Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Traditionalist Islam


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was delete. Proto :: ►  00:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Traditionalist Islam


apparent fork of Sunni Islam ("sunni" literally means 'tradition', 'traditionalism' and 'Sunnism' are if anything used as synonyms only). no notable sources asserting its distinction from Sunni Islam (or its sub-distinction within Sunni Islam). seems to be a platform for advocacy that a certain brand is the proper claimant to Sunnism. Delete as needless POV-fork.  ITAQALLAH  16:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletions.    ITAQALLAH   16:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Sunni Islam perhapse? Otherwise Delete as fork. ---J.S  (T/C) 00:17, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete BhaiSaab talk 00:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - but I agree, it needs work. See the article discussion page. THis is an important concept for Islam in Indonesia. Perhaps the term is used differently there compared to this article. For Indonesia the distinction between "Traditionalist" and "Modernist" is not a Sunni vs. 'other' disticntion, but applies to Sunnis - there are traditionalist sunnis and modernist. THe article does discuss features of Indonesian traditionalism (eg the mysticism) that is not part of more "orthodox" modernism. Traditionalism refers to the syncretic fushion on of beliefs that are still common across Indonesia - modernism on the other hand refers to the change towards more  orthodox, non syncretic and non mythical Islam. The word traditional in INdonesia's case also refers to its blending with traditional Indonesian (and particularly Javanese) traditions from long before Islam's arrival in Indonesia. This map might help. Note that it only shows religious majorities for an area, also, the light green may seem small in area, but there are 120m people on Java. [[Image:Map Indonesian religions.jpg|150px|right|thumb|Indonesia religions map]]  --Merbabu 02:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: if it is a verifiable feature associated with Indonesia, it probably belongs in Islam in Indonesia. if there are traditionalist/modernist Sunnis then it belongs under Sunni Islam. there are however, no sources for either of these two claims (so seemingly fails WP:V and WP:OR). currently, the page seems to be a replica of Sunni Islam but with some major neutrality and factual accuracy concerns as highlighted above.  ITAQALLAH   02:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * as for the image provided, "traditional" is being used as a synonym for Sunni it seems.  ITAQALLAH   03:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment re merge, that might be one way. As for sources, I can try to find some - my Lonely Planet talks a bit about it but that's unlikely to satsify people! The map itself which makes the modernist/traditioanlist distinction is from the United Nations Development Programme in Indonesia - http://www.undp.or.id/.--Merbabu 03:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No - that map does not show a Sunni/Shia distribution. The link you provided suggests that Shia's predominate in the Aceh province - right up the top of Sumatra island. it also specifically says that Shia's number around 1 million (Indonesian's total Muslim population is around 200m!). That map shows a whole lot more of Indonesia as dark green than just relatively small Aceh.--Merbabu 03:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * i had another look... i think the traditional/modernist complex may be what makes up Sunni Islam (Sunnis constitute 98% of the demography) in Indonesia. still i don't believe it should remain outside of Sunni Islam and Islam in Indonesia. the article Traditionalist Islam says absolutely nothing about Indonesia or the distinctions you are making, it is an OR piece about Sunni subsect A vs. Islamists vs. Salafis. i think it is a needless POV fork.  ITAQALLAH   03:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * hhhmmm - well OK. While my vote is still keep (and improve - ie, apparent inaccuracies) because in Indonesia it is an important distinction, I don't have the knowledge to buy into the broader issue outside of Indonesia. It does make me want to develop the coverage in the Indonesian context. We all have to chose our "battles" carefully!!
 * Just as a very general comment on the POV aspects, as long as ideas are expressed to be a POV, and not said to be fact, then isn't it OK? Ie, by clearly presenting POV as a POV allows wikipedia to have Islam, Hinduism, Christianity. regards --Merbabu 03:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment/Question - is Indonesia, and particularly Java the only place to have such a syncretic, mystical version of Islam? Although my knowledge of Islam is based on my (considerable) knowledge of Indonesia, I suspect it is not the only place to have such a version of Islam.--Merbabu 02:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Traditionalist Islam that is discussed in this article is different from NU-style Islam in Java. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 08:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Syncretic forms of Islam are relatively common in parts of West Africa. This was more true before the jihadist (name historians used, I don't meant it as an insult) states of Usman dan Fodio and Al-Hajj Umar Tall. Still even today "syncretic mystical" versions of Islam are relatively common in West Africa. In the context of West Africa "traditional Islam" is sometimes used to mean these syncretic, critics call them "half-pagan", forms of Sunni Islam. These are seen as having a tension with more strictly Qur'anic, not necessarily Salafist, forms of Islam that began rising in the region in the last 150 years or so. This article, however, appears to having nothing to do with that.--T. Anthony 13:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I'm not sure of what specific evidence there may be that this is a POV fork from Sunni Islam, but I fail to see it and the nominator has provided none. The concept of traditionalist Islam, as defined rather clearly in the article, is obviously different from Sunni Islam: the term "Sunni Islam" embraces a quite heterogeneous group and it is possible to be Sunni (in the sense of "non-Shia Muslim") and yet "non-traditionalist", just as it is possible to be Roman Catholic and "non-traditionalist". Allon Fambrizzi 06:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
 * Also, the concerns about Indonesia have been taken out of context. The same issue Merbabu spots in Indonesia is true throughout the world: there are both "modernist" and "traditionalist" Sunnis. Allon Fambrizzi 08:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
 * Comment: if we accept for a moment the notion that there are "traditionalist" Sunnis and "modernist" Sunnis, in what way do they not belong as subsections under Sunni Islam? there has been no verifiable evidence provided as to how traditionalism differs from Sunnism, or whether it is a subsect of Sunnism. it's inappropriate to request disproving its (sub)distinction, as that is requesting negative proof. we need to see evidence that explains traditionalism in distinction from Sunnism. the main problem i see is that of verifiability. in fact, the article is about Sunni group A and ascribing that group alone to Sunnism to the exclusion of others.  ITAQALLAH   16:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, are you really saying there aren't in fact modernist Sunnis? Just asking because you may know more about this than me. Allon Fambrizzi 21:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
 * The group described in the article are known as traditionalists because they believe in the continuity of the prevailing religious institutions, namely, maddhabs, the ijazah system, the madrasah/dars-e-nizami system ,etc. And most notably, the authority of their leaders is legitimized primarily by tradition (in the Weberian sense. To call them traditionalists is not tantamount calling them the "true Sunnis"... it just means that they view Islam (and life, for that matter) through this traditionalist paradigm. Now, if this terminology is contested, then it can be explained in the article, rather than pretending this divide between Salafists and non-Salafists (i.e. traditionalists, in my opinion) does not exist. --Barastert 09:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete pov fork. Regarding Merbabu's objection put it to Javanese traditionalist muslim or something like that. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 07:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve. If the problem is that multiple groups will claim the term, then this should be explained. The divide between Salafists and non-Salafists (who I and others call "traditionalists") is too large to ignore. It has been written about endlessly by the claimants of the term, as well as by countless academics. --Barastert 09:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * do you have any verifiable reliable sources affirming the existence of 'traditional islam' in distinction to Sunnism? the main issue i see if that of verifiability. as long as we can see the exact definition and distinction of this term from some good sources then there is at least a foundation upon which we can construct the article.   ITAQALLAH   14:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * We don't usually delete articles just because they are unsourced. I know Sunni literally means "tradition" but you keep making what I think is the untenable argument that Sunni Islam is thus coincident to "traditionalist Islam." Sunni Islam now means something much broader than that (for example, it is a status as well as a religion). Allon Fambrizzi 20:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi


 * Delete per nominator --- ALM 09:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * strong keep "seems to be a platform for advocacy that a certain brand is the proper claimant to Sunnism." There is no possible justification for discarding the description and position statement of a sect, except bias towards that sect, or perhaps more generally. WP is not the arbiter of orthodoxy.01:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete After careful consideration I vote to delete. I can find no evidence for their being a "tradionalist islam" sect and the vast majority is the pov of the creator of the article.  The article reitterates the beliefs of (Sunni) Sufis as can clearby be seen if you refer to the wiki-articles of the 3 "scholars" that are mentioned:- Hamza Yusuf, Nuh Ha Mim Keller  and Muhammad Alawi al-Maliki. Content from the current version of the article should be moved to Sufism. Wikipidian 00:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Myself I'd be tempted to vote "start over." The term "traditionalist Islam" is used in scholarly sources. It is not a sect, I don't think, so much as an element of Muslim societies or histories.--T. Anthony 06:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes of course the term will be used in academic articles, just as "tradionalist christianity" and "tradionalist judaism" are occasionally used. However passing references to an obscure undefined concept doesn't justify the creation of an article for them.  One article which you linked to called Salafis (correctly in my opinion) the traditionalists .Wikipidian 17:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.