User talk:Snowsky Mountain

Hi Snowsky Mountain! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 22:03, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Snowsky Mountain. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hi

i saw what you did to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Gear article. i appreciate you taking the time to add in all the details to the original list. before it was just a couple of bullet point lines of the names and then the second section below where it was a small blurb on only some of the watches, i decided to delete that just leave the list of links so people choose to go to the article they want, instead of reading a short orphaned blurb on that page just below the list. what you did was integrate the small writings sections below to the list above, now it is more readable, that is great.

YipC (talk) 19:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Snowsky Mountain (talk) 13:51, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Huawei Mate series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CES (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know! I just fixed that. Snowsky Mountain (talk) 17:01, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited LG G series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sprint (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! I just fixed that. Snowsky Mountain (talk) 14:05, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Snowsky Mountain. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Snowsky Mountain

We're working to measure the value of Wikipedia in economic terms. We want to ask you some questions about how you value being able to edit Wikipedia.

Our survey should take about 10-15 minutes of your time. We hope that you will enjoy it and find the questions interesting. All answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be anonymized before the aggregate results are published. Regretfully, we can only accept responses from people who live in the US due to restrictions in our grant-based funding.

As a reward for your participation, we will randomly pick 1 out of every 5 participants and give them $25 worth of goods of their choice from the Wikipedia store (e.g. Wikipedia themed t-shirts). Note that we can only reward you if you are based in the US.

Click here to access the survey: https://mit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eXJcEhLKioNHuJv

Thanks

Avi

Researcher, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy --Avi gan (talk) 02:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for the information! I had been the original author of that material (although there may have been minor copy-edits by other authors in the interim). I will keep this in mind for the future, however! Snowsky Mountain (talk) 20:46, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Snowsky Mountain

Yesterday I noticed that you removed my edits on

Hello, that edit that you mentioned was simply me undoing some intermediary edits. As you can clearly see, my edit (or reversion, rather) was because a significant amount of relevant content had been deleted. My edit was to undo that deletion and restore the older version of the page, as that page has seen vandalism before. As for al-islam.org, that is a reputable website that includes content from other publications. It is not simply user-generated content, and is no less reputable than Tabari (which could be considered a religious source, like al-islam.org). I apologize for not providing an edit summary for that edit on Yazid I; as I mentioned before, that edit was to restore the page to an older version as relevant content had been removed. I will try to be more careful in the future. Best, Snowsky Mountain (talk) 17:52, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanted to revert the deletion by the IP, which came after my revision, you could have simply undid his revision. But you went to restore the revision earlier to my edits. Also, the deletion by IP was justified to some extent, as it was strong POV with phrases like "infamous for killing Husayn" and "destroying the Kaaba". As such, your intention seems to undo my edits as well, and put back in the unreliable sources and POV stuff you had previously included. And this is not the first time you have done so. Previously, you had restored POV at Husayn ibn Ali that I had deleted earlier. al-islam.org is editable, you can edit it by registering an account, just like Wikipedia, RationalWiki or Conservapedia. These sources can not be used to support anything on Wikipedia, except when something is added about these sites. Tabari, on the other hand, is a historical work, not a religious book pushing a religious doctrine. AhmadLX (talk) 18:15, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How are phrases like "infamous for killing Husayn" and "destroying the Kaaba" POV? If someone destroyed the Kaaba, then the phrase "destroying the Kaaba" is a perfectly acceptable statement to describe that person's actions. Snowsky Mountain (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See

WP:LABEL. Also bring the neutral and reliable sources that say "He destroyed Kaaba". If you find one, explain "according to XYZ(s) he destroyed Kaaba" rahter than portraying that Wikipedia considers him having done that, unless there is consensus among historians that he did it.AhmadLX (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

There is a general consensus that he did; there's even an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to that: Siege of Mecca (683). Snowsky Mountain (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He sent the army to recapture the city. I will rephrase it for you: Bring the sources that say "Yazid sent army to destroy Kaaba" or that "Kaaba was destroyed on his orders". AhmadLX (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the article you mentioned, states (and I have verified from the sources cited) that it is disputed if Syrians burned the Kaaba. According to some sources it was Syrians, according to others it was Meccans who inadvertently did this. If you notice, the article doesn't take sides, instead it presents the view points. That is NPOV. AhmadLX (talk) 19:55, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please reply to my comment on

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.. The thread is Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Lead_Section_of_Yazid_I. AhmadLX (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Snowsky Mountain (talk) 22:44, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@

Tafsir al-Kabir by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi

.

The Sunni position on the issue is that Ali was not nominated Imam or Caliph. So when you say Uthman pledged allegiance to him "what does that mean" wrt to Sunni view? Of course by writing that you want to say that they accepted him as Caliph, Imam or whatever. AhmadLX-)¯\_(ツ)_/¯) 20:51, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am simply stating what the sources say. There are multiple Sunni sources listed on that article that clearly state that Uthman pledged allegiance to Ali at Ghadir Khumm. Snowsky Mountain (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you verified from those sources? As far as I can see, there is no Hadith number specified. Alternative is to give full bibliographic info (edition, ISBN etc) with page number. As they stand now, they are unverifiable. AhmadLX-)¯\_(ツ)_/¯) 02:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The volume and page number are already there. Snowsky Mountain (talk) 16:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

of which edition? AhmadLX-)¯\_(ツ)_/¯) 18:02, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Snowsky Mountain (talk) 12:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Snowsky Mountain. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Succession to Muhammad at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 23:45, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Snowsky Mountain, while copy-editing I visited the article at

Saqifah and found it was identical to the section in the above article (compare this with this. Since Saqifah is marked as the main article for that subject, I replaced the text there with my copy-edited text and summarized the section at Succession to Muhammad. I'll probably do the same with any other sections that have articles with identical text. Feel free to revert my actions if you wish; I won't repeat them if you do and I'll stay at Succession to Muhammad. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:32, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for letting me know! And thank you for all your help in copy-editing the page; I really appreciate it! Snowsky Mountain (talk) 03:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; i should be back at it tomorrow. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:22, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cerebellum -- Cerebellum (talk) 19:20, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply

Hi Cerebellum, thanks for letting me know! However, after re-considering it, I do not know if it would be appropriate to nominate that page at this time. Is there anyway to cancel the review process for now? Best, Snowsky Mountain (talk) 02:19, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, just saw this. Unfortunately I already conducted the review. If it's ok with you, I'll fail the article to conclude the review, with a note explaining the circumstances, and you can renominate any time. How does that sound? --Cerebellum (talk) 18:25, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds great, thanks! Snowsky Mountain (talk) 02:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet, if you ever renominate feel free to let me know and I can review it for you. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:49, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Snowsky Mountain. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm}} template.— Etchubykalo (talk) 08:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, thanks for letting me know. I didn't get the content from the page

Attack on Fatimah's house. It was content that I myself had added previously but had been removed when the entire page had been revamped. Thanks, Snowsky Mountain (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Wanted to appreciate that you fixed my edit, I didn't really mean to remove any information but my stupid clumsy fingers did some weird ghost magic garbage. Thanks for re-adding the diagram, though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrustyCaverns (talk • contribs) 14:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]