Talk:Shakir Ali Noori

Assessment

@Hell in a Bucket: Please could you do an assessment of the article using Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Assessment.-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Toddy1:, I'm not convinced for giving it a mid or high quality assessment from WP:Islam of which I'm an active member. I've update the assessment to stub/low all over the three Projects tagged. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 06:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

The way you do assessments is to do a checklist, with yes or no against each criteria. That way it shows what improvements would be needed.

1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations.
   It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
   It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
3. The article has a defined structure.
   Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
4. The article is reasonably well-written.
   The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.
   Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way.
   It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:33, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Toddy1, I appreciate the ping but unfortunately I am not experienced in grading articles. I'd use User:AaqibAnjum, who is part of wikiproject Islam and seems to have a good head on their shoulders for presentation. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 12:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Removal of TwoCircles as a source and question about the point of the article

I've removed TwoCircles from this article due to the lack of reliability of the source. Earlier discussions at WP:RSN can be seen at the following:

• Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_171#Is_TwoCircles.Net_a_reliable_source?
• Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_75#Sources_for_Popular_Front_of_India_article

I also consider it suspect that the Two Circles article was created as a sort of promotional fan piece around the time of the first wiki link above. I'm removing it both from this article as well as any others where I find it being cited about pointy claims re: religion in South Asia, which is facing a whole lot of POV pushing and promotionalism as a topic area.
I'm also wondering, given the delete result at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunni Dawat-e-Islami, why there's so much material on that organization here. Some of the sources, such as this one cited multiple times in the article, gives the subject (Noori) only a passing mention. I don't quite understand the reason, and, in light of WP:TOPIC, much of the information here seems out of place. Why does Noori's biography need to include the number of schools which SDI operates in India, what languages those schools teach, or details of the inaugural meeting of the rival organization Dawat-e-Islami? A lot of into here seems irrelevant. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)