Template talk:Ahmadiyya

message: The image used in the template is representative only of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. If an image needs to be used at all, it should represent both branches of the movement. Nazli 04:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unilateral Image 

message: Hope it looks good and has enough info for now. We need some help from Ahmadis to make their articles better, they're really lacking right now. I'm surprised they haven't come earlier, since they're especially active in the English-speaking world. Everything here seems to be written by their detractors with only some non-partisan parties lightening things up. --Enzuru 19:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redid the look and other stuff 

message: Dr. Basharat Ahmad is not mentioned because he was the father in law of Maulana Mohammad Ali. This fact is incidental and was mentioned as part of his biography summary.
Dr. Basharat Ahmad is mentioned because of his prominence as an Ahmadi scholar and companion of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He is notable for his comprehensive biogrpahy of Ghulam Ahmad's life as well many other intellectual contributions. Please see Dr. Basharat Ahmad for links to many of his famous works.
Nazli 03:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: His work doesn’t appear substantial to mention his name in template. Writing a book or two should not be criteria to declare someone substantial. Someone is trying to impose his/her POV.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik07 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Please note he has not written only "a book or two". He has been a consistent contributor to Islamic literature for decades and like Maulana Mohammad Ali has has personal contact and interaction with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - hence his importance. Nazli 03:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Still does not qualify. A lot of nuts will qualify for writing  a few books under "Islamic literature". General acceptance on importance of work and credibility is relevant. Unless he is a personal friend of yours and you know something what not many else know.
Actually he does qualify based on "General acceptance on importance of work and credibility". Please see , , . Nazli 03:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't quite understand what you mean by "sneak in". Both Dr. Basharat and Naseer Ahmad are widely known and respected for their contribution to Islamic and Ahmadiyya literature - is evident from their well documented intellectual contributions.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazli (talk • contribs) 03:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Including the names of some widely respected and significant personalities is not an imposition of POV. Nazli 03:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What widely respected and significant personalities? Are you Lahori? As only you seem to know him. Is he widely known and respected outside Lahori community, a community which is pretty small on its own? Quit adding POV.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik07 (talk • contribs) 04:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: You have given only one Lahori site reference and claim they are known internationally? By how many people? You and who? If anyone is biased its you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik07 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here are some more references from sites not related to the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement. Library of Congress  . Ahmadiyya Muslim Community  . From an anti-ahmadiyya site . Miscellaneous references . Nazli 04:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr. Basharat Ahmad 

message: :Image:Ahmad.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 19:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given them the rationale. We'll see what happens. --Enzuru 14:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Ahmad.png

message: I have reverted  the latest changes to the template for the following reasons:
1. The new image is not representative of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement
2. References related to the differences in two branches of the movement (specifically their leaders/scholars) had been removed.
Nazli (talk) 05:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure That's fine with me, but please change the colors and partial caps; they are a real eyesore. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 06:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologize, I was not thinking of the colors / caps - please go ahead make any changes that you feel will look better. Nazli (talk) 12:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As the designer of this present day mutant, I have taken out the smallcaps and faded the blue colour. --Enzuru 08:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partial Revert 

message: With a parameter and a switch inside the template, the image may change. So you can have two indipendend images. --Ahmadi2 (talk) 19:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: I made major changes in layout. If there are any issues please discuss.Thanks.Peaceworld111 (talk) 23:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why the change of colors from the official ones of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam to the new ones?!--Nawabmalhi (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Black is the colour of the Ahmadiyya flag, not sure if that means that it is the color of Ahmadiyya, nevertheless the reason why I changed the colour is because a sharp dark colour looks excessively dominating on a page and so I wanted to change to a light background. There was no particular reason why I chose a trace of blue as the background other than readability and this. Moreover, the current design, which I also changed, is more simplistic. Thanks.--Peaceworld 09:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  major changes in layout 

message: 'Humanity First' is, according to the following judgement, an equal part of the organisation structure as the 'Shura', 'MTA' and 'Jalsa Salana'. This is my judgement, you may differ in opinion. Feel free to present contrary facts.
* All four organisations have members of the Community as permanent staff, and all four were founded by the Caliphs.  
* All but MTA have institutional international conferences held by the current Caliph.  https://www.khalifaofislam.com/tag/humanity-first/   
* All but MTA and Jalsa are run by the Community all year round. 
* The Ahmadi community raises money for Humanity First charity projects year round (through flagship annual events).  http://www.barkinganddagenhampost.co.uk/ahmadi-children-raise-3-000-for-humanity-first-in-dagenham-1-5043566  http://www.mercy4mankind.org/ 
In fact, Humanity First is therefore classed, by the community's own actions listed above, as above the MTA and Jalsa in the structure.
Considering that I have previously failed to leave enough evidence, I hope this evidence helps.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by PYoung550 (talk • contribs) 11:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for bringing this to the talk page. Being an organisation of the Community does not necessarily mean that it is part of the Community's organisational structure (or Nizam-e-Jama'at). Humanity first cannot be equated with the 'Shura', 'MTA' and 'Jalsa' because they are primarily for the Community and are religiously affiliated with it. The 'Shura', in fact, is exclusively for the Community members only. By contrast, although Humanity First was founded by and is run by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, as your evidences above point to, it is not religiously affiliated to the Community in the way other institutions or auxiliaries (Khuddam, Lajna etc.) which make up the Community's organisational structure are. Humanity First has always been secular in nature and was specifically set up to serve, not just Ahmadis or Muslims, but all humankind without any distinction. Relief convoys go out as representatives of Humanity First and not of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. An article about its foundation from the Community's official website here clearly states that Humanity First was established as a "non-political, non-sectarian" and "non-religious" charity. It is also notable that the official Humanity first websites here and here do not even mention the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in contrast to how the websites of the various auxiliaries of the Community do. If it was a part of the Community's organisational structure it would at least mention it on its offical websites would it not?. I still think it's more appropriately placed under Miscellaneous. -- Sirius86 19:36, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humanity First as an organisation? 

message: Add the following articles to the template, under the "United Kingdom" heading:
* Baitul Futuh Mosque
* Islamabad, Tilford (or to be replaced with Mubarak Mosque, Tilford
Order should be Fazl Mosque, Baitul Futuh Mosque, Islamabad, Tilford, Mubarak Mosque, Tilford. HolyArtThou (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added Baitul Futuh Mosque and reordered the list. Mubarak is already in the list, has a prominent link to the Islamabad, Tilford article, and covers much if the same detail. So including it seems like duplication. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 11:01, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 October 2023