Portal talk:Discrimination/Selected picture/5
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The page says "This bypass around Mecca, nicknamed the "Christian Bypass", is longer, and considered to be of a lower quality, than the road directly through Mecca."<sources>
I didn't find this in either of the two sources: [1] [2]. Bless sins (talk) 23:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, wikitravel is not a reliable source.Bless sins (talk) 23:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- The CNN source says "The archway at Mecca, shaped like a large book propped open, represents Islam's holy scripture, the Koran. From this point on, only Muslims may enter. "
- The CNN source is not talking about this picture. It is talking about an archway that is shaped like the Quran. Although there are many archways in Mecca that resemble the description, the CNN source may be referring to this arch. In anycase, the current image is not being referred to by the source.Bless sins (talk) 17:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- No response, then I'll remove the CNN reference.Bless sins (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
As the article says, the arch is at Mecca. Are you now trying to say that non-muslims are not barred from Mecca?
The gateway to Islam's holiest city features a huge structure arching over the road, marking Mecca's boundary in an otherwise empty desert.
So nice try, but anyone who reads the article realises your statement is disingenuous and deceptive. This is why I don't bother discussing things with you on talk pages. You are trying to play constant semantic games with sources. I don't waste my time with revisionists who try to pretend that something is not true when it is. I merely revert them; so that the encyclopedia can retain its accuracy, in the face of special interests who seek to redefine or hide such things as the discriminations they endorse. If I had more time, this would be in RFM or RFAr and would likely be a done deal by now. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 00:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- How does your above comment respond to my original concern? According to the CNN it is the arch (not the sign) that sets the limits for entry. The CNN source doesn't not mention any sign, and as such can't be relevant to this sign. If it mentions a sign (as pictured) please point it out. Thanks.Bless sins (talk) 15:04, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- Nonsense. The sign says "muslims only". It is a sign indicating religious discrimination, no different than Portal:Discrimination/Selected picture/1 does. The image illustrates the topic, like any other picture does. You don't have an issue with the picture unless you are trying to tell me that that sign in the picture does not and has never existed. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 17:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yes the sign says that. But, the CNN source isn't about the sign, its about the arch. If you want you can get a source about the sign, that'd be optimal. Or you can keep the CNN source, and get an image of the archway (which I think is this arch). But what you can't do is mix and match sources, applying them where they are not relevant.Bless sins (talk) 14:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- No. The sign exists. The sign is real. The photo is real. There does not need to be a source proving that the sign exists. Nor does there need to be a source proving what the sign says. That is what the picture does. The CNN source is not there to reference the existence of the sign. The CNN source is there to reference the fact that non-Muslims are provided unequal freedoms in Mecca (and Medina). Which, of course, the sign and the picture of it already indicate. And which is a fact you do not dispute. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 15:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yes the sign says that. But, the CNN source isn't about the sign, its about the arch. If you want you can get a source about the sign, that'd be optimal. Or you can keep the CNN source, and get an image of the archway (which I think is this arch). But what you can't do is mix and match sources, applying them where they are not relevant.Bless sins (talk) 14:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Nonsense. The sign says "muslims only". It is a sign indicating religious discrimination, no different than Portal:Discrimination/Selected picture/1 does. The image illustrates the topic, like any other picture does. You don't have an issue with the picture unless you are trying to tell me that that sign in the picture does not and has never existed. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 17:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
