Abu Ahmad ibn Adi al-Jurjani: In his hadith he is lenient, and most of his hadith is not preserved
Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi: He is not strong in hadith
Abu Ja'far al-'Uqayli: His hadith is not followed
Abu Hatim al-Razi: His place is truthfulness, but he was mostly careless. He used to write down his hadith, but it is not considered a proof.
Abu Hatim ibn Hibban al-Busti: He was among those who made many mistakes, even narrating from trustworthy narrators what does not resemble the hadith of confirmation. I do not like to use his narration as evidence if it agrees with the trustworthy narrators, so how about when he narrates something strange alone?
Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: He is not considered anything (reliable). Once, he said: Weak
Abu Zur'ah al-Razi: He is not strong
Abu 'Abdullah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi: He narrated rejected narrations from trustworthy narrators. He said in al-Mustadrak: He is not abandoned. And he once said: Others are more trustworthy than him. He said in the questions of Mas'ud ibn 'Ali al-Sijzi: He is weak in hadith
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: Weak, his hadith is not considered anything, one should not write from him
Ahmad ibn Shu'ayb al-Nasa'i: Weak, abandoned hadith. And once: He is not trustworthy
Ibrahim ibn Ya'qub al-Jawzajani: There is leniency and weakness in him
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Weak
Ali ibn al-Madini: Weak in hadith
Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari: Close to being acceptable in hadith, except that his son Muhammad narrates rejected narrations from him. And once: Truthful
Muhammad ibn 'Ammar al-Mawsili: He narrates rejected hadith
Marwan ibn Mu'awiyah al-Fazari: He used to consider him trustworthy
Yahya ibn Ma'in: His hadith is not considered anything. And once: He is not considered anything. And once: He is not trustworthy. And in the narration of Ibn Mahriz, he said: Weak in hadith