Talk:Tejendraprasad

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Minor Corrections & Main Photo[edit]

I've made a few minor corrections in spelling and grammar. I dont have a recent photo of Maharajshri - the first photo of him on this page is very grainy, does anyone have a better snap? wildT (talk) 08:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Title[edit]

If you see the title of articles on the Pope (leader for Roman Catholics), it says Pope John Paul II, instead of his name, John Paul. Hence, the title of this article too should contain the full title of the Acharya and just not his name only. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 10:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check out Wikipedia:Honorifics#Honorific_prefixes and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Clergy). If there is a clear order of clergy, and there is some documentation with reliable sources as to how they gain a certain title, then it can be used. What I have removed throughout these pages are the honorific titles: shree, maharaj, acharya, guru, hari, etc. The point of the policies is to only use titles when there is some clear distinction in gaining the titles. For example, priests in the Catholic church have to attend seminary school and become ordained. Some guy who declares himself to be the pope isn't the pope, because there is a process of election by cardinals. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 16:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With ref, to your example where you said a pope has to be elected by a process of election by cardinals, hence there is a process. It was decreed by Swaminarayan in his will, the Desh Vibhag Lekh, that his successors will be the Acharyas and that they have to take a certain title. Now, no person can just become the Acharya, the Acharya has to be from the Dharmakul, i.e. Family of Dharmadev, father of Swaminarayan. Swaminarayan installed sons of his brothers as Acharyas and the blood line continues till date. The most able person from the family is chosen by the Acharya to be his successor, who is given the title of Lalji Maharajshri(for Pre Acharya status). Both the above the above pages do not cover Hindu heads, but because they are equivalent to the Popes as heads of religion, they could be given same status as the Popes. This is what I have followed, adding just the name and title, not honorofics such as His Holiness etc. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I now propose to move the article to Sanatan Dharma Dhurandar Acharya Maharaj Shree 1008 Tejendraprasadji Maharaj. I further propose the other Acharyas articles be moved in the same way. If anyone has any objection please state he objection below, else I shall go ahead with the proposals. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 21:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the key here is not to make it too complicated, if Honorific forms a part of the legal name, or most popular name, so be it. If you make google books search and the name does not come up as you spelled and something else comes up - that is a problem as it means he is nor really addressed by this name... Wikidās ॐ 22:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think Acharya Tejedraprasad is better than the long confusing title with a number?? Cuñado ☼ - Talk 15:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well tht is his full title (1008 is a part of the title of the Acharya). If its confusing we could move it back to what it was (and shree and maharaj are part of the title, not honorofics) and mention the whole title in the article - it is important to mention the whole title to make people reading the page aware that it is his full official title. The name should not have been changed without a discussion in the first place. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was just thinking about this .. mayb Acharya Maharajshree Tejendraprasad Pande might be the mos viable option. Part of the title as well as his full name is included in this. Anyone object to this? ATG Contact 12:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done : moved this and other Acharya articles in line with this. ATG Contact 23:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I still object to having Maharajshree in the title. I admit that I don't know Hindu culture very well, but I've learned enough to know that it doesn't belong in an article title on wikipedia. According to what you told me, Acharya is a specific title of leadership in the religion, and Maharaj and Shree are honorific titles of worship that don't belong. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 05:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The words are part of the official title and the rules clearly state that religious heads articles can have their title included as the title of the article. By your own admission you state that you dont know the culture well - although these words can be honorofic at times, they are also other uses for them, like this. To give you an example apart from this, Shriram is a hindu name. Will you say that Shri is honorofic and Ram is his name? ATG Contact 10:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All right I'm tired of dealing with this. You just don't get it and I don't care enough to argue about this and a dozen other issues that I try to correct and you insist on a silly version of something. You could call the Pope "Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop of Rome, leader of the Roman Catholic Church, and head of state of Vatican City", but we use Pope Benedict XVI. Having an official title has nothing to do with wikipedia's policy on naming articles. The title "Acharya" is all you need, and anything else like "maharajshree" or "his royal highness" or "lord" or other honorifics don't belong. If you continue to make these Swaminarayan articles confusing, unencyclopedic, and full of untranslated Hindu words, the result will be a bunch of nonsense that nobody will take seriously. You're welcome to go down that route, but I'm removing all these from my watchlist. Someone else will have to improve them. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 23:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are most welcome to help out with Swaminarayan articles and your help is appreciated. I totally agree that the articles need to be simpler, more enclyclopedic and have translations of all Hindu centric words used in them for the articles to be rated well. Pl. remember that I am not the one to give him the title nor have I insisted on having the full title as the article title. Around The GlobeContact 23:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article should follow wp:Naming conventions (clergy) It should be moved to Tejendraprasad, with redirect from the old article name. Honorifics, degrees, salutations, forms of address and titles do not belong in article names except to the minimum extent necessary for disambiguation from other articles about similarly named individuals. LeadSongDog come howl! 19:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MoS is quite clear on this. But your recent proposal [1] is interesting but it contradict [2], which is based on a previously reached consensus. Let us see if you can build a consensus, but that would have to include omitting titles of Pope from the likes of Pope John Paul II. File RFC and see how it goes (as it obviously concerns rather a few articles, all of them went through the consensus building, and are based on MoS. Please notify us of RFC if you manage to do it. Wikidas© 05:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Refer to [3] on wp:Naming conventions (clergy) - Acharya is equivalent of the Pope in Swaminarayan Hinduism. Im not sure of the article title you suggested - if you wanted to remove his title, then it would be Tejendraprasad Pande and not just his first name anyway. Per Wikidas if you want a change theres got to be a MoS change first. Around The Globeसत्यमेव जयते 06:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Current Mos is -- here -- not sure what would be the naming in Indic version, but the policy proper is WP:Consensus. Wikidas© 06:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since LeadSong had made a revision to (proposed) policy before trying for consensus on individual pages, I reverted the change and made my comment here [4]. Please have a look and continue discussion there. Wikidas© 09:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NCIN has been stable long enough now, we should get on with implementing it.LeadSongDog come howl! 15:37, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tejendraprasad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:14, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tejendraprasad&oldid=1211154490"