Talk:Mustafa Raza Khan Qadri

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Islam High‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Grand Mufti of India claim

It is important that claims of Grand mufti of India are supported by WP:V and WP:RS resort. These edits [1] seem to have removed a WP:Failed verifcation claim, disrupted another cite with a possibly good source/further reading that may be worth retaining, and made a claim without citing a page number which make its hard to WP:V. There may be issues with the infobox change (vasectomy fatwa) being WP:UNDUE and poorly positioned. The good faith final edit cleared the explicit syntax breaking error but seems to have left other issues in place. Because of the possible usefulness of the added source and the importance of the claim I will not be simply reverting but will attempt to correct using a series of edits under a Template:In-use. Please wait until I have removed that template before making changes. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've done my best to adjust but i am concerned about the removal of the Template:Failed verification without fixing the problem (or sourcing a different spelling of Grand Mufti of India etc). Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mufti E Azam Hind

In the syntax-breaking edit I just reverted (that have have other issues as well) it seemed to imply "Mufti E Azam Hind" translates to "Grand Mufti Of India" in some language. I am stupid, but this is the English Wikipedia and reasonable knowledge of English is effectively the only requirement to edit. Can someone definitely confirm the language of "Mufti E Azam Hind" and what are its possible translations. (I think I effectively see this on the grand mufti page on a hyperlink in the infobox)? Apologies if this sounds like a stupid question. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC) (I'll recheck this at this point but I have RL stuff for bits through this evening).Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do see some content on (Razvi(ed),2011,pg 15("His Position On The Knowledge of Fiqh") which indicates "Mufti-e-Azam" translates as "The most exalted Mufti of all Time", in essence azam can translate as most exalted or greatest or probably grand. Its possibly a bit of a WP:SYNTHESIS to get to Grand Mufti of India, and probably requires careful qualification. I also note the following (floatling) source that I removed may be useful for something: Aala Hazrat Imam Ahmed Raza (December 2005). Al-Malfúz al-Sharif (1 ed.). South Africa: Imam Ahmed Raza Academy. ISBN 0620353082.. Still looking at this. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:29, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To voice issues with a couple of failed references that have been persistently removed I adjusted the content to match what is actually said. I've removed the word Ahlesunnat as its unclear its in the source. However to my best understanding 'ahle sunnat may mean body of literature but I'm really not sure. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 05:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned by Usha Sanyal as Mufti-e-Azam Hind. ScholarM (talk) 06:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Its a good reference, especially as on jstor. p.646 defining Mufti-e A'zam-e Hind as Great Jurisconsult of India) has to be almost imply Grand Mufti of India but I need to go back and re-read a few times; plus read that source a few times. (I will be doing other WP stuff in interim). Thanks.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:39, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae: Per the discussion above and those with TheresNoTime privately I am restoring

this version as it was helpful to the project. Dove's talk (talk) 19:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

private discussions don’t establish consensus and neither does a several month old discussion with a blocked user. Cease restoring it and misusing rollback. PRAXIDICAE💕 19:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What happened? I was noticed immediately from Swviewer that a terrible edit war happened there PAVLOV (talk) 20:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention one of the two blocked users in the above nearly two year old conversation is a sock who started adding this, whose edits you've restored across numerous articles and the other is incompetent and has many times been told to stop adding bad sources. Any discussion to establish consensus happens on Wikipedia, so any conversation you did or did not have with TheresNoTime off-wiki is irrelevant. PRAXIDICAE💕 19:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't misrepresent discussions had on IRC — I very clearly stated that "It would be inappropriate for me to make a unilateral decision, even less so in a private direct message :) I prefer to be transparent and fair, as I'm sure you can understand - you should make any requests to whitelist this site on Wikipedia itself". You asked if I would block your account if you restored the link (presumably once), and I said no. I disagree this spam link is helpful, and said as much. Further restorations will result in you being blocked. — TNT (talk • she/her) 19:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheresNoTime: It is not spam, can you please check it again. It is the restoration of citations to his disciples. I am sure you will never find sources to improve the encyclopedia except these kinds of stuffs. Dove's talk (talk) 19:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dove's talk: please explain to me how your use of WP:rollback was at all justified here when you rolled me back multiple times without a single explanation? PRAXIDICAE💕 23:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae I'm going to drop this for now, because it's fairly clear it will not go anywhere constructive and is a waste of my time 🤷‍♀️ I do not wish to interact with you other than as strictly necessary by policy. Dove's talk (talk) 12:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, I'd really rather not interact with you but you forced it by inappropriately using rollback and stalking my edits and rolling them back without an explanation, which you've yet to give and are required to do so per policy. Not doing so is a great way to get your rights revoked. Further, this isn't your own talk page, which I'll gladly avoid except for procedural notifications but given your contentious edits here and refusal to communicate you cannot ask me not to respond nor engage as this requires consensus and collaboration. PRAXIDICAE💕 17:12, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheresNoTime: May I know how my edit [2] was bad faith which lead you to revoke of my rollback. I was just improving the disciples section with sources including official website of Sunni Dawate Islami. Dove's talk (talk) 18:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TheresNoTime: Still Waiting for your response. Dove's talk (talk) 17:30, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]