![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Ali callig.gif, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
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.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
I found the following fragments under section Prosecution "Militarily established and holding control over the Umayyad government". Xareen ( talk) 22:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no pictures of Imam Ali or Imam Hussein or Imam Reza shrines? You put picture of mecca, and bahrain shias but not Iraqi/Iranian Shia pictures?
Please fix this immediately,and put a Imam Reza picture up.
Iranians are credited very much for keeping the faith alive, as well as building these mosques, it is upmost importance and of respect to give credit where it is due.
Put the pictures up please.
And thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.105.24 ( talk) 06:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
no valid pic of them is available.
Srahmadi (
talk) 07:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Srahmadi (
talk •
contribs)
07:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
the section Origin of Shias is totally stupid it is fully written by anti shia'a where is the shia view about how shia was there from the day one of islam ??? -- 82.194.62.25 ( talk) 08:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Those who thus emphasize the political nature of Shi'ism are perhaps too eager to project the modern Western notion of the separation of church and state back into seventh century Arabian society, where such a notion would be not only foreign, but completely unintelligible. Such an approach also implies the spontaneous appearance of Shi'ism rather than its gradual emergence and development within Islamic society.
Can we please fix this? Xareen ( talk) 22:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
The western scholarship that only view Shi'ism as a political movement is factually incorrect. The concept of separation of church and state did not yet exist in the Muslim community, in the 6th century AD. S.H.M Jafri, the author of The Origin and Early Development of Shi'a Islam writes Those who thus emphasize the political nature of Shi'ism are perhaps too eager to project the modern Western notion of the separation of church and state back into seventh century Arabian society, where such a notion would be not only foreign, but completely unintelligible. Such an approach also implies the spontaneous appearance of Shi'ism rather than its gradual emergence and development within Islamic society.[66]
Xareen ( talk) 00:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I removed repetitive superfluous content. Pass a Method talk 18:10, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
The Revolutionary Shias] DECEMBER 22, 2011 The New York Review of Books by Malise Ruthven regarding Shi’ism: A Religion of Protest by Hamid Dabashi (Belknap Press/ Harvard University Press) 99.181.147.68 ( talk) 03:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
The Revolutionary Shias DECEMBER 22, 2011 The New York Review of Books by Malise Ruthven regarding Shi’ism: A Religion of Protest by Hamid Dabashi (Belknap Press/ Harvard University Press) 99.181.147.68 ( talk) 03:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Is there a reason why this section should be removed? It contains a reference to the meaning of the word Shia and an alternate spellings to the sect like Shiite. This section should be kept.
Shia in Arabic The word Shia (Classical Arabic: شيعة shīʻah /ˈʃiːʕa/) means follower[19] and is the short form of the historic phrase shīʻatu ʻAlī (شيعة علي /ˈʃiːʕatu ˈʕaliː/), meaning "followers of Ali", "faction of Ali", or "party of Ali".[1][3][4][5] The term has widely appeared in hadith and is repeated four times in the Quran;[2] for example verse 37:83[20] mentions Abraham as a Shia (follower) of Noah.[21] Shi'ite, Shiite, Shia, and Shiism are alternative terms.
The dialogue which has been entered into regarding User:MatthewVanitas' mass-reversion of my edits has taken place on his talk page. Irānshahr ( talk) 17:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I have voluntarily removed the edit which states that Shia Islam is the "second largest and the oldest denomination". Not because this is not fact, but until I have a reference to hand to accompany it. It has already been explained to Matthew that my adjustment of the figures in the table was nothing more than restoring the referenced figures which had been wrongly altered. His reaction here seems to have been nothing more than a kneejerk dislike at the idea that Shia Islam is the "oldest denomination" of Islam. If and when I have a reliable reference of this fact then I will re-insert it. Until then I've removed it to accomodate this user's fears. Irānshahr ( talk) 18:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
As I said, I will not re-insert a claim of being "the oldest denomination" unless it is accompanied by a reliable reference.
I wouldn't get your hopes up about there being a "body of editors" on this page, otherwise things like earlier tampering of figures wouldn't have gone unnoticed. In general this is a neglected article. As I earlier explained to you, the fact that Shia Islam began in Ali's lifetime is axiomatic and there is nothing whatsoever controversial about stating it. Shia means "faction [of Ali]". To quote the second line of this article:
"Shia" is the short form of the historic phrase Shīʻatu ʻAlī (شيعة علي), meaning "followers of Ali", "faction of Ali", or "party of Ali"
Stating that "Shia Islam began in Ali's lifetime" is no different to stating that "Christianity began in Jesus' lifetime". There is nothing at all controversial about the statement. If you know anything about Islamic history you'll know that there were "followers of Ali" (Shi'ah) during the reign of Abu Bakr (632-634). The suggestion of locking in figures within a template is a good one, I may do that later. Irānshahr ( talk) 03:14, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I submit that the article layout has become massively cluttered with all the templates jammed into the margins for each section. At this point, we have templates for "Shia Islam", "Islam", "Muhammad", "Twelvers", and "Ismailis" all lined up in a row down the right margin. Is there not some policy on WP saying that you should pick one primary template that applies to the whole article? I suggest that the "Shia Islam" template be used and the others removed to cut down on the clutter. MatthewVanitas ( talk) 18:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
It's written in poor English, badly laid out, repetitive, over-long and meandering & ignores WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. It's notable (in a bad way) that what should be 2 major subsidiary articles, Shi'a Islamic beliefs and practices & History of Shi'a Islam, are just stubs.
As a starting point I propose a revise simplified structure
Unless anyone objects I'm going to start applying WP:SUMMARYSTYLE to History. It's focus needs to change from "Shia empires" (although still to be referenced) to the history of its development as a religious movement (esp. the Branches). DeCausa ( talk) 06:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I've done a condense of the lede, trying to make it somewhat mirror in structure/length that of Sunni Islam. It just felt too much like it was trying to argue a case for the validity of Ali's successorship, rather than simply describe it. What we call the WP:Beware of tigers issue.
I condensed it, and so as not to lose cites moved the secondary-source material down to "Beliefs" below for now. I feel better about the current lede, though I do think it should have some extremely brief mention of history/demographics. Someone reading just the lede should come away with a general idea that Shia differ from Sunni, the key issue is Ali/imamate, and within Shia there are three main branches.
I welcome any comments on my changes as I go through them. I am following WP:BEBOLD so I will not at all resent it if someone raises an objection or wants to go back a few drafts and bring something back. I just ask that anyone reverting or copy-pasting old text up to the new version provide a clear edit summary and ideally post about it here, so that we can all understand why things should/not be changed. Glad to be talking this out! MatthewVanitas ( talk) 19:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
A few brainstorms:
I think this is going pretty well, though I'm standing by for some hostility when someone comes by and finds they don't like this version. MatthewVanitas ( talk) 20:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there any strong fatwa sent by Muslim scholars to recognize shia as Muslims? Are they considered Muslim by Muslims? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.148.251 ( talk) 16:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
The article currently states:
Hussein is the last imam following Ali whom all Shia sub-branches mutually recognise.<ref>Discovering Islam: making sense of Muslim history and society (2002) Akbar S. Ahmed</ref>
However, to my understanding the Twelvers, Zaydi, and Ismailis (both Nizari and Mustali) recognise Zayn al-Abidin as an imam. Is this quote referring some other extinct Shia sects, or small current sub-sects, which I'm overlooking? Or is it incorrect, and all Shia sects recognise Zayn al-Abidin as successor to Hussein? I know that the Zaydi split off after Zayn al-Abidin's death, following Zayd ibn Ali vice Muhammad al-Baqir of the Twelvers and Ismailis, but is there any group that split off even earlier than that, yet is still considered Shia? MatthewVanitas ( talk) 18:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
References
I've been reading several scholarly articles on Abatur and other Gnostic deities and frequently learn of a connection between them and Shiite extremists. Has anyone else located the same or similar information? Secondly, where should it be written? The portal is located here (for those unfamiliar):
![]() |
Twillisjr ( talk) 14:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
I have done a lot of research in this area and currently work in the University of London and have been through hundreds of books in the school of oriental and african studies SOAS library too. The SOAS library contains more books on this topic than almost any other library. Some of the books are also very old. When you go through the oldest books like Al-Muwatta you realise that there was no such thing as Sunnis and Shias at that time. There were highly educated people like Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq and Imam Malik. But there were no theological differences. Then when students of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq when to far away places they still all agreed on what was contained in the Quran but allowed the people in those areas to continue with some of their pre-islamic laws and traditions if they did not contractic with the Quran. Due to there not being good communications, their implementation of islamic laws was also not as standardised.
A good book to read is
N.J. Coulson - History of Islamic Law http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=d5Ks31qHlSYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=coulson+history+islamic+law&source=bl&ots=QVA59sVI8G&sig=stT7OrQHTIkIJ6mgK5-kQzT0gAg&hl=en&ei=durLTOa5KI_QjAe06rnYBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false
The concept of Sunni and Shia developed much later. These terms were developed to divide people so that the rulers could get people to fight their opponents. The Safavid dynasty did a lot in this regards. Safavid ruled Persia and the Persians were sufi as were the Ottomans and the two groups would not fight each other. So the Safavid implemented a policy of divide and rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnleeds1 ( talk • contribs) 00:42, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
Proposal for removing prefixes "Islamic views on xyz" | |
I have started a request move to remove the prefixes Attached with the Prophets in Islam to there Names as in Islam. Like Islamic views on Abraham → Ibrahim as it becomes difficult to search the topic. Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Page Thanks. -- Ibrahim ebi ( talk) 19:50, 14 December 2012 (UTC) |
The respect that Sunni Muslims show to ‘Ali and his descendants ("sayyids" in the East or "sharifs" in North Africa) is just one of several ways in which Shia Islam has influenced Sunni Islam. [1]
I removed this edit as it is inherently incorrect. The Fatimids were known as Syed through witnessed accounts (and later collated as Hadiths) which confirmed the Prophet Muhammad (saaw) referred to Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain (as) as Syeds. This respected title did not originate from Shia Islam, but from their ancestor Prophet Muhammad (saaw) corroborated by the Sahabis who witnessed this statement. These Hadiths stating this case are accepted by Sunnis, especially Sufis, therefore this is not exclusive to or originating from Shia'ism.
Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain (as)are two childs of Ali (as). syed means children of Hashim. the sentence you removed is correct. because prophet had no son and only one daughter and Ali (sa) married to the only daughter of prophet so all descendants of prophet are also descendants of Ali (as. you are right. this title (syed) is originated by prophet. and the removed sentence does not claim it is originated by shia'ism. the descendants of prophet all are through Ali (sa) Srahmadi ( talk) 08:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
```` according to the shia fiqh seyed is one who is descended from Hashem, grandfather of holy prophet Muhammad, and this title, seyed, has specific ahkam in shia fiqh. of course now time they are known as the children of holy prophet. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali.shakeri.1987 ( talk • contribs) 19:42, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
I note that this main article is spelled "Shia", but most other articles and categories are "Shi'a". This was more mixed-up about a year or two ago, with "Shia", "Shi'a" and "Shiite" being used with no standardisation. I talked to some folks then, got the green-light for "Shi'a", and changed some cats and pages to that spelling. However, whatever spelling we're going with, the main article for the whole cat should match up. So should we change this article's spelling, or are folks adamant enough about "Shi'a" as a spelling that we need to put in a mass WP:CFD to change several dozen categories to remove the apostrophe? MatthewVanitas ( talk) 13:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I have started a section discussing the Etymology of the words/term, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Shia_Islam#Etymology_section Please feel free to share your thoughts. Thanks. Xareen ( talk) 02:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
The table includes Bulgaria with the way too unprecise indication "~100 000" Shia muslims, whereas the correct number given in the article Islam in Bulgaria is only 21 610, which is also the number of Shia population in the official census of 2011: http://www.nsi.bg/EPDOCS/Census2011final.pdf. Since this is a very small percentage of the total muslim population of the world, as well of the particular country, I will remove it from the article. -- Kreuzkümmel ( talk) 18:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Upon reading the "Imamate" subsection of the "Beliefs" section, I found the majority of the content to revolve around the early history of Shi'ite Islam, not necessarily Shi'ite beliefs regarding the Imamate; that was only in the opening sentences of that subsection. The smaller sub-subsections of "Succession of Ali," "Ali's caliphate," "Hasan" and "Husayn" all seem to consists of history, with actual beliefs regarding them and the rest of the Prophet's family being contained in the "Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt" subsection. Furthermore, the "History" section of this article is rather small and jumps from Origin of Shia Islam to the Fatimid dynasty. Why not move the sub-subsections on Ali, Hasan and Husayn down into the history section? MezzoMezzo ( talk) 07:51, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Shīʻatul ʻAlī (شيعة العلي) is not correct -- neither in the transliteration nor in the Arabic. The name "ʻAlī" is already determined. So it is not correct to supply it with an article (the "l" after Shīʻatu).
It should be read: Shīʻatu ʻAlī (شيعة علي) -- (DMG would be šīʿatu ʿAlī) -- 132.187.111.19 ( talk) 07:17, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
The English transliteration Shi’i redirects to this page. The English transliteration Shi’a does not. Is this an oversight? Do the two spellings represent the same Arabic word? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.151.9 ( talk) 19:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
For the purpose of disambiguation, if the mithrab inscription at the Abbasid Ibn Tulun mosque is to be used as a reference, the shahada ought to read, 'Ali is the wali (intimate or friend or associate) of God'. There the Arabic text is quite clear 'علي ولي الله'. Other variants might be referenced. Comments please? Cpsoper ( talk) 21:24, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Note: Shah Ismail I was the architect of the clash between Sunni and Shia entities in the Middle East. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.12.32 ( talk) 17:33, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
An anon editor just changed the stats opening the article, upping the percentage of Muslims who are Shi'a from 15% to 25%. Is this right, or is the anon just engaging in primate chest-beating behavior? Where would I look to get religion stats? Zora 01:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Shiites do not constitute the 10-15% of total population in Turkey. They are very rare, maybe only Azeris exist as example of Shiites living in Turkey. This information must be false. According to USA religious report, 500.000 Shiites live in Turkey. To take into consideration that Turkey's population is approximately 75.000.000, Shiite population corresponds to 0.7% of the total population.
http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/religiousfreedom/index.htm#wrapper — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.55.180.186 ( talk) 15:18, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Thulfeqar changed the percentage from 62% to 82%. This is unbelievable. All the news sites I've been reading have quoted figures like 40% for percentage of the total Iraqi population. In fact, the whole para is badly laid out and confusing. Percentages of total population, or percentages of Muslims? We need a table, like the one I recommended for Sunni Islam. I should have fixed this when I did the last major edit, but, hey, I didn't. For the moment, I'm going to modify the para with a placeholder rather than just reverting. Zora 23:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
To Zora, um what’s the website for the Iraqi senses bureau? Oh I’m sorry, they don’t have one do they, as far as news agencies go, they are about as reliable as anything considering the fact that most of them get their foreign information from the AP.(IE there is no real research envolved) I don’t see why that’s such an unbelievable figure it is more or less correct, I should have changed it to 90%! But that’s not even the issue at had, if there are no reliable statistics, then I don’t believe that any should be posted. Thulfeqar 3:41 AM, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page has been modified and trashed beyond repair. I'll have to come back in a few months and start afresh.-- Zereshk 08:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
I really like this article and appreciate all the work, thanks guys!, but would it be possible to get another map? Some percentage of the Yemeni population is Shia but the key to the map covers Yemen up. Would it be possible to add a pie diagram showing the figures for Yemen? Lao Wai 15:52, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
This map (Image:Shiyemap.jpg ) is wrong, because western and northeastern parts of Iran are Kurds and Turkmens who are sunni muslims.
lol, Northeast Iran is Mashad, thats a Sunni part? But i agree, Its a incorrect map..Probably the most accurate one thus far though. Shia population from '87 to today has tripled due to a baby-boom after the Iran Iraq war and the numbers should definately have to be reviewed and accurately estimated without being undercounted. -- Paradoxic 11:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
something is off with the second map. it doesnt have the borders of Yemen (which would have been South yemen at the time.) It makes it seem as though that area is part of Saudi Arabia. Also isnt ther a significant Shia population in Yemen. It isnt shown on the map. Xerex 15:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The answers to your questions are all simple: (1) Yemeni borders: with regard to those, the map is very old, this is very obvious!! There has been a very long border dispute between the Yemenis and the Saudis which wasn't resolved until less than 5 years ago, I believe, which explains what you see. The borders are now demarcated and 'all is good'. (2) Yemeni Shia areas: the dark green doesn't mean that all the Yemeni ZAIDI Shia live there only, but it means that these are their areas of heavy concentration. It is, however, true and is well known to those specialized in the region that the former 'Northern Yemen' republic was of majority Zaidi Shia population, which explains what you see on the map. The "significant Shia population" you are talking about is above 40% and being so doesn't mean you have to see 40% of the Yemeni soil painted in dark green!!! Certain areas would have more people per squre kilometer than many vast lands!! There is no such rule, when it comes to drawing maps, to reflect the percentage a group of people comprise in the total population by means of colors on the country's map!!! I thought this was commonsense!!! SilkySword 06:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any Shia Muslims in the far east? From what I know, East Asian Muslims are all either Shafi (Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, southern Philippines, southern China) or Hanafi (northern China) Sunnis. Le Anh-Huy 02:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Yea, if I remember correct, Indonesia and Malaysia are 99% Ahlus Sunnah and China is like 95%. There is some Shi'a in the area, but a (Malay I think) brother on Myspace informed me that there was no Shi'a there. -- xx-Mohammad Mufti-xx 08:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
You'll be surprised that there are 2.5 millions Shias in Indonesia ( http://www.jalal-center.com/muktamar/2.html) Oleleho ( talk) 03:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Really 95% of China is sunni? A "brother" on myspace is being used as a source?! What a joke! Can we please keep the gullible jokers out of Wikipedia? How do you know he's a "brother" it could be anybody pretending to be a "brother" on the internet! Use some common sense "brother"! Wikipedia has an incredibly foolish amount of falsehoods about shias. Especially any page with demographics of any place in Pakistan. People who create those articles usually write about Pakistani shias as if they are from a different planet. Where in reality the term Pakistani Shias should tell you that they are from the same country as Pakistani Sunnis but just belong to a different sect of a religion.
This article mentions Shia Islam as being 15% and 85% of all of islam. Only one number can be correct. The first number is mentioned in the first paragraph. The second number is mentioned in the "Demographics" paragraph. This appears to have been corrected 216.119.176.54 11:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)Anders
This article mentions an incorrect percentage of 15-25% of all muslims which does not coincide with the facts stated on the sources provided. The initial source is cited from a page that says only 15% and also the cited reference for the sentence is not from a legititmate source but from a "forum" site. Also in the same page above it states 10-15% which are the factual numbers. Please correct this immediatly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viper112 ( talk • contribs) 07:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
The table shows Oman being 75% Shia but the map doesn't show anything! Zazaban 23:25, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
I like the Image:Shiite-1.jpg map but it's a pity as i see that it was removed by a bot because of its disputed status of fair use images. I believe it is more accurate than Image:Muslim distribution.jpg. I don't have Photoshop or an image software but if you have you can recreate it yourself. -- Szvest 10:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up ®
The article states that 15% of Muslims are Shi'a and then goes on to say that there are 400 million Shi'a Muslims. This would imply over 2 billion Muslim people in the world, which is not correct. I am suggest dropping the 400 million, as almost all sources agree with the 15% claim. Elijahmeeks 05:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
The Map is not correct. The provinces Gilan and Mazandaran are shown as Sunni, while they are Shi'a. Please replace the map with another one. Sohanaki 19:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
This articles states that Shia Muslims constitutes the majority in Yemen. According to the Islam in Yemen article, this is not true. What is the correct, then? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hamid-Masri ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC).
'the shia muslims is betwean 15 - 25 % of muslims and in bahrain there is 70 % of population are shia muslims and in India there is betwean 43 to 83 millions are shia muslims , shia muslims in saudi arabia betwean 20 - 30 % of population , kuwait:at least 35% are shia muslims. also the shia muslims are 16 - 20 % in United Arab Emirates , 18% in Qatar , at least 1% in Egypt , 35 - 40% in Lebanon , 16 - 20 % in Syria , 40 % of muslims in Ethiopia , 15 - 20% in Afghanistan , 20 - 37 % in Pakistan , 20 - 37 % in Turkey and there is a lot of Shia Muslims in other countries .If you want near right information go to the web site of The Congress Library' Ahmad_islam88 ( talk) 16:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Since there has been no census in Lebanon since 1932, it is pure speculation that Shia are the plurality of Muslims there. If someone has a good source, please bring it forward, but until then, wording needs to be changed. Hoshidoshi ( talk) 15:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
The intro states that there are 130-190 million Shiites worldwide, which constitute 10-15% of the Muslim world. In the demographics section it states that there are actually 190-250, making up 15-25% of the Muslim population. Both of these statements cite the same source and the source only says the first set of numbers with no mention of some estimates giving as high as the latter number. I'm changing it back to the 1st set of numbers until someone can cite another credible source supporting higher numbers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.177.72 ( talk) 18:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The current first pararaph reads,
“ | Shi'a Islam (Shī‘a Arabic: شيعة; šīʿa is collective; Shī‘i, šīʿi, is singular), is the second largest denomination of Islam, after Sunni Islam. Shi'a Muslims, though a minority in the Muslim world, constitute the majority of the populations in Iran, Azerbaijan, Bahrain and Iraq, as well as a plurality in Lebanon. They also constitute over 45% of the population in Yemen, over 35% of the population in Kuwait, 10-20% of the population (primarily Alevi) in Turkey, 20% of the population in Albania, 20% of the population in Pakistan and 15% of the Muslim population in India. There are an estimated 130 to 190 million Shi'a, 10-15% of the world's Muslim population. | ” |
It seems like way too much detail in the intro paragraph. I'd like to change to this,
“ | Shi'a Islam (Shī‘a Arabic: شيعة), is the second largest denomination of Islam, after Sunni Islam. Shi'a Muslims, though a minority in the Muslim world, constitute the majority of the populations in Iran, Azerbaijan, Bahrain and Iraq, as well as a plurality in Lebanon. | ” |
Thus deleting the extended etymology and extended demographics. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 04:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
No reason to remove the extended etymology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.187.53 ( talk) 16:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Provided reference (i.e. State, Nation and Ethnicity in Contemporary South Asia By Ishtiaq Ahmed) says,
“ | According to Demographic Reasearch Institute of Karachi University, Shias make upto 12-15 per cent of the Muslim population. Shias themselves claim to be more than 30 per cent, while Sunni sources put the Shias at only 6 per cent of the Muslim population (Qureshi, 1989:109). | ” |
Taking all percentages w.r.t. 2008 estimate of Pakistan's total population of 172,800,000; we have:
While different estimates for Shia population in Iran varies from 70%(Sunni Sources), 75-85%(Western Sources), 90%(Official Sources of Govt. of Iran).
Taking all percentages w.r.t. 2007 census data of Iran's total population of 70,472,846; we have:
It is clearly evident that even lower percentage(i.e. 70%) of Iran's Shia population will exceed (Iran's data is of 2007 census while Pakistan's data is of 2008 estimate) higher percentage(i.e. 30%) of Pakistan's Shia population.
So until anyone has claim of more than 30% for Pakistan's Shia popultion with verifiable references, please allow demographic data of this article to rest in peace. ;)
-- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi ( talk) 15:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Why is Yemen not listed in the demographic table? Best estimates say that 40-45% of Yemen is Zaidi Shi'a. Given that the population of Yemen is around 25 million, that means there are at least 10 million Shi'a in Yemen. Please add them to the table. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.130.148 ( talk) 05:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
It appears that that web site uses Wikipedia as its primary source (look at the note at the bottom of the page). We need to remove the information sourced to this web site and find reliable sources for Shia population statistics. -- Falastine fee Qalby ( talk) 22:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Yemen's large Shia population (ca. 10,000,000) is missing in the list. Tajik ( talk) 12:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Here are sources stating the number of Shi'a in Yemen. Please include these statistics in the article.
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,45a5199f2,45a5f8b22,488f180d1e,0.html
http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/cults/shia_population.htm
I have repeatedly try to highlight the fact that the actual estimated Shia Muslim Population of Pakistan is far more then the given lame facts by UNCHR or CIA FACTBOOK. I am a have now finally provided references supporting my claim of the fact that Shia's in Pakistan make up about 25% or above, out of the total Muslim Population of Pakistan. Let me be clear about this that though Muslim are about 97% of Pakistan in this regard we are only estimating the Muslim population and the sect's in Pakistan. Hence the Shia are estimated to be more then 30 million out of 160 million. In future i would provide further references supporting my claim. I would likely mention two links supporting this. 1) http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?id=3591 and 2) http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=106508§ionid=351020401---> the last paragraph.
According to the 2007 Pakistan Inter-Faith Society Dialogue in Karachi out of the total 100% of Muslims in Pakistan Shia Muslims are around 25-30%. Pakistan Bar-Council meeting with the Census Commission of Pakistan under the Interior Ministry repeated the fact that Shia Muslims were One-Third of Pakistan's population. And so it is acknowledged by many and also accepted by the Shia community of Pakistan. I came to know this through the Newspapers. <ref name="DAWN NEWS">
I would kindly request you all to stop changing the facts by relying on decades old facts from the CIA factbook and UNCHR. Kindly look for further independent references in this regard free from any political or religious pressures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paki90 ( talk • contribs) 22:56, 11 October 2009
All the sources stating the fact are based on either 1981 or 1998 census report. Hence these sources are correct though yet old, although rough independent estimates suggest they account for one quarter (15-20%) of the population. However, Shia Muslims claim to make up one-third of Pakistan’s population of 180 million, according the to current estimates the actual Shia population is more than 30% of Pakistan on this link, here and here, [2] since in the last census reports great number of Shia families publicly never exposed their Shia faith by practicing " Taqiyya", due to reason that they feared getting killed since during early 80s till 90s, the last two decades were bloody and the Shia's in Pakistan had to face mass execution by the hands of extremist Deobandi and Salafi organizations [3] [4], many Shia groups continue to practice Taqiyya since they fear death by the hands of Anti-Shia forces that use to dominate Pakistan at that time. There was a complete lawless situation, and yes no body talked about the genocide that the Shia had to suffer by the state sponsored extremists. Overwhelming results regarding Shia execution in Pakistan. Last year i attended a "Inter-Faith Religious Harmony Convention" at the Marriott Hotel in Karachi, the convention was presided by the Judges from the Supreme Court Bar council, Secretary of Interior, Secretary of Religious affairs and many notable Scholars. In the convention they all laid emphasis on co-existence and facts regarding the total sectarian division in Pakistan and stated this; "Around 65% of Total (To be precise) Pakistani Muslims are Sunni Muslims and there is a minority 30% Shi'a Shia Ithna 'ashariyah Muslims, while remaining 5% of the Muslim population comprises Salafis, Nizari, Sufi and Zikri. Then the secretary of religious affairs (Mr. Agha Sarwar Raza Qazilbash) [6] stated that Muslims are divided into following schools: the Barelvi 39%, Shia Ithna Asharia 25%, Deobandi 21%, Ahle Hadith or Salafi 5%, Ismaili 5%, Bohra 0.25%, and other smaller sects." Now lets talk about this division, The Barelvi, Deobandi, Ahle Hadith, Salafi are sub-sects of Sunni Islam, While Shia Ithna Asharia, Ismaili, Bohra are sub-sects of Shia Islam. Then everyone talked about various problems like religious freedom, sectarian hatred, etc while one of which was Taqiyya in practice, due to which the actual Shia estimates in Pakistan has always been uncertain and is certainly more then the mentioned 25%. I hope you understand Taqqiya then hopefully you'll understand my claim and what this is all about. SyedNaqvi90 ( talk) 16:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
The New Encyclopædia Britannica 1998, p. 17
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Hey, i accept your view, but what is wrong in mentioning both figures? We can mention it to be between 15% to 30%, hence satisfying both point of views. Would you please re-consider this? SyedNaqvi90 ( talk) 09:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I think we can enter two more columns to demographics data table i.e. minimum estimate/claim & maximum estimate/claim. To start with we can have blank values. Will be shortly expanding the idea/proposal. -- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 10:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, thanks alot brother. I have also added the Pakistan's maximum claim, by mathematically finding the figure out of the total Muslim population in Pakistan/percentage of Shias in Pakistan. Hence out of 173,000,000 the total Muslim Population of Pakistan, mathematically the 30% of the figure, which is actually 57,666,666. Even the 20% makes the total Shia population in Pakistan mathematically to be round about 43,250,000. Regards! SyedMANaqvi ( talk) 16:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello everyone, i have just changed the Shia variation in Pakistan from 10% - 15% to 10% - 30%, since the percentage variation should mention the minimum & maximum estimate, hence i edit this claim. I rather accept and respect the Pew Forum Research, but i have also mentioned the Shia communities claim regarding their actual size in Pakistan, with a reference. I hope you all would regard this justified. Though i haven't edited the the Shia population table since, it already has a maximum estimate claim. Regards! SyedMANaqvi ( talk) 17:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
The demographics of Iraq page, following Encyclopedia Britannica and the CIA World Fact Book, contradicts this assertion. How can we square this? 128.135.29.48 ( talk) 21:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Iranian-Americans are far more numerous in the United States than census data indicate, according to research by the Iranian Studies Group, an independent academic organization, at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The group estimates that the number of Iranian-Americans may haved topped 691,000 in 2004—more than twice the figure of 338,000 cited in the 2000 U.S. census.[5]
According to extrapolated 2000 U.S. Census data and other independent surveys done by Iranian-Americans themselves, there are an estimated 1-1.5 million Iranian-Americans living in the U.S. in 2009, with the largest concentration -- about 72,000 people -- being in Los Angeles.[13][14] For this reason, the L.A area with its Iranian American residents is sometimes referred to as "Tehrangeles" or "Irangeles" among Iranian-Americans.[15] An NPR report recently put the Iranian population of Beverly Hills as high as 20% of the total population. Iranian communities in the U.S. also have varying religious populations among each city. Other large communities include New York; New Jersey; Washington, D.C.; Seattle, Washington; and Houston, Texas.[16] Iranian-American organizations, including the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans and Iranian alliances across borders have banded together to form the 2010 Census Coalition, focusing on educating the Iranian-American diaspora about the 2010 Census.
How is it that, in the Shia demographics section, there are only 200-400 000 Shias living in USA. When there are clearly over million Iranian Shias living in the US. There are Jewish Iranians, Christians, Catholics, and Zoroastrians, but all of these pale in comparison to the overwhelmingly Shia majority of Iranians. In short the stats should reflect the number of Iranians living in the US and on the fact that most of them are Shiites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.132.95 ( talk) 01:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Please before editing or inserting any figure, kindly check whether it corresponds with the official and local view of the said country or not? For an Instance from Arab sources and Kuwaiti Media Shia population is between 35 - 40 percent of Kuwaiti Population. From renowned and neutral Non-Shia and Non-Muslim Indian sources India's Shia population is between 40-50 million as per 2005-2006 report, similar is case with Pakistan where Shias are between 25 to 33 percent[43-55 million]. CIA Factbook, PEW Research Centre are not authenticated by the officials of these country to be considered there findings of the local communities in the said country. In order to maintain the neutrality all sources should be taken into consideration. For more please refer articles Shia Islam in India and Shia Islam in Pakistan where you will get multiple sources both national and international to refute the 17-26 million figure from other sources.
Last but not the least Britannica Book of the year 1997 mentioned Indian Shia population over 26 million, that's 13 years ago and the source is third party similarly Pakistani Shias at that time where no less than 25 million so how come they are below that figure after 13 years there is no finding which says that birth rate of any community in these countries declined in past decade or more Humaliwalay ( talk) 05:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I am just giving a heads up to concerned editors about changes that I will be making later today regarding the statistics in the introduction about overall demographics of shia in relation to total Muslim population. I will be referencing the 2009 pew research that has been done. This study has been cited extensively by all major media outlets and is regarded as the latest most accurate estimate. I cannot post the link at the moment because my work place has blocked the pew site. However here is an article that references the study: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25434060
I will post a link sometime later today for the pew study. The paragraph in the wiki says that Shia make up 20-30% of Muslim population where in fact it is 10% or 13% at most. Mbcap ( talk) 11:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
There is a bit in the persecution section about Saddam Hussein's treatment of Shia Muslims. I have found this document that we could use to reference the statement as it lacks one at the moment. I do not know how to cite a pdf so was hoping someone would do it. The document is called 'SADDAM HUSSEIN:crimes and human rights abuses'. It was published by the Foreign and commonwealth office in 2002. The link is http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/02/uk_human_rights_dossier_on_iraq/pdf/iraq_human_rights.pdf
It is a questionable document in regards to its link with propagating the need for the war that subsequently followed so I am not sure if it would be appropriate to use it. If possible, maybe someone knows of a better source to use as reference. Mbcap ( talk) 19:32, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
I have added the citation needed tag to the following statement in the article:
According to Shia Muslims, one of the lingering problems in estimating Shia population is that unless Shia form a significant minority in a Muslim country, the entire population is often listed as Sunni.
Please could someone find a suitable source for this. I shall wait 48 hours before deletion. That is an arbitrary waiting period as I do not know what would be appropriate. If someone objects, could you tell me how it works normally. Mbcap ( talk) 20:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
'as a last source ' - should this be 'as a last resort'? Unclear to me, as a non-muslim. Regards to all.
Notreallydavid ( talk) 21:43, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I read in a book that Shia's are often called "Rejectionists". The book is "Fundamental Shi'te Beliefs" (downloaded from kalamullah.com). Is it a reliable source? A.A.Wasif | Talk 11:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is already a seperate article, linked at the bottom of this article, on rafidah which is the arabic for rejectionists and an insult used to refer to shia by Sunnis so it's already covered
@ Sa.vakilian and Mhhossein:The structure of the article needs to be changed.-- Salman mahdi ( talk) 07:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Shia Islam
No. Your structure is more suitable for Twelvers article. So this is my suggestion:
-- Seyyed( t- c) 15:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Sa.vakilian and Mhhossein: I think the table of the list of Imams is related to its own article and just its link is enough for this article. Salman mahdi ( talk) 07:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
This article states that Mohammed quite explicitly designed Ali as his successor. Someone should update this article to explain why 75% - 90% of Muslims, the Sunni, do not believe that Ali was the rightful heir to Mohammed as leader of Islam. This article just silently states as fact this successor designation, and does not say why the overwhelming majority of Islamic people do not believe that Ali was the rightful heir despite (??) this statement from Mohammed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.77.111.18 ( talk) 20:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
@
Sa.vakilian and others: Why does this sentence exist in the article: "Muhammad, before his death, designated Ali as his successor.
" Do you agree it should be removed or rephrased?--
Anders Feder (
talk)
02:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
This particular POV seems to have been first introduced by an anonymous editor
[7] and then, on a second occasion (in good faith), by
Faizhaider
[8]. If that continues, the involved editors should be blocked.--
Anders Feder (
talk)
03:14, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: External link in |chapterurl=
(
help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) (
help) asserts that Mohammed said something like "he of whom I am the patron ... Ali is also the patron", and that was interpreted as designation of Ali as his successor.The Shiʿites maintain that the Prophet designated ʿAlī as his successor by God’s command.[9]" For more explanation there is another article: Succession to Muhammad.-- Seyyed( t- c) 04:55, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
There are too much unrelated material in this article, please help to delete it.
5.116.141.161 (
talk)
14:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
@
Salman mahdi: Sorry, but this is an important article on Wikipedia and your edits are of very limited quality. Please read the
WP:MOS and don't dump incoherent stuff in the middle of the prose the article contained before. I took the liberty of reverting yours edits, but you can obviously still find them
here. Please don't make major changes to the structure of a high profile article without establishing some minimum of consensus beforehand. You can add reliably sourced parts back in a little more carefully, or we can discuss them if you wish. But keep in mind, the point is not to present Shia Muslims' beliefs, but to explain in ordinary English what reliable sources write about Shia Islam.--
Anders Feder (
talk)
20:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Massive amount of work is needed.-- 88.111.129.157 ( talk) 19:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Strivingsoul: Re: [10]. What is "integral to the author's characterizations of the subject" is completely irrelevant. The author of that source does not dictate Wikipedia policy - see WP:ONUS: "Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion". I don't really mind either way, but if anyone challenges the statement's neutrality, you won't have a case.-- Anders Feder ( talk) 07:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
That whole paragraph seems very WP:UNDUE, amongst other issues. There's no reason why the opinions of a single academic should have an entire paragraph dedicated to them in the lede of the article. Also, whilst the first sentence is clearly attributed as her opinion, the rest of it is presented as fact. Big claims require big evidence. While this clearly isn't suitable for the lede, I'm not exactly sure where else in the article to put it. So for the time being I'm removing the paragraph from the article until these problems are dealt with. Brustopher ( talk) 23:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm partially in agreement with Brustopher for he believes that there's no reason to have a whole paragraph dedicated to a single academic, but also I see no reason to not include major views in this regard in the lead. For this, I suggest Strivingsoul and Seyyed to support Dakae's view if they can find similar viewpoints from other academics (such as Corbin) and bring them some where in the body of the article. Then, we can simply dedicate a paragraph in the lead to major views. Mhhossein ( talk) 07:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Shia Islam. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
The section on Ismailis is titled "Ismaili ("Sevener")" leading one to believe that the two terms are interchangeable. However, the graphic captioned "Tree of the Shia Islam" suggests that Seveners are just one branch of Ismailism. Which is it? 74.71.78.145 ( talk) 00:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Shia Islam has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Where it says "...law Abu Bakr, not Ali ibn Abi Talib, was his proper successor." simply remove ", not Ali ibn Abi Talib,". it is confusing and unnecessary. Randydspence ( talk) 00:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
The claim, in an article titled "Shia Islam", that Shia is "non-islamic" seems false on its face. Surely, Shia Muslims identify themselves as part of Islam, so where does this notion that it's "non-islamic" come from? Situwannabe ( talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@ Faizhaider and Sa.vakilian:.I want to add some valuable information about shia history according to Corbin.You revert my edit and propose me other place. Can you tell me where I could palce it.Thanks. m,sharaf ( talk) 08:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
breif historyAccording to Henry Corbin, we can envisage four fundamental periods for the history of Shia. First period considers with the life of Imams. The period begins with the imamate or guardianship of Ali. He was one of near relative and treasure of mysteries of Prophet Muhammad. The first period lasted until the absence of twelfth Imam namely Muhammad Al mahdi in 329/940.However Koleini passed away exactly in the same year. [1]
- ^ Henry Corbin (1971). En Islam Iranien;Aspect spirituels et philosophiques. Vol. 1. p. 39.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Shia Islam. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.iis.ac.uk/home.asp?l=enWhen 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Shia Islam. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Shia Islam. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Shia Islam. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
I've just made several edits cleaning up mislinked or unlinked shortened footnote cites in this article. When I came to the cites of various editions of a work by Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī, I stopped. Refs should cite the page in the variation of the work which supports article assertions; if different variations of a work are used, they should be cited individually. I didn't want to do this, and I'm not sure it is appropriate in this case since, after checking here, I'm pretty sure that all these variations are page-for-page identical since they all have 253 pages. I'll leave it to others to clean this up. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:36, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
bears the caption:
This is too long a caption. I am planning on changing the caption to " Shah Ismail I" - which is what the pictures is. If you need to get the caption information into the text please consider doing it soon. Carptrash ( talk) 16:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
The inclusion of Alevism and the Alevis in Turkey to this article is highly problematic. Alevism is mostly a syncretic religion. It incorporates some elements of Shi'a such as the veneration of Ahl al-Bayt, but it includes significant elements of sufism, Christianity, Khurramiyah, and pre-Islamic Anatolian, Mesopotamian, and Central Asian cultures, as well. Some local versions in Turkey even include strong elements of animism (There are numerous examples of attributing sacredness to specific trees, plants, bodies of water, etc.). The creed, the rituals, and core beliefs of Alevism all differ from the mainstream Sunni and Shi'a versions of Islam. In Alevism, the compulsory practices of both Sunni and Shia Islam, such as daily prayers, pilgrimage (to Mecca or Shi'a ziyarat sites in Iraq and Iran) or the fasting during the month of Ramadan, are not observed. Unique religious ceremonies, such as Cem, are performed in local vernacular – mostly in Turkish – and open to both men and women. Music and dance are incorporated into religious rituals. Poets such as Pir Sultan Abdal, Fuzuli and Shah Ismail are recognized as saints and their poetry is venerated as sacred texts. The place of worship is not the mosque but rather the Cemevi (Cem house) where the Cem rite is conducted. Similarly, their fasting is unique. It is in the month of Muharram, and especially in the day of Ashura, despite the Shi'a hadith that specifically prohibits this act. The style of fasting is entirely different as well, to simulate the pain suffered by Hussein and his companions (especially to simulate their thirst), they do not drink a single drop of water in the day of Ashura and the twelve days preceding it. There are other additional conditions, as well. They do not consume meat, and do not engage in sexual intercourse during this fasting period (even after breaking fast at sunset). Most Shi'a mourning elements such as chest-beating, zanjir and tazieh are not part of Alevi mourning period in Muharram which shows that the rituals of these two belief systems were developed in entirely distinct environments and according to entirely different religious needs.
In summary, the rituals and belief system of Alevism is highly eclectic, and it radically differs from Orthodox Shi'a Islam. It can be examined as a synthesis of Twelver Shi'a elements, and pre-Islamic religions, customs, culture and traditions of the region but the Shi'a elements seem to be significant mostly on the surface level. In its essence, Alevism can be considered either as an entirely different religion or more probably as a distinct Anatolian philosophy, or a world view. Pigeonholing such a complex belief system as Shi'a does not seem correct to me. Including them in the Shi'a population of the world without mentioning these distinct characteristics does not seem fair or logical to me.
If I am correct the Druze is included here as a Shi'a sect, as well. That is highly debatable, as well. I hope that we can find some middle ground here, unless the inclusion of both of these groups to the Shi'a population of the world can give the impression as that someone is actively trying to inflate the numbers of the Shi'a population and can give the article a unscientific coloring.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.238.127 ( talk) 19:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
There are a significant amount of Shia in Russia mainly Azerbaijani migrants and some Dagestani people. The total number almost certainly exceeds 600 000 Shia people. Sources are here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B7%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B4%D0%B6%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%86%D1%8B_%D0%B2_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8 . Since these are official figures which tend to underestimate for bureaucratic and political reasons, many suggest that there are more than 1 000 000 people or even 2 000 000.
91.211.26.70 ( talk) 06:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC) a Moscovite
@ Ohnoitsjamie: As result of discussion between @ HyperGaruda: and me, material was moved to this article. Where is POV issue exactly as well as is not better try to remove the drawback rather remove it?! Saff V. ( talk) 07:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
I just did a minor copy edit but have qulams about possibly supporting incorrect material. Someone please check.
Given the importance / contentiousness of the subject, I probably won't do any more copy ed (my only contribs) on this page until it looks more robust. Jimmy Hers ( talk) 21:46, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Please rename the page from Shia Islam to Shia to avoid confusion to non muslim. Shia is not part of Islam because Shia is not Islam and Islam is not Shia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HarimauMalayaHM ( talk • contribs) 09:12, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 05:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
I contest the following passage,
They also have a complete knowledge of God's will. They are in possession of all knowledge brought by the angels to the prophets (nabi) and the messengers (rasul). Their knowledge encompasses the totality of all times. They thus act without fault in religious matters. [1]
It seems disingenous to rely on what one non-Shi'i westerner has written, to define key Shi'i beliefs with regards to the knowledge of the imams.
I suggest this passage is removed and that we use Shi'ite sources to source Shi'ite beliefs. ParthikS8 ( talk) 21:14, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I agree as it smacks in the face the fundamental tenets/basic principles of Islam. No creature, no matter how well endowed with knowledge or special attributes, can have such Absolute Knowledge --which is the confine attribute or distinct domain of God Alone. In my opinion, it is impossible to reconcile some Shia belief (like the above) with Islamic beliefs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WaleedAhmadAddas ( talk • contribs) 14:52, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
References
The first parentheses end with ‘sometimes spelled Shi'ite is also used in archaic English’. I tried to change it but the change was reversed. I will change it back unless there’s a reasonable counterargument to the following:
1. This is ungrammatical.
2. ‘Shiite’ is not archaic, but very common today, and in no way a slur or inappropriate. Someone behind the edit may think that any word from Arabic must be replaced by as close a transliteration of the Arabic as possible, but that doesn’t mean usage they don’t like is ‘archaic’ if many people use it. Nor is the Arabic word for ‘English’, ‘al-injliziya’, in any way archaic just because it differs from the source language. Harsimaja ( talk) 05:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
“Nor is the Arabic word for ‘English’, ‘al-injliziya’, in any way archaic just because it differs from the source language.”
1. Which is precisely the point. You say إنقليز when saying the word “English” in Arabic. Which is a direct Arabic transliteration of the word. Likewise it is more grammatically correct and proper to refer to a Shi’i individual as a Shi’i, and not a Shi’ite.
2. Forcing adjectives to be created in lieu of already existing (and more correct) adjectives is redundant an unnecessary. JasonMoore ( talk) 12:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Shia Islam has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Just want to correct some grammatical issues 39.32.34.61 ( talk) 06:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. After extended discussion, there is no support for the move. ( non-admin closure) Vpab15 ( talk) 20:16, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Shia Islam →
Shi'ism – Requesting page move based on
WP:COMMONNAME. According to
Google Ngram analysis
Google Ngram analysis, "Shi'ism" has significantly more usage among sources than "Shia Islam". Such article naming already has precedence in regards to religious sub-groups (e.g.
Protestantism,
Anglicanism and
Sufism).
(I'm seeing an issue with Ngram processing the request; just press enter in the search bar and it should work fine.)
Alivardi
(talk)
12:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
One has to be very careful attempting to demonstrate frequency when using Ngram searches. There are many pitfalls in constructing queries, and then in interpreting results. Certain queries are almost always an invalid comparison, such as comparing a unigram with a bigram (e.g., "Shiism :: Shia Islam". In particular,
this Ngram search (listed as "Google Ngram analysis) is invalid. The assumption here is, that "Shia Islam" is the alternative form of "Shiism" and so they may be directly compared. This is false. In fact, a regular web search for Shia Islam (unquoted) demonstrates that there are all sorts of variations, often (but not exclusively) with interpolated words, such as "branch of", "version of" and so on. So as a first approximation, you would have to find all of the most common synonyms, and sum their frequencies, and then compare that sum to the unigram Shiism. Ngrams does permit summation, but the number of items is limited by the size of the input field. Here is one such comparison of Shiism to a summation of Shia Islam plus as many of the top aliases matching the template Shia * of Islam
as I could fit in the input field (but not enough of them):
We can see that the line graphs are now much closer, with Shiism still in the lead but not as much as before. However, this comparison is *still* not valid; you would have to substitute in other keywords into the '*' field, if they contributed any significant amount of information to the query, but the input field is already maxed out in that one, and I wasn't able to add more. (You could do it with two or more queries, manually summing the results at the end, and creating your own curve.) And even this only deals with the 4-gram template, "Shia * of Islam", and not any other 4-gram models or trigrams.
There is another factor which makes the original query invalid. Shiism is a unigram, and my guess is that it would provide very high precision in searching for the topic, and moderate recall. I think Shia Islam would also provide high precision, but lower recall; for one thing, it would miss articles about Shia Islam which were titled differently, for example: 'Shia and Sunni Islam', 'Differences between Shia and Sunni Muslims', 'Shi'i | History & Beliefs', not to mention unigrams such as 'Shia | Definition of Shia by Merriam-Webster'.
There are other factors as well, but these two factors should be enough to point out that a great deal of care needs to be taken, when constructing Ngram (or web search) queries, and in interpreting the results. The numbers so far, shows the "Shiism" vs. "summation of a whole lotta 'Shia Islam' aliases" still in favor of "Shiism", but they are closer than before. It's possible that "Shiism" would still be the most common, in a perfectly constructed query, but I would say that we don't know that for sure yet, and more research is needed to determine that. My hunch is that they will turn out to be pretty close. Mathglot ( talk) 21:25, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
From what I can see in the " Shia * of Islam" queries that Mathglot had used (now with corrected spelling), the added wording variations actually contribute very little to the "Shia Islam" curve, something which becomes obvious when they are separated. Trying to substitute in more keywords doesn't make much of a difference; see this wildcard search for the top ten keywords, the sum of which (as seen by right-clicking on the line) is pretty tiny. Similar results are shown when using the alternative "Shia" spellings. [21] [22] Also note that the majority of the results don't actually refer specifically to the ideology so the actual result would be even smaller.
I've also tried searching for other variations of "Shia Islam", but nothing is coming up in meaningful enough numbers so as to show up on Ngram. Most of everything else that I'm finding doesn't actually refer to the ideology, but rather the people that follow it (à la the articles Mathglot had referenced: 'Differences between Shia and Sunni Muslims', 'Shi'i | History & Beliefs' and 'Shia | Definition of Shia by Merriam-Webster'). And after all that, "Shi'ism" is still returning nearly double the number of results. I therefore believe it's pretty clear that this is the more common name.
Alivardi
(talk)
14:30, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
What if the reason that "Shia Islam" is more common, is because people use Wikipedia's nomenclature, even if it may have been wrong all this time? You would have to look at results before this article started, i.e. 2004. -- HyperGaruda ( talk) 22:04, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Evidence of some previous moves can be seen here.
Hopefully this RM will lead to stability. Andrewa ( talk) 17:57, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Replying here to this edit as such discussion does not belong in the survey.
Shi'ite and related terms were unknown to most outside of Islam until the Iran hostage crisis of 1979, when suddenly the term Shi'ite was in the papers on a daily basis. It explicitly and unambiguously refers to a particular form of Islam and to its followers.
When I google Shi'ite I get more than two million ghits. Now that means nothing, as do raw Ngram figures (as discussed above). But it is easily interpreted by looking at the first few hits. Are they relevant? And they all seem to be. So now I Google Shi'ism. I get about 320,000 hits. There is no need to go further. Whether or not these are all relevant, Shi'ite is the winner by a significant margin. And this is as would be expected from the history above.
Another reason to avoid Shi'ism is that it's easily confused with schism, a related term. That would not be an overriding consideration but it makes it even less recognisable. Andrewa ( talk) 00:19, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
As currently written, isn't "Shia" functioning as an adjective to "Islam". Considering that "Shia" technically is a noun, should it not be written using the adjective form "Shi'i", i.e. Shi'i Islam? -- HyperGaruda ( talk) 08:49, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Negative, “Shi’a” refers to who (group), and Shi’i refers to a singular Shi’a. JasonMoore ( talk) 12:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Shiite is not only not necessary but simply incorrect as Shi’i is more correctly appropriate for referring to an adherent of Shia Islam, and Shia is the plural derivative. I.e “Shia Muslims” “Shi’i Muslim.” JasonMoore ( talk) 14:05, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Shia Islam has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Husayn is the last imam following Ali whom all Shiah sub-branches mutually recognize.[182] The Battle of Karbala is often cited as the definitive break between the Shia and Sunni sects of Islam, and is commemorated each year by Shiah Muslims on the Day of Ashura." to "Husayn is the last imam following Ali whom all Shia sub-branches mutually recognize.[182] The Battle of Karbala is often cited as the definitive break between the Shia and Sunni sects of Islam, and is commemorated each year by Shia Muslims on the Day of Ashura." LopingLeopard ( talk) 20:10, 3 December 2021 (UTC)