Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamism

This page is preserved as an archive of the associated article page's "votes for deletion" debate (the forerunner of articles for deletion). Please do not modify this page, nor delete it as an orphaned talk page.

pardon the subpage, but the page is too long to edit

Propose Islamism for deletion, for the following reasons:

• it is disputed, and for good reason, and has been for months - see Talk:Islamism for even more objections which are summarized and expanded here:
• it is redundant given militant Islam, which has already been proposed for deletion - which failed, since there is no reason to delete it whatsoever - it being the more neutral term. The two cover the same material, and can't really coexist easily
• the mere existence of the term as the prime title of an article about a substantial movement implies that Islamism is a neutral term accepted by that movement - whereas, those who accept the title Islamist come from a much wider variety of strains of political movements than those covered in the Islamism article - the common strain being that they accept Islam as a political movement.
• the many inappropriate redirects to Islamism also imply that there is a common ideology pursued by Islamic parties, militant Islamic groups including those engaged in terrorism, and Liberal Islam - in effect all those lumped together as mildly to strongly Islamist - whereas Islam as a political movement is really quite diverse, and the trends listed in Islamism are quite minor politically. They are only a main force in Islam in the media, and a few very angry places.
• User:RK exploits the protected status of the Islamism page, which would certainly cease to exist without the protection, to redirect every other mention of political Islam to it, among them Liberal Islam which is hardly what anyone means when they make reference to Islamism, although it might be what they mean when they refer to Islamist. This behaviour can only be discouraged by deleting the page Islamism
• Several attempts to repair Islamism to redefine it correctly as a term applied to describe Islam as a political movement by those who reject that view entirely, and lump together unrelated movements, have failed. As with Islamofascism, there is no compromise with the people who insist on this one term and reject all others for POV reasons. Thus we owe them no respect here.
• The article combines subjects that should, in addition to militant Islam and Islam as a political movement, be covered in modern Islamic philosophy - its existence simply creates redundancy.
• The term Islamism has only been popular in recent years, and that mostly with American and Jewish commentators, while the British scholars have always preferred militant Islam prior to the War on Terrorism - thus many consider Islamism to be a propaganda term like Islamofascism.
• the abusive tactics taken by User:RK might be taken up by other similar vandals, and will certainly discourage serious contributors from helping refine these articles - as it is evidently not possible to alter Islamism without incurring his tactics, it seems best to delete it to send him a strong message.
• the abusive tactics taken by User:RK are censoring substantial material including quotes from important scholars like Ziauddin Sardar, Anthony Nutting and G. H. Jansen - see tarika for an example of the level of scholarship and detail that Jansen for instance applies to the subject, as compared to the sources cited in Islamism, which are of relatively recent and shallow vintage, and some of which are obviously written by folks who can hardly define Islamism neutrally.
• the article and debates around it are now prone to leading to racist assumptions - for instance, User:RickK equates sending the name of User:RK to groups that are, according to RK, part of Liberal Islam, to some kind of "death threat" - as if these people don't have better things to do, and as if "death" is the only thing that they do with those they disagree with. Both RK and RickK seem to share this assumption, and it's probably common the United States, given the media bias. Let's not encourage this kind of political equation.
• Suggestion: read Islam as a political movement, free free to copyedit it and militant Islam (both may have some quirks due to the frequent edit war situation) and decide for yourself if Islamism contains the same depth of coverage and breadth of sources, and the same neutral point of view advantages.

Keep. There are over 53,000 Google hits on this term. In addition, the creator of this Deletion proposal page is suspect in himself. RickK 01:35, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Just because Google rates a word highly doesnt mean that its a correct definition!!

Google like many search engines can be modified to give a word more hits. Google baiting i believe the term is!!?? Besides other definitions fit bothe Militant Islam or Radical Islam come to mind when trying to describe the ideology of the gruops mentioned here. And since there is no further defining difference between Radical/Militant Islam and islamism i see no need for it to be here specially since certain users are very large with their delete buttons when editing the page. Just my two cents!!

I do however understand that islamism is used by some groups as a academic term, but since it lacks any difference from the definitions of radical/militant Islam other than it being a word used specially after the 9/11 attack by Al-Qaida (which btw is a Salafi group) by media and some academia as a means of explaining some seemingly new emerging intrepetation of Islam, which is not there!! Salafi is an offshot of Wahabism, and adheres to strict neoarchaic (yes thats right, its a new "old" translation) translations of the Quran and Aha'dith, and have been outlawed, unlike wahabi's, by among other nations Marroco. The reference to Wahabism underline the fact that the definition Islamism is void, in that it is used to describe old movements and that have been active with their intrepetations, for the Wahabism part since 18something, and since their emergence have been defined as radical Islam. With the spread of war, in amongst other places Afghanistan and Chechnia, some of their offshot groups have adopted a Militant Islamic Ideology. The word Islamism, would in its basic form mean an ideology of Islam, that covers all the islamic groups since the time of the Prophet.

I would say that the current form of the entry is unacceptable since it; (a) has not even taken into account the other definitions that cover the same groups it seeks to define with this definition, (b) is used a perojative, (c) apparently is in a constant flame edit war.

I would propse that either the entry redirects to radical/militant islam or simply state what the world Islamism means an ideology of Islam, which would cover all Muslims, as Judaism covers all of the Jewish faith and not radical/militant jews only.