→Question on Sources: please assume good faith |
Will Beback (talk | contribs) →Question on Sources: reply |
||
Line 131: | Line 131: | ||
::I'd asked you to specify which material you felt needed sources, but instead of responding you just rewrote the text, deleting material that is readily sourceable. Yes, there are sources for the raja, the capital, etc. I've restored some of that. Please be more careful in the future and ask clearer questions before deleting material. <b>[[User:Will Beback|<font color="#595454">Will Beback</font>]] [[User talk:Will Beback|<font color="#C0C0C0">talk</font>]] </b> 03:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC) |
::I'd asked you to specify which material you felt needed sources, but instead of responding you just rewrote the text, deleting material that is readily sourceable. Yes, there are sources for the raja, the capital, etc. I've restored some of that. Please be more careful in the future and ask clearer questions before deleting material. <b>[[User:Will Beback|<font color="#595454">Will Beback</font>]] [[User talk:Will Beback|<font color="#C0C0C0">talk</font>]] </b> 03:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC) |
||
:::My initial post at the top of this thread is comprehensive and clear. I was requesting substantiation for unsupported text. I posted the text and the citations in question. I asked for a quote from one source for which there was no link. You then provided a quote from the source in question and the quote did not support any of the text. All of the necessary information was provided so that any editor who was interested in the content being challenged could see which text was not sourced and had an opportunity to provide sources for the un-sourced text. There was no wrong doing. Editors do not need your permission before making good faith changes to the article. Please be more careful in the future to avoid criticizing and finding fault with fellow editors who are working within Wiki policies, in a collaborative and good faith manner to improve an article.--<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — [[User:Keithbob|<b style= "color:#090;"><i>Keithbob</i></b>]] • [[User_ talk:Keithbob|<span style="color:#075;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 15:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC) |
:::My initial post at the top of this thread is comprehensive and clear. I was requesting substantiation for unsupported text. I posted the text and the citations in question. I asked for a quote from one source for which there was no link. You then provided a quote from the source in question and the quote did not support any of the text. All of the necessary information was provided so that any editor who was interested in the content being challenged could see which text was not sourced and had an opportunity to provide sources for the un-sourced text. There was no wrong doing. Editors do not need your permission before making good faith changes to the article. Please be more careful in the future to avoid criticizing and finding fault with fellow editors who are working within Wiki policies, in a collaborative and good faith manner to improve an article.--<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — [[User:Keithbob|<b style= "color:#090;"><i>Keithbob</i></b>]] • [[User_ talk:Keithbob|<span style="color:#075;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 15:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC) |
||
::::As I told you, this text was simply copied from another article and then trimmed slightly here. The text was already discussed at great length on the MSV talk page. You are acting as if you'd never seen this before and didn't know that it had already been vetted. On this page, you wouldn't answer my simple question about which assertions you felt were unsourced. I do assume good faith, but good faith isn't an excuse for deleting sourced material. Anyway, I trust this is now settled and we won't have to spend another month discussing LoPinto. <b>[[User:Will Beback|<font color="#595454">Will Beback</font>]] [[User talk:Will Beback|<font color="#C0C0C0">talk</font>]] </b> 20:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Source for list of Rajas? == |
== Source for list of Rajas? == |
Revision as of 20:25, 15 September 2010
Transcendental Meditation movement Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Moved from Transcendental Meditation article
The article on Transcendental Meditation had become way too large. Plus, many of the points covered were only tengentially related to Transcendental Meditation. As a partial remedy, and in adherence to the Guideline on article length, I have moved the section on the Global Country of World Peace to this new article. I hope to add more detail about the goals of the Global Country of World Peace as I have time.TimidGuy 15:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
New templates
I added "main" and "navigation" templates Tanaats 01:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Citation
I was working on this topic and tried some of the links,e.g. http://www.maharishiglobalfinancing.org/Europe11/index.html but they seem to be no longer active. Sueyen 22:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
The page seems to have been deleted entirely, with no explanation.
- There is an explanation in the deletion log. The page was deleted under CSD G11. --Philosophus T 22:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
This article
The Global Country is the current umbrella organization for activities and organizations initiated by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. This article about it was speedy deleted, and then restored with the suggested that it be greatly reduced. I've removed the redirect so that it can be edited according to the direction of the Admin who speedy deleted and then restored -- which is to greatly reduce it in length. TimidGuy 15:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
How do we know what is the "umbrella" organization?
This article reads like an advertisement. Judyjoejoe (talk) 02:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Rajas
In the meantime there are 36 (?) rajas, a further developed structure related to cities and locations of india: I know, there is alsways the need of still more time for writing. I for myself am german and can only suggest. anybody out there who would like to do and could do the research and writing? --Josha52 (talk) 13:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I removed the statement that the rajas were "intensively" trained. What is the source for the extent of training? Training to do what? What about the common knowledge that the raja "course" costs a million dollars? Who are these rajas? Judyjoejoe (talk) 02:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, Judy. I like your deletion of "intensively." I think the sentence you added would need to be sourced; otherwise it probably violates the policy regarding no original research. TimidGuy (talk) 12:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't think my statement needs to be deleted. What I am saying is that there is no original research on how many meditate today and the TMO does not state indicate how many people of the number taught continue to meditate. I can cite the same source that claims six million were taught, but say that the source does not say how many continue. Judyjoejoe (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
If that is not sufficient, I will find a third party source. Judyjoejoe (talk) 15:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- The organization has no way of knowing how many still meditate. Yes, I think you'd need a published source. TimidGuy (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Dead Links
This article is full of reference links that are no longer functioning. I am going to search for other reference material for these links. If they cannot be found, then the article may have to be rewritten. I'll keep you posted. Bigweeboy (talk) 01:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Big, see what you can find and then we can see if anything needs to be edited after that. --Kbob (talk) 03:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Coming back to this article after some time. I am removing the "dead" links. We can try to fine "live sources" later. Bigweeboy (talk) 17:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Removal of POV
I removed a rather large section that is a point of view. If such material is added, it should have a source to support it.Thanks.(olive (talk) 15:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC))
Meditation
The section on meditation seems out of place. There's no indicaiton of what connection it has with the topic of the article, besides having the Maharishi in common. Unless the two can be connected in some way, I suggest deleting it. The TM article is already linked in the intro and the template. Will Beback talk 19:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- While TM is an important aspect of the programs offered and supported by GCWP, I think your suggestion is reasonable. Bigweeboy (talk) 15:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
External Links
I have added 2 external links - one to US Peace Government; another GCWP web site. Bigweeboy (talk) 17:56, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- What's the connection of the US Peace Government to the Global Country of World Peace? That's never spelled out in the text. Will Beback talk 18:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Is USPG the only affiliate, or are there GCWP affiliates in ountries too? Will Beback talk 19:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Bigweeboy, Doesn't GCWP have their own official web site? If not, I guess the Peace Gov site is OK since it says that it is the US affiliate of the GCWP. However the other link that you call the GCWP doesn't give any info about GCWP in spite of the fact that the words GCWP are at the top of the page. So I think maybe that link should be taken down. What do you think?--Kbob (talk) 20:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Proposal to bring the Raam artcile to this page
I would like to merge the RAAM article into this one. Is this OK?-- — Kbob • Talk • 20:42, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me. I added the appropriate tags to both articles. If nobody object after a decent interval, go ahead and do it.Fladrif (talk) 16:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Is there a reason for the merger? Will Beback talk 07:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
- Sure. I seriously doubt, given the lack of external sources on the Raam currency, that it is notable enough for its own article. "Raam currency" gets all of 5 hits on google news archive, all between 2002 and 2005. "Raam notes" gets one hit. I think that establishes a complete lack of notability.Fladrif (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
- I think that search may understate the available sources. I'm busy with other articles at the present, but I think that there are more sources that can be added. Also, as a currency, it's nice to have it as a separate article - for example there's a currency infobox that would be less appropriate if it were just a section of another article. Will Beback talk 16:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Merge to Maharishi Vedic Education Development Corporation
An editor recently added a tag suggesting that this article be merged to Maharishi Vedic Education Development Corporation. I disagree. First, I've suggested that the MVEDC article be merged to the TMM article. Second, the MVEDC is a US coproation whose main purpose appears to be holding the sublicenses to trademarks, and possibly to holding title to properties in the US. Third and most important, the Global Country of World Peace is an international country with a substantial bureaucracy. It is the successor to the Natural Law Party and is many respects the main organ of the TM movement. Unfortunately, the current article does not describe it properly. Will Beback talk 23:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Gee, there are a lot of merge requests. In this case, I don't see a reason to merge this article into the big list. This topic is notable on its own. It's fairly long already and likely to get longer. Will Beback talk 22:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Rajas'
Looking at this section [Rajas] it is interesting to note that most of these people (who seem to wish to make political/social/cultural impute to the various countries they have been "assigned" (given the statement "... intention is to have a parental and nourishing role in the family of nations) are white and of Anglo-Saxon origin (mainly American). At the same time they have been "assigned" countries where the population may not mirror this racial or cultural typing. Have there been any reliable sources who have commented on this? Tucker talk 21:17, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- None that I've seen. Will Beback talk 21:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Reference questions
Always trying to learn more as a Wiki editor.
1. Can you please help me with this reference? Is it valid? It seems to be a reprint of a CNN story, but the URL link at the top of the story to CNN returns an error.
- "The Maharishi and the Global Country of World Peace unsuccessfully approached small, impoverished nations about purchasing or leasing land to create a sovereign nation, and in one case sought to install a king in an indigenous tribal nation.[1]" --BwB (talk) 13:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
2. Can we use reference sources for the English version of Wiki that are in Spanish?
- "On June 23, 2002, a ceremony was held on the Talamanca reservation to appoint a TM-chosen Indian as the reservation's first king.[2]" --BwB (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- ^ "Mystic's followers want own country". CNN. June 6, 2001.
- ^ "Costa Rica: Secta divide a indígenas". La Fogata. July 24, 2002.
- CNN is a valid source. That article has been reprinted in two other locations as well: [1][2] Links aren't necessary, they're a convenience.
- I suggest you read WP:V. Will Beback talk 19:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Will. The policy says it is preferable to use English refs, and if none available, then to provide a translation in the footnotes. However, in this article there is no translation provided. What should we do? --BwB (talk) 07:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- It says the text should be added to a footnote, or this talk page, if requested by other editors. The text is available at the link and Google or AltaVista can provide translations. Are you requesting me to copy the text from the link that you can follow yourself, and copy the automatic translation that you can get on your own? If you are then I'll do so. Will Beback talk 07:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- No Will, I am not asking you to do anything. --BwB (talk) 08:01, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- OK, if there's no request then we're in compliance with the policy. Will Beback talk 08:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- No Will, I am not asking you to do anything. --BwB (talk) 08:01, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- It says the text should be added to a footnote, or this talk page, if requested by other editors. The text is available at the link and Google or AltaVista can provide translations. Are you requesting me to copy the text from the link that you can follow yourself, and copy the automatic translation that you can get on your own? If you are then I'll do so. Will Beback talk 07:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Will. The policy says it is preferable to use English refs, and if none available, then to provide a translation in the footnotes. However, in this article there is no translation provided. What should we do? --BwB (talk) 07:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Question on Sources
- The Maharishi Purusha Capital of the Western World is located on 170 acres in West Virginia purchased by the GCWP in 2009.[1][2] The property will be designated a Global Capital and will include a palace for the Maharaja and residences for the Raja of Invincible America and the Prime Minister. Accomodations for 150-200 people, including 120 professional meditators, are being constructed.[1] Bob LoPinto, the Raja of Potomac Vedic America (regional director),[3] is overseeing the project.[1]
- ^ a b c Pisciotta, Marla (January 1, 2009). "Meditation Retreat Planned for Hampshire County". State Journal.
- ^ Purusha Capital 39°23′18″N 78°37′35″W / 39.3883°N 78.6264°W
- ^ "Ads for sex aids, gravestones gravely find their way despite spam blockers". Daily Breeze. Torrance, Calif. August 30, 2005. p. A.2.
Some of the text in the paragraph below, which currently appears in the article is unsupported to be unsupported. There is one source [3] which says the GCWP purchased land for 1500-200 for meditating professionals and that Bob LoPinto is the regional director for the project. However I don't see any sources that support the rest of the content. There is a source listed is community newspaper in Calif (the land is in VA) and has an article title "Ads for Sex Aids". Is this vandalism? There is no page number or date given and at present the source is not verifiable. Does anyone have any further insight on this? -- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- I moved it above for easier threading and to add the reflist. Will Beback talk 21:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- This text was copied by Bwb from Maharishi_Sthapatya_Veda#Purusha_Capital. I'm not sure which specific assertions you're questioning. I don't know of any source that talks about accommodations for 1500.
- The relevant material from Daily Breeze is:
- I'm getting beaten to death by breathless announcements from a New England gravestone makers association. Just the ticket for a California columnist. Same goes for the upcoming inauguration of "His Highness Bob LoPinto as Raja of Potomac Vedic America aboard the yacht Celebrity." Really, Raja LoPinto? (An Italian raja?) I'd like to go but I can't because I'm too busy considering an invitation to "Real Movers and Shakers," a variety show featuring handicapped people scheduled for early October.
- The column is based on various announcements the reporter has received. Will Beback talk 04:09, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- The text has been edited since I move it from the MSV article. Cut down, it look like. --BwB (talk) 09:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I trimmed it. Apparently you copied large blocks of text from other articles. I deleted the material that wasn't relevant here, or that was otherwise unnecessary to repeat in two places, and linked back to the full texts. Even with hyperlinks we'll never achieve the theoretical ideal of having material appear only once, but we should try to minimize duplication. Will Beback talk 09:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- One other point of discussion - in the list of Rajas presented in the article, we see Bob LoPinto mentioned and the countries he is associated with. In the "Daily Breeze" reference Bob LoPinto is called the "Raja of Potomac Vedic America". which is correct? --BwB (talk) 09:14, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- The domains of the rajas appear to have changed occasionally, at least during the Maharishi's lifetime. There's no reason to assume that both descriptions can't be correct. Will Beback talk 09:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- How can both be correct? Either LoPinto is the Raja of Potomac Vedic America, or he is not. --BwB (talk) 10:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- We don't have any source that says he is not. There are at least two possibilities. First, the sources may be incomplete, and he may hold all of the titles. For example, I've seen where rajas with multiple domains are addressed with only the most relevant title when talking about their activity in an particular domain. Just becasue the other domains aren't mentioned in the same breath doesn't mean they don't exist. A second possibility is that he held the Raja of Potomac Vedic America title at the time of the first source (2005) and then he gained the other titles later. I don't see why Bob LoPinto and the Purusha Capital continue to generate so much controversy. If there are any COI issues here I trust that the COI guideline will be followed closely. If that's not it then maybe someone can explain why we keep talking about this same text which we already discussed at the MSV article. Will Beback talk 11:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- How can both be correct? Either LoPinto is the Raja of Potomac Vedic America, or he is not. --BwB (talk) 10:53, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- The domains of the rajas appear to have changed occasionally, at least during the Maharishi's lifetime. There's no reason to assume that both descriptions can't be correct. Will Beback talk 09:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- The text has been edited since I move it from the MSV article. Cut down, it look like. --BwB (talk) 09:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Let's not get too far astray here. The goal of this thread is simple; to make sure that the text which is posted at the top of this article is properly sourced.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I've cleaned up the text to accurately reflect the existing sources. Since none of the sources mentioned, Purusha Capital, Rajas or GCWP capitals, I removed that text and moved the revised text to a more appropriate location in the article. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 03:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'd asked you to specify which material you felt needed sources, but instead of responding you just rewrote the text, deleting material that is readily sourceable. Yes, there are sources for the raja, the capital, etc. I've restored some of that. Please be more careful in the future and ask clearer questions before deleting material. Will Beback talk 03:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- My initial post at the top of this thread is comprehensive and clear. I was requesting substantiation for unsupported text. I posted the text and the citations in question. I asked for a quote from one source for which there was no link. You then provided a quote from the source in question and the quote did not support any of the text. All of the necessary information was provided so that any editor who was interested in the content being challenged could see which text was not sourced and had an opportunity to provide sources for the un-sourced text. There was no wrong doing. Editors do not need your permission before making good faith changes to the article. Please be more careful in the future to avoid criticizing and finding fault with fellow editors who are working within Wiki policies, in a collaborative and good faith manner to improve an article.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- As I told you, this text was simply copied from another article and then trimmed slightly here. The text was already discussed at great length on the MSV talk page. You are acting as if you'd never seen this before and didn't know that it had already been vetted. On this page, you wouldn't answer my simple question about which assertions you felt were unsourced. I do assume good faith, but good faith isn't an excuse for deleting sourced material. Anyway, I trust this is now settled and we won't have to spend another month discussing LoPinto. Will Beback talk 20:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- My initial post at the top of this thread is comprehensive and clear. I was requesting substantiation for unsupported text. I posted the text and the citations in question. I asked for a quote from one source for which there was no link. You then provided a quote from the source in question and the quote did not support any of the text. All of the necessary information was provided so that any editor who was interested in the content being challenged could see which text was not sourced and had an opportunity to provide sources for the un-sourced text. There was no wrong doing. Editors do not need your permission before making good faith changes to the article. Please be more careful in the future to avoid criticizing and finding fault with fellow editors who are working within Wiki policies, in a collaborative and good faith manner to improve an article.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'd asked you to specify which material you felt needed sources, but instead of responding you just rewrote the text, deleting material that is readily sourceable. Yes, there are sources for the raja, the capital, etc. I've restored some of that. Please be more careful in the future and ask clearer questions before deleting material. Will Beback talk 03:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Source for list of Rajas?
Do we have a source for the list of Rajas presented in the article? --BwB (talk) 09:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- The original source was a series of webpages that contained memorial tributes to the Maharishi from members of the GCWP and other luminaries. It seems to have disappeared from the web. (I've learned my lesson - TM-related websites are unstable). Luckily, an abbreviated version of the same information, with titles, was printed in a newsletter which I've found recently.[4] Complicating matters are the edits of a new editor which changed the domain assignments. I'd guess that these two edits were probably made by the same person.[5][6] They seemed to be working from some source, though I've never found it. It seemed authoritative so I left it. While I assume that the new information is more accurate, it is not verifiable. I'd be fine with reverting back to the earlier version, but the ideal would be to find an up-to-date list. Surely one of the editors here can find such a document? Will Beback talk 10:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- FWIW, here's a very short and out of date list.[7] (scroll to the end). Will Beback talk 10:14, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Also, there are many pages like this one, [8], that list the titles for individual rajas. Will Beback talk 10:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- I feel it important to have this information referenced. --BwB (talk) 10:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Go for it. Will Beback talk 11:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- It would be good for it to be referenced. At the same time I think we can be a little patient with the process unless someone feels that the text currently in the article is contentious in some way.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:39, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- If there's no objection, I'll revert it back to the prior version which is verifiable. I assume that the E-Gyan newsletter is an adequate source. If we ever find a newer or better source then we can change it. Will Beback talk 05:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- I feel it important to have this information referenced. --BwB (talk) 10:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Ok
Yes, I see "transcendental" is part of the quote...its a poor word choice since it can have so many references, but if its quoted has to be used.(olive (talk) 04:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC))
- We don't have to use the quote. I think it's a bit odd too. Will Beback talk 04:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- I altered the text so that it's no longer a quotation to address these concerns. Will Beback talk 05:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)