User talk:West Bank Boy

Hoaxes on wikipedia are considered vandalism

25pxInformation Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Magyaristani, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. i wasnt vandalising, i created a new page all the reference underneath.--West Bank Boy 15:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a forum upon which to legitimize the existence of an ethnic group or not. That is vandalism. It is just as bad as Magyars who claim they are Huns and try to get political minority status. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 16:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

im legitimizing anything, magyaristani does exist and it's not like the magyar who created the stupid idea of calling themself Huns.--West Bank Boy 17:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islam in Hungary

(rv West Bank boy, please explain any changes in the talk page, especially why you disagree with official government census figures)

I disagee with official government census figures cause these are unreliable sources written by commies or socialist or some extreme fundamentalist trying to hide the truth of muslims population in hungary.

This is known as an ad hominum attack. You should not besmirch the reputation of people by assuming they must have ignoble motives. This is similar to my removing anything you say because you are a Muslim. see assume good faith.

I just wanna notify u that im hungarian (my religion is islam) and i've seen muslims in great numbers in hungary, there's no such a thing as 3,000 or 6,000 or 300 or whatever, these are very extremely nationalist propaganda done by heartless hungarians

ad hominum

from other part of the world like america who have never been to hungary nor know anything about hungary like i do as i grew up in there and experience things in there, yet the topic about islam in hungary seem to keep changing everyweek writing by some all sort of anti-Islam members of wiki who wants things to be on their way and not wiki's way

Wiki is interested in truth. Wikipedians tend to value truth above all else. There are many sources of contradictory information on the web, we have to work out which is the most reliable. Why do you think Muslims were underrepresented in the census? (for example are a lot of them unregistered workers?), why is your source of 606,000 more reliable?

, vandalising as much as they can to make a fun out these things,

I do not think that changing a number is Wikipedia:Vandalism. Vandalism is blanking pages or inserting obscenities. You are not a vandal as you are changing a page to what you believe to be true. Similarly, the person who reverts is not a vandal either.

however this topic was to be disputed but again there's always some vandals who comes take these off without much point.

ad hominum

It's pretty sad that there are many who has no mercy for this topic and they had to be taught a good lesson by someone moderate. anyway the reference i posted about muslim population in hungary is very much referenced as you can see it is over 606,000 not 3201 or all these extremist unreferenced sources which are damaging muslim's reputation in hungary and wikipedia itself.

ad hominum

These are very important fundamental aspect for wiki and for muslims in hungary to keep the peace and not causing conflict for unreferenced source which provokes things into conflict and violence cause by some idiot who's writing things in wiki which can endangers other's lifes, afterall wiki is very popular in hungary.

So are you saying "put this statistic in otherwise there will be violence". We must put the truth in Wikipedia, not what we would like to be the truth, or to

Can you imaging if Wikipedia is a fundamentalist website and not a pedia website????

Yes I can see Conservapedia

geez

geez = By Jesus(pbuh). This may be offensive to catholics and muslims who think Jesus(pbuh) was a prophet

i hardly come here cause it's getting fundamentally anti-islam and it's a shame. This has to stop.

The difference is in epistemology. Thanks for writing. I have to go know, but would love to continue this conversation. Mike Young 12:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to above by West Bank Boy

(MY)This is known as an ad hominum attack. You should not besmirch the reputation of people by assuming they must have ignoble motives. This is similar to my removing anything you say because you are a Muslim. see assume good faith

(WBB)This is absolutely has nothing to do with Ad hominum or assume good faith cause i was not insulting nor ordering you but telling you the truth, i've sent the sources about that but again you chose to ignore it why??? (im not insulting just presenting the actual situation.)
- (MY 2)Sorry, I must not have made myself clear. I did not think the Ad Hominum attack was directed towards me, but towards those who took the 2002 census, who you referred to as "commies or socialist or some extreme fundamentalist trying to hide the truth"

(MY)ad hominum

(WBB)again you put ad hominum, but not getting what i've said. please try and be more reasonable, im not ordering you to but if you dont treat me as human being then i gonna have to get someone higher than you to dealt this matter. see the real assume good faith.
- (MY 2) Your defence seems to be that those who produce statistics you do not like do so for ignoble motives. This is like saying that Muslims only edit wikipedia to alter statistics in favour of Islam, and so therefore what they find does not count. What you have quoted is from a Rumanian Property development web site, which unfortunately does not quote where the sources in the site comes from. They are obviously copied from somewhere, but is this a reliable source or not?. Why is this more accurate than the official statistics?

(MY)Wiki is interested in truth. Wikipedians tend to value truth above all else. There are many sources of contradictory information on the web, we have to work out which is the most reliable. Why do you think Muslims were underrepresented in the census? (for example are a lot of them unregistered workers?), why is your source of 606,000 more reliable?

(WBB)my sources are reliable cause that's the conservative fact.
- (MY2) You can’t just say a source is less reliable. Now if you think that the official statistics are wrong, then you have to present evidence why you think they are wrong. Your observation that you can see loads of Muslims on the streets of Hungary IS valid evidence to support your view, but to make it stick you need to quote something reliable. For example, are a lot of the Muslims foreign born? Do you have any more modern stats for the number of Muslims? Are there any mosques with very large numbers of worshippers? Where do the Muslims come from (Turkey?). In the absence of evidence then you will continually be reverted, if not by me then by somebody else

(MY)I do not think that changing a number is Wikipedia:Vandalism. Vandalism is blanking pages or inserting obscenities. You are not a vandal as you are changing a page to what you believe to be true. Similarly, the person who reverts is not a vandal either.

(WBB)Im trying to fix this topic into conservative from fundamentals.
- (MY2)I think you will be able to do this, but you must find some good official statistics to support your claim. This may take a bit of work, but that’s what it’s all about.

(MY)ad hominum

(WBB)again you put ad hominum, same as above what i've told you before see the real assume good faith

(MY)ad hominum

(WBB)This not ad hominum, this is instigating what you doing.

(MY)So are you saying "put this statistic in otherwise there will be violence". We must put the truth in Wikipedia, not what we would like to be the truth, or to

(WBB)The Truth is the conservative truth and it's cannot be denied.
- (MY2)Things aren’t true just because you say they are. They obviously can be denied

(MY)Yes I can see Conservapedia

(WBB)Well im a die-hard conservative to tell the truth, it's seem your some kind of leftist not listening and to try understand my problem.
- (MY2) No, I’m not a leftist, even if I were, that would not be relevent, what is relevent is the evidence you can bring. Incidently, in the UK and the US it is the left who support Muslims and the right wing who tend to oppose thim

(MY)geez = By Jesus(pbuh). This may be offensive to catholics and muslims who think Jesus(pbuh) was a prophet

(WBB)lol Muslims get offended from that?, that the fundamental part of Islam, so tell me you know Islam more than me??
- (MY2) I am not discussing if I know Islam more than you. This is a point about demographics in Hungary, not the finer points of Islamic doctrine
(WBB)And Geez has nothing to do with Jesus.
- (MY2)Geez (or Jeez) is a contraction of Jesus
(WBB)see the real assume good faith cause afterall Muslims believe Jesus as a prophet not son of god.
(WBB)so it would be nice that you listen and stop insulting me. best regardWest Bank Boy 05:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:39.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:39.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Hungary

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you.

Also, concerning the edit you did on my User Talk page:

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you.

Additionally, concerning User Talk pages, please refrain from using patronising language. It can be offending.

Szabi 14:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:10.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:10.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Magyaristani

I have deleted Magyaristani because frankly it's completely made up. That's not to say that there are no muslims in Hungary, I'm sure there are. But that particular article is entirely your own original research (or imagination). You have provided no evidence that the term is used and, judging by your other contributions, you seem to be here to cause trouble more than anything. Your user page is classical flamebait, as is the accompanying image. Pascal.Tesson 03:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term itself (Magyaristani) wouldn't even mean a Hungarian Muslim specifically in English. It would mean any citizen of the country of Hungary regardless of religion or ethnicity while Magyar would be reserved solely for the ethnicity. See similar usage with Kazakhstani or Uzbekistani. It made no sense. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 16:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax

Could you explain this, dear friend? :)

--peyerk 07:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it is still a source to prove wikipedia, that there are that many.West Bank Boy 16:03, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man,

stop it! Now!

--peyerk 14:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dont tell me to stop it, ur the one that started doing all the hoax on islam in hungary, ur just a full of hate towards muslims, send ur hate somewhere else, go to islam in serbia or romania and carry on ur hate there.West Bank Boy 16:03, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop personal attacks, please. And try to answer. Please.

--peyerk 21:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Bank Boy

Dear WBB,

I would like to discuss the source that you keep linking here. Are you ready to answer any question?

--peyerk 17:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Peyerk, tudsz magyarul beszelni? ez nagyan fontos hogy ezt a sourcesek kel betenni mert mar van eleg sok muzsulman magyarorszagon, csak a problema az hogy menni van? 3,000 fo ez semmi, van tobb mint 3,000 fo, ezt en nagyon jo tudom mert en voltam magyarorszagon eleg tobbszor. en nem akarok haboruzsni veled mert en nem vagyok olyan fajta ember aki szeret haboruzsni, jobb hogy ezt teg be az agyadban es a macsik, not putting another source on that article can cause internal conflict in hungary afterall Islam is the fastest growing religion in hungary and most of the converts are magyars like me, so better put both of the sources in it, just to keep the peace, it very sad that many people are very wikimaniac and they quickly believes it whatever the article says. Just imagine if any other muslims in hungary jumped into wiki and sees these things, Isten õrű.West Bank Boy 17:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is your mothertongue, WBB? It cannot be English, neither Hungarian...

--peyerk 20:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian is my mothertongue, im hungarian now and im proud to be, i hardly can speak arabic or english, hungarian was the first language i spoke when i was a small child, didnt understand english or arabic back then, yes maybe im arab but what kind of arab am i when i cant speak arabic but speak hungarian lol.West Bank Boy 06:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WBB, you are kidding. Your Hungarian is not that of a native. Sajnos a magyar szöveged helyesírása és nyelvhelyessége egyaránt tele van súlyos hibákkal. Olyanokkal, amilyeneket anyanyelvi beszélő (író) nem követ el. Azt kell gondoljam, hogy nem mondasz igazat az anyanyelvedről. Bocs.

--peyerk 06:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes i know habib but doesnt most hungarians doesnt speak perfect hungarian? hungarian language is not easy to learn, it's just as hard as arabic or chinese, and yes i am hungarian, cause im assimilated into hungarian, if any arabs try re-arabnise me, i wont accept it cause that how much im hungarian with Islam as my religion. when live in transylvania or slovakia for example i still wont assimilate into anything but hungarian. hungarian culture is a very colourful culture and it is very enough for me to accept it, not just me but any minorities in hungary like arabs, pakistanis, chinese, tatars, except ciganys, are strong enough to be assimilated into magyar, even africans, yeah i said it right, africans who doesnt speak their mothertongue anymore but speak hungarian more better than me,haahahaa a black-coloured hungarians who speak hungarian hahaa, what a funny hungarian winabi-oromo-mobutu people they are who speak hungarian. can u imagine peyerk?West Bank Boy 04:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

most örülsz ugye? a rohadt fajtád miatt elmaradt a dakar rally