Talk:Kalki Bhagawan

New Section - Influence

Had included a section "influence", with details of some prominent people who are students of Sri Bhagavan. In this section, had referred to articles from national newspapers in India, including The Times of India and The Indian Express and The Hindu. Listed here are some of the links that had been referred to

I find that this entire section has been deleted by "MatthewTStone" has deleted with the comments "Reverting to version minus junk references etc"

@MathewTStone, Request to explain the reasoning for deletion. Do let me know your suggestions on how to improve the quality of my writing. Thanks for your attention --Prodigyhk (talk) 06:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

There is nothing much wrong with the quality of the writing. It is the quality of the sources that is a problem. Newspapers like Times of India, The Hindu, etc., might be acceptable, but self-published blogs and YouTube etc are not. Nor are references which are effectively 'self-published' e.g Oneness websites and publicity material are not good sources for an article about the Oneness organisation itself, which is a money-making commercial entity. For a start, suggest reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources MatthewTStone (talk) 08:47, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Matthew for your feedback on quality of the source materials. Will review the references to ensure the quality of source is maintained. --Prodigyhk (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

After a while, we can say when those kind-of-reviews get too much time to change, the article can really get sticky somewhere and hence not develop; so welcome to wikipedia, where you really nead those bots on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.12.26.206 (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

[User:187.12.26.206] thanks for the welcome :) .. And what do you mean by "nead those bots on" ?Prodigyhk (talk) 10:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

@(talk) if you're still around this field here, note that what
187.12.26.206
tried to say is that @(talk) would be a bot but he really isn't he is a real user like you. 177.158.129.70 (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Unreliable information

@MathewTStone, Please maintain the standard. Not only is the article you had reinstated filled with unreliable sources. It was a clear case of vandalism with WRONG and INSULTING information, mentioning that the subject is also known as "Lauda Kameena Chand". --> This is a very insulting word in local Indian language. We can not accept such deplorable and bad language in Wikipedia

Note - This entire section was first inserted on 15/Jan by user 46.9.71.74. It was immediately discovered as vandalism by administrator USER:Garion96 and removed. But, the user 46.9.71.74 has been persistent and keeps re-inserting. I have just followed the administrator and removed it when it was again inserted.

So, please read the material and also history before you start making your additions

Prodigyhk (talk) 16:31, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I take your point about an insulting word being included, and obviously this should not be included. However I think certain parts need to be reinstated, as they seem relevant, including news coverage from credible sources such as The Hindu. There have clearly been some 'incidents' at the temple, which have appeared in news reports. Also, there is at least one statement in there that needs a source, which is the claim about the founding of Jeevashram school in Rajupeta village. There is some indication that KB was known by his birth name of Veejay Kumar at that time, and that he was an 'administrator', not the founder of the school. During the revert, apart from some sources, the BLP tag was also removed. I would suggest that a blanket revert is not the way to remove items such as the vandalism. MatthewTStone (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

[hoax] (?)

... [hoax] for fun facts: google Lauda Kameena Chand and see it for yourself! hahahaha! 177.158.129.70 (talk) 15:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Biography

New section to be included - This is work in progress. Will be adding more material over the next few days. Do put in your comments and criticism here before I post it to the article page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prodigyhk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Will now update the main article with this section.

This section included to gives an encyclopedic narration of the subject's life and work, written in a neutral tone per WP standards.

Any issues or questions or objections with the content, please do raise it here for talk or on my talk page.

Please do not to delete it without raising on talk.

thanks Prodigyhk (talk) 16:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

The below section was put up for comments for 3 days in TALK before inclusion into main ARTICLE. Now, it has been pulled down. Request the other 2 active editors to comment here if you have any issues. The aricle is written in an neutral manner referred from independent sources. Arjuna Ardagh has a book published by an independent publisher. The second source is by a well known Indian journalist Suma Varghese whose details are available at http://www.lifepositive.com/writers/Suma_Varughese.asp Do note Life Positive is known Indian magazine and available at newstands.Prodigyhk (talk) 07:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Early years (1949 - 1983)

Family background

Sri Bhagavan was born on 7 March 1949 as Vijay Kumar, in Natham Village, Gudiyatham Town, Vellore district, Tamil Nadu, to Smt. Vaidarbhi Amma and Sri Varadarajulu. Sri Bhagvan’s father was the head of the accounts department of Indian Railways and his mother was an simple village woman. In 1955, when Sri Bhagavan was 6 years of age, the family move to Chennai.

Education

Sri Bhagavan attended the Don Bosco School, Madras. Then,graduated from Vaishnava college in Madras majoring in Mathematics.

Marriage

Sri Bhagavan married Smt. Padmavathi on June 9, 1977. This was an arranged marriage following the prevalent customary practice in India for marriages decided by elders in the family. Padmavathi, who is address as Amma by their students, was also a spiritual person and would take an active interest and participation in building the spiritual organization Oneness.

Jeevashram School (1984 - 1994)

Jeevashram School located in Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh was founded by Sri Bhagavan, in July 1984 to provide an alternative form of education. The land for the school was taken on a lease, with the support provided by Mr. Hari Khoday , an Indian philanthropist. As director of the school, Sri Bhagawan's focus was to develop an environment for children to truly flower and discover themselves. The school had 180 residential students and 200 day students from near by villages. It was at this school that his spiritual work would begin. In the summer of 1989, one of the students reported a mystical experience of divine silence. Soon, many other students reported similar experiences, and they were also able to pass their experiences to one another. During these experiences, children had vision of various Gods and would converse with them. Sri Bhagavan explained that the children had got in touch with Antaryamin, the inner guide who dwells in your heart that guides all beings towards greater truth . In 1991, Sri Bhagawan decided to close the school and start the spiritual work for the larger community. The school was closed a few years later in 1994, after the senior students had all graduated from high school and the other students were moved to other schools.

Spiritual programs for public (1991 to present)

Once the decision was made to close Jeevashram School, work started in developing the spiritual programs for the public. The principal of the Jeevashram School with a small group of teachers started the spiritual programs for public. The workshops were conducted as residential retreat programs conducted over 7 days or 21 days. The workshop focused on helping the participant accept themselves as they are and connect with their own inner divine self the Antaryamin

A second campus was setup in 1992 near Chennai city a place called Somangalam. In 1994, the campus of Jeevashram School was renamed as Satyaloka. Advance retreat programs for public were conducted at this campus. By 1995, Sri Bhagwan's workshops were being conducted in all major cities in India, including the capital New Delhi. In 1995, the first major public event was held at Chennai city, drawing more than 100,000 students from across India. In 1999, the work on building the Oneness University at Varadaiahpalem, Chitoor district Andhra Pradesh India started. Oneness University, located 70 km from Chennai, is accessible by the National Highway 5 and is on Tirupati Road leading to the ancient temple town of Kalahasthi. In 2000, the first campus was completed and Sri Bhagawan and his team of teachers moved to the campus. Over the next few years, various campuses, including the Oneness Temple in 2008 were built. In 2004, the first international program was started.

Editors, please include your comments below here

--->>> Have added my comments in new section. MStone 07:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Mathew, The reference list picks up a few reference from earlier posting due to WP setting. Please take care not to get confused during review. The reference for this section only starts from Argadh Prodigyhk (talk) 06:46, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Does Asian Tribune pass WP:RS?

A question has been raised about http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2010/01/14/two-kalki-ashram-inmates-found-dead It seems Asian Tribune is cited in 500 Google Books. Not an enormous number but enough to show that asiantribune.com is regarded as a reliable source. World Institute for Asian Studies (WIAS) doesn't immediately appear to have an agenda. Comment anyone? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi, This article on AsianTribune.com refers to "Deccan Chronicle" as the source. But, unable to find any such article in "Decann Chronicle" nor in other Indian newspapers. With this entry on WP, we will give credibility to a wrong story. Until we have good sources, suggest not include this story.

AsianTribune is not based in India and presently located outside Asia. Prodigyhk (talk) 12:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Please note, have removed this from main article. Once we complete this talk, we can decide. thanks Prodigyhk (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted those changes I'm afraid. We already had the discussion about his follower's biography. Generally we don't encourage followers of a controversial living figure to edit their BLP page extensively, which means that from now on changes should be discussed here first. The one change that does seem to have a case is that the crowd included CPI members, but then CPI is fairly mainstream in Chittoor, no reason why the crowd shouldn't. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Do not find any WP:policy that stops the said biography being posted. It is written in neutral tone and include sources from independent publish works. An article written by Suma Varughese in a known Indian publication LifePostive and an independently published book by writer Arjuna Ardagh. It is not right to take the argument that Ardagh who has attended the courses conducted by this teacher, is a follower and not a reliable source.

In any case the biography insert that I had was worded in a neutral manner. Please explain what policy you refer to for removal of this biography.

2. I have still not seen any legitimate source on the article of death of 2 men. refer earlier notes. So, this needs to be removed, until further clarity is arrived. Prodigyhk (talk) 06:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

3. Regarding your comment "then CPI is fairly mainstream in Chittoor", please refer Chittoor_district#Divisions. There no MLA from Communist Party in this district. So, how do you mention it is mainstream ?

In any case, do not understand you logic not to refer the crowd as "community party members" as clearly mentioned in the source article. Prodigyhk (talk) 06:29, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The initial problem is that Arjuna Ardagh doesn't appear to be an independent source, he's writing for Kalki Bhagavan. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

@Ictu, I have used Ardagh's notes for the basic run of the encyclopedic biography. Birth, parents, early education, organizations setup, etc. These are general stuffs that makes up any person's encyclopedia. I do not see any issue for continuing to use Ardagh's reference for these.

* For the specific sentence about what is offered at the workshop , -> The workshop focused on helping the participant accept themselves as they are [6] and connect with their own inner divine self the Antaryamin [7] Have used for source a well known Indian journalist Suma Varghese whose details are available at http://www.lifepositive.com/writers/Suma_Varughese.aspProdigyhk (talk) 11:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I've restored your addition of Communist Party of India (Marxist), though having been to Chittoor I can tell you they are fairly mainstream there, and relatively clean. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:10, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

My intent is not to blame the Communist party or question their sincerity. By replacing "crowd" with details of political nature of the riot, makes the article balanced per WP standard Prodigyhk (talk) 11:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Use of Wikipedia as a publicity vehicle

We need to be mindful that the subject of this article is the very head of a very wealthy organisation which would not hesitate to use Wikipedia as a publicity vehicle to further its commercial aims.

Most of the recently-removed Biography Section read as a sanitised Public Relations piece designed to perpetuate the mythology of its subject and his commercial activities.

It was also rather poorly sourced. According to WP:BLP, material must be "attributed to a reliable, published source" and its guidelines apply whether the "material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable…"

In particular, it relies heavily on Primary Sources. Please refer to WP:PRIMARY which defines Primary Sources as including those which "are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved".

Books fitting this description are Deeksha: The Fire from Heaven and Awakening into Oneness, which were both written by authors who became initiates/devotees of Kalki Bhagavan and were involved with the Oneness organisation through attending its courses. The organisation also appears to have endorsed these books in one way or another, which doesn't say much for the books' independence.

Moving on, the sources that are not WP:PRIMARY are a fairly rag-tag bunch (a clean up is in order, some links don't seem to go anywhere).

Strangely absent was anything that undermined the mythology of this so-called 'Bhagavan'. For example, why was there no mention of suggestions that Vijay Kumar, as he was then called, was at one time a mid-level administrator expelled from a Krishnamurti school? Or that he spent time as an insurance clerk? Or even maybe as a lowly rice seller? What about his alleged links to property developers?

Incidentally, the article could definitely use some coverage of his 'predictions', which never seem to come true – such as 'the ending of most religions' by 2012.

An overview of the citations is as follows:

^ Christian Aubert Du treizième baktun à la Terre. Not in English or apparently even very relevant to the subject matter. According to Amazon[1] the author appears to mainly have written a series of Language translation books.

^ Geoff Stray 2012 In Your Pocket 2009 - Page 12. This author [2] has written a series of books about 'predictions' for the year 2012. He doesn't appear to be much of an authority on anything much. I note that 2012 came to an end several months ago.

^ Keta Meera Sahebu Author appears to be a blogger[3] using WP for publicity. See author's User Talk page [4]. Referring to Google Books, his 'book' appears to be an amateurish collection of tertiary references.

^ Luis González Reimann [5] Cannot comment. Source provided returns a 404 Error but appears to be some kind of blog

^ Vicente Merlo Cannot comment. However, getting a bit desperate if we can't find decent references in English.

^ Kiara Windrider Deeksha: The Fire from Heaven Appears to be a Primary Source[6] Foreword is written by representatives of the organisation. Book based on the author's personal experiences, plus a series of interviews with fellow devotees at Oneness University.

^ http://www.onenessuniversity.org/index.php/about-us/founders Primary Source [7] – Completely unacceptable – organisation's own advertising and publicity material cannot be relied upon as a WP source.

^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Arjuna Ardagh Awakening into Oneness Appears to be a Primary Source [8]. Author was invited by Oneness Organisation to undergo its program and write the book. See [9].

^[www.lifepositive.com/Spirit/Sri_Bhagwan_Kalki/The_School_for_Enlightenment92006.asp] Appears to be a blog aggregation website or commercial site selling products/services

^ http://religion.info/english/documents/article_388.shtml#.UU8c8Bn652E A bit better overall. At least the coverage by Ramesh Avadhani shows a degree of balance.

Editor @prodigyhk, Wikipedia is not a publicity vehicle for organisations wanting to peddle their wares. MatthewTStone (talk) 06:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Mathey, Initially when I started last year, you gave me the same treatment and removed all edits. Accepting your seniority, had let go of this article and move to other articles. But, when this article was moved to Afd, checked your contribution. It is seen that over the past 4 years, you have treated the same way any editor who has added any neutral or postive edits on this article. Your primary focus has been only on adding to the "controversy" section and not allow other positive or neutral information. Your agenda it is to make this an ATTACK page of the subject. Prodigyhk (talk) 07:35, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Prodigy, it isn't an issue of "seniority" or treatment, WP:PSTS and WP:NPOV are wikipedia policies, if you had been on en.wp for 10 years and other editors for 10 days WP:PSTS and WP:NPOV are wikipedia policies and we must have objective 3rd party sources for all BLPs. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:12, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Matthew, you have made a long note above. As a colleague, I should have responded objectively and avoided my earlier rant. Now, moving forward :) my comments below specific to the biography section that is planned to include in the article.

Life Positive is a spiritual magazine available in India. I have given above, links of the editor whose article has been used.

Ardagh is a known writer in the area of spirituality even before he wrote this book on Oneness. In the book, he had recorded what he had encountered and experienced during his visit. Hence has to be treated as a secondary source.

In any case, even if you prefer to treat Ardagh as a primary source, WP:Selfpub allow us to use primary source if the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim. The materials in "biography" section that I plan to include refers to Ardagh book is presented in neutral tone as required by WP policy.

Look forward to your comments Prodigyhk (talk) 14:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

There are significant question marks hanging over many of the biographical claims made by VK/KB, his organisation, and his devotees. The book by Ardagh, a devotee, cannot be considered a reliable source. You will need to find reliable third party sources for any biographical material. Please also take note that NPOV is not just about 'tone'. It is about '...fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view...' M Stone (talk) 21:53, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Please be objective. My request is on review of the section 'biograhpy' I have created for inclusion in this article. It is written in a neutral tone and primarily in an encyclopedic manner detailing this person's life and his work. List your concerns clearly. Prodigyhk (talk) 03:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The version provided above on the Talk Page contains citations that don't link to anything. Please update it with working citations, and I will provide a detailed list of concerns. Thanks. M Stone (talk) 04:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. Prodigyhk (talk) 06:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Unverified biographical material

Editor @ProdigyHK, almost every significant point in this biographical section is contestable and cannot appear on Wikipedia in its current form. For its key points, it relies almost exclusively on a single source, Ardagh, that is very close to the subject of the article, Vijay Kumar/'Kalki Bhagavan'.

To give one example of the source's unreliability, according to this author, Vijay Kumar/'Kalki Bhagavan' was the sole 'founder' of the Jeevashram School.

However, as even a bit of perfunctory research will reveal, there are are one or more other individuals in India who are claiming to be closely involved with the founding of the school, and may want to be known as co-founders. These individuals have had a very serious falling out with VK/KB, and have been very public in doing so. Over the years, they have been highly critical of his actions.

If Ardagh cannot be relied upon as a source in this fundamental point, it demonstrates quite adequately that his book is not a reliable source for anything else. (Incidentally, Wikipedia can be leaving itself open to legal action from such individuals if it publishes unsourced biographical material.)

By his own admission, the author was a VIP guest of VK/KB who has endorsed the book. So the author is merely repeating, in parrot fashion, what he has been told by VK/KB or his followers. In other words, the book is a very low grade Primary Source about a highly controversial subject.

There also seem to be many gaps in this biography, e.g. VK/KB's employment by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, and as a vendor selling rice. At another point in his life, VK/KB appears to have been in employment as a low to mid-level administrator in J. Krishnamurti's Rishi Valley School. There are suggestions that he was fired from that position.

I believe these periods, and others, have been excluded because they do not sound impressive and do not fit with the messianic 'life quest' of VK/KB's mythology. Such omitting of 'unimpressive' information is time-worn literary device for placing emphasis on the more 'impressive' aspects of the subject matter at hand. It is sometimes called 'cherry picking'. (See WP:CHERRY and WP:UNDUE)

Furthermore, as another example of WP:UNDUE: there is nothing remarkable in the Family Background section, and it appears to have been created as a literary device, as part of the 'messianic' story. It serves to contrast the subject's latter-day 'god-like' status with his 'humble' birth and origins. Please also see WP:V and WP:BLP.

Also refer to WP:UNDUE regarding the 'Jeevashram School'. A lot of weight seems to be placed on this school, which does not itself appear particularly notable as an institution.

In the section 'Spiritual programs for public (1991 to present)' there also seems to be a lot of non-biographical detail about programs and campuses, and it even provides directions for reaching the temple/campus. In parts, it reads like an advertisement. I refer you also to WP:NOTADVERTISING#ADVERTISING and WP:SOAP

As I have said, almost every contestable point in this 'biography' relies on one, single, Primary Source, Ardagh's book. And that book aside, most of the other sources being cited here are merely pointing to topics such as low level trivia about Bollywood movie stars praying at the ashram, etc., and do nothing whatsoever for the veracity of this biographical material. There is also a PDF, apparently in Swedish (what is it about? This is an English publication).

As highlighted previously, part from what is being discussed here, the only reasonably independent sources being cited on the Kalki Bhagavan main page are news organisations such as The Hindu, India Times, and The Statesman. However, almost all of the material from these independent sources is raising questions about this individual and his organisation.

@ProdigyHK, it is significant that you have, at times, resorted to edit wars to try and prevent such sources being used, and somewhat suggests there may be a conflict of interest. Please see WP:COI.

The burden now rests with you to provide adequate, independent references for this biographical material.

Please note, in the following, in many cases I have placed a template against specific words. This means if the template is after the word 'founded', I would like to see a reference that says KB/VK was solely responsible for 'founding' the school, and did not 'co-found' it with other individuals; if it is next to the word 'decision', it means I would like a reference that he 'made a decision' to close the school, and that the decision was not forced upon him by external factors; if is next to 'majored' then the reference should support the assertion that he 'majored' in mathematics, etc., throughout :

Biography

Early years (1949 - 1983)

Family background

Sri Bhagavan was born on 7 March 1949 as Vijay Kumar, in Natham Village, Gudiyatham Town, Vellore district, Tamil Nadu, to Smt. Vaidarbhi Amma and Sri Varadarajulu. Sri Bhagvan’s father was the head of the accounts department of Indian Railways and his mother was an simple village woman. In 1955, when Sri Bhagavan was 6 years of age, the family move to Chennai.)

Education

Sri Bhagavan attended the Don Bosco School, Madras. Then graduated from Vaishnava college in Madras majoring in Mathematics.

Marriage

Sri Bhagavan married Smt. Padmavathi on June 9, 1977. This was an arranged marriage following the prevalent customary practice in India for marriages decided by elders in the family. Padmavathi, who is address as Amma by their students, was also a spiritual person and would take an active interest and participation in building the spiritual organization Oneness.

Jeevashram School (1984 - 1994)

Jeevashram School located in Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh was founded by Sri Bhagavan, in July 1984 to provide an alternative form of education. The land for the school was taken on a lease, with the support provided by Mr. Hari Khoday , an Indian philanthropist. As director of the school, Sri Bhagawan's focus was to develop an environment for children to truly flower and discover themselves. The school had 180 residential students and 200 day students from near by villages. It was at this school that his spiritual work would begin. In the summer of 1989, one of the students reported a mystical experience of divine silence. Soon, many other students reported similar experiences, and they were also able to pass their experiences to one another. During these experiences, children had vision of various Gods and would converse with them. Sri Bhagavan explained that the children had got in touch with Antaryamin, the inner guide who dwells in your heart that guides all beings towards greater truth . In 1991, Sri Bhagawan decided to close the school and start the spiritual work for the larger community. The school was closed a few years later in 1994, after the senior students had all graduated from high school and the other students were moved to other schools.

Spiritual programs for public (1991 to present)

Once the decision was made to close Jeevashram School, work started in developing the spiritual programs for the public. The principal of the Jeevashram School with a small group of teachers started the spiritual programs for public. The workshops were conducted as residential retreat programs conducted over 7 days or 21 days. The workshop focused on helping the participant accept themselves as they are and connect with their own inner divine self the Antaryamin

A second campus was setup in 1992 near Chennai city a place called Somangalam. In 1994, the campus of Jeevashram School was renamed as Satyaloka. Advance retreat programs for public were conducted at this campus. By 1995, Sri Bhagwan's workshops were being conducted in all major cities in India, including the capital New Delhi . In 1995, the first major public event was held at Chennai city, drawing more than 100,000 students from across India. In 1999, the work on building the Oneness University at Varadaiahpalem, Chitoor district Andhra Pradesh India started.

Oneness University, located 70 km from Chennai, is accessible by the National Highway 5 and is on Tirupati Road leading to the ancient temple town of Kalahasthi. In 2000, the first campus was completed and Sri Bhagawan and his team of teachers moved to the campus. Over the next few years, various campuses, including the Oneness Temple in 2008 were built. In 2004, the first international program was started.

References

As I have noted previously, Vijaykumar/'Kalki Bhagavan' and his organisation are experts at re-writing history to suit their own ends.

For what it's worth, it should be noted that there are many socially damaging aspects to his activities, and those of the Oneness organisation. Particularly in the way he and his followers have exploited superstitions about his perceived 'godman' status, enabling them to take a great deal of money over the years from poor people in India. There also seem to be significant issues in the way the organisation has treated local villagers in the area around its headquarters. There are many, many, unanswered questions about its financial dealings, and the channeling of untaxed funds for personal gain.

This so-called 'Kalki Bhagavan' is a controversial figure, and any biographical material must be rigorously sourced. Wikipedia cannot be party to any deception on behalf of him, his family, his organisation, or his followers. M Stone (talk) 03:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Note to User:MathewTStone

This is a Wikipedia page. Not your personal blog. So you are required to stick to the WP policy on neutrality and balanced coverage. Require you to read through the complete WP:BLP. Below are some notes for your quick understanding.

• WP:BLP - "Biographies of living persons ("BLP"s) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives: the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages.[3] The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material"
• WP:WELLKNOWN WP:BLPGOSSIP If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources, leave it out. Avoid repeating gossip.

Prodigyhk (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

You recently deleted a conversation from your User Talk Page which indicates you are editing on behalf of someone else. Who is that person? Vijay Kumar, his wife, son, or someone from the Oneness organisation? You have requested feedback from other editors on the 'biographical' material that you have submitted above. I have provided my feedback in great detail. This page isn't going to advance much further until you address the points I have raised. I will be reviewing your edits very carefully indeed, and anything not supported by independent sources may be removed. e.g. a self-published 'White Paper' is not a reliable source, nor is anything endorsed by the Oneness organisation. No one is repeating gossip. Everything I add is backed up by independent sources.Your own motives are highly questionable M Stone (talk) 20:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Mathew Timothy Stone, Your edits on this articles over the past 3 years, raise several questions concerning your level of knowledge of and/or adherence to conventional wikipedia rules and policies concerning neutral editing. You have strong negative opinion about the subject of this article. You have kept perusing your negative point in the article and in non-article space. You have also kept removing any other edits that are neutral or opposing your POV. Your edit patterns, are highly disruptive and, if unchecked, may require administrator intervention. Prodigyhk (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Please respond to the multiple issues raised here and on your User Talk Page M Stone (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Mathew, to answer your questions:

I am not editing on behalf of anyone. It is done in my personal time.

Have seen your feedback on the biography section. Presently busy at my job and kids have holidays. So, time is tight. Will get back to it, once things settle down and after we resolve our edit differences :)

Do request you to have an honest review of your own edit patterns of this wiki article. You carry a very negative personal opinion about Kalki Bhagavan. This is not allowing you to collaborate with other editors who have different opinions. Prodigyhk (talk) 10:32, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Issues relating to 'Kalki' and other titles and names

There are a number of issues relating to Vijay Kumar's name and title. It seems that in his early years, he was quite happy to be known as 'Kalki Bhagavan'. In recent years he, and his organisation, are trying to claim that he is simply 'Sri Bhagavan'. or 'Sri Amma Bhagavan'. I believe this is related to issues with the Indian legal system, which takes a dim view of anyone claiming to be 'Kalki', (i.e. an avatar of a Hindu deity). Needless to say, it would be embarrassing for the Oneness organisation if their so-called 'avatar' was dragged in front of a court. This is also a possible explanation for describing his ashram as a 'university', as this is likely to deflect attention, and make it appear more 'secular'. I have removed any names or titles except Vijay Kumar and Kalki Bhagavan, along with references to his so-called 'university'. M Stone (talk) 20:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

The only issue is that WP has been stick with you, a bigoted editor Mathew Timothy Stone who keeps deleting every other edit that does not meet your rabid negative viewProdigyhk (talk) 05:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Please maintain a civil tone in discussions. Everyone is entitled to their views. The indications on your talk page are that you are editing on behalf of someone who is close to the subject. You are also editing using sources close to the subject. I suggest you find independent sources to support any edits. M Stone (talk) 21:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

My final opinion regarding this article

Mr. M Stone will forever try to edit the article regarding his personal opinion of 'this' and 'that' because that is his perception of it; So, if - for instance - he keeps insisting that 'Kalki Bhagavan' is a religious leader in his sense of a clergy, and still cannot understand the job of a freelance Indian guru, afterall, I will consider Wikipedia as a very big rubish reddit for the frustrated ones. Afterall, it is been just a brawl between those ones. If this continues, I will just consider the fact that Wikipedia is loosing its respect, and soon it will be sold to Google. If you follow my thoughts, just leave Mr. M Stone play with his virtual intelectual property.

Maybe Kalki Bhagavan should buy Wikipedia. He's taken so much money from his followers, it would barely make a dent in his petty cash. M Stone (talk) 21:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

(ligh a candle now, Matthew!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.12.26.206 (talk) 11:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

This Vijay Kumar [10] makes it clear that he is in no way connected to the Vijay Kumar who is the subject of this page. M Stone (talk) 22:19, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

'Aha!I think I've got the point, now!

The Lack of more accurate refferences of what Kalki does besides using a controversial name.

Follow the following topics:

Indian Culture

• The Myth method:

Kalki Bhagavan wanted to gather his (very vast) indian public using philosophycal rethoric devices of which he affirmingly explains why he is superior; therefore, attracting his devotees to raise up their conciousness as well, seduced by the idea (for them) to escape suffering, life failure, depression, etc.

• Once that devotee is attracted to the 'liberation idea', everything falls into place to use a very simple 'Cult (psychology)' for that group of people. Then, some bits of Psychodrama methods is used to that group during the darshans, giving them a brief relief and associations with those mythological (symbolic impersonation) aspect of the protagonist, in this case, a deity.

Mindsets

• Usually, cultures or geographic spaces filled with civilians with some ignorance are very likely to be a susceptible target (not to be confused with susceptibility for ideological mindsets, because their lack of rationality - or objective education - makes them dwell in a very low perception of life, very often full of symbolisms. This same condition applies to mentally disoriented individuals.

Balacing the topic

Now, here, it is the part of the article I think therefor should be gathered the benefits in society, psychology and education for his controversial attempts.

I just wanted to share some basics directives to put this whole-schemed article into a more profound and insightful information 187.12.26.206 (talk) 17:25, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

I belive that what you meant by saying objective educationwas actualy Cognitive_development, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatubola (talk • contribs) 19:34, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Before this article continues, a consensus is needed.

I've been reading some aspects of this conversations and I've noticed that if the refferences are going to work for now on, these topics must be observed:

1) users are insisting that there has to be NEWS-related refferences; 2) in journalism, you just need to provide information gathered by a archived Press_statement, of which here we will consider a statement archived in the web that would meet the criteria of Journalism_ethics_and_standards, and that mean, NOT NEWS CHANNEL/JOURNAL links ONLY. 3) i.e. the Arjuna Aardag book sometimes will not meet the criteria; but some blogs and pages will. 4) This Article has to be neutral; if some people are preaching like a lawyer around this one should immediatelly be warned. 177.135.5.171 (talk) 23:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi user with IP 177.135.5.171

1. The other editor's contention is that independently published sources about the subject are not "really" independent. So, his argument to rely only on published NEWS. There are flaws in his argument, which I hopefully will be able to get a consensus agreement to move forward :)

2. Press Release - Under certain conditions, WP allows use of subject as as self published sources. Details are here. [[11]]. In this case, it would only allow press releases issued by the subject and not other persons.

3. Blogs do not meet WP requirement and can not be included. Please study WP:source

4.Sometimes it gets difficult to resolve issues and to ensure neutrality . May be the right course would be to get an admin involved.

Prodigyhk (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for these clarifications, Prodigyhk. In a sense now, it is clear to move foward on consensus;

For instance, on this, there would add a section in "Controversies" about internal conflicts (or, say, "misorganisation"), which there could include the deaths of inmates and the break of famous guides that became famous, maybe focusing on a publicity strategy. So, the only reference of the break you can find here [12] or in other oneness-movement-related sites. In deed, there is a bit of a neutrality here, since what would be focused here is his official statement, but one that was broadcasted only through oneness-movement-related channels. How do I deal with it? Why would its official value be reduced only because of the fact it wasnt spread by news channel? 187.12.26.206 (talk) 10:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible to invoke deletion again? Moraldobial (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

References to internal conflicts or the breakaway group of guides needs to come from independent sources. e.g. The Hindu published at least one short article at [13]. Sources close to the Oneness movement cannot be trusted. M Stone (talk) 23:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi person with IP address out of Aracaju-Sergipe-Brazil. Have some query since there are a few people out of South America with your similar style writing here. It will be easier for me to process inputs if I can know which of you are same person and which are different :-)

177.135.5.171 and 187.12.26.206 -> these users are from same location. Are you same.

Moraldobial and Tatubola -> these users seem similar. Are you same ? And style seem similar to the above users. Are all 4 of you same ?

Note - If it is against WP rules to ask this type of questions, do let me know. Prodigyhk (talk) 02:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Prodigyhk; for sure that is a good concern to be asked in WP:Q. So, here 187.12.26.206 (talk) 11:45, 30 April 2013 (UTC) is where I work. The following 177.135.5.171, as you can see, has the log of '23:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)1' which is UTC-3 in Aracaju-Sergipe-Brazil so at 10:35PM I really wasn't at work!! :) The other users such as Tatubola or Moraldobial I really can't say; probablly just a coincidence; Aren't them the same user?... I mean they have the same user page! I will check if it someone from the same school I work since this computer here 187.12.26.206 (talk) 11:45, 30 April 2013 (UTC) is shared or intranet as well :)

In order not to make more confusions like that, I will sign my posts. Sorry for the inconvenience. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 11:47, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

thanks user:187.12.26.206 for the clarifications. Now we can wait for inputs from User talk:177.135.5.171 who started this discussion "consensus" Prodigyhk (talk) 10:06, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Independent Sources

Following the discussion above, it is a consensus to gather independent sources, according to its discussion (above). Here will be gathered Independent Sources that (would) rather meet the criteria in case of broading the article for now on. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 10:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I have posted my comments on the sources listed below. M Stone (talk) 09:58, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

The Hindu

• KB´s followers never consumed narcotics;
• Article 01 and Artcle 02 about a International convention of the Viswa Hindu Parishad (VHP) held at KB´s headquarters.;
• Article about events of a KB´s enviromental project;
• Article about (local famous) actress Shilpa Shetty performing activities related to KB´s 'spiritual' practices;
• Article about (local famous) actress Manisha Koirala performing activities related to KB´s 'spiritual' practices;
• “Internal squabbles causing fissures in (KB´s) Oneness Movement”
• Big event at the KB´s headquarters (Relevant?)
• Article 01 and Article 02 reporting the 'Irate Crowd' assaults events at KB´s headquarters. NOTE: Article 03 suggests those assaults were propposed in response of the government´s negligency at (not) initiating a probe against KB. Article 04 probably started the first strife. (Relevant?) (Too much details?) Article 05 provides more details on the land issues. (more details here, here, here and here.
• The Madras High-Court 'Ban' on TVnews channels telecasting KB´s 'controversial' clips.

The Hindu can definitely be used as a source. It is has been publishing for many years, and meets WP guidelines as a 'reliable, third-party, published source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.' M Stone (talk) 09:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Matthew check this The_Hindu#Controversy - it is known in India that they take a Communist line. Think you may be interested to know, as you have high opinion about them. Anyway, for this article, we can use The Hindu as a source taking suitable care on how we present it. Prodigyhk (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, besides it is very clear to see their neutral position, it is mentioned the action of a Communist Party of India there. So, no tabloids here. I agree that it meets the guidelines. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 16:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

ExpressIndia

• Shilpa Shetty idem
• Manisha Koirala idem
• Stampede idem — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.12.26.206 (talk) 14:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I cannot comment on Express India. It may not be a particularly reliable source, and perhaps should be used with caution. M Stone (talk) 09:52, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Matthew my friend, Indian Express is one of the best known newspapers in India. Prodigyhk (talk) 11:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Prodigyhk, in my opinion, indianexpress.com is not a very popular site in India; While it could be a better popular as circulating newspaper, it doesn't feed the web rank, so it looses points in terms of web-authority, thats all... 187.12.26.206 (talk) 16:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

It is a bit crazy :) Both of you clearly no experts on India and on this task to write an encyclopaedic article about an Indian Guru ! Prodigyhk (talk) 09:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The truth is that an encyclopaedia article won´t meet the standards of a Hagiography if that´s your point! 177.159.22.51 (talk) 11:52, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The only point I was making is, this question about using Indian Express as a source would not be, among people with knowledge of India. And thanks for teaching me a new word Hagiography Prodigyhk (talk) 12:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

India Today

• (call it the) 'KB´s Financial thrusts crisis' (their follow up and coverage).

Not to be included. This article is from 2004, based on someone's allegations that are still not proven. Require follow WP:BLP - Biographies of living persons ("BLP"s) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives:Prodigyhk (talk) 03:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

• Shilpa idem.
• (local famous) Hrithik Roshan performing KB´s 'spiritual' practices. Ordinary people performing, as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.12.26.206 (talk) 14:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

India Today can definitely be used as a source. Like The Hindu, it is has been publishing for many years, and meets WP guidelines as a 'reliable, third-party, published source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.' N.B. This is a discussion about the reliability of sources. Therefore, the article's year of publication; whether or not it is titillating; and whether or not the allegations are true, is irrelevant to the discussion. M Stone (talk) 09:54, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Matthew, my comments are relevant to development of this article. Advice on what basis, you want to include unfounded allegations from 2004 in this article Prodigyhk (talk) 10:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't know why you are apologising. This is a discussion about reliability of sources, and India Today is most certainly a reliable source. If you will recall when the article was Nominated for Deletion [[14]], it was decided to 'Keep' largely on the basis of Vijay Kumar's notability through his coverage by the press. Like it or not, this is one example of such coverage. M Stone (talk) 10:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Mate, when I am rude, you ask me to be civil. Now, when I am trying to be civil in my disagreement by saying "sorry", you question me. Make up your mind ;)

* I agree India Today is an well known media house in India and can most of the time seen as reliable source.

* I do not agree that this specific article dated 2004 with unfounded allegations is a source to use in this WP article. Check WP:BLPGOSSIP

* Was not part of the deletion discussion in 2008, when they decided to delete, even though this article from India Today dated 2004 was then existing. In the recent 2013 discussion, that both of us participated, the few who participated had different ideas on why the person is notable and not just based on media coverage. The decision was made the subject is a notable person from India and so kept. And I remember you had requested for deletion :-) Prodigyhk (talk) 11:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

In case of WP:BLPGOSSIP the article remains without weasel words, so it meets our criteria here. Therefore, it can be used to highlight the media relevancy of KB´s. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 15:58, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

User @ Prodigy HK, you have on previous occasions been civil to me in discussions, and then later engaged in personal attacks on me when you don't get your way. This is not good WP etiquette, and I have no time for engaging with editors who conduct themselves in such a manner. You have yet to properly address the many issues I have raised with you in previous discussions. As far as India Today goes, I don't recall the veracity of any particular sources being discussed in the Deletion discussions, which were quite general. Coverage by media was one of the critical reasons for the 'Keep' decision, as there is very little else about Kalki Bhagavan that is notable. M Stone (talk) 22:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thaindian News

• Shilpa idem. Manisha Koirala idem; please find it - if necessary - to avoid being redundant here on talkpage...:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.12.26.206 (talk) 14:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Cannot comment about Thaindian. It can possibly be used as a source, but unless anyone has evidence to the contrary, I would suggest not for anything controversial or likely to be contested. M Stone (talk) 09:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Agree with Matthew. Prodigyhk (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Agreed; TN´s page looks like a web link repository. Everything you search there they redirect you to search engine hot-word methods: It leads you nowhere. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 16:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Life Postive

• ^ Varughese, Suma. "Sri Bhagawan Kalki - The School of Enlightenment". Life Positive. The class revolves around the concept of acceptance. Sounding like J.Krishnamurti or Eckhart Tolle, she tells us to practice 'sweekariyat', beginning with acceptance of the self. We are urged to look within and acknowledge all that is. She points out the suffering inherent in rejecting aspects of ourselves we do not approve of and of the false self we construct. She emphasizes the importance of 'experiencing' the moment, instead of resisting it. Bhagavan says, "Seeing is the key thing in the dharma. Supposing jealousy is there, you must learn to see jealousy. To see is to be free." http://www.lifepositive.com/Spirit/Sri_Bhagwan_Kalki/The_School_for_Enlightenment92006.asp
• ^ Varughese, Suma. "Sri Bhagawan Kalki - The School of Enlightenment". Life Positive. "Bhagavan says, 'The mind of man is like a wall which divides man from God. The deeksha is an electrical energy that makes a hole in this wall, which we call the mind. Once this happens, then God and man can come to relate to each other." .. A key concept is the importance of cultivating an intimate relationship with God, based not on fear or awe but friendship. "God is your supreme friend," Bhagavan is reported to have said, and we are urged to argue with God, fight with him and compel him to hear our prayer, as we would with a real friend. I find this concept of the friendly God very attractive, for too often we distance ourselves from divinity out of a sense of unworthiness. http://www.lifepositive.com/Spirit/Sri_Bhagwan_Kalki/The_School_for_Enlightenment92006.asp

Prodigyhk (talk) 03:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea why these lengthy quotes have been posted here. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Is this meant to be part of the discussion about reliable sources? If so, LifePositive appears to be some kind of blog and would need to be used in a very limited way, and only to support assertions that are not likely to be contested. M Stone (talk) 09:56, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

had copied it from above and so lengthy quotes included with the copy and paste.

LifePositive is a printed magazine that you can buy in India. The link is to their web portal. The subject Kalki Bhagavan is a spiritual master. It is important to cover details about his teaching and spiritual work. The articles in Life Positive will form the reliable independent source for this Prodigyhk (talk) 10:27, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Just because a publication is printed, and it can be bought in a particular country, does not make it a reliable source. It is a matter of opinion how important it is to 'cover details about his teaching'. Please provide some evidence that Life Positive is a reliable source. M Stone (talk) 10:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

These reputed and well known Indians are running this magazine, which makes this magazine a reliable source.

* President of Life Positive - Mr D.R. Karthikeyan, former chief of the CBI.

* Panel of advisers - Mark Tully, Kiran Bedi, Devieka Bhojwani, M Madhvan Nambiar, K M S 'Titoo' Ahluwalia, G Venkatesh Rao , and Parveen Chopra. Prodigyhk (talk) 11:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree that LifePositive isn´t quite neutral. Also, it looks like a segment of a publicity niche; so, there should be avoided those publicity contents. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 16:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

LifePositive is not claiming to be a news organisation like the others. It might be okay for limited use as a source, i.e. assertions that are not likely to be contested. M Stone (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

@User:187..., Just as to learn very detail information of a sportsman's performance, we read a sports magazine. Similarly to learn about a spiritual master, we do need to refer to a spiritual magazine, for information that is not usually in mainstream newspapers. Life Positive works in that niche as a source for spiritual news. Prodigyhk (talk) 09:51, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The comment was to AVOID PUBLICITY. 177.159.22.51 (talk) 11:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Opinions

• So, in my opinion (as far as the quality of the sources discussed here), The Hindu covers the most of the criteria, in detriment of the other media sources. I wouldn't include ExpressIndia, Thaindian and Life Positive; they wouldn't add much relevance. 187.12.26.206 (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Based on discussion to date, I would suggest that The Hindu and India Today both definitely meet WP criteria as 'reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy'. The others may be OK as sources for anything not likely to be contested. M Stone (talk) 22:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

• My opinion, other than Thaindian, the rest of the listed new source are established Indian media companies. We need to ensure unfounded allegations are not presented in the WP article. The WP editor need to ensure the WP articles follow WP:BLP - Biographies of living persons ("BLP"s) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives Prodigyhk (talk) 09:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The guidelines of WP:SOURCE for this article is - so far - widely discussed here via WP:CON. talk is concerned to the WP:BLP as the editor´s position; which fact does not represent the quality/reliability of the sources. [...] 177.159.22.51 (talk) 12:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposing a WP:BLP standard model

177.159.22.51 (talk) 12:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi User:177.159.22.51, Are you the same person as User:187.12.26.206 who was here yesterday (or) User:177.135.5.171 who was here a few days earlier. One request - it will easier for us to keep a track and continue conversation if you could all use registered user id ? Prodigyhk (talk) 16:26, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey man, isnt today a holiday ?! So why do you want me to use that computer ??! School is closed today man!! :)) 177.159.22.51 (talk) 20:27, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Life

Early life and proclamation

• An epiphany lead KB to decide to become a guru ?

Later activites/stablishments/education/techniques...

• What guided KB to the guru life? An specific event? A sum of sociologic events? Perhaps a trauma ?
• Then, how KB developed his skills to acquire expertness at the guru area? Is there a official course like in Cambridge ? How is this process done in India ?
• Is there a consecration ?

The foundation for his headquarters?

• And why? Is that a normal process of guru´s? Discuss.

KB´s system: beliefs, spiritual practices, contributions(i.e for the 'spiritual academy')

• Briefly, how KB´s system is structured; what is in (within) the system to be considered as dogma; are there innovations for the spiritual paradigmas? etc...

Noteworthy followers ?

177.159.22.51 (talk)‎ . 177.159.22.51 (talk) 02:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Added a strike bracket to the propposed section according to what has been recently discussed (below) and recent updates to the main article. Dafurlol (talk) 18:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Is this a proposed structure? 177.159.22.51 Please sign. The above would depend on reliable sources, first identify some reliable third party sources, then worry about structure. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is a proposed structure, based on another category-related W:BP. I am working on finding reliable third party sources right now. 177.159.22.51 (talk) 02:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Please read yourself WP:BIO instead of WP:BP above. 177.159.22.51 (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Agree with the comment from In ictu oculi, structure is a secondary issue. The first hurdle is ensuring reliable third party sources are used for any content on this page. M Stone (talk) 05:01, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

In ictu oculi Hi, welcome back. A list of media sources has been listed above [[15]] for review and comments Prodigyhk (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay thanks. I do not object to some toned-down positive content here, just as toned down critical content may also be present. Newspapers are reliable 3rd party sources. Regarding the two visits of film stars I do not think "followers" can be used. Simply "The ashram has attracted visits from some celebrities including a visit from Shilpa Shetty and.. " One visit does not a follower make, and a separate section is not required. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I have added a sentence to that effect. Maybe this page needs to be done on a sentence-by-sentence basis. M Stone (talk) 09:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)