Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:05, 3 April 2011

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 14 days

Biography B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Transcendental Meditation movement B‑class Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transcendental Meditation movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transcendental Meditation on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Transcendental Meditation movementWikipedia:WikiProject Transcendental Meditation movementTemplate:WikiProject Transcendental Meditation movementTranscendental Meditation movement B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hinduism: Shaivism B‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Shaivism task force (assessed as High-importance).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 14 days

Other Sub Pages:

• Talk:Maharishi Mahesh Yogi/Sources

The choice of lead photo

It puzzles me that such a heavily cropped photo has been chosen as lead photo. What is the rationale of the choise? Are there others that find this choise debateable?

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 04:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

There are very few options from which to pick. That's about the only picture we have of him from the era of his greatest fame. The others are from when he was much older.   Will Beback  talk  08:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I would have thought there were thousands pf pictures of the Maharishi taken over the years. Wonder why we have to have a photo from the "era of his greatest fame"? --BwB (talk) 08:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

For copyright reasons, we can only use pictures that have free licenses. Basically, people have to donate pictures they've taken themselves. If you or anyone you know has photos of him to donate then those would enrich the Misplaced Pages Commons. If the main photo of the article does not depict him around the time of his greatest notability, his "prime", then which period of his life would be better to represent? I don't see any problem with the photo, or even the cropping.   Will Beback  talk  09:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

His era of "greatest notability" seems like subjective evaluation. Is there a Misplaced Pages policy that specifies we use a photo of "greatest notability"? If not then Wiki Commons has several photos from different periods of his life.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

The policy is "use common sense". The other photos in the Commons are not as good. The only other one that's perhaps usable, in my opinion, is File:MaharishiMaheshYogi-01.jpg, which was taken just two months before his death. We already include a similar picture (with eyes closed) later in the article. Is there any actual problem with the photo in question? What's the issue here?   Will Beback  talk  22:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

My primary issue here is that the photo is so heavily cropped. In a biographical article in a dictionary it is not usual, nor, in my opinion, comme il fault, to have a picture where a large portion of the person's head is cropped away. Also, the technical quality of the photo could be better.

I think it's a very valid point that there should be one picture ("lead picture" or not) from "from the era of his greatest fame" (late sixties to early seventies?). Finding a better public domain picture from Maharishi's most notable years is probably not undoable.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 06:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

When you find a better public domain picture let us know.   Will Beback  talk  06:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

To me, common sense, would mean using one of the high quality photos we have available (File:MaharishiMaheshYogi-06.jpg) and putting the lower quality photo in the History section of the corresponding time period. That would be my suggestion. Later if a better 70's picture is found, we could consider switching.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to only have one photo from approximately the same time period.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 22:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

The photo in question is a high quality photo. The photo Keithbob is proposing is from the end of MMY's life, a year or less before he died. File:MaharishiMaheshYogi-06.jpg   Will Beback  talk  22:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Note number 173

There's an error message in red.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 23:09, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Reference corrected on February 7. Thank you, AnomieBOT!

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Maharishi_Mahesh_Yogi&diff=412613428&oldid=412311967

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 19:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Coplin's speculations on "Shaivite family", note 18

Note 18:

The given name "Mahesh", an epithet of Shiva, indicated that the Maharishi came from a Shaivaite family.

Maharishi's first names are said to be Mahesh Prasad, but, on the other hand, his father's first names are said to be Ram Prasad. Using Coplin's flimsy logic, one could obviously just as well conclude that Maharishi came from a Vaishnava family. It would appear to me that Coplin's statement is pure speculation, and of a highly debateable encyclopedic value.

1. Coplin, J.R. (1990) p. 48

Oops, I forgot to sign! This was written by me on March 9.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 13:58, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

• The name "Mahesh" indicates that the family was probably Saiva (worshippers of Shiva), the largest Hindu group in the South, but second to Vaishnavas in North India where Krishna's life unfolded. -Coplin "SRM's Emergence"

As far as I can tell, Coplin does not cite that assertion in his paper. If we deem Coplin to be a reliable source, then we can't just toss out his findings because we disagree with them. However this is clearly presented by Coplin himself as speculation, which we don't convey on our text. We have two options: fixing it with attribution ("According to Coplin, the given name "Mahesh", an epithet of Shiva, indicated that the Maharishi probably came from a Shaivaite family") or deleting it on account of it being unhelpful speculation. I don't see it as being that helpful to readers, since we can't say for sure. Any other thoughts?   [[User

Will Beback|Will Beback]]  talk  21:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I think you have stated the two options clearly, and I suggest the second one. A general problem with Misplaced Pages is that it is a collage. It is pointless to adduce unhelpful matter only because there is a written reference. Anyone can write anything, and the fact that someone has written something is not a good criterion for inclusion. Coplin is not an expert in this field, and thus not a reliable source — this is substantiated both by his lack of references and by his confused wording in the quotation above. Besides, as I have indicated, if the Maharishi's father was called Ram Prasad, then anyone can see that Coplins speculations are nonsense.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 05:51, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, speculations and findings are different things. Findings would indicate research.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 06:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Am/Br English

The article has a mix of American and British English spellings. The guideline here is consistency and lang variety appropriate to the subject. The subject being Indian I should think Br English favored. Spicemix (talk) 02:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I see in the Infobox Br Eng was specified in Nov 2010. Spicemix (talk) 10:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Good. Let's use British English spelling. --BwB (talk) 13:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense to me too, but one small point. Normally, we spell out numbers up to nine, and use numerals for 10 and up. See . But perhaps there is some different approach in British style? Early morning person (talk) 18:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I see the next point there allows flexibility so long as there's consistency. The article before was a mix of both styles. I think spelt-out numbers, up to say a hundred, are considered a more pleasing or more literary style in Am and Br Eng, and my own judgement is one might go one way or the other depending on whether it's a more scientific or literary article. The William Shakespeare article, considered high quality, spells out ten, and goes into numbers elsewhere, and Winston Churchill is mixed.... Spicemix (talk) 09:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I find numbers more visually pleasing and easier to pick out in dense text. --BwB (talk) 09:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Spicemix's comment on flexibility as long as there is consistency: yes, quite right, as long as the number over nine is expressed in two or fewer words .Early morning person (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

"unrelated to religion"

• ... the leader or "guru" of the TM movement, varyingly characterized as a "Neo-Hindu" new religious movement, and as an organization unrelated to religion.

The highlighted text was added with the edit summary "adjusted language for NPOV". The footnote includes these citations:

• The Herald Scotland, April 21, 2007 Meditation-for-old-hippies-or-a-better-way-of-life?
• Johnston, William. . Silent Music: The Science of Meditation. Harper SanFrancisco, a division of Harper Collins, (1974); p15.

I don't see that assertion in either source. The Rawson article (at least the excerpted part) doesn't mention religion, and the Johnston book doesn't mention the TM movement. I'm sure we can find better sources which make this assertion directly.   Will Beback  talk  23:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I've found the complete Rawson article here:. Rawson repeats the standard "mantra", "TM is not a religion and requires no change in belief or lifestyle." However it is not clear that he is referring to the movement. While practicing the technique does not require changes in lifestyle, belonging to the movement does. I think we shouldn't make the highlighted assertion unless we can find a source which supports it directly.   Will Beback  talk  00:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

If the sources are weak, yes we should endeavor to improve them.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 14:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

If you feel the sources are not strong enough we can try to find more. --Luke Warmwater101 (talk) 14:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

OK. I'll remove it sources that say the movement is not related to religion.   Will Beback  talk  21:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

That's a bit rushed. It is not what I meant. Better to not remove anything until we have come up with some sort of solution.--Luke Warmwater101 (talk) 02:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The sources don't support the assertion. Please don't add it back until we've found sources for it.   Will Beback  talk  03:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I would not add it back because it would be petty, but I think that if I had removed a source unilaterally you would have gotten quite annoyed at me. I believe the most correct and respectful thing to do would be for you to restore it yourself and wait for this to be resolved.--Luke Warmwater101 (talk) 15:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Quite inappropriate to delete with no consensus while the matter is under discussion and after WBB has said "I'm sure we can find better sources which make this assertion directly."-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Keithbob, when I recently came across another assertion that was incorrectly sourced, and started a thread about it, you wrote that when an editor misreads a sources its best to make the correction and move on. Talk:Transcendental Meditation movement#Poor research, again.

Nobody here disputes that the assertion wasn't supported by the sources. I'm sure no one here thinks that unsourced statements should be kept. The addition of the text was a well-intentioned error that has been corrected. The problem is resolved. If someone finds sources which say that the movement is unrelated to religion then we can add those. No problem.   Will Beback  talk  21:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Editors in this thread said they were willing to discuss and address your concerns they did not give consensus for removal. It is therefore quite inappropriate to delete this sourced content without consensus while the matter is under discussion and especially after you yourself have said at the beginning of this thread "I'm sure we can find better sources which make this assertion directly."-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:05, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

• B-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• B-Class Transcendental Meditation movement articles
• Top-importance Transcendental Meditation movement articles
• B-Class Hinduism articles
• High-importance Hinduism articles
• B-Class Shaivism articles
• High-importance Shaivism articles