Talk:Sky Kingdom

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Malaysia Mid‑importance

	Malaysia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malaysia and Malaysia-related topics 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.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Oo, some problems

Firstly, sources aren't directly linked. I don't have time to go poking around for stuff and where they came from, but a lot are missing.

Secondly, the quoting of blogs, which are opinion-based, questions the reliability of this article.

Thirdly, do we really need a list of followers? After all, this article already says that there are a lot of followers, which for obvious reasons we will not put down.

-x42bn6 07:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the entry for the One True Religion!

(wink)

I'll see what I can do with the sources. The problem is, a lot of this information I pieced together over about thirty articles--a little piece here, and a little piece there... (Like his wives and children). If you look at the first link, you'll find the same list of articles.

It may be that some of the articles are lying or mistaken. I dunno. "Blog" (like "newspaper") describes a medium rather than the content which could be fact, opinion, or some mixture. In Malaysia, I'd trust the blogs further than I'd trust the newspapers, but you have to bring your own judgment to each article. I am convinced that the "Sky Kingdom" entry is at least 90 % reliable, with the major problems being the lack of in-depth theological sources and sect history.Dawud 09:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually a good point. There doesn't seem to be any sort of reliable source for Ayah Pin and his religious movement, other than Malaysian newspapers (not terribly reliable, judging by their track record), and blogs (hah!). There just doesn't seem to be any detailed, reliable source that we can use. Is Ayah Pin actually claiming to be God, or are they being attributed to his followers? Is he saying that his followers are claiming that he is God, or any number of Godly figures, or is he being circumspect and indirect? --T-Boy 03:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't really paid that much attention but it appears some of his followers at least have said he is God. He himself has made numerous bizzarre statements such as this one [1]. While I wouldn't trust Malaysian newspapers completely, I would trust them far more then most blogs. Esepcially when it comes to quotes from Ayah Pin. It's possibly they've made up or more likely used the quotes in a misleading way but I doubt it's. For starters, as far as I can tell (not being in Malaysia for quite a while) this wasn't really a big issue so I suspect they didn't care that much. Secondly, although it's true the Malaysian media is not always reliable the way they operate is to black out or ignore negative issues and to report government statements etc in a positive light without questioning (all these to some extent, it isn't really that bad). They don't tend to make stuff up much so generally, if you read between the lines you can get a fair idea. I've seen numerous reports in various international media like the BBC and didn't Malaysiakini have anything? Nil Einne 19:00, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the list of followers. I was thinking of trying to keep track of who was in jail, who was out, that sort of thing. (I think they're all out on bail now). Let folks know they're not forgotten.Dawud 09:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date and unclear

This is not a high-priority article (unless, of course, Sky Kingdom really is the one true religion), but I hope that someone some day can: (1) bring the story up to date - what happened to the followers who were on trial, and where is the leader now? (2) copyedit the article so that (at least) the verb tenses are consistent and the sources are checked, and it's made clear whether any of the buildings still exist. Thanking that unknown someone in advance ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.154.153 (talk) 20:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Sky Kingdom. 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:

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) 07:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious vandalism

I just removed some obvious vandalism from the page, but it had been there for about 4 months. Perhaps some protection would make sense. Sdt (talk) 14:24, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]