Template talk:Islamism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Islam (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Template:Islamism[edit]

Should other parties like the Turkish AKP, Iraqi [[SIIC], Islamic Dawa Party, Islamic Virtue Party, Moroccan PJD and Bahraini al-Watan parties be included? Should orgs be listed by country? AndrewRT(Talk) 00:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't really think we can include a list of "islamic conepts" in this template. This is because Islamists discuss almost all concepts, from spiritual to tmeporal, from economics to sex, including the major tenets of Islam and its major texts.Bless sins (talk) 02:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Islamists[edit]

I noticed that Muhammad Asad, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Sheikh Usthaz M.A.M.Mansoor are included on the template. Islamism doesn't seem to be mentioned in the articles on these individuals. Plus, the first was a Qur'an translator, the second is the prime minister of Turkey and the third appears to be an academic; on what basis are they included here? MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with your concerns. Erdogan has publicly proclaimed himself to be a secularist and even promoted secularism during his visit to Egypt, much to the annoyance of the Muslim Brotherhood who are real islamists. The AKP has secularism in its party manifesto too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.86.31 (talk) 14:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I have to disagree about Erdogan. From an event 2013 Egypt revolution, Erdogan had shown his support for the Muslim Brotherhood. He said, he did not support the revolution. And he mentioned that the act of that military takeover was an act of tyrany. He's rejecting any replacement appointed by the military. While for some others individuals mentioned, only a few numbers are actually wahhabists; while the others are NOT wahhabist. It seemed, just because there were revolutions involved, these individuals are wahhabist? Example: Said Nursi. He never supported revolutions. Then Mustafa Kamel Ataturk or Ataturk toppled the existing government through his secular movements. How can you call him a wahhabist? Yes. The existing king may had done something wrong. But the act of tyranny after the post-revolution didn't make him better. In one unrecorded source, he instructed the military to burn the scholars on a train while him and his partners were drinking lustfully in another carriage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.195.159.212 (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)