This is what my post said I find the first paragraph of the article to be rather strange It gives the controversial definitions one coming from a RSS mouthpiece and another coming from some Greek literature upfront The more commonly used and most logical definition a follower of Hinduism is provided at the end In a neutral disinterested tone article the controversial parts should not be provided so much prominence If anything they should be included in the disputes section no   It is hard to fathom how this gave you the sense that I am trying to make this a battleground between Hindus and Sikhs I did not even mention the word Sikh there  and I have been discussing this subsequently in a healthy manner it is only you who got some war path impression Disappointed