Talk:Kanwar Pal Singh Gill

A request to DAulakh

Hi Daulakh... I have provided enough evidences with all the text which I have added, If you have any doubts on Amnesty International's Reports or on rest of the references then please talk, but please do not suppress the truth. Please go through the provided references first. I have not deleted any of the information, I have simply added more alongwith references. This is Wikipedia and I beleive that I have the same rights as you. So with due respect, it is my humble request that please do not delete the information which I have added recently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Singh6 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thetruth's contribution

I have reverted your changes to a POV version. Please read your talk page. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 17:33, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The NPOV version is from a BBC profile. I'm leaving it here until I can work out a version that's not directly from the article.

KPS Gill's Counter-Terrorism Techniques in Punjab

There were serious charges levelled against him and his police by human rights activists that thousands of suspects were killed in staged shootouts and thousands of bodies were cremated/disposed without proper identification or post-mortem. . Police under his commnad used in-human torture techniques to extract information from Sikh Militants and in their killings, Gurdev Singh 'Debu' an area commander of Khalistan Commando Force, was boiled alive by his police. Even Khushwant Singh is said to have gone volte-face after reading the research Reduced to Ashes Book by a human rights group and remarked "It is spine-chilling.... Well, Mr Gill, it is not rubbish; you and the Punjab police have quite a few awkward questions to answer".

Several number of Sikh women - teenage girls, young and old women, were also gangraped and molested by Indian security forces during house to house searches. Looting of the villagers’ property and ransacking of the entire villages also happened during his reign.

I have added Amnesty International Report as a reference> (http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA20/002/2003/en/uvSEW2lMY-gJ)

Accusations of Sexual Misconduct and Human Rights Abuses

Surely there needs to be some discussion on the widely discussed issue of Gill's involvement in human rigts abuses in the Punjab. Note that Amnesty Interbational have labelled him the 'butcher of Punjab' and many sikhs regard him as a traitor.

There also needs to be a dit on Gill's conviction for sexual harrashment.

This whole article is very misleading!!

MSprealMF 2111hrs 28/06/07

Reverted

• Reverted [1] - also violated policies as enshrined in biography of living people. --Bhadani (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Issue tags

The article has a {{Cherry-picking}} tag but no explanation of the issue. I am going to remove the tag as the editor Satanoid is not explaining why s/he feels that. Seeing Satanoid's history, I'm not too excited that s/he will explain the tagging. Nevetheless, I'll be fine if the editor comes back and explains - we can discuss. However, I'll let the POV tag intact because I feel there are certain issues which needs fixing before that tag can be removed. Can someone explain the POV part as well. Thanks, --RoadAhead ^=Discuss= 21:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

"Became involved"? or "was given the post of"?

"Gill became involved in sports administration after retirement from police work and was the President of the Indian Hockey Federation" --> This is not correct language (I think) it needs fixing because currently it reflects to the reader that the subject "became involved" voluntarily or so. Perhaps we should work on finding the facts around this, or fix the language to not give such impression. --RoadAhead ^=Discuss= 21:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

BLP flags

The edit war over this seems to have died, but the article is littered with editwar debris and unsourced or poorly sourced content, some of it rather rude, some of it rather too glowing. I killed a couple of bits but not going to spend a lot of time on it. Hopefully someone who knows more will apply the editorial hatchet to the bits that need to go.- sinneed (talk) 04:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Accusations... in lead

Doesn't belong in a wp:BLP at all. REALLY doesn't belong in the wp:lead of a BLP. - sinneed (talk) 12:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC) I won't kill this again, wp:lead, but I think that it doesn't belong in the lead, and that it doesn't belong per wp:BLP. Maybe an article about the Punjab police actions in that time period.- sinneed (talk) 13:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

It don't feel terribly strongly about this, and an anon editor does. Flagged.- sinneed (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

He was DGP not officer

Question:

A lot of 'experts' on KPS Gill have given their bit or psedo-history (POV) on various allegations and his involvement in National Sports events etc. He was also in the business of Indian National Security, thwarting terrorism and most importantly these 'experts' such as Sinneed and Roadahead don't mention anything about his role in the Gujarat Police ? You got anything against mentioning anything on that Sinneed ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morbid Fairy (talk • contribs) 17:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The sources say he was an officer. Please take your dispute to them, not to Wikipedia. If you find a source that says he was never an officer, we can use it for wp:BALANCE.

Not at all. That would belong in the body. I have not gotten that far due to steady wp:vandalism.

"these 'experts' such as Sinneed" - No one has stated that I am an expert.- sinneed (talk) 19:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Former DGP

Former is used due to copyright violations, enjoy Morbid Fairy (talk) 19:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

He is retired. No one can copyright the fact that he is retired. It doesn't even need a quote.

He was a police officers... he eventually became the DG. - sinneed (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Scandal at IHF

Clearly, there are conflicting reports in the press. The bare statements in the lead are misleading, and I am removing them formally. If they are restored, I will flag them and alert the BLP noticeboard. I will not remove them again.- sinneed (talk) 04:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

This is a BLP.

The wild statements attributed to nameless organizations cannot. Please provide quotes, from sources, cited, meeting wp:RS. If you just can't, please provide the location in the source you are citing. I don't see it there. It is certainly possible that I missed it, since you are at least paraphrasing and won't be copying.- sinneed (talk) 23:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by name less?.... you can read it properly at www.ensaaf.org, there is one more source, i.e. Human Rights Watch, please extract information from it as well.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 23:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

To expand a bit. I see this content as weakly sourced, the sole document being a plea made to a court to consider investigating, and arguing why the investigation should take place. It argues that Gill should have stopped the men. It argues that he caused them to do these things by creating an environment tolerant of abuse. Phrased that way, it *MIGHT* make it, but anyone who disagreed with us could simply kill it, in my opinion.

Reinstating what I see as wild statements of construction in a wp:BLP is exempt from the wp:3RR, and I will kill them steadily. Please consider reworking, and staying to the facts, letting the readers draw their conclusions. *I* have a US NFP... that doesn't make me an wp:RS... that argument is specious. That I accept that ENSAAF won't lie about the facts doesn't mean much of anyone else will... and their conclusions are no better than anyone elses. If you disagree that this fails wp:BLP, the BLP noticeboard might be a place to get someone to decide that. I won't oppose. :)

Namless... not named. Please add the sources, provide quotes or locations. I see you adding wp:OR that I see as libel in a wp:BLP.- sinneed (talk) 23:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Kindly mention something about the available text in world famous international body Human Rights Watch's reference as well, so that readers could help us in the conclusion. You can invite any neutral editors who have knowledge on Sikhism related articles, e.g. Roadahead, Sikhhistory or someone else.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 23:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I will invite no one. You may choose to do so. The content you keep adding is wp:OR and must stay out.- sinneed (talk) 23:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I like the improvemnet in the new text which you have proposed. But I feel that it can be improved a little bit in following terms:

• I had read in some of the sources in this articles that KPS Gill had seen Khalra's tortured body while interrogating him which contradicts with new sentence could reasonably have been expected to have knowledge of his torture.
• Also references indicate that he did not punish the culprits who were working under his direct command.

You might want to read Human Rights Watch reference a bit more. I think it talk about the direct accusations between Khalra and KPS Gill prior to Khalra's abduction. The whole police department of state of Punjab was working under direct command of KPS Gill. Khalra was picked up when he kept challenging KPS Gill for open discussion. This new reference has really good information I blieve.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 23:55, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

• "KPS Gill had seen Khalra's tortured body" - If you find a wp:RS that says that, great. You haven't presented one. He was in the room with the man, after he was tortured, and the signs of torture were on his body. The reader is left to decide whether that means he saw the signs... thus the "reasonbly"blah blah blah.- sinneed (talk) 00:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• No problem, I will try reading the references in details and will try finding new ones. If time permits, you can also read the provided references a bit more. Thanks. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• At this point, probably not. I will count on you to provide the locations of the statements you place in the article, and will fact-check them then. And really, at this point? Quotes, please.- sinneed (talk) 00:16, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Militancy <> Terrorism

Terrorism <> Militancy in and of itself is not a PoV term. Calling an attack a terrorist act, or a person a terrorist or an organization a terrorist one... those would be PoV in many cases. Clearly there was terrorism in Punjab. Buses and planes bombed, with the target being no one in particular, just whoever showed up at the bus stop during that 10 minutes, is clearly terrorism, I should think... but in this case it is moot.- sinneed (talk) 03:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

But you do NOT know who did it... KPS Gill and his government, to change public opinion against Khalistan movement or Khalistani organizations, to change public opinion (which is normally required by rebels to take people alongwith)

against themselves. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 03:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Somehow I missed this gem. Let me get this straight... you are proposing that the Government of India perpetrated a massive and enourmously successful conspiracy to pretend that there was Sikh Terrorism in Punjab... that it was so good that even today, 25 years on, there is no outcry over their conspiracy... but only that they violated human rights seriously in fighting the terrorism? I think you will find little support for such a position.- sinneed (talk) 05:03, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

South Asia Terrorism Portal

South Asia Terrorism Portal/Institute for Conflict Management references can NOT be used in Khalistan movement related articles because it is headed by KPS Gill himself, who was a party in the Khalistan movement and who is blamed for mass murders and mass cremations by Human Rights Watch, ENSAAF and other Human Rights Organizations. it violates wp:pov in Sikhism, Khalistan movement etc related articles.

As we can NOT use any Khalistani mouth pieces in these articles, similarly we can NOT use KPS Gill's own mouth piece in them. I will delete all of its references in any Sikhism, Khalistan movement related articles and I will expect all neutral editors to do the same. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 03:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Expect all you want. And please discuss each article on its own talk page.- sinneed (talk) 04:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• No worries! as adviced I will duly document its deletion and its being wp:npov in the talk pages of any and all Khalistan movement related articles. I would like to give reasonable time to respected wikipedia editors so that they could find any other wp:rs references (if they want to) before totally deleting the referenced contents. I will expect the same from other respected neutral wiki editors.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 04:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Similarly Punjab: The Knights of Falsehood can NOT be used as a reference to support this article or any of Khalistan movement related articles. It is written by him and he was head of one of the sides in the conflict. It is KPS Gill's own book. Violates wp:npov. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 03:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Humor. Clearly it can be used to support the fact that he wrote the book. And yes, books by an author about the author's work can be used, but one must work harder to avoid wp:POV traps, see wp:RS#Reliability in specific contexts "Primary sources, on the other hand, are often difficult to use appropriately. While they can be reliable in many situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research."

• For example, if someone wanted to write "KPS Gill was a real hero!" and cited it to his book, that would be an Epic Fail. If, on the other hand, the book gave a date for his marriage, it would generally be OK to use that date... *generally*.- sinneed (talk) 04:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks! I will definitely take care of these points while deleting its references from Khalistan movement related articles. I will duly document them in the talk pages so that I could give reasonable time to respected wikipedia editors so that they could find any other wp:rs references (if they want to) before totally deleting the referenced contents. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 04:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

wp:Talk - talk about the articles on their talk pages, not here. Please don't delete the sources, that is rude. One may much more constructively add CN and Dubious flags.- sinneed (talk) 04:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

An editor objected to ...

"He was appointed as a consultant by the Chhattisgarh government of India to help tackle the Naxalite movement in the state from 2007 to 2008." As this has only a primary source, and seems of secondary importance, I have pulled it here for possible addition.- sinneed (talk) 04:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

This has been obsoleted by more complete information from Wikireader. Thank you WR. :)

Nexalite Movement - Please help

I had to kill a references which unfortunately violates wp:npov. It support following sentence:

He was appointed as a consultant by the Chhattisgarh government of India to help tackle the Naxalite movement in the state from 2007 to 2008.

I will appreciate if any other editors could provide any other NPOV reference to support this text. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 04:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• A reference cannot violate wp:NPOV. Only editors can do that. So no, you did not have to do it. You did. I have restored it, as it is a reference. Since you were not challenging the content, your edit makes very little sense. Please review wp:NPOV, wp:RS. You have very clearly not understood. In any event, the problem was terminology. The source was here, I named it and put the ref on the statement. I *DO* challenge the statement, as I think the wording is poor.- sinneed (talk) 05:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC).

No! as I said before, I do not have any objection to the text but I do have objection to KPS GIll's own mouth piece to support his own acts/promotions/contributions etc etc. I am going to kill this reference for now. If you want, feel free to delete the whole sentence. I will NOT restore it again. He is a party in these cases so he can not become reference as well. This will be my last edit for tonight.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 05:41, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• You need not wp:LIKE the source. wp:BLP might also be a good document to study. WP:SELFPUB links to a copy of the key part. It is a bit of a stretch to claim that a widely-regarded (see me be wrong in the discussion of whether South Asia Terrorism Portal is notably considered to publish expert information on terrorism and counterterrorism at its article, if interested) corporation is a self-published source of its chief executive.

- sinneed (talk) 08:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

This source clearly meets the requirements even in wp:BLP for this fact. Please seek support for your position, if you wish. I am confident you will not find it. Sorry. Restoring.- sinneed (talk) 05:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

BBC has clearly mentioned the following:

• He publishes the Faultlines journal and runs the Institute for Conflict Management, as well as advising governments and institutions on security related issues"
• Mr Gill has also written a book, "The Knights of Falsehood", which explores the abuse of religious institutions by the politics of terrorism in Punjab
• He and his team have been accused of committing excesses in the name of stamping out terrorism
• Then in the mid-1990s, a senior female civil servant from Punjab, Rupan Deol Bajaj, sued him successfully for sexual harassment

Hence! considering his reputation, his active involvement as 'a one side/party' in the Khalistan movement and allegation of his committing excesses", his own sources (which he is publishing and running.. per BBC), can be NOT be considered rs to support his own articles or any of Khalistan movement related articles. I do NOT want to give a chance to other editors to start adding Khalistani sources in 'this' and any other Khalistani websites either. This articles must stay neutral wp:npov with references from third part sources.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 18:30, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

he is one of the people involved with ICM. he does not own the site. so it is a RS. SATP is considered a reliable site about info about terrorism and is widely sourced by RS. Khalistani sites especially run by banned terrorist organizations are no comparison to SATP. also remember Gill was a commissioned officer in the police force of the world largest democracy and was never fired from that job. So nice try comparing SATP and khalistani sitesWikireader41 (talk) 19:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he does in some real sense run the site. It also simply doesn't matter. If it said "KPS Gill has rocked the world of the Naxilites, phear him!" then it wouldn't be useful as a source. This is, however, citing his qualifications as head of the organization, which is very much appropriate to his Wikipedia article. I have provided references leading to the related section at wp:BLP. This really isn't complex. The argument against this source used in this way appears Wikipedia:Tendentious editing.- sinneed (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

• Regarding User talk:Wikireader41's comments, Please note that democracy means the system where majority always rule. Well! if KPS Gill walking free, it is only because this largest democracy of the world, i.e India is protecting him at every single cost. Its security forces can freely abduct and kill human rights activists if they try to persue cases against mass murders and mass cremations of its police (which worked under direct command of KPS Gill). And it can put maximum hurdles in the investigations if its Supreme court directs its own commision to investigate mass murders/disappearances of Punjab And if even lawyers want to persue this largest democracy's mass killings/mass disappearances/mass cremations etc cases then they end up taking protection for their own lives, atleast from the level of Supreme Court. And if they persue cases against police without this protection then they end up being raped/murdered alongwith their infants inside this democracy's police stations. And remember! India's National Human Rights Commission finally decided to give compensation of Rs 100,000 per victim with no admission of wrongdoing or prosecution of officials. Its order concluded "It does not matter whether the custody was lawful or unlawful"
• I did NOT add above mentioned facts into the article. I am struglling to keep it appear neutral wp:npov. --99.51.223.161 (talk) 00:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

KPS Gill is not only walking free He is thriving. he was called by Lanka, Gujarat and Chattisgarh to advise on security matters as reported in RS AFTER he killed thousands of innocents in Punjab alongwith a few hundred hardcore militants. I agree his methods may not be ideal and many innocent sikhs became 'collateral damage'. but USA is doing the same now in pakistan with hundreds of innocent muslims dying in drone attacks. sound like a hi tech version of old fashioned encounters by Punjab Police. yes what India and USA did carries a lot more weight than any Khalistani.Wikireader41 (talk) 02:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

wp:Talk please - focus on the content of the article, not the people, the countries, and political thought.- sinneed (talk) 02:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Before i forget, I would like to thank Wikireader41 for finding and adding neutral reference to save this text.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 04:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Murder of Human Rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra

I am questioning the need of this subsection. did KPS Gill murder this person ??? if not then why such a prominent subsection in this article. does not seem NPOV at allWikireader41 (talk) 17:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

especially since this is mentioned in the prior section on human rights abuses. and what is ensaaf. is it a reliable source by any stretch of imaginationWikireader41 (talk) 17:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

No need for Ensaaf to be a wp:RS. The book is published. Gill visited the person while in custody, "with the marks of torture on his person" according to a deposition. Even an author who considers him a hero objects to this.- sinneed (talk) 19:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

• Sorry, too many sources. The Ensaaf pleadings to the courts would be reliable in that they say what is here. They need not be correct, the court has only ruled that there should be an investigation. Many many pleadings turn out to be incorrect... and may well not belong here.- sinneed (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

i was talking about ensaaf.org. is that a RS. which RS mention it ?? also if we want to keep the section on Jaswant Singh Khalra how about adding a subsection on killing of Talwinder Singh Parmar who was a militant belonging to a designated terrorist organization and was involved in Air India Flight 182 bombing. If Gill is responsible vicariously for Khalra's death surely he should get credit for killing Parmar also ( this happened when KPS was chief) Wikireader41 (talk) 00:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Human rights organizations, including ENSAAF, Amnesty, HRW, Committee for Information and Initiative on Punjab, CIIP etc are all relaiable per wp:rs. They all are third party sources, which documented the crimes and tried to get justice to the victims through all legal means. They did NOT advocate Khalistan and never hailed Khalistani militant organizations in the whole process--99.51.223.161 (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

• Anon - Actually, HROs are not wp:RS at all times. Many have their own agendas... they are intimately involved as for example thinktanks... otherwise they would not exist. They must be used wisely. IHRO was a Punjab-only HRO, and the RS board declined it (it is defunct now, so the point in its case is moot). There is no blanket RS acceptance just because an organization is (or claims to be) an HRO. wp:Notability is important, for example... and Ensaaf seems weak there...- sinneed (talk) 01:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
• Wikireader41 - I would say that, like SATP, it is a useful source within limits. SATP seems to have much more notability (thank you), but that could simply be because no one has expended the effort you did to firm it up... it has no article at all. I am dubious because I see little notability. I am dubious because of its focus on Punjab. As above, there is a history of a Punjab-focus-HRO being too focused on Punjab and failing credibility.- sinneed (talk) 01:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
• "If Gill is responsible vicariously" - not vicariously. He was there according to one of his officer's testimony in 2005. Until that bit was well-sourced I was doubtful about the mention here, and especially so MUCH coverage. I am still doubtful about all that volume. I expect that eventually it will need to be cut down to who the man was, what he did to tick off the police, that he died, and that 10 years later an officer testified the Gill was there after the writ of habeous corpus was served, and visited with the man for 30 minutes, the claim about the advice. Court testimony is very strong sourcing. I still want to get the writ into the text.- sinneed (talk) 02:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

anon IP. please do not compare ensaaf.org to amnesty. otherwise we can compare KPS to jesus christ. do any secondary sources mention anything about ensaaf.org. it appears to be a one person show run from somebodies basement to me. any secondary sources talking about ensaaf.org will be welcome Wikireader41 (talk) 02:15, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries! There will be, and we all can find them out. Also, please take a look at my last reply under section Nexalite Movement - Please help. I hope that my reply duly addresses some of the confusions about this notability.--99.51.223.161 (talk) 02:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

• This has already been discussed recently - so that makes 3 logged-in editors opposed, and 1 anon supporting. Unless something changes, clearly for the moment Ensaaf.org does not have wp:consensus as a wp:RS. The RS discussion board would be a good place to gather support.- sinneed (talk) 02:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
• To clarify... I do not oppose using Ensaaf.org in footnotes under all circumstances... but simply that it lacks the notability of, say, Amnesty International.- sinneed (talk) 02:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

This murder has its own article, which is rather poor. I propose to move most of this content to his article, murder section, and leave what is here focused on the involvement of the subject person.- sinneed (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. this is a BLP. remember he is innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law. this is very contentious info which needs to be removed asap. right now to a casual reader it might appear thet KPS killed this guy personally.Wikireader41 (talk) 01:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where information is perserved based on available secondary references. It is not an Indian judicial court. There are several countries in the world which kill their opponents and let their own criminals walk scot free. KPS Gill is one of them {You have also accepted in the discussions (in this talk page) that he killed thousands of innocents}. Your insistence of removing all anti-KPS Gill information simply show your own POV and nothing else.

Faultlines - does it exist apart from the web site?

I see a 1999 collection of work into a book, but is this an electronic-only thing? If so, does it have an existence outside the web site? Does it deserve a separate mention at all?

At the moment, I think it does rate a mention, I see a number of academic citations and press references. I do think it is essentially part of the web site... but in this age of emedia I am not sure that matters.- sinneed (talk) 15:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

it doesnt matter. remember wikipedia. it does not exist on paper;-) Wikireader41 (talk) 01:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Prosecution of police for HR violations during the Punjab insurgency

There is an entire article on the HR in Punjab, with the laws and immunity already discussed. It is clear to me that this does not belong here. Does it belong there? This is a wp:BLP. There are specific calls for prosecution of Gill, and those *MIGHT* go here if they are adequately noted and meet wp:BLP in all other ways.- sinneed (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

i could not agree more Wikireader41 (talk) 01:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Allegations of HR violations in Punjab

Beyond the 2 points already discussed, this needs to be sharply focused on Gill... this is a wp:BLP, and everything mentioned must tie to him, and do so in a way that does not libel him and also does not violate wp:BLP.- sinneed (talk) 19:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

could not agree more Wikireader41 (talk) 01:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Insurgency in Punjab

would propose a section on punjab insurgency with a brief backgrounder for the new reader and a link to main article. His role in defeating it needs to be discussed in detail since that was his main achievement. the widespread violations of Human rights during that era needs to be given due weight & have a subsection within this section with allegations about his involvement in death of Khalra as reported in RS mentioned in there.Wikireader41 (talk) 01:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)