Talk:Aga Khan IV/Archive 1

Archive 1

untitled comments

I believe that the last paragraph of this article:

Founded and guided by His Highness the Aga Khan, the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) brings together a number of development agencies, institutions, and programmes that work primarily in the poorest parts of Asia and Africa. AKDN is a contemporary endeavour of the Ismaili Imamat to realise the social conscience of Islam through institutional action. AKDN agencies conduct their programmes without regard to the faith, origin or gender.

has been copied literally from the AKDN's website at [1]. This may be a copyright infringement.

CubaLibre 12:55, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Announcement

Someone made the fact of who made the announcement of a pending divorce anonymous. ([2]) Doesn't who made the announcement add useful information?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 19:35, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Is he still married to his first wife, or did she die or were they divorced before his second marriage? i dunno

He is divorced from his first wife (I've added a link to the article). Ud terrorist 17:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Prince of what?

I apologize if I'm not following the correct format; this is my first discussion post on Wikipedia.

What exactly is Aga Khan IV prince of? The link to his father dosen't seem to provide much information, either. The article makes reference to Pakistan. His grandfather's article makes mention of Persia. Is this where he gets his title from?

Thanks for whatever enlightenment you can provide.

It says "Aga Khan IV has British nationality", but it doesn't mention any other nationality/ies. At any rate, he's definitely not a prince of the UK. Nor, presumably, of the Republic of Pakistan.

He is the prince of Ismaili Muslims.

Some of us Ithna Ashari Shia Muslims call our Imams "Princes". Maybe the Ismailis do the same...? Armyrifle 14:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The titles of prince and princess, which are claimed by children of the Aga Khan by virtue of their descent from Shah Fath Ali Shah of the Persian Qajar dynasty, were recognized as courtesy titles by the British government in 1938.[1] - from this website under Prince Aly Khan.

Hi, the aga Khan is a prince of the blood, not landed Aristocrat nor a ruler of a principality, which means he doesn't have to have a land to which the title belongs. It was recognized by the British empire in 1938, as his website says. He retains this title as his ancestors were members of the qajar imperial family, this is the only reason why he uses his title. Hope this answers your question.

KBE ?

Somebody added in the postnominal letters KBE and the category Knight Commanders of the Order of the British Empire. Can anyone provide a link to prove this ? Dowew 01:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Prince Karim Aga Khan IV became Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire on December 31, 2003. It was announced in the London Gazette, Wednesday December 31, 2003, Supplement No. 1. The announcement reads:

DIPLOMATIC AND OVERSEAS LIST To be Ordinary Knights Commander of the Civil Division of the said Most Excellent Order: His Highness Prince Karim, Aga Khan IV. For services to international development, especially in Asia and Africa, and to UK-French relations.

-- Aylahs ^(talk) 17:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

"Hazar Imam"

It is true that many people write "Hazar Imām" but shouldn't it be rendered, at least on Wikipedia, as "Ḥāẓir Imām" since the correct term in Arabic is "حاظر امام" (that is, an Imām that is present (حاظر, ḥāẓir) and not in hiding (غیب, ghayb) like other Shīʿī's Imāms)? (I believe this is also taken from His title "ألإمام الحاظر" (al-imāmu-l-ḥāẓir...) and so on.) Kitabparast 00:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

In the article, it is spelled حاضر Which one is correct?

I second that, the Arabic reads ḥāẓir and not hazar; also ḥāẓir makes sense like said above, as it means "present". --Zybez 02:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

descent from Prophet

why is his descent controversial? explain in article and provide citation.Mowens35 17:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

His Highness Prince Karim al-Hussaini Shah Aga Khan IV, as the 49^th Imam (spritual leader) of the Shia Imami Ismaili Muslims is descended from the Prophet Muhammed (SAS) through his daughter Hazrat Bibi Fatima (AS) and the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law Hazrat Ali (AS). Over the centuries, there have been many who have sought to deny the family's lineage to suit their political, religious, financial or other interests. However, two key legal cases clearly established the legitimacy of the Aga Khan's lineage in the courts of the British Empire.

The first, known as the Khoja Case, was litigated in the High Court of Bombay between the months of April and June, 1866, before Justice Sir Joseph Arnould.[3] The second, known as the Haji Bibi Case was tried before Mr. Justice Russell in 1905 and is reported in The Bombay Law Reporter.[4]

Cimm^[talk] 22:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

His lineage is nonetheless disputed by many, and the legal cases did not do much to prove anything that was unknown before the cases. As well, it can maybe be touched upon that the family that claims to be direct descendants have a strong liking for white women, and that a man like Agha Khan happens to have very little blood in him that is from Muhammad, and that's under the circumstance that they have proven his descent, which they have not.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.93.206.223 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

-I think your statment is a of a bigot. Women, whether white or black, are human beings, and everyone is equal in that matter. Their preferences have nothing to do with the lineage.

I agree with the above. All the races are equal, and if he is descended from Muhammad, it's through the male side anyway. Furthermore, after so many centuries, it would be rather strange if he had more than a little blood in him from Muhammad, given that the only way to achieve that is incest.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 02:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

tone/npov

The tone of this article reads a bit too much like a hagiography or something copied from the subject's own publication. Subsolar 09:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

"Some critics say..."

A guy keeps putting in a defamatory / unreferenced set of allegations about Aga Khan IV's fundraising. There's no backup for this. If it's removed he reverts it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.193.251 (talk) 14:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List it at WP:BLP/N if it continues. David Underdown (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I've warned the other editors about unsourced allegations being a WP:BLP violation. I've also removed the section that was a WP:BLP violation.

If the problem persists, be aware that the WP:3RR policy allow you (and others) to revert BLP violations an unlimited number of times. If the other editor keeps putting the unsourced information back in, read that policy regarding warning and (if the problem persists) reporting a 3RR violation. If you need help on this, just ask at the help desk. Wikipedia has very strong policies against libeling people. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

"Harvard Associates"

His Harvard associates remember him for being shy, serious, intelligent, and a good team player.

- Deleted this line, as there is no citation or reference —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.106.167.19 (talk) 15:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Out of wedlock?

It says that he was born "seven months" after his parents got married. Meaning he was a child of sin according to Islamic law, which prohibits sex between unmarried couples. Or was he born prematurely? Some clarification would be in order. 212.118.133.150 15:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I am not privy to his parents' sex lives, though his father was well-known for his mistresses and girlfriends and was living with Bettina, the famous fashion model, at the time of his death. If you compare the dates of his parents' marriage and the date of his birth, he was born seven months after their marriage. That is all the published material/clarification allows at present. If you or anyone else has any further information, go right ahead and cite it, with proper citation. Or, presumably, you could consult a biography of Prince Aly Khan, which might clear things up. I do not have one at hand.Mowens35 15:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

That's not something you want to be known if you claim to be the Imam. I always knew this guy was a phoney, but maybe tha's because I'm not Ismaili but Ithna 'Ashari. Armyrifle 14:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Since the article as I see it states that he was premature and cites a source, should I assume the problem has already been dealt with? Also, Armyrifle9, whether you believe in this man or not, his parents' sex lives has nothing to do with whether or not he is the Imam. Being Ithna'ashari is no excuse; my father is one and I don't go about insulting other religions, credible or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.125.110 (talk) 00:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the legal wedding was 7 months before his birth, as stated in his father's article, there were complications because of a previous divorce the bride was going through. The religious ceremony on the other hand was certainly earlier. --Enzuru 01:36, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I must say this discussion is so jevenile, do we know for a fact, that in the past the Prophets and Imams were rightfully born within the weddlock, as it is said this issue is not even relevant to the beleivers and it should not be relevant to the others as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.59.213.234 (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

unrelated

Says Wikipedia : "The Āgā Khān married his second wife, HSH Dr. Gabriele Princess of Leiningen (née Gabriele Thyssen), at his vast walled compound and chateau near Chantilly, France (unrelated to the commune of Aiglemont in the Ardennes) on 30 May 1998."

About Aiglemont : note that, if it's unrelated, you don't have to mention it - the property in Gouvieux is introduced only in the last paragraph of the article but missing in the preceding sentence. I won't update the article as I'm not home. --193.56.241.75 (talk) 13:26, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Aga Khan IV/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

*It needs more references, there's not enough background, and there's a long list of red links that are not very useful. Eixo 20:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 14:09, 1 May 2016 (UTC)