User talk:Kuddyc

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Khurramchaudhary, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Peaceworld111 (talk) 18:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Websites/Infobox

Salaam and thank you for your contributions.

• However I disagree with some of your edits concerning the addition of the websites. Sites such as Khalifatul Masih II and Khalifatul Masih II cannot be added in the infobox because I've already added more representative websites to the Khalifatul Masih II and Khalifatul Masih IV pages, namely [1] and [2].
• Concerning the Khalifatul Masih V page: I understand that a proper website doesn't exist, but still this Khalifatul Masih V link is not a website under dedication. It is at best an external source of information and hence I think it should be in the External links section.Peaceworld111 (talk) 02:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Salam. I just thought it would be better to have more websites available but I'm okay either way. Let me know what you think about some of the changes I've made to the Khaliftul Masiah infobox template. I'm trying to simply add to it and clean it up a little.

I've made the reversions. I'm currently happy with the Infobox template changes. You may want to have a look at Category:Ahmadiyya stubs, a collection of articles that are in need of expansion. That's where major attention is needed.Peaceworld111 (talk) 02:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Salam. I made some changes to the Template:Khaliftul Masih. The changes allow it to be used for the Khulifa and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. The only thing is I think we should rename the template to 'islam_ahmadiyya_leaders' though I don't know how to do it. Thoughts? Eventually, I think the template can be expanded to also include prominent Ahmadi leaders such as MM. Ahmad, etc. Also, I made that same mistake of having the title 'Caliphate' in the upper right-hand corner of the template/doc section. Can you have a look? Refer to the documentation for the new field that switches between Prophethood and Caliphate.Khurramchaudhary (talk) 07:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that the template should be changed to Islam ahmadiyya leaders or to any similar name because:

• the notability of people on Wikipedia like MM Ahmad or others is not recognized because of their affiliation with Ahmadiyya but because of their recognized status or notability in their career, in this case e.g. MM Ahmad being the vice president of World Bank. Hence such an infobox for these people will not be representative. So a more representative infobox should be. E.g. the infobox for Abdus Salam is Template:Infobox scientist.
• If you look at other religious leaders/founders like Muhammad, Jesus, they all use the infobox Template:Infobox Person and so it is best to follow similar strategy. The reason why I created Infobox Template:Infobox Khalifatul Masih was because of the existence of similar infoboxes as found in other religious successors for example, Template:Infobox Caliph and Template:Infobox Pope...to follow a similar strategy. So I don't think that the infobox should even be applied to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.Peaceworld111 (talk) 15:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• I agree overall that we should follow the approach laid on wikipedia (using the same templates as other prophets, etc.) however, I think that the template we make should have some consistency across leaders (ie, Ghulam Ahmad and Khulifa) within the commmunity. The infoxbox Template:Infobox Person does apply from a high-level but when tying together as one group/unit/community, I think it's a better approach.
• I may have spoke quickly (it was 2am my time when I wrote it) when I said MM Ahmad. I agree that he should be recognized for his work with the World Bank first, not just because he was an Ahmadi. However, what I meant was other leaders such as prominent missionaries (ie, the first missionary to England in the 1930s.. I can't remember his name). With a consistent template, we could tie all the leaders (Ghulam Ahmad, khulfa, and highly visable Ahmadi leaders) and overall, it would show the depth of organization within the community. Does that make sense? Khurramchaudhary (talk) 16:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• Essentially I think there are two main problems with using the same template on the Ahmadiyya Khulafa and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. First of all, it is a valid point to say that using a similar template ties the group of leaders together, but as I stated above, my apology for not being clear, that within the Ahmadiyya community, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has a different status to the successors. He is recognized as a prophet and the others not. But that's not the point. The point is that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is recognized as the central figure in Ahmadiyya (though the Caliphs are held high and hold high level of authority - which is different). Similarly Muhammad is recognized as the central figure in Islam and the successors are not (though the Caliphs are held high and hold high level of authority - which is again different). Again the same could be said within Christianity. With these examples I am trying to say that all these people (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Muhammad,Jesus etc) are recognized as the central figures and their successors are not. Ok, now that we have established two opposing views, one that ties a particular group together irrespective of the different statuses of the individuals and the other that I have just explained. Which one to choose can be a highly subjective choice, but i'd rather vote for the second one.
• The second, though potentially a bigger problem is that it may not follow WP:NPOV guidelines. You see that you have titled Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as Imam Mahdi which may be considered bias as if he is unanimously accepted as Imam Mahdi by all (or at least most) Muslims. This cannot evidently be accepted on Wikipedia. Ok, you might be thinking that the same problem might occur with Khalifatul Masih. But the phrase Khalifatul Masih unlike Imam Mahdi is rarely used outside the Ahmadiyya community, as though it is the phrase invented by the community (though obviously not). Let me give you examples. you see the phrase Caliph (which means leader or successor) has not been pointed out as POV because the phrase is exclusively used within the Muslim world, though it only means leader and implies the leader of Muslims (see:Caliph for definition). So if we were to use the translation instead this would have accounted for bias.
• Other Ahmadiyya leaders: Ok, for this i think it would be best to create a separate template (possibly just for prominent missionaries) again for the reason that they and the Khulufa hold separate statuses within the community. But the problem here would be that there are no (just 1 i think) articles about prominent/historical missionaries. You need the articles first before the template.
• Finally, if I haven't made myself clear, please ask. Wassalam.Peaceworld111 (talk) 18:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• to add to the second bullet point in my last edit. Here is the evidence. If I do a google search of Imam Mahdi : 1 you get result from Ahmadi but also (infact maniy) from other Muslim sites. But if I google 2 there is not a single website concerning non-Ahmadi Muslims. Hope that helps.Peaceworld111 (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• Don't get me wrong. I completely agree with you when you say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has a very different status then the Caliphs. And though I think the use of the same template is a good idea (the one we worked on provides more details and information then the Template:infobox person, my intention is not to say that Mirza Ghulam Ahamd and the Caliphs are similar in any way. But I don't think that means we can't modify the template specifically for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to give him more distinction (perhaps greater emphasis on certain portions, thicker border, I'm not sure, I'm just thinking outloud) to show that he does have greater status.
• I may have put 'Imam Mahdi' which may be controversial but that really can be whatever we feel is appropriate. You're right that many don't believe that he is the Imam Mahdi but we can put another title.
• I think we both have the same intention -- to ensure the accuracy of the Ahmadiyya community's information on Wikipedia. Along with accuracy, I'm a stickler for presentation (as you may have noticed). My vote is to continue with a common template yet modify it specifically for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to show that he is central to the community and distinctly different from the Caliphs yet that they are all tied to the same community. As we progress, I think we can add sections to expand the infobox and add more prominent volunteers/community leaders. Though I can only think of a handful right now, I believe there are many 'forgotten heros'. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 20:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• If you really want to keep the template (for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad), you will not only have to remove Imam Mahdi title but also Prophethood subtitle in order to comply with Wikipedia WP:NPOV guidelines...and of course I wasn't getting you wrong, I was only explaining to you merits and distadvantages of the same template. And its not just about accuracy, its also about neutral point of view and Im as a wikipedian quite strict on that.
• But also the template in Hakim-Noor ud-Din article says that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a predecessor. That's kind of confusing.
• By forgotten I think you mean companions of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad such as Jaluddin Shams, Maulvi Abdul Karim etc? yeah. that'll be a good start. For that I would personally recommend a separate template.Peaceworld111 (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• I'll change 'Imam Mahdi' to 'Founder of Ahmadiyyat'. I'll change 'Prophethood' to something though I'm not sure what to change it to.
• I agree about making Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a predecessor of Hakim-Noor ud-Din however, I made that change based on the profile of Abu Bakr. I agree it's a little misleading so I'm going to remove it. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 01:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

• More on the issue: Is the following bit not confusing too? Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was succeeded by Hakim Nur-ud-Din?Peaceworld111 (talk) 02:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

• I agree confusing but technically accurate. I found the following published by Review of Religions "He passed away in 1908 and was succeeded by his foremost votary and closest companion, Hazrat Hafiz Haji Hakim Maulvi Noor-ud-Din. After his death in 1914, Hazrat Haji Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, was chosen as Head of the Movement ...". I know what you mean though. It sounds like we're taking away from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad since he was a prophet while Noor ud-Din was a caliph. I think the best thing to do is put the information and cite the reference. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 02:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

• Possible correction required: 23 March 1889 was the date that Ahmadiyya community was founded, not necessarily the date he claimed to be the reformer...please check on that. Secondly since you placed claim to reformer, you can equally put claim to prophethood without compromising NPOV. Thirdly it is best to put the Founder of the Ahmadiyya movement instead of Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community which is POV per Lahori Ahmadis regard Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as their founder too.Peaceworld111 (talk) 18:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

• Corrections made except instead of 'Claim to Prophethood', I put 'Claim as Messiah'. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Possible correction:maybe it is best to put just the date when Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be the Promised Messiah, i.e.without the date of his death. Unlike Khilafat, there is no successor as a Messiah. Maybe that'll clear the confusion I pointed out earlier.Peaceworld111 (talk) 21:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I removed the date and just left it as 'circa 1891'.Khurramchaudhary (talk) 23:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Bahishti Maqbara

Here's a thought from me. I think you might want to move the article Bahishti Maqbara Rabwah to Bahishti Maqbara with subsections consisting of the graveyard of Qadian and Rabwah. Peaceworld111 (talk) 13:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Great point! I'm not sure how you change the title though. Can you do it for me? Khurramchaudhary (talk) 18:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

moved. you see the arrow pointing downwards on the top right corner, near the history tab - thats what is used to move pages.Peaceworld111 (talk) 18:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I quickly made a few edits and will continue to work on it. If you have any resources, it would be a great help. Other than what was written in 'The Will' and a brief article on Al-Islam.org, there isn't much info on Bahishti Maqbara. Do you know if we can use pics from Al-Islam.org? I tried to use one but it seems Wikipedia doesn't like it :)Khurramchaudhary (talk) 18:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

No, the pics on alislam.org are copyrighted and hence cannot be used (see above section for more guidance). Also the upload form Wikipedia:Upload may give you a good idea what you can upload and what you can't. See each link for the limitations of the uploads. Note that most internet images are copyrighted and hence cannot be used. Peaceworld111 (talk) 19:29, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at this independent source (which is preferable) 1 by Simon Ross Valentine for more information.Peaceworld111 (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problems

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Bahisti Maqbara Rabwah.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Bahisti Maqbara Rabwah.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 04:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 04:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Talim-ul-islam emblem.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Talim-ul-islam emblem.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Dr. Abdus Salam Scientists of Pakistan.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Dr. Abdus Salam Scientists of Pakistan.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Eeekster (talk) 20:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Friday Sermons article

Good article, but possibly disputed by some editors. Other than that, I would propose to change the heading as it is currently incorrect to something like List of Friday Sermons (2011 - Mirza Masroor Ahmad)Peaceworld111 (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll make the change to the article. Obviously, there will be a list sermons for previous years so I think we'll evetually a parent article that links all years (ie, 2010, 2011, et.). Possibly "List of Friday Sermons"? and then sections broken out per Khalifa, per year? Let me know what you think. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Parent article

This is a strong disagreement on my part concerning the parent article you just created, List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad) simply because it just the same as other articles, but without the summaries - it's just in my opinion a pointless article. You need to look at parent articles like List of religious leaders to have good idea what a parent article should look like - just listing the years. I think it is better to create an article along the lines List of Friday Sermons by Khalifatul Masih - creating sections for each Khulufa and just listing the years. Thanks a lot. Peaceworld111 (talk) 10:47, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I thought about that but I'm basing this on the format of TV eposides (see List of Law & Order episodes. Though it isn't the same thing, I think it's similar and unlike most, not many have (or will have) a slew of sermons online. I'm open either way. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 15:28, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

oh, i get it. Ok why don't we keep it how it is and if it doesn't work later on we'll discuss.Peaceworld111 (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

sounds good. my other thought was make the parent article similar to a 'bibliography' page where it would summarize all Friday sermons, books, writings and other speeches (ie, addresses at Jalsa, etc.) with links to subsequent pages. for now, i think there's quite a bit a work for just the Friday sermons so we can talk later as me make progress. Khurramchaudhary (talk) 20:45, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

cleaning articles

Salam, I've cleaned articles partially by removing excessive unneeded links, adding appropriate references and removing unneeded material. When adding references for the quranic verses cited in the sermons, you would need a reference that shows the verses cited in that particular sermon...giving reference from the Qur'an will not be a reference in this particular case as it doesn't show us that in a particular sermon such and such verses were cited. Also adding delivered by is unnecessary as it is obvious from the article heading. Peaceworld111 (talk) 09:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

length

...and saying that some sermon's length is n/a doesn't make any sense to me...?Peaceworld111 (talk) 09:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

• "N/a" usually means "not applicable". If you meant that you don't know how long the sermon was, just leave that entry blank, rather than putting in "n/a" or "unknown" or anything like that. (Please note that this comment is not meant to indicate my opinion of the overall article -- it is just a suggestion for improvement of the article.) --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. RadioFan (talk) 14:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad, 2011) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad, 2011) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Friday Sermons (Mirza Masroor Ahmad, 2011) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. RadioFan (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Image - Baitul Islam Mosque

If you ever happen to be passing by Baitul Islam mosque, would you mind taking a good shot? Peaceworld111 (talk) 12:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I'll be there for Juma on Friday. A shot of the building alone? Kuddyc (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Well there a number of nice images on google image search but they are all copyrighted, but they may give you a good idea what to look for.Peaceworld111 (talk) 22:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

If you can get any other nice images maybe like an aeriel view of Peace Village, Ontario (which I doubt would be possible) or maybe some other relevant images I'd be grateful.Peaceworld111 (talk) 22:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Salam, did you manage to get the pics?--Peaceworld 09:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Salam. I didn't get a chance last week and this week I'm out of town. I should be around there sometime next week (Juma for sure) and I'll take one then. Sorry for the delay. Kuddyc (talk) 14:57, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Salaam, it's been a long time since i edited, whenever you manage to get the image I would be delighted if you post it here. Jazak'Allah.--Peaceworld 18:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Ghana Khilafat Ahmadiyya Stamp 2008.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ghana Khilafat Ahmadiyya Stamp 2008.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 03:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Sermon list

Template:Sermon list has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)