Talk:Jagtar Singh Hawara

File:Jagtar Singh Hawara.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Jagtar Singh Hawara.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 13 November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality

The statements 'Punjab Police were very powerful and had control of a semi-police state. They killed many Sikhs just because they were Sikhs' may or may not be true but they should be sourced. --Boreas74 ^{You'll catch more flies with honey} 15:46, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Jagtar Singh Hawara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100705132347/http://www.indiastudychannel.com:80/india/pincodes/Districts-348-Fatehgarh-Sahib.aspx to http://www.indiastudychannel.com/india/pincodes/Districts-348-Fatehgarh-Sahib.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070807163523/http://www.punjabnewsline.com:80/content/view/5104/38/ to http://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/view/5104/38/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080513071931/http://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/view/5102/38/ to http://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/view/5102/38/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:18, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Revert by GSS

@GSS, I’m moving the discussion from your talk page to here.

I noticed that you have reverted my contribution to this article.[1] As you mentioned on your talk page, could you specify which sourced content was removed? For example, this link was removed because it doesn't work: https://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/view/5104/38/. Reliable sources have been cited. Whitewashed how? Write&Publish (talk) 11:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

"Let's start with the lead section. First, could you explain why you altered the lead section to shift the focus away from the main reason for notability? Specifically, what led you to remove "He was convicted as a conspirator in the assassination of 12th Chief Minister of Punjab, Beant Singh" from the lead section? GSS ^💬 11:06, 29 July 2024 (UTC)"

@GSS Typical Wikipedia articles include the office holder's office details in the first sentence. Specific sentences may be changed if there are issues; however, why have you reverted my entire edit? Are there any other sentences you have an issue with? Write&Publish (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

My question is, why did you remove that specific statement? In your edit summary, you claimed, "Improving article: fixing grammar and updating references." How is removing the main cause of notability an improvement? The lead section must focus on the primary reason the subject is notable. In this case, the subject is notable for being a member of a banned militant group and for their involvement in the assassination of Beant Singh. His position as the head of the SGPC was disputed and unrecognized, and he isn't notable for that. So, once again, why did you remove the very important event he is notable for? GSS ^💬 12:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@GSS I'm of the opinion that his position as the jathedar of the Akal Takht is notable. However, I will revert the edit and revise the lead section to reflect what you consider notable. If you have an issue with any other sentence, I request that you not revert the entire edit. You can either discuss it here or change the sentence you have an issue with yourself. I hope you will respect my contribution and the time spent. Write&Publish (talk) 13:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted your edit because altering the lead is not the only issue. Your opinion does not matter here; the content you add must adhere to the established policies, and you must provide a convincing reason for removing sourced content. There are numerous statements that lack proper sourcing, and you now also need to explain why you removed an important claim from the infobox. GSS ^💬 13:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

1970 or 1973

Lead and info box say 1973. Body says 1970. Oliver Puertogallera (talk) 15:15, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I tried but couldn't find a reliable source to support either of them, so I have removed it for failing WP:V. GSS ^💬 15:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)