Author talk:Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi

Alive

This man is (after long discussion) known to be alive and the article on Wikipedia, regarding him w:Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi was later changed to a Biography for Living People. I suppose this article too needs changing. -- Nasiryounus (talk) 19:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

While there are indications of doubt, it would seem on the balance of probability that the person is deceased. That said it matters little as the major reason that death date is relevant at Wikisource is with regard to public domain and copyright, and when the clock starts. If a later death is proved then we will update as appropriate. For the moment, the existing data would seem acceptable. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it would seem acceptable, but the thing is, the majority (regardless of probability or doubt from articles on the internet) seem to believe that Shahi hasn't passed away, but for one organization from Pakistan, which claims to be representative of Shahi, however another organization based in England and has branches in numerous countries (MFI) seems to claim that they are the representatives of Shahi and basically seem more reliable than the one based in Pakistan (ASI) as they provide reliable proof. I have gone through thorough research on this matter. Do not doubt my sincere efforts on this article, have been on the case since (well, quite a while now).

I've been accused of promoting the MFI, and sometimes the ASI and even Shahi, however, I do not represent either, it's just personal interest in the matter. -- Nasiryounus (talk) 22:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted the addition of Shahi's death date because there is reasonable doubt from news sources.

• 2008: Hindustan Times says Gohar Shahi is alive and serving a life sentence. This is the article.
• 2008: The Indian News Agency PTI says Shahi is alive and serving a life sentence. Source here.
• 2008: Indian Express says Shahi is in London after leaving Pakistan. Source here. Of course, other sources say Shahi died, but they disagree regarding the cause of death and the date (some say 2003 and some say 2001). Personally, I think we could simply say that his whereabouts are unknown given the confusion. Omirocksthisworld (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

All I am seeing is two sides trying to push their own agenda. I have recorded a date of death, and noted that it is disputed. The attached news articles are hardly definitive, though there would be indicative evidence of a possible -> probable death. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd just like to mention that it seems more likely that Shahi is alive, than dead, as:

1. More articles mention Shahi being alive than the number of articles mentioning his death
2. There is no evidence of his death, as he doesn't have a grave and had "disappeared" from his residence in London, 2001. There are news-articles from many reputable sources, dated back to 2001, regarding Shahi's disappearance, however, I cannot find them, as it has been 8-9 years since.

I suppose what could be mentioned is, "Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi - (1941 - [disputed]). And I say this because, the first impression one gets from reading this is that Shahi has died, and it is more probable that the common man wouldn't go into reading what reputable sources have got to say about it, and I say this out of personal experience. - Mfi.media (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Editing at Wikisource

Wikisource is the absolute last place that edit wars will be tolerated, and the repeated edits and reverts really needs to be moderated. With the continual edit / revert of external links, I have simply removed them from the Author: namespace. There is so obviously two schools and viewpoints, and both sides are welcome to state their position on this page, and then leave it alone. You may feel welcome to add the highly relevant links, though please do not edit the other person's links, they will need to stand side by side. We are not here to referee your differences nor to resolve whose version of the truth will prevail. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

My intention was not to be POV-pushing, but to just point out that the death date is disputed. The English Wikipedia has included the sources I mentioned for referencing claims that Shahi is alive while including sources from the Pakistani Press Foundation, Sunday Telegraph and Your Local Guardian to suggest that Shahi is dead. However I have no problem with the way the page is right now, since it already mentions that Shahi's death is disputed. Also, I apologize for the exclusion of the goharshahi.pk English link- I seemed to have forgotten my own philosophy of inclusion instead of exclusion when in doubt- how hypocritical of me. I clearly wasn't thinking, and was pretty much asking to be reverted. Omirocksthisworld (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

External Links

• Gohar Shahi web site(English) (Urdu)

Article protection

Due to the dispute over facts, this page has protection set upon it. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Let me tell you that the death of Shahi is not disputed but anti-gohar elements are trying to make this disputed. Its not disputed at all.--Saeedrags (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I would think that the evidence that they dispute the death is evidence enough. Whether you or I have an opinion either way cannot change that. All up, for our purposes, the year of death is used for determining public domain status, so it becomes a moot point with recent living authors. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

But the sources says that he was died on 25-11-2001:

1. Check this link
2. 2nd source
3. This source is from dawn newspaper as it is biggest English newspaper in Pakistan.
4. This source is from Daily Times, which is second largest English newspaper in Pakistan.
5. This source

If you still have confusion, please contact. Regards,

Thanks for the links. None of them could be defined as authoritative, and most would be said to be hearsay. That said they indicate a cluster of dates. As mentioned earlier, there is a date of death recorded, it is noted as disputed. This indicates two schools of thought, and from WS's POV that is sufficient. I think that it is sufficient to round out the matter. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:25, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

In this case only the year of death is disputed and not the death.--Saeedrags (talk) 10:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I was searching for the reliable source and aftermath, I found this source of telegraph, UK. I hope it would work.--Saeedrags (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

For Wikisource's needs, it is not important. Sufficient detail exists for our needs. There are references onwards where people can refer to encyclopaedic works. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

If you carefully read This article, it also states that The sentences are said to total 59 years. An appeal was filed in the High Court of Sindh and before it could be decided, Goharshahi died and the case was 'abated', which clearly resolve this issue and confirm death status.--Saeedrags (talk) 16:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The talk page at wikipedia is the place to discuss this matter. Cygnis insignis (talk) 16:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Messiah Foundation International

This article fails to mention that Shahi has also found Messiah Foundation International, which is quite clearly evident in all the references from Wikipedia. It'd be much appreciated if it were mentioned. - Mfi.media (talk) 20:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Done — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Removed all founding data. This is an author page, not the encyclopaedic entry. I have taken it back to bare basics as it seems that too much data is taken as argumentative. This is Wikisource. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:00, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I think that is reasonable. Omirocksthisworld (talk) 00:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)