Talk:Mubarak Ali Gilani
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mubarak Ali Gilani article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Mubarak Ali Gilani be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Pakistan may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
FOX dubbed 'muslims of america'
editi just saw this news report and i think anyone who's informed about this "FOX dubbed 'muslims of america'" group should contribute about the story and add the link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9_ntPp3tek&sdig=1 -- Jaakobou 13:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
+++account associated with link has been closed+++ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.65.34.205 (talk) 18:09, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The tone of this article is not neutral. It is written as if promoting the subject, not conveying a neutral point of view. There should be no 'False propaganda and it's refutation' section, for example.
The 'Publications' section sounds like ads. The emphasis added is dubious: 'very simple religious observance to cure certain mental disorders and supposed incurable diseases.' Every mention of curing mental disease with the Quran should have 'purported' everywhere, and it does not.
The passage 'such allegations have proven themselves to be fabrications with intent of vilification and slander' is partisan. This language does not belong in an encyclopedia. S. Textor (talk) 03:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Message to Xzinger
editWhoever you are, you are advised to cease and desist in your attempts to slander the name of Mubarak Ali Gilani with the false information you continue to post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirkhwand (talk • contribs) 19:09, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Mirkhwand, You removed reference titles and access dates here, here and then removed large portions of sourced text while falsely accusing me of vandalism in the edit summary. My edits are referenced with reliable sources and if you have issues with the text or references discuss them here on the talk page rather than deleting them. --Xzinger (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Xzinger, your so-called sources have been proven to be false, and incendiary propaganda both in the past and present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirkhwand (talk • contribs) 19:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Mirkhwand, You continue removing sourced content without discussing or following the wikipedia policy on MOS:ISLAM even thou Neutron Jack has twice informed you, I am reporting you for administrative action.--Xzinger (talk) 07:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Mirkhwand reverting changes
editMirkhwand, you have reverted my changes with no comment. I edited "holy quran" to simply "quran", because that's what MOS:ISLAM directs. If you disagree, say why. Neutron Jack (talk) 04:02, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
content dispute
editI have posted to the two Wikiprojects this page falls under to assist in resolving the dispute. Neither version is acceptable. Neither is adequately sourced for the contentions and inflammatory language on the one hand and the peacock terms on the other. I do not believe the Washington Times cite is sufficient to support the possibly defamatory content. Please do not readd w/o consensus to do so. Challenged negative BLP once removed should not have been restored w/o consensus. Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:30, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Dlohcierekim, thanks for protecting the page. If by defamatory you mean the use of word militant by Washington Times then here is a video produced by Gilani himself proudly displaying his militant views and confessing to providing "guerrilla training". --Xzinger (talk) 05:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Dlohcierekim, Even the respected Guardian describes Mubarak as militant.
When the 38-year-old journalist set off through the seething streets of Pakistan's biggest city, he walked straight into a trap. Pearl was hoping to interview Sheikh Mubarak Ali Shah Gilani, a militant Islamic leader who he hoped would tell him about links between Richard Reid, the Brixton-based Briton accused of trying to blow up a transatlantic flight with explosives in his shoes last December, and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda. Pearl disappeared before he reached Gilani's home.
--Xzinger (talk) 08:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
The current version is the precontention historically status quo stable version. Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:40, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Dlohcierekim, the current version has several unsupported claims including of mubarak being from the Ahlul-Bayt (House of Mohammed) and his american nationality added at the end using Category:American Muslims.--Xzinger (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2019 (UTC)