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.
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
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology
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
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.
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)
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]?
Addition to seperations
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
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
Criticism of Islam
Latest comment: 8 days ago5 comments5 people in discussion
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
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!
Latest comment: 8 days ago15 comments6 people in discussion
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
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
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.
Islam founder is not muhammed (صلى الله عليه و سلم)
Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
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
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.