User talk:Andries: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 18:35, 18 March 2009

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive!

WikiProject Biography is holding a three month long assessment drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unassessed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2007 â September 1, 2007.

Awards to be won range from delicacies such as the WikiCookie to the great Golden Wiki Award.
There are over 110,000 articles to assess so please visit the drive's page and help out!

This drive was conceived of and organized by Psychless with the help of Ozgod. Regards, Psychless ^{Type words!}.

Sock puppet

Checkuser stated it was not related by IP/location to a particular user, no more or less. It did not indicate that the account was not an abusive sockpuppet, only that the account is not related to an individual user. Vassyana (talk) 20:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that, but if you accuse someone of being a sockpuppet then at least you should know the puppet master. Otherwise it is a bit like calling somebody a thief and not being able to answer the question when the thief stole, nor what object he stole , nor from whom the thief stole. Andries (talk) 20:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's an apt comparison. If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck ... The user has an obvious familiarity with the interface (very selective undo, using "rv" to mark a revert). Their edits were geared solely towards edit warring and disruption. Obvious familiarity + disruptive editing = abusive sockpuppet. It is the most common way that abusive sockpuppets are identified. Connections to particular established users are usually decided by a combination of editing patterns and checkuser verification. I hope that helps clear up where I'm coming from. Completely off-topic, how have you been of late? What's been occupying your time on-wiki? Vassyana (talk) 20:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote nl:optische schijf. I am not sure about your reasoning. Someone may have been very familiar with the non-English Wikipedia and only then started editing the English Wikipedia. Andries (talk) 20:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good deal. :) I saw your edits in en.wiki here and there (making some damn sensible talk page comments). I suppose it could be someone familiar with another wiki, but the immediate participation in edit warring is highly suspicious. Regardless, disruption-only accounts are regularly blocked coming out of the gate. Vassyana (talk) 20:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Recovery from cults book cover AFF.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Recovery from cults book cover AFF.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bala Sai Baba

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Bala Sai Baba, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 10:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sathya Sai Organisation official logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sathya Sai Organisation official logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clerical sexual deviancy allegations

Why do you think my title was so bad you had to change it? The allegations were made against PRIESTS not ordinary believers. The current title just panders to fashionable anti-Catholic hate speech. Do you really think that Catholic believers should be singled out in this unfair way? Is wikipedia an encyclopedia or just an airing ground for media myths and propaganda? And don't tell me to write an article on other religious group members who have commiteed sexual offences cos I think the whole thing is just totally unscientific. Religion is not necessarily the determining factor. Say a person is a Catholic doctor who commits abuse. What made him do it - being a doctor or being a Catholic? I will not be party to irrational hatred directed at randomly selected groups, based on no evidence - I oppose it and I hope that any decent person would do the same thing. Colin4C (talk) 13:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have so many things to say that I do not know where to start. I am btw one of the main authors of Sathya Sai Baba. Andries (talk) 13:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a reason why the topic of sexual abuse by religious authorities is notable and somewhat different from other sexual abuse. 1. religious authority have more power (sociology) without any responsibility to other worldly authorities and differences of power tend quite naturally to lead to sexual abuse 2. the betrayal of trust in religious matters tends to be quite bad because religion ultimately depends on trust. Andries (talk) 13:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: category:critics of Islam

Hi Andries, the appropriate place to review the deletion is Wikipedia:Deletion review. I suggest you bring it up there if you think it deserves a category. Thanks. Spellcast (talk) 14:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had listed it there, so I do not understand your comments. Andries (talk) 14:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, let's see if the deletion can be lifted. One of the main reasons it was deleted was because of the vague title and the possibility of too much PoV problems. For it to be undeleted, it has to address those concerns. Spellcast (talk) 14:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the objections but I do not agree with them. If we delete articles and categories merely because of possible POv problems then I think 90% of Wikipedia should be deleted. Andries (talk) 14:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kirtanananda Swami

"Changed section title I heard a different less flattering story"

I'm interested to hear your different story. Please tell.

Henrydoktorski (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ehh that a devotee of Kirtananda discovered that he had several wives and that he was angry about it, but I may be confused with another successor guru of Prabhupada. Andries (talk) 22:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I think perhaps you must be thinking of someone else. Kirtanananda didn't like women.

Regarding the assassination attempt: I believe the words "distraught" and "crazed" are appropriate. I will send an e-mail as I don't want it necessarily available here.

Henrydoktorski (talk) 01:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism and other troubles in the article Siege of Leningrad

Hi, Andris,

You are right. Thank you very much for your kind reminder, I had so many books about the [[Siege of Leningrad] on my desk yesterday, that reading and editing the article took much attention, so I used the inuse template without a prior step, as you mentioned; albeit this does not mean that other users can now vandalize the article by deleting well referenced facts of history, with links to Britannica, books from my library, public libraries here in CA, and other sources.

Deletion of well sourced edits is vandalism. I do not have much time for dealing with vandals, and other users, who do not help make Wikipedia better.

Regards, Steveshelokhonov 23:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, if you know Russian and have time, I would appreciate some help with translating Vistula-Oder offensive from the russian Wikipedia. See [1] Andries (talk) 23:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are not identical, just like all books on history. The Russian discussion shows no activity since May 2007, their idea to post the original Russian map of operation was not accomplished, and Russian users became inactive. I'll look again during the next weekend. Steveshelokhonov 00:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 01:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Jim_Jones_brochure_of_Peoples_Temple.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jim_Jones_brochure_of_Peoples_Temple.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the nerve of some people

<silliness>How dare you wikistalk me to a category deletion discussion and agree with me! The nerve! The outrage!</silliness> Just saying hello and I hope you're doing well. :) Vassyana (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this dispute has geographical aspects i.e. activism against Islam seems to be a popular career opportunity (or more positively a popular vocation) lately here in the Netherlands. It is probably not that way in other countries and contributors who voted for deletion may not be aware of the current situation in the Netherlands. Andries (talk) 08:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kranenborg

I was depending on my memory of previous conversations regarding the source. I had thought he was discussing conversations involving witnessing to premies. My apologies if my memory is flawed and thanks for keeping close to the source. Do you still have a translation of the section used for reference kicking around? If you do, could I get a wikilink please? Thanks! Vassyana (talk) 22:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked it. The word that Kranenborg uses is Dutch "ontmoeting" which is literally "meeting". Andries (talk) 22:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tx

Geen probleem, ik wist waar ik aan begon (translation: No problem, I knew what would be coming my way) --Francis Schonken (talk) 22:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 12:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prem Rawat 1RR probation

Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Prem Rawat 1RR parole proposal, the articles now in category:Prem Rawat are on special 1RR and disruption probation. A notice describing the probation is at talk:Prem Rawat. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rawat link

Since your online, please do us all a favor and remove the Rick Ross link at the PR article.Momento (talk) 21:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prem Rawat articles, should go to RFAR

In my opinion 1rr, and DR via AN and ANI, and discussion, have failed. Take it to RFAR. Lawrence § t/e 18:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that my behavior in the last years was not completely innocent, though I do not think that I have made any serious violation of policies any guidelines in the last half year. Andries (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Arbitration

You have been named as a party at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Prem Rawat ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, John Vandenberg (talk) 02:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The spread of Islam in Indonesia...

Your question on the Wali Sanga (nine saints) was a good one - and resulted in me doing a fair bit of work to update the info. Ie, I added a new section to The spread of Islam in Indonesia (as I had once intended to do) and updated and created a number of articles on the texts and the sunan - see my contribs for the last day or so. kind regards --Merbabu (talk) 14:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sathya Sai Baba 2

Remedy 1.1 in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sathya Sai Baba 2, which provides that "Andries is banned indefinitely from editing Sathya Sai Baba and related articles or their talk pages," has been amended (as a result of a successful motion) by striking out the words "or their talk pages." Thus, Andries is now permitted to edit the talkpages of these articles, but not the articles themselves. In doing so, he is cautioned to be mindful of all applicable Wikipedia policies including those concerning conflicts of interest and biographies of living persons.

For the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 02:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello Andries,thank you for the advice.I will not vandalise again.Hope you enjoy wikipedia. From:Malaysian-Hardstyle

Lifting topic ban

No problem! The best thanks is to help keep things neutral there, and to remember to be careful about RSes so as to avoid any further trouble. If there's any doubt, bring it to WP:RS/N for an opinion. --Relata refero (disp.) 13:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Cults and new religious movements in literature and popular culture

I have nominated Cults and new religious movements in literature and popular culture, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cults and new religious movements in literature and popular culture (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sceptre ^(talk) 18:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prem Rawat mergers

You left ambiguous merge tags on Teachings of Prem Rawat. That particualr merge is being debated at Talk:Teachings of Prem Rawat#Merging?, but without you to explain your intent it's hard to make progress. Because there are several merge proposals on the table, I've create a central thread to discuss them and the overall division of material. Talk:Prem Rawat#Organization Your particiaption there would be helpful. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theory of Religious Economy

Hello Andries,

Thanks for the helpful links and advice. I am new to wikipedia, so any input is much appreciated. I plan to work on the development section, researching some key figures and their applicable publications. I find the Theory of Religious Economy interesting and hope to make some relevant additions to the page. Any input or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. I am not familiar with the religious situation in the Netherlands (I am from the US), but would be interested in reading about criticisms of the theory from that region. Unrelated topic-My favorite artists (I am a painting major) are from the Netherlands - Bruegel, Van Eyck, Van Der Weyden, etc. Anyways, Thanks,-(Ad Re Spring 2008 (talk) 03:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Andries,

Thanks for you edits to the entry on Religious economy. It is certainly improving, but it still has much improvement to go. I am recruiting a set of students to improve it further, and I think that it will be much better by the time they are done with it. Their work cycle will be the next 6 weeks. So I would like a stay of merge-ing until after that and we and other Wikipedians can assess the value of the page then. Best, --Htw3 (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Munster

I moved Munster back where it came from. I think a requested move would make sense here. Münster and Munster are not at all the same. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had proposed it on the talk page and received no objections. Andries (talk) 17:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you have one now, and if you'd like more than one, I'm sure I can rustle up a flashmob of irate Irish wikipedians. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article Munster keeps on getting incorrect links. I had removed most of them recently. Andries (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it will continue to collect incorrect links, just like all vaguely ambiguous names and many disambiguation pages. There are over 1500 pages link to Munster, most of which are referring to the Irish one on a very cursory check. It may make it slighly easier to spot mistaken links, but that's it. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article Munster (Ireland) will not collect incorrect incoming links. so there is a very good reason for the move. Andries (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Share International

I think not, making unsourced and unverifiable claims is advertising even if "claim" is stuck in front. Spurs is the best team in the world and Spurs claim they are the best team in the world are equally spammy. we call it the Age of Aquarius is a bit of a give away too. Jimfbleak (talk) 09:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

latest comments on my talk, since discussion seems to have moved there Jimfbleak (talk) 04:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andries wrote: Is this notice board for discussing each and every minor religious group? To me, it seems that minor religious groups (See list of new religious movements and list of cults) should not be discussed here only because of this reason. Andries (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andries, Share International is not a religious group, and it has been discussed on Fringe theories/Noticeboard. (Even Alice Bailey's teachings, that Share International is loosely based on, can not be considered a religion.) The fact is that you are trying to use Wikipedia as a free web host to promote Share International; and -- know that this misuse has been made known -- you are trying to present yourself as a religious martyr. If you had written a balanced article, instead of that piece promotional hype, all this dispute could have been completely avoided. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 17:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been accused of both anti-cult and pro-cult. The former more often than the latter. So I think your allegation that I try to promote Share International is untrue. Andries (talk) 21:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me repeat: If you had written a balanced article, instead of that piece promotional hype you did write, all this dispute could have been completely avoided. And I can add: When you change the articles so that they are neutral, there will be no further dispute. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 22:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be some misunderstanding here. Andries has worked diligently at being a royal pain in the neck to anyone trying to get a fair hearing for just about ANY new religious group. If he is a martyr, he is an anti-religious one. I don't think his intention here was to be promotional, more likely he was trying to assert his neutrality. It won't work, Andries! (How are you going, by the way?) Rumiton (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Evidence presented did not disclose a history of problematic editing, in terms of basic content policy, by Jossi, and the Committee commended Jossi's self-imposed restriction to edit only talk pages for Prem Rawat related articles. Due to a history of incivility and personal attacks surrounding articles related to the Prem Rawat movement, the preexisting community enforced one-revert rule on Prem Rawat and related articles that commenced March 4, 2008, has been superceeded by Arbitration Committee enforced article probation. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cults, sects, and new religious movements

This project that you created was proposed for speedy deletion on the grounds that it overlaps with Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion. I have removed the speedy tags, but maybe you need to discuss with the folks over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion, to see what links there should be. Maybe it could be a sub-project or a task force. --Bduke (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh Thugs

Page 329 of the UK edition - notes to Chapter 16.

"There seem to have been very few Sikh Thugs. But Sahib Khan, the Deccan strangler, 'knew Ram Sing Siek: he was a noted Thug leader - a very shrewd man,' who also served with the Pindaris for a while and was responsible for the assassination of the notorious Pindari leader Sheikh Dulloo.' Sleeman, Ramaseeana I, 239-40."

Thanks! Mikedash (talk) 23:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theory of Religious Economy

I'd like your thoughts on the additions to this article from the "Spring 2008" editors. It seems like they ARE doing this for a class, despite previous assertions that the educational aspect was done. It does seem like they're not used to speaking and writing formal English. Am I WP:BITEing them by aggressively copyediting as much of they write as I can stand? Jclemens (talk) 03:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is okay. The problems with the article are several

1. rather off-topic digressions

2. too much US-centric and as a related consequence tend to lump different countries together that have little in common with regards to cultural differences and religions. For example, Belgium and the Netherlands that are neighbouring countries have a completely different law against cults (no laws in the Netherlands). Also post-communist countries differ very much from each other. Why is Czechia free but non-religious and why is Russia much more religious? (Though I believe there is a lot of room for non-Orthodox religion in Russia)

3. Not NPOV: criticism is missing. Clearly this theory cannot explain as much as it proponents claim.

4. Lay out and referencing should be improved.

Andries (talk) 11:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism guideline

I've proposed the creation of a separate guideline for plagiarism and avoiding it. See here. I mentioned there the guideline you created in your user space. Hopefully someone will use that to start it off. Carcharoth (talk) 19:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Arathi

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Arathi, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Arathi

I have nominated Arathi, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arathi. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Andries/list of self-proclaimed deities

User:Andries/list of self-proclaimed deities, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Andries/list of self-proclaimed deities and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Andries/list of self-proclaimed deities during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 16:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your User Page

You may think your User Page quotes to be succinct and rather clever but I have the upper-hand on you both intellectually, morally, and religiously. The next time you consider using intellect as a mask for your true agenda, ponder that your quote betrays no more depth of thought or consideration than the dribble produced for mass-consumption by Nichez.

Moral decisions are not always bad by definition. If truth exists, then it may at times be arrived at by human beings.

And your address of the legitimacy of organized religion based on the motivation of their adherents in taking them up is circular and non-sensical at best! Why not address a particular religion as to its truth, or worse, all of them as being untrue. What does their adherents' motivations have to do with these religions' claims as to what is true and what is not.

You have read yourself into a box filled with things you wish to read. My warning to you is that in this manner you will not find the truth and this may be doing you a great disservice of cumulative character. No amount of thinking will change the truth.

Epigraphist (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But I have compassion upon you regarding your experience with Sathya Sai Baba. Believe me perhaps not, but I assure you that there is one truth and that humans are capable of understanding parts of it -very important parts- in the life that is knowable by the senses.

You have my consideration.

Epigraphist (talk) 15:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sathya Sai Baba movement

I went through and removed a ton of unsourced material from that article, though there are still whole chunks of portions with no citations. Cirt (talk) 06:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~I do not see many unsourced statements in the article. Andries (talk) 06:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)~~[reply]

There are whole unsourced paragraphs in a few places. Cirt (talk) 07:13, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After a second look, I do see quite a lot of unsourced material, but many of it is either well-known, publicly verifiable, and undisputed (e.g. about the ashram) or sourced already in the article Sathya Sai Baba. Andries (talk) 07:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that does not help the fact that there is uncited/unsourced material in this article. (Especially an article like this on a controversial topic.) Cirt (talk) 08:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Sathya Sai Baba movement unbalanced?

Because there is quite obviously nothing featured relating to the public reception of the movement. Also, there are a number of web based sources used, these are weak verifiers, especially if the site is a Sai Baba site. Plus, there is nothing about the controversey surrounding the miracle work, or the attempts to debunk it, the videos that evidence trickery, or anything about certain key followers responses to abuse allegations. Also, nothing about the movements ties to state government and policing or the wider influential network that includes a number of notable individuals. I have just toned down one paragraph that read pretty poorly in terms of objectivity. I'm afraid I will have to decline from entering into further discussion on this. If the tag offends you please remove it. Thanks. Semitransgenic (talk) 21:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Public reception is missing, I have to admit that, but that has little to do with neutrality.

2.I think the controversies (sexual abuse, false miracles) should be treated in Sathya Sai Baba, not here, because they are very closely related to the person of Sathya Sai Baba. Lack of substance in teachings should and is treated here.

3.I cannot remove the neutrality tag, because the arbcom thinks that I have a conflict of interest.

Andries (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just by way of clarifying the tag directive: it relates to balance. It simply asks readers to: Please improve the article by adding information on neglected viewpoints. There are clearly a number of neglected view points, I don't doubt there is plenty in the literature on NRM's of relevance, I simply don't have the time to delve into any of it. Regarding the other points, his followers constitute 'the movement', therefore what they believe can be legitimately addressed. One of the core beliefs has to do with acceptance of miracle work so why is it incorrect to deal with the criticism and controversy surrounding this? And, there are quite obviously ties between the movement and local government, and with members of the Indian government but this is not addressed either. Forgive me for being cynical but the article is, in many respects, a content fork from the main Sai Baba page, I don't see how you can separate the man from the movement when one emanates from the other.If you are a true devotee you will find a way to remove the tag ; ) That's my final word on the issue Semitransgenic (talk) 00:13, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure whether the movement emanates from the leader. There is a line of thoughts in study of cults that says that far too much influence has attributed to the leader (e.g. J. Gordon Melton is a representative of that)

A short treament of the controversies in Sathya Sai Baba movement and further referring to Sathya Sai Baba for more information would be okay to me but a re-hashing of the controversies, sorry, no, I think that would be wrong. Andries (talk) 07:05, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

The modest and plain look of what is nowadays considered the traditional Dutch cuisine,

Yes But is there an article on the traditional Dutch cuisine? The link is red...

Warrington (talk) 10:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, bu~t I think there should be. The reason is that traditional Dutch cuisine is very different from the motley contemporary Dutch cuisine. They are two different subjects. Andries (talk) 20:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree!. Wonderful idea

Are they any good sources and references on this subject?

Warrington (talk) 12:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation on Prem Rawat

Andries, you were involved in Vassyana's informal mediation on the Prem Rawat articles, and I was not. However I read through the talk pages earlier this year and got the impression that over that lengthy mediation Vassyana had tended to support one side more than another. For that reason I have opposed Vassyana's nomination for ArbCom. Another user has stated that they don't think Vassyana showed partiality. I don't want to make a big case of this, but I suppose it'd be helpful to other voters to provide some evidence. As I said, that mediation lasted a long time and spread across many talk page archives. You know the case far better than I, so in the interests of time and efficiency I'm wondering if you have any relevant recollections of Vassyana's participation (pro or con) that you can share. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My view on the matter is colored because I then felt and still feel that the complaints by User:jossi and user:momento about an alleged violation of WP:NOT are baseless. There was no need for a rewrite. See the mediation by Vassyana of Talk:Techniques_of_Knowledge. To be honest I do not really remember much of the mediation by Vassyana on talk:Prem Rawat except that some of his assessments of sources (e.g. Levine, Van der Lans) was misguided. Andries (talk) 15:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Anti-Islam activists

Category:Anti-Islam activists, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 12:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of religious sects

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of religious sects, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No content.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Editor2020 (talk) 04:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no.

"I am busy providing citations on the talk page. Did you check it? Please restore statement for which citations have already been provided on the talk page. Arbcom thinks that I have a conflict of interest, so I cannot edit the article directly.".

the onus is on those who want statements to be included to add the references. If you can get people to agree with your sources, get them to re-add the statements WITH the sources, unsourced statements will not sit on BLP article pages while the sources are being discussed. they can be re-added when people agree the sources are good. I'll be reading that article more carefully later - if it's not got a source, I'll scrub it - as per our BLP policy. --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are no "exceptional circumstances" - it's unsourced, it's gone. I can see why you aren't directly allow to edit the article if you don't understand the basis of WP:BLP. --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aktion T4 and euthanasia (February 2009)

May be you are interested in the recent "discussion" about modifications recently made on the section Aktion T4 and euthanasia of the that article

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator Elections

Nominations for Coordinator positions in the Military History WikiProject have commenced, and voting will begin on March 14, 2009. Make sure to get involved and ask questions to the candidates. Nominations for Coordinators goes until March 13. Then come out for the voting which begins on March 14. Thanks and Have a Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver ^{The Olive Branch} 00:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sathya Sai Baba and Arbitration Enforcement

Please note that I have created an arbitration enforcement thread, seen here. ←Spidern→ 14:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you know more about the Dec 2007 version than I do. Please contribute your thoughts to the above link and why this version is better than the current version. I have written some of my comments. Radiantenergy (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Lucille

Hi, I have found your usernames on articles related to advaita. I need your help and suggestion. I am trying to add an article on one of the Living spiritual teacher. but,I am facing an problem.

The editors who have visited this page don't understand spirituality and they have tagged it for deletion. i need your help urgently. so they are trying to compare it with other biographies in the field of sports etc. As you know,the field the spirituality is not very commercial. so I am having a hard time convincing them. could you please help and and take a look at article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Lucille http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Francis_Lucille.

Appreciate all your help.

Thanks Amarhindustani (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]