Misplaced Pages

User talk:Bksimonb

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 195.82.106.244 (talk) at 10:10, 13 November 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 10:10, 13 November 2006 by 195.82.106.244 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

BKWSU information technology team

Talk:Brahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University/Archive02

Copyright issue

Simon,

we are still waiting for clarification on the position of copyright on God Shiva's images.

Can you tell us when to expect this? There would seem no good reason for delay.

Thanks Brahmakumaris.info 16:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

NPA to TalkAbout

NPA to Bksimonb

Please see Misplaced Pages'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)

Personal attack

Simon,

you wrote stating that;

"Sadly, this underlines how little due care and attention you are giving any given references that oppose your organization's current PR and, perhaps, how unaware or misled you have been of your own organization's history."

In case I have it entirely wrong, can you please verify when and whether the BKWSU told you and tells newcomers about, e.g.;

  • the 40 years Confluence Age and failed 1976 Destruction scenario?
  • the re-editing of the Sakar Murlis?
  • the role that Kirpalani's parnet Sevak Ram played?
  • the role of the Advance Party?

Indeed, when does the BKWSU actually tell people about;

  • the importance of mediumship and channelling within the organization's spiritual practise (as listed on the old letterhead)?


If you can read what I wrote and not see the concern and public interest that individual's are being willfully mislead ... what can I say?

What divine virtue is this you are practizing here? 195.82.106.244 20:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments to arbitrator

Hi.

out of decency, I'll cc you in on this discussion as you are working with Luis on this page.

Personally, I'd be careful how you are setting yourself and the BKWSU up for a fall within the public domain by pursuing these issues in an unfair and dishonest manner. In my opinion, matters really ought to be handled in a fair more subtle and delicate manner - and, of course, "taking the task ahead ... in an organized way and as per rules" as BapDada said.

We still have to address the matter of channelling and mediumship. I am happy to wait until arbitration is over as the sources given are inarguable.

Thanks. 195.82.106.244 09:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


Response to Luis Riveros and Request to Jossi

Luis, to state that I have never provide a single reliable resource is laughable. Look back through the history of the topic and discussion page and anyone will see that I provide endless citations in balance mostly pro-BKWSU, academic or impartial. Yes, agreed, I mostly built this topic. If you look back at the original article prior to your re-write according to BKWSU PR, it is almost entirely verbatim BKWSU teachings - references; , comparison or through the Discussion pages anyone can see my input. You are being utterly dishonest and making prejudicial allegations you cannot support in an attempt to reach your goal.

Perhaps you could help here Jossi.

In Misplaced Pages:Verifiability it states that, "Material from self-published sources may be used as sources in articles about the author(s) of the material, so long as:

  • it is relevant to their notability;
  • it is not contentious;
  • it is not unduly self-serving;
  • it does not involve claims about third parties, or about events not directly related to the subject;
  • there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it."

Luis has claimed that this only refers to the author(s) themselves using the material. I believe this is entirely wrong.

Luis has point blankly refused to allow any citation from BKWSU published material which in essence, of course, make fully public their teachings and beliefs even though the very same publications are used by the academics.

My question here is would such self-published material allow "reasonable" use of BKWSU published material where it is clearly and specifically referenced in a manner that anyone could purchase a book or attend one of their 7,000 centers and request a copy of said materials to check references? For example;

  • specific scriptural references or other publicly available materials and
  • the organization's own websites?

BK Luis has stated that it is only acceptable if it is easily downloadable but, of course, refuses to accept that if it is downloadable from http://www.brahmakumaris.info even though it is clearly BKWSU produced material, e.g. or where a BK produced teaching aid states End of the World/Destruction in 1976 after 40 years Confluence Age etc.

It is understandable why the BKWSU might want to bury this information but I believe in the public interest for it to remain.

Lastly, what group exactly am I meant to be a part of with any other contributor!?!

Thank you.