Talk:Islam

Criticism on a basic religion?

I’m not an expert of Wikipedia, but I want to discuss this after I’ve seen this. I have checked any basic religions, majority and minority, in English Wikipedia, none of them had criticism content, and had several articles to explain that. And this article is the only basic religion that have criticism. Similarly, Al Quran is the only primary religious text that have criticism, after comparing the other Abrahamic religion (Bible, both Old and New Testament, and other)—higher criticism is something else—even in other reilgion's such as Vedas. I think we should talk about a religion as whole, which has varying opinions and perspectives depending on sect/denomination. Or, each one must have its own criticism, to be fair. I hope this will be considered, thank you. Abdul Harits Ritonga (talk) 22:34, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Reply to Abdul Harits Ritonga From the looks of it, Islamic articles are hijacked by missionaries and people with an agenda to push a narrative that is anti-Islam. Editors claim to be secular yet are not equitable in their actions. One example is the Qiraat article, where it is slowly being asserted to a narrative where the Quran is not preserved, not to mention that the article itself is highly different than the one written in Arabic. I hope the Islamic community becomes aware of this issue going on wikipedia and will do something about it.

Also, to add on to the criticisms part, English language Wikipedia do seem to be bordering on eurocentrism. They add criticism on Islam, but do they not realize there are criticisms about Christianity too? In the Islamic World (Yes they are the almost the same amount of christians in this world), Christianity is viewed as a form of idolatory. Not just with Islamic apologists but Jewish critics too. Also, white supremacy terrorists attacks, kkk and more are based on the bible and are criticized in muslim majority countries. Because of this, should we add a critics page in Christianity where people view the Bible as violent and corrupted? Note: I am aware of Wikipedia editors coming from all facets of faith, from christianity, judaism, muslims, other religions and atheism. Personally I do not believe in said paragraphs above in the critic to Christianity, but it is a thing within communities that are not eurocentric and should be discussed.

-Anon 7 August 2020— Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.143.242.122 (talk • contribs)

Christianity article has a criticism section in it. If you want to add these sections to other articles, you are more than welcome to do so! Regards Epelerenon (talk) 04:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I can confirm that Christianity does have a criticism sectionRayyanislam (talk) 20:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The criticism section has generic, mostly west-centric, criticisms of Islam, none of which are specific to Shi’ism. Since there is already a dedicated ‘Criticism of Islam’ article, is this section not rendundant? User2346 (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Remove images

Pls remove the images of prophet. This is not good, it hurts our sentiments. Zia emran (talk) 02:10, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Options to hide an image and WP:Content disclaimer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:07, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I confirm his words, I have never seen a picture of the Prophet published in Islamic regions, I don't know where you got this picture from?! If these images are not deleted and popularIf these images are not deleted and Wikipedia's popularity decreases. Mehran Raeessi Fard (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I realise this is fruitless but I'd actually like to add my voice in support of this as a non muslim. Why do we NEED the image? Its clearly upsetting to muslims, and the sheer volume of complaint over years and years of comments tells me that we're doing something fundamentally unnecessary. What exact informational content is gained by it? Can't we at least move them to a page like islamic art or something? I'm not a muslim, but I'd be annoyed if an article on catholicism featured an image of the "piss christ" or other images considered upsetting to catholics. Muslims already cop a hard time in the western world, and this sort of thing makes Wikipedia off-limits to billions of people for no gain. Why do it at all? Duckmonster (talk) 11:55, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Images often say more than written texts. It is part of research to view and analyzse images. Also although we might not gain much, we lose something by allowing censoring images. Additionally, just because there is a trend within Islamic reform-movements to regard everything that is not going according to their plan as "offensive", we do not have to play along. I am pretty sure there are many common Muslims, who appreciate art and their own culture as every other person does. If there feel attacked by the sight of an image, Wikipedia has the option to hide images (HELP:NOIMAGE).--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Uns expert criticism.

The sections on the pages about religions should be removed because it is uns expert and may cause people to hate Wikipedia. Mehran Raeessi Fard (talk) 20:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

UNS? In general, content that is well-sourced to WP:RS is unlikely to be removed, see Wikipedia:Content disclaimer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Snippets

Can you add snippets for Poetry and Music?

Outdated information

The statistics regarding the number of followers and the percentage of the world's population is from a source written in April 2015; almost 6 years old. This should be updated, especially given the article's mention of it being the fastest growing religion. FaultPicker (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Added citation, supporting fastest growing religion. Emdad Tafsir (talk) 10:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Infobox religion

There's something weird about this infobox: Template:Infobox religion redirects to Template:Infobox Christian denomination. Why? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:14, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

That is, indeed, weird. ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~^Kontakt 20:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I've opened a thread at Template talk:Infobox Christian denomination#Template:Infobox religion. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

The template:infobox Christian denomination may be sufficient for other religions, and is used by some religion articles using the template:infobox religion redirect. GOLDIEM J (talk) 00:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Considering to infobox is added to this article by sockpuppet user Eliko007 who is blocked(and who spammed all of main religions pages with infobox in the same day). And without any previous discussion. I will remove infobox and will start discussion here. I am against adding infobox. Sometimes especially for complex topic's infobox is not needed and it can make even greater confusion, also synthesis of published material and it is often under attacks and vandalism. AnAnicolaidis (talk) 00:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Agree. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I see some potencial upcoming troubles with an Infobox: While it works fine with Judaism, a religion in which we have a clear defined structure (and in Christianity a hierarchy of clerics) Islam does not have one. It more than often spread by syncretism as the main message is the belief in "one true God", often assimilated to other cultures, many groups which accept one or the other (even within the Main-Branch of Sunnism), too much disputed content. It is often even hard to overview basic beliefs here on Wikipedia, due to unclearness and, to be honest, bias about Islamic history itself among main-stream Islamic discourse. I already imagine the upcomming edit wars about small things like, if for example "Qisas al anbiya" should be considered part of Islam or a mere cultural work. Or the languages: Are Aramaic and Hebrew also included? Many words within the Quran are not genuinly Arabic: Does Persian count? Many works, which influenced the Muslim belief are stored in Farsi, not Arabic (Arabic was usualy used for Fiqh, Tafsir and science, while Persian was used for poetry and art. The latter more significant to understand the Muslim religious perceptions). Since even some really basic (despite the evidence) claims are often challanged (especially by Muslims, when it goes against their personal views) like images, depictions of angels/jinn/devils, Muslim sects, Islamic history, I would not dare to make a clear fixed infobox for Islam. I would strongly recommand not to create such an infobox for Islam, without an elaborated discussion after taking several points of views with appropriate references to Islamic studies (and not just some youtube videos, Islamic blogs from some sheikhs or self-published books).--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 11:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Islam is pretty complex and really, all religions should be examined case to case if adding of a infobox is useful or not. In this case, I think not. It can make more troubles than benefits. As I mentioned, can cause even greater confusion, synthesis of published material, original research, cherrypicking sources and it is often under attacks and vandalism. So to stay out. AnAnicolaidis (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2021

"Angels Muhammad receiving his first revelation from the angel Gabriel. From the manuscript Jami' al-Tawarikh by Rashid-al-Din Hamadani, 1307."

"Prophets and sunnah A Persian miniature depicts Muhammad leading Abraham, Moses, Jesus and other prophets in prayer."

"Scholars Crimean Tatar Muslim students (1856)"

"Pre-Modern era (1258–18th century) Ghazan Khan, 7th Ilkhanate ruler of the Mongol Empire, converts to Islam"

"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham_Moses_Jesus.jpg/330px-Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham_Moses_Jesus.jpg"

"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Mohammed_receiving_revelation_from_the_angel_Gabriel.jpg/330px-Mohammed_receiving_revelation_from_the_angel_Gabriel.jpg"

"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%BE_%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8._%D0%A2%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B0_%D0%B4%D0%BB%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%B9_%28cropped%29.jpg/348px-%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%BE_%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8._%D0%A2%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B0_%D0%B4%D0%BB%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%B9_%28cropped%29.jpg"

"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/GhazanConversionToIslam.JPG/330px-GhazanConversionToIslam.JPG"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This following images under those sub headings should be removed or be replaced by some other image that doesn't show Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.) as according to our religion Islam what that wiki article is about. It doesn't permit showing pictures showing Prophets or angels or any people associated to them. Anonyuser2113 (talk) 14:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

No article on WP is according to your religion, see WP:RNPOV. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2021

Ttshameer (talk) 05:38, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add the below additional references to learn islam. Also, please provide me access to update more dawa related info to this page.

https://www.islamreligion.com/ebooks/islam-guide.pdf https://www.islamreligion.com/ebooks/True-Religion-of-God.pdf https://www.islamreligion.com/ebooks/Did-God-Become-Man.pdf https://www.islamreligion.com/ebooks/Islam-Is.pdf https://www.islamreligion.com/ebooks/The-True-Message-of-Jesus-Christ.pdf https://www.islamreligion.com/category/1033/evidence-islam-is-truth/ https://www.islamreligion.com/ http://www.peacetv.tv/ https://www.whyislam.org/prophet-muhammad/tenthings/

 Not done. Wikipedia prefers to use as little external links as possible, and is not a means of promotion; see WP:EL. This is also not the place for requesting user permissions. Try editing on other Wikipedia pages first and come back later. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:04, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Ottoman Template

After reading throught he article again, I still wonder, if we should add the "History of Ottoman Empire" Template. The early stage of Islam also contains the "Muhammad" Template. We have a template for Sunnis and Shias in their respective sections. We also have two sections much about the Ottoman Empire and the Ottoman Empire strongly influenced the entire Muslim world. Therefore, isn't the Ottoman Template appropriate?--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 11:52, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Need correction in above article RabiaYounus (talk) 08:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2021

The page contains images which depict the Holy Prophet (PBUH). This is offensive for Muslims and has caused much debate in the past. As a result, these images should be removed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mohammed_receiving_revelation_from_the_angel_Gabriel.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham_Moses_Jesus.jpg 121.200.4.11 (talk) 01:02, 9 April 2021 (UTC)