Wikipedia... just rated B?

[virtualeye]

AssalaamuAlaikum,

I wonder brothers put a lot lot of text here, but nobody gives any time to put some good material about Islam in wikipedia.

Wikipedia is being rolled by nonmuslims but yet it is the highest ranked source for many articles searched at google.

For instance, the topic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah is not very detailed and hence it is B rated article.

Wassalaam.
VE

 

[samiha]

wa alaykum salam.

sometimes i personally see Wiki as a waste of time. I see the importance, and that a lot of ppl go there for information, but when i see all the usless discussion in the other pages it just gets me angry.

From a Muslim perspective... how can you ever have a NPOV????

i suppose it's just what kind of person you are.

 

[Ahmed_2000]

salaam allaikum ,

allah does not mean god .. allah is the name of god

Illa means god not alllah .in the Torah they still have allah there and it doesnt mean god . its the name of god.

 

[Ahmed_2000]

salaam allaikum

i dint read the whole thing .. uuuuuhhhh

Wipedia is such a trash

 

[virtualeye]

AssalaamuAlaikum,,

That was my concern, that the trash is highly ranked in google and were are getting a huge loss becuse of misinterpretation of Islamic articles at the top page of google.


I totally agree with this user at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:His_excellency

I am also fired at this situation, but how wonder how to tackle the problem when wikipedia is at highest rank for many many topics related to Islam.

Either all the Muslims from wikipedia would have withdrawn or a considerable number of muslims would have fought the battle of arguments. I think there will be some muslims who will not withdraw from there. And the second option is not there (as there are very few muslims)

I understand that wikipedian think that they must add some trash to every good POV (Point of View) to make it look like NPOV (Neutral point of view).
Is it neccessary to throw some splashes of mud on your bright clothes so that others dont feel complex?

Anyway, my only point is that: wikipedia can not be made NPOV, but we could have fought the battle at a better level to make Islamic articles not look so miserable.

Wassalaam.
VE

 

[Mabsoot]

:salam2:

Some people feel that the Addition of Lies, Distortions makes things Neutral.

That is not Just with what the non-Muslims do, but also some Muslims are inclined to talk and act like that too. Particularly when it comes to the mistakes of certain groups and individuals who do Shirk and Bidah etc.:astag:

The Truth is the Truth, there is never any middle ground when it comes to Islam.

As Muslims we should spend our time bettering ourselves, making our own family and friend better.. and then help others, bring new articles, ideas from the scholars, make new media and address issues on our terms.

Wasalam

 

[NewMuslim]

Walaykum Salaam
I try to change things at wikipedia, but then my edits are reverted because they're "NPOV". I find it VERY hypocritical when someone could continously add their criticism of Islam on that site (WITHOUT references) and then when anybody tries to answer it without references, their edits are reverted.

As in the article Muhammad. Look at the page, and at the top you'll see a picture of him, face unveiled! I suggested a solution in the Talk page, and others say to take the picture down and replace it with a veiled one, but the people there say "then the article won't be POV".

All religions on wikipedia are respected but Islam. It sounds like a whiny statement, but just look at the articles on Christianity or the Bahai Faith or Baha'ullah's article (where his picture was put at the bottom of the article with a warning, yet it wasn't claimed to be "NPOV"). Then look at the articles on Islam, and the 100 + articles criticizing it. Afterwards, look at people trying to give the answers to the criticism and their efforts being reverted because it somehow made the article "NPOV".

I want to join the "Muslim Guild" which aims to improve Muslim articles on wikipedia.

Sometimes, I just want to throw something at my computer and hospitalize the admins on wikipedia. It seems I'm not alone

 

[virtualeye]

AssalaamuAlaikum,

I am currently participating in the article "Muhammad" (SAW) too. And I am usually angery there and people ask me why I am so incivil, while they use their sweet civil knives. I had been banned two days ago and again being threatened for banning.

I will either leave wikipedia or will be banned.

Wassalaam,

VE

 

[kayleigh]

Wikipedia is good for a quick answer on something that doesn't matter much, or for looking up dates. Otherwise, I've been taught to avoid it like the plague. My history teacher flips out whenever he sees anyone using it as a source or just using it, period. Since people can add whatever they want, it's not a very reliable source. Even with fact checkers, there's so much material there's no way anyone can make sure everything on it is 100% true. It's best to use another source.

 

[virtualeye]

Walaykum Salaam
I try to change things at wikipedia, but then my edits are reverted because they're "NPOV". I find it VERY hypocritical when someone could continously add their criticism of Islam on that site (WITHOUT references) and then when anybody tries to answer it without references, their edits are reverted.

As in the article Muhammad. Look at the page, and at the top you'll see a picture of him, face unveiled! I suggested a solution in the Talk page, and others say to take the picture down and replace it with a veiled one, but the people there say "then the article won't be POV".

All religions on wikipedia are respected but Islam. It sounds like a whiny statement, but just look at the articles on Christianity or the Bahai Faith or Baha'ullah's article (where his picture was put at the bottom of the article with a warning, yet it wasn't claimed to be "NPOV"). Then look at the articles on Islam, and the 100 + articles criticizing it. Afterwards, look at people trying to give the answers to the criticism and their efforts being reverted because it somehow made the article "NPOV".

I want to join the "Muslim Guild" which aims to improve Muslim articles on wikipedia.

Sometimes, I just want to throw something at my computer and hospitalize the admins on wikipedia. It seems I'm not alone

AssalaamuAlaikum,

Brother NewMuslims,

I agree and my reactions are even reflected in my posts on talk pages there.

Even it is not recommend by many muslims to do edits on wikipedia being it is trash, but if you are interested in edits then I would just recommend one website I visited and liked
http://www.cyberistan.com


The special thing is that this website is awarded by Encyclopedia Britannica for good and neutral references and it yet it is a purely an Islamic website.

so you can use references from this website and when sombody tries to reverted your edit then you can tell him that this website is encyclopedia awarded website etc...

wassalaam,

VE

 

[virtualeye]

Wikipedia is good for a quick answer on something that doesn't matter much, or for looking up dates. Otherwise, I've been taught to avoid it like the plague. My history teacher flips out whenever he sees anyone using it as a source or just using it, period. Since people can add whatever they want, it's not a very reliable source. Even with fact checkers, there's so much material there's no way anyone can make sure everything on it is 100% true. It's best to use another source.

Yes, many Muslim editors have also left wikipedia. But I was just pondering about one point, i.e. Even if we leave wikipedia, it will keep on decieving people about Islam. So better option would be to keep the content at less deceiving by fighting there.

But anyway, I am also sick of the environment there because there are very less number of Muslims to support me.

Wassalaam.

VE