Contents

Talk:Ahmadiyya

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ahmadiyya article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 365 days

Skip to table of contents

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pakistan Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. India Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion: New religious movements Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as High-importance). Indonesia Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics 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.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Islam: Ahmadiyya Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Ahmadiyya task force (assessed as Top-importance). Theology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology 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.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 23, 2015, March 23, 2017, and March 23, 2020.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about use of the terms Qadiani and Kafir and related ideas of whether Ahmadiyya are considered Muslims. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting on that topic.

These questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning Ahmadiyya.

Why does this page call the Ahmadiyya community Muslims?

Wikipedia adheres to a neutral point of view. That means that we rely on the information available in reliable, independent, secondary sources, which identify Ahmadiyya as a branch of Islam. The Ahmadiyya community's beliefs, like Islam, are based on the Six articles of Islamic Faith and the Five Pillars of Islam. Like all Muslims, Ahmadis accept the Quran as their holy text, face the Kaaba during prayer, follow the sunnah, and accept the authority of the ahadith.

Two arguments against the identification of Ahmadiyya as a branch of Islam are brought up repeatedly. One is that, according to some Muslims, Ahmadiyya has critical differences that put it outside of Islam. This is not relevant here; we stick with what reliable, secondary sources say just as we do when discussing the Nation of Islam, Messianic Jews, Won Buddhism, or any other controversial religion, and we avoid censorship. The second is that the government of Pakistan has declared that Ahmadis are not Muslims. That is not relevant here. The government of Pakistan does not influence Wikipedia policy. Both of these concerns are discussed in the article.

Why was my request or comment removed?

Because of the frequency of meritless and disruptive requests, any further requests to censor the page by removing the terms Muslim or Islam, unless the request complies with all relevant Wikipedia guidelines, including WP:Reliable sources, will be deleted without discussion. Any further requests to insert words such as Kafir or Qadiyani, or to rename the article to Qadianism, will also be deleted without discussion.

This section is permanently on this talk page and does not get archived. It is for mobile-device users for whom the the normal talk page header and FAQ are not shown.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

As ahmadiya community called themselves muslim to hijack islam, while its actually not islam, thats is why they cant be called "Muslim". Hafiz usama qureshi (talk) 11:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hafiz usama qureshi There is established, clear consensus that Ahmadiyya are Muslims, and this article, as well as the rest of Wikipedia, will continue to use that wording. —C.Fred (talk) 11:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"There is established, clear consensus" from whom ? Non muslims ? How is it relevant then ? Who should have authority to say what is compatible with Islam creed and what is not ? Wikipedia ? Non muslims ? Everyone movement can identify as muslim and it is true ? So tomorrow some buddhist says buddhism is a branch of Islam and it becomes true ?

Qadianis do not meet the basic requirements for claiming being a part of Islam. It is a verifiable fact.

Just a sneak peek: https://www.answering-ahmadiyya.org/11-reasons-why-ahmadis-are-not-muslim/

That's the problem with Wikipedia and the reason why I never donated. When it comes to hard science (math, physics, geography and such) it is reliable.

When it comes to soft knowledge (geopolitics, wars, economy-finance, history, philosophy, religions, theories of hard sciences) it becomes pure propaganda by some admins who just use the brand name of Wikipedia to assert an opinion as a fact.

Wikipedia should be split in 2 independant organisations. TheOtherPointOfView (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can use the same logic about Shia, sufies, salafies and athari

I mean some salafies consider all other sections non muslims

and yes they have articles in internet that say

“why athari not a Muslim “

”why Shia not a Muslim “

and so on 176.29.237.186 (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove all Islam and Muslim the Ahmadiyya community are not Muslim according to Pakistan government 71.241.206.50 (talk) 11:18, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Wikipedia is not a mouthpiece or sectarian propaganda arm of the Pakistani government. DMacks (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What any govt. says doesn't matter. We can't term the Ahmadis non-Muslims just because the Pakistani govt. thinks that, no more than we can call the Bahá'í Faith a heresy as per the Iranian govt.; that's NPOV violation. ― Ö S M A N  (talk · contribs) 09:46, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Read my comment above. On what basis are you proving they are muslims ? Just because they say so ? So if I say I am a rabbit it becomes true ? We need some critical mind at least for once. TheOtherPointOfView (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is calling themselves a rabbit, and you are correct- Wikipedia does not try to police religious groups' identities. PepperBeast (talk) 20:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then there is a way to fix that if Wikipedia wants to REALLY avoid conflict and not doing propaganda for one side or the other (which is not being objective because objectively Qadianis are not muslims whether you like it or not based on verifiable facts from both creeds that are mutually exclusive, enumerated in the link above):

"Qadianis" claim to be a new recent branch of Islam but the canonical mainstream branches of Islam reject this claim and consider them as a whole other different religion that is however inspired by and derived from Islam. (Same situation as sikhism)

Voila. You actually reflect the reality with a sentence like that. Instead of claiming falsehood. Please stop the bs and step up the game. Wikipedia is not your truth for God sake. (I am talking generally to all admins that keep doing propaganda for the past 15 years). TheOtherPointOfView (talk) 23:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That information is already in the article. PepperBeast (talk) 23:50, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

“ (Same situation as sikhism)”

sikhim never consider themselves Muslims 176.29.237.186 (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

|}

Shouldn't we put a 1-question FAQ on the talk page like this?:

I mean, this is commonly restated. ― Ö S M A N  (talk · contribs) 10:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It could certainly save some time in the long run - it crops up a lot! Iskandar323 (talk) 10:24, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. FAQ should be answered at the top. HolyArtThou (talk) 22:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC) HolyArtThou (talk) 22:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See how it's done in Talk:Adam's Bridge. Mobile users don't see talk page header boxes, so the FAQ is also in the first section, without a signature or date, so that the auto-archiver always keeps it there. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:37, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created a draft FAQ at Talk:Ahmadiyya/FAQ. If that seems reasonable, I can add it to this page. PepperBeast (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Works well enough for me. He who dares wins! Iskandar323 (talk) 17:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I have low hopes of success, but we'll see if it makes a difference. PepperBeast (talk) 23:20, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pepperbeast: That's an excellent and well thought out FAQ. I made some revisions to the /FAQ subpage, slightly expanding the reasoning beyond "because sources said so", and replacing the idiom "crop up". If you agree, we can put that revision on this talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:57, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me. PepperBeast (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I created a non-archivable first section of this talk page too, because the talk page header boxes don't appear for mobile users, and most of these meritless requests come from mobile devices in my experience. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:36, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent move. PepperBeast (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Anachronist; @Pepperbeast: I think we should also add something in the FAQ regarding moving the article to "Qadianism", since that stuff was actively discussed (see the archives). ― Ö S M A N  (talk · contribs) 13:57, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable to me. I'll draft wording when I have marginally more time PepperBeast (talk) 14:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pepperbeast: @EmperorÖsmanIXXVMD: I would just do what was done on Talk:Adam's Bridge. Under the FAQ question "Why was my comment removed?" simply say that any requests to rename the article to "Qadianism" will also be removed. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just added it to the answer of the second question. Feel free to revert if you want to write an expanded answer to a third question in the FAQ. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add at the end of third paragraph in the introduction. It is noted that Ahmadiyya sect is not considered Muslim according to the constitution of Pakistan, and hundreds of court decisions and parliament resolutions. 97% of Muslims in Pakistan feel hurt when Ahmadiyya are called Muslims. Nabeelan (talk) 03:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: seems undue weight for the introduction, already mentioned in the #Persecution section. Also, just no to adding "97% of Muslims in Pakistan feel hurt when Ahmadiyya are called Muslims." Cannolis (talk) 03:39, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]