User talk:Sevadar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sevadar

I left a message on Sant Thakar Singh's talk page. Can you check it out and reply to it, please? It was primarily directed at you since you're the primary contributor. Stiles 16:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sevadar! I've noticed you've been making a lot of contributions in the area of Sant Mat etc; thanks! May I suggest that you use the preview function of the editing window more often? This allows you to see what your changes will look like before saving them to memory, and using the preview button makes the page history of each article more user-friendly as there are less individual edits per person. Thanks for contributing! --Kwekubo 00:50, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank-you for the tip! I am new to the wikipedia so I do not have all the etiquette down quite yet. Thanks again. 22:18, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Autobiography

Your edits had me laughing. Yes, Wikipedia is rife with autobiography, and in every single case that I know of (which is many) it has caused problems. "Autobiography" is a term which can also apply to edits by adherents of subjects, beliefs, and views. For example, is calling a particular leader or guru "The Master" truly encyclopedic and NPOV? It seems to imply that there is only one. Just a thought. I hope we can work together to write the best possible articles on many topics. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:40, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I am glad someone "got it." The main problem is how to do NPOV on hardened cases where intentional spin is being applied. I don't know how to loosen that up. I do know that asking someone to apply a neutral point of view to their own life is probably impossible. That is why English has a first and third person. If we could speak about ourselves objectively, we would not need both. Thanks for your help on the article. Regards, 23:34, 3 October 2005 (UTC) Sevadar

[edit] A "Spirituality" portal

Hi, Sevadar,

Some editors have been discussing the possibility of creating a “Spirituality” portal. What do you think of the idea? — RichardRDFtalk 14:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi Richard, I don't know much about portals, must be some kind of advanced wikipedia concept. Sounds good. I was unaware of the good work being done in the Spirituality article, I will have to look more closely. Thank-you for clueing me in. 00:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)Sevadar

I'm sure you'll catch on very quickly. I look forward to your participation in the Spirituality WikiProject and reading your contributions to the Spirituality portal. :-) — RichardRDFtalk 00:35, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Spirituality

Template:Spirituality has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Spirituality. Thank you. — RichardRDFtalk 17:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Quality needed

Hi Sevadar, I have been reading the St Thakar Singh article, nice work, a lot obviously went into the article, just a few concerns: the article was B-rated, while I wouldn't have had a problem with that grade in high school, it is unacceptable to me as an initiate. The main things I noticed about the article was that the tone was pretty "devotional", which IMHO would be a little off-putting to non-initiates. Another thing, it is written:

"He has also made something of a name for himself as an antiguru debunker; on the same page there is a video clip of Lane being interviewed about Gurus by a local television station. So Professor Lane has good reasons to maintain a bias and propagate inaccurate information. His students/followers regularly vandalize this article. For more on his salacious views on gurus...."

Ok, so Lane is very anti-guru, and doesn't have anything nice to say about Sant Thakar Singh... so what? This passage seems pretty "salacious" to me... why are you trying to cast dirt on this person's reputation? His viewpoint deserves respect... even if it is harmful/inaccurate.

I would like to tidy up the Thakar Singh article, hope we can cooperate on it. We can make this article of "utmost quality" like it deserves to be.

Peaceupnorth 07:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)