Talk:Ramadan riots

message: This whole article needs to be re-written, it is totally biased, and loaded againts Muslims. The riots had very little to do with Islam, although there were many, possibly a majority, of Muslims involved, but they also had many many non-Mulsim blacks, arabs, and other ethnic minorities. see this from the BBC: "the area which is home to large African and Arab communities."  Aaliyah Stevens 21:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is true that the article might have some issues with neutrality and original research, but for the most part the information in it seems to be facts supported by reliable sources. I don't seen any major issues that should make a    tag needed. As for "Arab and African communities", that doesn't mean "non-Muslim". -- Karl Meier 23:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, Aaliyah Stevens is welcome to point out any facts that are incorrect. The facts in this article are sourced from mainstream sources, news reports and public research. TimothyHavelock 05:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

text: If I believe that non-Muslims didn't participate in Ramadan events that included yelling chants such as "Allahu Akbar", "Jihad"? Well, perhaps I do believe just that, but that is not of much importance here. What I believe, think and have as a personal opinion, is not what this article is about. However, if it is actually true that the non-Muslims actually did participate in the Islamic Ramadan celebrations, then I agree it would of course be interesting. Please do present the evidence that is available to you. -- Karl Meier 19:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Exactly. As long as Aaliyah Stevens doesn't offer anything sibstantive to disprove the well-established facts that these suburbs are being shaped and framed by islamic tendencies and cultural attributes, I think I'll take the word of established and respected scholars, sociologists, historians, newsreports and statistics over the word of one single Wikipedian. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TimothyHavelock (talk • contribs) 05:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Terrible propoganda article

message: This whole topic is better served by the French riots article.  MERGE!!Aaliyah Stevens 22:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No it isn't, because the article discuss a separate issue, which is the Islamic Ramadan riots. Another thing is that the article that discuss the violent attacks that happened in France, is already quite large. It surely doesn't need more material. -- Karl Meier 22:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not credible sources? You must be joking. Are mainstream British, French, German, Dutch, Swedish and US newspaper reports not credible? Is AP and Reuters not credible? Are established historians and world renowned middle east experts such as Bernard Lewis and Martin Gilbert not credible? Are European research institutes like the Dutch Institute of Migration and Ethnic Studies, swedish  forum för levande historia, or France's top national education official Jean-Pierre Obin not credible? Are the 14+ sources for muslim opinion polls that clearly indicate shifting religious sympathies not credible? Get real. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TimothyHavelock (talk • contribs) 07:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[French riots]]