Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:16, 22 April 2009

Template:Werdnabot

Ehm?

Enzuru I must correct you on a few points. You are assuming Guru Nanak went East and West on a mission of conversion. Sikhism has no words or methods for conversion. There are no Crusades, and no Jihads and no forced conversion.

Could you find where I said he was looking for converts? Because I don't believe that, and I didn't say that, his mission was clearly different. And in Islam, there are no forced conversions either, no Crusades, no Jihads for rounding up converts, at least for mainstream fiqh. And I didn't say Baba Nanak was a pacifist either, so, I honestly don't know what you're correcting me about. I feel (and I hope incorrectly) that you are judging Islam in a poor light through that, as well as making judgement about my beliefs before I even state them. Going to Amritsar was a great moment in my life, I have nothing against Sikhism nor the Sikh Gurus. --Enzuru 23:37, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

On the contrary I have a deep respect for Islam (as do most Sikhs), they don't necessarily have a deep respect for some of the followers eg Arabs, Afghans and some tribes from Pakistan. Some of teh purest forms of Islamic thought I have found amongst some of my Persian, Kashmiri and Turkish friends. If you didn't say the above about Sikhism then I am sorry. Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 14:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The difference between Sikhism and Islam is less than that of a Sakura's petal, no question about that in my heart. I truly believe in Baba Nanak's inspiration, that it came from the Ahl al-Bayt in my perspective, who in our traditions guide people regardless of whatever name or faith they refer to themselves as, and if it would be right to refer to myself as a Sikh of Baba Nanak I would. I agree, I do find that Islam seems to be purer amongst those more connected with its esoteric currents, though I don't know if they correspond with those ethnic groups. --Enzuru 01:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply to your request on my talkpage

Can you help me file this? --Sikh-history (talk) 23:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

1. Read the RFC guidelines for "RFC on users" here.
2. Create a new page using the this link.
3. See example of some already filed RFC on user conduct to see what you need to substantiate to show the disputed/offensive conduct.
4. Explain well why its offensive and how the user is slipping insult into comments and escaping being noticed by wikipedia admins who may not be from the same culture?
5. Send link of the RFC to other editors who have the experience of seeing the edits of the user on whom you are filing RFC.
   

Let me know if you need any more help on wikipedia processes or policies.
Regards,

Actually, recurring personal attacks reporting should be done at this page. Apologies, I guided you to another lengthy process which is actually used for editing behavior of a user, not something as obvious as a personal attack. Generally, Misplaced Pages suggests to initially ignore and warn for incivility, but WP:NPA rule states some attacks are never acceptable and that includes religious or racial comments directly pointed at another editor or community. For example, comments like this comment and and this comment are obviously deliberate religious insults showing hate towards other editors and community. Misplaced Pages is very strict on such kind of personal attacks. Regards, --RoadAhead 06:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I will bare this in mind. Regards --Sikh-history (talk) 10:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, since Satanoid continued hurling personal attacks on other editors after repetitive warnings, I have reported him at ANI here. You have earlier reported non-constructive personal comments from this editor so feel free to add to this report.--RoadAhead 16:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

RE:Sikh Extremism

Thank you for your kind words. I think I need to leave this to people more knowledgeable on the subject such as yourself, or a bit more aggressive than I about pushing sources such as vi5in. I'm not willing to push any source that doesn't have a consensus, but in the end someone will need to do that. I just hoped we could rebuild the article without much arguing and such, because debates can and will go on forever. And I can't honestly see an end in sight when so far most sources have been rejected. There is obviously much more to this than I understand, I just wanted to help guide the article in what way I could. Perhaps you and RoadAhead should rebuild the articles using sources acceptable to you two (because I don't understand what is), and then call upon the rest of us to do the POV editing needed to balance it. --Enzuru 11:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hello Sikh-history,

I would like to, but it is hard to move forward when one party doesn't want the article to exist in the first place. So every reference that is brought up is immediately questioned - not in the context of the source itself, but in the context of invalidating the article as a whole. It's very hard to work in an environment like that. I propose this. How about we list sources that are acceptable to both parties and then move from there? Thank you for trying help improve the article --vi5in 16:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Focusing on the content, rather than the other editors and/or their motivations

"...purely in the basis of your previous history and the bad faith you have created. I have not even taled about the extreme hate you have expressed for Sikhs..."
Working on a complex global article using only 2nd sources, avoiding PoV, striving for completeness yet keeping to relevant information, is very demanding. I would like to make the same recommendation here as I have at other user pages. It is even harder if we, as editors, are distracted by other editors' personalities. Many places in Misplaced Pages, there are words to the effect of "focus on the content, not the person". I believe this is a critical part of the long-term success of Misplaced Pages. If we each can remove our focus from ourselves, from other editors, from our motivations and feelings, from their motivations and feelings, we can focus much more effectively on the challenging task creating and maintaining the encyclopedic knowledge of the entire human species. :) All the best. sinneed (talk) 16:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Ah, good sir, I think I may have over-played my statements. I don't think you have anything to apologize for. All the very best. :) sinneed (talk) 20:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Hey. This is an off wikipedia thing. Is it okay I ask you some questions about Sikhism and your own personal opinions on some things Sikhism related? Deavenger (talk) 00:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I must warn you I am more interested in the History than the religion. Sometimes my historical views are at conflict with some religious people.--Sikh-history (talk) 13:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks. If there's any questions taht you don't want to answer, just tell me.

Do Sikhs like Hindus. Because I know in India, Sikhs are looked upon with much respect and they were always tight with the Hindus. But whenever I go to pages like Khalistan or other places on the internet, there seems to be plenty of Sikhs who hate Hindus.

Also, I heard that under (I think itw as the first Sikh ruler of Punjab, not sure though) had a kingdom that stretched from Punjab all the way to parts of Tibet, is this true? Deavenger (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

There are some mindless fools who confuse a deep seated dislike for the Congress Party and its politics with a hatred for Hindu's, but amongst Sikhs they are few and far between. Maharaja Rajit Singh's Kingdom streched from Kashmire, and most of present day Pakistan. --Sikh-history (talk) 15:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you support Khalistan? and also, I remember reading about a person named Kabir. Was he a Sikh? Deavenger (talk) 16:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I always ask the question, what would the nation of Khalistan achieve today for the Sikh people? Nothing. Where would it's border be? Parts of Pakistan and India? That would be a non starter. It would be land locked. My conclusion would have to be that it would be illogical to support Khalistan. In a world where people are moving together, Khalistan would be going againt that trend. Saying all this, I cannot say as a historian I am too thrilled about the treatment of Sikhs in the late 70's and 80's by the Government of India. The entire 1984 debacle was a political stunt by Indira Ghandhi and her son Sanjay that backfired. Who suffered the most? The Sikhs. Can anyone honestly say Extremism was heard of amongst Sikhs prior to that?--Sikh-history (talk) 11:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Honestly, I think it's safe to say that there's almost no one, unless they hate sikhs, who are happy about how the Sikhs were treated in the 70's and 80's.

You're Punjabi right? How often do you visit Punjab and how well can you speak Punjabi. Deavenger (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Technically I am from Haryana, abd I am a Sikh by choosing. My parents are Hindu Panjabi from the Amritsar area.I am fluent in Panjabi and Hindi and am currently learning Persian.--Sikh-history (talk) 18:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I haven't yet had the pleasure of visiting Haryana or Punjab yet, though I'm hoping to do it in the future. I'm also trying to learn Hindi as well as my parents language of Malayalam. Deavenger (talk) 19:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Warnings on User Talk pages

It is considered acceptable to delete warnings, even serious warnings, from one's user talk page. Even anon users may do so (this was news to me, a kind editer gave me the link) please see wp:blanking. We should not restore deleted warnings on talk pages other than our own. Deleting warnings is considered to mean that the warnings have been read and understood. All the best. sinneed (talk) 14:54, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow , I didn't know. Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 15:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Avicenna's notability

Since you're impartial, please vote on this issue. Thanks! --Enzuru 03:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Why did you roll back the removal of the source?

If you feel it should be in, why not simply say "source says '...democratic...' on page 22" or whatever? Why mention my name in the undo? I am not the focus. The content is the focus. A *LOT* of these sources are being misused, by multiple editors with multiple agendas. sinneed (talk) 20:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I was adding in another source in the refrence, but got sidetracked. You will see it in the next few minutes.--Sikh-history (talk) 21:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Satanoid's insulting personal attacks reported

Dear editor, tired of explaining and warning Satanoid of his/her repetitive personal attacks, I have filed a report at ANI. Your views will be appreciated. --RoadAhead 02:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Editing style - complex edits - removal of sources - changing of statements

Please do not make complex or multisection edits. It is rude, and you tempted me to revert your edit. A good rule of thumb is that if a good explanation won't fit in the edit summary, you are doing too much in the edit.

Please do not delete sources at this time. The article is very contentious, and it is rude. Please flag and discuss instead.

Please do not change the statement of someone whose statement you dislike. Instead, if you feel it presents an unbalanced view, add one that does. This article is far too contentious for this kind of behaviour.

Please do not remove a reasonable request for a page number. You are prone to giving HUGE sources, and not saying WHERE the in the source one should look. This, too is rude. You further tempt me to revert your edit. It is not a good change, as it is now. sinneed (talk) 17:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Fact-flagging an entire section is pointless. Instead, there is an Unsourced flag that can be added to the section. I am reinserting the globalsecurity.org citation, only 1 time. I am adding a section flag.sinneed (talk) 17:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

You are much much better than this edit would lead a reader to believe. I ask that you do the quality of work on this article that you are clearly capable of, and have done. sinneed (talk) 17:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I just thought it placed to much weight on one source. Will be more careful in future.--Sikh-history (talk) 18:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

"a flower petal on a cup full to the brim"

One of favourite Baba Nanak analogies. It also shows the depraved caste that Sufis had evolved into at that stage. --Enzuru 05:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

If you read The Sufis by Idries Shah, it is attributed to many other Sufi's too. Regards :-)--Sikh-history (talk) 09:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, interesting! By "attributed" is there certainty, and would that mean he had been quoting? --Enzuru 09:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

If you read The Way of the Sufi and its forward (by Idries Shah), I think this same story has occurred on many occasion. I am not sure, but it maybe Ibn el Ghazli, who is cited in the forward. Long time from when I read it, and I am getting olf now. :-) --Sikh-history (talk) 10:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring - user:sikh-history, user:satanoid, user:Roadahead at sikh extremism

I hear you each saying you think one or more of the others is misbehaving. ALL 3 are misbehaving. Stop doing these huge editwar-type reverts. If you don't care enough to give edit summaries, and if you don't care enough to make the individual changes, then perhaps a break from editing this article would be good for you. Please:

• edit summaries for every edit - please
• if someone makes 5 edits, and you want to revert 3, do... not all 5 - please
• if you think another editor is vandalising, say so, in the appropriate forum. Not an edit summary, not on an article talk page. Your talk page, their talk page, or possibly seek a 3rd party who might help

All 3 of you are better than this makes you appear. sinneed (talk) 22:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

3 or 5 times he has deleted my refrences and you have done nothing. I am not edit warring just restoring contributions.--Sikh-history (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

*blink* - Well.
I am sorry you perceive the 100 or so (98 on last report run) edits I have made to the article, 34 edits to Satanoid's talk page, including multiple last warnings, only warnings, warnings, correcting notes, suggestions, requests, an unknown but large number of edits to the article talk page... as "nothing."
Be that as it may, killing an entire block of edits with a description of "reverting until the edits are discussed", then discussing nothing, is indeed continuing the edit war. sinneed (talk) 20:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok fair point. Regards

Professor Christie Davies

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Professor Christie Davies, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.rdg.ac.uk/AcaDepts/lw/Sociol/publish/people/academic/christie/bio.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of H S Phoolka

A tag has been placed on H S Phoolka requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Misplaced Pages:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Closedmouth (talk) 12:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

H. S. Phoolka first version completed

Can you help me expand this--Sikh-history (talk) 09:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can try to gather information on H. S. Phoolka. I know about the subject in general but adding specific notable information will require some reading on my part. --RoadAhead 17:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sikh-history, after your request on my talkpage, I was able to do some study for the propsed article on H. S. Phoolka, here is the result (typed red-eye, will edit and improve later). The article you created "H S Phoolka" was already deleted so I utilized the opportunity to title my new entry appropriately as "H. S. Phoolka" --RoadAhead 09:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Please: Edit summaries, No original research, Talk on the talk page, Citations. Please.

Sikh Extremism
I pulled the addition about the top 10 political mistakes, as there was no response on the talk page for 5 days.
I removed the OR about there being no Sikhs in the entire UK who aligned with Al-Qaeda, please remember wp:NOR.
Citations: If you can't find a citation for something, that will be a good trigger to stop and think "Will this help the article? Will it be able to stay in the article?"
Also, please, please, use the edit summaries.sinneed (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:User Khalsaburg

I will take a look at the article, abd it's talk page as well as the user's edits and talk page. I will leave updates here, so stick around! :) Andy (talk) 15:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I have looked at the users edits and I see that they are generally good faith but yes, contreversial. I ahve responded on the users talk page and recommended what to do there, I will keep here, to see how it goes, and if you need any further help hit me up! Andy (talk) 15:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Could you elaborate, I ve looked and cant see any of the users edits. Thanks for linking it but again, User:Khalsaburg edits are not there. Thanks for your help, though. :) Andy (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, again, Khalasberg provided with two legitimate refs that seemed to go well with his edits, I am going to have a look at the article now, to see how it looks. I thibnk it is different branches of Sikhism believing different things, so I will see if I can get the article to a NPOV status, covereing the majority of beliefs. Regards. Andy (talk) 10:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Khalsa has just left me a note saying you deleted his edits, if they are good faith (which they seem to be) please don't revert, especially if they have references which they provided me with. If you need a hand, I will see what I can find out for you. :) Cheers. Andy (talk) 11:29, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Not deleted. Just restored a previous version where a swathe of text was deleted for no reason.--Sikh-history (talk) 11:31, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I see once again. What I would do now is to tke a wikibreak to calm the situation down, (I have also said this to khalsa) and I will see to the articles, and make sure they are NPOV. Regards Andy (talk) 11:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok then, if it is good, verifiable, uncontraversial material, put it on, what I recommend is to include both sides of the argument in the article, like yours and Khala's. I am sorry for all this mix up, you are truly a great editor. I will give khalsa a shout on what you and I have said, but I still think a wikibreak for both of you is a good thing. :) Andy (talk) 11:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Barn

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For your hilarious comment on my talk page. It is good that editors can still be calm and composed and even funny through difficult situations! :) Andy (talk) 12:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Maharaja Ranjit Singh

Hey SikhHistory, On Maharaja Ranjit Singh's page, you keep changing the name of his birth place from Mughal Empire to Sikh Empire. Let me explain you that Sikh Empire was a country that was established by him much after his birth, there was no Sikh Empire before his birth. Mughal Empire was the place in which he was born, at time of his birth, the Mughals were the authority of Punjab. If you have have any comments then leave them at my page. User talk:Wjkk20 —Preceding undated comment was added at 22:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC).

I see thanks .--Sikh-history (talk) 15:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Jahkta

Well then, plese put all that in:) That they don't do halal etc as that was a requirement for conversion is just what I thought, but you summarised it well- that must go in! The enobling bit is ok but it should just be briefly summarised like you just did, in one sentence, not a long quote as that's not the best style for articles as it over-emphasises one person's writings, and we tend to summarise. Sikhs are not all vegetarian, and there's not a requirement on them to be, but many are . So we could put that, as it's a fact.:) Sticky Parkin 18:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

which sect is that? We could just say there's no requirement for sikhs to be vegetarian, but some are. It is particularly prevalent in the 'bloggs' sect, amongst whom vegetarianism is preferred because...' Must admit, I've never heard of sikhs particularly avoiding meat before, but then I only studied it once, for a few months. Sticky Parkin 19:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. If it has to be football, I suppose I'm a Chelsea fan.:) But I'm more of a Shakira fan.:) Sticky Parkin 12:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Kuttha

Namaste thanks for your inquiry. I know Persian and some other Iranian languages, but such a word "Kuttha" does not exist. I can offer you two theories though. The first is from the Persian word: کته which does mean a piece, it can mean a piece of many things, food included. It also is a specific form of rice as well. However, some Iranian languages borrow Arabic words heavily and transform the word to different meanting. Another is that "Kuttha" comes from the Arabic (QaT'a) قطعه which قطع (QaT) means cut-off/ripped off. So piece of sacrificial food that was sacrificed could be related in meaning to this word also. Your best best to e-mail the Iranist in Harvard like this person: . You can give him my viewpoint and see if he agrees as well. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Gurunanak Jal Jeer at Bidar, Karnataka

I am trying to finalise an artcile on Architectural Legacy of Karnataka. I have included a section on "Sikh Gurudwara at Bidar" since it was first established at Bidar in 16th Century and is very relevaent to karantak's legacy. There is an artcile on this Gurudawra in Sikhi Wiki with some good photos. But when I tried to use these photos in en:wiki, the same were rejected as not licensed properly. Can you help me by posting one or two good photos of the Jal Jira Gurudwara at Bidar on wikicommons for use in my article? Thank you. --Nvvchar (talk) 05:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Maharaja Ranjit Singh and Sansi

Please include these additions with references. Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 07:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the above message. Did you mean that I amend Maharaja Ranjit Singh article based on the secondary source citations I posted on the discussion page of that article? I do not want to create any discord. Therefore, I am posting citations on the Discussion page first so that other editors get adequate time to consider various sources to reach a consensus. Regards. --Internet Scholar (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

H S Phoolka

Are we looking at the same article? The article about this gentleman, which I agree I deleted, contained a total of thirteen words, and gave no specific information about him at all. Mr Phoolka may well be a significant person, but the article did not so indicate; the book you mention did not, for example, figure in the deleted text. Notability in wikipedia rests with the wording of the article, not in other information which is not included in the submitted text. If you wish to expand the article to the point where notability is indicated in the wording, let me know and I will happily restore it. But please be advised that if it is not rapidly augmented another admin will delete it again! --Anthony.bradbury 22:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

"Your persistent naked vandalism and POV !" as According to Khalsaburg

Hi, its getting boring now, wrt Langar and Nihang I noticed you decided to edit the aol/youtube reference reference I added but left out the one you wanted to remain?

And then you have the audacity to say that youtube references are not allowed. Can you explain your apparent hypocritical tendencies ?

If you are going to report me for vandalism can you kindly mention the above to the administrator ? Thanks Khalsaburg (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

You tube cannot be used as a citation but it can be used as another link. Indeed when I have time I will compile a report on your POV and Vandalism regards. --Sikh-history (talk) 07:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Nihang and Akali

Please note that Akali and Nihang are not same thing. In fact they differ as much as sky and earth.

Neutral?

You tell me that my edits violate neutral point of view but yet you persistently edit Sikhi related articles to make out Vegetarianism is only adopted by the "minority" of Sikhs and good "Orthodox" Sikhs like yourself eat meat? Also referring to Panthic Jathebandis such as Damdami Taksaal and Akhand Kirtani Jatha as minority sects? Outrageous. This is shameful, and please don't say that you are neither for or against Vegetarianism, I have seen posts by users like yourself claiming to be historians (perhaps even by you personally) on this and other sites, anyone who claims to be neutral in this matter, eats meat. You have no right to identify yourself as "Sikh-history" and parading around like the edits you make are the only neutral ones when they are infact pro-meat and simulataenously weasling Sikhi articles towards whatever other un-Gurmat practices you follow/advocate. I beg you to stop this masquerading as a Sikh history/Wikipedia authority and let the articles remain edited in the way there is a Panthic concensus for. Jsu (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I am actually a vegetarian (not that I need to explain myself to you). If you persist in adding POV and changing consensual wording, you will be eventually blocked. Please do not try to threaten me or make personal comments again as I will not hesitate to report you to admins (again resulting in a block). You have been warned. DDT and AKJ are minority sects. Thanks--Sikh-history (talk) 16:26, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I would ask that you read my post again and determine if there are any threats made or implied. I would only like to say that I think you are a fake; you seem to think that your contributions garner greater credibilty than those of others because of your self-styled title of "Sikh-history" combined with a second rate shabby website to add the illusion of authenticity to any contributions that you make. Please stop the condescension. I would say that is you and your contributions that should be reported and removed for POV, as you seem to ignore the vast amounts of literature that are in disagreement with your "neutral" edits. Anyway I shall not waste anymore of your or my time as there are many like yourself who are determined to distort and propagate Sikhi to suit their own requirements and it is only through Guru Jee's Kirpa that this will stop. Jsu (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm. Please do not direct extremist and fanatical comments at me. I view comments like "it is only through Guru Jee's Kirpa that this will stop", as a personal threat. I only care about about well referenced material. Not POV. Any more threats and I will report you. Thanks--Sikh-history (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

If that was a threat than so is this lol, so you may as well report me then. Unlikely that the administrators would consider anything I've written to be (mis)construed as a threat. I don't think you would see my comments as fanatical or extreme if you were an Amritdhari Singh/Kaur with full faith in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee which I think someone with the, albeit artificial, username of "Sikh-history" ought to be. As I said earlier, you seem to care only for reference material that is inline with your so called neutrality. That will be all from me I think. Jsu (talk) 21:58, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Just to finish off: I suppose that you consider yourself to be more of a Sikh historian and scholar than Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh, Professor Sahib Singh, Bhai Veer Singh Jee, Maskeen Jee, Kavi Santokh Singh, Bhai Joginder Singh Talwara, Bhai Kahn Singh Ji Nabha, Baba Gurbachan Singh Jee Bindrawale, Baba Thakur Singh Jee and many others? I would humbly ask you to read their works and correct your multiple POV contributions and reference them accordingly. Jsu (talk) 22:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

This wikipedia. Not a playground to threaten editors or push a POV, or add deliquent messages to my message board. If you have references with ISBN numbers test them on the talk age and then add them. Otherwise do not waste my time with fanatical and extremist belief. See http://popularsikh.com/node/65609#comment-42 for further info. Regards --Sikh-history (talk) 08:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Coat of arms

Hi, I was reading Sikh empire and I noticed that the coat of arms in the upper right infobox looked a bit... modern. Do you happen to have access to a contemporary picture of the empire's coat of arms, assuming it actually had one? The sleek, rounded symbol, with lovely shadows, looks more like a computer icon than an early 19th century coat of arms, so I suspect it is not a picture of the actual coat of arms. Do you agree? A baby turkey 18:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Agree 100%. Will search for examples.--Sikh-history (talk) 12:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:Khalsaburg, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 22:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Conflict

This mesage is directed impartially at both user:Sikh-history and user:Khalsaburg:

Gentlemen; it seems abundantly clear that there are significant issues between you which are not going to be easy to mediate; and disagreement as to specific facts is in any case well beyond my level of knowledge. But what is very clear is that each of you is accusing the other of vandalism, and you both appear to be edit warring, and if you are not able to agree may I strongly suggest that you either henceforth ignore each other, or else proceed to dispute resolution. Having advised you, it would not now be proper for me to take further action, but I forsee another admin doing so unless you can reach an accomodation of some kind. --Anthony.bradbury 17:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Has the Satan Returned?

My dear friend has the notorious Satanoid returned under this guise. Here are his IP's 90.192.112.168, 90.192.59.187. Same BSkyB broadband. Same cry wolf. Same attitude. Taraa a Bit --194.217.96.4 (talk) 11:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Cheers mate. People are on the case. Haqve more faith in wikipedias NPOV. Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 12:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Islam and Sikhism

Are all the recent edits regarding inputs before yours incorrect > Khari Sharif (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I was wandering why this particular reference was reverted by yourself? Could you kindly re-examine the following link?

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Islam_and_Sikhism&diff=prev&oldid=271670851 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khari Sharif (talk • contribs) 19:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Khari Sharif (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring at Akhand Kirtani Jatha

Please remove your focus from the other editor, and wp:assume good faith. I will be encouraging the other editor in the edit war to do the same. Please stop the edit war immediately and discuss, instead, if you have a strong enough interest in the article. I would also encourage you to add a source when adding substantial information during an content dispute.sinneed (talk) 15:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Not a war, just trying to get the editor Khalsaburg to discuss and add references rather than delete paragraphs, other editors have worked hard on.--Sikh-history (talk) 20:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Veggie article

I'm happy to help, though I'm not online as much at the moment as I'm staying at friends'. Here is an example of how I think it should be formatted, to give you some ideas. Sticky Parkin 12:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks good.--Sikh-history (talk) 12:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Heaven, Hell?

W'Salam, you said, "Sikhism uses heaven and hell as a metaphor rather than an actual place"

I tried, but could not find references to your suggestion?

The closest ref was http://www.sikhism.com/

It states clearly "Sikhs do not believe in heaven or hell" so I will add "In Islam there is no metaphorical rendition" if you disagree with the above link? Khari Sharif (talk) 15:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you really think this was a good edit summary?

Clear up text No, you were pushing your point of view firmly... that is not what the quoted text at least, says.sinneed (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I think its good because Dabistan e Mazhib contradict one of the historians above. Surprised your sharp eyes missed that Sineed. Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 09:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It is VERY acceptable for references to conflict. Pointing that out while avoiding wp:undue is fine. Killing the reference of which you disapprove is not. We have been over this a few times. May I impose on you to explain the reasoning in killing sources of which you disapprove? I see it as a lesser form of "book burning". Silencing the authors simply because we disagree with them is not appropriate. Instead, we balance them... we note the conflict... possibly explain why one source is better than the other, but normally we let the reader do that.sinneed (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

wp:no personal attacks - warning - User:Khalsaburg

At user talk User talk:Khalsaburg, you posted a note in a section titled "A Solution To Your Extremism". This is NOT appropriate.

You *must* focus on the content, rather than the editor, or I fear you will not be able to edit Misplaced Pages at all, at some point. I, myself, am unable to edit articles that I value because I find the editors there personally objectionable, and am unwilling to deal with the stress of trying to treat them with civility (Young Earth Creationism for example). Whatever method you choose, please do not make such a personal remark again. If an editor is behaving badly, it is essential to focus on the behaviour, not on the person behind it. It is clear that Khalsaburg feels strongly that some content does not belong in some article...but strong feelings do not require extremism.

I feel strongly that the Young Earth Creationism that stating that all YECs must be either Christians or Jews is false and demeaning to persons of all other faiths. It has no source at all. Yet the content is still there. But I appear to be the only person interested in the article who is willing to kill the statement. To the editors who find my argument ludicrous, this might make me seem an extremist. The 2 editors behaved rudely, I did some really poor work, I disapproved of their behaviour formally, they disapproved of mine formally, and I left the article.

I would encourage you to read the wp:dispute resolution document again, and decide how best to proceed. You make many useful edits that improve Misplaced Pages, and I have learned a great deal from you and many other editors in looking at articles you have edited. I look forward to working on articles with you in the future, whether we are able to agree about them or not.

All the best.

sinneed (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

You really must stop this behaviour

What another editor does or does not do outside of Misplaced Pages is very much not something about which you should insult them. Focus on the content, not the editors. wp:No Personal Attacks is very important, I, you, and every other editor should be confident of being able to edit without personal insults.sinneed (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Sineed You Are Reading Too Much Into This.

I think you are reading too much into it. That is not a personal attack. Many people are fearful and scared of posting on forums for fear of IP's being exposed or something else happening. Thanks--Sikh-history (talk) 10:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

terrorism map

Hi,

I started a discussion on the template and map talk page. No one responded, so I deleted the map to spark some action. Even the second time I deleted it, I added a request in the summary to refer to talk, but still there is nothing. --65.127.188.10 (talk) 22:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is kind of ridiculous. You can run with this if you want to, I'm not interested in giving up the time to fight this kind of crap anymore. --65.127.188.10 (talk) 13:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Idea

We can protect the article, where only admins can edit it, just send an admiin a message. Just an idea. Thanks JMS Old Al (talk) 12:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Why have you deleted sections and references from Islam and Sikhism article ?

These?

Mughal Empire and references to Qu'ran  ?

I deleted the repetition and you have put it back? Khari Sharif (talk) 12:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any Islamic or Arab references to verify this as authentic ?

"At Mecca, Nanak was found sleeping with his feet towards the Kaaba Kazi Rukan-ud-din, who observed this, angrily objected. Nanak replied with a request to turn his feet in a direction in which God or the House of God is not." The Qadi took hold of the Guru's feet. Then he lifted his eyes seeing the Kaaba standing in the direction of the Guru's feet, wherever he turned them. The Qadi was struck with wonder. He then recognised the glory of Guru Nanak."

Your references seem far too vague ? Khari Sharif (talk) 12:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

You didn't answer my question above? Can you verify your story from authentic Islamic scholars because as you understand most if not all Muslim will find the story total nonsense? I hope you understand, then you suggest on my talpage that I rely on wholesale information from non-Muslims! Do these non-Muslims have the concrete proof of any of the above story of the 'jumping Kaaba'? If not, I think it should be speedily deleted. Khari Sharif (talk) 16:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Single Purpose Account

I am a little worried that your name suggests this is a single purpose account. Clearly I am unfamiliar with the policy, perhaps you could enlighten me? C.U.T.K.D 10:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Like I said on your page, Ilecture in History and am Sikh. Sounded like a good a name as any.--Sikh-history (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Khalsaburg

Hi. You created this as an encyclopedia article - I have moved it into your user space at User:Sikh-history/Khalsaburg. The place to make a suspected sock-puppet report is Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 13:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

SPI cases

When filing a new SPI case, please;

• Use the buttons to ensure that the case template is properly filled.
• Follow the instructions that are explicit that you must NOT add additional headings.

Mayalld (talk) 13:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

•  Clerk note: the request, on the SPI case that you raised, was for diffs. Linking to contribution histories, and expecting somebody to go through the whole lot is unreasonable. Mayalld (talk) 07:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you want me to...

Request page protection? (Only admins can edit it) or semi protect, only users can edit? Or neither... JMS Old Al (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh and...

I mean the Skih vegitarinisim page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JMS Old Al (talk • contribs) 00:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Checkuser results.

Checkuser has reported back at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Khalsaburg.

Satanoid is "stale" in that he has no recent edits to check. However, given that he hasn't rdited in over 3 months, there seems to be little need for a block, and should he return the IP that Khalsaburg uses is now a matter of record, so it would be possible to checkuser at the time.

The CU check has shown two other users who use the same computer as Khalsaburg, and your input would be welcome as to whether these users have made problematic edits.

Mayalld (talk) 07:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Vegetarianism

Thank you for your message, I am happy to leave that. I am always suspicious of any unreferenced edit which reverses the meaning of an article without a reference, but it looks like this is already covered. -- Q Chris (talk) 12:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

1. http://video.aol.com/video-detail/nihangs-prepare-sukhnidhan-bhangcannabis/1485969083
2. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=8G8gUr9fIKc
3. Guru Nanak: A Global Vision - Dr Inderpal Singh and Madan jit Kaur
4. Guru Nanak: A Global Vision - Dr Inderpal Singh and Madan jit Kaur
5. Guru Nanak: A Global Vision - Dr Inderpal Singh and Madan jit Kaur