User talk:75.117.52.108

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] FLORIDA (ALACHUA) USER: 75.117.52.108 (formerly 75.91.80.24)

You are suspected of vandalism and violating WP:BLP in regard of controversial material insertion.

Please note that it is the policy that editors must take particular care adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to the law in Florida, United States and to our content policies.WP:LIVING

Please note that you can not add such unverifiable material from your or someone elses own blog or blogsite to the page of LP ether.

Besides it should be ALSO comply with this policy: The views of critics should be represented if they are relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to side with the critics; rather, it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. WP:LIVING

Probably most important rule is: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm".WP:LIVING

Your insertion/revertion was not in encyclopedic tone and did not place any reliable sourse in the text. Dipika site or any unofficial site is not a reliable source for such a content.

Please also see:WP:LIBEL - all contributors should recognize that it is their responsibility to ensure that material posted on Wikipedia is not defamatory. Wikidās ॐ 16:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. GBT/C 16:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sort it out on the talk page, please. GBT/C 16:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying. This guy's a true believer beyond discussion

However 3rr clearly states an exeption to the rule: reverts to remove clearly libelous material, or unsourced or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons (see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons); the revertions are by IP and are poorly sourced for a controversial material. User does not respond. Please advice. Wikidās ॐ 16:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to Alachua comments from 75.117.52.108 (talk)

I accept that because the letter was published on the personas website, your contribution does come under exception. I would however reinforce your referencing with references from WP:reliable_sources in order to arrive at NPOV here. Your should note that as far as international English goes celibacy has a different standard to a sannyas. Whereas sannyas standard is higher, because celibacy in the common understanding was not broken I suggest rewording of the article to the following:

Satsvarupa dasa Goswami began suffering from headaches resulted from an anxiety disorder in the early 80s. In 2004, he agreed to stop initiating disciples after an intimate affair was uncovered. GBC has confirmed that after considering the issues in the case and he shall retain his Goswami title and continue in the Sannyasa order. [19][20][21] In the letter to his disciples and friends, he discusses his 2002 deviation from the strict sannyasa standard, his current status, and requests that the readers accept "this news in a thoughtful, forgiving spirit" [22] Over the years many devotees have taken the opportunity to focus more upon their relationship with him, appreciating humility of both his life and his writings.[23]

Please confirm and we can call it an agreement. Please note that in order to not be mistaken as vandal, you should register your account and use a screen name. Please also sign your posts with ~~~~ to avoid further problems. Wikidās ॐ 17:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This talk page should comply with the guide:
Article talk pages should be used to discuss ways to improve an article; not to criticize, pick apart, or vent about the current status of an article or its subject. This is especially true on the talk pages of biographies of living people. However, if you feel something is wrong, but are not sure how to fix it, then by all means feel free to draw attention to this and ask for suggestions from others. WP:TALK
Dear 75.117.52.108, I suggest you yourself edit the above post to comply with the guides and remove statements that may hurt other people or by your own admission unfounded statements confirming - 'THAT would be sensationalist'. Please use your right to revise the comments[1], legitimate comments may be retained.Wikidās ॐ 19:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, right. Tildes. I haven't become Wiki dasa yet so forget the details sometimes. How about you be fair minded about the subject in the first place? If you are a disciple, blocking out this falldown won't help you. If you want to remain a disciple you need to find a healthy frame for this. 75.117.52.108 (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, 75.117.52.108. Please note that all contributors should recognize that it is their responsibility to ensure that material posted on Wikipedia is not defamatory. This is the policy that should be enforced and is being enforced by me on a number of edits. See also my other reverts: [[2]] Hope this helps. Wikidās ॐ 21:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you really believe that? That you're just a crusader for justice? JPS poisoning to get his position is wacky. SDG falling down is a fact and one of consequence. The two don't compare. These things can be written in a fair minded way and obstructionism doesn't help.
The Poison controversy for example, as stupid as it is, has some currency. Prabhupada was being poisoned, but by dumbaass doctors and dumbaass medicine. There was no intent, just stupidity. How much that changed his health outlook I don't know. Probably not overwhelming, but yet not insignificantly. These things need to be addressed with a clear head to keep the freak show people from getting the upper hand. 75.117.52.108 (talk) 21:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you that many things can be written in a fair minded way and obstructionism doesn't help. However some do not have any verifiable evidence, and thus do not exist as far as WP:CITE. It has nothing to do with what I beleive or not, but if it is based on belief, as its a case with some of your above suggestions, you should state so. Wikidās ॐ 22:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Three-revert rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Stifle (talk) 19:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)