3swordz

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 10:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sikh extremism

An article recently created on Sikhs, i.e. Sikh extremism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sikh extremism. Thank you. Singh6 (talk) 08:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please give your vote Delete or Keep and participate in the discussion at Articles_for_deletion/Sikh_extremism. I believe this article is specifically created with bad faith and it does not have any basis. The editors of this article are famous for vandalizing Sikhism related articles, and they have been blocked several times as well. I think following links should be enough to disclose the true face of these Anti-Sikhism fundamentalists:

• Islam and Sikhism Vs 90.196.3.37 alias 90.196.3.246
• See his acts in section - ip 90.196.3.246 (Talk)
• His Biography

Please give you vote ... at Articles_for_deletion/Sikh_extremism. Please feel free to leave me a message if you have any question. --Singh6 (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving me a message. It was very sad thing whatever happened. Kindly add your email address into "my preferences" in your wikipedia account. It will give you an extra advantage to stay on top of any messages which you might miss because of few days of absence from wiki. Also, you will be able to send and receive emails to all other wiki editors. hmmm....--Singh6 (talk) 15:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thought to send 2nd message to request you to add and activate an email into your wiki account, or please send me an email. --Singh6 (talk) 11:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Sukhdev Singh Babbar

Kindly pay attention to Talk:Sukhdev Singh Babbar. Respected Sir, I understand that you must be busy in your life but I still request you to pay your kind attention towards Sukhdev Singh Babbar.

I had come across its AfD discussion several months ago, so I completely re-wrote the article, inserted plenty of world level references and ‘was able to save it by proving its notability. I had recently requested a neutral editor to simply restructure it with sub-sections so that it could get better ratings (It has been awarded rating level "B")

This article is an excellent example of collective Indian attrocities on Khalistan movement people and their family members. There are "torture/harassment/un-lawfull custody incidents of Mr. Babbar's family members etc", "Indian Police even illegally occupied Mr. Babbar's house immediately after his death. Every single sentence/incident in this article is strongly referenced which bring culprit government and its illegal/cruel acts into light. It also show how Indian sucurity forces openely violated law of the land in Mr. Babbar's case. (Again referenced)

Since every single sentence is fully referenced, hence! after finding no other excuse, Vivin even tried to get certain part of this article deleted by putting one excuse or the another, so that he could suppress the referenced truth, 'could make it pro-Indian and 'could hide the fully referenced crimes of world's largest democracy, which is definitely a WP:NPOV issue. There is no personal research and article simply state what is there in the references. Since every sentence is referenced, hence you will not have to do any extra research. Please watch Sukhdev Singh Babbar and its talk page, i.e. Talk:Sukhdev Singh Babbar. --Singh6 (talk) 01:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

please avoid an edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kakkar. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Kingturtle (talk) 18:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

There was no edit war. Kingturtle (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

the infallible

you are revert warring now. All you do is keep blanking a paragraph based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If you have no argument to present, kindly stop it. Otherwise feel free to present actual evidence that onkar is unrelated or WP:UNDUE to omkara. Your sectarian allegiances are of no interest here. --dab (𒁳) 07:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

This section was first added by some ip user, 122.166.64.24, on 18 nov 2008, never a part of the article until then.

I reverted it 25 dec 2008

Reverted it again on 28 jan 2009 after ip user 220.227.179.5.

10 march 2009 you bring this still unreferenced section back, while "removing (another) completely unreferenced section"

This is a view supported only by you and two ip users over several months, added only recently, with no references. Dozens of other contributors had no problem with it. So, UNDUEWEIGHT.

Are you above debate? Do you know Gurmukhi? Do you know that the article is only about AUM the HINDU SYLLABLE? Answer for once!

I present my arguments repeatedly, you can't reply to any of them. When you attempt to, I refute it informedly. And you say it's because "IDONTLIKEIT." What makes you right? I keep blanking it. So what? You keep reverting it. You ignore my points. You present no arguments, I do. Why do I have "sectarian allegiances" and you don't? I told you I'm not religious, I still want the facts represented accurately. You persist in your baseless claim, saying, "omkara, omkara." This is AUM.

The article is ... AUM the Hindu concept, discussing only the SYLLABLE. It's not that long of an article, read it. It discusses its use as a syllable in meditation, as well as a myriad of encoded meanings. Om is a SYLLABLE in Jainism and some forms of Buddhism also.

Ik Onkar is not a SYLLABLE, it means One God. Not the trimurti, not the three Vedas, not a primordial sound, not 3 stages of consciousness, not 3 senses, not 3 states of knowledge, not etc. etc.

Om does not mean One God, the article never says that once. So, UNDUE. It is an entirely reinterpreted cognate.

This. Is. An. OM. Article. Stop bleating "Omkara." This is an Hinduism Om article, and its appearance (still as a syllable) in other creeds. Aum in Sikhism is misleading and incorrect. Why are you bent on this?

I've presented many, many arguments. What, are my posts too long or something? Do you have some kind of article quota? Read my posts and answer the points. You have less of a right reverting than I do, I give relevant arguments, you brush right past them. You have no arguments to present, kindly stop it.

BTW, your incorrect "om ligature" is now something else entirely. It was once an 'Oorra' with an adapted 'horra' vowel symbol, as it ought to be. Now it's an 'Oorra' with a 'tippi' addition, which aren't even connected. You're not even consistent, you have no clue what you're talking about. My compromise is totally reasonable, and rather generous considering your bullheadedness. Get off your high horse.3swordz (talk) 12:44, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree

See comments on my page. --Sikh-History 09:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale

Hi Mr. Editor

I have noticed that you have contributed in this article. I am not an established editor hence I can not edit this article (it is semi-protected) I guess. I have found several neutral references to make some changes into its lead section

From -

...was the controversial leader of the Damdami Taksal, a Sikh religious group based in India, who supported...

TO -

...was the 14th head of the Damdami Taksal, a 300 years old Sikh religious school of the Sikhs which was founded by last Sikh prophet Guru Gobind Singh. He supported ...

Can you please make this edit in Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale to make this article more valuable and neutral.

Maharaj, parh lia karo jee, bahut daer lagaa daindo ooo....--24.5.208.21 (talk) 07:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

That info already seems to be in the Damdami Taksal article itself, I don't see the point of repeating it on Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale's page. Linking Damdami Taksal is enough, I think. The focus of the article is Bhindranwale, not Damdami Taksal. You can add to the Damdami page if you want, it's not semiprotected from the looks of it.3swordz (talk) 09:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

General Points of Contention - Friendly advice

Hi fellow editor, I strongly advise not to delete references but tag them for discussion and get consensus. I have reverted the removal in this instance before another editor warns you.Thanks--Sikh-History 13:38, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Sikh-History, the source was credible but the statement was not (I assume you're referring to the Harmandir Sahib edit.). The source was a news site (credible) which was quoting a BJP spokesman trying to say that Bhindranwale was a congress-terrorist-gone-berserk. This spokesman is not a scholar, the statement was an opinion (POV), he was making a case for trying to have Bhindranwale's image removed from the Harmandir Sahib. That is what the news article was about. Read the sourced material, if personal points of view on Bhindranwale belong anywhere they belong on Bhindranwale's page, not here. The edit made by the contributor who added that source wanted to support his own personal opinion bluntly that Bhindranwale was a terrorist (POV), he did not include that it was the view of the BJP as he should have. The original edit was pure POV, look at it. 3swordz (talk) 02:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

You should well be aware by now that that is not the way to get things done on wikipedia. Because you disagree with a reference (or the person in the reference), you cannot delete it. That is WP:POV. Please tag it and encourage a discussion. The last thing I want to see is another Sikh editor blocked because of this article, and other Sikh related one's. Like I said, I am not agreeing or disagreeing but drawing your attention to wikipedia protocol. Thanks--Sikh-History 08:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

From the comments on my talk page, I suggest you tag the offending reference and sentence and get it discussed, rather than deletion. Deleting references is a very tricky business. Thanks --Sikh-History 10:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

If a good source is attached to a bad edit, should the source be left hanging? I'm not clear on this. This is why I deleted it originally, as I've maintained from the start I have no problem with the source. Reply on Harmandir Sahib talk page.3swordz (talk) 04:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

April 2010

On my talk page, you wrote:

Hi Sinnead, this is 3swordz, you helped mediate a tiff between me and Sikh-History a while back regarding Harmandir Sahib. We've hit another roadblock in the "Jatt Sikh" article. Your help would be appreciated.

For context regarding the matter, it's on his talk page under the same heading. First things first, would this news article be acceptable for sourcing in the wiki article: Caste System Among Sikhs in Punjab by ratan saldi http://www.asiantribune.com/node/18221. i've seen articles like these being used for citation frequently (same type of article as the previous argument) and Sikh-History had no problem citing from it until he did a 180 and deemed it unfit when I looked through it and quoted it correctly. Sure it's not academically ideal but it's pretty good for South Asian article citation standards, and it is mostly definitely not pro-Jatt.

If you deem it completely worthless and explain, I will try to accept it; otherwise Sikh History needs to be cool with it and cool it with the smears. He's got it in his head that any description of Jatt Sikhs is Jatt showboating and nothing else (and in his words the info will provoke "phallus-comparing" between Jatts and non-Jatts, his main complaint), and has been calling me a racist for no reason.

The info I was maintaining simply dealt with Jatt agricultural ownings, and their proportion to other Sikhs (he thinks "at least half" and "50-60%" are not majorities) He is only wary of an uproar/"big-up" contest. I did not add this info or the source, but I think it is very relevant and want to maintain it. I have succeeded in having him fix one of his own major screw-ups, though he credits other editors for pointing it out. Anyway, your help would be appreciated. Sorry for the hassle. Again, for context, it's on his talk page under "Jatt Sikh."3swordz (talk) 10:24, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I fear that I find User:Sikh-history's behaviour unacceptable, and will no longer associate with that editor, so I cannot be of any help.- Sinneed 14:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh. Thanks anyway. 3swordz (talk) 08:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I have quoted from articles verbatum and as per your request you wished to prove that Jatt Sikh's were a majority, and I have found an article that states they are 50 to 60%. what more can be done here and what is the problem? Thanks--Sikh-History 19:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

You wrote this on Nancy the admin's page:

"Hi Nancy, can you please mediate, between me and this, user. He seems to be under the impression that because I am from the same race as him, that I shold forgo the WP:NPOV policy we have here. Also see the conversation on my page. I really can't believe in the 21st Century people have such views. Thanks--Sikh-History 07:57, 2 April 2010 (UTC)"

"Jatt" does not have anything to do with Wikipedia, that is obvious. But it might with "Jatt Sikh," ya know? I never enlisted your help either in showing information. You want to withhold that information not because it is wrong per se, but because you don't want to bruise egos, as you think it will inevitably do. What's amazing is that you are always the first to see things through a racial/race-conflict prism, then proceed to call me a racist. And that you had no problem citing the source in question until I found it, looked through it and quoted it correctly. Then it became useless to you, hm? not to mention you see personal attacks everywhere(to you, calling out your edit rationales is the same as attacking you, I suppose). go ahead, involve an admin.3swordz (talk) 08:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and let it show that I also finally got you to fix your big misuse/screwup on the Jatt Sikh article regarding population proportion after repeated notices, because you did not budge when the users "SPat" and "LastEmperor" brought it to your attention repeatedly,much earlier and admittedly in a milder manner. The source was just fine while you were misquoting it to drastically reduce their population.3swordz (talk) 09:08, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

References Re: Jatt-Sikh

Thanks for the references to the Jatt-Sikh article, but please familiarise yourself with two points:

1. WP:SYNTH. Do not be tempted to draw conclusions from references.
2. References need appropriate page numbers and ISBN numbers for verification.

Please re-add baring this in mind. Thanks --Sikh-History 07:33, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

1. No conclusions were drawn, it was simple rephrasing, I can phrase it how I want if it is fact. And well over 50% is a majority, like it or not. If the word "majority" makes you uncomfortable or fear a "phallus-contest," tag it with "citation needed" at the most, although that would look strange next to cited statistics.
2. These are academic peer-reviewed journal articles I bought online for good money, in PDF form. Familiarize yourself with what those are. They are not books.3swordz (talk) 09:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

And this proves that you truly have an agenda and will go to any length to get this info deleted. Just look at yourself, now that you can no longer call the statistics or sources into question, you've been reduced to indiscriminately deleting entire swaths of factual information over the semantics of one word in the entire edit. So much for your attempts to nitpick. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak.3swordz (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Note the following points:

1. I have had to warn you yet again for personal attacks. Please stop this behaviour. It really does no one any favours. Remember WP:AGF
2. You have added sources correctly, but see WP:Citation. You will note that full citations are required, ISBN number as well as page numbers, for WP:Verifiability.
3. The source I cited I have quoted verbatum, and have not indulged in WP:Syth. Please do not do this.

Thanks--Sikh-History 13:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

1. Yet to see a single personal attack. Name one. I suppose your "racist!" remark isn't one.
2. Yet again, familiarize yourself with academic peer-reviewed journals. They do not have ISBNs, and are not sold by book labels; they are published in academic journals, I bought mine in PDF online format. Again, NO ISBNs.
3. I doubt you hound other editors to quote verbatim (it's apparent what you're up to), even though it's not synthesis, and like having to quote that two plus two indeed equals four.
4. ps. do not abuse warning notices the way you accuse other editors of, especially for personal attacks that don't exist. Thank you.3swordz (talk) 07:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey, found a source for it (a book with an ISBN the way you like at that, not even an academic peer-reviewed journal the concept of which you are unfamiliar with) that states the obvious just for you. Any more nits to pick? 3swordz (talk) 08:26, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1984 ghallooghaaraa

Hello Sir/Madam, some sikhism related Afd is going on. Since you have edited several Sikhism related articles so I thought to notify about this Afd as you might have some interest/extra-information for wikipedia readers out there. Good Luck.--DawnOfTheBlood (talk) 07:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Gujarati Jats

You may want to look at this. I must confess I didn't know there were Gujarati Jats as well. Thanks --Sikh-History 13:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I've looked into this and it seems true, though I don't know about all the "came from a place called 'Half' in Iran 500 years ago" stuff in that particular source. It may be a folk origin story among them, stated as fact. Perhaps a more professional source should be used alongside it, but I don't oppose their existence so I accept it. 3swordz (talk) 11:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Well it certainly would support the Scythian theory of origin of Jats and other tribes. Thanks--Sikh-History 13:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It's rather recent though for Scythians (Central Asian or otherwise), don't you think? But this is beside the point. Whatever it supports, I'm okay with it. I think Gujarati Jats probably do exist, albeit in smaller concentrations. 3swordz (talk) 20:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Portrait1 Dalip Singh Saund.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait1 Dalip Singh Saund.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Dr Narinder S Kapany.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dr Narinder S Kapany.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Hondh-Chillar massacre

Can you write the title of Hondh-Chillar massacre in Gurmukhi in Punjabi? Thanks--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 21:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Sure, also added IPA for good measure. 3swordz (talk) 12:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)