User talk:TalkAbout

TalkAbout has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

• [[1]] Naming conventions [[2]] Picture tutorial*[3]3RR*[4]Vandalism* [5]Request for Investigation*[[6]] Manual of Style [[7]]Citing Sources [[8]]*[[9]] Editing Tutorial
• [[10]] Community Portal [[11]]Mediation
• [[12]]Policies and Guidelines*[[13]]List of guidelines[[14]]Help Desk*{{editprotected}} Request for Protection of Pages.
• [15] Three-revert rule*[16] Suspected sock puppets

The picture you added takes up too much space, shrink it down or you will need to use { { - } } marks. But by all means add it in if it is an real picture. Since your are a photographer maybe you can help add in pictures to other politicans because I have trouble getting them for many pages I edited. Just wanted to make sure you were not an vandal because there was a lots of vandalsim on pages by random ip adress users.CS California

You can shrink down your picture and up load a new one (check in file history of your file). Someone also needs to find out when he is born and where in guangdong he came from.CS California

Is it just me or is the entire article a word for word copy from his website?

It sure was, but I've reverted it back to a free version now. -Wiccan Quagga 05:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was no articles that were given to me that were campaign bias that left nowhere. the picture was the only one available from an old chronicle newspaper I had. The empty braket sign { { - } } was to organize the article around the large picture that was imputed.

Point 4 Please don't use brackets that lead to no where Which brackets lead nowhere

If the information was "disputed" just change it and indicate why, you dont have to make a big deal about it. As you commented no "bias information should be added." I agree that bias information should not be added. The secondary bracket edits were to fix the links so they just summarized the information instead of showing the whole link. NO LINKS were Deleted.

Your link were listed in an unorganized manner displaying the adresses check links on other politican cites they were all organized History page of leland yee articles:

• [17]Death Threats Over Video Games
• [18]Supervisor Yee's plan includes ban on new ventures in the Tenderloin, March 31, 1998
• Salon.com,Grand Death Auto
• [19] Suit tying video game to murders may proceed
• [20] Violent video game blamed for deaths, Matier and Ross

"By all the useless re-arranging you make it hard for people to research and cause some delay in accessing said information." (TalkAbout) How do people find stuff if it is unorganized?

You mentioned:

• Police and parent groups are concerned about violent video games causing children to be desensitized to violence. (why are you talking about parents when the article relates to Leland Yee?) They also believe that the video makers should be held accountable in these type of crimes. Others believe it is not the direct cause of the violence. (you indicated believed twice which is not factual. Why are they included. It still is unrelated to the main article leland yee. We are not writing about the relations between video games and desensitizing children) Both of Yee's bills passed with a wide support due in part by all the media attention and support by parents.(this last sentance should be added to the point with bill 1792)

Note that the bottem two points can be combined because they relate to Bill 1792 & 1793. Why was the combination reverted??? Death threats is a minor aspect and should be combined.

• Yee is the author of California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793, which was signed into law on October 7, 2005, which would prohibit the sales of "ultra-violent" games in California to persons under the age of eighteen. Judge Ronald Whyte issued a preliminary injunction against the law on December 22 2005. Judge Whyte will soon deliver his final opinion on the constitutionality of California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793
• Yee received death threat as a result of authoring Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793.
• Why were these point made significant since the article should be factual?
• Points I made still incorporated the non-bias information provided?

Point 7 The photo you uploaded has been removed on two occasions by the wiki folks...see your talk page because you do not cite the source.

Which wiki folks removed this check history! the only people who modify it are not even members of wikipedia. I have been modifying this page since 06:18, 30 May 2006 (check history) and the picture only has been taken off by non wikipedia users. The picture sent in by TalkAbout does not cite the source either.

Point 3 Please check your spelling. You wrote:

• Finance Committee, he championed fiscal responsibility and accountability and established the largest "Rainy Day" budget reserve in San Francisco's history. Yee

Why start an new sentance with just yee and not finish it? Everyone makes mistakes just fix it and indicate that it is an minor edit. You dont have to wine about spelling when it is such an minor issue. It seems like you copied this information through cutting and pasting. It is not problematic if you can easily change it and write bias information read articles linked. I don't know why you have to make such a big deal about such a small problemCS_California

Hi just a hint on how to use the Wiki. Signing comments ;

When you leave a post on a discussion page, sign off automatically using four tilda signs from your keyboard, that is the ~ sign usually made by an alt-n or similar depending on your input settings. Four tilda will automatically sign your username and time of post whilst hiding your IP address. Making links ; Likewise, the use of two square bracket signs such as [[ is to make a Wiki link automatically is NOT used to turn text red. It is NOT used for long sentances but for words with Wiki topic pages already established or worthy of establishing. When a single word turns red, it means that there is no existing wiki topic page for it to link to. Vandalism and 3RR policy It might serve you to read up on some of the official policies of the Wikipedia such as the Three-revert rule (or 3RR) and the processes by which to report vandalism or rouge users/IP address to the admins, e.g. Requests_for_investigation. If you do enough good work and contributions, you can asked to bemade an admin which gives you more power to protect the Wiki and defend it against vandals.Good luck. 195.82.106.244 14:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• To indent contributions to discussion pages, use one or more colons, e.g.

It is convetion that each new contributor indents their contribution to a discussion to make it easier to read and see where one finishes and the next starts. Thanks. 195.82.106.244 14:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Headings don't use brackets.
• If you use brackets to link to topics with no pages, learn how to make new pages.
• Check to see if singular nouns already have a page, it is not necessary to make new pages for plurals as well. Learn how to make a link from a word to a slightly different equivalent topic.195.82.106.244 10:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Stanger195.82.106.244|195.82.106.244, I don't know how to reply so I gather you have access here some how? Sincerely, TalkAbout 01:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, learn how to use the Wiki. Read the manual and guidelines. When reverting an article state that you are reverting and to which version. By doing so, you establish the pattern which makes it easier for the admins to decide who is right and who is doing wrong. Likewise if making an edit, state what the edit is in a brief impersonal manner, in the window provided for doing so, so that others know what you have done. Thank you.195.82.106.244 21:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talkabout,

Thanks for adding that trivia. I recently added to the folklore of RWC, also. However, it seems I am destine to inform you that the very system you describe has never been shown to be effective. The reasons vary. In any case, I would be remise if I did not point this out, let alone add that to your fine addition. In any case, I considered it in poor taste if I was to edit your addition. I will allow you that happy privelege(sp?).

Best Regards, 05:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)meatclerk

Hi Apparently i am deleting the dicussions page.... All that i can say is that i am not. and loose all of them valuable discussions . jp

Thanks for comment and suggestion to come up with some other addition. I had rather intended to imply in the edit summary that steroids were given for sake of the baby because a premature delivery could occur, rather than specifically for the reason why premature delivery was to occur - my attempts to abbreviate this for the edit summary comment were less clear thna I had wished. I also thought the phrasing (of mother/family having to request) needed reworking for better encyclopaedic style; much monitoring is required and sentances such as "X & Y are monitored" or "Where a premature delivery is likely to occur administration of steroids helps minimise ..." seem, to me, to read better. More importantly the article already mentions the use of steroids, so this seemed duplication. However I agree some further mention of issues seems indicated :-) I have therefore copied your post to Talk:Pre-eclampsia, placing a response and possible suggestion there for other editors to join in over. David Ruben ^Talk 03:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, when you want to link to the article about Bosnia, please do not link to Bosnian, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as Bosnia (region) or Bosnia and Herzegovina by writing out [[Bosnia and Herzegovina|Bosnian]]. Regards, Jeff3000 02:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the reason for the removal of Category:Allied health professions was because the category does not exist. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 06:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cheery smiles! -all in all your page in a whole lot better nick than over my neck of the woods right now. Can we chat offline? searchin man

Saving you from on unwanted e-mails! TalkAbout 17:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I gave you substantial unequivocal evidence in my nine point reply under 'Searchin Man complaint' as to why there is an urgent need for an NPOV on the article. Re-visit point 1 of the reply before vandalising the NPOV. And please don't accuse me of personal attacks, ..not yet anyway. searchin man 22:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am having a mediation problem and would like some help on this in the Brahma Kumaris discussion page. I have a fellow Named:Avyakt7 AKA Riveros11,72.91.28.223 AKA 72.91.151.117,

It would appear that he wants some thing removed. I can't seem to find it, but will remove what I do find. Now here is the problem: This fellow has been placing others information up too. It all started with him sussing someone and coming on the wiki to complain about a forum. Now, I don't know how to go about this, nor am I authorized to removed it permanently. Any help/advice you can offer whould be most appriciated. TalkAbout 05:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what you're asking. I can suggest, though, that you try a dispute resolution process, which will perhaps help clear things up. If you need an article to be deleted, you can look at Articles for Deletion for information. Good luck! Replace the {{helpme}} template if you need additional help. —Keakealani 05:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keakealani,

No, I don't want the article deleted. He says there is some thing there in the Discussion Page that he wants deleted. On the other hand he has been actively trying to out other wiki participants? So, who do I write to get this resolved or how do I start with mediation for him. He seems to have several IPs.

The article is fine, he just wants to turn it into an advertisement for the organisation rather than a neutral informative article. Thanks TalkAbout 06:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

As Keakealani said, please read and try one of the methods listed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution if the problem persists. Cheers, Tangotango 08:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I need help with avyakt7(Riveros11) that has taken ownership of an article and removed an advertisement tag. Now I don't want to revert because he will state that I am the problem. Please note that the Brahma Kumaris article is in arbitration and I have had problems with this editor before on this one article as he is part of the BK IT TEAM. The article currently has a clean up tag due to all his editing and currently he is demanding to know who an editor is before he allows any editing? Can you help! PEACETalkAbout 17:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cancel the Help...Admin Jossi already assisted. TalkAbout 17:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please realize that user.244 has been lying. DO you see that? Please do not try to cover this. Both of you are antagonistic to Brahma Kumaris. Both of you have been abusing it by placing your biased views in it. Currently, you are not qualified to mediate anything in this article, we need an "unbiased" mediator if you want to go that route. I would like to work that article so that it is "unbiased." In other words, I would like to work with you, so neither BKs feel left out nor user .244 and yourself. This article needs to be neutral. I don't know what happened with you and user .244 and to vent your views in a such a strong way, but WIKIPEDIA must not be the place for that.

Sincerely, avyakt7 Ps: If you would like to discuss about this article, feel free to contact me avyakt7atyahoo.com

That's over 4 days now and nothing, look I'll happily accept a response from the 'Old one' himself if he has anymore clue. searchin man 01:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I was you I would check your email

TalkAbout, I've noticed that your signature does not seem to be working, where you have to go back and wikify your userid. If you've set this up intentionally, fine. If not, the problem could be that you have "Raw signature" checked on "my preferences" under the "User profile" tab. Unchecking this box should make the software automatically include your userid linked in your signature. –RHolton≡– 22:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RHolton,

Problem solved! Similar to looking for my glasses only to find they are on my head.:) Thank you! TalkAbout 01:10, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Recovery_from_Cults_(book) Andries 18:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Andries seems to think I could let you know about other relatd AFD's if I tell you in a neutral manner about them, but from past experience I think that's a bad idea. Suffice it to say this: let it be known to you that there might perchance possibly be other related AFD's out there on a related topic that you may also be interested in commenting on at some point in the future. Perhaps. There, I hope that will sound to any random roving Wikipedia Administrator just like a friendly pointer and not like canvassing. Yours, Smeelgova 19:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I have removed some of the links you added, as they pointed to a page that pretty much only contained links right back to Wikipedia, and doesn't appear to be a reliable source anyway. Please use wikilinks to point to other articles at Wikipedia. Thanks --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 19:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand you are trying to provide information to help people, Wikipedia is not here to be an instruction guide or a collection of external links. Information must be verifiable and notable to remain here. If the information isn't already out there in a WP:RS, Wikipedia simply cannot have it. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 21:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recovery from Cults[21], XBK info: A guide to life after leaving the Brahma Kumaris, 2006

I placed the {{external links}} tag on that article primarily because of the number of links. When an article needs its external links broken down into sub-sections, we've passed over the spam event horizon. If you disagree feel free to contest it at the article's talk page, but I feel the tag should remain until the links are culled quite a bit more. Thanks --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 23:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I have changed the formatting of Template:Cults, so that it can now run down the right side of an article, like [[Template:ScientologySeries, and virtually all of the other templates within Category:Religion navigational boxes. Check it out please and let me know what you think. Yours, Smeelgova 23:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Smeelgova,

Sorry for the delay in replying, been having trouble with my camera memory cards for my projects. Looks great! It is Gold. PEACETalkAbout 18:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently debating whether to leave Wikipedia altogether or simply take a break. I've become disillusioned by all of the personal attacks and overall bad manners by users of opposing POV. Therefore, I would most appreciate it if you would post your opinions/comments on the Template:Cults Talk page. Hope you are doing well. Yours, Smeelgova 19:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, you uploaded several images such as Image:Drum Trance,.jpgor Image:BBP Archives 2006.jpg with conflicting statements: YOu wrote: "My own work, attribution required, not for commercial use or profit", which is incompatible with GFDL license. Please keep in miong that wikipedia material may be used commercially. Please review 'all your images (using, eg., your complete list of contributions) and update descriptions accordingly. Otherwise your images may be deleted from wikipedia.`'mikkanarxi 21:02, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am seeing that I am being implicated, along with the BKWSU IT team, in some kind of conspiracy or unethical behavior [[22]][[23]]. This is a personal attack in the form of repeated accusatory comments so I am issuing you with the first NPA warning.

I should point out that I am currently the only representative of the BKWSU IT team posting on Wikipedia and that means that anything I post is circulated and approved by the team first. Other BK contributers are posting autonomously and have to take responsibility for their own conduct on Wikipedia. In communications I have had with other editors off-line I have basically recommended following all of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies since, apart from being unethical, bad conduct makes any editor less credible and liable to be banned.

If you would like to clarify anything with me by all means use my talk page or email me via my talk page but please don't just post sensational headlines on an article talk page implying "guilt by association".

Regards Bksimonb 04:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bksimonb,

Dear Bksimonb, it was searchin man via an e-mail that said you three were in direct communication and even provided details of your activities. So, given that I see that there is no personal attacks on my part, as I stated prior I was going to be discreet about this, but since you bring it forward I see no need to be. So, perhaps you need to State in a public way that you do not support sussing people out,tracing IPs, attacking them personally (including starting rumors of others) and that Avyak7Riveros11 andsearchin man are not in direct contact with you or working at your direction. That you do not approve of language that is demeaning, sexually condescending towards females since you profess that you are a woman run organisation. Even though you acknowledge direct contact with them and offering guidance to them on how not to be banned, you have now established a secondary working relationship group. In any effort it is not a good idea to be in contact with others while trying to remain un soiled by their activities while in Official capacity of BKWSU IT team as the PR Voice of BKWSU.

When you came on I had some high hopes of working on a neutral but truthful way. I thought your first posts indicated that the BKWSU was perhaps having some thoughts about the following:

• Child Abuse
• Ex-Member attempting suicide
• Ex-Members committing suicide
• Member being asked to break all contact with their families
• Ex-Members having sever psychological problems due to the Tenents/Teachings/Indoctrination
• Ex-Members not being offered any Exit counseling.....

That is why I was so happy to address you as I truly sensed that this was the case, which it apparently is not. See, my motivation is seeing all the post problems and the havoc it causes in the lives of the Ex-BKs and their families. From a PR point I say you are loosing some points in the way Avyak7Riveros11 treated Green108 as I am sensitive to individuals and on-going issues. So, if you, Riveros (with numerous IPs) and Seachin Man see that I am delicate on how I handle a few....it is because I am aware. Perhaps I am taking on more concern, perhaps some that really should be shouldered by those that told them day after day of Destruction and of jumping off 5 stories to their death if they left. If someone such as my self has taken the time, I pose this to you and the organisation: Why are you not listening to the cries of those that have served you for years/decades, the children abused while in your care and why have you turned a blind eye and continue said practises?

To call some one BROTHER or SISTER is to indicate a bond, a bond that would say that you would carry this individual through times of hardship, to not leave them alone to suffer if it was the system that caused said suffering.

Bksimonb why deny the tenets or teachings. Be truthful, be a light of goodness that does not hide the wrongs, be a soul that is loving, as in loving those in need one find the ultimate truth. Do not abandoned nor thrash these brothers/sisters about for wanting to WARN others of the suffering they have been through or are going through.

Humanity is judged by the way we treat our weakest in society.

So, continue to try and have me banned if that is the only solution you see to hiding the truth.

In closing I must say one thing since Searchin Man has made it public in reference to the individual and that individual’s spouse. To pose even the question would say that you do not know who some of your most loyal people are. Do a little more reading and you will see the truth in bold print.

A lot of what Avyackt7Riveros11 erased had the citation in the bibliography which you have yet to address.PEACE TalkAbout 18:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:TalkAbout,

I have no personal interest in whatever email exchange you had with User:Searchin_man. I also don't see it as any concern of yours what communication I have with other editors by email. Other that what I have told you it is our own business who and what we discuss amongst ourselves.

Here is a suggestion. If you believe a user has violated Wikipedia's policies then use the correct channels to address this. Keep your complaint only to the user concerned. Do not rant and rave on the discussion page of an article. That is for discussing the article only.

Most of your response seems to consist of a rant against the organisation and my not addressing the points you raise. Let me make it clear that I am not here to address that. It is beyond the remit of the IT team of an organisation to answer to sensational allegations. I am here to stop the damage the article is causing the organisation by the disinformation and bias it currently consists of. I intend to do this by learning how Wikipedia works and bringing the article up to a standard more appropriate for an encyclopedia. I am confident I will achieve this simply by following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and taking the sound advice from admins such as User:Rholton.

Also, if you really want to rant about the organisation why not find a more appropriate outlet such as a personal blog? Wikipedia is just simply not for that purpose.

Finally, as to whether I trying to get you banned, well, that is really in your hands. You always have the option to remain civil and respectful of other editors, their beliefs and their affiliations.

Regards Bksimonb 06:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

Bksimonb,

First, Sir I feel personally attacked by this: “Do not rant and rave on the discussion page of an article. That is for discussing the article only." I have been civil to you and your members of the Brahma Kumaris organisation. What I see here is that you are trying to work the system to hide your true practices, to suit your PR needs under a shield of "verifiable" sources approved by your members, while leaving others out that are quite legitimate. The truth cannot be forever shielded in secrecy. TalkAbout 21:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you are still around. I've been away for a while myself. Anyway, you are right that the last remarks I made were a bit harsh and perhaps uncivil. They may not technically break the NPA policy but are probably not in the spirit of it. I sincerly appologise for any offense caused. I should have used a more appropriate tone to express my views.

I am sorry I can not agree with your views about the BKWSU and my affiliation with it but I hope we can put this behind us and proceed with the same mutual regard that we started out with. Regards Bksimonb 19:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the user is moving the bulk of the text to Rationale for the Iraq War. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 05:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I left a response to your message in the talk page. Kowloonese 03:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 17:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I heard about that, it is a strange case, the actual FDA regulation stipulates that folic acid must be added to bread and cereals, but recently a few customs officials have started to interpret that as it must not be added to anything else, and have gone so far as to search the baggage of anyone who has an Australian accent (presumably they don't have anything better to look for). So far my illicit Vegemite smuggling ring (one jar in return in return for letting visitors stay with me) has kept me in stock ;)

Thank you for my cheese, and have a great day :) Sad mouse 20:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi talkabout,

What you have bought up has already been sorted out and it was concluded that it was not a personal attack, and any negative results have been rectified. I am no longer involved with wiki content, so any further comment or questions are unlikely to be seen and replied too.

thank you.

jesselp 18:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for more references for the article Sathya Sai Baba and Beliefs and practices in the Sathya Sai Baba movement. I understand that you may have Babb's book that contains a chapter about Sathya Sai Baba. I would be very happy if you could use it to expand or to reference mentioned articles. I would be even more happier if you could send me excerpts of the article or even a copy of the article. Andries 19:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC) ttalkabout@yahoo.com[reply]

Don't know if I will get into editing Sathya Sai Baba or wait until the arb case is done? :-)20:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The article Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.

A temporary injunction has been passed in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris. All editors listed as a party to this case are banned from editing Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University until the case is settled.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 11:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Image-Brahma Kumaris Info.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 03:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, left a message on your talk page, it is OK to delete.PEACETalkAbout 07:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My main criticism of your page are the description of the owners, as the educational details seem resume-like, which is not allowed on wikipedia. If you changed that part it would no longer read like an ad.

On a side note, there is a certain format that business articles should have that I'm afraid I don't know much about. You may want to consider a layout akin to Ford Motor Company which has the info box to mention notable people in the company.

I'm afraid I can't offer very much help other than that, as I just patrol new pages. Thanks! Cmw4117 18:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bkell, All items have been fixed. PEACETalkAbout 18:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work. Everything looks fine now. —Bkell (talk) 19:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've put in some new section headers that will hopefully make it easier to navigate. Thanks for pointing that out. The infobox was gone before I had ever seen the page, so I don't know what happened to that. OCNative 05:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

195.82.106.244 is banned for one year for a personal attack which contained a threat against another user [24]. 195.82.106.244 is placed on Probation. He may be banned from editing any article which he disrupts by engaging in aggressive biased editing, especially that relying on inadequately sourced original research. Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University is placed on article probation. The principals in this matter are expected to convert the article from its present state based on original research and BK publications to an article containing verifiable information based on reliable third party sources. After a suitable grace period, the state of the article may be evaluated on the motion of any member of the Arbitration Committee and further remedies applied to those editors who continue to edit in an inappropriate manner. Any user may request review by members of the Arbitration Committee. Should any user violate a ban imposed under the terms of this decision, they may be blocked for an appropriate period of time. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris#Log of blocks and bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 17:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the compliment on the list! I hope you feel better soon. Which template are you referring to? Smee 16:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi. I see you edited the vfd, after it had been closed. I will not remove it, but please refrain from modifying it after the debate is closed, unless you have something important to say. Thank you. AstroHurricane001^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 22:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else removed your comment. At least it's in the edit history. I did not remove it at any point. AstroHurricane001^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 00:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much! This was unexpected and a real treat, it's been fun learning about the graphic design stuff lately... Smee 00:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Actually, if you knew me you'd know how ridiculous the above heading is since I'm actually a keen open source advocate and don't use their OS or other software if I can at all help it. In relation to the thread on the BKWSU talk page [25] I think the example of Microsoft is different since, according to the CNN report, they are actually intending to pay a blogger to represent them on Wikipedia. I have always been clear about who I am and what my conflict of interest is and this is detailed in my statement to Arbitration [26]. And no one's paying me!

I'm here because the BKWSU article was presenting an aggressive and biased account and obviously we were hearing about it from people. It would be nice if we could have just send an email to Wikipedia and ask them to sort it out but I don't think that's how it works here. Look at it from our perspective. What options do we have? Though this is a massive time and energy sink the only option seems to be for someone, namely me, to sign up as an editor and join in the editing process. Fortunately I enjoy it (sometimes) and it is a great opportunity to learn (always) so I take back the "time and energy sink" comment but you can hopefully see what an organisation is potentially lumbered with on account of this wonderful Wikipedia thing and some of the editors that frequent it. Now I understand that as an editor with a "conflict of interest" I am "strongly discouraged" from editing the BKWSU article. Well, if I could be assured that a neutral editor would take up the task to be proactive in challenging poorly sourced, biased or aggressive editing of this an other articles I would gladly take a holiday or contribute to other articles I find interesting (having gone to all the trouble of becoming an editor and all). However, what I am observing is that only editors with a vested in interest in a topic like the BKWSU are actually prepared to do this. So I guess it's down to me and other concerned editors then. You may call this "whitewash" if you want but you can be darned sure that if there is any way I can challenge what I see as undue weighting, bias or inadequate references against the BKWSU and inappropriate behaviour by opposing editors towards me or the article then be rest assured that challenge I will :-)

If you feel I am doing something underhand, and, if as you suggest, you have documented this, then by all means raise a request for investigation, or whatever Wikipedia procedure you feel is most appropriate to deal with it. In the meantime, is it too much to ask that we keep whatever issues you have with me, or other editors, out of the article discussion pages so that we can concentrate on the article(s)?

Now I'm asking you, in the interest of fairness, if it is possible that we can work together to create a more balanced article that includes an account of criticism and/or controversies. I wouldn't go as far as to say the article is an advert as such since it doesn't really push anything that I can see (except the CNG project that I only just noticed. Yikes!). However I do take your point about the lack of these sections creating an impression that there is no criticism or controversy. Of course it would have to be NPOV, especially with regards to undue weight [27]. Even the BKWSU's own books such as Adi Dev document the early reactions to the organisation, as do books like "Peace an Purity". Right now I am gathering reliable secondary sources, as I see you have too, but I have to admit that actually adding content to an article is proving more of a challenge to me, in terms of my research/writing ability, than I thought it would be. I'd be interested to hear where you are up to with this. Not because I think I "OWN" the article or anything but simply to see if it is possible for us to work together in a more relaxed and less confrontational setting.

Thanks & regards Bksimonb 11:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bksimonb,

Listen, please understand that what ever future edits I make, are not personal and that I am just doing the research. If I find some thing of notability I will place that in as well as I do not believe in being one sided. Understand that I am being truthful here. Now as to Avyakt7. I find his attacks very unproductive and his "tone" demeaning. I think he has shown this tactic to work in getting others to give up on editing the article with great success I might say.

In addition I would like it if you would stop referring to "gorillas" when addressing me or points about me. If you must know I consider myself bi-racial. So, please take note, refrain from this as I do want to work with you, Appledell,and others in a positive fashion. Keep in mind that ALL people are beautiful and trying to get at them via a racial means is not civil and self degrading of the individual doing it and those they represent!

I understand that you are very competent in programming (glad to see you believe in open source) and considered one of the best on the IT TEAM. So, if you profess that it is not a TEAM effort I will note that once again. In the interim, let us clear the slate and begin a new and hopefully some thing can be worked out or at the very least some level of decorum can be gained. PEACETalkAbout 19:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir,

I thank you for keeping your comments off my talk page. I have no wish to become involved in whatever nonsense has gone before.

As you were one of the contributors involved in the edit warring and arbitration case, I am not entirely sure what your opinions are worth and suggest that you take your own advice, helping to move the topic forward by adding your own references and citations.

Some people 01:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]