Talk:Rabwah

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Hi. I keep putting a certain sentence about the name of the city at the top because i think this is the most important part about the city...that it's name has changed. so some people know it as Rabwah whilst others know it as Chanab Naghar. I want it to stand out and since i am making this site mostly for my studies...i think it would best be placed at the top...even if it doesn't conform with most wikipedia formatted articles

Hi there, I've noticed that in Rabwah, you keep putting a certain sentence about the name of the city at the top, in small font. This isn't the way most Wikipedia articles are formatted; the standard formatting is described in the Manual of Style. Could you please leave a note at Talk:Rabwah saying why this article should not conform to the standard format? Thanks, Cyan 23

I think you should place that note about the naming change in the history section (and remove the bar). In this way, you leave the article with a clearer look. Muriel Victoria 16:42, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I myself am an Ahmadi, but I have to question the NPOV of this article. I edited as best as I could for grammar and unnecessary facts. At any rate, this article is not for your studies, it is for everyone. Aurang 06:53, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The sentence More than 95% of its residents belong to an Islamic sect called the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association. in the second paragraph should be changed to More than 95% of its residents belong to the Islamic sect called the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association.

same here. i'm an ahmadi too, but i think articles in wikipedia should be neutral. "The peaceful environment of the city is its trade mark" i think sentences like these should be deleted. - rajputking

[edit] Peacock Terms

"a lush green city", " 100% literacy rate", "peaceful environment of the city is its trademark" these are peacock terms unless any source is mentioned. Please only remove peacock tag if you fix these or discuss these here. --Webkami 12:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I myself am from there and I know these things first hand. Yahya 04:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry but your personal knowledge is not enough guarentee to add some information on Wikipedia. You MUST provide source of the claims and cite references. That should be in form of link to other verifieable valid researches or sources. I am sorry but I will have to report for ban if you keep reverting without valid sources. --Webkami 10:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

In adddition to that I have tagged some of the unverified claims with {{fact}}. Please somebody who have more knowledge on the subject can either provide a source or remove these terms/sentences.--Webkami 10:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

  • {{fact}} tags against unsourced statements were again reverted back. I have reported this behaviour to administrators. Please provide source instead of removing {{fact}}. --Webkami 17:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Read Wikipedia:Verifiability, WP:NPOV, Wikipedia:Reliable sources, etc. etc. before writing any more, Yahya. While I appreciate your efforts firsthand knowledge is no good. I grew up in Baltimore, a lush city which was my beloved playground. Then again... I didn't really know I was from the city with the highest murder rate in the country for many years. In any case, I hope you get my point and will begin to use reliable sources and neutrality. Thus, using a city website to call it "a lush green..." is not acceptable just because it's sourced. Thank you. gren グレン 19:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Change of Name

I have put a heading regarding the current 'official' name of Rabwah and it was removed without giving a sound reasoning. The current name of Rabwah is Chenab Nagar. You may visit this link to verify. http://www.irshad.org/info_m/news/idar1125.php I can provide other links as well. The article editor/originator seems to be religiously biased. He even used very foul language in one of his comments for a renowned religious scholar who had a differnce of opinion with main author.--Zeyadamin 10:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Which "renowned" scholar are you talking about Zeyadamin? The murderous Maudoodi who instigated violence against Ahmadis in 1953, not to mention his party Jamaat e Islami in 1974, resulting in killing of many innocent people? Obviously your description of a scholar is that of a terrorist. No wonder everyone considers you Sunnis terrorists. The site you have cited is a known anti-Ahmadi site. How do you claim to be unbiased yourself by citing it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yahya01 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

I think i don't need to defend my point of view here because the way Yahya01 talks it is quite evident that the person is in fact biased. If you have any material to support your claim againt the respected Maududi Sahab place it on a space on wikipedia with proper reference, unbiased language and no abuses. As for anti-ahmedi sites, well if you can place pro-ahmedi and solely religious site on a page dedicated for a city, then I think someone should present the alternative view as well. Here are some links about Maulana Maududi. They are from BBC website, i hope it is acceptable for you. The links are for urdu pages. http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/news/story/2004/01/040128_maududi_hadith_rza.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/news/030713_maudoodi_thinker_ua.shtml The second link states about his anti-ahmedi activities but you can observe that it has been done is an unbiased and matter-of-fact way.§Zeyadamin 06:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


Your khanzeer Maudoodi was both a terrorist and a traitor to Pakistan and Islam. Here are only some quotes but the Pakistani News Media of the time in 1953 and 1974 is filled of the horrendous treatment that Jamat Islami the party of terrorist traitor Maudoodi perpetrated on Ahmadis;


1. Treacherous Ulema: How the Ulema "helped" the Kashmir cause, one has to quote only the “Great” Moulana Moudoodi, the great Amir of Jamat Islami as quoted by Sardar Shaukat Hayat in his book ‘The Nation that lost it soul’:
I conveyed the message of Quaid Azem to him [Maudoodi ed.] requesting him to pray as well as support Pakistan’s cause. Moulana replied: “How could he pray for “NA - PAKISTAN” (unclean Pakistan) How could there be a Pakistan till the whole of India had been converted to Islam. Later the same Moulana beseeched for my help as I was a Minister in Panjab cabinet to rescue him from non Muslims of the area which task was performed by sending Pakistani troops. On reaching Pakistan, he issued an edict (Fatwa) against the “Mujahids” (fighters involved in Kashmir war) involved in Kashmir’s Jihad, saying that they would not be martyrs but would be dying the death of a dog because no Islamic State had declared Jihad.


2. ... Way back in 1953, the Jamaat-e-Islami under Abul A’la Maudoodi created mayhem in Lahore, so much so that blood flowed along the streets of the city. And it would not stop until General Azam Khan came along. In those days of Jamaat initiation into the politics of violence, the targets were men of unimpeachable integrity like Sir Zafrullah Khan [an ahmadi ed.]. No, no one wanted to have his tongue cut out or have his body turned into mincemeat. But he had to be pushed out of Islam because he swore by the Ahmadiyya version of faith.
In the years since then, Maudoodi’s followers have come a long way. Some of the best moments of their lives came in 1971 when Golam Azam swiftly made it a point, per courtesy of the Pakistani genocide, to offer assistance to Tikka Khan in the matter of doing away with the miscreants out to destroy Islam and Pakistan in these parts. The miscreants, of course, were seventy-five million Bengalis whose very simple wish was to assert themselves in the politics of their own land.
http://www.thedailystar.net/2006/08/30/d60830020327.htm


3. ... The Punjab elections of 1951 had, no doubt, brought Mian Mumtaz Daultana into power, but that didn’t solve his endemic problem. One of his deferred dreams had been to become the Prime Minister of Pakistan. This could happen only if somehow he could manage to bring down the Federal Government. Ch. Zafarullah Khan, an Ahmedi, in the Federal Cabinet thus was chosen as a perfect Achilles’ heel. Mian Sahib dexterously used his provincial secret service, already in link with the Islamist groups [Jammat e Islami notably ed.], and succeeded in creating an atmosphere of popular agitation, calling for a legislation declaring the Ahmedis as non-Muslims , just for legal purposes.
http://www.pakistanlink.com/Commentary/2006/Dec06/29/03.HTM


4. In 1948, during a drafting session of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, representatives from Saudi Arabia clashed with Pakistan over Articles 19: freedom to change one’s religion. The furious Saudi delegate had to listen to Zafrullah Khan describe the Article as consistent with Islam’s denunciation of compulsion in religion. This Saudi anger (and possibly money) soon found its way into Pakistan’s domestic politics. One year after Zafrullah Khan’s clash with the Saudis at the UN, a new group called Majlis-e-Ahrar-e-Islam issued a demand that Khan be removed from the cabinet, and all Ahmadiyyas be declared non-Muslim. These agitations peaked in 1952 with riots in Punjab, and on May 18 Khan resigned from the Basic Principles Committee. The campaign was then intensified by Maulana Maududi’s Jama’at-i-Islami, which launched a project to declare Ahmadiyyas non-Muslim……
http://www.preventgenocide.org/prevent/news-monitor/2003dec.htm


5. Let’s not create a Frankenstein
....it was in Pakistan that a call was made in 1953 by Maulana Abul Ala Maududi, the founder President of Jamaat-e-Islami, to declare them as non-Muslims. The call emanated more from political expediency than religious fervour. The Ahmadis, although small in number, had a strong position in Pakistan; Lahore had been their stronghold. The foreign minister of Pakistan at the time was Sir Zafarullah Khan, an Ahmadi. So were many top brasses in the bureaucracy and military. Although they were 5% of the population, 20% of the total literate persons were Ahmadi. Maulana Maududi, a refugee from India, had no constituency in Pakistan so he had to create one. The campaign to declare the Ahmadis as ‘non-Muslim’ gave him his chance. Anti-Ahmadiyya riot swept across Pakistani Punjab. Pakistan, created in the name of Islam, was besmirched within six years of its creation with Muslim blood shed by fellow Muslims. Rioting was particularly severe in Lahore that resulted in the imposition of Martial Law in the city. That was also the beginning of the inroad of military in Pakistan politics.
http://www.thedailystar.net/suppliments/2005/indp2005/indp03.htm


Here are some quotes from Maudoodi's book. He is obviously anti-democratic/anti-human rights;


In this Islamic government system there is not much room for a person to exercise his free will.
[Ref: Abul A’la Maududi, Tr Al-Ash’ari: A Short History of the Revivalist Movement in Islam, 1941]


From political point of view, the theory of Islamic state is the very antithesis of Western secular democracy.
[Ref: Abul A’la Maududi: Islamic Law and Constitution]


Islam wants to destroy all other [not Islamic] governments.
[Ref: Abul A’la Maududi: Islam and Jihad, page 6]


If Islamic government has adequate resources, it will destroy all other governments of the world.
[Ref: Abul A’la Maududi: Islam and Jihad, page 24]


"Islamic State is Universal and All Embracing. A state of this sort cannot evidently restrict the scope of its activities. Its approach is universal and all-embracing. Its sphere of activity is coextensive with the whole of human life. It seeks to mould every aspect of life and activity in consonance with its moral norms and programme of social reform. In such a state no one can regard any field of his affairs as personal and private. Considered from this aspect the Islamic State bears a kind of resemblance to the Fascist and Communist states."
- Mawdudi, Islamic Law and Constitution


—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yahya01 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

I just want to bring one point to the notice of everyone. I do not agree or disagree with whatever Yahya01 has posted about the respected Maududi. He may post it with proper references at any appropriate place on wikipedia. I just want to highlight that at the beginning of his comment a word 'khanzeer' was used which means 'pig' in Urdu/Arabic. It is highly abusive and considered exteremely derogatory in our culture. I request the moderators to please take approriate action.Zeyadamin 06:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I second that. Wikipedia is not a discussion forum and abuse towards anyone should not be tolerated. Somebody please take action. --Webkami 09:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yahya01's Changes

I am sorry but by deleting {{NPOV}} without making any changes to the article or consensus of other editors you are not making the article Neutral. Also by removing the warning given to you on your talk page (about removing {{fact}}) the history is not going to change. Please discuss the removal on talk page rather than removing it and hoping that nobody will notice. --Webkami 10:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/b/Talk%7ERabwah_d2ef.html"