Talk:Outline of Prem Rawat

message: I do not think we need this page. We have articles on the subject that are all in the necessary categories and templates. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrary section header 

message: *I modeled it after List of Sikhism-related topics.  It is a useful page that will be expanded upon.  Smee 19:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sikhism is a large religion with many related articles that warrants such a "list". ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, this article was only started minutes ago.  Allow time for expansion.  There are already "many related articles" that are listed here, to warrant such a "list".  Smee 19:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I modeled it after List of Sikhism-related topics.  That is how the information is formatted there, and has been for quite some time now.  Smee 20:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useful list 

message: ::Feel free to add more and to create missing pages.
::Also, please consider working on those listed as stubs or needing attention and to update list as needed.
Jerry lavoie 22:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see List of Sikhism-related topics for comparison.  Smee 23:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed that text from there as it is not appropriate text for article namespace. We welcome the same in all articles in WP. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved comment to editors from article

message: Used the proper names rather than the titles. Note that only the of the brother may be notable enough to warrant an article in WP. I have left the other two brothers without redlinks. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 14:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay.  I have not checked into availability of sources on those yet.  Smee 14:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Familiy names 

message: There are several people in the list that in my opinion, fail the WP:BIO notabilty guidelines, which I have listed below. Suggest these are removed from this list.
* Eugene M. Elliot III, student of Jeffery Hadden
* Daniel A. Foss, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Could not find any info beyond a couple of articles and review of other's people works. Greenwood Publishing group lists him as "has been employed as a computer programmer and data base manager for academic and government researchers." 
* Ralph Larkin, a consultant  (only one article published with Foss above: Beyond Revolution: A New Theory of Social Movements. by Daniel A. Foss, Ralph Larkin)
≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for commenting here first.  I would point out that their research is referenced in other wiki articles.  Perhaps those mentioned above could simply be listed here without wikilinks/redlinks.  Smee 21:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That could work, but it is somewhat different than the treatment in other "list of related topics" in which only topics that have an article in WP are listed. What do you think? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's try it this way first and see how it goes.  I actually think that some of the individuals listed above might be notable, I have found more sources that those you initially listed...  Smee 22:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. If we do not find material for articles about them we can always delete them later. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: The article is a GA, now going through FAR, and it reads: Lord of the Universe is a 1974 satirical documentary film ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes? So? Most of the entries have no further description, and I think it would be a mistake to start adding descriptions to all of the entries. As it happens, that entry was mistakenly labelled a "parody" which is different from a "satire".  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 05:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

text: So, add satire. It is an important qualifier. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 14:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I've removed the unsourced family members and those without articles. See WP:NOT. Do we have a source for the documentary being a satire?  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 17:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Some of the names you deleted, Will, can be sourced to . If you need page numbers, let me know. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are we listing the names of non-notalbe family members anyway? This isn't a genealogy. (If they're important to his life they should go in his bio). Nor do I see why we're listing the names of non-notable scholars with no sources. Unless there's a good reason to keep them I'll remove all of the redlinks.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 00:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure. There is no need for these. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentary 

message: I'm proposing renaming this list. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Prem Rawat 4/Current Article Issues#Category and template names.    Will Beback  talk   19:33, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming 

message: The Arbitration Committee are proposing to combine the discretionary sanctions authorised for this topic area with those authorised in several similar areas. Details of the proposal are at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Motion: New Religious Movements where your comments are invited. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 21:23, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitration Motion