Talk:Islam in South Asia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Problematic page[edit]

KA$HMIR, I find it hard to understand what this page is about. There is already an Islam in India page. This page is duplicating a lot of that subject, if not the content.

Secondly, the majority of this page is taken up by political history and the content on Islam proper is very little. On the whole, I don't find this a satisfactory situation. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@123sarangi, Lorstaking, Satpal Dandiwal, AKS.9955, GenuineArt, शिव साहिल, 1990'sguy, Razer2115, DBigXray, Auto5656, Devopam, AshLin, Bharatiya29, EEMIV, Shrikanthv, and Desmay: Guys if we don't act now Wikipedia will turn into Islamipedia.we need your votes here. It's another silly content fork. 42.108.234.185 (talk) 04:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CANVAS and follow, just because of your comment above pinging me along with a bunch of others, I am now ineligible to !vote since I will now be considered CANVASSED !voter.--DBigXrayᗙ 04:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bit surprised to see my userid getting a mention here, while I don't remember showing any interest in this article any earlier than this. Now since I did, I find this article violating WP:NPOV , it is not about Asia , but only about India and Pakistan and that also lopsided opinions. This is sad. Wiki should not come to this. It defeats the basic preamble. I recommend WP:TNT irrespective of WP:CANVAS that you inadvertently put me through. Additionally, you may want to obfuscate better than your current Vodafone network based cellphone browser from Pune, Maharashtra, India location. Devopam (talk) 19:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto the above -- why was I pinged? Is this some NadirAli (talk · contribs) nonsense? --EEMIV (talk) 20:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar issue of the title[edit]

There is a grammar issue in the title. It should be "Islam in South Asia" not "Islam In South Asia" -- "In" does not need capitalization. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 04:02, 4 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]

That will be settled after the current AfD closes. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, that's trivial change and should happen ASAP.VR talk 16:45, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Caste[edit]

@Darren-M and KA$HMIR: Caste section should be deleted as Islam does not recognize any castes because this article is about Islam in South Asia so I think we should remove caste section as it doesn't follow WP:OFFTOPIC and WP:NEUTRAL policies of Wikipedia. This is what See also section is designed for so we can just add a link to Caste system among South Asian Muslims there? Do you agree? Thank you 2607:9880:4030:18:7185:7E78:A744:3515 (talk) 22:39, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Caste system among South Asian Muslims page goes into some detail about the intersectionality of the caste system and Islam so I think there is value in keeping the section, especially given the section seems to have (at a glance) relevant sources. I would be open to the section being expanded with some of the content from the linked page in order to make it clearer, though. Darren-M (talk) 22:57, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Languages in the infobox[edit]

The languages field in the infobox is getting quite out of hand. Frankly speaking, there is no need for such field at all, because Muslim is a religious category, not an ethnic group. Uanfala, what do you think? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:16, 3 January 2020 (UTC) missing phrase added. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think I prefer to leave this matter to the regular editors of this article. But yeah, for the infobox to have two full paragraphs detailing what languages are spoken by South Asia's Muslims is a bit over the top, especially given the fact that the article text itself has absolutely no content on the matter. Some similar articles like Islam in Southeast Asia also have a list of languages in the infobox, while others like Islam in Africa don't have infoboxes at all. Personally, I don't much see the point of an infobox here. – Uanfala (talk) 15:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion infobox are very useful here for quick and very general knowledge. Second South Asia is the most populated region the world so complexities are bound to happen not to mention there are 600 million Muslims in South Asia on top of that is the lsrgest population of Muslims in the world. South Asia is complex least you can say. Urdu is considered dominant and inter ethnic language among Muslims in South Asia but that would ruffle some feathers so that is why we have other regionally dominant languages among Muslims listed in the dominant headings. I would rather move other languages beside Urdu to under minority subheadings without mentioning the regions but I think we would need to semi protect the article because otherwise we would have a edit war. 2607:9880:4030:6:24FD:B12B:EFE0:7092 (talk) 16:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Muslims of South Asia speak all the languages of South Asia. What is the point of listing them? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe not many small languages which are not listed here as only large regional languages are listed here which vast majority of average English speaker wouldn't know. I took out the regions and move all the other languages beside Urdu to newly defined subheading which is regional languages which accomodate all those languages. I hope helps in finding a consensus as I find infobox useful. 2607:9880:4030:6:24FD:B12B:EFE0:7092 (talk) 16:48, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It looks a bit more decent now. But I remain skeptical of the worth of listing languages here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I furthered trimmed the language section leaving bare necessities. 2607:9880:4030:6:ECA6:66A9:29C5:E839 (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Total population[edit]

The current version of the article [1] gives in the infobox a total population of 622.3 million. This has five sources: of these, #1 has the figure of 507 million (estimate for 2010); #2 #3 are an opinion piece and a blog post respectively and neither seems on first glance to have any relevant information; #4 says that Muslims represent 29% of the region's population (which is separately given as 1.29 billion), so that works out at 374 million (clearly by now an outdated figure); #5 is a book where the page cited gives no figures at all (apart from the observation that South Asian Muslims are one third of all the Muslims in the world). So, in sum: yet another confirmation of the Ninth Law of Wikipedia: the more refs there are after a statement, the higher the likelihood that this statement would be complete bollocks. Uanfala (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Political history[edit]

I added the political history section but please keep it brief as last time the history section got really big because of political details which is not really needed on article about religion. 2607:9880:4030:12:55F8:6756:71C1:8E7A (talk) 22:14, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Write 5 names of sufia e Karam in south Asia[edit]

Give answer please 202.5.138.102 (talk) 06:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Refs[edit]

  • Malik, Jamal. Islam in South Asia: Revised, Enlarged and Updated Second Edition. Netherlands, Brill, 2020. ISBN: 9789004422711

Bookku (talk) 01:54, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pst[edit]

Constitution of south Asia before and after islam in Urdu 203.101.177.174 (talk) 14:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Islam_in_South_Asia&oldid=1221370854"