Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sikhism

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Religion
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sikhism. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sikhism|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sikhism. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Sikhism

[edit]

Pathankot Campaign

[edit]
Pathankot Campaign (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article describes a 1775 clash between Sikh Misls but fails to show its a distinct, notable event beyond skirmishes already covered in articles like Kanhaiya Misl, Bhangi Misl, or Sikh Confederacy. "Pathankot Campaign" isn’t a recognized term in historical scholarship, also WP:RS don’t treat it as a standalone event separate from typical inter-Misl strife. It leans on a narrow set of sources, like Gandhi (1999) and Gupta (1939), lack the mainstream weight or specificity to confirm details. NXcrypto Message 10:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War

[edit]
Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no conflict such as the "Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War", sources do not support it and provide no significant coverage to a conflict under this name. This article is a part of a series of fringe pseudohistorical articles created for ethno-religious POV pushing. Srijanx22 (talk) 05:06, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete sources exist that proves the content is genuine. But the article title is indeed pseudohistory. The available content could be merged into any of the parent articles. Academic sources lacks covering this as an individual war.Borax || (talk to Borax) 14:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. AlvaKedak (talk) 10:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The coverage in the sources is not enough and none of the sources support this neologism made up by the author "Ahluwalia - Ramgarhia war" , in fact sources do not even support that this was a war, sources at best refer to it as skirmishes and do not provide significant coverage to them. Anyway given the author's history of making copyvio, I doubt this article is free of it. The relevant details (not closely paraphrased) can be covered at the articles of relevant personalities. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:32, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maha Singh's Invasions of Jammu

[edit]
Maha Singh's Invasions of Jammu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article fails WP:GNG & there is no WP:SIGCOV in sources for these minor plundering raids/conflicts. This article also treats these two sackings as one conflict which is pseudohistorical and not backed by sources. Srijanx22 (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination still stands, the sources call it a sacking not an invasion, evidently both are discussed separately and not portrayed as part of the same conflict like you are doing. Even then the coverage is not significant with only a single page worth of mention in the first one and second one provides coverage only to the second sacking and that is already covered at Maha Singh and Haqiqat Singh Kanhaiya's articles, there is no need for this article. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 14:29, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your deducing method is literally taking us to nothing, that's not how it's done. Regardless of article title the article stands out on the base of coverage. (p. 309): "Mahan Singh's first sack of Jammu" and [https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfTheSikhsVol.IvTheSikhCommonwealthOrRiseAndFallOfSikh/page/n349/mode/2up (p. 339): "Second pillage of Jammu by Mahan Singh". When the historian has already affixed the chronology, you are proposing to split the article based on your own spurious assertion. If only a talk page discussion was sufficient for the article title. Heraklios 16:18, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do not misrepresent me, I never proposed splitting this article. These two were  minor conflicts that you have combined together in this article, this topic is already covered at the Maha Singh. Absolutely no need for a separate article only for POV pushing. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:35, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - TNT case, all of the content is closely paraphrased and contains copyright issues. The effort to fix it is not worth it. Note that most of these are consecutive sentences in source and article.
Analysis
Source309-313 Article
In the first expedition the people of Jammu alone had been sacked. The Raja’s palaces and treasury had remained untouched, for the simple reason that the loot acquired from them was enormous. Now was the turn of the Kaja to be fleeced. Only the inhabitants of Jammu had been sacked during the first invasion. Because of the size of the plunder taken from them, the Raja's palaces and treasury had not been damaged
Brij Raj Dev returned with his treasure from Vaishno Devi to Jammu shortly after Mahan Singh’s retirement. The people also settled down in their peaceful avocations in due course of time. Two years had elapsed. Mahan Singh all of a sudden led a second expedition to Jammu at the head of 5,000 men. The government and the people were taken unawares. The remaining riches of the people, the Raja’s entire treasury and armoury were all looted. Soon after Mahan Singh retired, Brij Raj Dev returned to Jammu with his treasure from Vaishno Devi. In due time, the villagers also made their homes in their quiet activities. It had been two years. Suddenly, Mahan Singh was in charge of 5,000 troops on a second invasion of Jammu. Both the people and the administration were caught off guard. The Raja's entire treasury, armoury, and remaining wealth were all plundered.
Huge quantities of gold, silver, ornaments, diamonds, pearls and jewellery ali worth a crore of rupees fell into Mahan Singh’s hands. Immense arms and ammunition were taken possession of. The neighbouring chiefs were frightened. They paid tribute to Mahan Singh, and saved their territories from his depredations. Maha Singh came into possession of enormous amounts of gold, silver, jewelry, gems, pearls, and decorations valued at a crore of rupees. Massive quantities of ammo and weapons were seized. The chiefs who lived nearby were terrified. They paid tribute to Mahan Singh and protected their lands from his ravages
Not a single house or place escaped. Women were stripped of all their ornaments and costly clothes. Floors were dug in search of buried wealth. Plunder lasted for three days and nights. Loaded with enormous booty worth more than a crore Mahan Singh returned to Gujranwala. No house was left intact, for women were stripped of their jewelry and ornaments, floors were dug up in pursuit of hidden riches, and the city's treasures were plundered. The value of the loot amounted to more than one crore rupees
Mahan Singh assured them that he had not come to plunder, but to establish his authority. In the night he surrounded the town and closed all exits Having promised them that he had come to take over and not to plunder. But at night, he commanded his soldiers to encircle the city and seal all the gates.

Koshuri (グ) 04:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Regardless of the name of the article, it has enough coverage.The arguments provided in favour of deletion are poor, the article does not make much use of close paraphrasing, not that it would have been a problem as WP:TNT is used when the article contains significant amounts of copyright violations which according to Earwig is unlikely (see [9] ) AlvaKedak (talk) 12:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    A total non-argument this is. The issue is of close paraphrasing, which is something that the earwig cannot catch. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Then you might be interested in WP:CCI, for now the article must to be kept. We are not deleting articles for dubious close paraphrasing issues. You can start a Copyright investigation for that. AlvaKedak (talk) 17:54, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Best Regards (CP) 21:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep: the two book sources seem ok, not extensive coverage of these events, but I wouldn't expect there to be much. Needs a rewrite and some of the close paraphrasing is worrysome, but that's not a reason to delete this. Oaktree b (talk) 15:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh–Wahhabi War

[edit]
Sikh–Wahhabi War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a pseudo-historical fringe article, there is no conflict such as the Sikh–Wahhabi War. This article is misrepresenting and confusing the Barelvi movement for Wahhabism and is compiling disparate conflicts between ethnic groups as a singular religious conflict. No scholars support this narrative. Srijanx22 (talk) 16:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Islam, Sikhism, and Pakistan. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Undoubtedly pseudohistorical concept with no significant coverage. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 02:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Totally out of a revenge nomination for filing this SPI, pfft. I'm afraid I can't win against their canvassing but I'd try my best to give a comment which makes good faith editors turn into the side of keep.
    • Oh for God's sake there's a whole chapter which is 9 pages dedicated to this conflict:
      • www.DiscoverSikhism.com. History Of The Sikhs Vol. V The Sikh Lion of Lahore (Maharaja Ranjit Singh, 1799-1839). pp. 159–167.
    • Not enough? Here's 22 pages of coverage:
    • Darn it, here's a whole book based on it (crux: pp. 58-131):

Please see more sources in Sikh–Wahhabi War#References which have coverage ranging from pp 2-5, I'm sorry if I'm being a bit too informal, but I'm frustrated because I can't bypass the "Delete" votes by the SPI gang and it looks like they will succeed in taking down a massive notable article. Heraklios 16:33, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you prove how these sources are academic? You are simply falsifying them. Had such a war happened, you could find better sources. Nevertheless, you are falsifying your sources. None of your non academic sources prove how this pseudohistorical concept you came up with is true, including the title itself which is ridiculously incorrect, Wahhabism had no presence in India at the time, Barelvi movement was not Wahhabism. That itself proves that this notion of "Sikh-Wahhabi war" is something you cooked up.
Instead of mentioning a failed SPI, and playing a victim by making personal attacks, you need to focus only on this AfD. Srijanx22 (talk) 05:38, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trivially: Sage Publishing & JSTOR are reliable publishers. We don't need any introduction for Hari Ram Gupta. "You are simply falsifying them. Had such a war happened, you could find better sources. Nevertheless, you are falsifying your sources. None of your non academic sources": Let me be clear, you're proclaiming that given sources are "non-academic"? at this point please respectfully withdraw your frivolous but more like revenge nomination. We can deal with the article title and content issues on the talk page. Heraklios 16:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
JSTOR is not a publisher. That Sage publication you are citing is not about this war. You are still yet to explain how any of those sources give significant coverage to the subject in question. Srijanx22 (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Not notable and not supported by any of the sources mentioned above, regardless of the bad faith assumed by the article creator, and their clubbing of desperate ethnic conflicts under their own neologism. NXcrypto Message 03:14, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Significant coverage in the sources but I am not satisfied with the title of the page. The title should be either Sikh Barelvi War or Syed Barelvi holy war against Sikhs. Syed was the only one per source who adopted Wahhabi and it was not a whole community of Wahhabi that was part of holy war. Title change and some improvement needs done. RangersRus (talk) 19:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It should be kept (I agree with you), but even Syed being Wahhabi is unclear; according to one of the sources, he was "confirmed" to be Wahhabi, but in a google book, he was only considered to be that by other people... - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 22:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per TNT, I cross checked some of the sentences in the article and it turns out almost all of it is closely paraphrased. These statements follow the same sequence with minor substitution. This is what I found by only checking one source , I wonder how much of it is copyvio if we were to compare all the sources especially given that the author's contribution history is merely closely paraphrasing sources, suffice to say that keeping this article in current form is not a good idea.
Analysis
Source160-63 Article
The Sayyid's forces consisted of Hindustanis, the Kandharis, Yusafzais and Khataks. The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold Ahmad Barelvi, at the head of an allied army of Hindustanis, Kandharis, Yusafzais, and Khattaks, planned a surprise attack against the Sikh troops. The attack, led by Allahbakhsh Khan, was launched in the early hours of 21 December 1826, catching the Sikhs off guard as they slept in the cold.
The first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills The first attack led to considerable losses among the Sikhs. However, Budh Singh quickly rallied his men and launched a counterattack which forced the enemy to retreat. The Ghazis retreated from the field and the hills.
Budh Singh had won his spurs, but did not follow up his victory. About 500 Sikhs were killed in all, while the Sayyid lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna and their commander Allahbakhsh Khan. While the Sikhs held their ground, they had suffered about 500 casualties. The army of the Syed lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna, and their commander, Allahbakhsh Khan.
The Sayyid shifted his headquarters to Sitana at the foot of Mahaban mountains on the western side of the Indus in the heart of Yusafzais. Syed Ahmad Barelvi shifted his base to Sitana, situated at the foot of the Mahaban mountains on the west bank of the Indus River, in the territory of the Yusafzais
Now the Pathans from all around began to flock under the green flag of the Sayyid. In two months their number grew to 50,000. The Barakzai chiefs of Peshawar with an army of 20,000 strong and 8 pieces of cannon joined them. Pashtun tribes from various areas began to gather under the command of Syed Ahmad Barelvi, and in two months, their number reached 100,000 men. The Barakzai chiefs of Peshawar joined the movement, and their army consisted of 20,000 men and 8 guns
a Sikh force under Sardar Budh Singh Sandhanwalia concentrated at the village of Pirpai, 32 km south of Peshawar and 30 km from Akora. The Sikh army, comprising about 10,000 troops and 12 cannon, was reinforced by Raja Gulab Singh, Raja Suchet Singh, and Atariwala Sardars A considerable Sikh force under Budh Singh Sandhanwalia was concentrated at the small village of Pirpai near Saidu situated 32 km south of Peshawar and 30 km from Akora. Budh Singh was joined by Raja Gulab Singh, Raja Suchait Singh and Atariwala sardars. The Sikh army numbered about 10,000 with 12 cannon
The Sikhs lay in their trenches under heavy assaults of the Ghazis for a few days. When their supplies were about to be exhausted, Budh Singh led the attack. The Sikh guns created havoc among the enemy. They took to flight. About 6,000 Mujahidin were killed and wounded. Murray says that the Sikh horsemen gave the fleeing Ghazis a hot pursuit "each Sikh killing fifteen to twenty of the runaways". The Sayyid fled into the Swat hills. Ranjit Singh sent dresses of honour to Budh Singh Sandhanwalia and other commanders. The Sikhs held their ground even though the Ghazis pressed them heavily for a long time. When their supplies began to run low, Budh Singh made a sally. The Sikh artillery inflicted heavy losses on the enemy, forcing them to retreat. It is estimated that nearly 6,000 Mujahideen were killed or wounded in the battle. Historian Murray affirms that the Sikh cavalry followed the fleeing Ghazis, and every horseman is said to have slain fifteen to twenty of the retreating warriors. Syed Ahmad Barelvi himself took shelter in the Swat hills the jihad movement suffered a crushing defeat. In recognition of the Sikh triumph, Maharaja Ranjit Singh sent congratulatory presents to Budh Singh Sandhanwalia and the other leaders
Sayyid Ahmad began to live with Fatah Khan of Panjtar, a fanatic and one of the bitterest enemies of the Sikhs. With his help the Sayyid commenced coercing the neighbouring chiefs to support him fully in the Jihad against the Sikhs. Ahmad Khan of Hoti, for his lukewarm response, was killed in* an action. The Sayyid brought the entire Yusafzai valley under his sway. Mir Babu Khan of Sadhum, a town on the Kalapani river in Peshawar district was subdued. He looked upon Barakzai sardars of Peshawar as his enemies, and incited the Khaibaris to harass them. Syed Ahmad Barelvi took refuge with Fatah Khan of Panjtar, a staunch opponent of Sikh rule. With the support of Fatah Khan Syed Ahmad began consolidating his power in the area by forcing the neighboring tribal chiefs to unconditionally support his jihad against the Sikhs. This campaign included the coercion or subjugation of leaders like Mir Babu Khan of Sadhum and Ahmad Khan of Hoti, the latter being killed for his insufficient commitment. Syed Ahmad's influence was extended over the Yusafzai Valley and tribes such as the Afridis, Mohmands, and Khalils were won over to his cause against the Sikhs.

Koshuri (グ) 14:03, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - per nom. Close paraphrasing together with the baseless notion of "Sikh-Wahhabi war" shows that there is no need for this article. It is misleading to have one. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Seriously, are we really doing this? It is not productive to bludgeon in an AfD , especially because concerns about close paraphrasing should be raised at WP:CCI, not here.

The article must be Speedy Kept as per the arguments and sources provided above. We should not allow a good amount of notable articles to be removed through the deletion process for these reasons.

If this is being driven by personal conflicts , then I urge you not to turn this encyclopaedia into a battleground or create unnecessary backlogs for the sake of “revenge”. AlvaKedak (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Sikhism&oldid=1284740778"