Talk:Hari Singh Nalwa
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hari Singh Nalwa article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_without_national_boundaries.svg)
Comments
There are contradictions within the two references. While one states that Hari Singh was killed "dishonorably" from behind, the other source says that Hari Singh died due to internal wounds from an Afghan cannon ball launched by Dost Mohammad Khan's army. So what are we to believe?
Someone with more expertise than me needs to review the edits by User:24.108.182.49. All the other edits from this user are nonsense or vandal. The text inserted sounds authoritative, but its hard to tell. --Vees 03:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't get this:
Nalwa was dishonourably murdered in an ambush from behind.
and then you say:
He died when 60,000 troops attacked his fort. The sikhs told him that they were about to attack as they thought he had died however he was still alive.
Which was it? And what Sikhs told him that that they were about to attack? Attack who? Whose side were they on? And did you mean Baron Charles Hugel?
Tidy up tag added
We need to work on this article with info for this famous and great general.
No offence, but he was very feared and loved, but none of his exploits are fully mentioned or acknowledged.
We need some more info on his background.
He was a powerful Khatri warlord.
--Mein hoon don 14:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Nalwa article
Okay I also believe he was amazing, but we need to cite some references with the quoted material or else people are going to question its authenticity. Whoever put up that amazing quote from the British newspaper needs to also give the source so that it validates the article more. Without citing references, the article will lack strength.
Also, I am going to contact his descendants (the Nalwa Family) and see if they can furnish any additional info. I should be in Punjab this April-May, so I'll pay them a visit.
Gorkhali (talk) 03:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Vandal deletions of ref by user British Raja
Please do not delete references from this article as you have done twice already for no assignable reason
Please do not delete these references a third time .
Intothefire (talk) 06:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Gurjranwala or Kashmir
I think we need more sources for the Kashmir claim, also this edit is a little messy. Pahari Sahib 15:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
VANDALISM
We have a new vandal, so be prepared and keep a keen watch on Harisinghnalwa a chap who has shown up as of today April 6th and has begun their vandalism.
It boggles my mind why do people do this.
Gorkhali (talk) 05:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
What about today, I mean 28th April 2011 ??? I have constantly been writing about Hari Singh that Yousafzai women would say about him "Raghe Hari Singh Teezan" ("Hari Singh Dangerous is coming")or Raghe Hari Singh Kunee ("Hari Singh The Brave is coming"). But this is being deleted which is pathetic !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.160.59 (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Hari Singh Nalwa' s background
Hari singh Nalwal was into a Khatri family not a Jat family.--122.163.121.99 (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
false pride over nalwa
sikhs try their best to prove that hari singh nalwa was the most gallant general of ranjit singh which he was not the two hindu general of ranjit singh diwan mohkam chand(greatest ranjit singh general ever) and diwan misr chand(commander in chief of sikh empire from 1813-1825) both hindu khatri are always rated higher than your hari singh nalwa sikhs who live in their mythological world and belief that they are the best cant even see that general like hari singh nalwa came after diwan mohkam chand and diwan misr chand both hindu khatri.122.161.78.118 (talk) 18:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
most of them dont even know or most probably sikhs dont want to accept which even maharaja ranjit singh accepts that "HINDU ARE FAR BETTER WARRIORS THAN SIKHS FIRST TWO COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF RANJIT SINGH WERE HINDU DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND AND DIWAN MISR CHAND ONLY ONE SIKH HARI SINGH NALWA WAS C-IN-C OF RANJIT SINGH"122.161.78.118 (talk) 18:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
- Please don't bring religion or ethnicity into wikipedia. My concern is about WP:Verifiable. One more revert and you'll find yourself blocked Thanks SH 18:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
i can show opinion of sikh historians themselves who have mentioned that the only general of maharaja ranjit singh who single-handedly created sikh empire for ranjit singh was diwan mohkam chand and you know what "RELIGION IS IMPORTANT" specially for sikhs who have "KHALISTAN TERRORIST MINDSET" who say "WE SAVE HINDUS" first go and save yourself world knowsn guru gobind singh went to lachman dev a hindu rajput to become the general of his army and he as banda bahadur first established a sikh empire which no other sikh was able to do.122.161.78.118 (talk) 19:00, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
- What on Earth are you talking about? Terrorist Midset? Khalistan? Hari Singh Nalwa has been praised for his military genius by a multitude of historians from varying backgrounds, including Gupta. Maharaja Ranjit Singh had a very enlightened policy towards his subjects and had many general including Mikham Chand . See Ranjit Singh. I don't see anyone exagerating anything. I myself am a Hindu convert to Sikhism, and I see no issues at all. Like I stated, I am just interested in WP:Verifiable. ThanksSH 11:41, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
hari singh nalwa was a coward sikh khalistani who used to work under HINDU COMMANDER IN CHIEF FIRST DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND AND THEN ANOTHER KHATRI HINDU DIWAN MISR CHAND, RANJIT SINGH KNEW THAT HIS EMPIRE IS BUILD BY HINDU GENERALS AND THEREFORE FOR HIS WHOLE LIFE HE USE TO GIVE GRANTS TO HINDU TEMPLES CLEAN THE STEPS OF TEMPLES, SHER-E-PUNJAB GHANTA LELE BHAG YAHAAN SE EVEN SIKH HISTORIANS WRITE THIS "IT WAS THE BRILLIANCE AND STRENGTH OF DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND WHO MADE RANJIT SINGH THE SHER-E-PUNJAB" abe apni aukaat dekh sikh, guru gobind singh toh pair pakadne gaye the "LACHMAN DEV" , why their was not a single brave SIKH who established THE FIRST SIKH KINGDOM.
This is sikh propaganda coward hari singh, he was always below "DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND AND DIWAN MISR CHAND" these two were the greatest generals(commander in chief of ranjit singh) one was from 1803-1814(mohkam chand) and misr chand from 1814-1826 only after both of them die then come this "KHALSA KA SOLDIER" aukaat dikh gayi in short get the hell out of my hindu country your SIKH EMPIRE was made by "HINDU LEGENDARY GENERALS INFACT YOUR SIKH EMPIRE WAS FOUNDED ONLY WHEN MARATHA EMPIRE MADE MOGUL EMPIRE A PUPPET"
Aurangzeb was not even interested in SIKH REVOLTS , AURANGZEB remained his last 25 years in central-south india dealing with HINDU MARATHA EMPIRE which he cannot crush and then MARATHA EMPIRE WAS THE FIRST WHO TAUGHT INDIANS HOW TO WIN. COWARD SIKHS SHOWED THEIR BRAVERY WHEN THEY REFUSE TO FIGHT IN PANIPAT WAR EVEN THOUGH MARATHA EMPIRE INVADED PUNJAB IN 1758 TO SAVE SIKH WOMEN AND MEN WHEN THEY EXTENDED THEIR BOUNDARY UPTO ATTOCK/PESHAWAR and this is what Ranjit singh also knew i am posting few observations go and search GOOGLE BOOKS(if you dont have real books) who was
1-DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND(HINDU KHATRI FROM PUNJAB) 2-DIWAN MISR CHAND(HINDU KHATRI OF PUNJAB)
it was the greatness of these two because of which RANJIT SINGH destroyed DURRANI EMPIRE, nalwa worked below hindu generals for most of his life untill both of them died.122.161.78.118 (talk) 12:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Dont try to portray SIKHS are GREATEST because i know history and i am amazed that HINDU DONT KNOW THAT SIKH EMPIRE WAS NOTHING BUT THE EMPIRE WHICH WAS MADE BY HINDU GENERALS NOT SIKHS OR MUSLIMS BOTH OF THEM ARE COWARDS AND NUMBER 1 IN SPREADING RUMORS AND LIVING IN WORLD OF REJECTION.
You raise the banner of KHALISTAN and see how HINDU will crush SIKHS again and again, this is a clear warning the religion which has to depend upon HINDU to first found the empire(lachman dev alias banda bahadur) and then on two great hindu generals to expand their empire, this is all SIKH PROPAGANDA , no historian who is unbiased will rank HARI SINGH ABOVE DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND AND DIWAN MISR CHAND these two are legends they were commander in chief of sikh empire when they captured 80% of their so called "SIKH EMPIRE" Kashmir expedition was under DIWAN MISR CHAND anyone can search , hari singh was not even his deputy at that time in 1819 when this general ended the 500 year muslim rule, ranjit singh never went personally on Kashmir campaign .
IT WAS HINDU AND MORE HINDU GENERALS AND SOLDIERS ON WHICH RANJIT SINGH CLAIMED TO BE THE LION OF PUNJAB.122.161.78.118 (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
It says that he led sikh armies into Kashmir, you all sikhs are very much like muslims try to propagate false history and think that lying for 100 times will make it right for example kashmir expedition was under hindu general diwan misr chand and here are the sources ---
Here is what great Hindu basher and pro-muslim and sikh historian cum writer Khushwant Singh writes-----http://books.google.co.in/books?id=L5-oshsQ2cUC&pg=PA37&dq=koh-i-noor+kashmir+ranjit+singh&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7EghT6iMIIvMrQfk7NivCA&ved=0CF8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=koh-i-noor%20kashmir%20ranjit%20singh&f=false
As you can see he wrote- the generals who led his armies in this campaign were all punjabis(he has written this intentionally to take credit away from punjabi hindu mohkam and misr chan); Mohkam Chand, diwan misr chand,fateh singh ahluwalia, hari singh nalwa and akali phoola singh what happened this represents the preference both hindu generals and then 3 sikh generals and ranjit singh trusted hindu more than khlasa or misl sikh generals.122.161.78.118 (talk) 12:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Diwan Misr Chand given the title of "FATEH-I-NUSRAT" by Maharaja Ranjit Singh when he put the SAFFRON flag on the top of Srinagar Fort. In short if you all khalistan minded sikhs though that why Ranjit Singh was so much inclined towards Hindus it because he knew his Empire belongs to HINDU(even though his empire has only 10% hindu, 80% muslims and 10% sikhs).122.161.78.118 (talk) 12:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
many sikhs belong to this sect of sikhism , his name is vanit singh nalwa a completely anti-hindu---http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ULhgNexD92QC&pg=PA228&dq=hair+singh+nalwa&hl=en&sa=X&ei=T30hT8ANiuesB6GunMUI&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=hair%20singh%20nalwa&f=false
read this book and you will think as if only one general of India was great all others are useless, look i appreciate sikhs their courage , resistance but their is a thin line between appreciation and exaggeration all the other neutral historians give completely different picture most historians regard both the diwan misr chand and mohkam chand as better general than hari singh nalwa but his "PERSONAL RELIGION AND SUBCASTE" made him blind , most of sikh empire was captured by these two punjabi khatri(hindu) and not sikhs but sikhs try to take the "BENEFIT BY USING PUNJABI AS A TERM" this hides the religion of the generals.
In short plz keep appreciation away from history by writing "hari singh led armies into kashmir" you are taking away credit of hindu general who was then commander in chief of sikh armies diwan misr chand. Maharaja ranit singh son kharak singh was also their as titular head the real command was in diwan's hand. Give Hari Singh Nalwa the pride of his share of achievements and dont snatch the glory of other generals just because they are "HINDU".122.161.78.118 (talk) 16:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Website sourcing
Can someone please explain to me why http://www.harisinghnalwa.com satisfies WP:RS. - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- It seems to have some good books cited in their, but I'll leave it to you. SH 23:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- We could always use those books directly, rather than relying on the website as a tertiary source. The main problem is that it is effectively an advocacy group, established to preserve/promote his memory - such things are usually only reliable as sources about themselves, as has been pointed out time and again at the reliable sources noticeboard. - Sitush (talk) 00:54, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- It seems to have some good books cited in their, but I'll leave it to you. SH 23:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
plz see again the line that hari singh nalwa led the armies in kashmir, and secured koh-i-noor it was misr chand a hindu khatri not a sikh have a look at sources ---
plz search for once "misr diwan chand kashmir 1819" on google or google books you will yourself found all the references, this is plain propaganda by sikhs and its disgusting. let us show when hari singh was the chief of this operation.122.161.78.118 (talk) 20:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- That does not answer the question that I posed. It is possible for there to be two reliable but differing opinions, for example. I have previously explained this to you. - Sitush (talk) 20:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
i am not doubting two origins or stories if i am not wrong i have clearly mentioned on list of rajputs about shivaji multiple origin theory that is about his caste but in this case their is no doubt and i am sure that apart from that one book, hari singh nalwa the champion of khalsaji which is a mere exaggeration of facts in favor of the writer ancestor no good historian(including sikhs) will ever write that hari singh was the leading chief in kashmir campaign.122.161.36.54 (talk) 07:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- I am going to remove the citations that use this source. As noted above, if there is any useful info there then it should be possible to obtain it from other sources. - Sitush (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Tit-Bits
Tit-Bits is a penny rag and should not be used in this article. Since when do we use purveyors of Victorian pot-boilers, jokes and science fiction short stories etc as reliable sources for statements of Indian history? I think that some people need to revisit WP:RS. Please remove it once more. - Sitush (talk) 21:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
you can simply search the google books column it is clear it was diwan mohkam chand a hindu khatri who brought shah shuja safely from kashmir and in return his Begum handed over the "KOH-I-NOOR" diamond to Ranjit Singh, i strongly feel that wikipedia has become a site for spreading propaganda because of the wide spread fame of koh-i-noor sikhs are claiming that hari singh secured shah-shuja it was mohkam chand who secured both shah shuja and koh-i-noor diamond . Infact the previous emperor of afghanistan zaman shah who was ousted by his own brother who throw him out of kabul was given refuge by ranjit singh only when diwan mohkam chand asked his master to do so. Just writing that "citations needed" only allow this "NON-HISTORICAL" fact to spread more untill someone remove it.122.161.36.54 (talk) 07:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Will you please stop hijacking every query that I post here with the same response. People have been blocked from editing in the past for doing such a thing. - Sitush (talk) 07:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- I apologise. You may not in fact be the same person who has been doing this recently, although I am fairly sure that you are. - Sitush (talk) 07:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
this shows how backward you are, its the same IP address once you switch off your modem and starts it again in 2 hours their is little change in your IP everytime , second thing it is related to your query , we cant just let "CITATION NEEDED" tag remain their the long it lives their it will only spread this "UNHISTORICAL FACT" when their is all the evidence of the world that it was mohkam chand a hindu khatri who led the armies into kashmir that free shah shuja the afghan ruler and in return his wife wafa begum handed the koh-i-noor to maharaja ranjit singh.
You dont know these sikhs, they have not read their history because if they do then they will know that 80-90% of sikh empire was captured by HINDU GENERALS(first two commander in chief were both hindus) and they live in their mythological world very similar to muslims that Mogul empire was defeated by Nadir shah not by Maratha empire, Maratha empire raided Mogul empire 2 years before nadir shah defeated them in delhi further its evident that he dont proceed at all into the Maratha empire, he returned from Delhi itself maybe aware that if he was standing at DELHI it was more because of MARATHA EMPIRE rather than of his own abilities the Mogul empire by then have lost central india, west india, south india and Marathas were in fast forward mode raided delhi for the first time in 1737, similarly these sikhs try to show that Sikhs were bravest generals which they were not, hari singh name comes after diwan mohkam chand and diwan missr chand.122.161.36.54 (talk) 10:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Please do not lecture me about the nature of dynamic IPs. The chances are reasonably high that I know far more about them than you. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. But no more: you are still failing to understand any of the policies and guidelines that have been mentioned to you. I am going to seek out an administrator. - Sitush (talk) 10:58, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
The russian writer Isaac which our sikh friend is quoting as a legendary historian has no base of any history scholar leave about him being an expert on indian history. He was fiction story writer not a historian and its surprising Sitush that you have allowed all these texts to remain with just a citation tag, the longer these type of contents remain on wikipedia the more it will be spread and it is a fact that it is not true. The fact 2 days are more than enough to give reliable sources that Hari Singh led the armies and not Diwan Mohkam Chand. Their are thousands of magzines and columnists are those reliable sources related to Historical facts for me they are not. Can we accept the versions of simple columnists who work for some paper or magzine. Note that a historian writing some piece of article in any paper is different but any person who has no link with history his remarks or opinions cannot be entertained as historically valid. 122.161.36.54 (talk) 13:46, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
no matter how many times you ban me, it only represents the double standards , here you are not making edits leaving article with citation needed tag and on other hand you clean up the whole article. No matter how badly you tried to ban me it will not work mr sitush no matter how hard your ADMINISTRATOR or this site tries because their are many available means . And you dont try to teach me more about INDIAN HISTORY i know low class human beings like you who have "HALF KNOWLEDGE" of everything and used to think themselves as "PROFESSOR". Why dont you become a sweeper and clean the gutter instead, Oh sorry you may clean only half-gutter in that job as well. 122.161.36.54 (talk) 13:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Geez, do you think that I am stupid or what? Of course I know who Asimov was. I have explained all this before, eg: with reference to edit warring & WP:AGF. I was giving SH time to respond, as a gesture of good faith. Citation requests are valid. You are persisting in doing things in the wrong manner and, believe it or not, there are ways to limit your disruptive behaviour no matter how many times you change your IP. A little less aggression on your part would work wonders, I think. - Sitush (talk) 15:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Duggal source
Why is Duggal - Duggal, Kartar Singh (2001). Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the last to lay arms. Abhinav Publications. ISBN 9788170174103. - a reliable source? His book contains no footnotes, no indication of his authority and a very worrying preface where someone says that Duggal has fixed some common misunderstandings relating to Singh. Nothing wrong with him offering his opinions etc, of course, but without any indication of his authority it causes me to query whether we should use him at all - we do not know whether he is a fringe theorist or mainstream, for example. - Sitush (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- KS Duggal is an OK source as far as I can see. He's been cited in other articles to do with Sikh figures. SH 23:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- You mean that he has been used in other Wikipedia articles or that he has been cited by other historians? Who is he? - Sitush (talk) 00:51, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
man i have add JD CUNNINGHAM source as well you have deleted it, second thing their are snippet views as all books are not available and further for reference best of sikh historians hari ram gupta, khushwant singh,harbans singh all say the same thing but their books are not available completely only snippet views are .
refer to this work, its by jd cunningham but you termed it "NOT RELIABLE" as far as i know jd cunnigham is quite a reliable scholar .
all the noted sikh historians it was diwan mohkam chand who brought shah shuja alive and as promised his wife wafa begum gave koh-i-noor but the fact is these are snippet views. i think this is more than convincing evidence .122.161.36.54 (talk) 21:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
their are more than enough evidence, i maybe little bit aggresive or i react quickly but i am not adding anything wrong, syed muhammad latif is noted historian from punjab , khushwant singh himself a noted scholar, sir lipen henry griffin all are quite standard historians of sikh empire and its clear that diwan mohkam chand the C-IN-C of sikh empire brought shah shuja, yes hari singh accompanied him.122.161.36.54 (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Cunningham and Griffin are too old, and they were British Raj writers who had peculiar and discredited outlooks. They should not be used except very occasionally in extremis. This is not such a situation. - Sitush (talk) 00:50, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
and what about hari ram gupta, harbans singh, khushwant singh ,fauja singh,syed muhamad latif.122.161.36.54 (talk) 01:04, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- You did not cite them, and so I did not remove them. Are you saying that you have listed them in among all of your comments above? You see, I could not even be bothered reading every one of those because of the ranting that was going on. I'll happily do so if you point them out to me, but that was a classic case of you generating "more heat than light". - Sitush (talk) 01:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
i said it that , i have only snippets of those, full view not available. "Empty containers like you make more noise"122.161.36.54 (talk) 02:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- Well, if you have only seen snippet view then that is not acceptable here. Ever. - Sitush (talk) 02:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
i know you are angry, because i have fucked you so many times, everytime you tried to show yourself as "COOL" , i again and again showed that you are a dumb fool. Dont take all this on heart , i know you are furious.122.161.36.54 (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I Have an extensive....
Library on the Nalwa Sardar. I will start going through it and posting them for you to sift through Sitush. Thanks SH 23:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to say but i have read most gud books on sikh empire by noted historians such as hari ram gupta, fauja singh,harbans singh,khushwant singh and i dont think you will provide any new info. 122.161.36.54 (talk) 01:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- Let's see what turns up. Best to be open-minded. - Sitush (talk) 01:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- Hari Ram Gupta is an excellent scholar. SH 08:22, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
not only hari ram gupta, but others such as fauja singh, harbans singh bhatia, khushwant singh, and ganda singh all of them are top historians of sikhs and second thing i have read 4 of them hari ram gupta, harbans singh, khushwant singh and fauja singh. among european scholars on sikh JD cunningham(though he is partial at times) and lepel griffin books are good on sikhs history. 122.161.127.181 (talk) 08:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- Cunningham and Griffin are serious last resorts - too old. - Sitush (talk) 08:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ok I have been looking at this book Hari Singh Nalwa Champion of the Khalsaji by Vinit Nalwa, which seems to be the most comprehensive research. It states that Diwan Mokham Chand lef the attackmon the Attock. As for the Kohinoor, there is mention of Ranjit Singh but not Harin Singh or Diwan Mokham Chand. It should be noted that the above mentioned HariSinghNalwa website is also linked to this book. The book is very well researched. What it does say id Hari Singh was sucessful in pushing the Afghans from this side of the Khyber pass and conquered Peshawar (the second Afghan capital). It also notes that Afghan women still put their children to sleep by saying "be quiet or Haria (Hari Singh Nalwa) will come".SH 11:58, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ignoring the stuff below (I cannot even be bothered reading it properly due to the ranting), that book seems dodgy to me. Look at the publisher's name. - Sitush (talk) 11:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
- Manohar Publisher are good as far as I know. I have used several of their books in my own work as references. The Hari Singh Nalwa foundation is a legitimate organisation. On top of that I spent a few hours going through the book. It is well researched with some excellent illustrations maps. It's up to you Sitush, but I went through several other books and found this to be one of the best. Best Wishes SH 18:30, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
- I've also looked into Vanit Nalwa. She seems ok to me. Thanks SH 18:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
dont even say this to anyone the book which you are referring to is nothing more than a "CRAP" , find me citations to that book, that book is only to promote the "KHALISTAN" concept , the author in that book tried her best to show that "HARI SINGH NALWA" is the greatest which he is NOT, any good historian will rate "DIWAN MOHKAM CHAND AND DIWAN MISR CHAND" both hindu khatri above HARI SINGH NALWA. That work is one of the most unreliable works , many of the "CLAIMED" facts are not even backed by any evidence. This also shows that what i was saying was true , the fact i am neither a sikh nor a hindu punjabi but i am more than aware of Sikhs and their history and i am shocked at times that Hindu Punjabi dont claim any credit for sikh empire even though their are two hindu punjabi generals who were greatest general of maharaja ranjit singh , it was only in the last years when a sikh hari singh became the commander in chief of sikh armies otherwise it was hindu generals as well as army from punjab,jammu.122.161.150.213 (talk) 05:27, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
This is all useless, she is not even a scholar, and i couldnt find any reference of her or her work by other scholars. Here i am taking the names of scholar such as hari ram gupta, harbans singh,khushwant singh and you are referring to vanit nalwa , that work is probably the most unreliable work , an over-exaggeration of hari singh nalwa. For her all HINDUS are evil and only hari singh nalwa was a great general .The reality Hari Singh was no match for Diwan Mohkam Chand or Diwan Misr Chand. Hari singh became chief of sikh armies in 1825 by then these two HINDU GENERALS have made durrani empire and afghans a mere "PUNCHING BAG" their strength was destroyed by two HINDU generals. 122.161.150.213 (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
infact it is sikhs like "VANIT NALWA" why the coming generation of sikhs are forgetting that Maharaja Ranjit Singh was sher-e-punjab because of hindu khatri, she is no more than a "KHALISTANI" mindset sikh and as a hindu i can only laugh upon at her work. Its shameful because generals such as diwan mohkam chand and diwan chand who were COMMANDER IN CHIEF and supreme generals of ranjit singh is defamed by a woman writer who claims to be descendant of hari singh. I am sure that even Hari Singh would be ashamed of such descendants who are trying to give the glory of other generals to him. 122.161.150.213 (talk) 05:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Multan and Kashmir belongs to Hindu Diwan Chand Ranjit Singh
Both these important places were conquered by Hindu Diwan Chand not a sikh---http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Q0ABAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA31&dq=diwan+chand+multan+1818&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aLIqT6ipOMTTrQfxvZn2DA&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=diwan%20chand%20multan%201818&f=false
It is obvious that the web of myths which sikhs have made around that they protected HINDUS , hahahahaha Hindu dont need protection we were the one Maratha Empire which first attacked Mogul Empire capital Delhi in 1737 that is 2 years before nadir shah, similarly nadir shah never proceeded further from delhi it was the advice of sadaat khan who knew that all his baggage and cavaran will be looted by Maratha. Similarly it was a Hindu Rajput Lacchman dev who founded the first sikh kingdom, it was two hindu general diwan mohkam chand and diwan chand who completed destroyed the strength of Durrani Empire and also send a message to sikhs that the INVINCIBLE Pashtuns are not only weak but can be routed in full fledge battles. In battle of Attock in 1814 Diwan Mohkam Chand defeated Wazir Fateh Khan(Governor of Kabul) and his brother Dost Mohammad Khan(later become the Emir of Afghanistan) in an open pitched battle it was this battle which marks the beginning of Afghan decline and Indian Upsurge .
To celebrate his victory he made a Ram temple in attock but unfortunately before temple was completed he died in the same year(1814). 122.161.111.128 (talk) 16:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
really
don't show me all this muscle...i'll stick it in... come...net sessions...coach is calling.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.110.80 (talk) 11:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Dubious sourcing
Someone has been adding a lot of information recently. It appears mostly to be unsourced, and those bits that do have a footnote are citing "Sardar Hari Singh Nalwa Published by SIKH MISSIONARY COLLEGE (REGD.) Page 4". What is this book? Who wrote it? Why is it reliable? Where can we get a copy? Why is there SHOUTING in there? - Sitush (talk) 10:41, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
This is the source i was using
http://www.rajkaregakhalsa.net/literature/General%20Sikhism/Sardar%20Hari%20Singh%20Nalwa.pdf
is it relable ?
if not i will undo my editings.
Thank YouMarwahasaab (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Is there someone here who has done more than read snippet view of books available on the internet? Does anyone check the veracity of the references being cited? Most of the authors cited here DO NOT provide the source of their information...are they reliable because the version of the book being referred to (written during the British Raj) has been reprinted in the twentieth century? Cunningham is being dubbed as an 'unreliable' source for Ranjit Singh's era, this is news to students of history. Going solely by the proceedings reported on this page, this seems to be a forum where 'Sikhs' are pitted against 'Hindus' (promoted by a 'Muslim'?) If there is no mention of Hari Singh Nalva in the works of established historians (Hari Ram Gupta, Khushwant Singh etc) why not delete this page altogether... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runjeet (talk • contribs) 12:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Well, the source linked o above by Marwahasaab is certainly not reliable and this is for the reasons that you give. Any objections to removing it? - Sitush (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
To Runjeet: Can you please list what you think is objectionable? As I understand it, Hari Singh Nalwa is a major historical figure in that time period because his role as a general. I have a number of history books that focus on this time period and I can help edit the article further.--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class India articles
- Low-importance India articles
- C-Class India articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Indian history articles
- Mid-importance Indian history articles
- C-Class Indian history articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject Indian history articles
- WikiProject India articles
- Start-Class Sikhism articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (military) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class biography (military) articles
- C-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- C-Class South Asian military history articles
- South Asian military history task force articles