Talk:Aga Khan IV

message: I do not know if the Aga Khan is a prince.   However I believe that he was granted the style His Highness  by HM Queen Elisabeth II and that of His Royal Highness by the Shah.  The adkn.org website says that this occurred in 1957 and 1959 respectively. I do not know if this is personal or whether it is hereditary.
:: He was awarded KBE (Knight of the British Empire) and the title "His Highness" by the HM the Queen Elizabeth II.
The titles of prince and princess, which are claimed by children of the Aga Khan by virtue of their descent from Shah Fath Ali Shah of the Persian Qajar dynasty, were recognized as courtesy titles by the British government in 1938.[1] - from this website under Prince Aly Khan.
:::The style of H.R.H. is nonsense. To be 'Royal' you must be the head of state of a recognised country. The Aga Khan is the head of a religious sect. The style which is recognised in the United Kingdom and elsewhere is 'His Highness'. Therefore the intro should be modified accordingly. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style HRH and HH & Other 

message: HH The Aga Khan is also known as the "Silent Prince Of Islam" because of his services to Muslim Ummah. Also a book titled "Dunya-e-Islam Ka Khamosh Shehzadah" ("Silent Prince Of Muslim World" title: Urdu) was written by Syed Jah Jafferi (a Shi'a writer) in which he presents HH The Aga Khan as the silent prince.
=== countries ===
It says in the countries visited west africa. that is a region in africa with many countries FIX IT  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.105.67.58 (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silent Prince Of Islam 

message: It says in the countries visited west africa. that is a region in africa with many countries FIX IT  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.105.67.58 (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  countries 

message: I've removed the NPOV tag as no one seems to object and because most of the article, at least, I think we can all agree is neutral - so putting a tag on the whole page is not justified, at minimum.
What I suggest is that anyone has any neutrality issues with any sections of the article, please insert the following tag [but put  around it] below the header of the section you're concerned about:
POV-section
...and then explain on the Talk page precisely what change (wording) you want to see implemented on the Wiki and why. If it is something factual or cited, and pertinent, then we should be talking about how it can be presented in a more neutral way, and not about deleting it.
Please don't simply delete material from the Wiki page and replace it with your own or with nothing. Mention your concern on the Talk page and let's see what changes can be made from discussion with each other. Many people have worked hard on this Wiki and their work shouldn't simply be deleted without discussion.
Thank you,
Mukesh.ambani (talk) 23:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality Tag Removed (April, 2012)

message: Several registered editors have been removing large parts of this article without proper explanation or discussion, and the most recent one has now been blocked. Now an IP (registered in Pakistan) has been removing the same material. While I can appreciate that some people might wish to remove parts of this article, blanking without consensus and edit-warring over it is not the way to go about it - once any unexplained removals have been challenged and reverted, they must be discussed here on the Talk page first and only redone if there is a consensus. I have now protected the article against unregistered editing. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to actually get a consensus before you can make your changes, especially once they have been contested -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:10, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

text: Improvements to references looks like a good thing to do :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:10, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

text: Hi. Firstly, the article is still free for readers - it is just semi-protected against editing in order to prevent what clearly looked like a POV-battle including the unexplained removal of sourced content. Now that you have explained what you wish to remove from the article, please wait for others to respond and wait for a consensus supporting you before you make your changes again. I don't know anything about the subject myself, so I can't help on the content decision - I can really only act in an admin capacity. But if nobody responds in a few days, we can ask for help/opinions at a relevant project. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

text: OK, I understand what you mean. But yes, we have to wait for discussion and consensus now. And if that doesn't happen soon, I'll be happy to help look for other people who might assist -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Page protected

message: I added a modification in hopes of working towards resolving the dispute. I added [].
I did the following:
* Changed to the title to "divine nature", as "noor" and "mazhar" were disputed by 4dpeace above. Feel free to suggest another title. I think divine nature communicates more in English than Noor and Mazhar. Based on the references I looked up, Mazhar is stated in the Encyclopedia of Ismailism, and on an official report, whereas Meherally uses both Mazhar and Noor in his book.
* I removed reference citing Meherally' comments from his website as he was a source disputed by 4dpeace, but I left in a reference to Meherally's published book, as published books are valid references according to WP:BLP.
* I added several references showing some history of the "divine nature" of the Aga Khan in the, and additional corroborating other references. The one quote from H.S Morris deals with what he calls East African Khoja Ismaili's, whereas Asini deals with Khojas of Indo-Pakistan,.
Kind Regards,
FordPrefect1979 (talk) 19:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Jan 4 modification 2012

message: Earlier on, I added citations from the book "Understanding Ismailism" by A. Meherally.
This book and author A. Meherally appears to be controversial. For example, 4dpeace complained about Meherally's work above. It has now been pointed out by Rallyeye that the book is self published. I double checked this, and I cannot find anything not written by A. Meherally published by A.M. Trust from Burnaby and I have to agree that the book appears self published.
FordPrefect1979 (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Akberally Meherally's Works

message: In an excellent interview decades ago on " CBC Man Alive", HH Prince Karim Aga Khan commented on
'"DIVINITY IN ISLAM"' . If only I can get help to obtain the video & it's transcript from
The Canadian Broadcster's archive..  Someone -  Please help!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogerir (talk • contribs) 02:19, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  DEVINE 

message: The following was contained in html comment tags under the article
Note that both articles mention the pending divorce (the first article notes a tabloid faked a part of a threatened settlement, but the actual pending divorce itself is true), and there is no article I have found that says the divorce is no longer pending and that they are already divorced, or that they have stopped divorce proceedings.
I removed it from the html and added it here FordPrefect1979 (talk) 19:10, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  html comment regarding divorce 

message: I ask are all these necessary? I agree there material requires editing and it is my belief that to make section better more specific verifiable material is required.
I prefer alonger term point of view with regards to improving the article.
With regards to the first part of the third paragraph in the lead: Among the goals the Aga Khan has asserted he works toward are the elimination of global poverty (particularly in Africa and Asia, where many of his followers reside); the promotion and implementation of pluralism; the advancement of the status of women; and the honoring of Islamic art and architecture.
Yes there was a citation request, and now there are several citations; however, I believe it can be improved.
Assume the word asserted is removed. I then submit the phrase is not verifiable, or written from a neutral point of view. I believe it is possible to improve this by adding specifics. For example, in what ways does the Aga Khan and his organizations work towards the elimination of global poverty?
If it is true, one could write that they address global poverty with micro-financing institutions and then reference that. One could address poverty by addressing health care needs for wage earners. If such examples exist the phrase can be made verifiable and referenced. I believe it would also read more like a neutral statement of fact.
The same holds for the promotion and implementation of pluralism. The question that comes to mind is: How? Even giving speeches as a Muslim leader in favor of pluralism would be valid and verifiable and could be referenced.
With regards to the advancement of women. Again should there not be specifics of some kind?
What I'm trying to get at here is that details and specifics are verifiable, whereas statements such as "working towards the elimination of global poverty" is relatively meaningless unless one says how.
It is possible to verify that someone said that they are working towards the elimination of global poverty, but how do you verify that they actually are?
You have to verify that that they are involved in things that actually address poverty. I am saying that the specifics of such things could be written about, micro-financing for example, and that such things are verifiable.
I'm saying the article can be improved with specifics. For example, I wrote that the Aga Khan owns a 100 million Stirling yacht. This is a verifiable fact. I no longer even have to bother writing that Aga Khan has a luxurious life style. The verifiable fact has made the statement. Likewise there are other facts regarding the details of the work done by the institutions in his name that can likely be stated and referenced. In my opinion such contributions would improve the article.
Kind Regards,
FordPrefect1979 (talk) 05:14, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation Requests Added April 2012

message: I removed the term sect, unless in direct quotations as the term can be considered pejorative--at least in the Christianity.
I believe a lot of decent referenced content has been added recently, but I would urge all writers to ensure they take pains to stick to verifiable facts and to write with a clinical a neutral point view. I catch myself going off at this neutral point of view at times, and I try to correct myself.
Kind Regards,
FordPrefect1979 (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutral point of view

message: I updated the reference on this, note that the Morris article was published in 1952 and the constitution in 1986.
My initial concern was the word constitution, as I read it after it was added by Alys, did not fit my understanding:
Generally, every modern written constitution confers specific powers to an organization or institutional entity, established upon the primary condition that it abides by the said constitution's limitations. According to Scott Gordon, a political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contain[s] institutionalized mechanisms of power control for the protection of the interests and liberties of the citizenry, including those that may be in the minority."
But, looking over the encyclopedia of Ismailism, which references the dictionary, I'm content with an ecclesiastical decree being defined as a constitution.
FordPrefect1979 (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Ismaili Constitution

message: Dear Mukesh.ambani, 69.165.248.173, and Alisomji,
Mukesh.ambani, you have undone my changes on more than one occasion. I respect the contributions added to the page by the three listed above. However, I want to reiterate my following neutrality concerns.
#WP:CLAIM: It is my humble opinion that the use of the word claim with regards to the Aga Khan's posted trace of his ancestry to the profit Muhammad through Ali in the lead is inappropriate as it implies doubt. It is my humble opinion that it is better as I wrote it, and frankly the fact that any person can trace his or her ancestry back 1300 years is dubious no matter how you write it. The word claim is not required. A section to reiterate various scholars arguments as to feasibility of his claim can be added.
#The page is about the Aga Khan and discussing his father's affairs is not neutral, and in my humble opinion it violates WP:BLP. The page is about the Aga Khan IV not his father, and there is an implied guilt by family association. Also affairs are potentially gossip, WP:GOSSIP. The word claim is also inappropriately used in the divinity section where it implies the Aga Khan's statement is incorrect.
#It is my humble opinion that the speculation about the Ismaili's current private beliefs with regards to the divinity of their Imam is not referenced and constitutes editorializing, MOS:OPED.
#The alcohol section is inappropriate and at variance with the references used. While I do not see why one would write about another consuming alcohol, unless it is consumed to access and something of significance occurs, I admit this could be a Western bias. I will note the the SI article reference I added indicates the Aga Khan had dinner at one of his houses where the guests enjoyed wine but he did not. The wikipedia page, as it is currently written indicates allegations about the Aga Khan IV's grandfather whom the page is not about. In my humble opinion, it is not appropriate to discuss allegations against ones father or grandfather on a WP:BLP page. It is my humble opinion that the prohibition against alcohol is questionable as per the quote I have added on the talk page. The Aga Khan, a religious figure, has given a quote which has multiple interpretations and the author has selected one possible meaning. The Aga Khan's quote follows: Our belief is that the thing which separates man from the animals is his power of thought. Anything that impedes this process is wrong. Therefore alcohol is forbidden. I have never touched alcohol. But this, to me, is not a puritan prohibition. I don't want to drink. I've never wanted to drink. There's no pressure being placed on me by my religion.
I simply humbly and respectfully submit my specific concerns about the writing, content, to the authors.
Kind regards FordPrefect1979 (talk) 16:17, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality and [[WP:BLP]] concerns April, 2012

message: Welcome back FordPrefect1979.
Any undoing of actions you did to the Wiki have been justified in the explanation bar when clicking undo. And, I think you know that, even though your response doesn't seem to reflect it.
As far back as I can remember, I've undone I think only two actions to the Wiki that you did. One of them was a deletion of content that you did and the other was a change in wording that you did. In both cases, I gave a pretty comprehensive explanation (in the explanation bar) on why I was clicking undo on your action. The deletion of content that you did without previous discussion, in particular, was unwarranted and unjustified. You shouldn't be surprised that it was undone as you never discussed deletion of content here in the Talk section before going ahead and deleting what you did.
I don't know if the other authors ever plan on returning, but, I will try and address your points in the same order you gave them, as a couple of them relate to me, anyhow:
1. Changed "claims" to "indicates." I hope that is fine. It's a compromise and seems neutral per Wikipedia policy.
2. I think it is absolutely relevant that the Aga Khan's father indulged in extramarital relations, when discussing the Aga Khan's own extramarital relations. Why? The reason is that the father's behavior with married women may have influenced the son's behavior with married women. It also shows that the Aga Khan was not the only man in his family to indulge in extramarital relations (so, he's not a lone sheep in this regard). Therefore, I see it as relevant. 
3. Be more specific. Please post the specific area in the divinity section you want changed and please suggest what change specifically you want to see made.
4. The alcohol discussion comes under "Nizari Ismaili Imamat." The reason it is relevant is because it is a major area of prohibition for Nizari Ismailis (it is one of a small number of things, yet a big thing, that is prohibited in Nizari Ismailism). How the current Aga Khan behaves with alcohol is somewhat different from that of his grandfather. This is significant because, to Nizari Ismailis, the current Aga Khan and previous Aga Khan are spiritually the same - it is only the physical body that has changed, but, not the Imam inside the body or the Noor inside the body. Therefore, one would assume that both the Aga Khan III and Aga Khan IV view alcohol exactly the same, especially because their comments on alcohol are being made within only a few decades of each other. But, that isn't the case, and so this is worth highlighting and discussing, as there is somewhat of a significant change in the view of the Imam of Nizari Ismailism on this subject.
Kind regards,
Mukesh.ambani (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Response to FordPrefect1979's Concerns and Complaints

message: Does this add up? "Forbes describes the Aga Khan as one of the world's ten richest royals with an estimated net worth of $800 million USD (2010). ... His philanthropic institutions, spend more than $600 million per year". So he would be broke in one year and 4 months - or does he make money that fast? Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something wrong with the maths? 

message: Who is his heir? --89.178.106.66 (talk) 03:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heir 

message: He is called a British Iranian in the info box but this is never mentioned in the article again.
His father Prince_Aly_Khan is referred to as part italian too.--88.104.137.223 (talk) 14:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnicity  

message: The line "The Ismailis muppets are Shi'i Muslims" in the section "The Status of the Imam in Nizari Ismailism" may indicate a term of abuse ... or I may simply be ignorant and muppets may have another meaning in Arabic 115.64.6.216 (talk) 10:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV? 

message: The article currently states:
:Among the goals the Aga Khan has said he works toward are the elimination of global poverty; the promotion and implementation of secular pluralism;
In the referred Spiegel article, the only direct quote I can find states:
:"I am not opposed to secularism as such. But I am opposed to unilateral secularism where the notions of faith and ethics just disappear from society."
Is this equivalent to what is stated in the article? Does the Aga Khan support "the promotion and implementation of secular pluralism"? I don't dispute the claim but it seem like it needs more support --moogsi(blah) 21:34, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secular pluralism? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Aga Khan IV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060512165548/http://www.princessinaara.org:80/3.html to http://www.princessinaara.org/3.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The comments on the murder of his father do not make sense.  His father died in a car accident. Why is that reference in here?  Expand  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.41.101 (talk) 23:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: murder of his father?

message: In the introduction, I read that the yacht Alhamshar costs "just" £ 100 million (reference 19). In the section personal finances, I read £ 200 million (reference 63). Anyone knows what's the correct number? Kind regards, Vinvlugt (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  100 or 200? 

message: The article does not mention his real name family name.
Aga Khan being an honorific.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pervaz R. Allaudin (talk • contribs) 17:27, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is his real name. 

message: The article at the body says: that "he skied for Iran as its representative, and he was a descendant of Iranian Qajar dynasty".  also his name represent being Iranian descendant. he got an Iranian citizenship and skied in the national team. It must be added. lack of the term "Iranian descent" in Aga Khan article, and being formerly an Iranian citizen. The Stray Dog Talk Page 00:22, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  lack of the term "Iranian descent" and being "formerly Iranian" citizen 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Aga Khan IV. 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/20111106113929/http://www.theismaili.org/cms/14/The-Aga-Khan to http://www.theismaili.org/cms/14/The-Aga-Khan
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130722105517/http://www.mcgill.ca/secretariat/sites/mcgill.ca.secretariat/files/hondoclistalpha_0.pdf to http://www.mcgill.ca/secretariat/sites/mcgill.ca.secretariat/files/hondoclistalpha_0.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111106113929/http://www.theismaili.org/cms/14/The-Aga-Khan to http://www.theismaili.org/cms/14/The-Aga-Khan
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Aga Khan IV. 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/20120427042945/http://www.pewforum.org/Muslim/Mapping-the-Global-Muslim-Population(6).aspx to http://www.pewforum.org/Muslim/Mapping-the-Global-Muslim-Population%286%29.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080930190206/http://www.iis.ac.uk/view_article.asp?ContentID=103467 to http://www.iis.ac.uk/view_article.asp?ContentID=103467
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:31, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Aga Khan IV. 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/20160214191632/http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=9c5e7816-0ee5-4ccf-b19e-441b1156cb31 to http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=9c5e7816-0ee5-4ccf-b19e-441b1156cb31
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160201020151/http://www.ppaf.org.pk/Patners_detail.aspx?poid=4 to http://www.ppaf.org.pk/Patners_detail.aspx?poid=4
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The infobox claimed that he was a member of British nobility. This would mean he held a title of British peerage, such as a barony. The article makes no such claim. Knighthood and a sui generis grant of the style (Royal) Highness are insufficient to be considered nobility in the British system. The fact that he is British and is a noble does not mean he is "British nobility". Hairy Dude (talk) 19:32, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "British nobility" 

message: I am sunni and i want to change religion.... but when i change the religion in relative no one will give me a girl for marry or etc Aleem khan122 (talk) 13:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ￼HI can you get you number I respond you about you question 45.137.112.196 (talk) 13:50, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want to change religion 

message: Islam term is for religion either person is from Shia or Sunni or ismaili sect. there is no such thing as Sunni Shia Ismaili religion. SaneFlint (talk) 07:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a branch of a religion. The page King Charles III lists his religion as protestant which while not a religion in itself, is a part of a religion. -- Cosmic6811 🍁 (T · C) 23:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Cosmic6811 Should edit as Sect.  I guess then it will ultimately match with its meanings not to divide Islam into new kinds of meanings except its sects' names. King Charles has protestant meaning with an tag that mentions his membership etc. SaneFlint (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we can put Islam and then have Ismaili in brackets? -- Cosmic6811 🍁 (T · C) 01:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Cosmic6811 that sounds better SaneFlint (talk) 03:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  islam is a religion name.