This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Pls give reasons for ommisions for AKJ information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.198 ( talk) 22:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Wonder what info of AKJ was omitted? Is the line ending - without legitimate democratic jurisdiction - correct? Did the writer of this line mean to say it would not be legitimate and done without legitimate democratic jurisdiction? puzzeling, as I thought the whole idea of Sarbat Khalsa was exactly that - done by majority. Allenwalla ( talk) 04:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm nominating this section as needing editorial review for Neutral Point of View, I question the last statement about genocide on a par with Nazi Germany. Please see WP:NPOV for guidelines. Chuckiesdad ( talk) 08:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I request editor Sikh history to not to distort this section and also not to delete the references. It violates several wikipedia policies including wp:pov and wp:vandalism. He can discuss his issues over here. Thanks.-- DawnOfTheBlood ( talk) 21:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Sikh History is at it again and he insists Sunder Singh Lyallpuri was a leader of the Taksal rather than Sunder Singh Bhindranwala. Jujhar.pannu ( talk) 17:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Google books, http://www.panthic.org/articles/2696, and http://www.vidhia.com/Rehat%20Maryada/Gurmat_Rehat_Maryada_-_Damdami_Taksal.pdf. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa ( talk) 14:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Please do not use the term WP:Weasel in the wrong context. The reference by Martin E. Marty, R. Scott Appleby, John H. Garvey, ed. (1996). Fundamentalisms and the state: remaking polities, economies, and militance. The Fundamentalism Project 3. University of Chicago Press. p. 266. ISBN 978-0-226-50884-9 states "In 1706, when Gobind Singh...he is said to have founded a distinguished school of exegesis.". WP:Weasel does not apply where it is the reference that makes the assertion. Thanks SH 12:30, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
The article lacks it. if there is indeed a meaning. Etymology section can be added-- DBig Xray 12:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Sapedder, you should have discussed before removing stuff here. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 17:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I made mention of it in my edit summary, basically that one source was a duplicate source of a single book by Pashaura and Hawley in two citations, so I merged the two. The other by Fair and Ganguly quote Oberoi that "while the claims to the tenth guru are plausible, there is no real firm evidence to support it either." I don't know about the encyclopedic value of this statement, it basically says "it could be, but maybe not," which doesn't add to the article imo. Oberoi's satisfactory threshold of proof isn't stated either, and its alumni in prominent positions puts in question its obscurity; it just seemed like a subjective statement. I looked through the source for more info specifically pertaining to Damdami Taksal but didn't find any, so I made the decision to remove the source; the subject matter makes it better suited to other, related articles. Hope this clarifies, Sapedder ( talk) 12:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Pls give reasons for ommisions for AKJ information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.198 ( talk) 22:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Wonder what info of AKJ was omitted? Is the line ending - without legitimate democratic jurisdiction - correct? Did the writer of this line mean to say it would not be legitimate and done without legitimate democratic jurisdiction? puzzeling, as I thought the whole idea of Sarbat Khalsa was exactly that - done by majority. Allenwalla ( talk) 04:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm nominating this section as needing editorial review for Neutral Point of View, I question the last statement about genocide on a par with Nazi Germany. Please see WP:NPOV for guidelines. Chuckiesdad ( talk) 08:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I request editor Sikh history to not to distort this section and also not to delete the references. It violates several wikipedia policies including wp:pov and wp:vandalism. He can discuss his issues over here. Thanks.-- DawnOfTheBlood ( talk) 21:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Sikh History is at it again and he insists Sunder Singh Lyallpuri was a leader of the Taksal rather than Sunder Singh Bhindranwala. Jujhar.pannu ( talk) 17:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Google books, http://www.panthic.org/articles/2696, and http://www.vidhia.com/Rehat%20Maryada/Gurmat_Rehat_Maryada_-_Damdami_Taksal.pdf. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa ( talk) 14:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Please do not use the term WP:Weasel in the wrong context. The reference by Martin E. Marty, R. Scott Appleby, John H. Garvey, ed. (1996). Fundamentalisms and the state: remaking polities, economies, and militance. The Fundamentalism Project 3. University of Chicago Press. p. 266. ISBN 978-0-226-50884-9 states "In 1706, when Gobind Singh...he is said to have founded a distinguished school of exegesis.". WP:Weasel does not apply where it is the reference that makes the assertion. Thanks SH 12:30, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
The article lacks it. if there is indeed a meaning. Etymology section can be added-- DBig Xray 12:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Sapedder, you should have discussed before removing stuff here. Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 17:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I made mention of it in my edit summary, basically that one source was a duplicate source of a single book by Pashaura and Hawley in two citations, so I merged the two. The other by Fair and Ganguly quote Oberoi that "while the claims to the tenth guru are plausible, there is no real firm evidence to support it either." I don't know about the encyclopedic value of this statement, it basically says "it could be, but maybe not," which doesn't add to the article imo. Oberoi's satisfactory threshold of proof isn't stated either, and its alumni in prominent positions puts in question its obscurity; it just seemed like a subjective statement. I looked through the source for more info specifically pertaining to Damdami Taksal but didn't find any, so I made the decision to remove the source; the subject matter makes it better suited to other, related articles. Hope this clarifies, Sapedder ( talk) 12:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)