Talk:Ahmad al-Hassan

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

---

Ahmed Hassani al-Yemeni → Ahmad al-Hasan al-Yamani – his title "al yamani" is not pronounced "al yemeni". 89.148.53.8 (talk) 05:25, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussion with ILikeCod

Hi ILikeCod, I would like to discuss with you the changes that you made, can we merge your changes with mine? That way we can see both points of view and include all the references. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goamn (talk • contribs) 02:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

sure, but i dont know why you removed the new york times source ... Ilikecod (talk) 02:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok I will revert back the changes and then add the new york times, I will add a new section "Controversy" and talk about the Battle of Najaf there. I have around 3 references showing how the media confused the Battle of Najaf leader (Soldiers of Heaven) with the Ansar of Imam Mahdi, and I will put all the media view points there about Battle of Najaf. If you want me to change anything please tell me through the talk page, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goamn (talk • contribs) 03:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Black Banners

108.6.11.253, you can't just keep putting the "Black Banners" text back in. It requires references, to show that it really happened. You need to refer to newspapers, books, or other reputable sources. If you just put the text back, again, then I will summon Wikipedia administrators. Neutron Jack (talk) 04:32, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Discussion about additions and changes that had been done

Greetings. I came and put in my time and effort to add information on the page and put in the list of famous scholars who disagree with Ahmad al-Hassan's claims and someone comes and reverts the page back to how it was with the broken reference citations and a site that doesn't have the name of Ahmad al-Hassan to begin with as a reference being cited. Most of the page doesn't even have proof for what it says and there is no [citation needed] brackets behind the claims and many parts of it are very one-sided as if it was a blog written by a pro-Ahmad al-Hassan person. This is not how an encyclopedia like wikipedia should be and I kindly ask whoever who did that to provide an explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.76.49.20 (talk) 02:26, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Edit war

@InZain11: has recently edited this article to remove sourced negative information about the subject, and replace it with laudatory content sourced to the subject's own website. This change has been reverted multiple times, and InZain11 has now violated WP:3RR to restore the information. Rather than prolonging the edit war, I instead ask InZain11 to comment here as to why they feel the altered version is preferable. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:25, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

InZain11 contacted me on my user talk page with the following comment.

Hello,

I am knowledgeable on the individual and that is the main reason why I am editing his page. I am including sources after every sentence and after every image included with complete detail. Not only that but I am including every minor detail with justification. As a result, please keep my version with undoing all my verified hard work. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InZain11 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@InZain11: Using the subject's own website as a source is not valid; Wikipedia relies on reliable independent sources. You have also whitewashed the article to remove information that is not complimentary to the subject, which is a violation of neutrality. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:28, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Using words like "whitewashed" makes you sound like an ignorant individual. The page is filled with non-factual information and bogus references to make the individual look bad. I am here to clear everything up and use VERIFIED sources from his website that explain the mess that was on the page before and clarify any misconceptions. I am doing what is right and am using images and the website that I cited has SOURCES in it so its not like information is fictional. I expect you now to put back my changes because you're the one in the wrong because I still have more than 75% of the page to edit and clean up. Thank you.

@InZain11: Everything WikiDan61 has told you here is correct, regardless what you think. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:48, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@FlightTime: Its backed by FACTUAL evidence, details and most importantly REFERENCES. I am not even done editing yet. I am still on the introduction. What you are doing is suppressing my ability to spread the message that Ahmad Al-Hassan is the saviour of our time. -InZain11

@InZain11: What part of Using the subject's own website as a source is not valid; Wikipedia relies on reliable independent sources do you not understand ? - FlightTime (open channel) 20:58, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@FlightTime: I understand that very well. I clearly stated that the website I am using is the first stepping stone to other references on there. That is how research is done. The process of linking helps with finding the answer an individual is looking for in a place filled with many kinds of information. This is why people come to Wikipedia first then branch out.

Good luck with that. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:08, 21 November 2018 (UTC)