Talk:Nirmala Srivastava/Archive 1

message: The problem with simply stating the various background items as facts as opposed to saying that she claims them to be true, is that there are editors around here who say it didn't happen, so stating these things as unattributed fact invites an edit war. Me, I don't care either way, as I know nothing about the lady. At any rate, it would seem like items such as her being jailed as part of the Quit India movement would be pretty easy to verify, so if you can point to some text source for those items, I think that would be sufficient. --Gary D 23:24, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
---
There is a questionable sentence which states that "The French and Belgian governements have also regularly included her organisation in their official lists of dangerous cults."   The list to which the editor is refering is a pre-2005  report to parliament . In 2005 there was a decision to stop the unconstitutional list of "official" sects in favour of public freedom of religious expression
Source:  
Official document: 
If anyone wants to contest this, please do, before I erase France from the source list.
Shane 08:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Attributed claims versus stating items as fact

message: Some of the criticism shouldn't appear in this article. 
points such as:
*Critics assert she claims to be the Supreme Goddess (aka Adi Shakti, or the Holy Ghost) and her followers worship her as such. 
*It is alleged that her followers routinely wash and decorate her feet and then drink the mixture of offered elements (panchamruta), believing it to contain "divine vibrations".
can't even be considered critical in nature - how are these points critical of Nirmala Srivastava?
Sfacets 12:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 14:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mataji's association with Rajneesh is also attested to in Coney's book which is the only academic source. So unless anybody has any sensible objections, this modification is going in. --Simon D M 12:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: I would just like to point out, after several reversions, that 'Self' in the context of this article is being used as a Proper Noun, and as such is capitalised. 
Sfacets 21:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Self as a proper noun

message: I am using firefox (linux) and find the image on the right does not collide with the 'contents' block, when it is on the left it looks awkward. Maybe problem with my browser, please help? Also on biography pages the usual place of the image is the right hand side! Perhaps putting it on the left has some reason? IrfanAli 08:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image Nirmala1.jpg position

message: Please also note extensive discussions on the Sahaja Yoga entry. Sahajhist 22:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other discussion pages

message: I have requested details of source materials from those involved with the Sahaja Yoga websites which have used these statements for several years. Thank you for pointing this out. Sahajhist 22:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed

message: Please do not remove the reference to the University of Virginia website.  It is a valid and credible source. --NovaSTL 08:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No its not. Its a student essay from the year 2000. This issue has been extensively discussed on the talk page attached to the Sahaja Yoga entry. Please read. Sahajhist 22:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not an essay. It's research published by a reliable source overseen by an expert in the field. The date is irrelevant. No one has found pointed to anything in the article that's incorrect. -Will Beback 22:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes it is an essay and, btw by an undergraduate student. The date is very relevant. Sahajhist 00:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I asked you before several times why the date is relevant but you never responded. So, why is the date relevant? Are we only allowing weblinks to articles by PhDs? If so, there won't be many links left. -Will Beback 05:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The relevance of date is that an article that is written in the present tense about a subject can be misleading when changes have occured in regards to said subject.
No one said anything about needing a PhD, however (as previously discussed on the Sahaja Yoga discussion page) references to work by author(s) of unclear academic standing may be removed at any time. Sfacets 05:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: There's no rule anywhere in Wikipedia that says that. If you want that to be the rule for these articles then we're going to have to remove virtually every link, including the "official" ones. But you can't make that the rule for some links but not for others. -Will Beback
06:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I propose you continue this discussion on the Sahaja Yoga Talk page, where the discussion originated. Sfacets 08:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: How about this link ? Also, she was born Christian? I find that hard to believe.71.97.245.142 17:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is correct. Nirmala's brother, H.P.Salve, confirms this in his memoirs (see main page for citation). Sahajhist 22:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference

message: :Image:Nirmala1.jpg - Do we know what year this photo was taken? It appears to be quite old. -Will Beback · † · 07:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the question you were referring to? Does it matter? Sfacets 08:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. It matters. When was this photo taken? -Will Beback · † · 08:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is the date important to you? Please state your reasons. Sahajhist 20:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does this request meet with such resistance? It's a simple question. -Will Beback · † · 00:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Compared to this photograph , taken March 14, 2006 (which is among the best recent photos I've seen), the :Image:Nirmala1.jpg appears to have been taken at least 20 or 30 years ago. -Will Beback · † · 10:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The difficulty with the dating is that very few of the early photos have precise dates. See Geoffrey Godfrey (compiler), The Divine Mother: 1008 photographs of Shri Mataji (London: Life Eternal Trust, 2000) Sahajhist 22:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It shouldn't be hard in this case. Sfacets claims to have taken the photo himself. -Will Beback · † · 03:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image:Nirmala1.jpg 

message: What's our source for calling the subject a "pacifist"? I did a quick Google search and couldn't find anything.   ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 22:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, but that doesn't help. Just the opposite. That letter apears to encourage warfare.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 18:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An editor restored the category, with the comment: "(see int'l honours.)". However I don't see anything there about pacificism.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 04:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That means nothing. A: The only requirement for nomination is being alive, and we've already indicated the subject is a living person. B: One needn't be a pacificist to be nominated or even win the Peace Prize. No one would call Arafat, or even Kissinger, a "pacifist". C: The subject has written a letter calling on George Bush to rid the world of terrorism. It doesn't say anything about doing so with love and pacifism. D: We need a reliable source which calls the subject a "pacificist".   ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 04:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not proposing using the letter as a source. However it is sufficient to raise significant doubt about an unsourced claim of "pacificism".  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 07:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Blogs are not usable as sources for biographies. Also, a few flowery lines aren't sufficient. As I wrote above, we need a reliable source who's called her a "pacificist".  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 04:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The talk is here:  Sahajhist 00:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A very nice talk. Shri Mataji looks much better than last year.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 07:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pacificists 

message: The following statement has been issued regarding this matter:
"Our Deepest Respect to our National Flag
We Sahaja Yogis have the highest and deepest respect for our National Flag, which is the symbol of our National Freedom. Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi participated actively in the Quit India Movement. Her father Shri P K Salve was imprisoned by the British because he participated actively in Mahatma Gandhiji’s Freedom movement. It is inconceivable that any member of Shri Mataji’s family would tolerate even the slightest disrespect to our National Flag.
Possibly, at an Independence Day function held abroad, some foreigner Sahaja Yogi brought our Flag and without meaning any disrespect, kept it on the ground. The Flag was respectfully removed immediately on being noticed.
Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi asks us all to respect National Flags of all countries.
This unintended but serious mistake is greatly regretted. Not even the slightest disrespect to our National Flag will ever be tolerated.
To all those whose feelings have been hurt by this wholly unintended and unfortunate error, we express the assurance that we fully share their anguish and we extend our deeply felt and sincerest regrets and unqualified apologies.
For H.H. Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi Sahaja Yoga Trust
Rajendra Kumar
Trustee"  Sahajhist 01:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is the assertion that it is a copyright violation? I think it'd be better to restore the photo along with a mention of this letter.  -Will Beback · † · 01:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: if you restore the photo, you expose Wikipedia to legal action. The photo is clearly copyrighted material. Sahajhist 01:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A) Who is the copyright holder? B) How do we know this? -Will Beback · † · 03:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Why don't we assume that the people posting the photo are the copyright holders? Unless someone provides evidence otherwise it's a reasonable assumption. -Will Beback · † · 05:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, thats not a reasonable assumption. The person doing the posting has to provide the evidence, not the other way round. Sahajhist 05:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The photos have been posted on various blogs, so one of them must be the copyright holder... The editor needs to seek permission from the original copyright holder (the person who took the photo). Sfacets 17:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I have got the free copyright for the images.Parvez 17:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: From who? Sfacets 17:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: That is confidential. If needed i will submit to wikipedia.Parvez 18:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: That's not how it works. You need to show proof that you own the license to the image, otherwise you cannot upload it. Feel free to contact Wikipedia about it, and then (if you get a(n) (positive) answer you may upload the images again. Sfacets 18:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The holder of the copyright is known to me. He has already had the photos removed from flikr (part of Yahoo). Sahajhist 21:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag photo 

message: WP:WTA calls on us to avoid using "claim" because it isn't neutral.  However if we agree to use it in one instance I think we should allow it in all instances on this page, which would result in the article being full of "claims".  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 22:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: a classic example of wikipediaspeak. Sahajhist 02:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, you've been around here long enough that I'd thought you knew the policies. Sfacets knows, though, because he cites WP:WTA often. Anyway, if we let this one "claims" stand then it's only to change the text so that other assertions are called "claims". For example, "She says'claims that on May 5, 1970 she witnessed the rising of the..." However since the guideline says not to use "claims" we don't have to go down that path. Unless you want to insist on "claims" I'll chnage it back to a neutral term like "says".  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 03:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Claims"