User talk:Sukh/Archive 5

From June 2006 to July 2006

References for Maharaja Ranjit Singh's Ancestry (Mahan/Sandhu edits)

Hey Sukh!

The references on Maharaja Ranjit Singh's page are not consistent with the sources and external links listed on the page.

Since the town of Gujranwala was founded by Sansi's its easy to see why this has been a cause for confusion. By the way I've read some of the material that you're overlooking and think you're doing a great job.

Here are the references, the bibliography is usually listed at the bottom of each page: http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/warriors/charat.html http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/warriors/ranjit1.html

Some other references with Bibliographies and references to Sandhu Heritage: http://www.4dw.net/royalark/India4/lahore2.htm (look for Naudh Singh Sandhu) http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE2-3/bajwa.html http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/l/lahore.html http://www.punjabilok.com/misc/freedom/freedom_index.htm

Hope this helps to simplify things for you,

Thanks!

Sorry about the delay. I'll look into this shortly. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Sikhism FA

Yo Sukhbhai - I'm back. What is your thinking on the FA drive? Is there anything I can help on? By a brief examination, you've done a fantastic job. I think poignant criticism will only now be obtained on FAC, so I'd like to know where you stand. Rama's Arrow 06:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back Nirav! The Sikhism article has come a long way. I've been extremely busy recently (which is really bizarre, because I don't think I've done anything particularly productive the last week!) and so haven't been able to concentrate on WP as much as hoped. There is a couple of things I'd like to do first before a FA drive. In this order:

• Correct errors in decision making section as pointed out by Hardeep on talk.
• Remove ISO transliterations for people's names and places (there is a general consensus that they're a bit overwhelming)
• Add a line or two about Sikh sects and groups
• Copyedit
• FAC!

It's been good to note that a few more Sikhs have contributed to talking about the article on the talk page. Some of their feedback has been very constructive! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure, I'll begin addressing the problems tomorrow. The overall article looks good - especially creating the Sikh fork, as it should be religion-specific. Rama's Arrow 02:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Question

I'm beginning to think that the "Independent India" section in history is not relevant to the discussion of the Sikh religion. What do you think? Rama's Arrow 23:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it's more suited to the article Sikh? A quick mention is all that is required on the Sikhism article I think. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, I'll suitably compress it. Rama's Arrow 23:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

FAC

If you feel generally comfortable, I think you should launch the FAC. Poignant criticism will only be obtained there, so no point in waiting. I'll continue to copyedit and keep a close eye on things. Rama's Arrow 23:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey - you haven't setup completely. You must write a nomin on the "leave comments" and list it on WP:FAC. Rama's Arrow 00:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, sorry! Rama's Arrow 00:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It's now done ;) I was thinking of a nice intro...! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Hahahaha....Sweet dreams! Rama's Arrow 01:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

congrats!

The Upholder of the Wiki star is the ideal award to a person who has almost single-handedly protected the integrity of articles related to Sikhism, and added some unique and wonderful knowledge. Rama's Arrow 06:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Whether or not the FAC succeeds, you should sleep deep and peacefully in the knowledge of the fantastic work you've done. Btw, if you're thinking about going for RfA again, I'd strongly suggest that you diversify your work on admin-related tasks, and beyond Sikhism-related articles. I think it is necessary to showcase more growth in contributions. Rama's Arrow 06:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I think I'll put off the RFA - I've just not got the time at the moment, and administrative tasks are not something that especially appeal to me at the moment :)

I totally forgot that this barnstar was here, it's time to add it to my trophy cabinet - barnstar number three! Thanks! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sukh - many thanks! The day was especially important for personal reasons. Also, Happy Birthday to you, whether upcoming or belated! Rama's Arrow 16:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Belated - but thanks still :) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Btw, user:Anwar saadat has some "issues" - consistently opposes all Indian topic FACs, and RfAs. Good that you replied on technical points he raised, but don't expect much from him. And don't worry about the FAC, it will pass inspite of him. Rama's Arrow 16:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I've seen some of his votes on other issues and I know what you mean. However, in this case at least I think his criticsms are valid. I'll try and address them when I get time. I do agree with both Anwar saadat and zafiroblue05 that the article may be a bit difficult to read. Again, I'll try and address that soon! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Kartarpur

Greetings, Mr. Sukh.

I see that you have made a short stub on Kartarpur, in which it is said that 'Kartarpur is a small town near Jalandhar established by Guru Nanak Dev.'

I knew this was coming. I think, we have to make a disambiguation page for Kartarpur. If I am not wrong, you have an edition of 'The Illustrated History of the Sikhs'. It must be having a map showing two different Kartarpurs in the Punjab; the Kartarpur in the Jullundur Doab, which was founded by Arjan and the one founded by Nanak. Arjan also founded the towns of Taran Taran(Majha) and Sri Hargobindpur (on the Beas), although I have read at some places that Har Gobind founded Sri Hargobindpur, which I think is wrong for he founded Kiratpur, which again according to some was founded by Har Rai. The list is long.

However, I think the disambiguation page should have links to pages entitled as Kartarpur(Nanak), for the town founded by the first Guru on the banks of the Ravi between present-day Kalanaur and Basohli along the course of the Ravi as it descends from Chamba and flows towards Lahore, and Kartarpur(Arjan), for the town founded by the fifth Guru.

By the way, we even need a disambiguation page for Shahadara linking to the one on the left bank of the Ravi facing Lahore and the one on the eastern bank of the Yamuna in Delhi.

Regards. Rajatjghai 18:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey Rajatghai,

Unfortunately, the book does not have a map that shows either Kartarpur. Yes, I agree with you that we need a disambig page. Maybe instead of having Kartarpur (Guru's Name) it should be Kartarpur (District)?

I'm quite astonished by your knowledge of Punjabi clans, culture and geography. Are you studying/have studied a degree related to such a subject? It'd be good to know your background on all this stuff! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, sir. No, I don't have any degree as such in "Punjab Studies" so to speak. In fact, I am ashamed to say that I can't even write my mother tongue in either script:Gurmukhi/Shahmukhi. But I am passionate about the Punjab and hence try to gather info from wherever I can:Print, electronic, web etc.

Coming to Kartarpur, I agree on your suggestion about making two articles entitled Kartarpur(Districtname). It is very much acceptable to me.

Ah yes! I have made a slight but important change to the Sikh article. Please have a look. I hope you like it.

One last thing. I want to upload a suitable image of the Durgiana Mandir on the Hinduism in Punjab page. But I don't know how to. Can you help?

Thanks. Rajatjghai 01:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I can teach you Gurmukhi if you like. I know Devanagari too, so I can teach you via that. Very little difference between Devanagari and Gurmukhi in terms of how the script works.

I'm not sure about the change to the Sikh article. Is it wise to lump all Sikhs together as a single ethnic group? Especially when there are plenty of Sikhs that aren't Punjabis?

You can upload pictures using the 'Upload File' link in the toolbox on the left hand side. Make sure you've got appropriate licensing permission from the copyright holder! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 01:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that today there are plenty of Sikhs from non-Punjabi backgrounds and diverse racial groups. I have two solutions for this issue:

• In the 'Related groups' section, something could be added such as "Converts from various racial groups."
• It could be put to a discussion and vote, the likes of which we saw in the article on the Harimandir.

Rajatjghai 03:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

How about doing both? :) Sorry about the delay in replying, totally forgot! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Sikhism

Hi - yeah I've been keeping an eye on. I think you should report both Aryan818 and Elven on WP:ANI as WP:TROLLs. Rama's Arrow 00:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Especially Aryan818, who's been removing refactoring other people's edits. Rama's Arrow 00:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I know. I've been trying to keep the comments under check on the talk page, but some of the edits are so wild and ruin the indentation so badly that I often get confused about who said what! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Read my comment on Aryan's talk page! :) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Btw, don't be discouraged over Zafirblue not changing his object vote. Raul654 doesn't promote based on vote count, and now that you've addressed his objections, its moot. This Fire Burns 04:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Howdy

How have you been Sukh! Thanks for your message yesterday on the Sikhi talk board! I have been away from Wikipedia for a while. Hope all is well with you. 138.49.98.53 09:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Are you sure that was me? I don't remember posting on any talk board... Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 09:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I know what you mean. The Sikh talk page ;) Yes all is good for me, we've turned the Sikhism article around so it looks pretty good now. Leave any comments you have about it on the talk page! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 09:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Sukh, I don't have my laptop with me so I was not signed in before. What's the deal with the Khalistan page? I can see a lot of communal intent with the edits and reverts. I tried to introduce a few things on the page with comments on the talk page and 61.17.232.118 and 61.246.20.56 (possibly the same user) keeps reverting it. I need your feedback on how to handle it. Zafarnamah 20:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I've lost all interest in that page. It's just not really worth my time to handle. There are complaints from all sides and nobody is happy with the state of the page. I will see if I can add balance to the debate over the coming days. Please don't get sucked into a revert war (just let things settle down for a bit)! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Sukh. I noticed that the user AnvarA had completed removed all accounts of Operation Bluestar and replaced them with the GOI version provided by Brar. He has been slowly trying to change the entire article in this manner and I see that you have tried to revert his changes on July 2. Since he was blocked once for a revert war, now he may be reverting using different IP addresses without logging in. I can be wrong, of course! Thanks for the update. All the best, Zafarnamah 05:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I have to say I definately approve of some of Anvar's edits. I've recently got Sikhism to FA status and will be concentrating on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic) next. After that I can concentrate on the Khalistan article. I think the best course of action is to simply leave the page for the moment. Let Anvar do all the edits he wants, and then we can address individual points on the talk page. We need to sort out this page once and for all. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Reporting

You have taken enough abuse. I've reported our friends: [1]. This Fire Burns 15:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Normally I can't be bothered with doing stuff like that.  :) Sikhism should be FA soon! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you please add Muhammad Iqbal to your watchlist for a bit? I'm having some trouble with POV-pushing anons. This Fire Burns....Always 20:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Already have. I've been kinda watching the events from afar... I'll see where I can help. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Your first FA! Great reward for a month of hard, patient work. Btw, if you start another FA drive for a Sikhism subject, jus lemme know. Will love to help. This Fire Burns....Always 03:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm thinking about concentrating on Guru Granth Sahib after I've finished doing the Naming Conventions proposal and sorting out the Khalistan page. Feel free to contribute in the mean time! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sikhism

Congrats on FA! -- Samir धर्म 03:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

From me too. Good work! -- thunderboltz^{a.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK}04:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Congrats Sukh... Lots of hard work on the FA -- Lost 06:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! I think it is likely to be the hardest of Sikhism-related pages to get to FA. From here on in, hopefully it'll get easier! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

FAC of Fundamental Rights...

Okay, I looked through the Act, and found (on page 5, 7B(2)) that only one right is not accorded to OCIs (see changes). So now that point is also taken care of. Please reply on the FAC page.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91^{(esperanza elections!)} 04:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

PS. good work on getting Sikhism up to FA status! --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91^{(esperanza elections!)} 04:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sukh

There has been a massive edit war going-on the Khalistan article. Both editors have been blocked but there has been lot of neutral United nations and stats removed. Please have look at it and rectify by taking or adding any information that has been removed. Try and make neutral as possible.--Sikh scholar 14:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Sukh

Sukh, if you need any detailed information on the Khalsa, I can provide it ALL, as all my family are, order of the Khalsa e.g. dad, mum, aunts, uncles and grandparents. Moreoever, we have close links to some of the most respected Sikh leaders in Sikhism, who are greatly involved in promoting and educating the Sikh diaspora about Sikhism, around the world. Moreoever, that goes for Philosophy, Sikhism commmon sense, interpretation, historical records and pretty much anything else. However, the only problem is I'm very busy (working on my PhD in CS) for the time being so when I have slighty less work load (hopefully 2 months) I can help significantly then P.S. Give me reply when recieve this.--Sikh scholar 02:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I would like detailed information on the function and history of the decision making structure in Sikhism. What was decreed by the gurus and what has been a development since. And also, how the SGPC relates to all this. The internet has been contradictory and fruitless and I haven't had chance to get any books yet.

Basically if you can contribute anything then it's appreciated. It takes a *lot* of work to get even a single article up to standard on Wikipedia. I contributed several days worth of constant work on Sikhism as did others to make it a featured article. If you have a web site with all this sort of information on, you can copy it straight to Wikipedia (provided you are the copyright holder of the material). Is there any specific topic that interests you?

Also, if you have pictures of manuscripts, Sikh monuments and buildings or pictures of old (very old so they're in the public domain) paintings then please upload them! We suffer from a distinct lack of multimedia content related to Sikhism (I've tried my best to fill some of the void with good content). Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem Sukh. However, the reason why you've had these problems finding the information. Is because Sikhism is a very beautiful but complex religion that takes many years of study to under the full depth, richness and scope. Compared to other world-religion we also have comparatively low number of highly educated Scholars, which has made the lack of information, context and interpretation worse. Guru Gobind Singh was quoted on many occasions saying he wanted all of his Sikhs to be highly educated, to be able to understand the religion correctly. One of the Gurus (I can't remember which) used to say that education was a person's 'third eye'. What he meant was it allowed you to see things in a different correct way, instead of simple and stupidly. Therefore, don't worry I can help you with everything, however, it takes time, which I'm currently short of at the moment. However, don't worry, we'll make all the articles world-class and beautiful in time. With regard to pictures we have many. Question: Is the copyright with me if I took a pictures of holy Sikh manuscript, monuments, temples and etc. I've visted all the major temples in Punjab e.g. +50. The only ones left are Patna Sahib, Hemkund Sahib, Hazur Sahib and Nankana Sahib and then I've visted and payed my repsects to all the major temples in Sikhism and Sikh history- that would be a nice feeling. Far as I'm aware of copyright Law is if you take a Photograph, the copyright remains with photographer so if photographer is me then the copyright holder is me. --Sikh scholar 16:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

If the manuscript is suitably old (you're safe with anything before the 1930s ish I think) then yes. Just state the rough date it was made and where you got the picture (Own picture in this case). Please upload high quality images to [2] and add them to Category:Sikhism. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 16:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the photographs of the temples are your property. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 16:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Singh

Hi. I have made a number of changes to the Singh article. Please have a look and tell me about rectifications needed.Rajatjghai 06:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks good! Although, I thought the Sanskrit root of Singh was Sinha (सिंह) and not Simha? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

India and Indian

Hi - I've had some detailed talks with user:Spasage on the sensitive issue of national identity between India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. We've come up with some ideas on how to resolve the problem, through a disambiguation page for both "India" and "Indian." Obviously its a big move, so please weigh in here[3]. This Fire Burns.....Always 08:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Your report to WP:AIV

Hi Sukh. I took a look at your report to WP:AIV about 86.7.132.163. I have decided not to take action against this user at this time. There are two reasons for this:

1. He has not been warned since June 8. In order to block a user for vandalism, he must have been appropriately warned in the last 24 hours.

2. This appears to be a content dispute. I examined the contributions from 86.7.132.163 and none that I could find fall under Wikipedi'a definition of vandalism.

If you can provide me specific diffs of recent vandalism, I am willing to reconsider this. Also, you might consider Wikipedia's other avenues of dispute resolution as they are more appropriate to a content dispute. In particular one of the mediation mechanisms is probably the most appropriate way to try to resolve this. Good luck, Gwernol 14:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

On closer inspection I agree that his changing of other user's comments on the Talk page is unacceptable. I have endorsed your warning on his talk page. If it happens again, let me know and I will block him from editing. Thanks, Gwernol 14:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll investigate content dispute resolution later. This really *isn't* a content dispute (some of the user's addition are actually ridiculous if you look closely - and none of it is sourced) and the user refuses to engage in any dialogue. I'm no fan of Bhindranwale, but I realise when the additions are frankly a joke :) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Mujibur Rahman

Hi Sukh - I hope you'll be able to check this article and its FAC. This Fire Burns.....Always 00:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I will have a look at it soon (probably tomorrow cause it's late over here!). Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I've just had a quick glance: why do the cited web pages show PHP as the format? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi - I've fixed that issue, and many others. Please take a look. This Fire Burns Always 20:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. I will try and look properly when I have a moment spare ;) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Sikhiwiki character coding

Hi Sukh,

Thanks for the message. I have emailed Gurumustuk Singh a few times over the last several weeks and unfortunately the problem has not been totally resolved. It is possible that he has been very busy or may be he is not an expert at Wiki-technology - I don't really know!!

Any suggestion on how we can fix the problem? Or better still - do you know a wiki expert who could liaise with Gurumustuk! Yours suggestion will be most welcomed.

Congrats on getting the Sikhism article a FA status. Well done. What next for Sikhism on Wikipedia? The Sikhism Portal needs improvements???

Sorry I should have put this on my User talk page!!! Unfortunately, did not read the top of your user talk page. --Hari Singh 00:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Not to worry, people do that all the time! :)

It appears as if the original database was in ISO-8859-1 format (that is standard Latin script) but stored Unicode text in UTF-8 format. Then it seems as if the database was updated to UTF-8 format thinking that the stored text was in ISO-8859-1 format. So now it serves UTF-8 data encoded again in UTF-8 format. This sounds quite complicated, but it's an easy mistake to make. Please ask Gurumustuk if he has changed the database recently. I've never set up a wiki so I'm not exactly sure about the problem.

Thanks for your kind words about the Sikhism article! I'm not sure the portal is where we should concentrate on next. My thinking is maybe make either the Guru Nanak article featured or the article on the Guru Granth Sahib? Both could be both fascinating for us to research and have plenty of differing opinions :) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I will pass on the section on the database format to GMS - I think that the Wikimedia or SQL engine was recently updated in connection with the 'rate my turban' system and this has somehow resulted in the 'mess'. As you say, if you don't have experience in setting up a wiki from scratch then it's not easy to know where the problem may be.

However, when using the system, it works OK in preview even with Gurmukhi text, but as soon as the page is saved, the data appears "lost" as "uncodeable" - ie question marks appearing, characters in the 128 to 255 ascii range replacing special character like -, ", ' (dash, double quote, single quote) and so on.

Also the quotation and other such templates do not work at all. It is irritating but I hope we will get it resolved soon as it has slowed progress on new articles and new input.

On the matter of the next step in the area of Sikhism at Wikipedia, whatever you decide, you have my support. Due to time constrains, I do not like to take any long term undertaking but you have my support and moral backing. I hope you don't mind me dabbing in every few days just to add my two pence's worth!! Guru Nanak will be an easier task at present as there is huge amount of information available and it will easier to make the article more user friendly and attractive - more pictures, more Sakhis to relate, etc. You decide and we will follow!! --Hari Singh 01:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sukh, GMS appears to have solved the problem. I have not tested it fully but Gurmukhi appears Ok now. --Hari Singh 01:21, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

About Questions from 86.7.132.163: Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prohibitions_in_Sikhism

These questions have a touch of racism to them - possibly by a islamic religious body. I recommend dissociation of this discussion to a different place. The religion might be discussed but not with taking rubbish analogies like '....wearing ...sleeve'.

jujhar.tronics@gmail.com

Jujharsingh on Wikipedia

I was merely humouring the user. I know the user who made the comments has been a pain. They've been temporarily blocked already for a short period. More serious measures can be taken if the user continues to be a nuisance. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

New para

Hi - I'm responding here so as to keep out our noisy friends. I don't think you should keep this para, because apart from dealing with generalities, it pollutes the structure which got this article to FA status.

You should add data on Sikhism-Hinduism connection no doubt, but in appropriate places. And only meaningful data - i.e., the RSS/1984 riots mention should be taken out, becoz it is too much about politics and will demand details of its own that have nothing to do with Sikhism. We want to talk about Sikhism, not religious politics in India. The para you added violates NPOV becoz it gives unnecessary importance to a particular group of people making assertions about two broad religious systems. The RSS is also not credible source, becoz it doesn't get to decide what is Hinduism, much less what is Sikhism. I mean so many people talk of all religions as one, so why don't we add that line to every religion article here?

Thus, theological/philosophical connections of Hinduism should be added in "Philosophy and teachings." If the Gurus had particular opinions, teachings or actions relevant to this question, it should be in "Ten gurus" section. And you should add in "Sikh people" - about Hindu-Sikh relations, and that Sikhs visit and pray in Hindu temples and to Sufi shrines/saints in "Observances." Its hard to ignore the relevance of Sant Kabir, Nanak's mentor, to modern Sikh observances.

On the basic claim that Hinduism and Sikhism are perhaps one - this sentence should be included in "History" - the latter in relevance to the ideas of Sikh and Hindu authorities (not RSS) - and/or "Philosophy and teachings."

I hope this is helpful. I'm otherwise fine with however you deal with this, as you should ask some other contributors on what they feel. This Fire Burns Always 21:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

To add, this present para protudes as an obvious political question/influence on this article, and you'll find many people objecting to it. This Fire Burns Always 21:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I definately agree with some of your points. However, I will see how other users respond to it and then get back to you! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 21:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to make some of the changes you mentioned - however please leave the paragraph in one place for the moment. Once we get the actual content up to scratch, we can mix it into the page ;) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 21:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hinduization of Sikhism

Hi - do check this article out. It has obvious problems, but I'm not sure if it merits an AfD. This Fire Burns Always 14:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

This situation is now spiraling out of control. I've set the page up for speedy deletion because it's a copy vio. However, I agree with Elven that the issues need discussion. However, the article is a copyvio, POV and labelled very badly. It deals mainly with the RSS so it should be labelled accordingly.

I think we should sort out the para on the Sikhism page, and then let Aryan and Elven battle it out on *another* page. I have not got the time to get involved in these silly games with people who have no idea how to cite or discuss properly! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok its up so check it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elven6 (talk • contribs)

Hi - I've shifted the article to VfD - speedy delete applies (I think) only if Elven himself nominates it. This Fire Burns Always 15:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind VfD, but because of the copyvio it's a candidate for speedy delete (see WP:SPEEDY) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Omg I CITED WHAT WAS TAKEN, its like talking to children right now who refuse to listen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elven6 (talk • contribs)

Linking to [4] and Sikh Lionz is not appropriate citation. Look at the Sikhism article to find out what is proper citation: direct URLs and page numbers to books. And, look out how it's not acceptable to copy large chunks of text EVEN if it is cited! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Large chuncks, most of the stuff isn't even a sentence, its Wikipedia, nothings stoping you from helping out is their. Fricking the 2 of you think you own the Sikhism articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elven6 (talk • contribs)

Please give your comments on the AFD and please be WP:CIVIL -- Lost 16:03, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I can help out. But I'd much rather start with a blank page than a copyright violation. If you want to add information about Hinduism's influences on Sikhism, you can do that already - there is an article at Hinduism and the Sikh Panth. You are welcome to add your *own* words there, with citations please. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 16:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Im not posting their, he never provided proof or anything why not give him hell! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elven6 (talk • contribs)

Because the article doesn't contain any copyright violations as far as I am aware nor is the title of the article an issue. I'm not picking on you - it's just that this article contains copyright violations and has at best a dodgy title. A more appropriate title would be "Hindu influences on Sikhism" or "RSS opinions of Sikhism" or something similar. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 16:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Im sorry but is their anything stoping you, a more expirenced editor from fixign what I did wrong? Elven6 14 July 2006

No there isn't. And I am fixing it. The only way to fix a copyright violation is to *delete* it (otherwise it puts Wikipedia in a pickled legal situation). I recommend that you change your vote to delete, and then I can work with you to introduce both citations and BALANCE to the Hinduism and Sikh Panth article. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 16:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Maharaja Bhupinder Singh

Hi Sukh, I was trying to work on Chail, which is supposed to have been habilitated by Maharaja Bhupinder Singh. Infact, right from my young days, I have heard a legend that the Maharaja had a tiff with Lord Kitchener and eloped with his daughter. He was banned from entering Shimla after that. So he made his palace at Chail. Most of the websites corroborate this. But they all seem to be wrong. To begin with, Lord Kitchener did not have a daughter. Secondly, the Maharaja was born in 1891 and the Lord was in Shimla in the first decade of 1900s. Chail was established in the late 1800s.

If you or any other Punjabi reading this has any knowledge about the subject, please enlighten me.

PS: Sukh, sorry for using your talk page as a notice board, but it seems to be very frequented by lot of Punjabis -- Lost 17:03, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind you using my talk page as a Punjabi noticeboard ;) Unfortunately, I don't know much about this so I'm unable to comment. However, I'm pretty sure Rajatjghai may know a thing or two. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I have copied the q to his page -- Lost 18:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Sukhi Paaji

Paaji, This is amit from aapkadomain.com, Tussi mere page de peechhe kyo pade ho.... bachche ne ik page banaya haga tusi usi no delete karan di gala kar rahe ho.. I m not doing advert.. I m mentioning clear competitors in Brighter light.. Please advise if i can make any further changes to make it more suitable.. Regards

Amit (talk)

Unfortunately, your page/company is not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. There is no malice intended - it just isn't a large enough organisation. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Check this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hinduism_and_the_Sikh_Panth#Sources

Has you can see he never stated any sources he just based it off of it, it is just his opinion so I think we should deal with it as well.

I mean you don't see me making a article about my opinions do you?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Elven6 (talk • contribs)

Is it that hard to sign your posts? PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTS! If you enter ~~~~ at the end of your post, the computer will automatically convert this to your name and date/time of the message.

I'll have a look into the article for you. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Greetings, Mr. Sukh.

I have been working on a template called "Castes and Tribes of the Punjab". I had begun it with the intention of studying tribal and caste groups in the region through a purely anthropological prism.

Two "Kamboj warriors" have been giving me a headache on the template since the past few days. especially one of them, called User:Sze cavalry01. I already have had a revert war with his crony, User:Satbir Singh about two days back. Have a look at the history page of the template and you will be able to fathom the reason for the whole fracas.

As things stand, I will soon be leaving my hometown and heading out to a new place for work. I think these are probably my last days at this portal (as an editor that is).

Before I go, I would like to "hand over" this template, which was well, "my own baby" to yourself and Rama's Arrow. In my four months at the portal, I haven't really got to know anybody else really well.

I would really wish that you look at the template and take some action, since I wouldn't really like to leave this place with the feeling that it is the stronghold of caste iconclasts.

Also wanted to enquire about the procedure to close down an existing account since I wanted to close mine.

Regards.Rajatjghai 19:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I've added the template to my watch list and will investigate further. However, as it's quite a long running dispute I'm having problems figuring out exactly what the dispute is. Is it just the naming of "Ancient warrior tribes"? If so, why is Kshatriyas incorrect?

I wish you the best on your new job. I will hopefully be in your situation soon aswell, so my contributions here will decrease. However, I encourage you still to visit every now and again (a few times a week if you can afford to). Your contributions here have been very valuable because you have contributed to a niche area where there are few contributors. Please don't leave permanently!

There is no way to close your account as far as I am aware. However, you can use an away template: see Template:Wikibreak. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I did not even approve of "Ancient warrior tribes". The only point I make is that if you say that Kamboj, Yadav, Gujjar etc. are Kshatriya clans (which they are), why not create a single category called "Kshatriya groups", which should include the above as well as Rajput, Khatri, Jat, Tarkhan et al, since they too claim Kshatriya status.

But as we have seen, this is a point of high controversy. The best example of this is the Khatri page, where the Kshatriya status of the group is hotly disputed. This has lead to the page being ruined.

If some madcap comes and disputes the claim of groups such as Ahirs, Gujjars and Yadavs (which in most Indian states are considered to be OBCs), then the people like the two I mentioned will get engaged in a revert war. The whole template would then go down the way of other pages such as Khatri, Rajput (semi-protected till recently to thwart Vandal attacks), Kayastha, Bhumihar, Yadav et al.

Thus, I had suggested that each group should be mentioned by their proper name rather than the Varna they belong to, since it is always a matter of speculation (except in the case of Brahmins and Dalits). As such each page usually does mention the theories about which Varna the group belongs to. Since the status of Ahirs, Gujjars and Yadavs is in dispute, I suggested that these be placed under a simple heading, "Ancient Tribes" which would be suffiecient. However, the two people said that that would be "a gross suppression of historical facts" just for the sake of being politically correct. If I was afraid that such a "hypothetical war" could become a reality, I should delete the page altogether.

I agreed and nominated the page for speedy deletion. However, since there was no proper discussion, User:Street Scholar reverted it.

I exchanged "Kshatriya" for a less speculative though equally ambiguos term - "warrior". I thought the other party was satisfied. Today however, I found "Kshatriya" back on the page.

This is the Ram Kahaani so far. The rest I leave to you and Rama's arrow.Rajatjghai 19:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The page isn't a candidate for speedy deletion. And, even if it went for a standard request for deletion it probably would fail (because as far as I'm aware, neutrality issues aren't a reason for deletion).

I'm not too comfortable getting involved in this because I was not raised in India and I'm not overly familiar with the varna system. I have a basic understanding, but that's all it is. As such, I will post this issue on Wikipedia talk:Notice board for India-related topics and see if someone can help. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I have, as of now, protected the page to prevent this major revert war. Please discuss changes and reach consensus on the template's talk page.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 04:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

ANI report

Hi Sukh - I've reported our friends, this time I want decisive action.[5] This Fire Burns Always 06:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Excellent ;) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 10:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

hi

Hullo man. The quotes on your User page are awesome! Buntygill 07:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm gonna diversify my range soon :) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 10:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I look forward to more interesting and knowledgeable quotes there from Guru Granth Sahib and elsewhere! Buntygill 00:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Nirankari

Sukh,your reasons for the recent 'rv' on the subject matter would be appreciated. Afterall, the guidelines are that any 'rv' should be accompanied by reasons.

Look forward to your views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.6.54 (talk • contribs)

Apologises for not stating my reason. I get so used to anonymous users adding inappropriate content that I often forget to add my reason.

My problem with the addition is mainly because it gives the impression that the Nirankaris were invented by the Indian government: "There are sources that point to the Nirankaris having links to the Government of India. The sect was reportedly created to divide the Sikhs;" Whether this is your intention is unclear, but at the very least it could do with clarification.

Also, it suggests that the April 1978 issue of The Indian Express contains assertions which back this up. But, the quote from that merely says that the sect was 'strengthened' by the Indian government. This is very different from the claim it was created to divide the Sikhs.

Do you have a copy of the Indian Express edition so we can further clarify what it says? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughts. Much appreciated. Obtaining a copy of the Indian Express edition concerned would be a tall order from where I am at. I can however refer you to a link online that provides the same information: http://www.sikhcybermuseum.org.uk/history/amritsarmassacre1978.htm

I would think those responsible for the said cyber museum would have done their research in this respect. You may wish to browse the rest of their website; their credits page does point to research being done.

Pollux —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.6.54 (talk • contribs)

Not to worry about obtaining a copy. Even in India it is likely to be a tall order to obtain a copy. I'm always a bit cynical about such references and eventually we can aim to replace the content with sourced facts from published books (something I can pick up in a library!).

If you have anything further to contribute, please do so. Regards. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hinduism and The Sikh Panth

Most of the information on the Hinduism and The Sikh Panth page is clearly pro-Hindu, and is not correct. Also, in Sikhism, under the headline of Relationship with Hinduism, once again it is clearly pro-Hindu. Any changes I make to try to better this, and I'm sent a message warning me I will be blocked.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by JaSsa (talk • contribs)

Please do not remove content without discussing it first on the talk page. Please discuss your objections on the talk page, highlighting what you feel is wrong with the particular text in question. We can address any objections via alterations, not by deletion. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

General As

I've certainly learnt most about Sikhism while working on this FA project with you - I was positively stunned to discover how akin is Nanak's teaching to the Gita - but I've always been an explorer of religion and philosophy, and Sikhism appealed to me becoz of its strong, disciplined and pesonalized philosophy and devotion of God. Sikhs are religiously disciplined, and have always had a spirit of confidence, pride and self-preservation as well as spiritual depth, whether attacked by Muslim armies or pulled apart by Sikh and Hindu political leaders, (most and individual) Sikhs have remained united and true to their consciousness. I've felt not remotely conscious of any difference with a few of my Sikh friends (including you), nor does it remotely affect my Hindu spirit. I would put up a userbox saying I'm a Sikh - after all, it means a student of the gurus and God, but I'm a bit worried that it may be misconstrued by others. One of my father's best friends is a Sikh, and he regularly cracks Sikh jokes himself. Its that ability to laugh at oneself without being slightly threatened that appeals to me. Of course, negative stuff has happened ever since 1947, but nobody can blame them since the Sikh homeland was cut right in half - common Sikhs have endured this amazingly, given the trauma and fundamentalism that event provoked amongst Muslims and Hindus. Enjoyed the essay? Cheers, This Fire Burns Always 23:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

To be clear, the amazing element is the personal foundation of devotion and the pursuit of God that remains firm no matter what events, political, social or religious challenges that threaten individuals and communities of Sikhs. The core message of Nanak remains firm in the most testing circumstancs. This Fire Burns Always 23:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I just realized that we Gujaratis use the word "Seekh," which means "to learn." I'm gonna put up that userbox. This Fire Burns Always 23:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

hehe - I created a "I am a Sikh" userbox long ago, but I think it got purged in the "Big Delete"! You may have to recreate it. Basically the same as the Hindu one, except I used Image:Khanda.png and background colour to suit.

It's strange because I'm not sure whether I consider myself a Sikh enough to put up that user box! I did have it originally, but I deleted it because I'm not certain of my beliefs.

I've got great respect for all the Gurus (obviously, I was raised in a Sikh family so that comes with the territory!) but I think I'm closer to a Nanak-panthi than a Khalsa Sikh of Gobind. I find it difficult to reconcile some of the teachings of Nanak against rituals and ceremonies with the conventions that have occurred with the latter Gurus. However, I do definately see the *need* for them in terms of how the situation for Sikhs changed with the Mughals.

I also see the symbolic reasons (and in some cases practical reasons) of the 5Ks. I very much see the reason that Gobind Singh created the Khalsa uniform and if it weren't for the Khalsa uniform Sikhs would be virtually unknown today (would they/we even exist?). However, I still view it is as bordering on the ritualism that Nanak himself was against.

I'm not at all a religious or very spiritual person. But it's interesting to learn more about my own heritage and about the frankly outstanding contributions that the Gurus made. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The Khalsa was instrumental in preserving Sikhs against attack from Muslim kings. But if you see Jainism, they have virtually no distinctive element in their culture, and virtually have never had any political power, but they're still going well. So I don't doubt that Nanak's teachings would have survived - after all, they gained popularity only because he gave the people of Punjab a spiritual recourse they could relate to. See how the teachings of Sant Kabir and Sai Baba are popular, even though it isn't even clear if these individuals were born Hindu or Muslim.

The best part about Indian religions is that they do not ever have an explicit identity. Only the common bonds are stressed in Indian religions, not doctrinal differences. You'd be hard pressed to distinguish a Jain from a Hindu in Gujarat, and a Sikh from a Jat Hindu in Punjab. In the end it doesn't matter whether Sikhism comes from Hinduism, or if you call yourself Sikh or not, because religion is supposed to be about God, not people. Identity and differences are the inherent politics in religion.

You've got me going, so I'll tell you a personal observation about Hinduism. The caste system is the most evil thing, and untouchability is pure evil. However, Hinduism is not defined by it at all.

Sure the varna system is in the Vedas, but here the Bhagavad Gita gives the answer: the Vedas, literally "Knowledge," give information about all kinds of human pursuits, both material and spiritual. Only the wise will decipher the truth of God from all the information. The ignorant will use caste birth for evil purposes, while the wise will treat the brahmin and shudra as one, judging by the depth of genuine devotion that one gives to God - that devotion makes all social, economic and political distinctions immaterial. Why else would Hindus and Sikhs worship at Haji Ali Dargah? Why would Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs attend the sermons of Sai Baba? Did it matter to the common man what religion or nation these gentlemen belonged to?

Human civilization has always divided itself in one form or another. Until the last 100 years, racism has been the norm in all cultures - believe it or not, there is so discrimination in African society itself. So why is the caste system used to lynch Hinduism? The Vedas are information, a description of the world. It is for the devotee to find his course to God. A true devotee of God will seek to discover God, not be engrossed by the human world and its issues created by God. At that point no human distinction or pursuit will define the one who seeks to discover God.

The Gita elucidates that it is human nature to do bad things, but a human also has the capability to find his or her way to the stuff that matters most. Krishna explicits says that he is prepared to satisfy all desires of man, material and spiritual. But wisdom and salvation is only available to one who tries to see beyond the obvious. So friend Sukh, it doesn't matter if you call yourself a Sikh or not, but its more important what you think of "Waheguru." The important question is how will you discover Him? This Fire Burns Always 01:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Re.Punjabi (Abulfazl)

Yeah dear I wish Icould translate on both ends but Idont know which wordprocessor I will have to use for writing either shahmukhi or gurmukhi. I have used character map writing these literals in Shahmukhi and gurmukhi. If you know pls help me. And pls also suggest some articles to betranslated in either scripts. Abulfazl 06:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

If you're running Windows XP it should be easy. Follow the instructions here: [6]. When you install the Gurmukhi keyboard (I recommend using this one: [7]) also install the Urdu keyboard too. This should enable you to type both Gurmukhi and Shahmukhi. However, because Windows XP doesn't recognise Shahmukhi, it will be labelled Urdu. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

If you have Windows 2000, the Urdu keyboard should still work. However, the Gurmukhi one won't. You may have to use an old font like AnmolLipi and then I'll convert it for you. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Sikhism

Hi Sukh - please check the portal. I've made some changes and only a few formatting errors remain to be sorted. This Fire Burns Always 05:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

It looks great. Well done! Sorry about not being able to contribute much recently, I've been a bit busy. But I should be able to do more soon. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem as you've earned a good wikibreak if you wish to take one. For the portal, it needs changes in selected article, biography, picture and maybe DYKs each week - more time before rotation owing to the paucity of good length articles. Its up to us to make these updates (obviously others are welcome always). This Fire Burns Always 14:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

About ur version of HInduism

I know my HInduism and Sikhism...U just know only Sikhism...so listen...ill tell u what..if ur down,....u wanna talk on the phone sometime?...Id really like to hear ur side if ur willing to hear mine...lets have a nice debate were no one care erase anything ARYAN818 09:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't take Wikipedia seriously enough to consider having a telephone debate! If you want to discuss anything, I'm more than happy to do it here. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

No we could accomplish alot more on the phone...typing here is tough...Im a college student and i dont have the time...i mean everyday their is someone new to argue with and i type in long paragrpahs which they dont comprehend...including u...I mean i have given a gazzillion facts on why Hinduism and Sikhism are the same and u ignore it...All u do is tell me that im wrong and thats it lol...thats not a debate....so just call me up manARYAN818 21:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks Sukh I appreciate your welcome :-)--Sikh historian 19:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)