This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punjab, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Punjab on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
[The following was C&P'd from my talk page. Also, you can look at Ikjyotsingh's talk page.--S.Rich]
First, it is not "Shikh", but Sikh. Shikh refers to a name of Arab descent, which is entirely different than Sikh.
Also, according to Tisdale's article: "Although Saund removed his turban, a Sikh symbol of religious devotion, soon after he immigrated to the U.S., he remained connected with the Sikh organization in central California that had provided housing for him upon his arrival at Berkeley." This comment along with the Indian High court decision proves what I have been saying as correct. You cannot nitpick quotes that suit your predisposition.
Second, what I quoted was not any "religious law" or interpretation of it. It is a law based on an Indian High Court (Commonwealth Law) decision, and is the worldwide accepted legal definition of a Sikh. Therefore, I have reverted your edit.
The issue (and edits) concern the reliable sources which support the particular story. Not your reading of worldwide accepted legal definitions, The existing sources support the info about Saud's Sikh affiliation. Wikipedia follows what the sources provide. We do not take informatioon from other sources and apply original research or synthesis. If or when you find material that says Saund himself was Patit, then you can add it. I will eit he article to de-emphasise the Sikh aspect, but please do not add Patit info without proviing a supporting source--S. Rich (talk) 14:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Fine, and this seems like a fair compromise, although, I think you are slightly overusing the reliable sources idea. If 2+2 = 4, then it is 4. I shouldn't have to find a research article to prove it. Anyways, the article you mentioned, Tisdale's article, clearly states the Saund removed his turban. The original article and your original comments did not mention this fact at all. Ikjyotsingh (talk) 22:58, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Glad to work something out. Please keep in mind that truth is not what Wikipedia strives for. Rather, Verification is the driving factor. As far as research goes, look at WP:BURDEN. If you want to say Saund was x, y, or z, you are the one who must come up with the source that says so; and by source we mean a reliable source. This is fundamental.--S. Rich (talk) 23:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
"In May 1962, Saund suffered a severe stroke which left him unable to speak or walk without assistance. He was defeated for reelection in November 1962 by Republican Patrick Martin by a 56% to 44% margin."
This line in the article doesn't match up with these 2 articles