Talk:Ranjit Singh

Protection

I have fully protected the page. Both sides, please list the cause of the dispute and cite reliable sources to supplement your view. Thank you. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

There can be no doubt that Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a Jat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.202 (talk) 23:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Desecretion of Ancient Monuments, Muslim Mosques/Tombs

In order for this article to be more neutral, some aspects of Sikh desecration of Muslim monuments, Tombs and Mosques need to be made which are not stated in the article. Many Islamic tombs where broken down, precious marble, gems stolen and in many cases, many of the Islamic monuments where dismantled and shipped elsewhere to built Sikh Temples. The Badshahi Mosque of Lahore was used as a horse stable by the Sikhs and the city of Lahore was generally considered to have been left in a state of neglect as reported by numerous European explorers who recounted the degree of degradation under Sikh Rule. The article needs to be more honest rather than giving a certain bias! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.63.220.150 (talk) 22:48, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

You are a sikh person who is posing as a muslim and talking of hearsay among the sikh community to make themselves feel better. no muslim would ever say the rubbish that you are talking about it. you are just trying to put down muslims so you are posing as a muslim and talking of fairy tales that are common in the sikh community in their hatred of muslims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.105.230 (talk) 02:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

The above is just hearsay and anti sikh propaganda. Please provide sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.225.105.97 (talk) 11:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC) The British Factor-- The article presents a good account of Ranjit Singh victories and conquest of western Punjab and Peshawar, it ignores the British factor. The article refers to an era when Mighty Muslim Mughal dynasty was at the verge of collapse. As the article has mentioned the Marhata uprise just before the Ranjit Singh time, it was quelled by the Afghan led by Ahmad Shah Abdali (pl see Wikipedia). Before that Nadir Shah of Iran attacked Western India and looted it. The India at this time was divided into small kingdoms. The British had the famous philosophy of divide and rule. In 1839 when Ranjit Singh was making Lahore as his capital, British was engaged in the war against Afghans in the Peshawar area in 1839 (pl. see Wikipedia for reference on British Afghan wars). One can ask the question how the British is fighting the Afghans while the whole Western region of Pakistan is occupied by Maharaja Ranjit Singh. From Ahmad Shah Abdali and Syed Ahmad rallies against Marhatas in the past, the British were worried of the Afghan attack on British army. And that is one of the reason that Ranjit Singh main focus was to weaken the Afghan power with the help of British. That was one of the main reasons when Maharaja Ranjit focused on Western Punjab and Peshawar area instead of spreading east or south. Soon after the death of Ranjit Singh the British took the whole region when they realized the job they wanted was done.

Desecration of Muslim Places The article mentions Ranjit Singh as a secular leader. This contradicts the historical description of his reign. The Sikh religion started in the Muslim Mughal era and was initially supported by the Mughal emperors. When Ranjit Singh took Lahore, the biggest Mosque in Lahore was made horse stable. Pigs were slaughtered in the mosques in addition to widespread bloodshed. In the short history of Sikhs and Indian Muslims before Ranjit, there is nothing that would trigger avenge on Ranjit's part. The only sensible rational points to a bigger plot where the purpose was to divide different groups in India based on their religion and ethnicity to pave way for the establishment of the British empire. The Hindus and Muslims realizing this plot waged the war of Independence in 1857 against British which resulted in brutal failure, massacre of the Indians and colonization of the Indian Subcontinent.

- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.215.181 (talk) 03:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Issues of Dispute

There are two major issues which are being distorted or being suppressed by some caste based interests:

1) Caste of Ranjit Singh

There is effort by a certain caste group to claim Ranjit Singh as from their caste and they do not allow properly referenced counter-claims to their position. The best way to resolve this is by allowing both claims and counter-claims and leave the judgement to the reader.

The controversy is regarding whether Ranjit Singh was a Sansi or Jat.

2) Sati of his wives

This is second area of dispute. There are verifiable references regarding the existence of Sati practice in Ranjit Singh's family and close kinsmen. His wives committed Sati, so did the wives of his brother-in-law , Jawahar Singh. References are available from neutral third party accounts that can be cited in this article.

Also, this attempt seeks to launder Sikh history in the light of later 19th and 20th century reform movements within Sikh society. Nothing wrong with this intent but it is still a distortion of history nonetheless, however well intentioned.

People need to know about real Ranjit Singh , not a mythical one of reformist and casteist imagination.

Let us resove these issues amicably with the academic spirit of inquiry.--Internet Scholar (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Practice of Sati in Ranjit Singh's Immediate Family and Clan

Hello Nichalp,

Please refer to the following work for a citation about the practice of Sati in Ranjit Singh's family:

Cults, Customs and Superstitions of India, John Campbell Oman, Chapter V "Cenotaph of Maharaja Ranjit Singh", pp 111-116

http://books.google.ca/books?id=gbuzAxlYFb8C&pg=PA111&lpg=PA111&dq=Sati+of+Ranjit+Singh's+wives&source=web&ots=WDMQK7bgJh&sig=n7xaUV0Bf0GNXbhXfwt-DyugczM&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA111,M1

Please note this is not an attempt to make any group look better or worse but an attempt to present history objectively. There are also other accounts of Ranjit Singh's cenotaph available from neutral sources, including the pictures of his cenotaph commemorating Sati of the Ranis in Lahore in 1839. The Sati of the wives of Ranjit Singh's brother-in-law, Jawahir Singh, also merits inclusion in this article.

--Internet Scholar (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

There needs to be a section about funeral of Ranjit Singh which has been discussed in many European contemporary accounts.--Internet Scholar (talk) 21:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Editions to the Maharaja's name/Sansi connection of Maharaja Ranjit Singh

I have restored back Maharaja Ranjit Singh's name from Deol back to Sukerchakia as it is crystal clear of Maharaja being the authority of Sukerchakia Misl and being so he's also one of the Sukerchakias as the Misls would only choose the leader who was one of them and by means of someone who like others in a misl would also inherit the same name used to call the misl, in the family. (talk) 06 December 2008 (UTC)

This is not as simple as meets the eye. Although, Griffin acknowledges the existence of "Sansi Jat" group, he also adds the following with regard to his connection with the Sansi tribe, which is distinct from Jats:

"The Sindhanwalias claim, like most other Sikhs, a Rajput descent, but they have also a close connection with the thievish and degraded tribe of Sansis, after which their ancesteral home, Raja Sansi, five miles from the city of Amritsar is named."

Reference: Ranjit Singh and the Sikh Barrier Between Our Growing Empire and Central Asia,pp 153, By L. Griffin, Published by Asian Educational Services, 2004, ISBN 8120619188, 9788120619180, 223 pages. Note: "thievish and degraded tribe of Sansis" remark should be understood in the context of colonial perception of Sansi tribe.

Further to this is the research published by Prof. Sher Singh Sher, establishing Sansi & Rajput ancestry of Maharaja's family. Sher Singh Sher had established in reputed journals that Ranjit Singh was a Sansi and that Sansi tribe itself is of Rajput origin. Refer to pages 10 and 13 of The Sansis of Punjab; a Gypsy and De-notified Tribe of Rajput Origin, By Sher Singh, 1926-Published by , 1965, Original from the University of Michigan, Digitized 2 Aug 2007. CHAPTER TWO MAHARAJA RANJIT— SINGH THE MOST GLORIOUS SANSI establishes Ranjit Singh's Sansi and Rajput ancestry.

Given this diversity in published opinion , I think it would make sense for this article to give coverage to claims of Jat and Sansi, as well as Rajput connection of Maharaja Ranjit Singh's ancestry. The citations about the Sansi background of the Maharaja are unambiguous and from very reputable sources. Thanks.--Internet Scholar (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

PS - Lets make the edits only after further discussion and eshtablishing consensus. Regards.--Internet Scholar (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

---

More secondary source references from reputable authors about the Sansi ancestry of Maharaja Ranjit Singh are given below. These are all from very reputable sources including scholars like Fauja Singh, Sangat Singh and Sher Singh Sher (SGPC nominated International Professor of Sikhism).

^ The Sansis of Punjab; a Gypsy and De-notified Tribe of Rajput Origin, Maharaja Ranjit Singh- The Most Glorious Sansi, pp 13, By Sher Singh, 1926-, Published by , 1965, Original from the University of Michigan
^ Tribalism in India, pp 160, By Kamaladevi Chattopadhyaya, Edition: illustrated, Published by Vikas, 1978, Original from the University of Michigan
^ Sociological Bulletin,pp 97, By Indian Sociological Society, Published by Indian Sociological Society., 1952
^ Indian Librarian edited by Sant Ram Bhatia,pp 220, Published by , 1964Item notes: v.19-21 1964-67, Original from the University of Michigan
^ The Sikhs in History, pp 92, By Sangat Singh, Edition: 2, Published by S. Singh, 1995, Original from the University of Michigan
^ Some Aspects of State and Society Under Ranjit Singh, pp 5 By Fauja Singh, Published by Master Publishers, 1981, Original from the University of Michigan

A Sansi rising to the throne of Maharaja is a tribute the egalitarianism and casteless character of Khalsa that Guru Gobind Singh instilled in a caster-ridden society.--Internet Scholar (talk) 02:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

War with Gorkha

Though I realize the page is currently locked due to disagreements regarding other subjects, I found it somewhat surprising that Maharaja Ranjit Singh's famous battles against the legendary Gorkha commander General Amar Singh Thapa was not mentioned anywhere.

In 1809, the forces of the Nepalese (Gorkha) Empire had expanded past Garhwal and the Kangra led by Amar Singh Thapa. Ranjit Singh was able to drive the Nepalese forces back across the Sutlej river marking the extent of Nepali expansion. While this page is locked, I may try and update the woefully underwhelming Amar Singh Thapa page but thought I would throw this out there for anyone willing to take on the task. Encyclopedia1742 (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

As I try to fix this article we will hopefully get to these sections as well. Just give it some time and we will get to it. As you can see I have already started to fclean the article creating a skeleton upon which to build up to give Maharaja he rightful respect he deserves.

Cheers

Gorkhali (talk) 04:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Another point I forgot to mention is that, as we improve this article, we will try to include how everything was interconnected, how all these key figures knew each other, how many of the heros of the Nepal wars came to the service of Ranjit Singh after the Sagauli Treaty, Kunwar Balbhadra Singh died fighting in Afghanistan against the pathans during Ranjit Singh's Afghanistan conquest etc etc etc etc, why the Phulkian states joined the British in the Anglo-Sikh war, and so on, there is a lot to write about.

I was really disappointed by how the article was to begin with because it was not at all up to standards of an academic article.

Its gonna be a big task, but I will try to do my part to bring Ranjit Singh's article to better heights.

The only problem will be dealing with people's POVs.

Gorkhali (talk) 04:39, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

This Article is Severly Bias

No Neutrality is presented in this Article and a very certain view point of Ranjit Singh is being presented. The Anti-Muslim propagation from a Sikh point of view is blatantly present, and there is not attempt in being subtle about the glorification of the Sikh Rule. Words such annexed are used instead of conquer, and even the indigenous Muslim population is given the title of invaders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.74.175 (talk) 11:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Totally biased article

This article is absolutely rubbish, I cant understand why Sikhs feel so ashamed that this King was gay?

And the desecration of Muslim places of worship has not got ONE single mention, all Muslims know about this that Masjids were trashed by Sikhs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.26 (talk) 03:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

You have to cite a source for controversial statements like that because without a source that sort of thing reads like propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Profitoftruth85 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

This article needs to have its facts checked and is far too bias. While certain events and facts are present the article it self is propaganda in its present form and is better left for a religious article, not a factual one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.80.45 (talk) 04:47, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Artists Impression of picture

The picture is obviously another artists impression, its never been seen before and cites no artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.26 (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

When you click on pictures on wikipedia you can see additional information about them. This picture for example leads you here when you click it and you can use that page to determine the origin of the picture.Profitoftruth85 (talk) 00:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

When you click on the picture there is no information on the origin of the picture, because at the time of his reign there were no portraits of this style or impressions in India, similarly some people claim this to be painted at the time of his rule will claim there is also a black and white photograph circulating on the net, when in fact cameras did not exist during his life time in India, ie another fake Ibn abdul hassan (talk) 11:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about?

English: This is a full length oil portrait of the Maharajah Ranjit Singh, 80" x 52" oil on canvas. Completed in 2009 by the artist Manu Kaur Saluja. The portrait has a museum exhibition credit at the Royal Ontario Museum (Toronto), from Nov 28, 2009 through March 28, 2010. The painting depicts Ranjit Singh sitting on his golden throne within the walls of the Lahore Fort. He is in full dress armor, with the Koh-i-Noor diamond on his right arm in it's original setting.

-Profitoftruth85 (talk) 18:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Either its a painting of a live individual in question, or its an impression, pure and simpe. I await your answer? Ibn abdul hassan (talk) 15:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Article is absolutely rubbish.

Either it should be deleted or replaced with a more accurate version with less bias. Ibn abdul hassan (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Personal Life

I would like to see greater insight into the Maharaja's personal life. Users ought to refrain from adding allegations of homosexuality unless concrete evidence is gathered, however, greater detail about his childhood and wives should be added. If anyone has access to such information, it would greatly improve the quality of the article and the depth of the Maharaj's character. 14:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.217.232.90 (talk)

Ranjit Singh's Caste Background: Deletion of sourced content and references

Please note that he user Gurkhaboy deleted properly sourced contents and references as follows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ranjit_Singh&diff=374677634&oldid=374557744

The ancestry of Maharaja is complex and any description of it cannot be complete without reference to Sansis, Jats and Bhati Rajputs. The above edit looked to be inspired solely by POV and could easily be construed as vandalism because the user did not care to leave any cogent edit summary to explain the deletion well sourced content and references.

The following references are reputable and qualify as WP:Source test:

• Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society , Page 114, Gypsy Lore Society - 1912
• The History of the Panjab, Page 335, Syed Muhamad Latif, Calcutta, Central Press Company, Limited, 1891 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.205.241.254 (talk) 15:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I am placing below the well sourced content that was deleted:

Noted historian of Punjab, Syad Muhammad Latif, and another colonial writer H.A Williams also traced the origin of Ranjit Singh's family to Sansi gypsies who claimed descent from Bhati Rajputs

--142.205.241.254 (talk) 15:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

There is an undue amount of attention being paid to his ancestry. Its Syed muhammad latif by the way.--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 18:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The ancestry of this Maharaja is a very widely discussed subject and has adequate notability as a controversy to merit inclusion in the lead of this article (see WP:Lead)

The claim gypsies being of Rajput descent has been disproved long ago and doesn't hold valid.

Gorkhali (talk) 19:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any citable sources to support what you are stating or this your WP:OR? Both of the above sources contradict you. This is an encyclopaedia. Editors cannot dissect or question cited sources so long as they passs WP:Source test. Your personal opinion however esteemed and true cannot be cited in the article nor can any sourced content be removed on its basis. Thanks.--142.205.241.254 (talk) 19:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Jatts and Rajputs share a common ancestry, and it has been proved that Gypsies are linked to Jats, so it would be OK to assume Rajputs have a common ancestry.

"An international collaboration led by Manir Ali of the Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, first identified the ‘Jatt’ mutation in one of four Pakistani families. Further study amongst Roma populations in Europe showed that the same mutation accounted for nearly half of all cases of PCG [Primary congenital glaucoma] in that community. Manir Ali’s research also confirms the widely accepted view that the Roma originated from the Jatt clan of Northern India and Pakistan and not from Eastern Europe as previously believed."

As for the reference, please include it in the section that talks about his ancestry. In my mind, I am of no doubt the Sansi caste and Jats are closely allied and Maharaja Ranjit Singh's family were from the Sansi Caste. Thanks --Sikh-History 09:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Sir Lepel Griffin on Ranjit Singh's ancestry

"...and from Sansi the Sindhanwalias and the Sansis have a common descent. The Sansis were the theivish and degraded tribe [sic] and the house of Sindhanwalia naturally feeling ashamed of its Sansi name invented a romantic story to account for it. But the relationship between the nobles and the beggars, does not seem the less certain and if history of Maharaja Ranjit Singh is attentively considered it will appear that much his policy and many of his actions had the true Sansi complexion"

Source: Sir Lepel Griffin, Punjab Chiefs, Vol. 1, p 219 --142.205.241.254 (talk) 12:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Remove the name Ghaus Mohammad Khan from the list of Generals of Maharaja Ranjit Singh

The information is invalid that Ghaus Mohammad Khan is one of the general who belong to the army of Maharaja Ranjit Singh.

Ghaus Mohammad Khan is a wimbeldon Player and not any army general of Maharaja Ranjit Singh.

Please remove the name Ghaus Mohammad Khan from the list of generals who served the army of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikramaditya dalvi (talk • contribs) 16:53, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality and Tone

Please can certain paragraphs in this article be edited and written with a less controversial point of view.

It is an important part of Sikh history in the Punjab and should not be allowed to be hijacked by writers who seem to enjoy antagonising other communities or use it as a means to promote personal bias, islamaphobia and propoganda, thus detracting from the subject content.

There is also the danger that with continued objections or resulting wheel wars the entire article could be removed or suspended as a result of anti discrimination policies which WIKI adhere to. The article is an important part of Sikh history in the Punjab and deserving of a more balanced viewpoint which does the subject matter justice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ch ifzaal mehdi (talk • contribs) 09:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The article reeks of bigotry. The figure Maharaja(king-of-kings) Ranjit Singh is a very important figure in the history of India, Pakistan, Sikhism and Punjab and we are yet to see a neutral and correct point of view in the discussion.

Koenig12 (talk) 22:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)koening12

Bogus Map made by sikh putting in urdu words

The map at the beginning is fake and is made by a sikh person who put in urdu words. This is why i hate wikipedia the whole article is fabricated nonsense. The entire sikh history has been disproved many times as nothing more than exaggerations. ranjit singh is probably the worst of the exaggerations, he had hardly achieved anything before they were annexed into the British empire. talking about mughals or durrani empire is one thing but ranjit singh and claiming so called battles is just ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.105.230 (talk) 02:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

That map was made by User:Khalid_Mahmood who is a prolific editor on the urdu wikipedia. Try not to make sectarian comments because it weakens your arguments by the way.

Also you are wrong in your historical analysis. The Sikhs fought continuously for a ridiculous amount of time and suffered horrible losses for a couple hundred years before they were able to achieve the victories of the Sikh misl and Sikh Empire period. Also don't forget that when Sikh armies and states won victories they shared the spoils with punjabi muslims and hindus (like the land reform that took place in just 7 years under Banda Singh Bahadur unlike foreign invaders like the Mughals, Afghans, and Marathas. --Profitoftruth85 (talk) 05:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Any person can pose as anyone on wikipedia. the map used in this article is an edited map made and edited by a person. simply editing a map and putting "sikh sarkar" in urdu does not have any use. an alternate map should be put in place. simply using urdu words to give more validity to a map does not work. As for historical analysis, I do not feel that regurgitating rss sikh "history" in wikipedia is going to be of any use. but then again that seems to be the case in wikipedia where a supposed fake battle is made and an article is made on it. The famous battle of panipat in 1761 is only one of the few battles based on facts. In which the marathas were completely and decisively defeated and were pushed out of punjab to the farthest areas of central india. Even then you're not going to get a good wikipedia article on it compared to historians.

Its a shame that Pakistanis would rather connect themselves to foreigners such as Ghazni or Ghori rather than a fellow Punjabi such as Maharaja Ranjit Singh. 174.1.73.129 (talk) 04:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Ranjit Singh by Manu Saluja

This portrait, completed in 2009, was not painted during Ranjit Singh's lifetime. It seems to be produced from the artist's imagination and may be incorrect, in that Ranjit Singh was blind in one eye. The portrait, "File:Ranjit Singh, ca 1835-1840.jpg" appears to be more accurate, so it should be restored to the infobox.98.248.224.199 (talk) 06:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File:RanjitSingh by ManuSaluja.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:RanjitSingh by ManuSaluja.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests - No timestamp given What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:19, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Facts backed with references being removed. why ? =

Gujrat District Gazetteer of 1921 has reference to Ranjit Singhs father Maha singh being a chief of the Chatha Jatt tribe . Why has this fact been removed?--92.21.74.8 (talk) 12:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Kashi.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kashi.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 9 February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Governor appointed by Zaman Shah

Zaman Shah appointed Ahmad Khan Shananchi as governor of Punjab not Ranjit Singh.

Book written by non-Sikh. This is clearly stated in the book on page 34-35. and there is many other verified sources are available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desijatt1 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=kxtEFA5qqR8C&pg=PA12&dq=ranjit+singh+sansi&as_brr=3&ei=3cgzS9zWGInolQTk4e2rAQ&cd=6#v=onepage&q=ranjit%20singh%20sansi&f Desijatt1 (talk) 15:41, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Tag the appropriate but with the and tags and raise it here rather than just deleting vast swathes. The article needs a clean up rather than hap hazard adding and deleting. Thanks SH 20:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

To Desijatt1, the book you cited, which is written by S.R. Kakshi and Rashmi Pathak, states that Zaman Shah Durrani appointed Ahmad Khan Shananchi as governor of Punjab in 1797, "though soon to be pushed aside. In 1798 Shah Zaman led his 4th invasion in Punjab..." It is between 1798 and July 1799 that Zaman Shah appointed the 19 year-old Ranjit Singh as the governor of Punjab and this is what that matters because this article is about Ranjit Singh, this is important fact that has to be included. This was for the first time that a Sikh was made the governor of the Punjab region and that's why it is important that we mention this fact in the early years before him becoming Maharaja. I don't see a reason why someone wants to erace this fact from history. You Sikhs/Indians may not like Afghans in particular but this is an encyclopedia and not a playground for nonsense like that. Please keep your personal feelings to the side.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 23:21, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

To Nasir Ghobar,

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=FzmkFXSgxqgC&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=maharaja+ranjit+singh+zaman+shah&source=bl&ots=netCC-k_qy&sig=3powr6o3ZkvDynom6ZtfxsUL5ng&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BUMwUMlqipuMAumAgZAD&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=maharaja%20ranjit%20singh%20zaman%20shah&f=false

Book written by Karl J. Schmidt, Page 66 clearly state how Ranjit Singh captures Lahore. Desijatt1 (talk) 01:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Karl J. Schmidt does not go into details, he skips things. King Zaman Shah of Afghanistan appointed Rangit Singh as governor of Lahore in 1799.

• "Zeman made the mistake of appointing a forceful young Sikh chief, Ranjit Singh, as his governor in the Punjab." [1] - Library of Congress Country Studies
• "The Afghan king, Shah Zaman, confirmed Ranjit Singh as governor..." - Students' Britannica India, Volumes 1-5, by Indu Ramchandani, [2]
• "Zaman Shah appointed him as governor as a way of making him an ally." Colonialism: An International Social, Cultural, and Political Encyclopedia, by Melvin E. Page, p. 495 [3]
• "The Afghan king, Shah Zaman, confirmed Ranjit Singh as governor of the city" - The History of India by Kenneth Pletcher, p. 248 [4]
• If you google "Zaman Shah appointed Rangit Singh as governor", you'll get many more positive results confirming the claim. I, therefore, warn you that deleting or eracing this highly sourced fact from this article constitutes vandalism.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 01:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Ranjit Singh captured Lahore in 1799 AD. He was not appointed governor.

• http://www.trcollege.net/study-material/12-history/72-rise-of-sikhs
• http://books.google.com/books?id=kJO1WIABhPQC&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=maharaja+ranjit+singh+captures+lahore+1799&source=bl&ots=t812KBGd86&sig=QmVvqCY_mbzXZ4Afmql3jZf3VI4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=snwwUM3VBuXIigKzo4Fg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=maharaja%20ranjit%20singh%20captures%20lahore%201799&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=ApzUuLiO0jYC&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=maharaja+ranjit+singh+captures+lahore+1799&source=bl&ots=4xB1H5k-VL&sig=h13HzuXlIJV9iI5V0vMo831M9wM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=snwwUM3VBuXIigKzo4Fg&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=maharaja%20ranjit%20singh%20captures%20lahore%201799&f=false
• http://books.google.com/books?id=gqIbJz7vMn0C&pg=PA172&lpg=PA172&dq=maharaja+ranjit+singh+captures+lahore+1799&source=bl&ots=fPD2zjRHTu&sig=j-k9N0oFXWBW4iOXNXvJRKlF76Q&hl=en&sa=X&ei=snwwUM3VBuXIigKzo4Fg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=maharaja%20ranjit%20singh%20captures%20lahore%201799&f=false

You will get countless results confirming this claim that Ranjit Singh captured Lahore in 1799 AD. Desijatt1 (talk) 06:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

These also skip the details. King Zaman Shah and the 19 year old Ranjit Singh established friendly relations in 1799 at which point he (Ranjit) was formally appointed as the governor on the order of King Zaman Shah. This is sourced fact and nobody is denying it except you. The article needs to mention this and other details because readers want to know. It was about 2 years later that Ranjit declared himself King. Your story doesn't make any sense, and what does capturing Lahore has to do with being sworn as governor? In any case, we may add both sides of the story if that makes you happy.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 08:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Desi Jatt appears to have provided some good references, however we need WP:Consensus before we move on.Also please be mindful of WP:Manual of Style ThanksSH 15:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

If we can't get WP:Consensus I suggest WP:Mediation. Thanks SH 15:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Adding valid important information that is properly sourced does not require consensus. You do not own this article, it is for everyone to edit.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 16:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh really? according to you, the sources you are provided are 100% authentic, but reliable sources provided by others including me are not. Different authors skip points etc. What rubbish. Last, I agree on your last point that this is for everyone to edit, but not to provide misleading information, so stop your disruptive editing. Thanks Desijatt1 (talk) 17:35, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what your point is. You are just posting links to books and these books don't disagree with me. I'm someone who wants to know who ruled Gujranwala or the whole Punjab territory when Ranjit Singh was born there? Was it the Durrani Empire or the Mughal Empire? How did he capture the city of Lahore when he was only 19 years old and the books say that Afghan King himself was there in the same year along with an Afghan army? Did the Sikhs and Afghans fight in 1799? What was the name of the battle? Were is the source for this? With who did he fight before capturing the city? How did Ranjit become a King in 1801? What was he before 1801? Your version is skipping all this and just goes like this: He succeeded his father at age 18, became King of the Sikh Empire and began fighting the Afghans. This is no way to write an article about someone who formed an empire. I added new information about him imprisoning and later killing his mother, and some sources say he was 17 when he became a leader. Things like these are very important. Look at how well the Ahmad Shah Durrani article is written. It explains all details, like his father and grandfather being killed in a battle when he was a youth, then he was held a prisoner until Nader Shah released him and made him one of his commanders. I want Ranjit Singh's article to be written the same way with all important details.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 18:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

For your kind information most of things you mentioned above was mentioned in the article, but you remove most of the information related to it and re-add some rubbish things.

1) Gujranwala was ruled Sukerchakia Misl (Sikh) and last commander of the Misl was Ranjit Singh. Before Ranjit Singh, Gujranwala was ruled by his father and grandfather. After the death of his father he become ruler of this misl, but he was minor that time. Sada Kaur his mother-in-law was also leader of other misl and also political mentor of Ranjit Singh's misl. Both misl are united by Sada Kaur and Ranjit Singh to form one and powerfull misl.

This book deal with things related to Ranjit Singh in very detail and off-course is a very reliable source of information. I'm sure after this you will say things opposite to this. the only thing you wanted is to mislead the information Maharaja Ranjit Singh and tarnish his image. This book also goes very deep how Ranjit Singh captures Lahore that time.

• http://books.google.com/books?id=4udb8LsF3-oC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=Sada+Kaur+and+Ranjit+Singh&source=bl&ots=XUOtft37p7&sig=OqMkP63xp1pZNyzX6i2EEduUl9o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JDkxULC3FaKoiQKStoHYCA&ved=0CGgQ6AEwDQ#v=onepage&q=Sada%20Kaur%20and%20Ranjit%20Singh&f=false

Desijatt1 (talk) 19:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not talking about who was the local ruler (governor, mayor, district council, and etc.). I didn't come to tarnish anyone's image, the article was very messy [5] and I came to clean it up. The painting in the infobox was not of Ranjit Singh but of an imposter, it's better that we use the 1830 real image of him in the infobox. My intention is to make this article nicely presented without false information or too many unsourced opinions.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 01:59, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Invasions and Conquests of Ranjit Singh.

This is detailed article written by 9 different writers about Conquests of Ranjit Singh and published in The Tribune daily.

• "Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s Subjugation of North Western Frontier. [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desijatt1 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

This is a great source of information about the Invasions and Conquests of Ranjit Singh because this is written by 9 different writers and there is no chance of bias in it. Desijatt1 (talk) 18:45, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

The focus is the year 1799 and prior years. I've already read many historians, there is no need to read more, and I made my self familiar with the situation. Based on what I've read, King Zaman Shah arrived to Lahore with his army, it was his fourth time coming there, he held a meeting with Sikh leaders. Zaman Shah acknowledged the 19-year old Ranjit as the chief Sukerchakia Misl. Zaman Shah had to leave because his brother in Kabul was acting up, so he left Lahore. On his way, I think while crossing the Indus River, he got into some kind of trouble and at that point Ranjit sent his teams to help Zaman Shah make it safe. In the meantime, Ranjit began sending messengers to other Sikh leaders that he was the new leader and that even Zaman Shah of Afghanistan recognized him as such, many of them began joining forces with him, acknowledging him as the rightful governor. Kabul confirmed his recognition as the rightful governor. However, there were some Sikhs who refused to recognize him and then Ranjit began facing them one by one until they all accepted him as their ruler. By 1801, when he had conquered the whole of the Punjab region he declared himself as the King (Maharaja). Ranjit was not fighting with Zaman Shah but with Mahmud Shah who had dethroned Zaman Shah a year before. After this Ranjit began conquering more lands outside Punjab until his death. The article should explain the situation the same way as how it happened. It was not Sikhs vs. Afghans but more like Kings vs. Kings. Of course the Sikh and Afghan armies had to fight, just like Sikhs fought other Sikhs and Afghans fought other Afghans. When the British arrived, they fought both the Sikhs and the Afghans.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 19:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Another fact is that the Afghan army also had many non-Afghans and the Sikh army had many non-Sikhs. Most book writers usually skip this point.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 19:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

The above mentioned article by me deals with all his Invasions and Conquests. I also added some information with regard to this article and other reliable sourced in the Invasions and Conquests section, but it was you who removed the properly sourced information and you also got warning for this. So don't remove reliable information added by other users without any reason otherwise you will be blocked. This article is not your personal property that first you remove all the good information and start the article from scrap or zero information according to your desire as you did to many other articles and create mess. Thanks

Desijatt1 (talk) 20:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Ranjit Singh captures Lahore in 1799

I've read many historians. As mentioned above with reliable sources most historians reject the claim that Ranjit Singh was appointed governor of the Punjab. Most historians agreed that Ranjit Singh captured Lahore in 1799. I do agree with the Nasir that Afghan army was in Punjab in early 1799 under Zaman Shah, but Ranjit Singh captured Lahore in July 1799. At that there was rebel back home in Afghanistan for Zaman Shah. He left Lahore without any battle to crush the rebels back home. After that Ranjit Singh & Sada Kaur (mother-in-law of ranjit singh) attacked Lahore and captured it. These are not my views.

• 80% of historians agreed and verified that Ranjit Singh captures Lahore in 1799.
• 20% historians didn't agreed with above claim and assumes that Zaman Shah made Ranjit Singh governor of Punjab.

There was no historically proof or record to verify the claim of some (about 20%) historians.

Now, It's up to the third parties, administrators and WP:Mediation to support which claim. To support 80% historians or 20% historians. If they need more reliable sources to verify this i will add later. Desijatt1 (talk) 22:46, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

First, the article was just awful before I began working on it, see for yourself [7] (notice how many times Ahmad Shah Abdali is mentioned). Second, you are skipping the fact that Ahmad Shah Durrani had legitimately made the entire Punjab region part of his Afghan Empire since 1749, when Ranjit was not even born, which Ahmad Shah took from the Mughal ruler under an agreement. Mughals had ruled it since 1526 when Babur took it after defeating the Afghan Lodi dynasty. Western sources (3rd parties), including Louis Dupree (professor), Nancy Dupree and many other experts on Afghanistan, claim that Afghans lost Punjab in 1801 [8], NOT 1799 as some contemporary Sikh book writers wrongly put it. How many book links do you want me to list here to convince you? To the world at large, Ranjit got control of Lahore in 1799 after King Zaman Shah appointed him (hand picked him [9]) as the governor, but to the Sikhs this gets wrongly translated as him capturing the city. We are not writing a book, when putting info like this in an encyclopedia we go by the fact that he was appointed as governor because that's how politics/governments do business. A person has to be appointed for governorship not force their way. You are discrediting him by claiming that he captured the city. I have no problem with both views being added, but to make Ranjit a legitimate governor then it's wise to write that he was appointed instead of capturing it. These actions are excersized through treaties, agreements, memorandum of understandings, or public announcements, which I'm sure that Zaman Shah signed with him. In 1799, Zaman Shah personally met with Ranjit in front of all the Sikh leaders in Lahore. What do you think they talked about in that meeting? The British also met with him and signed a treaty (Treaty of Amritsar).[10] Last but not least, your 80%/20% is wrong and nonsense, and it's quality that counts not quantity. Most of your books are based on theories of events made up by the authors but as for mines they provide references to original older sources, which are based on authentic historical documents.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 02:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Before the page gets unprotected. You must try to read these books slowly and try to understand what really happened so that you don't get angry and remove information which you may not agree with. The British clearly used Ranjit Singh to fight for them against the Afghans. Before him making a deal with the British he was not interested in territories outside the Punjab.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 03:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nasir Ghobar, I disagree with this statement and it's source;

To the world at large, Ranjit got control of Lahore in 1799 after King Zaman Shah appointed him (hand picked him) as the governor

I just read through the relevant sections of Hari Ram Gupta's A History of the Sikhs Volume IV and Khushwant Singh's History of the Sikhs:1469-1839 and both have no mention of him being hand picked Zaman Shah. Both sources describe him as one of many Sikh military leaders besieging Lahore and engaged in negotiations through vakils (lawyers) with the other parties. Hari Ram Gupta's book in particular is meticulously detailed and well sourced and Khushwant Singh is also a respected historian. In contrast, the book you cite has that as a throwaway line.

These actions are excersized through treaties, agreements, memorandum of understandings, or public announcements, which I'm sure that Zaman Shah signed with him.

I'm not so sure, could you please show us the treaty?

The British also met with him and signed a treaty (Treaty of Amritsar).

If you read through this treaty ( Original text here http://archive.org/stream/acollectiontrea06deptgoog#page/n48/mode/2up) you can see that Ranjit Singh is refered to as the ruler of his own state.

You should sign your name so that others can see who posted the message. You guys are coming up with a story that makes no sense to anyone. You assume that a person who invades a land gets to own it. That's not how it works. In order to claim land it has to be recognized by other governments, particularly neighboring states (empires). There is no recognition of Punjab or Lahore being independent by any governments until 1801 when Ranjit Singh signed the treaty of Amritsar with the British and without the knowledge of the Afghan king. You purposely skip facts and only tell us half of the story. Historians say that King Zaman Shah of Afghanistan made the 19 year old Ranjit Singh the governor of Lahore, we must add this important information in his article here in Wikipedia whether you agree with it or not. You may add that he was not appointed as governor by Zaman Shah but captured the area militarily. It's upto to the readers to decide what to believe and what not to believe. Appointing Ranjit as a governor does not require a treaty. Treaties are for 2 different governments to settle something, I wasn't trying to say that Zaman Shah and Ranjit signed a treaty, I was saying that some kind of official record was made so that Ranjit is recognized as a governor. Knowing how Afghan government functioned at the time, it was most likely a public announcement along with some kind of a signed written statement. The books tell us that: 1.) after his 4th conquest, Zaman Shah and Ranjit were at a meeting in 1799 as allies; 2.) Zaman Shah had to leave for Kabul because of an emergency so he left the 19 year old Ranjit Singh in charge by appointing him as the governor of Lahore; 3.) and in 1801 Ranjit Singh declared himself an independent ruler. On the other hand, you guys are falsely claiming that the 19 year old Ranjit Singh defeated Zaman Shah in 1799 and then declared himself the ruler in the same year. Not only do you have no proof, it's just absolute nonsense. Why would Ranjit send help when Zaman Shah was crossing the river while getting stuck at Jhelum River on his way to Kabul. Keep your Sikh nationalism to the side, this is an encyclopedia mainly for English speaking people around the world. The main problem is that you Indians look down upon Afghanistan because of the state it is in today, you fail to understand that in that time it was very powerful not only militarily but in many things. Afghans made Persian the official language of Punjab. Persian was also the official language of the later Sikh Empire.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 19:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding this nonsense "you can see that Ranjit Singh is refered to as the ruler of his own state", did Ranjit Singh declar to anyone that he was a ruler of an independent state before 1801? Did he issue his own coins? Knowing that he was power hungry like many others, he could easily have misrepresented himself to the British, who themselves didn't care about any of that because they had their own divide and rule policy for the Sikhs and for the Afghans.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 20:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

To Nasir Ghobar, You are repeating nonsense again and again. Repeating false information does not make it true. Now, you contradict with your own words. Let me remind you the point of dispute is whether Ranjit Singh captured Lahore in 1799 or not and the answer is big yes, he captured Lahore in 1799. Now, you come up with other stories and different points. Official language etc. Can u tell me what to do official language with capture of Lahore. I never say Ranjit Singh defeated Zaman Shah. It's not about what to believe and what not to believe. It's about truth, reliable sources. Most historians reject the claim that you are making. Others users are also agree with me. Desijatt1 (talk) 00:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Naw, it is you who is repeating the nonsens. "Ranjit Singh captured Lahore in 1799" is an incomplete statement because it doesn't address who he captured the city from. It implies that he captured it from King Zaman Shah of Afghanistan. I'm making the point that up until 1801 Lahore was considered part of the Afghan Empire with Ranjit serving as its governor. This is not only mentioned in many books but also in famous encyclopedias such as Britannica. [11] There is nothing nonsense about this or about me teaching you that Persian was the official language until when the British took over Punjab from the Sikhs in the mid 19th century. Ranjit and Zaman Shah were allies up until their deaths.[12]--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 01:40, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

A couple quick points

1. In Wikipedia you can't use encyclopedias as a source when more reliable sources are available.
2. I agree that Government bureaucrats wrote in persian for rulers in North India but I'm not sure how that is related Shah Zaman
3. If you read the link about them being friends it says this:"The latter tried everything in his power to extort the diamond from his guests, going as far as depriving them and their family of food until they surrendered it.", not very friend-like

The main point that we have to consider is the nature of Shah Zaman's entrance and retreat to Lahore and how Ranjit Singh fits into the whole picture

1. As Shah Zaman was entering Lahore his caravan was looted by Ranjit Singh's uncle
2. On December 2, 1798 Ranjit Singh, six other Sikh chiefs, and 11,000 horse began cutting off supplies to Shah Zaman's camp
3. On December 15, 1798 Ranjit Singh and the other Sikh chiefs swear to fight against their common enemy
4. Shah Zaman receives news that Persians are invading and Herat is in revolt resulting in him leaving immediately
5. Two Sikh chiefs, not including Ranjit Singh, occupy Lahore and proceed to treat the citizens badly

From my understanding of the reading it's clear that Shah Zaman did not have an effect on who was the ruler because he was forced to retreat due to his domestic issues.--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 02:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)