Talk:Golden Temple
Warning: active arbitration remedies
 | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence, realise) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | Golden Temple was one of the Art and architecture good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | |||||||||||||
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_in_Amritsar,_India.jpg){kind=small}
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. |
 | Text or other creative content from Operation Blue Star was copied or moved into Golden Temple with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Did you know nomination
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by Launchballer talk 17:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the Golden Temple is made of copper overlaid with gold leaves?
- Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by Ophyrius (talk) and MaplesyrupSushi (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 19:50, 13 April 2025 (UTC).
General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- At least one sentence copied/closely paraphrased from bbc.co.uk; see Copyvio Detector. - Other problems:
Hook eligibility:
- Cited: - The proposed hook as written is not supported in the article. The article says
The Temple was renovated in marble and copper in 1809, and in 1830 Ranjit Singh donated gold to overlay the sanctum with gold leaf.
The article does not support the idea that the Temple ismade of copper
. The listed source for the hook is not accessible via Google Books, and the source for the claim in the article, pp. 28-30, also does not mention anything about the temple materials including copper. The Encyclopedia of Sikhism entry on the temple does say its upper levels and roofs are gilded copper. - Interesting: - Not very. I would recommend making it a bit more specific. It is unsurprising that a "Golden Temple" would indeed have gold leaf on it.
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
Updated 28 April 2025; DYK withdrawn without necessary improvements. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
@Dclemens1971 (talk) Thanks for reviewing this nomination. It's hard to change the language of the sentence as it represents the the information clearly and is a translation of the the information. As a sikh myself, I can assure that the similarity is a coincidence. Still, to prevent a violation, I've fixed it to prevent the copyright violation. Also, thanks for the source & I think that it would be better to change the hook. Apologies for taking your time in this hook as this is my first nom. saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 09:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- Ophyrius There's still part of that sentence that is copied word for word from the BBC source. Please ping me once you have addressed that, updated the text of the hook and added an image to the DYK. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:32, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: I have provided a courtesy ping to the nominator; if improvements are not made by 28 April I will close this DYK nomination. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Dclemens1971: I'm withdrawing this nomination as most of the sources are book sources and I was unsuccessful finding their web equivalents. Also there aren't much intersting facts in the article for dyk which are reliable. saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 05:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Ophyrius: Are you really sure about withdrawing this? Given how this is the most important site in all of Sikhism I'm sure there is material that could work as a hook. @Dclemens1971: Does anything else come to mind, or is the main issue the close paraphrasing and not the lack of a hook? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: The close paraphrasing is not completely dealt with, see notes above, and that's a threshold issue, but the lack of a compelling hook is the bigger obstacle. Surely a good hook can be written but "did you know the Golden Temple is covered with gold" is not it. I am not a sufficient expert on this subject matter to develop my own hook so depend on the nominator. Feel free to reverse my "no" and restore the "maybe" if you'd like to take over the review! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: You are right but Having been through the article, I think the content is already known by most people. But, still I think 1 sentence can nominated as hook. But, it's a book source like most others & I can't find a web equivalent. Book sources is the main reason I'm unable to find good hooks.saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 09:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Ophyrius: Are you really sure about withdrawing this? Given how this is the most important site in all of Sikhism I'm sure there is material that could work as a hook. @Dclemens1971: Does anything else come to mind, or is the main issue the close paraphrasing and not the lack of a hook? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Dclemens1971: I'm withdrawing this nomination as most of the sources are book sources and I was unsuccessful finding their web equivalents. Also there aren't much intersting facts in the article for dyk which are reliable. saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 05:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
If there's no problem with the source I choose this hook. Else, you can close this discussion as failed.saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 09:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- ... that land for the Golden Temple was chosen by Guru Amar Das?
- Not taking over the review as I generally try to avoid reviewing articles that involve contentious topics (and the Golden Temple and Sikhism as a whole fall under that). I'll ask around and see if anyone could propose a new hook here; the article is fairly dense so there might be something useful. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
I have to note that the article is currently at GAR, so this nomination will have to go on hold until that is resolved. In any case, how does this sound? I asked at the Wikimedia Discord for suggestions, and a user suggested the following idea:
.jpg)
Volunteers preparing food for the Langar
- ALT ... that the Golden Temple, the holiest site in Sikhism, serves thousands of meals for free daily?
- That could definitely work if the sourcing is proper and the GAR is resolved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:35, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
- This BBC source says it serves 100,000 meals every day, so I would tweak the hook to be more specific about that instead of just saying "thousands". ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5 and ArtemisiaGentileschiFan:Added image. Also having an alternative.saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 04:02, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
The GAR has closed in delisting, thus failing the "newness" criterion.Redtigerxyz Talk 13:52, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5 and ArtemisiaGentileschiFan:Added image. Also having an alternative.saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 04:02, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
GAR
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • GAN review not found
- Result: Delisted. Tarlby (t) (c) 15:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
Poorly reviewed by a blocked user and should return to GAN's queue. During the DYK process, a copyright violation and failed verification was already found immediately by Dclemens1971. The prose doesn't look good either. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 03:16, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- can try to help address some of these issues. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Eucalyptusmint Do you still plan on working on this? Tarlby (t) (c) 17:56, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Comment. I did not go through it with a fine-toothed comb but I would agree this needs a close look and may warrant delisting. The GAR should have caught the copyvio. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Suggestions
Since the GAR has closed, noting suggestions that need work:
- In "Mughal Empire era destruction and rebuilding", Abdali is said to have destroyed the Temple a 3rd time in 1764. In earlier para, it is said that the Temple was rebuilt in 1764 (renovations continued till 1784) after second destruction in 1762. Was the 3rd destruction after rebuilding in 1764 following the 2nd destruction OR it is rebuilt in 1764 after the 3rd destruction?? Please fix the chronology
- "Ranjit Singh era reconstruction": says that Ranjit Singh founded the Sikh Empire at age 36. Then at age 22, he restarted rebuilding? Please fix the chronology. Was the rebuilding start when Singh was not a king?
- "Destruction and reconstruction after Indian independence": Was the Temple destroyed or damaged in Operation Bluestar? NPOV needs to be examined. Also, Wikipedia:UNDUE to this event. No need of Chellaney's report etc. The Operation needs to be summarized in 1/2 paras, considering its importance in overall history (Wikipedia:Recentism). The same is again covered in "Operation Blue Star", which is a better summary of the events.
- "Destruction and reconstruction after Indian independence": The 2021 death of a young man may be UNDUE in the history.
- "Destruction and reconstruction after Indian independence": 2023 blasts seem misplaced under the heading. Maybe "Post Indian Independence" may be a neutral title.
Redtigerxyz Talk 14:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
- I agree with these suggestions especially the one around "Destruction and reconstruction after Indian independence" - there are zero citations about the "destruction" and the entire section doesn't describe the so called destruction and reconstruction. The heading is quite POV and not reflective of the content. A better title would be Operation Blue Star and subsequent events or something like that. Longewal (talk) 01:54, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
- The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
- There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
- It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
- Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
- Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.