Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

wikipedia help wanted

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Sat Nam. Some months ago, I was asked to fill out the wikipedia

reference for Yogi Bhajan - which I did by the grace of Guru Ram Das.

 

There are 2 things I would like some help with, both to enhance that

article and to honour the life and work of Yogi Bhajan.

 

1) I would like some help or advice on how to address the " cult "

critique that has been posted at the top of this article. I know

there is a loose administration that runs wikipedia, but I have no

experience in working with or through it.

 

2) I would also appreciate it if anyone were able to spruce the site

up with photos, much as the Albert Einstein is decorated. If you have

technical smarts to do it - or if you would like to give me some

advice on this - I would be happy to hear from you.

 

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Guru Fatha Singh,

 

As you probably know, Wikipedia is moderated by the

public. As far as I’m aware there are 3 or 4 levels of moderators

each with more power and responsibility. The lowest level is when average

joe makes an edit to a page. You can go in right now, without logging in

or anything and make a change and it will immediately show up. Of course,

these kind of edits are the ones most heavily monitored. Next you can

create an account (for free). I’d highly advise this for anyone who

wants to make serious contribution for Wikipedia. It allows other

moderators to see what changes you’ve made over time and allows you to start

developing a trustworthy reputation. You can get promoted to the higher

tiers based on your expertise and activity within Wikipedia. I’m

not intimately familiar with the authority held by the higher ranked users but

amongst it includes the ability to remove edits, flag suspicious users, and

mark articles as incomplete or biased.

 

I must say that though I support Yogi Bhajan’s cause

most whole heartedly, that the article does appear “biased” from an

encyclopaedia perspective. Nearly every single reference is by a 3HO

related publication, member, or organisation. There is no mention of any

of the controversy of which I gather there is a fair amount… I’ve

just glanced at the Rick Ross site which to me looks more biased than anything

but reality is on your side: As far as I’m aware, none of the court

cases ever resulted in a ruling against Yogi Bhajan. Many of them were filed

against his students and not him directly. Many were thrown out.

Moreover, Yogi Bhajan has been recognised personally by the US Congress and

every major leader of the modern era.

 

I would recommend the following:

1.

Create a Wikipedia account: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin & returnto=Harbhajan_Singh_Yogi

 

2.

Read and become intimately familiar with Wikipedia’s

policies

3.

Add a “Controversies” section –

perhaps as a table. Find another spiritual leader and see how it’s

done for them… Add every case related to Yogi Bhajan along with the

result – good or bad. Avoid blaming, explaining, etc, Avoid any style

of writing that might appear editorial-like. Be totally transparent and

let people judge for themselves.

4.

Immediately after the “Controversies”

section, add an “Accolades and Awards” section and list the fact he

was recognised by Congress and reference all the letters 3HO and Bibiji

received from world leaders upon Yogi Bhajan’s death and anything else. Try

to find references to these that aren’t 3HO related publications.

5.

Add another section called something like “Celebrity

Affiliations”. Rick Ross had an article from MSNBC saying that Courtney

Love attended Women’s Camp… Whether you like it or not,

celebrity affiliation is perhaps the best way to build credibility in today’s

society.

6.

Review the text that’s already there. If

possible, find other references. Ensure that the copy sounds like a news

report and not like something from the About section of 3ho.org. Read up

on Wikipedia’s referencing policy and find out why they say the article

is “incorrectly referenced”

7.

Contact Wikipedia and inform them that you would like

to work to improve the article as to make it more credible in their eyes.

Ask them what you can do in order to improve it and get the WARNING flag

removed from it. This would be even better if it came from an

organisation like 3HO or KRI. Maybe this should be done first…

8.

Add the Rick Ross site (or a more credible version

thereof) as an External Link…or at least as a reference. Its better

down there than at the top of the page!

 

Graphics would be nice but they aren’t the reason why

the article is being labelled biased. All-in-all it pays to be totally open

and transparent. Wikipedia and its moderators are very Aquarian.

They are unpaid and they give because they can. That being said, some

have been known to be biased and difficult. Computer information mavens

also tend to have a biased toward Atheism, so be aware. From their point

of view however, they face daily onslaught from people who wish to use and

abuse Wikipedia as a promotional, marketing, or misinformation tool.

 

While I lack the time and knowledge to improve this page

myself, once the information is gathered, I’ll gladly advise anyone on the

technical aspects of getting it into Wikipedia…

 

Wahe Guru Ji Ka Khalsa, Wahe Guru Ji Ki Fateh!

Hari Karam Singh

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Hari Karam Singh,

 

Sat Nam. Thanks for your detailed and balanced input. With the grace

of God, we'll make this right.

 

Blessings abounding...

 

Guru Fatha Singh

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " Sacred Studio "

<sacredstudio wrote:

>

> Dear Guru Fatha Singh,

>

>

>

> As you probably know, Wikipedia is moderated by the public. As far

as I'm

> aware there are 3 or 4 levels of moderators each with more power and

> responsibility. The lowest level is when average joe makes an edit to a

> page. You can go in right now, without logging in or anything and

make a

> change and it will immediately show up. Of course, these kind of

edits are

> the ones most heavily monitored. Next you can create an account

(for free).

> I'd highly advise this for anyone who wants to make serious

contribution for

> Wikipedia. It allows other moderators to see what changes you've

made over

> time and allows you to start developing a trustworthy reputation.

You can

> get promoted to the higher tiers based on your expertise and

activity within

> Wikipedia. I'm not intimately familiar with the authority held by the

> higher ranked users but amongst it includes the ability to remove edits,

> flag suspicious users, and mark articles as incomplete or biased.

>

>

>

> I must say that though I support Yogi Bhajan's cause most whole

heartedly,

> that the article does appear " biased " from an encyclopaedia perspective.

> Nearly every single reference is by a 3HO related publication,

member, or

> organisation. There is no mention of any of the controversy of which I

> gather there is a fair amount. I've just glanced at the Rick Ross site

> which to me looks more biased than anything but reality is on your

side: As

> far as I'm aware, none of the court cases ever resulted in a ruling

against

> Yogi Bhajan. Many of them were filed against his students and not him

> directly. Many were thrown out. Moreover, Yogi Bhajan has been

recognised

> personally by the US Congress and every major leader of the modern

era.

>

>

>

> I would recommend the following:

>

> 1. Create a Wikipedia account:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin

>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin & returnto=Harbha

> jan_Singh_Yogi> & returnto=Harbhajan_Singh_Yogi

>

> 2. Read and become intimately familiar with Wikipedia's policies

>

> 3. Add a " Controversies " section - perhaps as a table. Find

another

> spiritual leader and see how it's done for them. Add every case

related to

> Yogi Bhajan along with the result - good or bad. Avoid blaming,

explaining,

> etc, Avoid any style of writing that might appear editorial-like. Be

> totally transparent and let people judge for themselves.

>

> 4. Immediately after the " Controversies " section, add an

" Accolades

> and Awards " section and list the fact he was recognised by Congress and

> reference all the letters 3HO and Bibiji received from world leaders

upon

> Yogi Bhajan's death and anything else. Try to find references to

these that

> aren't 3HO related publications.

>

> 5. Add another section called something like " Celebrity

Affiliations " .

> Rick Ross had an article from MSNBC saying that Courtney Love attended

> Women's Camp. Whether you like it or not, celebrity affiliation is

perhaps

> the best way to build credibility in today's society.

>

> 6. Review the text that's already there. If possible, find other

> references. Ensure that the copy sounds like a news report and not like

> something from the About section of 3ho.org. Read up on Wikipedia's

> referencing policy and find out why they say the article is " incorrectly

> referenced "

>

> 7. Contact Wikipedia and inform them that you would like to

work to

> improve the article as to make it more credible in their eyes. Ask them

> what you can do in order to improve it and get the WARNING flag

removed from

> it. This would be even better if it came from an organisation like

3HO or

> KRI. Maybe this should be done first.

>

> 8. Add the Rick Ross site (or a more credible version thereof)

as an

> External Link.or at least as a reference. Its better down there

than at the

> top of the page!

>

>

>

> Graphics would be nice but they aren't the reason why the article is

being

> labelled biased. All-in-all it pays to be totally open and transparent.

> Wikipedia and its moderators are very Aquarian. They are unpaid and

they

> give because they can. That being said, some have been known to be

biased

> and difficult. Computer information mavens also tend to have a biased

> toward Atheism, so be aware. From their point of view however, they

face

> daily onslaught from people who wish to use and abuse Wikipedia as a

> promotional, marketing, or misinformation tool.

>

>

>

> While I lack the time and knowledge to improve this page myself,

once the

> information is gathered, I'll gladly advise anyone on the technical

aspects

> of getting it into Wikipedia.

>

>

>

> Wahe Guru Ji Ka Khalsa, Wahe Guru Ji Ki Fateh!

>

> Hari Karam Singh

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...