Talk:Asaram Bapu/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 →

Aquitted by supreme court in november 2012

Asaram Bapuji was aquitted from the case of death of two children in the gurukul in motela/motera. reference supreme court judgement dt 9-11-2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.205.103.122 (talk) 12:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit requested for Statements on 2012 Delhi gang rape victim

Hi,

I want to add few details in the below section

Statements on 2012 Delhi gang rape victim

Asaram Bapu however denied giving any such statement in which he blamed the girl for the gang-rape. According to him his statement was distorted and presented in the wrong way. < ref >"Asaram Bapu denied giving such statement". India News. 2013-01-08. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref>

To prove his innocence, Asaram Bapu announced a reward of 50,000 rupees for anyone who can prove he blamed the victim for the incident. < ref >"Asaram Bapu announced reward". IndiaToday. 2013-01-16. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> < ref >"Asaram Bapu announced reward". IBNLIVE. 2013-01-16. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref>. No claim has been made to the proposed reward by anyone.Saurabh shar (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 August 2013

Asaram Bapu however denied giving any such statement in which he blamed the girl for the gangrape. According to him his statement was distorted and presented in the wrong way. < ref >"Asaram Bapu denied giving such statement". India News. 2013-01-08. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> To prove his innocence, Asaram Bapu announced a reward of 50,000 rupees for anyone who can prove he blamed the victim for the gangrape. < ref >"Asaram Bapu announced reward". IndiaToday. 2013-01-16. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> < ref >"Asaram Bapu announced reward". IBNLIVE. 2013-01-16. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> Till date no one has claimed the proposed reward of 50,000 rupees.

Saurabh hariom (talk) 10:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Yes, that may be added. But, not with the YouTube source, ANI News, NDTV etc (you can search in Google to find these) should be used. See WP:RS, WP:NPOV and WP:FIVE. --TitoDutta 12:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

± As asked i am adding 3 more links supporting the above context, all 3 are from reputed news agencies. < ref >"Asaram Bapu denied giving controversial statement". business-standard. 2013-01-15. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> < ref >"Asaram Bapu denied giving controversial statement". DNA. 2013-01-15. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> < ref >"Asaram Bapu denied giving controversial statement". onenewspage. 2013-01-15. Retrieved 2013-08-26. </ref> I have presented 5 sources for the above context, i hope it is sufficient for the edition.Saurabh hariom (talk) 06:19, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

≈ Hey whats wrong with the above portion, its neutral and based on facts..why cant we have it added. Saurabh hariom (talk) 05:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

≈ This page is semi-protected, only an established editor can make the changes . I would request any established editor to do the above change.Saurabh hariom (talk) 10:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Partly done: "To prove his innocence" is not supported by either source, nor is the last sentence. I've done a little copy edit to the neutral part and added it with the original citations, formatted using the cite web template. Please let me know if you would like to adjust it further. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 01:38, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Suggested text about alleged assault

Suggested text based on reliable sources. Do not delete this thread.

[when?]A 16 year old girl has brought forward an accusation of sexual assault to police[which?] against Bapu. The girl said that the assault occurred at Bapu's Jodhpur Ashram.[1] Bapu denied the accusation[when?] and claimed that it was a conspiracy against him which was orchestrated by Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi.[2] Bapu was asked to appear to police for interview before Friday the 30th of August 2013.[2] Bapu did not appear before police on the Friday. On the Saturday the day after the request had expired, 300 police officers went to Bapu's Ashram to search for Bapu.[3] They evicted Bapu's supporters.[4] Bapu's supporters injured two members of the media at the Ashram.[5][3] Police discovered that Bapu had left his Ashram and was seen near Indore.[3]

IRWolfie- (talk) 10:28, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I think that looks good. I don't see anything that could be left out, and at this time there is no reason to add any additional information. Gandydancer (talk) 10:44, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
To be sure that my "approval" is not misunderstood, I would make several changes in the wording, for instance the first sentence should mention the date that the girl brought the charges to the authorities, dates rather than the day of the week should be used, etc. Also, as noted below, the info needs to be checked against the sources. My agreement is more to the amount of copy re the incident rather than the exact wording. Gandydancer (talk) 12:50, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
You say "On the Saturday the day after the request had expired, 300 police officers went to Bapu's Ashram to search for Bapu." but the source cited says that " 300 police officials have been deployed outside Asaram's ashram to prevent a repeat of attack on media personnel." M.P. police were not searching for Asaram.-Shahab (talk) 11:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Another problem: Eviction of supporters is nowhere mentioned in the claimed source. Moreover supporters injured media persons in Jodhpur (Rajasthan) while 300 policemen had been deployed and the arrest of Asaram was from Indore (Madhya Pradesh). The way this written, it seems that there was only one ashram in the entire episode.-Shahab (talk) 12:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
The reason that it is different is because the newspaper, annoyingly, updated the story today instead of writing a new one, IRWolfie- (talk) 12:55, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
My suggestion is:

On 20th August, a 16 year old girl filed a report in a New Delhi police station claiming that Asaram had sexually abused her in his Jodhpur ashram on 17 August.[6] The Delhi police promptly transferred the case to the Rajasthan police which registered the complaint on 21 August.[7] A summon for questioning was issued by the Rajasthan police on the 26 for Asaram and he was given four days time to reply to the summons and make himself available for questioning.[8] When till 31th August Asaram had not responded to the summons, a team of Rajasthan police was dispatched to his Indore ashram in Madhya Pradesh where he was currently present.[9] Around midnight of the same day, Asaram was arrested, and then on the morning of 1st September he was flown from Indore to Jodhpur via Delhi.[10] He is currently in a Jodhpur police station where he is being questioned. The police have to produce him before a magistrate for seeking further custody within 24 hours.-Shahab (talk) 12:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

looks good, IRWolfie- (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
I think you should include the statement about the conspiracy. This is discussed in two of the sources and represents the subject's direct response to the allegation. Preferably his own words should be used as a direct quotation: I always believe in letting the subject of an article have his say. Supporters of Julian Assange know that nowadays conspiracy theories are a lot more believable than they used to be. Wnt (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
perhaps this can now be moved to the article and further clarifications, such as with the conspiracy theory can be added? IRWolfie- (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Yes, better something than nothing - I didn't mean to hold up having some text there (however, I didn't check the entire text above) Wnt (talk) 19:03, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) While this version certainly does a great job of providing information, perhaps it is a little too detailed? It's a hard call considering that, for example, the Edward Snowden article has extensive coverage of the incident that resulted in a call for his arrest. This version does not mention the political implications, that I feel are important. Gandydancer (talk) 15:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Added few questions in the first draft and made few minor changes in both the first and the second draft. Note, we write dates like 1 April 2013 and not 1st April 2013. --TitoDutta 15:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
  • And the arrest should be included too. --TitoDutta 15:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

-- I also wanted to inform editors that there is no rape case involved in this case. It was sexual assault and medical report confirmed that rape was not involved. Current edit is total wrong info and needs modification. More over some media houses still use this case on rape inspite of repeated confirmation from DCP Lamba. You can say that media is biased and section of media distorting/supressing facts. 1. On social media and Youtube Exposed by Jodhpur police( Statement by DCP on this case which no media published it. Balant misreporting/misquoting by media) 2. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/asaram-bapu-wrongly-booked-for-rape-by-delhi-police-says-jodhpur-police/1/300832.html·( Which clears the case) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.53.241.95 (talk) 05:31, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I also wanted inform you this following explanation needs modification. (my suggestions in bracket) Asaram (Bapu) has been involved in several(too much generalization) controversies including criminal cases filed against him, encroachment by his ashrams, his remarks on the 2012 Delhi gang rape, and a 2013 charge of rape(Sexual Assault) of a minor.


Kaarora (talk) 08:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)1. Can you please update the wiki with honest proofs .

The Girl herself accepted with conversation to her freind that nothing wrong has been done to her , his father is putting such pressure on her to put false allegations against Saint .

2. It's a complete conspiracy against the Saints , said Shri Subramaniyan Swamy in his tweets .

3. Here is complete coverage of False allegations going against Asaram Bapu ji..

Kaarora (talk) 08:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)I urge and request the Wiki team to update the wiki with honest & unbiased views .

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/erchnpw8raichvv/xD3IF0Iujv/Final%20suprachar%20with%20music%20%28VCD%29.mpg

Recent edit 2 September 2013

Kaarora (talk) 09:00, 12 September 2013 (UTC)Can you include the Article link

http://www.merinews.com/article/how-the-traditional-media-is-conspiring-against-asaram-bapu/15889880.shtml#globalbar

so that people shall now about reason of conspiracies against the Saint.

Offcourse this is a Trusted Resource .


The section's prose etc are being discussed above. It has not been proved subject has raped. "Other victims" — which victims? This is an encyclopedia and not a newspaper where every hour's details will be served. Plus, since the crimes have not been proved still, it should be carefully handled per WP:BLPCRIME --TitoDutta 00:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Nobody has claimed that the subject has definitively raped the child. I replaced the euphemism "sexual assault" because it does not exist in the Indian Penal Code and he has been arrested under IPC 376 (rape). Regarding "other victims", please bother to read the article before you question "which victims".--Crème3.14159 (talk) 00:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • It does not matter what exists in Indian Penal Code and what not. Wikipedia is a world Encyclpedia and not for Indian Penal Code readers only. Stop wrongly quoting Jimbo Wales. Wales' comments were on the talk, not article. I have reverted twice. I'll wait for sometime to see if someone else does anything. Or, go and self revert --TitoDutta 00:12, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia maybe a "world Encyclpedia" (whatever that means) but partisan editors cannot censor out a universally-accepted term for a criminal offence in criminal jurisprudence and use a euphemism. Can you please explain what part of my edit needs to be removed and why? Everything I added was well-referenced. If you have not heard of the word "rape" previously, then please have a look at Laws regarding rape, Rape in English law and Rape in the United States.--Crème3.14159 (talk) 00:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Court has not given their verdict still. "Other victims" — who? Have you noticed the discussions in this talk page? Where were you when we were discussing things? The header was decided by other editors, discuss changes at talk page first. --TitoDutta 00:35, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Courts have not given a verdict. So? How is it related to what we are discussing? The word "allegedly" has been repeatedly used. I am not sure I understand what you are trying to get at. Previously, you tried suppressing the rape allegation entirely. Now that Jimmy interfered to get it back, you have a problem with the word "rape" when this is the charge under which he has been arrested. Exactly what are you trying to say? Regarding "other victims", if you had bothered to read the citation, it was a young woman from Raipur.--Crème3.14159 (talk) 00:53, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I've removed this stuff about the latest allegation. I've left the other section intact - it doesn't necessarily mean that I think it's okay as is.
Also, Crème3.14159, I don't know about the Indian press, but the Daily Mail is definitely not good enough for a WP:BLP. See: Tabloid_Terminator#Daily_Mail -- Hillbillyholiday talk 01:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  •  ::::::* In addition, Jimbo commented on the talk page issue and not the article. If you don't understand go ask anywhere you want. And where you found me deleting the entire controversy section. Actually I was suggesting to add it. --TitoDutta 01:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I don't need to ask anywhere. If a devotee has a problem with the article, he himself should clarify exactly what problem he has. Reverting without any specific answer to what troubled him is not enough. Everything added here is well-referenced.--Crème3.14159 (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Who mentioned devotees? You need to be very careful when inserting material about allegations against a living person. That means giving an usually high number of reliable sources and discussing the issue here, IRWolfie- (talk) 09:12, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I suggest new editors familiarise themselves with WP:IMPARTIAL:
"Neutral articles are written with a tone that provides an unbiased, accurate, and proportionate representation of all positions included in the article. The tone of Wikipedia articles should be impartial, neither endorsing nor rejecting a particular point of view. Try not to quote directly from participants engaged in a heated dispute; instead, summarize and present the arguments in an impartial tone."

IRWolfie- (talk) 09:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

  • The section is in much better condition than what I saw last time. The confusing comments "the girl bathes for two and a half hours, "other victims"[who?] are alleging etc are gone. IPC should be linked to Indian Penal Code for non-Indian readers. --TitoDutta 17:07, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • IPC linking done. --TitoDutta 17:10, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit-warring about the "potency test"

I removed twice now reference to the potency test using an edit-summary: "removed "potency test" per BLP as too suggestive of wrongdoing and without context of expert analysis". Please do not reinstate this until consensus forms. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 01:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I fully agree, IRWolfie- (talk) 10:34, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
According to reports, after he claimed that he was impotent and unable to have committed the act, he "was on Sunday subjected to a "potency test", which confirmed that the 72-year-old's libido is active. He was made to take the test after he told cops that he was impotent and therefore incapable of committing the crime he was charged with." It was called a "normal procedure". This information is significant and should be returned to the article. Wikipedia does not need special "expert analysis" reports on top of Indian police reports to include medical information in this article. If that were the case, we'd be arguing about whether or not a medical report on a rape victim was good enough without some sort of "expert analysis". Gandydancer (talk) 12:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I too agree with Dr. K. --TitoDutta 17:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) That's a false analogy. The victim results establish the fact that she was assaulted so there is no need for expert analysis to add them to the article. But the potency results imply that Bapu was capable of the assault. Per BLP he is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty through proper analysis, including DNA, by medical and legal experts and proceedings in a court of law. Insinuating that he could have done it goes over that reasonable BLP barrier. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't know what the BLP policy on expert analysis is but this is a key piece of information in establishing the very capacity to commit sexual assault. Bapu's defense was that he is impotent and hence incapable of rape (because he was charged of rape then). I don't see how this is insinuating criminality. There is an allegation on him, he countered it with a claim. There was a test to refute his claim. It needs to be reported as corroborative evidence because even the police is using this as medical evidence to establish criminality. Whether he actually molested/raped the girl is a larger concern of the case but that doesn't mean that all information pertaining to this "incident" should not be reported. Noopur28 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC) @Noopur28:, please sign with four tildes, and not three tildes (last edit) --TitoDutta 09:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
I believe that Noopur is correct. It has really concerned me that the editors of this article apparently believe that there is nothing wrong with reporting the condition of the alleged victim's hymen, which according to a few news articles was intact, suggesting that she could not have been raped. But editors refuse to report on the condition of the male's penis, which according to numerous reports is functioning quite well, as "too suggestive of wrongdoing and without context of expert analysis". With over 100 page watchers for this article, it strikes me as odd that a "medical exam", which may well have consisted of India's "two finger test", for the victim is good enough, but we need some sort of "proper analysis, including DNA, by medical and legal experts and proceedings in a court of law" above and beyond what India's news sources have provided to mention the physical condition of the male's penis. Gandydancer (talk) 11:22, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Since there are no further objections, I have added this information to the article. Gandydancer (talk) 00:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Last time I checked, IRWolfie-, Titodutta and I had not agreed to this. How is it this was added in the face of such opposition? Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 00:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Exactly. I support Dr. K. See also, my rewriting request below. --TitoDutta 00:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I believe that the arguments offered here have not shown reasonable rational for inclusion of a few early reports that stated that the girl's hymen was intact, while refusing to allow very widely reported information regarding the fact that, contrary to to a statement that he was impotent, a test has confirmed his potency. Since it appears that the editors here believe that they have offered adequate argument and are reverting any attempts to add any mention of the potency test, I wish to draw a wider range of informed, but uninvolved, editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same or closely related topics. User:Binksternet has done a lot of work with women's issues, User:MastCell has medical-related knowledge, and User:Roscelese has worked on rape-related articles. I will place an invitation to comment on their talk pages. Of course, other editors are welcome to ask for other opinions as well. Gandydancer (talk) 12:21, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Exactly the opposite, few editors are adding it before finishing the discussion. The draft we were preparing above was better. Note, I don;t support adding that girl's hymen condition too. --TitoDutta 13:00, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree with Tito. Converting this BLP into an out of court "she said, he said" using medical records for both of them is not encyclopedic information. Only when this evidence is examined in a court of law and a decision rendered, this medical information should be mentioned if it becomes part of the court decision. Otherwise we are going to convert this article into a trial by encyclopedia. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:50, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
If this is going to be a case for mindless consensus then I call for the hymen information to be removed. I am not asking for consensus anymore. After this edit, I will remove that information from this article because I believe it delves in unnecessary detail in the bigger picture and also implies false allegations on the part of the victim.Noopur28 (talk) 15:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Lovely, someone has already removed it. I will enter the potency test again. I am just awaiting the decision on bail. You can take it to arbitration if you want. If the girl's medical examination details are relevant, so are Bapu's. If Wikipedia BLP policy doesn't support that,then we need to change the policy and infuse some sense of consistency into it. Noopur28 (talk)
  • Do not add it again. --TitoDutta 15:56, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Both the girl's and Bapu's medical details have been removed. There is no consensus that they be added into the article again. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 04:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
I would agree with both of those steps. Its important that we don't implicitly cast aspersions in a complex legal case, IRWolfie- (talk) 09:35, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 September 2013

This information is wrongfully written and is incomplete which deteriorates the image of the person mentioned , it is against the dignity of an individual, please delete this page as it is totally wrong. the cases mentioned here are declared by Supreme Court of India as false and that is not mentioned here, All the informations are wrong and rubbish, please delete this page.

180.215.148.164 (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template.. Also the place to request deletions is at WP:AFD. RudolfRed (talk) 15:32, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Public in Satsangs

Please add - People in thousands visit His satsang conducted across India and take diksha. One reference is http://www.ashram.org/Press/PressView/tabid/912/ArticleId/3503/-MADHYA-PRADESH-SATSANG-MEDIA-COVERAGE.aspx This is news paper cutting, dont treat it as self-website reference. There are many news paper cuttings added at same section of website for references if anybody want those. Naveentirthani (talk) 15:19, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

No editor interested adding this? but interested only in one side, adding controversies? Naveentirthani (talk) 15:23, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

This information: Around 80,000 devotees took diksha in Chhindwara in Feb 2013. has been removed calling it a "self-published primary source". How is this different than using, for instance, corporate information from a company's web page and putting it in the corporation's article? Gandydancer (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Regardless of whether it is self-published or not, we cannot cite (or even link) a web page that contains extensive newspaper cuttings - it is almost certainly a breach of the newspaper's copyright. If the material comes from newspapers, you should provide a proper citation to the original. We can then look into whether the material is appropriate. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:40, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

References

Much of the information sources and references taken to built this write up seems wrong. e.g. He never worked on tea stall. No allegation of land encroachment have been fount true. No allegation of rape or murder have been sustained by court. Apex court of India have discarded each of the case after through process. He have been on targets of Media for not giving broadcasting rights of his satsang and other programs. All others are paying media houses for air time to broadcast their programs, in some cases media houses do it free of cost to encash the popularity and boost TRP, however Asaram Bapu asks media houses to pay money in lieu of broadcasting his programs. Asaram Bapu have been serving millions of poor and defeated people for many years and helping them to come out of shadow of their pains and sorrows. He never take any money from any Foreign or Indian government, still able to serve millions without any selfish interest. He is only saint in India who can challenge any government for their wrong doing without fear as he do not get any obligation from govt. He is only person in India who shakes all pseudo Hindus to wake up and fight with wrongdoings of christian missionaries, NGOs, Media and Political groups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.3.222 (talk) 13:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Ashrams working under his guidance

here are more then 370 ashram's working under the guidance of Asaramji Bapu.[4] These ashrams organise spiritual and social activities on a regular basis. Some of these activities include Weekly Satsang, Distribution and sale of Rishi Prasad and other spiritual publications. Read Sant Sri Asaramji Ashram for more information.

The aim of all Ashrams and Yoga Vedanta Samitis is to show the path of real peace and happiness to the masses. Their involvement in various activities are targeted towards the spiritual, moral, educational, and health related uplifting of the society. These organizations provide financial aid to the poverty-stricken as well as engage in many humanitarian relief efforts. All the Ashram and Samiti efforts are carefully scrutinized and diligently managed with Bapu at the helm.

Ashram Activities :

1. Temple for Spiritual Practices (Maun Mandir)

2. Charitable and Educational Activities

3. Mobile Ayurvedic Dispensary

4. Ashram's Publications which includes :Audio/Video Cassettes and CDs

5. Satsang and Shibirs (Meditation Intensives)including Special Programs for Youth/Students and Satsang For Prisoners

6. Spreading Universal Brotherhood

Sri Yoga Vedant Seva Samiti

There are over 1200 Sri Yoga Vedanta Seva Samiti's established by the guidance of Bapu around the world. [4] These Samities are responsible for the spiritual and social activities in their local area by the guidance of Asaram Bapu. Read Sri Yoga Vedant Seva Samiti for more information.

Bal-Sanskar Kendras

Bal Sanskar Kendra or BSK for short are sessions and camps conducted for all-round & comprehensive development of children/students. BSK is inspired by Asaram Bapu and coordinated by Bal Sanskar Kendra Dept., Shri Akhil Bhartiya Yoga Vedanta Seva Samiti, Sant Shri Asarmaji Ashram, Ahmedabad, Gujrat, India.

The FIVE guiding principles of BSK are:

1. Teach Yogic Practices to awaken Dormant Spiritual Powers.

2. Share Inspirational Anecdotes & Stories from Scriptures & History of India .

3. Instill Good Sacrament & cultural values for character building & success.

4. Provide Health Care tips & precautions for all seasons for healthy bodies.

5. Knowledge gain while having fun & playing games........ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.177.225.79 (talkcontribs) 05:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Consistent use of surname per MOS

Hi, I notice that the article uses Asaram and Bapu interchangably and sometimes uses Asaram Bapu to refer to the subject of the article. MOS:NAMES#subsequent use guides us to use the subjects full name the first time it is mentioned and then use the surname, with exceptions. It seems to me, based on that, that we should consistently use Bapu. I've made that adjustment. If it should be Asaram instead, please let me know. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 02:00, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Bapu is a given name not actually a surname of Asaram. WP:GIVENNAME is confusing and needs expansion. AnupMehra 08:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
I reverted the change because the Indian news reports use the name Asaram and I assume that to be correct. Gandydancer (talk) 12:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
That's fine, but needs to be consistent one way or the other. I'll restore my copyedits and change all of the references to Asaram. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Please keep full name of a person which is used in Media and other places. His name is Asaram Bapu and he is public figure as well. Please show some respect as well when taking his name. Irrespective of his last name is given or assumed, it should be used as Asharam Bapu. Please use full name where ever article mentions his name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.53.241.95 (talk) 06:14, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
This page should not be put up in Wikipedia..he is not a god or demigod...he is just another self made god a pretender in disguise of Saint...and thus he is insult the Sainthood and the faith of millions of people world over..in recent years India has seen the rise in such swami n bapus and this has become a sort of business..please keep the importance of Wikipedia of high value by avoiding portraying such double standard people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickde (talkcontribs) 09:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


The name Bapu is actually an honorific title meaning "Father". Under Honorific Prefixes Wikipedia states that, "Where an honorific is so commonly attached to a name that the name is rarely found in English reliable sources without it, it should be included. For example, the honorific may be included for "Father Coughlin" (currently at Charles Coughlin) and Mother Teresa."

Therefore adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines the honorific title "Bapu" (Father) should be included, as it is rarely found in reliable English sources without it. Wewillfindaway (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Pretty badly written

The article is very badly written and is ridden with logical and grammatical errors. Two glaring examples: "Thaumal, Asaram's father, subsequently founded a company which produced coal and wood."

How does one "produce" coal? One produces charcoal (from wood). Coal is mined, processed, transported, distributed, sold; it is produced by nature. Wood, too, is produced by nature.

The statement "(Asaram) sold tea in front of the Magistrate's office" begs the question, "In front of which magistrate's office?" One could say, perhaps, "before the District Magistrate's Court / Office" or something like that....

How can the man be both Sirumalani and Harpalani? He can be either the one or the other. If there was a name change (like in the case of L.H. Hiranandani), that should be stated, because that explains the dual names....

AchisDeGeth (talk) 13:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

support - a major re-write is called for. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Asaram

Hi,

We must keep Wikipedia clean from such people who just fool people..and most importantly should avoid using Bapu word. Earlier Wikipedia used to be a clean and good source of knowledge but nowadays we see everyone even thugs,culprits are making their way to Wikipedia..a sort of Social media marketing and thus undermining the importance of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickde (talkcontribs) 09:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia's central policy is neutrality. Please control personal opinions and baseless claims. The name Bapu is actually an honorific title meaning "Father". Wikipedia states that, "Where an honorific is so commonly attached to a name that the name is rarely found in English reliable sources without it, it should be included. For example...Mother Teresa." Please see: WP:HONORIFIC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wewillfindaway (talkcontribs) 00:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Contraversies

Truth can be seen at http://ashramnews.org/2013/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhushan m patil (talkcontribs) 11:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Message To All

This is the message we want to convey to all the users (spammers, bot users etc...) who edited this page in the past. With all due respect we'd like to update them that we're active and maintaining this page so please pay some respect while posting any matter.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as few users do that. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devoutly (talkcontribs) 14:44, 17 November 2013‎

I have restored the contents of this page. Everyone needs to work constructively together to develop the article. Please do not remove others comments unless they are an attack or reflect negatively without sources. GB fan 15:34, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Also I've undone your edit where you replaced all the much discussed/argued over sourced content with unsourced/poorly referenced. I agree that this part of the article still needs to be improved but please do so by using reliable sources and maintaining WP:NPOV. Propose what you think needs to be improved here next time before making such bold moves. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Devoutly, you use the word we, are their multiple people editing from this account? Also just to let you know, anyone can update articles on Wikipedia, if you want to maintain a page about Asaram Bapu that you have complete control over the content please find a webserver and create your own website. GB fan 16:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
  • You added very poorly written content. Do not use edit summary like this — calling Wikipedia editors "anti-social" is a personal attack. --TitoDutta 16:43, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia pages aren't under the rights of a particular person or group for them to "maintain". There are people who belong to the close quarters of article subjects and try to remove anything and everything that maintains an NPOV. Request Devoutly to take note of the general purpose of Wikipedia before making challenges. Happy editing. -- Xrie (talk) 13:12, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Just responding to concerns brought up on my talk page from Devoutly, it is indeed too bold to make substantial removals of content unless there is a clear violation of our policy on biographies of living people, which does not appear to be the case here. If you have concerns about sourcing, it is best to concretely describe those concerns here, and we can go from there. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:28, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, Devoutly has complained even in the Teahouse and on my talk page. By now, I hope the user is content with all the feedback and understood what was wrong with those edits. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:19, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit request 2 December 2013

Change Asaram Bapu from controversial godman to godman/Great Indian Saint.It shows disrespect for him in wikipedia.He is a high level saint who have done self realization.The rape cases on him is not yet proven,and he himself is not guilty.The girl's father was given 3 crore to say against Asaram Bapu as known by the source.And the controversy is due to Asaram Bapu's repeted speaking about the Indian Govt.It's a political conspiracy.Asarm Bapu have supported many poor people against the Distasters,hazards which occur in India.The recent was the Uttarakhand tragedy.He also have followers from NASA.Let's support a man who always deed good for others and if we are writing about him than we should not malign his profile by not knowing the facts.Lets make the world a better place by better people,legendary wikipedia.Thank you.

Govindahare (talk) 09:07, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Controversial doesn't mean bad as such, just a person who remains a point of controversy. Also we follow neutral point of view and "Great Indian Saint" hardly fits that. Also, Wikipedia is not for supporting or promoting people. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:04, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Wekepedia is also not the place to defame great Indian Sant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalpeshvyas2000 (talkcontribs) 03:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

HES THE GREATEST OF GREAT..... that is clearly depicted by the huge support hes is having form his crores pf followers even in present time. so its a alarm for the conspiraters that they should stop spreading fake rumours against Param pujya sant shri ASARAMJI BAPUJI...... I and crores of people will always stand for bapuji... because we believe on what we have seen on own. And bapuji have always worked and lived for the welfare of the people. Even in his 400+ ashram lakhs of shelter less people are living free of cost- which includes lot of children, man, old ones and ladies..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Om Srivastava (talkcontribs) 20:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Do people still call him 'bapu' ?

Why not just write his first name and actual last name, instead of what he started to use to deceive people? If tomorrow I start calling myself XYZ God, would you start writing God for my name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.147.191.23 (talkcontribs) 06:41, 16 October 2013‎ (UTC)

If you persuaded reliable sources (such as major Indian newspapers) to write about you then we would use whatever name those reliable sources used. We use whatever name is generally used. Hope this helps. filceolaire (talk) 13:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Please see couple of videos in http://www.ashram.org/MultiMedia/Videos.aspx to know why people love him so much to call Bapu. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhushan m patil (talkcontribs) 11:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, many many call him Bapuji and actually worship him. Well current conspiracy doesnt mean that earlier he was being called as Bapuji but people wont call him now, please dont make your own assumptions, be factual and come to ground to know the reality. Naveentirthani (talk) 18:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

hes bapuji and that is clearly depicted by the huge support hes is having form his crores pf followers even in present time. so its a alarm for the conspiraters that they should stop spreading fake rumours against Param pujya sant shri ASARAMJI BAPUJI...... I and crores of people will always stand for bapuji... because we believe on what we have seen on own. And bapuji have always worked and lived for the welfare of the people. Even in his 400+ ashram lakhs of shelter less people are living free of cost- which includes lot of children, man, old ones and ladies..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Om Srivastava (talkcontribs) 20:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Why the original article on Sant Shri Asaramji Bapu Changed to Asaram Bapu

I noticed that this page is getting changed so many times and the originality of the ariticle which was before couple of years has been changed completely. The title of the article was Sant Shri Asaramji Bapu now changed to Asaram Bapu. In the article also, teh name is changed in a similar way. Also, there are many contents which are missing like how he was brough up and his journey to the self-reliazationw with his Guru Sai Leelashahji maharaj. The recent allegation / charges are completely false and need not be considered to change and supress the original article. As per the law too, a person remains innocent untill and unless the allegations are proved. So, kindly change the article back to its orginal without getting baised opinion formed based on paid media speculations.

regards, Abhijeet Jadeja — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hariom66 (talkcontribs) 10:27, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not recommend using honorific titles in article names. That's why "Sant Sri" is no longer there. Additionally, the articles need to maintain neutral point of view. The recent allegations and arrest of the person are strong enough to be considered for inclusion in the article. If he comes out innocent, that information can also be added here. -- Xrie (talk) 09:10, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Reply: Its not honorific title, "Sant" means a Saint where as "Sri" is prefix like you Say "Mr." X. In india, we use Sri for males and Srimati for females. Also such titles are used by Wikipedia in common for e.g. "Mother" terresa.

2nd point which is unaddressed, why is whole Biography of bapuji being removed. As you have included "Strong enough" allegations, the biography and other social works should also be included.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.15.249.97 (talkcontribs) 08:27, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect info

In this information it has mentioned wrong details that medical report proved RAPE its all fake as media has just spread this fake news regarding MEDICAL report just to maligned the image of great saint . Please change that information as it is fabricated .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.17.158.163 (talk) 14:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Owner of this article, seems to be part of conspiracy

It clearly shows that owner of this article has become part of conspiracy and hence hiding truth. Please visit ashram.org, ashramnews.org. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.99.187.202 (talk) 08:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Matra Pitra Diwas

It is a widely celebrated day across India and has been acknowledged by all the religions and is appreciated. It is even made mandatory to celebrate it in all government schools of Chattisgarh district of India. So, Matra Pitra Diwas must be merged with Valentine Day India.14.139.38.10 (talk) 16:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2014

Asaram is originally from Pakistan and his religion is originally Muslim. Nothing about it is mentioned here. please add it or else a new page of asaram will be created. 1.186.236.26 (talk) 19:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources for the information you think should be added. Please do not create a separate article, each subject can only have one article. GB fan 19:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

No "Controversary" on Asaram Bapu Being a True Saint