458:
no place in an objective encyclopedia. Furthermore, I removed the "See also" link for "Islamist
Terrorism". While there is controversey over him being accused of supporting terrorism and him saying he was quoted out of context, he has never actually committed any act of terrorism and therefore is not a terrorist. The person who inserted that link has referred to him on more than one occasion as a terrorist which is not only biased and factually inaccurate but also wildly inappropriate for an informative work such as Knowledge (XXG). I can provide links for Knowledge (XXG)'s neutral point of view policy if need be. Please don't allow such slip ups to happen again.
315:
609:
banterings? Or a dozen other synonyms for the word? It doesn't add anything at all to the article and is completely unnecesary to get the idea across, and getting the idea across in the most direct and concise manner is something any good encyclopedic source should try to do. As I said, check the other articles on controversial religious figures. It would make sense to keep this one consistent with the others.
429:
the notion that this or any article on
Knowledge (XXG) should inherently have a negative tone; this is an encyclopedia and is meant to be a neutral portrayal of all articles on the site. With that in mind, I can look up other sources on him when I have the time (there are many would really would dispute Fox News and the Daily Mail as reliable sources). All perspectives need to be displayed, in a neutral context.
149:
131:
937:). If you feel that it is a reliable source then it would be worth asking about this on the RSN before adding it to the article. Also, proper attribution would probably be required. Additionally, the source does not support your claim that "Abu Usamah is well known for his unequivocal position on Islamic extremism, and extremism in general." You would need to find a reliable source to support that.
100:
253:
243:
21:
780:"I did read yours and explained why your reasoning here is incorrect; if anything, you did not read my post. I'll restate it for you here. He is a preacher; he is also a lecturer, a speaker, a polemicist, and a thousand other things. You said that preacher is a more appropriate term, which is absolutely, positively, 100% just a matter of opinion and not fact."
219:
159:
819:
There has been a recent "edit war" over the addition of certain things to the article. This article is currently under mediation by
Knowledge (XXG)'s official mediation committee due to a number of disputes and other users should recognize that. When the mediation has been completed then editing it
660:
I have explained to you in clear language here why what you are doing is wrong. I will not report it as vandalism since your edits do seem to be in good faith (despite being incorrect), but if you tamper with this article again then I will bring this forth for arbitration from the site. Please step
619:
His so-called "rebuddle" video is a lie. But as you said, we won't argue that point. Why preachings, because he is an iman, who preached hatrid toward the secular world and praised Bin Laden in his preachings. Speeches, comments, or remarks would be inappropiate and inaccurate. Preachings is the most
753:
Are you telling me that I shouldn't be alarmed by another user stating openly that they think any article on
Knowledge (XXG), and objective encyclopedia, should have an inherently negative tone? That's a textbook definition of bias right there. I will be seeking outside mediation at this point, as
537:
page before continuing. As for "preachings" specifically my issue is with the wording and what it implies. Controversy is simple, concise, and to the point, exactly how an encyclopedia should be. Like I said before if you want a compromise that will be more clear, then I believe that "Controversy
457:
I recently noticed a series of edits in this article by one individual that are extrmely biased. I changed the section formerly called "Radical
Preachings" to "Controversey" as that is neutral, as an encyclopedia should be. What is or isn't "radical" is a matter of opinion and such adjectives have
608:
You are correct about there not being criticism, and as I suggested earlier, perhaps you should flesh the article out a bit more to fix this. As for preachings, it's just another adjective that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Why preachings? Why not speech? Or comments? Or remarks? Or
532:
Whether you think I am making light of it or not, the fact remains that he claims he doesn't support terrorism and doesn't hate the secular world. It is not up for
Knowledge (XXG) to decide if he is being sincere in that or not, and your continued insistance that he is not and clear statement that
511:
Why is it vague? What does the designation of "preachings" add to the article? If you look at other articles on controversial religious figures such as Pat
Robertson "controversy" does just fine; if anything, add "criticisms" to it as well as that is the standard. One sentence simply reiterating
428:
While the statements he has made seem downright awful from what I have read, to call him a terrorist is not only incorrect but irresponsible. The man has never committed an act of terrorism, thus he is not a terrorist (even if he seems to support it). To call him that shows a strong bias, as does
784:
Preacher is the best synnomym. "Controversial speakings" doesn't make sense in english. "Polemicist
Controversy" might make sense, though I think it might confuse some readers. "Controversial lectures" is just inaccurate, since when he made the comments he wasn't teaching. He was preaching. If you
655:
I also checked out the links to Adam Yahiye Gadahn and John Walker Lindh and found absolutely no mention of Abu Usamah. Considering your stated intention to insert bias into this article, I believe based on that that you are trying to insinuate a link with random terrorists who have nothing to do
591:
And he clearly says in his rebuttal video, which I did a quick search for and found on YouTube, that this isn't the case. Again, Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia and only provides information to the public; it's not up to this site or us (its editors) to make a judgment call and this comment in
477:
His supposed support for terrorism isn't the only issue listed under the section, there appear to be a number of controversial statements he has said. There is nothing at all vague about the term because, as I stated above, he has claimed that his statements were taken out of context and disputes
1121:
Yes, this is definitely a good exchange because the reason it took you 10 minutes, is probably because it took me the most part of an hour to chronologically order the references in trying to make sense of the broader picture. You then picked up on my research and pointed out the decision made by
620:
accurate adjetive. It does add something to the article; it adds that he is incouraging other muslims to hate the secular world and support Osama Bin Laden, which is exactly what he is doing in his preachings. Since you want to compare it with other religous controversial figures, take a look at
731:
I did read yours and explained why your reasoning here is incorrect; if anything, you did not read my post. I'll restate it for you here. He is a preacher; he is also a lecturer, a speaker, a polemicist, and a thousand other things. You said that preacher is a more appropriate term, which is
651:
The issue of preachings is not the main deal now at this point, as it is simple: you seem to think it is more accurate when that is clearly just your opinion; the appropriateness of a certain adjective is clearly a subjective matter as adjectives are something to be avoided in an encyclopedia.
1081:
program, followed by the police submission to Ofcom, and finally Ofcoms reply. This is very far from the picture that has been painted in this biography, and I think the narrative that has been discussed here is probably a more balanced and better placed to be employed in the biography.
522:
I think you are making light of his support for terrorism and hatrid for the secular world with your recent edits. Preachings adds that he expressed his views to an audience, and it implies some sincerity in his comment. Why are you so opposed to the "preachings" being in the
908:
Abu Usamah is well known for his unequivocal position on
Islamic extremism, and extremism in general. During a Friday sermon delivered at the Green Lane Mosque of Birmingham, United Kingdom, Abu Usamah criticized ISIS, and similar groups, for radicalizing Muslim youth
533:
you think the article should have an inherently negative tone causes me to suspect your intentions. I can see from your user page that you have a mostly stellar history in editing and improving this encyclopedia so his seems out of character; please view the
555:
First, in Pat
Robertson they say controversy, but then they list the criticisms. Secondly, he clearly said he hates the secular world and supports terrorists, as the sources clearly point out. He is only denying it. I don't know why you provided a link to
582:
I know that, his section is better and more developed. Perhaps you should use the documentary called 'Undercover Mosques' as a reference here as the criticisms to bring this article more in line with that of other controversial religious figures.
490:
As I already pointed out, "Controversy" is a good enough term. If you disagree then state why here so we can all come to a consensus. Do not edit the article without discussing it here again when you know that the dispute hasn't been resolved.
652:
Remarks or comments would be just as useless, that's why I threw them out there. Since your only reasoning for adding preachings has been that in your opinion it sounds better, I will change it back and not allow you to tamper with it again.
683:
because Abu Usamah praises Bin Laden. I am not linking random terrorists. Secondly, you apparently did not read my last comment. I said my reason for adding preachings is that he is a preacher. Do not put words in my mouth. And mind
1076:
Yes, and thank you. I was not selective, but actually unaware of those references that you supplied. This is a good discussion in that it reflects the natural sequence of events that unfolded starting from original
1053:"On the evidence (including untransmitted footage and scripts), Ofcom found that the broadcaster had accurately represented the material it had gathered and dealt with the subject matter responsibly and in context."
418:
Fox news and daily mail are not quality reliable sources? The man is a terrorist undeserving of any praise. Plain and simple. That is why the article has a negative tone. Terrorists are not depicted in a positive
744:
Now this is almost funny if it weren't a subtle jab. I challenge you to show where I put words in your mouth and where I attacked you. Was it my pointing out your bias? Look here, from your own comment above:
642:
This is getting dissappointing now. You have openly stated that you have taken sides in the issue and appear to want your opinion of Abu Usamah to be presented as fact in this article. I'm going to link to the
374:
875:- please refrain from removing sourced material from this article or adding unsourced material as you have done on a number of occasions recently. If you have a reason for this please mention it here first.
560:, because I see no violation. Preachings is better because it provides important detials as to what the controversy is about. Controversy and criticisms is not appropiate, because there is no criticism.--
1304:
820:
should be fine and it should be more clear as to what is appropriate and what is not. Until then, please be mature and respect the fact that the issues with this article are already being sorted out.
960:. However, on that same line of reasoning, the daily mail and daily mirror both of which have been used in this biography, certainly have have a lower reliability ranking than MEMRI (see for example
772:"They aren't just supporting terrorism; they are widely regarded as taking part in it. That's a world away from the type of comments that Abu Usamah makes. It's not even close and inappropriate."
711:
They aren't just supporting terrorism; they are widely regarded as taking part in it. That's a world away from the type of comments that Abu Usamah makes. It's not even close and inappropriate.
324:
229:
802:
You've stated your position clearly and i've stated mine to the best of my ability, so i'll leave it for now. Hopefully the mediation will take place soon and this can be resolved.
79:
776:
Keep in mind the only reason Abu Usamah is notable is because of his support for terrorism. See the Afd. Every source that proves his notability says he is a terrorist supporter.
1360:
604:"Preachings is better because it provides important detials as to what the controversy is about. Controversy and criticisms is not appropiate, because there is no criticism."
1350:
299:
762:. I find this entire exchange very disappointing but let it be known that I followed all guidelines and tried my best to explain this to you in a reasonable manner.
368:
478:
much of the information about him, even recording a video in his defense. That's where the controversy comes in. All Knowledge (XXG) does is inform people of it.
749:"The man is a terrorist undeserving of any praise. Plain and simple. That is why the article has a negative tone. Terrorists are not depicted in a positive light."
84:
1355:
910:
39:
1365:
1330:
1021:
report. I suggest that the Controversy section of this article be changed to Undercover Mosque Controversy, and its contents be adjusted to be less biased.
1345:
1229:
If you replace "that the show did not breach any of the protocols under which it was being investigated" with "in favor of Channel 4", I'm O.K. with that.
1055:. The police was even forced to issue an apology and pay a "six figure sum" to Channel 4. I suggest you select sources less selectively. This won't fly.
67:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
758:
policy but also that you are unwilling to take a break from this for even one day to consider what I have said, as I recommended to you per the page on
177:
59:
1014:
546:
have much the same. There is no reason why this article, which is also about a controversial religious figure, shouldn't keep with that consistency.
1297:
305:
1340:
1335:
181:
1203:. However, upon investigation of the matter Ofcom ruled that the show did not breach any of the protocols under which it was being investigated
656:
with Abu Usamah. The link to Osama bin Laden is appropriate as Abu Usamah has mentioned the guy before but the other two are being removed now.
1201:
1100:
program". Since no claim is actually based on that program, I fail to see the problem. Also, we don't do "narratives" here. We summarize
176:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge (XXG)'s articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
1370:
587:"Secondly, he clearly said he hates the secular world and supports terrorists, as the sources clearly point out. He is only denying it."
275:
185:
755:
644:
172:
136:
1278:
1096:
It took me all of ten minutes to get that information. My brief search does not suggest Mr. Usamah is an "unfortunate victim of the
1049:"no evidence that the broadcaster had misled the audience or that the programme was likely to encourage or incite criminal activity"
1267:
1206:. The West Midlands Police also later apologised for their initial accusation, and offered £100,000 in compensation to Channel 4
661:
back from the computer, cool off for a day or two, and think seriously and maturely about what I am saying before you act next.
1147:
program which was first aired on 15 January 2007. In the program, Abu Usamah was quoted, among other things, to have said that
759:
534:
111:
978:
The Daily Mail is an unreliable source. However, there are other reliable sources that support the text such as this in the
266:
224:
1122:
Ofcom. As such, I believe it is worthy to add a new section entitled Undercover Mosque Controversy with the following text:
274:-related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
727:"Secondly, you apparently did not read my last comment. I said my reason for adding preachings is that he is a preacher."
389:
1312:
356:
27:
979:
834:
This information should be incorporated into the article. I have added a BBC News ref which can be used. Thanks. →
512:
your point that you think it's too vague without any real explanation is not justification to change the article.
68:
925:. Not all sources can be considered acceptable for a biography of a living person. The source you have provided (
632:. Nowhere do I see "controversy" as a subtitle. They only mention their support for terrorism, as the subtitle.--
961:
647:
policy and will ask that you please review it, because you are on the borderline of violating it at this point.
934:
117:
99:
1308:
1214:
1087:
1026:
968:
350:
901:- Ok. I am going to add the following factual information (I believe this is what sourced means) onto the
1204:
1197:
1182:
1159:
723:
I know, that's why I stated in my last comment that I don't take issue with bin Laden being linked to.
346:
1185:
78:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
790:
689:
633:
561:
524:
502:
469:
420:
20:
987:
942:
880:
408:
Given the very negative tone of this article, I would suggest higher quality sources are required.
382:
396:
1210:
1083:
1038:
1022:
964:
870:
700:
672:
621:
538:& Criticisms" would also be good. Articles on other controversial religious figures such as
82:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see
468:
Controversy is too vague. The title should give a little more detial to his terrorist supprot.--
75:
1256:
1207:
1199:
1011:
1234:
1144:
1140:
1112:
1097:
1078:
1060:
1018:
1003:
704:
676:
625:
1045:"in a ruling published today Ofcom found that the programme was "a legitimate investigation"
164:
930:
922:
789:
I'm not going to respond to your other comment, because it is irrelevant to this article.--
737:
685:
574:
I like your response here, we're into the meat of it now. This should make things easier.
821:
803:
763:
716:
680:
662:
629:
610:
547:
513:
492:
479:
459:
430:
1101:
918:
557:
1293:
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
1017:). Almost all the negative articles referenced in this biography refer back to the same
362:
983:
955:
938:
896:
876:
1104:
963:). Is there a reason why those references were added? or why they cannot be removed?
1324:
539:
1230:
1108:
1071:
1056:
905:
page. Please explain here prior to removing it, as you have on several occasions.
258:
578:"First, in Pat Robertson they say controversy, but then they list the criticisms."
854:
501:
Controversy is way too vague. They were preachings, and we should mention so. --
439:
409:
314:
148:
130:
902:
543:
248:
154:
596:"I don't know why you provided a link to WP:DR, because I see no violation."
600:
I never said there was. I placed it there for both your and my reference.
679:
because they are famous converts to Islam who support terrorism. I linked
926:
917:
To understand better what is meant by reliable sources please refer to
835:
31:
851:
1178:
The story caused backlash that resulted in 364 viewer complaints to
1155:, and to have referred to non-muslims by use of the derogatory term
732:
absolutely, positively, 100% just a matter of opinion and not fact.
1196:
view of the intended message by Abu Usamah and the other preachers
1002:
It seem sees as though Abu Usamah was an unfortunate victim of the
592:
addition to your earlier ones makes your intentions a bit suspect.
242:
218:
184:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
1316:
1238:
1218:
1189:
1179:
1116:
1107:. If you have reliable sources (on Mr. Usamah), please cite them.
1091:
1064:
1030:
1006:
program that was concluded by the police to be overtly biased and
991:
972:
946:
929:) seems to be contentious according to a number of entries on the
884:
858:
839:
824:
806:
793:
766:
692:
665:
636:
613:
564:
550:
527:
516:
505:
495:
482:
472:
462:
442:
433:
423:
412:
271:
707:
because they are famous converts to Islam who support terrorism."
1289:
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
35:
1143:, he was among a group of preachers whom were the focus of the
93:
74:
from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
51:
15:
313:
1043:
But then again, OfCom rejected the claims of distortion.
754:
you have demonstrated not only a desire to violate the
381:
270:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
998:
Revise Controversy to Undercover Mosque Controversy
395:
304:This article has not yet received a rating on the
1303:Participate in the deletion discussion at the
1184:. In addition to this, on 10 August 2017 the
8:
1279:Police apologise for mosque documentary slur
1361:Unknown-importance Muslim scholars articles
1268:Channel 4 vindicated over Undercover Mosque
97:
1149:Christians and Jews are enemies to Muslims
213:
125:
1351:Unknown-importance Islam-related articles
785:have a better term, that would be better
830:Police lodge complaint against Channel 4
736:"Do not put words in my mouth. And mind
1257:Ofcom backs Channel 4 over mosque probe
1249:
1153:jihad is coming against the unbelievers
215:
127:
1010:the intended message (see for example
719:because Abu Usamah praises Bin Laden."
1192:regarding what it considered to be a
756:Knowledge (XXG):Neutral point of view
645:Knowledge (XXG):Neutral point of view
194:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Biography
7:
1356:Start-Class Muslim scholars articles
1298:Abu Usamah At-Thahabi at Lecture.jpg
264:This article is within the scope of
170:This article is within the scope of
1366:Muslim scholars task force articles
1331:Biography articles of living people
116:It is of interest to the following
1346:Start-Class Islam-related articles
1188:also raised a formal complaint to
760:Knowledge (XXG):Resolving disputes
535:Knowledge (XXG):Resolving disputes
438:Completely agree with MezzoMezzo.
14:
284:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Islam
453:Problem with bias in the article
404:Concern about quality of sources
251:
241:
217:
157:
147:
129:
98:
57:This article must adhere to the
19:
815:This article is under mediation
26:This article was nominated for
1341:WikiProject Biography articles
1336:Start-Class biography articles
849:Does anyone have a source? --
325:the Muslim scholars task force
197:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
1139:During Abu Usamahs tenure at
947:19:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
885:07:42, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
859:19:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
322:This article is supported by
278:and see a list of open tasks.
60:biographies of living persons
182:contribute to the discussion
72:must be removed immediately
1387:
1371:WikiProject Islam articles
1317:01:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
1239:19:20, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
1219:18:20, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
1117:23:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
1092:21:39, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
1065:16:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
1031:16:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
973:17:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
840:19:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
483:22:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
473:03:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
463:16:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
443:16:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
434:00:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
424:06:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
306:project's importance scale
287:Template:WikiProject Islam
992:12:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
413:10:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
321:
303:
236:
142:
124:
825:22:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
807:21:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
794:21:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
767:13:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
693:23:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
666:14:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
637:04:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
614:03:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
565:19:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
551:18:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
528:03:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
517:22:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
506:00:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
496:20:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
1151:, to have taught that
318:
290:Islam-related articles
106:This article is rated
317:
173:WikiProject Biography
110:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1194:completely distorted
1186:West Midlands Police
1008:completely distorted
1047:and said there was
1309:Community Tech bot
701:Adam Yahiye Gadahn
673:Adam Yahiye Gadahn
622:Adam Yahiye Gadahn
319:
200:biography articles
112:content assessment
1145:Undercover Mosque
1141:Green Lane Masjid
1098:Undercover Mosque
1079:Undercover Mosque
1019:Undercover Mosque
1004:Undercover Mosque
933:(see for example
705:John Walker Lindh
677:John Walker Lindh
626:John Walker Lindh
340:
339:
336:
335:
332:
331:
267:WikiProject Islam
212:
211:
208:
207:
92:
91:
50:
49:
1378:
1281:
1276:
1270:
1265:
1259:
1254:
1075:
1042:
980:Evening Standard
959:
900:
890:Removing content
874:
864:Removing content
400:
399:
385:
292:
291:
288:
285:
282:
261:
256:
255:
254:
245:
238:
237:
232:
221:
214:
202:
201:
198:
195:
192:
178:join the project
167:
165:Biography portal
162:
161:
160:
151:
144:
143:
133:
126:
109:
103:
102:
94:
80:this noticeboard
52:
38:. The result of
23:
16:
1386:
1385:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1321:
1320:
1305:nomination page
1291:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1277:
1273:
1266:
1262:
1255:
1251:
1069:
1036:
1000:
953:
921:and especially
894:
892:
868:
866:
847:
832:
817:
717:Osama bin Laden
681:Osama bin Laden
630:Osama bin Laden
455:
406:
342:
289:
286:
283:
280:
279:
257:
252:
250:
230:Muslim scholars
227:
199:
196:
193:
190:
189:
163:
158:
156:
107:
12:
11:
5:
1384:
1382:
1374:
1373:
1368:
1363:
1358:
1353:
1348:
1343:
1338:
1333:
1323:
1322:
1301:
1300:
1290:
1287:
1283:
1282:
1271:
1260:
1248:
1247:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
999:
996:
995:
994:
950:
949:
891:
888:
865:
862:
846:
843:
831:
828:
816:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
797:
796:
782:
781:
774:
773:
751:
750:
742:
741:
729:
728:
721:
720:
709:
708:
696:
695:
658:
657:
653:
640:
639:
606:
605:
598:
597:
589:
588:
580:
579:
572:
571:
570:
569:
568:
567:
509:
508:
488:
487:
486:
485:
454:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
446:
445:
405:
402:
338:
337:
334:
333:
330:
329:
320:
310:
309:
302:
296:
295:
293:
276:the discussion
263:
262:
246:
234:
233:
222:
210:
209:
206:
205:
203:
169:
168:
152:
140:
139:
134:
122:
121:
115:
104:
90:
89:
85:this help page
69:poorly sourced
55:
48:
47:
40:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1383:
1372:
1369:
1367:
1364:
1362:
1359:
1357:
1354:
1352:
1349:
1347:
1344:
1342:
1339:
1337:
1334:
1332:
1329:
1328:
1326:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1299:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1288:
1280:
1275:
1272:
1269:
1264:
1261:
1258:
1253:
1250:
1246:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1211:Rahman.mukras
1208:
1205:
1202:
1200:
1198:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1181:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1160:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1084:Rahman.mukras
1080:
1073:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1040:
1039:Rahman.mukras
1035:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1023:Rahman.mukras
1020:
1016:
1013:
1009:
1005:
997:
993:
989:
985:
981:
977:
976:
975:
974:
970:
966:
965:Rahman.mukras
962:
957:
948:
944:
940:
936:
932:
928:
924:
920:
916:
915:
914:
912:
906:
904:
898:
889:
887:
886:
882:
878:
872:
871:Rahman.mukras
863:
861:
860:
857:
856:
853:
844:
842:
841:
837:
829:
827:
826:
823:
814:
808:
805:
801:
800:
799:
798:
795:
792:
788:
787:
786:
779:
778:
777:
771:
770:
769:
768:
765:
761:
757:
748:
747:
746:
739:
735:
734:
733:
726:
725:
724:
718:
714:
713:
712:
706:
702:
698:
697:
694:
691:
687:
682:
678:
674:
670:
669:
668:
667:
664:
654:
650:
649:
648:
646:
638:
635:
631:
627:
623:
618:
617:
616:
615:
612:
603:
602:
601:
595:
594:
593:
586:
585:
584:
577:
576:
575:
566:
563:
559:
554:
553:
552:
549:
545:
541:
540:Pat Robertson
536:
531:
530:
529:
526:
521:
520:
519:
518:
515:
507:
504:
500:
499:
498:
497:
494:
484:
481:
476:
475:
474:
471:
467:
466:
465:
464:
461:
452:
444:
441:
437:
436:
435:
432:
427:
426:
425:
422:
417:
416:
415:
414:
411:
403:
401:
398:
394:
391:
388:
384:
380:
376:
373:
370:
367:
364:
361:
358:
355:
352:
348:
345:
344:Find sources:
327:
326:
316:
312:
311:
307:
301:
298:
297:
294:
277:
273:
269:
268:
260:
249:
247:
244:
240:
239:
235:
231:
226:
223:
220:
216:
204:
187:
186:documentation
183:
179:
175:
174:
166:
155:
153:
150:
146:
145:
141:
138:
135:
132:
128:
123:
119:
113:
105:
101:
96:
95:
87:
86:
81:
77:
73:
70:
66:
62:
61:
56:
54:
53:
45:
41:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1302:
1292:
1274:
1263:
1252:
1244:
1193:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1007:
1001:
952:Fair enough
951:
907:
893:
867:
850:
848:
833:
818:
783:
775:
752:
743:
730:
722:
710:
659:
641:
607:
599:
590:
581:
573:
510:
489:
456:
407:
392:
386:
378:
371:
365:
359:
353:
343:
341:
323:
265:
259:Islam portal
171:
118:WikiProjects
83:
71:
64:
58:
44:no consensus
43:
845:Birth name?
369:free images
108:Start-class
1325:Categories
1245:References
903:Abu Usamah
822:MezzoMezzo
804:MezzoMezzo
764:MezzoMezzo
715:"I linked
663:MezzoMezzo
611:MezzoMezzo
548:MezzoMezzo
544:Tim LaHaye
514:MezzoMezzo
493:MezzoMezzo
480:MezzoMezzo
460:MezzoMezzo
431:MezzoMezzo
984:MontyKind
956:MontyKind
939:MontyKind
897:MontyKind
877:MontyKind
791:Sefringle
699:I linked
690:Sefringle
671:I linked
634:Sefringle
562:Sefringle
525:Sefringle
503:Sefringle
470:Sefringle
421:Sefringle
191:Biography
137:Biography
76:libellous
1102:reliable
1015:Standard
927:Memri TV
523:title?--
419:light.--
28:deletion
1231:Kleuske
1109:Kleuske
1105:sources
1072:Kleuske
1057:Kleuske
375:WP refs
363:scholar
32:March 6
1157:kuffar
931:WP:RSN
923:WP:BLP
738:WP:NPA
703:and ,
686:WP:NPA
675:and ,
628:, and
440:Addhoc
410:Addhoc
347:Google
114:scale.
1190:Ofcom
1180:Ofcom
935:Memri
919:WP:RS
911:Memri
558:WP:DR
390:JSTOR
351:books
281:Islam
272:Islam
225:Islam
1313:talk
1235:talk
1215:talk
1113:talk
1088:talk
1061:talk
1051:and
1027:talk
988:talk
969:talk
943:talk
881:talk
855:not?
542:and
383:FENS
357:news
180:and
42:was
36:2007
1307:. —
1012:BBC
397:TWL
300:???
65:BLP
30:on
1327::
1315:)
1237:)
1217:)
1209:.
1115:)
1090:)
1063:)
1029:)
990:)
982:.
971:)
945:)
913:.
883:)
838:—
836:AA
740:."
688:--
624:,
377:)
228::
34:,
1311:(
1233:(
1213:(
1161:.
1111:(
1086:(
1074::
1070:@
1059:(
1041::
1037:@
1025:(
986:(
967:(
958::
954:@
941:(
899::
895:@
879:(
873::
869:@
852:Y
393:·
387:·
379:·
372:·
366:·
360:·
354:·
349:(
328:.
308:.
188:.
120::
88:.
63:(
46:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
