Talk:Sant Nirankari Mission

Correction

In first few lines of article, it is mentioned"they claim to be part of the Sikh Panth ", there is nothing like this. First thing is Nirankari Mission is not a religion, as the name says "Mission", which means it has some objective or aim, which is "Universal Brotherhood", it teaches to respect every religion and implement the teachings mentioned in holy books in life , not just read them.

Future Recommendations

Though the article has come a long way, its far from perfect and here is a list of few more ideas that could be incorporated.

- It is difficult to encompass the whole of SNM in a single page. So more pages will definitely be added for the future.

- Annual Congregations need to be mentioned. This should incorporate not just the Delhi smagam, but also those held in other regions eg. bombay and even those abroad

- Pictures, videos could be added provided copyright permission from SNM is obtained. Please do take note that publishing anything on this media means publishing under a GFDL compatible license, which means that anyone can publicise/use/distort stuff mentioned here freely.

- A good review of the nirankari literature including the SNM magazine, is needed. At the moment its a mere list.

- Referencing - This has been put off as the article is still in development stages. If the Vancouver style has to be used, this would mean massive alteration of the article each time it is edited. A Harvard style is preferred for now, as it is less of a hassle.

- There is extremely little of the SNM History. All there is at the moment is whatever that is available on the official website. How about reading through the SNM literature to incorporate more SNM history.

- Perhaps there needs to be a section on all the inter-faith meetings that are being held.

- If more stuff could be added for the Sewa dal section, it might as well come on a new page.

If anyone has anything else to say for the purposes of improving the article, please mention it here. If anyone is intrested in editing, please do so. Be mindful of the fact that information needs to be written in a factual manner, rather than an opiniated manner. References are highly encouraged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zyx42 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Tone and unreferenced

This article should change from an uncritical self-description with an unencyclopedic tone to an article with reliable third party references. To describe beliefs and practices scholarly references are preferred. Andries (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It is not enough that the website of the mission is used as references. Andries (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Self-published sources. Andries (talk) 15:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Sikh?

The article doesn't mention the word "Sikh" once. Is that deliberate? ... said: Rursus (bork²) 05:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the following may be informative

Pritpal Singh Bindra (August 30, 2009). "Nirankaris and Sant (Neo-)Nirankaris". Essays On Sikhism. Retrieved December 13, 2010. Peaceray (talk) 03:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal (withdrawn by nominator)

The article Nirankari appears to duplicate much of the information in this article, and was previously a redirect to here. I propose merging whatever information in Nirankari can be appropriately sourced (at present, that article has no sources) and making it a redirect once again. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Dont Merge these two articles as they refer to different organizations Sant Nirankari was founded in 1929. but Nirankari's exist prior to that. User talk:Bandukia —Preceding undated comment added 14:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC).

It seems that there are definitely two separate, albeit related, movements under discussion - SNM appears to be a development of the Sikh Nirankari subculture, but the two are distinct. I'm less certain about the necessity for a merger in the light of this new information, although it still might make sense to treat both of them under the same umbrella if there's a scarcity of sources on the older Nirankari movement. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Nirankari movement was orignally started by Baba Dyal Singh as u may refer to books wrriten by various people for eg "Reflections on Baba Dayal and Nirankari movement" by Navtej Singh, Punjabi University. Dept. of Punjab Historical Studies or "The Nirankari Sikhs" by John C. B. Webster or " Baba Dayal: crusader of true Sikhism " by Dīwāna Siṅgha, Māna Siṅgha Niraṅkārī. but as per this link by SNM www.nirankari.com/modules/founder/bababuta As per this site the founder was Baba Buta Singh who was sikh and gets his motivation and knowledge from Adi Granth which was the incomplete Guru Granth Sahib holy book of Sikhs. And Baba before name was used by sikhs and Singh after name is also used by sikhs. (bandukia (talk) 16:08, 13 December 2011 (UTC))

After doing some editing and researching, I think it's become clear that there is a definite need for seperate articles. Both need substantial copyediting, and are in dire need of sources, but these problems can be addressed. I'm hereby withdrawing my proposal to merge the two. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Major cleanup

This article was almost entirely an SNM fluff-piece, so I've removed most of the article which was simply a repository of SNM materials, and inserted some sections based on WP:Reliable sources. It is completely unacceptable that the article did not cover the sectarian struggle between orthodox Sikhs and the SNM, which is the focus of the vast majority of secondary sources.

I'm not 100% clear on the link between the SNM and the original Nirankaris, as sources appear to differ as to the relationship, but I've addressed that as best as possible. The article could still use some points on SNM doctrine and activities, but again drawn from secondary, neutral sources and not just quoting SNM directly.

Hope folks are overall pleased with the improvements, and that we can add a few more RSs and ideally get some photographs of SNM buildings, events, etc. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree Mathew but unfortunately people are readding WP:SOAPBOX, WP:Reliable etc. I've tried to resolve trhe edits but I suspect sockpuppets. SH 17:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Don't bother reverting more than once or twice, that just leads to edit-wars, and will reduce your own credibility in arbitration. Just keep calm, revert once of twice with a clear and non-attacking explanation of why an edit is unsuitable. If he undoes your reverts twice leave him a message and report him. One must refuse to be dragged into a fight, but instead use the established processes to remove bad editors and protect vulnerable articles. It's all the easier to get them blocked when they're obvious socks and refuse to dialogue. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Matthew merely reverting the article will not help the author to improve the article rather it will be a discouragement for him who spent his valuable time to enrich this article with his useful content. Could it be possible for you to take a look at the previous version of this article and suggest scope of enhancements to the author? I've seen user 'Lovermankind' tried to talk to SH where SH didn't respond Regarding 'Sant Nirankari Mission'. Hope your positive favor. Thanks, Jaspreet --Bharat42 (talk) 18:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Said authors have not communicated here on the Talk page despite making dozens upon dozens of edits with no attempt to provide edit summaries. If you wish to mentor them, or refer them to any of Wikipedia's volunteer mentoring services, that'd be great.

Further, you are incorrect that SH refuses to communicate; he replied on LM's own Talk page: User_talk:Lovemankind

Further still, one should not edit an article if one cannot write neutrally, or is here to push an agenda as LM and anyone supporting his version would appear to be. Further, I quite, quite doubt that given more time LM would make his version better, as literally everything he has been completely unacceptable by WP standards. Can you seriously tell me that "was blessed with the divine service to take forward the Message of Truth" is appropriate material? Much less removing valid refs, unnecessary bolding, biased prose, a lack of wikilinks, etc. Essentially the editor simply does not understand Wikipedia, and so should not be making massive edits, particularly on a topic where he refuses to be neutral. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:42, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately Matthew this is a familiar pattern for most of the India related articles. See Jat people, Khatri, Tarkhan (Punjab) etc etc. Disruptive editing, WP:Puffery, WP:Honorifics, WP:NPOV etc etc. Not reading the comments when pages have been reverted, and in this case suspected sockpuppetry, which I will report as well. ThanksSH 20:37, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Dear Matthew and SH – Earnestly speaking, the idea was only to add to the existing page, may be in the shape of ‘spiritual ideology’ or ‘history which was missing, or community service which was untouched. I agree with both of you, that due to lack of familiarity with ‘WIKI policies’, some deviations might have crept in, but that can always be improved with your support, as long as the intentions are good. Being senior members, your support can always go a long way. Thanks and Regards.--LoveMankind talk 08:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Your edits are basically WP:Soapbox and therefore do not meet the encyclopaedic requiremens of Wikipedia. ThanksSH 13:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Improve this article

About a year and a half ago, I did three dozen edits on this article. Most of this was in WikiGnome realm of editing, and specifically inline citations, since the version before I started lacked many inline citations as well as secondary and tertiary sources. I added some of those type of sources, and separated the nirankari.org into their own group / section (group="SNM" in the ref tag / References from Sant Nirankari Mandal website {{Reflist|group=SNM}}). I put all references into citation format, so that it ended up looking like this.

After I performed more individual edits on this article than any other before or since, I was exhausted with it and unwilling to address the NPOV issues.

If you are truly interested in improving this article, I implore you to first read, then adhere to, these Wikipedia guidelines. Doing so can help avoid unnecessary conflict & countless reverts. After all, I think everybody's goal here is to get the most reliable and informative article out there with external links that point to the most authoritative and important sources and that no one would consider to be excessive link spamming.

• Wikipedia:Verifiability
• Primary, secondary and tertiary sources
• Wikipedia:External links
• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Wikipedia:NPOV dispute
• Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
• Wikipedia:Citing sources
• Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

Namaste,
Peaceray (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The issue has been of an editor who is a representative of the organisation changing the artiucle to read like some sort of advert and constituted a WP:SOAPBOX. The version Mathew reverted it to isn't perfect but far better than the version by Lovemenkind and Bharat44. Thanks SH 08:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear SH, It is no secret, as my user-profile itself mentions that I am associated with the Mission. But, that's precisely why I possess the necessary domain knowledge, and I am able to add the relevant, yet the missing content. There are two aspects here on Wikipedia; one is being an editing expert - here you win; second is being an subject expert - here I can contribute a bit better; and if our skills synergise, the results will be enormous. Please do not stand on the other side.

What Matthew did in April to this page is catastrophic, he simply reverted to a very primitive page thereby depriving the page of the vital content, all under the disguise of compliance to Wiki:rules. As senior and experienced editors your contributions could have been more valuable had you helped to make the good content compliant to Wiki:Rules rather than resorting to reverts or deletions.

Thanks and regards. --LoveMankind talk 13:29, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually when people are directly involved with organisations such as this, it is difficult for them to maintain WP:NPOV. The same problem exists with Sikh and other India related artilces. Mathew has done a sterling job in maintaing WP:Balance, and stop it becoming a WP:Soapbox which your edits made it into. ThanksSH 20:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear Sikh-history, Thanks for your response. Those who possess domain knowledge - you brand them as 'involved with the organisations' in your parlance, and hence should not contribute - and those who are not involved, cannot contribute anyway, because they don't have the content. This is a catch 22 situation. Indirectly, you expect Sachin Tendulkar to contribute to soccer, and Ronaldo to Cricket; that's funny, isn't it?

Also, it is difficult to understand your keenness and passion for the page on 'Sant Nirankari Mission' since you are not involved with the organisation. It will not be out of place if one contributes in his own area of expertise. --LoveMankind talk 07:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

My only concern is maintaining Encyclopaedic quality on all articles I suggest you read WP:AGF, before making further comments about my motives for editing. The India related articles (of which I have been involved in for sometime), tend to have serious WP:POV issues. Rather than engage in apointless debate with me on the merits or demerits of Wikipedia policy I suggest you read Wikipedia policiy of WP:POV, WP:Puffery, WP:Reliable and WP:Manual of Style. Best Wishes SH 11:58, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Sikh-history, Whenever there is a conflict between technicalities and the spirit behind it, the spirit always prevails over and the spirit should prevail over. Your focus seems to be more on technicalities whereas that of Lovemankind is on the spirit.

The focus should be on reconciliation and making the good content compatible rather than resorting to reverts as done by Sikh-history. In fact, the content is finally the lifeline of Wikipedia. Thanks.--TruthDivine (talk) 16:40, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, TruthDivine. Sikh-history is actually correct in this instance. While we welcome most contributions to the encyclopedia, people who work for an organisation are discouraged from editing the article about that organisation. Notable people are asked not to edit their own articles or articles where they may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

Wikipedia is not intended to serve as a webhost, and is not the place to advertise, or to go into extreme detail about an organization or its mission. That is not the kind of information you would see in a book-based encyclopedia, and it's not the kind of encyclopedia we are trying to build. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. -- Dianna (talk) 22:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request

Would it be possible to remove the Gyan Publishing reference and add a {{cn}} tag? Gyan Publishing/Publishers/Publications is on the mirrors and forks list so does not qualify as a reliable source. Thank you. JanetteDoe (talk) 16:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Spirituality gives Health and Wealth.Future talks should be based on it.It is the need of time. Email-drchauhanjs@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.138.30 (talk) 12:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Useful information

Rather than take up the battle to turn this mess of an article into a proper unbiased, encyclopedic source of information, let me just point anyone who comes across this and is curious about what the Saint Nirankari Mission actually is here, from before it was ruined. Snarkibartfast (talk) 14:35, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sant Nirankari Mission. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100702161707/http://www.nirankari.com/history/hist3.htm to http://www.nirankari.com/history/hist3.htm

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) 01:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Sant Nirankari Mission.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:08, 19 July 2020 (UTC)