Swadhyayee (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Stoneice02 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 146: | Line 146: | ||
As for newspaper articles, please do not post them at all, since they're bound to be [[WP:COPY|copyright violations]]. - [[User:Ulayiti|ulayiti]] [[User talk:Ulayiti|<font color="#226b22"><small>(talk)</small></font>]] 13:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC) |
As for newspaper articles, please do not post them at all, since they're bound to be [[WP:COPY|copyright violations]]. - [[User:Ulayiti|ulayiti]] [[User talk:Ulayiti|<font color="#226b22"><small>(talk)</small></font>]] 13:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC) |
||
:I would like to reiterate what the above user said. I know nothing about and have no interest in [[Swadhyay Parivar]]. Please don't post information about it on my user talk page. It makes more sense to put this information on the article talk page. If you had looked carefully, you would have noticed that my edits to the article had nothing to do with the content of the article and were simply fixing templates and removing your signature from the article. Thanks. [[User:Khatru2|Khatru2]] 17:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC) |
:I would like to reiterate what the above user said. I know nothing about and have no interest in [[Swadhyay Parivar]]. Please don't post information about it on my user talk page. It makes more sense to put this information on the article talk page. If you had looked carefully, you would have noticed that my edits to the article had nothing to do with the content of the article and were simply fixing templates and removing your signature from the article. Thanks. [[User:Khatru2|Khatru2]] 17:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC) |
||
== Response == |
|||
Thanks for the constructive critisism, Swad... I can see your point, but I have ''attempted'' to read the article. However, it is difficult to read as-is. With the cleanup tag, I was hoping for more headings and more summarizing at the top. The intro is 10 paragraphs long, longer than most Wikipedia articles. Also, under '''Controversy''', you direct people to the Talk Page. I think, in that instance, it would be better to summarize both viewpoints on the issue. I think the intent of the talk page is for editors to discuss the article and changes to the article, not as a way to by-pass NPOV. Next, under ''Practices''... I think this whole section has to go. First, the whole section seems to refer to news items about the subject. These would be better merged into other parts of the argument, maybe present day history. Also, there are no citations for any part of this section as there should be. Finally, the last sentence ends in three exclamation points which is bad form in any written work, especially an encylcopedia article. Finally, on the subject of citations, I think there should be a lot more. A lot of the article seems to come from your (obviously vast) knowledge of the subject. This doesn't suffice for a Wikipedia article. Please don't take any of this as an attack against you. As I've said, I have absolutely no knowledge on this subject and I only found it with the Random Article link. My motive is simply to make it look like a first class article with absolute NPOV. [[User:Stoneice02|Stoneice02]] 05:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:44, 16 September 2006
29/08/2006.
The Readers & Editors pl. bear with me. I am using editing for the first time and am likely to miss the correct page.
I want to add to : Swadhyay or Pandurang Shashtri Athavale.
I was associated with Swadhyay or Pandurang Shashtri Athavale in the activities appearing on www.swadhyay.org. www.swadhyay.org is created by The Office of Swadhyay and/or Pandurang Shashtri Athavale.
There are controversial claims about Swadhyay or Pandurang Shashtri Athavale and there is a clash between editors whether to add a particular matter or not.
If a thing can be defined with the help of physics or chemistry, it can be decided whether a particular thing can be added or removed. So can not be done for a human being or social or religious activities.
From the time June, 2000, there is deviation from what is claimed on www.swadhyay.org. Even prior to June,2000, the image of Pandurang Shashtri Athavale or Swadhyay was always glorified or exaggerated.
I am not out to defame Pandurang Shashtri Athavale or lower the image of Swadhyay. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and changing facts have to be incorporated in it.
Late Mr.Pandurang Shashtri Athavale is popularly known as Dada. Dada means elder brother in Marathi - An Indian Language spoken in State of Maharashtra. Here-in-after, I shall refer Pandurang Shashtri Athavale as Dada. Dada gave discourses upon message of Srimad Bhagwad Geeta - A scripture of Hindus. He motivated people to use one's god gifted abilities to speak, move, think, hear for selfless work which he called Kruti-Bhakti. Based on this principle/logic his followers known as Swadhyayees moved from house to house and went to Indian villages at one's own cost and spreaded the message of Srimad Bhagwad Geeta and nurtured these activities. The number of followers went on increasing and at present it could be in millions but that does not necessarily mean that the followers observe dictates of Srimad Bhagwad Geeta henceforth shall be referred to as Geeta.
Dada also motivated Swadhyayees to involve in money producing experiments for spread of renovation of Vedic culture. Experiments known as "Yogeshwar Krushi", "Shree Darshan", "Vruksh-Mandir", "Amrutalayams", "Matsya-Gandha" and so on. The financial returns along with donations received were collected in nearly 100 trusts created for Swadhyay activities. The trustees were dedicated Swadhyayees and Dada was not a trustee. Dada used to say that The President of Swadhyay activities was God (Lord Yogeshwar).
Around June, 2000, Dada told trustees that The Swadhyay activities were his ownership and he was handing over reign of These activities to his adopted daughter Smt.Jayshree a.k.a. Dhanshree Srinivas Talwakar popularly known as Didi. Simultaneously, all the neutral trustees from all trusts were removed and replaced by Didi and her husband Srinivas Talwalkar a.k.a. Rao Saheb. Dada used to take blank resignation letters from the trustees in advance.
This was not well received by old dedicated Swadhyayees who had helped in foundation and nurture of these activities from day 1.
This was protested by old Swadhyayees and it resulted in violent attacks on old Swadhyayees by comperatively new Swadhyayees. The first attempt had taken place on 28th January, 2001 on Mahesh Shah an industrialist.
After an year, In June, 2001, The Hon. Ex-Chief Justice of High Court at Ahmedabad and Andhra Pradesh declared to media that Didi was using money and muscle power against old Swadhyayees, therefore he was submitting his resignation to Dada. He told the media that The funds of the trust in securities were valued at Indian Rupees Two Hundred Crores and property valued at Indian Rupees Five Hundred Crores. All the facts here-in are documented in Indian Newspapers. This fact had appeared first in "Gujarat Samachar" and later in all Gujarati newspapers.
Subsequently, number of old Swadhyayees became victims of violence and faced false criminal cases. The criminal cases were over 100 filed in rural Gujarat & Maharashtra ( Indian States) against various old Swadhyayees and/or ex-trustees. In 22 identical cases, an appeal was preferred by one Pankaj Trivedi and others in High Court at Ahmedabad. The High Court ruled in the matter in favour of Pankaj Trivedi and quashed all criminal cases at one go. The High Court further observed and recorded that the language of all 22 cases were word by word same and cases had been filed by different persons miles away from each other. The Court hence stated that the cases were filed in retalliation of bonafide civil case filed by Pankaj Trivedi for opening of a temple which was closed down by Didi to harass Pankaj Trivedi. The temple at Bhav-Nirjar, Ahmedabad had come in existence with the help of Pankaj Trivedi. The Judgement is documentary evidence and can be varified from The High Court at Ahmedabad.
Those who were assaulted and their bones broken are Vinod Shah, Shankar Thakkar of Mumbai, Vinoo Sanchania of London while he was in Jamnagar, Gujarat, India. One Satish Rughani of Rajkot was assaulted in his house. He just came out after bath and his towel was thrown and he was naked. His wife was locked up in other room. Satish Rughani had accompanied Dada for receiving Megsasay Award.
Some of the old Swadhyayees were arrested like core criminals by police from other states and brutally beaten on the way to the state of police and in lock-up too against the legal provisions not to use 3rd degree for confession.
On court dates or while the arrested were presented before The Magistrate, thousands of Swadhyayees from villages were summoned to the court who tried to kill some of the arrested old Swadhyayees. Usually, police had to resort to cane charging to disperse the mob and protect the arresteds lives.
All these facts are documented by newspapers. Cases were filed against number of newspapers by Swadhyayees for reporting such un-becoming attitude of Swadhyayees against old Swadhyayees. The Press Council of India decided in favour of newspapers. In English, a magazine "India Today" had published an article highlighting wrongs of Swadhyay.
Pankaj Trivedi was killed on 15th June, 2006 outside Ellisbridge Gymkhana, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India. The police arrested eight to ten senior Swadhyayees. One of them was Ghanshyam Chudasama, P.A. to Dy. Comm. of Police under whose jurisdiction Pankaj Trivedi was killed. Ghanshyam Chudasama was working with some other office and using some influence, he had got himself transferred to Dy. Comm. of Police. As confessed by him, the plot to kill Pankaj Trivedi took place in The High Court premises when the order in favour of Pankaj Trivedi was passed.
Pankaj Trivedi was a green card holder and shuttling between U.S.A. and India. He went to U.S.A. just about 3 months before his life was taken away. He was harassed at U.S. air-port. When he came out of air-port, 4 white-skin people in uniform accosted him and warned of not to speak a word about Swadhyay wrongs while he was to stay in U.S.A.
Next day, Home Security Agency raided Pankaj Trivedi's house in U.S. A. as some one has printed some writing in Urdu with his photo along with photo of Bin Laden and this writing was passed to U.S.A. police stating that Pankaj Trivedi was a Bin Laden associate and threat to President Bush. Home Security Agencied investigated this matter and found Pankaj Trivedi was innocent. These facts can be varified from Home Security Agency, U.S.A.
Swadhyayee
Welcome!
Hello, Swadhyayee! I'm ulayiti, and I'd like to welcome you to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions, and I hope you'll like the place enough to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
- How to avoid common mistakes
When commenting on talk pages or voting, you should always sign your name by typing in four tildes (~~~~). This way people will know who made the comment and can respond to you. If you have any questions at all, feel free to ask me on my talk page. You can also have a look at the help pages or put up a question at the village pump. Welcome to Wikipedia, and happy editing!
I've restored the critical link and protected the page so that it can't be edited by anonymous users. Some people seem to want to censor all criticism of Swadhyaya. - ulayiti (talk) 16:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, and I'd rather you didn't edit the comments left by others on my talk page, even if they're misspelt. The person who wrote that might not like you correcting their errors. :) - ulayiti (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
- I've restored the information on the Swadhyay pariwar page and blocked the user who was responsible for removing it (they'd been doing the same thing before). Now, I don't really know anything on Swadhyay, I'm just reverting vandalism, so if you have any problems with the article in the future I suggest you contact someone from Category:Indian Wikipedians. They might be able to help you better. - ulayiti (talk) 18:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
India related links and your queries on my talkpage
![]() |
||
Newcomers: Welcome kit |
Register: Indian Wikipedians |
Network: Noticeboard | Discussionboard
Browse: India | Open tasks |
Deletions
|
Hi, hope the above links are useful. I've been inactive, of late, and may not be able to help you much in this regard. How about placing a brief description of the problem on the Indian Wikipedians' notice board? Whatever edits you make, pl. ensure that they adhere to the verifiability policies here. I am not sure if converting Swadhyay from a redirect to an article page is a good move. Also, it seems to have some personal opinions, which do not have a place on Wikipedia - pl. review your actions on this. Pandurang Shastri Athavale and Swadhyay pariwar are the pages that you may want to edit - however, they seem to be locked from editing for new members, hence you'll have to wait for a while. I again suggest that you place a msg. on the Indian wikipedians' notice board. --Gurubrahma 13:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
History & talk page etiquette
Hi Swadhyayee, this is the link for the history page of Swadhyay. You should probably be writing on Talk:Swadhyay as to why you believe that Swadhyay should not redirect to Swadhyay pariwar. Also, consider if it is better to redirect Swadhyay to Svadhyaya which already has some of the ideas you mention. If you want to create a new section on a talk page, just click "+" button next to the "edit this page" button. Pl. use Show preview button and edit summaries more often. Don't worry about the mistakes you may make, we have all done them here! However, please rein your emotions and temper your language in discussions and it will be fine. --Gurubrahma 11:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oops, I just realised that Svadhyaya also redirects to the Pariwar page. This has been done by Ulayiti. Can you pl. take it up with Ulayiti who I see has interacted with you above? --Gurubrahma 12:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I did that a while ago, mistakenly. Feel free to revert it. - ulayiti (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Swadhyay things
Hello, I apologize for taking long to contact you. I've been busy. First thing, I'm not quite sure what you want me to do. Here is how I view the whole thing:
Svadhyay and all other spellings, in English, will almost surely be referring to the Swadhyay Pariwar organization. This is why I thought the redirection from Svadhyay makes sense. As for the note at the top, I will add it, and I hope it will be acceptable. Let me know if it is not, and we can work something out. I will post a similar explanation on the talk page for the pages affected. -- Superdosh 19:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- In response to your latest message, it's not a question of who's morally bankrupt or not. It's a question of notability. And in the English-speaking world, Swadhyay almost universally refers to the organization headed by Jayshree Talwalkar. Further, I'm not sure what else can really be said for the word, other than its definition -- which is now given at the top of the Swadhyay pariwar page. Also, I know that pariwar means family, but the organization is called the Swadhyay pariwar, and this is the encyclopedia, not the dictionary. We can't define all these terms. For example, would you have the page on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh say something about how the words are separate from the organization? -- Superdosh 04:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- I understand that Swadhyay means self-study, I actually studied Sanskrit myself for a year. But, this is not the point. While in Gujarati and Hindi and Sanskrit, Swadhyay is simply a word, when it is used in English, it almost always refers to the organization. I do not have citations, but for example, a google search for swadhyay discounting all "swadhyay pariwar" references, almost all hits have to do with the organization, not the word [1].
- I understand that people of Swadhyay were involved with violence. In fact, it says so on the Swadhyay page. And I'm not trying to glorify what they do, if the article looks that way, be sure to edit it. But do not simply add critical material that repeats something already said later on. And make sure everything you add is properly CITED. -- Superdosh 14:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
protection
Its only semi-protected. If you have had your account for more than 4 days, you can edit it.Bakaman Bakatalk 22:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not too involved in anything, though I am disturbed by the recent stuff happening there.Bakaman Bakatalk 14:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment on editing
By the way, when editing an actual page, you don't need to sign it. You should only include your signature when editing a talk page. Cheers, Superdosh 04:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Greetings
Hello. Thanks for your message, but I really didn't restore or redirect anything, I only linked Bhagavad Gita and Upanishads to existing articles. --Fire Star 火星 21:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Re
I'm a bit busy at the moment with things. Could you find an actual source like (The Hindu, TiExpress, The Pioner, etc.) to back uop the stuff. A blog does not cut it on wiki, and though I may be understanding many users will not.Bakaman Bakatalk 01:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you look at my user page you would see that I'm not Gujju, so I have no idea what the blog would say.Bakaman Bakatalk 02:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Talk page spamming
Please stop spamming users talk pages, thank you.--Andeh 11:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Discuss issues on the talk page of the article, discussing things across many talk pages isn't the correct way to do it. Thank you friend.--Andeh 12:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, no need to make a bigger deal out of it. I don't believe the messages aren't harmful/spam'mish.--Andeh 13:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Swadhyay pariwar and related articles
Hi, I'd like to remind you again that I have very little interest at all in Swadhyay pariwar, so you really don't need to post news items about it on my talk page. The only reason I've been editing the article sporadically is to counter vandalism, and that's pretty much the only thing I can do there since I don't know anything about the movement. So if you want to discuss the article, please limit it to the article's talk page, it'll save you a lot of trouble.
I probably won't even be on Wikipedia any time soon (since I'm busy with other stuff), so chances are I won't even read the stuff you post on my talk page. If you need help with something, I suggest you ask someone else.
As for newspaper articles, please do not post them at all, since they're bound to be copyright violations. - ulayiti (talk) 13:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- I would like to reiterate what the above user said. I know nothing about and have no interest in Swadhyay Parivar. Please don't post information about it on my user talk page. It makes more sense to put this information on the article talk page. If you had looked carefully, you would have noticed that my edits to the article had nothing to do with the content of the article and were simply fixing templates and removing your signature from the article. Thanks. Khatru2 17:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Response
Thanks for the constructive critisism, Swad... I can see your point, but I have attempted to read the article. However, it is difficult to read as-is. With the cleanup tag, I was hoping for more headings and more summarizing at the top. The intro is 10 paragraphs long, longer than most Wikipedia articles. Also, under Controversy, you direct people to the Talk Page. I think, in that instance, it would be better to summarize both viewpoints on the issue. I think the intent of the talk page is for editors to discuss the article and changes to the article, not as a way to by-pass NPOV. Next, under Practices... I think this whole section has to go. First, the whole section seems to refer to news items about the subject. These would be better merged into other parts of the argument, maybe present day history. Also, there are no citations for any part of this section as there should be. Finally, the last sentence ends in three exclamation points which is bad form in any written work, especially an encylcopedia article. Finally, on the subject of citations, I think there should be a lot more. A lot of the article seems to come from your (obviously vast) knowledge of the subject. This doesn't suffice for a Wikipedia article. Please don't take any of this as an attack against you. As I've said, I have absolutely no knowledge on this subject and I only found it with the Random Article link. My motive is simply to make it look like a first class article with absolute NPOV. Stoneice02 05:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
You must be logged in to post a comment.