Talk:Soka Gakkai

The flag shown is the wrong flag. This: Sanshokuki2 Is the proper flag.I can't make the edit because it locked

Not sure we want to include new links to pages that are being evaluated for their validity. The pages related to Nichiren Shoshu and Taisekiji are largely unsourced "original research"; or the citations are to the subject's own websites - both violations of WP policy. --Daveler16 (talk) 04:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Once again Daveler, you are wrong. Regarding Article 23, you stated that all vehement criticisms of the Nichiren Shoshu are from the past. Here is an up to date SGI 2019 website, https://nichiren.com/eng/index.php/news/ in which SGI takes apart the Nichiren Shoshu 2602:306:CC5C:C1A9:40E3:BBE6:7162:7932 (talk) 01:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC) Mark R. Rogow

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sanshokuki2.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

This applies to other sections, but the most prominent one in my mind is the one that reads:

"Soka Gakkai has long been a subject of criticism in the Japanese weekly tabloid news/magazine press. Press criticism of the Soka Gakkai should be seen against the backdrop of negative press coverage of new religious movements in general. It is important to understand that Japanese journalism is unlike that of the West. Scholars point out that less than two percent of journalists in Japan have degrees in journalism. That plus feeble libel laws leave little recourse for the victims of malicious defamation. Associate Professor of Religion at Hamilton College, Richard Seager writes that it is time to cease being overly intrigued by the Soka Gakkai’s history of controversy. “Over the course of a relatively short period, the Soka Gakkai moved from the margins of Japanese society into its mainstream.”"

This seems like way too much analysis for an encyclopedia entry. I'd trim this down to something like:

"Soka Gakkai has been subject to criticism in Japanese weekly tabloid news/magazine press, but current scholarship shows them being more in the mainstream of Japanese society than in its margins."

Bigfreakingkelleher (talk) 17:57, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

@Bigfreakingkelleher and LaunchOctopus: Go ahead and edit. Be an "excellent citizen". WP:WEASEL, WP:FLUFF, WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFIABILITY all look like they're highly applicable throughout this article. You can contribute to "humanistic progress and continuous improvement" of this article by improving its "vision and structure" in line with Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Let the source, culture and education be with you! But please don't violate WP:RELTIME by writing about "current scholarship". Date the scholarship to whenever it was done. It's unlikely that you're going to edit this particular article to update it for new scholarship every year for the next 20 or 30 years. Boud (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

It seems nothing was ever done about this, so I've added the NPOV tag. Given the vast amount of criticism out there about Soka Gakkai, its one tiny mention of "cult appellation" amongst _tons_ of laudatory fluff is entirely NPOV. -Etoile ✩ (talk) 10:54, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

The information about the SG's newspaper Seikyo Shimbun is unofficial and deserves to be corrected.The newspaper claims 5,5 millions copies in circulation, but this account is made by the Sôka gakkai itself, and it is disputed. The Seikyo Shimbun is not sold at newsstands in Japan, only through subscription, made by members of the SG. Thus, it is not correct to claim it is the 3rd japanese newspaper.Raoul Mishima (talk) 11:47, 19 november 2023 (UTC)

I add a line about Seikyo Shimbun not a member of japanese official newspapers circulation authorities / impossible to verify it's claimed 5,5 millions copies. Raoul Mishima (talk) 02:49, march 12th 2024 (UTC)