Talk:List of Bahá'ís
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It may be inappropriate to include the names of living individuals as adherants of the Baha'i Faith because their relationship with the Faith may intensify or cool, depending where they are up to in their lives. Any suggestions would be welcome. Occamy 18:40, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- On the subject of listing living Baha'is: That would seem to be one of the main purposes of this list. On a slightly different subject: How can an entire band (The Mooseheart Faith Stellar Groove Band) be listed on a list of Baha'is? I think they need to be listed by name, at least (Todd Homer, Larry Robinson, etc.). Is every member of the band a Baha'i? The web page I found refering to an album by the band only listed Homer and Robinson. Jlavezzo
-
- Got to be honest I know very little about it (never heard of them before seeing this article a couple of months ago), but I was under the impression they considered themselves as a Baha'i band in which case I think it is appropriate to have the band by name. Otherwise sure change it. Actually if you want to change it anyway it won't do any harm - your choice :) -- Tomhab 20:09, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- I'm also concerned about it, but prominent, public figures who have publically mentioned their faith may be appropriate. I'm more concerned about Count Leo Tolstoy, who as I understand it was an admirer of the Faith, but not an adherent, per-se. no where is Baha'i listed on his biography for example. I'm going to remove that one. If someone has documentation, then by all means re-add it, but they should probably also add this information to the Tolstoy page.
Contents |
[edit] Ogden Nash
Can someone provide documentation that Ogden Nash was a Bahai?--HistoricalPisces 18:55, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Yes - I've asked that one just now, on the Ogden Nash talk page. I can't quite believe that someone who famously wrote "Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker" was a practising Baha'i. Apparently, there's been no response to that question here in half a year. If someone can't document Nash's faith in the next week or so, I'll remove him. PaulHammond 20:40, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Nash was not a Baha'i, but used the word Baha'i in one of his poems..this is probably how the rumour started.
fwiw, -Anthony
[edit] Should Covenant Breakers be removed from this list?
Since when did expulsion make someone *never* a Baha'i ? Obviously to be a Covenent-breaker you must have been originally a Baha'i. I will revert again tomorrow. Wjhonson 21:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- To be honest it doesn't really matter to me. I reacted because this was one of many attempts you've made to amplify the importance of Subh-i-Azal and Muhammad `Ali, two of the most notorious opponents of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha, respectively. No Baha'i today would consider Muhammad `Ali to be a Baha'i, so this argument is really silly. I will stop deleting him on the list, but I doubt it will last more than a few weeks until other Baha'is continue to delete it. Cuñado
- Talk 22:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- I find myself in agreement with WJohnson on this one. I can't see how merely listing Azal's name of `Ali's name "exaggerates their importance" - the fact is that both men were historically important figures within the Baha'i faith, even if Baha'is mostly remember them today for how they fell short of the ideals that the Bab and Baha'u'llah expected of them. Whatever happened later, the fact is that `Ali was Baha'u'llah's son, and during Baha'u'llah's lifetime was a highly respected Baha'i. Mason Remey should be listed here too - he was a Hand of the Cause of God, before the furore he caused after Shoghi's death led to the rest of the Baha'i world excommunicating him. Surely, for NPOV purposes, it might be just as important for someone to read about Muhammad `Ali, and the effect he had on the development of the Baha'i Faith as to understand the effect the Baha'i Faith had on Seals and Croft? PaulHammond 20:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
- The question of who should and should not be on the list is a tough one, as pointed out in my 5Feb2005 comment. Baha'u'llah tells us that life-long Baha'is can lose their faith on their death-beds and vice versa, so only God knows who left their "mortal frame" as Baha'is. However, we can list prominent individuals who are Baha'i by virtue of them recognising the authority of the head of the Faith, currently the Universal House of Justice. This would keep the issues involved simple. Muhammad `Ali et al are in a different class because they recognised one Head of the Faith but not the next. We would tie ourselves in knots trying to agree criteria for their inclusion without confusing the general reader. I suggest we have three choices:
- exclude those considered by the Universal House of Justice to be covenant breakers
- create a separate page/article of them, maybe with a link to this article
- put them on a separate list on the same page, with a suitable explanatory note.
- For the sake of simplicity, I recommend that we exclude their names from this page. Otherwise I fear that we will have a replay of the whole "mainstream Baha'i - covenant breaker" debate and the purpose/utility of the page will be lost. --Occamy 17:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- The question of who should and should not be on the list is a tough one, as pointed out in my 5Feb2005 comment. Baha'u'llah tells us that life-long Baha'is can lose their faith on their death-beds and vice versa, so only God knows who left their "mortal frame" as Baha'is. However, we can list prominent individuals who are Baha'i by virtue of them recognising the authority of the head of the Faith, currently the Universal House of Justice. This would keep the issues involved simple. Muhammad `Ali et al are in a different class because they recognised one Head of the Faith but not the next. We would tie ourselves in knots trying to agree criteria for their inclusion without confusing the general reader. I suggest we have three choices:
- I find myself in agreement with WJohnson on this one. I can't see how merely listing Azal's name of `Ali's name "exaggerates their importance" - the fact is that both men were historically important figures within the Baha'i faith, even if Baha'is mostly remember them today for how they fell short of the ideals that the Bab and Baha'u'llah expected of them. Whatever happened later, the fact is that `Ali was Baha'u'llah's son, and during Baha'u'llah's lifetime was a highly respected Baha'i. Mason Remey should be listed here too - he was a Hand of the Cause of God, before the furore he caused after Shoghi's death led to the rest of the Baha'i world excommunicating him. Surely, for NPOV purposes, it might be just as important for someone to read about Muhammad `Ali, and the effect he had on the development of the Baha'i Faith as to understand the effect the Baha'i Faith had on Seals and Croft? PaulHammond 20:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Very much agree with Occamy. Occamy brings up a really good point about we don't know who really left this mortal-frame as Baha'is. With this said, however, his suggestions for a definition of a Baha'i and thus inclusion in this page is something that can be easily determined, while other metrics of inclusion become more problematic/difficult to determine. So all three of his suggestions seem appropriate to me with my vote going to the first one. -- Jeff3000 18:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
-
-
Actually I think this whole page is a bit silly. I wouldn't mind deleting it. We could add in all of the Hands of the Cause, the Apostles, the Counselors, the rest of the family of Baha'u'llah, and others. All this page does is copy the Category:Bahá'í individuals. Cuñado - Talk 21:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, could be deleted. -- Jeff3000 23:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I looked into a few ideas and now I don't think deletion is the right step. See List of people by belief, and look through some of the other lists of religions' followers. Personally, I think they should all be deleted, but if every religion has one, then we might as well just keep this page and make improving edits. Cuñado - Talk 18:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
So is this just another page of "approved Baha'i thought" ? And if so, how is it that it's not pov by definition? I mean you are defining it to say, only include people who the UHJ approves. Is that really what you think this encyclopaedia is supposed to be? Suppress all thoughts that aren't stamped approved ? And you don't think that's pov ? Wjhonson 05:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- It comes down to first defining "what is a Baha'i"; then one can say who is a (famous) Baha'i. The vast majority of readers would accept that a Baha'i is one who recognises the authority of the House of Justice. This a plain fact rather than pov, though it may be unpalatable to believers in Baha'u'llah who do not recognise the House of Justice as the legitimate head of Baha'u'llah's Faith. --Occamy 17:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Actually Occamy I could not disagree more. A Christian is not one by virtue of approval of some priest or preacher. They are one, because they state they are one. That is the same really with all religions, including Baha'i in my opinion. A Muslim doesn't get approval, a Jew doesn't get approval. Nobody includes or excludes them from their self-declaration. The pages for people of a religion are self-declarations. Not one of them is for "approved" members. If you can find one that is, post it here. Wjhonson 03:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Juan Cole
I had added him to the others list, but after reading here about "covenant breakers," i reverted. A better enty would be at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Bahá'í_individuals but that should be at his choice. i think i"ll try to contact him first. Take Care!--Will314159 09:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cathy Freeman
While Cathy Freeman's stepdad was a Baha'i, and her mother and possibly other family members became Bahais, i dont think she considers herself a Baha'i, though she did participate in Baha'i activities in the past. On this note, I will delete her from the list. Bigkev87 09:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
