User talk:Sukh/Archive 1

From June 2005 to December 2005

Sant Bhindranwale
What do u despite so totally?

Are you a Sikh or Hindu judging by your intervation in several sikh related pages I see your very pro-Indian in bias.


 * I am - broadly speaking - a Sikh, although that is irrelevant apart from the fact that it gives me more interest in such related pages. Khalistan is a very tricky issue and different sides have their own opinions as to what exactly happened.  You indeed show your own bias in the article.  Take for example this:


 * Attacks by Sikh militants have dropped markedly since 1992
 * Attacks by militants and Indian forces have dropped markedly since 1992


 * Why would you remove the fact that they're Sikh militants? You might not agree that they could be Sikhs (then again, you might) but to most people they are considered Sikh militants.


 * Why did you remove this line?


 * Total civilian deaths in Punjab have declined by more than 95 per cent since 1991.


 * You need to present your views in a much more NPOV way. And, you can't remove the disputed sign because the neutrality of the page is STILL disputed.  The Khalistan page has been looked at a lot recently and it's a tricky issue.  Coming in and making lots of changes will be heavily scrutinised.


 * In regards to the Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale article. I never reverted any of your edits simply reinstated the disputed sign.   However, some people may disagree with certain things you have written.  For example:


 * The word "guru" is offensive to Sikhs when used by people to claim they are if they follow Sikhism. As Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji (Sikh Holy Book) is the last and eternel guru of Sikhism.


 * You say it's offensive to Sikhs. Well evidently that's not true.  You could say it's offensive to most Sikhs or it's offensive to Orthodox Sikhs and still get your point across.


 * I'm not trying to stifle you. Any edits you make are acceptable as long as they are presented with a neutral point of view and backed up with references (essential in such controversial articles).


 * Sukh 13:23, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok in regards to Sant Bhindranwale page I dont mind it being in dispute.


 * But for Khalistan page I have tried to added some relevant human rights abuses information, which is critical to the struggle for Khalistan. Vivin has stated his pro-Indian govt bias in the page I was only giving the Sikh side of the story. Human rights abuses have played a massive part in Khalistan and Sikh politics. So If you dont mind I would like to include it the page so that people are aware of violence from both sides.


 * Regards,


 * Thetruth


 * As long as you phrase your edits correctly that should be alright. But try and balance both sides of the story.  Saying things like "Some Sikhs believe that..." instead of "Sikhs believe..." and BACKING UP your claims with references to 3rd parties: books, web pages, newspapers etcetera. Also, please sign your comments with &#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e; this brings up your name and the time/date you made the comment.


 * Also, don't remove the disputed notice. If you think it is neutral please discuss on the talk page and if there is a consensus the notice can be removed.  Sukh 15:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Khalistani being voted for deletion
Thetruth has been going around making a number of POV changes. He has also created the Khalistani article. I feel that since it's a hypothetical term, and not even one in common use, there is no need for this article. There even isn't enough information on the subject. Could you please add your vote to the talk page? --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; )


 * Well it's not a hypothetical term but it's fairly self-explanatory. I recommend either a re-direct to Khalistan or the addition to Wiktionary.  The vfd page doesn't appear to have been set up and it also needs to be listed at the appropriate date on Votes_for_deletion.


 * I agree that the truth's edits are getting out of hand. I have been away for the weekend, but I'm going to be reading through the Khalistan page over the coming days and merging edits from the truth's version which I can verify.  If he is not happy with that, we can consider locking it - and other controversial pages he is editing.  Either that or we can approach an OP to ban him - but maybe it's too early for something quite that drastic yet.


 * Sukh 16:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Very well, I think I will set up a redirect to Khalistan. That way we can bypass the whole vfd thing. His edits really are getting out of hand, but yes, I agree that it may be too early to do anything. We'll see how it goes from now on. --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; ) 17:03, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Edits to Khalistan
Good job on the edits. I agree, the article needs a bit more work --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; )


 * I took a look at Khalistan again. I compared it to the "Protected" version of the page, and a lot of information that we originally had, has been removed. I am considering merging the current version's useful info with the protected version. What do you think? --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; )


 * Go ahead. I've stopped really keeping track of what's been going on because there have been attempts to vandalise left, right and centre.  Although hopefully this RFC/Revert War Evidence will provide some sort of support.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:17, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Dealing with Thetruth
Thetruth only seems to be coming to Wikipedia to add his own POV changes. What should be done about this? I have warned him, but I doubt it's going to have any effect. --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; ) 4 July 2005 20:04 (UTC)


 * That's true - he shows no intention of listening. I *think* the way forward is abitration (which he probably won't listen to anyway).  I haven't got time to follow it up at the moment, but you're welcome to do it.  Otherwise I'll do something over the coming days.


 * Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 4 July 2005 20:23 (UTC)

Arbitration
After Thetruth's new round of changes, I have decided to request arbitration in this matter. --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; )


 * Good call. I've added my statement.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 10:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Nair page
Hello Sukh,

The Nair page is one that I wrote mostly from scratch. However, User:Thetruth has taken it upon himself to vandalize it. I find myself constantly reverting it - I'm not sure what else to do. The request for arbitration has already been made, so basically I'm waiting until I hear something from that quarter. But he shows no sign of stopping. His edits seem to be done only to spite me since they don't clarify or add any information. He seems to be deleting things from the article. Also, there is a revert war on the KPS Gill article. I've added information from a BBC article about him, but Thetruth keeps reverting it into a POV version. I've left a message there asking him if he is ready to discuss changes. Hopefully he will listen to that. But I'm not sure what to do with the Nair article since it's not like he has a specific point of view to promote there - the edits are seemingly out of spite, like I already mentioned. --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; )


 * Hi,


 * The arbitration looks like they may send us to 'request for comments'! But, if he cannot accept the proposal on his talk page to resolve this, I may have to research how to get an admin to ban him - he is simply vandalising if he cannot discuss his changes. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi,


 * An RfC seems to be the only way. He doesn't seem to be making any more changes, although that might be solely due to the fact that the pages are protected. When I have some more time, I will submit an RfC. --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; ) 17:07, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Babbar Khalsa Page
Why do you keep changing what i have done on the babbar khalsa page. I know much more than you do about it and it was infact created by Shaheed Jathedar Sukhdev Singh Babbar in India in 1978 after one of his best friends and mentors, Shaheed bhai fauja singh was killed along with thirteen other sikhs while having a peaceful protest against nirankaris. The Canada branch was then started By Shaheed Jathedar Talvinder Singh Babbar in 1979.


 * I'm glad you've come to ask me actually. Because you haven't registered an account, it's difficult creating a dialogue and for me to notify you of my changes.  Please create an account so I don't have to track IP addresses.


 * I'm not 100% sure if this is you, so please correct me if I'm wrong: Before we start, may I please remind you that Nirankari is not a place for filth (nor is anywhere else on Wikipedia). If you want to show that a large portion of Sikhism does not consider the Nirankari's as legitimate Sikhs, there is a way to say that without the vulgarity shown in your contributions.


 * Reasons for me reverting your changes:


 * Unsuitable honourific titles that go against Neutral POV "Shaheed", "Ji". If that was their official title or sanctioned by a large portion of Sikhs, then that *might* be a suitable name... but it's not, so please use their real names.


 * Removal of "In 1991 the Babbar Khalsa operating in Canada under Talwinder Singh Parmar broke away from the BKI and formed the Azad Babbar Khalsa (Independent Babbar Khalsa)." - is this untrue?


 * Removal of "Sikh militant attacks included assassinations, bombings, and kidnappings. Since 1992, Indian security forces have killed or captured many senior Sikh militant leaders and total civilian deaths in Punjab have declined more than 95 percent since over 3,300 civilians died in 1991." - is this untrue?


 * If you think my reverts are unjustified you are entitled to that opinion. However I believe they are biased.  If you want to discuss them, we can incorporate your changes with a more neutral perspective.


 * Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 21:22, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Shahmukhi Punjabi
Hi there, Sukh. I updated the image on the Punjabi page to say Punjabi in Shahmukhi now. :) Vpendse 15:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Punjab
An acceptable view, the thing is, on Wiki, "X, Y" ususally (in fact, damn near universally) means "City, State/Country". When I see "Punjab, India" I think "A city named Punjab in a state or country called India". Parentheses are preferred for disambiguation for two reasons - one, they're accepted, by simple view, of being outside the name, whereas adding it with a comma tends to imply that's part of the name. Secondly, the pipe trick. Punjab (Indian state) as a quick way to state it. This is just personal preference, but it's also how most other country articles on wiki are handled. I'm not quite trying to force a standard, but simply ... notify of the one that has appeared before I even came around? :) If the folks who edit the India-related pages want to have their own standard, that's fine, but considering Punjab is the only article this is required for, I figured this would be the best method. Furthermore, it only appears at the top of the page. :) (Put another way, the only U.S. state that requires this is Georgia, and it's done with "(U.S. state)" and this has persisted, so I assume it's the best option they came up with. "Victoria (Australia)" is different because Punjab is actually a region, split between two states in two countries, so a better disambiguator should be used) As always, I welcome comments. --Golbez 19:07, August 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * REASONABLE! When I was typing "Acceptable" I was thinking, "Wow, what a horrible word, his point of view is acceptable by me, like I could refuse it" but I was so burned out that I couldn't think of the word I wanted to use. Reasonable! OK, I feel better having pointed that out. :) --Golbez 20:49, August 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * LOL. Not to worry :D  Erm, I personally feel that either Punjab, India or Punjab (India) is okay.  I just think it is unnecessary to add province or state in there.  What do you think? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 21:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Indic text
Many thanks for your efforts to stop "corrections" in the wrong direction. Enabling complex text support for Indic scripts and Template:IndicText at least have a fighting chance to achieve this goal. --Pjacobi 23:59, August 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Frankly I'd got sick and tired of reverting the "corrections".  Now the only thing I have to do is stop people removing the templates! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 10:04, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I told the guy who removed the template from hindi how bad an idea it was. I think your template is really clever and probably the best way to fight this buggy web browsers indic scripts rendering problem. It would be useful on all Wikipedias. BernardM 11:59, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

KPS Gill
http://www.sikhlionz.com/kpsgill.htm I'm not sure how far it is true really. I'm not really averse to removing the line from there if you disagree with the source.

(Sorry about the triple post, webserver wasnt responding.)

--Gaurav Arora Talk 18:05, August 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * That's not a very credible source :D. I cannot find any credible sources to back that claim up so I'm going to remove it.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:22, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

irrelevant
No, it's not "irrelevant" to define what ATSUI supports, because ATSUI is available under OS 9 as well as OS X.

No, it's not "irrelevant" to list which keyboard layouts are available under OS X, because the list differs from "supports": there is no Tamil keyboard layout. - Nunh-huh 23:40, 21 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't mean my comments to sound as harsh as they did!


 * No, it's not "irrelevant" to define what ATSUI supports, because ATSUI is available under OS 9 as well as OS X.


 * Well even with that fact, what relevance does it have to the end-user? If Mac OS 9 can convert Unicode to the MacDevanagari/Gurmukhi/Gujarati format then we should add it to the list also.


 * In regards to the keyboard - I'll add that back. If there is no Tamil keyboard layout that obviously needs to be mentioned.


 * Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:12, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * If you don't understand the importance of content, you shouldn't decide whether it's "irrelevant", and you shouldn't delete it. ATSUI is available under OS 9. Not all applications make use of it. Mac OS 9 doesn't convert Unicode to Indic fonts as shipped. The appropriate Language Kit is necessary, and all OS 9 browsers require WorldScript to show Unicode characters. Unicode support was initially introduced with Mac OS 8.5, but applications (until OS X provided easier methodology) generally didn't use it. I'll leave you to dictate what's important then, as you evidently feel you know enough to do so. - Nunh-huh 01:21, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I still believe even mentioning ATSUI for Apple OS X is irrelevant - it's the standard text API and only complicates the page. The only sections that should be complicated are the Linux ones ;)


 * However I encourage you to write about Mac OS 9 - although I suppose its only relevant if web browsers on OS 9 support WorldScript.


 * I'll leave you to dictate what's important then, as you evidently feel you know enough to do so.


 * What a lovely overly sensitive attitude! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 08:28, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Edit war with User:Happytime
Hi! I would suggest that you discuss the matter at Talk:Hindi. utcursch | talk 08:16, August 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * I would like to dicuss these changes if Sukh would agree to it. Sukh claims that I am some other user; they probably had the same problems.  Happytime


 * I don't have the tools to prove you are 'thetruth' but it is a hunch. Either way an administrator should be able to check.  So you do want to discuss problems?  If so, I'm more than happy to discuss them with you.


 * Sikhism


 * What reason do you have for removing:


 * Sikhs believe in the concept of reincarnation. All creatures are believed to have souls that pass to other bodies upon death until liberation is achieved.


 * The concept of reincarnation is central to Sikhism. If you don't know anything about the subject in hand, don't make such edits.  If you are a Sikh I suggest your learn about your own religion in more depth.  And why did you remove the image of a man reading the Guru Granth Sahib at the Harmandir Sahib?


 * Urdu


 * What supporting evidence (references) do you have for making this change:


 * It soon became the language of the Mughals, distinguished linguistically from local languages by its large and extensive Arabic-Persian vocabulary (40%) superimposed on a base of grammar, usages and vocabulary that it shares in common with Hindi. 


 * To:


 * It soon became the language of the Mughals, distinguished linguistically from local languages by its large and extensive Arabic (20%) and Persian (70%) vocabulary and the rest being derived from Turkish and local dialects in its purest form. 


 * Are you honestly saying that 10% of Urdu's vocabulary comes from the Indian subcontinent?


 * Khalistan


 * I'm not even going to start with this article. You changes mimic those of The Truth and I've made it apparent before what I dislike about these biased, unfounded changes.  The key?  Quote credible sources and stop doing such blanket changes on such a controversial article.


 * Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Sikhism
 * I think you may be mistaken on this part, I will recheck it.


 * Urdu
 * The reason that the original Urdu language is such is because of its being used in the Mughal Courts. The Muslims were invaders and they brought their language and culture along with them.  The Urdu language that was concocted was derived directly from those Muslim languages.  Very little of it contained what was homebrewed in India.  It's grammar was similar though because of the mingling with local tribes.


 * Khalistan
 * This page was asked to be removed because of it not being a country rather a thought. I prefer to keep it but have it withought any pro-Sikh biases and glorifications (we have to keep this neutral).  Facts over whims.


 * Happytime 22:50, 26 August 2005 (Unsigned)


 * I've moved your comments down so it is easier for me to keep track of the points.


 * Reincarnation is a central and fundamental part of Sikh teachings. Please try a Google search for "Reincarnation" and "Sikhism".  Here are some simple results:.


 * I largely agree with what you have written about Urdu, however that is not what I had issue with. What I had issue with the change in percentages without a source.  I also had issue with the fact that you seemed to remove large chunks of text which mentioned the fact that the common language spoken in every day life in both Northern India and Pakistan is the same - Hindustani.


 * In regards to Khalistan: Indeed, we do have to keep it neutral - and on such a controversial article, even more so.  Here's the questions I have for you...


 * Why did you completely remove the introduction to the article?
 * You write that the article must be kept "withought any pro-Sikh biases and glorifications". Why then do you giver honourific titles to the Sikh gurus (i.e. Ji)?
 * Why would you remove the link to Sikh times?


 * There are other points that need mentioning, but I haven't got time to go through it all. Also, please do not revert the talk page for Hindi - the comments there are not personal attacks, they are disputes that need to be resolved. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


 * A language is defined by the people that speak it. Just because in your opinion people should speak Urdu and Hindi in a certain way, with certain vocabularies does not mean it is the case.  Either provide sufficient sources for your claims or realise the fact that Urdu/Hindi spoken by "Jo Bloggs" is the same language. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:17, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

A light at the end of the Happytime tunnel?
Happytime seems to have momentarily foregone forcefed edits in favor of calm discussion on his talk page (scroll down to "Hindi/Urdu"). So far I've been making do with analogies to English, but I'd really like the support of people with more direct and extensive knowledge of North Indian languages, especially Hindi/Urdu. --skoosh (háblame) 21:46, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes hopefully he will converse with us - but then again, maybe it was just because of the block? What he fails to understand is I actually do understand what he is trying to tell me - but removing the facts is not acceptable.  I'll add my input tomorrow hopefully.  Just keep in mind that when he is quoting 'Urdu words', their 'Hindi' equivalents are just as prominent in Urdu.  These might help:


 * 
 * 


 * Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 21:56, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the links. They might indeed come in handy.  --skoosh (háblame) 01:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

3RR
You have ben blocked for 24 hours for violating Three-revert rule on Urdu language.  Grue  05:58, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

FYI: 3RR
For your info: You have been listed for a 3RR on Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. -- Chris 73 Talk 13:49, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hindi
You appeared to be in the right there, but please don't just keep reverting. Substantiate your position on the talk page, and discuss on the users talk page before reverting more than once. If that doesn't work, there are other measures available, including getting other editors to help you. - Taxman Talk 18:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


 * We have discussed this issue before - not just I, but other users too. The user continues reverting and using anonymous IPs to add their own POV opinions (which are very absurd).  I'm compiling an evidence page which I see you've added to!  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:37, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I know, but at least explain and point to the past discussion and work for consensus. It makes your position a lot stronger and makes it clearer the other party is causing the problem. In a sterile revert war both parties may be blocked. There's no need for that since explaining and gaining consensus for edits is not that hard. - Taxman Talk 13:57, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

RFC on List of people who have said that they are gods
Could you comment on this RfC? Thanks. &asymp; jossi &asymp; 20:06, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Uhmm, I'm not really sure how I could help. Is there anything in particular you wanted me to look at?  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:32, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The ongoing debate includes discussions about the different concepts of "God" in the Judeo-Christian tradition vs. Eastern traditions such as Hinduism. Surely you can comment on these aspects. &asymp; jossi &asymp; 00:08, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

2005 Kashmir earthquake
Thank you for your contribution at 2005 Kashmir earthquake. Please keep it up!!! Pradeepsomani  ( talk )

Guru Govind Singh and Rama
Hi, Sukh I read somewhere that Guru Gobind Singh had stated that he is a descendant of Lord Rama, through one of his twin sons, Luv. Is this a true statement that is recognized by all Sikhs? Or is this a point of view?

Thanks.

Raj2004 14:38, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * From : "According to Guru Govind Singh, Guru Nanak is a direct descendant of Kush, the elder son of Rama, and Guru Govind Singh himself is a direct descendant of Lava, the younger son of Rama."


 * See and .  I think from the POV of Sikhs, these sorts of comments are propagated by right-wing Hindus who wish to include Sikhism in their definition of Hinduism.  Whether it is true or not I cannot answer - I am no scholar of Sikhism.  I suppose you could find the answer in the Dasam Granth or ask on the Sikhnet Discussion board. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:56, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Sukh, thanks for the info. Sikhism is obviously an independent religion that was influenced by Hindu traditions. So I don't think it's just a right-wing Hindu point of view.
 * In Sikhism, one of the names for God is Ram? Isn't this correct?
 * Ram is also a Hindu name for God.


 * Raj2004 15:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * It definately isn't just a right-wing Hindu point of view. But many Sikhs do believe that right-wing Hindu groups are actively pursuing an agenda to integrate Sikhs as a sect of Hinduism.  How true this is is a matter for debate!


 * Yes, Ram is one of the names of God as used in the Guru Granth Sahib. Also Ishwar, Gobind, Karim, Allah, Hari and others.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Sukh. But we do agree that the Sikhs were great defenders of Hinduism in the north and there may not have been Hinduism in north India without their help.


 * Raj2004 21:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Indeed. In many ways, Sikhism can be seen as developing to defend Hinduism against Islam by "merging" the best of both religions while staying true to Dharmic roots.  Many Sikhs do not like to view Sikhism as any relation to Hinduism or Islam even when (in my opinion) it is routed in both (considerbly more so in Hinduism than Islam).


 * I'm not a supporter of any of these sorts of groups - neither Khalistani or Hindutva activists. But I know what views they both hold and like extremists everywhere they are unwilling to compromise or come to consensus.  Reminds me of Wikipedia revert wars! :D Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 21:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, Sukh I agree. Do you think the Vedanta concept of Nirguna Brahman corresponds to the Sikh concept of God, i.e., Waheguru?


 * Raj2004 00:00, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Also, I think the bhakti reform movements in Hinduism, like Sikhism brought the common man closer to God, without the intervention of priests.


 * I was born in the US of South Indian parents and am trying to learn as much as possible about different religious traditions.


 * Raj2004 00:04, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes I suppose there is parallels with Nirguna Brahman. Sikhs believe in an omnipresent God that is the God of all (i.e. the Hindu god, Muslim god, Christian god etc. are all the same).  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Malayalam for "Sukh" is slightly wrong
Sukh, the Malayalam script for your name in your user page is slightly wrong. Now it reads "Sukha". This is because the "a" part of the last letter in the word ("kha" in this case) does not get truncated in Malayalam, as it does in Hindi. The correct version is സുഖ്. --Lettherebelight | Talk 09:08, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks for the tip! Do you know which other Indic scripts also follow this convention? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 09:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


 * This must be the case for all South Indian languages. I cannot vouch for this, because I don't know any other South Indian language. --Lettherebelight | Talk 06:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes I think the others do, but the Dravidian languages are mysterious to me as well. I do think that the Tamil should be லுக்க். Tamil has weird conjuncts and orthographical rules (compared with northern scripts that is). I don't know if doubling the 'k' aspirates it either. Infact, take my suggestion with a grain of salt altogether! See: Omniglot: Tamil and Thamil Paadanool. Khiradtalk 10:58, 12 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info! Are you sure the 'k' should be doubled?  In Gurmukhi and Devanagari it's not double using Adhak or a consonant cluster.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:06, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Template:IndicText
Perhaps u might want to have a look at the articles Upanishad and Bhagavad Gita. I understand yr reasoning behind alligning the template right, but as you can see that reasoning is not applicable in these articles. Thanks --Deepak|वार्ता 16:01, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah I see. Well I don't see a problem in having Template:IndicTextLeft or Template:IndicTextCentre if that would be sufficient?  Or we could try rearranging it so it's above the "Hindu Texts" bit?  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 17:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Template:Hindu scriptures is very narrow and in order to place the Indic Text template above it, we'll have to reduce its width considerably. So I think Template:IndicTextCentre is the most appropriate for the mean time. Cheers --Deepak|वार्ता 21:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Happy Diwali
Thanks! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

India related links
Happy Diwali. Hoping, you will find this useful:

---Pamri &bull; Talk &bull; [ Reply] 06:53, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

A "Spirituality" portal
Hi Sukh,

Some editors have been discussing the possibility of creating a “Spirituality” portal. What do you think of the idea? &mdash; RichardRDFtalk 14:27, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I entered some basics to get the ball rolling. I look forward to your participation in the Spirituality WikiProject and reading your contributions to the Spirituality portal. :-)   &mdash; RichardRDFtalk 00:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how useful I'll be but I'll try and contribute what I can! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:42, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Babbar Khalsa
Hi, just a friendly note to let you know that I've listed some ideas for improving the above article on its talk page. --Gurubrahma 07:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Improvements are definately needed! However, I haven't had time to look at properly yet - I'm very busy!  However, as soon as I get enough time, I'll be sure to go over it in detail.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:42, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Spirituality
Template:Spirituality has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Templates for deletion. Thank you. &mdash; RichardRDFtalk 17:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Template:List of Sikh Gurus
Please refer to the talk page of the List of Sikh Gurus' template so as to solve the age problem. --Adamrush 22:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Nankana Sahib (Guru Nanak's hometown)
Seeing as how you are a bit of an expert on Sikhism, I thought you might be interested in cleaning up a mess I found a few days ago. It's the article on Nankana Sahib. It contains about two or three paragraphs of original information mixed into an enormous piece of copyrighted text which was just pasted into the article. You'd probably be better at fixing this than others. --Adamrush 22:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * "Seeing as how you are a bit of an expert on Sikhism" - lol, no I'm not! :D I'll see what I can do to fix it.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Re:Sikh articles

 * Consider, Mr. Sukh - almost every religion has a series of articles. Sikhism is compressed into one. It will considerably help the quality in the forseeable future if one has the freedom to discuss the adherents differently from the religion. Sikhisim is a major religion that should have a proper network of good articles.

To reply to your points: if the Five Ks and Khalsa are mentions on the Sikhs article, what does the main article lose, since Sikhs is an important branch that millions of Wikipedians can easily check into?

There is a lot of info about culture, history and community of Sikhs that one can research and input into the Sikhs article. Jai Sri Rama! - User:Rama's Arrow.

Re:sikhs
Hello,

We have reduced our disagreement now only to the "Sikhs" re-direction one.

Even if by entering "Sikhs" a user wants info on "Sikhism" and doesn't get the page on religion, it is no harm since "Sikhism" is clearly linked in the opening sentence itself.

I'm sorry but I have to stop my activities on Wikipedia for a while. I encourage you not to re-direct "Sikhs" here becoz of the above argument I've offered. But if you still truly believe in your POV, then obviously I won't take offense.

Jai Sri Rama! User:Rama's Arrow.

Tara Singh
Hi Sukh,

I need your help on the Master Tara Singh article I created. Another person put in a lot of info into it later, but without references and its difficult for me to judge the quality and factuality.

I'd really appreciate it if you could go over it to see if the article is ok in its present state, or if it needs any cleanup.

Jai Sri Rama!

Rama&#39;s Arrow 03:21, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Uhmm, I don't much about Tara Singh so I'll have to recheck it with other sources. Here's some sources:


 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 


 * Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:56, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Although the article may not be particularly factually incorrect, it reads like a glorifying biography. I does need toning down.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:03, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi Sukh - thanks for your help. Your sources helped clear a lot of the main problem of unreferenced material, and I've re-formatted the article and removed repeat and questionable material, although I think we will wait a little bit more before taking down the cleanup notice.


 * Jai Sri Rama!


 * Rama&#39;s Arrow 17:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It certainly looks better, but I haven't got the time to read it all yet. Good work.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:49, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

You Sukh balls
What have you got against Klingons


 * I can't help it - they just look real ugly! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:50, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Sukh in Shahmukhi
I see you have "Sukh" written in various scripts, if you wanted Shahmukhi - سکھ Mustaqbal 11:35, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Cool, thanks! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 11:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Shaikh Siddiqui/Siddiqui
Greetings, I was wondering if you could assist in the NPOVing of Shaikh Siddiqui, please see Talk:Shaikh Siddiqui as well. Mustaqbal 01:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Ack, they were pretty bad weren't they? You seem to have done a decent job highlighting the main problems.  I'll see what I can do (I'm not familiar with Arab/Muslim customs nor the customs of South Asian Muslims, so I'm not sure just how significant 'Siddiqui' is).  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)