Talk:Mangala Dosha

Mangala Dosha Mock marriage

There is a custom in India that in certain situations a human being can marry a plant (tree or flower). Unfortunately I can't find any description of this ceremony. Can anybody help me, please? Thank you. Henriku (talk) 03:29, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Hinduphobia content

I have tried to edit the page content where this mentioned that this Hindu tradition is a superstition. It is mentioned in our religious textbook it is based on astrology and astrophysics. But I am seeing that many Wikipedia article do not follow Hindu religious textbook but promote Hinduphobia openly. There are many court cases going on against Wikipedia for promoting Hindu phobia content. Lucky kar g (talk) 13:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you show in any of the sources that it is described as a tradition as opposed to a superstition? Wikipedia only summarizes what other people write. Religious texts cannot be used as they are primary sources and have to be attributed.

I'd check the sources myself but I'm taking a short break at work.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

There is a topic that is based on Hindu tradition but you are saying that Hindu religious texts cannot be used as a primary sources how it is possible? Lucky kar g (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Primary sources cannot be used in most cases, not just on hindu traditions but everywhere. If you want to know more, you should click this link. It will explain it a lot better than I can.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:23, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

You said "Primary sources cannot be used in most cases, not just on hindu traditions but everywhere". What if I tomorrow press a article indicating traditions of Christan or islam as superstition. Will it be acceptable for wikipedia? Lucky kar g (talk) 13:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

If your source describes it as a christian/muslim superstition, then yes, definitly.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/astrology/kundali-dasha-remedies/mangalik-dosha-solutions-worship-maa-brahmacharini-harmonize-marital-life/articleshow/113918528.cms

https://hindi.news18.com/news/dharm/what-is-manglik-dosha-remedies-by-celebrity-astrologer-vinay-kumar-jha-5880199.html

Two articles not mentioned it as a superstition. Thank you Lucky kar g (talk) 13:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

I can't check right now if they are reliable sources, but Times of India often is a good source so I'll look into it when I'm home.

I have an hour of work left and then an hour to travel home, so I can really dive into the topic in about 2 and a half hours.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 13:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

I had a quick look, but it seems both are astrology, which are pseudoscience and a fringe idea according to wikipedia. I think you can't use these for that reason. You could ask for a second opinion with another editor, but I'd stick with anthopological research.

I haven't checked the sources that are already present in the article yet, so I'm not done with my research. Don't worry.

14:23, 2 May 2025 (UTC) Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 14:23, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

The first source (K. Anand (1965). "An Analysis of Matrimonial Advertisements") states:

"The Hindus have a superstition that the marriage between a person born under the influence of Mars (Mangal) and a person who is not, end in disaster."

However this is quite an old source, and one could say this is outdated language. Yet when we look at a more recent source (Shalu Nigam (29 August 2019). Women and Domestic Violence Law in India: A Quest for Justice), we get from the glossary:

"Manglik: Superstition based on Hindu traditions where someone born under the influence of the planet Mars is considered as having Mangal dosh, or Mars defects, which is inauspicious, and his or her marriage with a person who is non- Manglik is perceived as disastrous."

So here again, it is described as a superstition. I don't think I can help you much unless you have some high quality research or books on the topic that describe it differently.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 15:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

2409:40E2:1021:8E78:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 04:52, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

So Wikipedia is making a article on Hindu ritual but it will not follow the scriptures aap Hindu tradition but it will follow the leftist propaganda news articles that spread Hinduphobia. Great Lucky kar g (talk) 04:59, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia should never follow religious texts, it should always follow how professionals analyse these texts. I have gotten into conflict with christian editors about this too, since they wanted to just say that miracles really happened and I said that a religious book isn't proof of that. You could use the scriptures in the form of:

"The idea of Mangala Dosha stems from [name of religious scripture]: "[quote from the scripture]"[source of the religious srcipture]"

This is a foundation of wikipedia. It isn't hinduphobia as much as it is antichristian or islamophobic. Wikipedia is a secular project, therefor we can't just accept religious claims.

I'm also confused why you call it leftist propaganda. Both articles seem to be academic studies on the ideas around marriage.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 08:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

"Wikipedia should never follow religious texts, it should always follow how professionals analyse these texts" are a so called professional knows more than texts? He/ She becomes professional after reading those texts. Lucky kar g (talk) 12:47, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

"I'm also confused why you call it leftist propaganda. Both articles seem to be academic studies on the ideas around marriage" you are confused because you don't have a common sence that their can be a human who follows it and also who do not follow it or calls it superstition. But your article are based on second type of humans. Lucky kar g (talk) 12:49, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Please stay civil. We use arguments to argue our points, we don't say people have no common sense because they disagree.

We use secondary sources from professionals because all texts, especially religious ones, can have many interpretations. We therefor only use the interpretations of people that studied in fields such as anthropology, sociology or theology.

If you do not understand or do not want to follow wikipedia's rules on reliable sources and how we use primary and secondary sources, then perhaps wikipedia isn't for you.

I would advice you to go talk to someone at wikiproject India, who might be able to explain it in a better way than me. Talk to someone there or read the rules I linked. Either way, I do not think I can help you.

Good luck with any future editing,

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 18:35, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

1) https://theprint.in/india/biased-anti-hindu-campaign-begins-against-wikipedia-after-it-urges-indians-to-donate/472980/

2) https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikipedia/hinduphobia-on-wikipedia-how-one-of-the-worlds-most-trusted-resources-is-struggling-with-hate/?amp=1

I think wikipedia should have a article named "Promoting Hinduphobia on wikipedia". Lucky kar g (talk) 05:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

You can try to make it, but I don't think you'll get far if you see equal treatment of all religions as hinduphobia. There is an article called Anti-Hindu sentiment, which might be something you're interested in.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 08:18, 3 May 2025 (UTC)