Talk:Fatima Jinnah

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit]

"It is thought that the publication of Hector Bolitho's "Jinnah Creator of Pakistan" in 1954 prompted Miss Fatima Jinnah of doing a biography of her illustrious brother."

Come on... this is obviously written by a fan of Jinnah (probably a Pakistani nationalist). If someone has time, could you review this article and delete the POV phrases?

I quite agree. I've cleaned it up and deleted the POV stuff, which was not only contentious but repetitious. Article could still do with more detail, though, and some better references. -- TinaSparkle 20:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about the first position written? It says that the position of ladies and gentlemen is given to husband or wife of prime minister or president, but there are no accounts of Jinnah getting married Zeekboi (talk) 11:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Holidays? - Help Required...[edit]

Her birth and death anniversaries are national holidays in Pakistan, especially in Karachi.

Above statement in the article is not entirely true. I am not sure about Karachi or Sindh (in general) but in Punjab and Sarhad, her birth and death anniversaries are not holidays and technicaly they cannot be considered national holidays. Karachites can help. Szhaider 09:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Her death[edit]

Can anyone expand the Death section of this article. The link given that talks about a controversy behind her death is rather interesting and thus I think more has to be written on it. Thanks. bandishhh 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Muhammad Ali Jinnah.jpg[edit]

Image:Muhammad Ali Jinnah.jpg 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 02:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Languages[edit]

Could she speak Urdu? Her brother MA Jinnah spoke Gujarati and English and I think Sindhi, but his Urdu was non-existent. What about her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahassan05 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Fatima Jinnah Book My Brother.jpg[edit]

Image:Fatima Jinnah Book My Brother.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Religion[edit]

The cited source in the article says: "So only the Quaid and Fatima Jinnah had abandoned the Ismaili faith. Both carefully avoided a sectarian label. Both said they were neither Shia nor Sunni, but `Mussalman'. The Quaid was at pains to gather the Muslims of India under the banner ofa general Muslim faith and not under a divisive sectarian identity." Why is an editor repeatedly adding "shia" to the infobox? Gimmetrow 16:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, two of our sources don't deal with Fatima Jinnah's religion at all, instead discussing her brother's. I thus removed them. Huon (talk) 15:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All political people generally avoid being labled as either Sunni or Shi'i, but they were Twelver Shi'i and if i remember correctly there was a case in Supreme court where Madam Fatima Jinnah testified that she and her brother were Asna Ashri Shi'i.

So, I hope it would be put back in. For reference please read the following; http://tribune.com.pk/story/404111/the-quaid-and-the-quetta-massacre/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutawassam (talk • contribs) 10:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That source is an editorial, not the best of sources. Furthermore, it doesn't say much about Fatima Jinnah's denomination. It says she signed an affidavit about her brother's denomination (which incidentally would insure her inheritance), and it says that after her death the last rites were performed in a specific way. The Friday Times similarly does not unambiguously claim Fatima Jinnah was a Shia. When the issue is contentious and sources vague, it's better to have the infobox state what they all agree on and to have the article itself explain the details. Therefore I've reverted the infobox entry back to just "Islam". Huon (talk) 11:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Following the discussion on Fatima Jinnah's religion, I have included a reference to a book by: Khaled Ahmed Title: Sectarian War: Pakistan's Sunni-Shia Violence and Its Links to the Middle East. From page 7-9 Chapter 1, this book discusses in detail the religious affiliations of both Fatima and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Legally, they both were registered as Shias as discussed in this book. Of course, as is the case in general, they may not be devout followers and would like to be called as Muslims or Musalmaan, but so does the rest of Muslims, whether Shias or Sunnis. But when it comes to following rituals e.g. prayers, marriage, funeral, he/she has to follow some sect, because there is no way which is for Muslims and others for Sunnis and Shias. It will either be Sunni or Shia way. For Jinnah's, it was Shia Islam. Birdsview (talk) 11:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As far as Muhamamd Ali Jinnah is concerned, he was not a religiously observant leader, He was neither a Shia, nor a Sunni. Faizan (talk) 12:23, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree to Huon that sect can be discussed in the body of the text meanwhile, the info box can only say Islam. Lets keep it this way. I will revert my changes back and include a section on discuss the religious affiliation in a bit detail. Birdsview (talk) 18:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mumbay/Bombay[edit]

Please see the referenced lead of Mumbai article which says the city was renamed to "Mumbai" in 1996. The city name was "Bombay" at that time and this should be stated as such here (The title redirects to the same city though). --lTopGunl (talk) 13:08, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was changed per WP:COMMONNAME it is always best practice to avoid redirects. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:21, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a relevant case... Mumbai did not exist at that time. It was Bombay, other wise we'll have to say "the city currently known as Mumbai" or "the modern Mumbai city" or something which would be redundant. Get the point? --lTopGunl (talk) 13:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. What does it matter what it was called at the time? Darkness Shines (talk) 13:33, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example from Muhammad Ali Jinnah, "Born: 25 December 1876 Karachi, British India" (not Pakistan, because it did not exist then). It matters in context and history. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:35, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

I don't know about improvement, but there are certain things that got removed along with the infobox edits... care to explain those? --lTopGunl (talk) 14:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited[edit]

[1] I see TG has again decided he is immune from WP:V. Please explain why the content which was tagged as cn 7 days ago has been reverted in against policy? Darkness Shines (talk) 16:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think article blanking is the solution to improving the article when the same content could be referenced very easily from the linked articles from the internal links. Infact, a reference that you added after removing that content fairly well sources parts of that content too.. that would be self inconsistent and disruptive. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is better to work from a blank slate. Your appreciation of policy does not go unheeded. I will remove the content again in 24hrs if still unsourced. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you do so, I will report you for wiki-lawyering your 1RR sanction. You need to discuss what should be done with the content and what citations should be added to which parts. Indiscriminate blanking of content is not the policy that you claim. Common sense is something that comes first. --lTopGunl (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:V is quite specific. As is WP:BURDEN You are more than welcome to report me for following policy, but beware the boomerang. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think I will not. There's no deadline for working on a wikipedia article, and this isn't even a controversial or a BLP article. As I've stated, citations are already there, just not inline. Simply ignoring that fact and removing content is disruptive. The only way to go through this is discussion on content. If you are willing to discuss on how to sort that out, you are welcome. --lTopGunl (talk) 17:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fatima Jinnah. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fatima Jinnah. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrongly placed on "July 30" birthdays[edit]

Hello All,

I noticed that Jinnah is listed under the "July 30" birthdays when her birthday is July 31. This should be moved ASAP from the "July 30" birthday list.

- Kyle C. 2600:8802:1300:3D3:D91B:3C06:2CDC:6374 (talk) 02:58, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fatima_Jinnah&oldid=1206735160"