Talk:Islam in India
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Islam in India article.|
|Archives: Index, 1, 2|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|Islam in India was the Indian collaboration of the week for the week starting on June 11, 2006.
For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.
|This is not a forum for general discussion about Islam in India. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Islam in India at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk.|
|This article is written in Indian English (colour, realise, analyse), and some terms used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved.|
Why is the census 2011 figures not on this page and why is a undo trail when it is getting added? No explanation given by either editors. Im bringing it back for lack of explanation. thevikas (talk) 15:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- As I understand it, it is being reverted because the authentic figure does not exist. The 2011 census has not published figures for the various religions (for what reason, I don't know). The source being added is from rediff, but it can't be verified on the actual census website, so it is very suspect. At least, that is my understanding of the problem, DS might have something else to say about it. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- I just reverted Madman, who was attempting to add the same stat from the same source. I repeat; for the higher figure to be used, you need a better source than rediff. I have tried to find the statistic on the census website; it is not available. If anybody finds it, it may be used. Until then, this revision stays. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Population Exchange Policy with Malaysia should be put in the Article
The Malaysian government has already decided on a population exchange policy with India, whereby Indian Hindus who were brought by British and allowed to remain in Malaysia after independence will be repatriated to India and same number of Muslims from India will leave for Malaysia. This should be put in the article as the joint Muslim councils of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Malaysia are already approaching the UN in regards to this. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
- Uh...that sounds unbelievable. But if it's true, please provide a reliable source which verifies it. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
- I don't understand what you are saying. Muslims are free to go to any Muslim country they want if the country has asked them to come. The government of India has no choice in the matter. I will try and post the link to a Malaysian talk show where this was being discussed, the heading was in Malay but I will try to get it. It is not possible for the Indian government to "contain" the Muslims as the Muslim population is increasing and will just result in more and more riots. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 10:04, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
I agree with all that you said. However you should also mention that some members in Pakistan and Bangladesh have also come up with agreements for getting Muslims out of India. They have come up with a different arrangement whereby the Muslims in india can first travel to Pakistan and then from there go to any Muslim country they want. This is also a good option either Muslims can migrate directly from India to other Muslim countries or they can go via Pakistan to other Muslim countries. We should make mention of this in the main page as well. Ali Machine (talk) 01:58, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
- These are valid points and should be put in the article immediately. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 13:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
In the denominations section, there is no mention of Sunni muslims, which are the largest denomination (in fact Sunnis consider Sufis, Shias, Dawoodi Bohras, Ahmadiyyas etc. as non-muslims) and I hope somebody can mention them (Sunnis) here.—Khabboos (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- Many Sufi groups in India are Sunni - although there is a prejudice against them by some other Sunnis such as followers of the Salafi movement. Chris Fynn (talk) 06:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2014
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Many point in "Islam in India" miss. Especially regarding destruction of temples(You can refer: Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent). Enormous no of temples were destroyed and conversions happened. Of course you can also mention Akbar played a significant role in establishing good relationship between Hindus and Muslims. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 08:46, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Godhra Train burning was not an accident
It is mentioned on this page that the train burning in Godhra was an accident. It is written that: "The Bannerjee commission appointed to investigate this finding declared that the fire was an accident." A reference is also given for this: http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2203/stories/20050211004203200.htm. But the link is not working. I looked it up and found that it was not at all an accident. The commission set up for this concluded that it was caused by a mob of people, mainly Muslims. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhra_train_burning
And the Banerjee Commission that claimed that it was an accident was thrashed badly by the High Court for being unethical. Kindly correct this thing in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capachow (talk • contribs) 14:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- That is not the only source which says it was an accident. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- Yeh. But now it is very well accepted by all the courts that it was not some fire accident. It was caused by a mob. So this info should be added in the section on this page. --Capachow (talk) 04:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
HELLO.MY NAME IS EDIN.I AM FROM BOSNIA.I WROTE A BOOK CALLED ,,SVJETSKI ALMANAH DEMOGRAFSKE ISTORIJE MUSLIMANA"(WORLD ALMANAC OF DEMOGRAPHIC HISTORY OF MUSLIMS).I UPLOADED A MAP (ONE OF MY OWN WORKS) THAT SHOWS THE TERRITORIAL DISTRIBUTION OF MUSLIMS IN INDIA BY TEHSILS.THE MAP IS VERY DETAILED.I THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO ACCEPT THIS MAP AS A PART OF THIS ARTICLE.HERE IS THE LINK TO THE MAP: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:INDIA.PERCENTAGE_OF_MUSLIMS_BY_TEHSILS._ACCORDING_TO_THE_2001_CENSUS.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edin Radoncic (talk • contribs) 21:29, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Why is there nothing here about the sweeping genocide of millions of Hindus that Muslims perpetuated for centuries in India chronicled by modern historians such as Will Durant and Alain Danielou? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 04:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)