User talk:Appledell

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
{| style="border-spacing:8px;margin:0px -8px" width="100%" {| style="border-spacing:8px;margin:0px -8px" width="100%" {| width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background-color:#F5FFFA" ! Getting Started
 * class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid #084080; background-color:#F5FFFA; vertical-align:top;color:#000000;font-size: 85%"|
 * class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid #FFFFFF; background-color:#F5FFFA; vertical-align:top"|
 * style="color:#000"|
 * Wikipedia Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia

Requirement of Rfc
Hi [[ ! Getting your info out there ! Getting more Wikipedia rules
 * Manual of Style
 * Be bold in editing
 * How to write a great article
 * WikiProjects
 * style="color:#000"|
 * Cite your sources
 * Neutral Point of View
 * Point of View
 * Verifiability
 * Uploading images
 * Image use policy
 * Image use policy
 * style="color:#000"|
 * Policy Library
 * }
 * class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid #FFFFFF; background-color:#F5FFFA; vertical-align:top"|
 * }
 * } ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * }
 * } ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Check the discussion before making edits
Hi

Please check the discussion before making edits.

We have not come to an agreement over why all the controversy have to be removed. Others accept some but not all. Many are referenced in the academic papers listed and academic papers yet to be listed.

Thanks. 195.82.106.244 01:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, I agree entirely with your statement: "Please check the discussion before making edits." I also entirely agree with Admin Jossi's comments on the controversy section. To me, the two go hand in hand. You may have a different interpretation, but that is mine. Thanks. Appledell 21:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Posters
Its been discussed. You did not respond. There are no such rules.

You are a BK. You can easily check against the BKWSU's own records and those given in the referenced books as can any other contributor.

That is the way the wiki works. 195.82.106.244 11:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Erm, sorry, "you are a BK"...so what's the point you're making? I think you'll find YOU did not respond to my issue about linking to that site (copyright infringement) - whether the posters are genuine or not is not the issue I'm addressing. Anyway, I see the posters have not made it back into the article, so that's alright then. :-)


 * What is the point? You can go look in the center's or main center's library or call up Jayanti or Janki and check the facts with them. Personally, I would depend on the written rather than verbal evidence. If you are going to Madhuban this season, you can also check there. If you need me to tell you exactly where, I can do so.


 * One fact it would be worth checking was this one about Lekhraj Kirpalani being so sure of Destruction in '76 that he was promising to give away all this fortune.


 * The posters are also covered under WIkipedia's fair use policy. 195.82.106.244 08:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 17:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello, I am unclear as to what my involvement is in this arbitration case. If someone can help explain it to me, I'd be very greatful. Appledell 19:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Appledell; You have been an editor of the article About Brahma Kumaris. Certainly, you have "your side" in this. Why are you posting? what is what you se in this article which prompted you to post? and finally, do you have any evidence which backs up your view? Best Wishes, avyakt7 00:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Temporary Injunction
A temporary injunction has been passed in Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris. All editors listed as a party to this case are banned from editing Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University until the case is settled.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 11:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

195.82.106.244 is banned for one year for a personal attack which contained a threat against another user. 195.82.106.244 is placed on Probation. He may be banned from editing any article which he disrupts by engaging in aggressive biased editing, especially that relying on inadequately sourced original research. Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University is placed on article probation. The principals in this matter are expected to convert the article from its present state based on original research and BK publications to an article containing verifiable information based on reliable third party sources. After a suitable grace period, the state of the article may be evaluated on the motion of any member of the Arbitration Committee and further remedies applied to those editors who continue to edit in an inappropriate manner. Any user may request review by members of the Arbitration Committee. Should any user violate a ban imposed under the terms of this decision, they may be blocked for an appropriate period of time. All blocks to be logged at Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 17:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed comment from BKWSU Talk
I removed a brief comment on the BKWSU talk page since it was in response to a suspected banned user and wouldn't be relevant by itself. Hope that is OK.

BTW. To sign posts use four tildes instead of two. Thanks & regards Bksimonb 07:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Requirement for Rfc
Hi Appledell. I see you have also had some problems on the BKWSU talk page. I would like to file an Rfc to try and resolve the problems we are experiencing with the user concerned. This requires that two editors try and reach a solution on his/her talk page. I have tried that and got a less than stellar response. I would appreciate that you also try. You also seem to have picked up on some biased misrepresentation of references in the article.

Regards Bksimonb 16:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back
Welcome back Appledell! Good to se ya... Best, Riveros11 17:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, replied at my talk page. :) Orderinchaos 12:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * So as you think both versions are fine - but me and the two other editors have entrenched views on which of the two to use, do you have any suggestion of how to move this forward? Appledell (talk) 14:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
Sorry about the warning. I've left a comment here. · AndonicO  Hail!  10:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

BKWSU
Added the reference which indicates that the God of Bhagavadgeetha is shiva. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skbhat (talk • contribs) 09:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)