text:
Talk:Ammeter

Image of a meter
I WANT A PICTURE IN HERE!!! --Cyberman 05:29, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * You asked for it, you got it! It's not a great picture, but it's better than nothing! Someone should find us or shoot us a nice photo of a D'Arsonval meter movement to go along with the diagram.

 * We should probably also try to rationalize the somewhat-redundant text between here and the Galvanometer article.

 * Atlant 14:09, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I really do not like the picture, drawn "by hand using a mouse" in Paint? A SVG version (perhaps made in Incscape) would look much more professional indeed. --81.227.72.130 (talk) 15:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It's good that Atlant made an illustration, but it's so different from a real-world meter movement that it really, seriously needs to be replaced; sorry! I added text, trying to be diplomatic, to the caption. Wikipedia should not have a misleading illustration.

First, the pole faces are arcs of a circle, not the curiously-curved shapes shown. Second, the front and rear hairsprings carry current to the coil, not the suggested flexible leads. Third, the coil is wound on a rectangular bobbin, not the iron core, as the image implies. Fourth, the core is stationary, supported by a non-magnetic metal plate or such. Please have a look at a Weston-type movement!

current to voltage
Could someone explain how to convert a current meter to a voltmeter using a resistor?

 * Easy...you simply attach the ammeter and a huge resistor in series, and hook up the two ends of this "voltmeter" circuit to the two positions in the target circuit you want to measure the potential difference between. Then, you measure the current running through this part of the circuit (it will be small because of the huge resistor).  You now have the resistance, and the current through this voltmeter circuit, and therefore can calculate the potential difference with V=IR. Ed Sanville 02:46, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I am trying to work out how to intergrate this into wiki, do you people think this is worth an article?mickpc

COULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN WHY WE ARE USING MI INSTRUMENT FOR AC AND MC FOR BOTH AC AND DC......? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.200.82 (talk) 09:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I assume "MI" means "moving iron"; "MC is "moving coil". Indeed, this should be fixed.Nikevich (talk) 07:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Ammeter
What will happen if an ammeter is connected in parallel with a resistor ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.147.177.226 (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

What happens depends upon the value of the resistor. If it's a milliohm-range shunt, the ammeter measures much higher currents. If the resistor is something like a sizable fraction of an ohm, it will make the ammeter read low, the amount depending upon the relative resistance of the ammeter and the resistor. If the resistor is many ohms or greater, it will have no effect, BUT -- if that resistor has a voltage across it, the ammeter will effectively short-circuit the resistor. That's likely to cause trouble.

Moving iron
". Not used in practice due to non-linearity of the scale."

I have a couple of commercial products that incorporate moving iron meters. Will edit. Tabby (talk) 16:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

A superb reference, if a copy can be found
It's the The Instrument Sketch Book, published by Weston Electrical Instruments, Newark, NJ. Nikevich (talk) 08:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The page says that the resistance of a ammeter is kept as low as possible. How low is this? Would this affect the results when measuring?

84.107.227.4 (talk) 17:25, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

 * An ammeter is actually a very low resistance, called shunt, connected in parallel with a current measuring device. Most of the current flows via the shunt and different shunts are usually provided for different current measurement ranges. 70.27.152.243 (talk) 16:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

merge
Today I edited the "Application" section by merging into it my edited version of the article "Ayrton shunt", which was a stub. I haven't yet figured out how to import the image from that stub, nor how to remove the stub. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derfnac (talk • contribs) 21:14, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Ammeter Circuit Symbol
This article needs to have an Ammeter circuit symbol ! Darkman101 (talk) 02:30, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Dead link
With regards to link 8, "Ix Innovations, LLC. "PocketPico Ammeter Theory of Operation" (PDF). Retrieved 2014-07-11.", someone else seems to own the domain now. The link seems to be dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:1135:C2FA:109F:C168:8624:824 (talk) 13:26, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

The long Application section could be subdivided
The long Application section (lots of content about shunts) could be subdivided - eg. into high current (using shunts), DC, AC ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Shunt resistor
Shunt resistor redirects to this article - which then links to shunt (electrical). Some content about shunts could be moved to the shunt article ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Stadiometer
what is this 117.213.15.88 (talk) 15:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * See stadiometer. No relation to ammeters. It's a device for measuring people's height, usually medical.
 * If you're thinking of construction or suveying, then there is also stadiametric rangefinding, which is a technique for measuring distances by using the apparent height of a measuring staff, when seen through a telescope. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Changing the title into scientifically correct name - amperemeter
... and "ammeter" is a neologism, a bastardization, a colloquialism, that should therefore go into parentheses. Point of Wikipedia is to educate, not pander to the lowest common denominator. Lajoswinkler (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * See WP:COMMONNAME and also I presume you have WP:RS to back up your claim here. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Typical Wikipedian English language pandering, as usual. Always same story. "Reliable source" for a staple scientific apparatus omg... Lajoswinkler (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ammeter


text:
Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix

Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix (ダンスダンスレボリューションセカンドミックス), sometimes abbreviated as 2ndMix (セカンドミックス), is the second game in the Dance Dance Revolution series of music video games. It was released as an arcade game by Konami on January 29, 1999. The initial release has a total of 33 songs: 22 brand new songs, and 11 from its predecessor, Dance Dance Revolution (1998 video game).

Gameplay
The core gameplay and scoring system of 2ndMix is the same as the previous version of Dance Dance Revolution. The arrows in 2ndMix do not have different color-cycles based on their time signature. The "Vivid" arrow colors familiar to players of later mixes were not introduced until the club versions. All foot panel mods have been turned off and the difficulty and style of a song cannot be changed.

Best of Cool Dancers
Dance Dance Revolution: Best of Cool Dancers (ダンスダンスレボリューション ベストオブクールダンサーズ) is a music video game by Konami. It was revealed on February 11, 1999 at select locations in Japan and was used solely for ranking Dance Dance Revolution players prior to a company-held tournament. The game featured only four songs, all four of which are from previous releases and runs off of a Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix machine. The four songs of Dance Dance Revolution Best of Cool Dancers each have a set level of difficulty and style of play. Each song is used for a specific round in the tournament qualifications.

Link Version

Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix Link Version (ダンスダンスレボリューションセカンドミックスリンクバージョン), released on April 28, 1999, introduced the ability for players to save high scores and play custom step edits using their PlayStation memory cards. A player would first need to format the memory card with "Link Data" using the home version of 2ndMix, and then insert the card into one of two slots on the front of the arcade cabinet. Link Version includes 5 new songs, in addition to the full 2ndMix song list. After the release of Link Version, Link Data features had been implemented in every future DDR version for the System 573. Dance Dance Revolution SuperNOVA originally planned to include PlayStation 2 memory card support, but the functionality was removed and replaced with e-Amusement instead, albeit only for Asia.

2ndRemix
Dance Dance Revolution 2ndReMix (ダンスダンスレボリューションセカンドリミックス), the home version of 2ndMix, was released in Japan on August 26, 1999, for the Sony PlayStation. It includes 34 songs, seven of which are new to this version and are hidden and unlockable. Two of the hidden songs were previews of the next arcade version, Dance Dance Revolution 3rdMix and can only be played on Basic difficulty.

The home version has the ability to disc change to 1st and Append Club version. It also allows to unlock features in previous mixes such as the nonstop ranking from 3rd Mix. The interface is still the same as the one used in 2ndMix.

Dreamcast
On February 17, 2000, Konami released a version of Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix for the Dreamcast console. It features 43 songs, seven of which are hidden and unlockable. The song list includes seven songs from Dance Dance Revolution 3rdMix.

Dance Dance Revolution (2001)
Most of the songs in 2ndMix (with the exception of "BAD GIRLS", "BOYS", "HERO", "stomp to my beat", and "MAKE IT BETTER (So-REAL Mix)") were included in the North American version of Dance Dance Revolution for the PlayStation.

Music and Soundtrack
The original soundtrack for 2ndMix was produced by Toshiba EMI under their Dancemania dance music brand. It featured 32 of the songs in the game. It also came with a second disk that featured a "Nonstop Megamix" with the various songs mixed together in succession. It was released on April 28, 1999. Toshiba EMI re-released the original soundtrack to promote the release of Dance Dance Revolution X3 VS 2ndMIX (in which the game included DDR 2ndMIX) on November 30, 2011.

Reception
On release, Famitsu magazine scored the PlayStation version of the game a 31 out of 40, and the Dreamcast version a 30 out of 40.

Tournament
Between February 11 and February 28, 1999, Konami held qualifiers for the King of Freestyle Dancers tournament in association with Toshiba Emi, Intercord Japan, Japan Airlines, Japan Travel Bureau, Pioneer, Puma and others sponsors in order to build public awareness of Dance Dance Revolution and attract customers to the sponsors' products.

The tournament itself was held on September 26, 1999 in the Zepp Tokyo music hall in Japan. In addition to the competition between the finalists, Konami had a freestyle dance troupe called Konamix perform alongside Captain Jack, whose musical performance also served to announce music for the upcoming Dance Dance Revolution 3rdMix. The winner of the tournament received autographed memorabilia, various products from the tournament sponsors and a trip for two to Okinawa.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Dance Dance Revolution 2ndMix


text:
Sino-Soviet War

The Sino-Soviet War may refer to:

 * Sino-Soviet conflict (1929), minor armed conflict over a railway in 1929
 * Sino-Soviet border conflict, military conflict in 1969

title: Sino-Soviet War


text:
Muppets from Space

Muppets from Space is a 1999 American science fiction comedy film directed by Tim Hill (in his feature directorial debut), written by Jerry Juhl, Joseph Mazzarino, and Ken Kaufman, produced by Brian Henson and Martin G. Baker, and the sixth theatrical film featuring the Muppets. The film stars Muppet performers Dave Goelz, Steve Whitmire, Jerry Nelson, Bill Barretta, and Frank Oz, as well as Jeffrey Tambor, F. Murray Abraham, David Arquette, Josh Charles, Hollywood Hogan, Ray Liotta, and Andie MacDowell. In the film, Gonzo attempts to discover his origins. After he and Rizzo the Rat are captured by government officials during his search, Kermit the Frog and the rest of the Muppets set out to rescue them.

It was released on July 14, 1999. It grossed $22.3 million against a budget of $24 million, making it a box office failure, and received mixed reviews from critics; many considered it the weakest theatrical Muppet movie. It is the last Muppet film to have the involvement of Oz and Juhl and the last theatrically-released Muppet film to be produced by The Jim Henson Company before the franchise was acquired by The Walt Disney Company in 2004.

Plot
Gonzo's species has always been a mystery, but after having nightmares of being denied entry to Noah's Ark, he begins to realize just how alone he is in the world.

Gonzo tells Kermit that he is getting tired of being referred to as a "whatever". After an alien species appears to be trying to send a message through his bowl of alphabet cereal, Gonzo realizes that he may not be alone after all and that evening, he climbs to the rooftop of the Muppet boarding house to watch the sky. Suddenly, he is struck by a bolt of lightning, which allows him to communicate with a pair of cosmic knowledge fish, who reveal his origins as an alien from outer space.

Hoping to contact the aliens, Gonzo makes an impromptu appearance at the television studio for UFO Mania during a live broadcast, where Miss Piggy is working. Concerned about Gonzo's behavior, Kermit and Rizzo go down to the studio. Unable to convince his friends of the aliens' existence, Gonzo is lured by Agent Barker to K. Edgar Singer of C.O.V.N.E.T., a top secret national security facility disguised as a cement factory, whose mission is to investigate threats of extraterrestrial attacks. Singer is aware of the aliens' attempts to communicate with Earth, and having seen Gonzo on television, believes that he is the key to convincing his superior General Luft that aliens exist.

Gonzo and Rizzo are taken to C.O.V.N.E.T., where Rizzo gets flushed down a tube to the facility's rat medical research held by Dr. Tucker, alongside other Muppet rats. Unable to get answers from Gonzo about the aliens, Singer decides to have Gonzo's brain surgically removed, and has him taken to a holding cell while the surgery is prepared. Meanwhile, after Miss Piggy interrogates Barker, she, Kermit, Fozzie, Pepe, and Animal go to rescue Gonzo and Rizzo from C.O.V.N.E.T., using various inventions from Bunsen and Beaker.

While Gonzo is in his cell, an alien channeling his voice through a sandwich asks him where the alien ship can land, and Gonzo suggests a beach named Cape Doom, unaware that Singer's assistant Agent Rentro (Bobo the Bear) is listening. Gonzo is then taken to the surgery room, and the Muppets arrive to rescue Gonzo and Rizzo.

Meanwhile, Rizzo escapes from medical research and frees Gonzo from the dissection table, while Singer and Luft witness the other rats attack the surgeon Dr. Phil Van Neuter. Luft feels that his time has been wasted and angrily leaves. Upon discovering from Rentro that Gonzo is heading for Cape Doom, Singer prepares the Subatomic Neutro-Destabilizer weapon to use on the aliens. Singer and Rentro then head to Cape Doom.

The Muppets rescue Gonzo from the facility, then arrive at Cape Doom where a crowd of alien believers await their arrival. After an hour-long wait, the ship arrives and the aliens, who all resemble Gonzo, explain that many years ago they lost him, but now welcome him back. Singer shows up and tries to kill the aliens, ultimately failing to do so (Rentro having removed the weapon's battery) and is laughed at. Gonzo considers going with his long-lost family to their home planet, but chooses to stay on Earth with the Muppets with his family's blessing. Singer is invited by the aliens to go with them and leaves as Earth's ambassador.

Later that night, Gonzo and the other Muppets watch the stars from the boarding house roof.

Cast

 * Jeffrey Tambor as K. Edgar "Ed" Singer, the head of C.O.V.N.E.T.
 * Pat Hingle as General Luft, a military official who K. Edgar Singer reports to
 * Andie MacDowell as Shelley Snipes, a UFO Mania anchorwoman
 * Rob Schneider as the TV producer of UFO Mania
 * Gary Owens as UFO Mania Announcer (voice)

Muppets performers

 * Dave Goelz as Gonzo, Bunsen Honeydew, Waldorf, The Birdman, Zoot, Chip and Beauregard
 * Steve Whitmire as Kermit the Frog, Rizzo the Rat, Beaker, Cosmic Fish #1, Bean Bunny and Alien Gonzo
 * Bill Barretta as Pepe the King Prawn, Bobo the Bear as Rentro, Bubba the Rat, Johnny Fiama, Cosmic Fish #2, Rowlf the Dog and The Swedish Chef
 * Frank Oz as Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Animal and Sam Eagle
 * Jerry Nelson as Robin, Statler, Ubergonzo, Floyd Pepper and Lew Zealand
 * Brian Henson as Dr. Phil Van Neuter, Sal Minella and Talking Sandwich
 * Kevin Clash as Clifford
 * Drew Massey as Fast Eddie
 * Peter Linz as Shakes
 * John Kennedy as Dr. Teeth
 * Adam Hunt as Scooter (voice only)
 * John Henson as Sweetums

Additionally, Whitmire, Kennedy, Linz, Massey, and Rickey Boyd make on-screen cameos as hippies at Cape Doom.

Cameos

 * F. Murray Abraham as Noah, he appears in Gonzo's nightmare.
 * Josh Charles as Agent Barker, an operative of C.O.V.N.E.T. who is interrogated by Miss Piggy.
 * Hollywood Hogan as Man in Black, working as an operative of C.O.V.N.E.T. who throws Rizzo into the lab.
 * David Arquette as Dr. Tucker, a sadistic scientist that works at C.O.V.N.E.T. and is in charge of the medical research that involves the rats
 * Ray Liotta as the gate guard at C.O.V.N.E.T. whom Miss Piggy manipulates with the spray bottle created by Bunsen and Beaker.
 * Kathy Griffin as an armed guard of C.O.V.N.E.T. who falls in love with Animal.
 * Katie Holmes as Joey Potter, a character from Dawson's Creek (uncredited)
 * Joshua Jackson as Pacey Witter, a character from Dawson's Creek (uncredited)

Production
As with the previous film Muppet Treasure Island (1996), veteran Muppet performer Frank Oz was unavailable for most of the shooting of Muppets from Space due to scheduling conflicts with his directing obligations. As a result, his characters Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Animal, and Sam Eagle were performed on set by other puppeteers, with Oz later looping his voice in post-production. For most of the filming, Peter Linz performed Miss Piggy, John Kennedy performed Fozzie Bear and Sam Eagle, and Rickey Boyd performed Animal. Kennedy and Linz's voices can be heard in the film's theatrical trailer. In addition, Muppet performer Kevin Clash was also unavailable for most of the shooting, due to scheduling conflicts with his work on Sesame Street (1969–present).

Filming began in November 1998 at Screen Gem Studios in Wilmington, North Carolina.

The film would mark the first appearance of Scooter since the theme park attraction Muppet*Vision 3D (1991). His voice was performed in Muppets from Space by Adam Hunt, the brother of Scooter's initial performer Richard Hunt.

The film's visual effects were provided by Illusion Arts.

Writing
An earlier draft of the story was written by Kirk Thatcher called Muppets in Space. In the screenplay, aliens abducted Kermit because they believed him to be their leader, leading the other Muppets to attempt to save him. A set of Welch's Jelly Glasses were produced based around this theme. According to the production notes featured on the DVD, the film was inspired by Gonzo's song in The Muppet Movie (1979), "I'm Going to Go Back There Someday".

In a 2009 interview, co-writer Joseph Mazzarino revealed that he left the project before shooting started, due to changes made to his draft of the screenplay. Mazzarino stated that his draft included parodies of Men in Black, Contact (both 1997) and Alien (1979), and that Randal Kleiser had been selected to direct the film. However, shortly before shooting began, The Jim Henson Company fired Kleiser, as they felt he was not "bringing enough vision", with Mazzarino subsequently hiring Timothy Hill as the new director, and the parodies were removed, as Hill wanted the film to be "more real".

In addition, Mazzarino stated that in his draft Gonzo did not turn out to be an alien. Instead, the aliens were getting signals from episodes of The Muppet Show (1976–1981) and made themselves look like Gonzo, as they considered him to be the "ultimate being". In the end, they would reveal their true forms, and Gonzo would remain a "whatever", with his family being the Muppets.

Music
Muppets from Space was the first Muppet film to not feature original music, opting instead for a soundtrack consisting primarily of classic soul and funk tracks.

Some tracks were remade by contemporary artists, such as "Shining Star" by the Dust Brothers featuring Jeymes, and "Dazz" by G. Love and Special Sauce, recorded at Muscle Shoals Sound Studio in Sheffield, Alabama. The band was in the studio recording with Little Milton on the "Welcome To Little Milton" record. The band got a call from Jason Brown, their manager, while in the studio, to record a song for the movie. Will McFarlane, who was a Shoals/Malaco studio regular, and former Bonnie Raitt guitarist, played with the band on the song. Parliament's "Flash Light" was updated by George Clinton as a duet with Pepe the King Prawn named "Flash Light (Spaceflight)".

Two soundtracks were released featuring music from the film. The first album, Muppets from Space: The Ultimate Muppet Trip, consisted of the classic soul and funk tracks featured in the film and was jointly released by Sony Wonder, Epic Records, and Sony Music Soundtrax a day before the film's premiere, while the other was an album containing the film's score, which was composed by Jamshied Sharifi with additional work by Rupert Gregson-Williams. This album was released by Varèse Sarabande on August 13, 1999.

Earlier drafts of the film contained original music, including the song "Eye 2 the Sky", written and recorded by Ween, which was not included on the soundtrack. This song was intended to be sung by Gonzo. Gonzo's performer Dave Goelz had also recorded a new rendition of "I'm Going to Go Back There Someday" for this film, a song which had originally appeared in The Muppet Movie (1979). This song was also dropped, but was included on the Muppets from Space soundtrack, also sung by Gonzo.

Marketing
To promote the film's theatrical release, Muppets from Space was accompanied with a marketing campaign with promotional tie-ins such as Wendy's and Travelodge. From May 17 to May 21, 1999, Wheel of Fortune had a theme called "Wheel Goes to the Movies" which featured a prize on the Wheel that included a four day trip to Los Angeles for the world premiere of Muppets from Space. For the film's home video release, the pizza restaurant chain Sbarro promoted the film with six figurines in a set, along with Muppet pizza boxes and bags.

Home media
On October 26, 1999, the film was released on VHS and DVD with supplemental features such as a blooper reel and an audio commentary by Kermit the Frog, Gonzo, Rizzo, and director Tim Hill. It was released alongside The Muppets Take Manhattan on a double feature DVD by Sony Pictures Home Entertainment on June 9, 2008. The film received a Blu-ray release on August 16, 2011 also alongside The Muppets Take Manhattan, with all of the special features from the DVD included.

Box office
Muppets from Space was released on July 14, 1999 in 2,265 theaters and grossed $7 million during its five-day opening frame. At the end of its theatrical run, the film grossed $22.3 million worldwide against its $24 million budget.

Critical response
On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 63% based on 57 reviews and an average score of 6.17/10. The site's consensus reads: "If Muppets from Space lacks the magic and wit of its cinematic predecessors, this pleasingly silly space romp is funny and clever enough to make for better-than-average family entertainment." On Metacritic, which uses an average of critics' reviews, the film holds a 53/100, indicating "mixed or average reviews".

Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film a two-star rating (out of four) and concluded his review by saying that "maybe Muppets from Space is just not very good, and they'll make a comeback. I hope so. Because I just don't seem to care much anymore." Conversely, Robin Rauzi of the Los Angeles Times gave the film a positive review, stating that "twenty years after The Muppet Movie and 30 after the beginning of Sesame Street, there is still life in these creations of felt, foam rubber and fake fur. With care, they will easily entertain and educate a third or fourth generation of children. The magic is back."

Michael Wilmington, reviewing for The Chicago Tribune, praised the puppeteers' performances, but remarked "[t]his picture isn't goofy or dreamy enough, however engaging it may be to re-encounter the intrigues of Miss Piggy, the wistfulness of Kermit or the weirdness of Gonzo. Or relax into the period funk soundtrack (including the O'Jays' "Survival," Earth, Wind and Fire's "Shining Star" and many others)." Lawrence Van Gelder of The New York Times felt the "Frenetic movement and loud music overwhelm warmth and compassion, and the balance of character, plot, irreverent humor and innate decency that made some of the earlier Muppet movies so welcome is lost."

In a 2000 interview, Frank Oz stated that the film was not "up to what it should have been" and "not the movie that we wanted it to be."

title: Muppets from Space


text: User talk:129.170.246.208

title: User talk:129.170.246.208


text:
Phillips Theological Seminary

Phillips Theological Seminary is a private seminary affiliated with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and located in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It was established in 1906 and was originally a part of the now defunct Phillips University.

History
The forerunner of Phillips Theological Seminary originated in 1906 as part of Phillips University in Enid, Oklahoma, a liberal arts college and graduate school affiliated with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). The Articles of Incorporation for the proposed "Oklahoma Christian University" were executed on October 9, 1906, known as Founders Day. The first classes were held at the College of the Bible of Oklahoma Christian University in Enid, Oklahoma on September 17, 1907. The university changed its name to Phillips University in 1912. In its early years, the seminary was known as the College of the Bible of Phillips University. In 1951, the Association of Theological Schools accredited the seminary, which became known as The Graduate Seminary of Phillips University.

The seminary began offering distance classes in Tulsa by utilizing facilities at local congregations and at the University of Tulsa in 1986. In 1987, Phillips Graduate Seminary incorporated as a freestanding institution independent of Phillips University. The board of trustees voted to change the name to Phillips Theological Seminary in 1995. In 1997, the board of trustees voted to move the seminary to Tulsa. Phillips Theological Seminary acquired its current campus in 2002 when the QuikTrip Corporation donated its former corporate headquarters to the seminary. After extensive renovations, the first classes were held at the 901 N. Mingo Rd., Tulsa, Okla. campus in 2003. Phillips Theological Seminary was approved to offer comprehensive distance education in 2009.

The seminary's namesake, Phillips University, filed Chapter 11 Bankruptcy on April 1, 1998 and closed four months later. It was named for businessman and philanthropist T.W. Phillips of Butler, Pennsylvania, who financed the university in its early years. Phillips Theological Seminary houses the transcripts of the alumni of Phillips University.

Academics
Degrees conferred by the seminary include the Master of Divinity (M.Div.), Master of Theological Studies (MTS), Master of Arts (MA) in Social Justice, Master of Arts in Ministry & Culture, and Doctor of Ministry (D.Min.). Additionally, a wide array of certificates and graduate diplomas are conferred.

In addition to providing pastoral training for the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the seminary also provides pastoral training for the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church (USA), Cumberland Presbyterian Church, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, and the Unitarian Universalist Association.

title: Phillips Theological Seminary


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Does God Exist?

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETED. dbenbenn | talk 23:19, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Does God Exist?
Not encyclopedic. Dump of HTML-formatted transcript of a debate. Available elsewhere on the web. 209.188.109.56 05:40, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Talk:Auburn, California

County Seat
The introduction currently says "Auburn is a city in the county seat of Place County"; was that supposed to read "a city AND the county seat of"? (I would just correct it but I suppose county seats might work differently there than where I'm from.) GCL (talk) 00:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Climate
Short section has been added about the Köppen climate classification and relation to grape growing + wineries, as this is essentially the reason that there are many wineries in the region. However, I am not sure if this is the appropriate section. The page currently doesn't have dedicated "Culture" or "Economy" sections, which makes the decision of placement ambiguous. --Ms. Anthropic (talk) 22:18, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Auburn, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140416182228/http://auburn.ca.gov/services/Elected/council_bios/bio_powers.html to http://auburn.ca.gov/services/Elected/council_bios/bio_powers.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090909132857/http://www.auburn.ca.gov/dept/dept_airport.html to http://www.auburn.ca.gov/dept/dept_airport.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090909133035/http://www.auburn.ca.gov/dept/dept_air_abt.html to http://www.auburn.ca.gov/dept/dept_air_abt.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090909133025/http://www.auburn.ca.gov/dept/dept_air_srvc.html to http://www.auburn.ca.gov/dept/dept_air_srvc.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Auburn, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110531210815/http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx to http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090822010546/http://www.auburnchamber.net:80/VISITINGAUBURN/HistoricalTour/OldTownFirehouse/tabid/123/Default.aspx to http://www.auburnchamber.net/VISITINGAUBURN/HistoricalTour/OldTownFirehouse/tabid/123/Default.aspx
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Auburn, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141103002921/http://www.calafco.org/docs/Cities_by_incorp_date.doc to http://www.calafco.org/docs/Cities_by_incorp_date.doc
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:07, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Auburn, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder2.census.gov/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Auburn, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070101224349/http://www.puhsd.k12.ca.us/placer/ to http://www.puhsd.k12.ca.us/placer/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090621230416/http://microchunk.tv/2008/03/21/auburn-statues/ to http://microchunk.tv/2008/03/21/auburn-statues/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:42, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

House/legislature members
Hey Adflatuss,

Since our districts were re-drawn in 2020, Auburn has different Assembly, Senate, and House members representing it. The city is still represented by Brian Dahle and Joe Patterson of the 1st Senate and 5th Assembly districts, but is now represented by Roger Niello of the 6th Senate district, is no longer represented by Megan Dahle of the 1st Assembly district, and is now represented by Kevin Kiley of the 3rd House district rather than Doug LaMalfa and Tom McClintock of the 1st and 4th House districts (the 4th was re-drawn westward and is now represented by Mike Thompson).

If you want to check it out, here's a cool map I found where you can compare the new/old districts: https://statewidedatabase.org/gis/districtscomp.html

Is it all right if I update it to this (assuming I've done everything correctly)?:

 * leader_title1           = State Senate
 * leader_name1            =  and
 * leader_title2           = State Assembly
 * leader_name2            =
 * leader_title3           = House of Representatives
 * leader_name3            =

And thanks for the welcome. angryfishstick1 ( talk ) ( contribs ) 06:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Auburn, California


text:
James Klock

James Bell Klock (October 5, 1856 – June 14, 1927) was a Canadian politician. He represented the riding of Nipissing in the House of Commons of Canada from 1896 to 1900. He was a member of the Conservative Party.

Klock was born in Aylmer, Canada East, the son of Robert H. Klock, an early lumberman in the Ottawa Valley, and was educated in Aylmer and Berthier. Before entering politics, he was a farmer. In 1883, Klock married Alice, daughter of judge William McDougall. He was involved in the timber trade and also raised livestock. Klock took over the lumber company established by his father at Klock's Mills south of Mattawa. He was also a director of the Crystal Gold Mining Company and president of the Quinze Electric Power Company. Klock served as reeve of Cameron Township. He later married a Miss Patterson. He died in Preston, Ontario at the age of 70.

title: James Klock


text:
Pentose phosphate pathway

The pentose phosphate pathway (also called the phosphogluconate pathway and the hexose monophosphate shunt or HMP shunt) is a metabolic pathway parallel to glycolysis. It generates NADPH and pentoses (five-carbon sugars) as well as ribose 5-phosphate, a precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. While the pentose phosphate pathway does involve oxidation of glucose, its primary role is anabolic rather than catabolic. The pathway is especially important in red blood cells (erythrocytes). The reactions of the pathway were elucidated in the early 1950s by Bernard Horecker and co-workers.

There are two distinct phases in the pathway. The first is the oxidative phase, in which NADPH is generated, and the second is the non-oxidative synthesis of five-carbon sugars. For most organisms, the pentose phosphate pathway takes place in the cytosol; in plants, most steps take place in plastids.

Like glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway appears to have a very ancient evolutionary origin. The reactions of this pathway are mostly enzyme catalyzed in modern cells, however, they also occur non-enzymatically under conditions that replicate those of the Archean ocean, and are catalyzed by metal ions, particularly ferrous ions (Fe(II)). This suggests that the origins of the pathway could date back to the prebiotic world.

Outcome
The primary results of the pathway are:

 * The generation of reducing equivalents, in the form of NADPH, used in reductive biosynthesis reactions within cells (e.g. fatty acid synthesis).
 * Production of ribose 5-phosphate (R5P), used in the synthesis of nucleotides and nucleic acids.
 * Production of erythrose 4-phosphate (E4P) used in the synthesis of aromatic amino acids.

Aromatic amino acids, in turn, are precursors for many biosynthetic pathways, including the lignin in wood.

Dietary pentose sugars derived from the digestion of nucleic acids may be metabolized through the pentose phosphate pathway, and the carbon skeletons of dietary carbohydrates may be converted into glycolytic/gluconeogenic intermediates.

In mammals, the PPP occurs exclusively in the cytoplasm. In humans, it is found to be most active in the liver, mammary glands, and adrenal cortex. The PPP is one of the three main ways the body creates molecules with reducing power, accounting for approximately 60% of NADPH production in humans.

One of the uses of NADPH in the cell is to prevent oxidative stress. It reduces glutathione via glutathione reductase, which converts reactive H2O2 into H2O by glutathione peroxidase. If absent, the H2O2 would be converted to hydroxyl free radicals by Fenton chemistry, which can attack the cell. Erythrocytes, for example, generate a large amount of NADPH through the pentose phosphate pathway to use in the reduction of glutathione.

Hydrogen peroxide is also generated for phagocytes in a process often referred to as a respiratory burst.

Oxidative phase
In this phase, two molecules of NADP+ are reduced to NADPH, utilizing the energy from the conversion of glucose-6-phosphate into ribulose 5-phosphate.

The entire set of reactions can be summarized as follows:

The overall reaction for this process is:
 * Glucose 6-phosphate + 2 NADP+ + H2O → ribulose 5-phosphate + 2 NADPH + 2 H+ + CO2

Non-oxidative phase

Net reaction: 3 ribulose-5-phosphate → 1 ribose-5-phosphate + 2 xylulose-5-phosphate → 2 fructose-6-phosphate + glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate

Regulation
Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase is the rate-controlling enzyme of this pathway. It is allosterically stimulated by NADP+ and strongly inhibited by NADPH. The ratio of NADPH:NADP+ is the primary mode of regulation for the enzyme and is normally about 100:1 in liver cytosol. This makes the cytosol a highly-reducing environment. An NADPH-utilizing pathway forms NADP+, which stimulates Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase to produce more NADPH. This step is also inhibited by acetyl CoA.

G6PD activity is also post-translationally regulated by cytoplasmic deacetylase SIRT2. SIRT2-mediated deacetylation and activation of G6PD stimulates oxidative branch of PPP to supply cytosolic NADPH to counteract oxidative damage or support de novo lipogenesis.

Erythrocytes
Several deficiencies in the level of activity (not function) of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase have been observed to be associated with resistance to the malarial parasite Plasmodium falciparum among individuals of Mediterranean and African descent. The basis for this resistance may be a weakening of the red cell membrane (the erythrocyte is the host cell for the parasite) such that it cannot sustain the parasitic life cycle long enough for productive growth.

title: Pentose phosphate pathway


text: User talk:70.26.180.19

title: User talk:70.26.180.19


text:
Talk:Sahih al-Bukhari

2008 editing
I cleaned up the page and added a bit of information. reading this discussion I can see how messed it had gotten to be. But it was in pretty good shape when I arrived.

It seems to me that it should be expanded to at least mention that Shi'ite objections and to explain Melchert's observations about the history of the Sahih. If anyone feels up to either of these tasks please do it without adding any POV. The relationship between al-Bukhari and Muslim should also be noted.

DKleinecke (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to add a comment to both Striver and Zora, that while you guys have been fighting for several pages worth of content (I understand some time has past since but this talk page remains still), that you got into an edit war. Think before you write. Lurk before you leap. And please, if you get into a fight, take a step back and let a THIRD PARTY help you. "Islamic" was trying to do so, I wonder if his help was in vain as I haven't seen him write anything after a while. I hope you can resolve your differences for the good of the page, though. --192.75.71.133 (talk) 18:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Commentary
I am not an expert on Arabic or Islam, but when you wrote "one of the most famous of its commentary", I think you meant "commentaries". I didn't change it because I wasn't sure. Art LaPella 20:27, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Requested quotation of Style guidelines
Striver, you said you failed to find anything in the Manual of Style that deals with the criticisms I have made about excessive subdivision of articles due to insufficient material. You also asked for a quote. I am happy to oblige (bold emphasis added):

Structure of the article
The number of single-sentence paragraphs should be minimized, since these can inhibit the flow of the text. By the same token, paragraphs become hard to read once they exceed a certain length.

Articles generally comprise prose paragraphs, not bullet points; however, sometimes a bulleted list can break up what would otherwise be an overly large, grey mass of text, particularly if the topic requires significant effort on the part of readers. Bulleted lists should not be overused in the main text, but are typical in the reference and reading sections at the bottom.

Headings help to make an article clearer, and comprise the table of contents; see Section, which users can choose under 'Preferences' to view (the default) or not to view. Headings are hierarchical, so you should start with  and follow it with ,  , and so forth. The 'second-level'  is overly large in some browsers, but that can be fixed for individual viewers with a style sheet more easily than a nonhierarchical article structure can be fixed (see help:User style).

Just as for paragraphs, '''sections and subsections that are very short will make the article look cluttered and inhibit the flow. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading''', and in these circumstances, it may be preferable to use bullet points.

The degree to which subtopics should appear in a single article or be given their own pages is a matter of judgment and of controlling the total length of the article.

Between paragraphs and between sections, there should be only a single blank line. Multiple blank lines unnecessarily lengthen the article and can make it more difficult to read.

I hope you will now please reconsider your fondness for subdivision in articles whose length does not support it. --AladdinSE 01:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Major revision
Non-muslimz have to follow the guidelines given here I happened across this article. It was a jumbled mess. I've straightened it out as best I can. I also added some perspective on how much Sahih Bukhari is to be trusted. It is my current understanding that the ulema and the Salafis do not see eye to eye on this. I need to get some references for that.

Probably still needs a lot of work, but this is a good first approximation. Zora 11:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I dont appreciate you removing the content part. It actualy made me quit upset, since it took me time to do it, it is relevant, it is sourced, and makes me remeber why i vowed to not talk to you. You take maters in your own hand, and just outright delete anything that hapens to not faling in your taste. stop doing that. --Striver 12:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Its "non-Muslim", not "Academic". --Striver 12:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Striver, all you did was revert. I think my version treated the Shi'a quite fairly, and explained why they didn't trust many Sunni hadith. Also, if you're going to revert, you need to mark it as a revert. Zora 13:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Zora, respectfully,i did not revert. I looked through both versions, and carefully made a third. I removed
 * ''"they were collected and written down 150 to 300 years after Muhammad's death in 632 CE."
 * since that is not relevant to this particular collection, they can find info about that in the links provided in the intro. Further, it is acctualy innacurate, or at least pov, since Sunni and Shi'a belive some hadith where collect even during the Prophets life. I added a etymology section, and then added the date for the publication of this particular collection, something your version missed. I moved all the glorification of Bukhari, his ablution, his only collection sahih and stuff to the Sunni view, since Shi'a view that as irrelevant or false. I did not touch your text about salafi and stuff, but i dont agree its true. But instead of deleting it, i added a "Fact" tag.It is not "Academic", it is "non-Muslim", to say non-Muslims are Academics is a insult on Muslims. However, i keept your sectioning of the three views. And then i moved the content part to the end, instead of having it where it was. Thank your for not giving rashed judgemnts on my work. --Striver 09:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Striver, "collected" means written down. There is NO EVIDENCE that anything was written down before the Abbasids. Something that is passed on orally for 150 years is not considered in any way "fixed" until the date that it is written in a form that can't be altered by later transmitters. (This is actually a problem with the manuscripts too, since later copies of supposedly early manuscripts may have been altered; the Muwatta is supposed to be much later, in places, than the ostensible date of first composition.)

Your take on academics and non-Muslims is bizarre. Only a very few non-Muslims are academics. Some academics are Muslims, but if they participate in the Western academic tradition, they have to play by those rules, which mandate non-supernaturalist explanations. Very few Muslims have been willing to do so. There is a near-total lack of overlap between the Muslim scholarly tradition (which has been effectively moribund for 1000 years) and the Western academic tradition -- which is becoming increasingly international.

I fixed the article. You mangled it again. I will revisit it in a day or so, when I'm less irritated. I can take out the ablutions stuff -- I left it there in deference to other editors. Zora 11:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I chuckle most insincerely at the very humourous statement above, (taken totally out of context ofcourse - lest I offend any Muslims <-Note word capitalised out of respect): "Only a very few non-Muslims are academics".1812ahill (talk) 04:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Ok, you belive there is "no evidence". Shi'a and Sunni do not agree on that. Sunnis belive Abu Bakr wrote down some hadith that are still available, for example. In short, there is a dispute regarding that.

 * As you formulated yourself "Western academic". "Western academic" is fine with me, we can change it from "non-Muslim" to "Western academic", since "Western academic" does not imply that Muslims are not worthy of being called Academics. There does exist a very long "Muslim Academic" that outdates the "Western academic" with over 1000 years. And no, "Muslim Academic" does not need to play by the "Western academic" rules to be deserved to be called "Academics". If i would object in some way, "Western academic" does imply that there are no Muslims in the west, but never mind, "Western academic" is fine instead of "Non-Musilm".

"
 * Zora, stop insulting me by refering to my edits as "You mangled it again". Keep doing that and you will se a fast detoriation of our relationship. And we dont need that.

 * The ablutions stuff needs to be there in the Sunni view, its important to them. I personaly find it amusing that he could get it so wrong while trying so hard, but that is the Shi'a view. The ablutions stuff is notable and deserves to be included. Peace. --Striver 11:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Zora's revision
I removed most of the Shi'a-centric material. It is sufficient to note that Shi'a don't trust Bukhari; it is not necessary to include an exposition of the full Shi'a position on hadith in general. I also reorganized.

Islami, your para was completely unsourced. We can't just state contentious matters as true. However, we can say that "X believes Y" and give a citation. You need to give us the X and the citation. Zora 02:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

My para is a translation from the Arabic version of this page. The source for the dates is also mentioned in a book by Shaikh Abdul Fattah Abu Ghidda, regarding the name of Sahih Bukhari. The acceptance of his book by major scholars had been narrated by almost every book about this subject, including Abu Ghidda's one.--Islamic 04:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, but we need either an English language source, OR a quote from a published Arabic source, quote in both Arabic and English, so that other editors can check your translation. 99% of the editors (and users) here don't read Arabic and don't have access to Arabic sources. Just waving your hand in the general direction of some scholar and telling us to find the info isn't all that helpful. It's like doing a science experiment: the experimenter has to describe exactly how he/she set up the experiment, so that it can be re-done, and checked. Well, if you give a quote, someone else should be able to look it up and say, "Yup, that person did say that."

 * You might be able to do this easily by just googling on Bukhari. I'm busy, and should be doing other things, but it's usually quick to google, find an article on a reputable site, and cut-n-paste both the quote and the link.

 * I'm well aware that a great many articles on Wikipedia don't cite their sources carefully, but we're responsible for our own behavior and doing the best we can, regardless of others. Just as I'm sure you're doing your best to be a good Muslim despite being surrounded by many people who aren't trying :) Zora 04:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. I will work tomorrow on putting these original quotes here. We can ask for a volunteer to check the translation. I don't think to find a lot of material in English, but Google surprise me sometimes :) I will give it a try tomorrow. --Islamic 05:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Unaccaptable. Zora, you included a long rant about " what is a hadith, generaly", but instead removed the more specific details of the Shi'a view of this hadith collection. Then, you also moved the Sunni view of Bukhari into the non-disputed section. Also, you removed the content, and also other issues. This is unaccaptable. You did do some good edits, and some of that should be keept, but im tired of cleaning up after you. Re-insert what you need to do, but stop unitarliy overhauling the article. The last time you did that, i took time to make a third vesion that included both our edits, now im not going to bother, its just a plain revert. You are utterly respectles towards other peoples work when deleting entire sections such as the content section. Stop that. --Striver 09:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Striver, it's a Sunni hadith collection, and the Shi'a view of it is definitely a minority view. The Shi'a view doesn't get 60% of the article. 10% is more like it. The list of "Hadith from Bukhari that Shi'a like" is grotesquely POV and needs to be axed. Zora 10:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Zora, there is no such thing as a "Hadith from Bukhari that Shi'a like". Further, If you belive the Shi'a pov is geting undue weight, then to the wiki thing and break it out, dont delete it. --Striver 10:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Further, 6/31 lines, excluding references, the list, see also and external links is not undue weight. --Striver 10:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

And regarding the list, 6 of the hadith are viewed as objectionable by Shi'as or are used by Sunnis, and many more hadith are neutral, so the list is not a "Shi'a list" --Striver 10:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Those are all hadith about Shi'a concerns. And as for "breaking out" the Shi'a material here -- it is merely a duplication of the Shi'a section of the Hadith article. The Shi'a don't trust Sunni hadith collections. Period. It's not special to Bukhari, it applies to all of them. The Hadith article is very clear about that. The Shi'a view of Bukhari can be handled in one sentence. Zora 13:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, you are correct in one sense, that Shi'a take notice of all Hadith that Sunni use to bolster their claims, but that does not make them "Shi'a hadith", the Umar hadith are never refered to by Shi'as, exept to refute them. Those are explicitly Sunni hadith, Shi'a rejecting them and thuse showing intrest does not make them "Shi'a hadith" and does not make the list a "All Shi'a hadith collection" - Your logic is fundamentaly flawed, using you logic, there exist nothing exept Shi'a hadith.

Again is your Shi'a view of Bukhari hadith flawed. You put in a large chunk from the Hadith article into this article, but refuse to include the parts that are concerned with the Shi'a view. That is totaly unfair, specialy when you remove reference to what Shi'a trust instead and also remove reference to in what particular part was Bukhari biased, specificly the hadith mentioned that are ommited. You can not ommit what Shi'a trust instead and also what we specificaly hold against Bukhari.

Further, it is unacaptable that while you reject the Shi'a the opurtunity to expres their view since "it is already in the Hadith article" (while giving a long duplicate from the "Hadith" article), you put Sunni view of Bukhari in the main space, and only mention what non-Muslims think about that, without event mentioning what the Shi'a view about that! Totaly unaccaptable. Keep the Sunni view in the Sunni view, and let the Shi'a have their six puny lines.--Striver 14:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Striver, the Shi'a POV is there in my version. It may not be as long as you want; but by the notability rules, Sunni would get 85% of the space and Shi'a would get 15%. Now the Sunni have five lines and the Shi'a have four. You're over-represented as it is. Zora 00:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Dont compate the amount of lines in my prefered version to the amount of lines in your prefered version, that is missleading. And you know that. --Striver 16:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

OH, and as for the list
You've made a list of the hadith that Striver finds notable. This is pure personal opinion. There are many thousands of hadith in Bukhari, and different scholars, and different laypeople, may find different sets of hadith worthy of attention. If someone is notable, and his/her fave hadiths are of interest, we could possibly put a list in the article dedicated to that person. You aren't notable, you don't have an article, and your fave hadiths do not deserve star billing. Zora 01:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Stop it will you! That is non-sense, according to that logic, we can never link to the hadith untill all hadith have articles, and that is non-sense. If you feel there is a unbalance since a hadith or two is missing, then add them and stop adding non-sense arguements. --Striver 16:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Islami
Islami, I removed the dates you gave -- they didn't mean anything, so far as I could tell. Were they death dates? Moreover, giving dates in Hijri rather than Gregorian is not at all useful to 99% of this encyclopedia's users. One solution is to give two dates, the Gregorian followed by the Hijri. For reliable conversion from Hijri to Gregorian, we need a day and month as well as a year; one Hijri year can span two Gregorian years.

I will also point out that so far as I can tell from reading the Melchert article I referenced, and comparing his references to yours, he's got the right of it. All your references are contemporary pious assessments of Bukhari that seem to be based on tradition rather than sound historical research. Contemporary historical research starts with finding the earliest surviving manuscript, and then checking other works from the same or earlier periods (either published or in manuscript) to see if there are any references to earlier versions of the work that haven't survived. According to Melchert,

 * Actually, the Sahih of Bukhari seems not to have been widely published until well into the tenth century, for virtually all known transmissions were through a single man, Muhammad ibn Yusuf ibn Matar al-Firabri (d. 320/932). [6] Somehow, no one else of the many illustrious traditionists who related hadith of Bukhari (al-Mizzi lists over eighty) recognized the value of his collection of sound hadith and transmitted it. Its organization, in particular its chapter headings, seem not to have stabilized until the mid-tenth century. [7] It first attracted commentaries in the later tenth century.

Against your account of crowds gathering to hear Bukhari, and eminent scholars recognizing his worth, we have manuscript evidence showing that he was at first ignored.

I'm not going to put this in the article. Anyone who is interested in pursuing the question would do better to go to the academic sources. But I just want you to consider that you might not know things that you think you know. (Actually that's true of all of us, me too. Who knows how many of the things I think I know are going to be jokes to future generations?) Zora 04:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Zora, I think you did not get the main point. Since his teachers such as Ibn Maīn (847 CE/233 AH), and Ibn Madīni (848 CE/234 AH), reviewed and approved his book after it was done, then we know for sure that he finished his book before they died!
 * By the way, al-Firabri (d. 320) is not the only transmitter of Sahih Bukhari. There were many others such as Ibrahim ibn Ma'qal (d. 295 AH), Hammad ibn Shaker (d. 311 AH), Mansur Burduzi (d. 319 AH), and Husain Mahamili (d. 330). Melchert knows that, and for that reason we never trust oriantalists. --Islamic 05:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Islami, I don't think you see the problem. Perhaps we have historical references saying that Bukhari wrote a book and his teachers approved it.  (Though I doubt that, I really do.) However, the earliest surviving manuscript of the book is dated many years after these references. Since all books were copied by hand we have no way of knowing if the book we're seeing is the same book described in earlier references. What Melchert is saying that using accepted techniques, we can trace ALL the copies of Bukhari back to al-Firabri's version, which is dated well after Bukhari's death.  So of course it's possible that the text was altered. In fact, that was common practice at the time.

 * The person who should be arguing with you here is Melchert, because I'm still learning. I do not have the expertise he has. But I had enough years in graduate school to learn how to recognize expertise.

 * One of my enthusiasms is creating the universal online library. All books ever made available online. It would be great if all the surviving Islamic manuscripts were filmed, and put online, so that you and I would be able to argue about this on the basis of the earliest manuscripts of the authors we're discussing. (Of course, it would also be great if I were buckling down to learning Arabic, instead of letting my textbook and DVDs gather dust.) Maybe we'd be able to come to some agreement then! Zora 06:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Zora
Zora, stop reverting with totaly missleading summaries like "rv to non-Shi'a centric version". --Striver 23:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Striver, your "version" is more about Shi'a views than it is about Sunni or Western academic views. Not only that, your list of famous hadith is irretrievably POV. Zora 23:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

12 neutral rows + 15 Sunni rows + 6 (six!) Shi'a rows + 11 non-Muslim rows does NOT make a Shi'a centric article. You still have not explained H-O-W the list is Shi'a centric, just came with the undefendable notion that this article should not link to article about hadith. --Striver 23:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

What is N-O-T fair is your version, it moves the Sunni view to the main space, and then adds a non-Muslim rebutal to it, also in main space. THEN it compares the remaining Sunni view to the entire Shi'a view and concludes that the Shi'a have gotten a good deal. That is not fair. --Striver 23:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Please, someone explain this to me as if I was a six-year-old... If this is one of the Sunni six major Hadith collections, why does the very intro paragraph prominently introduce the Shi'a view? I'm not going to revert Striver's contributions now because I expect editors more familiar with the topic to do that, but this cannot go on. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 15:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Is "while Shi'a have the opposite view" to much? Sure, ill remove it, that is not a big issue. My problem with Zora is about mixing the different views, giving lots of space to explain issues one click away, and at the same time deleting information that is not one click away. --Striver 15:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Editors more familiar with the topic try to edit Striver, but he reverts, claiming "vandalism". Zora 19:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The only "Editors more familiar" here is you, and i did add everything relevant you wanted to add - it is your sectioning (mixing Sunni and non-Muslim pov in main space) and omittions (deleting 4 out of 6 Shi'a lines claiming undue weight, and removing the contents) that i do not find motivated. --Striver 19:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I rewrote, putting in a "Sunni" section. I also vehemently dispute your collection of "famous" hadiths. That's all your creation, and the names attributed to the hadiths seem to be the ones given by Shi'a. You have reverted to a badly-written, POV version. Zora 19:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you put the Sunni pov in the main article. More specificaly in the "Bukhari's collection today". Then, on top of having the Sunni pov in the main space, you added only a Sunni section, you did'nt even bother to create a "Shi'a" and a "non-Muslim" section, you just bundled them together. You did not even mention that the Shi'a have their own version of "most trusted" hadith, you did not mention that Shi'a hold againt him that he did not add the  hadith of thaqalayn, you did not mention that Shi'a hold againt him that he added hadith that are view as directly despicable. And then, on top of that, you maid the non-Muslim part of the "Other views of Bukhari's collection" twice as big. Is that fair? No. Further, not even the Sunni editor was satisfied with your edit:. Do note that the Sunni editor used my words when he corrected your edit, proving that i do not write in a "Shi'a centric" maner, if i did, the Sunni editor would not have used my text.

Regarding "the names attributed to the hadiths seem to be the ones given by Shi'a", what hadith seems to be in that maner? please be specific. --Striver 20:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, lets try to be constructive. Except for the hadith links, what else would you like to have in the article now, that is not there already? I belive i added everything you wanted there, did i miss anything? Or is your only complaint that the Shi'a should only get 2 lines and not 6? --Striver 20:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

 * The list of hadith by name has to go. That is pure original research on your part, Striver. You have given no evidence that the Sunni use those names (or that the Shi'a do; since you always use Shi'a sources, I'm guessing that you got the names there). You have given no reason for picking THOSE hadith out of the thousands in Bukhari. You've given no evidence that anyone besides yourself regards those hadith as particularly notable.

 * Also, some of the material in the Shi'a section is not necessary to understand the Shi'a view of Bukhari; it's just presenting the Shi'a POV in general, and this is NOT the place for it. It's as if I were to insert an essay on why Buddhism is far superior to Sunni Islam. Zora 22:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

respons
Ok, lets talk about the hadith.

You do the following claims:
 * ''You have given no evidence that the Sunni use those names (or that the Shi'a do; since you always use Shi'a sources, I'm guessing that you got the names there)

Since you refuse to narrow down your allegations, ill do it for you: Lets disscuse the Hadith of the pen and paper. In that article, you will he this link, with this text "The shia claim that Hazrat Omar(R.A) went against the wishes of the Prohpet(saw) when the pen and paper was called for, i am refering to the hadith in Sahih Buhari which you will be familiar with". As you see, the key words are "pen and paper", and they are definitly Sunnis. But for you information i also dug out this: "Regarding Omar's Refusal to Give the Prophet a Pen to Write his Will!!!", again the same key words, and again Sunnis. And look here to: "THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PEN AND PAPER INCIDENT: A REPLY TO ANSWERING-ANSAR'S ARTICLE.", same key words, still Sunnis.

So, three Sunni sources identifying the hadith with "pan and paper". Still calling it a Shi'a centric name?

You continue.

 * ''You have given no reason for picking THOSE hadith out of the thousands in Bukhari.

My motives are irrelevant, anyone is free to pick any hadith he/she wants and creat a article about it, providing its a notable hadith. The list links to all hadith articles in wikipedia, if you feel any particular hadith is lacking, please do wikipedia a favor and add it, instead of complaining. Now that it is clear, i will tell you why i picked those hadith:

For starters, it was Zereshk that enumerated and quoted a set of Shi'a hadith. Since the Shi'a article was geting a bit large, i broke them out and gave them a article each. Then it was logical to have a "list of hadith". Of course you afd'd it, and it failed. Now that there was a list, i felt that i needed to make the article balanced, so i picked some Sunni hadith that gave merits for the Sunni Caliphs: (note: all above hadith are pure pro sunni, Shi'a reject them, created by me to give balance)
 * Hadith of Qur'an and Sunnah — Sunni Ahad Sahih
 * Hadith of Abu Bakr's superior faith — Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of Umar and prophecy Shi'a Mawdoo and Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of Umar and foretelling Shi'a Mawdoo and Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of Umar and religion Shi'a´ Mawdoo and Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of Uthman's modesty Shi'a Mawdoo and Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of Learning Qur'an from four people — Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of Abu Bakr leading the prayer
 * Hadith of Abu Bakr and Muhammad in the cave
 * Hadith of Learning Qur'an from four people

And it whent well, now there are both Shi'a and Sunni hadith, the list is balanced. While writing about some other topics, some other hadith came to mind, like the
 * Hadith of seeing God as the clear as the sun — Shi'a Mawdoo and Sunni Sahih
 * Hadith of pre-Islamic marriage forms
 * Hadith of Persians and knowledge
 * Hadith of the Verse of Rajm
 * Hadith of Jesus praying behind Mahdi

Those where created since they came to mind while working on other articles. And then, some hadith where in some articles, and i broke them out and gave them their own article, hadith such as:
 * Hadith of Najd
 * Hadith of Umar's speech of forbidding Mut'ah
 * Hadith of the ten promised paradise

One was not even created by me
 * Dua Sanamain Quraish

Now, if you think some hadith is lacking, then please add it, stop please complaining. I try constantly to include pure pro Sunni hadith, just hoping that one day i wont need to hear "im Shi'a centric", for example, i created Hadith of Abu Bakr's superior faith some days ago.

Then you write:
 * ''You've given no evidence that anyone besides yourself regards those hadith as particularly notable.

well, if you actualy bothered to read the hadith articles, you would understand why that is false. But ill save you some time and ill copy paste the "external link" section of the Hadith of the pen and paper:

Shi'a:
 * http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/obedience/en/index.php
 * http://www.al-islam.org/guided/16.html
 * http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/islam/0000111.php

Sunni:
 * http://www.yanabi.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=12&threadid=107&STARTPAGE=1&enterthread=y -Sunni site.
 * http://www.ansar.org/english/faq14.htm
 * http://understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=369&sscatid=93
 * http://www.ic.sunysb.edu/Stu/azarinni/Pen.htm

I hope i wont need to hear "You've given no evidence that anyone besides yourself regards those hadith as particularly notable." anytime soon, and i hope we are done regarding the hadith lists.

Then you wrote:
 * ''Also, some of the material in the Shi'a section is not necessary to understand the Shi'a view of Bukhari; it's just presenting the Shi'a POV in general, and this is NOT the place for it. It's as if I were to insert an essay on why Buddhism is far superior to Sunni Islam.

What line are you refering to, specificaly? --Striver 23:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Striver's hadith project
Striver, you are the one who decided to make articles for separate hadith and you are the one working on those articles. No one else thinks that this is a good idea. Both you and Zereshk chose to highlight hadith cited by Shi'a when arguing with Sunnis. Your choices had a polemic purpose. By linking to those hadith, you are propagandizing for your POV. Why those? Why not hadith about salat? Wudu? Hijab? Wife-beating? Dogs?

The only sane way to treat hadith is to cite specific hadith when it's necessary. Several translations should be given if possible, as the MSA was translated by Salafis. Zora 01:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Zora, i see no other option than repeating myself: If you see that a hadith is lacking, creat it. Go and creat a hadith about wife-beating and dogs. I was about to creat one about dogs some days ago. But *please* stop complaining! I *do* add notes about conflicting translations when it happes. "Why those?"? Did you just miss everything i wrote up there? Because they are controversial! Some are pro-Sunni, some are pro-Shi'a. I dont understand your obsetion of labeling everything controversial as "hadith cited by Shi'a when arguing with Sunnis", no matter whose side they support. Please stop that, its like citing both tax-increase and tax-cuts as "Issues raised by Republicans when arguing with Democrats", its ridiculuous. --Striver 07:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

 * As for "No one else thinks that this is a good idea", its just typical of your complaining nature. Ill site a AFD:
 * ''Keep, needs a bit of a re-write, but this is verifiable, and Striver has given it context beyond Wikisource. -- Samir
 * ''Keep Current article could use more references, but stands by itself as adequate. And interesting. Georgewilliamherbert

 * And here is another AFD:
 * ''Comment I am kinda starting to see Strivers argument about these hadith articles. I believe that if we can have hundreds of entries for Bible chapters and verses (not to mention hundreds of Pokemon cruft articles), then we should have ALL the hadith entries as well. (I don't care if it's 10 or 10000 articles, we've already set a precedent with Bible entries) Just for the record, I currently consider myself agnostic, I believe that God is unknowable and everything written about ALL religions is pure speculation, but that is strictly my POV.

 * Zora, stop complaining, and stop pretending im the only one supporting the hadith's, if i where the only one, the afd's would have failed. --Striver 07:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Edits
I took a look at your edits, and its not bad, we are geting closer to a agreed version, ill coment more later. I dont agree on the hadith, but i wont revert that part yet. --Striver 07:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I added a bit more, added a specific hadith to the SHi'a view, but i endore your other trimings of it, i also added a Sunni view comment, and then re-added the content section. --Striver 07:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

"at least seventy full commentaries have been written on Imam al-Bukhari’s great Sahih" --Striver 21:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Umdat al-Qari --Striver 21:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Irshad al-Sari by Al-Qastallani --Striver 03:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Fath al-Bari --Striver 03:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Edits
I modified the "view" section, it is rediculous to have a views section when this place is called an encyclopedia so as such it should follow the same format and not a discussion or polemics between differing groups. If shia have an issue with Sahih Bukhari they should mention it in there own pages not on the page solely dedicated to Imam Bukhari ie a sunni page.--Rami.b 08:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

From my discussion with many shia it is clear that a word has one meaning in sunni islam but may mean something different in shia islam, it is only after 1900's that the two worlds have mixed and this mix up in vocabulary and knowing what the other really means has only come up now, prior to that both lived in different worlds almost.--Rami.b 08:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

just added an article about him, i know what wiki says about articles and such but it is better than what is there at present, so until a real scholar comes along and directly quotes material from what he has read i dont see anything wrong with this for the time being. to many muslims come to this site and read the fitnah that is present here and believe it as true simply becouse it is a popular site. if i can edit this page so can anyone else and that is saying a lot!--Rami.b 08:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:ArabicSahihBukhari.jpg
The image: Image:ArabicSahihBukhari.jpg has been marked for deletion as it is deemed to be replaceable and unless any action is taken will be deleted on Thursday, 16 August 2007.

If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself. → AA (talk) — 08:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

What have we learned, from what they say?
Looks like I missed a good deal of argumentation. I would like to say I find perhaps more than half of the External Links unnecessary as they link to hadith-a-day type sites and lectures and what not. This page seems to have become a bulletin board for advertisements. Acceptable links, in my opinion, would be: one link to an on-line translation, another to the original in Arabic, a link to site with in-depth information regarding the Sahih and so on. All in favor say: "Aye!" Supertouch (talk) 18:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

New topic...
so, this entire page is incredibly biased. i thought wikipedia was supposed to be a neutral source... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.226.106.21 (talk) 16:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Shia view
It should be explicitly stated that Shias do not consider everything in Bukhari to be authentic. Right now its says "most Muslims" consider it to be authentic, but this seems a bit misleading. It should explicitly state Shias dispute this, as well as a minority group of non-mainstream Sunni intellectuals.

69.235.21.24 (talk) 01:27, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Textual distortion section
I have removed the section regarding textual distortion yet again. My rationale for doing so is supported by a number of Wikipedia policies. First, wp:sources: the website cited as the basis for this section, [www.al-islam.org] is clearly a Shia propaganda site which even devoid of this bias would hardly be reliable. Second, wp:undue: this article is about the book Sahih al-Bukhari itself not its translation which had not been mentioned prior to the addition of this section. This section would at most be worthy of a sentence in the event that it followed mention of the translation (and was based upon sound sources). Third, wp:neutrality: this section clearly violates Wikipedia's policy of neutrality. Please do not re-add this section.--Supertouch (talk) 01:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

 * The text shouldn't be removed from this article. All the sources are reliable, including [al-Islam.org] (See here). Please read wp:reliable sources; you can not expect that distortion be reported by a Sunni source. The important point is that the text is verifiable. Please also see When to cite. This text is written in English wikipedia as it discusses the mutilation in English translation, and the external link of this translation exists in the article, so the best place for the text is here, however I prefer that a separate detailed article be written in this case (if someone interested just write me). I gave an example of deletion and wrong translation which are two types of Mutilation, and to be more sure I am going to add addition of a non-existing sentence as well. Please don't remove this section and try ti improve it instead of deleting the facts.--Aliwiki (talk) 23:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

 * About the reliability of the sources: Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project, which is used as a source here,has been cited by the Columbia University here (as a main reference on Islam), the British Academy here, the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade here, the George Mason University here, Intute here, and is archived by the Library of Congress.--Aliwiki (talk) 11:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I found something more: The famous Sunni scholar Amin Ahsan Islahi has the following view about distortion::
 * 1) To deliberately interpret something in a manner that is totally opposite to the intention of the author. To distort the pronunciation of a word to such an extent that the word changes completely. For example, the word ‘مروه’ was changed to ‘موره’ or ‘موريا’.
 * 2) To add to or delete a sentence or discourse in a manner that completely distorts the original meaning. For example, according to Islam, the Jews altered the incident of the migration of the Prophet Abraham in a manner that no one could prove that Abraham had any relationship with the Ka‘bah.
 * 3) To translate a word that has two meanings in the meaning that is totally against the context. For example the Hebrew word that is equivalent to the Arabic ‘ابن’ was translated as ‘son’ whereas it also meant ‘servant’ and ‘slave’.
 * 4) To raise questions about something that is absolutely clear in order to create uncertainty about it, or to change it completely.

As it can be seen, the situation of my text is in agreement with this great Sunni scholar idea.--Aliwiki (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

 * The two websites, al-islam.org and Answering-Ansar.org, which you have cited are clearly Shiite propaganda sites. The former says this on its homepage:
 * "Kindly send any comments or suggestions about this site, or any factual information on cases of tahrif known to you, to the Shi'a Encyclopedia team of the Ahlul Bayt DILP."

 * And the later:

"...I am a new revert. I converted around a year ago. recently i have chosen to follow the shia imamate sect... As far as if answering-ansar.org helped me? Ofcourse it did."

In addition to the the sites' POV nature, they are simply not reliable to begin with. To quote the relevant guideline, WP:SPS:
 * "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—including but not limited to books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets—are largely not acceptable.
 * Self-published material may in some circumstances be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications."
 * This clearly includes these two sites are being unreliable. Your choice of words, "mutilation", hardly makes the addition of this section seem unbiased. Supertouch (talk) 18:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

 * All can send any comments, suggestion, information and ... to that website, but it doesn't mean they will publish it. I remind you that Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project has been cited by the Columbia University here (as a main reference on Islam), the British Academy here, the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade here, the George Mason University here, Intute here, and is archived by the Library of Congress, so it can not be considered as an unreliable souce.--Aliwiki (talk) 09:16, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 * I've removed the text added by Aliwiki from this article for a number of reasons. I explained why over on the RSN thread, but I'll explain it here as well, with a bit more detail. The issue here is a combination of verifiability and original research. For example, consider this line: "Comparison of this hadith with original Arabic text[15] proves that the Arabic text of the hadith and the English equivalent are completely different and its last sentence". The reference given (the al-islam link) doesn't say anything about the comparison of the text; all it does is show the two sides. It's original research to say, "well, the two sides are clearly different and this is the right translation". To add text like that, you would need a separate reliable source that does the comparison and points out that the two are different.
 * Honestly I'm not sure why this section even exists. I don't get the sense that the English version shown on al-islam.org is all that important; it's just another translation out there. There are plenty of other versions out there, aren't there? Wikipedia isn't meant to be a battleground, and this isn't the place to point out that all English translations of the text are wrong - especially without any source of reliable sourcing to back that up. If you want this text, I recommend starting your own website and posting about it there. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 12:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 * to User:HelloAnnyong: You didn't read al-islam.org's article completely. this is what is written there: "Those with even a rudimentary understanding of Arabic text will be able to see that the underlined arabic text of the hadith (wa imaamukum minkum) and the English equivalent are completely different!"; Neglecting this, if a sentence has a problem you should rewrite it or asking citation, instead of deleting the whole text. Fortunatelly the online translation of Bukhari is available here so you can verify the text. That why there is distortion in translation is another topic; If you are interested we can discuss on my talk page.--Aliwiki (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 * First, we'll discuss it here, as this is the appropriate place to talk about topics for this article. Second, I did look at the source ( http://www.al-islam.org/sources/default.asp?person=379&ed=708&pg=v4p437.gif ) given, and nowhere on there does it say that the two are completely different. Having any knowledge of Arabic is irrelevant; the fact is that you're taking a primary source and making a judgment on it - in this case, that one part of the source does not match the other - and that is original research and cannot be allowed into the article. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 * It is written in English see. What you saw is a link of that article. I kindly ask you to read the article, as a detailed description is provided there. But the answer to the question why Sunnis are mutilating their books is obvious; There are things in those books which are against their beliefs. here there is list of other distortion Sunnis made in their books (gradually I will add all of them in their articles in Wikipedia). Please also read the idea of the famous Sunni scholar Amin Ahsan Islahi about distortion I have provided above. There are many articles in Wikipedia about criticism of religious books such as Bible and Qur'an, but I don't understand why there shouldn't be criticism about Sahih Bukhari or other Sunnis book? We can't expect that Sunnis themselves report distortion of their books. --Aliwiki (talk) 16:28, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Ah, I see. Okay, here's another problem then: the text you added to this article was copied word for word from that source, which violates our copyright violation rules. I'm not going to get into the question of them "mutilating" their books because they're against their beliefs; that's unencyclopedic and doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Again, Wikipedia is not a battleground, and we're not going to engage in ideological battles, particularly between Shiite and Sunni. If you want to have those battles, take it elsewhere; Wikipedia is not the place for it.
 * I will say this: you are right that we have plenty of pages that have criticism sections, and one on here would be acceptable. The question, though, is how to go about it. If you look at the criticism articles you linked to, you'll see that nearly every line has a reliable source. The text is written in a neutral way that accurately represents the text in the source. Now compare that to what you were added. Yours was, more or less, a screed about how this one version is mistranslated, and that somehow means that they're mutilating their books and so on. If I were going to attempt to use that page as a source, this is what I would write:
 * "A translation of al-Bukhari into English written by Muhammad Muhsin Khan has been criticized for its inaccuracies.[1]"
 * That's all. If people want more clarification, they can click through to the reference. There is absolutely no reason to use this page as a place to state, "well here are all the things that are wrong with the translation", and to do so would be skewing the text in the article. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your guide. I am going to rewrite it.--Aliwiki (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You're more than welcome to try, at least. Before you insert it into the article, though, post the text here (or somewhere else) so myself and other editors can review it. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:29, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I see you added it anyway. It doesn't belong in the lead of the article, so I made it its own section. And again, per the discussion on RSN, Answering Ansar is not a reliable source. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Inserting the text in a new section as you did is a better idea. Thank you again. Answering-Ansar.org is a reliable source, but I won't emphasize to put it here now as I am busy. (Maybe later)--Aliwiki (talk) 15:20, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it's not reliable. It's just a website run by some random person, and is therefore a self published source - and cannot be used. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Original Manuscript of Sahih al Bukhari
As a devout Muslim, we should express our outrage against "SHARIA HARAM LAWS", which are based on false/ fabricated hadiths attributed to a fictional character named Bukhari.

Since the spread of false hadiths of Bukhari by Jewish scribes to make Islam become a foolish religion devoid of any characteristics desired by Allah in Quran, Islam has declined in this world. No more contributions to science and mathematics since past 600 years Muslims led astray by mullahs with fake hadiths.

If being a suicide bomber was way to heaven, the mullah would be knocking over everyone to get to the front of the line to die--- but they brainwash the illiterate fools to die and go straight to hell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.37.189.70 (talk) 20:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

It should be noted that the original manuscript of Sahih al Bukhari DOES NOT EXIST, and that the compilation we have today is from the 14th century Mamluk imam al Yunini.

The German Wikipedia article about al Bukhari DOES mention this, and I think this is very, very, very (I can't stress it even more), VERY important information which should be stated, especially on the English version of the article. It could be placed under the heading 'authenticity'.

Greetings! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axatoramus (talk • contribs) 00:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

 * That's not at all unusual, I doubt that we would have original manuscripts for any medieval works, but yes it is important to note earliest extant copies.130.216.234.155 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

231 to 233
I am wondering if someone could tell me what this contains and if it might be the basis for a section in the Islamic sexual jurisprudence article. If any notable commentators have written about it. --174.92.135.167 (talk) 08:50, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 05:15, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Suggestions: Wording, Shia views, Secular views, Historicity
Hello,

This article is not too bad but I see a few suggestions:

- The second last paragraph of the Overview section states "Each version is named by its narrator." and "The most famous one today is the version narrated by al-Firabri (d. 932 CE/320 AH)" - What does it mean that versions were "narrated"? Does it mean that the volume was not actually written down by Bukhari, but only later by other persons? Please clarify the meaning of this passage.

- We need to include a brief explanation of the Shi'a view of this collection.

- We really, really need some secular historian's / irreligious scholars' views on the reliability of Sahih Bukhari! The article is currently really unbalanced, featuring exclusively the orthodox Sunni view. There should also be a mention of things like the oldest extant manuscript.

- In the "Authenticity" section, there are currently several quotes of praise from names that would be totally obscure to anyone but a fiqh expert. Can we not trim that down in favour of a more general statement along the lines of "Uninterruptedly since medieval times, Sunni scholars of Islamic jurisprudence have held Sahih Bukhari to be the most reliable source after the Qur'an", and back it up by quoting modern academics?

Thank you all! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.72.244 (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sahih al-Bukhari. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100219053737/http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/hadith/bukhari/imam_bukhari.html to http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/hadith/bukhari/imam_bukhari.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.e-imj.com/Vol4-No1/Vol4-No1-H5.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:25, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sahih al-Bukhari. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.islamic-dictionary.com/index.php?word=sahih
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.e-imj.com/Vol4-No1/Vol4-No1-H5.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001062255/http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/ to http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

criticism section
Dr Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser, with reference to Mohammad Tawhidi, said "I’m with him, not in condemning it in its entirety, but in condemning the vast majority of the Sahih al-Bukhari, which we believe is the origin of many of the radical interpretations in Sunni Islam." This article would benefit from a "criticism" section not dealing with criticism of historical sources but of the document itself, especially coming from Muslims. Just as there is an article "Criticism of the Bible" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.153.0.251 (talk) 18:18, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

IMAM BUKHARI
Assalaam alaikum — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.48.187.10 (talk) 10:52, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Author Details
I understand that there's a separate article about the author, but shouldn't there be a brief introductory section about Ismail Bukhari as well. Moughera (talk) 13:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sahih al-Bukhari


text:
Charles McCool

Charles Arthur McCool (February 27, 1853 – March 19, 1926) was a Canadian politician. He represented the riding of Nipissing in the House of Commons of Canada from 1900 to 1908. He was a member of the Liberal Party.

McCool, a lumber merchant before entering politics, was born in Chichester, Canada East (Chichester, Quebec).

title: Charles McCool


text:
Michelle Dawson

Michelle Dawson (born 1961) is a Canadian autism researcher who was diagnosed with autism in 1993–1994. Since 2004, she has worked as an autism researcher affiliated with the Autism Specialized Clinic of Hôpital Rivière-des-Prairies in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Career
In 2004, Dawson joined Laurent Mottron's research team. Dawson says that most scientists try to determine how autistic brains are broken, but Dawson thinks it would be more useful to try to determine how autistic brains work rather than how they are broken. She has collaborated with Mottron to publish research papers, with Mottron estimating that Dawson contributes about 20% to the finished product.

She wrote a paper challenging the ethical and scientific foundations of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)-based autism interventions. She also challenged the medical necessity of ABA for individuals with autism in the Supreme Court of Canada in Auton v. British Columbia, 3 S.C.R. 657.

Personal
She herself was diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder in 1993–1994. Born in 1961, Dawson was not diagnosed as a child. Dawson has been receiving disability benefits, on account of her autism diagnosis, since 2003. Michelle Dawson is a high school graduate.

Before working under Laurent Mottron, Dawson was a postal worker for the Canada Post until she took a leave of absence in 2002. Dawson filed two human rights complaints against the Canada Post, alleging that she was being discriminated against. The first complaint was settled out of court. The second complaint was the first autism-related case taken to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, where she represented herself. She won this complaint.

Dawson received an honorary doctorate from the Université de Montréal in June 2013

In 2015, she was recognized by the Québec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission for her human rights work.

She was awarded the Ordre de Montréal in 2017. The award states "She has documented the poverty of scientific and ethical standards in autism intervention research, and the resulting harm to autistic people. Contrary to long-entrenched views, she believes that autistics deserve the same basic rights as the rest of humanity. She also believes that in research, as elsewhere, autistic and non-autistic people should work together as equals."

title: Michelle Dawson


text:
Talk:Tony Esposito

Untitled
This page is now included on the French Wikipedia. Someone should probably add that on the sidebar.
 * The French Wikipedia link to their Tony Esposito article has been added. I took out the Netherlands Wikipedia link to a Tony Esposito article because it was apparently about an Italian musician or singer born in July 1950.  H Padleckas 01:36, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tony Esposito