38
edits
User talk:Lightyears: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Saggy
Lightyears (talk | contribs) |
(→Saggy) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
::On this, I am thinking of a section in the Scientific Errors article. Jinns were made out of fire, says the quran, which is in fact impossible. (Later I can think of a main article about jinns, or expand [[Jinn|this one]]) [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 05:32, 21 July 2017 (EDT) | ::On this, I am thinking of a section in the Scientific Errors article. Jinns were made out of fire, says the quran, which is in fact impossible. (Later I can think of a main article about jinns, or expand [[Jinn|this one]]) [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 05:32, 21 July 2017 (EDT) | ||
:::Jinns, angels, magic etc, and all aspects of the "unseen" in general is of course pure nonsense. But none of it is seen by Muslims as following the laws of physics or as a scientific matter even in principle. Where they try to explain it they speculate that it means the jinn were made of the fire's energy or it was a magical fire or any fantasy they care to indulge. It's much as how they see miracles in general where anything goes. It's a different matter when it talks about tangible beings and objects like the falsifiable creation stories of humans and mountains now that we know about evolution, genetics, plate tectonics etc. [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 18:48, 22 July 2017 (EDT) | :::Jinns, angels, magic etc, and all aspects of the "unseen" in general is of course pure nonsense. But none of it is seen by Muslims as following the laws of physics or as a scientific matter even in principle. Where they try to explain it they speculate that it means the jinn were made of the fire's energy or it was a magical fire or any fantasy they care to indulge. It's much as how they see miracles in general where anything goes. It's a different matter when it talks about tangible beings and objects like the falsifiable creation stories of humans and mountains now that we know about evolution, genetics, plate tectonics etc. [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 18:48, 22 July 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::Something created out of fire ''has to follow'' science. How does the error get solved if a Muslim says the laws of physics don't extend to it? (He could have easily said the seven heavens also are imaginary or are some invisible dimensions. how does that make and sense?) | |||
::::"Jinns were made out of fire" (15:27) is a scientific error. I guess you agree with it. Reason: To make it highly specific, fire is not a material as ancient people thought. Its a combustion process and has only a handful of well studied products (non-living). Now somebody will say they were made out of the gas etc. Sorry, living things are not gaseous. I am not quoting the hadith yet but they do teach that Muhammad saw every little detail of jinn: jinn are anthropomorphic or animal-like in their looks and behavior etc. This rules out any claims about an "unseen" creation. Maybe I will gather everything... [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 06:59, 23 July 2017 (EDT) | |||
==Editor rights== | ==Editor rights== | ||
| Line 97: | Line 99: | ||
:::Correct, he came close to converting, but saw on the page that there's no way the Qur'an could be divine.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 11:39, 21 April 2017 (EDT) | :::Correct, he came close to converting, but saw on the page that there's no way the Qur'an could be divine.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 11:39, 21 April 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::That reminds me, we should restart the apostate testimonies. still locked i guess. [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 15:27, 21 April 2017 (EDT) | ::::That reminds me, we should restart the apostate testimonies. still locked i guess. [[User:Saggy|Saggy]] ([[User talk:Saggy|talk]]) 15:27, 21 April 2017 (EDT) | ||
== Saggy == | |||
Hi, | |||
I saw that you blocked Saggy.[https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Saggy] He is a major contributor of both useful and unuseful stuff. Wouldn't it be better to put put some kind of sanction with regards to topics or editing main articles, instead of fully blocking and revoking talkpage. At least let him edit talkpage to see if he's willing to comply. I believe losing a longtime editor like him would do more damage than betterment. | |||
Thanks,--[[User:AAA|AAA]] ([[User talk:AAA|talk]]) 22:22, 9 February 2018 (EST) | |||
:Hi, the first part of the block comment relates to a page Saggy was building which had some very inappropriate content and has since been deleted by someone else https://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=WikiIslam:Sandbox/50000_Reasons_for_Leaving_Islam&action=edit&redlink=1 | |||
:The main problem is that neither I nor currently anyone else has the time to check his edits, which were very numerous and frequent. Admins past and present very much agreed that his edits need approval because while some are helpful and appreciated, many are certainly not for a variety of reasons, while others take disproportionate reviewing time and/or page length for minimal if any benefit. You bear a burden of joint responsibility when approving edits, and all this reviewing (which sometimes requires lengthy investigation) takes a lot of time, and longer still is needed for his arguing about some rollbacks. | |||
:The pending edits page only records the earliest 100 pending edits. Further ones do not appear there as the page is now full up (I may work through some of it at some point). So newer pending edits would not be reviewed even if someone has time eventually, except that when people with editing rights edit those pages in future, it is easy to not notice or perhaps care that you're approving a bunch of pending edits at the same time, especially given there was a rapidly growing backlog of pending edits scattered around the site (mainly Saggy's), and increasingly, multiple unreviewed edits to untangle for a page. As for sandbox pages, who knows what one of the many editors may approve and add to the site if asked by him when admins (there aren't any really active) and ExMNA aren't paying attention. I'm not sure if enabling his talk will allow him to make requests of other users and there are things he could change/hide that would hinder another admin from fairly judging whether and when to remove the block. | |||
:My opinion, not least after seeing the page I linked to, is that the risks to the site outweigh the benefits of unblocking, at least when there is no ExMNA supervision. I leave it to ExMNA to review the situation when / if they ever get someone for supervising the site and clearing the pending edits backlog. They know about the block, and it seems they were already aware of him given that they had previously reverted Saggy's editor rights when he got them automatically for reaching a certain number of edits. Given the backlog, he must have realised that there was a risk he was wasting a vast amount of time unless he hoped he would find someone to one day give him editor rights again so that he can approve his own edits. That's something I and ExMNA would be unwilling to facilitate for the reasons above.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 13:09, 12 February 2018 (EST) | |||
:ok--[[User:AAA|AAA]] ([[User talk:AAA|talk]]) 23:34, 15 February 2018 (EST) | |||