User talk:195.82.106.244

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
  • THIS PAGE IS WORK IN PROGRESS, FOLLOWING OTHER USERS COMMENT I AM IN THE PROCESS OF REBUILDING WITH THE ENTIRE HISTORY PLEASE ALLOW ME TIME TO DO SO



Contents

[edit] Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing because of your disruptive edits. You are invited to contribute in a constructive manner as soon as the block expires. // Pilotguy (Cleared to land) 21:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University and BK Followers

[edit] Message for admins.

There is a BK Follower Riveros11, using various IP in the Tampa Flordia 72.xx.xx.xx range, that is trying any trick in the Wiki book to block any other contributor outside of the BKWSU to the above page.

For the record, I have tried to engage in Discussion, formal Mediation and Arbitration and he has refused to co-join despite being informed. I have also put in a RfC for use of self-published material within the set limitation according to policy. Two admins have agreed that this is inline with policy already.

Rather than engage in discussion, Riveros appears to me to just be intimidating folk off with endless and often erroneous Vandalism accusations, including newcomers. I am going to remove those to give the newcomers an easier ride. I have no fear that I am doing the right think. Help .. don't bite.

195.82.106.244 23:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Time to rebuild

It sounds like you are going to restore the whole page- if so, I applaud your choice to do say. It raises your credibility in my eyes and probably others as well. I will peak back in a couple of days. Sethie 02:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I looked over a bit of your request for arbitration. There are many ways to avoid this lengthy, time consuming (on the part of both yourselves and arbitors), process that can sometimes get very ugly.

I'm a member of two (or maybe even three) Seperate WikiProjects that have could perhaps provide assistance. In any case, I'm willing to provide you with assitance.

As a member of a fairly new religious movement myself, I can sympathise with your passion in this matter. I could tell you TONS of stories, but I would rather assist you both in creating the best article you can.

Please leave a message on my talk page, and I can give you both more information about how I can be of assistance.

You're certainly free to do whatever you want, but take it from me - it's much better to perhaps see things in a different light and work towards a common goal than go to arbitration. Sincerely, NinaEliza 04:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

PS: With the current neutrality tag on it, I suggest that few readers are going to give much weight to anything written there, and everyone loses - including the readers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NinaEliza (talk • contribs) 05:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Whoops! Sorry, forgot to sign.NinaEliza 06:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Well heavens, I guess I should have read the talk page before I made my offer. In any case, it still stands. If I can be of service, please let me know.NinaEliza 07:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello again

I am writing to let you know that I unfortunately need to rescind my offer of personal assistance. Currently, there are great demands on my time - both here and in real life. I encourage you to contact the Mediation Cabal, make a Request for Comment to the general community, or simply seek a Third Opinion. You may also consider posting a message on the noticeboards for various WikiProjects that are appropriate to the topic.

I will reiterate, it is simply best to try to reach consensus with your fellow editors based on the common goal of writing a fair and well-written article. As long as you can at least share this small patch of common ground, there is hope.

Sincerely, NinaEliza 05:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your question

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brahma_Kumaris_Info

Jossi,

that really is not the place for further discussion on this matter Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brahma_Kumaris_Info. What the likelihood of it succeeding without further contention? Why does the same principle not apply to pages on the other major "new religious movements"" Why not go engage them?

I am asking honest questions, not a rhetoric questions here.

If you want to discuss this from a spiritual perspective and ask where I am personally coming from on this matter, I am happy to do so.

Thanks. 195.82.106.244 03:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Opposition to other major "new religious movements" have been described widely in scholarly books and articles. If as you say there is documented material about opposition to Brahma Kumari since 1930, then find it and add it to the main article. Hope this helps. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I have references, the question remains, what are the likelihood of being able to post them? 195.82.106.244 03:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
If you have references, then present these at the talk page. Me or other experienced Wikipedians will assist you there. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 05:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 17:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Please let the ArbCom clerk do his duties. You can use the talk page to raise concerns, and edit the section in which you provide your evidence. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../1/9/5/User_talk%7E195.82.106.244.html"