Talk:Lakshman Joo

India: Jammu and Kashmir / History / Literature Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian literature workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article was last assessed in March 2012.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Hinduism Mid‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Where is Lakshman joo's Holy Shrine located ? what is the location of his expiry, where he expired ? NOIDA, U.P

Nature of Article: POV

This sounds more like a hagiography than a proper encyclopedia article. Things like "he achieved mahasamadhi", which require the reader to espouse a lot of very biased viewpoints, are inappropriate for Wikipedia. I work all day, but if I can't get to this, I hope someone else finds the time.

Peace,

--LordSuryaofShropshire 03:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Namaskarji. This is the accurate and technical way of describing a soul's journey out of the Kantha or above. ॐ नमःशिवाय _{Śaiva Sujīt} सुजीत ॐ 17:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swami Lakshmanjoo was possibly the most respected teacher of Kashmir Shaivism of the past decade. He personally sought no publicity, but gave freely of his knowledge. There are many other accounts of famous people who sought him out (Indira Gandhi, Dr. Karan Singh, Mahesh Yogi, Muktananda, Gopi Krishna...the list is endless), but since his only interest was Kashmir Shaivism, this page deals with his life in relation to that subject alone. George 05:39, 17 Feb '08 (UTC)

I agree with the hagiographic critique and added an advert tag to the article. This needs cleanup. Which is not to say that he was not a highly respected teacher nor was he interested in advertising himself. Just that the language in this article is not neutral. It's going to take a lot of work to fix everything to a non-promotional attitude. - Owlmonkey (talk) 17:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there are two competing biographic sections? They need to be merged. And the lineage section reads like a religious text not a neutral encyclopedic discussion of the lineage that he held. Many issues here. - Owlmonkey (talk) 18:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I attempted a merge of the two biographic sections, removing point of view style language as I went. I put the lineage narrative into a blockquote so it's intact but does not appear as factual encyclopedic content. I know lineage can be quite important in some hindu and buddhist traditions, and showing an unbroken and pure lineage is central to a teaching, but I'm not sure if the entire narrative is something that should be on an encyclopedia article about him. Question, should Swami Ram's name be rendered "Ram" or "Raam". It appears in both forms in the article right now and we should be consistent. - Owlmonkey (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the distinction between "Raam" and "Ram" is that the former is the "simple transliteration" while the latter is a lazy IAST transliteration, and I agree that we should be consistent in this choice. In IAST, it would be spelled "Rāma", which is much more difficult to type, so I would personally prefer to spell it Raam. Śaiva Sujīt (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jaidev Singh

The value "Jaidev Singh" has to be aded on wikipedia (separaetely). He was tremendiously important scholar and teacher of kashmir Shaivism, and a student and friend of Swami Lakshmanjoo! 84.108.116.179 (talk) 13:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above appears to have been done (in 2012). -- HLachman (talk) 19:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miguel Serrano

Why is Miguel Serrano even mentioned in this article? Not only is the idea of "Esoteric Hitlerism" that Serrano proposed pretty directly opposed to Trika philosophically, but I don't even see any connection there at all. Serrano bastardized several Hindu concepts in a syncretic pseudo-Nazi doctrine along the lines of Savitri Devi and even if Vijnana Bhairava was one of the texts he used, what does this have to do with Swamiji? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.66.7.31 (talk) 01:58, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is some issue in terms of WP:SCOPE/WP:RELEVANCE. It appears that the work of the author in question (Serrano) mainly centers around some fringe theories about Nazism and extraterrestrials, etc., whereas the work of the other author mentioned (Reps) seems more directly relevant to the subject matter at hand. Also, there have been no comments disagreeing with the above IP editor in four years. So, I removed the Serrano info. -- HLachman (talk) 19:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feb 2018 massive edit

There was a massive edit (Feb 2018) in which a lot of previous text was removed without explanation and replaced with new text of questionable quality. The text seems to have been copied (plagiarized?) from a facebook page called swamilakshmanjoo (with some of the matching text there dated 2013). Portions of the newly-introduced text have been removed or corrected already (Mar 2018), but it's unclear that the present article is any better than prior to the massive edit (while issues of possible plagiarism remain). Unless there is some objection within the next few days, I intend to restore the text as it was prior to the massive edit. -- HLachman (talk) 09:39, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No objection whatsoever. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:46, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the restoration is done, thanks. If anyone has any issue with this, please discuss here (in the spirit of WP:BRD). -- HLachman (talk) 04:15, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Honorific

"Joo" is an honorific. Oliver Puertogallera (talk) 11:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]