Talk:Nithyananda/Archive 6

Disinformation Campaign against SPH
SPH and Adi-Shaivite Minority Tradition have been victims of extended disinformation and smear campaign. There is a report reviewed and published by the UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression which gives the details as part of the case study.

Investigative Journalists inquiring into SPH were shut down viciously by the government, this was reported.

''One of the biggest instances of paid news in the history of India was when Kannada news channel Samaya TV and its reporter was held guilty by the U.S court for civil conspiracy and defamation. It was established before the court that had conspired with a child molester Vinay Bharadwaj to attack against Paramahamsa Nithyananda.'' This is from a peer-reviewed paper on disinformation and media.

Despite his whereabouts being unknown, and media reports that he is a fugitive, there is no clear indication that Nithyananda has absconded in an attempt to flee the jurisdiction of his rape case. There is no indication that I could find that any court revoked his passport. These are from an investigative journalist's publication in the USA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.110.41 (talk) 05:44, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:04, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @SMcCandlish Can you please comment if the file hosted on the official website of Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights are reliable source or not? UN report Regards. Eevee01(talk) 12:58, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely not a reliable source. If this were an official statement of the UN HCHR, it would be a high-quality primary source, which would be valid to cite for certain kinds of things (nothing that consisted of analysis, interpretation, evaluation, or synthesis).  However, what this document is, is a form someone filled out.  An anonymous author (clearly a Nithyanada follower, since they refer to him as "His Holiness" and other honorific epithets, and much of the material reads like recruitment propaganda) has filled in [most of] the blanks of an incident report form, and filled them in with a position/opinion/stance, including many unproven claims.  This is basically the fallacy of circular reasoning; Nithyananda's supporters believe all these things, and are trying to use their own material as "proof" that their beliefs are correct, when all this material does is restate the beliefs.  Worse, all the substance of relevance here is  going to involve analysis, interpretation, evaluation, and/or synthesis (it's about legal and other social claims, not about mathematics, after all), so it will require secondary sourcing.  Even a statement from the actual HCHR would not be sufficient sourcing.  I'll address the rest of the material above in a separate post.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * To cover these points in the order they're presented above:
 * Nothing called "SPH" is the subject of this article (unless that's yet another epithet for Nithyananda). The article is also not about the Adi Shaivite Minority Tradition; see WP:COATRACK.
 * As noted above, the PDF from the UN website is not a UN statement; it's an incident report, gathered up with all other properly submitted such reports, and it was obviously written by an anonymous Nithyananda follower. It proves nothing, and is not a reliable source.
 * That India has freedom-of-the-press problems is a long-known fact, and has no bearing on article, which is not about journalist suppression in India; COATRACK again.
 * Just because some law-review article (in India, but about a US case) made a claim doesn't make it true. The court case in question was a ; the defendants didn't show up (probably because they're in India, the case was in California, and there's no way for a US court to force an Indian news organization to pay a fine – it's cheaper to ignore the case than to fly lawyers to the US to fight in court).  The court case proves nothing whatsoever.  The claim "One of the biggest instances of paid news in the history of India was when Kannada news channel Samaya TV and its reporter was held guilty by the U.S court for civil conspiracy and defamation" is patently false (it's not even using the correct legal terminology; there's no such thing as "guilty" verdict in a civil suit, just for starters).  Anyone can sue anyone in the US for anything, and the case will virtually always be found in favor of the party that shows up when one side doesn't bother.  But that never actually establishes that any particular claim made is true or false.  The law journal article being cited here makes various other claims, but all of them are sourced to the same India-based news organizations the article is simultaneously attacking as unreliable and corrupt, so it's self-defeating as a potential source to cite. The most interesting thing in it is the claim that someone actually confessed to faking the video that is alleged to be fake [and if you read way back in the talk archives, you'll find me suspecting it was a fake; I'm not suprised that it seems to have turned out to be one].  That actually might be important for this article, but it should come from the sources this law-journal article cites (and other sources we find), not from the law-journal article (which clearly isn't even reliable for law claims, much less claims about audio-visual effects).  Our article is presently saying it was faked, but without any details.  There appear to be at least 6 sources to use to provide those details.  And they should be used for that purpose; simply stacking up a bunch of redundant citations for the same simple claim is WP:OVERCITE, and anyone can remove the redundant citations at any time.  It would be better that they were retained and used to source additional statements.  Who faked it?  Why?  Our readers will care about that.
 * Moving on, it's up to sources to tell us Nithyananda left India during prosecution, but it is well-sourced that he did so, and him doing so makes him a fugitive regardless of whatever reasons he may have had in mind.  He also did make statements that he was leaving over concerns about assassins and mobs.  Our article covers this, and does not anywhere impute to him the motivation "I am fleeing India to escape prosecution", so bringing it up above is a waste of time.
 * Finally, courts don't revoke passports (in most jurisdictions, anyway). The department/ministry of state (or rough equivalent) does that. Courts may issue no-travel orders, but that's not the same thing. And it's all irrelevant.  If Nithyananda had not been considered a flight risk, then prosecutors would likely not have asked for a no-travel order, or a large bail amount, or other surety against flight, nor sought outside the court to have his passport revoked.  We have no evidence any such steps were taken, we have no sources telling us why, so there is nothing for us to say about it.  Their failure to predict his flight ahead of time tells us nothing about why he absconded, and does nothing about the fact that he is a fugitive, having left the country during prosecution and never returned. There is no magical way around that, and WP is not going to lie about it to help Nithyananda's reputation.
 * — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * In India, passport is a fundamental right, it is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India, this is upheld by Supreme Court and High Courts on multiple occasions since 1960s. Government can only temporarily impound a passport. But only courts can revoke them as it involves curtaining of fundamental Rights. Government cannot revoke passports for even exiled/fugutive. Cancellation of passport in Indian context leads to defacto statelessness as stated by Supreme Court. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.110.41 (talk) 05:43, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * When he left India, there were no restrictions on his travel, on the contrary courts ordered that he is free to travel outside of India as well without any restrictions, which he has done on numerous occasions. He has been exempted from personal appearance in the court case which is pending since 2010. Leaving India in this situation doesn't make him a fugitive (whether there are ongoing cases or not) as he has court permission. He needs to be declared a fugitive by a competent authority. In case of India it is courts only that have the authority to do so. So far his fugitive declaration is by the media alone, there is no court declaration to back it up. Bottomline: He left India with court order granting him the permission to do so. When he was outside of India his passport was illegally cancelled. This is identical to the situation of the Naga Couple. Given the slow nature of the Indian legal system, it will probably be a few decades when his passport and citizenship get restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.110.41 (talk) 05:51, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The defendants were US citizens living in US as confirmed by court summons, hence it was filed in US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.110.41 (talk) 05:54, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * This is all entirely beside the point. We KNOW ALREADY that he was able to leave India, since he did so.  We have no information why his passport was not impounded or revoked, or him saddled with a large bail (or no bail and held until trial), or given a stay-put order. There is nothing for us to say about it.  And it has no effect whatsoever upon his status as a fugitive.  Indian police said he's a fugitive, and the media reported that; they didn't make it up.  It's irrelevant anwyay; the definition of a fugitive (who is not an escaped convict) is someone who has absconded during a criminal proceeding, and Nithyananda meets this definition. There is nothing anyone can do about that (other than Nithyananda, returning to India).  There is no source evidence whatsoever that Nithyananda had special permission from the courts to leave India during a criminal trial against him, and that's an absurd claim.  There is nothing to argue about here.  What citizenship was held by persons involved in the default-judgment case is irrelevant to the matter; it was still a default judgment, which produced no findings of fact, so making claims based on it that the plaintiffs' accusations are necessarily correct/true is an abuse of sources.  Court documents are primary sources anyway, and we don't use them this way, even in cases that are not default judgments; they're good as primary sources for, e.g., what a judge specifically wrote, but we use secondary reliable sources for the import/meaning of the case.  (And that article, in a foreign law journal with no reputation, that can't even get basic legal terms correct is clearly not such a source.) I will remind you all of the WP:TALK and WP:NOTFORUM policies.  Our talk pages do not exist for endless "I disagree with someone on the Internet" debates about trivia – like a distinction between passport revocation and impounding when passports have nothing to do with anthing in this article, or what country a case participant was from when it has no effect on whether it was a default judgment or not.  Our talk pages are only for  to which they pertain, and nothing in this discussion is going to result in article improvement.  PS: You can stop e-mailing me directly about this article.  I am not a magical gatekeeper, and I do have the power to delete it or radically change it.  This is very simple: either you have good sources to make changes or you don't.

Birth name
@Kashmiri, see Patronymic. Nithyananda's name is RS is A. Rajasekaran in which "A." stands for Arunachalam (his father's name). In Tamil Nadu, the use of initials and/or surname is up to the prerogative of the person with no strict rules. The late chief minister Karunanidhi preferred to be referred to as M. Karunanidhi where the initial M stood for Muthuvel - his father's given name. M. Karunanidhi's son prefers to be referred to as M. K. Stalin incorporating both his father's and grandfather's names. Eevee01(talk) 09:28, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Acnaren
User:Acnaren is a fanboy of this godman. Please block him.Strong Gold (talk) 04:34, 6 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't think there is a need of adding sub-headings, all the allegations are divided by the paragraph. Also no one will ban Acnaren because you don't like them. Eevee01(talk) 16:14, 6 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree that the subheadings are against the principles of WP:CRIME and WP:BALANCE. When a matter is sub-judice it is all the more important to not use wikipedia as a tabloid Acnaren (talk) 15:04, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Acnaren I've removed the subheadings. Eevee01(talk) 15:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Have you addressed WP:COI issues anywhere? You've claimed connections to officials at his Ashram and other editors have notified you about WP:COI repeatedly, but you've not responded as far as I can see. And over 10 years, your edits have been exclusively limited to this article.
 * If you're in any way related to the person or his institutions, please add a line or two to your user page outlining the nature of your relationship. And please read WP:COI closely Hemanthah (talk) 16:05, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

In an old discussion on page deletion, there is a claim that User:Acnaren is/was a volunteer at Nityananda Mission. Without appropriate WP:COI declarations, @User:Acnaren, I think you should refrain from significant edits on this article. --Hemanthah (talk) 16:27, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Republic TV sources
Yesterday, User:Tayi Arajakate removed WP:REPUBLICTV sources because they are deprecated source. Later this edit was undid by User:Acnaren,. I found this discussion in the talk page archive about the use of Republic as a source for the UN petition. But I'm not sure if we can use Republic for the legal name. This name was added by User:APPU. <b style="color:DarkTurquoise; font-weight: bold; font-family:cambria">Eevee01</b>(<b style="color:#40E0D0; font-style: italic">talk</b>) 16:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I have removed it again seeing as there is community consensus for Republic TV's deprecation and Acnaren being the only one supporting its inclusion in the archived discussion. The UN complaint isn't given a whole lot of weight by the Business Line citation so I'm not even sure if it should be included in the manner currently present in the article. Also I think the addition of Sri and Swami in the name violates MOS:HONORIFIC regardless of the sourcing. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 03:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with you. Republic TV should not be used as a source. I also agree with not including honorific titles in the name. @APPU and @Acnaren I’d like to also hear your views on this matter. <b style="color:DarkTurquoise; font-weight: bold; font-family:cambria">Eevee01</b>(<b style="color:#40E0D0; font-style: italic">talk</b>) 05:10, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree to not use Republic TV as a source. But I think we can not help removing Sri and Swami, it is the part of his legal name; I would have never added it if it was merely his common name. This is a court order can be used as a source for his legal name. Some other sources I found Appu (talk) 05:19, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In the documents you mentioned Sri is mentioned in everyone's name. Also there are no reliable sources which address Nithyananda with his "legal name". <b style="color:DarkTurquoise; font-weight: bold; font-family:cambria">Eevee01</b>(<b style="color:#40E0D0; font-style: italic">talk</b>) 05:36, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The usage of the term swami is very close to the English "Father"/"Mother" in clergy names (Mother Teresa, etc.), so I'd be supportive to having it in the article, even in the title. On the other hand, sri is a honorific pure and simple and should be left out per WP:HON. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  08:45, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi @Kashmiri, can you please explain why did you remove the title of Mahamandaleshwar from the infobox, . It is an official title given to him and unlike other titles it is neither disputed nor self given. <b style="color:DarkTurquoise; font-weight: bold; font-family:cambria">Eevee01</b>(<b style="color:#40E0D0; font-style: italic">talk</b>) 16:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * This is to comply with MOS:HON. We don't include honorific titles, unless they are commonly used with the name; and even then, we don't usually add them to the infobox. See for instance Charles de Gaulle, commonly known as General de Gaulle. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  19:16, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Mahamandaleswar can remain as its a religious title similar to pope or mufti or Moulana2603:8001:2:4CDB:455C:422A:2C53:715A (talk) 09:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Coronations
13 Jan 2014, News9 reported the coronation of Nithyananda as the Acharya Mahamandaleshwara in a negative way. However it doesn't dismiss the fact that it did report, youtu(dot)be/k4d5Au1MZ5A << This is a clip of a news report. All other documents are primary reference. Requesting Wikipedia editors to see if this can be used, and if not please document here why.

Nithyananda is the 293rd Pontiff of Madurai Aadheenam irrevocably, this is upheld by the High Court of Madras. Earlier references where to the court order, adding a indian kanoon reference to the same, “point 44. .. Hence this court is of the opinion that the Petitioner’s appointment is irrevocable and hence he [Sri Nithyananda Paramashivam] is the Junior Pontiff of the Mutt.”, order to CRP.(PD)(MD) 818 of 2018 and CMP(MD) 3630 of 2018 Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, delivered on 10 July 2018, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/96776711/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.105.225.73 (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * KAILASA-United-Nations-Persecuted-Hindus-Representation-UN-Minority-Forum.jpg

KAILASA Nation at United nations
Putting links about this news for approved editors

(1) https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/557452912/kailasa-nation-led-by-sph-nithyananda-paramashivam-speaks-on-behalf-of-hindu-diaspora-at-un-s-minority-issues-forum

(2) https://www.indiaspeaksdaily.com/the-united-nations-accepted-the-nation-of-kailash/

(3) Video link to the full LIVE video from the official UN website ( From 1 hr 24 min to 1 hr 26 min 20 sec ) : https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1n/k1nlz2keec

(4) So far mainstream media has not covered, social media links on this topic are there though.

Defamatory, false, and edited footage and false news such as the one on E=mc^2 was widely covered out of context and is seen as relevant for this Wikipedia article - I find it unfortunate. However, I do hope neutrality means this UN news is also covered/mentioned, if not without bias and prejudice, at-least mentioned. Earlier only Main Wiki Page of SPH was edited and edits of Hindu sympathizers were undone by some editors. Now even talk page edits are being reverted like the last one by user Hemananatha https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nithyananda&oldid=1058548011. Not sure if it was done as a mistake or as per policy. Please do not repeat this, or at least cite the policy before doing this, otherwise it feels being silenced. 103.105.227.34 (talk) 02:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I did cite the policy, WP:SOAPBOX. As you say yourself, there is no reliable source covering this. So it isn't clear what you wish to be added to the article. Hemanthah (talk) 13:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry you are right, i noticed now u did cite the policy. As I said, based on trolls E=mc^2 false defamatory news is noteworthy, but this UN news is considered unreliable. There is a primary UN reference, what about that? I have mentioned timestamps, actually for some odd reason timestamps have shifted to 1hr3mins so note that corrected but however the footage is there, the speech is there. Fact is simple KAILASA nation addressed the United Nations. Indian or International media may cover this in a few days. But the fact that even UN link is not accepted as reliable but troll news is considered reliable it just feels unfair. I can wait until it comes in some so called reliable news / media; until then i can document primary link/resource like UN in talk page .... that is ok? right? It is information which is true, it is primary reference. WP:SOAP if u apply to article i can leave it, why would u constrain basic free speech even in talk page? Policies should be applied to stop anyone from writing false information especially at the cost of harming people life - the false content of the wiki page has historically contributes to normalization of violence towards SPH and his followers. Is this fair to people of a persecuted community who have been marginalized by Hindumisia media and had no other option left that to voice in United Nations. Even news papers have right to reply section, some countries give that as a right.

103.105.227.34 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:25, 6 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The video, in its entirety, is a submission from his group. It's not a UN source as you are trying to paint it. If I leave a comment on a UN website, that doesn't mean UN is now endorsing me.
 * What you are telling doesn't make sense. The link is a UN link. IT is evidence that it happened, KAILASA nation participated and addressed. This is a simple fact. What is the paint in this? 103.105.227.34 (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Anyway, your time will be better spent on establishing a trustworthy account with quality edits than on creating walls of text nobody will read. You could then edit the page yourself. Hemanthah (talk) 06:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not neutral in this subject and I am following wikipedia rules of avoiding this article for that reason, and besides largely i do not trust editors in wikipedia, they are biased against the SPH because they follow Indian news. It is a futile discussion. Indian media men have been threatened by state home ministry for writing anything in favor, so that silences all SPH neutral voices in India, and then the biased voices are anyway active there. Refer: https://www.ndtv.com/cities/sex-swami-probe-on-cctv-journalist-alleges-harassment-417885 Read the news how the police would reach into the houses of journalists and harass them at mid-night. The judge who ruled that the coronation of the SPH as the 293rd pontiff of Madurai Aadheenam cannot be revoked was transferred. There are links for all these facts already there in this talk page. One day, may be few months later, or  a few years later all this will be known more and more clearly. This talk page is a historic documentation of all bias and prejudice there has been and the records the hostile the situation. There are enough DK/DMK affiliated editors who have done this smear campaign, and I can tag the next time anybody comes to this page and wikipedia can follow due process and verify. Around 2014 a fake editor account challenged that even the temples of the SPH do not exist anywhere on planet earth and this edit was impossible to undo because no mainstream media gave so called reliable link to proove that the temples even exists. Despite having 100,000 images of the temple, and serving millions of free meals per month, and having several public documents and land documents fundamentally the very existence of the temple is denied and Wikipedia article for months together said the temple is a ecommerce website not a temple! And then things like E=mc^2 troll news are the top item in this page. This article has a tendency to become taboloid in nature, because editors see Indian tabaloid journals as reliable and court documents and primary references such as UN links - unworthy. Further more there is no right to reply in wikipedia, and talk page is the only place left. For decades this viscious persecution went on, and finally thanks to international human rights organizations truth is coming out, and no thanks to Indian media. Nobody is writing walls of text on this talk page, if anybody has a problem with that, they can edit this or undo this like you did, more than this, situation cannot be helped, and a persecuted community can be coerced and bullied. 103.105.227.34 (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * UN is a reliable website but I don't think we could use primary sources especially a video like this. We need reliable, independent, secondary sources for this claim. Wait for some news outlet to publish this news. Also, Wikipedia in not about truth (see WP:TRUTH), it publishes only what reliable sources says about the subject. It doesn't matter what you or anyone else think about the subject. If you want to document anything then you should consider using some other platform, talk page are for this purpose. Please read talk page guidelines. Regards. <b style="color:DarkTurquoise; font-weight: bold; font-family:cambria">Eevee01</b>(<b style="color:#40E0D0; font-style: italic">talk</b>) 11:03, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The UN event is certainly not a part of Nithyananda's biography. Neither did he speak at the event nor was he in any way involved. Please keep in mind that this is a biographical article about Arunachalam Rajasekaran, and not a diary of the organisation he founded.
 * Additionally, the report was just one of ~20 reports presented by various NGOs at the fairly routine session of an UNHCHR subcommittee. Sticking the report into an encyclopaedia is WP:PEACOCK. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  20:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

UN publishes another report on human rights violations of monks and nuns disciples of Nithyananda of KAILASA
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Kailasa-Nation.pdf https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Women/WRGS/Pages/CFI-Women-girls-humanitarian-situations.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.105.225.73 (talk) 14:58, 10 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Nonsense. It's not any UN publication whatsoever – these are simply comments on an UN document, posted online like 40 other comments received by that UN body. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  20:42, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Recent news items
I will be adding recent media links in this section for the perusal of anybody with some interest, time, and permission to edit

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.105.227.34 (talk) 05:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Blue Corner Notice
There is no primary or credible source about blue corner notice. Use of blue-corner notice should be removed without a credible and primary source backing it up. Nithyananda group has claimed no such notice exists. 47.145.239.187 (talk) 15:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Agree with the above statement. The recent news report shows an official statement by Interpol that denies the presence of any Interpol notice. Clearly using Interpol to falsely bolster claims of criminality is the job of a tabloid newspaper and not an encyclopedia. https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/nithyananda-case-interpol-denies-issuing-blue-corner-noticee-fugitive-godman-172559 189.176.48.2 (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 January 2023
Please remove the line "He is subject of an Interpol Blue notice and a court-issued non-bailable warrant relating to allegations of rape" as the recent confirmations from Interpol (see https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/nithyananda-case-interpol-denies-issuing-blue-corner-noticee-fugitive-godman-172559 with the official letters https://www.thenewsminute.com/sites/default/files/images/Interpol_Nityananda_280123_650%20(1).jpg) shows that there is no Interpol notice against the subject of the BLP and the reports that there are notices against him were falsely created to bolster false claims of criminality. Prominent portrayal of unproven crimes is against the spirit of WP:BLPCRIME and seriously affects the position of the subject and his community. 189.176.48.2 (talk) 14:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Why remove sourced information about non-bailable warrant? — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  15:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The news about non-bailable warrant is not true, just like interpol notice
 * Prominent portrayal of unproven crimes is against the spirit of WP:BLPCRIME and seriously affects the position of the subject and his community 2603:8001:0:1B4:196A:F729:96B:6D46 (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * N. being a public figure, the case and charges were covered by all main media outlets in India and so, plenty of sources confirm it. We can't censor this information based only on a poor quality scan from a niche news website. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  17:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The difference is Interpol itself saying there is no notice vs others being quoted as saying this on behalf of Interpol. That being said, the controversy part is covered elaborately in the article below. To portray it prominently in the first paragraph is against the principles of an encyclopedia and more the attitude of a tabloid paper trying to create sensationalism. 189.176.48.2 (talk) 18:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It's not Interpol saying it – it's The News Minute saying it. We have no way of establishing whether the scans are genuine, and no other media confirm it independently. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  20:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You are being intentionally difficult, and it would appear that you have a strong vested point of view on this matter. Your edit history also seems to convey this. Wikipedia will not directly publish primary sources unless reported by secondary and tertiary ones. Interpol issues these certificates but does not publish them directly. Unlike other links on this matter which don't have anything backed by the primary source, the latest one has both and hence should be trusted more in this particular case even though newsminute is not a source of great repute as you mention. 189.176.48.2 (talk) 00:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This user has left a lengthy diatribe on my talk page. I highly suspect a conflict-of interest here. User talk:Nofoolie Nofoolie (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * "Despite a request by Gujarat Police to Central Bureau of Investigation in November 2021 for an Interpol Blue notice to be issued against him, this request was not executed, whilst it was reported as issued on news-wires" This is opinionated tabloid writing and not encyclopedic writing. Needs re-work. This is prominent portrayal of unproven crimes is against the spirit of WP:BLPCRIME — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:0:1B4:196A:F729:96B:6D46 (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: I've also rolled back the recent changes to that effect. The source provided shows images from February 2021, when the sources saying that blue notice were issued are from after that point. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There are 2 of them one from Feb 2021 and one from Nov 2022 76.79.168.234 (talk) 16:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

United States of Kailasa
Please add "United States of Kailasa signs bilateral agreement with Newark, New Jersey, USA"

https://tv9telugu.com/world/nithyanandas-united-states-of-kailasa-and-the-city-of-newark-new-jersey-usa-entered-into-a-protocol-bilateral-agreement-au18-866970.html

https://ibctamil.com/article/nithyananda-kailasa-country-map-rejected-un-1673606000

https://zeenews.india.com/tamil/world/diaspora-states-of-kailasa-and-usa-entered-into-protocol-bilateral-agreement-428749

https://telugustop.com/nityananda-kailasa-bilateral-agreement-with-usa-city-of-newark

https://www.dailythanthi.com/News/India/american-city-administration-recognized-nityanandas-kailasa-as-a-country-878004 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:0:1B4:34AC:48EF:B889:AEFA (talk) 06:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mey37DM-nR0&ab_channel=ThanthiTV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4-eUoU1CC0&ab_channel=JayaPlus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuThaq9lxAU

Ik.Kaluha (talk) 16:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Article page should have an entry on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:0:1B4:196A:F729:96B:6D46 (talk) 01:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Woefully undue, and clearly misreported. Becoming a "sister city" with a document signed by a mayor is not a "bilateral agreement." ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sister City is a form of bilateral agreement.
 * https://asiamattersforamerica.org/articles/boston-and-kyoto-celebrate-60th-anniversary-as-sister-cities 76.79.168.234 (talk) 16:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It is an agreement, but issues with UNDUE and NOTNEWS remain. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  19:51, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Please add "United States of Kailasa signs sister city agreement with Newark, New Jersey, USA"
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Clearly consensus against this change, please don't file it again. Lemonaka (talk) 10:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


 * How? 76.79.168.234 (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Proposed Section on Kailasa at the United Nations
Kailasa's participation in the UN and representations to various UN bodies about the persecution of Nithyananda have been widely reported by newspapers - especially reputed Tamil publications. Yet the edits from BLP page are being constantly deleted - or given a negative spin - by editors from India who have a vested view against Kailasa or who do not follow the Tamil sources. I submit to neutral admins to consider the factual write up below which includes wide references to include as a section on the page without any editorial spin. The section is very relevant to the BLP as it shows the involvement of Kailasa in the UN and the fact that they have been accepted to present their position on the persecution. https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1n/k1nlz2keec?kalturaStartTime=3806

(including proposed section below for consideration by the admins) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.176.30.136 (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * What goes into or comes out of the article has nothing to do with "admins", but is a matter of broad editorial consensus among editors. Admins are here to fix technical problems that require admin-level access to fix, and to restrain bad-acting editors who flagrantly violate policies, e.g. by inserting spam links or verbally attacking other editors. Anyway, I don't know why you've linke dto media.un.org. That site has nothing at all about "Kailasa"  or "Kailaasa"  or "Shrikailasa"  or "Nithyananda" .  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Kailasa at the United Nations
In June 2021, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights's  Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in its 79th session published a report by disciples of Nithyananda alleging persecution of his women disciples and nuns by state and non-state actors. On Dec 2nd, 2021, during the 14th session of the United Nations Forum on Minority Rights, Kailasa Nation was invited to present its case of state persecution and the attack on minority Hindu traditions in India and other countries. Kailasa submitted recommendations to protect minority traditions which included preventing hate speech in the media and judicial over-reach. Kailasa has since worked with and made submissions to a number of organs of the United Nations including various Special Rapporteurs appointed by the OHCHR to monitor Human Rights abuses around the world.

On February 22, 2023, Ma Vijayapriya Nithyananda representing 'United States of KAILASA' at the 19th United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESR) meeting sought UN's involvement in stopping the persecution of Nithyananda. On the same day a large contingent of women leaders heading various divisions of Kailasa attended the CEDAW meeting in Geneva and discussed the issue of women's protection and women's advancement at the UN

189.176.30.136 (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Read Talk:Nithyananda/Archive_6, esp. my closing comment. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  21:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Your comment is really incongruous. There are a tens of thousands of NGOs in the world. 20 of them presented in a vital conference. And you think - in your esteemed opinion which is contrary to that of numerous real news editors - that it is not important? Clearly shows that you are biased. You should stop editing this page immediately. By your logic there are 4 million people falsely accused in India. And so reporting about one more person is irrelevant and these comments against the subject should be removed too. Similarly, the comment that the article is about the person and not the country he founded? Are you real?? It is like having a page about Barack Obama.. but not reporting anything about the actions of the US during his presidency and only reporting about his family. If you had taken the time to read the references, all the submissions by Kailasa were about the illegal persecution of the subject of the BLP and are directly relevant! This page is supposed to provide facts reported by other sources. Not completely caricature the BLP based on individual editors' view points. I want this to be strongly placed on note for the admins to look into. 189.176.30.136 (talk) 16:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There are hundreds of meetings at various UN committees taking place every month, and NGOs are frequently invited to present their perspective. No, meeting attendance is not a matter for an encyclopaedia, and certainly not for a founder's biography. By the way, do you understand what biography means? — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  20:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry this page has long lost its encycolopedic or biographic status long while ago - and a lot of it due to contributions of editors trying to tarnish the image of the subject reflecting news that is sensationalist - case in point being the fake news about there being an Interpol notice (which was finally reverted by your intervention). This news was on the page for more than a year slandering the image of the subject without any factual basis. Please take a look at the section on "Controversies". It is a sequence of date-time events and is more of a tabloid recounting than a biography. All I am suggesting is to have a balanced article. 15 key newspapers all linked above - and I am sure I can find you more - seem to think Kailasa's submission to the UN is important and they have all linked Swami Nithyananda in the title - by name. Whenever a news is favorable to the subject, the argument is made that newspapers are not reliable sources of what is important. But when there is a negative news their inputs are taken as gospel. This is nothing but biased editing. 189.176.30.136 (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The article subject did not attend that meeting and it is not part of his biography. Which part of biographical article you don't get?
 * Besides, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and not a summary of news clippings. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  01:16, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, an argument could be made to WP:SPLIT the Kaila[a]sa section to a new article. Maybe this material (which is reasonably sourced, I think) would be pertinent there. Really, the whole "Which part of biographical article you don't get?" argument is a strong argument to not have the Kailasa material in this article at all, other than a short WP:SUMMARY that points to an article on the supposed island nation.  It has enough independent non-trivial coverage that it passes WP:GNG.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:38, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Removing referenced news
News about UK Representation was considered important enough by newspapers from two countries. Yet it was removed by editors since it is favorable to the BLP - and they are clearly saying this too. This clearly shows the bias among the editors against the subject of the BLP. Strongly requesting admins to enforce a ban on editing by these few biased editors who have capitalized on the restrictions on editing and have hijacked the page to make it a caricature!!!! 189.176.30.136 (talk) 02:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

If you would like something changes to the article, make an WP:Edit request. Illusion Flame (talk) 02:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response @Illusion Flame. The page is locked for editing and hence I am not able to add one. I am requesting a revert of the massive deletion done on a restricted page by Kashmiri on 21:02, 28 February 2023‎. Can you help me file a WP:Edit_request for this? 189.176.30.136 (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I am requesting a revert of the massive deletion done on a restricted page by Kashmiri on 21:02, 28 February 2023‎
 * Filing edit request For User:189.176.30.136. See above. Illusion Flame (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Don't expect us to edit war for you. M.Bitton (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Filing edit request For User:189.176.30.136. See above. Illusion Flame (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Don't expect us to edit war for you. M.Bitton (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Don't expect us to edit war for you. M.Bitton (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

The material in question is this:

I would oppose restoring this, as it is not encyclopedic. People from religious groups and NGOs attend meetings at parliamentary/legislative bodies every single day of every year. This isn't even really news much less encyclopedic material. That Nithynanda has representatives and friends is already covered in the article; there is no particular reason to name-drop one of them. That one of them was photographed with someone is completely irrelevant. That various other random people attended the same event is completely irrelevant. That a brochure with pictures of people at the event included an advertisement is completely irrelevant. This is just "noise" content, not encyclopedia writing. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Section on Teaching
In following up on the other threads on this page, the section on "Teachings" has been pared to the bare minimum. While the section on Controversies is growing day by day and occupies bulk of this page! It is widely accepted that Swami Nithyananda has millions of followers worldwide. And they clearly follow him because of his teachings. He has published more than 100 books translated into dozens of languages. And if I remember right, he has a Asia book of records for the number of books he has written. Yet the editors here don't seem to think that is an important part of his biography! I wonder why. I would suggest the admins to reflect on the changes that reduced that section - which was quite small to begin with - to one line and the other acts of the editors who were part of doing this. 189.176.30.136 (talk) 00:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)


 * It's hard to make out anything intelligible from his teachings, sorry. The bulk of his lectures appear to be popular Hindu myths told to gullible people as if they were true, combined with a good dose of self-aggrandisement. Perhaps we should state that. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  01:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Perhaps more to the point, we do not have reliable, independent source coverage of his "teachings", but we have an ever-growing amount of reliable, independent source coverage of controversies surrounding him. As with all public figures around whom controversy swirls like a vortex but about whom little else is written, the article is necessarily going to focus on the controversies.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Minor typo
This statement has a minor typo: "that"

In November 2023 the chief of staff of Paraguay's agricultural minister was replaced after the Paraguay government discovered tbat they had signed a memorandum of understanding with representatives of Kailaasa.[106]

Whosethose (talk) 02:07, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you User:SMcCandlish. Whosethose (talk) 05:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Location of Kailaasa "island nation"
It is stated that Kailaasa island nation is located outside the coast of Ecuador, near Trinidad and Tobago…has anyone seen a map of South America? Those two nations are on opposite sides of the continent! 82.209.140.197 (talk) 22:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Good catch. Fixed. The error was actually in one of the sources. I've rewritten the material to indicate that the sources conflict with each other and one of them has this error in it. Also cleaned up all the citations and dates and such.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The fact that one of the sources mentioned Trinadad does not warrant a special mention. Numerous other sources have referred to Kailasa first being formed in the International waters off Ecuador. 47.145.215.131 (talk) 19:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC)