Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Shri Ram Chandra Mission

Proposed Deletion of Shri Ram Chandra Page Discussion
This page is proposed for deletion because the piece is acting as a strong point-of-view blog for anti-SRCM persons, and, it is duplicating the same arguments which appear on the Sahaj Marg page.

An administrator proposed merging the pages, deleting what existed on the Sahaj Marg page and replacing it with a stub, and currently the pages are locked and protected because of long-term POV abuse. A look at the archives reveals years of blog-like conspiracy theories, promotion of agendas, and little willingness to build true consensus.

There are several blogs that several of these anti-SRCM editors already post on, and their stated goal is to do everything they can to smear SRCM. For instance, please see Shashwat Pandey's user page, which until June 28, had a stated goal to attack SRCM (he changed it due to an administrator's warning; look in his history and click on June 22, 2007, for example).

Finally, the information cannot be sourced by credible third-party references.

Discussion welcome! --Renee 08:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

This page cannot/should not be deleated
This is a page regarding SRCM, and has valid and neutral input here. As such this page cannot be deleated as there is a mediation process already underway regarding teaching of this group!!

Till that process is not over any such action will contradict wiki policy.--Shashwat pandey 20:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration?
Please note that mediation is only between user Shashwat Pandey, who has a long history of POV abuse documented on his discussion user page, and Sethie, who has been trying to make the article neutral. Administrator Jossi suggested this page be merged into the Sahaj Marg page and editors on that page are trying to create a neutral page. Would be open to arbitration to solve this page. Please see Shashwat's post on the Sahaj Marg page where he argues basic facts appearing across three factions. I don't think consensus is possible so believe that arbitration should commence. Renee --Renee 09:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE
Don't bow to those who would hide the truth...If that does not work, then they attempt to eliminate it. Do not serve the BUSINESSES but PEOPLE. We want the article to not be deleted.

Charles --Roicharlemagne 22:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Delete this page to maintain sanctity of Wikipedia==== ==

I have been reading this page for sometime and was wondering when Wikipedia would take note that this page has become a place for spreading hatred by some misguided individuals like Shahwat, Don etc. These few individuals have written similar content in many blogs on internet and they have successfully managed to bring Wikipedia's level down to an unsubstantiated blog.

I am glad that finally Wikipedia is thinking of putting an end to this baseless edits by some individuals. This page should be deleted immediately. --Nirajsri 08:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS
Those who question the "integrity of past editors" and shoot the messengers rather than offer "referenced" material and edit the article to make it more NPOV to their mind show the Spiritual value of their SRCM (California) PATH.

The lineage of SRCM was collaborated on by our Sufi brothers and other factions and reflects that POV also with WIKI REFERENCES. (If anyone can find some that is not properly referenced, then change it)

When the Master calls other religions "corrupt" and that is referenced to the Master in one of his "SPEECHES", then it is not "misguided" to report it, but one can question the "guidance" of the Master if there is a "misguided" attitude. That is not UN accepted also.

The statement on "HOMOSEXUALITY" is an attack on a "disenfranchised" group and is not in accordance with UN charter which SRCM claims to "adhere to", and yet, the Master claims that to condone homosexuality is to abuse "human rights legislation". That is also referenced. UNDO THE DAMAGE OR FACE IT.

Show your truth (SRCM California), and reference it according to WIKI. We will respect your edit as the TRUTH according to you. Or be like a "corrupt religion" of the dark ages and attempt to hide the TRUTH, your HISTORY, and your whitewash your LEGACY.

I agree that some recent edits are not WIKI and should be edited or changed.

Jeanne--J.d&#39;arc 19:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)