Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 190.40.124.121 (talk) at 17:59, 13 January 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Arb

You really should be putting comments only in your own section. Regarding the 195 editor, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/195.82.106.244. He can not be proven by technical means to be the same editor as BK.info, but that doesn't mean he isn't. For example, if all the BK.info edits were done from an internet cafe or a friends house, it would look like two different people. However, checkuser is only a tool, and accounts can be considered sockpuppets by their behavior even without technical proof. Your off-wiki information would be good evidence in the case confirming that BK.info and BW watch are associated with the 195 editor. By the way, traceroute shows that the web site bk.info is hosted in England, which is the same place the 195 editor is coming from, but I can't get more specific than that. Thatcher131 01:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris

Hello,

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 17:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

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 Misplaced Pages's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.

My personal background

I am not an ex nor current Brahma Kumaris. Do you keep a file of people who work on the article? I do not know why I am interested in the article. Andries 16:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Andries, Thank you for answering. My response is: No, I don't but perhaps I should. I have observed that there is a "relationship" between you and Jossi. Hope that he is not the reason you are here. Certainly, I look forward to see your contributions to this article, however; it would be hard to do it without the BK, ex-BK background. It seems that you have selected a side on this issue. Best Wishes for you. avyakt7 22:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no relationship between Jossi and I, but there is a pattern of perennial disagreement on a large number of subjects and articles.

I admit that I may make mistakes in selecting and assessing sources because I do not have a Brahma Kumaris background.

Due to my background I admit that I am more inclined to agree with other critical former members of religious group. Nevertheless, I see the danger of generalizing too much from personal experience and I admit that some apostates exaggerate controversies and distort beliefs and practices or violate Misplaced Pages policies. I have not studied enough of the case to see who is right or wrong in this case, except that I think that you are clearly wrong in your repeated removal of my well-sourced new addtions without making any comments on the quality of my edits.

Andries 00:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

You are doing yourself a disservice in the abritration case reg. Brahma Kumaris

I think that your constant reverts of well-sourced material without trying to integrate the material that you think is fine and without discussion of the quality of the edits and the quality of sources will work strongly against you in the arbitration case. I considers your behavior disruptive and I think that the arbcom members will agree at least to some extent with me (though I may be completely mistaken). Please do yourself a favor and start to discuss edits and sources seriously on the talk page. Andries 20:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Andries, I noticed that the arbitration case you went through with the article on Sai Baba is very similar to our case here...If arbitrators are consistent... I believe we are in good shape. Thank you for the advice, but I have other thoughts. Best, avyakt7 22:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I do not think that the arbcom case reg. Sathya Sai Baba is very similar. There the dispute was about a living person, not about beliefs and practices. Andries 00:35, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Temporary Injunction

A temporary injunction has been passed in Misplaced Pages: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 11:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris

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 . 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 Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris#Log of blocks and bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 17:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser?

I don't see any outstanding checkuser requests. Where are they? Thatcher131 19:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Thatcher131,

Here you have the links for requests at different points in time:

None of them have been acknowledged. Thank you, avyakt7 14:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)