Talk:Soka Gakkai

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)

Had to Undo

Sorry, but a blog isn't a good reference.--Daveler16 (talk) 00:09, 7 April 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

The Image of Nichiren Buddhism's Object of Worship

Displaying the Nichiren Buddhism Object is highly inappropriate. It is for members' daily practice and visitors to our cultural centers only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.165.190.60 (talk) 16:38, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I recognize your concerns but on this site we have to follow WP guidelines. This is also an issue on various other pages such as those about Islam. Most Muslims feel that any graphic portrayals of Muhammed are sacriligious. Yet they appear in WP articles.BrandenburgG (talk) 19:02, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Citations

A statement in the lede was referenced to the website of an interested party. There are plenty of legitimate, scholarly references to the marriage of the Soka Gakkai and Nichiren Shoshu, so I substituted one of those. Also, an un-referenced characterization of Komeito fixed.--Daveler16 (talk) 00:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

New additions and changes to the "Relation to Nichiren Shoshu" section either have no citation and constitute "original research", [is not allowed]; or are referenced to Nichiren Shoshu websites. The place for Nichiren Shoshu doctrine and version of history is the Nichiren Shoshu Wikipedia page, not the page of another religion. Picture caption changed. Other changes will be made to reflect both WP policy and the subject of the Soka Gakkai page.--Daveler16 (talk) 16:31, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

In the Gohonzon section, reference to "Dai Gohonzon" removed. The cited reference, Seagar, males no mention of it as a model for transcription, on page 93 or anywhere else in Encountering the Dharma.--Daveler16 (talk) 03:49, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Caption changed again. Building opened in October 1972 so it's unlikely the picture was taken in September 1972. Also, this article is about the Soka Gakkai, not the Nichiren Shoshu opinion of the Soka Gakkai and its history.--Daveler16 (talk) 03:59, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

No more editing wars

There have been many generations of editors active on the Soka Gakkai page. I think we need to welcome many new editors into the future.

There have been a lot of controversial edits on this page as well. But I am proud that these disputes have been largely discussed on the Talk page and usually wise compromises have been made to accommodate the spectrum of reliable sources.

So let's avoid hit-and-run edits and reverts. I think everyone here will agree with these concerns.

Also, I think all wikis, not just WP, struggle to develop rules of etiquette (see [1], for example). Let's try to be respectful and keep the pace of edits to a speed that other editors can follow. Believe me, I've learned this from my own experience after having received some bitter feedback from my streaks of obsessive edits in the past.

Thank you for your cooperation on this!BrandenburgG (talk) 19:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I have to agree with BrandenburgG and Daveler16. Nichiren Shoshu has its own page, and they can put their POV there, where it's appropriate. This page is not about the Nichiren Shoshu view of the Soka Gakkai. And, the sources have to be real and legitimate. And there have to be sources!--JackBNimble43 (talk) 18:48, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Removal of image

@HansJohan808, I'd like to request that you voluntarily remove the image you placed on Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nittatsu_Shonin.jpg). I suspect that this image is copyrighted by others and not, as you claim, your own work.

The image seems to be a photo taken from a bifold publication as the crease from the publication is very evident. Taking a photograph of a publication does not make it your "own" work.

If you had taken this image on your own I suspect you would have had to have an unlikely and very privileged access to the event being portrayed. And, if you were the photographer, I suspect you would have uploaded an original image into Wikimedia Commons.

I would also like to request that you voluntarily remove this image from the three sites:Nichiren Shōshū, Soka Gakkai, and Dai Gohonzon.

Thank you for your voluntary cooperation. BrandenburgG (talk) 19:57, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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.

Wikipedia 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)

Follow the Source

@HansJohan808, this concerns your edit on 7/3 in which you changed Nam to Na-mu. You claimed you wanted to use the untruncated version.

I understand your frustration about whether NMRK should be translated as Nam or Namu. The debate goes on and on among different Nichiren groups and requires compromise. Who's right? Who knows? The compromise on the NMRK article itself is to call it Nam(u). Pretty clever, right?

Another compromise is to follow the source. The source here (https://books.google.com/books?id=v2yiyLLOj88C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Religions+of+the+world+:+a+comprehensive+encyclopedia+of+beliefs+and+practices&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjIkpbw_5vjAhXhlOAKHdOVABQQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=Gohonzon%20%3A%20a%20comprehensive%20encyclopedia%20of%20beliefs%20and%20practices&f=true) is very reliable. Here the two authors use Nam and not Namu so we should use what the authors use and not second guess them. BrandenburgG (talk) 20:14, 4 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/wiki/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)