Abu Ahmad ibn Adi al-Jurjani: Generally, what he narrates is not followed by others
Abu al-Fath al-Azdi: He is not to be used as an argument
Abu Ja'far al-'Uqayli: He mentioned a hadith for him and said: He is only known by it
Abu Hatim al-Razi: Sheikh of Homs, his hadith is written but not used as an argument
Abu Hatim ibn Hibban al-Busti: He denies hadith, narrates many mursals, and narrates from unknown people. His hadith does not resemble the hadith of the trustworthy. So when the majority of his narration became what the hearts rejected, he deserved to be abandoned as an argument
Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: There is nothing wrong with him
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: There was nothing wrong with him, there is nothing wrong with him
Ibrahim ibn Ya'qub al-Jawzajani: Not an argument
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Lenient in hadith, many mursals
Al-Dhahabi: A narrator of hadith, but not precise
Dahim al-Dimashqi: Trustworthy
Ali ibn al-Madini: He was a weak sheikh, and once: Trustworthy, people narrated from him
Muhammad ibn 'Ubayd al-Himsi: There is nothing wrong with him
Yahya ibn Ma'in: Weak
Ya'qub ibn Sufyan al-Faswi: Lenient in hadith