Talk:Swami Maheshwarananda

2551:

serious and factual wikipedia page of a real person LPB. On the other hand- at least 7 witnesses (more than 4 of them with open identities, 2 of them speaking in top time tv show interviews, others telling theirs stories in respectable magazines , and ALL of them long time devotees of swami maheshwarananda ) are not thrustworthy , not enough "hard evidence" to take a notion of the possbility of sexual abuse had ahppened ? Victims of sexual abuse/mind control have problems of facing the ( horrible ) reality so it is known fact in psychology that such cases are often popping out later the 5 years period of the actual abuse and that is unfortunately too long period to make court case in most countries. If almost WHOLE BOARDS of YIDL in Serbia and Australia had resigned ( more than 30 people ) - claiming in open letters ( Swami Chidanand ) that the sexual abuse allegations are real - and we are talking about people that were in YIDL for a long periods of time, some of them for more than 30 years ( very close and important associates of SM ) and most of them with more than 10 years of being in YIDL doesn't that ring a bell?

2434:

someone said that the references were no good, therefore the deletion. Okay, so I researched the references, found pretty good ones, and lo and behold! - deleted again. Without comment. Then, finally, a comment: now it wasn't the references, but the content. So I dug up more references, posted it again. Others pointed out that the newspapers which published the reports were, after all, decent and in part high quality media, but the followers now said that these newspapers only quoted one and the same witness. Which turns out to be not true (more references, more countries). Post it again. Again deleted. And then you come along and say that because I posted this so often, I cannot be neutral. And therefore, this doesn't belong here. That's Kafkaesque to the extreme. And please note: All the entry says is that there are these reports; it even includes the disclaimer that the Swami and his org are denying the allegations - though as I found out and pointed out above, the NZ org does not deny the allegations.

2836:

entries, too). In other words, change the face of Knowledge to a considerable extent because if the abuse headlines don't belong to Maheshwarananda's Knowledge entry and if we want to have some equality policies here, a whole lot of information which is neither the subject matter of legal court cases, nor has been admitted by the alleged culprit to be true, has to be deleted. If, on the other hand, one wishes to keep Knowledge as it is and harmonize the Maheshwarananda entry with the rest of Knowledge (rather than the other way round), the sexual abuse issue should be included in the article. So: Include or change Knowledge. Also, I would like to point out that in this case, no decision is a decision, i.e. it would by default favour the "delete"-side - and yet not through argument, but through mere inaction (calculated or not). Hence my plea to come to a decision, please.

1573:

heart-searching). I understand that this is not what followers like to have on this site, but it is part of Maheshwarananda's public persona, and there is ample reporting on this issue. The original entry (now back up again) made it clear that Maheshwarananda and his organization deny the allegations, and there are several links and references. Just erasing this without giving a good reason is not a very productive way of managing this entry and its objectivity. Remember, this is not an advertisement space or a place to honour one's guru maharaja, but it is an encyclopedia entry. The current entry does not say that he did, nor does he say that he didn't do it. It reports that there have been allegations, and that some journalists followed these cases and found them to be believable. Merely disliking this is not a good reason for erasing it.

2593:: Knowledge is not a platform for combating real or imagined harm done to others, but it is an encyclopedia. The promotional tone of the article needs to be curtailed, but that's a different matter from making allegations of sexual abuse. I find that many Knowledge biographies of saints, gurus and cult leaders are biased in favor of such personalities, unless he/she gets convicted by a court for some crime, and in this case a conviction is unlikely to follow. In BLP, polemical sources are often discarded by default, so it's hard to get criticism in such articles. But that's what follows from Knowledge policies. If you ask me the real abuse wasn't having sex with the guru, but drinking his feet-bath water. If one performs the later, the former is a rather trivial issue. 1765:

media reports. Those are referenced. I think there is little room to dispute the fact of the media reports. Then, keep in mind the guidelines for biographies of living persons, which say: "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well-documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it." I think reports by reputable news sources qualifies for "well-documented". Knowledge articles requires a neutral point of view, I therefore need to ask you to make the effort and please try to think like someone outside of your little cult for a moment, and understand that the public has a legitimate interest in being informed about negatives as well as about positives of the person in question.

1241:

most frequently used in the public. Later when Wikidas attempted to changed the little I began to wondered what is his "real name" as per passport, so I made the inquiry. The information that his formal and legal name in his passport is Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda, I got from his secretary (I believe). The problem of this discussion however, is that I have mentioned at the beginning of all this talk, that this in fact is his formal and legal name, but for some strange reason nobody really cares about that.

2516:

this person has made headlines in the past few years. It might be damning headlines, but that should not count as much as the fact that if the Swami was in the media during the past few years, it was precisely because of the sexual abuse allegations. I guess Knowledge would be much less informative if we applied the same criteria to other living person biographies. Please, therefore, reconsider whether we should continue to pretend that there were never such reports.

2152:

slander? All of this is not a minor detail. An article which, for example, claims that Swami started to meditate when he was three years old, that there are "thousands of YiDL centers around the world (proof? addresses?), and does not back this up, may at least also cover the fact there are some fairly well references allegations of sexual abuse. In fact, the documentation for these allegations is way better than almost everything else in this article. (

1689:. Because yet again it's gone, deleted by the very same 62.201.19.45 who always deletes the bit about the sexual harassment, and does so without argument, without comment, and even after the references were updated. 62.201.19.45's Knowledge history references ONLY changes on this site, or, more precisely, only this one change: deleting this paragraph. Please stop, this is not a place to censure entries, it is a place for information. Thanks 1849: 1077:

and that documents provided will not be misused to violate laws of personal privacy. I am not at all clear how is this then handled on Wiki. In what form and to whom are this documents to be communicated, who verifies their accuracy and so on. To my knowledge there is no such statement on the internet. I never heard of a dispute like that (about the name) before. Normally you show your passport and documents and that's it.

2667:

of a journalist reporting on it. So, what do we end up with? I always thought that one of Knowledge's strengths was that it offers information beyond mere basic data. But if we need to stick to basic data, we may need to just leave the most basic facts there: name, job description (yoga teacher), birth date and place and books he wrote. I'd call this process unwikipediation, but if that's what "we" want, so be it.

726: 525: 500: 274: 326: 305: 587: 1643: 648: 621: 511: 2628:

ambitions to be a spiritual leader is relevant and important. Also it would be interesting to add that a person that promotes his system of yoga and healthy living is a person with long list of health problems ( severe heart problems ) and obesity. So, let's be honest and simple - allegations are heavy and well documented and their place is on this wikipedia page. Period.

420: 402: 658: 430: 203: 1151:(to translate it those who do not know what honorifics stand for: Vishwaguru Mahamandaleshwar Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda Puri - "Teacher of the universe" - "The lord of the arena of sacrifice" "Super-human-being" Swami Maheshwarananda "Pure". After AFD it was renamed only to "Super-human-being" Swami Maheshwarananda. I am sure it is his 'passport' name... 1470:

track his whereabouts and go meet him. To my understanding, it is not a celebrity of such kind that he would be unapproachable. Then, if asked politely I am sure, you can have a look in to his passport. Ignoring the truth inevitably results in violation of Wiki rules. The name of the living person with a biography on Wiki should at least be what it really is.

1261:

living people with bio on Wiki be ready to show the passport at any time to anybody? Maybe mediation would be a good start? Clearly it is a simpler path, if Wikidas tries to find proof for himself only, rather than for a general public. There are methods how to verify somebodies real name. I did that to a reasonable extent, but cant do that for you

2373:

the result. The article makes wild unsubstantiated and inconsistent claims about Yoga in Daily Life (e.g. MS developed it, doctors developed it, it is ancient and presumably therefore older than both MS and the doctor who developed it, etc.; his gurus are held to be avatars of Siva, but there is no reference, etc. etc.)

535: 2472:

See it like this: Knowledge has strict guidelines for the biographies of living persons, which by default reject adding such allegations to the article, unless there is hard evidence for them. I am not happy with the removal of such information, but I understand that we have to play by the rules even

2200:

Please note that the paragraph did not claim that Swami sexually abused people; it referred to the fact that in recent years, such allegations have been reported in a number of media. Given the references, this is difficult to deny. Wouldn't it seem a little bit dishonest if we failed to mention this

1028:

If a guy in Bronks would choose to be called Vishwaguru Saint and would become notable, Wiki would be required to use his name as a title in his biography. The problem here is that one culture is mutilating another culture by badly applying well meant rules. Names as required by the person to present

1024:

Depends upon how far back you looked. I did not originally author that sentence. I have removed the modified version which said, He uses his honorific title... That is in fact not true. What matters are facts and not little tricks. His name was given to him some 45 years ago by his Guru. That became

2561:

Ler me cite this line from wikipedia own policy on LPBiographies : " If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well-documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it." If such obvious allegations and INCIDENTS as those on sexual

2515:

Furthermore, and strictly speaking, the evidence needed for the claim that there are media reports on sexual abuse by the Swami are the references themselves (provided). It still seems very strange to me that you claim that on Knowledge, one cannot even mention the one fact about a person with which

2376:

I readily admit that the fact that the fact that the abuse passage is being deleted again and again and again made me especially sensitive to what is happening here. I have no personal ties to, nor did I have any, to Swami Maheshwarananda, so I am relatively neutral, yes - besides the fact that I am

2277:

And by the way, nobody blocked the Abuse section as Lakata claimed. It's up there again because unless decided otherwise, and for objective reasons, it is part of Swami's public persona. A google news search suffices to prove that. Reports, from DIFFERENT people, have appeared in Austria, Australia,

1240:

Here is how things stand. When I originally submitted the article, I simply specified entire title, because I did not know better. Then somebody suggested that it should be shortened, I had no problem with that, because the name Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda is used on his books and it is the name

1133:

Now what can I say more to it? How can someone first claim to find no way to change a title "in to something shorter" (at a time 4 honorifics and a name) and now claiming that he is in a direct possession of that same guy's utility bills and passport that states current now much shorter article name

1076:

Yes. We are talking here about a living person with a residence in Austria in Vienna. There are documents like proof of residence which shows his name. Then the passport, personal ID, etc.. However, this dispute must then be raised to high enough level by Wiki admin's that this will seem appropriate

856:

is legaly part of his name as per passport. If you are regarded as worthy of it in India, you can have that (honorific spiritual title) as part of your name in passport. Swami is also a title. It means monk and there could be thousands of Maheshwaranandas. There is just no way, you can cut the legal

2858:

I have just removed the allegations because at least one of the sources, "Smythers, P. Sexual Abuse in Yoga Groups: The Case of Swami Maheshwaranda. Journal of Social Group Processes 33:1", seems to be made up in whole cloth. I couldn't verify the existence of the journal or the article. Two others

2666:

TGeorgescu: To repeat, and you can check this yourself: These are not, as you claim, polemical sources. To call profil polemical is a bit like calling Time magazine and the Economist polemical. If you mean that the nature of the allegations is scandalous - perhaps they are, but that's not the fault

2550:

Dear Georgescu, please let's be objective, but really objective :Hard evidence? This whole article is based on "not at all" sourced, and to be honest, more than biased claims that serve more as a marketing tool for a personality cult ( and sound more like a fairy tale than a LPB ) rather than as a

2433:

To Demiurge: ... for a moment, try to get into my shoes ... how would you react if you read an article in a good and trusted political news magazine (profil) and posted the content of this article on Knowledge. And then your passage would be deleted about 6 times without any comment? Then, finally,

2372:

You can look up my former name, it was something like Diogenes and then a number. I forgot my password. I am asking for neutral people not because I think that they necessarily agree with me, but because the back and forth is utterly unproductive. Additionally, it is not the motive which counts but

2269:

Okay, so does anybody know how to involve neutral, non-partisan Wikipedians in the dispute of whether the fact that reports of sexual abuse have been published in five different countries is noteworthy information about Swami (or not)? It may also be noteworthy that in a recent declaration, the New

1469:

Passport of a living person is a reliable source. My word may not be enough, but anybody is free to verify it with enough interest in the subject. Reluctance to make the effort does not count to disqualify those who did make the effort. For example, because this is a living person, you can actually

1360:

Because of redirects it is not possible to move the page back to its original name. The original name discussion was done on the talk page in great extend several months ago. It was agreed to keep Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda. Explanation: Paramhans doubles as title and legally first name as per

1127:

I was also considering how to change the title in to something shorter, but did not find a way. I disagree though with plain dismissal of facts, especially by people whi are really not in to yoga in similar things and not interested in the subject. Has anyone even checked the list of links provided

2894:

Maybe you care to explicitly state which of the references do not support the given content? Each of them does, so your claim is just that, a claim. Anyway, by now it is well-known within the yoga community that a number of Maheshwarananda's disciple confirm the sexual abuse. The fact that this is

2835:

I wonder what will happen next. I am surely biased, but to my mind, the arguments offered by the "include"-side are good ones, and haven't been answered yet by the "delete"-side. If the "delete"-side wishes to be consequent, there is a whole lot to delete on the evangelical scandal list (and other

2142:

I am happy that there is some discussion on this topic here. The former edit-delete-undo-delete circle was getting boring. I would just like to point out that not only are the articles independent of each other (compare countries and cited persons/alleged victims); also, while not exactly the BBC,

922:

for this, and it says "Generally, titles and honorifics should not be used either in the article body or when naming an article," though it does leave an exception for when a person is known by their name with the honorific included. In this case, though, I don't think it's needed. Side note: this

1764:

Dear Lakata, I am so glad you are finally ready to discuss the matter. I am not Pythagoras01, but since I have reverted the section blanking several times myself, too, I feel partly addressed, too, and would like to take a stab at an answer. Look, what do you mean by "it"? The article talks about

1703:

Lakata, is there a reason why you deleted the section on sexual harassment? The section gives references (much more accurate than many others in this entry), it is relevant, and it is a well-known fact that such allegations exist (a google search may convince you of that). Not mentioning it here,

1625:

Point accepted. I corrected and added references. By the way, profil is a serious Austrian news magazine, akin to the Spiegel, Newsweek, Time magazine; and Connection is one of the longest standing German magazines on things yoga, meditation, etc. and has a good record of doing sober research and

986:

your own reference confirming that Paramhans is a title and added it at the same time and now you claim it is his first given name. Are you this person's fan? I will leave a note on you talk on being disruptive. You called a vandalism reasonable edit. You should never do it or you will run into a

2627:

Encyclopedia's one and only purpose is to inform with relevant information on certain phenomena, event, person etc. Purpose of the information is action, not just useless piles of data for curious bookworms. Information on sexual scandal ( huge and relevant incident ) involving a person that has

2511:

I understand. Where I beg to differ is the evaluation of "hard evidence". There are around a dozen female disciples who have come forward with reports of being sexually abused by the Swami. Additionally, the entire board of at least two national organizations and some long-standing teachers have

2151:

And Lakata, if neither profil, nor Respekt, nor New Zealand TV, nor Connection, etc. are reliable sources, who or what is? Should we discard all the journalists, newspaper and TV editors, etc. involved, sit back and nod to your and Swami's version instead? Then why didn't he or YiDL sue them for

1587:

Ok, this section is deleted again and again and again, making good material for reports of vandalism. If you think this does not belong here, then please at least provide ONE single argument. All this may backfire, i.e. it really appears as if YIDL has to hide something. Otherwise, you'd able to

1424:

Existence or absence of third party source readable on internet, does not affect the reality of things. As mentioned in the discussion, I have made reasonable efforts to establish the truth. Even if ones name is made solely out of honorifics, the name should not be nulled because of that. In the

1572:

There was a section on the fact that various media reports have been published in different countries about a number of former students of MS reporting sexual misconduct by Swami. The entry also mentioned that some long-term disciples left Swamiji because of this reason (most after some serious

1260:

What is the truth can not simply be ignored. I am sure legal documents can be submitted, if necessary, but only according to the law. This can not be avoided. Not every bloke on the street can ask for your ID either. There must have been issues like that before. How where they handled? Must all

1975:

The Respekt piece is apparently "Translated by Roman Peterka for Beyond Orange, an organization founded by former members of the Yoga in Daily Life community" - so it seems to be merely repeating claims made by a small number of people who have already had disagreements with the subject of the

1032:

It may be that you have removed parts from the names of other Hindus Masters. But everybody answers for his own actions and I can not help you there. The bottom line here is that "genuine" legally valid parts of names are being stripped from persons names, because in western culture it is not

2308:

neutral and non-partisan. I'd never heard of this yoga guy outside of Knowledge (I can't even spell his name), and have no interest in his teachings or indeed in yoga. Just like I'd never heard of the famous TV chef outside of Knowledge (famous to people interested in cooking - not famous to

1250:

When the article was moved the first time, it was first suggested on the talk page, left for any comments for a few days until everybody agreed and then the move was made. The current procedure was change first, check later. That is not what one would consider civilized behavior. Not even on

2058:

I have looked over to the Sathya Sai Baba page , which has a long section on criticism, while Sathya Sai Baba has never been officially charged with anything either, as far as I can see. Seems in his case, the official charge sheet was rightly not made the be-all and end-all of determining

1870:

Since the majority of reports on this person from reputable media, as opposed to self-published or obscure, deal with the sexual abuse, I call it very disingenuous to the public to exclude this angle, especially since what is left is just advertisement, fluff and self-aggrandisement.

2147:

Of course we can all pretend it never happened and that all these articles and reports do refer to a completely different person who just happens to look like Swami and has the same name. Or we concede that this issue is part of his persona, and hence has to be part of this entry on

1626:

work. But that you may research yourself. By the way, the sources in this section stand now in sharp contrast to some of the other sources quoted in this article, most of which are in-house publications of YIDL or totally missing (such as the blood donation work for the Red Cross).

2025:

In any event, the original sources of articles may not be serious. No one has been charged with a crime or convicted. Consequently, adding defamatory content without solid evidence (a lady said that) to Knowledge is contrary to Knowledge's policy on biographies of living people.

213: 1191:

The initial title was longer because I was unaware about the title rules on Wiki. (no honorifics required) If you check the article, you can find a link to his cover organization and a phone number. If you can reach his secretary, you can get additional information like that.

2895:

everywhere but on wikipedia and YDL websites only confirms the less than straightforward dealings with the issue, so I pledge for keeping it here in the discussions. It's a worthy testimony, especially if the reasons given are as shallow as Huons. Let's keep it like that.

942:

Paramhans according to his passport is his first name, Swami is his middle name and Maheshwarananda is his last name. If we would follow the suggested logic, a person named Doctor Pope, would be deleted from Wiki, because all his names would be Honorific titles.

1425:

absence of internet source to confirm or dispute a statement it would seem reasonable that at least a second source of information (not necessarily on internet) is found which contradicts the first, before any action is taken to assume that the first is wrong.

2437:

So yes, I guess by now I am no longer neutral as far as the history of this passage is concerned. As far as the Swami or Yoga is concerned: I couldn't care less. But the history of one of my few attempts to do something worthwhile on Knowledge is, I admit,

1214:

to prove one way or the other. Basically, Atmapuri, the burden is on you to prove that Paramhans is actually his first name. We really shouldn't have to do this by getting in touch with him and going through a strange certification process. If he really is

1722:

made are unanswered and still stand, therefore the continuous blanking of the sexual abuse section is unwarranted and in my opinion constitutes vanadalism. If there are differing opinions, why not discuss them here instead of just vandalising the page?

2562:

abuse mentioned in the article are not noteworthy , not relevant , or not well documnted than what IS? Does wikipedia serve as a marketing tool for certain individuals or as a place to share relevant information of the public interest and benefit?

815:

What is disputed is the name of the person. Verification is currently not possible as there is no support on Wiki to submit legal documents (passport copy or proof of residence). The current name has been "verified" by checking with his secretary.

1925:

Profil is the longest established and one of the biggest Austrian news magazines with a long history of politically highly relevant media scoops. Comparable to the German "Spiegel", and if there is such a comparison, to the English "Economist".

1957:

I understand your point that sources must be evaluated independently, and that the dubious sources for the fluff don't justify sources for the criticism which are not up to par. But I hope that the links I have given show that they indeed are.

1219:

enough to have his own article, then the information should be out there. But as far as I can tell right now, Paramhans is just an honorific. And at some point, we need to stop going round and round in circles and come to some conclusion. —

2512:

resigned after checking the validity of these allegations. Against this, the accused is one person and this one person (expectedly) denies the validity of the allegations. Now, weighing the evidence ... how hard does it need to get?

153: 2709:

Again, I have sympathy for such criticism, but this has to be sorted out according to policies. There is a reason why the BLP policy is biased against criticism: Knowledge does not want to be dragged in legal battles.

510: 1899:

The promotional wording can be dealt with separately. We don't put in dubiously sourced potentially defamatory claims about a living person in order to balance out promotional self-aggrandisement in their article!

1409:

I read the discussion and I still don't see any indication in the sources that Paramhans is part of his legal name. You mention that its his name as it appears in his passport, Do you have a source that confirm

1789:

No one has been charged with a crime or convicted. The edit regarding "Media Reports on Sexual Abuse" is contrary to Knowledge's policy on biographies of living people even with the principles fairness at all.

2115:

Wanted to remark regarding a gossip loop, as mentioned on the BLP notice board, that's t to my understanding not the case here, since each source has done original interviews with one or more abuse victims.

1287:, it does seem that he's almost always referred to with Paramhans in the name. So maybe it's just easier to leave the name the way it is. Having said that, though, this article still reads like a fansite. — 2235:

Look up the kid who wanted a cooking lesson from a famous TV chef, but ended up swimming with dolphins instead... and ask yourself why Knowledge is mute on that topic too. This may help you to believe it.

1118: 873: 2169:

Exactly, you've got the point. if administrators are not biased I can't see how can they let some 'facts' be in this article , and on the other hand to block quite relevant and documented information?

1091:

Sorry, maybe I need some clarification here. Why do you have access to his personal documentation? Are you somehow personally related or affiliated to this guy? If so, we have a lot more to discuss. —

1498:. These claims are not supported by third party reliable sources that can say it is his legal name, nor is there a need to include a honorific in the name, even if it is a legal name. The policy is - 2201:

aspect of the Swami? I mean, if he made headlines in the past few years, it was precisely because of the sexual abuse accusations - and his Knowledge entry should be mute on this? I can't believe it.

1052:

to prove this one way or the other? Either a source stating "Paramhans is his legal name and he no longer has a first name," or one saying "Paramhans is an honorific and his current full name is

3000: 1704:

then, would seem to come close to censorship, no? I therefore reverted it; if there are non-partisan arguments for deleting the section, I am of course ready and willing to be discuss.

1610:

be added without citing reliable sources - this is our default. You've cited two sources, one is a blog (not acceptable), and I can not access the other to check its reliability.

2985: 876:

as it was at the time of AFD? Swami Maheshwarananda is sufficient, obviously, even in India unless you are trying to be respectful (which is not the purpose of Knowledge). Even

147: 253: 2965: 1856:), especially if it involves living persons. Still there are no real facts that support these published allegations. Otherwise it is only spreading of slander. Thank you. 1948:

3) As has been said, Connection is one of the longest standing German magazines on things yoga, meditation, etc. and has a good record of doing sober research and work.

1447:

soruce. Your word that this is his official name is not sufficient. If you can't provide a reliable source for your claim that I don't think this can/will move forward.--

2798:. Consensus in these articles can be a waxing & waning tide, but for this subject it certainly looks like enough reliable sources have weighed in - this scandal 835:

Just because it is a commonly used title and is used in other places it is nevertheless is a honorific title. Thus it should not be part of the name of the article.

2817:

Thanks - the comparison with similar entries referring to evangelical Christian is a very good one. Here, too, it is not only legal matters which count, but legacy.

2086:

On a more serious note, the sourcing there is a lot stronger than what's offered here. I'm not saying it can't be improved. It may be that some of that article is

2955: 476: 44: 2930: 258: 762:

Now that the AfD is done, I would like to rename this article "Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda", as the name most commonly appears online. Any objections?

2794:

There's a nuance between gossip and scandal that's dogged BLP editors since the beginning when it comes to sex scandals. As for religious leaders, there's

241:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or 2112:

On the other hand, the subject of our article here is a very minor figure compared to the Sai Baba, so hour-long BBC documentaries are not to be expected.

1510:

and may need to be reported to the appropriate board. In any case we should note that COI editing is strongly discouraged. Besides his other POV pushing

2995: 1588:

provide good arguments rather than just deleting without a single word. Fact is that more and more such allegations (note the word!) are coming forward.

740: 79: 2040:

I very much appreciate understanding Knowledge´s editors who temporarily blocked the controversial content because of the suspected sources. Thank you.

2802:

affects Maheshwarananda's legacy, therefore it should go in. (One point - It is NOT slander or libel to quote & cite a reliable source in a BLP.)

482: 1395:

Discussion was already done. See this talk page. Consessus was already reached, but the recent move was made wihtout any discussion or suggestions.

3005: 2990: 2970: 2960: 553: 233: 2795: 2980: 2950: 2144: 1662:

with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Knowledge's

716: 706: 2940: 962:, the word "swami" is an honorific. So really, all I'm seeing here is two honorifics followed by a last name. Am I wrong in that judgment? — 384: 374: 85: 2880: 1766: 919: 557: 2338:

who read in a magazine about some bad things a yoga guy allegedly did, and suddenly you're on a crusade that these particular allegations

1833:) is removed, because still there are no real facts that support these published allegations. Otherwise it is only spreading of slander. 3010: 2975: 2629: 2563: 2409: 2177: 1880: 1284: 452: 2945: 2935: 2902: 1724: 1627: 1589: 1574: 561: 2873:

Nice justyfiyng...one reference "seems to be made up" so you remove it and all the rest ! Really scientific and neutral approach !!

2402:

is not written by an neutral person,' but from his devotees, and that is obvious from it's style of praise and lack of objectivity.

1894:

They look obscure to me. Then again, I don't understand German. Would you care to justify your claim that they are "reputable media"?

168: 1673:

If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Knowledge's

857:

name in parts without actually deleting it and Adf was already done. The naming culture in India does not follow western concepts.

552:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to 1502:-3 and as the member of clergy he may be called Paramahans, but the policy is not to include such name in the article. The editor 135: 2270:

Zealand branch of YiDL does no longer deny these allegations; they only say that they are not in a position to investigate them (

1164:

You're right, this does sound vaguely suspicious. If this is going to start dealing with sensitive data, then we might need some

735: 631: 548: 505: 350: 99: 30: 602:

or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the

443: 407: 104: 20: 2271: 1784:. (One is a dead link, incidentally.) Has this guy actually been charged with any crime or, better still, convicted of one? 74: 1331:

The result of the move request was: not moved - discussion seems dead, and consensus if anything is against the proposal

1753: 1667: 1647: 285: 1937: 1558:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

1326:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

349:

and related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

129: 1615: 681: 671: 626: 65: 2335: 333: 310: 125: 1686: 1128:

to establish notability? I am getting a feeling of being ignored here. Atmapuri (talk) 21:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

782: 209: 2330:

accounts turn up desperately wanting to put "scandal" into the biography of a living person, some of them might

1659: 2884: 1770: 273: 2633: 2567: 2413: 2181: 1884: 1025:

his legal name. It is customed in Hinudism that Gurus name their desciples giving them new spiritual names.

175: 2906: 2145:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Yoga-swami-faces-allegations-of-sexual-abuse/tabid/1771/articleID/300358/Default.aspx

1631: 1593: 1578: 1460: 1452: 1415: 1386: 1134:

with just one honorific title and the name? I would put it up for an official move by an admin and am very

877: 595: 242: 109: 2841: 2822: 2765: 2672: 2521: 2443: 2382: 2347: 2283: 2241: 2206: 2153: 2095: 2013: 1991: 1905: 1819: 1728: 1709: 1694: 1611: 1529:, this sounds as a compliment. The truth however is only one at the end. There is no POV attached to it. 2590: 2121: 2064: 1965: 1876: 1526: 1347: 291: 24: 2837: 2818: 2668: 2517: 2439: 2378: 2279: 2202: 1719: 1705: 1690: 1003:

Haha, wow. I guess that one covers it for me. Thus, Paramhans is an honorific and should be removed. —

2898: 2876: 2715: 2598: 2478: 2405: 2173: 1741: 778: 252:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to 1381:

appears to be an honorific title. Given the article has some move history suggest it be discussed.--

849: 202: 1981:

Why is the piece from Connection not on Connection's own website, but on "julia-koloda.de" instead?

1682: 1530: 1503: 1471: 1426: 1396: 1362: 1332: 1262: 1207:

So are you saying that you don't have a direct affiliation with him? Either way, we need some good

1193: 1078: 1034: 944: 899: 858: 817: 797: 189: 161: 141: 55: 2400:

One note on 'neutrality' of the editors- I am sure that Swami Maheshwarananda's page on Knowledge

1949: 898:

There is no problem with removing honorifics unless they duplicate legaly also as the first name.

451:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

2041: 2027: 1857: 1834: 1791: 1745: 1534: 1475: 1456: 1448: 1440: 1430: 1411: 1400: 1382: 1366: 1336: 1266: 1197: 1082: 1038: 948: 903: 884:-- there are so many Ramakrishnas... in India I guess. The names that are honorifics are removed. 862: 821: 801: 767: 256:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see 70: 2807: 2761: 2757: 2343: 2237: 2091: 2009: 1987: 1901: 1815: 1663: 1518: 1444: 1288: 1221: 1169: 1157: 1144: 1135: 1092: 1057: 1004: 995: 979: 963: 924: 890: 841: 51: 2589:, there is where the matter gets decided according to Knowledge policies. I suggest reading 2117: 2060: 2045: 2031: 1961: 1872: 1861: 1838: 1795: 1749: 958:

Wikidas, can you find proof showing that Paramhans isn't his first name? Also, according to

540: 346: 1920: 1681:

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through

2859:

are PDFs not hosted by the purported publisher. None of them supported the given content.

2711: 2594: 2474: 2087: 1781: 435: 249: 2272:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Portals/0/images/Yoga%20in%20Daily%20Life%20Society%20Response.doc

1852:

I ask everyone, please do not add defamatory content to Knowledge regarding the section (

2864: 2586: 2005: 1651: 1208: 599: 185: 1848: 2924: 2334:

be neutral. I mean, come on, you're telling us that you're just a neutral uninvolved

2327: 1737:

Pythagoras01, do you have real evidence for it? Since otherwise you spread slander.

1674: 1603: 1507: 1499: 1165: 763: 1938:

http://respekt.ihned.cz/respekt-in-english/c1-53834960-the-nightlife-of-a-great-yogi

987:

block. evidence that it was not his first name is both his given name and this edit

793:

The proposed new title seems OK. Thanks a lot for helping cleaning the article up :)

2803: 2304:

This is part of your problem. Most of the people who are in disagreement with you,

2274:). So if even YiDL takes note of this issue, Knowledge should also take note of it. 1549: 1513: 1317: 1211: 1152: 1139: 1049: 990: 885: 836: 663: 2910: 2888: 2868: 2845: 2826: 2811: 2769: 2719: 2676: 2637: 2602: 2571: 2525: 2482: 2447: 2417: 2386: 2351: 2287: 2245: 2210: 2185: 2157: 2125: 2099: 2068: 2049: 2035: 2017: 1995: 1969: 1916:

With pleasure. I am new to Knowledge, thanks for giving me a chance to explain.

1909: 1888: 1865: 1842: 1823: 1799: 1774: 1757: 1732: 1713: 1698: 1635: 1619: 1597: 1582: 1538: 1520: 1495: 1479: 1464: 1434: 1419: 1404: 1390: 1378: 1370: 1340: 1298: 1270: 1231: 1216: 1201: 1179: 1159: 1146: 1102: 1086: 1067: 1042: 1014: 998: 973: 952: 934: 907: 892: 881: 866: 843: 825: 805: 786: 771: 193: 524: 499: 1952: 1494:

There were only unreliable claims that that his name is legally Paramahans or

1029:

themselves in court and on the passport, should not be shortened in any form.

653: 586: 530: 425: 342: 2278:

the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Germany, and England. What more do you need?

2860: 725: 1854:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Swami_Maheshwarananda#Media_Reports_on_Sexual_Abuse

1831:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Swami_Maheshwarananda#Media_Reports_on_Sexual_Abuse

647: 620: 1853: 1830: 325: 304: 448: 2326:

Whereas I have the temerity to suggest a possibility that when multiple

1934:

2) While the Respekt article was not referenced, it should have been.

419: 401: 1929: 679:-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the 560:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the 959: 676: 1033:

practiced to give people honorifics as part of their legal name.

1119:

Vishwaguru Mahamandaleshwar Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda Puri

874:

Vishwaguru Mahamandaleshwar Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda Puri

338: 1950:

http://www.julia-koloda.de/mediapool/128/1289718/data/Yoga1.pdf

2055:

Julia Koloda is the journalist who wrote the Connection piece.

848:

The honorofic is not misspelled. Check the google for a quick

267: 248:

from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially

225: 197: 15: 2077:

Yeah, but that dude was the avatar of Shirdi Sai Baba, right?

724: 585: 2796:

an entire category for just those by Evangelical Christians

1685:. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being 1780:

The sources provided look inadequate to avoid problems of

2143:

there is a recent TV report on the issue in New Zealand:

1921:

http://www.profil.at/articles/1124/560/299653/yoga-gibst

1316:

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a

1117:

At the time of AFD when article (the same ad) was named

1943: 1511: 1439:

I doesn't have to be an internet source, it can be any

1352: 988: 983: 160: 1548:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a

447:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 337:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1986:

I'm going to look a bit further into the others. --

481:This article has not yet received a rating on the 2585:The place for voicing such concerns would be the 2008:so hopefully we will get some more input soon. -- 1666:page, and ask for independent help at one of the 3001:Start-Class Rajasthan articles of Mid-importance 675:, which aims to improve Knowledge's coverage of 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1048:Okay, let's try this another way. Can we find 174: 8: 2986:Start-Class India articles of Low-importance 1953:http://www.connection.de/index.php/magazine 923:article really does read like a fansite. — 271: 918:: Agreed; ditch the Paramhans. There is a 615: 494: 396: 299: 2966:Automatically assessed biography articles 1930:http://en.wikipedia.org/Profil_(magazine) 1283:*sigh* Okay. Based on what I can find in 777:Go for it. Thanks for following through. 2473:when we personally dislike the outcome. 2377:allergic to the very idea of censorship. 1814:it, so please don't edit war over it. -- 617: 496: 398: 301: 1879:) 17:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC) ,formerly 603: 212:on 12 March 2009 (UTC). The result of 1675:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 7: 2956:Unknown-importance Hinduism articles 2756:No, that's not the main reason. See 1806:There needs to be consensus here to 669:This article is within the scope of 546:This article is within the scope of 441:This article is within the scope of 331:This article is within the scope of 2931:Biography articles of living people 2342:be covered by Knowledge? Really? -- 811:Summary of factual accuracy dispute 290:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 14: 2996:Mid-importance Rajasthan articles 1658:If you are engaged in an article 1455:) 16:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC)-- 1847: 1641: 656: 646: 619: 533: 523: 509: 498: 428: 418: 400: 324: 303: 272: 231:This article must adhere to the 201: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 1944:http://en.wikipedia.org/Respekt 1810:the material, not consensus to 1353:Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda 711:This article has been rated as 570:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography 379:This article has been rated as 208:This article was nominated for 3006:WikiProject Rajasthan articles 2991:Start-Class Rajasthan articles 2971:WikiProject Biography articles 2961:Start-Class biography articles 831:Misspelled honorific in title? 573:Template:WikiProject Biography 461:Knowledge:WikiProject Hinduism 1: 2981:Low-importance India articles 2951:Start-Class Hinduism articles 1568:Sexual Harassment Allegations 1539:20:58, 21 November 2010 (UTC) 1521:18:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1480:20:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC) 1465:16:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC) 1435:10:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1420:14:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1405:08:11, 13 November 2010 (UTC) 1391:19:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC) 1371:13:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC) 1341:13:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC) 733:This article is supported by 464:Template:WikiProject Hinduism 455:and see a list of open tasks. 353:and see a list of open tasks. 234:biographies of living persons 42:Put new text under old text. 2941:Low-importance Yoga articles 2869:23:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC) 558:contribute to the discussion 1640:This goes to 62.201.19.45: 691:Knowledge:WikiProject India 246:must be removed immediately 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 3027: 3011:WikiProject India articles 2976:Start-Class India articles 2911:16:37, 16 March 2014 (UTC) 2336:man on the Clapham omnibus 1829:Dear anyone, the section ( 1121:Atma/ the same user said: 806:09:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC) 787:05:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC) 772:00:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC) 717:project's importance scale 694:Template:WikiProject India 483:project's importance scale 385:project's importance scale 359:Knowledge:WikiProject Yoga 2946:WikiProject Yoga articles 2936:Start-Class Yoga articles 2889:19:34, 4 March 2014 (UTC) 2827:13:10, 30 June 2013 (UTC) 2812:04:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC) 2770:23:49, 28 June 2013 (UTC) 2720:23:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC) 2677:09:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC) 2638:22:12, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 2603:21:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 2572:16:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 2526:16:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 2483:12:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 2448:23:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2418:23:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2387:21:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2352:21:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2288:21:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2246:21:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2211:07:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 2186:23:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC) 2158:22:07, 24 June 2013 (UTC) 2126:04:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC) 2100:01:28, 21 June 2013 (UTC) 2069:00:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC) 2059:legitimacy of criticism. 2050:22:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 2036:18:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 2018:18:22, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1996:18:01, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1970:17:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1910:16:28, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1889:15:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1866:10:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1843:07:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1824:11:12, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1800:13:36, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 1775:18:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 1758:17:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 1733:13:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 1714:19:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 872:So why do not go back to 826:07:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC) 732: 710: 641: 593: 518: 480: 413: 378: 362:Template:WikiProject Yoga 319: 298: 194:11:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 2846:12:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC) 1699:16:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC) 1636:09:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC) 1620:22:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 1598:16:28, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 1583:16:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 1555:Please do not modify it. 1323:Please do not modify it. 1299:13:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC) 1271:13:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC) 1232:04:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC) 1202:04:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC) 1180:22:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1160:22:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1147:22:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1103:20:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1087:19:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1068:19:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1043:19:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 1015:17:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 999:17:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 974:17:15, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 953:17:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 935:16:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 908:17:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 893:16:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 867:09:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC) 844:21:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC) 2004:I've mentioned this at 1650:. Your edits have been 878:Ramakrishna Paramahamsa 1668:relevant notice boards 1525:Comming from a fan of 729: 594:This article has been 590: 280:This article is rated 75:avoid personal attacks 1527:Paramahansa Yogananda 1348:Swami Maheshwarananda 736:WikiProject Rajasthan 728: 589: 549:WikiProject Biography 100:Neutral point of view 25:Swami Maheshwarananda 1942:On Respekt itself: 1687:blocked from editing 982:-- you have removed 444:WikiProject Hinduism 105:No original research 978:Atma you are being 920:proposed convention 596:automatically rated 2760:, near the end. -- 1664:dispute resolution 1648:disruptive editing 880:is redirecting to 730: 591: 576:biography articles 286:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 2901:comment added by 2879:comment added by 2758:User:Demiurge1000 2408:comment added by 2176:comment added by 1761: 1744:comment added by 1646:Please stop your 1612:Materialscientist 755: 754: 751: 750: 747: 746: 672:WikiProject India 614: 613: 610: 609: 493: 492: 489: 488: 467:Hinduism articles 395: 394: 391: 390: 266: 265: 224: 223: 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 3018: 2913: 2891: 2420: 2188: 1851: 1760: 1738: 1645: 1644: 1557: 1516: 1506:is in a serious 1355: 1325: 1295: 1292: 1228: 1225: 1212:reliable sources 1176: 1173: 1155: 1142: 1099: 1096: 1064: 1061: 1050:reliable sources 1011: 1008: 997:at this time -- 993: 970: 967: 931: 928: 888: 839: 699: 698: 695: 692: 689: 666: 661: 660: 659: 650: 643: 642: 637: 634: 623: 616: 605: 578: 577: 574: 571: 568: 554:join the project 543: 541:Biography portal 538: 537: 536: 527: 520: 519: 514: 513: 512: 502: 495: 469: 468: 465: 462: 459: 438: 433: 432: 431: 422: 415: 414: 404: 397: 367: 366: 363: 360: 357: 347:Yoga as exercise 334:WikiProject Yoga 328: 321: 320: 315: 307: 300: 283: 277: 276: 268: 254:this noticeboard 226: 205: 198: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 3026: 3025: 3021: 3020: 3019: 3017: 3016: 3015: 2921: 2920: 2896: 2874: 2403: 2171: 1739: 1660:content dispute 1642: 1570: 1562: 1553: 1514: 1351: 1321: 1311: 1293: 1290: 1226: 1223: 1174: 1171: 1153: 1140: 1097: 1094: 1062: 1059: 1009: 1006: 991: 968: 965: 929: 926: 886: 837: 833: 813: 779:ChildofMidnight 760: 696: 693: 690: 687: 686: 662: 657: 655: 635: 629: 575: 572: 569: 566: 565: 539: 534: 532: 508: 466: 463: 460: 457: 456: 436:Hinduism portal 434: 429: 427: 364: 361: 358: 355: 354: 313: 284:on Knowledge's 281: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 3024: 3022: 3014: 3013: 3008: 3003: 2998: 2993: 2988: 2983: 2978: 2973: 2968: 2963: 2958: 2953: 2948: 2943: 2938: 2933: 2923: 2922: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2892: 2881:94.253.252.233 2871: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2830: 2829: 2789: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2730: 2729: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2679: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2607: 2606: 2605: 2591:WP:GREATWRONGS 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2513: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2435: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2374: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2275: 2261: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2149: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2113: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2072: 2071: 2056: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 1999: 1998: 1983: 1982: 1978: 1977: 1915: 1913: 1912: 1896: 1895: 1827: 1826: 1803: 1802: 1786: 1785: 1767:217.13.184.246 1679: 1678: 1671: 1623: 1622: 1569: 1566: 1564: 1561: 1560: 1550:requested move 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1373: 1346: 1344: 1329: 1328: 1318:requested move 1312: 1310: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1276: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1235: 1234: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1149: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1071: 1070: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 940: 939: 938: 937: 896: 895: 832: 829: 812: 809: 795: 794: 790: 789: 759: 756: 753: 752: 749: 748: 745: 744: 741:Mid-importance 731: 721: 720: 713:Low-importance 709: 703: 702: 700: 697:India articles 668: 667: 651: 639: 638: 636:Low‑importance 624: 612: 611: 608: 607: 592: 582: 581: 579: 545: 544: 528: 516: 515: 503: 491: 490: 487: 486: 479: 473: 472: 470: 453:the discussion 440: 439: 423: 411: 410: 405: 393: 392: 389: 388: 381:Low-importance 377: 371: 370: 368: 351:the discussion 329: 317: 316: 314:Low‑importance 308: 296: 295: 289: 278: 264: 263: 259:this help page 243:poorly sourced 229: 222: 221: 214:the discussion 206: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3023: 3012: 3009: 3007: 3004: 3002: 2999: 2997: 2994: 2992: 2989: 2987: 2984: 2982: 2979: 2977: 2974: 2972: 2969: 2967: 2964: 2962: 2959: 2957: 2954: 2952: 2949: 2947: 2944: 2942: 2939: 2937: 2934: 2932: 2929: 2928: 2926: 2912: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2893: 2890: 2886: 2882: 2878: 2872: 2870: 2866: 2862: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2847: 2843: 2839: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2828: 2824: 2820: 2816: 2815: 2814: 2813: 2809: 2805: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2771: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2721: 2717: 2713: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2678: 2674: 2670: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2639: 2635: 2631: 2630:109.60.14.150 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2616: 2615: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2569: 2565: 2564:109.60.14.150 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2527: 2523: 2519: 2514: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2504: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2484: 2480: 2476: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2460: 2449: 2445: 2441: 2436: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2410:109.60.14.150 2407: 2388: 2384: 2380: 2375: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2353: 2349: 2345: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2318: 2307: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2289: 2285: 2281: 2276: 2273: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2247: 2243: 2239: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2178:109.60.14.150 2175: 2159: 2155: 2150: 2146: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2114: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2101: 2097: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2057: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2047: 2043: 2038: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2019: 2015: 2011: 2007: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1997: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1984: 1980: 1979: 1974: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1967: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1954: 1951: 1946: 1945: 1940: 1939: 1935: 1932: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1922: 1917: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1898: 1897: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1881:217.13.185.14 1878: 1874: 1868: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1850: 1845: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1825: 1821: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1805: 1804: 1801: 1797: 1793: 1788: 1787: 1783: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1762: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1743: 1735: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1721: 1716: 1715: 1711: 1707: 1701: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1676: 1672: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1653: 1649: 1638: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1621: 1617: 1613: 1609: 1605: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1585: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1567: 1565: 1559: 1556: 1551: 1546: 1545: 1540: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1519: 1517: 1512: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1500:MOS:HONORIFIC 1497: 1493: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1457:Labattblueboy 1454: 1450: 1449:Labattblueboy 1446: 1442: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1412:Labattblueboy 1408: 1407: 1406: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1388: 1384: 1383:Labattblueboy 1380: 1377: 1374: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1354: 1349: 1343: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1327: 1324: 1319: 1314: 1313: 1308: 1300: 1297: 1296: 1286: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1272: 1268: 1264: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1233: 1230: 1229: 1218: 1213: 1210: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1199: 1195: 1181: 1178: 1177: 1167: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1156: 1150: 1148: 1145: 1143: 1137: 1132: 1126: 1123: 1122: 1120: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1104: 1101: 1100: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1069: 1066: 1065: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1030: 1026: 1016: 1013: 1012: 1002: 1001: 1000: 996: 994: 989: 985: 981: 977: 976: 975: 972: 971: 961: 957: 956: 955: 954: 950: 946: 936: 933: 932: 921: 917: 916:Third opinion 914: 913: 912: 911: 910: 909: 905: 901: 894: 891: 889: 883: 879: 875: 871: 870: 869: 868: 864: 860: 855: 851: 846: 845: 842: 840: 830: 828: 827: 823: 819: 810: 808: 807: 803: 799: 792: 791: 788: 784: 780: 776: 775: 774: 773: 769: 765: 757: 742: 739:(assessed as 738: 737: 727: 723: 722: 718: 714: 708: 705: 704: 701: 684: 683: 678: 674: 673: 665: 654: 652: 649: 645: 644: 640: 633: 628: 625: 622: 618: 601: 597: 588: 584: 583: 580: 563: 562:documentation 559: 555: 551: 550: 542: 531: 529: 526: 522: 521: 517: 507: 504: 501: 497: 484: 478: 475: 474: 471: 454: 450: 446: 445: 437: 426: 424: 421: 417: 416: 412: 409: 406: 403: 399: 386: 382: 376: 373: 372: 369: 365:Yoga articles 352: 348: 344: 340: 336: 335: 330: 327: 323: 322: 318: 312: 309: 306: 302: 297: 293: 287: 279: 275: 270: 269: 261: 260: 255: 251: 247: 244: 240: 236: 235: 230: 228: 227: 219: 215: 211: 207: 204: 200: 199: 196: 195: 191: 187: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 2903:62.178.23.79 2897:— Preceding 2875:— Preceding 2838:Pythagoras01 2819:Pythagoras01 2799: 2791: 2790: 2762:Demiurge1000 2669:Pythagoras01 2560: 2518:Pythagoras01 2440:Pythagoras01 2438:frustrating. 2404:— Preceding 2401: 2399: 2379:Pythagoras01 2344:Demiurge1000 2339: 2331: 2305: 2280:Pythagoras01 2260: 2238:Demiurge1000 2203:Pythagoras01 2172:— Preceding 2168: 2092:Demiurge1000 2039: 2024: 2010:Demiurge1000 1988:Demiurge1000 1960: 1956: 1947: 1941: 1936: 1933: 1928: 1924: 1918: 1914: 1902:Demiurge1000 1869: 1846: 1828: 1816:Demiurge1000 1811: 1807: 1763: 1740:— Preceding 1736: 1725:193.110.28.9 1720:Pythagoras01 1717: 1706:Pythagoras01 1702: 1691:Pythagoras01 1680: 1654:or removed. 1639: 1628:62.178.23.79 1624: 1607: 1606:accusations 1590:62.178.23.79 1586: 1575:62.178.23.79 1571: 1563: 1554: 1547: 1375: 1345: 1330: 1322: 1315: 1289: 1285:news sources 1222: 1190: 1170: 1124: 1093: 1058: 1053: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1005: 964: 941: 925: 915: 897: 853: 847: 834: 814: 796: 761: 734: 712: 682:project page 680: 670: 664:India portal 547: 442: 380: 332: 292:WikiProjects 257: 245: 238: 232: 218:no consensus 217: 184: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2118:Lovelybeing 2061:Lovelybeing 1962:Lovelybeing 1873:Lovelybeing 1718:The points 1496:Paramahamsa 1379:Paramahamsa 882:Ramakrishna 282:Start-class 148:free images 31:not a forum 2925:Categories 2712:Tgeorgescu 2595:Tgeorgescu 2475:Tgeorgescu 2148:Knowledge. 1445:verifiable 1361:passport. 1166:admin help 980:disruptive 606:parameter. 343:Hatha yoga 1683:consensus 1209:secondary 1136:concerned 854:Paramhans 632:Rajasthan 567:Biography 506:Biography 250:libellous 186:Lalit82in 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 2899:unsigned 2877:unsigned 2406:unsigned 2174:unsigned 2088:WP:UNDUE 1976:article. 1782:WP:UNDUE 1754:contribs 1742:unsigned 1652:reverted 1531:Atmapuri 1504:Atmapuri 1472:Atmapuri 1441:reliable 1427:Atmapuri 1397:Atmapuri 1363:Atmapuri 1333:Kotniski 1263:Atmapuri 1194:Atmapuri 1079:Atmapuri 1035:Atmapuri 945:Atmapuri 900:Atmapuri 859:Atmapuri 818:Atmapuri 798:Atmapuri 764:Looie496 458:Hinduism 449:Hinduism 408:Hinduism 210:deletion 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 2792:Include 2587:WP:BLPN 2006:WP:BLPN 1812:exclude 1808:include 1608:may not 1410:that?-- 1294:Annyong 1227:Annyong 1217:notable 1175:Annyong 1125:Comment 1098:Annyong 1063:Annyong 1010:Annyong 969:Annyong 930:Annyong 758:Rename? 715:on the 383:on the 154:WP refs 142:scholar 2800:itself 2328:WP:SPA 2042:Lakata 2028:Lakata 1858:Lakata 1835:Lakata 1792:Lakata 1746:Lakata 1604:WP:BLP 1508:WP:COI 1376:Oppose 604:|auto= 288:scale. 126:Google 1515:Wikid 1309:Move? 1291:Hello 1251:Wiki. 1224:Hello 1172:Hello 1154:Wikid 1141:Wikid 1095:Hello 1060:Hello 1056:." — 1007:Hello 992:Wikid 966:Hello 960:swami 927:Hello 887:Wikid 850:proof 838:Wikid 688:India 677:India 627:India 598:by a 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 2907:talk 2885:talk 2865:talk 2861:Huon 2842:talk 2823:talk 2808:talk 2766:talk 2716:talk 2673:talk 2634:talk 2599:talk 2568:talk 2522:talk 2479:talk 2444:talk 2414:talk 2383:talk 2348:talk 2340:must 2309:me). 2284:talk 2242:talk 2207:talk 2182:talk 2154:talk 2122:talk 2096:talk 2090:. -- 2065:talk 2046:talk 2032:talk 2014:talk 1992:talk 1966:talk 1906:talk 1885:talk 1877:talk 1862:talk 1839:talk 1820:talk 1796:talk 1771:talk 1750:talk 1729:talk 1710:talk 1695:talk 1632:talk 1616:talk 1594:talk 1579:talk 1535:talk 1476:talk 1461:talk 1453:talk 1443:and 1431:talk 1416:talk 1401:talk 1387:talk 1367:talk 1337:talk 1267:talk 1198:talk 1168:. — 1083:talk 1039:talk 984:here 949:talk 904:talk 863:talk 822:talk 802:talk 783:talk 768:talk 556:and 356:Yoga 339:Yoga 311:Yoga 216:was 190:talk 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 2804:EBY 2332:not 2306:are 1919:1) 1552:. 707:Low 600:bot 477:??? 375:Low 239:BLP 176:TWL 2927:: 2909:) 2887:) 2867:) 2844:) 2825:) 2810:) 2768:) 2718:) 2675:) 2636:) 2601:) 2570:) 2524:) 2481:) 2446:) 2416:) 2385:) 2350:) 2286:) 2244:) 2236:-- 2209:) 2184:) 2156:) 2124:) 2098:) 2067:) 2048:) 2034:) 2016:) 1994:) 1968:) 1908:) 1900:-- 1887:) 1864:) 1841:) 1822:) 1798:) 1773:) 1756:) 1752:• 1731:) 1712:) 1697:) 1634:) 1618:) 1596:) 1581:) 1537:) 1478:) 1463:) 1433:) 1418:) 1403:) 1389:) 1369:) 1356:— 1350:→ 1339:) 1320:. 1269:) 1200:) 1138:. 1085:) 1041:) 951:) 906:) 865:) 852:. 824:) 804:) 785:) 770:) 743:). 630:: 345:, 341:, 192:) 156:) 54:; 2905:( 2883:( 2863:( 2840:( 2821:( 2806:( 2764:( 2714:( 2671:( 2632:( 2597:( 2566:( 2520:( 2477:( 2442:( 2412:( 2381:( 2346:( 2282:( 2240:( 2205:( 2180:( 2120:( 2094:( 2063:( 2044:( 2030:( 2012:( 1990:( 1964:( 1904:( 1883:( 1875:( 1860:( 1837:( 1818:( 1794:( 1769:( 1748:( 1727:( 1708:( 1693:( 1677:. 1670:. 1630:( 1614:( 1592:( 1577:( 1533:( 1474:( 1459:( 1451:( 1429:( 1414:( 1399:( 1385:( 1365:( 1335:( 1265:( 1196:( 1081:( 1054:x 1037:( 947:( 902:( 861:( 820:( 800:( 781:( 766:( 719:. 685:. 564:. 485:. 387:. 294:: 262:. 237:( 220:. 188:( 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index