User talk:Anonymous editor/Ahmadiyya Movement

My position

Hi jayjg. I think it is easier to just call them Ahmadis rather than Ahmadi Muslims. Why? Because Muslims don't consider them to be Muslims, Ahmadis consider themselves to be Muslims. However, Ahmadis and Muslims can both agree to calling them Ahmadi. Regards a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh and it wasn't deceptive. I just didn't have enough space to completely write out this minor change. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It was a mistake and it wasn't deceptive. I just felt one edit was easier, wouldn't you? Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

No it isn't. It avoids writing that they are considered heretics and also calling them Muslims. It is a name that both they and Muslims will agree to. And the Lahori Ahmadi movement might actually consider a reference to the Ahmadi Muslim Community to be pov. So this avoids this little tangle. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Once again. Still they prefer called Ahmadi or Ahmaddiya or Ahmadiyya community, even though most of them classify themselves as Muslims. I actually researched them and worked on their article, I actually know quite a lot about them. So to avoid both POV isn't is better to just give a wording that both sides agree to? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Really? Well then I guess that's a difference between you and me. And it's not controversial to the other regular editors in the article. However, I will note this for the future. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Sure it's on their site and that is what they classify themselves as, but that does not mean that they don't agree to being called Ahmadis, they call themselves the Ahmaddiya at many occasions. And isn't calling them Muslim a pov?Look at this page from their official website > [1] and notice how they don't refer to themselves as Muslims in the title there. I believe the exact term is Ahmaddiyat. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but if the Messaianic Jews did not mind being called "messianites" or something and the mainstream didn't either than wouldn't it be easier to use the term that they both agree to? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

"There's no evidence that "they" agree to the removal of that designation from themselves" - see the link I gave you from their site. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Also notice that the site you were looking at is only of one sect of the Ahmadiyyat which is the Ahmadiyyat Muslim Community. This ignores the smaller Lahori Ahmadiyyat . Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Jayjg, just one question. Don't they also call themselves just the Ahmaddiyat or the Ahmadi movement? Isn't it better to avoid a dispute and just go with what both sides agree to? Look at their site once more and see how many times they also use stand-alone terms. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[2] Official website: Look at the title. Islam is stated separately and notice how they don't call themselves Muslim in the title, which is what we are disputing (not Islam). --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

How about we just call them the Ahmaddiya then? It is not disputed according to their sites. See links I gave.--a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Lol! Yeah the "true Islam". :) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Jayjg it is their view on Jesus, which has in part made them heretic and to call them that on the Jesus page is pov. It would be taking the Ahmadi side. Therefore using a title which neither side disputes is better. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Ofcourse it is when it's in the title. You disputed Muslim being added, which is different than saying Islam. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay I have changed it in the article and used a name that I think can refer to both of them. Does that solve your dispute? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

"the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam" is what I inserted. Do you agree with that? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

No, the Muslim was removed because this is not the proper name of the Lahori ahmaddiya and it would be pov not to apply to them, but glad to hear that you are happy. Btw, why did you make a big deal of this? Regards a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Jayjg's Position

They call themselves Muslims, regardless of whether or not others agree - see this: [3]. Removing "Muslim" from their description is, in fact, promoting the POV that they are not Muslim. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It could have been done in two edits, and you've removed the description before without commenting. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

They call themselves Muslim; other Muslims disagree. It's not up to Wikipedia to remove the designation, and you can't really speak for Ahmadi Muslims. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

No, I would move the information first, then edit it, especially when you know it to be controversial. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

On their own official website they call themselves Muslim!!! It's in their very name for themselves. How can you claim any different? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

They call themselves Muslim, part of Islam, and there's no evidence that "they" agree to the removal of that designation from themselves. It's controversial in the same way as calling "Messianic Judaism" "Judaism" is controversial, and yet we use that name on Wikipedia because that is what they call themselves. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

They call themselves the "Ahmadiyya Muslim Community" on the main page of their official website. On their overview page they describe themselves as "Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam" and "Ahmadi Muslims"[4]. Given the evidence, I find your claim that they don't mind not being designated as Muslim disturbing. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

The official name of the tiny Lahore group is "Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat-i-Islam". Did you notice the word Islam in their name? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Since the controversy is, in fact, over whether or not they are actually Muslim, removing the word "Muslim" from their name is not a good idea, but rather Wikipedia taking sides in a dispute. It also goes against Wikipedia's policy of describing groups as they describe themselves, and there is no evidence whatsoever that Ahmadi Muslims would acquiese to other Muslims removing that designation from their name. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

How about we call them by their official name, just like "Messianic Judaism", "Nation of Islam", "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints", etc.? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

"Ahmadiyya Movement" is not their official name. I've used the official names they use to describe their movement, on their official website - Ahmadiyya Muslim Community/Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam. By the way, they are quite clear that they are Muslim - in fact, that they are the "true Islam". See this link: Ahmadiyyat - The True Islam Jayjg ^(talk) 02:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh and regarding the Lahore community, the official website is at www.muslim.org , and it makes quite clear that consider themselves part of Islam. Even the page you linked to describes them as part of Islam, and finding a webpage here and there that doesn't explicitly say "Muslim"/"Islam", or that doesn't use it in the exact place you think it should, is hardly an argument that they don't consider themselves to be Muslim. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

They have an official title, and that is what Wikipedia mandates. They do not dispute their own title for themselves. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

No, it's obviously not acceptable. It violates any number of Wikipedia conventions. Again, we don't refer to "A group called Messianic Judaism" or "A group called Nation of Islam". Please restore it to the neutral name for itself. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I realize you've removed the "Muslim" name, which is also official, but I'm willing to accept this as a compromise. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)