Talk:Swami Rama

message: Someone who blanked the section related to the above asked "Why is Rama being singled out?"
Answer - it's HIS FREAKING ENTRY.  Reference to other people belong on other pages.
Use some common sense people.  If there is a list entry for "gurus who were indicted on sex-related charges" and simply added the tag at the bottom of the page, would that make you feel better?  
All this blanking is making it harder and harder to assume good faith.  Sadly, even if you don't believe any of it is true, it is part of his public biographical history and you can't change the past.  Debate it somewhere else instead of depriving people of the right to know and make up their own minds.  Or if you have a leg to stand on, add documented contradictory information -- it will be welcomed with open arms by those of us who prefer objectivity and balanced view.  But blanking it is worse than any imaginable breach of NPOV.  DON'T DO IT, or we'll ask the thread be locked.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venus Copernicus (talk • contribs) 18:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to Stop Blanking 

message: Women's rights have far exceeded their means and clearly such income is far beyond their means too, such is the case of such frivilious claims and worse nonsensical ones too. As the previous edit claims that only the swami's reputation is at stake, such blanks are unwarrented in the only realisation that such women ONLY WANT TO MAKE MONEY this way.
----
The author is a senior scientist and  a swami who only knows the swami rama system far too well and the saint to realise from a number of investigations that all these claims are untrue.
Instead of the scientific investigations on parapsychology, maybe the need of the hour is an investigation on these women, their psychology and a reasonable way to predict when the next such case will emerge, maybe someday even a female anti crist too?
ANY funding for this?
Clearly $1.67 million for this
Dr Bheemaiah  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.95.109.103 (talk) 15:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ridiculous and frivilious claims 

message: The entry was made by Robert Walkter himself, which is against the rules.  Further, Walter has been publically discredited, and his memior roundly disabused.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.118.244 (talk) 20:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children of Swami Rama deleted 

message: I've received childish threats and insults that don't belong here, or anywhere mature discussion takes place. Two things must be made clear:
1. ANY accusations that I have a personal interest in this article is FALSE. I have never had any relationship with anyone related to "Swami Rama" or his Institute. I am completely impartial, and my edits are based on what is properly referenced, not what I believe or don't believe. This is simply an article that I found with information regularly blanked without just cause, and I watch it to protect the integrity of the information available. If someone has a problem with that, they need to find another place to play, not here. This is grown up time.
2. If sources referenced here are "discredited" then anyone is welcome to prove it, not just say it and expect us to accept it like they are God. And don't argue it without backing up what you say, because this isn't the place - the right thing to do is cite sources (if they exist) AND ADD THEM TO THE ARTICLE FOR MORE BALANCED NPOV. Both sides can then be considered. But just arguing the information is incorrect and therefore shouldn't be allowed to be referenced is HEARSAY unless there is a source. Common sense. Like any other honest editor, I welcome ANY reference on this issue, for or against this claim or any other information.
The bottom line is that if someone can properly reference that information from one source (such as reports of Walter's claims) is contested by another (such as DNA testing), I applaud them. But no one will decide which sources are true for the rest of us. Not on MY watch.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venus Copernicus (talk • contribs) 01:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're impartial, why is it that the only contributions that you've made to this article are consistently negative?  Why is it that you attacked Empacher repeated here and in other venues?  Why is it that you make no other contributions to this topic area excpet this page?
Ansd where do you get off telling someone to 'stay off WP"?  The only one playing God here is you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.248.150.96 (talk) 17:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with Venus Copernicus. The comments by that first IP were way out of line as we are to comment on the contributions, not the contributers. ~ Troy (talk) 00:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blanking and belief parenthood of Walter was discredited 

message: Am I pessimistic for thinking that cleaning up all the non-conforming nonsens added to the article will result in me being accused of taking sides? Before anyone starts, let me say that I removed SOME of the changes recently made because they are the kind of comments (not facts or references) that don't belong in ANY Wikipedia article, ANYWWHERE. 
Waxing on about how great Swami or is people are is mere opinion. There may be truth to it, and I may or may not agree, but it is OPINION and therefore does not belong here. Also, asserting inside information as to someone's MOTIVES does not belong here. Lastly, praising and worshiping someone in a Wikipedia article ist he furthest thing from what belongs here, exactly the same way that an isnult would not belong. This is not my opinion. This is common sense. These are the rules, and you can ask any authority here to back me up on this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venus Copernicus (talk • contribs) 00:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Supposed True Knowledge versus Verified Information over Opinions - the REAL WP objective

message: I am willing to go over, point by point, every single edit I reverted and explain why. But most of them are so obvious, I'd rather jsut have a moderator step in and clean this up. Just look for yourself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venus Copernicus (talk • contribs) 14:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Stupid Edit Wars

message: Or at least a bot should be set to prevent blanking.  The new IP user is very likely the same person ans the previous one doing the same thing over and over. 20:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Please Lock This Page

message: I notice a recent addition to the section on Swami Rama as a father, saying he also had a daughter named Miranda Marbaniang, who lives in Shillong, India. I would love to know more about her: Who is her mother? Was her mother married to Swami Rama? If not, what was their relationship? I'd especially like to know who contributed this information, so I can learn more. Thanks!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.66.183 (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Children?  

message: Here's the section that was removed:
"Swami Rama is reportedly survived by one daughter and two sons. Two of these children have been acknowledged in "At the Eleventh Hour," a biography of Swami Rama written by the current spiritual leader of the Himalayan Institute of the USA, Pandit Rajmani Tigunait (see also Tigunait's 2001 interview with Yoga Chicago). http://www.yogachicago.com/sep01/interviewpandit.shtml</ref> These children are his son, Mohit Kumar (or Mohit Dhasmana), http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1233164/</ref> and daughter, Devyani Mungali, http://www.sanskritischoolpune.org/aboutus.php?id#section2  by his former wife in India, Lilu Kumar, whom he married after leaving the post of Shankaracharya. Lilu and Mohit Kumar have been involved in several lawsuits in India (notably Original Suit No. 865 of 1997 filed in The Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dehradun), challenging the current leaders of the Himalayan Institute Hospital Trust, founded by Swami Rama.
Robert Walter, an American registered securities broker, claims to be the younger son of Swami Rama. He and his mother, Shirley Walter, plan to publish a double memoir of their relationships with Swami Rama and their involvement with the Himalayan Institute, "Son of a Swami: A Life of Lies."  http://www.sonofaswami.com  Shirley Walter was a founding director of the Himalayan Institute USA, according to the original incorporation papers filed with the Illinois Secretary of State. Her yoga center became Swami Rama's first base of operations in the United States (also described in "At the Eleventh Hour" by Tigunait).
Another woman, Miranda Marbaniang of Shillong, claims she is Swami Rama's oldest daughter."
Obviously the last sentence would need a source. The other sources need to be checked to see if they meet WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 07:14, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children 

message: There's a remarkable paragraph in Psychokinesis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychokinesis) about Swami Rama, complete with citations about how he demonstrated psychokinesis (moving a needle a few feet away). How is this not mentioned in this article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.125.101 (talk) 06:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psychokinesis 

message: After multiple contributions, the flags at the head of the article no longer seem pertinent. If no objection(s), will remove them in 30 days. Elfelix (talk) 02:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of flags

message: In 1997, a woman won a lawsuit regarding multiple sexual assault through Swami Rama while she was attending the Himalayan Institute in 1993. </ref>
Please add further information, I find this very important in a spiritual and human sense.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.95.5.60 (talk) 12:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I just added this to "Criticism":