This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Punjab High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punjab, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Punjab on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PunjabWikipedia:WikiProject PunjabTemplate:WikiProject PunjabPunjab-related High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Sikhism This article is part of WikiProject Sikhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Sikhism. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventionsSikhismWikipedia:WikiProject SikhismTemplate:WikiProject SikhismSikhism India: Punjab High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as High-importance). Architecture Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1. Archive 2.

Literally well known that the Sain Mian Mir durbar sahib foundation laying myth is a myth began by a Muslim historiographer Butay Shah, in the 1800s, who knew of the close relations between the Guru and the Sain, however, it clearly states in the Guru Granth Sahib itself, that Guru Arjan ji asked Guru Ram Das Ji to place the first foundation brick^{[1][2] [3]}

Neutrality Dispute: The views given are one sided in respect of Operation Blue Star

I Pankal143 (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't most entries on the page Talk:Golden Temple (disambiguation) be archived here? Wiki-uk (talk) 09:49, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears so. Gsingh (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Moved and archived. Gsingh (talk) 05:22, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Interior of the Golden Temple, Amritsar, painting, dated 1854 V&A Museum --Ekabhishek^talk 16:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I just wanted to point out that the Ahmad Shah Durrani (Abdali) article does not mention the brutalities of this man and what he did to the Sikhs and the Golden Temple. Could someone please contribute something to that article since he is being portrayed as a benevolent guy, which he really was not? --Pee3.14159 (talk) 02:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to point out that Harmandir Sahib was rebuilt twice, once due to Mugals who filled the temple with dirt and destroyed certain parts to beyond repair. The second time after Operation Blue Star (which has already been mentioned). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.165.41.172 (talk) 08:27, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The opening paragraph's last sentence talking about a Muslim fakir (Sai Hazrat Mian Mir) laying the foundation should also clearly state that Sikhs are not Muslims, and it was an act of seeing everyone as an equal by Gurus. It should mention that the Sikh Guru had asked him to lay the foundation, it wasn't like the Muslim fakir was a leader of Sikhs.

Please let me know your views about this, and let's correct that sentence.

Harry33166 (talk) 17:34, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have rephrased the paragraph to conform more accurately to the cited source and made a couple of corrections - 1) the date the cornerstone was laid - 2) the Sufi saint didn't compile the Adi Granth. Apuldram (talk) 23:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.sikhnet.com/news/golden-temple-all-real-gold-asked-canadian-pm Mention if it is real gold. Mention how much all that gold might be worth. Mention if there are thus any security problems. Jidanni (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it is real gold is covered in the section 'Architectural features'.The value to the Sikh community and to the world cannot be expressed in dollars or rupees. The location gives some protection. The details of protection measures should for obvious reasons not be published. Apuldram (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have true idea Pankal143 (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good for you. Are you going to tell us what your idea is? Apuldram (talk) 22:20, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I never heard the name Harmandir Saheb before, I referred to it as Golden Temple. Should this page be moved to Golden Temple as Harmandir Sahib is not a very widespread name ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.215.112.58 (talk) 12:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A decision was made to move to Golden Temple on 18 March 2007, see here, but never successfully implemented. (I think that the move process was probably not correctly followed and the system automatically returned to the older title)
This section (from above) may also apply. Apuldram (talk) 14:14, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Golden Temple. 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/20131116080518/http://new.sgpc.net/ to http://new.sgpc.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:37, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sapedder: Thanks for reverting that vandalism. Is it necessary to keep this source now, since you've expanded the article with other reliable sources. This source doesn't look reliable and isnn't properly accessible. "Server errors" et. al. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:52, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaning towards keeping it, the link doesn't work for me either and the website looks defunct, but the source itself looks reliable. The exact page numbers aren't included, but judging from a search, info from pages 44, 50, 110, 121, 126, 212, and 349 support the statement about practices, and info from pages 110 and 212 supports the statement about decline and proselytization, so it doesn't look misused. The citation should be fixed/clarified instead of removed imo, even if there is adequate sourcing otherwise. I'll go ahead and update it with the archive.org link. Sapedder (talk) 05:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sapedder: Thanks for fixing that link. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:08, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Encyclopedia of Sikhism has a dedicated and comprehesive article on Singh Sabha movement in Volume IV (S–Z). We should rely on that one (as the older version of this article did and now-dead-url learnpunjabi.org used to link to). We should avoid relying on passing remarks on different pages, as these do not provide the appropriate context relevant here. I have fixed the link. Sapedder: I found some of the past removal/changes unconstructive (some by others and some by you). I have reverted them here (I see the same problems with your edits in Idolatry in Sikhism article, but let us discuss that one on its talk page). If you would like to discuss changes in the Singh Sabha subsection, please share your concerns and comments after you have read the dedicated EOS article I just linked and other cited sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:34, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree quite strongly, as I think any honest Wiki user would, with this arbitrary characterization of “unconstructive,” and the subsequent baseless reversions to clearly inferior writing on this pretext. The vast majority of the content was drawn from already existing sources, and is backed by those sources, often multiple ones. I think any user comparing the prior versions of both the Singh Sabha and Idol articles compared to my versions would see a leaps-and-bounds improvement. Both articles were long-neglected, poorly written trainwrecks more interested in making arguments supporting specific POVs than actually presenting a clear, detailed view of Sikh history and beliefs.

The Singh Sabha article omitted massive amounts of detail, context, and history and had poorly written summaries of cherrypicked opinions for the determined pov that the mainstream Sikhs were interlopers who “changed” beliefs (to the exclusion of the mountain of Sikh scholarship explaining otherwise, some already present within the existing sources.) and other facile, ignorant talking points.

The Idol article seemed more interested in proving idolatry than presenting actual history, details, and context, taking constant unwarranted potshots at mainstream Khalsa beliefs in every section, never aiming this scrutiny at the sanatan section, and (incorrectly) using other sikh sects as entryist positions to launch further attacks at mainstream beliefs. Again, no context or history, only pushing a viewpoint via selected opinions. That doesn't help, it only invites counter-opinions and arguments, and is of no use to the article or the reader. Stick to the facts.

Both articles were gutted of almost all information, and then filled with unbalanced opinions you favored, rendering them useless for all practical purposes. Where was this concern for constructiveness and neutrality then? Both articles were long overdue for massive overhauls.

I think my edits are better described as inconvenient for people who need major details to be omitted to better present their own POV; such types often have no knowledge or even interest in the circumstances that lead to historical events. Adding those inconvenient details are certainly more "constructive" and less divisive than, for example, continuing to formulate more flawed arguments in deficient English and contributing them quite generously to the Criticism page, which I observed doesn’t actually exist for a certain much larger religion, but instead redirects to a victimhood page, curiously enough. Perhaps in the interest of constructiveness, this can be rectified. Sapedder (talk) 14:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sapedder: Please avoid questioning or projecting motives. Also avoid allegations of "unwarranted potshots at mainstream Khalsa beliefs", etc. If you identify particular scholarly sources with page numbers, and work politely with others AGF, we can improve whatever you wish to contribute. Let us continue the idolatry-in-Sikhism-related discussion to that article's page. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have replaced the Holiest Gurudwara and pilgrimage site description with preeminent spiritual site. I hope there are no concerns with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoyceGW1 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ms Sarah Welch and Sapedder: Hi, since you were instrumental in reaching the consensus version of this article, I reverted JoyceGW1's good faith changes [1] yesterday, asking them to discuss it here first. I am unable to verify some of the sources for technical reasons. Were the changes made by them OK? Kindly see this. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:38, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk and JoyceGW1: So this is what I've gathered from the given sources:

• EOS makes no mention of the term in the given entry.
• Both Pashaura, and Cole all mention the term as referring to a distinct raised platform on the perimeter of the site, not the whole site or the gurdwara itself.
• Madanjit does not mention the term at all on the given page, but here the given info is similar to the other sources, referring to a specific area, and that the term arose from legend.

Neither is it written in any of these sources that this title was given by Guru Arjan. So with that, I think the edits are OK. Also, feel free to replace dead/ineffective links with these ones. Sapedder (talk) 02:48, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sapedder: Well, I removed this association of At Sath Tirath with Guru Arjan as per your suggestion and the sources. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Thanks. I added the link above for Madanjit so it can be verified by others, and replaced the one for Cole (previous link wasn't working for me either). Sapedder (talk) 11:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sapedder: Nice.. Thanks for fixing the IPA. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sapedder:, thank you. I am going to assume you reviewed the other changes as well since you mentioned "the edits are OK". JoyceGW1 (talk) 07:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JoyceGW1: Yes, I think the edits that were made are okay in totality. The other part you added about the daily routine being set was also in the sources. Sapedder (talk) 23:54, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gagandeep Sra: Do not remove Harmandir Sahib from the lead or change it without discussion. Harmandir Sahib is a sourced name for the building. Discuss here first. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnblaze editor: Do not remove Harmandir Sahib from the lead which is a sourced commonly known name of the place. You also added unsourced content in the article and removed sourced content/sources in your edit [2]. You have also reverted maintenance work done on the article in the past. Discuss your concerns here and gain consensus first. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Golden temple Ravi n jha.jpg

Sgpro321 (talk) 05:59, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please add my photograph on this page Sgpro321 (talk) 06:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sgpro321: Please address the copyright concerns on Commons first. Once that has been taken care of, please reopen this request (change "yes" to "no" in the template text above) and it can be considered. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ds00896 (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please Change The Name This is Not GOLDEN TEMPLE This is Sri Darbar Sahib Ds00896 (talk) 14:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Melmann 15:55, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The gurdwara is built around a man-made holy water pool 2409:4050:2DB9:FC42:7EFB:6FD4:CDD9:516 (talk) 17:02, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why it is being mentioned that Guru hargobind went to shivalik hills and guru gobind singh came back with khalsa when this event is not true. Guru hargobind sahib didnt leave amritsar. They stayed there, built Akal takhat sahib, fought four battles with mughals. Guru harkirishan sahib visited delhi on many occasions and Guru teg bahadur sahib stayed in Baba bakala so this event is nor true that they went to shivalik hills to escape persecution. Sikhsingh (talk) 20:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guru Hargobind left for Kartarpur. There the Battle of Kartarpur happened and the the Guru left for Kiratpur where the next few Gurus stayed. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed some of it by going through the sources. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 22:22, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This is much accurate. Sikhsingh (talk) 01:23, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sequence of names is incorrect ,it shall be replaced with "Harmandir Sahib also known as Golden Temple or Darbār Sahib". & by the way suvaran mandir is a wrong name. Velthorion (Interact) 10:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the commonname / article name should be mentioned first per MOS:LEADSENTENCE WP:COMMONNAME, and "Suvaran Mandir" is sourced. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]