Talk:Khalistan movement/Archive 3

message: I am deleting this section in its entirety since the References section is more comprehensive.  If anyone disagrees, please revert the change I am about to make. Zafarnamah 09:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further Reading Section 

message: I think the introduction is too long and the direct quotes are inappropriate.  I feel a general introduction, outlining what Khalistan is and why the movement was formed is all that's needed here.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 17:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the propoganda that has dominated the issue of Khalistan in the Indian press, is the only reason to provide direct quotes.  But let me try to rewrite the introduction and shorten it. Zafarnamah 06:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: The Council of Khalsitan has said that it is willing to negotiate teh boundaries of an independent Khalistan, so long as that is the only subject of the negotiation.  it says the demand for independence is non-negotiable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.225.126.64 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: The article is at a stage where we can remove the NPOV tag.  If anyone sees an opinion that requires removal or revision, please feel free to make that change or make a request and I will make the change. Zafarnamah 15:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Tag 

message: I've reverted one of Volatileacid's changes because it completely removed the bit about the language controversy.  Several sources back this up, especially .
I've left the other edits because I am a bit anxious to see how Pettigrew came to the conclusion that "...timed for an important anniversary in the Sikh calendar, sought to maximize Sikh casualties."  I haven't got the book in question, so if anyone could clarify what she wrote about this and what evidence she has for saying such things, then it is appreciated.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the controversial phrase "to maximize Sikh casualties" and I have reinserted what is almost a direct quote from Pettirgrew, shortening it a bit.  It's an indisputable fact, however, that the attack was planned and rehearsed beforehand.  Ram Narayan Kumar also has shown that the date picked by the army was deliberate (see his Reduced to Ashes for useful references). There is no other explanation except the army’s objective to maximize the number of Sikhs killed.  Ahmed Shah Abdali had also attacked the Harmandar on an important day in the Sikh calendar for similar reasons. Zafarnamah 01:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly understand that the attack was planned and rehearsed beforehand, but it is something different to say that one of the objectives was to maximise the number of Sikh casualites.  The date of the attack and its significance in the Sikh calendar could be put down to coincidence.  I'm not arguing either way, it's just a comment that people will have issues with. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 01:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Volatileacid|Volatileacid's]] edits 

message: Finally managed to look at the entire article and I've tried to clean it up where I can.  Some outstanding points (commented in the article itself):
* Khalistan is envisaged by its proponents as a secular state, rejecting theocracy and espousing a liberal form of nationalism in which all communities may live as equals."  I don't have an issue with this statement itself, but I'm not sure what "a liberal form of nationalism" is?
* "The Indian state and the Indian media misrepresented the Anandpur Sahib Resolution as a secessionist document in an attempt to malign the Sikhs." - Needs citation.
* Maybe this is a bit of a pedantic point, but even though the consitution classifies Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains all under the banner of Hinduism, it doesn't specifically prohibit some from "manifest[ing] his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." and therefore the UDHR isn't really broken. 
* Operation Woodrose: Eliminate may be too strong a word. "Their identity and whereabouts must always be disclosed" does not indicate elimination. 
* "All initiated Sikhs were “terrorists” in the eyes of the Indian state and were to be killed extra-judicially."  - This is by no means a fact and needs an appropriate citation.
I'll try and solicit other Wikipedia editors to give this article the once-over. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 01:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I think this needs more information about Khalistan nowadays and not just the past.  Needs to talk about support from outside India and the fact that it is (now at least) a bit of a dead duck in India. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well this article almost makes it seem like Khalistan is a active movement in India. Frankly it has more support from Southall rather than Indian Punjab. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.1.71.89 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

text: It's hard to answer this question without empirical data.  The Indian state has not allowed a referandum to be conducted on this issue.  The end of the article does provide information on the recent activity that is related to this issue and all of the new activity seems to be coming from Punjab rather than South Hall. Zafarnamah 05:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current State of Khalistan 

message: Here are the issues I have with recent changes by this IP:
* (lit. "pure-land") -> (lit. "land of the Khalsa (the Sikh Nation)")
:The literal name of Khalistan is 'pure-land' and can be taken to mean 'Khalsa-land', but Khalsa means pure anyway.
* and coincided with an important anniversary in the Sikh calendar -> was planned to coincide with an important anniversary in the Sikh calendar when thousands of pilgrims were present.
:Can someone please write exactly what Joyce Pettigrew said about this and how it was substantiated?  I'm a bit cynical about this point (i.e. it was planned well in advance for this particular day); surely the Indian government couldn't have been *that* stupid?
* by a memo from Home Ministr Patel shortly after India achieved independence. 
:Patel is already mentioned in the quote
* "Many Sikhs today criticise this move because they think that it gave the state an excuse to attack the temple."
:No reason to remove this statement.
* "Unfortunately, Sikh leaders like Dr. Jagjit Singh Chohan, Harchand Singh Longowal, Didar Bains, Ganga Singh Dhillon, much of the Akali Dal leadership, and others were complicit in the attack on the Golden Temple. The evidence against them is clear in their letters published in Chakravyuh: Web of Indian"
:Very POV - the first word is all that needed to be read.
*"Youn gSikh boys, ages 8 to 13, were taken out ini the courtyard of the Golden Temple complex and asekd if they supported Khalistan,. When they answered with the Sikh religious incantation "Bole So Nihal" they were shot to death. The Guru Granth Sahib, the Sikh holy scriptures, handwritten in the time of the ten Sikh Gurus, was hot full of bullet holes by the invading Indian forces."
:Please cite this directly
* Removal of comment: "NOTE Eliminate may be too strong a word. "Their identity and whereabouts must always be disclosed" does not indicate elimination."
:Absolutely no reason to remove this comment
* Meanwhile, Sikh police officers were locked in their barracks.
:Citation please
* Many organizations have said that the massacres were pre-planned by the Indian regime.
:Adds nothing to the article.  Please state the organisations in question.
* That saem year, the Indian newspaper Hitavada reported that the Indian government paid about $1.5 billion to the late governor of Punjab, Surendra Nath, to foment and support terrorist activity in Punjab and in Kashmir.
:From .  1.5 billion sounds a bit much don't you think?  
As a general note, some of the text seems to have been lifted word-by-word from other sources.  Please don't do that otherwise it's only going to have to be deleted, even if true! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes by 66.225.126.64  

message: SAD-Amritsar is a major political party with grass-roots membership in Punjab.  Here is a recent resolution by the party.  It shows how disconnected most scholars are from the grass-roots politcs in Punjab. 66.30.106.157 15:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the full press release from this talk page.  If you wish to view the release, it is available here: . Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, see related item ("Move for Sikh state") in the March 20 edition of the Calcutta-based Telegraph here: .  Zafarnamah 00:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Activity on Khalistan by Organizations in Punjab

message: This article is pretty much unreadable. No maps, no pictures. Horribly POV. Completely off topic in places. This is pretty much everything Wiki should not be. 70.230.68.66 20:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Obtaining maps and pictures is difficult because there are very few maps or even agreed boundaries to "Khalistan".  In regards to POV, please feel free to change anything you have issue with.  Just ensure any significant changes are cited.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article