Former featured articleIslam is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good articleIslam has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 1, 2007.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 11, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 17, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
October 20, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
November 20, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
December 11, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
May 3, 2007Good article nomineeListed
May 22, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
January 9, 2008Featured article reviewKept
July 30, 2010Featured article reviewDemoted
May 20, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
August 28, 2023Good article nomineeListed
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of November 18, 2006.
Current status: Former featured article, current good article

Muslim Population Figure Is Wrong

According to the Pew Research Center (https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2011/01/27/the-future-of-the-global-muslim-population/), in 2010 (the last year with reliable data), the global Muslim population was 1.6 billion. The wikipedia page the link sends you to does not, in fact, have any solid source for the claim that Muslims now number 1.9 billion.--Mwidunn (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The number 1.9 billion does not seem impossible.
Muslim Population by Country 2024 (worldpopulationreview.com) says it reached 2 billion
Global Muslim Population Exceeds 2 Billion (moroccoworldnews.com) says 2 billion.
The latter seems to have a bias, I don't know how reliable the first one is. The citations are given in the Demographics section. I want to have a look at it. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to fix some issues. For example, projections are given by the PewResearch. I further removed sources used twice. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Devta mission meaning 2409:4054:211B:8B3E:0:0:1979:38A5 (talk) 10:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad (SAW) was not the founder in islam.He was the last prophet in Islam

Mohammad (SAW) was not the the founder of Islam, he was the last prophet in Islam. Before him estimate 1,24,000 prophet was sent to earth to spread beauty of Islam. 2409:40E1:D:2AD:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 17:54, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad may be the last prophet to Muslims and Jesus may be the son of god to Christians but these titles are religious claims that don’t factually describe who they were to people outside that religion. “Founder” is the most neutral and accurate term. LaggyMcStab (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, Founder is not neutral at all. It is misrepresenting the religion.
if you check the definition of the word "founder" and its usage through time. It is hardly ever used in the context you did. Moses is not the "founder" of Judaism even though the laws, teachings and identity of the religion comes from him.
Therefore the word is wrong not only because it is misrepresents the religion but also because it isn't the norm when speaking about religions for it usually denotes the views of the writer rather than the neutrality of the writer.
To be truly neutral means to stand apart from certain beliefs and world views. The idea of "paul" being the founder of christianity is an argument made against christianity and you will find many articles to this effect. If you choose this stance when describing paul, that is not you taking a neutral stance but you picking a side
. Same can be said of "moses" in respect to judaism and "mohammed" in respect to islam.
I indulge you to do a little research on the concept, history, etymology and usage of the word "founder", thank you. Aleebabz (talk) 02:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction

Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon Him is not the founder of Islam. Islam existed centuries before Muhammad was born, Islam began with the beginning of time. 197.239.7.169 (talk) 17:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of Al-Fatiha

Please add Al-Fatiha under the Prayer Section for people to listen and understand its meaning. This is the first and most important chapter of The Quran recited in the beginning of all prayers. LINK TO FILE - [6]https://file.io/v2ABHj9v0dnv Omar sam123 (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section speaks about the Muslim prayer ritual and has a Wiki-Link to Salah, which explains the use of al-Fatiha during prayer. The main-article in question only touches the surface level on its matters, but allows readers to dive deeper into each related subject by simply following the Wiki-Links. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2024

Whats with the practicing and non practicing muslims on the top, Christians,Hindus,etc are not practicing or non practicing? is it islam where we draw the line? Raah7sj (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
whats the need of using the term "practicing and non practicing muslims population", replace it with just muslims. Raah7sj (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see it now. I've changed the text boldly. It may be reverted.
I agree that having that in the lead is a bit odd, especially when we do not have that in the lead for Catholic Church or Christians. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim demographics section is problematic

You have to define precisely whom you count as a Muslim. For example a recent poll from Iran said that less than 40% of Iranians consider themselves Muslims today, and yet the maps and figures in this article claim that islam is the religion of more than 90% of Iranians. The same can be said about other countries. Muslim demographics articles totally ignore the statistics about atheists, agnostics, apostates, converts to christianity and non-believers of all sorts. They simply count everyone born within a traditionnally Muslim society as Muslim. To be fair, this isn't the way christianity figures are constructed. The numbers estimated for christianity are those of the estimated actual believers, not people born in Christian cultures. How do you plan to correct this bias ? Yorik18 (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

You have to define precisely whom you count as a Muslim

We cannot, but it would be great if such definitions would be clarified in such statistics. However, it is rarely done. We can only work with what sources provide us.

The numbers estimated for christianity are those of the estimated actual believers, not people born in Christian cultures

There is a difference between Christianity and Islam in regards of adherence. A Christian is made by baptism and every person is born "sinful" (this is also why a lot of babies were baptized when born and babies unbaptized led to the Catholic limbo-theory). In Islam, a child born from Muslim parents are consdiered Muslims. It does not have to be a conscious choice, you probably do not even have to believe in it. There are some opinions which constitute [[[Apostasy in Islam|Apostasy]], but they are not clearly defined. For some, missing a prayer can lead to Apostasy (I think some Hanbalites hold this position), while others even interprted angels as merely abstract intellects and are still highly esteemed scholars of Islam (such as ibn Sina). Because of these reasons, Muslim and Christian identity are hardly comparable. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Picture depicting Prophet Mohammed should be removed

The picture depicting Muhammad leading Abraham, Moses, Jesus and other prophets in prayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam#/media/File:Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham_Moses_Jesus.jpg User583489 (talk) 16:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Seems a reasonable part of that section per MOS:IMAGES. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change type to Abrahamic?

Over at Talk:Christianity there has been some contention over whether Abrahamic or Universal religion is a better fit for Type in the Infobox. The primary justification for “universal religion” has been the fact it’s used here. But “Abrahamic” seems more notable for both. Thoughts? Jtrevor99 (talk) 18:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Abrahamic" is more familiar to me, I can say that much. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abrahamic is given its own descriptor in the classification line. I guess we should wait to see what the outcome of the discussion at the Christianity talk page is before making changes here. The debate is if "Universal religion" should be left in or not. Completely Random Guy (talk) 22:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After recently cleaning up unreliable sources from Abrahamic religions, I realized that the term has a few more issues than it seems on the first glance. The term originates from Interfaith dialogue and entered academic discourse. However, the academic validity has also been criticized, for oversimplification.[1] While there are prominent similarities, such as Creatio ex nihilo[2] and veneration of a Creator-deity, there are also significant differences.
Other similarities are only shared on the surface level. For example, all three feature Abraham, but the role ascribed to this figure is different. Both Islam and Christianity share the return of Jesus, but while in Islam, it is more or less an aggadic narrative featuring some end-time battles with barely to no theological significance at all, in Christianity it is a closure of the history of mankind (as per Christian teachings). Other concepts often mistakenly considered "typical Abrahamic", like hell, are not even precisely Abrahamic at all (Karmic religions do feature hell as well, whereas Judaism not necessarily).
Besides these "intra-religious" differences, there also has been objection from an ethno-historical perspective. Islam, as a religion spread through Asia is also an Asia religion, not (only) a religion surrounding the Mediterranean Sea.[3] Christianity spread across Europe and incorporated European ideas, whereas Islam assimilated to Asian ideas as it spreads. Judaism is a unique situtation again, given that this is also an ethnic religion.
By using the the classification "Abrahamic", we allow judgement over theological features, which is something up to the theologicans and the adherences of the religion. Same as using "karmic" (as I did above), when not speaking about a religion featuring Karma. For example (and this is only an example), when I believe in Buddhism but not Karma, does this form of Buddhism stops being Buddhism? Classifying religions according to features (in this case the figure of "Abraham" and associated beliefs, often even subject to dispute within one of these three religions themselves) comes witht he issue of being prescriptive rather than descriptive. The label "Universal religion", on the other hand, explains very well how the religion operated over centuries (and thus, gained reliablitiy). In contrast, Judaism is an ethnic religion. We often see that Judaism does not entirely fit into the same classifications of Christianity and Islam and has a lot of unique traits, but due to similar mythologies and the label "Abrahamic", it is assumed they are equal in most matters.
Terminology such as "Universalistic" is actually used then discussing the classifications of religions, as for example, here: A Matter of Class: Taxonomies of Religion Author(s): Jonathan Z. Smith Source: The Harvard Theological Review , Oct., 1996, Vol. 89, No. 4 (Oct., 1996), pp. 387- 403 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Harvard Divinity School" and (although pretty old, yet good in regards to classifications I suppose) "THE CLASSIFICATION OF RELIGIONS Author(s): Durin J. H. Ward Source: The Monist , OCTOBER, 1908, Vol. 18, No. 4 (OCTOBER, 1908), pp. 544-575 Published by: Oxford University Press". I would suggest to go with terminology actually describing the religion, instead of referring or implying certain theological elements. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 02:44, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2024

Muhammed is a messenger of God , not the founder of islam! He is just a messenger of god. 156.192.239.204 (talk) 22:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Bakhos, Carol. The Family of Abraham: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Interpretations. Harvard University Press, 2014.
  2. ^ Burrell, David B., et al., eds. Creation and the God of Abraham. Cambridge University Press, 2010. p. 25-39
  3. ^ Schubel, Vernon James. "Teaching Islam as an Asian Religion." EDUCATION ABOUT ASIA 10.1 (2005).
Categories