Template talk:Islam in South Asia

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Islam This template is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles South Asia This template is within the scope of WikiProject South Asia, which aims to improve the quality and status of all South Asia-related articles. For more information, please visit the Project page.South AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject South AsiaTemplate:WikiProject South AsiaSouth Asia articles

This template was considered for deletion on 2013 August 17. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

I noticed that Barelvi and Deobandi are listed as organizations, which isn't accurate. Organizations such as Dawat e Islami and Tablighi Jamat adhere to Barelvism or Deobandism, which are broader ideological movements. With that in mind, I will move them up to the section for general ideologies, next to Wahhabism which is also a movement. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, Barelvi and Deobandi are ideologies. I have also removed Tablighi Jamat and Jamaat-e-Islami Hind which don't fall under Political Islam. I am not sure if Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan participates in politics like Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh. Buzzzman (talk) 16:17, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Hindu-Muslims conflicts/riots/violence and blasts in Hindu-dominated areas are WP:OR labelled as Islamism. So removing them, please add references here to prove they are thought to be acts of Islamism movements before adding. Thanks, --Benfold (talk) 05:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What order are the links displayed in? There's been a recent addition of a duplicate link and edit-warring over its removal, but it's not surprising given the wall of text of apparently randomly-arranged links. Could they be subdivided in some way or, failing that, put into A-Z order? Thanks. PamD 07:22, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that edit warring over the removal. That was my mistake. The editor was doing a string of questionable edits (including modifying a closed AfD and an RPF archive), there was no edit summary and in the clutter I didn't realise there was a duplicate link. Coming back to the point, some of the organisations are clearly based on one country, while others are pan-South Asia. How about a country based classification? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 07:53, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did a partial classification. Some of the organisation were hard to classify, so I just put in "Others". --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template name should move from Template:Islamism in South Asia to Template:Islam in South Asia because these all are related to Islam not Islamism. Some might be related to Islamism but majority of them are related to Islam. Hasan (talk) 04:38, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]