User talk:Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

Hi Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa! welcome to Wikipedia!

Be bold in editing pages and don't let others scare you off! To sign your posts (for eg. on talk pages) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp.

Here are some links that you might find useful:

  Wikipedia:How to edit a page
  Tutorial
  Sandbox, the place where you can experiment
  Wikipedia:Where to ask a question.
  Wikipedia:Five pillars
  Wikipedia:Manual of Style

You can contribute in many ways

  write an article
  fight vandalism
  Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome
  Improve illustrations and upload new images
  perform maintenance tasks
  Become member of a project that interests you

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. If you need help, you can drop a note on my talk page or use Wikipedia:New contributors' help page. You can also type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia! utcursch | talk 07:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest[edit]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 02:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing issues[edit]

Sorry, I've been away - holiday and other more pressing stuff. I'm happy to work with you on this article, but unexplained blanking of critical discussion by an editor with a major conflict of interest - like this - is a very quick way of heading towards a block.

Can I remind you that references require that the cited statement(s) actually source what the article says? For instance: [1]

One of Yogi Bhajan's significant impacts on popular culture has been his use of the word "great." In the 1960s and 70s, before the proliferation of the ubiquitous smiley and "Have a nice day!" Yogi Bhajan never settled for "nice." He counseled greatness. He encouraged greatness. He expected greatness in his students, no less

Where is this actually sourced in the cited quote?

Yogi Bhajan, The Teachings of Yogi Bhajan, Pomona, California, 1977, quotation #1: "When the little me has recognized the big me and the little i has recognized the big I, oneness is achieved. And when one knows that one is the one and one knows everything is one, then what is there it find? It is only when we think that I am and everything else is everything else that we have to find something." p. 105; quotation #2: "Live as royal saints. Nobody shall walk over you, but nobody who needs you shall be deprived of your strength." p. 104.

It's fine to quote that second paragraph. But not to paraphase it into something completely dissimilar like the first.

And frankly this is the problem with the whole edit. For instance:

In 1969, Yogi Bhajan established the 3HO (Healthy, Happy, Holy Organization) Foundation to further his missionary work. It served his premise that every human possessed the birthright to be healthy, happy and holy. It was only a matter of unlearning one set of habits and replacing it with a kinder, more uplifting routine.

The citation you gave here supports the quote about birthright, but says nothing at all about "unlearning one set of habits and replacing it with a kinder, more uplifting routine".

Plus, really, you're not providing reliable sources. "Primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of the article are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please include more appropriate citations from reliable sources". Gordonofcartoon (talk) 01:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Welcome back. I appreciate your critical outlook. The material I erased was slanderous and offensive - and hardly objective, if objectivity is what we are looking for.

It is difficult to cite exact word-for-word quotes of someone who has lectured as profusely as Yogi Bhajan. There is not easy source or way of searching for these quotes.

I have done the best I can and will revisit from time to time, but for the moment, I have done the best I can. There is a lot of 3rd party referencing there now that wasn't there before. Then again, I happen to a) teach the teachings of Yogi Bhajan, having studied his teachings for some 36 years. My students cite me as a reliable authority on this subject matter; b) be the guy he asked to write his biography and for that reason I am possibly better versed on his life than anyone else you will find.

Do I have a personal interest here? Kind of, but really I just want the truth to be represented. There is no personal stake in this, any more than you have a stake other than your admirable dedication to the truth. Am I objective? Who is objective? I have seen the redwood forest and now I write about it. Can anyone who has seen the redwoods remain objective? I leave that with you to decide. Thanks again. talk

Articles for deletion nomination of Third Sikh Holocaust 1984[edit]

I have nominated Third Sikh Holocaust 1984, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Third Sikh Holocaust 1984. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am following the discussion with interest. Will contribute or possibly edit the article as time allows. I thought the footnotes were extensive and authoritative enough. It happens Sikhs don't control the major media outlets in India or elsewhere so their story - the afflictions visited on them are less than well known. In writing the article, I had hoped to shed some light on them. (talk)

The article you created was just deleted?[edit]

The article you created was just deleted?
All is not lost. Here is what you can do right now:

Many administrators will be happy to give you a copy of your deleted article, either by putting it on a special user page for you (a process called userfication) or by e-mailing you a copy.

Once you have the article, you can try to resolve the issues why it was deleted.

If you've repaired the article, or you believe the reasons for deleting the article were in error, you can dispute the deletion at Deletion Review. Generally, you must show how the previous deletion(s) were in error, but this is the place to resolve disputes about whether a deletion was wrong.

Ikip (talk) 15:48, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry they deleted your article[edit]

This appears to be the location were they do much of their plotting, wonder if you were aware of this group.

Wikipedia_talk:Notice_board_for_India-related_topics

Wikipedia_talk:Notice_board_for_India-related_topics#Sikh_Holocausts

In my opinion them doing this is a violation of WP:CANVAS, basically they got all their little cronies to come into the deletion discussion, and rigged the vote.

User_talk:YellowMonkey blocked User:TeamQuaternion, to prevent him from further participation in the deletion discussion.

Next they deleted arguments from the deletion discussion itself. Have a look at the edit history they took out TeamQuaternion's last comment after they blocked him?

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Third_Sikh_Holocaust_1984

Anyway my mother always taught me that cheaters never win in the end.GHALOOGHAARAA (talk) 02:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest first reviewing this rule.[edit]

WP:POVFORK

Then ask yourself, if between your article and the the 1984_anti-Sikh_riots this rule is being violated.

To be honest I think the answer is yes. These two articles have wildly differing points of view.

Then have a look at this article that was created by combining the two articles.

User_talk:Guru_Fatha_Singh_Khalsa/sand

I would suggest that you paste this article back into 1984_anti-Sikh_riots, replacing the existing article.

Those people are making some weird argument about copy right violations right now that is so technical that even I don't understand it. To be honest it sounds to me like they are making a legal threat WP:THREAT, but at this point I am assuming good faith WP:AGF

One more thing, Wikipeida rules are so convoluted that some people think that who ever knows the rules best wins, but it is not true. One of the five pillars of wikipedia is WP:IAR


GHALOOGHAARAA (talk) 18:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to join the Sikh project![edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sikhism

All you have to do is click on the link below and add your name to the list, then you will have 40 new friends who think pretty much like you to help you!

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sikhism#Participants

Thanks for all this! Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 20:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really happy to see that you got your good article online.[edit]

Looked at your new user page! Followed the link, really glad to see that your writings are online some place! The really deserve to be.

Looks to me like Sikh wiki is written from a Sikh point of view, and that is not a bad thing. Hope you are still studying the Wikipedia principle of WP:NPOV. Please don't get discouraged with Wikipedia I think you have a great deal to offer, and writings is Wikipedia rank a lot higher in the search engines than other places. However, search engines keep track of clicks, and as more and more people read your writings where every you put them, I am sure you writing skill will be recognized where ever you put it.

There is another really good writer that maybe you should be aware of, who wrote:

Sikh_extremism

Well he mostly wrote it, others edited as well. He is also being attacked for not having a neutral point of view. His article was also put up for deletion. I am right now going to read the deletion discussion but I really get the feeling that the only reason it did not get deleted is because he know how to use the Sikh project group to get people to come in and vote for his side. I don't know this for a fact, and this is entirely speculation on my part. I am investigating further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GHALOOGHAARAA (talk • contribs) 01:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. I found the site you mention to be interesting and well-informed. By the way, how does one use a project group to get people to come in and vote for one's side? Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 16:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Holocaust Unique (book)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Is the Holocaust Unique (book), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Is the Holocaust Unique? (book). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

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) 06:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1984 ghallooghaaraa[edit]

Hi. See my comments on the talk page of this article. Deb (talk) 14:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of 1984 ghallooghaaraa[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, 1984 ghallooghaaraa, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1984 ghallooghaaraa. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Soman (talk) 12:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Please make your self familiar with the wikipedia policies to overcome any challenges .... good work... good contribution to wikipedia... thanks DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 08:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe your article has extremely good historical information. Go and vote (keep/delete etc) for your article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1984 ghallooghaaraa. You must defend your article if you believe it is a good improvement of this great pedia. DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 05:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Comments on My Talk Page[edit]

Please see my comments and reason for deletion. I think inclusion of this section warrants discussion, so as to avoid possible edit wars. Also note referencing. Thanks --Sikh-History 09:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DrV[edit]

An article you largely wrote is now at deletion review here. Hobit (talk) 13:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Physio-kundalini syndrome[edit]

What the heck are you doing creating a second article on this topic when we already have Kundalini syndrome? Gatoclass (talk) 15:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to do substantial work on an article, you create a sandbox page in your own user space, you do not create an entirely new article on essentially the same topic. That is known as content forking. There is no reason to create an entirely new article called "physio-kundalini syndrome" when it's clear it's just an alternative name for kundalini syndrome. I will now have to put this article up for AfD. Gatoclass (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kundalini syndrome[edit]

Can you please restore the lede to this article? Before you started editing it there was an introduction in the right style: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Kundalini_syndrome&oldid=369042368

That's the style that would be followed. PvsKllKsVp (talk) 00:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Revision history of Sikhism. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please don't make such comments when editing. WP:AGF is a fundemental precept of Wikipedia. As I stated before, if you want to make changes, please provide a rational, without attacks such as "hot air". SH 10:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

InterWikiProject Collaboration[edit]

The Outline WikiProject is currently working on the Outline of Sikhism.

You are invited to join this collaboration.

The Outline of Sikhism is the latest addition to the religion section of Portal:Contents/Outlines.

We look forward to learning from your expertise on this subject.

The Transhumanist 05:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gurmukh (yoga teacher)[edit]

The article Gurmukh (yoga teacher) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability. No independent sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. You have new messages at WikiDan61's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Speedy deletion nomination of Soram Singh Khalsa[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Soram Singh Khalsa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Weel (talk) 09:03, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kundalini yoga, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madonna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Krishna Kaur Khalsa (Thelma Oliver), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Golden Temple. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Harbhajan Singh Yogi may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • the Eugene company's top six executives must return more than $30 million"] in ''The Register-Guard]]'', October 14, 2012.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:27, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Harbhajan Singh Khalsa[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Harbhajan Singh Khalsa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://sovyatnik.editboard.com/t465-guru-ram-das-ashram-in-la. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. reddogsix (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Miri Piri Academy Boys at Harimandir Sahib.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Miri Piri Academy Boys at Harimandir Sahib.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Miri Piri Academy Girls.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Miri Piri Academy Girls.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Miri Piri Academy students practicing yoga.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Miri Piri Academy students practicing yoga.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Miri Piri Academy science lab.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Miri Piri Academy science lab.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Guru Ganesha Singh Khalsa portrait photo.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Guru Ganesha Singh Khalsa portrait photo.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images[edit]

Please stop uploading images under our fair use policy until you review the policy and understand it. Reasons such as "Frankly this was easiest" are not even close to valid. Eeekster (talk) 03:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Was being flip. The truth is that I spent some considerable time researching and finding these unique photos. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 00:39, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Ya Ho Wha 13 and Source Family Commune.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Ya Ho Wha 13 and Source Family Commune.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Source Family LMTL Photo.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Source Family LMTL Photo.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Father Yod.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Father Yod.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gurucharan Singh Khalsa[edit]

The article Gurucharan Singh Khalsa has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Autobiography and questionable notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Eeekster (talk) 03:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015[edit]

Information icon Please do not write or add to an article about yourself, as you apparently did at Gurucharan Singh Khalsa. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr/Ms Eekster. My name is Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. That is my real name. I am not Gurucharan Singh Khalsa. Therefore the article I contributed is not an autobiography. Thanks. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 04:37, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Edward O'Brien (mural artist)
added links pointing to Irish, Santa Fe, Look magazine, Espanola, Art Institute, Pecos and Golden Temple

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests.
Message added 22:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File:Source Family LMTL Photo.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Source Family LMTL Photo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Source Restaurant, Los Angeles circa 1970.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Source Restaurant, Los Angeles circa 1970.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Information icon Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Deep Ecology, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

  • avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
  • instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies.

You've been warned about this before. You are not allowed to write about yourself on WP. This not only applies to writing autobiographical articles, but also to what you just did when you created a section about yourself in another article.[2] - CorbieV☊☼ 21:56, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism Articles[edit]

Waheguruji Ka Khalsa Waheguruji ki Fateh!

Satsriakal!

Respected Sir

I belong to a Sikh family. I have been disturbed at the way pages showing the history of Guru's. It has been referring to a "death" date which according to me is incorrect. I recently visited Nanded and there is a museum that is dedicated to the Sikh History. In these museums there is a plethora of knowledge available regarding our Sikh history. In one of the information board (picture attached) it is written that the Son of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, Ajit Singh Ji attained martyrdom. Now every of our Guru was a fighter. Guru Gobind Singh Ji also knew about his date upon which he will become immortal. It is believed that Guruji after the same event prepared his own Angeetha (pyre) (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Death_of_Guru_Gobind_Singh#Setting_His_Own_Pyre).

My submission to you is that we must not use the term of death for our Guru's as they are all alive in the form of Guru Granth Sahib Ji as it is said "Sab sikhan ko hukum hai Guru Manyo Granth, Guru Granth Ji manyo Pragat Gura'n di Deh, Jo Prabh ko milbo chahe, khoj shabad main le." So I guess everyone who obeys Guru Granth Sahib Ji will always see his/her Guru Ji in his bodily avatar always (As it is said Pragat Gurua'n di Deh). But someone who leaves physical form of human body can never come back in such form unless the person who leaves the physical form of human body proclaims something to still consist of his/her physical form.

So let us make our Guru's immortal as Guruji Himself said it!

I tried several things such as these: 1- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Summary_of_dispute_by_Arjayay (The dispute does not seem to be in my favour) 2- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Paramdeeptung#November_2016 (My attempts to edit pages were undone and finally I was blocked as well) 3- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nanded#Dies (No one is in my support) 4- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Arjayay#hi (This user said I need to develop consensus)

My hope now lies in you. Please find the attached picture it is taken from a museum in Nanded. I assume people who are enforcing their riights have never been to Nanded as well.

Image:

File:Fortress War.jpg
Fortress War

Please revert.

Best wishes Paramdeep Singh Tung

Orphaned non-free image File:Krishna Kaur Khalsa 1976.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Krishna Kaur Khalsa 1976.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean. The image is free and authorized. Why are you doing this?

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning[edit]

It is obvious that you are here on a promotional agenda, spamming your bits and pieces all over Wikipedia and promoting a certain group and treating Wikipedia like your personal blog. If this continues then you will be blocked, while you could've been blocked already as the disruption has been going on for far too long, you haven't been given a final warning (although you've been alerted to the conflict of interest policies etc.) —SpacemanSpiff 03:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shakti Parwha Kaur Khalsa for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shakti Parwha Kaur Khalsa is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shakti Parwha Kaur Khalsa until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ~ Winged BladesGodric 07:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Miri Piri Academy logo.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Miri Piri Academy logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dharma Singh Khalsa moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Dharma Singh Khalsa, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Guy (help!) 09:25, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dharma Singh Khalsa[edit]

Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dharma Singh Khalsa".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gurmukh (yoga teacher) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gurmukh (yoga teacher) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gurmukh (yoga teacher) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

—SpacemanSpiff 06:19, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm surprised anyone took a pop at this article; she's certainly one of the world's best-known yoga gurus, and she got a whole chapter in Janice Gates's Yogini book. Anyway, all seems to be well now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest on Harbhajan Singh Khalsa[edit]

Hi, I see you were given a fair warning of possible conflict of interest on similar articles back in 2008.

You should therefore be aware that it is critically important on articles in which you may feel some attachment, such as this one, to be scrupulously neutral and if need be to confine your editing to edit requests on the talk page.

If you feel able to go beyond that, then you must take extreme care to be neutral, and to cite the most reliable sources. Your mention of the Thompson Report was, for the record, totally uncited, so I've removed it. The sources cited in that sentence are certainly reliable, numerous, and recent; so if you wish to note that the claim made there has been refuted, you must base it on a more recent, unimpeachable and unquestionably neutral source, which you must cite in full, preferably supported by a full quotation of its conclusions. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:04, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am shocked that you have deleted the claim to which you seem to object, while doing other (undoubtedly) good work. It looks very much as if you are succumbing to Conflict of Interest. I would urge you not to edit the article for a cooling-off period. I have restored the claim, again, as it is extremely well supported; you may or may not have found a refutation of the the claim, but a refutation (even if it were certain) is not a reason to *remove* the claims that it refutes - indeed, it is ridiculous to add a refutation and then to remove its raison d'etre, so it then has nothing left to refute in the article. No, you are going seriously wrong here: I only hope it was a slip of the keyboard, as it were. If it was intentional, then it was either a serious misunderstanding of how Wikipedia articles work, in which case please stop, or it was a conflicted action, which is forbidden. I do hope I am making myself clear. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing not logged in on Harbhajan Singh Khalsa[edit]

Could you please take extreme care to log in before editing this article. Wikipedia takes a very dim view of people who repeatedly, whether intentionally or not, do not log into their accounts when editing controversial articles, especially when making large deletions. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I do and I will. 18:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit-warring[edit]

I am sorry to see that an edit-war has broken out in the article. Given that discussions have been under way for some time now, that is not acceptable. There is a clear policy on this (WP:Edit warring), as there is on editing with WP:conflict of interest. Please stop at once. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for File:Harbhajan Singh Khalsa.svg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Harbhajan Singh Khalsa.svg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 23:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021[edit]

Copyright problem icon Your edit to Harbhajan Singh Khalsa has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism at Yogi Bhajan[edit]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Yogi Bhajan. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just looked at your page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Horse_Eye_Jack - I doesn't say much, but I did see it said "Assume good faith". Can you do that and walk back a bit and see that the edits I did were in good faith, and that the citations I removed were flawed. For a detailed analysis, see: https://fairinvestigation.com/the-thompson-report-2/ Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 16:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did assume good faith, you were first warned about this behavior in 2008 and have been warned over a dozen times since. I assume that you are capable of comprehending those warnings. That means that you are aware that your edits were vandalism. You knew what the right path was, you knew what the wrong path was and you chose the wrong path and now you're facing the consequences of that choice. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! Did you know that I wrote most of the article myself and added the photos and signature? Probably not. I wrote it because I know the material and you do not. I wrote the man's biography. And now you want to defend some profoundly flawed content that has wormed its way into the article? God bless you! Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know that because of your COI you weren't supposed to do that? Because you've been warned about it repeatedly so you should. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What I am telling you is that without my interest in the subject, this article would hardly exist. COI regulations are fine in principle, but in practice they do not always get the job done. Because of my proximity to the subject matter, I know The Olive Branch Report cited in the article is unprofessional and illegal. Because of your distance from the subject matter, you have no idea - and you are going to leave it as a major citation? May The Force Be With Us! Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What major citation? Its used once and then for its own contents. Do you have a reliable source which says that the Olive Branch Report is incorrect or illegal? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:04, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The "An Olive Branch Report" (AOBR) is directly cited as #25, and indirectly in citations 4, 5, 6, 24, 26, 27, 28, & 29 which are article citing it as evidence. The entire section "Alleged sexual abuse" is based on it and Pam Dyson's book. When AOBR came out, Barbara W. Thompson, J.D., L.P.I was hired to assess its merit. Here is a link to her report, known as "The Thompson Report": https://fairinvestigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Thompson-Report.pdf. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 18:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And what reliable sources discuss this report? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please. This is a report about a report about a minor religious figure whose only biography is self-published by a student of his. You think the New York Times or the ACLU or a professor at a major university or some other neutral third party would discuss such a report? Why would they? Nobody discusses the report except those who know about it, and they are few and far between. Besides, you would not consider them reliable sources. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If no reliable third party has discussed the report then neither should the wikipedia page. That is how we enforce a neutral point of view here on wikipedia. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why not focus on the An Olive Branch Report? Barbara Thompson discussed that report and found it to be both flawed and illegal. The following are her qualifications. She is a unquestionably a very reliable and professional source. Why is her critique of the An Olive Branch Report not taken into account in this Wikipedia article? Why is such an amateur report (An Olive Branch) given credence while a professional investigation (Thompson) is not? Her qualifications: "Barbara W. Thompson, J.D., L.P.I., is a former attorney and a current licensed private investigator in Pennsylvania who has managed a private investigations practice for 25 years. She was a first and second vice-president, secretary, and treasurer of the Pennsylvania Association of
Licensed Investigators (PALI), and served as an executive board member for eighteen years. While on the board of PALI she co-chaired a team of board members who worked on the revision of the Pennsylvania Private Detective Act of 1953. She has actively worked to raise the quality of
professional private investigators and private investigations throughout her career." Her report: https://fairinvestigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Thompson-Report.pdf Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of that would make her a subject matter expert. Those are not qualifications we recognize. For our purposes Thompson's opinion is only relevant if its featured in reliable sources. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You consider the journalists that uncritically accepted and cited the An Olive Branch report in their articles to be reliable sources? Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On their own a journalist is generally not a reliable source, its only when they're producing work for a reliable publication that their work is considered to be reliable for our purposes. Note that the sources don't base their reporting on the Olive Branch report alone, they appear to report that dozens of women have claimed abuse at the hands of Bhajan. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They appear to report lots without substantiating evidence or testimony. I think you are just going to oppose what I say no matter what. I get that millions of women in America alone are abused every year. Perhaps you are one. My heart goes out to everybody who has been hurt. But having dug deeply into this matter and interviewed many people, I do not believe that Yogi Bhajan has done any of the outrageous things he has been accused of doing. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an opinion either way. Our own opinions aren't supposed to skew our editing, if one can't edit a topic area dispassionately they can't edit it at all. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is the problem. You (speaking generally of Wikipedia and its army of well-intentioned staffers) are very good at catching people who have personal interests in a subject. But you (collectively) allowed numerous citations (9 exactly) in this article based on a flawed and even illegal report, the An Olive Branch Report. They got past you. That is the problem with being disinterested (or "neutral" as you like to call it). Being disinterested, you likely do not care enough about a subject to deeply study and understand it. Without knowledge, you (collectively again) are liable to let really flawed material get posted that never should be. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You keep saying illegal, what would be illegal about the report? Again the articles don't appear to be based on the Olive Branch Report, they appear to draw from a wide variety of source material. Again we are talking about credible allegations by dozens of women. The Olive Branch Report substantiates those allegations but it is not those allegations. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What makes allegations credible is 1) that those making them make themselves known. Allegations cannot be anonymous. 2) their testimony is sworn. That is, they swear that it is the truth. 3) The accusers are subjected to cross-examination. The Olive Garden fiasco honored none of these criteria. Nobody did. As stated in the Thompson report, the makers of the Olive Branch report committed a number of legal errors that could make them liable for prosecution. One is that they were in no way qualified to conduct an investigation. Another is that they conducted their sham exercise out side the boundaries of their state of Pennsylvania. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They appear to have been more qualified than Thompson. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good night! Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When you wake up can you tell me more about fairinvestigation.com? It appears to be an attack page not a reliable publisher. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since you say it that way, I have to respond that what constitutes an "attack" depends on a person's perspective. From the perspective of Guru Amrit Singh Khalsa who commissioned the report, the legacy of his teacher was under attack. He wanted the report to set the record straight. If you have time, I can share with you some of my own rejoinders: https://www.messengerfromthegurushouse.com/yogi.html https://www.messengerfromthegurushouse.com/worm.html Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 23:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will and I'm sympathetic but you must understand that on wikipedia we regularly encounter "true believers" who try to enforce their own version of "truth" on the site. We're pretty jaded when it comes to handling this sort of thing which is why we're so insistent on going by what WP:RS say not what we ourselves believe. I know that this might seem foreign to a man of great faith who seeks the truth but we settle for something less than absolute truth and that is what is verifiable using a very narrow definition of verifiable. Are you sure that none of the reporting has talked about the Thompson report? Even just mentioning that it exists and disagrees with the Olive Branch report? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 00:05, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Horse Eye's Back - You might be surprised if you got to know me. I have one of the most critical mindsets you could ever imagine. That is why I dialogued with you in a respectful and rational way. I get where you are coming from. I just think a good man is being trashed and I don't especially like it. In answer to your question, I have not seen any trace of a mention of the Thompson Report in any of the reporting cited in the article. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 00:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Information icon Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Yogi Bhajan, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. You have been warned about conflict of interest editing twice in the past, please consider this your third warning. Due to your COI, you should not be editing this article nor related articles directly. Instead, please use the editing request system WP:ER to place requests for proposed changes on the talk pages of articles with which you have a COI. An unconnected editor(s) will then analyze the proposed changes and either make them or not. Again, please STOP directly editing articles with which you have a conflict of interest. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 16:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Netherzone. I may not have time for this. Yes, I am connected with the subject of the article. I concerns me that a flawed and illegal report on the allegations against Yogi Bhajan should be cited in an article like this. That's all. If you have time, you can check: https://fairinvestigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Thompson-Report.pdf Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and one of our three principal Core Content Policies is "Neutral Point of View". That means that all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic are included. Therefore controvertial content that you do not agree with should not be deleted along with the reliable sources associated with that content, and replaced with your preferred content. For balance, all POVs should be represented. You need to use the article talk pages to discuss controvertial changes. I understand that you are busy, as are 90% of all of us WP volunteers, however you do need to comply with policy and guidelines in relation to both content and conduct if you wish to participate in this collaborative project. Thank you, Netherzone (talk) 17:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, the An Olive Branch Report is not a reliable source. The Thompson Report is. That is the source of our difference. But perhaps you would need to read The Thompson Report to know that. I realize this is hard. You are a volunteer. I am not being paid either. Somehow, it is nice when truth and reliable sources prevail on Wikipedia. I pray for that. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I've move the message you left on my user talk page to the article talk page of Yogi Bhajan, as that is the correct location to discuss content issues in relation to the article. It also allows other editors who have watch-listed the article a chance to see the discussion and weigh-in with their thoughts. The article talk page is located here: Talk:Yogi Bhajan. Best regards, Netherzone (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guru_Fatha_Singh_Khalsa&oldid=1215596626"