Talk:Islam in India/Archive 3

Add this line to demographic section.
Controversy of Muslim population in India As per as 2011 census of India, it was found that 172.2 million Muslims we're living in India as it's citizens, constituting 14.2% of the country's population. As per as recent estimation of year (2020) Indian religious demography by Pew research center, it has been found that 213.34 million Muslims are living in India constituting 15.4% of the country's population. But however, at a same time, many individuals and experts have said that the Muslim population in India is more than the expected census results, leading to a heated debate and controversies as their claim of being that estimation as truth is still not known today. As per as Zakir Naik, he claimed that India has over 250-300 million Muslims. He also told that the government of India suppress real Muslim population. As per as author Shakir Lakhani, there should be at least 90 million Indian Muslims who have not been registered by the Indian authorities during last census. This means that in 2011, there were at least 22 Muslims out of every 100 Indians. There should have been about 262 million Muslims in 2011 census, instead of 172.2 million as reported by census authority earlier. 2409:4065:301:6A3F:CEFF:9D83:1639:763 (talk) 07:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:31, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not worth bothering about unless there is commentary by demographic specialists. Otherwise it is just a conspiracy theory. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, wikipedia articles summarize the best available mainstream sources. The opinion of teleevangelist Zakir Naik is not really relevant in this article. JimRenge (talk) 19:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2021
117.97.68.178 (talk) 18:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC) The percentage of muslim in india is about 39 percent
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:51, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

How many demographic tables do we need
The article only needs one table showing historical populations. It does not need two. It is also essential that the sources cited support the content.

Of the sources: -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:39, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Does have data, but not to the precision quoted in either of the tables.  For example:  1951: 303.5 Hindus (growth rate 27.36) 35.4 Muslims (growth rate -16.5).  Whether the data for 1901-1941 is for India as it was then, or for the present-day boundaries of India is not stated.
 * 2) Variation in Population since 1901 was produced by the 2001 Census of India, and contains total population figures for India from 1901 to 2001.  It does not split by religion.  Whether the data for 1901-1941 is for India as it was then, or for the present-day boundaries of India is not stated.
 * 3) Is exactly the same as [2]
 * 4) Is the Indian Census home page.  It does not support anything - citing it is rather like saying "there is a book in the library that has the data, but I do not know what the title is, or what page the information is on".  It is not a useful citation.

The above table is based on what the sources explicitly say. The Hindu article cited only supports 1951-2011. The IndiaSpend article cited supports 1901-2011. -- Toddy1 (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

According to Table B (which got the data from "Variation in Population since 1901" - 2001 Census of India, the population of India for 1941 was 318,660,580.
 * Was the population of India for 1941 for India as it was then, or for India as it is now?

According to the 1941 Census of India, the population was 388,997,955.

So it is plausible that the total population figures for India quoted above exclude present-day Pakistan and Bangladesh, and that in 1941, present-day Pakistan and Bangladesh had a population of 70,337,375. -- Toddy1 (talk) 18:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

People of banu asad clan in india
In coastal Karnataka, a group of Persian speaking Sunni Muslims from Iraq having Assadi surname arrived in Mangalore during the reign of Tipu Sultan. They claim their ancestry from Banu Assad. These population migrations may have been favoured by both the Nizam of Hyderabad and Tipu Sultan of Mysore Faisal Mangalore (talk) 23:01, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Not true at all..iraqis were not favored by my ancestors Tipu sultan nor any Muslims rulers people bit were looked at under suspicion as in the past Arabs tried to loot attempts to take away trading spots from local ethnic Indian people in other regions as they were known to steal especially after gold land which majority of iraqis after some years left India..they were allowed to stay set up to trade Indian made products to their nation as this was limits Arabs had in india..all syedd families were ethnic Indian who studied learned islam by earlier Muslims indian who studied converted to Islam under prophet Muhammad and his followers family members only and had no admixture. See India haplogroups and only western state of kerala mappala have little bit of J1 and that is due to Yemenis intermarriages with South West states Indian of oldest times.even today indian Muslims do not intermarriages with Arabs and did so rarely in the past. Tipu sultan my ancestor had no arab admixture at all however he and some mugal family member few did convert to Islam thru those who converted st time of prophet Muhammad. Bharatihist (talk) 09:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2021
Whoever changed wrote this page has commited major forgery placed lies..all the first three mosques in india were created built and initiated first by ethnic Indians converts. In gujurat there was a building that ethnic Indian Muslims and used however some Arab traders also came and used it..in Tamil Nadu and Cheraman is famously well known that ethnic keralates South Indians who were rajas priests witnessed splitting of the moon in india so they looked into old ancient Hindu scripts and went to Arabia to meet prophet Muhammad and they converted to Islam as they had planned since their particular scripts prophecies about splitting of moon and avatar descriptions exactly Muhammad..the now Muslims ethnic Indian keralites came back to india kerala Tamil Nadu and built their own mosque however it was not correctly made facing kiblah..Arabs had nothing to do with building any mosques nor commissions towards mosques..the thousands of Muslims were ethnic Indian..being convert to Islam is not mean to become an Arab however some changed their surname to Arab ones so they would no longer have duties positions in Hindu temples nor caste positions..none of Arabs who did come stayed..some few families in gujurat stayed for about ten to 15 at the most even fewer until 20 years as they did long term trade exported Indian products to Arabia particularly Yemen..marriage only happened when Arabs wanted to take back Indian women to Arabia..only Yemenis of ethnic Indian desert were welcomed to live move to or move back to india due to their heritage and longterm brotherly relationship with mainland Indian brothers..why are frauds people lying about my ethnic and ethnic religious community. Why are so many strange non sense untrue lies allowed here..Arabs did not live stay longterm in india except in small less populated parts of sindh only..the arabs were constantly driven out of India especially by Pratikgaras present day people of Punjab upper half of sindh and warrior castes of india both Hindu and Muslims as ethnic Indian majority did not trust people of Saudi Arabia to live stay in India..not even Muhammad bin Kassim and descendants did notexcept traders from Yemen who syay for long as ethnuc indian armies had warned them out. were well known and close to Indian Muslims converts. There were no mosques that were constructed by ethnic Arabs bit by ethnic Indians converts and not that many Arabs were staying in india except about 50 families all of whom returned to their middleeast homeland..Muslims Indian use horses as upto 30% of Muslims indians were Hindu Rajput khashatrias warrior horse riding warriors then converted to Muslims rajputs..most syed Ansari qureshi nearly all Muslims indian are unmixed never had any Arab admixture nor ancestry and genetics history proves so..Indian Muslims ethnic is a lot of indo Aryan Deccan ethnic background with some minor admixture with Yamnaya culture mongloid peoples of various backgrounds..some have Caucasus background and Yemenis as dawoodi bora do and not ethnic Persian nor Arabs such as Saudi Levant..only fairly recent admixture in some families clans in South Africa of India families had in recent decades married some families of Iran Levant only. It's not old ancestry however and limited to South Africa ethnic Indian Muslims. Tughluqs Islam architecture is of old vedic Aryan Deccan buddist dome arches ethnic Indian architecture and built by ethnic Muslims indians and Hindus..India gujurat combat was always great and beautiful and didn't become beautiful just due to indo Islamic called architecture. Ibn Battuta never said any such thing. How much do Arabs Persians lie to discredit Indian Muslims and all Indian due to jealous and forgery as their lies purpose is to lie take away achievements of ethnic Indian Muslims and all Hindus ethnic Christians and forge it as theirs ..we indian Muslims will no longer tolerate such blatant and fake written things anymore Bharatihist (talk) 09:30, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

True Muslim population in India
280 million Muslim population in India 2405:204:3106:A1CA:0:0:1FF0:60AC (talk) 04:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is based on what reliable sources say. There is also a problem that reliable sources sometimes publish flaky estimates based on assumed rates of growth.  It is more reliable to quote census data, and quote the date for that data. -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Muslim-Sikh conflict sub section needs editing
Under the section ‘conflict, and controversy’, in the subheading Muslim-Sikh conflict there is a brief paragraph at the end claiming there are tens of thousands of Muslims living with a ‘disguised identity’ as Sikhs in Punjab, India. The source states there are thousands of Muslims living in Punjab with a disguised identity, not tens of thousands as the article mentions. The source provided is also outdated as it is from 2001. Furthermore, there is no actual evidence mentioned anywhere which supports such a claim. It is based solely on hearsay as the source itself claims this was discovered through conversation. This information can be very misleading and biased as it does use verified statistical evidence. Anonymous userr2222 (talk) 17:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Quite right - worse still, the only source for this information was an uncorroborated single opinion piece, which is certainly suitable for sourcing such material. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Imar Subhani
“Umar Subhani, an industrialist and millionaire from Bombay, provided Mahatma Gandhi with Congress expenses and ultimately died for the cause of independence.”

He committed suicide as a result of financial ruin caused by British sanctions. The page does not gain from not saying the truth. 65.60.220.61 (talk) 22:01, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Map at the top of the page is unhelpful and misleading
At the top of the page is a map which shows the amount of Muslims in Indian states by population, not by percentage, making it appear that Uttar Pradesh has the largest proportion of Muslims by far, when this is not in fact the case. I'd suggest replacing it with the map later in the article which shows percentages by state, or the one which shows percentages by district. Agwic (talk) 19:19, 11 July 2022 (UTC) Both (1) population numbers and (2) percentage of state population numbers have advantages and disadvantages (see graphs above). The key points are that Uttar Pradesh is a state with very large numbers of Muslims, but J&K has the highest proportion of Muslims. -- Toddy1 (talk) 19:46, 11 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, both means of portrayal have value, perhaps in different places on the page. I would lean towards keeping the population at the top of the page though, since the raw numbers are the most instructive to the core subject, while the percentage figures are a form of analysis of the former, and are a means of illustrating secondary information, such as political import. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Agree with Toddy1 that percentage is the more relevant piece of information. States with larger population (and often also larger area) automatically becomes darker if just raw population numbers are illustrated. This is not really illuminating St.nerol (talk) 13:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

15/09/2022 Discussion on reverts.
Hello, JimRenge. This is regarding your reverts in the article. I am looking for a civil and polite conversation. Hope you will care for a fruitful interaction. Anand2202 (talk) 09:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)


 * There were 3 things - (1) Content addition with citations to reliable source - the edit mentioned about an Indologist who described about the Islam in India roughly 200 years ago. Link to the book, along with page number details and all other stuff required in the reference was given. Your revert points to WP:LEAD policy. May be you could suggest a more appropriate section where it will add value to the article? Anand2202 (talk) 09:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * (2) The content in the subsection Haj Subsidy actually belongs to previous subsection Muslims in government. Someone might have wrongly put it there. I just rectified the error in good faith. You see it fit for reverting? How? Kindly reconsider. Anand2202 (talk) 09:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * (3) The content under Haj Subsidy is outdated but written in present tense. Right away I could do the needful changes and expand the section! But since this is a "sensitive" topic, I don't want others to "get hurt" and jump in thereby creating an undesirable situation. I have put the template to give enough time for such sensitive editors (if any!) to make necessary changes. And I think your revert was a knee-jerk reaction. Please reconsider.
 * Even I can revert it in no time, but I am putting here more efforts to have a conversation in order to establish a meaningful dialogue and exchange of our differing views. Hoping to collaborate with a positive outcome. Thank you. Anand2202 (talk) 09:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello Anand2202, yes I reverted too much and corrected it . The problematic edit is, which adds:
 * "Back in 1831, noting his comparative observation on the Islam in India and in other nations, Professor of Indology M. Garcin de Tassy in his article "On Certain Peculiarities In The Mohammedanism Of India" wrote - "...tolerance has succeeded in mollifying Musulman fanaticism in India. Sunnites and Shyites do not exhibit there the mutual animosity which severs the Turks and the Persians; they commonly live upon good terms with each other, and even participate, with a very few exceptions, in the same religious festivals. Some musulmans are, in a manner, at once Shyites and Sunnites." cited to Garcin de Tassy (September 1831). The Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register for British and Foreign India, China, and Australia. London: Parbury, Allen, and Company. p. 353.
 * I reverted your edit because per WP:LEAD: the lead is a summary of the article text. The text you added is clearly not a summary of the article. I can not suggest a more appropriate section where it will add value to the article because I doubt that an article from 1831 is appropriate for this article. please see WP:OLDSOURCES for more info. Thanks JimRenge (talk) 10:04, 15 September 2022 (UTC) corr. JimRenge (talk) 10:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Dear @JimRenge, Your promptness is appreciated. I can understand your concern. You see, this article is semi-protected for a reason. As already highlighted, this topic has a potential to create unwanted rift among editors. I noticed certain things are lacking which would give the reader more enriched knowledge from this article. Given the present situation where things go out of control very quickly on the communal lines, I took a nuanced approach in addition of content to improve this article. I am doing some background work on the same and thought to start from the historic perspective of Islam in India. The earliest available manuscript that I got hold of is under discussion here. I guess you will agree with me that the edit under question can be moved to 3.7.1 Shia–Sunni relations. Now, this content cited from a book from 1831 is just the beginning of my planned future contributions. Rest assured you will be glad to see more value addition to this article. Have a good day! Anand2202 (talk) 10:33, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Population Map
The population map is dumb. Of course a state with a smaller population will have a smaller Muslim population than a state with a larger population. A map with population **densities** would be far more valuable. 2620:10D:C091:480:0:0:1:42C0 (talk) 21:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

update Muslim population of 2023.
it's almost 200 million Muslims in India in 2023 Iamsmfs1 (talk) 17:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia cannot have projections in its primary stats. Please provide source. Rasnaboy (talk) 05:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Dates of mosques
Some of the dates given for the earliest mosques in India are before the origin of Islam. I think sime fact checking is in order. 2600:1700:C830:8A0:312A:6E77:B3B4:2D8D (talk) 16:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Ladakh
A 2011 census shows that the population of ladakh is 46% Muslim,39% Buddhist and 12% hindu is it not considered majority a Muslim majority state ? 2A02:C7C:507D:0:80F5:9C55:2169:8614 (talk) 09:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2023 (population controversy)
Greetings I'm wondering why the whole section about "population controversy" has been taken out ?

If you look at religion in Bangladesh or Pakistan sections there are always "population controversy" subsections on how the Hindu population is supposedly under-estimated (multiplying the Hindu pop by 2 and even 3 quite casually), why can't we keep the same here ?

It was present just before "Denomination" section :


 * Controversy of Muslim population in India

As per the 2011 census of India, it was found that 172.2 million Muslims were living in India as its citizens, constituting 14.2% of the country's population. As per as recent estimation of year (2020) Indian religious demography by Pew research center, it has been found that 213.34 million Muslims are living in India constituting 15.4% of the country's population. But however, at a same time, many individuals and experts have said that the Muslim population in India is more than the expected census results, leading to a heated debate and controversies as their claim of being that estimation as truth is still not known today. As per as Zakir Naik, an Islamic preacher, he claimed that India has over 250-300 million Muslims. He also told that the government of India suppress real Muslim population. As per as author Shakir Lakhani, there should be at least 90 million Indian Muslims who have not been registered by the Indian authorities during last census. He have also said that there should have been about 262 million Muslims in 2011 census, instead of 172.2 million as reported by census authority earlier. In 2021, Congress MLA from Bhopal Arif Masood have also said, "The country's population is over 130 crores and the Muslim population stands at around 25 crores." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:a03f:6504:1700:882f:57cd:b1ad:af28 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I'll ping, the user who deleted the content several days ago, to see if consensus can be gained here one way or the other. Tollens (talk) 02:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It's a collection of random statements and speculations from a televangelist, some party politicians and an author. They are neither reliable sources nor due for inclusion and they have further been synthesized into a "controversy". If we are to follow policies and guidelines then it can't go in, in any form and if there are other articles where such a section has been built up then they need to be removed as well. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 09:22, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That was my first impression too. I don't see the article sections mentioned by IP in Islam in Bangladesh nor Islam in Pakistan either. I'll mark this as answered - if the IP editor would like to provide a reasoning why these sources are both reliable and do not constitute undue weight I'd be happy to take a look, but otherwise I agree with this reasoning for its removal. Tollens (talk) 20:45, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2023
norhern = northern 2603:8000:D300:D0F:C066:DFF9:D743:49D7 (talk) 02:54, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 04:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe the IP somehow spotted this spelling error and wanted it fixed. :) Abecedare (talk) 04:51, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Pew Research Center Survey
"Beliefs about God"

The research center (PEW) have clearly stated- "Nearly all Indians believe in God, with most saying they are absolutely certain in this belief" so it implies that it have taken an account of all Indians on their Religiosity status from all the sections of the society that includes Muslims as well.

It have clearly stated on the chart that 79% of Muslim population in India believes in God with absolute certainty, 12% believes in God with less certainty and 6% don't believe in God.

The source is reliable as per as Reliable sources.

The 2nd one talks about the Ex Muslims who were Muslims in the past in India but left Islam and this is also demographic part of Islam in India as they can't be counted as Muslims and should get reflected in demographic part. Reliable sources are provided for the 2nd as well but you are saying that it is irrelevant in this case.

How come it is irrelevant which talks about the demographic structure and religiousity status of Muslims in India & the aftermath ?

The sources provided for the 2nd sentences of EX-MUSLIM of Kerala are also Reliable as per wiki.

Then??? Pitush Puttar (talk) 06:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC)


 * There appear to be some pretty weird numbers coming out of Pew for India; one can't help but wonder if the challenge of accurately sampling a billion people might elude even this generally reliable pollster. At the same time, it's been a while since India has done any serious census work for itself, so there's little to stand against it. However, an ex-religious group is of course going to have a bias a mile wide and is unlikely to be providing quality, impartial information - just because they are reliably cited doesn't make their findings sound. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Your - "However, an ex-religious group is of course going to have a bias a mile wide and is unlikely to be providing quality, impartial information - just because they are reliably cited doesn't make their findings sound".
 * My reply: See that organization is a first ex muslim organization of India which have been launched in India by the Muslims of India who have left Islam to become atheists. It's important to mentioned that as a part and project of Islam in India because it's talking about the status of Islam among Muslim population of India and it's demographic consensus. Reliable sources are also provided for the same. Wikipedia demand Reliable source and those lines are at par with Reliable categories.
 * What are your views regarding this ? Pitush Puttar (talk) 04:22, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see the problem with including the Pew source on religiosity. The methodology seems to be sound, they have weighted each religion's responses and surveyed nearly 30,000 people. Additionally, Wikipedia commonly trusts Pew for many other religious statistics, so in my view it's safe to say that the results of this survey are reliable. To the point about the "odd" numbers, 3% seems to be a reasonable amount of Atheists in India; the higher number of 6% among Muslims could be attributed to adherence to Sufi sects that do not necessitate belief in God(though that is just my own speculation).
 * As for the ex-Muslims in Kerala, their websites are not being used to draw any statistical conclusions(where bias would be prominent), rather they're just being used to show that this demographic exists in general. Kerala definitely has a higher Atheist influence than the rest of India(see Dinkoism, for example), so I think it's worth mentioning the presence of this organization. I do think, however, that the sentence should be reworked to better fit with the paragraph, possibly by leaving out the bit about celebrating their "foundation day" every year, as that seems a bit like WP:Soapbox. Harshalrach (talk) 00:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC)