Talk:Mooji

Lot of work to do!
Hello everyone!

I do not want to flood an important BLP page with tags, so I writing the issues here. PLs let's fix the draft together.

1. Relies solely on primary sources. 2. One citation used multiple times. 3. Writing style is not encyclopedic. 4. Mooji is a very notable spiritual teacher in the West and also in India. A lot about him is not present in the article. I am sure there must be coverages too. Just too tired right now to find them all. But I will, probably tomorrow or day after. Others. . . pls help.

Highway Bird (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Highway Bird


 * @Highway Bird, I've reverted those edits and I'll break down why:
 * Template:Story doesn't apply here. The Biography section is well supported by independent, reliable sources—BBC News, The Guardian, Público, Outlook India, etc.—many of which cover his biographical details in depth. It's entirely appropriate for us to reflect the weight of that biographical detail in the article, per WP:NPOV (specifically WP:WEIGHT). I also don't see any hyperbole, irony, or other unencyclopedic rhetorical elements in that section.
 * It's standard to mention the subject's mother in a Biography section, especially if we also mention the father. Both are sourced to The Guardian. If the issue is that we don't cite a reference for the sentence about the mother, we can certainly add that.
 * The BBC source says Mooji has called his approach, the lazy man’s way to enlightenment but it's unclear if that's a direct quote from the subject or a paraphrase from the source's author. Because of that ambiguity, it's better to paraphrase rather than imply something the source doesn't say.
 * I'll quickly reply to your other points:
 * The article predominantly relies on independent, reliable sources. That wasn't the case about two years ago when it was reported to BLPN and was subsequently rewritten. Sure, there are primary sources supporting a full name and date of birth and a single sentence at the end of the Biography section, but they're fairly basic WP:BLPPRIVACY and WP:ABOUTSELF claims.
 * There's no issue with using citations multiple times. In fact, WP:WEIGHT suggests we should give more editorial weight to in-depth and reliable sources, which we do. Also, site functionality like WP:INLINECITE and WP:REFNAME specifically allows us to bundle references, as we are in this article.
 * If you can point out unencyclopedic writing and further coverage in reliable sources, please do. I certainly looked for other sources when the article was rewritten a couple years ago, but not since. Most of what I found was either unreliable or not independent, but perhaps you'll have more luck.
 * Since you're relatively new here, I'll leave some important information about Wikipedia and content about living persons on your Talk page. If you have any questions or comments about this article, feel free to leave them here. If you have any general questions, there's The Teahouse or you can ask me directly. Cheers! Woodroar (talk) 16:08, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey! These inputs have made me reflect. I will read more about BLPs. Thanks for your guidance. Keep supporting. Highway Bird (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2022 (UTC)Highway Bird