Talk:Amr Khaled

More background
This entry would be enhanced by some background on Amr Khaled's ideologies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.175.214.33 (talk • contribs).

New picture
I think someone should put a better picture, this one dosent look right. The one in the arabic wikipedia looks better. Bazel 17:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think this one is more recent than the one on the arwiki, it should do fine for now.. and please do not forget to sign your comments on wikipedia again.. -- PASSIVE (Talk|E-Mail) 10:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Bazel 222.152.199.229 03:24, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I've updated the profile image with a more recent one from his website, a snapshot of a promotional flash movie currently running to advertise for an online interview schedule. IMHO this image is indeed much more appealing than the previous one, however, feel free to change--NomadOfArabia 03:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * this picture looks a lot better, good job Nomadofarabia Bazel 03:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I think both of the images are good ones. Before I saw the posts here, I restored the infobox image and positioned the new image in the Ministry and audience section of the article. I hope this hasn't offended anyone. — Athænara   ✉  05:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your comment Athaenara and no offense taken at all. The main reason for objecting to the original image and hence replacing it, IMO, was that the original one seemed to be rather awkward as a infobox image for the article. Although the image is taken from an interview, which may make it of more significance than promo images, however, there surely are better interview images of him. I guess the original intention of selecting this image in particular was to hint somehow Amr Khaled's appreciation for the intellectual approach of dealing with Islam (with the pointing of his finger to his head and all). Yet somehow the image IMHO ends up as some sort of a funny snapshot, taken of him while he gazes to what seems to be nowhere. On the other hand, I think that requiring other images to illustrate a section such as Ministry and audience currently comes as a second priority to selecting an appropriate main image for the article. Thus, preferring to preserve the new image for the article's infobox, I moved it back for now. However, I'm more than willing to discuss this further in the evidence of an opposing concession. --NomadOfArabia 11:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

wrong informations....!!!!
he's #13 in time 100

actually he IS 63 of 100 according to the TIMES site it self http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/time100/article/0,28804,1595326_1615754_1616173,00.html GamerXp 21:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

NO according to the TIMES and his personal site he's 13..dunno where ppl got the rummor of this 62 number? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TAKEN00 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Check this out: http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/time100walkup/article/0,28804,1611030_1612457,00.html the link you provided is just a list the actuall ranks are in this link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TAKEN00 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)