User talk:TruthForKnowledge

November 2025

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Mahdi, you may be blocked from editing. DMacks (talk) 03:26, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry what do you mean? Theres wrong information regarding Muslims belief that I simply corrected as there is clear misinformation. TruthForKnowledge (talk) 03:35, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You do not have permission to impose your religious or moral position on what is or isn't allowed on our encyclopedia. DMacks (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral point of view does not equate to violation of the sanctity of religion. Neither does it equate to falsehood.

You as an editor are spreading falsehood, Im sure that is a clear breach of Wikipedia policy.

One such example is that you falsely mentioned sahih Bukhari books does not mention the Mahdi, yet it does. “How will you be when the son of Mary descends among you and your imām is from among you” hadeeth 3449. You don’t appear to be Muslim yet quoting utterly false things. Imam Mahdi is a core part of Sunni Islam. Another hadeeth in sahih Muslim which you said doesn’t exit is Hadith Number (standard): 155 (or 247 depending on edition). Both these refer to the imam Mahdi. Maybe the name is not mentioned explicitly by his name but it’s clear to us Muslims it’s about him.

A quick google search appears to show that appear to have similarly copy pasted from google ai search results which I took a screenshot of. Even if you are non Muslim you can edit but mention truth and not falsehood. To make matters worse is this is backed by any source, as it’s fake information. The only source I found was Google ai which automatically wrote what u wrote although all I wrote was imam Mahdi bukahri hadeeth. A basic search without depending on ai which as you know can be and does get things wrong. As such your spreading falsehood and this ought to be reported.

The Sunni scholars affirm that belief in “Mahdi of the House of the Prophet”is one of the Islamic tenets for “Ahlussunnah wal Jama’a”.

Sunnis have 6 major collections of traditions based on the Sunni standards for verifying the authenticity of a tradition. These 6 books are: Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sahih al-Tirmidhi, Sunan Ibn Majah, Sunan Abu Dawud, and Sahih al-Nisa’i.

Sunni References:

Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p86, v9, pp 74-75

Sunan Abu Dawud, v2, p7

Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,376; V3, p63

al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn, by al-Hakim, v4, p557

Jami’ al-Saghir, by al-Suyuti, pp 2,160

al-Urful Wardi, by al-Suyuti, p2

al-Majma’, by al-Tabarani, p217

Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v9, p144

Fat’h al-Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, v7, p305

al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p249

al-Tathkirah, by al-Qurtubi, p617

al-Hawi, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 165-166

Sharh al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, by al-Zurqani, v5, p348

Fat’h al-Mugheeth, by al-Sakhawi, v3, p41

Kanz al-Ummal, v7 P186

Iqd al-Durar Fi Akhbar al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar, v12, Ch. 1,

al-Bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al-Zaman, By Ganji al-Shafi’i, Ch. 12

al-Fusool al-Muhimmah, by Ibn Sabbagh al-Maliki, Ch. 12

Arjahul Matalib, by Ubaidallah Hindi al-Hanafi, p380

Muqaddimah, by Ibn Khaldoon, p266

and also in the works of Ibn Habban, Abu Nua’ym, Ibn Asakir, etc.

To avoid conflict and as a gesture of goodwill, I will give you by the end of the week to write correct information which can be verified and also neutral to both sects of Islam before this escalates and your reported for spreading false information contrary to Islamic beliefs.

And regarding the picture on that page, again you seek to conflate neutrality with violation of religious beliefs. In Islam you cannot show a picture of the prophet, therefore if an editor attempts to do something corrosive such as post a photo then that’s not neutrality but disrespect. This extends to other prominent figures in Islam.

If you continue to act in a way which is contrary to Islam, be it Shia or Sunni, then investigation ought to be conducted on where else have you been speeding falsehood about Islam. Islamophobia is real and is occurring. I hope you’re not one who is participating to that.

If this persists then legal action may be taken for attacks on Islamic beliefs, something which I believe Wikimedia foundation would rather avoid when one of their editors is clearly spreading falsehood. TruthForKnowledge (talk) 01:31, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you retract your legal threat, Users who make legal threats such as you are promptly blocked from editing. Untamed1910 (talk) 02:18, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Legal threat at user talk:TruthForKnowledge. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:15, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or threatening to take legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while any threats to take legal action currently stand.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 02:21, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]