Talk:Sunni Islam

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn and reinstated. I am changing the move request to move to Sunnism and Shiism. Mast303 (talk) 02:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Sunni Islam → Sunnis
• Shia Islam → Shias

–

I may consider moves to “Sunnism” and “Shiism”, if there were enough evidence to support those as

WP:COMMONNAMEs. Estar8806 (talk) 02:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

See

Shi'ism. Dekimasuよ! 03:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

• Strong oppose: per above. The article is about a denomination not adherents. Non-starter.
  Iskandar323 (talk) 05:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose. "Names of other religious sects don't use the name of the main religion in the title" is not entirely true. See Chalcedonian Christianity. Srnec (talk) 03:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but

  Shia. Mast303 (talk) 01:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Your argument isn't exactly cohesive. You're not requesting a move to Sunnism or Shi'ism, both of which were rejected at the RM cited above, but "Suuni(s)" and "Shia(s)". Protestantism is not called "Protestants", and Sunni Islam wouldn't be called "Sunnis" either. As Iskandar said, the article is about the denomination not the adherents. Estar8806 (talk) 02:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Also you're mixing examples. Hanafi, Maliki, etc. are legal schools within Islam, not denominations, and while 'Hanafi school of Islam' might be precise, a suite of titles like that would obviously throw up concision issues. But more broadly you may be correct, but not in the way you think. Yes, maybe Hanafi, Maliki, etc., as bare adjectives, need a name review.

  Iskandar323 (talk) 05:52, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  I went to poll Britannica, and, sigh, it's also inconsistent, with Hanafi school for one, though at a url ending 'Hanafiyah', and Maliki for the other, but at a url ending 'Maliki school' - go figure! And the others: [1][2]/

  Iskandar323 (talk) 05:58, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Oppose – any claim that something is the
  Shi'i Islam might be a close call, especially for the latter (though the current Shia Islam seems much less common to me; using Shia and even Shi'a rather than Shi'i seems to be a Wikipedia thing, which you will find everywhere on this website, mainly because editors aim for consistency with ... what is already everywhere on this website). But then to really find out, someone would need to go look at the evidence. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 04:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  I saw the alternative adjective of "Shi'i" mentioned in the other RM, but in my experience, based on my interaction with sources, if that "Shi'ite" is by far the more typical alternative to "Shi'a", whereas "Shi'i" seems like a rarity.

  Iskandar323 (talk) 05:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Yes, Shi'ite, that's the word I used before I ever came to Wikipedia. Must have been the most popular variant in the subset of sources (mostly about early Isma'ilism, ghulat Shi'ism, Jabirian Shi'ism, etc.) that I read, too. But on Wikipedia, Shi'ite is almost never used, and now I don't use it either –strange how this website can influence one's habits. Anyway, a future RM should start with looking at the evidence of common usage in sources, something I admittedly don't have the time for right now. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 21:28, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note. I plan to cancel/modify this discussion and make a move discussion to move Sunni Islam to

Shi'ism. That will be more appropriate. That also means that there will be new and different comments. Mast303 (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 05:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Sunni Islam → Sunnism
• Shia Islam → Shiism

– More appropriate title; see Protestantism and Sufism for consistency. Also names of other religious sects do not use the name of the main religion in the title, unless the name of the sect is ambiguous on its own. Reinstating modified earlier request. Mast303 (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose - per
  Catholicism, and Orthodoxy is much more notable such that the vast majority of people would instantly recognize Protestantism as being a subset of Christianity. Can the same be said for Sunni, or Shia? Taking Protestantism as an example, that term is significantly more common than Protestant Christianity as demonstrated by this ngram 1. The same cannot be seen for Sunni Islam 2 or Shia Islam 3, where the longer form is more common. Estar8806 (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment – As I specifically mentioned in the previous RM, we need evidence of usage in reliable sources showing that the proposed targets are in fact the most
  Ahl al-Kalam, etc. What is important here is common usage in sources, not some form of unattainable and undesirable consistency in having everything called Fooism. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 04:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Many sources do use Sunnism and Shiism (or Shi'ism); see for example 1, 2 and 3. The 3rd one is a credible educational institution. I might add more. Mast303 (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  We don't need a source to show that it is sometimes used. We already know that. What we need is for someone to prepare a representative and neutrally selected sample of the very best sources on the subject (let's say, the best sources on Islam), and inquire which term is most common in them. I'd say we need to look at 15 sources at the very least to get a vague idea, though 30 or 50 would be coming closer to being somewhat representative.

  An easier but far less qualitative test is Google Scholar (hence: GS), which has 22,100 hits for "Shi'ism", 15,500 for "Shiism", 8,900 for "Shia Islam", 6,610 for "Shi'a Islam", 5,350 for "Shi'i Islam", 4,430 for "Shi'ite Islam", 4,280 for "Shiite Islam" and 832 for "Shii Islam". It has 33,600 hits for "Sunni Islam" and 9,530 for "Sunnism".

  Counting together all versions that have 'fooism' vs those that have 'foo Islam', GS yields 33,930 hits for 'fooism' (24,400 on the Shi'i side and 9,530 on the Sunni side) and 55,102 hits for 'foo Islam' (21,502 on the Shi'i side and 33,600 on the Sunni side). So if we want to streamline the two articles and adopt something consistent, GS clearly suggest

  Shi'ism and Sunni Islam (overwhelmingly in both cases). ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 06:02, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Oppose move per ghits provided above. O.N.R. ^(talk) 09:46, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose: Mainly based on recognizability and naturalness. -ism words are terrible things and best to be avoided except where unavoidable, and here they are readily avoided already in a manner that concisely provides infinitely more clarity to those not already familiar with the terms "Sunni" or "Shia" (or Sunnism/Shi'ism) - they will know from "Islam" (which adds little length) that it is a type/form of Islam. Also, as noted already by others, "
  Iskandar323 (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  • Oppose - per
    Mysticism in Islam
    ), not just a few historical denominations or branches of Islam.

  Moreover, I would point out that the leaderships, beliefs, theologies, escathologies, and practices of Sunni and Shia Muslims are quite different (for example, see Imamate in Shia doctrine and Mourning of Muharram), although they belong to the same religion and share a common history since the split of the Muslim community due to the succession to Muhammad (see Sectarian violence among Muslims). For these reasons, I find the current titles of both articles to be appropriate as they are. GenoV84 (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per
  WP:RECOGNIZABLE.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose Per
  WP:COMMONNAME - never heard of the proposed move targets compared to the current titles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:33, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]