Talk:Sathya Sai Baba: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:50, 18 July 2005

Sathya Sai Baba is Love. If you don´t like Sai Baba, please keep the Love. Testing

--- thats a wonderful quote, whoever has written it here (above). As Sri Sathya Sai Baba says there is a need to have capacity to receive Love too. Lets pray to Him that the ignorant over here will soon have the capacity to receive Love from all.

Sathya Sai Baba received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"Botschaften aus dem Jenseits Göttliche Gaben oder Betrug?". Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen. August 4, 2004.

---

It has been a couple of weeks since i have suggested certain changes under the title "SOME SUGGESTIONS" in the page but the changes haven't been done. Please update the changes as soon as possible. I did not update the changes as i did not want to interfere with the "objectivity" of the page.

---

SOME SUGGESTIONS

1. In External links, please add not just discussion groups where "pornographic and abusive language" are used, but give links to discussion group on Sri Sathya Sai Baba, where discussions on Love, Service and Compassion are done. There are many such discussion groups, am sure you are aware of that. Please add at least some of those into the listings.

2. Websites of followers are very short as compared to Websites of critics. So you need to update these listings. I can give you a minimum of 50 website URLs if you request them.

3. References - Links should not be primarily slanted anti-SSB. There should be positive thoughts too in the section, qualitatively and quantitatively.

4. In books for Sai Baba, please give the link to Sri Sathya Sai Books and Publications Trust.

5. In the section on Media and government, the selection has only been partial. There are hundreds of articles which are appearing in everyday newspapers speaking about SSB in an objective angle, yet not slanted and negative. You need to take all those things into consideration. You can go to websites of many of Indian publications and you will get data on the same. Don't just restrict to India Today, who used the whole issue as a marketing issue for their anniversary celebration. SSB on front cover will obviously attract attention.

6. There is a necessity to revamp sections like 'history and origins', 'teachings', 'practices', 'organisations' etc.

7. Try getting primary data on SSB rather than secondary data. A operations researcher/statistician/scientist/analyst will tell you the importance of primary data as compared to secondary data. So do visit Prasanthi Nilayam. Please don't restrict yourself to: this guy said that, this person said this etc...

Please talk about what you want to write in the page Sathya Sai Baba. and DO NOT use this page to advertise petitions.

- Kesava 0430 19 Jan 2004 UTC

What should be added is that

1. the Sathya Sai central trust is the largest single recipient of overseas donations in India even though the Sathya Sai Central Trust rarely asks for donations.

2. there are well documented allegations of sexual abuse of young men by Sathya Sai Baba (SSB). That his alleged homosexuality is in contradiction with his claim to be pure and his teaching about chastity

3. there is good reason to believe that the birth date of 23 november 1926 is a fabrication. According to his school register he was born in 1929. Ex-followers of SSB accuse him of having changed the date to match a prediction by the Indian guru Aurobindo.

4. SSB is a hermaphrodite if we may believe various independent testimonies or performs a trick to make young men and boys to believe that he can change himself into a woman

5. the PM Vajpahee is a follower of SSB

6. the president of India Abdul Kalam visited Sathya Sai Baba's main ashram

7. there has been a documentary called 'Seduced by Sai Baba' on Danish TV which showed young men who claimed that they had been sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba.

8. SSB's extraordinary claims of omnipotence and omniscience have been proven to be untrue by the skeptic Dale Beyerstein.

9. SSB claims to be a purna avatar like Krishna

10. the scholar Brian Steel and ex-follower found out that the original Telegu discourses were heavily edited.

11. even some ex-follower can't find a rational explanation for the miracles that they have experienced when they were a follower. Some ex-followers refuse to retract the miracles that they claim to have experienced.

12. quite a lot of people defected from the organization after ex-follower David Bailey published his Findings.

13. SSB assertions about magnetism shows huge discprepancies with generally accepted scientific knowledge about this subject

14. it has been proven that SSB sometimes uses sleight of hand for his materializations. Not only in the movies online but it has also been seen by so many people. The word credible in the article is too weak.

15. SSB wants his followers not to use the internet. Ex-followers and critical outsiders see this as SSB's way keep his followers. Followers see this as a good protection against the poison of calumny.

16. SSB's teaching are an eclectic mixture from Hinduism

17. The US government has issued a travel warning against SSB, in the section crime in Andhra Pradesh

18. ex-followers accuse him to be a dangerous quack

19. in contradiction to the current article (24 Jan 2004) the size of the contributions of the Sathya Sai Central Trust to the water project in Andhra Pradesh are disputed.

Andries 24 Jan 2004

Andries, can you please use the "Show Preview" button. You have already made 19 saves in 1 hour. I've messaged you at User_talk:Andries. Jay 11:10, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Okay I will. Andries 11:20, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Still to do by Andries

~~Sathya Sai organization (indulal Shah?)~~
Murders investigation, shot by the police after they had been tied?
~~darshan daily~~
~~Educare~~ (fomerly called Education in Human Values)
~~Not possible to discuss it with in the SSO, examples Matthijs van der Meer, Ella Evers, Serguei Badaev, Barry Pittar, Terry Gallagher etc.~~
~~Sathya Sai speaks http://www.sssct.org/Discourses/Speaks/Pages/Main.htm~~
Paul Holbach: Allegation, Hypocritical invitation for investigation of authenticity because the setting of the ashram is such that real investigation is not possible.

Andries 23:34, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to India Today article http://www.saiguru.net/english/media/001204india.htm

copy from Andries' tak page

I havn't read it yet, and I will read it, but I wanted to tell you that I exploded with laughter as soon as I opened the page. I have seen this guy before, and always in negative contexts. Also, his hair is a great source of amusement for me. Anyhow I will read the page and give you more substantial feedback next time ;) Sam Spade 21:45, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Amazingly NPOV. I am very impressed with your impartiality, and the thoroughness, this is really a very fine article. You are clearly a solid editor to be able to edit something this close to you so well. Many people tell me (or show me by their POV edits) that they are unable to edit on articles close to them personally. I'd be interested in discussing theology with you some time, this is an article I have written (Pantheism).

I agree, I've seen Andries single-handedly change the page from a stub, I've tried hard to spot and remove POVs but not succeeded yet ! Jay 09:37, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your compliments. I think the main reasons why I was able to write a NPOV article on this subject in which I was so intensely emotionally involved is because it is now several years that I became an ex-follower. Secondly I still have a intellectual interest in the subject. Thirdly, there have been many excellent articles of ex-followers and last but not least it bothers me to read some articles that state that believers in SSB are blind and stupid quote from salon.com about SSB "No matter -- in this part of the world, faith is absolute. Believers don't refuse God, and they don't question him.". I think this is one sided and unfair and I feel vicariously insulted when I read it so I want to show the skeptical, objective readers the other side of the story. Andries 10:53, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Borrowing teachings from other religions

LordsuryaofShropshire, I don't agree with your edit that SSB occasionally uses teachings from other movements. He uses them very often. However, he uses occastionally teachings from other religions, like Buddhism and Christianity. I will revert your edit. His teachings are a confused and for his followers confusing mix of (sometimes contradicting) teachings from the rich heritage of Hinduism.

With regards to your edit about bhajan singing, I guess you are right. This was an old edit (not by me) which was not corrected because I wasn't sure about it. Andries 11:06, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I was not disagreeing that he doesn't use ideas from other faiths. It's just that when it states his borrowing from religions, the following laundry list of ideas are, every single one of them, part of the Hindu tradition. Also, like with the ridiculous statement on bhajans, a lot of these ideas are made to seem like original philosophies whereas they are common practices in India from centuries before his arrival on the scene. --LordSuryaofShropshire 18:07, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

I agree with you even though I don't know enough about Hinduism to be certain. The strange thing is, if this is true, that it is difficult to spot plagiarism by SSB. Andries 18:16, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Relationship with the allegedly Muslim Sai Baba of Shirdi

What I meant to say with regards to SSB's claim to be a reincarnation of Sai Baba of Shirdi is that SSB never showed Muslim traits nor Muslim teachings unlike Sai Baba of Shirdi. Andries 21:36, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I understand you now! Well, I edited what you edited... heh... basically I changed it to something along these lines: while he claims to be Shri Shirdi Sai Baba reincarnated, a man whose following responded to a harmonious blend of mystic Islam and Hinduism, Satya shows no signs of Muslim influence. --LordSuryaofShropshire 23:58, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)

That is even better. Thanks. Andries 00:44, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Prophecy, Incarnations, Prema Sai Baba

I once read in an article where the details of Satya Sai's future incarnation are mentioned - his name, the state and town/village where he will be born and the time. Can this information be included in the article. Jay 05:54, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

There is only anecdotal evidence for the future birth date & place of Prema Sai Baba, from private interviews, not from public discourses [1] & [2]. I will include it though because the story is popular among followers. Andries 11:27, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I added it on the page about Prema Sai Baba. Andries 14:49, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

To Alteripse, Birth place and date revert

Alteripse, I reverted your edit on the place of birth and date because only the date is disputed, not the place. Your other edits were very good. Thanks. Andries 15:55, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

== "many fewer followers since 2000"

What is the evidence for this assertion? I have softened the wording to make clear that this is a POV, not a proven fact. The groups I have attended both before 2000 and recently, in London and in Arizona, have similar attendances now as in 1998. People whom I know who have visited Puttaparthi say the queues (lines)there are at least as long as ever.

[[User: Pachiaammos 6 May 2004, 23:45

The number of followers has substiantally fallen down in countries like the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. With regards to the Netherlands it is my own observation and could also be read in the Newspaper Trouw. There is only one group left in Sweden. There used to be several. With regards to Norway, I read it on Robert Priddy's website. Andries 19:19, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Dale Beyerstein's study

I think that Beyerstein proved in his extensive study that SSB is not omniscient and omnipotent. I will remove the adverb supposedly. That is a weasel term and against the policy of wikipedia Andries 11:01, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Goldstein or Indulal Shah?

When did Michael Goldstein succeed Indulal Shah as head of the international Sathya Sai Organisation? I thought that Goldstein was the head of the American SSO. Thanks in advance. Andries 14:49, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Is the article getting too long? Should it be split up?

I don't understand why this article is getting so long. There is even more that I want to write. Should the article be split up in several seperate main articles?

Thanks in advance. Andries 22:08, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Keep writing, first of all. Its best for articles to be under 32k, but many arn't. If you do want to split things off, I reccomend creating a sub-page for the allegations/debate of allegations etc... The references section is a big part of the article too, but I donno what to do about that. Maybe a section in the talk page, like Talk:Sathya Sai Baba/References? Sam Spade 22:33, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I have done a radical overhaul of this article, primarily to shorten it because it had become unwieldy. It read like it had like Topsy, just growed as points were added by critics of SSB and counter-points by supporters. I have retained inshallah the balanced NPOV inclusion of what Baba says and what his opponents say. But, IMHO, Wikipedia's primary purpose is to inform browsing readers who have heard the name Sai Baba and want to know more about him, not to air a detailed discussion of whether he is who he says he is. User: Pachiaammos 07:23 9 May 2004

Pachiaamos, I appreciate your efforts to downsize the article but the usual way of doing that is creating separate main articles. I don't agree with your removal of references and this is not the wikipedia policy. Instead, I request you to add references too for what you write to ensure intellectual accuracy. I found some of your edits of doubtful quality and I wasn't able to verify them due to missing references. I disagree with your removal of the section views on the guru. I think that Wikipedia readers who are interested in the subject would find this a highly interesting section. Kind regards, Andries 09:53, 9 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The history section is too long and should only contain facts

I think the history section has grown too long. I think we should only write undisputed facts there which will make the section very short. The rest can be moved either to the beliefs and practices article or to Allegations article. The Kasturi biography is important as a myth in the sociological meaning of the word i.e. a story not necessarily untrue that is important for the group.Andries 21:17, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited down the History section aas you suggest and moved the discursive part to the Allegations page.

I have restored the Kirlian Photography sentences (under Practices) which someone secretly (accidentally?) removed.

User:Pachiaammos 11 May 2004

Thanks for doing that although I think the place of the history section should be at the beginning of the article

The Need for References when writing about SSB

I want to quote Robert Priddy to make it clear why reference are important when writing about SSB. "Sai Baba repeatedly warns against listening to or spreading rumors. He compares this to dogs barking at nothing (eg. p. 130, Sathya Sai Speaks, Vol 13). Remarkably, however, his ashrams and movement are certainly far more subject to rumours and unconfirmable stories than any other place I have ever been. Many originate from him in interview sessions and are then reported outside, where they become 'hearsay', which he then neither needs to confirm nor reject. Why is all this so widespread in the Sai movement? " from http://home.no.net/anir/Sai/enigma/Rum1.htm Anyone who writes about SSB should keep this in mind.

Kirlian photos

I removed your Kirlian statement because I have never seen a Kirlian photo of SSB. I didn't know whether I should believe it. I had heard about Baranowski and a friend had seen a video about him with regards to SSB. In what book have you seen it? Can I find it on the internet? By the way Kirlian photography is not scientific. Andries 20:38, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The book list should be on alphabetic order

By the way, according to the rules of wikipedia the book list should be in alphabetic order of the surname of the author. Andries 21:02, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

to Andries

Could you explain what your purpose is in frequently removing my contributions? (I grant that you have left some of them in place.)

Because I didn't find them all good. And besides you also removed some of my contributions, like the references that took me so much time to find and to maintain them. Andries 18:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I don't accept that your reason for removing my Kirlian contribution is balanced. You personally have not seen a Kirlian photo - so what? I better understand your wish to remove the word "scientific" (or to say "supposedly scientific") if some scientists do not accept Kirlian photography is a science.

Hello Pachiaaamos, the reason why I moved and changed (not removed) your paragraph about Baranowski was that I found the statement about the Kirlian photos doubtful. I didn't doubt that Baranowski testified as you wrote about Baba's aura. So if you can provide a reference for your statement e.g. book with page number on which the Baranowski's Kirlian photo of Baba can be found then I have no problem at all. In other words, where is the picture? The subject is controversial and very complex and there is, I believe, a lot of disinformation so that is why the references are important. Andries 18:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

And altogether, what is the benefit of the high level of negative references in the article as you have created it? I don't see similar references in articles about other contemporary/recent spiritual leaders such as (Sri) Aurobindo or Swaminarayan.

I am sorry but SSB is simply controversial. Please do add more positive websites if you want. Andries 18:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Can we reach a compromise text, without making the article unwieldy or POV?

I hope so. Andries 18:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

User: Pachiaammos 12 May 2004

Perhaps those gentlemen have molested fewer children? I assure you no one is unnecessarilly presenting contentious information, but rather providing what facts the resources allow. As for your other concerns, Kirlian photo's are at the fringes of science, accepted by some for spiritual purposes, and not by others, and if you express this clearly I think you should have little trouble w legitimate additions. Sam Spade 14:00, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

to others

Is there anyone else here who cares what is said about Sai Baba or is this just a 2 person dialog?

User:Pachiaammos 12 May 2004

Do you mean what is said about Sai Baba in the article or on the talk page ? Jay 13:55, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The short, simple, and accurate answer is yes. Sam Spade 14:00, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the article, what is said about Baba. If no-one here cares, I don't want to strive to improve it.

The object here is to present neutral information with respect for the facts. If we succeed then I think people will read the article Andries 18:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Pachiaammos 12 May 2004

Yes, certainly! If you're good at the subject, pls go ahead and contribute. Every article on wikipedia needs improvement. I'm not a devotee of Sathya Sai, and am not for or against him, so I'll be pretty neutral with your edits. I'm happy with Andries neutrality, but its always good to listen to another (neutral) point of view! Jay 17:13, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I find it very interesting that the critics of Sai Baba are allowed to spout their unproven allegations but anyone who rebutts the critics with FACTUAL information is "slandering" them. It's obvious from looking at this talk page that Andries thinks he "owns" this article. I've watched this type of behavior from his group for two years. They don't want you to know how many lies I've uncovered in their stories and that there are anti-Sais who have criminal records. This is why they can't get into a court room. They'd last about two seconds.

I requested User:209.240.205.63 to be blocked because of vandalism

Insists on slandering the critics of Sathya Sai Baba e.g. Skeptics "such as Premanand, 'a school drop out", "Tal Brooke who is an evangelical Christian sees himself as a 'false prophet and an 'Antichrist, as predicted in the Bible." "Hari Sampath's website, sathyasaivictims.com went down after a query was turned over to Illinois police regarding a report on an internet message board that Sampath was wanted in India for theft and sexual assault. Since then Sampath's high profile public appearance seems to have evaporated." This user is probably sincere but brainwashed.
Please block. Andries 06:04, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I also added a NPOV warning until the user is blocked and the slander against Sampath, Premanand and Brooke has been removed. I could remove it now but the user re-instates it quickly. Andries 11:41, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

What I mean is that the remarks that you make about Premanand, Sampath and Brooke are irrelevant and in the case of Sampath are libel which is a criminal offence. Andries 20:31, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I left a message asking User:209.240.205.63 to discuss changes on the talk page. BCorr|Брайен 20:28, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I left a new message asking User:Freelanceresearch to discuss changes on the talk page. BCorr|Брайен 21:00, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi Andres. While I agree that User:Freelanceresearch is almost certainly the same person as User:209.240.205.63, I think it's important to at least give a new user the benefit of the doubt. I got an edit conflict, so I stuck in my "nice" request and welcome message above your note. You might consider removing it or toning it down, but it's your choice. I personally feel it's important to avoid "biting the newbies". And also, I doubt that the account or the IP will be blocked without some broader discussion. I'd recommend listing Talk:Sathya Sai Baba on Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 21:07, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

thanks for your help. I have been very liberal with undocumented edits on this article but I find these latest edits slanderous and irrelevant. They are ad hominem attack against the critics of SSB that don't belong in a serious article. I don't think that discussion in this case with this person helps to come closer. I know this person from yahoo group sathya sai baba. I will do my best to do tone it down but I am very pessimistic. Andries 21:14, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

disputed warning

I gave the article a disputed warning because of the following untrue sentences. I am too tired to correct the article now.

"Glen Meloy has openly an admittedly indulged in fanatic anti-Sathya Sai Baba propagandizing and has been accused of cult-like control of anti-Sai activists. Another critic (Hari Sampath who resorts to conspiracy theories) say that school records revealed several different birth dates for the boy (under his original name Sathyanarayana Raju) and suggest that he invented the 23 November, 1926 day of birth because on 24 November, 1926 the famed Hindu philosopher-mystic Sri Aurobindo said that the Divine had descended on Earth. Hari Sampath's claims are not substantiated, however"

Andries 19:19, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

anon editor 61.95.133.8?

please discuss such large edits on the talk page. Could you also provide sourses for your claims. I do not fell that at the meoment your edits agree with NPOV. Finaly could you explain you deletion of large amounts of aparently good text?Geni 13:03, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

{pseudoprotected}

Since it is quite clear than anon user has no intention of ceaseing to edit the article and I do not find their version remotly acceptable I can't see any point for this tag. If anon decides to disscuss thier edits or another wikipedian supports them I will of course reconsider my position.

Far From Neutral

This wikipedia article is far from "neutral". Someone does not allow anyone to alter it. They provide only way one information with no quality counter sites. This site is a farce.

Hi. You haven't mentioned what makes you believe that. You can always edit an article, in case you find it to be "far from neutral". In case of an "edit war", if you feel that somebody is not allowing you to alter it, you can always request for dispute resolution. Also see Wikipedia:Mediation, Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee. utcursch 06:25, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

I agree that there may be too many critical websites and articles mentioned as external links but the way user:61.95.133.83 edited the article is not according to NPOV guidelines. For example, s/he stated unattributed opinions, mentioned that SSB's alleged birth date was 23 Nov. 1926 as if it were a fact, though SSB's school record says that he was born in 1929. That is totally unacceptable. Andries 07:16, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I will admit failing to see how copying and pasting the article "love" (as the person complaining has done)to this article helps with NPOV (or anything for that matter). About the matter of user:61.95.133.8?'s edits. they involve serious removing of material (which in my judgement results in a POV article) without discussion on the talk page or anywhere else.Geni 10:20, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bad Edits

09:03, 31 Dec 2004 202.153.37.96
07:13, 30 Dec 2004 210.214.44.150
07:38, 28 Dec 2004 210.214.48.168
These edits all have a very slanted view. I have reverted twice so it's up to someone else. gren

Comments by anon

This page cannot be used as a bulletin board for those obsessed with criticsing Sri Sathya Sai Baba. If this is a bulletin board which is meant to be objective, its time that those obsessed with those critising Sri Sathya Sai Baba accept other view points too. It cannot be a one sided view. Acting as if one is objective, by putting in some positives here and there, which are clearly surrounded by negatives would not help. Writing the positives as if Sri Sathya Baba is a fraud with hidden agend is clerly depicted throughout this bulletin board. I have also found that any changes brought about in the content is changed by some so called objective 'experts'. The critics before questioning others as vandalists will really help in asking the questions to themselves...

Am i "objective?" No..No..No..Am a true hypocrat...

How does adding that thought for the day thing active your aims? If you feel that any of the reported critisms are unfair feel free to add reference comments to the the article to that effect.Geni 13:19, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Some of you being the spokesmen of what Sri Sathya Sai Baba has done and not done, may be reading through his literatures will certainly help. The reason being that whatever is written in this website with respect to his teachings itself is far away from what He teaches. So better acquaint oneself with HIS teachings first. There has been attempts on my part to change some of my content but it has all been deleted by the officeal "knowledgeable" people who claim to know much about Baba without even making a visit to HIS abode. Amen...Reading HIS speeches itself will bring a lot of solace and peace. If you are really interested in understanding about HIM thats the basic that you can do. On the other hand, if it is ego satisfaction that is required by maintaining, all these mud-slinging in the name of "objectivity" please continue...Am surprised that you kept the earlier comment. Because even that was deleted at a point of time...

redgadless of what his speaches may or may not do they are not encyopedic.Geni 13:21, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The full text of the Thought of the Day doesn't belong on Wikipedia. I think we can, though, add a link to the Thought of the Day at the bottom of the page under External links. —Mar·ka·ci 18:39, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)

---

SOME SUGGESTIONS

1. In External links, please add not just discussion groups where "pornographic and abusive language" are used, but give links to discussion group on Sri Sathya Sai Baba, where discussions on Love, Service and Compassion are done. There are many such discussion groups, am sure you are aware of that. Please add at least some of those into the listings.

2. Websites of followers are very short as compared to Websites of critics. So you need to update these listings. I can give you a minimum of 50 website URLs if you request them.

3. References - Links should not be primarily slanted anti-SSB. There should be positive thoughts too in the section, qualitatively and quantitatively.

4. In books for Sai Baba, please give the link to Sri Sathya Sai Books and Publications Trust.

5. In the section on Media and government, the selection has only been partial. There are hundreds of articles which are appearing in everyday newspapers speaking about SSB in an objective angle, yet not slanted and negative. You need to take all those things into consideration. You can go to websites of many of Indian publications and you will get data on the same. Don't just restrict to India Today, who used the whole issue as a marketing issue for their anniversary celebration. SSB on front cover will obviously attract attention.

6. There is a necessity to revamp sections like 'history and origins', 'teachings', 'practices', 'organisations' etc.

7. Try getting primary data on SSB rather than secondary data. A operations researcher/statistician/scientist/analyst will tell you the importance of primary data as compared to secondary data. So do visit Prasanthi Nilayam. Please don't restrict yourself to: this guy said that, this person said this etc...

---

It has been a couple of weeks since i have suggested certain changes under the title "SOME SUGGESTIONS" in the page but the changes haven't been done. Please update the changes as soon as possible. I did not update the changes as i did not want to interfere with the "objectivity" of the page.

---

okay, I basically agree with suggestions 2-5 and disagree with 1 and 7. Not sure what you mean with nr. 6.How should these sections revamped? Andries 13:14, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Andries, with all due respect, this article is helplessly biased against the subject of the article (my guess is that 80% of the article is critical). Suggestions by anon 1 and 7 will be a good attempt to add some balance to this article. I can help if you don't want to it. --Zappaz 04:57, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

well, it was referred to by the press in 2004 so it cannot be bad. The question is not about balance but about NPOV. And the abusive and pornographic yahoo groups is pro- and con- ,not necessarily critical. It just happens to be the main discussion forum. With regards to 7, this is first source, not 2nd and 3rd source and is not recommended by Wikipedia standards. According to the guidelines we have to use the best sources (Nagel, Steel, Priddy, Badaev) available and in this case they happen to be critical. Please find better sources if you can. Andries 07:45, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK. I could take the challenge, but note that will not be pretty... I would much prefer that you take the challenge yourself and write for the enemy, for once. As per your statement about being about NPOV and not about balance (after your discussions Anti-cult movement, issue if 1st sources, and that the only sources you found are of critics, I take that with huge pinch of salt....! --Zappaz 16:50, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I will rewrite it a bit. Hmmm, I have to admit that you have a point with the 1st sources. Andries 16:55, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

--- As it has been mentioned that there is agreement with points 2-5, i would not like to get on further explanations with it. Regarding point 1 am not able to understand the point of difference. Just like the way it has been mentioned that there is a group which can speak about pornography and what not, there are yahoo groups which speaks about Divinity, Peace etc. To add "objectivity" here are some points: The number of members in the webstie that speak about pornography is only 897 while memberships of other groups have crossed 2300. Naturally and obviously, as the whole world are not full of perverts. And who are we to decide which discussion groups should be listed here or not?

So please list the following discussion links too:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saibabalist/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saibabanews/

If you have trouble adding it, i will be happy to make the modifications...

Purported cult

This material is from the article List of purported cults, which we are paring down to a pure list. Editors here can best evaluate its statements and decide how to integrate it into this article. Thanks, -Willmcw 20:55, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Sathya Sai Baba

Some ex-members like the late Glen Meloy consider the Sathya Sai Organisation that was founded by Sathya Sai Baba a cult. The reason is that these ex-members say that the allegations of sexual abuse carried out by Sathya Sai Baba are correct and the Sathya Sai organization refuses to properly investigate these. Ex-member Robert Priddy who maintains an extensive website about Sathya Sai Baba believes that it is a secretive, autocratic personality cult that has strong cultic characteristics. More than 800 people have signed an internet petition requesting impartial investigation regarding accusations of sexual abuse charges and murder. [3]

Followers purport Sathya Sai Baba's group is not a cult because it displays atypical characteristics like charity and tolerance towards other beliefs. Also, it does not claim to be the only way to God and truth, encourages a critical assesment of the guru before accepting him, and does not advocate proselytizing. They point out that often cults will expect their adherents to abandon worldly duties and to severe ties with their families, which is something Sathya Sai Baba has explicitly said not to do.

References:

When are the suggested changes (1-7) going to be updated in the discussion page?

We only agreed about 2-5 and I already sized down the critical weblinks a bit. I'll try to size down the allegation here too. Andries 07:41, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vandalizing the page

Deleting, without explanation, links along, with important templates and categories, is vandalism and if it continues we will have to have the page protected. If anyone objects to any of the links, they should act in an adult manner and bring their concerns here to be discussed. I reviewed the "rebuttal" links and found one which was clearly not useful for our readers, a Yahoo group that is devoted to collecting disparaging information. I deleted that link, with an explanatory edit summary. Please explain why the other links should be deleted. -Willmcw 01:18, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

you are right willmcw, it has happened with me too. This was when i tried to add certain content which of course, was about the good work undertaken by Sri Sathya Sai Baba. Some fellows have deleted all those changes without any discussion.

An idea: How about reviewing the whole page as such?

We will discuss how each and every paragraph should be written, right from the intro paragraph.

There is a lack of objectivity in this page and i feel, presumably i may be wrong, that there is too much of mud-slinging in this page against SSB.

Go for it. Be bold. Cheers, -Willmcw 22:03, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

considering the contiversal nature of the subject perhaps it would be better to lay out your suggestions on the talk page first.Geni 23:59, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, which is what the anon was proposing doing (I think). Let me also add that it would help the discussion if everyone uses a name and signs their talk-page contributions. Registration is free and actually allows for greater anonymity. Sign by adding four tildes (~) at the end. It iis definitely better to discus matters here, rather than reverting without communicating. Cheers, -Willmcw 02:35, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

---

Service activities

Hii, you all can address me as monkey. First suggestion: We need to document all the service activites undertaken by SSB. Is there a need for creating a new subheading for the same in the page? Or can we put it up somewhere else in the page? Monkey

Thanks for contributing, Monkey. A subheaduing is easy to create. Just type two equal signs on either side of the section title - they'll format it as a section header. See the example above. Note that only the initial word and proper nouns are capitalized. Cheers, -Willmcw 01:07, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Just a reminder that the article already states several times that SSB's followers and his organizations are involved in service projects and charity. Andries 12:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Refreshments

Made some changes in the page.

1. Added three pictures. One is the Sarva Dharma Symbol, second is a picture about Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning and the third one is about Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Medical Sciences.

2. Added more weblinks about Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

3. Added media reports that caem on service activities undertaken by Sri Sathya Sai Seva Organisations.

Any feedback please discuss here.

Thanks

monkeyishere.

Thanks for your contributions. But we will need to cut back on them. Wikipedia is not a web directory. We don't add links just for the sake of adding them. Also, where did you get the photos? Did you take them yourself? Cheers, -Willmcw 02:40, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Most articles have from 1-20 links. This article has 53. Without losing the official websites, or necessary-for-NPOV critical sites, we need to cut this down. To begin with, we need to remember that the purpose of adding external links to articles is to provide readers of the article with additional information. Forums generally have little information (and much opinion) so I suggest dropping all the forums. News mentions should be included only to cite specific facts, not to serve as a list of press clippings. Usually we should only have one link to any given domain, unless there there are reasons for additional links to specific pages. See wikipedia:external links. Cheers, -Willmcw 06:23, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

---

There is no need to worry about copyright issues about the photo. Hope that will address your concern...

Regarding the media reports that i pasted on the page, it was based on the idea that it will document the activites undertaken by the Sai Organisation and all those news reports indicated specific activities undertaken at different locations at different time spheres. So now that it has been removed, i would suggest you to give a summary of activities that Sai organisation has been doing based on those news reports. Otherwise, it would be preferable to keep the newsreports. If you believe that the page size is getting long, then we will come out with a new page for service activities undertaken by the Sai organisation.

Regarding the weblinks, its not necesary to keep those links under External Links, but can certainly be kept under different headings as an alternative. If you have a different idea, do come up with the same. Also, you can notice that the new external links are not one and the same, but are different and provide varied information. Please exhaustively check the weblinks and verify oneself. You will find that resources provided by the weblinks provided are different.

Regarding removal of forums, please mention which are the links which you wanted to be removed, and i would also request you to support your idea with specific reasons.

Wikipedia is "an encyclopedia" and "What Wikipedia is not" do not hinder whatever has been pasted in article page.

monkeyishere.

Thanks for your reply. Let's start with the photos. Did you take the photos yourself? If not, then who is the copyright holder and where did you obtain them? Your personal suggestion not to worry is nice, but doesn't answer the questions. -Willmcw 19:50, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Monkeyishere, I have already removed all the forums and I oppose moving the erxternal links to the related section which is against the style guidelines. Andries 20:13, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

--- Replies

Regarding the photograph: For willmcw - My brother has taken the photograph and hasn't put any copyrights on that. What about the abridged documentation of the news articles?

For Andries - Regarding the forums- Please mention the links that you have removed in this discussion forum. Because i find that some links which are not exactly forums has been removed. Those links provided a lot of informtaion/facts and was not just opinions. I request you to replace them.

About the style guidelines - Are you speaking about the styleguidelines of Wikipedia or the pattern followed in this page? If it is the pattern followed in the page, then there is nothing that stop us from having a relook at the pattern followed here.

Would you like to suggest any other alternative?

Thanks for your reply. Please go to the image pages and indicate that your brother is releasing the photos under the public domain, GFDL, or other similar license which allow for unlimited copying for commercial and non-commercial purposes. If there is information in the news articles you linked that is important to this article, then please add the info. Lastly, please sign and date your talk page contributions. Thanks, -Willmcw June 28, 2005 20:11 (UTC)

Monkeyishere, the only website that I removed is Vedamu, a website related to Vedic studies inspired by Sri Sathya Sai Baba which I found hardly related to SSB and his movement. You can also find this yourself by check the history of the version and then the differences between the versions. Other external links removals that I did were only forums. For the rest, I agree with Willmcw's requests and advices to you. The lay out guidelines are general guidelines for all articles in Wikipedia. Please sign your posts by using four tildes ~~~~ Thanks. Andries 28 June 2005 20:29 (UTC)

---

hii

1. I've made some changes in the intro section, as i found that the language used was grammatically appropriate. Also put in some additional information.

2. Added a link which depict photographs related to miracles performed by Sri Sathya Sai Baba.

3. Added a link depicting videofilms related to discourses given by Sri Sathya Sai Baba, Vibhuti materialisation performed by Sri Sathya Sai Baba etc.

Willmcw, as per your suggestion i tried to work out the photo suggestion. am unable to understand the different guidelines. could you explain how do i go to the licencing page etc which you mentioned?

monkeyishere

The page you're looking for is at wikipedia:image copyright tags. Find the appropriate tag, then edit the image description page and add it there. Let me know if you have any questions. -Willmcw July 6, 2005 20:08 (UTC)

moved comment

Moved from article by Willmcw 00:23, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC), who did not write it.

Steel, Brian [4] "An interesting and serious attempt to present a balanced picture of SSB. However, this long article is a good illustration of the strengths and weaknesses of Wiki digests and of its philosophy of Free Content (allowing use by anyone and editing by anyone) since, although both 'sides' are represented in this case [..], some sections of the Wiki essay are in a constant state of flux as supporters and critics of SSB vie for supremacy for their point of view, with occasional injections of propaganda and malice."

saisathyasai.com

I added some relevant, additional links, and they were removed. I am the webmaster to SaiSathyaSai.com and considering that most of the Anti-Sai Sites listed are duplicates of each other (for example SaiGuru.net and the Hetnet.ExBaba sites) and considering that Brian Steel and Robert Priddy's sites are listed on these two sites (qualifying them as multiple links), I think I am perfectly entitled to provide a link specific section that discusses each these sites in depth. Why isn't this allowed?

- Joe Moreno 15 July 2005

You are referring to these two links:

http://www.saisathyasai.com/baba/Ex-Baba.com/exbaba-index.html ExBaba.com Deception
http://www.saisathyasai.com/baba/SaiGuru/fraud-site.html SaiGuru.net Deception

I removed them for two reasons. First, we already have a link to http://www.saisathyasai.com/. On the home page of that link are links to the pages you added. There is no need to add more links to the same site. Second, they seemed to be deceptively labelled. -Willmcw 05:33, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Willmcw, WHY then do you allow the "hetnet.exbaba" site and the "saiguru.net" site when they are mirror sites to each other? The "hetnet.exbaba" site has duplicated all of Brian Steel and Robert Priddy's articles on their site. So why do you allow these sites when one link would suffice to the "hetnet.exbaba" site? "chello.no" (Priddy's site), "saiguru.net" and "hetnet.exbaba" all list multiple links under "Websites of critical former followers, skeptics and other critics" and "Media Articles". Why are they allowed to do this when one link would suffice?

It is clear that some sort of bias is going on. Am I allowed to post multiple links from my one site on other categories as well? Or is that reserved for Anti-Sai sites only? I think we would all like to clearly know what the policy is for posting links on this site.

Sincerely,

- Joe Moreno

I'll take a look at the links you mention. If they truly mirror each other then there is no reason to have both. Our policy is here: wikipedia:external links. Note that this article already has more links than most, so adding more is not attractive. Cheers, -Willmcw 06:16, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean these two sites?

I don't see any resemblance between them. -Willmcw 07:32, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Willmcw, yes, those are the two sites I am talking about. If you look at my SaiGuru.net Deception page, I provide a complete list to ALL of SaiGuru.net's links. 98% of them are an EXACT duplicate from ExBaba.com. The remaining 2% are outdated articles or were cut and pasted from a newspaper, etc. Click the "articles", "news", "media", "experiences", "sai org" and "conclusions" links, in the menu, to view the comparisons. Robert Priddy has several sites: http://home.chello.no/~reirob/ and http://home.no.net/anir/Sai/.

Thanks,

-Joe

Joe, I think there are several reason why your website deserves only one link, if it deserve to be listed at all. I doubt if it deserves to be listed here because of your intellectual dishonesty, your shameless defamation, libel and ad hominem attacks on the critics of SSB. The reasons why it deserves only one link are as follows.

There are already many external links than recommended for Wikipedia.
Your website was only writtenb by one author, i.e. Gerald Joe Moreno
Other website like exbaba.com and saiguru.net consists of articles of many different authors, not only by critical former members but also other sources. Some of the articles on exbaba are of scholarly quality e.g. by Steel, Dadlani, Nagel, and Priddy. Some of Nagel's work was published in the official magazin of the Free University of Amsterdam about New religious movements, i.e. her 1994 article Sai Paradox. The exbaba website is huge but has only one link, so I think it is totally inappropriate and unfair to give your website more space than exbaba
Your website shows great intellectual dishonesty and lack of reasonableness
Your website contains ad hominem attacks on the critics of SSB.

Andries 16:45, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Andries, I think anyone with any semblence of fairness can see that my articles are not any of the things that you ascribe to them. I can back up ALL of my points of contention with screen captures, links and caches. I think anyone who views my Affidavits page can see, first-hand, the kind of person you are and the kind of bias you have. And I will note that in the 9 months my site has been online, you have not come forward with even ONE single article that factually discredits ANY of my articles. So if you want to talk about ad hominem attacks, look in the mirror. And the proof that this site is biased is clearly shown when Reinier is allowed to post his site TWICE (you providing a link to his lamentable attacks against me) but I am NOT allowed to post my link in reply. So if you want to talk about dishonesty and deceit, this site reeks of it. Why is Reinier allowed to post his site and a second link about me, but I am NOT allowed to post my site and a second link about him? I think everyone can see what kind of people run this site and I honestly don't expect these comments to be allowed to stay here. Again, I have nothing to fear and I have nothing to suppress. Apparently, you do.

-Joe Moreno

Can you please post the specific links that you are referring to? It's hard to know which ones you mean. Thanks, -Willmcw 21:02, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Joe, I may overlook something, but I see only one link, not two, to Reinier's reply to you. Andries 21:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Under: "Websites of critical former followers, skeptics and other critics", there is a Main Link to Reiniers hetnet site.

Andries posted a Second Link (from the hetnet site) under: "Rebuttals and Surrebuttals of criticisms" named: "Reinier van der Sandt answers Gerald Joe Moreno".

My Main Link is posted under: "Rebuttals and Surrebuttals of criticisms".

In response to Reiniers page against me, I posted my Second Link and it was deleted. Now if Reinier's site can post a Main Link to his site and a Second Link to his page about me, why can't I post my Main Link and a Second Link about Reinier?

Furthermore, there are multiple links from the hetnet domain (Reinier's site) also posted under "Media Articles". However, when it comes to me, "all of sudden", only ONE link is allowed. If you want to set the standard, it should be applied equally.

So if I cannot post more than one link to my site, then the same should be applied to the hetnet site. Fair is fair.

-Joe Moreno

Okay, here is the list of links that clearly shows the bias FOR Anti-Sai Sites (Pro-Sai sites are ONLY allowed to post ONE link, while Anti-Sai sites are allowed to post multiple links:

BRIAN STEEL: 4 LINKS:

Brian Steel's scholarly website about Sathya Sai Baba
Annoted research bibliography in three parts part 1, Items of a scholarly or academic nature or provenance, collected by Brian Steel
Annoted research bibliography in three parts part 2, Work Critical of SSB and his Mission by non-devotees (including ex-devotees), collected by Brian Steel
Annotated research bibliography in three parts part 3, A Basic Bibliography of Works about Sathya Sai Baba by the SSO and his Devotees, collected by Brian Steel

REINIER VAN DER SANDT: 4 LINKS:

Concerned former Dutch devotees of Sathya Sai Baba Extensive website that contains scholarly studies and videos of alleged materializations
available online
‘The truth will prevail...’ a Sai-devotee’s struggle for disenchantment by Matthijs van der Meer, originally published in the Dutch New Age magazine Spiegelbeeld October issue 2000
Reinier van der Sandt answers Gerald Joe Moreno

ROBERT PRIDDY: 3 LINKS:

Myths promoted by Sathya Sai Baba another wesbite by Robert Priddy
"I lost the desire to live" B. N. was a follower of Sai Baba for 17 years article by Bettina Vilmun, translated from the Danish daily national newspaper B.T. (tabloid) (January 31 2002)
Robert Priddy's extensive website about the Sathya Sai Baba and the Sathya Sai organisation

SAIGURU.NET: MIRROR SITE TO EXBABA SITE: 4 LINKS:

Listed under "Media and Governments", ref 1.
Allegations concerning Sathya Sai Baba Multi lingual critical website of ex-followers
A Friend in India to All the World article in the New York Times by journalist Keith Bradsher December 1, 2002
Divine Downfall Mick Brown's article about the sexual abuse allegations in The Telegraph newspaper UK (Oct. 2000)

SAISATHYASAI: MY SITE: 1 LINK:

Allegations against Sathya Sai Baba Examined by Gerald Joe Moreno

LINK DELETED: Gerald Joe Moreno Answers Reineir Van Der Sandt

Any Questions?

-Joe Moreno

Links to 3rd party articles, like reprints of New York Times articles, are in a special category. You say that SAIGURU.NET is a mirror of EXBABA, and before you said it was a mirror of HETNET, but I didn't see the duplications. Can you provide the links which show them to be mirrors? Thanks, -Willmcw 19:10, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Willmcw, then how do you explain Brian Steel's links? They are NOT referenced to "third party articles".

And you have not answered why I am NOT allowed to post my rebuttal to Reinier's article (his article against me is not a "third party article".

Obviously, you have not researched ExBaba.com. http://www.exbaba.com/ is a frame site that opens up the http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/ site. They are exactly the same. Just view the source code for ExBaba.com. So when I refer to either one of these sites, they refer to the same thing.

I already provided you with the link that conclusively shows that SaiGuru.net is a mirror site to ExBaba.com (or, if you prefer, hetnet.nl/~ex-baba). Once again, Click Here to view the main page. Or, Click Here for the "Articles" category. I provide the link on SaiGuru.net and the duplicate link. Cut and paste them to compare.

-Joe Moreno

We don't have a link to ExBaba.com, so what does it matter if http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/ is a mirror of it? The http://www.saisathyasai.com may carry some of the same articles as http://home.hetnet.nl/~ex-baba/, but that does not make them mirrors unless all of the content is the same. I am sure that many of the "pro-Baba" sites carry the same articles. http://www.saiguru.net/english/ doesn't look like the other sites either. "Mirror" means exact copy. You haven't proven anything. -Willmcw 21:44, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Okay Willmcw. Thank you for saying that. I am sure that since this is the case (with SaiGuru.net), I can post my articles on another domain and post a link to them. I'll just make sure the layout is different and add a few articles. That should level the playing field :)

Also, you did not respond about Brian Steel's articles. Why is he allowed to post all those links? I think we all would like to know. One link per site. Remember?

-Joe Moreno