User talk:AlexandreJ
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!
Dear AlexandreJ: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:
- Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- Community Portal
- Frequently Asked Questions
- How to edit a page
- How to revert to a previous version of a page
- Tutorial
- Copyrights
- Shortcuts
Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.
If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Stifle (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image Tagging Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG
 |
|
Thanks for uploading Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I will put the article Srila_Prabhupada:_The_Prominent_Link on article for deletion
Please read the policies and guidelines for creating a new article, otherwise you may be creating another article that may be deleted. Andries 11:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I do not mean to say that all books by or about Prabhupada have no place in Wikipedia. For example, I voted to keep the Bhagavad Gita As It Is which is a notable book. Andries 11:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I can see that the tone of the article is not an adverisement, but still if a book or any other subject warrants an article then the subject should be notable in some ways. The difference between the books the Bhagavad Gita as it is and the The Prominent link is obvious in that respect. Andries 12:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
To answer your question. The question what subject merits its own article is not a black and white question, as you will understand. Often a Wikipedia:google test is used to help making a decision. In the case of the book The Prominent link this will only yield 933 results, which I personally consider too little. Andries 12:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
In the case of books, Amazon ranking is also a good way to assess inclusion and exclusion. Andries 12:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Andries, thank you for the further clarification, and the information about Amazon ranking. For the Wikipedia Google test, is there an approximate minimum number of yielded results that would, in your view, be sufficient in this case to indicate possible notability?--AlexandreJ 12:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Based on my experience and observation of the followers Srila Prabhupada, over the past 10 years, issues and controversies related to initiation and succession seem to be one of the major sources of conflict. The book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link seems to me to provide a different way of looking at a number of these issues. The book includes contributions from persons who are, or were at one time, in positions of prominence in the ISKCON organization. In my ten years of reading, it is the first time that I have seen a major statement on initiation/succession in the tradition of Srila Prabhupada presented as exploratory rather than as supposedly conclusive. I believe that being aware of the additional perspective that the book presents will allow readers to draw a more informed and complete understanding of the issues.--AlexandreJ 16:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Dear Andries, the book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link (PL) has created substantial waves. The Governing Body Commission of ISKCON, directly and through it's Sastric Advisory Council (SAC), has devoted much energy to addressing it, including a major paper dealing with the issues raised in PL. The SAC's paper can be downloaded here:
-
-
-
- There is an active, dynamic PL conference sparking much thought on issues of succession in Srila Prabhupada's movement. Thousands of persons associated with the ISKCON organization, and with other parts of Srila Prabhupada's movement, are affected by the ideas in PL.
-
-
-
- I'm not sure who first suggested that the PL Wikipedia page be deleted. I'm not sure if it was you, or if it was someone else, perhaps a member of the ISKCON organization. I am open to the possibility that whoever first suggested that it be deleted was not doing it for any political reasons. Based on ten yeas of contact with the ISKCON organization, and based on my experience of how the leadership of the ISKCON organization has responded to the book, I am also open to the possibility that some devotees who post on Wikipedia might wish to silence the ideas presented in the PL book.--AlexandreJ 05:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Below is a list of articles related to the book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, taken from a number of Vaisnava websites:
-
-
-
-
-
- The following excerpt, available at a cached link, gives one an example of how some leaders within the ISKCON organization have responded to the PL book, seemingly misrepresenting it, and painting the book as something hostile and/or subversive:
-
-
-
-
-
- "The covert ritvik propaganda presented in the book 'Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link' by Dhira Govinda dasa. Much energy is required by this ministry to combat the erroneous philosophy being presented by a person highly placed within ISKCON leadership. This is further compounded by the fact that Dhira Govinda widely conducts seminars which supposedly teach psychological and spiritual well-being but ultimately result in anti-ISKCON mentality among the students. One can observe the mood of Bhaktin Miriam as she publicly condemns the GBC for disapproving of The Prominent Link. And she is in charge of organizing Dhira Govinda's seminars in New York."
-
-
-
-
-
- --AlexandreJ 05:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Some excerpts from a section of the PL book, entitled 'Support for PL and Apprehension to Express It', written by Dhira Govinda dasa:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Typical comments that I’ve received, at places like ISKCON leadership meetings and Sunday Feast programs, from devotees serving in all capacities within Srila Prabhupada’s movement, including top-level leaders in ISKCON, include statements, delivered in hushed tones, such as 'I really liked your paper, The Prominent Link. You wrote just what I’ve been thinking for many years.' Concurring with the statements of Ambarisa Prabhu and Balavanta Prabhu in the Foreword and Preface, many Vaisnavas emphasize the straightforward common sense of the concepts in PL."
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- (...)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Many devotees have expressed disappointment and sadness that these principles have been neglected and overlooked by the leadership of ISKCON.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Tones tend to be hushed in such conversations due to an apprehension that expression of such views is discouraged in the organization, and that such expressions would incur the disfavor of members and leaders of the institution. There is a perceived culture of fear and repression in the ISKCON organization, masked by a pretense of openness to frank discussion of issues.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Ostensibly ISKCON wants innovative, thoughtful members who boldly apply their intelligence, within the framework of guru, sastra and sadhu, for gaining a deeper understanding of devotional principles. In practice, as experienced by many, if one does not conform to the organizational line on issues such as those addressed in PL, then the institutional leadership, without rational discussion or genuine attempt at understanding, often condemns the dissenter and discourages members of the organization to honestly look at issues from unorthodox perspectives. The implied message is 'We have already thoroughly considered these issues. So you needn’t apply your intelligence here, because we’ve thought it through for you.' Such a stance is unlikely to attract and retain independently thoughtful members. There is in the organization a veneer of broad-mindedness, accompanied by an implicit assertion that views such as those espoused in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link are not to be found amongst persons in good-standing in the organization. If someone in the organization advocates such convictions, they are then branded and condemned, and pressured to leave the institution. Once they have left, it is again safe for the leadership to declare to the members that no one in good-standing would hold such views as expressed in essays such as The Prominent Link, and anyone who thinks that way is deviant, and so you’d do better to not even consider thinking in that way.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Authoritarian dynamics, wherein the leadership is fearful of permitting subordinates to analyze and discern for themselves, may be somewhat prevalent in today’s religious institutions, but they are not conducive for Vaisnava society or relationships. Such reluctance to allow members to fully utilize their cognitive faculties may stem to a substantial degree from a benevolent desire to protect. The ISKCON organization may also benefit, however, from introspectively looking at other motivations for this authoritarianism, such as fear that members, upon analysis of facts from an alternative perspective, may realize that they are being, in some ways, misled.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "We understand that this imperious leadership style is not extant throughout the organization, but it is manifest with sufficient regularity and pervasiveness that many, perhaps most, of Srila Prabhupada’s followers, both inside and outside the institution, feel alienated and stifled. Thus, for the purpose of attracting and maintaining satisfied, intelligent members, it is, we believe, imperative for ISKCON leadership, especially at the top levels, to seriously assess its mode of addressing issues and concerns. As Balavanta writes in the Preface to PL, spiritual matters in Srila Prabhupäda’s society must be resolved through 'open and frank discussion amongst mature devotees whose voices are not suppressed.'
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link provides an opportunity for the movement to integrate and incorporate a new, attractive, and sastrically sound paradigm for carrying Srila Prabhupada’s legacy deep into the future. It is the opinion of many, including this author, that ISKCON needs to reexamine its paradigms, with fearless detachment, on issues including the guru issue, to avoid remaining a relatively insignificant cult, and to become a substantial player in the institutions of society at large. We understand that there are many fears, ranging from loss of important personal relationships to loss of legal battles, associated with implementation of the PL model. We contend with confidence that Srila Prabhupada’s movement possesses the strength to handle the challenges that will arise with the PL paradigm, and that the movement will undoubtedly be strengthened by accommodating and encouraging the PL model."--AlexandreJ 05:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link
An editor has nominated Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- I logged in to my page today, after not having checked it for a while, and found it deleted. I've recreated it. Cheers.--AlexandreJ (talk) 00:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- I logged in to my page today, after not having checked it for a while, and found it deleted. I've recreated it. Cheers.--AlexandreJ (talk) 00:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Book advertisements
Please do not repost book advertisements. This posting was deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- This is not a book advertisement. I logged in today and found my page deleted. I only discovered today that there was consideration to delete this page. I did not participate in the process of evaluating the validity of my page. I have recreated it. It's an information page about a book relating to a theological issue that relates to the Hare Krishna movement.--AlexandreJ (talk) 00:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link
A tag has been placed on Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. DarkAudit (talk) 00:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- On March 23rd, 2008, user DGG wrote the following in the History section of my page: "books can not be speedied". I've recreated the page. I'm willing to discuss.--AlexandreJ (talk) 00:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] DRV request
I took the liberty of posting a deletion review request for you. Please review and see if my reasoning for your request is sufficient. DarkAudit (talk) 03:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for doing this. I appreciate it. I like what you wrote. --AlexandreJ (talk) 03:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Hello AlexandreJ. Thank you for reposting your article on your userpage. I appreciate your enthusiasm for wikipedia. Happy editing. Thanks again. Ism schism (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Thank you for your suggestion to move the article, and for your willingness to dialogue with me.--AlexandreJ (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- AlexandreJ, I offer you my humble apology, I had seen editors use their user pages before when working on articles. I am not sure why yours was deleted, I have never seen that done before. Again, I am very sorry for the inconvienence. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 17:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link
Hello AlexandreJ. I noticed your reposted article on your userpage and appreciate your hard work. Also, I have a question concerning this book. What about this book inspires you? I have never read it, but after looking through your edit history, I see that you have spent almost 2 years as an editor and almost all of your edits are concerning, Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link. I admire your commitment to this book, but why only this one article for 2 years? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Ism schism. Thank you for your post. I read the book for the first time in 2004, after being in contact with the Hare Krishna movement, and some of its various factions, since 1995/96. I found the book to be unique in the way that it addresses controversies relating to issues of succession in the ISKCON organization and the greater Hare Krishna movement. I don't know if I agree with all aspects of the book, but I feel that the issues that it brings to light deserve to be discussed and explored. I think it might be interesting to people participating in the Hare Krishna movement, as well as those observing and studying it from outside. The history of the movement is itself controversial. I'm into "more". The more information one has about a topic, the less they have to fill in the blanks, the closer their understanding can come to the reality on the ground.
- I'm willing to provide information about the book from various angels of vision, including much critical information, from people who are critical of the book for various reasons. I invite contributions to the page. I think dialogue is healthy. The issues related to the book are something that I had read about and carefully considered for years, and I feel comfortable writing about. I use Wikipedia often, though primarily as a reader. This is a topic about which I feel sufficiently knowledgeable that I am willing and interested to write about on Wikipedia.
- Furthermore, I get the impression that the issues described in the book tend to be suppressed (for lack of a better word) within the ISKCON organization. This results in people within and outside the organization not having a complete picture when it comes to issues of succession in the Hare Krishna movement. When I first read the book in 2004 I wished that such a book had existed in 1996, or that such information would be available on the Internet, for people considering getting involved more closely with the Hare Krishna movement in general,and the ISCKON organization in particular. I welcome challenge and disagreement when it comes to the ideas in the book. I see them as sound and able to stand on their own. I think the book is a valuable additional resource for people studying the Hare Krishna movement.
- There is a particular quote from the second edition of the book that I resonate with strongly. And it tends to reflect my attempts to discuss issues related to the book, both in person, and on the Internet:
- "Tones tend to be hushed in such conversations due to an apprehension that expression of such views is discouraged in the organization, and that such expressions would incur the disfavor of members and leaders of the institution. There is a perceived culture of fear and repression in the ISKCON organization, masked by a pretense of openness to frank discussion of issues.
- "Ostensibly ISKCON wants innovative, thoughtful members who boldly apply their intelligence, within the framework of guru, sastra and sadhu, for gaining a deeper understanding of devotional principles. In practice, as experienced by many, if one does not conform to the organizational line on issues such as those addressed in PL, then the institutional leadership, without rational discussion or genuine attempt at understanding, often condemns the dissenter and discourages members of the organization to honestly look at issues from unorthodox perspectives. The implied message is 'We have already thoroughly considered these issues. So you needn't apply your intelligence here, because we’ve thought it through for you.'"
- I'm interested to provide complete, honest and impartial information for various reasons, some of them personal, some of them intellectual. Thanks for reading. --AlexandreJ (talk) 17:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] My comments
I have posted a comment on the draft article's discussion page. We can continue the conversation related to this article there. Regards. Abecedare (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] DRV
Just to let you know, I voted to overturn the deletion. Editorofthewiki 10:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thank you very much. I appreciate it.--AlexandreJ (talk) 22:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG
I have tagged Image:ProminentLinkjacket.JPG as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. Melesse (talk) 09:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- I have added the "not orphan" tag, as you suggested. Thanks. --AlexandreJ (talk) 00:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
