe he was born Abbas, not "Abbas Effendi." He was known as Abbas Effendi in Palestine. Is there any historical source saying he was born with the name or title Effendi? I know of none. - Parsa (talk) 17:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is true that in most cases it is an honorific. However, it is entirely likely in this instance that the name was given to Him at birth, in the same manner Abdu'l-Baha Himself is historically noted as insisting that this be done with His grandson, Shoghi Effendi. In terms of historical documents, in all documents I've seen He is referred to in one of the following ways: Abdu'l-Baha (which He chose for Himself), Abbas Effendi, Ghusn-i-Azam (in reference to His birth) or simply Aqa (in itself an honorific). But I am not an expert on the rules and customs of Persian and Arabic naming, so it's entirely possible that Effendi is not part of his actual name, but if it is an honorific it is one He had from very early on. Peter Deer (talk) 21:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

text: I studied Middle East history and Arabic pretty extensively in college. Yes, Effendi is an honorific implying high class in Turkish society. Yes, his given name is `Abbas. Just as Baha'u'llah's name is simply Husayn-`Ali. I think the piece you're missing is that throughout the 19th century people around the Middle East started taking last names because there was a dramatic increase in the movement of people, and the tradition of last names was strong in Europe. Most people already used their craft or town with their name, so you were `Ali Baghdadi, or `Ustad `Ali. The change was that these names became official in documents as people traveled. Much like people coming into Ellis Island had to choose a last name, sometimes out of thin air. It's clear that at some point, I'm not sure exactly when or where, `Abbas chose Effendi as a surname, and all his family used it from then on. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 16:42, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see some documentation on that.  What is the name used on the passport that the pictures were taken for in Adrianople.  A passport name would be the formal family name.I'm Nonpartisan 00:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Well, I just stepped over the the Baha'i Encyclopedia Project page, and Abbas Effendi is what is used there, that's a final answer for me.  http://www.bahai-encyclopedia-project.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81:abdul-baha-abbas-1844-1921&catid=36:administrationinstitutions&Itemid=76  —Preceding unsigned comment added by I'm nonpartisan (talk • contribs) 01:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effendi 

message: I would think it be prudent to expand the "exiles with his father" section a bit more. It's very short and these were some of the pivotal years of `Abdu'l-Bahá's life. Someonething similair to the Bahíyyih Khánum or Ásíyih Khánum article? --Lizzie1988 (talk) 23:23, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. That period covers Baghdad, Constantinople, and Akka far too quickly. This is the period when he gains some of his titles, in the change of fortunes of the community in Akka, as well as significant aspects of his station following Baha'u'llah's death and early difficulties in succesorship - but finding sources covering the periods in detail and with authority and facts must be adhered to. It's much more than three short paragraphs. Smkolins (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

text: and of course newspaper coverage like Abdul Baha Prays in Ascension Church and many more.... Smkolins (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  One more:  Wiki-uk (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeap - I also recall Abdu'l-Baha in London. Smkolins (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm also champing at the bit for World Order, I know one person who has a box of back issues next to a scanner, part of the Heritage Project ongoing at Media Services, but I don't know if that's the plan for getting them online. The first book that tried to be very specific about the travels of Abdu'l-Baha was 239 Days, but it's been out of print for many years and many other books have been published since.  Promulgation of Universal Peace is great as a historic document of the time, but there's some missing days in there.  The same Heritage Project is digitizing all sorts of audio, thousands of tapes, and I bet there will be some interviews and personal rememberances in there, just jewels ready to find.I'm Nonpartisan 05:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I even found a parody -  from Stephen Leacock.Smkolins (talk) 14:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's live! - See `Abdu'l-Bahá's journeys to the West - Still lots to do but it's been suggested to go ahead and post it so more hands can easily access to improve. Smkolins (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanding 

message: *Another thought I had about expanding is to take the Journeys_to_the_West section into it's own article with a survey of the trips/talks and events during the trips - sources include Juliet's Diary, Paris Talks, Promulgation of Universal Peace, Portals to Freedom, and others. Has anyone seen a chronology of any depth of his trips - where he stayed, who he met with, etc.? I recall there being painting of Abdu'l-Baha for a time in a hotel at Niagara I think.... Smkolins (talk) 22:28, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: and of course newspaper coverage like Abdul Baha Prays in Ascension Church and many more.... Smkolins (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  One more:  Wiki-uk (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeap - I also recall Abdu'l-Baha in London. Smkolins (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm also champing at the bit for World Order, I know one person who has a box of back issues next to a scanner, part of the Heritage Project ongoing at Media Services, but I don't know if that's the plan for getting them online. The first book that tried to be very specific about the travels of Abdu'l-Baha was 239 Days, but it's been out of print for many years and many other books have been published since.  Promulgation of Universal Peace is great as a historic document of the time, but there's some missing days in there.  The same Heritage Project is digitizing all sorts of audio, thousands of tapes, and I bet there will be some interviews and personal rememberances in there, just jewels ready to find.I'm Nonpartisan 05:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I even found a parody -  from Stephen Leacock.Smkolins (talk) 14:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's live! - See `Abdu'l-Bahá's journeys to the West - Still lots to do but it's been suggested to go ahead and post it so more hands can easily access to improve. Smkolins (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Journeys to the West

message: *
*
*
*
*
*
Smkolins (talk) 02:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's live! - See `Abdu'l-Bahá's journeys to the West - Still lots to do but it's been suggested to go ahead and post it so more hands can easily access to improve. Smkolins (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Partial List of Refs for First Journey

message: Regarding the phrase in the first section: "and his Will and Testament laid the foundation for the current Bahá'í administrative order." (I have not made any changes to the article. I just want to see if there is agreement about this.)
Perhaps it might be more complete and true to what it says in the Bahá'í writings to say that it was Bahá'u'lláh who laid the foundation for the Bahá'í administrative order (established the Houses of Justice). Then some wording could be used to indicate that 'Abdu'l-Bahá, in his Will and Testament laid the foundation for its current (or present) form. Servant of Baha (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: possibly - however while certain features were certainly set by Baha'u'llah it is Abdu'l-Baha which delineated crucial features of Bahá'í administration as we have them. Perhaps it would be more useful to borrow from the language of that page - that "the Will and Testament constitutes one of the four so called Charter documents delineating the features of Baha'i administration".Smkolins (talk) 00:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is not a discussion forum.  Please move this discussion somewhere else.  The talk pages are meant for discussions on the contents of the page as specified by reliable secondary sources.  Reliable sources are those published with editorial oversight such as academic publishers and peer-reviewed journals, and the above is all original research based on interpreatation of primary source religious material and that type of material is not permissible in Wikipedia.  Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Administrative Order 

message: this might be useful for noting his death - , ,  --Smkolins (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  tributes on death of…. 

message: Why is the picture the one where he is old, and not the on at age 24. Abbas Effendi is often referred to for his good looks, and the image is also more common in Bahai usage. 89.242.129.234 (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ? Source? Considering almost every picture of him is from his later years I severely doubt it. --Smkolins (talk) 23:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Already sourced as [23] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%60Abdu%27l-Bah%C3%A1#cite_note-lotoae-23 .78.148.67.220 (talk) 23:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: 1923 - that's a very old source, and wasn't that high a quality one even then. If you search google images for Abdu'l-Baha you see very few of him young, and very many of him older.--Smkolins (talk) 23:37, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry - it was published 1912 (not 1923) when hardly any other pictures of him had been published. --Smkolins (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Only Bahai sources refer to his being designated KBE due to "humanitarian work" related to sharing of grain from his storage.  On the other hand, contemporary British sources give a different reason.  According to Harry Charles Luke, an official in the British Colonial Office who served as assistant Governor of Jerusalem, `Abdu'l-Bahá "on the 4th December, 1919, was created by King George V a K.B.E. for valuable services rendered to the British Government in the early days of the Occupation."  He was ceremonially knighted on April 27, 1920, an event which was prominently reported in the Star of the West.  Regards, A35821361 (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: First, your excuse is " By "later scholars" you mean Bahais, who had a vested interest in depicting the leader in a positive light, and not merely as a lackey of the British." which is NOT the reason I reverted and then you say "the reason given by a British colonial official is more believable than a Bahai apologist." MacEoin is not a Baha'i nor an apologist. And more specifically judging whether a statement/source is more credible than some other statement/source is a scholarly question. That's why Wikipedia raises scholarly sources as the higher reliable source. Smkolins (talk) 11:23, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Alessandro Bausani is the source for your reversion, not Denis MacEoin. As you may be aware, Bausani was a prominent Bahá'í who served on the Italo-Swiss National Assembly and later on the National Spiritual Assembly of Italy for twenty years.  Bausani served as a delegate for the first election of the Universal House of Justice in 1963.  MacEoin, on the other hand, is a former Bahá'í and an academic who was declared an "apostate" by Momen.  Regards, A35821361 (talk) 13:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually on digging, the only version of the iranica article I can find doesn't make any case of why the knighting happened. I found another. But further, your accusing me what I mean by later scholars fails "good faith" principles of wikipedia. I wasn't thinking of Bausani - please stop placing your presumptions on me. I don't go checking the religiosity of the sources to judge their soundness. Nor should you. Second, as I said, academic sources trump political ones - it is a judgement call to say whether a government action is sincere or serving some other ends for example. Academic sources can look at many factors or proofs of a thing and make a broader case one way or another. Such is the case with the new source - I don't really know why the previous source was originally used (perhaps the original version of that article made the case but the only version I could find doesn't to my reading) and in any case a PhD has a higher reputation than an encyclopedia and a later work has a higher reputation than an old one. So from my pov you are promoting a fringe idea on an article with content that has no place for it. Show me comparable sources that credit your view or pull your presentation back where it belongs which is not here.Smkolins (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You weren't thinking of Bausani, you actually cited him as a reference, although you seemed to think you had cited MacEoin when in fact you hadn't.  The British colonial officials explicitly stated why the knighted `Abdu'l-Bahá, no reason for you to go "digging" to find a narrative that fits your agenda.  Regards, A35821361 (talk) 10:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at your words. My thinking wasn't my thinking? And the cite was bad - the version I found stated no reason whatsoever for the knighting. It was just stated as a fact. And that doesn't fit my finding a scholarly effort and you failing to find a scholarly effort either. Use better thinking.Smkolins (talk) 02:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason for his knighthood 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on `Abdu'l-Bahá. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110101163638/http://www.oneworld-publications.com/pdfs/Encyclo_Baha.pdf to http://www.oneworld-publications.com/pdfs/Encyclo_Baha.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The whole tone of understanding needs reflection based on the majority understanding, not some obscure theoretical unreferenced definition attempting to reason someone through a pov that is not the majority pov. This approach violates policy of neutrality and dependence on sources so I reverted it.  Smkolins (talk) 07:58, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "This translation of the ''Kitáb-i-'Ahd'' is based on a [[solecism]" 

message: See MOS:POSTNOM: "When an individual... seldom uses their post-nominal letters..., post-nominal letters should be omitted from the lead, and their titles described in the main body of the article." 
As `Abdu'l-Baha never used the title, and is not known for the title, it doesn't need to be in the first sentence. The lead mentions: "The war removed the openly hostile Ottoman authorities with the British Mandate, who knighted him for his help in averting famine following the war." and in the body of the article: "For this service in averting a famine in Northern Palestine he received a knighthood at a ceremony held in his honor at the home of the British Governor on 27 April 1920."
Further details are in Political objections to the Bahá'í Faith (I think the difference in dates has to do with when the paperwork was filed vs the party): "Accusations of ties to the British also arise from the knighting in 1920 of `Abdu'l-Bahá, then head of the religion, by the British Mandate of Palestine.[46] According to Harry Charles Luke, an official in the British Colonial Office who served as assistant Governor of Jerusalem, `Abdu'l-Bahá "on the 4th December, 1919, was created by King George V a K.B.E. for valuable services rendered to the British Government in the early days of the Occupation."[47] According to a recent PhD, however, `Abdu'l-Bahá, received this award in recognition of his "humanitarian work in Palestine" during the war, especially his distribution of grain from his personal supply, which averted a famine in Northern Palestine."
Comments? Cuñado ☼ - Talk 00:19, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeap. If the subject needs specific attention it needs scholarly attention if the information is not itself balanced and only presents a point of view. Smkolins (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-nominal letters 

message: Taking up 's challenge ("...actually making the MOS for Baha'i articles..."), here is my proposal:
----
Expressions or names are spelled different from their normal English spelling if all three of following conditions are met:
# The expression or name is found with that spelling in the glossary at the bahai.org website, currently https://news.bahai.org/media-information/style-guide/ – or whatever updated digital version of that guide if it uses unicode characters, and is accepted as such by consensus
# The spelling is not explicitly forbidden by the WP:AT policy
# The expression or name is only, or nearly only, used in connection with that faith (i.e. it has no common or widespread usage outside that faith)
For usage of the expression or name as (or: in) an article title there is a fourth condition:
# redirects from common and less specialised alternative spellings of the expression or name should be existing
Examples:
* Bahá’í World Centre, not Baháʼí World Centre, nor Bahá'í World Centre (the last two should be redirects per the 4th condition)
* "children's classes", not "children’s classes" (found in glossary, but fails 3rd condition)
----
--Francis Schonken (talk) 11:02, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: just to say… I literally cannot see the typographical difference in the first two which goes back to my problem with the whole enterprise along with do I type a ', the only easily available character, to make valid entries in the wiki context? Smkolins (talk) 11:50, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Re. "I literally cannot see the typographical difference in the first two" – Well, neither can I. But computers know the difference, e.g. take the second of them, what is between the double quote marks here: "Baháʼí", copy these six characters, and paste them in the search field (upper right hand side) of this page: http://whc.unesco.org/ – now hit the little magnifying glass, to initiate the search. Results: zero. Now repeat the same operation with the first of these two, "Bahá’í" – 3 results. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:05, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not saying there isn't a difference but what is the point of a change no one but computers can see? Moreover every time someone hits save there is the potential it changes the characters even inadvertently. Below I also detail a specific case where the pageviews counts are broken by at least some of these changes that I'm not even sure are correct with respect to the effort being taken where ʼ and ' are in Baha'u'llah as linked. It seems to break something specific. Then we have the case that pageviews of articles are broken from their histories under other names. It's getting to be a mess. Smkolins (talk) 12:11, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Re. "...what is the point of a change no one but computers can see?" – it's people who use search engines on websites like the UNESCO website. If people see diacritics which they don't know very well how to type easily & correctly, they'd copy-paste the expression from where they found it into the search field, which is much easier, and avoids errors due to typing yourself, of course. Also, it is respect for people engaged in Bahá’í Faith, if their glossary says that's the way to spell it we shouldn't be doing something much more complicated than copy-pasting, with the complicated procedure only achieving something which, according to the bahia.org's pages, is incorrect (and indeed sends search engines searching where they can't find anything): it is very disrespectful to use such an "invisible" cloak as using a typographically different (but to a human eye invisibly so) letter, which obfuscates which content important websites like UNESCO's might have on the Faith. To give a comparison (while I have no connection whatsoever with Bahá’í Faith), I'm quite a fan of the music of Leoš Janáček, I'd be appalled if someone wrote that name as Leοš Janáček, with a typographical difference which is not visible to the naked eye, but makes the Wikipedia article unreachable. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style guide 

message: I'm seeing two different marks being used. Is that *correct*? Or is this a script problem? Smkolins (talk) 11:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if the typography is correct, and thanks for the less and hope it makes its way into the MOS entry, care to raise the issue with whomever maintains the pageviews system? Smkolins (talk) 13:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  from [[World Order of Baháʼu'lláh|World Order of Bahá<u>ʼ</u>u<u>'</u>lláh]] and [[Gleanings from the Writings of Baháʼu'lláh|Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá<u>ʼ</u>u<u>'</u>lláh]]

message: also it would be nice if MOS Bahai orthography existed for people to refer to since it and variations are being used to justify things. And is it ironic it itself is not using the new MOS? Smkolins (talk) 11:45, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we need an MOS specifically. It would mostly be a repeat of the Baha'i orthography page. My experience with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Arabic is that the MOS requires upkeep and maintenance. Since there is a published standard for transliterating Baha'i words, it's pretty straightforward. Now that we have the Unicode figured out, there's not much left to talk about. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 17:16, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

text: I agree consistency is good. I also note that the variations probably come from a mix of people doing what is in front of their eyes to do and the keyboard setting defaults on their computers and versions of Windows, Macs, and Linux might easily strongly vary. Smkolins (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Bahá’í spelling|MOS Bahai orthography]] 

message: I'd also love if someone could check if we didn't just create a bunch of dead links across the internet. Smkolins (talk) 11:46, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: And redirectly should hit the final page but url syntax is not trivially tolerant of syntax like this. It often breaks and through changes like this could be dropping urls as going nowhere all across the internet. Smkolins (talk) 13:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: links

message: It looks like we *are* are *not* creating more convoluted urls - 
:(old) …Talk:Arc_(Bah%C3%A1%27%C3%AD) vs
:(new)…Talk:Arc_(Bahá%27%C3%AD)
Smkolins (talk) 11:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: more convoluted urls

message: I can appreciate there was a lot of what seems like manual work doing all these migrations and changes. I've done a lot of work creating content for years so I know both the monotony and discipline it takes to do a lot of work like this. So yes Kwamikagami I see a lot of effort on your part to make this happen. Clearly it means a lot to you. I hope it means something to the breadth of humanity. I could ask that it was piloted and examined for results alittle more. Smkolins (talk) 12:15, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: industry

message: As I mentioned above, we can insert characters directly, <ʻ>, <ʼ>, but that's difficult for us editors to see. Or we can enter them indirectly via their Unicode numbers, or use the templates  and . Both of these would be easier for editors to see and possibly to type. There was an objection to doing this before, but I thought we might revisit it. I'm happen to go through all the articles I edited and switch one to another. 
The templates even work in page links. Cf. 
Baháí Faith
— kwami (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct coding vs templates