This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Momento (talk | contribs) at 07:44, 16 November 2012 (Revert). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:44, 16 November 2012 by Momento (talk | contribs) (Revert)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
As per talk - "In January 1979 the Los Angeles Times reported that Rawat was maintaining his Malibu following despite a rising mistrust of cults. Bob Mishler and Robert Hand, a former vice president of the movement, complained that money was increasingly diverted to Rawat's personal use and that the ideals of the group had become impossible to fulfill. The charges found little support and did not affect the progress of the Mission.
REASON - As per talk "As suggested by several editors "In January 1979 the Los Angeles Times reported that Rawat was maintaining his Malibu following despite a rising mistrust of cults. Bob Mishler and Robert Hand, a former vice president of the movement, complained that money was increasingly diverted to Rawat's personal use and that the ideals of the group had become impossible to fulfill. The charges found little support and did not affect the progress of the Mission", comes under the category "Content from sources that is only mentioned once or even twice in years possibly would not carry enough weight to be included in an article and especially a BLP. As well, such content may be fringe content and again consideration should be given as to how much weight if any such content should be given" . I propose removing it.Momento (talk) 05:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
FOLLOWED BY - If there are no policy based arguments, I'll remove it in 24 hours.Momento (talk) 22:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
FOLLOWED BY - "removed as per talk" Momento 03:11, 10 November 201 2"
POS or NEG - Two positive sentences and one negative.
REMOVED - "One witness said that Rawat "played the whole time he was there ... he played with squirt guns, flashed pictures of himself for all to see, and took movies of everybody ... Love flowed back and forth between him and his devotees".
REASON - As per talk "Who ever this witness is (in bold), I don't believe they deserve so much space and should be removed".
POS or NEG - All POS.
REASON - Putting travelling before learning to fly is logical. No material removed.
REASON - Try to get better balance with photos. No material removed. Photos put back.
REASON - Re-arranged material for better chronology and flow. No material removed.
REASON - Replaced photos. No material removed.
REMOVED - "Critics said that his lifestyle was supported by the donations of followers and that the movement appeared to exist only to support Rawat's "opulent existence". Supporters said there is no conflict between worldly and spiritual riches, and that Rawat did not advise anyone to "abandon the material world", but said it is our attachment to it that is wrong. Press reports listed expensive automobiles such as Rolls-Royces, Mercedes-Benz limousines and sports cars, some of them gifts. Maharaj Ji's luxuries are gifts from a Western culture whose fruits are watches and Cadillacs," a spokesman said. Some premies said that he did not want the gifts, but that people gave them out of their love for him. They saw Rawat's lifestyle as an example of a lila, or divine play, which held a mirror to the "money-crazed and contraption-collecting society" of the West
REASON - As per talk "This paragraph is far too long. We just need to say Rawat's affluent lifestyle was a source of controversy and the premies rebuttal for NPOV. We can do without the material in bold - the argument between premies and the media is repetitive and including a biased individual's unsubstantiated quote is undue weight etc - "Critics said etc".
POS or NEG - Removed three positive sentences and two negative (tit for tat)
REMOVED - "self" from "self pilots" as redundant.
REASON: Not necessary to include future name when link will connect to it.