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

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic 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: 3 months

	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 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 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Theology (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology Spirituality Top‑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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

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 in one or more external publications. Since these publication(s) copied Wikipedia, rather than the reverse, 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) Section sizes Section size for Islam (54 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 15,997 15,997 581 581 Etymology 4,456 4,456 167 167 Articles of faith 765 25,592 21 1,295 God 3,449 3,449 236 236 Angels 3,163 3,163 169 169 Scriptures 4,844 4,844 239 239 Prophets 7,734 7,734 342 342 Resurrection and judgment 3,141 3,141 243 243 Divine predestination 2,496 2,496 45 45 Acts of worship 1,367 18,207 53 948 Declaration of faith 1,879 1,879 87 87 Prayer 2,878 2,878 180 180 Almsgiving 4,041 4,041 160 160 Fasting 1,278 1,278 95 95 Pilgrimage 4,142 4,142 210 210 Other acts of worship 2,622 2,622 163 163 History 386 73,622 0 3,285 Muhammad and the beginning of Islam (570–632) 4,930 4,930 463 463 Early Islamic period (632–750) 9,558 9,558 612 612 Classical era (750–1258) 17,385 17,385 802 802 Pre-modern era (1258 – 18th century) 10,110 10,110 415 415 Modern era (18th–20th centuries) 14,640 14,640 535 535 Contemporary era (20th century–present) 16,613 16,613 458 458 Demographics 10,133 27,632 316 548 Pew Research Center 17,499 17,499 232 232 Main branches or denominations 142 37,745 0 933 Sunni 6,668 6,668 311 311 Shia 14,021 14,021 374 374 Muhakkima 2,412 2,412 142 142 Other denominations 11,927 11,927 0 0 Non-denominational Muslims 2,575 2,575 106 106 Mysticism 17 8,737 0 375 Sufism 8,720 8,720 375 375 Law and jurisprudence 29 7,840 0 406 Sharia 7,811 7,811 406 406 Society 14 25,792 0 1,400 Religious personages 2,251 2,251 131 131 Governance 5,649 5,649 369 369 Daily and family life 10,060 10,060 500 500 Arts and culture 7,818 7,818 400 400 Islamist movements 2,018 2,018 100 100 Influences on other religions 5,288 5,288 153 153 Criticism 4,399 4,399 244 244 See also 201 644 0 0 Lists 317 317 0 0 Other 126 126 0 0 References 15 19,755 0 0 Notes 26 26 0 0 Quran and hadith 54 54 0 0 Citations 29 29 0 0 Sources 15,120 15,120 0 0 Encyclopedias and dictionaries 4,511 4,511 0 0 Further reading 4,948 4,948 0 0 External links 879 879 0 0 Total 283,551 283,551 10,435 10,435 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. The following reference(s) may be useful when improving this article in the future: Stats by ethnicity are missing; maybe start with [4] or [5]?

Yarsanism should be added as it is regarded as an independent religion which separated from Islam Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 16:08, 3 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

The situation is more complex in the case of Yarsan, as the religion has pre‑Islamic roots and has gradually incorporated Islamic elements since the eighth century. Rather than representing a separation from Islam, it reflects a long-term process of Islamic influence. Dr. Ivan Kučera (talk) 13:34, 3 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I have a positive suggestion regarding the subtopic "Criticism of Islam." Please remove it. There are several ambiguities or accusations about Islam. If you study Islam more deeply, these doubts will undoubtedly disappear. Please. ~2026-21870-14 (talk) 08:56, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

See WP:RNPOV. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:33, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

wikipedia is a page of free information and critisism of islam is a very prominent and relevant topic in todays climate and should not be erased. The argument "if you study islam..." could very well be interpreted as 'If you would share the same faith as me you would agree yo remove critisism regarding Islam'. This kind of rethoric should not be condoned on this ~2026-29931-28 (talk) 20:50, 18 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Oh, please, there will be even more problems! Considering the fact that the Quran says that the Jews think that Ezra is the son of God!

That's not even true! How will you resolve that? SinplicityOverused598 (talk) 12:16, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do you want us to guess what you're referring to as "that"? Largoplazo (talk) 12:37, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hello, I request that this image of the Prophet Muhammad and the angel Gabriel be removed, as it is not permitted in Islam. This article about Islam violates Islamic law; how can it be about Islam when it contradicts it? This is completely unacceptable, and images of important Islamic figures must be removed as soon as possible. EditorAli21 (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Not done: Wikipedia is not censored. See Talk:Muhammad/FAQ for an explanation of why this will not be removed, and for steps you can take to hide these images for yourself. Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 10:49, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia is a platform that respects everyone, and this issue has nothing to do with censorship; publishing this image is an insult to billions of people, and Islam clearly states that such images are not permitted. As Muslims, we show respect for our important figures by not displaying their images. If you visit any Islamic website, you will never find a single image of any Islamic figure. Non-Muslims should not be the ones handling an article like this; it is akin to giving someone authority over a matter they know nothing about. By not removing this image, you are showing a large portion of Wikipedia’s visitors that the site does not respect people. EditorAli21 (talk) 11:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

This has been discussed to death and you are suggesting nothing new here. If you do not want to see those pictures, then there is a way for you to disable them for yourself. Also, this is a global site. Anyone is free to edit. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:28, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Anyone free to edit??? You literally saying this has been discussed to death and it’s still not changed, At least the faces be covered. EditorAli21 (talk) 12:39, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Because people do not want to censor pictures, even if you personally do not see it as such. I already told you what your option is if you do not want to see the pictures. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:55, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Let them have at least a picture but make sure a veil is over Muhammad SinplicityOverused598 (talk) 12:18, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

As stated above, Wikipedia is not censored. Largoplazo (talk) 12:40, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Good point, but it's just that (my opinion) the pictures don't really add much to the article.

Just going to quote EditorAli21 on this: "Finally sorry if I annoyed anyone or disrespected anyone."

I might find a picture that is more on topic or explains something better. (Referring to the 15th century Persian miniature.)

Thanks, -- LightningThrower (talk) 03:29, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This article about Islam violates Islamic law; how can it be about Islam when it contradicts it? Wikipedia isn't Islam and isn't bound by Islamic law. The part about "how can it be about Islam when it contradicts it?" doesn't make sense. It's obviously about Islam despite its lack of conformity to Islamic doctrine. Largoplazo (talk) 13:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Respect for people who practice their religion goes without explanation. I am well aware of what Wikipedia is, and one of its goals is education; I mentioned only this article and no other, and I did not refer to Wikipedia as a whole or even to Wikipedia itself. This article “teaches” what Islam is, so how can it teach when it violates the most basic rules? It is like writing an article about mathematics, violating its most basic rules, and then saying: “This is mathematics.” This article needs updating, and the problem is not just the images; rather, some of what it teaches does not correspond to what Islam is. For example, the founder of Islam is Muhammad (peace be upon him), and this is incorrect; Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a messenger. I do not think at all that these images are necessary to understand what Islam is. If they were removed, it would not matter to the learners, and it would satisfy billions of people. EditorAli21 (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Respect for people who practice their religion goes without explanation. Wikipedia has no obligation to conform to every religious doctrine under the sun.

Since the article doesn't purport to be conforming to Islam, it doesn't need to conform to Islam. I can go out with some people and have a ham sandwich and a beer while explaining to them that Islam doesn't allow those things, and that's fine because I'm not claiming to be conforming to Islam.

If it offends you to see it, I understand, but you've already been given one alternative available to you. The other is to avoid Wikipedia. This is a bit like finding a restaurant with some items you'd like to try on its menu but insisting that the restaurant remove all the non-halal items because their presence offends you. That's unreasonable request. Your two legitimate choices are either to stick to the items that are halal or patronize only fully halal restaurants. Largoplazo (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

No one was saying there was an obligation. It's just respect and @EditorAli21 is correct. The images don't provide value in my opinion.

Thanks -- LightningThrower (talk) 21:08, 17 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would not reply anymore this conversation got big EditorAli21 (talk) 14:33, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Finally sorry if I annoyed anyone or disrespected anyone. EditorAli21 (talk) 15:28, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Islam isn't an organization, and it wasn't founded in the 7th century. LightningThrower (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

On 7th century, see Talk:Muhammad#Frequently_asked_questions,_please_read_before_posting #6. But I think you have a point on organization, I'll remove it, "610 establishments" is good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:48, 18 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks!

--LightningThrower (talk) 16:28, 18 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Islam founder is Allah the one true and only god the founder should be removed out of respect to Muslims if so then christianity founder should be Paul. Have respect and remove it Egyboi (talk) 12:34, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This has been discussed numerous times already. The answer has not changed. WP goes with what reliable sources say, not religious dogma. Jtrevor99 (talk) 12:40, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply