Template talk:Islamophobia/Archive 4

Stigmatizing labeling of media sites via template
This template is now is being misused to label certain web sites with the stigmatizing term of "islamophobia". I believe this hurts the credibility of Wikipedia and use of the unclear term of "islamophobia" should not be promoted by Wikipedia itself. The word can be misused by certain groups to label opponents performing legitimate criticism of islam. Now certain users can add any website to this stigmatizing template without discussion. User:Newslinger readded Document.no to this template, a small Norwegian conservative website, and added Breitbart too for good measure, without discussion or citing credible sources. --Bjarkan (talk) 06:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * As I stated on Talk:Document.no, the consensus of high-quality academic sources is that Document.no is an "Islamophobic" or "anti-Muslim" website. Sources below (emphasis added):


 * Unless you have comparable sources of similar quality that claim that Document.no is not Islamophobic, Document.no belongs in this template. —  Newslinger  talk   20:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Entries must be supported by the articles and sources
The 1993 Solingen arson attack does not mention Islam or Muslims. Per WP:V and WP:BIDI, each entry in this list must qualify by its relation to Islamophobia be explained in the article prose and cited to a reliable secondary source. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 02:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

My reasons for downsizing parts of this sidebar
Per my edit summary:

"major revision; general reorganizing; for the sake of not bloating the template, I've removed both the "Organizations" and "Riots and other violent incidents", since (unfortunately) if we counted all of them, we would be here all day, and it would be cumbersome to deal with in visual editing mode. more focus seems like the better option here" XTheBedrockX (talk) 02:10, 1 September 2023 (UTC)