Talk:1978 Sikh–Nirankari clash

A fact from 1978 Sikh–Nirankari clash appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 November 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Sant Nirankaris were expelled from the Sikh community after the 1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes, in which 13 Sikhs and 3 Sant Nirankaris were killed?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/November.

Wikipedia

India: Punjab / History Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Punjab portal This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Unreliable source

Ranbir Singh Sandhu does not appear to be a reliable source assuming the information provided here is correct and did not omit any pertinent information https://www.chardikalaa.com/?p=484. Further, the publisher is ostensibly unreliable and its nomenclature suggest a religious bias. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 23:12, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Further, I'm requesting clarification on this line: "Even journalists partial to Congress" (citing Mahmood) preceding an assertion that journalists reported that Bhindranwale nor his associates played a role in the violence. The sfn citation of page 141 does not appear to make any mention of this, and Sandhu, the only other source within the paragraph, isn't a reliable source himself. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 23:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

“Dr. Ranbir Singh Sandhu was the first Secretary General of the Word Sikh Council and held this office until 2000. He is Founder Trustee of Sikh Educational and Religious Foundation. He has published over thirty articles on Sikh faith and related issues and authored the book titled “Struggle for Justice: Speeches and Conversations of Sant Jarnail Singh Khalsa Bhindranwale” published by Sikh Educational and Religious Foundation in 1999. He was a Council Member, Interfaith Association of Central Ohio 1992 to 2001 and the President of the Association in 1998. Dr. Sandhu holds a Ph.D. from UC Berkeley, M.Eng. from University of Sheffield, UK (as a Commonwealth Scholar), and B.Sc. (Honors in Civil Engineering) from East Punjab University. He is currently Professor Emeritus, Ohio State University.” CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 00:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He is currently a professor in the engineering department in Ohio University [1]. According to Academia.edu, he holds a PhD in engineering which is further corroborated by [2] and [3] which states "Thesis (Ph. D. in Engineering)--Univ. of California, Mar. 1968". Definitely not reliable. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is he unreliable?

Cynthia Keppley Mahmood is Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Maine, Orono.

Mahmood is considered reliable but Sandhu isn’t? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because anthropology is a more relevant discipline than engineering with regards to history/humanities articles. {{— Preceding unsigned comment added by Suthasianhistorian8 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I still think he is a reliable source. If you want we can bring in other editors. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, please go ahead with it. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 18:21, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should I open a third opinion or go to a notice board? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's up to you, but I think a 3rd opinion would be quick and sufficient, a RSN would probably be a bit time consuming. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 18:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. 3rd opinion will be easier. About to open one now CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:52, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Response to third opinion request:

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on 1978 Sikh–Nirankari clash and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

I think that both the Sandhu book and the Sandhu article are not reliable sources as to statements of fact. Both sources were published by the Sikh Educational & Religious Foundation (SERF)—a religious organization that appears to be biased towards the Sikh point of view—without peer review. Moreover, as Southasianhistorian8 has pointed out, Sandhu is an engineer, not a historian. That said, the sources might be relevant for the purposes of presenting the point of view of an important religious organization (if it can be established that the SERF is important). voorts (talk/contributions) 00:12, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks voorts. I completely agree. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Suthasianhistorian8 I am restarting this topic as I feel that it is still a reliable source. Sandhu is citied and used numerous times by and in

Louis E. French in The Sikh Zafarnamah of Guru Gobind Singh [4] Published by OUP USA
The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Religion [5] Publisher is obvoius
Sikh Nationalism by Gurharpal Singh, and Giorgio Shani [6] Published by Cambridge University Press
Democracy and Counterterrorism Lessons from the the Past by Louise Richardson, Robert J. Art [7] United States Institute of Peace Press
Faith, Gender, and Activism in the Punjab Conflict by Mallika Kaur [8] Published by Springer International Publishing
Federalism, Nationalism and Development India and the Punjab Economy by Pritam Singh [9] Published by Taylor and Francis

Just to name a few. All this points to Sandhu being reliable. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 07:11, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 01:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to post this on RSN. I will note that books cite a large corpus, comprising both sources that we would consider reliable and unreliable on a standalone basis. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 08:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1469, have you reconsidered your stance on Sandhu? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 02:06, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for late reply. I didn’t see the earlier message. Wikipedia didn’t send me a notification for some reason. My opinion on Sandhu is the same as in my last comment. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 02:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if it's alright with you, I would like to ask an admin involved in South Asian topics to provide a third opinion. A RSN, like the ones I made before, are not likely to receive an answer. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 03:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure go ahead. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 03:52, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sandhu is not reliable, for reasons provided by the 3O provider. Scholars can use downright unreliable sources because they are trained to sieve the good from the bad etc. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:03, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks TrangaBellam, I agree. CanadianSingh1469, your thoughts? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 18:58, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Here at the request of Suthasianhistorian8). Not reliable for the reasons provided by the 3O provider. I'm curious, though, what the source is supporting? RegentsPark (comment) 19:54, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks RegentsPark. His source is used somewhat extensively in some sections of the article, for example, The government and press often referred to Bhindranwale traveling with an armed retinue, though all the weapons carried were licensed, no incidents ever occurred with his escort, and no laws were broken. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:57, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't use this source as support for the above type of statement. Also, see Abecedare's comment on my talk page ([10]) RegentsPark (comment) 20:16, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I agree completely. I am planning to, hopefully, in collaboration with CS1469, remove unreliable sources and their corresponding content and replace them with better sources. Abecedcare's comment was spot on and very helpful. Thanks. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 20:21, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I agree CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RegentsPark@Suthasianhistorian8 Would it be fair to use Sandhu when quoting Bhindranwale? The larger part of the book is translations of Bhindranwale’s speeches. So would it be fair to use Sandhu as the source for Bhindranwale’s quote? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 15:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This has already been answered by Abecedare, per the diff, ; however, the primary material itself (ie, the speeches etc) should be cited with care (if at all) in a tertiary work like wikipedia and only when put in proper context provided by acceptable secondary sources.. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 20:51, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks. If I say that DSP Bachan Singh was accused of killing Kulwant Singh Nagoke by Bhindranwale which made him a target of attack and on Bhindranwale’s militant hit list. I cite Sandhu. Would that be fine? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 20:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Suthasianhistorian8 CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 21:01, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@CanadianSingh1469 Please provide reliable sourcing from actual historians — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 08:06, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am giving an example. As basically using the source to quote Bhindranwale which seems to be acceptable in certain situations. So I am wondering if in a possible scenario it would be reliable to use the source to say that he was was accused of x by Bhindranwale(sandhu source) which put him on the hit list (different source) CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 08:33, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DaxServer CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 08:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd recommend limiting the usage, if any, of Sandhu's source to Bhindranwale's [translated] quotes, when and where they're due, that is. This is a primary source. Anything other than that, please find a secondary source. If these sources do not connect/discuss "accused of x by B" and "which put him on the hit list", then no. Using Sandhu for the first part will be WP:OR — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 21:12, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 21:24, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations of Congress involvement

Allegations of Congress involvement section does not belong on this article. It seems to be a better fit for Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale article. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 04:40, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Suthasianhistorian8 CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 01:12, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, give me a few days to respond more conclusively , I'll try to see if I can find more sources that expound on this first. Thanks. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 12:45, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime, do you agree or disagree with TrangaBellam's assessment that Sandhu isn't reliable? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 12:56, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 19:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning I disagree CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 19:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've asked an admin involved in South Asian topics to provide his feedback. Hopefully, his comment(s) can conclude things. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]