Talk:Shia Islam

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2026

~2026-56963-3 (talk) 20:01, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

bdjsghsuiasjghdkjag jghgdhqwjwhsd JHSIOQ

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. GearsDatapack (talk) 20:28, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2026

Change “as well as about half of the citizen population of Bahrain” to “as well as about half of the population of Bahrain”. Its a mistake to not state that bahrain has majority of its citizens as shia not sunni. This is a fact known by both shia and sunni bahrainis. The cite of aljazeera that states shia is less than half is biased and not based on official bahraini consensus as bahraini ministry of information do not ask citizens about their sects, which makes this false source a biased source as it is run by a sunni administration. Its true that the population is majority sunni given the non bahranins account for about half the population compared to 49% of less for both sunni and shia bahrainis relative to total population. Resources that back my statements are below:

(1) https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/sunnis-and-shia-bahrain-new-survey-shows-both-conflict-and-consensus (2) https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-report-on-international-religious-freedom/bahrain/ (3)

https://sat7.org/about-us/where-we-work/bahrain/ Aloooooyo (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before posting an edit request. The statement in the lede relies on official Bahraini document, while the sources you've cited rely on small samples and estimates. Skitash (talk) 17:03, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

The sources are down below, you can see source (1),(2),(3) listed below as links Aloooooyo (talk) 17:04, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 21 March 2026

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) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 16:09, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

---

Shia Islam → Shi'ismShi'ism – Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONCISE.

The word Shi'ism is about 4.5 times more common than the expression Shia Islam in English, as shown by Google Ngram. It is the older and more standard term in scholarship and historiography. (The corresponding English adjective and noun for an adherent is Shi'ite, also overwhelmingly more common than Shia Muslim.)

Shi'ism is also more linguistically accurate, as the Arabic word شيعة (Shīʿa) is not an adjective.

It is also consistent with Wikipedia’s naming of other major branches of Islam, such as Ibadism (the third-largest branch of Islam).

Finally, Wikipedia already uses Shi'ism in other article titles, including Twelver Shi'ism, the largest branch of Shi'ism. ~2026-17709-24 (talk) 19:43, 21 March 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 09:19, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment: to be WP:CONSISTENT you would also have to propose a name change for Sunni Islam to Sunnism. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:42, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Not at all. I said “consistent with other branches”, not “all branches”. Although Sunni Islam is more common than “Sunnism”, Shi'ism and Ibadism are much more common than “Shia Islam” and “Ibadi Islam”. ~2026-17709-24 (talk) 05:04, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

We should also remember that WP:NPOV applies to article titles. The suffix -ism can carry a pejorative connotation; referring to every denomination but Sunni Islam as an -ism could imply the others are divisive sects. To the extent that it is practical, Wikipedia should be consistent and neutral in how it refers to each denomination, and this means that either "Ibadism" and "Twelver Shi'ism" should be renamed, or both "Shia Islam" and "Sunni Islam" should be.

Accuracy to Arabic is also not particularly relevant given that this is the English Wikipedia and we would use Shia as an established English-language adjective in the article in any case (unless you are also proposing we change usage in the article to Shi'ite, which you should know is even less common as an adjective than Shia, at least per Google Scholar search results). ―Howard • 🌽³³ 10:06, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Eh, I find the -ism concern overblown. It *can* carry a negative connotation, but the -ism suffix is extremely common for religions, worldviews, philosophies, etc. We have Protestantism, Judaism, Buddhism, and probably hundreds of other examples. I appreciate the sensitivity to the matter but if the term is well supported by sources and consistent with other religion articles, there's no problem here. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 01:43, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Strong oppose: “Shia” with no qualifier is by far the most common term here. Shiite, Shi’i, Shiiatu Ali, Shiism etc are all much rarer and confined mostly to scientific literature compared to “Shia”. It isn’t an adjective in the phrase “Shia Islam” because the term is a compound noun. -ism is often pejorative and as just “Shia” feels incomplete as an article title “Shia Islam” is a great solution.

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Shia%2C+Shi%27ism%2CShiism%2CShia+Islam%2CShi%27a+Islam&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=50 Bari' bin Farangi (talk) 11:54, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Moving the article to just "Shia" could be acceptable, as various dictionaries (MW, Collins, Dictionary.com) specify the word can by itself be used as a noun referring to the denomination as a whole. It would also avoid the disputed -ism suffix, be the most WP:CONCISE name possible, comply with WP:PRECISE as "Shia" already redirects here, and have a precedent in Ahmadiyya. Furthermore, the same dictionaries specify the same noun definition for Sunni, so we could move that too to be consistent. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:23, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

I guess my main argument against just Shia or Sunni would be the ambivalence wrt meaning. As various of these dictionaries specify Shia and Sunni can be used for both a singular adherent and the sect in English. The problem doesn’t exist for Ahmadiyya and thus I still think Shia Islam incorporates the important term, ie Shia, while also being unambiguous wrt what the article is about ie the sect not a singular adherent. Bari' bin Farangi (talk) 12:49, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

The ambiguity argument is not really relevant as both Sunni and Shia are primary topics and thus already serve as redirects to their respective articles. Distinction within the article itself can already be given through context and grammar, eg. "Shia is the second-largest branch of Islam", "There are an estimated 200–260 million Shias worldwide", "The Imamah is a core doctrine in Shia"... ―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:59, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

While this wouldn’t be per se wrong going by dictionary definitions if thought through the lens of linguistic prescriptivism it is extremely non-standard phrasing for introductory texts on the subject here are a few quotes for comparison:

SAGE Encyclopedia of Global Religion:

“Shi'a Islam is one of the two major branches of Islam.”

Encyclopedia of Latin American Religions:

“Shi’a Islam, or the “Shi’a of Ali” (the Party of Ali), is the second largest branch of Islam after Sunni Islam.”

Daftary & Nanji “What is Shi'a Islam?”, Institute of Ismaili Studies:

”In seeking to express a response to the primal message of Islam, Muslims have developed distinct perspectives that have led various groups to coalesce around

different interpretations of the core message of the Qur’an and the example of the Prophet

Muhammad. One such perspective is that of Shi‘a Islam.”

Halm, Shi'a Islam: From religion to revolution:

”The Kufan penitents' movement marked the true beginning of Shi'i Islam”

Where we don’t find Islam as a qualifier we’re talking about the adherent(s) first and the sect as such second like in Britannica:

”Shiʿi, member of the smaller of the two major branches of Islam, the Shiʿah, distinguished from the majority Sunnis.”

or the Columbia Encyclopedia:

“Shiites [Arab., shiat Ali,=the party of Ali], the second largest branch of Islam, Shiites currently account for 10%–15% of all Muslims. Shiite Islam originated…”

or the Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions:

”Shīʿa (Arab., ‘party’). Those Muslims who believe that ʿAlīwas the legitimate successor…” Bari' bin Farangi (talk) 13:33, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

It appears then that reliable sources are in no consensus as to whether "Shia" can be used as a straightforward synonym for "Shia Islam", although I wouldn't consider it nonstandard as there are counterexample RS which use it in this way (for some reason, overwhelmingly Indonesian English texts). As it stands, either "Shia Islam" or "Shia" are acceptable to me, but I'm leaning towards "Shia Islam" due to its predominance. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 13:59, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

@Howardcorn33 and Bari' bin Farangi: Thanks for your thoughts. I’d like to address your three main arguments:
1. On the commonness of Shia:
I agree that Shia is more common and concise. However, changing the article title from Shia Islam to Shia would shift its scope from the belief (Shi'ism) to the community/followers (the Shia). I’m not inherently opposed to that, but it would require rewriting the article to reflect this change.
2. On the “compound noun argument”:
Your claim that “Shia is not being used as an adjective” is dubious. The fact that you both consider “Shia Islam” to be consistent with “Sunni Islam” shows that you’re using Shia as an adjective, because if you really wanted to be consistent, you would ask to move the page to Shi'i Islam, for the real adjective of شيعة Shi'a in Arabic is ‏شيعي‎ Shi'i.
3. On the “connotation argument”:
The concern about the suffix “-ism” being potentially pejorative is dubious as many other religions use it; for instance, Judaism or Protestantism carry no such negative connotation. Similarly, in many European languages, the equivalents of Sunnism, Shi'ism, or Ibadism are standard terms, without any pejorative undertone. ~2026-18081-86 (talk) 18:09, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

1st You misunderstand the main argument: “Shia” is no doubt the commonnname, all variations are largely confined to expert literature, but as you correctly seem to grasp the qualifier “Islam” is helpful in differentiating between the religious movement and its adherents and thus “Shia Islam” is the most concise you can go without dropping the commonname or causing a genuine chance for misunderstanding the subject of the article.

2nd This is the English Wikipedia: Arabic grammar is materially and formally irrelevant here, as it isn’t relevant to the English language. Both Sunni and Shia are nouns in English and thus both Sunni Islam and Shia Islam are compound nouns in English. I understand that English likely isn’t your first language and that you’d like to project your understanding of Arabic grammar onto the English language prescriptively, this however isn’t helpful for the above stated reason.

3rd This is just factually wrong and undermining your point by showing exactly why “-ism” suffixes read the way they do in English, a much better example would have been something like Buddhism. Both Protestantism and Judaism are not positive terms in English originally. Both exonyms (while undoubtedly both are commonnames today) are directly tied to a violent history of othering and religious persecution. In the case of Protestantism this is vocabulary emerged in the propaganda leading up to the 30 years war.

For more on this see:

Peter Marshall, “The Naming of Protestant England,” Past & Present 214.1 (2012)

Peter Marshall and Alec Ryrie, “Introduction,” in The Beginnings of English Protestantism (Cambridge, 2002)

Linford D. Fisher, “Evangelicals and Unevangelicals: The Contested History of a Word, 1500–1950,” Religion & American Culture 26.2 (2016)

For “Judaism” this vocabulary emerges as HIGHLY pejorative in the context of the parting of the ways and remained so from its introduction into English for roughly a millennium (in some Eastern-European languages like Ukrainian or Romanian this remains the case with only the equivalent of “Hebrew” being able to be used in polite company), thus we have to talk about the reappropriation of this vocabulary to give us the modern neutral English commonname.

For more on the pejorative dimension of “ioudaismos” largley beginning with Ignatus see:

Cohen, Shaye J. D. “Judaism without Circumcision and ‘Judaism’ without ‘Circumcision’ in Ignatius.” Harvard Theological Review 95, no. 4 (2002)

Bremmer, Jan N. “Ioudaismos, Christianismos and the Parting of the Ways.” In Jews and Christians – Parting Ways in the First Two Centuries CE?: Reflections on the Gains and Losses of a Model

Burns, Joshua Ezra. The Christian Schism in Jewish History and Jewish Memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016

Stanton, Graham N. “Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho: Group Boundaries, ‘Proselytes’ and ‘God-fearers’.” In Tolerance and Intolerance in Early Judaism and Christianity Bari' bin Farangi (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

• keep as Shia Islam: I believe MOS:TIES is relevant here, i.e we should weight reliable sources with ties to Shia Islam more heavily, as far as the naming conventions are concerned.

TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 15:47, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

TIES applies only to national varieties of English (MOS:ENGVAR). Shia/Shi'ism does not have strong national ties to any variety of English. It is irrelevant here. We should consider usage in the best sources and be respectful of usage differences by source, but I've not seen anything to suggest that sources that use one or the other are systematically better. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 01:52, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Lebanon, WikiProject Islam, WikiProject Iran, WikiProject Azerbaijan, WikiProject Iraq, WikiProject Religion, WikiProject Islam/Shi'a Islam task force, and WikiProject Bahrain have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 09:20, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. The assessment of Shia used alone or as a modifier and the nom's Ngram present an incomplete picture. This Ngram shows that Shia is dramatically more common that Shi'ism. Common compounds such as Shia Islam, Shia Muslim(s), Shia law, Shia community, etc. are individually less common than Shi'ism but collectively they contribute to the commonality, and therefore WP:RECOGNIZEability of Shia. Keeping Islam in the title not only reduces ambiguity, it increases recognizability. A Google Scholar in-title search returns 988 hits for Shi'ism, 730 for Shiism, 2,030 for Shia Islam, 1,210 for Shia Muslim and 3,830 for Shia. JSTOR returns 292 for Shi'ism, 343 for Shiism (including duplicate results on the first page), 25 for Shia Islam, 16 for Shia Muslim and 639 for Shia. Overall, these results show that Shia is quite common in scholarly sources. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 02:09, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Possible corrections to second introduction paragraph?

The last sentence seems a bit lengthy as well as possibly biased? I don't feel confident enough in the topic yet to make a better change but I'm curious if this sentiment is echoed and if there's a better way to phrase it. Whimsyworm (talk) 00:32, 3 May 2026 (UTC) Whimsyworm (talk) 00:32, 3 May 2026 (UTC)