This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Islam article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32Auto-archiving period: 90 days

	Islam 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.
	Islam 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.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 1, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result November 11, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted May 17, 2006 Peer review Reviewed October 20, 2006 Peer review Reviewed November 20, 2006 Peer review Reviewed December 11, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed May 3, 2007 Good article nominee Listed May 22, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted January 9, 2008 Featured article review Kept July 30, 2010 Featured article review Demoted May 20, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed August 28, 2023 Good article nominee Listed 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

This   level-3 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Religion Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Islam Top‑importance This article 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Theology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology 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.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Spirituality Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects 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.SpiritualityWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritualityTemplate:WikiProject SpiritualitySpirituality articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

To-do list for Islam:  ·  history ·  watch ·  refresh · Updated 2022-03-20 It needs to be integrated better internally; some sections do not flow properly Article reviews have pointed out the citations. Primary sources alone are discouraged. And many books cited here only have title and author. This page is not a forum for general discussion about Islam. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Islam at the Reference desk. This article was reviewed by The Denver Post on April 30, 2007. Comments: "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 examine the findings. For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page. This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following sources: Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2010), Contemporary Islamic philosophy: Islam, philosophy, modernity, Western philosophy, Jamal-al-Din Afghani, Muhammad Abduh, Muhammad Iqbal, Islamic fundamentalism, Islamic philosophy, Alphascript Publishing{{ citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link) Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2009), Islam and modernity: Modernity, islam, sociology of religion, Islamism, Arab socialism, liberal movements within Islam, Islamic feminism, Alphascript Publishing{{ citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link) Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2010), Islamic view of Ishmael: Islam, Ishmael, Abraham, Rasul, God, Adnan, Muhammad, Alphascript Publishing{{ citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link) Additional comments OCLC  697554244, ISBN  9786130678883. Section sizes Section size for Islam (48 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 9,937 9,937 Etymology 3,495 3,495 Articles of faith 784 24,612 God 3,491 3,491 Angels 2,955 2,955 Scriptures 4,931 4,931 Prophets 7,333 7,333 Resurrection and judgment 3,236 3,236 Divine predestination 1,882 1,882 Acts of worship 1,370 16,455 Declaration of faith 1,532 1,532 Prayer 2,707 2,707 Almsgiving 3,611 3,611 Fasting 1,276 1,276 Pilgrimage 3,554 3,554 Other acts of worship 2,405 2,405 History 373 72,208 Muhammad and the birth of Islam (570–632) 5,047 5,047 Early Islamic period (632–750) 9,044 9,044 Classical era (750–1258) 16,533 16,533 Pre-Modern era (1258–18th century) 10,083 10,083 Modern era (18th–20th centuries) 14,560 14,560 Contemporary era (20th century–present) 16,568 16,568 Demographics 16,981 16,981 Main branches or denominations 140 27,545 Sunni 5,059 5,059 Shia 8,326 8,326 Muhakkima 1,707 1,707 Other denominations 9,292 9,292 Non-denominational Muslims 3,021 3,021 Mysticism 7,243 7,243 Law and jurisprudence 6,034 7,051 Schools of jurisprudence 1,017 1,017 Society 14 25,519 Religious personages 2,247 2,247 Governance 5,286 5,286 Daily and family life 10,139 10,139 Arts and culture 7,833 7,833 Influences on other religions 4,440 4,440 Criticism 3,590 3,590 See also 176 176 References 15 19,510 Footnotes 30 30 Quran and hadith 54 54 Citations 29 29 Sources 14,874 14,874 Encyclopedias and dictionaries 4,508 4,508 Further reading 6,813 6,813 Total 245,575 245,575 Current consensus for article style - Primary sources, particularly scriptures, alone are discouraged. Article is ideally to be in Summary style but move extra content to its specific article rather than deleting it. [1] Differences in transliteration can be listed when first introducing the word but then must be consistent throughout the article with the most commonly used form [2] [3] History section should focus on religious history rather than political history of Muslim states Images on Wikipedia are not censored. Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: Stats by ethnicity are missing; maybe start with [4] or [5]?

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

Yes he is right founder is not a correct word, in your below link you're saying Hazrat Muhammad PBUH was sent to restore Islam here u r saying Founder.

Please change these words.

If you're own Wikipedia words n statement its mean we are not supposed to trust this field.

Please change or remove this page.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_in_Islam#:~:text=In%20the%20Quran,-Further%20information%3A%20Muhammad&text=According%20to%20the%20Quran%2C%20Muhammad,%22%2C%20and%20%22Prophet%22. Zohranajam2 ( talk) 09:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The religion didn't exist before him, and there is no historical sources from RS previously and independent of the subject that proved that Islam existed before Muhammad. Does Judaism, Christianity, African religions, Hinduism, etc., all of which predates Islam mentioned anything about Islam in their sources prior to Muhammad? Does any historical source prior to Muhammad mentioned anything about Islam? If the answer is no to both, then he was the founder, using Muslim sources. Tamsier ( talk) 11:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

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

I'm glad someone else raised this matter, as I've raised a similar issue before on another Islamic related article. For example, in Gambia and Senegal, the Muslim population is hyped up. There is no disagreement that most people in these countries are majority Muslim, but the figures do not tally and their statistical data in regards to Muslim populations is not even reliable. It is simply based on guess work especially Gambia. As such, many reliable sources cite these unreliable government figures. However, organisations and other RS who work and do research in these countries would tell you that almost 100% of the Muslim population syncretise with African religion. Tamsier ( talk) 11:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The picture depicting Muhammad leading Abraham, Moses, Jesus and other prophets in prayer /info/en/?search=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

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

I'll note that the parameter Classification is, per the template's documentation, intended for "Christianity", "Islam", "Buddhism", etc. when discussing branches, sects or denominations. It's not intended for this. Type is a valid (but undocumented) parameter that might be a better fit, but either way, I'd recommend removing Classification entirely from this and other major religions' Infoboxes per the discussion regarding the same topic on Talk:Christianity. It should only be used for subpages. Jtrevor99 ( talk) 03:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Is there an overall discussion going on somewhere? Since I think it might be beneficial to clear up the wrong usage of this template. VenusFeuerFalle ( talk) 18:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Not currently, no. On the template itself would probably be the best place for one, honestly. Jtrevor99 ( talk) 21:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

If you were about to start one, feel free to ping me along with other participants in these recent discussions. I want to do my best to provide input as soon as I feel to have the time for participating. VenusFeuerFalle ( talk) 22:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hazrat Muhammad PBUH was the last messengers with last book revelation which Quran with all details from the day world created. Before there was Tawrat, zahoor and Injel in which its clearly mentioned that Hazrat Muhammad will come. As you can check Hazrat Adam A.S was the first human then how cum islam start from 610 Islam Start from Hazrat Adam A.S and last book was revealed with amended and final call from Allah at Hazrat Muhammad PBUH time. Please correct this information as it giving a wrong concept to everyone.

there is many prophets came before Hazrat Muhammad PBUH

Islam was there and people were getting converted to other activities so from there these religion like christian judism came.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salih Zohranajam2 ( talk) 09:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The origin story you are describing is purely a religious claim and therefore not up to Wikipedia standards. No pre-Islamic sources support it.

Your point has already been addressed on this talk page. See here:

Talk:Islam#Muhammad (SAW) was not the founder in islam.He was the last prophet in Islam Zoozoor ( talk) 23:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, see its not about religous talk this is our history, which details are mentioned and I am talking about your own data.

You cannot show origin date from Hazrat Muhammad PBUH time as first person was Hazrat Adam A.S

Our whole existence is getting change and u r saying this is religious talk am i asking to change some sunni shia or prayer related.

If you think writing write origin or origin is religious then you should remove, you cannot write our origin from your own finding.

If you're not changing or removing then I will take this matter to next level. 217.165.17.104 ( talk) 09:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi again,

The article does indeed outline the traditional Islamic perspective on prophethood, including the belief in Adam as the first prophet, as per the Quranic narrative. It also delves into the concept of Khatam al-Anbiya (Seal of the Prophets) and highlights significant prophets from Adam to Muhammad.

However, Wikipedia is not a mouthpiece for sectarian apologetics. Because the written evidence from prior to the 7th century contains no explicit mention of Islam or Muhammad, the article describes the academic narrative of Islam's emergence.

Thank you for listening. Zoozoor ( talk) 16:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Can you please explain why you didn't follow same fof Hinduism there also no explicit mentioned which was written.

This is not good instead of doing correction u r arguing with us.

Apart from this go check history of Islamic place and history before 7th cc in Srilanka, turkey, jordan, KSA and many other countries there is places with our history even the most famous Masjid Aqsa. 2001:8F8:1A61:2723:31BE:C9FB:6B83:77EF ( talk) 21:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

No, Zoozoor is correct. First, you are wrong on Hinduism: the History section clearly states the scholarly view, just like it is stated here, in Christianity, in Judaism, in Buddhism, etc. There is nothing to correct here: this article already covers both the scholarly view, and the traditional/religious view, as it should. As has been clearly explained multiple times already, changing it to only describe the religious view on Islamic origins, ignoring the scholarly view, would not be compatible with Wikipedia’s standards. There is no point in continuing to argue when you have already been told multiple times why both views are expressed. Jtrevor99 ( talk) 22:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Can you please share reference which scholars is saying giving this date for origin.

Tell me what documents and reference need to change this origin date.

Because this is not correct one side you are considering Hinduism book reference for date but here in Islam you don't consider reference from our Holy Book. 217.165.17.104 ( talk) 07:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply

On referencing holy books on WP, see WP:RSPSCRIPTURE. WP:RNPOV may or may not interest you. You may enjoy websites like WikiShia more. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 07:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC) reply