Talk:Sathya Sai Baba bibliography

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Bibliographies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bibliographies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibliographiesWikipedia:WikiProject BibliographiesTemplate:WikiProject BibliographiesBibliographies

India: Literature Low‑importance

	India portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by the Indian literature workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This redirect was last assessed in May 2012.

Untitled

Can anybody tell waht happend to the familes of the three accused of sai baba's murder attempt?

Off topic question. Please ask it at talk:Sathya Sai Baba Andries (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is yet another Sathya Sai Baba related article that suffers from severe neglect. Can somebody clean it up? I cannot do it myself because the arbitration committee thinks that I have conflict of interest. Andries (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Selected works

there is no reason for selected works. on what grounds is the decision made to add these specific works? are they quoted more in the Sathya Sai Baba page? any relation to http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/Claimsnew.htm or http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/ .
any speculation is best elaborated on, or left out.

J929 (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To J929: In your now familiar “judge and jury” way, you have instantly removed the selected Discourses on these flimsy grounds:

“there is no reason for selected works. on what grounds is the decision made to add these specific works? are they quoted more in the Sathya Sai Baba page?”

This hasty action displays an extraordinary lack of knowledge of Sathya Sai Baba and, more especially, of the recent history of the Sathya Sai Baba Movement. (That, in itself is a cause for concern about some of your contributions.) Yes, there is a reason to quote some and yes, four in particular have been given very special prominence by the Sathya Sai Organisation for a long time. Please take note that until very recently, on the www.sathyasai.org official website (the first one to appear on the Internet in 1999) under the section ‘Discourses’, the following promotional text was boldly displayed: (The online versions of these and other Discourses are available at http://www.sssbpt.info/english/sss.htm)

"Four important discourses by Sri Sathya Sai Baba:"

Shiva Shakthi (6 July 1963). Swami heals himself from an 8-day stroke and announces his third incarnation as Prema Sai eight years after he leaves this body.

The revelation (17 May 1968). The last part of Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's discourse at the "World Conference of Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Seva Organizations" in Bombay, 17 May 1968. Sai Baba states plainly and directly that he has come as an incarnation of God to restore righteousness (dharma).

Forty-Third birthday discourse (23 November 1968). Swami speaks about His being the Avatar and proclaims his mission on earth: the establishment of righteousness.

Who is Sai? (9 June 1974). Sai Baba talks about God, the Religion of Love, and His Avatar-hood. He explains why he materializes rings, etc., and gives them to people, and he explains what "Sai Baba" means." (See http://web.archive.org/web/20070217085749/www.sathyasai.org/discour/content.htm for 17 February 2007)

These four Discourses (and many others) are well known to devotees, and are much quoted, especially to assert and reinforce the guru’s claims of Divinity and Avatarhood. They have had an impact on the way Sathya Sai Baba is perceived by them and by others.

I shall therefore restore three of these four (under the sub-heading 'Officially Promoted Discourses')and will add details for the fourth one (1974). They, like the rest of the 39 volumes of Discourses, are the closest evidence the world has of Sathya Sai Baba’s thoughts, teachings and Divine claims (and they have so far been neglected by Wikipedians). J929: Please do NOT remove them from this section of the Bibliography.

I shall not restore the other Discourses (not chosen by me, but taken from the Bibliography below)from the selection but I also recommend to readers the relevance of another formerly much promoted and quoted influential Discourse: Sathya Sai Baba, ‘He Whom Christ Announced’, Sathya Sai Speaks, Vol. XI, Chapter 54, pp. 337-347 (1972-12-24).

(Note that the SSSBPT has, presumably out of carelessness, not retained in print or online the recommended Discourse for 23 November 1968. For that date, they present a totally different one. (I do not doubt that the guru made this Discourse but the other (major) one for that date is not visible.) For that reason the reference to the Sandweiss version has been kept here.)

As a final comment on J929’s regrettable error and gratuitous extra-Wikipedian references, it is relevant to repeat that a few of the extensive Wikipedia series of articles about Sathya Sai Baba and his Movement have suffered for years from a chronically deficient factual base and an excess of argumentation, obfuscation, and filibustering, to which Users J929 and Radiantenergy have contributed more than their fair share in the past few months. I suggest that when Reliable Sources like the 39 volumes of Sathya Sai Baba Discourses, the biography Love is My Form, and a skeleton Bibliography are presented as useful references for editors writing about Sathya Sai Baba and eager to produce a balanced article, it is far from helpful for User J929 or anyone else to hinder the passing on of information about the existence of these little-known factual sources. Ombudswiki (talk) 01:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

your inferences of why things change on the web site would only be your opinion and your pursual and posting of those findings with your explanantion would be original research.

your opinions sound similar to those found on brian steel's slander page, http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/doss2claims.htm . ombudswiki; (brian steel) seems to be making the same remarks.
let the reader decide for themselves what to read.
Wikipedia is not a platform for your opinions/agenda nor for Sai Baba's.

none of the discourses you talked about are "officially" promoted, no where on the Sathya Sai website does it say that. there is nothing that says "official" yet you and brian steel http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/doss2claims.htm both tend to use that word. What agenda are you pushing? why not simply quote what is already there "Four important discourses by Sri Sathya Sai Baba"
"it is far from helpful for User J929 or anyone else to hinder the passing on of information about the existence of these little-known factual sources" i think it is safe to assume anyone researching Sathya Sai Baba on the internet would find the discourses (as they are provided in the references of the Sathya Sai Baba wikipedia page, in the bibliography page refrences, external links on the bibliography page and also the Sathya Sai Baba page as an external link for http://www.sathyasai.org/) there is no need to steer the reader past listing the discourses and adding an external link. If you are saying that there are discrepensies in the discourses, then it may be an issue of reliable sources.

brian steel states, "From the beginning of his Mission, it was SSB who assiduously attracted attention to himself and encouraged his devotees to talk about the special features he was promoting: his MIRACLES and his healing ability, his Avatarhood and Divine powers, his relationship with the legendary Hindu Avatars (Rama and Krishna), and the Shirdi Baba reincarnation connection." is this another reference to this connection? he continues, "From the mid-1960s to date, SSB's Organisation, the SSO, took over the main task of propagation of this Divine image of SSB, especially in print." do the Sathya Sai Speaks series count as "print"? if so, then the same opinion on that web site is being propogated here. is there a "concern" about the Sathya Sai speaks series? there are no official readings from website. the word does not appear on the website? At most, i included "A Guide to Books on Sathya Sai Baba" so that readers should they feel to want to read any prefered literature will have a external link.

please refrain voicing your opinions of ther editors ie. "excess of argumentation, obfuscation, and filibustering," "hasty action" etc... it doesnt help the article...

your suggestion on sources is your opinion. and oddly very close to http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/doss2claims.htm

J929 (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To User J929:

This is splitting hairs: "none of the discourses you talked about are "officially" promoted, no where on the Sathya Sai website does it say that". As one of my references shows, the 4 Discourses mentioned were selectively promoted by www.sathyasai.org for many years as indicating highlights in SSB's Mission. Many thousands of internet surfers have seen them. They are part of the Sathya Sai Baba story. I do not wish to comment further on the fact that the page was finally withdrawn from the official website in 2007 - but that fact is also part of the SSB story.

I have restored the relevant information for editors to consult and again I request that you desist from deleting it! Why are you so determined to suppress useful references to relevant bibliographical items? In this case, official Sathya Sai Organisation information about Sathya Sai Baba (1999-2007). I suggest that a further reversion on your part will merely provide evidence of gross interference, as have the previous strenuous campaigns you have fought (unsuccessfully) against the introduction as a fresh source of information on Sathya Sai Baba of the Biography Love is My Form (2000) and to contest other issues.

I must add these further observations. Since your arrival on the scene in June, your record shows more interest in "litigation" than in improving the quality and coverage of the several Wikipedia articles related to Sathya Sai Baba and his Organisation. The use by other editors of fresh bibliographical sources could help to improve them! Why deny them this sources?

Let me further remind you (and others) of a few of the results of your recent less than positive activities related to Wikipedia's articles and Discussion pages relating to Sathya Sai Baba. A COI case you instigated against me was decided in my favour. Furthermore, you found it necessary to apologise to me for several unfounded (and in my opinion, vexatious) accusations of vandalism. You have just been banned for 24 hours because of edit warring. For the sake of Wikipedia's reputation as a source of reliable information, is it not time to behave in a more constructive manner on this and related articles? (I reserve the right to publish this comment in other Discussion and Talk pages.) Ombudswiki (talk) 08:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Due to your patronizing remarks, personnal attacks and condescending tone i'm no longer reading your comments. the effort of sifting through the mud of your 'edits' has ceased. if you want to in good faith continue this discussion , please re-write your previous 'edits' without the slanderous comments. this is not your personnal web page. (write in point form if you dont want to employ social graces)

"As a rule, do not edit others' comments, including signatures." http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Good_practice
i chose not to pursue the issue.

As editor *** Crotalus *** said on the Sathya Sai Baba discussion, "I believe that this decision should be made by those without a personal stake in the issue. Do you have a conflict of interest with regards to the subject matter?" The COI is a concern, considering http://bdsteel.tripod.com/More/doss2claims.htm http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard&oldid=314077265

"Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position. This means that Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own opinions, experiences, arguments, or conclusions." http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

"you must cite reliable sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and that directly support the information as it is presented." where is the word "official" used in the pages you cited?

J929 (talk) 20:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not an adequate reply to my post, User J929.

Following that typical piece of evasive and rambling bluster to try to draw a curtain over specific criticisms of your previous assertions, I will venture to add a further "personal remark", which I believe to be pertinent to your 3 month rampage on Wikipedia:

How is it that when faced with detailed criticism of your assertions, time after time, you choose to avoid direct and substantiated answers? Your actions and agenda have become transparent, as others have already seen. You have been rebuked by several and briefly penalised by an Admin. None of this seems to deter you from your singleminded path (evidenced here and on the Sathya Sai Baba (especially) and Prema Sai Baba pages). Others may now be wondering why have you been so keen to refer to extraneous sources and so opposed to readers and contributors referring to fresh sources of reliable information like the neglected Discourses of Sathya Sai Baba and the biography Love is My Form

What have you achieved with your aggressive campaign? You have wasted the time of several Wikipedians. You have been obliged to apologise (to me) for your impetuous accusations of vandalism. Why not turn over a new leaf and contribute positive information for this encyclopedic article to progress? Until you do, do not expect me to waste more time on further responses to your rambling comments. Except in self-defence from your frequent personal attacks. You could begin, for example, by addressing my request on your Talk Page for evidence or an apology for your accusation about my alleged "lies" about the Daily Pioneer article. Which lies? Ombudswiki (talk) 04:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major categories

I think that it would be better to introduce more major categories e.g. 1. by SSB (already there) 2. about SSB 2a devotional 2b Journalistic 2c scholary 2d oppositional.

Ombudswiki/Brian is not the only one who made more categories (outside of Wikipedia). Andries (talk) 09:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Sathya Sai Baba bibliography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sathya Sai Baba bibliography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]