Talk:List of Hindus

message: This will make sense to the larger group to can know about the famous Indian Saints.
-----
I think most people are aware that George Harrison was a practising Hindu for most of his life.  There is no question about this.  Read any Beatles biographical book.
If George Harrison isn't a noted Hindu, shouldn't he be removed from this list?
----
Proof, please, that the following individuals are self-professed Hindus:
* Ralph Waldo Emerson
* Arthur Schopenhauer
* Nicola Tesla
* Henry David Thoreau 
llywrch 17:41, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Emerson and Thoreau ought to qualify... both of them were huge devotees of the Gita, extolled the virtues of the Vedas and made continual references to Hinduism (e.g., Emerson wrote a poem about Brahma, and both espoused a philosophy called Transcendentalism derived from Vedic concepts about transcending material reality). I don't know about saying, "I am a Hindu," but comes as close as you can without that exact phrase. Tesla and gghghvhvc, I have no idea. Graft 17:58, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)

text: Admittedly after two years, there are still a billion or so names to go. - toh 22:03, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The point of lists isn't to list everyone of a group. It's to list the ones who merit mention in an encyclopedia, such as this one. Unlike :Category:Hindus it can also add information and sourcing through annotation.--T. Anthony 09:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We can change the name as List of Hindu Saints 

message: ?--Dangerous-Boy
yes salman khan is hindu
?--Buddhist143
sources?--Dangerous-Boy 06:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  is salman khan hindu? 

message: When one says 'List of Hindus', one is talking about one billion people who are living on the face of the earth. Add to it all the Hindus who have gone by in the past and we are talking about several billion souls. Can you ever list them all in this page? A 'List of Hindus' is after all a one-sixth part of a 'List of Human Beings'. 
Even a title like 'List of notable Hindus' will not make sense. There will still be too many of them. Just delete this page. Instead start articles like List of notable Hindu kings, notable Hindu scientists, notable Hindu writers etc etc. That will be more manageable.
Sisodia 05:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First no one is going to try to list all Hindus. These lists are supposed to be about those who are notable in the history of Hinduism or notable people whose Hinduism is important. Also this is an argument for separating into several lists. Now I agree with doing that, I got a little criticism on the idea of multiple Hindu lists, but this list should still survive as a parent list. Just as List of Christians works as a parent to various Christian lists.--T. Anthony 03:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are they different souls, or the same souls in different bodies??Edison 16:09, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page does not make sense 

message: ===Ashoka===
We can note the same problem here.
How do you brand The Great Buddhist Emperor Ashoka as Hindu? The Bhangi-Brahmins are branding anybody as Hindu? On what basis are you doing such mischievous things? Who told you that  Chandragupta Maurya (324 BC-301 BC) and 
Bindusara Amitraghata (301 BC-269 BC) are Hindus? Don’t you people think that it is absolute foolish to bran anybody as Hindu without defining ‘Who Is Hindu? 
The simple definition of Christen is the follower of Jesus Christ and Bible, the muslims is who belives that there is God named Allah and holy book Kuran now tell me how to decide who is Hindu? And why these so-called Hindus are so confused to give an answer to such a simple question. Those people who themselves don’t know how they became Hindu are branding others as Hindu. On what basis they are doing such foolish things? The people who themselves don't know how they became hindu are brandins others as Hindu!
Tomorrow these Brahmin-Shudra’s will brand that Jesus Christ (1 A.D. to 33 A.D.) was also a Hindu!! Will you accept it? Don’t you think this is insulting to brand all Jain, Buddhist or Christen personalities as Hindu the great Phallus Worshipper i.e God Shiv Lingam worshipper? 
It is request to Wikipedia Administrator  to remove 
Chandragupta Maurya (324 BC-301 BC) 
Bindusara Amitraghata (301 BC-269 BC) 
Ashoka Vardhana (269 BC-232 BC)
These names from the List Of Hindus!
:They say jesus went to india to learn his mystism just like moses.  Back in the days of asoka, they didn't have a name for buddhism.  It was just like Hinduism except that it didn't accept the vedas.--Dangerous-Boy 06:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support deleting this article. With time this list will grow insanely long. Use common sense and delete. If you still want to preserve it, break it into parts or categorise people into sub-category of hindus. But I still prefer complete deletion of this. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 18:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dispute

message: We can note the same problem here.
How do you brand The Great Buddhist Emperor Ashoka as Hindu? The Bhangi-Brahmins are branding anybody as Hindu? On what basis are you doing such mischievous things? Who told you that  Chandragupta Maurya (324 BC-301 BC) and 
Bindusara Amitraghata (301 BC-269 BC) are Hindus? Don’t you people think that it is absolute foolish to bran anybody as Hindu without defining ‘Who Is Hindu? 
The simple definition of Christen is the follower of Jesus Christ and Bible, the muslims is who belives that there is God named Allah and holy book Kuran now tell me how to decide who is Hindu? And why these so-called Hindus are so confused to give an answer to such a simple question. Those people who themselves don’t know how they became Hindu are branding others as Hindu. On what basis they are doing such foolish things? The people who themselves don't know how they became hindu are brandins others as Hindu!
Tomorrow these Brahmin-Shudra’s will brand that Jesus Christ (1 A.D. to 33 A.D.) was also a Hindu!! Will you accept it? Don’t you think this is insulting to brand all Jain, Buddhist or Christen personalities as Hindu the great Phallus Worshipper i.e God Shiv Lingam worshipper? 
It is request to Wikipedia Administrator  to remove 
Chandragupta Maurya (324 BC-301 BC) 
Bindusara Amitraghata (301 BC-269 BC) 
Ashoka Vardhana (269 BC-232 BC)
These names from the List Of Hindus!
:They say jesus went to india to learn his mystism just like moses.  Back in the days of asoka, they didn't have a name for buddhism.  It was just like Hinduism except that it didn't accept the vedas.--Dangerous-Boy 06:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ashoka

message: If we keep adding any name in this list then I think whole Wikipedia will not be enough for one article!
There are millions of Brahmin-Shudra's around this world. The born hypocrate will kee adding millions of names in this list of Hindus without giving practical, logical and acceptable definitionof 'Hindu'.  We can not stop such people these people will keep adding named and I think this is certainly not good ! 
Some poeple will start writing names of List of Muslims ?
Some will start List of Christens? Is it fare? So it is better to remove the article List Of Hindus. The problem is that who will check the Authenticity? People will keep writing names which they can remember for last 3000 years :):)
And these Caste Brahmin and Caste Shudras will write anything because for them definition of Hinduism is very flexible! As per the Caste Brahmins Convience :) so it is better to remove the article 'List Of Hindus' it is certainly unending. Any Bhangi-Brahmin will write his neighbours name in the list !
:I support deleting this article. With time this list will grow insanely long. Use common sense and delete. If you still want to preserve it, break it into parts or categorise people into sub-category of hindus. But I still prefer complete deletion of this. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 18:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: It is better to remove this article 

message: Some of the names on this list seem very dubious, robert opeheimer a hindu? i've studied this amn before and i've never come across the idea that he was a hindu. there should be citations provided.
-Brodey
This article is a piece of crap.  Entries must be supported by citations Tiruvale (talk) 19:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is a piece of crap  

message: RATAN TATA IS NOT A HINDU! HE'S A PARSI AND A ZOROASTRIAN FOR PETE'S SAKE. HE GOES OFF!
-User: Afghan Historian
:CHILL!--Dangerous-Boy 03:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ratan Tata

message: Isn't she muslim?--Dangerous-Boy 03:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mira Nair]]  

message: Shevchenko mentioned his new religion on an Ukrainian Televison Talk Show - Buddhist143
:Can you try to find any news items online. If it is something more than a rumour, there should be something available on it in the net. Tintin (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Shevchenko

message: Isnt this a BLP nightmare? Why does this exist when we have categories, which are much easier to police? Hornplease 06:39, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is. And furthermore all those people that are listed as allegedly "influenced" by Hinduism are included without any references or sources. I just removed Alfred North Whitehead, who was certainly not influenced by Hinduism. There may be a few superficial similarities with some varieties of Hinduism and his Process Philosophy of Organism, but such you can find between any pair of arbitrarily selected philosophies. Whiteheads pluralistic ontology of neutral monism implies the complete rejection of ontologies like the Advaita Vedanta non-dualism of Hinduism, which pretend that the ultimate reality is one (Brahman) without a second, includes everything that is (mind, matter, energy, past, present and future), and pretend that time and everything finite is just illusion (Maya). If at all influenced by eastern spirituality, Whitehead was rather influenced by Buddhism (e.g. the buddhist not-self Anatta has some similarities with Whiteheads view of the souls and things as patterns of sequences of events), but there are also strong differences (e.g. concerning the ultimate reality versus illusion of time). Anyway, this list is just bogus and blunder and should better be removed completely, unless all claims are substantiated with proper sources!--Dr. Günter Bechly (talk) 10:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am deleting every single unsourced entry, having just cleaned up :Category:Indian Hindus and knowing that there are other applicable categories where violations of WP:BLP and WP:V have occurred. As umpteen other people have said above, this is a complete mess. In future, no source = no mention. - Sitush (talk) 18:34, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  BLP