Talk:Art of Living
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
the article in its current form does not conform to the guide line: "wikipedia is not a soap-box". the article's content is mainly advocacy, self-promotion, and advertising for the "Art of Living" group and its seminars and other activities. the article should deal with the subject in a more critical manner.
I removed the following clause from the article: Independent research, published in international journals such as the Journal of Affective Disorders, Biological Psychology, Physiological Pharmacology, and others, suggests that the Sudarshan Kriya has many mental and physical health benefits, including significant relief from depression and post-traumatic stress disorder and a possible increase in the body's resistance to cancer[1].
Please include actual links to the research. I couldn't find it through a perusal of PubMed. Unless there are actual links to the appropriate articles in those journals, this sentence is not appropriate for Wikipedia.--Thalia42 08:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I think the website clearly mentions published research http://www.aolresearch.org/pubresearch.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.134.235.194 (talk • contribs) 14:13, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC).
yeah i have done the part 1 course of the AOL and sometimes i don't know what to think. sri sri ravi shankar and his AOL could possibly bea huge scam or the man who is changing the world, the new jesus...
---> Who ever you are - Your brain either has stopped working or you never had one.. Before accusing the organization of being a scam you should have done your homework. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.134.235.194 (talk • contribs) 14:11, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC).
god bless you!
this article contains many unverified claims and generally appears to be praising AOLF and Ravishankar instead of providing impartial information. __________ I do not think the page should be merged with the survey of Hindu organisations. Even though AOL started from India, it does not preach any religion - Not chistianity, not hinduism, nothing. Even though generally assumed to be religious organisation AOL is very clearly a spritual organisation that claims no alliance with any religion in the world. However, I agree that the page on AOL survey should be merged into the main page for AOL as the AOL survey page is a skeleton page with little or no information.
i have done AOL basic cource one year back and doing daily sudershan kriya and related pranayam. i was also going to attend weekly follow ups on sundays.
The regular practice of kriya has improved my health remarkably. i have overcome consipation problem , frequent cold problem, depression etc.
I do not have unnecessary fear. my day-to day interpersonl skills are greatly improved . i am not getting angree on hot issues and solve them stratagically . this is possible only because of sri sri guruji. jai gurudev
Contents |
[edit] npov tag
- There are many NPOV issues that need to be resolved in this article. The lack of cites is evidence enough of this. --Mattarata 02:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
_____________ Lets try and resolve those issues. Maybe if you list some points that you think are raise concerns of neutrality, we can either delete or find reliable sources for the same. 71.202.141.40 00:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Section =Founder: Sri Sri Ravishankar= contains a sentence that needs to be cited. Section =Development Programmes= also contains a secntence that needs to be cited, and the last sentence in that section should also probably be cited. Section ==International Association for Human Values (IAHV)== in the last sentence of the first paragraph should maybe be cited. Fixing these few things will be enough to remove the tag. Also 71.202.141.40 you should register. --Mattarata 20:52, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I have some more issues. The very first section "Mission" claims that AOL is a not-for-profit organization, which is disputed. Note that I am not decrying the "for-profit" stance, but an organization, which is clearly in the business of making money should not claim "not-for-profit" status. I challenge the poster to support his/her claim with audited financial statement of the organization. During my seven years stay with AOL, I did not see any. Mere registering as "not for profit" does not actually make an organization "not for profit".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Freefall68 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 15 August, 2006 (UTC).
Thats cool. I think I should be able to help cite sources for a few of these. Maybe in a day or two, Ill update the page with sources. Karishma Anand 17:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- I started trying to find sources, and it seems like some of the statistics have been taken off the AOL website. I'm guessing other things have been too, and this is probably why it's very NPOV.--Alexandermiller 08:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I was suppose to revert with sources. I need to get this information from someone and it is taking longer than expected. Karishma Anand 04:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
http://www.guidestar.org/pqShowGsReport.do?partner=networkforgood&ein=77-0240101 does this help ? kalpesh soni sept 20
- Yes, that is a good link to include as a reference. It asserts their not-for-profit status and provides factual details about programs --Mattarata 16:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I think the 'for profit' and 'non profit' distinction is actually dependent on how/under which section an organisation is registered. I think it has very little to do with whether you and I perceive it to be non profit. Would appreciate if someone else can clarify this issue also. Thanks! Also how to dela with the npov tag? I have tried to cite additional sources, but need to know how what else to do to remove the npove tag.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.5.139.61 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 21 August, 2006 (UTC).
- If the organization is listed as a Non-profit corporation in any state in the US, then it can be considered a non-profit in the US. More globally, organizations may be listed as NGO or Non-govermental organizations, though it has been stated that "many NGOs in developing countries provide community services, but do so specifically for personal profit, unlike more developed economies where there are functional tax systems and incentives to drive the Non-Profit component. It would be quite a misnomer to thus call some of these organizations non-profits)." So calling Art Of Living a non-proft will probably depend on where specifically the organization is centrally administered and what the laws of that country are, or how the organization is viewed from the perspective of a world body such as the UN or something. Perhaps in the interim the phrase can be removed until further research is done?--Mattarata 22:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Is there a citation for "one of the world's largest volunteer based non-governmental organizations", or even a definition of volunteer-based or volunteers ? According to [2], AOLF has only 101-500 volunteers; although this may be true only for the US chapter. Also, the claim "largest simultaneous meditation that the world has seen till date" is uncited, and perhaps unverifiable. --Abecedare 02 October 2006.
- Request removel of the NPOV tag. I have re-edited the article so that (1) it clearly sperates verifiable facts from claim (hope I caught most of these!) (2) moved (or deleted) the discussion of SSR's non-AOL activities to more appropriate AOL pages. 74.135.167.85 19:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
The Patents section had a reference to the Sudarshan Kruya patent application that has now been removed. I have searched USPTO dbs for the patent and came up with nothing. Does anyone know why and when the reference was removed? Is there a citation available for the patent claim? Amritinder 07:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)Amritinder
[edit] Wikified
I added some references, all of the fact tags have been cleared from the article. I'm also tossing the wikify tag, the formatting seems to be good now. Not sure aobut the NPOV thing myself :/ T.K. TALK 18:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I think the whole article is [obviously] written by a devotee of Mr. Shankar [why call him Sri Sri Sri???] to deify this man who now claims to be "His Holiness"!
Amritinder's remarks on Patent registration seems to insinuate that USPTO is the only reference for patents.. Last time I cam by , I though that wikipdeia is global in nature and that other countries also have patent registries....
Some comments by other posters also seem to highlight the US view of things as the wikipedia way of stating...
[edit] Research
I would like to point out to http://www.aolresearch.org where a lot of published research is available. - Bharat Iyer
This isn't actually research, rather claims.... Sfacets 11:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the website clearly mentions published research http://www.aolresearch.org/pubresearch.html Sandip —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.134.235.194 (talk • contribs) 14:11, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC).
[edit] Progress
I removed this section, since it's material overlapped and was basically a subset of what is discussed in the Development section. Any other ideas for organizing/cleaning the page appreciated.
[edit] IAHV
Wikipedia has a page for International Association for Human Values. So either that page should be merged with this one; or the detailed discussion of IAHV's organization, programs, and achievements removed from here. I invite suggestions before I pick the 2nd option.
I had just edited some edits by 64.136.146.197 and wanted to present my reasons:
- AOLF, unlike WHO, UNICEF, UNESCO etc, is not a UN organization. It (like 2869 others [3]) is only in a consultative relation with ECOSOC, which is a UN body
- Thanks for adding the Sudarshan Kriya related studies. I have moved the references to the relevant section. It would help if someone could format them to be compliant with Wikipedia's standards and provide links
- The criticism of SK's effectiveness is not related to claims of its benefits per se, but rather some pseudo-scientific claims of its effectiveness [4] unsupported by the cited studies.
- Your translation of "Jai Gurudev" is superior. I have removed the non-literal translations though, since these are a matter of point-of-view. Abecedare 22:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
