Talk:Ananda Marga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Religion Portal This article is supported by WikiProject Religion. This project provides a central approach to Religion-related subjects on wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article is a frequent source of heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here.

The old discussion page has been archived here

[edit] Talk page clean up

I would suggest a clean up on this page because it's senseless and a big mess! If anyone don't disagree I want to archive this talk as well and refresh the talk page. There are too many line shifts, there are weird boxes, the posts doesn't reply to one another, and they are full of accusations. I would rather see that this page was being used for a proper discussion on the development of the article rather than personal mudslinging and spam!

cJ--Cracker jack 00:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggest archiving everything but this section and the previous one. John Broughton 01:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The old talk page has been archived. cJ--Cracker jack 01:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I will warn you that this (talk) page has been a recurring (but, fortunately, only occasional) target of a linkspammer, as well as being a place for edit and flame wars. John Broughton 13:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I've been aware of that, and just recently deleted a spamlink. Hopefully the flame wars have settled now, but I guess it depends on how well the updated article is received! cJ--Cracker jack 16:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the spelling correction 68.194.22.52. Has been on my list too! cJ --Cracker jack 19:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral Point of View (NPOV)

Could anyone tell if this page is NPOV?, and if not please help making it so! cJ --Cracker jack 21:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I have NPOV'ed some sections now. Still need some external evaluation! cJ--Cracker jack 23:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citations are needed

I will look for wore proper citation sources as to confirm the statements on this site. I do also hope other people would contribute here, because my time, and knowledge is limited. Cracker jack 22:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Relation to Hinduism

I have removed the following line "Its universal, rational and syncretic outlook and practices in some respects seem to place it in a category of its own." This seems to suggest that these features put it in variance with Hinduism. The whole paragraph probably needs rewriting as it is uncited. Xpanderin 17:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Criticism

I've had to revert the page due to vandalism of user 216.195.144.93 who removed the section on criticism of AM. If you are this author then please note that there was a raging battle over this article around a year ago and eventually a section on criticism of AM was added. You should note that this article wouldn't be complete without a section on criticism because it's a part of Ananda Margas history. Almost any religious or spiritual movement has had to face criticism. This is not due to the organization it self but due to members more or less misguided by their own "good" intentions. So please don't remove this section. After all it's not AM which was the problem here but some of its members. The Hilton bomber has been pardoned so I can't see how that is negative! Self-immolations have happened in AM, and if you don't like it to be written down then try contribute by explaining why it happened instead of denying the fact! The Purulia arms drop is also a fact and has been reported by many serious news providers. Whether the person behind this can be related to AM or not is a good question. I know he used to be a member of AM, but as far as I know he is not in AM any more. So, even if some members have committed wrong-doings it doesn't mean that the organization is bad therefore I believe it is also healthy to have a section on criticism. After all we're all humans and no one is perfect so a perfect organization wouldn't exist. That would be a lie.

Hope this clears things up. --Cracker jack 13:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)