User talk:Academycanada

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

Calaka (talk) 13:25, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your updates about User:Linux4ns. As he is involved in discussions, I think we can't do much as per policies. I'm presently concerned only about changes on the two lists. They should not be made unless there is some consensus on Nassab's page. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 06:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain this? Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 19:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The IP 173.206.222.117 and 128.100.14.157 are deleting info with references frequently in different pages. It seems that they are against one of the

Marjas (Grand Ayatollah Reza Hosseini Nassab) and they are deleting references related to him, without participating in discussion. Academycanada (talk) 21:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for the clarification. In the fairly unlikely event that you haven't watchlisted the page you may want to see this. Cheers, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 20:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Academycanada (talk) 08:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

None of the references you have provided are acceptable from a religious point of view. In fact, anyone can make a claim to be a Mujtahid or a Marja and announce his claim on various websites. This does not change the reality that he is not qualified to be a Marja. If this person has approval from authentic religious people or institutions, then we can discuss that. Otherwise, I can create several websites and say that he is not a Marja, and make reference to them to support my proposition.

1. There is a big deference between the websites which are create by a regular person, and the verifiable references from Hawza in Qom, university of Harvard, and official news websites, which have been mentioned above.

2. If sources of big research centers in Hawza, famous Islamic Department of important universities like Harvard, and the other mentioned sources are not verifiable, then what can be acceptable?

3. This is one of the rules in Wikipedia: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. Academycanada (talk) 06:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the difference. What I'm saying that University oh Harvard is by no means qualified to decide whether someone is a Marja or not. As you might know, there is a specific procedure that needs to be followed in order for a person to become a Marja, and there are specific procedures to verify the qulification of a person. These websites you refer to just publish the names of the people who have made the claim, irrespective of whether they are acutally qualified or not. So being "verified" (as you use the term)by big institutions in Hawza (which by the way there is none in the references) or Harvard or others doesn't prove that this person is qualified. They just verify that he has maid the claim. They are in no position to verify the "qalification" of him.

I completely understand the rules of wikipedia. People often get information from it that are not crucial, and it is no big deal if the information is not acurate. However, this case is exceptional in the sense that it deals with the religion of the people and the Hereafter. What if people are misled by this false information? Is Wikipedia going to answer in front of Allah (SWT)?

1. I mentioned the name of “Islamopedia” as the Islamic Study’s department in Harvard University, and this department embraces knowledgably experts in Islam and Islamic issues (including the concept of Marjaiat in Shiism.

2. You said: “these websites just publish the names of the people who have made the claim, irrespective of whether they are actually qualified or not”. This is not right, because the people who made the claim are more than 70 people, but names of only about 30 people who are qualified and introduced by Islamic Research Centers in Qom Hawza and other Islamic Organizations in deferent countries are mentioned in their websites, which I refer to.

3. You said: “big institutions in Hawza (which by the way there is none in the references)”. Did not you see the 8 references, or you just do not want to accept the truth? Because if you click on reference No.1, you will see list of Marjas (including name of Ayatollah Nassab) in website of “Noordir.com” which is published by the Computer Research Center of Islamic Sciences, which is one of big Research Centers in Qom Hawza.

4. The users are supposed to edit the articles according to this rule of Wikipedia, which I ask you to read it again carefully: “The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true”. This is the common rule for scientific, religious, social, cultural and other types of article. Academycanada (talk) 06:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1- Apparently you don’t get my point. The Islamic Studies department of Harvard verifying the Marjayiat of a person is like for the Howza in Qum to verify whether a person is an expert in English literature. They might have a department is English studies at Howza; however, it is not their job to do so as there are certain institutions and procedures for evaluating that. As a matter of fact, the Howza is not qualified to evaluate the level of expertise of a person in English literature. Similarly, the experts in Howza (and not Harvard University or any other institutions) are the only reliable and justifiable source for evaluating the level of expertise of a person in Fiqh.

2-Please pay attention to my words. I didn’t say that they publish the name of each and every person who has maid the claim. Also, the fact that they haven’t mentioned the name of all the people who have made the claim doesn’t mean that there is an evaluation process. How can they contact each and every one of them, evaluate their knowledge, and after that include their name in the list? That is impossible. In fact, as I said, the only way to evaluate is through scientific discussions, which has never happened in this case.

3-If you look carefully at reference number 8, the page is just a directory of Islamic websites (I’m translating the title of the page, in case you don’t know Farsi). It means that they have a directory of the people who are known to be Islamic scholars. Again, there is no evaluation process before adding the names of people to their directory. In fact, the description of the websites states that it’s just a directory and list of Islamic websites. This is just a database of Islamic websites on the net that have been collected and categorized by this institute, without any high-level evaluation. If you doubt what I’m saying, just contact them and ask about it.

4- Once again, I do understand the rules of Wikipedia. I’m just trying to avoid the consequences that might occur to the readers as a result of not being an expert in this field. People usually rely on the provided information and do investigate further. As I said, this might not be that critical in other issues, but as for religion, it might lead to deviation.

1. The Islamic Studies department of Harvard verifying the Marjayiat of a person is like for the English studies department of Hawza in Qum to verify whether a person is an expert in English literature. Both of them are valid as references in articles.

2. Beside that source, I mentioned seven other Islamic and news organizations such as Islamic Research Center in Qom and Baktashia News which are located in Iran, Iraq and other countries.

3. The mentioned sources above have published list of Marjas who are approved by them, and nobody forced them to add or to delete a name.

4. The responsibility of users is to edit articles in Wikipedia according to what is published in other verified sources, and to mention those references. If you as a Shia person want to choose one specific Marja among the list of Marjas to follow, you have freedom of choice to select one of them according to criteria which is mentioned in the Resalah of all Marjas.

5. Based on the mentioned rule in Wikipedia, if a person does not believe in Marjaiat of one specific Marja whose name is published in verifiable sources as one of marjas , then that person cannot delete his name from the list, but he/she can choose his/her favorite Marja from the list. We should respect the rules of Wikipedia. Academycanada (talk) 03:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1-Yes, they may be valid as jut references, but they are not qualified to evaluate the mentioned concepts. For any scientific evaluation, there is a specific institution in charge. None of the institutions that are referred in the article have the religious authority to verify a person’s Marjayiat.

2-Again, none of them have the authority to do so. Just imagine if a news organization become the source for verifying the authenticity of a scientific matter!

3-Although they are not forced to do so, their supposed approval is not from a scientific or religious point of view. Hoe can they actually verify his Marjayiat without having evaluated his knowledge? After a Mujtahid teaches for several years in Hawza and trains numerous students to become a Majtahid, it is proven that he is at the level of becoming a Marja. This person has been out of Hawza for many years, and he hasn’t trained a single student.

4, 5- Like I said, I do understand the rules of Wikipedia. Most probably you are not a Muslim, or if you are, you pretend not to be. To me, as a Muslim, the issue of guidance and deviation of people is far more important than the rules of Wikipedia. It is my duty to inform them this person is not qualified to be a Marja. However, at the end of the day, I can’t force them not to choose him as a Marja. The reality is that even if we assume he is a Mujtahid, one has to come to certainty that he is the most knowledgeable among all the Maraji, which is absolutely preposterous. I personally know SEVERAL Mujtahids and experts in Islamic studies who know this person and testify that he is nowhere close to being a Mujtahid, let alone a Marja!

By the way, I would be more than happy to discuss this in person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.100.14.157 (talk) 15:36, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

if you sent me that mail about whether im iranian....first of all im not irani im lebanese secondly why do you care where i live? this seems very suspicous to me especially when you have a hebrew symbol on your page i have no itentions of giving info to someone who seems to me to be an agent trying to gather information about people...where do you live and are you irani??--Bachehjonoob (talk) 15:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It really surprises me you (AcademyCanada) try to defend Nassab, considering that most probably you are not a Muslim at all. I wonder what Nassab has done to you that you feel the responsibility to defend him, even though you do not have good knowledge of the system of Marjayiat and Hawza. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.100.14.157 (talk) 18:36, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ooo im so sorry i thought it was canada who sent me. yes i dont know who he is or what makes him so interested in nasab or marjayat but he is suspicious to me and shouldnt be trusted....your in canada how is it there? what interests u in this subject exactly? r u a student there in canada? anyways if you wana help the page in any way it would be good especially if you can add all of the maraji pictures becuase no one has finished it completly i cannot o that part cuz i dont know how to.--Bachehjonoob (talk) 23:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

salaam 3alekum, If you want we should begin trying to update the maraji list and I may need your help. p.s. are you a muslim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bachehjonoob (talk • contribs) 00:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]