Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of actions by Major Singh Johal


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  14:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

List of actions by Major Singh Johal

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Flowery language used, created for a person with no article, otherwise non-notable. No sourcing I found discussing these military operations. Oaktree b (talk) 14:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 14:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The page has many sources, but I suppose the main problem is that they are all in Punjabi so it would be hard to find information in English. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep As I mentioned it is a notable subject in Punjabi works. It is discussed in english works, but not in a whole lot of detail. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:36, 7 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete The problem is not the language of the sources but that all the sources on which the bulk of the article is based are penny-press martyr literature. By citing their claims in wikipedia voice the article ends up portraying the activities of a member of a designated terrorist organization as "battles" that resulted in "Sikh victories". Unless scholarly sources have covered the subject, Major Singh Johal, in significant detail wikipedia should not have an article on him or his attacks. See my earlier comment on a similar genre of sources being used by the same article creator about a similar terrorist/martyr; if this a a recurrent problem, CTOP sanctions may be needed. Abecedare (talk) 18:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand your point, but I will like to point out Ajit (newspaper) which I used extensively throughout the page isn’t one of those glorifying books. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 19:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare Would using sources favourable of militants in moderate use be fine? Or using it in collaboration with reliable sources. As they are used in Surinder Singh Sodhi. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 21:50, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * My concern is not just bias but the quality of sources. The heydays of the Khalistan movement in the 80's is a well studied topic with literally 100s (possibly 1000s) of scholarly/journalistic books and peer-reviewed articles. So if content in a related topic cannot be sourced to comparable secondary sources, wikipedia should not have an article on it. What are the three best sources for Major Singh Johal? Note that, if a source is not stocked by quite a few libraries (check worldcat.org), or indexed by jstor.org or similar repository, it is unlikely to be suitable. Abecedare (talk) 00:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry if this is a redundant question, but just so I'm understanding correctly, are the aggregates of reports from newspapers sufficient for Wikipedia's purposes? For example, if a person was reported somewhat periodically in sources like the New York Times or Washington Post, but is absent or only marginally reported in academic books or journals, would that get the green light? CanadianSingh1469 claims Major Singh Johal was covered extensively by the Ajit newspaper. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 00:20, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * "ਖਾਲਿਸਤਾਨ ਲਿਬਰੇਸ਼ਨ ਫੋਰਸ ਦੇ ਖਾੜਕੂ ਮੇਜਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੌਹਲ ਪਾਲਾ ਨੇ ਸਾਇਨਾਈਡ ਨਾਲ ਆਪਣੇ ਆਪ ਨੂੰ ਮਾਰਿਆ" [Khalistan Liberation Force militant Major Singh Johal Pala killed himself with cyanide.]. Ajit (in Punjabi). May 15, 1991. pp. 3–4. Somewhat obvious why it is reliable. From a known and trusted news network.
 * History of Shaheed Bhai Major Singh Johal Alias Pala, Khalistan Liberation Force. Writer - Ranjit Singh Student Damdami Taksal, Sikh Youth Federation Bhindranwala Extracts from Fatehnama publication. Publsiher Fatehnama. A well known publisher that has published works by Dr. Sukhpreet Singh Udoke. The author is also a head of a Sikh political body associated with Damdami Taksal.
 * ਅਮਰ ਸ਼ਹੀਦ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਜੰਟ ਸਿੰਘ ਬੁੱਧਸਿੰਘਵਾਲਾ Published by Damdami Taksal. A well known Sikh institution.
 * CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 00:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * None of these sources are close to acceptable for this topic. See my talkpage comment about newspaper reports for a topic such as this one. And I have already explained why generic martyr literature like the other two "sources" you list is not usable. Abecedare (talk) 00:47, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Abecedare Using Ajt should I add the contents of this page to the actives section of Khalistan Liberation Force? (Note I added some previously) CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 05:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Lets discuss that at Talk:Khalistan Liberation Force. By the way, per this source you cited, the list of "actions" are claims taken from a secret personal diary kept by Major Singh Johal, and not verified attacks or killings. Abecedare (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That seems contradictory to all other sources. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 11:52, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Calling a secret personal diary the source isn’t fully true. If you read the full thing it doesn’t say that is the only source. It talks about getting the information from his family and that Johal has listed all of it in his own writing as well. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 11:59, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't ask for popular publishers, it sets it gold standard on academic publishers which implement and utilize peer review from experts and specialists in their respective fields. Fatehnama may be a popular publisher which majority of the Punjabi population may be well acquainted with, but it is not an academic publisher. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 00:32, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It has published academic works such as those by Dr. Sukhpreet Singh Udoke and others. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 00:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Abecedare put it quite well — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 19:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Unreliable and unotable sources make up the bulk of the article's references. The article's creation in the first place is simply part of an unfortunate trend we're seeing on Wikipedia to valourize a particular religious group to the maximum extent possible, with facts and neutrality being relegated to the periphery. Fabricating numbers on the opposite belligerent side to present in the most negative light possible is a common occurence. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:15, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I fail to see how this is occurring. The creator of the article has used many sources for his statistics, they do not seem to be fabricated. I do not believe that "facts and neutrality are being relegated to the periphery" Usingh0663 (talk) 22:08, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The most egregious violations in this article which I did not mention, but Abecedcare did, is that it's simply a compilation of the terror attacks perpetrated by the subject; if the attacks resulted in death and destruction and the unscathed evasion of the perpetrators and their accessories, it is termed as a "Sikh victory". This is simply preposterous. Even the supposed murder of 2 Shiv Sena workers on grounds of blasphemy is termed as a Sikh victory. These incidents are terrorist attacks and illegal activities, not battles or anything akin, so at the very least the table format is inappropriate which serves only to valourise a religious group and present them as having inflicted numerous defeats on a nation they've been at odds with.Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 22:53, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I am open to entirely changing the formatting and language. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 22:56, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That's good to hear and will definitely ameliorate some of the issues in the article. Abecedcare and DaxServer can hopefully shed more light on whether the subject meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 23:00, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It is covered in Punjabi newspapers of the time. Johal is not mentioned in English works. Some of the things he did do bare a passing mention. @Abecedare @DaxServer CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You still firm on delete or has your opinion changed? CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 23:23, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * According to Abecedare, the sources in this article are not reliable and he strongly suggests the subject fails to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. My stance as of now is contingent upon Abecedare's reply and possible recommendations. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 23:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I mean Ajit which is used frequently is definitely reliable. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 23:35, 7 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep I can amend the language to present a more objective article, for example, by replacing "Sikh Victory" with "Militant Victory" among other changes Usingh0663 (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete unnecessary fork more than adequately covered on Khalistan Liberation Force if any of these purported actions can be reliably sourced. Mztourist (talk) 06:21, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per Abecedare.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:45, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Same as above.150.129.164.94 (talk) 14:17, 9 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.