Jump to content

Talk:Islam: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Nader ecl (talk | contribs)
69 edits
←Replaced content with 'ISLAM FAILS ~~~~'
Tag: talk page blanking
Line 1: Line 1:
ISLAM FAILS [[Special:Contributions/62.132.202.3|62.132.202.3]] ([[User talk:62.132.202.3|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
{{skiptotoctalk}}
{{talkheader|search=yes}}
{{notaforum}}
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=FAC
|action1date=19:55, 11 November 2005
|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Islam/archive1
|action1result=not promoted
|action1oldid=28049819

|action2=PR
|action2date=17 May 2006
|action2link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Islam/archive1
|action2oldid=53774303

|action3=PR
|action3date=20 October 2006
|action3link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Islam/archive2
|action3oldid=82618558

|action4=PR
|action4date=20 November 2006
|action4link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Islam/archive3
|action4oldid=89117159

|action5=GAN
|action5date=11 December 2006
|action5link=Talk:Islam/Archive 18#GA nomination failed
|action5result=failed
|action5oldid=93657287

|action6=GAN
|action6date=2007-05-03
|action6link=Talk:Islam/Archive 19#Good Article: Passed .28congrats.21.29
|action6result=listed
|action6oldid=127894486

|action7=FAC
|action7date=2007-05-22
|action7link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Islam
|action7result=promoted
|action7oldid=132771804

|action8=FAR
|action8date=06:02, 9 January 2008
|action8link=Wikipedia:Featured article review/Islam/archive1
|action8result=kept
|action8oldid=182762516

|maindate=July 1, 2007
|aciddate=2006-11-18
|currentstatus=FA
}}
{{Outline of knowledge coverage|Islam}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|
{{WPReligion|class=FA}}
{{WikiProject Islam|class=FA|importance=top}}
{{WPMA|class=FA|importance=top}}
{{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=FA|category=Philrelig|VA=yes|coresup=yes}}
}}
{{external peer review|date=April 30, 2007|org=The Denver Post|comment="quite impressed"; "looks like something that might have been done by a young graduate student, or assistant professor, or two or three"; "clinical and straightforward, but not boring"; "where important translations of Arabic language or fine religious distinctions are required, Wikipedia acquits itself well." Please [[Wikipedia:External peer review/Denver Post|examine the findings]].}}
{{todo}}
{{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot|age=30|dounreplied=yes}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:Islam/Archive index
|mask=Talk:Islam/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan|type=content}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 25
|minthreadsleft = 10
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:Islam/Archive %(counter)d
}}

== Misleading photo caption.(?) ==

The caption under the picture of a Muslim woman wearing a headscarf states that Islam forbids women to show their hair in Public, shouldn’t this be clarified more? Qur’anic scholars have debated whether the book truly says this, and also some sects of Islam state that Women do not have to cover their hair and would argue that Islam does not prohibit it. Thoughts? --[[User:Misortie|大輔 泉]] ([[User talk:Misortie|talk]]) 18:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


Yes Allah says in Surah Al-Noor Chapter 24 Verse 31 "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof And let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms And not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers..."

So to clarify:
1. In public Muslim women have to cover their body except their face, hands, and wrists.

2. At home they are allowed to dress more freely (appropiately of course) to ONLY their family members and the full list of applicable family members is described in the verse because the family will not look at the women with "evil eyes" or bad intentions as opposed to going out in public where, as we all know, people (moslty men-some women lol) have bad intentions when women expose their body as opposed to women that don't.

And to note: Men are also instructed to lower their gaze when a women attracts them or to prevent impure thoughts from entering their minds- Surah Al-Noor chapter 24 Verse 30 "Say to the believing men that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts That is purer for them Surely Allah is Aware of what they do"

So the men "hijab" is given before the women "hijab"

I hope I clarified it for you and for anyone else who reads this. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ahminh|Ahminh]] ([[User talk:Ahminh|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ahminh|contribs]]) 20:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Ahminh, nowhere in the sura you cited doesn it mention hair, face, hands or wrists. The only body parts explicitly mentioned as private parts and bosoms. The sura also gives fathers and husbands as the only exceptions, but in practice the whole family is included (as well as doctors in most places). So, obviously, it is open to interpretation. Indeed, I have spoken to many women who consider themselves Muslim, but believe that completely covering the hair is not required, but that the sura only asks for modesty. [[User:Ashmoo|Ashmoo]] ([[User talk:Ashmoo|talk]]) 00:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Ashmoo, it does mention the hair "head-coverings over their bosoms"-the head has hair on it so it does mention hair. Please give references as to what you said- you did not provide a single reference (pertaining to doctor and "whole" family). I understand what your experience with Muslim women has been (as to what they told you) and I agree that the surah speaks about modesty-however it does not ask. Nowhere in the surah is the word "ask' to be found- Allah says to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) "And SAY..." . Also Allah says to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in Surah Al-Ahzaab Ch.33 Verse 59 "O prophet! tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad)...". I know that many people have different opinions but Allah gives a general dress code for women when they are abroad. Some women cover EVERYTHING including their face, hands, and wrists; while others don't cover their face or hands or wrists-just because some do things differently does not mean they are wrong but they should stick to the general dress code. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ahminh|Ahminh]] ([[User talk:Ahminh|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ahminh|contribs]]) 03:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Yes, well my actual point was that different Muslims interpret the surahs differently. Wikipedia doesn't allow interpretaion of primary texts. This means that the article can't include pronouncements about what surahs 'actually' mean, but only sourced interpretations by 3rd parties. [[User:Ashmoo|Ashmoo]] ([[User talk:Ashmoo|talk]]) 14:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

== Islam (Not-Known Facts) ==

Islam is the most respected,most old and most following religion.
Although many people describe it badly but,Islam is indeed better.
Islam teaches not to expose themselves(Private Parts),To Be truthful and live peacefully.
And,Many terrorists are Muslims but why are you talking badly about his/her religion.
Live peacefully and remember,Please:
In this world,There are not Bad Muslims,Nor Good Muslims,Not Bad Hindus,Nor Good Hindus,Not Bad Christians,Nor Good Christians,But Only Two Type of People:"Good and Bad".
There is no word before the above lines("Good and Bad").
Please remember.. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:RukhsarFaiz|RukhsarFaiz]] ([[User talk:RukhsarFaiz|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/RukhsarFaiz|contribs]]) 13:19, 5 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Actually Zorostrianism has a longer history than Islam, being tracked in history to almost 3 millenia ago. And sayings its the most respected is POV for sure, and sources are needed for saying its the most followed. [[Special:Contributions/206.75.198.6|206.75.198.6]] ([[User talk:206.75.198.6|talk]]) 15:29, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


Islam's history did not just begin when Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) introduced the Quran. Allah's first human prophet on this Earth (according to Quran and Muslim beliefs) was Adam (PBUH) who was the first human and Allah gave him guidance (teachings also). Just because science has not found evidence of Adam's teachings does not mean they do not exist. People thought the world was flat-that changed; people thought the earth was the center-that changed; people did not believe in black holes-that obviously changed. Just because they traced Zoronstrianism does not mean it is older than Islam. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ahminh|Ahminh]] ([[User talk:Ahminh|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ahminh|contribs]]) 19:45, 17 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Wikipedia articles are based upon science not religion and thus do not recognize Adam as the "first human". --[[User:NeilN|'''<font color="#003F87">Neil<font color="#CD0000">N</font></font>''']] <sup><font face="Calibri">''[[User talk:NeilN|<font color="#003F87">talk to me</font>]]''</font></sup> 21:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
::Actually, to this is not necessarily true, to quote [[WP:V]]: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source (see below), not whether editors think it is true." Correct me if I am wrong, but the practical application of this would be: "The adherents of such-and-such religion believe that..." or "the text of any given religion says..." just as: "Dr. scientist say the theory of such-and-such is true because of..."--[[User:Supertouch|Supertouch]] ([[User talk:Supertouch|talk]]) 22:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, you are correct in that the article could state "Followers of Islam believe that their religion is the oldest..." (with a cite to a scholarly source). --[[User:NeilN|'''<font color="#003F87">Neil<font color="#CD0000">N</font></font>''']] <sup><font face="Calibri">''[[User talk:NeilN|<font color="#003F87">talk to me</font>]]''</font></sup> 22:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

== Sects are NOT part of Islam ==

The section about Islam having sects is very misleading and wrong. Islam PROHIBITS having sects; Quran Surah Al-Anam Chapter 6 Verse 159 "Surely they who divided their religion into parts and became sects, you have no concern with them. Their affair is only with Allah, then He will inform them of what they did."

There are no sects in Islam; those who make them are wrong and are not following the Quran- thus it is not part of Islam and SHOULD be removed as it is very misleading.

Just to clarify:

Islam has no sects- no Sunni, Shia, Wahhabi, or anything else
And I quoted from the Quran to prove that.

PLEASE REMOVE IT!! Many people use Wikipedia and see it as a reliable source and when they see that part in the "Islam" article they will believe that there are sects in Islam.


NO SECTS! (one more time :D) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ahminh|Ahminh]] ([[User talk:Ahminh|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ahminh|contribs]]) 17:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Are you referring to the Denominations section? If so, the Quran may prohibit them but they obviously exist. --[[User:NeilN|'''<font color="#003F87">Neil<font color="#CD0000">N</font></font>''']] <sup><font face="Calibri">''[[User talk:NeilN|<font color="#003F87">talk to me</font>]]''</font></sup> 17:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


Yes and I would like to add a comment at the beginning of the denominations section AND at the beginning of the article stating that sects are not part of Islam; Quran Surah Al-Anam Chapter 6 Verse 159 and Surah Al-Imran Chapter 3 Verse 103.

Islam forbids sects and I am aware that there are many sects which Muslims are part of but they are wrong and I am trying to do my part to help them realize that sects ARE NOT part of Islam. Many of the people just listen to their parents and preachers that they must be (for example) Sunni or Shia or Wahabbi; however there may be a dispute and someone may want to visit Wikipedia (like the rest of the world nowadays) to see what the article says or anyone who wants to research Islam may use this article and I just want them to see the truth.

{{tlf|editsemiprotected}}
{{EP|n}}

:You need to state the '''exact''' wording of the text you want to add. "Sects are not part of Islam" is not nuanced enough and won't fly because they obviously exist. Note that the article should not rely solely on the Koran or other religious teachings to describe what Islam is - it also has to describe what has actually happened. --[[User:NeilN|'''<font color="#003F87">Neil<font color="#CD0000">N</font></font>''']] <sup><font face="Calibri">''[[User talk:NeilN|<font color="#003F87">talk to me</font>]]''</font></sup> 21:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


Okay the exact wording is: "Although sects are part of many Muslim communities, they are not actually part of the fundamental teachings of the Quran/Islam (whichever word looks better). (And then the source and I wont write the entire quotation here but it would be on the actual comment) Surah Al-Anam Chapter 6 Verse 159 and Surah Al-Imran Chapter 3 Verse 103."

That comment could go in the beginning and at the denominations in the article. Actually (speaking peacefully not matter-of-fact) Islam is SOLELY based on the Quran and Hadees/teachings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)-it is a religion not a current event and its teachings will never change; Islam is best described by the Quran not current events because that gets into the POV area (based on the reporter). I agree that it should have what has happened (sects etc.) but I wanted to add the comment to show people that sects are not part of the Islamic Religion even though Muslims are part of them <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/98.195.178.86|98.195.178.86]] ([[User talk:Ahminh|talk]]) 02:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I've paraphrased the text found in [[Islamic schools and branches]] and inserted into the two areas you specified. Not sure if it belongs in the opening paragraph but other editors can weigh in on that. --[[User:NeilN|'''<font color="#003F87">Neil<font color="#CD0000">N</font></font>''']] <sup><font face="Calibri">''[[User talk:NeilN|<font color="#003F87">talk to me</font>]]''</font></sup> 02:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

:Neill, you should realize that there are hadiths which assert that there will be 73 sects in islam. i made such an edit but it was removed. Maybe you could find an appropriate reference and insert it onto the 'islam denominations' page. thanks[[User:Jigglyfidders|Jigglyfidders]] ([[User talk:Jigglyfidders|talk]]) 17:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks it looks pretty good unless someone wants to suggest some more things.
Once again, thank you. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/98.195.178.86|98.195.178.86]] ([[User talk:Ahminh|talk]]) 05:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Community ==

The following sentence is from the lede: "Religious practices include the Five Pillars of Islam, which are five duties that unite Muslims into a community." (cite from Esposito). Probably there's nothing misleading about the sentence, but it seems to confuse two things. Muslims follow the Five Pillars and other practices. Yes, they share these practices in common. But from a social science standpoint, communities are created through identity and perception by those inside the group and those outside the group. Does anyone else agree that this sentence could use a little work?--[[User:达伟|达伟]] ([[User talk:达伟|talk]]) 23:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


Can somebody please delete the word 'poetic' from "The Qur'an is divided into 114 suras, or chapters, which combined, contain 6,236 āyāt, or poetic verses." since the Quran is not a poem of any sort and it was called a poem by the early arabs as an insult. This is from chapter 2.2

thank you [[User:Kabamaro|Kabamaro]] ([[User talk:Kabamaro|talk]]) 21:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


== Islam means Peace ==

In addition to the sources I will add - I will use some logic; Islam doesn't correspond to one meaning or understanding. As it is the case with many words in every language, Islam also has more than one meaning associated with it. It does mean submission to the will of God, but it also means Peace: When muslims greet each other, whether they are muslims or not, they are meant to send a Salution of Peace - [in Arabic] Assalam-o-Alikum - which literally means Peace be upon you, not submission upon you, which doesn't make sense. Salam means Peace, which derives the word Islam too. Is there no space for logic in Wiki? [[User:Peaceworld111|Peaceworld111]] ([[User talk:Peaceworld111|talk]]) 20:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

:The thing is, the word "Islam" contains two concepts- "peace" (or "wholeness", so we're talking about a particular, personal type of peace here) AND "submission"- there is no single English word of equivalent meaning. [[User:David Trochos|David Trochos]] ([[User talk:David Trochos|talk]]) 17:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
no islam means submission i know i am arabic . it means submission to god--[[User:Nader ecl|Nader ecl]] ([[User talk:Nader ecl|talk]]) 22:21, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

== Peace? ==

[[User:Peaceworld111]] has been aggressively trying to add "Islam means peace" to the meaning and etymology section. This problematic for a number of reasons:
# It contradicts common knowledge of the Arabic language—see for example the [[Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic]]
# Even if he were to add this with a reference, that reference contradicts much more reliable references such as the above
# The reference is not a reliable source as it is the website for an organization and a POV organization at that as it is a website for the Ahmadiyyah sect
# the user misunderstood what that source was saying: ''Islam means peace'' is NOT a linguistic definition but a proclamation that Islam is peaceful religion
--[[User:Supertouch|Supertouch]] ([[User talk:Supertouch|talk]]) 22:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, to be re-added we'll first need a reference to a proper etymological work. --[[User:NeilN|'''<font color="#003F87">Neil<font color="#CD0000">N</font></font>''']] <sup><font face="Calibri">''[[User talk:NeilN|<font color="#003F87">talk to me</font>]]''</font></sup> 22:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

== Five Basic Institutions of Islam ==

Tawhid is the eternal message of Islam. The central concept of Tawhid is “Allah is One and He likes Unity”. Its formula is Laa Ilaaha Illa-Allah, there is no sovereign except Allah. Its corollaries are one, Ummah – one world fraternity of mankind and one world kingdom of Allah.

Islam is the Ordained World Order, of allegiance to Sovereign Allah, to the World Government of Allah, run by the muttaqin to serve, and not to rule, mankind in His world kingdom.

One Sovereign – There is no Sovereign except Allah (Al-Qur-aan, 37:35/47:19)

Note:
ILAH – Sovereign. “There is no sovereign except Allah”, this is the great formula of Sovereignty in Islam. In fact, this is the message of the Eternal Qur-aan – the core, the essence, of the revelation. The Sovereignty of Allah is the rallying point of world humanity as is the march past around the Qabah at Makkah.

One Humanity – Humanity is One brotherhood (Al-Qur-aan, 21:92/23:52)

One World – The indivisible kingdom of the heavens and the earth belongs to Allah [The Sole Sovereign of this indivisible kingdom] (Al-Qur-aan, 3:189)


There are five basic institutions on which the world edifice of Islam is reared up –

1. Imaan – Motive force to heroic performance in allegiance to Sovereign Allah, to attain world unity, world peace and plenty for all. Innal lazeena aamanu wa ‘amelus salehat therefore means ‘indeed those who have activated the motive force for heroism and perform heroic deeds to attain Islam – to attain world allegiance to Sovereign Allah and thereby attain world unity and world peace and plenty for all in the world kingdom of Allah.

About Imaan, we have this guidance from the prophet: ‘Whoso from amongst you sees an outrage being committed, he should prevent it with his hand (using force); if he cannot do it, he should use his tongue to prevent it; if he cannot do this even, then at heart, 9he should treat is as abominable and shun it). But this is a case of the weakest Imaan.

Imaan fires enthusiasm inspirits the will to conquer and inculcates contempt of death to reach the target of world unity and world peace.

The belief in the Universal Sovereignty of Allah and the Uswa-i-Hasanah, that is, the ideal life-pattern and life-examples of Muhammad, (sm) the Messenger of Allah, to show mankind the effective way to implement this Sovereignty.

2. Salaat – The forman service of allegiance to Sovereign Allah and of self-dedication to the World-Order of Islam.

3. Siyaam – Practice of self-abnegation, self-purgation and self-purification through services of allegiance and rigid fasting during daylight hours, and thereby receive inspiration for more and more welfare services to promote unity, peace and plenty.

It is the ordained process of self-purification to keep the body and sould in a state of perfect trim.

4. Zakaat – The compulsory state levy at prescribed rates on the annual net savings after meeting all kinds of liabilities and expenditures.

Unused and un-invested surplus (al-‘afw), however, is to be surrendered to, and to be collected by, the state of Islam, which guarantees security of means and employment on a world basis to all. These measures have been enacted to finance the welfare programme of the state to eradicate and banish poverty, ignorance and all kinds of maladies from the world.

5. Hajj – The Annual March Past of humanity around the ‘Kabah and the Annual World Moot at ‘Arafah, and Muzdalifah and the Annual Campaigns and the Annual Social Dinners at the plateau of Mina to demonstrate and keep alive the sense of unity of the human race. The Hajj is an institution which inspires mankind to live as world citizens.

The World-Order is the goal of the forward spirits of the 20th century. People should, therefore, study the Eternal Qur-aan and the Uswa-i-Hasanah – the ideal implementation of the universal principles of the Eternal Qur’aan – minutely for this grand purpose. For, Islam, according to the eternal revealed principles in the Qur-aan, is the World-Order.

[Excerpts collated from ‘The Clarion Call of the Eternal Qur’aan’ (1991), by Muhammad Khalilur Rahman].

[[User:Nasireddin|Md. Nasireddin Ghani]] ([[User talk:Nasireddin|talk]]) 17:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

== cia factbook = sunni = ==

{{tlf|editsemiprotected}}
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2122.html
this peer-reviewed article claims sunni's make up 75%. i think the Islam page asserting over 85% Sunni was written by a boastful exaggerating biased sunni.

i think 75% sunni proportion makes more sense, because if Salafis, quranists, shia, ahmadiyya, sufis etc. add up, they are unlikely to ony make up nearly 10% of muslims, which is what the islam article says.

the following percentages make more sense
shias, 15% (mostly iraq, iran)
salafi 5% (mostly saudi arabia)
sufi+ quranist+ ahmadiyya = 5% (widespread)
sunni 75%

could someone make this change please on the following pages;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni_Islam
{{unsigned|Jigglyfidders}}

:I didn't read this, but you are an autoconfirmed user, you can edit semi-protected articles. Why are you using this template? --[[User:JokerXtreme|JokerXtreme]] ([[User talk:JokerXtreme|talk]]) 16:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Jigglyfidders

"I think" is not scientific basis for statistics or what "makes more sense". Salafists consider themselves sunni, and are largely considered to be part of the sunni fold- the others I would beleive are seperate...but you need to back them up with something more...furthermore there are many statitics Pew Reserach is the latest (quite reliable) one. and by the sounds of it you yourself dont seem to be far off these "boastful exaggerating biased sunni"...BPOV works both ways and unless something of substance is provided changes are not likely to stay for long--[[User:Elbasan101|Elbasan101]] ([[User talk:Elbasan101|talk]]) 19:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

== Ahmadiyya ==

Too small movement to be mention as a major group.[[User:Islamuslim|Islamuslim]] ([[User talk:Islamuslim|talk]]) 08:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:Taking into account your disruptive anti-Ahmadiyya edits, other than your personal disagreement I do not see any reason why we should be removing a large amount of content. Wait for further editors to discuss (even if they bother to entertain such a proposal!) before removing verifiable content. --[[User:Ari89|Ari]] ([[User talk:Ari89|talk]]) 08:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Sects that are way bigger than ahmadis like ibadi and others are not mentioned with that much emphasize seems to me another case of Islam-phobia. [[User:Islamuslim|Islamuslim]] ([[User talk:Islamuslim|talk]]) 08:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
:How did I not see the obvious connection that including a sect of Islam in the Islam page was a clear case of Islamophobia...? Appealing to a conspiracy theory is not a sufficient reason to remove cited content. Please stop removing this cited content on such flimsy POV reasons. --[[User:Ari89|Ari]] ([[User talk:Ari89|talk]]) 08:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Moved ahamdiyya under others[[User:Islamuslim|Islamuslim]] ([[User talk:Islamuslim|talk]]) 08:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
:No, you again removed the section. --[[User:Ari89|Ari]] ([[User talk:Ari89|talk]]) 08:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
::<s>Agree w/Ari on substantive point.</s>Given the comments by Supertouch below, I change my !vote to neutral on the substantive issue.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 09:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:::The [[Ahmadiyya]] sect should not have its own section here based upon [[WP:UNDUE]]. A quick scan of the Ahmadiyyah page (and its reference for India—as the number is not mentioned in the text of the article) shows the number of adherents to this sect is less than 10 million; this sect then constitutes less than a whole number percentage point of the entire population of Muslims. Based upon the number of adherents to this sect, were we to include them we would then be compelled to include a number of different Islamic and pseudo-Islamic sects: the [[Nation of Islam]] would have to be included, as would the [[Moorish Science Temple of America|Moorish Science Temple]], the [[The Nation of Gods and Earths|Five Percenters]], the Bahais, the Quran-onliers, the Ibadis, the Druze, the various sub-sects of both the Sunnis and the Shiites until this page becomes a list of groups. Brief in-line mention is the extent of mention any groups other than Sunni or Shiite should have—at least in my opinion. P.S. hello to Epee.--[[User:Supertouch|Supertouch]] ([[User talk:Supertouch|talk]]) 12:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:i agree with Ari. ahmadiyya probably has more members than the Pakistani Government gives them credit for. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jigglyfidders|Jigglyfidders]] ([[User talk:Jigglyfidders|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jigglyfidders|contribs]]) 17:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Based upon [[WP:UNDUE]] we should give other same preference. 200 million is not a sourced figure. Seems to me a case of dubious claim.[[User:AnandVisho|AnandVisho]] ([[User talk:AnandVisho|talk]]) 18:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' AnandVisho has been blocked as a sock of IslaMuslim.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 01:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The [[Ahmadiyya Muslim Community]] claims adherents as high as 200 million, but in some cases 160 million. But the point is that there is no clear define number, since no defined data has been collected on behalf of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. But clearly, 10 million is an underestimate, if the 'publicity' of the Community is considered. Also the adherents for [[Nation of Islam]],[[The Nation of Gods and Earths|Five Percenters]]and others is considerably lower compared to a 10 million figure. Kind Regards. {moved comment as Epeefleche advised} [[User:Peaceworld111|Peaceworld111]] ([[User talk:Peaceworld111|talk]]) 16:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

== Reference #15 ==

Is not working. Somebody should remove it. [[User:AnandVisho|AnandVisho]] ([[User talk:AnandVisho|talk]]) 20:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' AnandVisho has been blocked as a sock of IslaMuslim.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 01:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
:It says the article will be published soon, maybe we should wait, but it seems that it is refering to Foreign Policy? [[User:Peaceworld111|Peaceworld111]] ([[User talk:Peaceworld111|talk]]) 20:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

::Do you know how soon? [[User:AnandVisho|AnandVisho]] ([[User talk:AnandVisho|talk]]) 21:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment:''' AnandVisho has been blocked as a sock of IslaMuslim.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 01:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
:::The link does lead to [[Foreign Policy]] where it announces that the article is coming soon. Since the information the FP article is citing for is also supported by a few other references, perhaps we can just comment out this particular reference until the article is actually published.--[[User:Supertouch|Supertouch]] ([[User talk:Supertouch|talk]]) 22:53, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
::::Agree w/Supertouch.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 00:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:29, 6 April 2010

ISLAM FAILS 62.132.202.3 (talk) 10:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Islam&oldid=354290583"