Revision as of 22:56, 5 February 2007 editAmarkov (talk | contribs)11,154 edits Unfortunately...← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:00, 5 February 2007 edit undoSikh-history (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,267 edits →Unfortunately...Next edit → | ||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
Per ], accounts used by multiple people are not allowed. -] <small>]</small> 22:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC) | Per ], accounts used by multiple people are not allowed. -] <small>]</small> 22:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
:: Only one using it now, because it was seen as dodgy before. I sometimes edit from work, so if you need any help I am at your service. Thanks--] 23:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:00, 5 February 2007
Sikh Diet
I've looked at that article, and it is clear that it needs a re-write. I've got my doubts about anyone with a name such as yours that reflects a purpose editing articles, but I'll assume good faith, and make some suggestions for improvement.
- First, the article needs to have most, if not all the quotes removed, and if kept anywhere, the works they appear in should be cited as references.
- Second, the organization of the article needs work. I suggest focusing less on the dissension between the various beliefs and working your way up to that once the basics are stabilized.
And this is probably not important, but all capitalizations in sections are not good.
Mister.Manticore 15:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Great Suggestions
Hi Mister.Manticore,
- The name Sikh-History comes from our site www.sikh-history.com. The site is recognised worldwide as a leading source for historical information. We are at the forefront in ensuring extremist factions eg people like User:Harisingh don't get to just express their pont of view and that other points of view are put foreward. People such as these are motivated by alliegance to a particular Sikh Saint who espouses a fanatical stance on Sikhism. Www.sikh-history.com, has no such point of view and does not espouse the view of any Sikh Saint. Our core principles of Truth, Justice and Equality motivate us.
- The suggestion you have made are great. We are very keen to work with you on this and Sikh articles in general. The ammendments initially came to this article because the person who created it made a false supposition that meat eaters did not use Sikh Texts to back up their point of view and only vegetarians did. I think the devil in the detail with anything is interpretation. We had aimed to make a balanced debate about the issue but alas that has come to problems.
- With regard to the quotations, it make be difficult to create a debate about the Sikh diet without quotations from Historical texts that show what the actual diet was.
- Another point is that our concern is with a chap called User:Harisingh who has a track record of writting biased articles with his opinion and calls them factual. We aim to keep his articles in check on Sikhism, and ensure that historical texts rather than hearsay is used to back up opinion.
What do you think?--Sikh-history 12:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi
As a fellow Sikh, I first of all like to say hi. With regards to any disagreements you've been having with other Sikh wiki members don't feel bad- you should discuss things with other Sikh Wiki members. For Sikhs, it our ability to discuss things and our unity that has made us into such a great people & massively successful throughout history. King regards--Sikh 1 13:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Sikh1, Nice of you to write. As you have gathered Sikh-history is a collection of people with similar goals. Our aims are to counter ignorance and extremism through posting historical fact. Unfortunately HariSingh is an extremist and fanatic that cannot be reasoned with. His work on sikhiwiki is an example of this and an attempt by our memebers to reason with him has resulted in nothing. His views are so fixed and extreme, I fear he is beyond any help. We have tried discussion with him, and his reply was to call our edits "Vandalism" for which he was proved wrong. We are open to criticism and dialogue, but not open to dictatorial impositions. Pease visit our site www.sikh-history.com. Best Wishes --Sikh-history 17:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. Look first it is completely wrong to do personal attacks on Hari Singh, this is not befitting behaviour for a Sikh or a Wikipedian and it is not way you resolve things. In Sikhism the reason why we have been so successful as a people is the bonds that bind us together are stronger than any differences. This is what our ancestor Sikhs had in their mind and thats why they were so successful. Its through talking you resolve things- regards--Sikh 1 22:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Sikh1. The first personal attack came from HariSingh when he accused our memebers of Vandalism, when cleaerly he knew it was not. Maybe you should speak to him before speaking to us. You are right personal attacks will not solve anything, but we are pointing out a fact in the behaviour we have obsereved so dfar in HariSingh. Thanks --Sikh-history 05:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. If he did a person attack on you, that's no excuse to do one your self, rise above it and be better than that.--Sikh 1 13:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- Look, all i'm saying is we are Sikhs, we are all brothers & family - all children of Guru Gobind Singh and because of that we must treat each other with respect and honour - to honour our father's history (Guru Gobind Singh). We live in a time when Sikhs have many enemies, we don't want to make it worse by fighting each other- regards--Sikh 1 13:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- WE understand what you are saying, but we do not think there can be compromise with religious fanatics such as HariSingh. We would go as far as to compare him to religious fanatics such as those that follow Al-Qaeeda. Just like Al-Qaeeda has tarnished the name of Islam, we feel people like HariSingh and their fanatical views will compromise the great religion of Sikhism. HariSingh has a very willy and cunning manner, which is very sweet to the face which covers an uncompromising interior. He is a proverbial school ground bully who wishes to push his POV wherever he goes. Our aim is to rebalance that and take on the bully (because invariably bully's are cowards). We suffered under the bullying of the Indian Governemnt in 1984, we suffered under the rioting that followed (many of us lost relatives), and now we are suffering from fanatics bulllying us within our own religion. I am sorry to sound negative, but you sound like a kind person. For the record we are not only concerned about the meat issue, as our front page describes. Best Wishes. --Sikh-history 12:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Moving talk comments
For the sake of clarity, I'm just gonna blockquote our convo on the IP page when you weren't logged in. -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 14:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Copied from IP page:
Please explain your rationale for full rewrite of the introduction paragraph on the talk page. Thank you! -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 11:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi friend - the History of Patiala is very clear. A History of Sikh Misals by Bhagat Singh (Patiala University), concisely and clearly outlines this. I thought I would add it. Is there a problem?
- Please add your rationale to Talk:Patiala so we can go from there. Thanks! -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 12:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- done --Sikh-history 15:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately...
Per our policies, accounts used by multiple people are not allowed. -Amark moo! 22:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Only one using it now, because it was seen as dodgy before. I sometimes edit from work, so if you need any help I am at your service. Thanks--Sikh-history 23:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)