Talk:Sanatan Singh Sabha

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Help post citations

There is a statement in the article which reads: "However, there has been growing acceptance of Hindu and Sikh unity, primarily on the fact that they are both Vedic and Dharmaic religions." Will someone please help add the following citation for it:

Guru Nanak Dev, "Japuji Sahib", verse 5, lines 7 & 8.

Thanks.Kanchanamala 05:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The above statement has since been deleted from the article. However, there is a statement that Guru Granth Sahib Ji is regarded as the Fifth Veda. The above citation may be added for it. Thanks.Kanchanamala 06:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The next statement reads: "According to Vish Ayengar, all the spiritual traditions of India are inspired by the Vedas." The citation for this is available as citation # 11 in the archived version of the article "Hindu" as edited by GMoneyBags at 19:37, 31 January 2007. Will someone also please help add that citation for it. Thanks.Kanchanamala 03:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The above statement has since been deleted from the article. Please ignore the request for posting a citation for it. Thanks.Kanchanamala 06:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Kanchanamala, didn't notice your comments earlier. The reason I deleted the statements from article was because they had been posted by a AnthroExpert1, a sockpuppet of blocked user Maleabroad and were not only uncited but also trollish with their reference to anti-Hindus and neo-Buddhists. If interested, you can read more about Maleabroad's vandalism, trolling and POV pushing at multiple wikipedia articles here. Abecedare 06:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Please check this out: There is a statement ending in "Guru Granth Sahib Ji ... the fifth veda." The following citation can be added for it.

Guru Nanak Dev, "Japuji Sahib", verse 5, lines 7 & 8.

Thanks.Kanchanamala 06:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No help needed anymore. I helped myself. Thanks.Kanchanamala 11:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reasons for re-inclusion

The statement was earlier removed by Abecedare for quite valid reasons. However, I have deemed it fit to re-include it for the following reasons. I trust and hope that Abecedare and other fellow editors will be able to share my reasons.

1. The statement helps the article significantly.

2. The cited source has been published in the electronic media since 2001, and the author has respectable academic credentials.

Thanks.Kanchanamala 09:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)