Guest guest Posted December 28, 2008 Report Share Posted December 28, 2008 Sat Nam, I was checking my links to bios of Yogi Bhajan -- when, I found 2 wikipedia sites. One of them is fine, but the other has questions? This one has the questions at the beginning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbhajan_Singh_Yogi A major contributor to this article or its creator appears to have a conflict of interest with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (September 2008) The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. (September 2008) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of the article are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please include more appropriate citations from reliable sources, or discuss the issue on the talk page. (September 2008) This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2008) Should not this be looked into and resolved? And why are there 2 bios? I think this is the one that Guru Fatha Singh wrote: http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Siri_Singh_Sahib_Harbhajan_Singh_Khalsa\ _Yogi and if so, shouldn't this be the one and only bio on the wiki? Just wondering, Sat Avtar Kaur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 29, 2008 Report Share Posted December 29, 2008 > This article or section needs sources or references that appear in > reliable, third-party publications. > Primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of the article > are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please include > more appropriate citations from reliable sources, or discuss the issue > on the talk page. (September 2008) > I think this is the one that Guru Fatha Singh wrote: >http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Siri_Singh_Sahib_Harbhajan_Singh_Khals\ a_Yogi > and if so, shouldn't this be the one and only bio on the wiki? Sat Nam, I believe the SikhWiki entry constitutes a reliable 3rd party source. Why not attempt to enter the bio as a whole? I can help you. It is my wish to also re-work the Wiki entries for Kundalini Yoga. Or even enter a new " Kundalini Yoga as taught by Yogi Bhajan " definition, to differentiate between essentially two different styles of Kundalini. Contact me by email: filipfilip Truly Yours, Fateh Singh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 29, 2008 Report Share Posted December 29, 2008 Kundalini-Yoga , " Sat Avtar Kaur " <myralorey wrote: > > Sat Nam, > > I was checking my links to bios of Yogi Bhajan -- when, I found 2 > wikipedia sites. One of them is fine, but the other has questions? > > This one has the questions at the beginning: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbhajan_Singh_Yogi > > A major contributor to this article or its creator appears to have a > conflict of interest with its subject. > > It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, > particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk > page. (September 2008) > The neutrality of this article is disputed. > > Please see the discussion on the talk page. (September 2008) > Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. > > This article or section needs sources or references that appear in > reliable, third-party publications. > > Primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of the article > are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please include > more appropriate citations from reliable sources, or discuss the issue > on the talk page. (September 2008) > > This article may contain original research or unverified claims. > Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for > details. (September 2008) > > > Should not this be looked into and resolved? And why are there 2 bios? > > I think this is the one that Guru Fatha Singh wrote: > > http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Siri_Singh_Sahib_Harbhajan_Singh_Khalsa\ _Yogi > > and if so, shouldn't this be the one and only bio on the wiki? > > Just wondering, > > Sat Avtar Kaur > Sat Nam, Sat Avtar Kaur. Thanks for your interest. If you check, you will find the 2 articles are substantially the same. That being said, sikhiwiki is not wikipedia. sikhiwiki is an outgrowth of sikhnet, started by Guruka Singh. wikipedia was started by Jimmy Wales. Wikipedia runs on a mixed hierarchical/democratic system. Anyone can post an article, but there is a caste of editors that go around proofing and " fixing " things. Usually the editors do a good job. Certainly they mean well. The editors who have had their go at this site are clearly unsympathetic. They feel I have a " conflict of interest " because I know the Siri Singh Sahib, teach his teachings and write his bio (which I send out chapter by chapter each month on the internet). To their minds, this compromises my objectivity and my ability to do a good, balanced article. I don't see a whole lot that can be done about this, though I do appreciate that someone recently posted a nice photo with a congressman on the site. The congressman lends credibility for the hard of heart. I never figured out how to load photos. You may notice there is a particular dispute around the neutrality of the section " During the 1980s Sikh Holocaust " . This is one area I do feel empowered to work through. My approach has been to write and post (just this week) a couple of articles about the first 2 historic events known as Ghallooghara or " holocausts " . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_First_Sikh_Holocaust_(1746) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_Sikh_Holocaust_(1762) My current project is to do an article on the 1980s holocaust and link it with the Yogi Bhajan site. That may help so the reference looks more credible. I hope that helps you. If you want to access some of the discussion, go into the discussion page. You will find it there. If anyone out there happens to know their way through the wikipedia editorial hierarchy, they might like to see if they can present our case. As I understand things, this may never be resolved simply because no people will agree on what is or isn't credible - and by my mind that is just fine. In the meanwhile, if you want to refer someone to a nice-looking site, send them to sikhiwiki. The wikipedia article is still a work in progress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.