User talk:Wikidas/archive1

A tag has been placed on Giriraj Swami requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 15:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Ys, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 17:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC) AfD nomination noted
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

**.**.**.**
Thank you for your note. Logging will enable privacy of the IP.

Bio of living persons, A response

 * Please feel free to read Biographies of living persons, this will explain to you wikipedia's policy on biographies on living persons. Each statement made in such an article must come from an independent reliable source. The above tag can, and will eventually, be placed on all articles who do not meet these strict requirements. These are Wikipedia's rules, not mine. To be constructive we should all use them as tools and guides in making our editing choices. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 12:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits
I find your editing pattern very similar to that of Ism schism? We can have articles on rare Pokemon characters on Wikipedia (see: List of Pokémon (161-180)), why get so up-tight over keeping articles regarding influential religious leaders? Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 18:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to religious figures, just need some reliable references, that we all work on. All other sould be edited out - I found so many inaccurate statements, as for example Visnujana died in 1976 (someone saw him on the train to Delhi..) and Jayapataka taking sannyas in 1970... more like 1976. To have faith in a religious person, we need to remove the stories and leave the fact, then there is chance that the persons will be reading your writeups. It will also look more like Wiki... Wikidas (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

References for articles
Wikidas, I appreciate your concern and your contributions as an editor. For future articles, all of us editors should probably consult Reliable sources/Noticeboard every now and then, as this might be a good way to assure sources contribute to the notability of the article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. That is one but not the only criteria. POV selection should also be avoided to warrant objectivity. Wikidas (talk) 21:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Wikidas, I will also read Neutral point of view and try to help work with you on the POVs. There is a lot of work ahead. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Undid of potentially libellous material insertion by Talk
Please note that it is the policy that editors must take particular care adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to the law in Florida, United States and to our content policies.WP:LIVING

Please note that you can not add such unverifiable material from your own blog to this page ether. Besides it should be ALSO comply with this policy: The views of critics should be represented if they are relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to side with the critics; rather, it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. WP:LIVING

Probably most important rule is: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm".WP:LIVING

Your insertion/revertion was not in encyclopedic tone and did not place any reliable sourse in the text. Dipika site or any site is not a reliable source for such a content. Please also see:WP:LIBEL - all contributors should recognize that it is their responsibility to ensure that material posted on Wikipedia is not defamatory.


 * Dear Wikidas, the statement and reference you removed here included a link to an official GBC statement on the issue, and a letter by Satsvarupa Maharaja himself. I would hardly say it was liabelous. Yes, I agree that Wikipedia should not be written like a tabloid, but such an activity as this is significant within the life of anyone who is acting as a spiritual or religious leader. Any official biography would have to tackle the subject in order to be treated as anything other than a promotional literature. Devotees can have problems and they can also get over them. I'm not going to put much effort into pursuing the matter any further, but wanted to make my feelings clear for future reference. No offence to either Satvarupa Maharaja or yourself is intended. Best Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your desire for transparency. I'm just following the following statement of the policy: Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. I would consider it poorly sourced, considering that the documents are not published in verifiable sources such as ISKCON academic journals, magazines or related books. I would avoid putting similar references to other religious leaders for what an average person will consider a minor mistake especially if wording is not in encyclopedic tone. I would consider that majority of encyclopaedic writers would consider this appropriate for a living person.Wikidas (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Pleae note

 * Please note that concerning ISKCON religious leaders, I have consulted the Wikipedia: Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I have enquired concerning the notability of the members of ISKCON's GBC. I hope that this might start a process to examine sources for ISKCON religious leaders. Any thoughts you have would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. The page is at: . Ism schism (talk) 07:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Criteria for notable religious leaders in ISKCON

 * Question On the official Governing Body Commission website it states that there are "around 48" members. So my question is are all 48 notable due to membership on the GBC of ISKCON? These 48 could be a good starting place for a discussion on a minimum standard for notablilty for religious leaders in ISKCON. I believe there needs to be some criteria set for establishing, "what is a notable ISKCON religious leader?" Any thoughts? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 06:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussions on notability criteria for ISKCON religious leaders
Discussions on notability criteria for ISKCON religious leaders are located at: Wikipedia talk:Hinduism-related topics notice board, Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion, and Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). Ism schism (talk) 10:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Reliable sources for ISKCON related articles

 * I have added some ISKCON related websites to the reliable sources notice board at . Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 17:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

ISKCON work group

 * Wikidas, any thoughts on creating an ISKCON work group for biographies and ISKCON related articles? An example is, WikiProject Religion/Unitarian Universalism work group. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The discussion is located at, ISKCON work group or subproject. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)