Jump to content

User talk:Gary D

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jossi (talk | contribs) at 03:22, 5 October 2004 (→[[Prem Rawat]]: thank you). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

ACIM; materiel

Thanks for your article on ACIM that I started. It looks very impressive. Where are the followers located? I have the impression that ACIM is quite popular here in the Netherlands and in the USA. There is one controversial group in Wisconsin. Shouldn't that one be mentiond? Andries 17:50, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Materiel ;-) VampWillow 00:40, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Commercial item transport and distribution

I find this category very obscure. I think we should move these items to their various geographic/broader cateogries. Burgundavia 09:00, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)

Take a look at the articles that compose this category. They are all part of a transnational industry of shipping and distribution that recognizes itself. If they were pulled apart and realigned along other geographic or other categories, their unity as a cohesive industry would be lost. Transporting and distributing commercial "stuff" is a particular enterprise within industry. Someone "drilling down" from the main page who wants to learn more about this enterprise would be well served by this category. --Gary D 09:46, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Ok, I guess this a fundamental disagreement on what constituents a category. I guess one of my major disagreements is that this category seems very scattershot. Maybe we could slim down the category to include on those items which do move items and not the specific companies that do so. Burgundavia 09:55, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps a Wiki-consensus will emerge on how categories are handled, perhaps one that diverges from what has been done here. In the meantime, this category attempts to tie together all the answers to a user's question, "what goes into moving commercial stuff to the end consumer?" The major companies are a big part of that. If we specified a "category:computer industry", I imagine its article entries would include Apple, Intel, and Microsoft. --Gary D 10:01, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I liked your comment on Wikipedia:Categorization about functional vs taxonomic. Here is an idea regarding this specific category. Maybe leave in the main category all the non-company specific articles, such as truck, pier, ship and move the companies to some sort of subcategory. From my perspective, I feel that this would remove some of the "scattershot" nature of the category, while preserving the functional nature. It might even improve it's functionality, as someone who is looking for just what does this stuff can find it easier, and someone looking for the companies could find those easier as well. Maybe I will start double categorizing all the companies with taxonomic groups as well. Burgundavia 23:36, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)

  • Nice work on the moving. All my objections to this category have ceased. Burgundavia 23:46, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)
Two heads, and all that... ;-) --Gary D 00:13, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Re: Thank you

You're quite welcome! I'm only sorry the bot rollback function is currently borked, necessitating my flooding of RC. :) Cheers, -- Hadal 07:35, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Spirit/soul/pneuma/etc.

Let me know if you do get some sort of "pneuma" article written. I'm finding several links to spirit's disambig page that are screaming for a better entry that just doesn't exist. One article has a sentence like "Compare soul and spirit." My evil side wanted so badly to re-direct "spirit" to "soul," but I resisted. Joyous 22:48, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)

Bless you, my child. :-) --Gary D 22:51, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

There is a bit of discussion on vfd that pertains to our discussion here. See the entry on life force. Joyous 17:49, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)

Category for New religious movements

GaryD, I think there should be categories (and sub categories) for NRMs e.g. ACIM can be classified under the sub category New Age NRM and Sathya Sai Baba under the sub category Hindu NRM. I still have to read how categories work though. Andries 11:32, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Has anyone ever noticed "New Age" beverages in the soft drink aisle at the grocery store? I do not think, nor will I ever think, that New Age is a subcategory of New Religious Movements. Examining the article, one will notice a minimal writeup in its Religion subheading. New Age is a main category. A stand-alone container. I may create the category since you seem very anxious to get this term in the concordance. BF 01:17, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

BF, but I am quite sure that this is a way to classify NRMs, some are classified as Christian NRMs, some are New Age NRMs and some are Hindu NRMs etcetera. I didn't make it up. Andries 04:47, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I do agree with you, it is broader, though I have never thought of "New Age" as a beverage, I must admit! I would actually group the Human potential movement under New Age, for example, even though they would probably hate that, and I would include self-help and other stuff. I have a far better idea of what this thing I'm thinking of includes, than what to call it. And I am indeed anxious to get this collection started. Maybe you, Andries, and I can start with the collecting and then hash out what to put where and what to call it all. --Gary D 03:41, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Okay, I've created "Category:New religious movements" and have begun to populate it. Feel free to jump on the bandwagon. Andries, note that I included your "new to a society or culture" notion in this category's scope. Either BF or I may be next with "Category:New Age"

Thomas hatcher

Almost BJAODN quality eh? Burgundavia 10:23, Jun 23, 2004 (UTC)

Ahh, sigh, the great literature that we delete... --Gary D 18:04, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Dumont

I would have gladly obliged, but somebody beat me to it. By the way, I really am glad to see your involvement here -- you have a great attitude and make some really nice contributions. Thanks, and keep editing! Jwrosenzweig 16:10, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Maharaji vandalism

Why did you interpret my speedy deletion message as vandalism?? Look at what the article was just before I made the speedy delete notice. It certainly DID look like a speedy delete to me. 66.32.248.241 00:14, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Your speedy deletion was not the vandalism; the single line entry that you sought to delete was the vandalism; it replaced an entire substantive article that pre-existed there. Check the previous entry in the history list. --Gary D 00:19, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

What to say to the user

The first test is to write {{test}} . The second test is to write {{test2}} . The third test is to write {{test3}} . Because only registered Wikipedians are allowed to block users, the fourth test, according to what I do, is contact RickK (he is very strong at finding vandalism) and ask him to block the vandalizer. Is this correct?? 66.32.248.241 00:32, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You can put those messages on the user's talk page, yes. I suppose that puts down a "paper trail" justifying a later block. I don't know if there is a definite procedure or criterion for warning and then blocking, but there may be. I must confess I haven't used those messages myself, or spent that much time on it.
BTW, I urge interested users like you to create an account and do their work through that account, because IMHO the WP community tends to put more store in things done by a registered user than under an anonymous IP. (I know I do.) You don't have to use your real name. Just a thought. --Gary D 01:00, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sylvia Browne

Thanks! I had an opportunity to reword the particular article for Mrs. Browne. I also created an account (geoff43230). It was easy! mm, more. Depending upon how familiar one is with certain products, epinions.com is a nice resource to both read and compare reviews of items, as well as write them.

Take care!

  • Geoff

Prem Rawat

Thanks for your warning about a revert by Jossifresco because of alleged vandalism that was not vandalism but merely balancing POV. I have reverted it back to the previous version with making some changes. Andries 16:10, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please understand that I'm not trying to take his side or yours, but my attitude is that more material is always better than less, and I was afraid that some good material might be lost because it was labeled as vandalism. This was all the more likely because the original contributor was anonymous, and might not be back. BTW, I continue to believe that the best POV is not achieved by alternating positive and negative POV material, but by a neutral narrative, constantly distanced from both sides. --Gary D 23:18, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I need your help.... On the maharaji page, anti-religion, anti-guru, skeptics and vociferous ex-followers are coluding to impose their POV. Some are accusing me and using vituperation and threats against me. One Wikiedian (Andries) is braging to the ex-followers that he can get me removed from Wikipedia. I need someone that can bring some truthful NPOV. You once offered help, now I need it. --jossi 16:08, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I'm happy to help you on the Maharaji article if I can, jossi. Your help would be really appreciated. I am taken aback by the violence of the discussion. Not used to be rained on with negativity, innuendo and personal attacks. I 100% believe that Wikipedia can work and that concensus for a good NPOV article is possible, given time and patience. Hell, if you can have an NPOV aritcle about Uri Geller, surely we can have one about Maharaji. Look forward to your involvement. BTW, the last edit by an IP user is looking good. From my side, I have decided to take a step back and just monitor the page for a while so that other wikipedians like you and other people can contribute. This is not my page... Regards, --jossi 14:58, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Hello Gary. I can see that after all you managed to find sometime to help with the Prem_Rawat article. I thank you for that. When things got hot in the beginning, I decided it was too taxing on my feelings, took leave from editing and just lurked without contributing, until this week.
Just to give you a heads up on the "main players" so far. Hope this is useful to you.
  • Andries. Andries carries the Ex-premies POV. He consults daily with the ex-premies via their discussion forum. Sometimes his contributions are not pure NPOVs, his bias is quite transparent due to the fact that he had a pretty bad experience with another NRM.
  • Ed Poor. I called upon Ed to assist with the article and so far his contributions have been excellent and is assisting with keeping the air cool and the conversation civil.
  • Zappaz. Zappaz has been IMO the main contributor to the article and doing an excellent job of NPOVing my entries as well as the critics'. His research has contributed a lot to the article. (most of the reference section is his and most of the NPOVing of contributions by IP users is done by him)
  • Senegal. Also known as IP .121 and .122 seems to be an experienced editor that chose to be anon and uses a sockpuppet account to engage without revealing his identity (according to his talk page, he does that to avoid being harassed). Senegal was the one to split the article just a couple of days ago.
  • Jim. Jim Heller is one of the leaders of the ex-premie group. He has stated in numerous occasions that Wikipedia is a joke and that NPOV is a failed concept. He openly talks about his visceral hate for premies and for Prem Rawat. (I am being kind here, if you want read his wording, find it hereTalk:Prem_Rawat/archive5#Jim.27s_Gems . His is very abrasive, sometimes abusive IMO, engaging in constant personal attacks against contributors that are not supportive of his POV. He has also vandalized the article several times, the latest today.
  • Cynthia. Another ex-premie. Decided not to contribute because in her words, Wikipedia does not censor links to pedophile websites (???)
  • Mary Moore. Another ex-premie. Did not contribute to the article, made some comments in the Talk page, found the editing and NPOV tedious, and never came back again.
As for me, I am a student of Maharaji for the last 25 years and I am very proud of it and very thankful for having met him in my life. You can check my user page for more personal details (I live North of you on Ventura County).
My main concern is that left unchecked, the ex-premies will use Wikipedia to push their POV or to increase their relevance relative to their number. I am 100% in support of a balanced article, but will oppose one in which a small group of critical ex-followers are given more exposure than warranted.
Happy editing :) -- jossi 21:15, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I hate to be proven right... but it seems that the above is the case with the Criticism of Prem Rawat article. I am still hopeful that it will stabilize and present an appropriate picture of the critics. Regarding the techniques question, I will be happy to discuss via email. For obvious reasons, I do not want to publicize my email address here... Yours? ≈ jossi ≈ 04:27, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
I continue to have faith that the article will work out. My E-mail is garywho_@hotmail.com (note the underbar), or you can just use the Wikipedia-provided E-mail button for me. --Gary D 06:14, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)


Gary: both Richard and I are giving you carte blanche on Prem_Rawat/temp1. See our comments at Talk:Prem_Rawat/temp1. Look forward to see the fruits of your copyedit efforts... BTW, I am quite dissapointed to see that the xpremies have not done any subtantial edits to Criticism of Prem Rawat as they promised... :( --Zappaz 04:21, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you

Gary: I just wanted to tell you of my appreciation for your work and mediation on the articles about Maharaji. I had a hunch when I asked you for help and I do not regret for a minute that I did so. Hopefully you will stick around to see the other articles coming to light. I am working on creating a website in which people that were very close to Maharaji in the 70s and 80s can present their experiences and observations. It is a breath of fresh air .... you'll see. When the site is up I intend to add rebuttals to the accounts from the likes of Dettmers and other. Hope you stick around to NPOV my edits.... :). Richard sent me an email saying that he is getting closer to submitting his first draft of the Teachings of Prem Rawat. That will be nice to see online.

Next time Maharaji comes to speaks in LA, I shall send you an invitation. After all what you have learned about this man, I am sure you will be curious to meet him in person and see for yourself what all this brouhaha is all about :).

Again, thanks a lot for all your help and I wish you all the best. ≈ jossi ≈ 03:22, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia a cult?

Hello GaryD do you think that Wikipedia should be on the list of purported cults? Please read this article Wikipedia:controversial issues. Thanks in advance Andries 14:54, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Paraguay supermarket fire

Sorry, Gary D, I have hidden the line you've added to Template:In the news because there is no relevant page in Wikipedia updated to include this incident. Please feel free to undo my hiding when a page has been updated (but I don't think either supermarket or Paraguay would be a good page to update.... if I know which page to update, I would've done it myself...). Thanks. -- PFHLai 02:54, 2004 Aug 2 (UTC)

I've found one: Asunción. I shall undo the hiding at Template:In the news. -- PFHLai 02:59, 2004 Aug 2 (UTC)
Oh, okay, I was just about to concede that maybe it wasn't significant enough to justify updating any pages and so had to stay off the main page. --Gary D 03:03, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
With such a high fatality count, I think it can stay on the MainPage. IMO, the explosion in Belgium and the IMF funding to Turkey are less significant news.
I don't know how long this news item will stay on Asunción, though. That page is pitifully short, considering "Asunción is one of the oldest cities in South America." The link from the MainPage may lead more editors there to make more changes .....
Have a nice day. :-)
-- PFHLai 03:21, 2004 Aug 2 (UTC)

More POV categories

Check out the current voting on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, re: Category:Gay, lesbian or bisexual people. Postdlf 02:44, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Metric units

Hi,

We overlapped in our writing. I was just adding something to the talk page on Fort Bliss. The reference that you want is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Style_for_numbers.2C_weights.2C_and_measures

Bobblewik  (talk) 23:36, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)


Why did you revert the metric units on California State Polytechnic University? They looked fine to me. Cavebear42 02:27, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia Talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Protest to universal addition of metric measurements to US topic articles. --Gary D 02:31, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I have read your argument for the reasons to not include metric measurements. I disagree that the world should be forced to deal with our system rather than us deal with that of the entire world. Further, I believe that readers are accustomed to overlooking the metric measurements when they prefer the Imperial and vice-versa. It makes sense to me to include these measurements. I am going to go ahead and replace them. Cavebear42 03:18, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Manifest Sons of God

Weird? You betcha. Check out all the entries on category:Charismatic and Pentecostal Topics for other doosies. One Salient Oversight 02:45, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Workin' on the Charismatic topics

Hi. Just a note to let you know that I appreciate your efforts so far with your edits and contributions on all these subjects. Keep up the good work. It's good to know that there is someone else out there who knows a bit about these things. One Salient Oversight 22:14, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mr. Gary D: You are requested to contact the Law Office of Lavely & Singer PC (310-556-3051 x247) with regard to defamatory content on wikipedia that you repeatedly have restored, and therefore posted, after deletion by our office on behalf of our clients. If you do not respond, formal action shall be required. Thank you. Lavely & Singer P.C.

Whoah. What's all that in the line above? Anyway Gary, I just popped in to say how wonderful your category:Christian fundamentalism and evangelicalism is. I had a quick check and it is looking peachy. Good work. One Salient Oversight 11:46, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks much! I'm not sure it was worth exchanging four hours sleep for, but that's my choice. As to the legal thing, see Wikipedia:Village Pump#Kicking this legal threat upstairs for the full low-down. I'm not actually as personally involved in the threat as the blurb above might suggest. I am worried, however, that as Wikipedia gathers more public attention, it may start to be cowed into submission by people with money and lawyers who don't like what their articles here say. --Gary D 11:54, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gary_D&oldid=6347658"