Talk:Mul Mantar

message: Most of the parts of this article have been pasted from SikhiWiki.org. Click on the link to follow it. Sikhiwiki.org has not mentioned its licensing on the same page and I do not have any reason to believe that it is GFDL compliant.
:Note to the uploader: Please check the licensing of the article that has been copied from SikhiWiki.org and discuss it here. I am watching this page. --Andy123(talk) 04:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: SikhiWiki is a GFDL compliant Wiki.  See disclaimer . Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:47, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I have read the same. So, why dont we try to merge and transfer articles from Sikhiwiki.org to Wikipedia? --Andy123(talk) 13:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, indeed User:Harisingh has been doing just that.  However, the site is a bit preachy, so it'll need npoving and some of the content is also from non-FDL sources so it needs to be double checked.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible copyright violation

message: The article is inconsistent: sometimes God is "He" and sometimes "he". I just copyedited the Ōaṅkāra section, and on the basis of the introduction ("The English translation uses 'he' when referring to God. Sikhism does not recognise God as being of either sex and the original Punjabi version reflects this by being without gender.") I changed an instance of "He" to "he".  I now wonder if I was right to do so.  Isidore 22:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends, if by 'He' you mean another word for 'God' then it should probably be capitalised.  All about style I suppose.  As long as it's consistent throughout the article it should be okay. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've edited the article to use He, etc, throughout. Isidore 19:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Should God be "He" or "he"?

message: Under the explaination for Sat Naam the words "nothing in existence" are used and the whole section seems to imply that Skihs believe that God created the universe at a fixed point in time. However, I thought the Sikh belief was that the life-time of God's creations was infinate and humanly indefinable, therefore Sikhs can not say if there was ever a nothingness, as opposed to the Hindu belief.
This is mere speculation and I can not back this up with scripture references so I think clarification is required. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.82.50.2 (talk) 05:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mul Mantar. 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/20120825234434/http://www.sikher.com/guru-granth-sahib/user/search/scripturelist?scripturepage=1 to http://www.sikher.com/guru-granth-sahib/user/search/scripturelist?scripturepage=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: Welcome to wikipedia editing. Do you have a source for this addition? Please see WP:V and WP:RS. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Sarah, I just recovered this from the previous version of the page because I know the version that includes the "Jap" verse is common and that there is debate about which is the proper version of the Mantar. My source is the previous version of the page since I remembered seeing it here. But I just found this website as well, can we use this? https://www.searchgurbani.com/guru-granth-sahib/ang-by-ang Dylanraiman (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

text: This website as well: http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=1 Dylanraiman (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  As you note there is debate about "which is the proper version of the Mantar" etc in Sikhism and various subtraditions. We can't use such websites per WP:RS guidelines (anyone or any competing group can offer their own interpretation, or start a website to mislead/misrepresent/carelessly discuss Sikhism/Sikh beliefs). We must try to find high quality sources. Do you have a peer-reviewed scholarly or equivalent reliable source? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes I understand what you're saying. Would it be possible for us to use a primary source for now until we find a scholarly source? Basing this on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Primary,_secondary,_and_tertiary_sources. Dylanraiman (talk) 17:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, primary sources are generally not okay (except in cases where an exact quote is appropriate and when chosen with care as there are variant primary texts/manuscripts). We prefer secondary or tertiary RS. Japji is long, and this truncated version and its translation should be verifiable in a quality source. I will let that table you added remain the article for about two weeks. Hopefully, that is enough time for you to find an RS. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source?