Abu Ahmad ibn Adi al-Jurjani: There is nothing wrong with him, his hadith is written
Abu Hatim al-Razi: He is not strong
Abu Hatim ibn Hibban al-Busti: He had a bad memory and was often mistaken. He used to narrate inverted things from trustworthy narrators. I do not like to argue with what the trustworthy narrators agreed upon, so how can I when he contradicts them with problematic narrations?
Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: Famous
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: His hadiths are confusing, and once: He is weak
Ahmad ibn Shuayb al-Nasa'i: Weak, and once: He is not strong
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Weak
Al-Dhahabi: They said he is not strong, and once: He has munkar narrations
Zakaria ibn Yahya al-Saji: Weak, but he is not accused of lying
Ali ibn al-Madini: We used to consider him very weak
Authors of Tahrir Taqrib al-Tahdhib: Weak, but he is considered in corroborations and supporting evidence, and the statements of the Imams indicate that his weakness is not severe
Yahya ibn Ma'in: Weak, and once: He said: There is nothing wrong with him, his hadith is written, and once: We used to consider him very weak