Template talk:Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar

Proposed outline and other suggestions
Great work, Tito!

Directly editing this template would take more ramp-up learning time than I can spare just now. (Sorry, I could certainly work it out. But, as I am unfamiliar with Wiki markup and I have little or no programming experience, that would be very time-consuming.) So, instead, I have prepared a proposed outline for this template and some assorted suggestions (for example, a color scheme based on that which Baba selected for the houses where he lived in Lake Gardens and Tiljala). Once such a template is in place, I can help further with drawing up the lists.

The outline I propose would have three levels rather than just two, and I think it would look best with a bottom bar like that which appears in Template:Sister_Nivedita.

Here is what I recommend for now:

[snip... by author... already implemented]

I believe that this template should include a lot of 'red' for people and items that do not currently appear on WP. This would let us know how much work remains to be done.

Finally, I think we should use a different picture. Baba authorized the public distribution of only one picture - what he called his "gentleman's pose". This picture was updated over the years. The final version of his gentleman's photo is the one that was released after he came out of jail (sometime around 1980, I suppose). Sorry, but I don't recall the exact date. That photo is at the top of this post. --Abhidevananda (talk) 10:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I have tried to make these changes!
 * You did not mention sub-sub groupstyle, belowstyle, I have chosen a similar colour for sub-sub group. For belowstyle I have selected the titlebar color you have mentioned.
 * Where are so many articles? Specially entries for group like "Householders published disciples"? Notability (people) is applicable.
 * Adding quotes in template is not a common practice. I did it experimentally in Template:Swami Vivekananda and Template:Sister Nivedita. Most probably it is not possible, but there are some codes to change user's talk page quote (randomly, it does not change every day, you refresh/purge and get a new quote), I'll see if it can be added here, but most probably it can't be. And the thing I always fear (and remember (and experienced)): anyone (registered or anonymous) will be able to edit this template. So, the more complex we make a code, the more chances of it to get broken!
 * Feel free to edit the template! --Tito Dutta (talk) 11:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I get your point about the complexity of code and it getting corrupted. The good thing is that we have a history that should make it easier to restore broken code.
 * The color you chose for the sub-sub groupstyle is essentially what I had in mind. Either I must have telepathic powers or your intuition is highly developed. :)
 * The articles? They are all there... and probably more categories as well. That was off the top of my head. A lot of what is given on WP is shallow or wrong. For example, what is written about biopsychology is misleading - it's not that the business about cakras is wrong but just that this is not the the main concept of biopsychology as Baba introduced it. When Baba gave his first class on the subject, He explained how the body reflects the mind - how specific physical traits like hair on a man's chest or the size of a woman's breasts - indicate the psychology of that person. In other words, one could know a lot about someone just by seeing their body. It goes beyond palm reading or face reading. Then Baba declined to say more and told us to burn our notes. He commented that this type of information could be misused. Similarly, a lot of what is written about PROUT is very shallow and often very wrong. The WP page on PROUT needs to be greatly rewritten. I made a few small edits a couple months ago, but one day - maybe after I finish developing the Neohumanism article - I would like to reshape and expand the PROUT article.
 * Regarding the graphics in the template, I will remove the one about Neohumanism. I took out of the Neohumanism article after someone added it. The graphic is not just misleading but even wrong. And I see no point in adding a picture of a school building. Why not just have the picture of Baba... simple and to the point.
 * You ask about "Published disciples|Householders". Well you had two of them listed already - Ravi Batra and Sohail Inayatullah (aka Subodha). There are many others as well. I figure we can add to the list gradually. They don't all have to currently have a WP page, and they don't all have to be published commercially.
 * Anyway, that's my take on all of this. I'll start filling in some information later today or tomorrow. If there's not a WP page, I won't place an external link. We'll keep it in 'red' - a WP link to a non-existent page. That way we can see the contrast of what has been done and what yet needs to be done. --Abhidevananda (talk) 12:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, please go ahead and add some entries in groups or make any changes you want to do (like removing images etc)! I have some redlink-phobia. Wikipedia allows it, but, I try my best to avoid it (in Sister Nivedita template there are some redlinks, but actually that is my task list, I have already created 10 articles there, now taking a break will create remaining articles too very very soon). My reasons: most of the websites in world wide web are coded in HTML, and there is nothing like "red link" there! You can add a "wrong link" or "broken link" (which should return HTTP error 404 etc) in HTML website but not "red link". So, general anonymous readers (who are always the majority) often get confused and click there to read those articles (I can show you some statistics too if you want). And Wikipedia's error message after clicking a red link is not very meaningful, they don't tell "You have clicked red link", they start saying "Search in Wikipedia, check title might be case sensitive" etc. You can see such an error message by clicking here. --Tito Dutta (talk) 12:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Tito, maybe I am wrong about this, but I think that this template will be mostly used/visited by persons who would/could help with creating missing articles. As such, the red links are very useful in that they provide a quick and easy way to start the process of creating most of the needed articles. They also give a good idea to both potential writers of new articles and to any independent researchers about Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar as to how complete or incomplete is the current WP information on the subject. In this case, the currently available information is highly inadequate. --Abhidevananda (talk) 21:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Inserting template in article initially collapsed rather than expanded
Tito, I'm having trouble inserting this template into the PROUT page that I am editing. No matter how I set the "state" parameter, it appears expanded. What am I doing wrong? --Abhidevananda (talk) 07:19, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Cancel that request. Figured it out. :) --Abhidevananda (talk) 15:42, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Recent revert!
Greetings Bobrayner, About your this revert, (most probably they took the idea from my this template). I agree the quote was a bit too long, but, would you please explain the reason of this revert? I can not understand your edit summary removed sarkarspam. Regards! --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to make Sarkar-related content less promotional and more neutral. Removing the lengthy quotes from inappropriate locations is one of the first steps. Even this obscure template talkpage - where few readers would ever venture - has a photo at the top, so we may all see the great man's smile. bobrayner (talk) 15:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * He he! Noooo, actually at first I made a simple template (I'm not an expert of this subject) and used another photo. They gave me instructions to modify the template and asked me to use the photo, (see first discussion of this page), that was a part of that discussion (yes, they could just link it like File:Example.jpg, but that should not be a big issue, I have nominated the image for deletion in Commons and going to be deleted soon!)
 * Please don't use the word "Sarkarspam" since it might be insulting for an exponent of the idea.
 * Please see also this discussion of November 2012. --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Why are you still defending this spam? bobrayner (talk) 11:31, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That image was used as an example in a discussion, which is an accepted practice in Wikipedia (in PROUT talk page too, there are 2-3 images, every newsletter contains image), thus not s spam! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That image was used as an example in a discussion, which is an accepted practice in Wikipedia (in PROUT talk page too, there are 2-3 images, every newsletter contains image), thus not s spam! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Purpose

 * Templates of this sort are meant to be for linking to wikipedia articles. IRWolfie- (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I have seen many such templates with red ink and black ink. Furthermore, I have seen many such templates with a more complex structure than the one you have imposed. If you cannot cite a reference for both of these changes - that only a primitive format with links to WP articles alone is acceptable in such type of templates - I will probably revert these changes shortly. --Abhidevananda (talk) 22:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)