Talk:Five Ks

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Five Ks article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

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 articles

India Low‑importance

	India portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was last assessed in May 2012.

Appropriately neutral?[edit]

The statement that "One who is neither following rules nor keeping all five Ks can not be called a Sikh." seems likely to be supported by extremely observant Sikhs and equally profoundly disputed by less observant Sikhs. Particularly problematic on a page with no references.

A more appropriate statement might be eg "Some sources consider that...", with relevant references.

Even better: "Some sources consider that..., while others dispute this.", with relevant references for both views. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GS(v) (talk • contribs) 13:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A month later, the problematic sentence has not been substantiated or made more neutral. I'm removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GS(v) (talk • contribs) 14:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kacchera or Kachera?[edit]

I have noticed that at the beginning of the article, the undergarments worn by Sikhs is referred to as 'Kacchera', however later into the article, it is spelt as 'Kachera'.

I assume that this is a spelling mistake, but either way, the spelling should be consistent throughout the article. I felt like this should be pointed out. 86.155.14.152 (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Or kachhera. Let's pick one and stick to it. —Tamfang (talk) 06:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keski?[edit]

It seems like the subject of the Keski needs to be addressed. 100.44.4.72 (talk) 04:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"kachera (a white undergarment)"[edit]

The introduction says, "kachera (a white undergarment)", yet the section Kachera does not mention colour, and the picture clearly shows a pair of grey underwear. The main article Kachera does mention white, but again with the same grey image. ◃Amniarix▹ (talk) 12:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]