Talk:International Society for Krishna Consciousness/Archive 1

message: I would like the person that reversed the revisions in the previous version to explain why they did so, because the changes were NPOV not POV.  In fact this version that it was changed to is POV.  When both the versions are compared you will see that the changes refer to the following:
1)  Prabhupada's death is physical-only and not spiritual.  My version pointed this.  Thus my version puts forward a view that the challenger did not like.  It is a question of whether the vision should become limited or not.  A limited vision is POV not NPOV.
2)  The new version mentioned that the eleven chosen disciples were given the task of being instructing and NOT initiating gurus.
3)  Other groups that follow the ritvik method of initiations were mentioned.
4)  The website sources were linked.
5)  The new version tells facts and new views as is thus a NPOV however the version we have now is POV because it ignores the new views and their websites sources. 
6)  The book changes to Prabhupada's books were mentioned and sources for the originals.
--Volunteer 00:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previous Version 

message: I've gone ahead and made a few changes to the page today and have listed the reasons by each one. But feel it really needs a lot of work still. More detailed descriptions, pictures? Also I see little point in having 3 external links to the same website on the same issue, so have kept it to one per site in each section. People will just skip past them otherwise. My apologies for any offence this may cause.
GourangaUK 16:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This page is in need of serious improvement

message: I copyedited the article, and recast everything into encyclopaedic language. For me, this means
*Third person secular throughout
*People die (instead of "meeting their maker," "going to Heaven," or "departing this physical realm)
*Technical terms about religious beliefs are explained in common parlance
*Beliefs themselves belong to believers, and are beliefs instead of understandings
I also chucked a bunch of crime/sex abuse babble, and moved the list of ideological controversies under the heading it seemed to fit under.
Please note that I am disinterested in the subject. I've had some great food at a few temples in my time, but I don't have a very strong opinion about ISKCON because I'm Buddhist. I just want the facts here, no evangelism.
--Defenestrate 00:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyedit, third person NPOV tone, chuck a lot of controversy babble

message: We're moving forward. I think the article is neutral in that it doesn't put anyone in an overly harsh or overly critical light. But it's not a well-structured explanation of ISKCON, and the links section is ridiculously long for an article of this size.
One suggestion might be to separate out the different topics into multiple articles or sections:
*ISKCON, the organization, which I imagine is like a religious denomination, complete with all the worldly problems that go along with such an organization
*Hare Krsna religious practice & belief
*The Maha Mantra 
*How Chaitanya Mahaprabhu came up with the maha mantra
*Similarities and differences between Hare Krsna/ISKCON, vaisnaism (sp), and hinduism
*Cult allegations and popular perception of ISKCON
*Sexual abuse scandals
Again, I really think we should get rid of about half the links. The whole "official"/"unofficial" tag doesn't belong here, either.
--Defenestrate 18:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: This is shown under the major sub-heading "Points of philosophical contention". Contention generally means "a point asserted as part of an argument". I have seen some references to the four regulative principles in certain publications saying that vegetarianism is unhealthy and that of some vegan groups maintaining that this is not true vegetarianism. Otherwise there is no argument among any of the Vedic/Vedanata/Hindu/traditional Indian or even Gaudiya groups where the four regulative principles are involved. Therefore this section can be moved up under a main sub-heading. Kindly check on this aspect.
-Tharikrish 09:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The four regulative principles

message: "Just before his physical departure, Prabhupada set up a system of initiation employing the use of ritviks (ceremonial priests) who would continue to initiate on his behalf during his physical presence, without the need for any physical involvement from Prabhupada. In this way, while Prabhupada was physically present, he could continue to initiate new disciples and remain the initiating guru of the movement."
Nowhere in the directive that set up the ritvik system itself does it state that it must run "during Prabhupada's physical presence". This is a baseless assumption. Therefore the above two sentences should say:
"Just before his physical departure, Prabhupada set up a system of initiation employing the use of ritviks (ceremonial priests) who would continue to initiate on his behalf, without the need for any physical involvement from Prabhupada. In this way, Prabhupada could continue to initiate new disciples and remain the initiating guru of the movement."
So my question is, why does it keep getting changed back? An encyclopedia is meant to give FACTS. Since you cannot back up the sentiment that the ritvik system was meant to run until Prabhupada's physical departure, stating this is WRONG. Plain and simple. Whether or not "most people agree" that the ritvik system was meant to be disbanded has nothing to do with the fact that such a statement is not found in the letter dated July 9th, 1977, which was the directive setting up the ritvik system. If most people agree that 2+2=17 that doesn't make it a fact. Most people can agree on all sorts of nonsense. The fact is that the July 9th, 1977 directive makes no mention of the ritvik system running only until Prabhupada's physical departure. Therefore please rectify your encyclopedia entry. Thank you.
: In reply to the above please see: http://www.jswami.info/ritvik  Jayadvaita Swami has already investigated the question in much detail. What is the gain in promoting the argument here on Wikipedia? It is already mentioned in the main text under the title 'The Guru (spiritual master) and the Parampara (the disciplic succession)'.  GourangaUK 21:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IN REPLY - With all due respect, I don't see how the below statement is in anyway biased. It DOES mention that it was set up while Srila Prabhupada was still physically present:
"Just before his physical departure, Prabhupada set up a system of initiation employing the use of ritviks (ceremonial priests) who would continue to initiate on his behalf during his physical presence, without the need for any physical involvement from Prabhupada. In this way, while Prabhupada was physically present, he could continue to initiate new disciples and remain the initiating guru of the movement. Based on most of Prabhupada's statements in letters, most agree that it was right that the system stopped upon Prabhupada's passing. Indeed, the proxy-initiation ritvik system was disbanded in 1977, on the basis of Prabhupada's instructions in letters and tapes."
"A minority, namely the ISKCON Revival Movement, say it was a permanent order meant to continue even after Prabhupada died. More information about the proxy-initiation ritvik position is offered in "The Final Order," the main position paper of the IRM."
I'm at a loss as to what to more to say on this one? Hare Krishna, ys, GourangaUK 13:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  IN REPLY - My apologies Prabhu, now I see your point, I had not understood exactly what you were saying before. What do you think of Dwayne's amended text below? GourangaUK 10:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I didn't write the original entry and hadn't reviewed the text before, but that is the situation under which Srila Prabhupada wrote the letter starting the Ritvik system. I think it's an important addition as it helps people outside of the movement understand the situation in which the Ritvik system was started. Dwayne Kirkwood 18:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect information 

message: I switched the order in which the Bhagavata Purana and the Bhagavad Gita were mentioned in the very beginning of this article out of respect for the Bhagvatam.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.99.134 (talk) 09:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening comment 

message: Under the contents section of the article "The 'Maha Mantra'" it has a link from the word 'Hare' to an article on 'Hari'.  In my understanding 'Hare' is the feminine potency of Krishna, and 'Hari' is a masculine name of Krishna, so it seems misinformation?  Perhaps an article on 'Hare' could be started and the link set to that instead?  This also goes for the "Hare (disambiguation)" page which says that it is the Sanskrit vocative?  Maybe I am wrong.
Thanks.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 121.72.11.194 (talk) 21:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hare now links to the Hara disambiguation page (which is what becomes Hare in the vocative). Thanks for pointing it out. Ys, Gouranga(UK) 12:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'Maha Mantra' 

message: Hello Smeelgova - although I appreciate your adding to the ISKCON article, I genuinely feel that a survey of mainly Christian (and one Jewish) clergy about their opinion of so-called 'cults' is irrelevant in this instance. I say this not because of personal bias (there is significant negative but relevant material in the article), but on the following grounds:
* 1) Are Christian clergy expected to be a neutral and well-informed source for information on other religious groups who they are in philosophical disagreement with (in terms of their own theologies) and with whomn they have little or no dealings with on a regular basis? I cannot imagine anyone answering with solid evidence to the positive. If it had been a survey of 'neutral' academic observers then the findings would give a very different story.
* 2) The very notion of 'cult' when studying religious movements gives a negative bias to begin with. See  
* 3) I believe the conclusion given to be grossly incorrect. The following quote from a non-Iskcon scholar who has spent time investigating the movement gives (IMO) a much more accurate version : "Simply put, ISKCON has been present in the West for twenty five years. If it was, in fact, a danger to society, we would have long ago discovered that threat and dealt with it. Rather than a danger, ISKCON has shown itself capable of raising up a religious community which turned a number of people alienated from society in the 1970s into substantial law-abiding citizens who have in turn developed a program of service to the community through its efforts to feed the poor and other acts of charity. ISKCON does not threaten any Country's constitutional freedoms. Quite the opposite is true. In a series of cases it has been demonstrated that ISKCON's constitutional freedoms have been continually threatened by its having to repeatedly defend itself on issues which have previously been considered by Courts and discarded."
I am not simply reverting your edit for the sake of it, and am happy to discuss the matter further should you so desire. Best Wishes, Gouranga(UK) 17:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to hear what other frequent editors of that article have on the subject - it might be well for us to move this discussion to that article's talk page.  Happy new year to you as well! Smeelgova 00:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

text: And the cults which most western Atheists are concerned with are Lutheranism, Protestantism, and Catholicism. This doesn't tell us anything beyond the bias of the groups involved, and is not a respectable source by any means. Two of the groups listed are mainstream denominations, Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses, who are often given as 'cults' by other major religious groups because they evangelise, taking their members. 'New Age' isn't even a religious movement. Let's not not give this rag any prominence by using it when you're just arbitrarily fishing for sources that point out the Hare Krishnas as a cult. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 02:24, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISKCON and Religious Survey of 53 Clergy 

message: *This was the sourced survey of 53 religious clergy that was removed from the article, twice:
In 1993, Rev. Dr. Richard L. Dowhower conducted a survey of clergy to assess their opinions of cults, entitled "Clergy and Cults: A Survey". The 53 respondents were from the Washington, DC area and included 43 Lutheran clergy and seminarians, one Roman Catholic and one Jewish clergyman, and an Evangelical minister. Eighteen percent of those questioned about "The cults I am most concerned about are", gave the answer of "Unification Church, Hare Krishna" Referenced Citation(removed from ref formatting to show editors location/citation)Clergy and Cults: A Survey, The Rev. Richard L. Dowhower, D. D., Cult Observer, Vol. 11, No. 3 (1994).
*So, what do other editors think of adding this information to the article?  User:GourangaUK has written his opinions in the section above.  Smeelgova 00:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And the cults which most western Atheists are concerned with are Lutheranism, Protestantism, and Catholicism. This doesn't tell us anything beyond the bias of the groups involved, and is not a respectable source by any means. Two of the groups listed are mainstream denominations, Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses, who are often given as 'cults' by other major religious groups because they evangelise, taking their members. 'New Age' isn't even a religious movement. Let's not not give this rag any prominence by using it when you're just arbitrarily fishing for sources that point out the Hare Krishnas as a cult. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 02:24, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments from other editors

message: These people were in EVERY major American airport in the '70s--my brother and I (chidlren of airline pilot, we traveled a lot) joked about them all the time and knew to avoid them.  The airports were literally crawling with the Krishnas, hence the endless jokes about the phenomenon in movies like Airplane!  There was even a lawsuit, although I don't remember if the Krishnas or the airports won.  Why is there no mention of this--of the lawsuit if nothing else?
64.132.218.4 (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree a special mention should be made of them "living" in airports and harassing customers. 124.254.75.48 (talk) 05:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Literally crawling" ? Hello, this an encyclopaedia. Facts, please, not semi-literate opinion. 121.44.1.12 (talk) 09:30, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Scandals and Controversies

message: Should there not be a more specific reference to kirtans as they relate to ISKCON -- importance vis a vis Sri Chaitanya, how often, and different types or instruments, and so on?  Is the kirtan not an inseparable part of ISKCON daily life?  
Also curious as why no mention of George Harrison or the popularity of "My Sweet Lord", as it references the historical growth and cultural penetration of ISKCON, and demonstrates what is meant by Srila Prabhupada's wide rendering of Sankirtan.  Article also seems light on referencing use of public open-house meals and summer festivals.  
Would think it not accurate to say they have "restaurants" without specifying the serving of  prasadam, or else at the very least say "vegetarian restaurants" so it doesn't read like they own a few BurgerKings. 
If no objections or changes made I'll fix a couple of these tomorrow Joevanisland 23:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any edits and content you can bring to the article are appreciated. "My Sweet Lord" is mentioned in the article "Hare Krishna in Popular Culture". Chopper Dave 23:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See also Sankirtan, which is linked in the current article, but maybe not prominently enough? Ys, Gouranga(UK) 08:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

text:  Hare Krishna. I suggest you write a practices section on a sandbox page (eg. here ) and GourangaUK and I can help work on it and edit it to a NPOV section. Let me know when you start and we'll jump in :) Chopper Dave 21:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgive my poor explanation then, as my own perspective is not that of a devotee and would be (hopefully) NPOV from the start.  I'm more trying to grasp how articles come about when the need for NPOV seems to be offensive to the people/position being explained and would thus seemingly trigger objections.  Perhaps I've met too many devotees!  I can't help but feel guilty describing things such as prasadam and reincarnation as simply theories, even if I personally believed them to be so!  It's more a problem with who am I to write about ISKCON.  In truth, I'd be happy if the section "Preaching activities" was renamed simply "Activities", with the current preaching info plus a little bit more about devotee life.  I'll try something in sandbox as soon as I can.  Joevanisland 21:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Joe, Wikipedia is based upon the ideal of encyclopedic, informed, neutrality in it's articles. Any additions should be written with this in mind, with objections/debates being beaten out via consensus on the discussion pages. Best Wishes with your edits, Gouranga(UK) 11:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The focus within Gaudiya Vaishnavism (including ISKCON) is on the teachings of Bhagavad Gita, Bhagavata Purana and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. As a tradition it is more closely connected with the Puranic texts, and some of the Upanishads, rather than the three Vedas. Still, I suspect that there are some rituals that could potentially be connected to the rituals in the Vedas - at least in some form, or which are taken directly from them directly. The fire sacrifice during initiation and deity installation is the one that first springs to mind. Would have to find a GV priest who performs temple rituals and know the background behind them. Gouranga(UK) (talk) 16:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ISKCON is based on the essential Vedic message - matras given in diksa include Rg Veda's himn and the main chant is Upanisadic maha-mantra. Thus Vedaantic roots of the movement are hard to ignore. Number of rituals are performed, such as angihotras, but majority of the rituals are based on the Vaisnava Pancaratra system.Wikidās 21:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISKCON Activities 

message: Ok, I know that Swami Prabhupada translated the Vedas and other legendary Hindu scriptures. But does ISKON actually perform rituals in the vedic scriptures ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ne0Freedom (talk • contribs) 22:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The focus within Gaudiya Vaishnavism (including ISKCON) is on the teachings of Bhagavad Gita, Bhagavata Purana and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. As a tradition it is more closely connected with the Puranic texts, and some of the Upanishads, rather than the three Vedas. Still, I suspect that there are some rituals that could potentially be connected to the rituals in the Vedas - at least in some form, or which are taken directly from them directly. The fire sacrifice during initiation and deity installation is the one that first springs to mind. Would have to find a GV priest who performs temple rituals and know the background behind them. Gouranga(UK) (talk) 16:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ISKCON is based on the essential Vedic message - matras given in diksa include Rg Veda's himn and the main chant is Upanisadic maha-mantra. Thus Vedaantic roots of the movement are hard to ignore. Number of rituals are performed, such as angihotras, but majority of the rituals are based on the Vaisnava Pancaratra system.Wikidās 21:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  
ISKON
ISKCON: Followers of the Vedas? 

message: Why is a statement from ISKCON own source given as a fact? 217.198.224.13 10:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it shows that ISKCON is non-sectarian in it's ideals. To what extent it does or doesn't meet it's own ideals is a totally different question, but the source clearly illustrates this as an ideal of the organisation. Regards, Gouranga(UK) 10:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But nevertheless, ISKCON's ideology clearly puts it under the Gaudiya Vaishnava sect and it promotes bhakti yoga so I don't get what it means by being non-sectarian.Domsta333 (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to ISKCON it does not promote a particular sect, but adds.Wikidas© 03:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Non-sectarian in its ideals"

message: ISKCON arranges Rath Yatras in India and around the world at different times. These Rath yatras were objected by the Jagganath temple of Puri as being against tradition.  Adding a note of the issue in img cap.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have heard the story, which to me sounds largely political, and wouldn't see it as being noteworthy enough to add into the article. Ratha Yatra's have been happening around the world since the late 1960's. Think why are people objecting suddenly? Jagganatha is free to go where and when He chooses. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, this should be added as per NPOV. Giving a sense of the criticism faced by ISKCON (which can be regarded new Vaishanavism) by the old guard.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see that NPOV really comes into it. It's a story created for political purposes. By adding it here we are simply letting Wikipedia be used as a political soapbox. The history is that the Jagganath temple doesn't allow Hindus into the temple of non-Indian origin, or who are not from traditional Hindu families. It has had this rule for hundreds of years. One of the founder acharyas of the Gaudiya tradition known as Haridas Thakur (from 1400's) is one such example. Gaudiya Vaishnavas who were born originally in Muslim families, or from outside of Hinduism have in the past, largely tolerated this and got on with things (at least I don't know of any past protests). In recent years a lot of members of ISKCON when visiting Jagannath Puri for pilgrimage have felt it wrong that pilgrims who are racially African, Caucasian, or Chinese etc... are not allowed entry to the temple, even though they are practising Hindus. I don't know all the details, but especially in December last year, a number of articles appeared in the Indian press which were critical of this no-entry to foreigners rule. Now, shortly afterwards suddenly some members of the Jagannath temple are creating news stories which are critical of ISKCON. Does this not sound like a strange coincidence? The simple facts are that the members of the Jagannath temple have the responsibility to decide who is permitted into the temple and who isn't, and members of ISKCON have the responsibility to decide when they have their festivals. In my humble opinion this whole tit-for-tat scenario has no place in Wikipedia. Sincere regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 12:39, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am sorry to say this but the reasoning above is WP:OR. If Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has a criticism section. An article devoted to criticism of Hinduism. Why can't this article ISKCON have the section? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article includes plenty of criticisms (see: internal problems & controversy), but the above is a story being distributed for political reasons. How is it WP:OR for me to say that on a talk page? I really don't see it being notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 14:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think. Lets wait for somebody else' comments rather I and you (GourangaUK) having a fight. I still think atleast a 1-liner be added in controversy then. The Internal problems and controversy does not discuss view of organisation by other Vaishanava or HIndu outfits.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text:  Given that the Jagganath temple is not funded by ISKCON and **its** rules and policies of not allowing non-hindus to enter the temple is much much older than ISKCON iteself, what is your (ISKCON's) basis for demanding that they open their doors to ISKCON members? Desione (talk) 08:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text:  There are many organizations (such as Jagganath temple) who restrict their membership and the right of private organizations to restrict membership has been well recognized in modern legal courts throughout the world. So again, what basis does ISKCON has in demanding that Jagganth temple open its doors more than it has Desione (talk) 08:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Dear Desione, your above comments are innapropriate and off-topic. The question is in regards to the notability of the story for inclusion in this article. This talk page is not for people to air their own personal views or have a general debate. As I stated above "members of the Jagannath temple have the responsibility to decide who is permitted into the temple and who isn't". Who are you arguing with? Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 12:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: GourangaUK, I probably didn't phrase is right. What I was saying was that the event is not only notable but should be fully discussed. What needs to be discussed here is basis on which an organization (ISKCON) that does not even consider itself Hindu (or not sure if it is Hindu) is demanding that Jagganth temple allow entry to its members. Jagganath temple has full legal basis for denying entry to anyone it pleases. Do you see why this event is very notable and should be discussed at length? Thank you. Desione (talk) 10:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

text:  GourangaUK, I waited for a third party to comment. Desione supporting the inclusion, readded Referenced material about the controversy. The controversy reflects IMO the view of other Vaishanava (Hindu) organisations towards ISKCON.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's 'referenced' material about a controversy, stick it in the controversy section, not in an image caption. Personally I feel this controversy is of little significance and disappear overnight, not worth mentioning in the article Chopper Dave (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: With all respect, Desione's opinion is hardly neutral - and the above comments are again an attempt to become involved in a general argument, which is not the proper use of a talk page (see WP:TALK). Especially considering the current debate we are both involved in on the Hinduism talk page, I can hardly take that as a concensus. I'm not convinced that NDTV is a reliable source, and as Chopper Dave has stated, even if we do include the information, it should be in the controversy section, not within the image caption. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 20:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: GourangaUK, I don't have an intention to argue out with you on this at length. But since you question my neurality allow me to respond. Common sense (as opposed to bias or neutrality) dictates that the basis on which a self-proclaimed non-hindu organization disrespected and agitated against one of the most well respected Hindu institutions (which has acted well within its rights) should be discussed in detail in the ISKCON article. As per common sense (as opposed to bias or neutrality), this is an unusual act not just in the scope of Hinduism but in scope of any religious institution. Thank you Desione (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Adding in controversy as per DAve. Though the online link to the incident on The Times of India website seems to dead (TOI had publishd the story in the newspaper), i found this  which says "Earlier last week, the priests had criticised ISKCON for holding "untimely" Rath Yatra".--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi Redtiger, the TOI link is better, and the way you had written it out makes more sense now within the article. I have made some changes to the general wording and added some additional links on the subject. It is something that was building up in 2007. My view is still that it is too small affair to make much notice of, but if it has caused a stir within India then I understand your point. Best Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 19:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just made some minor modifications, removed racial/foreign references (both from Jagganth temple and ISKCON) and added Jaganth temple POV. Desione (talk) 08:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I tend to agree that the controversy will go away in time (if something similar doesn't happen next year). However, from what I have seen it has been building up for years. Desione (talk) 08:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Desione, I have reverted your changes on the grounds of WP:OR. It is not so simple to say that ISKCON is not a Hindu organisation, nor is that the reason why ISKCON members were not let into the temple. Members of ISKCON of Indian parentage have been allowed access for many years. It has only ever been people of non-Indian parentage that were not allowed. When they say 'No-Hindus allowed' it incorporates the belief that in order to be Hindu, you have to be of Indian stock. Have you ever visited the temple with non-Indian pilgrims? I have. This is how it works. I havn't got any particular problem with it, but we shouldn't change the facts. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 15:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rath Yatra Controversy 

message: *I have added some ISKCON related websites to the reliable sources notice board at Reliable sources for ISKCON related articles. Please feel free to post any reference you are considering using for ISKCON related articles and biographies. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 17:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable sources are discussed and presented on WP:RSN. Most of websites and all blogs are not Reliable. I have not seen a single good reliable source for DOM in a decent secondary source. Stop adding references to blogs and websites that are unreliable. See Google books and Scholar:  Wikidās ॐ 19:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources for ISKCON related articles 

message: *There is a discussion concerning an ISKCON work group located at, ISKCON work group or subproject. Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ISKCON work group

message: Category:Vaishnavism is an important category and should not be removed Wikidās ॐ 07:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ISKCON is already a sub-category of Vaishnavism [in Wikipedia], and thus the article should not be in both categories.--Editor2020 (talk) 16:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

text: It is in Vaishnavism, that's what I just said. You can't seriously be saying that the article "ISKCON" should not be in the category "ISKCON", so I am going to assume a breakdown in communication.
We are discussing two different things, articles and categories. The article ISKCON goes in the Category ISKCON. The category ISKCON is a Sub-category of the Category Vaishnavism.--Editor2020 (talk) 18:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reviewed and added appropriate cats. To compensate for the fact that ISKCON is labeled as a separate denomination different from Vaisnavism. There should be discussion on it. I will add it to Vaisnavism Project page. Wikidās ॐ 19:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you discuss categories you want to remove here: - Category:Krishnology appears to be quite on topic. Also Category:Bhakti movement]]  Category:Hindu traditions]] You can be more consistent and since you kept Bhakti movement]]   first time around keep it again. Why do you think that Hindu traditions is not a right category? Wikidās ॐ 20:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

text: It certainly doesn't belong to the lead of the article.Gaura79 (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead section acts as abstract of the article, and more often then not, it consists of both views, one advocating the group, other negating the group, only statement that I added was ISKCON has been a subject matter of discussion with anti-cult movements, and three references were provided, now why was that removed from the lead ? What is the understanding of lead section (introduction part) ? Kindly explain if my addition is wrong!.--talk-to-me! (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Regrading this revert , waiting for your input. :)--talk-to-me! (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Your references were not academic and POV type. It is balanced and placed in the appropriate section of the article, that deals with problems, of which anticult is not the most important one (unless you screen name is Cult free world). Wikidās ॐ 20:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you propose to incorporate the other half, in the lead section, to complete the picture ? If you refer the Anti-cult_movement page, you will find Stevan Hassan there, hence it is not a POV type, I linked it, you removed it.--talk-to-me! (talk) 18:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sure that there is hardly any place for it in the lead. Its just a few words and there is no controversy about it, its a fact of life. If it was a current problem, maybe it would come into lead, but since its not current, 20-25 years old, there is hardly any need to have in the lead. If you get a consensus of other editors on putting it in the lead, I can not see it as a problem, but at present it should stay where it is. Regards. Wikidās ॐ 13:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

text: As i am busy with some other stuff, i request to hold this discussion for sometime, once free, will return back !--talk-to-me! (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: Three references where moved from LEAD to section on internal problems, I wonder how come external criticism belongs to internal problems of the group ?--talk-to-me! (talk) 13:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly doesn't belong to the lead of the article.Gaura79 (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead section acts as abstract of the article, and more often then not, it consists of both views, one advocating the group, other negating the group, only statement that I added was ISKCON has been a subject matter of discussion with anti-cult movements, and three references were provided, now why was that removed from the lead ? What is the understanding of lead section (introduction part) ? Kindly explain if my addition is wrong!.--talk-to-me! (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Regrading this revert , waiting for your input. :)--talk-to-me! (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Your references were not academic and POV type. It is balanced and placed in the appropriate section of the article, that deals with problems, of which anticult is not the most important one (unless you screen name is Cult free world). Wikidās ॐ 20:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you propose to incorporate the other half, in the lead section, to complete the picture ? If you refer the Anti-cult_movement page, you will find Stevan Hassan there, hence it is not a POV type, I linked it, you removed it.--talk-to-me! (talk) 18:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sure that there is hardly any place for it in the lead. Its just a few words and there is no controversy about it, its a fact of life. If it was a current problem, maybe it would come into lead, but since its not current, 20-25 years old, there is hardly any need to have in the lead. If you get a consensus of other editors on putting it in the lead, I can not see it as a problem, but at present it should stay where it is. Regards. Wikidās ॐ 13:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

text: As i am busy with some other stuff, i request to hold this discussion for sometime, once free, will return back !--talk-to-me! (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent move

message: User:Cult free world add very biased sources, no meet WP:Verfiability and WP:Reliability.  Rick Ross is anti-cult activist -- not neutral source.  Freedomofmind is blog, anti-cult POV.  CESNUR site no say is cult, say is sect, and say yoga is sect too. Did User:Cult free world read article?  User:Cult free world do original research.  Please give 3rd party sources. No add bad sources. Thank you very much.  123.242.230.164 (talk) 16:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikidas and Gaura79, sorry if change referecnes.  Please fix.  sorry. 123.242.230.164 (talk) 16:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that that sources should meet WP policy. Please see WP:CITE for info and links to other policies. The statements themself are fair and there are sources to support it.Wikidās ॐ 17:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Stevan hassan (freedom of mind) and rick-ross institute, both are considered experts for cults. An encyclopedia article should contain information from all quarters about the subject. It can be discussed further, just that i noticed that article was missing these critical (important) section, which should be incorporated in the article, how and where, we can discuss that. Article needs some help for sure. :) --talk-to-me! (talk) 19:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, these men no cult experts.  They anticult activists.  This their purpose.  You need professors or universitys as neutral sources.  Thank you very much for listening. 123.242.230.164 (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I disagree with that, since all opposition against a religious movement could be reinterpreted as anti-cult. I think that it is necessary to allow some of the "activism" that can be interpreted as anticult, if the arguments they present can be supported by other sources. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 16:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Wikidās ॐ, this is very common with cult member's, that case of SSP, is not isolated one, here is another such case . It happens, but as far as ISKCON is concerned, its more spiritual, hence does not lead to that path, which Sahaja Yoga, or Sahaja Marg  lead to, we can work together with this article, keeping in view the WP:NPA policy. :) is it possible here.. I hope so..--talk-to-me! (talk) 11:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, sources no good, not 3rd party, from selfwebsites.  Sentence okay, just no good sources. Find good sources.  Thank you very much.  Agree with Gaura79 no lead (WP:UNDUE), but here good. 67.167.134.79 (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The sources are fine. The lead is another question. Sethie (talk) 16:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: User:Cult free world add biased sources

message: The oldest scriptures of Classic Indian Culture are the four (or three) Vedas, the oldest of them being the Rg-Veda the oldest core of which is generally dated to some time not before 1800 BC. The Bhagavad Gita is included in one of the two great epics of India, the Mahabharata which is generally dated to the time from 200 BC onwards, the Bhagavatapurana to the 10th century AD. None of the scriptures mentioned in the first part of the article are - considered even the most generous datings - older than 2,500 years.
(cf. Encyclopedia of Hinduism, C.A. Jones, J.D Ryan - Facts on File inc.
 Dictionary of Indology, A.K. Roy, N.N Gidwani - Oxford & IBH Publishing
 Wikipedia Article)
Akimboa23 (talk) 16:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As a newcomer to this article, I feel the above comment raises a valid question:  The first section of the article reads, "While some classified it as a new religious movement, its core philosophy is based on traditional Hindu scriptures such as the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam and the Bhagavad-gītā, both of which date back more than 5,200 years."  According to its Wikipedia entry, the Bhagavad-gītā is 2 or 3 thousand years old.  So how does the "5,200 years" figure apply?  Macduff (talk) 05:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian Scriptures 

message: This article needs to be factually written.  Saying that the Direction of Management was a "letter" when in fact it is legal witnessed document is untrue.  In addition quoting the parts that are being followed and then deleting any reference to the parts that are currently being ignored by the GBC is untruthful.  
Regarding Srila Prabhupada's appointment of the "eleven", the July 9th letter clearly names them as "ritviks."  That is truthful.  After his passing the eleven became "Zonal Acaryas" by appointing themselves to that post.  That is truthful.  
Anuttamadasi (talk) 23:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not your blog site. Read WP:ENCYC, use WP:RS do not spam this talk page or the pages of Wiki with your links. Disruption to Wikipedia is a serious problem. WP:DISRUPT. Wikidās ॐ 11:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, your mantric recitation of WP policies irrelevant to this comment in an attempt to push your own POV and silence this balanced critique shows your cult-promoting agenda. The comment to which you responded seems to me by far the most informative on this page. Enon (talk) 10:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Wikidas is entirely correct in stating, regardless of the views given in that comment, that it does not belong on the talk page. The comment was a polemic, discussing the issue in general, NOT a suggestion for sourced additions or changed to the article. The Talk page is NOT an open forum for discussing the topic...it is only for discussing referenced changes to the article. ONe's personal opinion or view is irrelevant. The comment mentions no sources, nor specific changes, it is, for all I can tell, a rant about the topic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.65.34.246 (talk) 23:47, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of the July 9th letter and Direction of Management 

message: International Society for Krishna Consciousness is better known as ISKCON in abbreviation. It is more popular and common name thus proposed a move, unless serious objection is mounted. Wikidas© 19:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  ISKCON is the better known name. Support move.--Redtigerxyz  Talk  04:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What evidence is there that one name is more popular than another? In this type topic, I don't know that Google is the best gauge.   Will Beback  talk   05:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  International Society for Krishna Consciousness temples are better known as simply ISKCON temples. The Times of India newspaper uses ISKCON repeatedly here, while gives the full form once. In this article simply ISKCON is used.--Redtigerxyz  Talk  07:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the Times of India uses "Iskcon" in one of the articles, which I don't think anyone is proposing to use here. Is our sole evidence for the predominance of one term over another two articles from the same newspaper?   Will Beback  talk   22:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Certainly ISKCON is the proper name. It is also used for a number of existing categories. In fact the redirect is measured much more then any other redirect normally measure. In other words it is ISKCON that is the most popular and used spelling for the organization. Wikidas© 22:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidence?   Will Beback  talk   22:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move to ISKCON 

message: "Bhavananda Das" (or Charles Bacis) redirect here - yet there is no mention of him. Maybe there should be something under 'controversy'.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.145.210.235 (talk) 00:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: you are right. the article was redirected in May 2008 following this deletion discussion. But if the redirect is to make any sense, Bhavananda Das will at least need to be briefly mentioned here. --dab (𒁳) 12:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Any relevant sources?Wikidas© 03:23, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bhavananda Das 

message: It is a notable logo, and is actually being used by many centres (British). So called "new logo" did not really take off and is copyrighted/licensed in a way that does not allow reproduction in Wikipedia. So the original historical logo is to be displayed. This is not business directory and there is no need to have the "current" logo displayed. The original logo has some meaning (which newer one does not have it seems) and it was designed by the founder of the organization, which makes it more important, notable and interesting for the purposes of the encyclopedia WP:ENCYCLOPEDIA. It is not a business directory WP:NOT, nor does it have to have the latest logo displayed, thus removal of historical logo shall be treated as disruptive and a vandalism. Wikidas© 21:55, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think your edits are disruptive. This is not the current logo of ISKCON and we have to accept it whether we like it or not. You can place the historical logo in the History section of the article instead.Gaura79 (talk) 10:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since "current" logo, that can change at any time, can not be reproduced on wikipedia there is nothing wrong in trying to show a design of the founder acarya and the logo that is based on his instructions. What is disruptive in showing a historical logo? Why do you think it is not appropriate for the Wikipedia? Removing valid content is disruptive  and listing AfDs in retaliation to deletion of Paramadvati  in a knew-jerk reaction is disruptive , , , . It is upsetting when it is not clear to you, that purposeful removal of valid historical material from the page is disruptive. Wikidas© 13:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't mind if you place the historical logo somewhere else in the article, but the placement suggested by you is misleading. This is not the logo of ISKCON.Gaura79 13:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  A photo of a young Benito Mussolini or the old one is not misleading, it is not a dating game it is Encyclopedia, it is not the "current" but most important logo that has to be shown. Wikidas© 13:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Logo of ISKCON 

message: This whole article is NPOV propaganda.  Issues---even serious crimes---are glossed over.  Esoteric cult issues are given fawning attention.  Someone besides shaven-headed traveller-annoyers needs to rewrite this. 
Not even a single mention that---for decades---the face of Hare Krishna seen by most was a persistently annoying beggar in an airport, pestering people to buy religous tracts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.180.83 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 11 June 2011
:Whilst your choice of language may not be very diplomatic, i agree with your broad point. I fully expected there to be a seperate page on the controversies surrounding this organisation and was surprised to find it merely a subsection. I was further surprised to see that most of the critisisms section has been given over to doctrinal issues, and where there is talk of the genuine controversies such as child abuse, brainwashing etc. it is presented very much from the point of view of ISKCON, going more into what the organisation has done to counter these allegations than the allegations themselves.
:I noted after going back through some of the edits that there was a section on financial irregularities which was removed from the article apparently with no discussion as to why? And why does it include "The ISKCON was described by academics[vague] as "the most genuinely Hindu of all the many Indian movements in the West"" if not for defensive reasons?
:Given the notoriety of this organisation and the publicity it has recieved, i am amazed that there is so little regarding these issues. Mankrik (talk) 17:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the vague "academics" to the Klostermaier source only. Pyrlights (talk) 16:09, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hare Krishna propaganda 

message: Under the heading 'Influential leaders since 1977': the sentence regarding Ramesvara, Bhagavan das and Harikesa: none of these three are mentioned in the reference supplied. No mention is made of expulsion of members by the GBC. This is an article about the GBC and various controversies within ISKCON, and it may well be worthwhile to include in this article somewhere, but it does not belong at the end of that sentence, and that sentence is otherwise unsourced and contentious. Elizium23 (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verification failed 

message: The diet describes a no meat, fish, or eggs. Immediately afterwards it has a link to ovo-vegetarianism (which would include eggs). I'd fix it, but I do not know which of these mutually exclusive items to change. 71.110.67.231 (talk) 03:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ovo-vegetarian? 

message: This article has serious NPOV issues and should be flagged as such.50.133.160.189 (talk) 16:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV issues 

message: Can we add a redirect from /wiki/ISCKON
Why HH Bhakti Vikasa Swami redirects to this page? It makes not sense, as he's not even mentioned in the article. There should be a separate article dedicated to him; it should not redirect here. --Iamrcr (talk) 19:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: Hello. I'd like to mention that the article misses out a lot of information regarding ISKCON's belief in creationism and their rejection of Darwinian evolution, the Big Bang theory from physical cosmology, and a host of other manifestly pseudo-scientific and incorrect information  that is spread through their schooling and education system.
A number of academics have already published about this phenomenon in the larger debate about modern attitudes towards science in Hindu social circles. Material for the same can definitely be procured. I'd like to know your opinions about the same.
P2C2E (talk) 02:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information about ISKCON's teaching material regarding their views on science 

message: We need to say who has authorized them per "ISKCON is an authorized branch" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 13:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Authorized by whom?

message: Looks like a lot of ISKCON supporters are trying to remove the litigation section under one pretext or the other. Do not try to misrepresent information. Espectially to User:Cinosaur 
:, I apologize for my delayed response. However, your above remark is unhelpful and borders on violating WP:NPA, WP:HA, and WP:OWN. Please note that your guessing about editors' religious views and alleged biases is particularly unwelcome here or anywhere else on Wiki. As for the litigation section, (1) it's poorly sourced, per MOS on New religious movements; (2) as such, it presents a truncated and slanted views on litigations, thus violating WP:NPOV and WP: UNDUE, and (3) should follow the Internal problems section rather than precede it, both logically and chronologically.  I'm also wondering what you sought to achieve by your request for the article's protection here? And yes, please sign your posts. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the Litigations Section? 

message: This section is informative, but the tone seems more essay-like than encyclopaedic. I think there's a difference between essay tone and encyclopaedia tone. What do others think? Does the section need some mild reshaping?
Regards to all,
Notreallydavid (talk) 23:29, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No references were added since you posted this, and it is indeed a POV essay more suited to a blog than an encyclopedia, so I've removed it. Little Will (talk) 13:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Educational activities and youth 

message: In suriname there is a debtie movement. They are similar to Hare Krishna and brhamacharya ( tweede rijweg). To be a follower you have to video tape your family and you have to take on a lot of debt and then you sell your babies to other people for money.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.49.157.227 (talk) 23:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  suriname - debtie family 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on International Society for Krishna Consciousness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101120070845/http://www.ffl.org:80/emergency-relief/new-york-times/ to http://www.ffl.org/emergency-relief/new-york-times/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:12, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi Arghya1999, I appreciate your efforts to expand the list of prohibited foodstuffs but I think it might be better for clarity to keep this simple, more along the lines of ISKCON's official propaganda. Otherwise we could add gelatine (as in jelly), rennet (in cheese), red lentils (aka masoor dhal), leeks, cochineal (red food dye), edible bone filler in tablets, gelatin again (as in medicinal capsules) – the list goes on and on, if you see my point! So, I hope you don't mind if I revert your edit :-) Samsbanned (talk) 01:45, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The addition was accurate, and I see no reason why it should be removed. It's true the list cannot be absolutely comprehensive, but the prohibition on onions and garlic is important and should be mentioned, as it indicates that ISKON's dietary requirements are much more stringent than simply ruling out meat and fish. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:51, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Accurate? Yes, but out of place here. Who other than a Vaishnava would consider onion and garlic to be a type of meat? Wikipedia should make sense to the general public, don't you agree? For your education, please read any ISKCON (notice the correct spelling - not ISKON) propaganda on the 4 regs. Extraneous items like red lentils, alliums, animal slaughter by-products like rennet and gelatine are never mentioned in the main body of text and are referenced afterwards, in the "fine print". This section is already cluttered up with 'too much information'. Samsbanned (talk) 03:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: A compromise would be reasonable. It should be possible to indicate that eating various vegetables is considered unacceptable without listing each one of them individually. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 03:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not see how this can be succinctly stated in the main body of work. I agree that there is more to prasadamarianism than being a vegetarian but how can this be possibly included here without confusing the general public? The addition of "fish or eggs" is simple, yet alludes to further complexity without clutter. I'm not really that fussed, but if you're going to include onion and garlic then you can't leave out red lentils seeing as they were generated from the body of the same cow. Now, can you see the confusion in the eye of the public? This Wikipedia article is not only read by devotees. हरे कृष्ण Samsbanned (talk) 03:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  4 regs - allium etc 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on International Society for Krishna Consciousness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130123024056/http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/28/en1 to http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/28/en1
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://culticstudiesreview.org/csissueidx/toc2001.1/grprept2001.1_harekrishna/grprept_hk_newsarticles/news_CO.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20021208081854/http://www.cosmicempire.freeuk.com/radhakrsnatemple.htm to http://www.cosmicempire.freeuk.com/radhakrsnatemple.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Within ISKCON, "... men advance spiritually through celibacy and nonattachment; women advance through motherhood and devotion to their husbands in the tradition of stridharma, the wifely duty of submission to the husband and the bearing of sons".[48] Due to this ideology of men needing celibacy in order to be spiritual, sex is something that is not highly discussed within the community. Also, the fact that nonattachment is something that leads to spiritual growth as a man, the men have little attachment for the women in their life. Additionally, men are encouraged to keep women at arms length due to the effect it could have on their gender in their next life.
"Also, the fact that nonattachment is something that leads to spiritual growth as a man, the men have little attachment for the women in their life. " feels redundant- the theme of nonattachment is covered in this section, and the claim that ISKCON men "have little attachment for the women in their life" seems to be maybe what the ideal that men are taught to strive for- but to claim that is how all ISKCON men actually are is an unsubstantiated claim. Hence removed that sentence. Sethie (talk) 21:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The section on procreation and marriage as of 05/04/19 does not talk at all about procreation and marriage nearly at all now. What happened? The first sentence "Within ISKCON, both men and women can advance spiritually by chanting Hare Krishna, studying the Bhagavad-gita As It Is, the Srimad Bhagavatam, Caitanya-Caritāmṛta, and other Vaisnava literature and rendering devotional service to the spiritual master and Krishna. " is not about procreation or marriage. The last sentence "ISKCON has experienced a number of significant internal problems, the majority of which occurred from the late seventies onwards, and especially within the decade following Prabhupada's death.[53] ISKCON has also been scrutinised by some anti-cult movements.[54][55][56]" is totally irrelevant. Cdiesh (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: sentence in procreation and marriage section

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International Society for Krishna Consciousness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100715063108/http://www.prabhupada.com/OLD-site/disciple.php to http://www.prabhupada.com/OLD-site/disciple.php
*Added  tag to http://omg.yahoo.com/news/george-harrison-gets-hollywood-walk-of-fame-star/21279
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:09, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on International Society for Krishna Consciousness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090811002934/http://vedabase.net/sb/1/17/24/ to http://vedabase.net/sb/1/17/24/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100324130526/http://www.ffl.org/ffl_about.php to http://www.ffl.org/ffl_about.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article - and associated pages - is not written in accordance with Wikipedia's NPOV policies. It is clear that people who 'follow' the beliefs of the subject of the article have been slanting and maintaining the content thereof in favour of the subject, and nearly all references are, at root, self-published by the organisation or its adherents. As such it probably needs a complete re-write. Undue weight is given to information which is not of encyclopaedic interest but only to followers of ISKC, and such information is especially subject to questions of factual accuracy by many recognised external sources. Articles on WP must always use reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy and which are not closely associated with the subject.
Do not remove these tags before the various issues are dealt with. (see: Help:Maintenance template removal). There are five different tags used here because they cover different issues with the article. 
--AlisonW (talk) 12:23, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the tag bombing of this page, can you point to some specific text or sections which you feel are undue, POV, or COI.  I am happy to try to correct some of it.  We have a Krishna Temple here in Utah and I occasionally attend their services (since they provide a free vegetarian banquet every Sunday after servies) but I am not a devotee or a member of their religion, just an observer.  Please let me know which areas are not to standards and I will try to make it neutral. Octoberwoodland (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: (also copied to your talkpage) Firstly, having multiple issues with an article is not "tag bombing", but putting that mis-accusation aside you have demonstrated one of the major issues with the article in your comment: "Krishna Temple ... I ... attend their services". The article, as it presently stands, is very clearly created (and 'maintained', from what I can see in the history, contrary to WP policy) by supporters of that organisation - directly COI / "believer's POV". WP articles are created to inform and provide information to those who are not fully cognisant of the subject of that article, to provide a *neutral* background about a subject without proselytising and favouring one view of the subject over another. At present this article fails on every count. By your own admission I would suggest you should not edit it due to COI. --AlisonW (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed and other tags 

message: For over a year the lead has said: "ISKCON was founded in 1966 in New York City by A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada who is worshipped by followers as Guru and spiritual master." In most faiths being venerated as a Guru and/or master is entirely different from being worshipped, and in most extant monotheisms it would be heretical to use the term for anything beyond a very specific list (in Catholicism saints are venerated, etc.). So of primary importance: what word do ISKCON members themselves use with regard to their veneration of Prabhupada? Second, what word do scholars use? Both should be cited and posted. SamuelRiv (talk) 02:51, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Their founder "His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada", is viewed by ISKCON devotees as a divine avatar and messenger of Krishna (God).  They view him as divine and in their temples there is always an image or small statue of him and the devotees leave offerings of either water, a fruit, a flower, or a leaf to venerate him.  Octoberwoodland (talk) 20:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

text: It is actual worship -- physically through multiple daily ceremonies and bathing and dressing of an effigy, verbally through multiple daily hymns and glorification, mentally through internal prayer and the acceptance that the founder has a post-death connection with his followers, and institutionally through the enforcement that the founder is the absolute highest authority on anything that is perceived as "Vedic" by the cult. So, the affinity of the cult followers for their founder goes indeed much further than mere veneration. As such, cult members use the term "worship". Their founder and other cult pinnacle-heads are worshipped on the same level as their god, as per direction of the founder himself. What scholars use is therefore of no consequence in this matter. WillemV369 (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guru worship 

message: This article needs a section to talk about Ritvikism and its main ideas. This is needed because a large Ritvik group in India is called ISKCON Bangalore while in fact it's a separate institution from ISKCON. So this can become a source of confusion for people who are new to this subject matter. This section could also talk briefly about the relationship between Narayana Maharaja's Pure Bhakti and ISKCON, and also about Paramadvaiti's Vrinda. --Iamrcr (talk) 09:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Relationship with other groups" section needed 

message: There are different groups within the institution trying to push distinct agendas over the subject of women's roles so I request editors to watch and research this section closely enough to ensure that there won't be any bias. Specially it should be highlighted that it's a controversial subject. This section was heavily biased when I found it so I performed some edits. --Iamrcr (talk) 09:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and I suggest that any editor who wishes to improve this article should address two main problems: any one of the  tags at article top, and/or the mess of references with lots of red-text errors at bottom. Please do not add garbage to the article without fixing these issues first. Thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 05:18, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality of "Women in ISKCON" 

message: Second paragraph, second sentence. Comma preceding "that its leaders" 198.176.81.33 (talk) 17:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extraneous comma 

message: Please ping me should there be any issues will be re-introduction of the multiple issues, and other additions I've made to make it clear that certain parts of this article do not meet policy/guidelines.  {talk} 19:58, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ping