Wikipedia Mediation Cabal
Article	[[{{{article}}}]] ([[Talk:{{{article}}}|Talk page]])
Status	{{{status}}}
Request date	13:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Requesting party	Unknown
Parties involved	User:Sikh-history, User:Khalsaburg
Mediator(s)	Leujohn ( talk)
Comment	One of the parties are a sockpuppet. Coclusion reached based on that.

Vegetarianism_in_Sikhism - there seems to be a disagreement between me and Khalsaburg. I am insisting on using sources with ISBN numbers and established websites, wheras Khalsaburg deletes these references and calls them obsufication. I have tried reasoning, but he continues to revert some real hard work and research. I have gone to the extreme of getting ISBN number for sources from websites and adding the quotations from the books in the footnotes.-- Sikh-history ( talk) 07:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, first of all SH claims that anyone who does not share his point of view is usually one and the same alias.

Secondly his use of ISBN numbers are merely that, he prefers to use obfuscation ie ISBN references without page numbers. combine that with the fact that I used websites that he insists are 'blogs', tell me if the following are blogs ? http://www.gurbani.org/articles/webart18.htm http://www.experiencefestival.com/vegetarianism_and_religion_-_sikhism I can add hundreds more transliterations. Yet, he has been warned on his own talk page by user:sineed that he himself directed me to his own blog!! but had the audacity the refer the above as blogs ??Go figure? When I agreed with another user regarding SH vandalism, SH deleted my input on that users talk page, is that allowed on wkipedia. He said I was canvassing, now how can that be canvassing if I am responding to another editors viewpoint on SH's vandalism ???? Now, if you are unaware, meat is NOT served in a Sikh Temple Langar but this user tries to make out it does? Now, I use websites for many references as you can see above as its easier for the reader to base the facts on truth, its generally done that way by most editors on Wikipedia as you may agree or may not in SH case, SH has reverted to using vague ISBN numbers by unknown authors that support the freedom to scoff meat and/or drink alcohol. The user has been described as a nuisance on many websites including punjabi.net and jattworld.com, I understand he lives in Edgebaston, in Birmingham and has been blogging on punjabi.net and Jattworld.com and various sikh websites enforcing a change in protocol re diet. I look forward to you response Khalsaburg ( talk) 22:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I rest my case. Need I say more. ISBN numbers are obsufication according to Khalsaburg and websites are better than books as references. Other editors are in collusion with me as here. I can add page numbers but ISBN numbers are excellent and show the validity of a sources. Read about sources here . -- Sikh-history ( talk) 07:09, 31 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Also "Khalsaburg", what you have stated above, sounds very much like an outing violation as done here. I may ask for a sockpuppet check based on this. Thanks-- Sikh-history ( talk) 09:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC) reply

This is the blog he referred me too

http://www.sikhism.us/essays-on-sikhism/8828-fools-who-wrangle-over-flesh.html Proof is on my talk page nas user:sineed talk page user:sikh-history referring blog sites, sineed and many others agreed that "is an open discussion forum so it should not be used as a reference"Thanks Khalsaburg ( talk) 14:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I agree this should not be used as a refrence but would be a great place for you to debate the issue, rather than on wikipedia. NOte, that is not a Blog, but a discussion forum.-- Sikh-history ( talk) 16:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Although I am vegetarian myself and a Sikh, Khalsaburg has a view that only the vegetarian point of view should be permitted. I am of the opinion that mainstream Sikh views should be permitted with cited refrences, since this issuch an emotive issue. Instead of discussing the issue, he deletes the entire article and adds copy and paste from www.info-sikh.com (a quasi blog site), and www.sikhiwiki.org (which is very low on the wiki scale).

So are you saying that Khalsaburg is copying text from other websites? Leujohn ^{( talk)} 04:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC) reply

See the edits he has made, and also points made by Roadahead. Much of the comments I made on this issue on his talk page have been deleted by him. Saying this I think I have a problem with him viewing ISBN numbers as obsufuction as he has stated here. I also have a problem with people who openly state they have a biased perspective on wikipedia. Thanks

-- Sikh-history ( talk) 11:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I get the picture now. Since I am not an administrator, I can't really do much, but there are two things you can do:

1. Go to WP:AN/I and get help from there (refer the guys there to this page)
2. DO NOT revert his edits as vandalism. That might earn you a block too.

Also, I will try to get Khalsburg's attention to this page, and request protection of the article. I am still confused as to if Khalsburg is copying text from other websites. (No elaboration needed, I just need a yes/no answer ;)

Yes. He is copying from www.Sikhiwiki.org here and here-- Sikh-history ( talk) 10:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC) reply