Talk:Banda Singh Bahadur
|Criticism of Banda Singh Bahadur was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 15 December 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Banda Singh Bahadur. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
||It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
- 1 This article needs MAJOR cleanup
- 2 add more detail
- 3 Stop vandalising
- 4 Don't delet any thing
- 5 Diear Ajjay
- 6 Banda's ancestory
- 7 Edit war must end
- 8 No objection
- 9 Toneline
- 10 Suggesting Addition of "NPOV" tag
- 11 File:Banda Singh Bahadur.jpg Nominated for Deletion
- 12 File:Banda-singh-punjab02.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
- 13 banda ancestry
- 14 accept the theory of majority of historians.
- 15 Removal of Torture section
- 16 thanks for removing word 'brahmin" from brief introduction.
- 17 Encyclopaedia of Sikhism
- 18 The picture of statue is not appropriate.it needs to be changed.
- 19 Why are you reverting my edits and deleting my posts in talk.
This article needs MAJOR cleanup
Even from a Sikh's point of view this is really messed up. It needs major work.
add more detail
Says Dr.Bhushan Sood...Some people try to delete the remarks or views of other people because they do not like those ideas. That is rude and does not show an open mind. In that case the articles in wikipedia would be biased and single tracked....and the generations to come will get a distorted history to read which would not be fair on our part.
i think that bandas campaigns should have more detail. such as the sadhura kapoori etc campaigns and battles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC).
Please don't vandalise this article by claiming origins of Banda Bahadur.Every historian on Banda has his own story to tell and nothing is known with certainity.Please see Notes below the article.Thanks.Ajjay (talk) 13:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Don't delet any thing
Please don't delete any thing, please add. new historical view. show open mind. Don't work under any kind of racial complex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukhdev Singh Minhas (talk • contribs) 18:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I am not deleting anything.It seems to be you who is making this article race oriented.Banda Bahadur fought for the freedom of Punjab and he was a sikh and not a racist sikh.Please show him in good light.Ajjay (talk) 19:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, it's an encyclopedia, guys - it's not supposed to show people in a "good" or "bad" light. Neutrality is the foundation of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:50, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
- You know very well that no authentic work on the early life of Banda Bahadur is known.He was a SIKH.From your talk you seem to be an adolescent.All the ancient sikhs warriors were people from India.They all must have had castes, tribes or races. But they chose to ignore that and treat everyone as equal.That is why all of them are called As Singhs.If Banda wanted to be known by his caste, then his name would have been Gurbaksh Singh Minhas or whatever.When you put his caste after his name(which is not even a surety), you don't realise that you are mocking his life and his struggle and his sacrifice.Please try and show some respect to his mission.Ajjay (talk) 13:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Would someone provide the name of Banda Bahadur's father and mother.Also if he had any brothers or sisters.And what name he used in his official capacity.Stating a historical fact and speculating on probablities is different, and speculations are not historical facts.Ajjay (talk) 06:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Edit war must end
Sukhdev Singh Minhas and Ajjay you two must reach an agreement and end this edit war.
If both of you have sources supporting your claims then both views should be added. Alot of things in life are controversial so there is no problem in adding 2 different views about a subject. I hope you two manage to work it out. ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 19:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
But whay ajjay is removing or deleting other's work's. I think he have no right to remove or delete from artical. he have some complex.Sikh Rajput 12:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Dear friend, i have nothing against anybody.If you check the history than you will notice that i removed only the mentioning of Banda Bahadur as Sikh Rajput.The sentence is obviously racially motivated.You know very well that Banda Bahadur is never mentioned as Sikh Rajput, but as a Sikh.
- He is mentioned as a Rajput, by those historians who think he was a rajput, to trace his origins.Even they don't write him as a Sikh Rajput, but as a sikh.His Rajput ancestory is mentioned in his early life .
- That he was a Rajput can be mentioned in his early life.That is not a problem.The problem is mentioning him as Banda Bahadur was a Sikh Rajput warrior, the correct language is and should be Banda Bahadur was a Sikh warrior.Ajjay (talk) 13:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
The writings in here has a lot of anti islamic tone when it should not be. The Sikh Gurus never picked side, they look at Hindus and Muslims and all other religions as the same. Don't forget it were the Hindus of Anandpur Sahib who drove the Guru out and there was a not a single Hindu who came to Guru,s aid. who came to Gurus aid, they were Muslim brothers who called him Uch da Pir.
I agree as well
Suggesting Addition of "NPOV" tag
The section on "torture and execution" in particular contains a plethora of weasel words like "barbaric" and "sadistic" - completely non-neutral and inappropriate for an encyclopedic entry. Furthermore, there are absolutely zero in-text citations for this entire section, so the entire thing is basically unsupported heresay.
File:Banda Singh Bahadur.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:Banda Singh Bahadur.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
File:Banda-singh-punjab02.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:Banda-singh-punjab02.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
most sources as well as most reliable historians accept dogra rajput origin of Banda Singh Bahadur as the his true caste, but i am amazed that the so called "BRAHMAN" origin of this great sikh warrior is spread on the basis that He was dogra and dogra are brahmans!!!!!!!!! really dogra is large caste which have all varna but dogra soldiers all belong to Aryan Rajput caste who were earlier kshatriya and then became rajput they are not brahmans. Brahmans destroy sikh empire i still remember 2 sikh general lal singh and tej singh both of whom were brahmans from meerut who converted to sikhism and let down sikh army in both the wars against british empire, i am not saying that british were weak they were most powerful empire of world but these two sikh brahmans were traitors.
Let me show one noted sikh historian who give his consent that "BANDA singh " was sikh their is no noted sikh historian nor any evidence . Similarly Banda being a Khatri is propagated as Khatri are dominant sikh caste and they dont want rajput jats to have their say but unfortunately they dont know that Guru Gobind Singh Sahib himself urged Banda to resume the duties of a real rajput. But because now we live in a free world all brahmans , khatri will claim this glorious sikh rajput as their own, but the fact most sikh historians themselves belong to non-rajput caste and most agree that banda was dogra rajput and not a brahman or khatri. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 07:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
most of the claims of banda being a punajabi or a khatri have been rejected most accepted version is that neither he was punjabi nor a khatri he was born in rajaouri a rajput town of dogra rajputs and his real name being lachman das, some still prefer him as punjabi to show that "PUNJABI ARE LIONS" reality most sikh warriors are nt punajbi their ancestors were from rajasthan(jassa singh, maharaja ranjit singh most families have SATI TRADITION) or jammu or even farther , otherwise rajaouri as birth place of banda cannot be place side by side of his punjabi khatri origin. both these things contradict each other220.127.116.11 (talk) 07:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
i am not the only one for example dewan hakim rai calls him a sohdi khatri because their was confusion that was "BANDA" 11th sikh guru and other started claiming him as a punjabi sodhi khatri in reality he went to punjab only after meeting guru gobind singh ji and converting to sikhism before that he was not familiar with punjab at all. These are not historical facts just because few consider him a 11th sikh guru they started claiming him as khatri(as all gurus were must to be of khatri stock). http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=FlH0TurcKsWsrAf2nP0G&id=h3FRAAAAYAAJ&dq=banda+singh+bahadur+khatri+sodhi&q=rajput#search_anchor
this will help , brahman, khatri origin of Banda Singh Bahadur seems to be fragile and guess work , because he was assumed to be 11th sikh guru many sikh started claiming him as a khatri(sodhi). Brahman origin arguments are even less convincing..The khatri origin is nothing by a pre-assumption that banda is descendant of Guru Gobind Singh and hence he will be the 11th guru and thats why he is sodhi khatri but most writers including khatri have rejected we can see that Banda was rajput and because of which their was no "11th guru of sikh" the last guru remained guru gobind singh if banda was khatri then he would have been accepted as guru but guru gobind singh instead of choosing any khatri choose a rajput and that ended the guru-system of sikhism.18.104.22.168 (talk) 10:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
how can all india brahmin sikh forum can be considered as a view-point , it is obvious that they are neither scholars nor in the field of academics . 22.214.171.124 (talk) 07:12, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
accept the theory of majority of historians.
in this article BABA BANDA SINGH BAHADUR is written as a brahman.but the majority of historians approves the fact that he was a rajput.i corrected it some times but it was re-edited to brahman again and again by a user tempname1.now this user had take semi-protection for the article and no-body can re-edited it.in this way the wrong information is being provided by this user .i think that user is himself a brahaman.i request all readers to make aware the administration of wikipedia about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramsinghantaal (talk • contribs) 16:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
- If people are willing to work with me, rather than fight about it, then perhaps I can help to resolve this one. I am reasonably experienced in caste-related topics here on Wikipedia.
We are currently showing various theories of origin and some of the sourcing in that section is highly suspect. I have tagged quite a few as needing more information. I have also removed some: British Raj sources and caste advocacy groups are not reliable sources for things such as this. Caste advocacy groups often attempt to puff things up, and the Raj people just wrote what they were told by locals - which basically amounts to the same thing.
I have also removed the statement of caste from the lead section. This is a temporary measure: leads are supposed to summarise the main body of an article and so it is clearly incorrect to plump for one caste or another when we have a long list of possibles. We could say that his caste is a matter of dispute but until we have checked out the sources that are provided, I'm not actually sure that it is. Many of those sources may well not meet our standards. In any event, important though caste remains in India, this detail really is rather unimportant compared to what he actually did - omitting it while we sort out the article body is not going to cause the earth to stop turning. - Sitush (talk) 17:39, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Removal of Torture section
I have just removed the Torture section from the article. The tone was all wrong for an encyclopedia but, worse, it was a violation of copyright. The content was first introduced in January 2006 and subsequently deleted/add/deleted etc over a period because people then spotted a problem, although they did not say where the material had come from.
I have just checked to see how www.sikh-history.com looked a year before the content first appeared here and, sure enough, we have copy/pasted from that website or from some other site that hosted the material prior to January 2006. I'm not digging around to find out which other site might have published the text first because sikh-history.com carries an all-encompassing copyright notice on its home page, dating from 2004.
- Actually, I've found that so much of this article was copied from sikh-history.com that I've more or less stubbed the thing. Sorry, but this is going to need a complete re-write. - Sitush (talk) 18:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
thanks for removing word 'brahmin" from brief introduction.
i thanks to you that you removed the word "brahman" from brief introduction of Banda Singh Bahadur .it was sure a wrong statement in that section and people who do not know much about BANDA SINGH BAHADUR could accept it as it is. but you forgot to remove the surname "bhardwaj".this is one of a leading surname of brahmins.it must remove immediately. in "early life " section there are diffrent theory of historians available.let the people read them and left the decision on themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramsinghantaal (talk • contribs) 02:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- I am aware that some people make connections between names and caste affiliation. I think that the best approach to adopt here, as with all of the sources in the Origins section, is to wait for more complete information to be presented by those who believe the statement to be true. If none is forthcoming then the name may well be removed completely: we need verifiability here. - Sitush (talk) 07:10, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Encyclopaedia of Sikhism
There have been various books called Encyclopaedia of Sikhism. Why is this web encyclopaedia reliable, and if it is a copy of one of those printed books then why are we linking to it? Unsigned comment added by Sitush (talk | contribs)
- This Encyclopedia is published by the Punjab University Patiala, an authoritive work on the subject with contributions by many respected scholars. I have added the publisher's name to the citation in the article. Apuldram (talk) 10:54, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm still concerned that we are linking to a copyright violation. - Sitush (talk) 10:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- The link is to a page in the original source, not to a copy - see the url. Apuldram (talk) 11:09, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm still concerned that we are linking to a copyright violation. - Sitush (talk) 10:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- The University publishes it on the web.
Those who prefer the scenic route could start at the Wikipedia article Punjabi University, which provides an external link to the University's website; a top bar in that website provides a link to their Encyclopaedia of Sikhism. Notice the url of their website.
Consult the index under B (for Banda); that brings up a list; scroll down to BANDĀ SIṄGH BAHĀDUR (1670-1716).
Or you could go directly to that page by clicking on the link in the Wikipedia article on BANDĀ SIṄGH BAHĀDUR. Notice that the url shows it is a page from the University's published website.Apuldram (talk) 15:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- Forget the scenic route - it adds nothing. Where is your evidence that the university has permission to publish? Plenty of official bodies breach copyright in India, as does organisations such as APNA, but we're not allowed to link to web pages that host material in breach of it. It's no different from, say, WP:YT. - Sitush (talk) 16:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
The picture of statue is not appropriate.it needs to be changed.
The picture of Baba Banda Singh Bahadar as a statue is not appropriate. there are many pictures of baba ji made by Sikh painters available which are far better and matches to baba ji,s real personality.i wonder why the edit access is not available for that section to make edit. please change that pic or allow access to edit that section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PSAntaal (talk • contribs) 05:57, 26 July 2014 (UTC) I remove that picture.i wish somebody will insert the better picture their or i request to admins to allow me to insert the new picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PSAntaal (talk • contribs) 06:20, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
- Hey PSAntaal, I noticed you uploaded a new picture and inserted a new caption. This all is OK with me (but remember to fill out the rest of the copyright info here, you are missing some template parameters see the template documentation for usage).
- Also, the text does not appear at all encyclopedic to me, remember we must keep a neutral point of view so statements like "No any other work is available better than this.This is the most popular picture in Sikhs which is easily recognised by everyone and also this gave the true impressions of the fearless warrior baba banda singh bahadur in one sighting to any person.This picture is most appropriate to represent Baba Banda Singh Bahadar" are not acceptable. Try to keep the description short and neutral (like "Painting of Banda Singh Bahadur by painter XX").
- I have removed some of the text in the description for this reason. Hope that helps, cheers --– sampi (talk•contrib•email) 09:20, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Why are you reverting my edits and deleting my posts in talk.
My contribution of a line in section 'Role in Sikh history' which is as it is 'After a meeting with Tenth Sikh Guru. sh. Guru Gobind Singh he turned to sikhism and becomes a sikh. Then The guru ordered him to go to punjab and fight the mughals with the help of Sikhs.After this the new era of his life starts" and a edit in which i replaced the word 'oppressed hindus' with 'Sikh army' are being reverted again and again. May i know the reason.I want to know that what is wrong in these comments. Please claryfy me about this and not delete my this post again.
- One revert was because you places the same text at two places. That spoils the article quality. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 07:49, 26 July 2014 (UTC)