Talk:Islam by country/Archive 2

South Asian
1/3rd of Muslims being South Asian is an exxageration. From the 1.8 billion data in 2015, about 500 million are South Asian, even fewer if you exclude northern/western parts of Pakistan that have historically not been considered part of South Asia. It is closer to 1/4th of the Muslim population. (27%)

Figures for Russia incorrect, should be 11.7%, not 6%. Sockerkorn (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Color coding for % of Muslims
I find the current color code scheme: red background for high percentage, yellow for low, white for none, to be possibly construed as alarmist, regarding Muslim populations as a threat, as if having a high percentage of Muslims is somehow dangerous or negative. I suggest changing it to a green scheme, by exchanging the "Red" and "Green" RGB values, i.e. color #XXYYZZ --> #YYXXZZ. A little experimentation showed me that it looks nice and readable after the change, still, before I actually make the change, I'd like to see if there are any objections, and to ask if the color codes are generated by a script, and where and how the change should be implemented. (I was thinking of running a regular expression on the text of the table itself) Cederal (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:03, 10 April 2013 (UTC) Done, using %s/#\(..\)\(..\)/#\2\1/g Cederal (talk) 11:40, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Be sure you check the changes after you do that, your template affected valid anchor links, like 'Country Name#Religion'. It does look nicer though. StasMalyga (talk) 13:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

That's like saying it's a good thing. I think it should be changed back to red. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.184.78.70 (talk) 07:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Anonymous passer-by: I noticed that too. Can't you guys use a neutral color? Like blue? Red looks like a threat, green looks like it is a good thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.13.98 (talk) 20:08, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Inaccurate
I am not a regular contributor, but I think this article is quite inaccurate. I just checked my own country (Ireland) and there is no mention of it in the second colmun source, number 21; "Muslims in Europe; Country Guide". I am removing the number from the table, as well as referencing number 20; "How many Muslims live in Austria?", which is the wrong country.

Moreover, having skimmed the Pew report, it gives estimates of the population per country. This is not made clear in the main article. I suggest that you rename the second column to "suggested ... population", or some such.

August 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.232.251.85 (talk) 00:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Other Inaccuracies
I am not a regular contributor either, but I was using this article as a source for an infographic. Not wanting to spend a great deal of time on it, I decided to just take a leap of faith that the numbers listed were accurate, but when I noticed that the percentage of Muslims (with respect to world Muslim population) was 1.8% for Ethiopia and 1.7% for Uzbekistan, I began to wonder because population listed for Ethiopia is 25,000,000 and 26,833,000 for Uzbekistan. At that point, I discovered a number of discrepancies. Not knowing whether or not there may be a good reason for this, I did not make any edits, but listed below are the discrepancies I found. Please keep in mind that I did not check the entire list; I only checked the figures for 2010.

Country | Pew Report | Wikipedia

Andorra | 1.1% | <.1%

Angola | 195,000 | 90,000

Argentina | 1,000,000 | 784,000

Armenia | 1,000 | <1,000

Bangladesh | 90.4% | 89.5%

Brazil | 204,000 | 35,000

Channel Islands | <1,000 | Not Included

Ethiopia | 28,721,000 | 25,000,000

(Republic of) Macedonia | 34.9% | 33.3%

Serbia | 280,000 | 228,000

Uganda | 4,060,000 | 3,700,000

Vatican City | <1,000 | 0

Vietnam | 160,000 | 63,146

Zambia | 59,000 | 15,000

Zimbabwe | 109,000 | 50,000

On top of that, I made another rather strange discovery. The figure for total number of Muslims, worldwide, is listed on the Wikipedia page, but not the Pew page. That isn't the strange part. I decided to tally the Pew numbers up, rounding the 55 countries with a listing of <1,000 up to 1,000. I was actually expecting the number to be larger than the one listed on the Wikipedia page, but it wasn't. If MS Excel calculated correctly, the total number is 1,610,470,000. Then, I did the same thing, replacing Pew numbers for those found on the Wikipedia page (for those countries where a discrepancy was found). This affected 10 countries. As you can see from the list above, in each instance, the number was significantly smaller. The total, after doing this, was 1,605,646,146.

Are these discrepancies intentional or inadvertent?

Emerald Evergreen 03:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisa Beck (talk • contribs)

Israel and sources for lists
I know that this subject might step on some toes, but I think it would be useful to separate Israel from the Palestinian territories on the population list. I'm not trying to make a political statement, but I am interested to know how many Muslims in 'actual' Israeli territory are Muslim versus how many in the Palestinian territories. Again, I'm not trying to suggest that they aren't the same country or anything, but I think other websites, such as the CIA Worldbook, makes a similar distinction for demographic and such issues. (Maybe Israel could have three entries, one for Israel, One for the P.T. and one as a whole, but this might be overkill).

I also had a question of sources for the figures. Do all the numbers for all the countries come from the same source? Are there multiple sources that cover various countries? As it stands, there are no listed sources for the figures presented and the table doesn't list a date any of the figures record. With the amount of immigration occurring around the world, sources even ten years old could prove grossly inaccurate.

I will look up some of the figures for population and see if I can't track down some sources. I'll also post a message on the relevant project pages since this seems to be the first comment on this talk. Peter Napkin Dance Party (talk) 06:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * While I am not sure which exact part you are asking about, if you are inquiring about the source for the List section of the article, the first sentence of the section states:

Figures indicated in the first three columns below are based on the demographic study by the Pew Research Center report of Mapping the Global Muslim Population
 * Specifically, the information is directly sourced and cited to the Pew Research Center's October 2009 report Mapping the Global Muslim Population. Other reliable, third-party, published sources -such as Statistics Norway and the CIA World Factbook- are listed, where applicable, in the final two columns of the table.


 * Also, the archive for this talk page may be accessed via the "Archive: 1" link up top, or you may use the search box to search the archive. — Kralizec! (talk) 17:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and added the Palestinian territories, as well as a couple of smaller nations and dependencies (Aruba, Isle of Man, Malta, etc.) that appear on the Pew report and CIA Factbook, but were not already on our list. — Kralizec! (talk) 18:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Globally?
How could we get the appropriate figure of the muslims populace globally ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.184.128.45 (talk) 12:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That figure is in the second sentence of the article: "according to a 2009 demographic study, Islam has 1.57 billion adherents, making up 23% of the world population" as per the Pew Research Center. — Kralizec! (talk) 13:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Please see this list by the Saudi Ministry of Hajj (also provides updated figures): http://www.hajinformation.com/main/d21.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.116.220.232 (talk) 09:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

= Inaccuracy islam is the worlds largest religion,about 2.9 billion people follow Islam Kuragin (talk) 13:00, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Good catch! It looks like an anonymous editor made the change  about four hours prior to your fix.  — Kralizec! (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The third column in the chart does not seem to be correct. For example, it says Muslims are 0.1 percent of Belize's population, numbering 1400. If it were one percent (1.0), it would imply Belize's population as 140,000. For 0.1, it implies Belize's population as 1,400,000. In fact, Belize has about 333,200, so 1400 Muslims would represent 0.42 percent, not 0.10 percent. I suggest, if the software allows, to align the table so that it uses a calculator for the third column, with the country's population figure cross referenced to the article on a country. GBC (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The third paragraph in the intro says parenthetically that Indonesia is the most populous Muslim nation but the table says India is. I think Indonesia is correct but I don't know for sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattmeskill (talk • contribs) 01:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Chart Won't Sort Properly
The column titled "Muslim percentage (%) of total population 2009 Pew Report" does not sort properly. Mattmeskill (talk) 20:21, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Islam in Italy
In Italy there are 1,293,000 million Muslim in the 2009!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.238.135 (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you source this to a reliable, published source? — Kralizec! (talk) 03:05, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

OK! Islam in ITALIA, is italian language! Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.239.2 (talk) 15:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Please!! control, is true the MUSLIM IN ITALY are 1,317,000! my name is Federico, vivo in Italia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.225.250 (talk) 15:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * the MUSLIM in ITALY are 1,300,000 in the 2010!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.238.68 (talk) 21:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * non cancelli!! i musulmani in italia sono 1,354,901! mentre quelli in francia sono 6,000,000. La prego di controllare meglio! grazie, e arrivederci. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.36.4.60 (talk) 01:19, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we understand that you feel there are more Muslims in Italy than are listed in this article. Can you source your claim to a reliable, published source? Please note that as per WP:SELF, other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as sources. — Kralizec! (talk) 01:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Broken Link #2
I found the working link to the broken link for reference #2 on the "Article" page, but I do not know how to change it. Here is the link: http://pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Orphan_Migrated_Content/Muslimpopulation.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.123.238.144 (talk) 08:46, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Palestine
In the list, Palestine appears to have a Muslim population of 98%. However, the Gaza Strip appears to have a Muslim population of over 99%, and the West Bank only 75%. The average of 98% could only be accurate if the Gaza population was many times the total population of the West Bank, which is not the case. Of course, the low number on the West Bank can be partly attributed to the Jewish settler population (17%), but even if we count them as Israelis, there is still 8% of non-Muslim Palestinians left, mostly Christians and Samaritans. The total number would depend on how we would count the settlers, but it would in any case be lower than 98%. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonlobach (talk • contribs) 16:29, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

they also put the muslim from israel in this line 46.116.114.18 (talk) 05:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Palestine is not a country. Why is it on the chart? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antifabricator (talk • contribs) 20:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Mistake needs to be corrected
The number for Vanuatu is incorrect. Although it might be hard for you to find population data on a small island in the south pacific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.15.31 (talk) 06:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

islam italy
The are 1,583,000 muslim live in italy, for 2011!! there are not 800,000 muslim in italy! please don' t cancel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.236.83 (talk) 20:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Kashmir
Kashmir is not shown as part of India on the map. Please fix it, or the image will be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indra1sen (talk • contribs) 19:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There is a clear consensus that the image is useful. I'm not sure how Kashmir is shown on other maps, but if you believe it is wrong on this map, try to fix it yourself then replace the image when you're done. Wiqi( 55 ) 20:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * If you do not know how to factually show correct international boundaries, you should not undo legit edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indra1sen (talk • contribs) 21:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

dont like how people want to represent islam here
they choose picture of mosques from non islamic countries on purpose to show some kind of dominance. look at christianity you dont see chruches in arabic countries in their articles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_by_country, though they are many christians in arabic countries like egypt or syria but no pictures of it why?? cuz its not usual in these countries, articles picture should show some usual examples and no propaganda or xenophobia.--Alibaba445 (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I would disagree. Showing pictures of mosques in non-Islamic countries informs the biased reader that Islam is not confined to a small amount of Arabic countries. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 08:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't the list itself do a far better job of that? These images are only tangentially related to the article topic and do little but detract attention from the list.  This article isn't List of Mosques, so the relevance of the photos are more likely to puzzle the reader than anything else.  Are we to draw some correlation between the grandeur of the mosque and the size of the population?  Why exactly are they being shown on what is already a crowded article page? -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 15:44, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course, but that's an argument to remove all the pictures. When I recently updated the page I had considered removing them all as they really don't add anything to the page, but I also know that that view is a small minority and they would have been reinserted very quickly. Also I was tired last night when I wrote this and forgot to leave Alibaba445 a link to Assume good faith as I really don't think anyone adding them was thinking of propaganda or being xenophobic. Anyway, I would argue that all the images should be removed because they add nothing to illustrate the article. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. They crowd the list and don't actually really illustrate what the list is about.   Alibaba445's suspicions may be unfounded, but it's a good indication that the reader is being left to guess a connection, and may be mislead. Images in lists (or along side lists) are problematic anyway.  They often get out of hand and interfere with the layout on the reader's browser. Using photos for decoration (as they are here) should never detract from the purpose of the article itself.  -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 12:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Color of Chad
The colors appear to be in descending order by percentage of the nation, but Chad is a different color, much darker than the ones above or below it, making it seem as if it should be changed. Am I right in thinking it is wrong, or do the colors mean something else? Thunderstone99 (talk) 19:55, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It was changed here. I noticed the other two but missed Chad. Fixed now. 00:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Islam in Argentina
I doubt the list is any reliable. This particular number is clearly wrong as most Middle-Eastern immigrants were Christians from Syria-Lebanon and some Christian Arabs. If you ever visit the country it'd become obvious that such a population would at least have a little more influence in the everyday life of a society of hardly forty million inhabitants (for instance, there aren't calls for prayer in the huge Mosque in Palermo and I'm not even sure if it's open for performing Salat) and therefore we Argentines would be quite more aware of the number. The estimation is excessive, to say the least, if we consider that not even half as many Bolivians live in Argentina -- a number that's easily acknowledged by anyone here. Missing that many Muslims doesn't make any sense at all.

Also, there's an "ongoing" (dead since 2007 or so but unconcluded nonetheless) discussion in the talk section of Islam in Argentina about this, so, we should consider another list or to take these numbers with a grain of salt. 190.172.97.247 (talk) 19:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Different estimates
I see some IPs trying to alter the data in the main (colored) column. This column lists Pew Research numbers; Whenever there are other, newer or more accurate estimates for a particular country, it will be good to have them, but in the two right columns instead ("Other sources"). StasMalyga (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The column specifically titled as "2010 Pew Report", it referenced in a title, the link in the reference shows a table where the middle column is for 2010. If the column is said to contain the data from the named source, it should contain the data from the named source, not other numbers from other place. That's the purpose of "Other Sources" columns - not "less significant" or "less accurate", but simply estimates that are not from 2010 Pew Research. It's not my preference, it's a common sense. StasMalyga (talk) 12:21, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Egypt
THere is something strange with the numbers for Egypt. According to the article "Egypt" has 82 million inhabitants. 83-90% are muslims which would be 68-74 million people, but in this list it says 80 million muslims. Clickenglish (talk) 06:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Different estimates. This article makes use of Pew Forum numbers, which says 94.7% and 80 million. The other article uses various/different sources. Both are good, as we can't be absolutely sure; but the list is much better if it uses a single survey for all countries, making it easier to compare, thus more informative. StasMalyga (talk) 03:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Glaring Conflict
Africa harbors the highest percentage of Muslims (52.39%)[8]

How can that be true if 1,005,507,000 of the 1,619,314,000 muslims in the world live in south east /east asia? tsk tsk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.63.86.11 (talk) 15:47, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect label
Second picture states percentage but it is numbers in millions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.91.75.153 (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Corrected Theothor32 (talk) 23:39, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Muslim per country
Hello everyone... I will complete this list in the next weeks. Peace 95.114.21.191 (talk) 06:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * What sources are you using? StasMalyga (talk) 20:26, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm researching firstly the english wikipedia and if needed then the web. I do this for each country step by step. Well, I am not finished yet, which means that the currently data can fixed..(it can also fixed after finishing) It's important that it will objective. However at so a big count, it doesn't change if 10 millions more or less, but I will try to give my best. Let's see what happen... 95.114.21.191 (talk) 23:07, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Two things to consider:
 * - Wikipedia on it's own is not a source, the numbers should be clearly linked to a reputable external estimate. As you can see in the current table, the colored column is sourced by Pew Research Report, in the other sources columns each estimate is sourced with a separate link.
 * - The current main column, while slightly outdated or not always accurate, is good because it relies upon a single source, which means a single set of methods in estimation and comparability.
 * I would advise you to hold with the compilation. Unless we have an analysis comparable to Pew Research for the main column, there is no sense in replacing it with disparate numbers. But you can always add alternative numbers to "other sources". StasMalyga (talk) 23:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not implicit plan to exchange this with the outdated report of Pew Research. My apprehension are that the population in Africa and Asia is heavily growing. And this continents are Home of largest Muslim populations. If possible I will help the Wikipedia to make it more transparent with sources. But let's see first what the result is. 95.114.21.191 (talk) 00:20, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * After I finished this objective. I will add single line for Christians and show you guys that number of Christians are cheated. For example the main Article says that 94.7% of Egypt are Muslims and the Article of "Christianity by country" says that 18% of Egypt are Christians, together that are 112.7%... I am not against Christians and Muslims. But let me finished this objective. Really I do this objective the Article says there are 80 Million Muslims in Egypt, but I show you guys here that its only 74Million. Well, peace. 06:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.3.104.7 (talk)

Sorting issue
Somalia should rank 12th with Turkey and Afghanistan needs a sorting number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loup Solitaire 81 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

What is this?
The following from the article does not seem to make a lot of sense, let alone have a source:

"Country with Islamic value[edit]

A study of 208 countries gave a surprising result that no one of Islamic countries applied Islamic value in the first 25 ranks. Most of Islamic countries used Islam just to control the countries."

I'm a bit reluctant to remove it in case someone is trying to say something important and relevant; perhaps an editor could re-write it in comprehensible English and add a source, or get rid of it.

StefanosPavlos (talk) 13:59, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I just got rid of it. It didn't make any sense and was unsourced. -- Local hero talk 14:14, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Discussion concerning content in this article
A discussion is taking place here which concerns some content of this article. Interested editors are invited to join the discussion. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:05, 14 June 2014 (UTC)Sockerkorn (talk) 20:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Pew map is clearly incorrect
The Pew Research Center map show the U.S. as between 7% - 15% Muslim, while the table in the article says 0.8%. Another page states the figure at 0.6%. There is no way that it's anywhere near 7%. TerrificBowler (talk) 03:56, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually not. The colour is for 1-7%. Please, compare it with the colour of Russia. --Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 09:46, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

POV removal
The following sentence in the opening paragraph seemed to smack of unnecessary POV (anti-Ahmadi sentiment):

“Ahmadis are about 1% as compared to Muslim population, and they are declared as non muslims.”

The Ahmadis see themselves as Muslims, but are subject to vicious persecution in some countries (e.g. Bangladesh and Pakistan). See, for example: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/06/15/breach-faith

In fact, there are many smaller denominations/sects/variants of Islam, and a significant number of Muslims who self-identify as “just a Muslim”, according to Pew. Consequently I have changed the offending sentence to:

“In addition there are a number of smaller Muslims sects and a significant number of Muslims who prefer to self-identify as “just a Muslim” rather than as members of any particular sect.” http://www.pewforum.org/2012/08/09/the-worlds-muslims-unity-and-diversity-1-religious-affiliation/#identity

Many Muslim sects seem to regard followers of other sects as heretics, but I don't think this page is the correct place for the implicit expression of such sentiments. StefanosPavlos (talk) 11:38, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I have removed the sentence "declared as non Muslims," as this is an article on "Islam by country", not on who considered who what. You may add number of non-denominational Muslims per WP:RS. --Peace world  11:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

This article is racist and meant as an intimidation tool.
Hi,

Countries like Iran, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia do not have an islamic population of over 90%. This statement is wrong on so many levels.

1. A big minority of people anywhere cannot believe in the supernatural and are therefor by default not religious. This is true everywhere. To believe that everyone living in those countries are uniformly muslim is racist. Please reconsider the numbers.

2. The number 1.6 Billion Muslims is a Bullying tactic to scare off any critique about Islam due to its huge number of followers.

Please change the article to reflect the correct number of Muslims in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.90.155.182 (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Islam by country. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081214054323/http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/31/3731-004.gif to http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/31/3731-004.gif
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120118130841/http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/Focus/religion/note_8.shtml to http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/Focus/religion/note_8.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Use of outdated information
For most countries, the table in this article gives one percentage number. Not so for countries in the EU, where the table gives two different numbers, often very different. One of these is clearly up to date, as it comes from this year (2016). The other one is a report on biotechnology from 2010. I can understand this latter report was used at some stage if no new data were available, but to use it now seems strange. We all know that Europe has received around a million immigrants, overwhelmingly Muslim, in 2015 alone, just as many came in previous years. The difference between 2010 and 2016 is not a difference between different estimates, it is a difference in time. We regularly update tables in Wikipedia when new information becomes available, we do not keep the old information alongside the new and I see no reason to do it here either. Jeppiz (talk) 10:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Quite apart from the above, the source says nothing of the kind. I looked at page 99 in the source where the data is claimed to be, and it doesn't even talk about Islam, it's a question of whether respondents approve of generative medicine. A word search of the entire document for Islam yields no result. Jeppiz (talk) 10:17, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Page 99 indeed makes no sense, but search for "muslim" instead: Page 384 shows how many people considered themselves to be muslims, e.g. only 2% of Germans. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 10:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) The source given for the higher number is from 2015, but it uses data from 2010, as it clearly states ("As of 2010, there were 4.8 million Muslims in Germany (5.8% of the country’s population) and 4.7 million Muslims in France (7.5%). ") So the two different numbers are actually from the same year, with neither including the 2015 immigrants. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 10:19, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that is most useful. Though that means that the data in the report on biotechnology shows how many people in the sample were Muslim per country, not necessarily how many Muslims there were per country. I'd be very hesitant to include it in either case, as the purpose of the study was to measure attitudes to biotechnology, not to measure the number/percentage of Muslims per country. To illustrate, the same table reports zero Jews in every country, and the authors of the report explicitly say that some demographic data can be quite far off. We need to remember the purpose of the study, which (again) was not to measure how many Muslims (or Jews, or Hindus, etc.) there are in European country but to sample attitudes to biotechnology. It was an error to ever include this source. Jeppiz (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I missed the discussion. But as it was already said, both data are from 2010. Both are poll or sample data. So why prefer one over the other? Let's rather look for more up to date data. Do you know any? --Nillurcheier (talk) 11:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Why prefer one over the other? Well, because one is a study on how many Muslims there are in European countries, one is a study on attitudes to biotechnology Nillurcheier, I'm assuming good faith and that you're just unfamiliar with academic research, but what you're doing here is not serious. A study on attitudes to biotechnology is designed to test attitudes to biotechnology, and the sample is selected according to that purpose. The authors of that study never had any intention to measure the number of Muslims in Europe and, crucially, they never make that claim. They report how many in their sample were Muslims, they don't say it's a measurement of Muslims of country. It's pure original research to use a study on attitudes to biotechnology to claim something that the authors of the study never claim. Jeppiz (talk) 12:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed the false claims once again, as it's pure original research. The source Nillurcheier insists on reinserting says nothing about the proportion of Muslims in different countries, it never makes that claim even indirectly. It's a scientific report on attitudes to biotechnology, which also reports how many of the respondents come from different countries and belong to different religions, but the authors never claim or even hint that this would be a measure of how many in each country belong to any given religion. That Nillurcheier keeps ignoring this and just reinserts the source, even with referring to the wrong page, looks purely disruptive. I have left a warning on Nillurcheier's talk page for the repeated OR violations, and will take it to ANI if the user continues in the same way. Jeppiz (talk) 15:01, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear Jeppiz cool down, it is about different data sources, not about the ultimate truth in counting Muslims. I did not add the Eurobarometer data, I only reverted your deletion. Eurobarometer data are used for years as sources in other pages as well. What should be wrong with them? BR Ulrich --Nillurcheier (talk) 15:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm completely cool, just a bit frustrated by your refusal to WP:HEAR. All you ask has been answered already in the discussion above, which you apparently did not yet bother to read. The authors of the report you cite never say how many Muslims there are in different countries, that's your personal synthesis, entirely unsuitable. Jeppiz (talk) 15:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * More than 260 pages are using Eurobarometer data: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&profile=default&fulltext=Search&search=eurobarometer&searchToken=4gbhwok07xb340uqeh7ti6onk --Nillurcheier (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There's nothing wrong with the Eurobarometer, the problem is with you making claims that the Eurobarometer never makes. That's original research. Jeppiz (talk) 15:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Islam by country. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2854.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:29, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Sweden
The figure for Sweden is from 2009, and needs to be updated. The amount of muslims in Sweden born in foreign countries alone is now 5,79% based on official data from the Swedish government: divided by the amount of muslims in those countries as per this list.

Add to that the amount of children born in Sweden to muslim parants and people converting the figure should be closer to 8,10% as of data based on November 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.140.52 (talk) 04:07, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

African-American Muslims are not a sect
What a strange claim to put into an article. Obviously African-American Muslims do not constitute a sect or anything of the sort. Probably most are Sunni, but some I've known were Shi‘i or Qadiyani or Tijani or Five Percenter, or any of many groupings. If the Nation of Islam is the sect that was intended, that may have been a hypercorrection from "Black Muslims" which was a nickname of the NoI decades ago. That nickname is not used much these days. It is to be changed to the proper name of the organization. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 07:47, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

World Total?
Is the World Total in the table, total of the numbers provided in the table or from the reference? I always thought it was from the reference because there is a reference next to the number. I think everything should be from the source as all the numbers are not up to date of what is going on on the ground and second we can make counting error. 45.116.232.0 (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I thought the table automatically tallies everything, so there's nothing to do. El_C 08:02, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * So why add it manually, second it is not programmed into the table. Then should the table also automatically tallies the region numbers too? 45.116.232.0 (talk) 08:05, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Good point. Best we stick with your total (from the ref), then. El_C 08:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Islam by country. 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/20110209094904/http://www.pewforum.org/The-Future-of-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx to http://features.pewforum.org/muslim-population/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120107191939/http://features.pewforum.org/global-christianity/total-population-percentage.php to http://features.pewforum.org/global-christianity/total-population-percentage.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110209094904/http://www.pewforum.org/The-Future-of-the-Global-Muslim-Population.aspx to http://features.pewforum.org/muslim-population/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312034628/http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=293 to http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=293
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bangladesh.gov.bd/www.bangladesh.gov.bd/index6517.html?q=bn%2F%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%82%E0%A6%B2%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A6%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%B6%E0%A6%95%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%9C%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8%E0%A7%81%E0%A6%A8
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081212024737/http://espino.ine.cl/cgibin/RpWebEngine.exe/PortalAction?&MODE=MAIN&BASE=CPCHL2KCOM&MAIN=WebServerMain.inl to http://espino.ine.cl/cgibin/RpWebEngine.exe/PortalAction?&MODE=MAIN&BASE=CPCHL2KCOM&MAIN=WebServerMain.inl
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140809051625/http://iwr.cass.cn/zjwh/201403/W020140303370398758556.pdf to http://iwr.cass.cn/zjwh/201403/W020140303370398758556.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160210140200/http://www.csa.gov.et/newcsaweb/images/documents/surveys/Population%20and%20Housing%20census/ETH-pop-2007/survey0/data/Doc/Reports/National_Statistical.pdf to http://www.csa.gov.et/newcsaweb/images/documents/surveys/Population%20and%20Housing%20census/ETH-pop-2007/survey0/data/Doc/Reports/National_Statistical.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160115132325/http://fowid.de/fileadmin/datenarchiv/Religionszugehoerigkeit/Religionszugehoerigkeit_Bevoelkerung_Deutschland_2014.pdf to http://fowid.de/fileadmin/datenarchiv/Religionszugehoerigkeit/Religionszugehoerigkeit_Bevoelkerung_Deutschland_2014.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722142449/http://www.eng.stat.kz/news/Pages/n1_12_11_10.aspx to http://www.eng.stat.kz/news/Pages/n1_12_11_10.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121202023700/http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_393_en.pdf to http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_393_en.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120605132439/http://www.sd.undp.org/sudan%20overview.htm to http://www.sd.undp.org/sudan%20overview.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131112150057/http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/nationprofiles/ to http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/nationprofiles/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130715084239/http://www.religiousintelligence.co.uk/ to http://www.religiousintelligence.co.uk/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Not in the source?
Please somebody confirm this statement in the intro which is not in the source. That....Southeast Asia contains the highest number of Muslims in the world, easily surpassing the Middle East and North Africa.

First the word Southeast Asia is not mentioned in the Pew source and the other source is not properly added. The word Asia-Pacific is mentioned in the source which includes East Asia for example, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China and Japan so it is not only Southeast Asia as it is much larger area.

I tried to remove this statement as it is not in the source but I was reverted not sure why? 65.95.136.96 (talk) 19:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Percentage of World Muslim Population doesn't add up to 100%
South Asia - 30.6% MENA - 22.9% Southeast/Eastasia - 15% Subsaharan Africa - 15% Central Asia - 3% Europe - 2.7% Americas - 0.3%

Adds up to 89.5%. Granted: Australia and Oceania is missing, so is Antarctica. But not enough to explain the difference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tp1024 (talk • contribs)


 * Very good point so the problem is we don't have a single comprehensive study source for Muslim population in the world. so we have to use different numbers from different sources with different dates and different names for the area included as populations. The best we can do is to find the most up to date numbers from reliable sources. I added up all the numbers from each region and added it to the table. I also updated the percentages so now it adds up to 94.9%.174.95.4.81 (talk) 18:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Islam by country. 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/20120317195234/http://www.galesburg.com/newsnow/x917961022/Sue-Hulett-U-S-should-focus-on-sanctions-against-Iran to http://www.galesburg.com/newsnow/x917961022/Sue-Hulett-U-S-should-focus-on-sanctions-against-Iran
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081214054323/http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/31/3731-004.gif to http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/31/3731-004.gif
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130618223858/http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/02016/images/map_of_religions.png to http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/02016/images/map_of_religions.png
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141114073838/http://www.instat.gov.al/media/177354/main_results__population_and_housing_census_2011.pdf to http://www.instat.gov.al/media/177354/main_results__population_and_housing_census_2011.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2854.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141223051211/http://www.taiwan.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=13332&ctNode=1937&mp=1001 to http://www.taiwan.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=13332&ctNode=1937&mp=1001
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131230234924/http://www.crescentrating.com/taiwan-city-guide-for-muslim-travelers/item/3308-halal-restaurants-food-in-taiwan.html to http://www.crescentrating.com/taiwan-city-guide-for-muslim-travelers/item/3308-halal-restaurants-food-in-taiwan.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:28, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Ethiopia's numbers are clearly wrong
Per Ethiopia's page, total population is 102 million, of which 34% are Musliim. This amounts to 34.7 million muslims, rather than the 65 million shown 195.23.32.141 (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Many changes by Arabeditor11786
You changed many data and I reverted. I want to explain why and propose how we can improve this table by cooparation: Some of your changes are simple updates based on an increased population -> no problem for me Other data are doubtful, since they are based on old, poor or rather selective sources. Two examples: you changed Kenya from 10 to 33% by using a newspaper from 2007 that said "roughly one third" neglecting eg census data from 2009 that say "11.7%" this is biased and should be avoided. Similarly, there is a long debate about egyptian copts, most sources say, they are around 10%. you selected one (PEW, btw a very reliable on) and set the value to 94.7%. In these and other similar cases, I propose to document a range (x - y %) and source the min and max value, given the source is reliable and sufficient recent (eg 2010+) Do you agree in this proposal? Any other comments or suggestions? BR --Nillurcheier (talk) 16:11, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * you are stressing my patience. Do not change census data! Please answer my proposal before continuing substituting high quality data by poor ones. --Nillurcheier (talk) 14:25, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Mayotte
I think Mayotte should be removed from the table. Mayotte is a usual first-level administrative country subdivision of France. It is something like Saratov Oblast in Russia. It is not a state. Let's remove Mayotte. 2001:470:1F07:421:0:0:0:EC5 (talk) 12:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus
Maybe we should separate Northern Cyprus from Republic of Cyprus into a separate table raw? They are both de-facto sovereign states and different jurisdictions. Also I suggest to use that table as a source of all "Islam by country" table raws. In that table, Northern Cyprus and Cyprus are different states and different raws. Moreover, that table automatically updates population of each table raw using a MediaWiki template, and this seems to be very convenient. 2001:470:1F07:421:0:0:0:EC5 (talk) 12:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No, officially it is a part of Cyprus and part of the EU. The mentioned list is not suited, since it counts Northern Cyprus population twice. We should keep countries and dependent territories without counting any twice. --Nillurcheier (talk) 14:06, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

2019 Edit - Glaring Flaws Noted
There are some glaring flaws I noticed with the current list that I am altering.

- Most countries where Muslims make up under 1% of the population cite only the CIA World Factbook, then when you go to that page, it has literally nothing on Islam. New sources are needed for this. Additionally, where censuses are used, they're more accurate than the CIA World Factbook which makes rough estimates. Pew Research is for the most part more accurate in its "Muslim Population by Country" article. - The percentages stay the same for most of the countries, but the population is from a few years ago (or just completely wrong, for whatever reason). The population is being updated as per the United Nations's 2019 data. - Some numbers weren't in any of the sources at all...

Please take up any issues here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maketrad (talk • contribs) 19:01, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I appreciate your activity. However changes have to follow these rules: No pseudoprecision, there are no exact population data. larger Countries should go by millions, smaller by 100.000. There are also no precise religious data. no percentages more precise than 1 decimal (5.6 not 5.62) Do not delate good sources (see Germany). If there is more than one qulified source, we have to report a range. Thanks! --Nillurcheier (talk) 15:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I also noticed this Maketrad, although what confuses me is that this chart has a lot of outright wrong data so I am failing to comprehend what exactly constitutes a "good source" if some of the numbers use no source listed at all. Also, some of the numbers use arguable sources that have no references for data used, lack sources/citations, so how exactly are they qualified and not WP:OR? I am definitely going to update this chart as it clearly needs it. I will create a talk page dedicated to updating the numbers, providing ranges based strictly on the sources, and criticize poorly sourced information. I agree that good sources should not be deleted, but bad sources should. ChaoticTexan (talk) 09:14, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I appriciate your activity. Some updates might be needed. There is no final answer to the question "what are good sources"?. My guess is, acceptable sources are, Census data, survey data (like PEW or Eurobarometer), CIA data (as fallback). Not qualified: Joshua project, similar muslim pages or other biased mssionary stuff. --Nillurcheier (talk) 09:45, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I respectfully disagree that there is no final answer to what constitutes a good source, as reliable sources and original research provides a decent framework for answering said question. With that being said, would you consider iNSAMER a reliable source? I'm looking over the information provided, but it seems as if it lacks any references, and just states data without any supporting evidence. The source itself seems to focus on "Humanitarian and Social Research" focusing on Muslim populations/topics, in addition to being located in Turkey. Which I understand these are not evidence the data is flawed, although it fails to support its own info along with having potential bias to skew data. For instance the World Fact Book says DR Congo is 1.3% Muslim, Pew Research says 1.4%, Global Religious Futures by Pew Research says 1.5%, iNSAMER says 10-15% are muslim which is significantly larger than the other sources, and it overstates people who follow indigenious religions. It does the same for other sourced countries. So would this not be considered original research? ChaoticTexan (talk) 10:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Table in Countries section
I've just removed Joshua Project sources from the table in the Countries section. It has long been the consensus that it is not a reliable source, including in WP:RSN discussions. But there is another issue with that table: unless we use one source, set at one date, for the entire table (such as a specific edition of the CIA World Factbook), we're likely to risk comparing apples with oranges, or at least misleading the reader into making that comparison. This article is of little interest to me but I think it would help if someone who was interested could make an effort to standardise the data in that section. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Updating Information by Country
This is a discussion page dedicated to updating numbers, providing ranges and discussing disputable sources for said data. This should help provide proposals before making edits (and to avoid edit warring). I will structure any information as the following:
 * Country:
 * Source as of year data was published: Percentage Muslim.

Helpful Sources/Links
 * The World Factbook
 * Eurobarometer — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChaoticTexan (talk • contribs) 11:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Pew Research: Muslim Population By Country
 * Pew Research: 5 facts about the Muslim population in Europe
 * any census data for countries
 * other reliable sources (please list) ChaoticTexan (talk) 09:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I propose that the 2010 Pew Research source gets replaced by the 2017 source if applicable to the country listed. A range of 7.8-11.1 would seem appropriate for Bulgaria.
 * Bulgaria
 * World Fact Book as of 2011: 7.8%
 * Pew Research as of 2017: 11.1%
 * Pew Research (Estimate) as of 2010: 13.4%
 * Listed on Wikipedia: 13.4% ChaoticTexan (talk) 10:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fully agreed, please add Eurobarometer and local surveys to the quality sources. World factbook is not my favourite since it is a secundary source without own research. --Nillurcheier (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * For arabic countries you can use Arab Barometer, they did a survey about religion last year but it's only about irreligion which complicate it because countries such as Egypt and the Middle East also have huge christian populations unlike Maghreb countries where christians are less than 1% of the population, but for maghreb countries it would be :

Tunisia : 99,8% -> 69,1%

Morocco: : 99% -> 87,3%

Algeria : 99% -> 84,6%

Libya : 97% -> 75,2%

Because the current numbers used are all pretty much outdated while Arab Barometer numbers are very recent (they come from 2019)

Arab Barometer

BBC also did an article about it -> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48703377

For arabic countries you can use Arab Barometer I think they did a study about Irreligion in the Arab world last year but it's only about Irreligion so it would be complicated for countries like Egypt or Lebanon who has a big christian population Aldo fitla (talk) 17:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I very much doubt the number for Arab Barometer. 69.1% in Tunisia is far too low for a relative religious country, I meant that’s on par with Western Europe. 92.23.223.37 (talk) 06:25, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I found a fairly comprehensive report to include. But i don't have time to don't have time to do much with it right now, so sharing incase someone else does. I'm not sure if it's already on here? www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2009/10/Muslimpopulation.pdf Irtapil (talk) 13:51, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Inaccuracies with Populations By Country
I am currently editing this document and I have some ideas for changes I am going to be making and would love feedback. It seems as if much of the data for population statistics are outdated and more recent sources for these statistics should be found. For instance, I noticed that South Korea's population of 35,000 did not seem to compare to any sources, so I updated it to the most recent statistics I could find (Pew Research). I was also planning on adding another section about predicted demographic changes in the future, as I think that would add a lot of substance to the article. Furthermore, it seems like a lot of the information in the summary could be in a section somewhere else in the document, and the second paragraph of the Denominations section has nothing to do with Islamic denominations. I would hope to make this article more accurate and credible, and would love to hear feedback.
 * If there are well sourced additional data, add them. Do not add any predictions or projections. this is glass ball data that should be avoided. Nillurcheier (talk) 21:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Much of the data stated on here is outdated, although some editors will revert even recent data (not projections). I did edits a while back on many countries whose information was either mistated or required an update with available present data such as from Pew Research Center, and it got reverted. I believe it was who reverted all of the valid more recent data as the current numbers to many countries on here predate updated numbers from the same sources. It was suggested that ranges should be used which makes little sense to me.


 * I agree that predictions/projections should not be added as they are pure hypotheticals/speculation. Although I highly recommend you post edit justifications on the update talk page which I made to justify changes and prevent users from disregarding them as irrelevant. In case valid data gets removed, you can then reference that article as evidence if a third party needa to get involved in a dispute.ChaoticTexan (talk) 16:57, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

corrected subregions which are majority Muslim
I've made an edit here to correct some errors in lists of subregions (Islam is not the majority religion in Asia, for example), and added a source for the Sahel. One conceivable issue: the text previously said Islam "dominated" these subregions—a vague and less-than-ideal term which I took to mean the subregions were majority-Muslim. But there are other possible metrics—i.e. that a majority of countries in those subregions are majority-Muslim (not necessarily a majority of the subregion's total population). I assume I got the intent correctly—but if not, do let me know. Thanks! Elle Kpyros (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Muslim population in the world 2022
Muslim population in the world 2022 MD Aasif Sheikh (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Mauritania isn't 100%
The pie chart and first paragraph in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Mauritania already clearly show that 149.20.252.132 (talk) 16:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Malay Archipelago
The intro of this article purports to list all 3 nations in the Malay archipelago that are not Muslim-majority, but it omits Papua New Guinea, which is part of the Malay Archipelago and overwhelmingly Christian. Maybe its designation in the archipelago could be disputed (even if the relevant article doesn't dispute it right now)? I know a lot of these geographical groupings can get subjective or debatable. But either way, as written, this is inconsistent. Ndiekemper (talk) 20:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Fair point. I've switched it to listing the three Muslim-majority countries rather than the exceptions, which sidesteps whether to include Papua New Guinea in the archipelago. NebY (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2023
Date for United Kingdom should be updated to 6.5% (census 2021). 77.131.35.152 (talk) 22:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Only the census results for England and Wales have been released so far, not results for the entire UK. NebY (talk) 22:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Lebanon haven't 67.3%of Muslim population . The number must be like 55 or 60 % . because Islam was minority before 1975.
Lebanon is 55%of Muslim not 67,3% 178.135.2.224 (talk) 23:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Western Sahara should be removed
Western Sahara should be removed because it is part of Morocco. It is administered by Morocco and the government there is Morocco. Western Sahara has no control and most of the population is Moroccan. Spain also declared that that region should be for Morocco. RidTheKid (talk) 13:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * not to be discussed here.Nillurcheier (talk) 16:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Iran
Iran Muslim population is not even over 90 2A02:C7C:507D:0:31:6A93:B69C:3483 (talk) 08:30, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2023
hello dear, please update the population of Muslims. it is no longer 1.9 billion it is more than 2 billion. Lavie Sherzad (talk) 14:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Actualcpscm (talk) 16:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Pakistan
According to the official 2023 Pakistani census, Pakistan has become the largest Muslim country in the world, surpassing Indonesia. Kindly add that info. EnchantedEdits (talk) 09:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)