This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 00:40, 14 August 2019 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Soka Gakkai/Archive 22) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:40, 14 August 2019 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Soka Gakkai/Archive 22) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Soka Gakkai article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23Auto-archiving period: 40 days  |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Soka Gakkai article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23Auto-archiving period: 40 days |
Soka Gakkai is a
It is a dangerous sect that supports and washes the brain with fanaticism and worship of a person. Terrible organization, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.135.151.77 (talk) 07:57, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
You don't know what you are saying. Research the reality.Ltdan43 (talk) 06:36, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Soka Gakkai article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.151.61.121 (talk) 09:05, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
My dog was killed by soka gakkai gang stalking using public vehicle operated by tax money such as ambulance and patrol car siren.
They should be clarify and apologize these action harmful to human civilization and destroying society
TETSUHEI (talk) 00:51, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Flag
The flag shown is the wrong flag. This: Sanshokuki2 Is the proper flag. I can't make the edit because it locked
Article too one sided?
I have been exposed to Japanese soka gakkai in real life numerous times, usually in a controversial way and decided to read up on it to get to understand it better.
Reading through this English version it seems all potential controversies or criticisms are put down to over-reacting Japanese media. Which in today's "fake news" crying environment seems a too easy way out, and the whole English article seems all too much in a positive light, where most issues in the world have more than one side to it. And we love Misplaced Pages as it arrives to accommodate all views of a subject in an impartial fashion, where this article seems too partial.
I have subsequently read the Japanese version, albeit with Google translate, and obviously with most members and public impact of soka gakkai being in Japan that article is a lot more detailed on the criticisms and controversies front. So if the Japanese version can stand up to the supposed majority of SG friendly editors and the same Misplaced Pages etiquette shouldn't some of the material shared there be included in the English version?
Fact is, SG in Japan is a deeply divisive issue, from my exposure all down to personal experience and not to media over reaction. So maybe there is a case to be made here to accommodate some of the less fawning views. ICBINBFM (talk) 02:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Excuse the typos ;-) ICBINBFM (talk) 02:58, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
- @ICBINBFM, welcome to this page. I believe we need new hard-working editors to continually improve this article.
- This article certainly should be impartial and reflect current reliable sources. The only disagreement I have is your choice of two words, "fawning" and "fake." Both of those words are very loaded. Let's use impartial words to convey impartial thoughts.
- I have also used Google translate to look at the Soka Gakkai articles in other languages (French and German). They are all unique and that probably reflects the sources that are available in different places around the world.
- Misplaced Pages guidelines are very clear that we are free to use sources from other languages. We should be very careful in their use, however, to make sure fellow editors can evaluate and respond to sources in other languages.
- No apology is necessary here about grammar. We know that there are editors whose native languages are other than English. Please just do your best and ask on the Talk page when you need help.
- BrandenburgG (talk) 19:23, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
- @ICBINBFM I'm not at all sure what you mean by "one sided". Criticisms and controversies regarding trrhe Soka Gakkai are prominent in the section on Toda, on the section on Ikeda, and in the Public Perception sub-section. There is also an entire section dedicated to the charge that it is a "cult". These are presented as criticisms and controversies, not as facts; that is probably as it should be, and is where the academic and modern news sources lead us. What is your idea for additional material? Thanks. --Daveler16 (talk) 20:06, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Spurious editing in "Cult appellation"
Removed edits stating, with no source, that Soka Gakkai controls the Japanese fire department and uses ambulance sirens to spy on citizens.--Daveler16 (talk) 23:11, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Karel Dobbelaere
@tetsuhei, why did you remove the Karel Dobbelaere (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Karel_Dobbelaere?wprov=sfla1) source? Further, why was it removed without even any discussion on the Talk page?
Dobbelaere is the past-President and General Secretary of the International Society for the Sociology of Religion. He is a specialist in the sociology of religion and an Emeritus Professor at two noted Belgian universities.
You replaced it with unsourced personal opinion. It is an example of outrageous disruptive editing. This must stop! BrandenburgG (talk) 16:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Disruptive editing
Over the years, many editors have worked to improve this article. The discussions are in the Archives.These discussions all occurred on the Talk Page, as WP policy stipulates. The discussions were sometimes contentious, but have resulted in the best use of respected, current, and often academic sources to convey the most accurate information about the Soka Gakkai -- its organization, its teachings, its history and its controversies -- the editors could construct.
For the past few weeks there has arrived an editor who is acting as if he (or she) and he alone can decide the content of this article. She has been asked to participate on the Talk Page and has not. She has been informed of the inadmissibility of Original Research, and reverts all corrections of same. She (or he)has been told this is about the Soka Gakkai, not another religion's view of the Soka Gakkai, and has ignored that. She's been asked to remove a picture that violates the rules of Wiki Commons, and has failed to do so.
All of that can be seen in the above few topics on this page (starting with the discussion "Citations"). I have also posted on his personal Talk Page requesting that he refrain from making scores of edits every few days soother editors can evaluate the changes, and to participate here on this Talk Page. The response has been another flurry of edits with no discussion.
For the record, HansJohan808 has, since becoming an editor on May 18th (evidently),and through 17:47 on 8July, made 400 edits. Of these. 367 are related to Nichiren Buddhism, possible indicating a single issue editor with an agenda. Of these, 59 have been on this age, the first being June 21st -- 59 edits in a little over 2 weeks.
This is all just for the record, for now.--Daveler16 (talk) 20:49, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Corrections
Changed the title of "Practices" back to "Practices", and added a clarifying opening sentence. Also, changed the first sentence in the "Gohonzon" section to match what the attributed source (Seager) actually says.--Daveler16 (talk) 20:16, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Also changed the caption of the Gohonzon picture so that it is relevant to the Soka Gakkai article, rather than impposing the views of another sect on the Soka Gakkai.--Daveler16 (talk) 21:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Removed a "timeline" that had no referenced source, and replaced it with a source that had previously been removed and replaced by said timeline. And while it is fair to note that the Soka Gakkai still has websites that are critical of Nichiren Shoshu, wording changed to reflect that those websites were constructed many years ago. Citation remains.--Daveler16 (talk) 16:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Made a number of changes correcting grammar and relevance, as well as removing some statements not supported by the cited references.--Daveler16 (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
There is now a list of performance groups, but no citations. Can that be corrected please?--Daveler16 (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Removed more statements in the "Former Relations..." section that had no, or faulty, references and so constituted Original Research.--Daveler16 (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Public Perseption
I added a few sentences about the reality of Japanese journalism which is not comparable to journalism in the West.Ltdan43 (talk) 22:33, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Made some corrections
Wow, there are a lot of things with no source, or wrongly quoted sources. Changed some in Gohonzon, "Faith Practice and Study", and Chanting.--JackBNimble43 (talk) 22:53, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- C-Class Buddhism articles
- Mid-importance Buddhism articles
- C-Class Religion articles
- Mid-importance Religion articles
- C-Class New religious movements articles
- Top-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- Low-importance sociology articles
- C-Class social movements task force articles
- Social movements task force articles
- B-Class Japan-related articles
- High-importance Japan-related articles
- WikiProject Japan articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics