" 

 == This article needs help == 
 and i dont know enough to be a help, but i am seriously confused, right off the bat. i mean, you talk about ali, and bakr and caliphs with no mention to who they are, when they were alive, how they were related, where they ruled specifically. in the first paragraph of the article proper alone, it seems like you refer to ali as if he lived and died or rather maybe he was two people... (""a violent coup d'état against Ali in his first day as caliph"" at least possibly suggests to me that he died in the violent attack, but not necessarily, but who did the coup, why, and when?) ali who? son of who? lived in where? related to who? serious, i don't know what the hell is going on. 
 

 :The first sentence of the article has a link to the Historic background of the Sunni-Shi'a split which is kind of necessary for this article.  To understand some subjects you sometimes need to go read some other things first.  I think this article is pretty good overall but some specific parts do need help.   

 ==First comments == 
 Now, lets just wait for Zora to vfd it.   

 ::lol. Youre right.  

 I put a POV tag on it. This page is unencyclopedic. I also suspect that many educated Shi'a would find it risible.   

 :You are welcomed to point out where the page lack encyclopedic qualities, so that we can fix the problem and have a good and encyclopedic page. We both are eagerly waitning your input, expecting them to come equaly fast as the pov tag came.   

 ::Oh, and regarding this, this is a Zereshk & Striver joint project, and we both support the facts writen here. You are encouraged to bring a Shia that contests any of the claims in the article, or try to falsifie any of it. It really isnt hard to find anti-Shia propaganda, or quotes what the old Sunni scholars thought of us, its the Salafis full time job to educate everyone of it.  

 :::She actually called us ""uneducated""...  

 ::::Yeah...  
 :::::""It feels to me like a grotesque waste of time and energy to negotiate with the mentally deficient and psychologically impaired.""Zora on Brandons talkpage 

 ::::However, i seems like Zereshk is geting the idea, everything is not up to here. It is not ok to remove what Shias belive are important, dissmising them as fables and pov just because she hasent heard of it. 

 :::::Brandon, I think I've figured it out. Striver and Zereshk enjoy conflict, enjoy writing something outrageous (poking me) and seeing how I will react. See the talk page on Historical Shi'a-Sunni relations. I always respond, due to my dogged insistence on trying to make Wikipedia ""good"" (by my standards). I have to let go of that. I just will not deal with them for a while, and see what happens. It's up to the rest of you to deal with Shi'a bias and Striver's spelling and grammar. I need to step back. I'll see how it goes if I just work on other articles for a while. Zora on Brandons talkpage 

 ::::  

 ::::I mean, its great that she has started to educated herself by reading some books about shias, like madelungs, but it is absurd that she belives she knows more than us about Shias after reading that book, dismmising everything that we belive in as inaccurate ""since madelung dont think so""...   

 :::::Striver, you really can be difficult at times.  I think it's safe to point out that average Shia knowledge is nothing special in scholarly terms.  I know many Sunnis whom if trying to write an encyclopedic article would get laughed off of wikipedia.  So, we must drop the idea that your religion privileges you in knowledge, and we must start getting you to cite references much better.  From scholarly sources, try books, especially established ones.  These websites that are getting passed off as real sources are problems because they are not scholarly works or even in the ball park.  Britannica would not publish things how you write them Striver, and just going on tone alone Zora's work is much better.  She also tends to cite sources more, and decent ones.  So, I