Difference between revisions 1269098 and 1269112 on enwiki

I ran a Google test on this new entry, and its closely related variants. It returned some 7000 hits, so it passes the Google test.

[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=islamofacism+OR+islamofascist+OR+islamofacists+OR+%22islamic+fascism%22+OR+%22Islamo-fascism%22 Google search on Islamofacism and related spellings.]


----
text from ''Islamfascists'' below:

(contracted; show full)

Wikipedia is not a forum for facts? Maybe that is why my excellent, FACTUAL contribution keeps getting deleted?[[User:JoeM|JoeM]]

: Wikipedia is not a forum for ''proving or disproving'' facts. It is of course a forum for presenting facts according to NPOV. That Islamofascism is evil is not an undisputed fact. That some consider it evil is a fact. That others consider that view evil and racist is another fact. Etc, etc. -- [[User:AdamRaizen|AdamRaizen]]


-----
I agree wih the others JoeM. If there is something relavant to intellect for general knowledge then have at it, but you are spewing war rants to encourage violence, JoeM. [[User:Kenneð|Kenneð]]
⏎

⏎
----
You can say all you want that there is a moral equivalency between the firefighters who died on 9/11 and the Islamofascists who flew those planes into the skyscrapers, but so far not one person has been able to challenge any of the facts in my article. [[User:JoeM|JoeM]]

: You've written very few facts, it's all un-encyclopaedic political rhetoric. I challenge you to find an article in Encarta or the Encyclopaedia Britannica that's written like the above. [[User:Evercat|Evercat]] 12:42, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)

:No-one is claiming any such moral equivalency. Please stop attacking a straw man, and please ''read'' the [[NPOV]] policy article to see how it works. -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] 12:44, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)

WHAT WIKIPEDIA ENTRIES ARE NOT
6#  Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. (But an article can of course report objectively on what advocates say, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. Go to Usenet if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views--and good luck.)
[[User:Kenneð|Kenneð]]
⏎

⏎

⏎
----
Someone thinks that he challenged the incontrovertible facts in my article. He failed. Saddam WAS an ISLAMOFASCST leader. He has been building mosques, funding suicide bombing jihadis in Israel, preaching jihad and martyrdom, and calling for a struggle to defend Islam. He is linked to Al Qaida, proved by the Prague letter. 

(contracted; show full)

It was written by French leftists who saw trough the murderous ideology that once clouded their thinking. Right now, I would like to move on to another topic. I can see that facts have no place in an Islamofascism article around here. So im going to write about the horrors going on right now in Red China. 
[[User:JoeM|JoeM]]



⏎

⏎
How is anything NPOV?  Einstein brought us Relativity.  BTW, why should we care what you think, JoeM?  did you lose somebody in the war and use emotional reasons for your statements?
⏎

⏎
No, I did not. I am just learned and have a strong moral compass when it comes to loathing those that appease killers. [[User:JoeM|JoeM]]

There are killers on both sides of the fence.  one side is green, the other is sand
⏎

⏎
:Besides the graffiti by Kenneth, I still don't have an answer to my question regarding references. The only one (besides "the news") is "I am just learned and have a strong moral compass", i.e. "this are assumptions by myself according to my knowledge and my morality", not really the best to start an encyclopedic article, isn't it? -- [[User:Tillwe|till we *)]] 14:04, Aug 10, 2003 (UTC)