Talk:Yasir Qadhi

message: Yasir Qadhi is extremely controversial, both within the Muslim community and without.  Within the Muslim community, his connections to Wahhabism/Salafism are points of frequent discussion.  Outside the Muslim community, his Holocaust denial has generated significant attention and controversy.  These are important elements of his biography.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazy polar bear (talk • contribs) 20:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should not be a fan site 

message: Since when is the Washington Post with whom Yasir openly admitted being a Salafi a "Wordpress Blog". Instead of calling people "jahil" why don't you openly address the fact that Yasir DOES INDEED refer to himself openly as a Salafi yet his followers are desperately trying to conceal this fact! It's almost like Christians insisting Jesus is God when he said no such thing. Yasir openly admits being a Salafi and his followers desperately try and cover up his admissions. Ironic. Again, the source is the WASHINGTON POST and unless you can find a source equally reliable where Yasir says he is NOT a Salafi then call a spade a spade and stop covering it up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.222.183.220 (talk) 19:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The source is the the Washington Post not a blog! 

message: Why is there no mention of Sh. Yasir's memorization of the Qur'an? Aside from simply memorizing it, I believe he has memorized it in more than one style of recitation. These are probably his most noble credentials, yet, there is no mention of it. Can someone please consult Sh. Yasir about these credentials and then post them in this Wiki entry? Thank you.
Shiblizaman (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please refer to core content policy Wikipedia:Verifiability. Any material presented must be verified by sources, especially when it involves biographies of living people such as this. That's not to say memorisation is doubted, it just means it needs to be appropriately sourced when added. ITAQALLAH 23:17, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sh. Yasir Qadhi is Hafidh of the Qur'an 

message: There are are some Madkhalis trying to add the issue regarding the 'Pledge'. 
apart from the twenty madkhalis still left alive, this information is quite irrelevant to most of the readers of Wikipedia. The Madkhalis are free to write whatever they want on their blogs but they should leave this trivial controversy out of this site.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.93.81.221 (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Madkhali pranksters 

message: Obviously you are a new user, who signed up specifically to vandalize this post. Yes, there is no problem with adding controversial material, but the neutrality laws for BLP and the strictest criteria for reference material has been ignored by you. While I have tried to be compromising, leaving a lot of your additions, you continue to insist on adding irrelevant, potentially slanderous material to this page. I have sent a notice to Yasir Qadhi through his blog and asked him to directly contact admin to state his own position where applicable. If you keep up with the vandalism and edit-warring, you may be banned as per Wiki's policies Abureem (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I said in a 'talk' to you earlier, the info about Grieve's statements was placed there specifically because I believed it to be newsworthy, not because I was using him as a mouthpiece. I don't think anyone who wasn't of the MP's (Tory) political persuasion would take it too seriously, but it is of interest to see how controversies about Qadhi have been publically aired in the UK. Likewise for the statement in the (Tory-leaning) Daily Telegraph, which is of note more for its being there in a major newspaper than for what it says. The same could be said of comments made about Qadhi in an editorial (presuambly fact-checked as it wasn't ever called libellous) in the Boston Globe, the link to which I believe you deleted. It is approprate, I think, in a "Controversy" section to discuss controversies about the subject of the article that have appeared in major newspapers or have been brought up by members of parliament, whether or not they're fatuous. Such is the nature of controversy. I didn't create this account to specifically edit about Qadhi, but the amount of vandalism on this page to make it into a fan-site (your own edits notwithstanding) caught my attention. As you can see, I have no interest in taking out your expansions on some of the material I posted, and generally I think a lot of improvement to this entry has been made over the past week through our interaction. Piel Divina (talk) 17:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I think we are getting somewhere. Thanks for the cooperation. Abureem (talk) 05:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Warning to Piel Divina about BLP

message: The material relating to controversies which was sources to blogs, forums, and polemical websites has all been removed as per WP:BLP. Any views of Qadhi which are to be discussed should ideally have some sort of coverage by a reliable third party source so that this doesn't turn into an article of blockquotes about his every musing or observation. Regards, ITAQALLAH 22:22, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Self-published sources are acceptable. Qadhi's founded blog where he makes statements about his views should be considered reliable. Pls explain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP#Using_the_subject_as_a_self-published_source Abuzzzubair (talk) 08:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Itaqallah is right. Like WP:SELFPUB says, self sources may be acceptable in certain circumstances, where one can't reasonably expect reliable third party sources. For example, date of birth, city of birth, university of education etc. But, even in these cases they should not be connected to any controversies.VR talk 19:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poorly sourced material removed 

message: I removed the claim about Qadhi posting links to articles online for a number of reasons.
*Is posting links really that big of a deal?
*When did he post such links? "Recent" is ambiguous. He specifically affirmed the Holocaust (in clear words) in November 2008.
*A google search for "Qadhi" on Centre for Social Cohesion's website yields no such allegations made by the center.
*Finally, on which website did Qadhi post these links?
VR talk 21:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The test is whether an RS reported it.  But yes, posting such links, given the background (which also received RS coverage), is a sufficiently big deal.  His affirmation of the Holocaust if covered in an RS should be reflected as well.  The article reflects the timing relative to his statements, and we need only reflect what the RS says.  The search on CSC's site is not definitive -- websites delete material all the time -- and in any event constitutes independent research -- if you find an RS that says he never posted it to that site, though, we could reflect that statement as well as the statement that he did.  We need not know which website he posted the links on -- we need only reflect what the RS reported.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:54, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What nonsense. A newspaper cites an indirect claim to another organization's claim of some links on an islamic forum. Yet, neither the newspaper nor the other organization can provide any references or any evidence.  And we are supposed to accept this?  For BLP, you need the highest sort of confirmation that the person actually did or acted a certain way.  The Telegraph should be sued for what could constitute defamation if no evidence is available. And certainly wiki can't participate in such tabloid-type reporting. Abureem (talk) 09:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I can't believe your discussing this, extraordinary claims req very strong sources, there is nothing say it was him at all, anyone could post in his name on any forum, there is not support for this at all, I support its removal. Off2riorob (talk) 20:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Online links

message: To begin with, this is a biography of a living person which means that all contentious material must be directly supported by quality reliable sources. The entire controversy section contains 2 sources. The first is this pledge that was supposedly "met with censure". There is no source that says the pledge was "met with censure" and nothing else in the paragraph is sourced. The other source is this blog entry by Mona el-Tahawy. It is used to source the sentence that Qadhi also faced backlash for his alleged shaking of CNN journalist Mona Eltahawy's hand. Nothing in the source supports the idea that Qadhi "faced a backlash" for shaking her hand and nothing else in the entire paragraph is sourced. The entire section violates WP:BLP and as such I am removing it. Also, before anybody reflexively reverts that removal, please read this. nableezy - 19:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  controversy section 

message: I wrote a section on his views on Shi'ism, which seem very polemic. The section was removed because my sources were apparently not verifiable and I would like someone else to go back and determine if they agree. At least one of the sources, from which I got most of my material, I believe was, and perhaps that material could be returned exclusively. It came from what appears to be a very professionally put together lecture series called "The Mahdi Series" easily found on Youtube - It is obviously Yasir Qadhi giving the presentation, and he is giving it in a well prepared, well written, thought out manner. In my understanding and reading of Wikipedia's verifiability policies in regards to Youtube videos, they must in general be taken with a grain of salt unless evidence is demonstrated that it is a reliable source and I believe that was most true in this case. I think what is ultimately necessary in using it is to find a website where he keeps a list of his lectures given, publications, etc. It seems that nothing like this exists?
--Sawyer207 (talk) 03:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Views on Shi'ism 

message: §His comments from this lecture are very enlightening and should be added to the lecture.
Please watch atlest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFARLhJv3JM  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.186.94.219 (talk) 23:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberalism 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Diannaa (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Since there is no mention of Qadhi in Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, it seems very strange to mention Abdulmutallab here, as their interactions have no bearing on Qadhi that I'm aware. I think it best removed. --Ronz (talk) 15:39, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Good suggestion; I agree. It's like trying to suggest reverse guilt by association.Parkwells (talk) 14:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Mention of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab

message: User Saheehinfo is hell bent on calling Qadhi a "Salafi" and term he no longer identifies with. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GYkedPkxlI
:I'm hell bent on making sure that the article is accurate. The book "Islam Is a Foreign Country: American Muslims and the Global Crisis of Authority" (page 330) clearly states that "today, American Salafis, such as Shaykh Yasir Qadhi of the AlMaghrib institute are offered as the solution". Saheeh Info 10:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Im sorry, but I dont see this as any different than other article subject's religion. Qadhi quite clearly disclaims that he is a Salafi. He wrote Because of this, I no longer view myself as being a part of any of these Salafī trends discussed in the earlier section. For those who still wish to identify with the label, I pray that you recognize the faults listed above and work to rectify them. Those who choose to abandon such a label have every right and excuse to do so as well. We cant be saying somebody follows some religious practice on the basis of a third party source saying so when the subject himself says he no longer does. This is about categorization, but the same thinking applies here. If the subject says I do not follow X religious belief then that settles whether or not we say he does (we dont in that case). nableezy - 16:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

text: The YOutube-source appears to suffer from WP:SELF. That is not acceptable as source. Please try to find a reliable third-party source. Regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 20:37, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Counting myself, four editors have reverted attempts by Nableezy and an assortment of IP addresses to use a blog and a Youtube video as sources. The message from the community should have been received loud and clear by now. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a BLP, and as such Im taking this to the WP:BLP/N. You arent the community any more than I am. nableezy - 05:24, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

text: Oh, and as it is a BLP the relevant policy is WP:BLPSPS. nableezy - 05:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Salafi

message: In case there's something here that could be used as a ref or would help us find more refs: --Ronz (talk) 15:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: External links moved to talk

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131607012300/http://www.rhodes.edu/religion/22337_22349.asp to http://www.rhodes.edu/religion/22337_22349.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090528220907/http://www.casaw.ac.uk:80/conf/rj2009/programme.html to http://www.casaw.ac.uk/conf/rj2009/programme.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:16, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've recently seen this video. I immediately noted that instead of translating the bits said in what I presume is Arabic, the captions just say "yada yada wuzza wuzza" and the like (even though I understand some of what is said there, with very little knowledge of Arabic or Islam). I also note that there don't seem to be any respectable sources using or referring to this clip. That said, it seems to have been spread widely enough for Qadhi to react to it, calling it a total fabrication, but at the same time conceding that every sentence in the sound clip was taken from a series of lectures given by him - see here. I think it would be great if someone knowledgeable could find neutral sources about this and come up with a NPOV write-up, clarifying exactly how much of a fabrication the sound clip really is. 188.142.221.122 (talk) 08:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried introducing that but it has been removed. Erkin Alp Güney 13:38, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

text: Can you please add again. any time i hear about him, it's about "holes in the islamic narrative" so it'd be insane to not mention it. 115.70.22.143 (talk) 05:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  More material for the controversy section 

message: I see no justification for this man to be described as a polymath. Amuz (talk) 12:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: He is a chemical engineer, scuba diver and Islamic scholar. Erkin Alp Güney 10:46, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polymath? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Wouldn't it be more better if this article was renamed to Yasir Qadhi instead of Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi, most people don't refer to him as his full name. On YouTube, and public speaking events everyone calls him Yasir Qadhi not including the Abu Ammar. It also makes the article name long and not easy to search for him. --12.29.116.64 (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this. I do not believe he is referred to publicly as "Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi" anymore Scholarlydoubt (talk) 20:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense. No real need to have the kunya in the title. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Adding my support to this. We have pretty much reached consensus regarding this issue. Foxhound03 (talk) 15:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've placed a technical page move request. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming article to "Yasir Qadhi" 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion