Talk:Islam in India/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Photos of Zakir Hussain (Musician) and Abul Kalam Azad need to be interchanged

117.199.53.15 (talk) 07:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Atheists!

Both Javed Akhtar and Irfan Habib are atheists. They can be mentioned as born under Indian Islam but I don't think having their pictures in the montage is appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.82.58.162 (talk) 18:29, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Sayasif, 21 June 2011

Javed Akthar has publicly quoted of him being atheist, hence would request his name to be removed from prominent Muslims in India. His religious belief is also stated on his public wiki page.

Sayasif (talk) 12:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea, but his image is in File:Indian Muslims.png, so this is what needs to change, and then alter the caption here to match. His picture should be replaced by someone else. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done for now: per Graeme Bartlett Jnorton7558 (talk) 14:25, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Haj subsidy: Untrue statement needs to be deleted or modified

Quoting statement: "India is the only country in the world where the government subsidizes the airfare for the Hajj pilgrimage, spending Indian Rupee symbol.svg 47,454 per passenger as of 2007."

First, it is an inappropriate and misplaced statement in the beginning paragraph of an article supposed to give information about Islam in India from a historical perspective.

Second, the above quoted statement is incorrect. India is not the only country that subsidizes airfares. Reference don't prove it. Also the Rs. 47,454 figure being reported "as of" is inaccurate, it should be "in" 2007 alone, but that is based on a news media report with no corroborative reference. The amount varies a lot every year.

This should be expunged from the beginning paragraphs.

Asad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.41.0 (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Teh sentence has no context with the Subject matter "Islam in India" and deserves deletion since the information only country in the world and the figure are not true. Wasifwasif (talk) 14:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

And...done. IP, next time, if there's an edit you want done to a semi-protected article, the best thing to do is to use the {{Edit semi-protected}}--this makes it more likely that the request will be seen and evaluated rapidly. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

No, it is imperative that such a statement be given in the introductory paragraph. Since the article has sections like "Ghettoisation of Indian Muslims" which puts the treatment of Indian society to Muslims in a bad light, to maintain neutrality of the article the sentence is necessary. The arguments that this statement is not written in historical perspective has no value - present situation must not be belittled infront of something that has happened in history. Or take a look at the Muslim-Hindu conflict section, much importance is given to the post 1992 events, where as Muslim atrocities before that are given nowhere. Does that violate your sense of historical perspective ? As far as the given reference is concerned, it backs everything that was quoted in the article. If anything in that source is factually wrong, correct it and put that sentence in order - not delete it. The figure spent on each passenger goes on increasing each year - so to give the readers an idea of how much is spent, we need to provide the latest figures available. if anybody has a per-passenger figure later than 2007, why don't you update it. 117.201.245.100 (talk) 13:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

First, in order to include the claim, you will need to provide evidence that it is actually the "only country in the world", since that wasn't in the source provided. Second, per WP:LEAD, we cannot hint at something in the lead that isn't actually covered in the text (except, sometimes, for basic things, like the birth date on the article about a person). Putting that one sentence in the lead isn't about balance, it's making a big deal out of a statement that we haven't even verified yet. If someone has more information about the subject, then we could create a new section in the article (my feeling is that I'd put it after "Muslim institutes", but the location is obviously a matter of discretion. It doesn't need to be a long section--even a single paragraph would be fine. We just need a little more than "India subsidizes the Hajj." But we cannot have a single throw-away sentence in the lead, and we also can't say things that are unverified (that it's the only country that does so). Qwyrxian (talk) 23:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

There were enough evidences cited before you deleted the sentence. One of the references did say India is the "only country" - even if that is untrue, that does not belittle the following fact - India is neither a Muslim country nor a Muslim majority country, still (inspite of being a "poor" county) the Indian tax payers spend an exorbitant sum of money to "promote" one of the fundamental elements of Islam. If this cannot be included in the lead, what can be? If it needs to be broadly covered later on, why not bring in some from the article "Haj subsidy".117.204.94.67 (talk) 02:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

May be we should also include that GOI plays a tricky calculation while providing subsidies data. It doesn't bases its calculation on market aire fare it bases its calculation on air fare of Air India specific for Hajj flights (which is higher than normal fares, It is interesting to note that ss on 5th July 2011, return fare through Private Airlines to Jeddah cost around Rs. 18,111 only but Air India charges Rs. 34,000 from the Hajis. There are many private tour operators that offer Haj packages for as low as Rs. 68,000, without any government subsidy (the government gives subsidy only on the Air India ticket, not to the Hajis per se). ). There have been demands from various sections to make hajj flights open for all operators and for bid based allotment too (Muslim leaders such as Syed Shahabuddin (not that Siwan hoodlum, but the ex-diplomat) has been demanding for 20 years that the Indian government should do away with the so-called Haj subsidy. He also claims that no Muslim leader ever asked for it.). Are State and Central Government are allocating budget for Haj Subsidy ! not at all ! Than how the funds are generating to spend on subsidy ? Air India and Indian Airlines are receiving discounts from gulf airport to operate haj flights, part of the discounts are returning to hajis that is called Haj subsidy ! For details plz refer WP article Haj subsidy and intresting ToI article Should the subsidy on Haj be withdrawn?.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 03:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Your statement that haj subsidy is the part of discount received from gulf airports is absolutely incorrect and a disparagement to the contribution of the Indian tax payer. Haj subsidy is paid by the Govt of India for airfare and accommodation ([1]). Your claim that there are cheaper airlines and so the figures are "tricky" is just ludicrous. There are much cheaper methods to transport the pilgrims, they could have been shoved into a passenger ship until it is full. Air India is a Govt carrier and Govt's assertion that the subsidy money be rather given in business to a government firm than a private airline is well founded. 117.201.246.193 (talk) 06:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Tax payers money is being conned by politicians for their own benefit so that they can claim that hey are being doing good to minority while GOI is also benefiting AI & IA as it is them who get subsidy by Gulf airports andd GOI's subsidy money for Hajis. FYI, Hajis till early 70s used to go via sea route thru ships which was much cheaper method when that way was closed and only Air route was allowed; as it was very costly in comparison to sea route GOI decided on subsidizing it (point to remember that sea route was not catered by govt. carriers while air route was under full monopoly of govt. carrier). Why is govt. playing drama of subsidy when it is taking money out of one pocket and keeping in another. And what a good way, you raise fare and then provide subsidy to meet the raise, GOI is just trying to feed and keep running it's white elephants AI & IA on the cruthces of Haj subsidy. The link provided by you clearly states, "Rs 770 crore, in flight tickets and accommodation provided to pilgrims.", but one needs to see the facts by eyes of logic rather than prejudice to judge them correctly. The link provided by you also proves my point that GOI now has accepted requests of those who sought most competetive bidder to take Hajis then the most costly one. It is killing many birds with a single stone.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 07:08, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

don't talk foolish gibberish. 117.214.19.126 (talk) 09:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I went back to the articles to see if I had missed something. Upon looking more closely, I see that the TMC article does say, "...India being the only country where the government pays a part of the Haj airfare to make the pilgrimage affordable for people like Ansari." I think I missed that before; apologies. It's not exactly the same as was in the article, but its close. 69.207.41.0, or anyone else, why did you say that the reference doesn't support that claim? I also searched for counter-examples, and can't find a single source (reliable or otherwise) stating that the information was wrong. It's true that the exact numbers are no longer current, and are in fact highly debated, so I think that leaving those out is worthwhile. Since it was my fault that the sentence actually got removed, I'm going to add in the new section myself. It will be a short section, since we already have the article Haj subsidy; I'll pull any necessary references from there. I do, however, still contend that the information does not belong in the lead, because it does not appear to be a main part of Islamic life in India. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I've gone ahead and added the section, pulling out only the most critical info. Given the fact that the subsidy percentage decreases this year (and every year from now until 2017 until it is gone completely), providing old numerical information would be misleading. I would say that any such info belongs only at Qwyrxian, and you can debate over there which data is correct. Let me know what you think about the new version. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Qwyrxian! for sorting it out. Qwyrxian article is fairly balanced but it lacks the info provided by the article Haj may cost less; new airline to carry pilgrims (Thanks to 117.201.246.193 for the link). I'll try to include it there or will you like to add it?--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 07:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Haj subsidy: Sub-section

The above has got too long so new sub-section, Faiz please read this again "The objective of the proposed reforms is to comply with the court directions. In August 2006, the Allahabad High Court restrained the Centre from subsidising Haj or any other Yatra of any community except for making arrangements to ensure law and order and pilgrims’ safety. ", AP High court dealt with Christians.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Plz provide reference to your claim. The IE reference provided in the section clearly deals with Haj subsidy and point AP court decission for out phasing it apart from pressure from Muslim groups and the Ministry of Minority Affairs.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 07:48, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I am quoting the same report, it says and I requote "The objective of the proposed reforms is to comply with the court directions. In August 2006, the Allahabad High Court restrained the Centre from subsidising Haj or any other Yatra of any community except for making arrangements to ensure law and order and pilgrims’ safety. ",, it is the IE article. Have you seen this? Secular nod to Haj subsidy - Small amount doesn’t violate Constitution: Court[[2]], perhaps it hasn't been scraped. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I was refering to Haj subsidy cuts start soon article whic too is an IE article. So, we need to place both of them and yes don't skip yatra portion. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 08:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Faiz and Yogesh, i count two reverts from both of you within the past hour. From the outside it looks like an edit war is beginning. Instead of using edit summaries to communicate, why not do it here? (i have no opinion on the discussion - i recently got blocked for something similar, so just pointing this out) --Sodabottle (talk) 08:02, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Soda. Wonder whether I have already????Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes two reverts but on different sections. It seems we were refering to two differnt articles of sam paper.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 08:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I am looking at the article cited.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

If it helps, I missed the fact that it was related to the high court myself--Faizhaider, be sure to click the Next or Page 2 link at the bottom of the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

It is very important to note that Indian Govt spends Rs. 7.7 billion every year with Rs. 47,454 per passenger.([3] [4]) It is not like many other measures in India where the expenditure per person is nominal. What is spend on each pilgrim is an exorbitant sum. This deserves space in wikipedia. 117.214.19.126 (talk) 09:42, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I disagree--I think that info is fine on Hajj subsidy; here, we need only a brief mention with a clear link to that article. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced

This statement is unsourced.Either please add a source or delete it."and the Muslims have played a prominent role in India's economic rise and cultural infuence".Please add a source,as this contradicts the general fact that muslims,on average,tend to be poorer then people of other religions.Zoravar (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Article name

this article should be renamed to Indian Muslims (which is currently a redirect). And, Islam in India should showcase the contributions of Islamic scholars of India to theology. Islam is a religion while Muslims are a community, and there is no descritption of the religion per se in this article. Shaad lko (talk) 08:06, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I second the above proposal. Wasif (talk) 10:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

*Why* should it be renamed? William M. Connolley (talk) 10:26, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Because that's what its describing - its current name is unsuitable for its content. It talks about Indian Muslims or Muslims in India, not Islam in India. Commonsense says taht any religion is different from its followers. Shaad lko (talk) 11:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Obviously any article about the religion is going to talk about the people, too. But "Indo-Islamic art and architecture" is not about the people William M. Connolley (talk) 11:14, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Even this should be Indo-Muslim art and architecture. The Indo- part refers to an ethnicity (viz, Indians) while the suffix -Islamic refers to a faith - it is plain wrong to mix those two. Can anyone care to tell me just where is Islamic art mentioned in Islam or what exactly is Islamic art? How does a religion define art, and did Islam ever specify any form of art? These are all Muslim contributions first (well, in their subconscious since Muslims are impacted by Islam, there may be a role for Islam in it but not primarily).Shaad lko (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the point is that there is a contradiction between the title and the content. Any article about religion should talk about the people too - but this one talks only about the people, and nothing about the religion.. Shaad lko (talk) 11:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

(e/c) Can anyone care to tell me just where is Islamic art mentioned in Islam? Certainly. It is in the Islam#Art section. ...or what exactly is Islamic art? Yes: Islamic art encompasses the visual arts produced from the 7th century onwards by people (not necessarily Muslim) who lived within the territory that was inhabited by or ruled by culturally Islamic populations William M. Connolley (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

this one talks only about the people - no it doesn't. As I've already said, there is a section on "Indo-Islamic art and architecture" William M. Connolley (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, is this definition of Islamic art beyond reproach? Shaad lko (talk) 11:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

In any case, despite a few sections on Islam, when the major tone of the article is towards Muslims as a people, should this fact not reflect in the title? Shaad lko (talk) 11:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't suppose it is beyond reproach. But if you object to it (do you?), the place to do so is over there, not here. As to the name: despite a few sections on Islam;;: I don't agree. There are quite a few sections which aren't about people. The name change doesn't appear to be necessary, and makes quite a bit of the article not fit under the new name. I still can't really see the point of the rename. a contradiction between the title and the content would be true of the new name. It isn't true of the current name William M. Connolley (talk) 11:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll explain below..Shaad lko (talk) 12:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, have you looked at the template? There is a vast series of "Islam in <country>" articles. Are you proposing to rename them all? William M. Connolley (talk) 11:51, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Ideally yes, and what better place to start than here. To give you an idea of what I'm talking about see this: Category:Christianity_in_England - these articles do not talk about Christians in England or their contributions. They talk about the theology of Christianity, churches, etc. There is no "Christianity in USA" article either - I hope that would make it clearer what I am talking about. Its unreasonable to give special treatment to Islam and incorporate all of Muslims' contributions into it. "Islam in India", imho can be about mosques, Islamic denominations, but why insert Muslim contributions into it, this presumes that anything done by Muslims is due to Islam itself.. Shaad lko (talk) 12:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

See the Islam in Turkey article - that is what this one should look like. So it may not be necessary to propose a change in all these articles. Shaad lko (talk) 12:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

New pic rm: why

I rolledback the new pic [5] by mistake, so will say here: I see a danger of "creep" as more and more geet added to the pic. And there is no evidence that KK is muslim, for example William M. Connolley (talk) 08:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

WikiLeaks on Indian Muslim population census

• http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-wikileaks-cables-chidambaram-nitish-love-jihad/20110906.htm

Apparently most in the American embassy in New Delhi believe that the official figure (Census 2001) of over 138 million Muslims in India is "under representative" as actual number is "substantially higher"—closer to 160 to 180 million. Should i go ahead and incorporate this into the article? Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 20:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

It is not a fact - not even a mainstream conspiracy theory. It is just a belief/theory of the American embassy people in New Delhi. It would be undue to mention it in the article --Sodabottle (talk) 20:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Katrina Kaif

Katrina kaif is not a muslim

katrina only has a muslim father.. thats all... but she was raised by her christian mother and her real name is katrina torquette.... still katrina's name is in indian muslims though she is a christian... please remove it from there... thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.94.96.207 (talk) 08:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Katrina was getting in the way!!!! I wonder why the many bots that prowl could not take care of this. Yogesh Khandke (talk)

before passing judgement...just ask Katrina herself if she is or not or is christian, agnostic, atheist etc. I dont think any one other than katrina herself is qualified to to make that judgement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.100.219 (talk) 01:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Badshah Khan.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Badshah Khan.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 18 November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:10, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

split this article

This article seems to be discussing Muslim Ethnicity in India and not Islam in India. It should be split off into two parts of Muslims in India and Islam in India.

Discussing things like Prominent Muslims of India has nothing really to do with Islam, Salman Khan may be considered a prominent Muslim of India but is probably agnostic. Sections on Islamic Thought etc, Sufi saints, religious characteristics make more sense here. Another Page on Indian Muslims would be more apt to discuss the Khan's of Bollywood — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.100.219 (talk) 01:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

• Do you think yourself that smart?who said you that Salman Khan is agnostic.But even if it is, challange it with reliable sources, as regards to another section on muslims of india, it had been created, corrupted and deleted.--Skashifakram (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 August 2012

Muslim population in Inida is not over 20% (2001 census) it's over 10% (13.7% to be exact). It's not even 20% according to 2011 census. Please make the correction in the first line of the article. 117.201.68.1 (talk) 04:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Where does it say that in the census? It seems the article uses the 2001 census, so it would be in need of an update, but the burden is on you to give us the source for. No, you're right, I misread; but it would be better for the article if it had an update. Done A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 04:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Ex President A.P.J Abdul Kalam is not a Muslim. Please remove him from the list of Muslim presidents in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sreejithsasikumar (talk • contribs) 06:38, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

ISLAMIC ARCHITECTURE IS MORE TO HINDUISM

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/true_story_of_the_taj_mahal.htm.

JUST VISIT THIS LINK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.175.63 (talk) 17:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The author of this above article has been described by many observers of contemporary Indian society as mythistorian and crackpot. Nothing more to say.

Where is Dr. Zakir Naik?

Dr. Zakir Naik is a prominent Muslim figure in India. He has an internationally acclaimed orator on Islam in India and has made a modern Islamic revolution in India through his Islamic Research Foundation (IRF) and Peace TV which no other personality in India could ever achieve. He has set a new trend of peace and mutual understanding between Hindus and Muslims through his lecture on similarities in Hinduism and Islam and his symposium with Sree Ravi Shankar. Unlike many Indian Muslims, he has shown his great patriotism and his appreciation of India's freedom for Muslims. He has revolutionised the strict practising of Islam among Modern Muslim youth and called for unity among the different conflicting sects and madhhabs among the Muslims. I think the article should remove references to Bollywood personalities such as Aamir Khan who has little to do with Islam in India and pseudo-Muslims such as Katrina Kaif. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ash wki (talk • contribs)

This isn't an article about "prominent Muslims in India". It's an article about the religion of Islam in India. A few prominent people are mentioned, but the goal is not to list all people in that category. We do have Category: Indian Muslims, which Zakir Naik is found in. Finally, please do not use negative terms like "pseudo-Muslim" to describe living people, not even on talk pages. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

And why exactly is APJ Abdul Kalam included in the list? He is an ex-muslim humanist according to his book "Wings of Fire" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sreejithsasikumar (talk • contribs) 07:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Could you please provide the link of Wings of fire, where Dr.APJ Abdul Kalam says exclusively that he is not a muslim.?Wasif (talk) 14:16, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

== Indian Muslims in Sri Lanka == Imt

Islam was introduced to Sri Lanka by Arab traders as well as Muslims from India's Malabar coast. These all eventually assimilated into the wider Tamil-speaking "Moor" (Muslim) group. But there are also Muslims of Indian descent who arrived during the British colonial period and still maintain their original distinct identities and customs. One example are the Memons who make up much of the merchant class of Colombo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.83.233 (talk) 16:40, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

First, we would need reliable sources to prove that. Second, it probably doesn't belong in this article anyways, since this is the article about Islam in India, not in Sri Lanka. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:35, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Mass Migration of Muslims out of India

I was wondering should we start the section on Muslim migration out of India. Considering that now there is a large scale Muslim migration out of India taking place with Muslims from India going to African Muslim countries and South East Asian Muslim countries and even Central Asian Muslim countries. A large number of Muslims now do not want to live in India anymore and are migrating to other Muslim countries, so a section for their migration process should be made in the main article. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 08:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Only if you can provide reliable sources that support that. Try posting your sources here and we can discuss them. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:23, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Refer the links

Hi, Before coming to a conclusion, please go through these links. http://www.hindustantimes.com/photos-news/Photos-India/EidcelebrationsacrossIndia/Article4-264515.aspx http://www.hindu.com/2007/12/22/stories/2007122255611200.htm Wasif (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't prove anything, even a non-muslim such as mamta baneerjee can be seen doing islamic namaz and yet she is not a muslim, see here http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/cpm-bjp-slam-mamata-banerjee-for-namaz-advertisement-51289. While former President Abdul_Kalam has explicitly stated he is an atheist in his book, see here for the discussion on his talk page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:A._P._J._Abdul_Kalam#India.27s_First_Atheistic_President . --Neelkamala (talk) 18:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi dont post something for the sake of pushing your POV. In the talk page link of Abdul Kalam's page, an unsigned user says that Abdul kalam is an athiest according to his book. No where the source link of the book is given where he says that I am an athiest. If so, i will surely accept and make the no. as 2. And to your link regarding Mamata banerjee, don't be so childish to push your view. In your link Mamata's image is designed to look like a muslim lady, whereas Dr.Abdul Kalam went to mosque to celebrate Eid by offering Namaz. Understand the difference and pls think twice before you post. Wasif (talk) 08:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

First assume WP:good faith and stop labeling well intentioned edits as "childish" and drop your preaching tone. We are here to discuss edits and not listen to your sermons. With that out of the way, the burden to prove Kalam is a muslim is upon you, since you claim it. Add reliable source or drop reverting the changes. Regarding mamata she indeed did namaz, see here from here official site https://aitmc.org/news_details.php?nid=1032 , goes to prove everyone doing namaz is not a muslim. --Neelkamala (talk) 09:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Since he is a born Muslim, the burden of proving him as an athiest, or Hindu or Sikh or Christian or whatever you claim is with you. Wasif (talk) 09:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

You are mistaken. See WP:CAT/R, Categories regarding religious beliefs of a living person should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief in question, either through direct speech or through actions like serving in an official clerical position for the religion.

Now that should make it clear to you. Either prove your claim of A. P. J. Abdul Kalam being a muslim or stop making unsourced changes.--Neelkamala (talk) 10:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Neelkamala is correct: you cannot add religious cats unless the person has self-identified; furthermore, the religion must be of relevance to the person's notability. Now, if you have a reliable source that says that he was born to a Muslim family, you could state exactly that (usually that would go under early life), but that still wouldn't let you add the cat. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Muslim Personnel Law is not Sharia

Original Text of Wikipedia reads "Matters of jurisdiction involving Muslims in India related to marriage, inheritance and wakf properties are governed by the Muslim Personal Law,[8] and the courts have ruled that Sharia or Muslim law, holds precedence for Muslims over Indian civil law in such matters.[9]".

The "Muslim Personal Law" links to Wikipedia article "sharia" and talks as if its sharia. This is not true. Muslim Personal Law is not sharia but came from "Anglo - Muhammadan Law" developed by british rule in india. Anglo-Muhammadan law and Anglo - hindu law were developed with British interests in mind and hence include many of the common British laws with some degree of cultural and religious influence to appease Hindus and Muslims. It must be noted that British usually used Britain educated Indian scholars who understood the british law and would protect their interest with some degree of freedom.

please read the brief synopsis.

He is an article by asghar ali engineer

My request is to remove the sharia reference as it is inaccurate.

Gandhijr (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the wikilink, though I have left the second point in the article about Sharia law sometimes taking precedence, since that's what the NYT article says. The two refs you give here don't help, because the first doesn't say anything about "Muslim Personal Law" and I can't read it in full; the second is not a reliable source. However, if you have more reliable sources, we could expand on the matter. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The NYT article refereed by you here is not an article about the personal law but Hindu Muslim divide based on babri masjid demolition backdrop. I checked the NYT author's profile and his works show no scholarly knowledge on Indian history. The article i quoted was specifically regarding Muslim personal law and the writer Asghar ali Engineer is well known writer and theologist. Please check his wikipedia link . Its sad to see an article related to different subject by some writer who has very little knowledge about the subject matter is used as reliable source but very well known and award winning scholar's work on the subject matter is considered as non reliable. Gandhijr (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

here is further reading of anglo muhammedan law and its development — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandhijr (talk • contribs) 19:50, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

This is what the NYT article says: "Hindus have seen the Supreme Court allow Muslim men to divorce their wives without paying alimony, as Muslim tradition allows. (The court ruled that Sharia, or Muslim law, held precedence for Muslims over Indian civil law.)". That's very close to what our article says (possibly too close; it maybe should be less close of a paraphrase). But the info is verified. Wrt Engineer, since he does appear to be such a prolific writer, it would be far better to get an academic text/journal article that he's written rather than rely on his blog. But it may be possible to use that source if nothing else is easily available. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Request to Rewrite

"Most of the Muslims in India belong to Indian ethnic groups, with minor to obvious levels of gene flow from outside, primarily from Persia and Middle East.[12][13][14]"

The quote above reads as Muslims belong to Indian ethnic groups but with outside gene flow at varying degrees and that too from Persia and middle east.

It reads as all most all Muslims have minor to obvious levels of gene flow from outside. This is not true.

It appears the writer did not read his own quoted sources thoroughly.

Muslims in India are found to have the same genetic markers as the regional populations and have shown same level of variations as other populations of India meaning they are no different than other Indian populations. For example a Tamilian Muslim will show the same genetic marker that is found among other Tamilians and so does a Punjabi or a Bengali in their respective regional concentrations.

Also note Parts of Persia, Pakistan and Afghanistan has been part of Indian empires for thousands of years and genetic markers concentrated from those parts are found in same degree among Muslims and non Muslims ( meaning Hindus ) when sampled.

Also Please note the it was the Turkic people from present day Afghanistan and parts of central Asia that invaded India, introduced and established Islam in India not Persians and Middle Eastern.

My suggestion is to remove this sentence as it tries to point towards something that's not true.

Gandhijr (talk) 10:21, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

That's not how I read the sentence at all; I read it as saying that across the Muslim population, there are some levels of gene flow from outside. Furthermore, the rest of your claims here are not backed up by reliable sources. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:59, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I will soon add links to the sources as time permits.Gandhijr (talk) 06:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Rewrite the Introduction paragraphs properly and systematically.

"Islam came to India with Muslim invasions and Arab trade to the Malabar Coast in the 7th–8th century. Islamic expansion arrived in north India in the 12th century and Islam has since become a part of India's religious and cultural heritage."

These statements are are all over the place and causes misinterpretations.

There were no Muslim invasions in to India (we are talking about republic of india and not south asia)in 7th-8th century.

The sentence should read " Islam first came to India with Arab trade in the 7th - 8th AD followed by Turkic Invasions starting in 12th century AD."

Please note Arabs never invaded India. The closet they came was to the western borders of present day Pakistan. They were defeated by Turkic tribes of afghan who invaded India and introduced Islam in the north of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandhijr (talk • contribs) 09:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The information appears to be verified by reliable sources. Please provide other reliable sources that state differently and we can figure out how to incorporate them into the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:57, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you list one verifiable source which says Islam came to India (we are talking about modern India) with Muslim invasion in the 7th - 8th century? Islam came to the west of River Sindh (modern day pakistan) by Umayyad calipahte and that too in in 8th century AD. They could not make any gains beyond sindh (Indus River)and were defeated by Indian Kings and later driven out from sindh itself my Turkic tribes. So Islam did not enter into north India through invasions in 7th & 8th century AD. Here is wikipedia article about Umayyad. please read the last but one para in origins.

The first muslim ruler to enter modern india was Mahmud of Ghor . He is a Turkic king from modern Afghanistan.

my request is very simple to correct the sentence in wiki which says "Islam came to India with Muslim invasions and Arab trade to the Malabar Coast in the 7th–8th century." This is not true and i have pointed out all the articles from Wikipedia itself.

please rewrite it to reflect the truth which is "Islam first came to India with Arab trade in the 7th - 8th AD followed by Turkic Invasions starting in 12th century AD."

Gandhijr (talk) 05:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Agree with the first part of Gandhijr's argument. Arabs technically never invaded the geographical region of modern day India. They were limited to Sindh and southern Punjab by Gurjara-Pratihara kings who stopped their westward movement[6] in the Battle of Rajasthan and by Kashmiri kings who limted their northern movement into Punjab.[7] However, Islam had arrived in North India with the invasions of Mahmud of Ghazni in 10th century. Turkic invasions of 12th century were two centuries too late for this. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 16:39, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I see your points. If the two of you want to take it out, I won't object. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Mahmud of Ghazni is also a Turkic from Afghanistan and his first attempt into India (modern India) is around 1015 AD (that's 11th century). The point to be noted is Ghazni was never interested in establishing a rule or introducing Islam into India. He was simply interested in plundering wealth of India and taking it back which he did in several raids. He or his forces never stayed in India or established any bases. Its highly unlikely that Islam came to India with him. Wikipedia article on mahmud ghazni is pretty well written and there are several sources for this as well. The person who is credited with bringing Islam into India is mahmud ghor who was born a generation after Ghazni. Since both are Turkic from afghanization, I put it simply as Turkic Invasions and the date will be 11th - 12th century. Gandhijr (talk) 05:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Not all accounts call Ghurids Turks. As per per our own Ghurid dynasty#Origins, Ghurids were most probably Takijs or Afghans. IMO, it's best to do away with generalizations such as "Turkic invasions" or "Arab invasions" and specifically mention the invader(s) who introduced Islam. Please also take a look at this map which depicts Ghazanavid empire at its peak. I am not sure how reliable it is, but it suggests Ghazni controlled parts of India. I'll try and find references for this. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 14:42, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Biased Article

This whole article does not seam to be fair and balanced. There are many mistakes, deliberate misinterpretations, wrong sources and contradicts itself at places. This is very unfortunate to see.

Please don't misunderstand. Appreciate the sincere efforts of all the people who are working to make this better and balanced. Gandhijr (talk) 10:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I've responded to each of your specific concerns above; note that in each case, you need to provide reliable sources to verify the changes you wish to make. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:59, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Will do. this article is wrong on so many levels that it will take some effort to correct and I am sure I will see a lot of resistance but as our beloved father said "satyameva jayathe". truth will always win. Gandhijr (talk) 06:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Confusion and error

Article States

The first Indian mosque, Cheraman Juma Masjid, is thought to have been built in 629 A.D, purportedly at the behest of Rama Varma Kulashekhara, who is considered the first Indian Muslim, during the lifetime of Muhammad (c. 571–632) in Kodungallur, Kerala by Malik Bin Deenar.

According to Wikipedia Rama Varma Kulashekhara ruled hundreds of years after the date being claimed for this masjid

What's going on there? Has Islam invented time travel and not let on to anybody? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.156.217 (talk) 09:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

The Article Cheraman Juma Masjid, states:

The Cheraman Masjid is said to be the very first mosque in India, built in 629 AD by Malik lbn Dinar. It is believed that this mosque was first renovated and reconstructed in the 11th century AD. Many non-Muslims conduct initiation ceremonies to the world of letters of their children here.

Probably Rama Varma Kulashekhara was one who got it renovated and reconstructed in the 11th century AD and was not the original builder (neither the first Indian muslim).

Thanks for pointing out the descrpancy. The article needs to be fixed & I'll do it now.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 11:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Few interesting facts to be noted here. Cheraman Perumal Juma Masjid is not necessarily the first but one of several mosques build in India during the life time of Prophet Muhammad however Cheraman Juma Masjib is the oldest surviving mosque in India. Arabs even before Prophet Muhammad's time had trade relations with Southern India from coast's of present day Karnataka, Kerala, Tamilnadu and Andhra. These age old trade relations created trust and friendship between Arabs and Indians and when Islam came through Arabs it was well received and was supported by the local kings by providing amenities such as gifts, land grants and construction. Cheraman Juma masjid is constructed at the behest of Cheraman Perumal which is the title used by the kings at that time. Ali ibn Sahl Rabban al-Tabari the famous scholar who lived in 8th century has written about Cheraman Perumal's visit to Madina and his meeting with Prophet Muhammad. Since all the records that exist call out Cheraman Perumal , Its difficult to figure out the actual birth name of this king and records from Kerala before 9th century are not well kept. Its is very likely that Rama Varma Kulashekhara may have renovated the mosque and hence his name is associated with it.Gandhijr (talk) 00:53, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Social and Economic Reasons behind (muslim) population growth

According the reference below, Female to male ratio amongst muslims is higher than that amongst hindus and mucher higher than the that amongst Sikhs and Jains. This may be due to a lower incidence of female foetus termination rates amongst muslims. [8] That being so, I wonder whether one should say "self-inflicted decline" in Hindu and Sikh populations rather than "growth in muslim" population. Jonathansammy (talk) 16:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Your point & deduction is quite valid but until we have a reliable source confirming this it's inclusion in the article will amount to violation WP:OR. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 16:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Inter-religious relations

I wonder whether the section called"Religious Conflict" should be changed to Inter-religious relations. The relations between Hindus and Muslims over the centuries have not been all about conflict. The same goes for the Sikhs whose gurus were influenced by Sufi teaching. A large number of Sufi saints are revered by Hindus in India. Changing the title would allow adding information on both positives and negative aspects of Indian Islams's interaction with other faiths.Jonathansammy (talk) 13:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

List of highest awards of Indian Muslim

Good Morning ,

Permission needed to make section tables of the Indian Muslims who have received highest awards just below the Prominent Indian Muslims. (talk) 06:31, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

As I've just explained on your talk page, at a minimum, you need a reliable source (either here or on the person's WP page) that they are Muslim. If they are still living, you must have a source where the person personally stated that they themselves are Muslim.

Also, as I said, I don't think the table is appropriate; those people didn't win because they are Muslim, so I don't see how that information belongs in an article representing how the religion of Islam exists in India. But even if others think it's okay to include, the sourcing is absolutely mandatory. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

New Sections

The article does not have much on the contemporary life of muslims in India. For example, detailed demographics, religious denominations, education, occupation, daily life of different islamic communities, food, festivals etc. Please suggest headings for these topics. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 14:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Population Exchange Policy with Malaysia should be put in the Article

The Malaysian government has already decided on a population exchange policy with India, whereby Indian Hindus who were brought by British and allowed to remain in Malaysia after independence will be repatriated to India and same number of Muslims from India will leave for Malaysia. This should be put in the article as the joint Muslim councils of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Malaysia are already approaching the UN in regards to this. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Uh...that sounds unbelievable. But if it's true, please provide a reliable source which verifies it. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are saying. Muslims are free to go to any Muslim country they want if the country has asked them to come. The government of India has no choice in the matter. I will try and post the link to a Malaysian talk show where this was being discussed, the heading was in Malay but I will try to get it. It is not possible for the Indian government to "contain" the Muslims as the Muslim population is increasing and will just result in more and more riots. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 10:04, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree with all that you said. However you should also mention that some members in Pakistan and Bangladesh have also come up with agreements for getting Muslims out of India. They have come up with a different arrangement whereby the Muslims in india can first travel to Pakistan and then from there go to any Muslim country they want. This is also a good option either Muslims can migrate directly from India to other Muslim countries or they can go via Pakistan to other Muslim countries. We should make mention of this in the main page as well. Ali Machine (talk) 01:58, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

These are valid points and should be put in the article immediately. Muslim Migration Leaving India (talk) 13:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2014

Many point in "Islam in India" miss. Especially regarding destruction of temples(You can refer: Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent). Enormous no of temples were destroyed and conversions happened. Of course you can also mention Akbar played a significant role in establishing good relationship between Hindus and Muslims. 196.15.16.105 (talk) 07:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 08:46, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

2011 Census

Why is the census 2011 figures not on this page and why is a undo trail when it is getting added? No explanation given by either editors. Im bringing it back for lack of explanation. thevikas (talk) 15:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

As I understand it, it is being reverted because the authentic figure does not exist. The 2011 census has not published figures for the various religions (for what reason, I don't know). The source being added is from rediff, but it can't be verified on the actual census website, so it is very suspect. At least, that is my understanding of the problem, DS might have something else to say about it. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

I just reverted Madman, who was attempting to add the same stat from the same source. I repeat; for the higher figure to be used, you need a better source than rediff. I have tried to find the statistic on the census website; it is not available. If anybody finds it, it may be used. Until then, this revision stays. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Sunnis

In the denominations section, there is no mention of Sunni muslims, which are the largest denomination (in fact Sunnis consider Sufis, Shias, Dawoodi Bohras, Ahmadiyyas etc. as non-muslims) and I hope somebody can mention them (Sunnis) here.—Khabboos (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Many Sufi groups in India are Sunni - although there is a prejudice against them by some other Sunnis such as followers of the Salafi movement. Chris Fynn (talk) 06:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Muslim writers

Muslim Writers like Kazi Nazrul Islam and Mirza Ghalib must be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.221.131.90 (talk) 00:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Godhra Train burning was not an accident

It is mentioned on this page that the train burning in Godhra was an accident. It is written that: "The Bannerjee commission appointed to investigate this finding declared that the fire was an accident." A reference is also given for this: http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2203/stories/20050211004203200.htm. But the link is not working. I looked it up and found that it was not at all an accident. The commission set up for this concluded that it was caused by a mob of people, mainly Muslims. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhra_train_burning

And the Banerjee Commission that claimed that it was an accident was thrashed badly by the High Court for being unethical. Kindly correct this thing in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capachow (talk • contribs) 14:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

That is not the only source which says it was an accident. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeh. But now it is very well accepted by all the courts that it was not some fire accident. It was caused by a mob. So this info should be added in the section on this page. --Capachow (talk) 04:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

It does not matter what the court said, our policies are we include all significant viewpoints. Darkness Shines (talk) 08:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

HELLO.MY NAME IS EDIN.I AM FROM BOSNIA.I WROTE A BOOK CALLED ,,SVJETSKI ALMANAH DEMOGRAFSKE ISTORIJE MUSLIMANA"(WORLD ALMANAC OF DEMOGRAPHIC HISTORY OF MUSLIMS).I UPLOADED A MAP (ONE OF MY OWN WORKS) THAT SHOWS THE TERRITORIAL DISTRIBUTION OF MUSLIMS IN INDIA BY TEHSILS.THE MAP IS VERY DETAILED.I THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO ACCEPT THIS MAP AS A PART OF THIS ARTICLE.HERE IS THE LINK TO THE MAP: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:INDIA.PERCENTAGE_OF_MUSLIMS_BY_TEHSILS._ACCORDING_TO_THE_2001_CENSUS.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edin Radoncic (talk • contribs) 21:29, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Why is there nothing here about the sweeping genocide of millions of Hindus that Muslims perpetuated for centuries in India chronicled by modern historians such as Will Durant and Alain Danielou? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.4.239 (talk) 04:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring by User:Delljvc

The references on the population figures are out of date, broken and inaccessible. I have added a reference with the latest data from 2011 census. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 04:33, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Is there any link for thegraph of Muslim population by states,as Census 2011 religious figures are still not published by Census Dept of India as of November 2014--Nehakangri (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Islam in India and Indian Muslims

Assalam-Wale-ikum , Khushamadid and Hello to all Editors, I think two separate articles should be written as "Islam in India" and "Indian Muslims". Because Islam in India should convey more specifically the geography and history of Islamic texts such as the holy Quran in India.Recently an oldest copy of Quran was found in Mysore, Similarly the masjids, revered mosques, Sharia law associations must be specified whereas Indian Muslims as a separate article can illustrate about prominent indian muslims who served the indian soil, contributed to the furtherance of Islam and added prosperity to mankind in some or other way. I am waiting for your opinions Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 12:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2015

INDIAN MUSLIMS WIKIPEDIA SHOW SOME NONE MUSLIMS IMAGE SO EDIT THAT PAGE.

ITS FOR VERY URGENT. Sar777 (talk) 09:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done No, it would be WP:UNDUE. - Kautilya3 (talk) 10:09, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Salman Rushdie

Why is Rusdhie included in the infobox, when he considers himself to be a "hard-line Atheist" ? Reference 103.6.158.190 (talk) 15:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Uttarakhand is named Uttaranchal

In the list of Indian states by muslim population, Uttarakhand is mentioned by it's former name. It has been years since the name change has taken place and therefore I request to kindly make the necessary edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.151.251.74 (talk) 16:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2016

Change the word "fist" to "first" when talking about the first Muslim to hold office. It is important because "fist" is completely unrelated to the topic, and "first" would make much more sense in the context.

Rocker517 (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 18:43, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Linguistic matrix

Please add the following sentence :

About 50% of the Indian Muslims speak Urdu, 25% speak Hindi and the rest speak over dozen regional languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.65.26.69 (talk) 06:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done. Please provide a reliable source for the claim. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

First Indian Muslim

Cheraman Perumal, of Kodungallur, Kerala, was the first Indian to accept Islam. Many historians have recorded this fact in their writings. For example, M. Hamidulla writes in “Muhammad Rasoolullah” quoting some old manuscripts from India Office Library (ref no. Arabic, 2807, 152-173) “There is a very old tradition in Malabar, South-West Coast of India, that Chakrawati Farmas (perhaps another name for denoting Cheraman Perumal) one of their kings, had observed the splitting of the moon, the celebrated miracle of the Holy Prophet at Mecca, and learning on inquiry that there was a prediction of the coming of a Messenger of God from Arabia, he appointed his son as regent and set out to meet him.He embraced Islam at the hand of the Prophet, and when returning home, at the direction of the Prophet, died at the port of Zafar, Yemen, where the tomb of the “Indian king” was piously visited for many centuries.” The Holy Quran makes the following reference to the miracle of Holy Prophet – “The Hour is nigh and the moon was cleft asunder” Thus it is clear that Cheraman Perumal was the first believer of India. However, there are differences of opinion among historians concerning the year in which it took place. (It is not in the scope of MeraWatan to sort out the chronological differences).

Advent of Islam

It is difficult to estimate the exact date when the Indo – Arab relations began. History has it that about 2200 years ago, Arabs used to visit Kerala to sell pepper, sandalwood, elephant horns. It is through Arabs, the Christianity and Judaism reached Kerala first. They had settled long before the arrival of Prophet. As Islam’s glory became established in Arabia, the relation was strengthened day by day. A group of Arabs arrive at Kerala A group of Arabs set to visit Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka) where it was believed to have the footsteps of Prophet Adam. On the way, they landed at Kerala. Cheruman Perumal, who was the king of Kodungallur, sent his men to investigate the matter. Sheikh Sahirudhin Ibn Baqiudhin Al Madani, one among the team, replied, “We are Arabs, We are Muslims. We have landed here while on the way to Ceylon”. The king, who’d earlier heard of Islam, became more curious to hear directly from the inhabitants of Madina- the center of Islam. Sahirudhin replied positively to all the questions. The king was overjoyed to learn more about the new faith and converted to it on the spot. Ahmed Zainudhin Makhdum has mentioned this in his world- renowned masterpiece, Thuhfathul Mujahideen. (Another historic text, Keralolpathi, reports that Perumal left for the pilgrimage at Makkah). Anyway the king kept his conversion a secret and asked the travelers to do the same. He presented many gifts to the travelers and while seeing them off, he told that he would be coming with them while they wee returning back to Arabia. The king visited each part of his country and introduced many administrative changes whereby he divided each part of his country among his relatives. ‘One among his sons, who arrived late from his visit to Kashi, was left with the land of ‘Kozhi’ and ‘Chullikkad’ which later came to be known as Kozhikode. He was given the power to nominate the Grand Qazi of Kozhikode, give permission for the ships leaving for Makkah and to conduct the Mamanga festival. (refer Keralolpathi).

Death of Cheraman Perumal

The king spent weeks in seclusion. In midst of his quiet life, he set out on the journey along with the Arab travelers who’d promised him earlier. On the way, they stopped by Koylandi and from there to Dharmapatnam where they halted for 3 days.Then they set out to Shehr Muqalla. On reaching there, they set for the Hajj pilgrimage and thereafter returned to Malabar. He aspired to spread the message of Islam. But on the way, he fell sick and breathed his last. His companions left for Malabar with the letter written by the king just before his death

Tajuddin R.A died at the port of Zafar, Yemen, (salalah in oman)where the tomb of the Indian king was piously visited for many centuries. But he had asked his companions, among whom there were a number of senior disciples of Prophet Mohammad, to continue their journey to Kerala. One Islamic scholar has written that Perumal followers built the mosque after reaching Kerala. The Cheraman Juma Masjid was built by Malik bin Dinar, (one of the 13 followers of Prophet Mohammad), who reached the ancient port of Musuris on the spice route in Malabar in 629 A.D.

Perumal in Theyyum Songs=

The Perumal story is sung in the Theyyum songs as follows: ‘Perumal who began his journey secretly handed over his Kovilakam (palace) to the Samudiri in Dharmapattanam. His companions were with him. The Prophet used to halt at Jeddah. Perumal went there and embraced Islam and adopted the name Tajudhin.’ The Arakkal records also shows that Perumal left for Makkah and changed his name to Tajudhin after embracing Islam The practice of receiving Pan from a Muslim woman when the King Samudiri ascends throne and the saying ‘I shall guard the sword (kingship) until my uncle returns from Makkah’ continued until 1890s. Two facts: Story Untold Islam spread along the western coast, including Kerala, long before the Muslim invasion of North India.

Islam spread in Kerala either at the time of Prophet or just before his death. Summarized from Kerala Muslims – History of freedom struggle by KM Bahaudhin C.V. Kunhiraman C.V. Kunhiraman describes the story of Cheraman Perumal in ‘Karthikodayam’ as follows: Cheraman Perumal left for Makkah after embracing Islam. Before leaving, he divided his kingdom among his son-in-laws and relatives at the Thiruvanchikulam Temple (see pic). This happened 1400 years ago. The Panthalam, Kottarakkara and Kollam dynasties came into being after this.

Perumal presents a gift to the Holy Prophet A tradition of the Holy Prophet has also been reported from one of the companions, Abu Saeed al Khudri, regarding the arrival of Cheraman Perumal: hadith “A king from India presented the Messenger of Allah with a bottle of pickle that had ginger in it. The Holy Prophet distributed it among his companions. I also received a piece to eat.” Hakim reports in ‘Al Musthadrak’

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aashiq Ibn Asim (talk • contribs) 17:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Jonathansammy (talk) 22:05, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Revert

@Omer123hussain: I have reverted all your edits of today because I disagree with them.

• You have moved the population information to the end of the lead. This is against the common practice. Please check all other Religion X in Y articles, and you will see why.
• No explanation for changing the claim that "some of the most popular actors" are Muslim. Your new sentence is broken.
• Removing the ethnicity of Sania Mirza is needlessly contentious.
• The most influential Muslims list is not from a newspaper, but from an academic source, Georgetown University.
• Changing "active Muslim parties" to "Political parties." Why?
• Removing the subheading for "Muslim-majority parties." Why?

Please note that your edits are subject to review by other editors. You need more solid ground to make such edits. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:27, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: Please do not revert, its not an good idea, and all copy edits are to improve the tone and standard of article with in good faith.

• Common practice? it is not must to practice same tone in all the WP article.
• "Georgetown University" means what? are you insisting to publish there findings here?
• Its not okay to name the city of single player, any way we cannot add all the sports persons names along with there cities, as long as they are wikilinked.
• Why to politicize the politics? "Political parties" is simple rather than "Active muslim political parties" and "non active political parties".
• "Some of the most popular and influential actors" looks to much glossy (peacock) as explained in my c/e, if you could read the edit summary, why cant we simply write "actors and actress"? are we using same tone in the article for "some of the most popular and influential tennis players" or "some of the most popular and influential scientist" etc etc.

Noted with thanks; No problem any one can review my edits. no one owns the WP, every one is free review every thing on WP. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 05:38, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I have reverted the edits as per the recommended protocol of WP:BRD, and initiated a discussion at the same time.

• All "Religion X in Y" articles are primarily focused on the present state of affairs. History is discussed only to the extent that it informs the present. The Lead is already overweight on history, and your edit made it even more prominent. History is not the main purpose of this article.
• Academic sources are the highest quality sources used on Wikipedia. See WP:RS. Moreover, you deleted the content claiming that it a "listing of a particular magazine", which is not the case.
• The argument you make now regarding Sania Mirza is a valid argument, not the one you had in the edit summary. As counter to the argument, consider this: Sania Mirza is often identified as a Hyderabadi Muslim [9], even being appointed as the brand ambassador of the Telangana state, and Hyderabadi Muslims claim a special ethnic identity which is not done by most other Muslim communities in India. So it is not obvious to me that Mirza's ethnicity is irrelevant as you make it out to be. Secondly, I think the article should indeed discuss the various Muslim communities in India eventually. India is a diverse country where ethnic identities are celebrated, not brushed under the carpet as you seemed to do in your edit summary.
• "Why politicize the politics?" That is quite a self-contradictory rhetoric. Anyway, note that the inactive (historical) political parties are not being listed, e.g., All-India Muslim League.
• "most popular and influential actors" is quite an accurate description of the reverence with which the community holds them. People like Dilip Kumar, Nargis, Meena Kumari etc. have been at the very top, not to mention Shahrukh Khan. So also the other artistes in their respective fields: Alla Rakha, Zakir Hussain, Vilayat Khan, Naushad, Mohammad Rafi, AR Rahman, Salim-Javed etc. The Muslim presence in the arts and entertainment is far greater than their 14% population figure would indicate. (This is not the case in other fields, e.g., politics.) Avoiding WP:PEACOCK does not mean we should misrepresent the situation. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: well I agree with some of your views but still reverting is not an good idea, specially the entire work and your justification for reverting my hard work. Any way there will be lot of c/e secession before we reach GA and then FA in future.

Please discuss if you have any plan related to article structure, citation style etc, so that we can work together to make it a GA, because that will be the main focus of Guild of copy editors. Currently the article have 27 section with almost equal sub sections and with 240+ sections, some of the entire section either have 1-2 citations or null.

And please don't just think, you may go ahead to add any constructive material about "various Muslim communities in India". Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 05:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Inclusion of important political development

Please refer latest undo. An important specific political development with proper reference has been undone claiming non encyclopedic. The inclusion is as follows:

'Since the major election win by the 'Hindu-nationalist' Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014, religious differences have increased. Muslim minority is more anxious about its future. Some laws proposed by the BJP seems to have 'sectarian tint' in a secular country("India’s biggest minority grows anxious about its future").'

A widely read newspaper clearly spell 'India’s biggest minority grows anxious about its future' and detail all the developments with specific examples. If there is change required in the presentation it can be suggested and this important development to be included for information of the readers. --Md iet (talk) 04:58, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

My edit summary said, Hardly encyclopaedic; it is just weasel wording, without any information; please discuss on the talk page. To explicate, supposedly "religious differences have increased". What differences? What increase? "Some laws"? What laws? Dig up the sources, provide the detail, and we can discuss it. The Economist is a newspaper. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. You need to know what you are talking about in order to write something here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:17, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

The Economist is 'a newspaper' a well circulated, authentic source of information and have potential to be quoted as reliable source of information. 'Wikipedia is an encyclopedia' containing material from authentic sources then how the matter taken from "The Economist" can be termed as Hardly encyclopedic".

Now to be specific let us see the details published in the source:

"In 2006 a hefty report detailed Muslims’ growing disadvantages. It found that very few army officers were Muslim; their share in the higher ranks of the police was “minuscule”. Muslims were in general poorer, more prone to sex discrimination and less literate than the general population (see chart). At postgraduate level in elite universities, Muslims were a scant 2% of students.

A decade later, with most of the committee’s recommendations quietly shelved, those numbers are unlikely to have improved. Indeed, since the landslide election win by the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in 2014, some gaps have widened. There are fewer Muslim ministers now in the national government—just two out of 75—than at any time since independence, even though the Muslim share of the population has grown.

India remains a secular country, yet some laws proposed by the BJP bear a disturbingly sectarian tint. One bill would allow immigrants from nearby countries who happen to be Hindu, Sikh, Christian or Buddhist to apply for citizenship, while specifically barring Muslims. Another would retroactively block any legal challenge to past seizures of property from people deemed Pakistani “enemies”, even if their descendants have nothing to do with Pakistan and are Indian citizens. Courts have repeatedly ruled in favor of such claimants—all of them Muslim—but their families could now be stripped of any rights in perpetuity." [10]

The above clearly answer "What differences? What increase? "Some laws"? What laws?".

This matter is presented with different wordings by me as follows:

'Since the major election win by the 'Hindu-nationalist' Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014, religious differences have increased. Muslim minority is more anxious about its future. Some laws proposed by the BJP seems to have 'sectarian tint' in a secular country.'

Now I request for scrutinizing the language if required and be presented in the article.--Md iet (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I have read The Economist article in full. There is no need to reproduce it here. The fact remains that the content you have added suffers from WP:WEASEL wording, which is not acceptable in an Encyclopedia.

• If the only "difference" that supposedly increased is the Muslim representation in the central Cabinet, that kind of thing is a systemic problem with any parliamentary democracy. If a liberal party gets elected, conservatives would be underrepresented and vice versa. In India, if a Yadav party or a Brahmin party gets elected, the other castes would be underrepresented. But the system also provides mechanisms for other communities to form coalitions and counter the sectarian parties. One might argue that Muslims had excessive power beyond their numbers during Congress regimes because they formed a key vote bank for Congress. But the point is that these facts don't represent discrimination or targeting of any community.
• The 2006 committee that the article fails to name is presumably the Sachar Committee. The article says its recommendations have been "shelved" whereas our article says they have been "implemented". You might want to research that.
• The question of "what laws" has not been answered. In fact, they are said to be bills, so presumably not passed yet. Unless and until they become laws, I don't think they belong in the article. If you can find what those bills are, and find sources that discuss them in more than depth than this wishy-washy article, please feel free to bring them up. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

We are not here to judge or discuss whether content is true or false but if it is published in reliable sources we can point out the same with NPOV. There are some other source pointing out similar stories:

-[11]; Increasing dominance of religion in citizenship laws

-[12]; citizenship-amendment-bill-2016-communally-motivated-activists-at-delhi-meeting

We editors may see the details further and discuss if the matter is representable.--Md iet (talk) 16:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I am glad that you found out which bill we are talking about. Now, please explain how this is relevant to this article. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Great, just read the headings of the articles published in reputed media sources:

• "Muslim ..more anxious about its future."
• "Increasing dominance of religion(Islam not included) in... citizenship laws."
• "Citizenship-amendment-bill-2016-communally(Islam not included)-motivated.."

Are these not related with Islam and with India? Now, will any one explain how this is not relevant to this article?-Md iet (talk) 04:10, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Newspapers are only reliable for news, not opinions. See WP:NEWSORG.

When a bill is introduced in the parliament, naturally it will be debated in the press as well as in the parliament. If you are interested in documenting such debates, please feel free to create an article on the bill. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "Islam in India".

If you genuinely care about the welfare of Muslims, you should be investigating the Sachar Committee recommendations, which were also alluded to in the Economist article. But it seems that you are more interested in taking political pot shots rather than anything of substance. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:51, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

If something is debated in the press on religion involving Islam and of India how it can be irrelevant of "Islam in India". We are not here to discuss welfare of any community.

Anyone else who feel the matter is not relevant may comment or suggest any scrutinizing required.--Md iet (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Regarding objection on wording of the matter and not generalizing the case we may scrutinize the matter making it more specific. It is clearly a matter affecting Islam in India. The section of the article specifically related with 'Law and politics'. The development pointed out in these sources comes under the category and needs to be reported in NPOV manner. The matter is also covered in the following reliable sources:

• [13]; A week of worrying about rising intolerance in India.
• [14]; India’s poor record on tolerance notwithstanding,..
• [15]; the-myth-of-intolerant-india,
• [16]; US concerned about ‘rising intolerance, violence’ in India

Editors may like to see the matter in details and suggest.- Md iet (talk) 04:59, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposed text

To make the matter more specific following is the suggested draft:

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 was proposed for the changes in the citizenship and immigration norms of the country by relaxing the requirements for Indian citizenship. The applicability of the amendments are debated in news as it is purely on religious lines (excluding Muslims)([17], Increasing dominance of religion in citizenship laws; [18], narendra-modi-wants-bangladeshi-hindus-in-sonowal-wants-muslims-out; [19], citizenship-amendment-bill-2016-communally-motivated-activists-at-delhi-meeting.)

India’s Constitution and Parliament have protected the rights of Muslims but there were news of record on tolerance 'notwithstanding'. There were 'fear' amongst minority and, 'targeting of dissenters'.([20], India’s poor record on tolerance notwithstanding, the long list of encroachments on freedom of expression, the climate of fear, and the systematic targeting of dissenters ..; [21], A week of worrying about rising intolerance in India; [22], the-myth-of-intolerant-india, India’s Constitution and Parliament have always protected the rights of minorities; [23], US concerned about ‘rising intolerance, violence’ in India)""

Suggestions if any invited.--Md iet (talk) 13:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for proposing text. It makes discussion a lot easier.

• The first paragraph is reasonable. However, "purely on religious lines" is not correct, even though the opinion column you have linked uses that wording. The note attached to the bill describes them as aforesaid minority communities from the aforesaid countries [24]. A minister has also said The principle is victimhood [25]. So, it is not "purely" on religious lines. There is a rationale, one that the Muslims of India can relate to. However, I agree that the exclusion of Muslims appears discriminatory. I would be satisfied if you cut out "purely" and just say "on religious lines".
• Your second paragraph is entirely confused. There is nothing called "tolerance notwithstanding". You just picked two random words that are next to each other and made a phrase out of them. The sentence in the source is saying "notwithstanding India's poor record on tolerance" and goes on from there. And, the example given by the source for this "poor record" is the banning of Satanic verses. Nobody in their sane mind would interpret the ban on Satanic verses as an attack on Islam. Quite the contrary. And, the "freedom of expression, the climate of fear, and the systematic targeting of dissenters" should very much include the hounding of Mushirul Hasan carried out by Indian Muslims [26]. In any case, you need to rethink this paragraph because it says nothing about Islam, which is the topic of this article. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:25, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Your suggestions are quite justified, let us redraft considering your views:

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 was proposed for the changes in the citizenship and immigration norms of the country by relaxing the requirements for Indian citizenship. The applicability of the amendments are debated in news as it is on religious lines (excluding Muslims)([27], Increasing dominance of religion in citizenship laws; [28], narendra-modi-wants-bangladeshi-hindus-in-sonowal-wants-muslims-out; [29], citizenship-amendment-bill-2016-communally-motivated-activists-at-delhi-meeting.)

India’s Constitution and Parliament have protected the rights of Muslims but there were news of record on tolerance amongst communities 'notwithstanding'. There were 'fear' amongst minority and, 'targeting of dissenters'.([30], India’s poor record on tolerance notwithstanding, the long list of encroachments on freedom of expression, the climate of fear, and the systematic targeting of dissenters ..; [31], A week of worrying about rising intolerance in India; [32], the-myth-of-intolerant-india, India’s Constitution and Parliament have always protected the rights of minorities; [33], US concerned about ‘rising intolerance, violence’ in India)"

Now I have deleted 'purely' from first paragraph. The first sentence of second paragraph is corrected as suggested and, taken out 'freedom of expression' word from second one as this is a general topic, not related with this article. There is no need of including Mushirul Hasan here now, as this is related with the freedom of expression. I think now the content is quite reasonable and directly related with minority Islam of India.

Further suggestions if any are welcome.-Md iet (talk) 03:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Here is my revised version of the second paragraph. The sources are clear about the role of the Narendra Modi government. So, we shouldn't brush it under the carpet.

India’s Constitution and Parliament have protected the rights of Muslims but, under the Narendra Modi government, there has been a growth in 'climate of fear' and 'targeting of dissenters', affecting the feelings of security among Indian Muslims.

Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for contribution, government can't be of individual, complete group/party is always behind it. Now here is latest revised version:

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 was proposed for the changes in the citizenship and immigration norms of the country by relaxing the requirements for Indian citizenship. The applicability of the amendments are debated in news as it is on religious lines (excluding Muslims)([34], Increasing dominance of religion in citizenship laws; [35], narendra-modi-wants-bangladeshi-hindus-in-sonowal-wants-muslims-out; [36], citizenship-amendment-bill-2016-communally-motivated-activists-at-delhi-meeting.)

India’s Constitution and Parliament have protected the rights of Muslims but, under the Bhartiya Janata Party, Narendra Modi government, there has been a growth in 'climate of fear' and 'targeting of dissenters', affecting the feelings of security and tolerance amongst Indian Muslims.([37], India’s poor record on tolerance notwithstanding, the long list of encroachments on freedom of expression, the climate of fear, and the systematic targeting of dissenters ..; [38], A week of worrying about rising intolerance in India; [39], the-myth-of-intolerant-india, India’s Constitution and Parliament have always protected the rights of minorities; [40], US concerned about ‘rising intolerance, violence’ in India)"

Hope these sentences fairly represent the matter and can be included in the article under 'Law and politics'.-Md iet (talk) 05:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2017

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 09:42, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Triple Talaq

Why is there no mention of Triple Talaq on this article? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:23, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Islam in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060622220846/http://jaihoon.com/watan/indarbmappilacommunity.htm to http://www.jaihoon.com/watan/indarbmappilacommunity.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060706220818/http://www.bahraintribune.com/ArticleDetail.asp?CategoryId=4&ArticleId=49332 to http://www.bahraintribune.com/ArticleDetail.asp?CategoryId=4&ArticleId=49332
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070514045222/http://www.censusindia.gov.in/ to http://www.censusindia.gov.in/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070514045222/http://www.censusindia.gov.in/ to http://www.censusindia.gov.in/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070514045222/http://www.censusindia.gov.in/ to http://www.censusindia.gov.in/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516075059/http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12109.html to http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12109.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070309080244/http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in/scientists/Abdulkalam/Abdulkalam.htm to http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in/scientists/Abdulkalam/Abdulkalam.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226131020/http://news.indiainfo.com/2005/05/11/1105godhra-rs.html to http://news.indiainfo.com/2005/05/11/1105godhra-rs.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/assam-violence-four-more-bodies-found-toll-rises-to-77/1038364.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080129233351/http://www.daijiworld.com/chan/achievers_view.asp?a_id=28 to http://www.daijiworld.com/chan/achievers_view.asp?a_id=28
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929125948/http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp?serv=pf&file=80201010&ct=0 to http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp?serv=pf&file=80201010&ct=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929132016/http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp to http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929125948/http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp?serv=pf&file=80201010&ct=0 to http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp?serv=pf&file=80201010&ct=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929132016/http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp to http://persian.packhum.org/persian/index.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:54, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Islam in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205180023/http://www.chaf.lib.latrobe.edu.au/dcd/page.php?title=&record=1512 to http://www.chaf.lib.latrobe.edu.au/dcd/page.php?title=&record=1512
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312061216/http://www.anti-caste.org/muslim_question/caste/bhatty_article.html to http://www.anti-caste.org/muslim_question/caste/bhatty_article.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312061216/http://www.anti-caste.org/muslim_question/caste/bhatty_article.html to http://www.anti-caste.org/muslim_question/caste/bhatty_article.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518201546/http://rajbhavan.maharashtra.gov.in/previous/latifbiodata.htm to http://rajbhavan.maharashtra.gov.in/previous/latifbiodata.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303215807/http://indianarmy.nic.in/PVC/photo_6.htm to http://indianarmy.nic.in/PVC/photo_6.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080517102331/http://www.flonnet.com/fl1608/16081210.htm to http://www.flonnet.com/fl1608/16081210.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070505143121/http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holnus/002200411132124.htm to http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holnus/002200411132124.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226131020/http://news.indiainfo.com/2005/05/11/1105godhra-rs.html to http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=46626
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121122532/http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/newdelhi/Muslim-leaders-back-cutting-Haj-subsidy/Article1-529806.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/newdelhi/Muslim-leaders-back-cutting-Haj-subsidy/Article1-529806.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:50, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Muslim sportsmen and women in India

Muslim sports men and women have appreciable contribution in the world of sports. In cricket Nawab of Patudi Mansoor Ali Khan, Muhammad Azharuddin have been prominent. In Tennis Sania Mirza is a big name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.65.201.36 (talk) 17:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Islam in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090207143141/http://travel.nytimes.com/travel/guides/asia/india/new-delhi/attraction-detail.html?vid=1154654624861 to http://travel.nytimes.com/travel/guides/asia/india/new-delhi/attraction-detail.html?vid=1154654624861
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205211800/http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/muslimperact/muslimpersonalact.htm to http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/muslimperact/muslimpersonalact.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

'...idolatrous and easy-going Arab'

To label pre- Islamic Arabs as idolatrous is subjective, partisan and pejorative, and so not up to Wiki standards. Recommend 'idolatrous' is deleted.

Oliver SB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ollo SB (talk • contribs) 14:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Islamic Traditions in South Asia

This section's content essentially duplicates the description of Sufism earlier under Denominations. Suggest deleting this section to remove the unwarranted redundancy.Sooku (talk) 08:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Missing citations

Can someone supply sources for:

• Ludden 2002
• Robb 2001
• Stein 1998
• Asher & Talbot 2008

please. If you need help formatting them, help is available. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

I guessed that the text and refs are copied from other Wikipedia articles, and so searched Wikipedia for "Ludden 2002", finding India#CITEREFLudden2002 (where all four are listed). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Locked for editing

In the lead, there is a sentence which reads, "Islam arrived in North India in the 12th century via the Turkic invasions and has since become a part of India's religious and cultural heritage, with the Delhi Sultanate, Mughal Empire, and Deccan Sultanates having ruled large parts of India". Please make it, "Arab and Turkic invasions" as it started with the Arabs. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:8100:2819:1B36:0:0:0:1 (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

"Turkic" seems an accurate summary of the body of the article: Umayyad invasions didn't make much headway; it was the Turkic Ghaznavids and their successors, the Ghurids, who were much more successful in invading India and formed the Sultanate of Delhi. Huon (talk) 00:47, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

First Mosque in India

The first Mosque/Masjid, "the Cheraman Juma Masjid" was built in Kerala by the companion of a Hindu king who visited Prophet Mohammed. The king died while he was returning after visiting the Prophet, and his wish to build a Masjid was accomplished by his companion. Techier31 (talk) 13:40, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Largest Muslim Populations Table

The percentage column on this table is flawed - it compares population to the total population of India, as opposed to the populations of the respective countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.51.109.72 (talk) 06:49, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Arabic and Persian architecture

There is no such thing as Islamic architecture since there is no notions of architecture in the scripts of Islam. The architecture built by Muslims in Alhambra in the west and Taji in the East are Arabian and Persian architecture/styles that predate Islam and has thus nothing to do with Islam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.68.199.166 (talk) 21:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Population

The population, source 1, comes from a 2015 source with 2015 numbers... The accurate number should be 204 million, that can be found here: https://www.indiaonlinepages.com/population/muslim-population-in-india.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.49.170.18 (talk) 15:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

The topic of persecution of Muslims in India

Looking at the different articles for minorities in different countries, especially South Asian countries, every minority has a topic of discrimination/persecution. This in conveniently lacking in this article. The article only links persecution of "muslims in general", not in India. Also no other minority religion in has "Relationship with non-muslims" part instead of discrimination; that list up history from Mughal era and partition, but no mention of contemporary status. The recent reforms from the Modi government last year that are generally agreed target specifically Muslims and the ensuing protests are not mentioned at all. Without these changes and updates, this article will considered as poor and biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.0.165.52 (talk) 13:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

en:Draft:Urdu feminist literature

Starting new article en:Draft:Urdu feminist literature. Please add relevant information with references.

Bookku (talk) 04:54, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Claim about data proving Muslim caste less rigid

Hi! In the section Interaction and Mobility, there is a passage which says "Data indicates that the castes among Muslims have never been as rigid as that among the Hindus". I'm aware of the citation, but has any external user(admin) examined the specific citation and concluded that the citation verifies the claim being made. I only ask because i'm noticing a trend of misleading statements being made in the past regarding comparison Hindu-Muslim practices. An example of this was on the Dowry system of India, where someone claimed that dowry practices are much more prevalent among Hindus and Sikhs, citing no objective evidence. There needs to be more monitoring of such claims as they are often created by certain religious communal groups(Not specific to any religion) that tend to preach hatred against other communities — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krao212 (talk • contribs) 05:39, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"Islamic Community of India" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Islamic Community of India. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 31#Islamic Community of India until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Widefox; talk 15:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2020

Change 225 million to 195 million, as stated in the article,I don't know where you got the 225 million number,it is mentioned nowhere https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/muslim-population-by-country Aritwik93 (talk) 15:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 22:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2020

The last sentence of the second paragraph in the lead says, "Islam arrived in North India in the 12th century via the Ghurids conquest and has since become a part of India's religious and cultural heritage." Please change it to, "Islam arrived in the Indian subcontinent in the 7th century when the Arabs conquered Sindh and later in North India in the 12th century via the Ghurids conquest and has since become a part of India's religious and cultural heritage."

References can be found at Arab Sind — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.99.216.242 (talk) 11:50, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

References for the above sentence can be found in the Islam in South Asia article also.

Someone please carry out the above request.

Multiple requests are unnecessary; only one open request is needed. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

331dot, nobody has carried out the request. What can be done next? I am new to Wikipedia.

You need to provide the references and position the citations in the proposed text (no one is going to go find them in other articles). --RegentsPark (comment) 17:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 18:51, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Translate to Spanish

Please--186.182.162.251 (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Regarding demography part

Census 2011, gaves India's Muslim population at 172 million constituting 14.2% of the country's population but however real Muslim population is estimated to be over 262 million or say about 22% of the country's population as because 90 million Muslims are not registered by the Indian census authority.. Plz change x (172 million Muslims 14.2% into) y (262 million Muslims 22%) in the description. 2409:4065:D89:B65A:15B6:CDCE:A59E:FA3A (talk) 07:09, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. We go by census numbers. Article is a guess at best. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

The end note describes the author as "Engineer, former visiting lecturer at NED Engineering College, industrialist, associated with petroleum/chemical industries for many years. Loves writing, and (in the opinion of most of those who know him), mentally unbalanced." Disgrace to The Express Tribune for printing such nonsense. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

References

Haj subsidy section

The article says "The government of India subsidises the cost of the airfare for Hajj pilgrims. All pilgrims travel on Air India. In compliance with Supreme Court of India and Allahabad High Court directions, the Government of India has proposed that, starting from 2011, the amount of government subsidy per person will be decreased and by 2017 will be ended completely". What's the current situation; can someone update please? Johnbod (talk) 04:12, 28 January 2021 (UTC)