Talk:Maharishi Mahesh Yogi/Archive 2

message: Haven't you read the response posted to you on your talk page?
Do you really think wikipedia admins will allow themselves to hoodwinked again by unfounded lies of what's going on? 
Why are you here..?
What is the purpose of your existence?
Who are you?
Peterklutz 05:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SFacets and the V word 

message: Ran a check to list the top editors
Toward the top of the list I found i.a. Sethie, here's what SFacets and he - one of the article's other TM-critical editors have to say with reference to his own knowledge regarding a subject CFacets persistenly defames:
:SFacets: I agree that there is alot of pro-TM biased editing, however it is important to let them contribute to the article for it to grow (after all followers are logically the ones who would know the most about the organisation). Of course the edits made should be monitored..
:Sethie: I concur 100%. Since Peterklutz, 186. has been around, I believe the articles have improved, a lot... I am definatley opposed to totally censuring anyone, unless every edit is absurd... 
Peterklutz 08:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  confessions of ignorance (copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sethie) 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maharishi_Mahesh_Yogi&curid=176796&diff=61800866&oldid=61675218
The Beatles incident certainly did cause a stir. Do you think this needs references? And yes, he was their "guru" in the public's eye, they were followers and had a personal relationship with him. If you think this should be rephrased, you give it a try.--quadpus 08:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More vandalism by Peterklutz 

message: The article at present refers to the subject alternatively as "Maharishi" and "Maharishi Mahesh Yogi". The second mouthful seems to me to be quite a bad choice for running text (though proper as the page name and in the lead section). Does anybody have a problem with changing the word used to "Maharishi" throughout? I understand that it's an honorific, which would normally be an inappropriate choice, but it seems to me that a) it is the appellation by which he is best known and most often referred to, and b) is there any real alternative? "Maharishi Mahesh Yogi" is too cumbersome, and the surname, Srivastava, would be mystifyingly unfamiliar. Any other suggestions? The usual place to look, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies), is very little help for an unusual case like this, so I invoke Wikipedia:Use common sense and suggest using "Maharishi" throughout, getting rid of the Mahesh Yogi except in the lead. OK? Bishonen | talk 19:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've said, I agree. Even MMY admits that its become something of a name, rather than a title.Sparaig 20:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How to refer to the subject

message: Added quotes by non-meditating researchers who dispute NRC conclusion cited by Skolnick. Sparaig 21:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  other side of research argument 

message: While I'm sure that he said it, the Pagels link takes one to the skepdic website which in turn cites trancenet as the source of the Pagels quote. Trancenet no longer exists so there is no reference to where the Pagels quote comes from. Sparaig 20:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Lawson. I fixed the problem by adding a link to your favorite JAMA Medical News & Perspectives article, which also has Pagels quote.  BTW, as a freelancer for The Sciences, I ghost wrote for Dr. Pagels when he was president of the New York Science Academy. We had a number of very interesting talks about pseudosciences. He was a great scientist, a great educator, and a great author. His mountain climbing accident was everyone's enormous loss. Askolnick 21:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Sfacet for catching my error. My memory was incorrect. My JAMA article did not have all the Pagels' quoted material, so the previous Skeptical Dictionary source will have to do. It really doesn't matter that the link in Skeptical Dictionary no longer works. That link was to a court document, well known to many supporters and critics of the TM movement, which I and many others have copies of. And Skeptical Dictionary is a solid, reputable source well recognized by Wiki. Askolnick 22:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just curious. Was he familiar with John Hagelin's professional work or was he going by the QM Consciousness For the Masses brochures? Sparaig 09:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know. Askolnick 12:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pagels original link is no more... 

message: I see that  immediately started editing the article when Voice of All removed the semiprotection, and among other things reverted my removal of some crude POV (such as the use of the word "sell" rather than "teach"). Considering that this is a controversial subject, could you please edit logged in, to avoid making the history and your own contributions list more confusing? Anonymous editing of an article like this simply encourages edit warring. And it gets worse when you neither use edit summaries nor discuss on the talk page. Please don't make me semi-protect again. Bishonen | talk 15:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits by 203.144.160.242

message: 203.144.160.242 continues to edit without logging in, without edit summaries, and without responding here, so I've semiprotected again. Bishonen | talk 19:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: All right, then: semiprotecting again

message: Dharmabatteries has done his/her own bit of stuff here. I'll not indulge in reversions though I think Bohenen should. "Attempted Rape" of Mia Farrow was never even hinted at by Mia Farrow, to list the most obvious POV entry. At one time, she said that he put his arm around her in private and attempted to get her to sit on his cot. She scurried out. Given that she's probably 6 inches taller, I doubt that this counts as "attempted rape." Certainly she never claimed it. Sparaig 03:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll support Sparig on this. I've never, ever come across any allegation of "attempted rape." Mia Farrow and those who were at the ashram at the time reportely were shocked and dismayed to discover that their giggling guru was just a man - and one who does not live up to his sacred word.  Farrow, John Lennon, and later on Ned Wynn were stunned to learn that MMY, who had taken a sacred vow of celebacy, was a dirty old man who had tried to get into Mia's pants. Later on, when Farrow explained to Wynn what had happened, he wouldn't believe it:  "Mia, he's a Brahmachari. He took vows of celibacy with his guru. You must have misinterpeted his intentions." Writing his autobiography years later, and a whole lot smarter, Wynn explained: "The former Mrs. Frank Sinatra turns to me. 'Ned,' she says with great patience, 'don't you think I know when a man wants to fuck me?" (Wynn, Ned, We Will Always Live in Beverly Hills, William Morrow and Co., 1990, p.259). By all accounts I know of, the giggling guru was only guilty of being a dirty old man (being nearly 3 times Mia Farrow's age) and being innept at his attempts to add yet another notch to the Holiness' bed post.Askolnick 11:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the "rape" reference is to a Rolling Stones interview with one of the Beatles years later.Sparaig 22:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More competing True Believers... 

message: Is this the best wording for the controversy template? "The neutrality of this article is disputed because:
This article contains very little information on it's subject, the Magharishi Mahesh Yogi, and rather serves as an advertisement for transcendental meditation practices without addressing concerns about the Maharishi's behavior or indeed any useful information about the man himself.
For details and discussion of this dispute, see the talk page." Sparaig 22:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV template... 

message: Crossposting. Sorry guys, I wasn't watching very closely. I have now blocked Peterklutz's entire IP range for a month to give you a bit of peace. I'm hoping it won't cause a lot of collateral damage to innocent anons. And if he starts riding the open proxies again, I suppose I'll semiprotect Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Transcendental meditation if you give me a shout. Mind you, MMY is such a mess anyway... anybody feel like cleaning it up a bit? Bishonen | talk 02:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: Peterklutz apparently static IP 85.30.186.206 immediately took over and reinserted the edits, so I've blocked that too for a month. Bishonen | talk 08:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oi vey. I'm also trying to keep my eye on proceedings, but I have a smorgasboard of crapola going on at the moment. --Woohookitty(meow) 08:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How mouth-watering! Bishonen | talk 09:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: So rephrase it... if it is referenced there should be no reason for its exclusion from the article.
Sfacets 04:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peterklutz range-blocked

message: Hello everyone, I'm just now "joining" this page.  I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia, although I've learned a bit in the last week or so from the folks on the Transcendental Meditation page.
I would like to jump in by proposing a change... The statement "based on the principles of Mantra Shastra espoused by the Adi Shankara (c. 788-820 CE,[1]), and taught by his own master, Guru Dev Brahmananda Saraswati" is only an allegation by MMY and is completely unverifiable.  It is also disputable (find "A Visit to the Shankaracharya" here 
I would propose changing it to a new sentence reading "Maharishi states that his teachings are based on the principles of Mantra Shastra espoused by the Adi Shankara (c. 788-820 CE,[1]), and taught by his own master, Guru Dev Brahmananda Saraswati." Tanaats 21:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like your rephrase, and I would add to that, we need a source even for that. Sethie 21:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Seems like a good change.TimidGuy 12:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hello and my initial proposal 

message: The passage "began publicly teaching a traditional meditation technique" is disputable and unverifiable.  I propose changing it to "began publicly teaching what Maharishi states is a traditional meditation technique."   Tanaats 23:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No feedback so I went ahead a did it.  Tanaats 02:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traditional meditation technique? 

message: I put a "main" template at the top.  Should I replace the "see also" section with a navigation template? Tanaats 01:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I went ahead and added the "navigation" template before the "see also".  Deal with it :).  We might want to merge the "see also" into the "navigation" template someday.  Tanaats 01:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New templates

message: Andries 20:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was probably before my time.  What did it say? Tanaats 20:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just press on the link and you will see. Andries 20:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was unclear.  What I meant to say was "What does it say that is relelvant to the article". Tanaats 20:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not understand your question. Read it and judge for yourself if it is relevant or not. Andries 20:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, sorry, I didn't see the link and I was looking at the Kent article instead of the link reference.  So my answer to this whole thing ends up being "I have no idea". Tanaats 21:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why was the source [[Stephen A. Kent]] removed?

message: The sentence "The TM Movement has consistently used modern technology to teach" seems a bit meaningless, and is probably impossible to source.  May I take it out? Tanaats 19:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Thanks for asking.TimidGuy 19:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. It's history. Tanaats 20:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The TM Movement has consistently used modern technology to teach? 

message: Haven't you read the response posted to you on your talk page?
Do you really think wikipedia admins will allow themselves to hoodwinked again by unfounded lies of what's going on? 
Why are you here..?
What is the purpose of your existence?
Who are you?
Peterklutz 05:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SFacets and the V word 

message: Ran a check to list the top editors
Toward the top of the list I found i.a. Sethie, here's what SFacets and he - one of the article's other TM-critical editors have to say with reference to his own knowledge regarding a subject CFacets persistenly defames:
:SFacets: I agree that there is alot of pro-TM biased editing, however it is important to let them contribute to the article for it to grow (after all followers are logically the ones who would know the most about the organisation). Of course the edits made should be monitored..
:Sethie: I concur 100%. Since Peterklutz, 186. has been around, I believe the articles have improved, a lot... I am definatley opposed to totally censuring anyone, unless every edit is absurd... 
Peterklutz 08:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  confessions of ignorance (copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sethie)