Talk:Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati

message: :Image:Bsst.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Bsst.jpg

message: Note:  Project Banner with Orissa workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under :Category:Orissa or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag  TALK2ME 03:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Orissa Addition 

message: The sources shown in this article are almost entirely internal to ISKON and from that wp:POV. On WP we need sources from more objective viewpoints, which is always difficult in areas of religion. Comparative works must be available for a person of such influence. Let's track some down and use them, lest this be dismissed as merely an ISKON hagiography. LeadSongDog come howl! 13:51, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[wp:RS|Reliable Sources]] 

message: In the external links section, a link to PDF file of the entire book "Shri Bhaktisiddhanta Vaibhava" is provided. This book is copyrighted by Bhakti Vikas Trust and is illegally hosted by krishnapath.org. Sharing of this link on wikipedia amounts to copyright viloation and hence I am removing the link from the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.150.210.187 (talk) 03:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[wp:RS|Copy Right Violation]] 

message: @Dāsānudāsa, please refrain from the Promotion of ISKCON founder with link spam and honorifics. These honorifics are discussed in ACB's article. They do not need to be added everywhere he is named. Venkat TL (talk) 09:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: [Copied from User talk:Venkat TL]: Hi again, just to remind you the honorific here is the Prabhupada, not the Swami, which is part of the gentleman in question's name. With an honorific "Swami" (like saying Swami Vivekananda or Swami Rama), he would be Swami Swami, as his sannyasi name is Swami (like Vivekananda or Rama). Dāsānudāsa (talk) 09:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: To use this article as an example, the Bhaktisiddhanta is equivalent to the Bhaktivedanta and the Saraswati to the Swami. Thanks Dāsānudāsa (talk) 09:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: ACB is not Vivekananda. What is your justification of adding link spam when these two links are already included in the section once. --Venkat TL (talk) 09:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not adding anything. I have reverted your removing something. That said, it is your removing part of ACBS's name that I object to, not the "see also" in the crises of succession section, so I have taken that back out. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 09:52, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotion of ISKCON founder with link spam and honorifics 

message: Starting this discussion to resolve a dispute User:103.2.135.33 has regarding the subject's name:
Should the article have the person's full name and honorifics like this? Why/why not? — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NCIN is quite clear that honorifics like "Srila", "Goswami", "Thakur", "Prabhupada" etc. don't belong if they are not part of the person's common name, otherwise we'd end up with ridiculous formations like Sri Srimad Guruji So-and-So Paramahansa Maharaja, etc., etc., as is common in the Indian religions. The use of the title "Prabhupada" is already mentioned later on in the lead para, anyway. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 12:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper name and honorifics