Talk:Ajaib Singh

Successorship

It is widely considered impossible for Cereal Crapper to be a successor of Sant Ji because Cereal Crapper is a Kirpal initiate. But Gurd's Ass keeps Crapping Cereal all over the internet, with wonderful 'informations' expressed in beautiful 'Englishes' prose. So there you have it...a bum boy crapping Cereal...not the first time... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.30.194.139 (talk) 05:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

go studying the 10 sikh gurus that are part of Sant Mat lineage and you will discover that this happened many times and it is commonly accepted. Also calling in that way a revered Master makes you a totally moron. And please, put your name, i sign my edits. Don't you are proud of your intelligence? --GurDass (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

- Please dear 223.176.81.113 don't remove important informations such as one of the Successors. If you know, consider someone else, you can add. But why removing?

- This is the second time. Please stop trying. I will always undo your distruptive actions.

- I also fixed the link you added, so you can thank me.

- Adding a successor means to keep the message of Beloved Sant Ji alive. Among the followers of Sirio Carrapa Ji there are disciples of Sant Ji Maharaj as well. During Satsangs and discourses there is always a lot of words of Sant Ji - this is sweet remembrence of the Wonderful Perfect Master. So, please, be so kind and do not remove the living message of Your Master, that of Sant Ji. As you can see, as you also quoted some dear sentences of Sant Ji, that He also was talking about His Beloved Masters many times. If you find important to commemorate our Beloved One, then, please let His message live on - which can only go thrugh his successors. Thank you. Ever in His Love and under His Shelter. --GurDass (talk) 10:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

- - - why 159.71.254.248 is trying to remove informations? --GurDass (talk) 09:07, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

- - - again vandalism... this is madness! --GurDass (talk) 00:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

erasing all the discussion which shows all the vandalism is a vandalism. --GurDass (talk) 16:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

i ask an help because of all the vandalism and removing of relevant part of the article. someone continuously modify the page and now is also erasing the discussion page! please see cronology of the page. --GurDass (talk) 16:37, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I have issued a warning to the user, and will watch this page and take further action if it becomes necessary -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

many thanks for the help. --GurDass (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The same user returned and did the same vandalism as usual: a lot of edits removing date of death (WHY???), successorship (ALL the successors! amazing! he hates them all) and he changed the photo an some other things. This time for me it was a bit more hard to revert because I reverted only vandalism and left the "positive" editing such as the photo change. Nobody can say I just revert to my edits... i really want to preserve important informations such ash date of death and successorship.

Every information is well referenced, it's impossible to say (as HE say) that the informations are not referenced. If there is some grammar mistake, just correct the grammar mistake. --GurDass (talk) 06:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

funny thing that Qwertyste123 creates grammar errors and then corrects them. The type "is considered is said" is HIS edit of 03:16, may 16, and then in 05:50 of the same date he corrects it saying: "fixed more grammar propagated by the illiterates"--GurDass (talk) 06:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Editor has been warned not to use abusive edit summaries -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I've also put a "citation needed" tag on the statement about successors, as only one of the three appears to be sourced -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

the source about Sirio Carrapa is enough? --GurDass (talk) 09:38, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

References added also for Sadhu Ram despite the same reference was already in his page. Removed Ram Singh Ji because he was not directly initiated by Ajaib Singh but by Baba Somanath, another disciple of Sawan Singh.--GurDass (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. I've also changed it so his actual death date is in the opening statement -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Sant ji.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Sant ji.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?

Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

same image is present here: http://www.santbaniashram.it/component/option,com_zoom/Itemid,99999999/page,view/catid,4/PageNo,1/key,8/hit,1/ with creative common license. nobody owns the images of the Masters--GurDass (talk) 09:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)!

That image is marked as CC noncommercial - which is still not accepted by Commons, unfortunately. As this person is deceased you can probably upload it to Wikipedia locally with a non-free usage rationale --Errant ^(chat!) 10:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I am the webmaster of that website, please tell me how can I do to modify the license of the image. I want that all the images of the website can be used by everybody, --GurDass (talk) 11:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I doubt that you have the rights of the image. the page in the copyright violation notice has a date which is 2 years older... mabdul 11:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

nobody "owns" these images, they belongs to all the humanity as all the material of the Sant Mat Masters. You can believe it or not, but still nobody is here to claim a copyright violation. So, do you have a reference for this claim? --GurDass (talk) 11:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Legally, the photographer owns the image, even if they are not currently making an explicit claim, and neither the Sant Mat Masters nor the web master have any legal right to change that. Copyright can only be waived by the actual photographer, and we do not currently have any evidence of such waiving in accordance with Wikipedia's minimum legal requirements. However, as ErrantX says, if it is deleted from Commons then there is a good chance it would be accepted on the local English Wikipedia under a non-free usage rationale - I'll be happy to help with that if it is needed -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

many thanks for the help, i really don't know how to do! --GurDass (talk) 12:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I got your message - bit busy now, but I'll get in touch tomorrow and I'll help you with it -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

As I said at File talk:Sant ji.jpg: please stop discussing this at three pages! This problem will be solved at least in 70 years. That sounds a bit sarcasm, but thats the through: the copy right laws in the us says that the copy right is lost after 70 years... mabdul 17:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll help with a non-free upload as soon as I have time - just very busy at the moment -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Quotes

Listed quotations like that, in a short biography and without critical commentary is way out of scope for Wikipedia - so I moved them to Wikiquotes (see wikiquote:Ajaib Singh) --Errant ^(chat!) 10:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

link provided in the page for wikiquotes doesn't work... can you please made a wikiquote page that works, bevore removing the quotes? i really don't know wikiquotes so i revert your undo. Of course after the creation of the wikiquote page you can remove again the quotes from here.--GurDass (talk) 11:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

ok now wikiquotes is working, sorry! --GurDass (talk) 11:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm useless - I keep getting source/quotes mixed up :) all sorted now! --Errant ^(chat!) 11:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 April 2013

> 69.30.194.139 (talk) 05:37, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not done – Sounds like vandalism if you ask me. ^King Jakob _C2 11:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing

This article needs more sources and those sources must not be hagiographies etc. Unless details of the man can be found in independent sources, the thing is likely to be deleted. - Sitush (talk) 11:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

I hope wikipedia, and I'm trying to be polite for the moment, will actually allow the people who know about Sant ji and followed Sant Ji to put up an appropriate article about one of the most important individuals of the 20th century, for @#$%#$ sakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.163.135.156 (talk) 04:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

50.68.222.104 is a vandal, ban him, he is undoing authenticated comments because that's what he does, he trolls around constantly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.163.135.42 (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2020 (UTC)