Talk:Kabir panth

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.

Hinduism: Philosophy Low‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Philosophy task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

A lot of this article is written from a Kabirist (Don't know the proper term.) POV. ALso, according to this article he lived to be 120 years old?! Zazaban 17:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Kabir panth" or "Kabir Panth"?[edit]

Which capitalization is correct? If "Kabir Panth" is correct, we'll have to get an admin to move the page. Kabir Panth is a redirect to Kabir panth.—C45207 | Talk 08:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the redirection was not necessary. --Tito Dutta (Talk) 07:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added An Image[edit]

I have added an image in the article. I was more interested in [[wp:infobox|infobox}]. Someone please go for it. --Tito Dutta (Talk) 07:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External Links Section Should Be Revised[edit]

The external inks section should be revised. --Tito Dutta (Talk) 07:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major deletions September 2011[edit]

First off, agree with Titodutta that there are too many ELs; which are the most authoritative?

Further, today I removed large chunks of the article as failing WP:N and WP:V. If you have objections, it would be best to bring them up here before restoring. Note that blogspots, sectarian or fan-sites, etc. are generally not WP:Reliable sources and are not admissible as footnotes. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]