Talk:Umar Al-Qadri

Anti-LGBTQI views
Al-Qadri has himself reverted the edits to this page as he doesn't want to truth to be known, but everything added was referenced to a reputable source. This page should be locked to prevent self-editing. 109.255.62.77 (talk) 11:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I am not Sheikh Al-Qadri, and neither is my wife. We are both, in fact, Spartacus. Now, please, stop removing referenced content and inserting unreferenced content. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Did you check the references for the content I removed? Does it meet notability criteria? Why have you deleted referenced content? 109.255.62.77 (talk) 11:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Most of the referenced material that you are repeatedly gutting from the article satisfies both notability and reliable source criteria. Most of the material you are attempting to insert is unreferenced. That will not fly in a BLP. Just stop. Take this as a warning that you are about to breach the WP:3RR rule and if you persist, you will be blocked. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 13:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not referenced, it's self promotion at best, but I shall now proceed section by section and reference why it was removed. If you have a dispute, please discuss it rather than proceeding with threatening behaviour. 109.255.62.77 (talk) 16:55, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Page has been semi-protected. As and when editors return, especially new editors, they would do well to read Beware of the tigers. This is a biography of a living person and, as such, please note that material about living persons added to Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research. The IP should also note that our WP:NOTABILITY guidelines apply to the subjects of articles, not article content. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)


 * User:Bastun has reinstated a rake of material with no references, obviously biased towards the subject. Request another admin to take a look at this. 109.255.62.77 (talk) 15:26, 23 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I am not an admin. I restored a lot of material with references. The article is 24 sentences long, and currently has no less than 19 references (1 repeated, which I need to name and re-use)). A ratio of 1:1.2 references to sentences would seem to be on the higher end of the scale for properly referenced BLPs. Not every sentence needs a reference - sometimes a reference will serve several preceding sentences, not just the immediately preceding sentence. The version I restored from had 21 references (one repeated three times, another repeated twice), and we don't really need three references for the same sentence. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There isn't a valid reference in the entirety of the "Life in Ireland" section: the first reference is a link to his own website. A quick look at the Charities Regulator and CRO websites would reveal that there is no organisation by any of the names referenced as Al-Qadri's organisations in the article.
 * Al-Qadri is definitely not a member of the Irish Council of Imams - he left very publicly, and a Google search will reveal this. He is not a member of Fingal County Council, Blanchardstown Citizens Information Centre or the TCD Scriptural Reasoning Group. There is no evidence he is still a member of Fingal Ethnic Network. Indeed the only link provided on that page is a link to a generic Trinity departmental landing page which doesn't mention him, as he has nothing to do with them.
 * Nor can two articles authored by Al-Qadri in two decades in Ireland be accurately described as "writing occasionally" - he has written, extremely occasionally.
 * This is just an analysis of a single section to put things in focus: merely quoting numbers when the references provided don't say the things claimed is not encyclopaedic, and you have clearly got form for this with Irish related issues: I note you were given a warning for repeated reverts on the People Before Profit page too. Stand over what you've written/reinstated with references or allow it to be deleted, this isn't a platform for your political views: set up a blog. 109.255.62.77 (talk) 20:54, 23 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Lol, what? Anyone can give a "warning"; I've been here for 17 years and my block-free record speaks for itself, so I wouldn't go down that road if I were you. Stop with the personal attacks. You clearly have an agenda against the subject of the article. WP:NOTHERE. Can the article be improved? Undoubtedly. I'll certainly have a look at improving the references over the next couple of days. Can it be improved by calling the subject "Islamist", or blowing his espousal of a very standard, religious view out of all proportion to make him look like some extremist? No. Have a read of WP:BALANCE and WP:NPOV. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 22:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Annnyway - we work cooperatively here. So I've added in Al-Qadri's resignation from the Council of Imams, prompted by your comment above. Al Qadri doesn't appear to have a personal website. We can absolutely use the Cultural Centre's website as a source - see WP:BLPSPS and WP:BLPSELFPUB. I've also added in another link to an I.T. article written by Al-Qadri. Note that the Irish Times website is shite. It's 'search by author' function doesn't work. It shows just the two results for articles written by Al Qadri, in 2015 and 2016. These are presumably the "two articles" you mention above - but the two articles used as references for that are dated to 2011 and January of this year. He occasionally writes. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 23:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

RogerCasementStan
It's clear from previous POV-pushing edits that has an agenda when it comes to the subject of this BLP, but this latest attempt to paint Al Qadri as "pro-Russian" is quite laughable. Pope Francis has come out with largely similar views, as did Sabina Higgins. Not seeing any additions to those BLPs from this account, though. Funny, that. Annnyhooo... that's two reverts inside a day. Please don't breach 3RR. Consider this your 3RR warning. You may also want to read WP:BRD. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:39, 19 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks for clarifying that tweets aren't an accurate reflection of the tweeters views. I'm going to remove his tweets you inserted into the section on views on LGBT issues and stick to what was reported in the press. Take it, as this is your own rule, that you won't be reverting that, or else your 3RR warning is worth little.
 * On a wider issue, you've been obsessed with moaning about my "agenda" for months now. Of course people are invested in different areas, issues and that's what motivates them to contribute. Wikipedia wouldn't get very far if we insisted all the Harry Potter fans HAD to edit Lord Of The Rings pages. Cop on like. RogerCasementStan (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi folks. I am the one who reverted the most recent Russia-related addition from you, Roger, and I explained my reasoning in the edit summary. It was not "tweets from a subject are not RS for that subject's views" - that view is against policy. It was that the sources do not support the claims, and also that other tweets from the subject explicitly contradict the claims - which is a major issue especially for BLPs.
 * I find the WP:POINT removal of the LGBT-related section - which it appears was much more closely accurate to the sources used, in that it was a direct quote - to be very unfortunate. I will be reverting that removal having explained my reasoning here; by 3RR I cannot do so if it happens again but I hope we can reach a consensus before any further edits on this matter. CharredShorthand (talk) 15:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)


 * And you're persisting with putting words in my mouth, Roger. Please don't do that. "Obsessed" with you? Hardly... 😄 Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)


 * is entirely correct. The tweets re Russia/Ukraine do not back the claims you are making for them. Entirely different to the LGBT situation. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * They do, but you already know that, you're just a simp for homophobes and murderers, with unlimited time to spend on Wikipedia. RogerCasementStan (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you please clearly explain how the tweets you cited directly support to Wikipedia standards the claim that this subject has a strongly pro-Russia stance, which was what you put in the article? CharredShorthand (talk) 16:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * If you didn't come here with such pre-conceived ideas and actually looked at my contributions, you might be able to work out that no, I'm in no way a, and you accusation is, in fact, ridiculous. It is also another personal attack. Last warning. Next time, I go to AN/I. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Good luck bro, last time you were going getting a Trinity College IP address banned. Get a hobby or something. RogerCasementStan (talk) 19:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * To explain it this way: the usage of Twitter as a primary source is allowed, for claims that meet WP:ABOUTSELF and (in the case of the LGBT views section) for direct quotes attributed to the subject. What you used it for in this situation was providing your own analysis of two tweets (in the "he has taken a pro-Russia stance" bit), which is not allowed per WP:NOR. Per point 4 of WP:PRIMARY: Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Also, between accusing Bastun above of being a "simp for homophobes and murderers" (having previously claimed the subject of this article was his "pet homophobe") and then suggesting I reverted your edits because I "didn't like the material", you've violated WP:NPA a few times already and it's pretty hard to read this as anything other than being WP:TENDENTIOUS and bordering on WP:NOTHERE. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 17:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh no, am I going to get banned from your internet sausage party? RogerCasementStan (talk) 19:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)