Talk:Johal

India List‑class

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Genetic data

Recently 2.222.68.184 replaced the "Origins" section, commenting that "Genetic data completely refutes any migration into north west india at the time suggested. Cunningham did not have genetic information, but his assumption was based on the pro western centric history of india, genetics refute his work". May be 2.222 is correct, but whatever he added constitutes original research, since his genetic text says nothing of Johal. Neither he provides the references from sources which directly say that Cunningham was in error.

The correct layout of the section must be as follows (supplied by thorough references).

In the past an opinion existed that Johals ...bla...bla...bla...
This opinion was based on the following evidence: ....bla...bla...bla...
Recent genetic studies suggest that this theory may have insufficient foundation {citations needed}
Other suggest that in fact Johal originated in ... based on the evidence... {citations needed}
The old evidence may be alternatively explained... {citations needed}

The above outline is based on the following principles

Old erroneous theories are facts. They are facts of history of the scientific research, and as such are of encyclopedic vaue.
All discusions, conclusions and controversies mentioned in wikipedia article must be directly referenced.
All discussions in the article must bear direct relevance to the main subject of the article.
Complete rewriting of an encyclopedic article cannot be based exclusivily on 1-2 very specific scientific articles. At best, these articles must be presented as an opinion, unless somewhere else it is stated that these articles represent a new consensus or at least a notable alternative theory. Loggerjack (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but there are mutiple issues with your edit. Incorrect referencing. WP:Reliable. WP:Synthesis. ThanksSH 11:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Your sorry not accepted. Please expain in detail.. From my part, my edits are explained in edit summaries: I resrtored an old piece of thext, inappropriatelty deleted, and added a bit new. Please state your disagreement with each separate edit, in article history. Loggerjack (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have binned all the genetic stuff. Let's start over, discussing it here first. - Sitush (talk) 08:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; genetic stuff does not belong to this article. There is no genetic data directly for Johal. Loggerjack (talk) 18:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your edit summary "it is seems blindingly obvious, eg: jattworld?)". What's wrong with jattworld? What is blindly obvious? While I agree with your edit, your explanations are hardly helpful. Loggerjack (talk) 18:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I am not wasting my time explaining something that you agree with. I've got rather more important (to me) issues to contend with. - Sitush (talk) 18:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I agree with your removal of general genetic data, but I don't understand the reasons for removal of "White Huns" part. Unless you explain yourself, I am restoring it. If you think that your time is more valuable than mine, you have a serious problems with attitudes, colleague. Loggerjack (talk) 19:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]