Talk:Akal Takht/Archive 1

Neutrality dispute on History section
The sentence "On June 4, 1984, the Akal Takht building was damaged during invasion of Darbar Sahib Complex in Operation Bluestar launched by the Indian Army on orders of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to destroy and suppress the culture of an ethnic group which raised their voice against the atrocities of the cruel regime and demanded the basic rights to live with dignity." does not conform with the Neutral Point of View requirements (see Neutral point of view). I would like to see a more neutral sentence (or even one with a credible citations) instead of this sentence. Confuseddesi (talk) 17:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality dispute on 1984 section
The article claims that the goal of Indira Gandhi was to "to finish the sikhs". This seems like a ridiculous claim. Whatever you think of the operation - no country would allow anyone to fortify a building, stockpiling weapons and get away with it. Most likely, her motivation was to ensure the unity of India. It seems very unlikely that "to finish the sikhs" was the purpose, particularly, since Gandhi insisted to keep her sikh bodyguards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.194.243.179 (talk) 11:02, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

GOLD ON AKAL TAKHT NOT GIVEN BY INDIRA GANDHI
READ http://akaltakhtsahib.com/architecture-history/ GOLD WAS FROM RANJIT SINGH. REBUILT BY INDIAN GOVERNMENT WITH EXISTING GOLD. RE-REBUILT BY SIKHS WITH GOLD FROM ORIGINAL RANJIT SINGH. DON'T ENTER LIES ON WIKIPEDIA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.217.7 (talk) 15:09, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello IP user 142.59.217.7, Please Do not type in All CAPITAL letters, it is hard to read. I Think it is established that the Akal Takht was heavily damaged in the military operation. and had to be rebuilt. The golden dome of the Akal takht was also heavily damaged and needed to be rebuilt. The sources are provided. Please provide your sources that claim what you say. regards. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  15:28, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you User:DBigXray, but given the yelling, the edit warring, the accusations, the removal of information and references, it will be a while before you will hear anything coming from this IP. Thanks for trying, Drmies (talk) 15:36, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Damage in 1984
"Damaged the outer facade"

What absolute crap. Everyone knows that the Akal Takht was reduced to rubble. This is not a biased opinion. There are pictures to prove it. This is a complete insult to what occurred that day and is a clear factual error. PLease correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satnam Singh B (talk • contribs) 01:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 15 December 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Akal Takht → Akal Takhat – Spelling is "takhat", as per the official letterhead of the Akal Takhat and Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925.&#32;1forever&#38;ever (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Happily888 (talk) 00:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 14:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * queried move request Happily888 (talk) 00:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Official is not the same as Common. Wikipedia goes by WP:COMMONNAME. UtherSRG (talk) 22:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The official spelling "Akal Takhat" is also common. 1forever&#38;ever (talk) 23:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: for clearer consensus – robertsky (talk) 14:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject India has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 14:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose. The version with an extra -a- is probably closer to the Punjabi pronunciation, but it appears to be less common in English (3x fewer hits on Google Scholar ). It may also be worth keeping the spelling consistent with the five other takht articles (none of which use the -a- variant). – Uanfala (talk) 13:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Current name is more common in published English sources. So keep the current name as per WP:COMMONNAME – ThethPunjabi (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2023 (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.