User talk:Jzkramer

Welcome!

Hello, Jzkramer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Microcosmic orbit

Did you put those note numbers in? They are not right. The numbers and footnotes and links to them would be automatically generated if you put in <ref>Author (date)</ref> to refer to the references. You can't number the refs, as they are supposed to be kept in alpha order by author... See WP:CITE for more info about citations. —Hanuman Das 11:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Also, talk pages are never blanked. See talk page guidelines. —Hanuman Das 11:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. I refer to this edit. —Hanuman Das 11:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing the wikify tag

You can be blocked from editing if you do so 4 times in 24 hours. See the three revert rule. Tags are placed for a reason. DO NOT REMOVE THEM UNLESS YOU FIX THE PROBLEM WITH THE ARTICLE. Please put it back or I will ask for you to be blocked. —Hanuman Das 11:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Every tag has links to pages explaining Wikipedia policy and describing the changes needed. Have you bothered to read the pages linked to in the tag? Also, you don't have to fix it. The tags put the article on a list of articles that attracts other editors to come help. —Hanuman Das 11:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Ah! Then thank you very much for fixing them. I didn't know what had come from what. I guess somebody else added those, but IIRC there were anon editors and I suspected it was you having simply forgotten to log in. —Hanuman Das 11:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikifying

means putting double brackets around the first occurance of each significant term to create a link to the article on that term. —Hanuman Das 11:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kriya Yoga

Sir, Regarding your claim that Hariharananda teaches techniques other than Kriya Yoga. Who are you comparing his teachings to and how do you determine what is the correct Kriya? What is the benchmark? In the absence of Babaji, Lahiri, Sri Yukteswar, Kebalananda etc. how can anyone reliably determine what is the correct Kriya? It seems to me that you only think Yogananda's autobiography a reliable source, but how would you know what Yogananda taught, (other than the limited descriptions in Autobiograhy)- or do you base your knowledge on SRF correspondence style Kriya? Does this explain why you persist with the minority POV that Kriya Yoga traditionally doesn't need to be taught by a realized master? It seems to me that good or bad Hariharananda and now Prajnanananda's teachings most closely resemble the orthodoxy of Yogananda, Satyananda and therefore your namesake Sri Yukteswar. I suspect that you are being a oddly pedantic here in order to retain a sense of editorial authority. Your edit of the last Kriya change was splitting hairs in the extreme. To back up an argument with..."everyone knows that" is a lazy way to justify a point.Jzkramer 08:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I said 'he teaches many things differently than other Kriya lines'. For example, your blanket statement that kriya is 'usually practiced under the guidance of a realised master' is incorrect. It's not. Yogananda, for example', taught simply that kriya "must be learned from a Kriyaban or Kriya Yogi." That represents what is by far the mainstream view. Hariharananda's is a minority view. If you're going to make blanket statements such as 'kriya is' this or that, you need to give the majority view. The other option is to not make blanket statements pretending to speak for all kriya teachers. Instead you can make a statement like 'one kriya teacher, Hariharananda, says ....." To which I or someone would add to the article "While other teachers, such as x, y, and z say.." But that makes a cumbersome article, which is supposed to be a general discussion of Kriya. That's why I offered the far more general view of Yogananda, which also happens to be the more common view. Other Kriya teachers that agree with that view include Roy Davis, Ashoke Chatterjee, Swami Shankarananda Giri, etc. I also didn't say 'everyone knows that', because it's pretty obvious that not everyone does. That's why I included a reference from Yogananda, who almost everyone is familiar with, rather than the far less familiar Hariharananda. ॐ Priyanath 16:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to add that I think the article is actually turning into a good encyclopedia article. I know there are some editors here that can seem a bit harsh, but I've learned alot from them about how to write, cite, and wikify an encyclopedia article. Unfortunately, encyclopedia article writing can be awful pedantic, but that is what we are writing here - an encyclopedia. ॐ Priyanath 19:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]