Talk:Chinna Jeeyar

Doubts on His holiness' life

 * Post sanyasa, what was the surname of swamiji?? Also kindly mention his holiness' name post sanyasa. Please answer if anyone knows. Ganeshsashank (talk) 06:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

v —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.157.196 (talk) 15:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

You question and your edit summary doesn't make any correlation. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia but not a question & answer session. If you have a doubt of this nature, please contact chinna jeeryar's office for an answer. otherwise post it in wikianswers.

Recent Vandalism WP:VANDAL attack on this page
There has been numerous edits to this page giving wrong and false information on Chinna Jeeyar Swamy. It is against wikipedia's policies WP:VANDAL, Libel, WikiHate, NPOV. Some ill-informed people are portraying chinna jeeyar swamy as self-styled, which is totally wrong. Inspite of several edits, couple of users are making false assertions on a living legend. The real fact is already mentioned at http://www.chinnajeeyar.guru, an official website. So, please do not make any more changes to this page, without going against the official version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 18:06, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Wow.. Wikipedia is maintaining this page from now onwards
WOW.. More wikipedia experts join in chorus to maintain this page. Great job guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 23:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


 * This has all been explained to you before. For example, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:BLP and WP:RS. I should perhaps apologise for loading a series of acronyms on you but the reality is clearly that you are choosing not to read the things. - Sitush (talk) 00:29, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear Sitush, don't continue to ill-lecture me about your knowledge of WP acronyms. I read that are relevant to the discussion topic(s), that are clearly violating WP::NPOV, WP::Libel and seeing the continued argument about the wrong edits made by you, your edits also fall under WP:WikiHate. Please go thru them. I read them and stop lecturing on it. What ever WP acronyms mentioned to me, they go for your wrong edits. You may try to defend and put it a different color, but the reality is already proved by the corrections/admission made by other WP administrators, by reverting your changes (read your creative).
 * I am not sure what your point is, : editors work on every page of Wikipedia all the time. That's how we make an encyclopedia. Ogress smash! 03:56, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear User:Ogress, it is baffled to see many of WP editors making changes to this page without even having a damn knowledge of a person whom they are writing about. Some say dude and some say what ever they want. I know you guys have the handles to twist in what ever direction you want. I am fed up with one-sided action and mentality. If I say something, i will be lectured with stream of WP acronyms without discussing the real issues and suggests me to read properly or threatened with blocking. As I said, everytime a different user come and say what ever they want and threaten and/or lecture and go. I am on the right side from the beginning as you can notice revert (by WP admins) of those derogatory comments/edits made to this page against wikipedia's policy of WP:Libel and WP:NPOV. By the way, I was accused by those intelligent people with violation of WP:NPOV, but if that is the case, all the edits made in response to it also falls into the same category. I don't have any idea who is the real admin or rogue user. I haven't see an honest response yet.


 * , I think you are great follower of Swamiji or maybe you are Swamiji himself. You must be feeling very harassed. You are new user, actually Wikipedia policies never discourages new users as long as they are following Wikipedia policies. I will suggest you to make article about Swamiji on Hindi Wikipedia and Telugu Wikipedia. These people will not disturb you there, you have all freedom there. There can be more sources about Swamiji in Telugu news papers. You can make nice and sourced article there and later you can translate it to English. If you are not finding reliable sources in English language then you can use Telugu or Hindi sources on English Wikipedia too, but sources should be reliable, like Navbharat Times in Hindi and equivalent state level daily in Telugu language. -- Human 3015  knock knock • 05:31, 12 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Dear Human3015, Appreciate your words. But the contention is not about writing here and there; Portraying the right and truth impartially. I am a follower of truth and facts. Yes, I am just a follower of HH. HH doesn't need wikipedia introduction and he cares less of what people write about him. As mentioned many times, I am following the given policy. But it is the WP admin/editors who are making mockery of Wikipedia policy system. They do not oblige to their own policies. They can have their own self belief on any person and write non-sensicle using their power, but a user new or old cannot scream on them. I do not agree about your comments on wikipedia. Wikipedia is no longer it used to be. Though i started writing on wikepedia recently, i know it from its early days. Notice the way the response metted to this article and abruptive behaviour of these users and response to it by their friends. Wikipedia is not a property of a bunch of volunteers. Every one has right to update an article with the correct information as long as they adher to wikipedia's policy. We cannot have one rule for public and a different one for the kings. It doesn't matter the source of the information. When people start putting words likes "self-styled" in-spite of repeated objections, any secondary references any where doesn't matter. Any joker can write bad comments on some people in any media and wikipedia editors like to take it as a source according to their understanding of wikipedia policies. This case is a perfect example --  some Indian newspaper journalist chose to address chinna jeeyar as Hindu Seer and wikipedia editors agreed to it. Wow. for them it is a great reliable source. In the name of experience, writing or commenting on an unknown subject and/or person is not allowed any where. Imagine about the fate of a dead personality when a living persons introduction is tarnished here at wikipedia.  They don't want to hear from a living person instead chose to hear from a newspaper (who knows whether the writer is a great follower or great hater of a person). What kind of reliable source one need to say that "chinna jeeyar belongs to a highly esteemed line of monks of the followers of Sri Ramanujacharya, called Jeeyars". It is very simple and there is no violation of WP:NPOV. And WP editors chose to neglect in favor of usage of word " self-styled". One doesn't need an experience to oblige to it. One just need to know " worship yours - respect all". From whom (kind of reliable source) that these admins want to hear that "chinna jeeyar belongs to a highly esteemed line of monks of the followers of Sri Ramanujacharya, called Jeeyars". One need to understand a culture and have respect towards it. Can any of these declare their identity,  ideology and sign no conflict of interest according to wikipedia policy of WP:COI. It is heartening to see misuse of wikipedia and abuse the power of open source in this global age. Thanks again for listening.

WOW, thanks to wikipedia so-called admins. The can of worms of hat-redness opened by them. user:Soham321 started a true color of the intention by pointing to another link. Any joker can write on any media page on any one and Wikipedia is taking it as a reliable source but not http://www.chinnajeeyar.guru website contents. Hat(e)s off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamanujaDasa (talk • contribs) 06:44, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * RamanujaDasa has been blocked one week for persistent disruptive editing. --Neil N  talk to me 11:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC)