Islam Template‑class

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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

There's no point of having hide/show links on this small template. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 02:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Islamic terrorism doesn't belong in this template (esp. after we moved it from Islamist terrorism to Islamic terrorism). We don't see Zionist political violence on Template:Zionism, do we?Bless sins (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also removed Talibanization, since that is term (see the article) used to refer more to non-Muslim Taliban-like movements than the Muslim movements. For the actual Taliban, there is the article Taliban.Bless sins (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notable people associated with Islamism should be added. Most are likely dead, so there should be no BLP issues.Bless sins (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Its best if there is no image. Islamist movement are highly varied (compare Islamists of Egypt with those of Iran), hence no one symbol can be used to represent them.Bless sins (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why is secularism on the Islamism template? If the template is going to have links to democracy, modernism, secularism it should be Political aspects of Islam, not Political Islam. Its like having environmentalism on a conservative template. --BoogaLouie (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While its true Islamist movements are highly varied, but they all have a few things in common:

• Opposition to Secular Democracy (and the liberalism that comes with the individual freedoms)
• Opposition to the Western World in general
• Protest Mode: Since Islamists are not fully in power and control of society, except Iran, they are usually in street protest mode in West as well as muslim-majority countries.
• Agitation: Whether through street protests, or through legal battles or publications..Islamists are always involved in agitation and resistance.

For these reason, I believe images like these (File:"Freedom go to hell".jpg) represents Islamism. I chose because the person's identity is hidden (so no personal harm) and it carries a placard which summarizes the crux of Islamism.

I don't think it's the right image for this template. Not all Islamists are anti-democratic. Many of them (though obviously not all of them) favor Islamic democracy. Just like how not all communists are Stalinists and not all Christians are anti-gay. Charles Essie (talk) 18:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Participating in a street protest can be a very democratic instead of anti-democratic thing to do. However, I have two concerns: first, the fact that there is text on the image makes it appear as if it was a canonical statement or tenet that Islamists subscribe to, which it hardly is. Compare this with e.g. Template:Islam which features the Allah Jalla Jalaalahoo - it's not just any instance of text, but a highly established one. Secondly, this photo has been taken in the UK, whereas Islamism is more prevalent in predominantly muslim-majority countries, and has very different connotations in the West. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 00:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Charles Essie yes, not all Islamists are opposed to democracy. But all are opposed to "Secular Democracy". That's what makes them Islamists in the first place.

Finnusertop on your two objections: 1) Opposition to secularism, and freedoms that come with it, is the uniting factor of Islamists. They put "Law of God" before "Law of Man". So yes, this is not a canonical text, but it does represent crux of Islamism. 2) Yes connotations are different in Muslim-majority countries, but the opposition to secular freedoms is the same.

I would say, until a better image comes along (chances of which are slim), let this image be used. --Fasi100 (talk) 22:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the image is purely decorative, and this is a navigation template. a decorative image does not assist with navigation, so we don't include an image. Frietjes (talk) 12:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Charles Essie, Fasi100, and Frietjes: The new image (File:Islam percent population in each nation World Map Muslim data by Pew Research.svg) is not very good either. It depicts the distribution of something but certainly not that of Islamism. The image also includes a legend in text that is rendered too small to be read. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 00:32, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1) First Tahrir Suare uprising was against Hosni Mobarak, which was overwhelmingly secular. The second one was against Morsi, and was counter-Islamist. The image of Tahrir Square as representation of Islamism is grossly incorrect and misleading. It is best we leave the image. 2) And the Arabic text of "Bismillah" is totally unnecessary and paints Islamism as a religious movement, which it is not. Islamism is first and foremost a political movement with religious grounding. Both of the images have been removed. --Fasi100 (talk) 03:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have removed the entry Islamic "Human rights", because the target article Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam makes no mention of Islamism or political Islam. The topic appears to be related to Political aspects of Islam instead of Islamism. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 22:47, 4 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The nation combines Islamic beliefs with black nationalism (I.e. politics) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.49.63 (talk) 23:49, 1 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So what. Produce a single reliable source that describes the Nation of Islam as Islamist. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:41, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Nation's template It contains the poltiics and Islam portals just like the Islamism template and Warith Deen Mohammed (who was the leader of the nation) of was a Muslim revivalist if you go to the article and click on the word "Muslim revivalist" there you have it You will see the Islamism template — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.49.63 (talk) 00:50, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're engaging in prohibited original research. Please produce a reliable source that describes the Nation of Islam as Islamist. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:02, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Via the World book encyclopedia dictionary Black Muslim, U.S. a member of the Nation of Islam, a black American sect preaching a form of Muslimism, black racial superiority, and total segregation between blacks and whites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.49.63 (talk) 20:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't see Islamist. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:37, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Muslimism means Islamist or simply Islam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.49.63 (talk) 20:39, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's exactly my point. You don't know what the editors of the World Book Encyclopedia meant by "Muslimism", so how can you say that they meant "Islamist"? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:42, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Muslimism because they are related words — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.49.63 (talk) 20:49, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Related words?!? The words Islam, Islamic, and Islamist are all related. So what? Without a reliable source that describes the Nation of Islam as Islamist, it doesn't belong in the template. Not Islamic or Islam or Muslim or Muslimist or Muslimism. Islamist. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:54, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/03/08/us/nationalist-faction-of-black-muslim-movement-gains-strength.html it is described as fundamentalist since Islamic fundamentalist and Islamism are synonyms does this count? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juantheman96 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I recommend that you read WP:No original research. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fayer, Steve; Flynn, Sarah; Hampton, Henry (1990). Voices of Freedom: An Oral History of the Civil Rights Movement From the 1950's Through the 1980's. New York: Bantom Books. p. 243 https://books.google.com/books?id=pgGDZ62WrNgC&q=Fundemantalism#v=onepage&q=Fundamentalism&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juantheman96 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Islamism and fundamentalism are not synonyms. Both are vague terms used by different sources in different ways. I second MShabazz's recommendation to consult WP:NOR, and in particular WP:SYNTH. To put a name on this template, we need to ensure that the designation of Islamist reflects RSs with due weight per WP:WEIGHT. For example, if we randomly take 10 RSs about that person and only one of them refer to them by that term, it would not be the case. Eperoton (talk) 21:16, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Juantheman96: please produce RSs identifying the entitites you're attempting to keep on the list as "Islamist movements". The ones for which this designation does not reflect RSs with due weight will be deleted from the template. Thanks. Eperoton (talk) 23:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pretty sure my edit will be reverted into the original hideousness, so I'll just dump this here for future references. My proposal of streamlining the template by cutting down every duplicating information and providing links to the dedicated templates: Revision 01:08, 1 December 2017‎. JahlilMA (talk) 18:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Every major Islamist leader including Qutb, House of Saud monarchs, Khomeini, Khamenei, and even moderate Islamists are hell-bent on gender segregation in public places such as mosques.--125.25.15.16 (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]