Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sri Chinmoy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 360 days ![]() |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
I came across a guy who gave me a leaflet about Sri Chinmoy... it says he painted "nearly 16,000,000 'soul-bird' drawings". After reading this wiki article, I was almost convinced that this guy is an absolute angel. No room for controversy in any way? That's ridiculous. I had to dig to find this document, which quotes several books, with a variety of negative perspectives and accusations. http://www.strippingthegurus.com/stgsamplechapters/chinmoy.html
Now, is this wikipedia or an advertorial page? If it's the former, then there has to be room for controversy, for questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.134.103.46 (talk) 10:04, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Which description should we use in the article? Leaders or teacher.
To the last edits or are they just confusing games from Sockpuppetry?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Asiasiasi
The main category is leaders : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:20th-century_Hindu_religious_leaders
--Riquix (talk) 16:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
I see above that separate Controversy sections have been discussed here a number of times, and consensus has been not to have them, but that concerns have been raised about possible whitewashing. SadirahFierg has been adding a Criticism section that is poorly sourced (blog, open wiki) and not very well expressed. I do not know whether the allegations are already covered in the article because I am unfamiliar with the groups and personalities alluded to, but I do see criticism mentioned in the article already, so it is possible the new section was already repeating material; it's also possible that some of its specifics could be usefully added using better sources. In any case, I've re-reverted it so that the added material can be discussed here, as well as revisiting whether there should be a separate section on criticisms in case consensus has now changed, in particular since this is not a biography of a living person and the historical record may have been amplified by publications in recent years. I'm also going to invite SadirahFierg to come here in case they don't see the ping notification. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.