Jump to content

Talk:Islam in France/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Islam in France before 1830

This article seems historically shallow. The article Population transfer mentions (rather oddly located in the section Expulsion of Jews and Gypsies) that Muslims in France were expelled in the 14th century, implying there are at least five centuries of Islam in France (and almost certainly more) not accounted for here. Does anyone have information on this? -- Jeff Q 13:14, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

this article is certainly shallow in many areas. I just tried to make a canvas. And some people added information here and there. Please, any help is welcome. I think it should be an important article. SweetLittleFluffyThing
Please forgive me. The term "shallow" was inexcusably rude. I'm afraid I'm too ignorant to contribute to this article myself. I hope that your initial work continues to be augmented by others. -- Jeff Q 16:20, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)


Oh, but do not worry :-) I was not offended. I spent a while on it, but I know very very well, it is very far from complete or neutral. It is very much a work in progress and really need input. In fact, at least 3 or 4 articles were developped from it (such as the one on the veil ban), so I was very happy. Any work to improve this one will be a good news as well. You are welcome to add any bit to it. No offense taken :-) SweetLittleFluffyThing 20:09, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Regarding the issue of historical depth, I just looked at the Jews in France article, which strikes me as a good model to strive for in terms of thoroughness. But, alas, I'm not the one to do it. Maybe after a few more years of grad school... JJM 00:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
"Islam in France before 1830s?" well, I think we'll need a CIA worldbook, a KGB description of the world, and maybe God's POV to allege things like that :-)

Attacks '85-'86

I removed

Attacks in the 1985-1986

13 dead and 250 wounded.

It clearly needs to be expanded upon or dropped. Jasongetsdown 18:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

The dead students are not "of Muslim extraction". They were Muslims. They might have been "of Algerian extraction" or "of Moroccan extraction" or whatever, but that is used for geographical relocation. Literally "drawn out of" or extracted from their country of origin or, as the expression is used now, their parents' or grandparents' original country. But they were not in any way extracted from the Muslim faith.

What does this sentence mean?

"Critics in particular are the Monde diplomatique and the Canard Enchaîné."

Critics of what? It's not very clear in context... AnonMoos 14:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Unclear word

The word "Recuperations" doesn't appear to be used in its ordinary English meaning as a section title, and I'm not sure what meaning was meant. AnonMoos 14:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

This might be a gallicism; the meaning is that people use particular fact for a design, typically for petty politics. Maybe "spinning" convoys the meaning in English. Rama 15:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
"hijacking" of an issue more like. 82.231.41.7 15:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Why merge something with a nonexistent article?

The article mentions that someone has recommended merging this with Islamism in France. However,that article does not exist, as it appears in red.

I'm assuming the idea is to start off a new article Misheu 10:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The hijab issue

This section obviously used to be a separate article. It had two references and two see alsos at the end of it. I removed both references, since one link was broken and the other one leads to a subscription-only article, one of the see alsos which is already linked at the top of the section as further information, and moved the other one down to the article-wide see also section.—Graf Bobby (talk) 04:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Standard of English in this article

The use of English language in this article is generally good, but I am concerned about several errors.

Take the following examples -

"citizens with foreign ascendency" - should be 'citizens of foreign descent'

"Christianism" - should be 'Christianity'

The following sentence is very confusing and I doubt it was written by a native speaker of English:

"Muslims in France can pretty much be distinguished according to French citizens, accustomed to France even though they may still suffer from some sort of discrimination, and Muslims immigants."

Are we to assume that the phrase 'be distinguished according to' means something like 'be divided into'?

I think the article needs to be thoroughly proofread for grammar, vocabulary and style.

86.133.239.63 22:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The first line in "Islamist Movements" is not a sentence. This section is in need of more cleanup than the rest of the article.Carl Wivagg (talk) 21:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

neutrality?

The article does give its sources but they are only two french national newspaper, they are far from giving a critical point of view of the matter. Any muslim or black or arab living in france would tell you that sayin that muslims are well integrated in france is a joke. Comparing to other european countries France is the country where someone with a muslim name have almost no chance of getting a job. However just take the time of giving soe ctritics instead of saying what the french governement says to keep everyone happy.

B*llsh*t. France is the country with the highest number of Muslims in his territory in Europe (certainly more than 6% of the population). As for the integration, unlike the British, the French never hide the discrimination they can see every day. Blacks and Arabs have no chance to get a job ? So how could there have been a Black minister (Rama Yade) and an Arab (Rachida Dati) one for two years ? The anti-French sentiment seems to be really strong on the English Wikipedia. That's a shame. I think the British desperately assuage their own racist problems by criticizing the others and treating them as fascists. I don't commend you. Yakuzanodon (talk) 15:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Yakuzanodon why get the British involved you fool, just because France has troubles with Muslims why target the British for hiding up discrimination? Your comment is stupid and weak, just because statistics completely put the French government out in the open you starting pointing fingers at the British government, well mate suck it up and weep that the French government is racist, end of mate.86.186.3.245 (talk) 01:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

The "Islamist movements" section strikes me as somewhat less neutral in presentation than the rest of the article. Furthermore, I think it is largely a duplication of a much more careful discussion of the same issues in the "Islamism" page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamisme). There is very little information that is specific to Islamism in France. Specific suggestions: 

     -the first half or so of the article could be severely curtailed and refer the reader to the Islamism page.
     -it could be better explained what the GIA has to do with Islamism in France. (It appears that the GIA is not concerned with the establishment of Islamic law in France per se, but rather, causing violence and unrest in France of the Islamist movement in Algeria. But this is very confusing in the article.)

I have little expertise in this subject, but absolutely no biases. If someone more familiar with Wikipedia editing conventions and a few sources on the subject would like to work with me, I would be happy to do the bulk of the writing for a revised section.Carl Wivagg (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Islamism?

Just doing a cursory reading, but it seems as though the "Islamism" section has very little to do with French Islam. I would suggest merging with the article "Islamism". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.152.231.210 (talk) 07:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

The last paragraph disastrous

First, Muslim TFR is noway to be 8.1 per women！ this number is perhaps true in some part of Muslim world such as Gaza or Yemen; but most Muslim country do not see such a high figure, especially in some rich country since 1990s. TFR in Algeria and Morocco is around 2.5, some higher place such as Saudi had TFR at about 4.1, so the French Muslim will be likely to have TFR level less than 2.5 as they came to a new country and often faces economic stress. the real figure is around 2.2-2.5, based on different groups, with TFR lower among Tunisians and Turkish but may be higher among the Mali or Senegalese.

Second, "30% of French citizen age 20 or less is Muslim", this is completely impossible. please check the sentence. France is a country of nearly 70 million people, on the other hand France is home to 6 million Muslim at most, 30% is just nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.73.78.62 (talk) 08:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

"The last paragraph disastrous" http://en.wikipedia.org/ is a wiki where anybody can edit a page, deals with it. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
"Muslim TFR is noway to be 8.1 per women！ this number is perhaps true in some part of Muslim world such as Gaza or Yemen;" No, this is not true in Gaza or in Yemen. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
"the real figure is around 2.2-2.5, based on different groups, with TFR lower among Tunisians and Turkish but may be higher among the Mali or Senegalese." Indeed. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it is unrealistic : France has nearly 65 million inhabitants, not 70. In this 65 million inhabitants, I do not know, if the about 6 million foreigners are included. Concerning the Muslims, about 5 million must have got the French citizenship and this population is very young. If we compare with Algeria, where 75% of the population is between 1 and 20 years old. It must be the case in France. 30% of the French generation between 1 and 20 being muslims does not seem to be much exagerated. 90.22.21.138 (talk) 20:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
"I don't think it is unrealistic" Well, if everybody were thinking it is unrealistic, then we could not quote somebody saying that "30% of French citizen age 20 or less is Muslim". Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"France has nearly 65 million inhabitants, not 70." Well, France has nearly 65 million inhabitants, and France has nearly 70 million inhabitants. Both claim are correct Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"In this 65 million inhabitants, I do not know, if the about 6 million foreigners are included." So you do not know this basic demographic knowledge. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"Concerning the Muslims, about 5 million must have got the French citizenship" Well, no. There are 4±2 million Muslims in France, and about half are French citizen. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"and this population is very young." Depend of what you mean by "very young". Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"If we compare with Algeria, where 75% of the population is between 1 and 20 years old" Well, no. It is 35% in 2010 according to [1]. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"It must be the case in France." Well, no. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
"30% of the French generation between 1 and 20 being muslims does not seem to be much exagerated." Well, it is not "much exagerated", it is "completely impossible". Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Reversion

My edit was recently reverted without explanation. Why?VR talk 02:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

The 2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings are the worst terrorist attacks in France since 1995, thus must be mentionned near the Terrorist attacks in 1995 section. On the other hand, the fear of several Muslims that they would be stigmatized after the 2012 attacks, is not very relevant and is WP:UNDUE in my opinion. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
If they are the worst terrorist attacks then they should be mentioned in the Terrorism article or Terrorism in France. This article is about the Muslim community of France. Details of the terrorist attack are WP:UNDUE to this article. Merah is very insignificant part of the Muslim community. On the other hand the effects of this terrorist attack on the Muslim community in France are very relevant to this article.VR talk 19:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily opposed to having them mentioned near other terror attacks, but the shootings should not be considered the work of an "Islamist movement". All evidence so far suggests Merah was acting alone, and his claims of affiliation with Al-Qaeda are disputed. Have you seen any reliable sources affiliate him with an Islamist group?VR talk 20:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Crime

It seems naive at the worst to make no mention of the demographics of crime in this article, and it's probable effects on continued discrimination. To remove mention of the elevated crime rate is at best, a misguided attempt to discourage racism by hiding the possible effects that racial profiling have in law enforcement, and at worst, an outright denial of the crime problem, reinforcing a negative feedback loop of problems that refuse to be recognized, and hence refuse to be solved.

Just as a personal aside, the newest round of riots continue to prove that crime, if not acknowledged and solved publicly, will be discussed in the shadows among people whose speech has been silenced, and lead to the formation of much more strongly anti-Islamic opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.142.236 (talk) 23:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

You need to include references to back up the claims. Without references, the statements have to be removed. Winkelvi (talk) 23:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

2013-09 dubious stat

There has been a recent adding of dubious claim that "more Muslims than non-Muslims have been born in France in recent years".

Accordig to pewforum, there was 7.5% "Muslims" in France in 2010. In order to make 50% of birth, they should have an average birth rate (100 - 7.5) / (100 - 50) / 7.5 × 50 = 92.5 / 50 / 7.5 × 50 = 12.33 time the average birth rate of non-Muslims. In order to make 60% of birth, they should have an average birth rate (100 - 7.5) / (100 - 60) / 7.5 × 60 = 92.5 / 40 / 7.5 × 60 = 18.5 time the average birth rate of non-Muslims. This is completely impossible.

A similar claim has been made about Netherlands a few years ago. It has been labelled as hoax. See for example here.

And of course a barely sourced crude sentence is much less reliable that the demographic studies currently mentionned in the Statistics section.

Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that, I agree with you. I added this information, thinking it could be true because their birth rate is relatively high while the population of some European countries decreases every year, but you're right, this statistic is an exaggeration. I removed it, and will update it again in 2050 when this statement becomes valid;) Shalom11111 (talk) 20:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Do not forget to do the same in 2040 for Israel, 17.7% "Muslims" in 2010 according to Pew forum. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Good one, oh and the number is actually higher. But unlike France's case, I hope they'll have a state of there own (outside Israel's current borders) by that time. Shalom11111 (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Please do. Please do everything (that you want to do) about Israel before doing anything about Europe. Please focus on Israel and stay away from Europe. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:54, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Why should I, and what are you implying here? Please do not tell other users what to do or stay away from, because neither you nor anyone else on Wikipedia have the authority to do that, and it clearly won't change my choice of editing at all. Shalom11111 (talk) 21:20, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Ben mon neveu, c'est toi qui a commencé les sous-entendus douteux. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Content free article.

Now,


article does comment on Koran, but it doesn't give any mention about Hadith.

Therefore it is practically content free:

It did no gave me understanding:

Why Islam in French is so different from Islam in Saudi-Arabia or Iran.

Koran can only be intepreted by choosing Hadith:

According to some ideas of Islam, but some liberals have had different ideas?

And different schools of Islam have different Hadith's:

That is sunni - shiaa divene: the reason for sectarian violence also.

Also liberal view on Islam have to commend on Koran, Hadith, etc. questions.

What do the imans in fact speak in France?

If they don't speak France at all: You should ask secret services of France.

This in totally unintelligible article, because it don't at all describe Islam in France:

Not liberalism of Islam or fundamentalism of Islam in France.

If some people of muslim polation in France like style of life in France, that's not a surprice.

But what do the fundamentalist in fact teach?

I presume the same stuff that some radicals elsewhere:

And that the life of their children and wife: human rights violations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.95.117.191 (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Ramadan = Thanksgiving

"most observe the fast of Ramadan, which is comparable to the Thanksgiving holiday in the United States and Canada" (???) OK, it usually happens in December, but surely Ramadan has more in common with the Christian 'Lent' - the supposed period of fasting, preparation and introspection before Easter?. 160.84.253.241 08:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanksgiving is in November in the U.S.. It is not like Ramadan in any way, shape or form. It is first and foremost a secular holiday. It lasts only a day. Nobody fasts, everybody feasts. There is NO religious component to it at all. It is what it says it is. A day of thanksgiving for whatever you feel like being thankful for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.145.197 (talk) 08:50, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Islam in France. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Liberation.fr

Parishan the website you link presented is not showing for the reference.Nocturnal781 (talk) 04:58, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I can see it at this link: "Selon une autre source proche du dossier, il s’agit d’un Arménien de 43 ans qui fait l’objet d’un suivi psychologique.". Same information in Le Figaro, with an additional note that the man was not under the influence of alcohol. Parishan (talk) 08:22, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
The first article is quoting another unspecified source; while the second one is not reliable. You must provide a source from a mainstream newspaper and that will be considered reliable. The independent is quoting Le Parisen as well so it cannot be used as it is not considered reliable. Nocturnal781 (talk) 19:13, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia:NEWSORG.Nocturnal781 (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
It's a legitimate source, but I don't think it's appropriate to have it under discrimination (the given rational is retaliation from someone who is suffering of schizophrenia and was hospitalized for it after the event [2]) section or in this article. I think Islamophobic_incidents article under France is more appropriate. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 01:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I take back what I said, it should be mentioned somewhere in the article, and under discrimination is the only possible place. Nocturnal781, your problem appears to be the mention of his origin. Since his given rational is retaliation and he has a reported psychological follow-up, his origin doesn't appear to be his motivation. I personally believe that origins should be mentioned when it is relevant in the understanding of a given event (given that it is a sensible subject in most cases). Most sources mentioning the incident seems to agree with me as they don't mention origin. But this is my personal opinion since I don't know if there is any Wiki-law which deals with this sort of thing. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 02:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi Noctural, if Parishan thinks it should remain there (new rational found: Un témoin a également assuré que l'homme a été aperçu mercredi par un fidèle aux abords de la mosquée. Il était en train de déposer des fleurs sur la plaque du « Jardin d'Arménie », installé par la ville de Créteil en hommage au peuple arménien, dans le grand parc adjacent au lieu de culte.), do you agree that the information that L'Association des Arméniens de Créteil a annoncé qu'elle « condamne fermement les actes de violence perpétrés » jeudi [3] be added as well as the fact that he has schizophrenia? Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 02:58, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I reworded the paragraph. Parishan (talk) 21:42, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
The issue I have is with the news article claiming he is Armenian, only one article is directly saying he was and other articles are quoting what Le Parisen said. Like I mentioned above in order to keep that claim up you must provide a reliable source which is in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines for reliability. Le Parisen is not considered reliable. Please provide a direct reliable source. Nocturnal781 (talk) 18:02, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
The article published in Le Point [4] gives a lot of information (more than merely mentioning him being Armenian) which confirms his origin. My opinion is to add the info that he suffers from mental illness and was hospitalized for it following the event. If his origin is to be left there, I think the info that the Armenian association of Créteil condemn the acts should be added. Reason is that mentioning ethnicity often falsely leave an impression that it was ethnically motivated, so disclosing the whole information (mental illness + the condemnation by an association from the same ethnic group) help dispel such impressions. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 23:02, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Oh I see what you say, all seems to be copied from the same article (more or less) with the same witness. But we're not dealing with an extraordinary claim here (and such copying these days is the norm with news sources in general) which would require to bring extraordinary evidence. His presence at Le Jardin d'Armenie and the Armenian association condemnation are extra details which smells true. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I haven't seen any responses from Parishan recently and he hasn't provided any reliable sources for claiming he is Armenian. Also Yahya brought up a good point as this man also has mental illness so this might not be an actual case of discrimination, we should mention that in the sentence also.Nocturnal781 (talk) 04:29, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
There are lots of sources indicating the man is Armenian, such as this one which also clarifies his legal status in France. The Armenian community of Créteil released a statement with regard to this man's mental health (incidentally, why would the Armenian community come forward if the man were not Armenian?). I agree that we should mention that the man has been treated for schizophrenia but the fact that he is Armenian is quite established. I even softened the wording in the article; I do not understand what other sources there can be. Parishan (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Islam in France. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Charlie Hebdo

Would a bit about the Charlie Hebdo massacre and related events be relevant to this article? Considering that it was quite a big event, Islam-related and has prompted a lot of attacks on Muslims which could be mentioned under 'Discrimination'? Shiningroad (talk) 15:16, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I think that something about Charlie Hebdo would be relevant but it is already included in the "Islamic terrorism" page. I think if there was a place to add it, you could add it to that page and not this one. The discrimination portion is about people discriminating Muslims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanl20 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Fairer Phrasing

I'm not Muslim but I strongly think the current sentence in the article right now: 

"France has a strong cultural tradition in comics, which in the context Muhammad cartoons is a question of freedom of expression.[55]

It makes it seem like many Muslims globally are being against freedom of speech when that is not even the aggravating factor yet that sentence makes it portrayed like they are the bad guys who cannot stand freedom of speech. But their anger is not against free speech but towards the cartoon mocking their prophet quite literally.

It really needs to be revised to (a question of freedom of expression versus disrespect for Islam). As that explains the whole picture and the actual factors behind the anger. This mockery of Mohammad is the equivalent of making a cartoon of Jesus as some degraded whimsical creep to Christians or making fun of the Holocaust for Jews, and I highly doubt either party be accepting of their most sacred thing being degraded either. If Christians or jews protest, it wouldn't be against free speech but specifically against what they see as honestly aggravating mockery of their people. Nvtuil (talk) 01:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Topics that would be great to include in that article

  • list of famous french muslim or of famous french from muslim extraction
  • "La plus con des religions" : le mot de Houellebecq et décision du tribunal
  • différence islam et musulman (désafection religieuse des beurs)
  • le hidjab ou foulard islamique a l'école et l'avis du Conseil d'Etat. Cristallisation du problème de l'intégration
  • l'affaire des photos d identité
  • le discours de Sarkozy
  • l'antisemitisme forcené de certains mouvements islamistes et sites internet islamistes
  • la mise en place du Conseil français du culte musulman
  • l'UOIF
  • le financement des lieux de cultes
  • Lhaj Thami Breze
  • Dalil Boubakeur
  • Union des organisations islamiques de France

Que celui qui se trouve dans l'aisance paye selon ses propres moyens.
Que celui qui ne possède que le strict nécessaire paye en proportion de ce que Dieu lui a accordé.
Dieu n'impose quelque chose a une âme qu'en proportion de ce qu'il lui a accordé.
Dieu fera succéder l'aisance à la gène.
(Coran, §. 65. La répudiation, v.7)


The description of Islamism her leaves out an awful lot of important information that already is covered in the Islamism article. Further, the present text implies that Islamism is somehow a return to traditional Islam and the Quran. Both Muslim and non-Muslim historians state that nothing could be further from the truth; Islamism is a very modern movement, and while religiously fundamentalist, it expresses ideas and beliefs that are new to Islam. The Islamist movement is also extremely violent, and Islamists have a long history of surpressing, and often killing, moderate Muslims in large numbers. The former French colony of Algeria has seen tremendous numbers of Muslims killed by Islamists. The description of Islamism given here simply doesn't correlate to reality; returning to traditional Muslim beliefs and practices is not the same thing as what Islamist preaches. Finally, this article should not act as a rebuttal article to the already written Islamism article. Changes to the Islamism article should occur there. RK 23:58, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Sorry, but it appears to me it is your description of reality that does not fit the french reality. I try to report what is from our historians and our analysts, who may have different interpretations from yours.
This version of history is a joke, as is the racist RK who thinks all Muslims just murder their opponents, thus an invitation to talk to them is a "death threat". Try the only neutral article on Islam as a political movement, and also read tarika and militant Islam and modern Islamic philosophy and consensus democracy and ijma to find good starting points for your discussion of real reality, not RK-racist-reality. And revert User:RK wherever you possibly can, it's racism not to do so - user:142.177.etc
I basically agree. I'll look for more information specific to Islamism in France, and other Muslim developments in that country. Some commentators have shown that the strategies of Islamists are adapted according to the countries in which adherents reside, even if their ultimate aim is no less ambitious. If this is so, I would expect to see that in France - a democracy gives powerful tools to minorities, by which to pursue their aims - which I understood this article to be hinting at. Observations of how local manifestations of a movement have a different character than when seen in another locale, or on a global scale, are important; and this in itself does not contradict anything that the Islamism article says. Mkmcconn 02:08, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I appreciated the "However, in Algeria, the situation is different, and events there may ultimately affect the posture of Islamists in France itself." because I thought your edit yesterday was somehow shadowing this. It should go further, as Islamists in France affect Algerian politics.

Please add them to Islamic party as well. - user:142.177.etc

"Since influence in French politics is possible without resorting to violence, the use of violence in that context is considered counterproductive toward acheiving their goal of integrating the political system according to the principles of Islam." would be missing part of the point. Islamists are not so much trying to integrate the french political system, than using France as a step to get the power in Algeria. They establish networks, use french muslim students, cultivate the "powerlessness" of youngs in suburbs, collect money and weapons. It is not so much (or only) that Islamists in France try to influence internal french politics. Talking about islamism in France cannot be dissociated of Algeria.

It's true anywhere that where there is an electoral path to power, violence is much less emphasized. - user:142.177.etc
I am making a french traduction of this article, and I have a question and a comment.
Question: Is it possible to have the french version of this sentence of Olivier Roy, as it would be better than a french traduction of an english traduction : Olivier Roy calls Islamists those which see in Islam a political ideology, in the modern sense of the term, "ideology". In other words a theory which presumes to entirely understand the social side of a society, in political terms.
Comment: I think we should make a distinction between islamist and fundamentalist. Islamists are those among muslims who want their religion to have more influence in the state. In France, what they openly want is a removal of the ban on headscarves, for example. In Turkey, they rule the state, wanted to make a law criminalyzing extra-conjugal intercourse, but finnally did not, for reasons of realpolitik. Fundamentalists are those, among islamists, whose ideology and purpose is application of the chariah. This separation seems for me very potent, as it can separate the rise of a mainstream conservative muslim movment among muslims in both France and Turkey that has goals I don't like, but that is decent, peacful, and respectful of democratic institutions, dans the fundamentalism, that can be compared to extreme right in Europa.
"Moderate islamists" are for example, those 40% of muslims, in France, who consider the Republic and the equality among men and whomen as important values for the naion and themselves (as 90% do in France), but who wish that the headscarf was not banned from french schools (as 56% do in France).
Berru (I have no accound in en:wikipedia, but one in fr:wikipedia)
"it is illegal in France to keep records in computerized files"

Interesting. Would this make a Wikipedia article that named a person's religion illegal in France? ( 11:58, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

No.

You are right that this strongly needs to be rephrased. The government or firms, do not have the right to ask someone what their religion is in application forms. Neither their color. Nor their ethnic background (a word we do not use much). Typically, when one enter a hospital, and fill the registration card, the card does not ask ethnic background. This is interesting to note, because my memory of the US was that pregnancy management was different when people came from one ethic background or another (based on likelyness of some genetic disease). Similar for CV. An employer is not supposed to refuse a job applicant because of his origin. Obviously, it is easy for an employer to notice the name (Michel Durant will not have the same "meaning" than "Abdel Touitou") or the color of skin. However, if the rejected applicant was to juridically attack an employer, and a file be found where people are listed by origin or religious, I say the employer would be in big trouble.

Text that needs to be clarified: "It was largely through reactive measures that the movement that is labelled Islamist came to be visible to the West, where it was labelled as being a distinct movement from Islam, pan-Arabism and resistance to colonization. "

What does it mean to be labelled as "a distinct movement from Islam"? Few would deny that Islamists are Muslims; few would deny that Islamism is a form of Islam. However, modern scholars of religion, and most Arab Muslims, believe that Islamism is a new form of Islam, and one that is not as traditional as it claims to be. Islamists claim that they are only asking for a return to traditional Islam, but much of their program is a new ideology that was created in response to the modern world.
Read fiqh to understand the reality here. - user:142.177.etc

I wish to stress that the idea of Islamism as a new phenomenon is not a western concept, but one held by many Muslims themselves. In fact, although not commonly known in the west, a great many Muslims have a conspiracy theory that the Islamist movement was actually created by western nations in order to discredit Islam. RK 23:23, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

German, British and American empires have all actually promoted jihad as a way to get their way when it suited them. Again, see Islam as a political movement (uncensored version). - user:142.177.etc
which is probably we often separate islamism (as a political ideology, those who want to be build a State, for example the FIS), fundamentalists (who have only one political request : application of the charia, and who consider a society is automatically islamist as soon as every person is a good muslim), and neo-fundamentalist (who occupy the space left by islamism, those who do not have the Nation-State to identify to, for example the GIA). The third one being a new form of Islam, one that is often referred to as "la maladie de l'Islam" in France (Islam disease).

I object to your rephrasing "Islamists want to influence the laws of the State they live in.". The islamists living in France do not only try to influence the french laws. They try to recruit new people to support the cause, they distribute coran books to the population, they bomb buildings and cars to spread terror, they accumulate weapons and money to fight in *other* countries than France. They use France as a step, build networks, and try to influence french foreigh policy.

I strongly assume that Islamist groups in France desire, ultimately, to guide France itself toward the goal of an Islamic state at every opportunity that might present itself. But, I tweaked RK's edit to make it less nationalistic. Mkmcconn 01:19, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Why? DanKeshet 01:32, Sep 25, 2003 (UTC)
In part, because Islamism is typified by anti-nationalism. The sentence should not imply that Islamists are interested in influencing only the laws of the State they live in; and anyway, I don't think that it was RK's intention to say that it should imply this. Mkmcconn 01:38, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Sorry, I was unclear. Why do you assume that Islamist groups in France desire, ultimately, to guide France itself toward the goal of an Islamic state at every opportunity that might present itself? DanKeshet
Because Muslims live in France; and Islamists consider it a burden and injustice for Muslims to live under the government of non-Muslims, deprived of the advantages of shari'a. I do not doubt the sincerity of Islamists who claim that democracy is a legitimate means to that end (and do not seem desparate to get there suddenly), and who denounce violence as counterproductive (at least in the local contexts where their numbers and influence do not imply a mandate for rule, for example, of France, or, the U.S.). But, I would find their position incomprehensible if they claim not to think that sharia is ultimately preferrable to secular rule everywhere, and if they would not welcome the opportunities to guide the laws of whatever countries they live in toward the acceptance of it. So, "I strongly assume" that this is the way it is, because I cannot make sense of their position otherwise. Mkmcconn 21:10, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I also object to the removal of "an islamist may be a fundamentalist or not". Do you remove it because you consider it is already clear enough from what is said above, or do you remove it because you consider it false ? If so, I will just try to find quotes to attribute the point.

I put it back in with an attempt at more clearly explaining the point of difference. Mkmcconn 01:38, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thanks. That is better imho. What do you think RK ?

The first sentence refers to people "of Muslim extraction". Has Islam attracted any French converts or can all Muslims in France trace lineage to Muslim immigrants? DanKeshet 01:32, Sep 25, 2003 (UTC)


I will try to find numbers. There are some converts, but I think the numbers are very low compared the people of muslim faith coming from (more or less recent) immigration. I know 3 person over 4 come from Algeria, Marocco and Tunisia. There are people from several other countries from Maghreb, which is why we more often refer to "Maghrébin" than to "Arabe". People from Mali come in quite significant numbers too right now. All this immigration essentially comes from after WWII, though some got in France after WWI, and are still aware of their ancestry. That would be interesting to find conversion estimates.

I've been cleaning up some of the grammar in this article, and wikifying many words. What is Orthodoxism (first paragraph)? This article is the only one which mentions it. When I searched Orthodox instead, I got Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Jewish Orthodox etc etc. Which one does this statistic refer to? --Fabiform 18:55, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Oh, apologies, cultural bias :-). When french refers to their orthodox, they talk about the catholicism orthodoxie. The jewish orthodox are usually classified in the jewish religion. I will ask to our 3 specialists on the french wikipedia, how they can more precisely define that if you wish Anthere

  • thanks for such a quick reply Anthere. I'd never even heard of Orthodox Catholicism so I wouldn't have guessed correctly! I've changed Orthodoxism to Orthodox Catholicism, but I haven't been able to find a sensible page to link it to on wikipedia for an explanation. So if you can find a good one... go ahead! Cheers. --Fabiform 14:18, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Got my page :-) Here you go : w:fr:Orthodoxie

There are two meaning to the word, so both are explained right now in the page. The one which interest us is

2. l'Orthodoxie, confessions (et non religion) du Christianisme, à savoir l'ensemble des patriarcats Orthodoxes des christianismes orientaux, au nombre de 4 + 1 (Moscou dissident Kiev ou le contraire), territoires canoniques qui représentent les églises des 7 conciles, mais les églises des 2 et des 3 conciles se revendiquent aussi "Orthodoxes" et sont moins territoriales puisque, du fait de l'histoire des hérésies, leurs membres nestoriens, coptes et arméniens furent chassés par les orthodoxes au premier sens du terme.

More precisions on some of the churches here : w:fr:Églises des 7 conciles

You read french I hope ?

Anthere

  • I do read French, but I'm still a little confused (mostly because I know very little about the subject of Christian denominations). So it says that Orthodoxy is not a relgion in its own right but refers to certain Christian denominatons. It specifically mentions eastern Christianity... do you think that Eastern Orthodoxy would be the best article to link to, and that perhaps I shouldn't have renamed it Catholic Orthodoxy? Obviously, tell me if I've misinterpreted the French! I see you've linked to this French article, but I think we should link to something in the English language if at all possible because users of the English Wikipedia are obviously not all likely to speak French.  :) Fabiform 19:41, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What Anthere appears to be referring to is Eastern Orthodoxy -- the Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, etc. churches. Ben
Right, we're agreed then Ben. I'll change it to Eastern Orthodoxy, unless ofd course Anthere comes back and tells us differently. Fabiform


No, I think it is really fine. Read the article, it seems to fit well. I linked it to the french article because I had no idea what the english article would be; and look, you found it :-) Anthere

I checked with one of my friend, who converted himself to eastern orthodoxy 2 years ago. As a reminder, numbers of followers of a specific religion are difficult to estimate since this is not really legal to ask someone his religion. But according to him, the number offered here (150000) is the number of French Eastern Orthodox (ie, from the french church). Estimates of total orthodox are probably more about 200000 right now. Most of the additionnal 50000 are romanians, who emigrated in France after Ceaucescu falls (so, an immigration going less than 10 years ago, I remember many romanians moved to France in 1993-1994). Most of those were illegal immigrants then, but since papers are no more requested to come in now, there are legal :-) Still, most of those belong not to the french church, but to a sort of branch of the Romanian Church located in France. I found no estimates of their real numbers, but these numbers have greatly increased the orthodox community in the past years. Since most of these people are not french, and do not belong to the french church, it seems they are perhaps not counted as Orthodox in most papers.

Here we are :-)

Anthere

Contrary to what was implied, France does not legally recognize religious affiliations (except for very specific purposes, such as military chaplaincy) and is actually explicitly prevented from doing so from a 1905 law. The CFCM is a private organization that the public powers recognize informally. (France does recognize religious organizations though, but it's mostly for tax purposes. There is also, for practical purposes, some official list of holidays of the major religions.) David.Monniaux 09:50, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH PLEASE

I'm sorry, but there is no civil war in France, and we don't expect to see one soon. If some people want to fantasm about Islam, 11-S, "Islamism" or whatever, well, just remember: NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH !!! Lapaz

6 million muslims

I removed the following text : "In 2005, reports indicate that France has approximately 6 million Muslims composing of 10% of the total population.", which had an article of the "Pittsburgh Post-Gazette" as a source (and apparently as the "report"). Regardless of whether the Post Gazette is a reputable source or not, the number conflicts with numbers extracted from french census quoted before that as well as the official estimate from the French Ministry. Since I doubt the Pittshburgh Post Gazette conducted its own census or survey in France, I can only assume it's one of those "established facts" that come from nowhere. 82.231.41.7 11:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

According to US Dept. of State 2006, there are 10% muslims in France, which is roughly 6 million. So, i added this text: "As of 2006, according to U.S Department of State, about 10% of France's population are muslims" Source: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3842.htm

As above, why quote the US Department of State ? Did they carry on a survey in France ? Not all sources are equal and we have much better sources to quote here. 82.231.41.7 00:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah...I was under the assumption, US Dept of State is a reliable source. However, a BBC report, which i assume is reliable also puts the figure to 8-9.5% (2004 estimate figure) Source: [5]

10% is correct as it was 8% just a few years ago acc to Pew

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/29/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/ Rustygecko (talk) 07:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Demographic threat

- Using "alleged demographic threat" as the title is unneutral as it indicates that the demographic threat is not true.

- First of all, there are more poeple that conservative and far rightists that believe islam in france is a demographic threat. It's unneutral only to mention them.... It's like claiming that Liberals and Stalinists disagree.

- It's stupid to quote the youtube video as most of it is bullshit. It's even more stupid to later spend half the article on disproving the same video.Alphasinus (talk) 22:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

"Using "alleged demographic threat" as the title is unneutral as it indicates that the demographic threat is not true." (Alphasinus) Actually this demographic threat is a WP:fringe theory that may be shown as untrue. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 22:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I am afraid that I will delete the stuff you added by a few weeks, if no source is given. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 22:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Alleged doesn't mean something is untrue, it means it's unproven. Rustygecko (talk) 07:40, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

100,000 converts

The article says

an estimated 100,000 are converts to Islam of indigenous ethnic French background.

There is no evidence for this. Unless some is added I will delete it. Rustygecko (talk) 07:46, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Per MOS:LEADCITE we wouldn't need to provide a citation in the lead as long as it's a summary of sourced information found in the main body. In this case the figure in question was never properly sourced. The IP who added it in 2011 to the main body didn't update the existing reference, and from webarchive we can tell that the 2011 version of the Figaro website didn't mention anything about it either. I have therefore removed it. Of course, it's an easy thing for someone to add it again in case they can provide a reliable source. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:26, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Maxwinteremory1, Maxwinteremory, Jkang685517.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: The Editing Process

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 4vli4bdel (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by 4vli4bdel (talk) 01:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Islam_in_France/Archive_1&oldid=1229203098"