Talk:Peter Deunov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity
Christianity Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
WikiProject Saints Peter Deunov is part of the WikiProject Saints, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to saints as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to saints. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Saints Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article may need an appropriate infobox template.
WikiProject Buddhism This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Peter Deunov, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Beginning of discussion

Zdraveite,

Tova e angliiskata versiq na bulgarskiq tekst otnosno Uchitelq Beinsa Duno. Ako obichate pridyrgaite se w redakciqta i dopylneniqta kum neq i se otnasqite s uvagenie i dobronamerenost. Nie pritegavame tochniq prevod na bg versiqta na tekst na angliiski ezik i v nai-skoro vreme toi shte bude publikuvan. Tova oznachava che angliiskiq tekst shte bude osnovno obogaten v nai-skoro vreme. Vsichki nedobronamereni ili nekorketni redakcii shte budat prechistvani i likvidirani. Tezi stranici striktno se nabludava ot bratskiq suvet na Obshtestvo Bqlo Bratstvo, Bulgaria i nqma da se dopusnat zlonamereni ili neobsugdani v bratski kolektiv na suveta dejstviq, koito celqt da distruktirat bratskata rabota po nauchnoto i istoricheski-avtentichnoto predstavqne na Slovoto na Uchitelq Beinsa Duno. Blagodarq za razbiraneto i uvagenieto!

Bez strah v Lubovta bezgranichna!

Obshtestvo Bqlo Bratstvo, Bulgaria

[edit] Redakciq na bazova informaciq otnosno linkovete

Promenite, koito sa napraveni ot Dave0 sa iztriti, zashtoto predstvlqvat spam ataka sreshtu oficialnata versiq na teksta, koqto e podurgana ot Obshtestvo Bqlo Bratstvo, Bulgaria.

VAGNO: Vsqka promqna v teksta predstavqsht Uchitelia Beinsa Duno trqbva da byde predvaritelno obsugdana kakto tuk na tazi stranica za diskusii, taka i s bratskia suvet na Obshtestvo Bqlo Bratstvo, Bulgaria. Ako se pravqt promeni bez tova obsugdane te shte budat smqtani za SPAMATAKA i shte budat likvidirani. Otnovo napomnqme da se otnsqte kum tezi tekstove s nugnoto uvagenie i internet kultura. Wikipedia ima striktni pravila za rabota i redakcia, ako obichate spazvaite gi.

Bez strah v Lubovta bezgranichna!

Obshtestvo Bqlo Bratstvo, Bulgaria

---krai na belegkata: 26.01.2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.44.101.70 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 26 January 2006

[edit] Reply to the note 26 January 2006

Hello, a few points in response to the note from 26 January.2006:

(1) This is an English version of the Wikipedia, please write in English. One advantage of this is that the trace could be easily reviewed when it comes to a dispute resolution. To understand the issues of ethics in Wikipedia, please visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines

(2) The claim below that this site has been maintained by the entity called below "Obshtestvo Byalo Bratstvo" and is a mirror site for the Bulgarian article is simply not true. This can be easily checked by tracing the version history of the article and also reading the Bulgarian Wikipedia site as of this moment.

(3) In Wikipedia nobody has the exclusive right to authorize or approve what goes into an article. The mechanism of (self) regulation is very simple - a peer review. If you have an issue - please raise it. Claiming that you are The Keeper of the truth is not a good enough argument. Wikipedia is not an extension of your web page.

(4) The only change done by Dave0 is adding a *relevant* link - valid, and 100% relevant. This can be easily verified by checking the version history of the article and the link. If you would like to add your own link, please do so - as long as it is relevant. Your link might also be a called "SPAM ATTACK" against the link posted by Dave0, with the same success. What you did is deleting a relevant link and putting your own instead for the purpose of self-promotion. Not only this, but you also added two links pointing to the same web page in the article for Paneurhythmy, which were the same but disguised. Speaking about "Otnovo napomnqme da se otnsqte kum tezi tekstove s nugnoto uvagenie i internet kultura" [transl: Again we remind you to deal with these texts with the appropriate respect and internet culture] is like the thief crying "Catch the thief!".

(5) For the benefit of all interested, I am translating below from Bulgarian the posted note. For the next translation I will have to charge you. For obvious reasons I did not translate the formula at the end of your note (about love!) - in the current context I find it quite hypocritical to use it.

(6) The only thing left is to appeal to you to follow the guidelines you yourself ask the others to follow (whether you will do the same with the Teaching you claim to follow, is your private matter). In the meanwhile, please don't try to alter your initial note from 26 January 2006, as it is captured in the version history.

(7) Your claim to have exclusive right to maintain and edit this page contradicts the policy of Wikipedia. It also breaks the copyright policies for Wikipedia articles.

Please take into consideration that by this note I am taking the first step required by the process of dispute resolution "talk to the other parties involved". I quite well understand, that in cases like this, your claim on exclusive right on this article will not cease, that is why I am taking the next step at the same time - I will be requesting an advocate. Stay tuned on this.

- quartz

[edit] Translation of the original note from 26 January 2006

Hello,

This is the English version of the Bulgarian text regarding the Master Beinsa Douno. Be so kind when you edit and add to this article to follow the original Bulgarian text and pay the due respect and goodwill. We have the exact translation of this article in English and it will be published soon. It means that the English text will be enriched very soon. All edits not done in goodwill or which are incorrect will be cleaned and liquidated. This page is under the strict supervision of the Brotherly Council of the Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria and it will not allow ill meant actions and actions which are not discussed in the Brotherly Council, which aim to destroy the brotherly work on the scientific and historically-authentic representation of the Word of the Master. Thank you for the understanding and the respect.

Without fear in the Endless Love!

Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria

    • Edition of base information about the links

The changes done by Dave0 are deleted, because they are a spam attack against the official version of the text, which is maintained by the Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria.

IMPORTANT: Any change in the text presenting the Master Beinsa Douno has to be discussed beforehand here on this page, as well as in the Brotherly Council of the Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria. If changes are done without this discussion, they will be considered SPAM ATTACK and will be liquidated. We remind everybody again to deal with this texts with the due respect and Internet culture. Wikipedia has strict rules for work and edits, be so kind to follow them.

Without fear in the Endless Love!

Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria

---end of the note: 26 Jan 2006

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Quartz (talk • contribs) 09:12, 27 January 2006

[edit] Outside views on this dispute

I don't read Bulgarian so I'm relying on the English translation by User talk:Quartz. Be BOLD doesn't merely allow editors to edit any article as they see fit and in accordance with the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia, but encourages them to do so. Regarding external links, please follow the guidelines on external links. I have looked briefly at the external links that are in dispute. The reason(s) for the dispute escape me; what are the perceived problems with the links in question? Finally, Sign your posts on talk pages. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External link discussion

Dear Quartz,

Thank you for help - translating of the first text is manifestation of good will. But your comment about transforming of the links is not correct. Do you know any information for the History and Tradition of the Brotherhood life created from Master Beinsa Douno? We (people, that work in commission for public relations and clear internet information in Brotherhood) wish only to show historically-authentic and clear from any misunderstanding point of view for Live and Word of Master Beinsa Douno. This clear point of view should be clear and to Wikipedia guidelines too. We understand this very well. And that's why when anybody edits some text in Wikipedia in any topic, he/she should debate this edition in discussion page. Dave0's editing is not discussed normally on this page, and above all his site has incorrect and incorrect information. This site simply destroyed and demolished the Word of Master Beinsa Douno with its suspicion that the Word is not published correctly. This is not true, because a half of it is published with the coordination and direct guidance of Master Beinsa Douno to his nearest disciples. This is the reason to say that Dave0 does not know and understand the history of Brotherhood organization and the work of Master Beinsa Douno. We hope and pray for Dave0. Let's Divine Light of Christ clear his mind. There is not any suspicion in the Word of Master in the Way of Disciple.

And because we wish to show clear point of view we start discussion for publishing of these links:

These links are not edited from the commission for information in Brotherhood. We ask Dave0 and Quartz, why the false information and suspicion in the Word of Master Beinsa Douno is not refered there?

Simply because this information is not true, and people like Dave0, under the mask of good wishes, demolish the purity of the Word of Master. The brotherhood official site will publish in Internet all original lectures and talks of Master Beinsa Douno in the near future. These publishing will be created on the base of scanned from original books information, because we wish maximal authenticity and clearness. In addition, now we (approximately 40 people from many countries) work for translating of 4000 talks and lectures of the Master in English, Russian, Spanish, German and French. Why these, brothers and sisters of Christ, do not doubt in the Word of Master?

Thank you for your understanding and patience.

With no fear in the Endless Love!

Commission for the information and public relations in Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.240.249.13 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 27 January 2006.

Phrases like demolish the purity of the Word of Master and do not doubt in the Word of Master suggest to me a possible misunderstanding of the neutral point of view policy. That policy requires that all points of view be fairly presented; the only justification for not including a particular point of view in an article is because it is not notable. "NPOV policy often means presenting multiple points of view. This means providing not only the points of view of different groups today, but also different groups in the past."
The statement, Simply because this information is not true, and people like Dave0, under the mask of good wishes, demolish the purity of the Word of Master., appears to violate the Wikipedia policy of WP:No personal attacks. May I suggest that such intemperate statements be avoided, please?
The biographical material in the above external links and the ones in the article, including the disputed one, read like hagiographies to me as does the article itself. A couple might be appropriate if clearly identified as such. But links to works by historians with solid academic credentials should be located and listed first. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to echo the comments of Walter Siegmund. Wikipedia's policies require that all points of view be represented, and that includes the unofficial along with the official. However it would be appropriate to label unofficial websites to indicate their status. The other point is that we must avoid negative comments about other editors. Please focus on the content, not the contributors. Thanks, -Will Beback 00:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Dear Commission for the information and public relation,

Unfortunately, as most of the Commissions for Public relations do, you failed to address concretely most of the issues I have raised on your note. I will try to re-iterate them in plain words:

  • You try to hide that the dispute is about a simple fact - you want to purge a link that you do not like from this article.
  • You falsely claimed (some people call this a lie) that this article has been maintained by you – You preferred to skip this question.
  • You falsely claimed that Dave0 has organised a Spam attack on the official version of the text – You did not comment on the fact that Dave0 has just added a link to a relevant site and you did not deny the fact that you misled the public claiming that you maintain the article.
  • You do not retract your intention to claim exclusive right on this article solely based on the assertion that you “by birth” are the authority on the teaching of Peter Deunov.

As to the substance of your claims about the linked site, have you contacted the site directly (here it is: http://www.beinsda-douno.net) to clarify your issues?

The only thing I can add from myself is that the site in question does not say the Word of the Master is not published correctly (as again you falsely claim). It says that many lectures (even during his lifetime) have been edited – do I hear you saying this is not true? It further says that many (but not all) current publications are edited – isn’t this true, and that the publishing house Janua’98 has published more than 75 volumes of unedited lectures and they are even accessible on the net – do you say this is not true? I guess your real problem is that the lectures are published by somebody else – otherwise why can’t I see on your “official” site what new books are published with the help of Vergiliy Krastev in Janua’98? Are you an “official” site just for some, but not for others? Is it possible that your publishing house touches the lectures here and there? Is it possible that you associate yourselves with sites and publishers that publish lectures the Master did not quite want to keep in his room? Seeing how you juggle with the Truth in this discussion, I do not expect many answers.

Your opinion has been heard and dismissed because you continue hiding your (otherwise very obvious) real intentions – of course, I am putting back the link you deleted. I like the site placed by Dave0, and I’ve checked it - there is nothing false there, so I can’t see your problems with it. I am not going to waste my time anymore on fruitless discussion but will proceed further with the dispute resolution. You will have to learn to live with others. Quartz 11:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

We wish to explain that the link to this site should not be tolerate hear on the article for the Master Beinsa Douno, not only because the information of the site is false, but because the sentence: "The English Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) Home Page" is said not in normal way. THERE IS NO any English Master Peter Deunov.... I understand that Christophorus (webmaster of the site) wish to explain that his page is the english home page of the Word of Master Beinsa Douno, but the style and English language is not good. We try to make connection with this webmaster, but there was no response. Let's this webmaster clear language on his site and after that published it anywhere.

AND AGAIN:

If anybody wish to edit or add any information to the article, FIRST of ALL he should discussed here on this page. There is no response from Dave0-Christophorus here again.

That's why we simple understand the unclear POV of them.

Very soon we will publish the translation of original Bulgarian page to English and German language. We say this because we wish to work clear to the rules of Wikipedia.

We published part of normal and good links now.

With no fear in the Endless Love!

Commission for the information and public relations in Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria 28.01.2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.75.158.125 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 28 January 2006

Guys, please tell me this was a joke! Make up a story – by now I know you can - like “a drunken student went to an Internet club next to the Sofia University, Bulgaria, decided to make a joke, and posted from the name of our Commission an unauthorized message. He has been detained for 24 hours etc” Are you really representing anybody? What a depth of linguistic analysis and argument!

I am putting the link back as you are not able to quote an untrue sentence from the linked page. But you are a good Commission - no answers given - anyway, pass to your friends they can update the page, but the link has to be added; meanwhile I'll do it for the current page.Quartz 10:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Quartz; I know you likely didn't mean to make a personal attack but your last post could be interpreted as suggesting that the anonymous editor(s) posting here are drunken students. Please review WP:NPA and consider how easy it would be to be misunderstood, especially by someone whose first language is not English. Remember, that we need to be discussing the article content, not one another.
In my opinion, the article asserts but does not establish notability as written. Reputable sources for the statements in the article that establish notability are not provided. Arguments about the external links in question are beside the point. Wikipedia policy requires:

Information on Wikipedia must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories and claims in articles must only be included if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (WP:V)

In my opinion, none of the external links are "reliable and reputable sources" for the assertions in the article. The Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, Religions of the World, and Contemporary American Religion (and references cited therein) would be good starting points. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Walter, if it sounded like this, it was nothing personal - just a bit of good humor considering that in bad grammar somebody explains how to write in good English.Quartz 11:02, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Items supporting the cleanup tag

These are the items that I think would improve the article:

  • The article has been placed in the Esoteric Christianity category. How do Deunov's thoughts differ from Theosophy, modern Rosicrucianism, Anthroposophy and the other schools of Esoteric Christianity? How are they similar?
  • Remove extraneous capitalization. Love, Wisdom, Truth, etc. are not capitalized in English.
  • Provide sources for important assertions. See Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words which are policy, and Wikipedia:Cite sources and Wikipedia:Reliable sources, which are style guides.
    • Paneurhythmy exercises were developed – these were a sequence of exercises performed to music, with the purpose of harmonizing and balancing the man internally. It is now practiced worldwide because of its remarkable life-enhancing qualities. Worldwide practice contributes to the notability of the topic, but needs to be verified by citing a published source.
    • The Master Beinsa Douno points to the Prayer as the main method of the disciple, helping to remain continually awake and in touch with the Spiritual Worlds. Special among his prayers is the “Good Prayer” given in 1900 – it is considered second only to the Lord’s Prayer. Who considers it second only to the Lord's Prayer and where is this published?
    • The whole world bows to me, but I bow to the Master Peter Deunov of Bulgaria. -Albert Einstein, French Public Radio Albert Einstein is such an important figure that this quotation alone would almost establish notability. But without a print publication, it is not verifiable.
  • How many people are or were followers of Deunov? According to one source, the movement consisted of 40,000 followers at its peak about 1937. (Fuerstein, 1998, p. 25) Whether or not this is true, it is verifiable, an important point, and should be addressed. Fuerstein, Georg (1998). Mystery of Light. P.O. Box 1030, Lower Lake, CA 95457: Integral Publishing, 246. ISBN 0-941255-51-4. 
  • To a resident of the United States, the Great White Brotherhood sounds like a White supremacist organization. The article for the former indicates that it is not, but it might not hurt to repeat that point here. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subsequent uses of name

I replaced most occurrances of Peter Deunov, The Master Peter Deunov, and Beinsa Douno with Deunov in accordance with Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Subsequent_uses_of_names. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The "pure" Word of the Master

In the 1990’s in Bulgaria, it has been developed an extremely conservative sectarian movement that see themselves as “guards” of the “true” Word of the Master Beinsa Douno. Their main conception is that the stenographic scripts of the Master’s Word are the “pure” Word of the Master and must not be edited. This movement accuses the rest of the publishers, except their own ones, that they have changed the Word of the Master by editing it to the level of a written speech. In fact, many of the stenographic scripts had not been transcribed to a full text for decades and finally they were transcribed in the 90’s not by the original stenographers. As most of the professional editors and publishers know that such a circumstances make impossible to judge which are the exact words in some sentences. The general rules of the stenography define that every scripts must be transcribed in a matter of hours by the actual stenographer to be reached total accuracy. However, there is no doubt in any of the opponent sides that the general meaning of the Word is truthful. Based on the above facts the members of this movement believe that no one is able to say which one is the right transcription of the stenographic texts and for that reason it must be kept untranscribed. The editors on the other hand try to give to the stenographic scripts as smooth and professional look as possible. It is a historical fact that almost all scripts had been written from three amateur stenographers and two of them passed away before they transcribe their work. Nowadays whatever have been left for the new generations is Word written mainly on untranscribed texts which are clearly not the original words of the Master because no one speaks in shorted sentences and stenographic marks. The conflict between the editors and this conservative movement rises higher due to the fact that there are paragraphs in the Masters Word which are in very poor lingual condition if they are left unedited. Such a matter creates the wrong impression in some readers, mainly new ones which are unaware of all details mentioned above, that the Master has very poor and illiterate speech. In conclusion, it should be said that nobody knows the exact words of his Word. In fact, even the alive disciples which are all over 70 are not able to know every single word of the Master’s Word. Finally, it raises the question: Do the Master’s word have to be kept in the form of untranscribed texts or it should be edited to the level of intelligent written speech? This question is the essence of the conflict between the official leaders of the Brotherhood and the conservative movement. - Galactic Radiance Jan 29. 2006

---

Thank you Galactic Radiance,
It is a relief at last to read a clearly expressed thought (no matter if I agree or not). This is exactly the point I was trying to make all these days - there are different views on how the works of the Master have to be preserved and presented. The link http://www.beinsa-douno.net represents one view (pure or purist, whatever you prefer) and as such it has the right to exist on this article. Hence you proved my point, and I am putting the link back on the article. Please, work with your friends from the Society to explain to them that the totalitarian habits have to be put behind (or at least it is worth pretending).Quartz 11:02, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Finishing of translation and editing, notes

We published full and addapted for english reader translation of original Bulgarian text of the article.

We do not agree with removing of Peter Deunov, The Master Peter Deunov, and Beinsa Douno because this is basic key-words to the topic. Most of the people and folowers know the key-words Beinsa Douno', Master Beinsa Douno (These names have deep meaning), and the name in the world and in the books and Internet is Peter Deunov, The Master Peter Deunov. That's why we do not agree with removing. We hope the editors of this article will find the decision of the problems with style.


We do not agree adding of the link beinsa-douno.net, because we have copywrites on the name, and because Universal White Brotherhood - Bulgaria, like official organisation have copywrites to the books of the Master Peter Deunov. The Brotherhood in Bulgaria bougth the writes from the family of Peter Deunov and these writes work around 10 years yet. BUT we use these copywrites only for coordinating of quality and good publishing of the books of Master with standards of THE HIGH IDEAL. We wish to cooperate around HIGH IDEAL OF MASTER BEINSA DOUNO WORK and NOT!!! to limit or demolish the work of our brothers that work for the Word of Master and Salvation of the Humankind. We do not have problems with "Janua-98" PH and beinsadouno.info. We wish to work together with REAL brothers in Christ and in virtue of Christ. And that's why now we work for publishing of new e-books with whole phototypic information for any book (included this info from "Janua-98" PH). After this we will publish the original photoptypic books in Internet for free use.

But crude and false tone of webmaster of beinsa-douno.net and Quartz is in a conflict with the tone of Wikipedia.

We first wish authentic and good published word of Master Beinsa Douno.

We will improve the article in the near future with notabily sources and clearer verifications.

We will make in near future special part for comparison on the topic of Esoteric Christianity.

With no fear in the Endless Love!

Commission for the information and public relations in Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria

Razum 21:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Dear Razum,
good work - I agree that you put it all there. You just missed a small link that reflects the purist movement (see the posting above) and I am putting it back (above the good link to the Bulgarian resource - you see, this is still a resource in English you are contributing to). As you saw, it did not hurt to admit you edit the works of the Master - you are just the other stream, there is always a balance.
I absolutely agree, however, that you sacked the Commission after the blunder they did with their linguistic analysis - a leadership course would be good. Pleasure to talk to a real person now. But about the copyright - how could I not guess that you have a copyright on the name? - imagine the Orthodox Church copyrighting the name of our Lord - the poor Presbyterians, where would they be by now? And how does it work if I may ask you? How do you enforce this? Did you know that "Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases"? And also that "Copyright law does not protect domain names"? Can you, please, put on your web page an application form for opening a new Internet site? What about the moral rights of the author (hope you have heard of the concept) - is editing breaching them? Did the Master claim copyright? I doubt it!
How do you accept the application tax for the name of the Master - thirty silver pieces in cash, money order, credit card? Do I send them to the Brotherly Council of the Society in Bulgaria?
While it is not too late, lodge a copyright for Razum [Reason] - there is a limited offer.
Quartz 11:02, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Lubezni Quartz, ako obichash procheti si lichnata diskusionna stranica, tam imash pismo ot men po temata. Shte chakam s turpenie tvoq razumen otgovor. Razum 18:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
"Dear Quartz, please read your personal discussion page, there is a letter from me on the subject. I will wait with patience your rational reply, Razum" Quartz 12:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I wonder it someone would be kind enough to provide an English translation of the comment above, please. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Dear Razum, I regret to say I won’t be reading this message. I do not have time. If I read it, I will have to translate it and reply. Both take time. You said you have 40 translators - promote one of them to the Commission, s/he will do the job. Why do I need to translate it? - because everything has to be in the open, under the light of the Sun and the watchful eye of our moderators. Time is important. Everything in its own time. Here, for me, the time is finished. What was said during this discussion is enough for an objective person of an average intelligence to understand. But rejoice, I will still be around from time to time to update the link - I hope you understand the importance of this - it teaches you all patience, and tolerance, and non-"liquidation" (the Master did not know this word, but - hey! the world advances) and it keeps the Commission honest (to an extent).
Dear Commission, I will miss you all. Do not thank me for the intro to the Copyright law - read the chapter associated with the moral rights as homework and create a Legal Commission to twist it a bit. Creating a Commission is easy - you log in and type l-e-g-a-l -c-o-m-m-i-s-s-i-o-n - Miracle! a New Commission has come to life. Four people make a Council etc. You have Commission(s), Council(s), Society(s), translator(s), publishing house(s), web page(s), associated web page(s) - I am sure you will manage to keep busy. And do not spread silly things around the globe, I will be checking how you are doing without me. Farewell, Quartz 11:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Bazova informacia po temata za neadekvatniq link

Quartz, I understand, that you do not wish to enter in any discussion. With your style and words you simple OUTRAGE upon decency of Wikipedia and the Teaching principles.

I add bulgarian text of my opinion. I will put a short resume in English soon.

I try to find new NPOV idea for problematic link.

And AGAIN:

We will improve the article in the near future with notabily sources and clearer verifications.

We will make in the near future special part for comparison on the topic of Esoteric Christianity.

With no fear in the Endless Love!

Commission for the information and public relations in Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria

Razum 12:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Bulgarian text of my opinion for problematic link:

Lengthy Bulgarian text removed by: Will Beback 23:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Shirota, Svoboda, Chistota! Razum 18:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC) }

Razum 12:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

This is the English-language Wikipedia. Please use English in your talk page comments. Messages that are only for one particular editor should go on their user talk page. Thanks, -Will Beback 23:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Improvement of three links

I add some good new links to the article: Drew Theological Methodist Seminary; Veliko Tarnovo; the Seven Rila Lakes.

Razum 13:14, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Noncompliant tag justification

Please see Items supporting the cleanup tag above for suggestions to improve the article. Some of those items are no longer relevant. A print publication by a reputable publisher must be cited for the following items. See WP:V, WP:CITE and WP:RS.

  • Einstein was reported to have said, ‘The whole world bows down before me. I bow before Master Peter Deunov from Bulgaria.’
  • After the end of the First World War in 1918 the number of his followers all over the country started growing rapidly and in 1930s they numbered about 40,000 people.
  • His grandfather by his mother’s side was Atanas Georgiev (1805-1865), an active public figure in the struggle for the independence of the church during the Revival in Bulgarian nation (18-19 century).

Assertions of scientific merit in the work of Deunov must be supported by citing publications in scientific journals. Otherwise, they must be referred to as philosophy, metaphysics, pseudoscience, or in some other way that does not suggest that they are science.

Year articles should not be linked unless they have particular relevances to this article. Do not link "Months, years, decades or centuries, unless they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic." Do link dates that include the month and day. "This allows the auto-formatting function for individual users' date preferences to work." See WP:MOSDATE and its talk page.

Link only the first occurance of a term. Only make links that are relevant to the context. WP:CONTEXT

While the manual of style does not seem to require it, the article would be more clear and concise if Deunov were used throughout rather than Peter Deunov and Master Beinsa Douno. This would be consistent with the articles for Rudolf Steiner, Annie Besant, Manly Palmer Hall and Max Heindel, other important figures of Esoteric Christianity. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Subsequent_uses_of_names Articles for other notable religious leaders of the 20th century follow this convention, e.g., Jiddu Krishnamurti, Chögyam Trungpa, Joseph F. Smith and Billy Graham. I found exceptions, notably Maharishi Mahesh Yogi who is referred to as Maharishi or the Maharishi. Also, Roman Catholic Popes, along with other royalty, are referred to by their regnal names.

The listed references are not generally available in the United States or the United Kingdom. I tried the University of Washington Library and the Oxford University Library catalogs, 1.9 million and 5 million titles respectively. Both [1] [2] May I suggest that it is not very helpful to the reader to cite references that he or she is not likely to be able to find in a library? --Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Wsiegmund, Thank you for ideas. Some of them is good, I do not accept othhers. Soon I will enter information about this. But now I will transform the link to Great white brotherhood under the text Universal White Brotherhood, because there is NO any link between these topics. Thank you, again. Razum 11:23, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
May I point out that Great White Brotherhood includes the term Universal White Brotherhood? It should be changed, if there is no link. I'm pleased that you understand that we share to goal of improving the article, even though we may not agree on how to proceed in every case. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Correct romanization of the name

The name "Петър" is transliterated as "Petar" - see Romanization of Bulgarian and Petar Stoyanov for an example of this. --Daggerstab 15:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I moved the article again, this time because of the surname. (I'm a jerk, I know...) --Daggerstab 17:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It may be technically more correct, but nobody calls him "Petar Danov" (about 500 Google hits). He is much more widely called "Peter Deunov" (about 20,000 Google hits). His "official" website calls him that[3], his books in English list that name as the author [4], etc. The Wikipedia: naming conventions (people) suggests that the most widely recognized variation be used. For those reasons I think the article should be moved back. We can include the alternate spelling in the intro. -Will Beback 21:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't have a strong opinion, but I find Will Beback's argument persuasive. Moreover, the print references that I've found (which are meager) use the "Peter Deunov" spelling. I agree that "Petar Danov" should be in the introduction. -Walter Siegmund (talk) 02:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree the spelling of Deunov, but official web site has this domain www.PeterDeunov.com [5] too. He is much more widely called "Peter Deunov" (about 20,000 Google hits), his books in English list "PETER DEUNOV" as the author [6], etc. The Wikipedia: naming conventions (people) suggests that the most widely recognized variation be used. That's why i correct the problem with first name from Petar to Peter. Sorry, Will, but I should again move the page from Petar Deunov to Peter Deunov. Razum 10:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with your action, but please don't do "cut and paste" moves. The way to move an article is using the "Move" link. -Will Beback 21:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The name is also sometimes spelt Peter Dunav, and that is how I spelt it in my note on the Bulgarian Religion page subsection orthodox Christianity. There is no such thing as correct Romanisation of Bulgarian, but we could maybe agree to be consistent? Please note that I am not an authority on the White Brotherhood, please do not take offence and feel free to edit the entry. I simply felt that no page on Bulgarian religion would be complete without a mention of The White Brotherhood. It maybe deserves a section to itself, rather than sitting in the orthodox christianity section.125.248.222.226 06:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It is time to clean up from noncompilant

I think that is time to clean up the page from the noncompliant tag. All problems are already gone, and the page is now in good condition. Thanks to everybody that help us to make this article better formatted.

Razum 10:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Wsiegmund, this is not hagiography, but real facts and true information. Lets we discuss this topic here. Please, give any reason to put this tag. But explain this, explain logic and your motives. We will work and the problems will disappear. Best Regards, Razum 11:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Razum; I agree that the article has been improved and thank you for your efforts.

  • I've noted a few items that need sources, in my opinion
  • The article as written would benefit from footnotes. Please see WP:FN. Footnotes allow content to be linked to its source. WP:CITET may be helpful, too. External links should not appear in the text. They should be cited as footnotes.
  • I object to the use of the word "science" in the article. I don't think that even by the standards of the time that Peter Deunov was a scientist or published scientific research in scientific journals. Wouldn't "metaphysics" be more accurate?
  • Even though the article topic does not appear to have garnered much attention by writers in English, that is not an objection to devoting as much space as needed to thoroughly explore the topic. The WP:NPOV#Undue weight clause says in part, "None of this is to say that tiny-minority views cannot receive as much attention as we can give them on pages specifically devoted to them. Wikipedia is not paper. But even on such pages, though a view may be spelled out in great detail, it should not be represented as the truth." This is relevant to my comment on the use of the word "science". Also, it may be appropriate to state in the introduction that English-language research, published by historians or religious scholars, is sparse. Please correct me if I'm misinformed.
  • The sentence, "His answers were documented and preserved for the generations", has a hagiographic flavor, in my opinion. Perhaps it could be reworded or deleted. Overall, the tone is much more appropriate than when I tagged it noncompliant.

Best wishes, --Walter Siegmund (talk) 22:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV-laden paragraph

This quote seems to me to be very POV-heavy.

During the Second World War Master Beinsa Douno advised his disciples Lyubomir Loulchev (advisor at the court) and Methodi Constantinov (high official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) to persuade Tsar Boris III to withdraw his decision on the deportation of Bulgarian Jewry and practically he became their true saviour.

"practically he became their true saviour"? This is a statement, which most Bulgarian historians would argue passionately. Furthermore, there is no citation of the true source. Unless someone provides a good reason to keep this paragraph, I will consider editing it out of the article in a week or two. Milen 16:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)