Talk:Swami Kriyananda: Difference between revisions
Pat Palmer (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{subpages}}") |
m (→why this article is here: wordiness chopped ofd) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
== red links added on purpose == | |||
I redlinked a couple of topics on this article as candidates for a pithy stub describing them in case the reader has no background in the subject area. It is okay if such a stub points off to another encyclopedia for "more details". Britannica is my favorite, but Wikipedia is okay too if the treatment over there isn't bad.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] ([[User talk:Pat Palmer|talk]]) 09:17, 28 February 2023 (CST) | |||
: The dead red was really bothering me, so I replace them with live external hyperlinks. Is that OK? They aren't exactly direct links to the named topics inWikipedia, but close enough. Thanks. [[User:Jack S. Byrom|Jack S. Byrom]] ([[User talk:Jack S. Byrom|talk]]) 10:03, 28 February 2023 (CST) | |||
::There is a convention of not including external hyperlinks in the body of the article itself. External links can be part of a reference, or on the External Links tab. If you'll restore the red links, I will put some stubs in place shortly (probably tomorrow). Sorry about that. Or leave them, I'll do it tomorrow (famous last words, he he). [[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] ([[User talk:Pat Palmer|talk]]) 10:11, 28 February 2023 (CST) | |||
:: oh, I see. Thanks for tolerating my editor OCD. It's a diagnosed condition. LOL. [[User:Jack S. Byrom|Jack S. Byrom]] ([[User talk:Jack S. Byrom|talk]]) 10:16, 28 February 2023 (CST) | |||
== why this article is here== | |||
There has been a Wikipedia version of this article for years, but it has been consistently biased against Swami Kriyananda in favor of the view of Self-Realization Fellowship, apparently, which ejected Swami K. many years ago from its organization. I have rewritten it here to be more balanced. I was particularly concerned about the summaries of legal issues regarding SRF versus Ananda and Swami K. Some of the writing on the Wikipedia entry was blatantly wrong and misleading, regarding legal decisions, which are a public record... misrepresenting federal District Court of California legal decisions on 1st amendment issues, and copyright rulings is a very serious editorial sin, in my book. That grievous error has been corrected here. [[User:Jack S. Byrom|Jack S. Byrom]] ([[User talk:Jack S. Byrom|talk]]) 10:59, 28 February 2023 (CST) | |||
Latest revision as of 11:02, 28 February 2023
red links added on purpose
I redlinked a couple of topics on this article as candidates for a pithy stub describing them in case the reader has no background in the subject area. It is okay if such a stub points off to another encyclopedia for "more details". Britannica is my favorite, but Wikipedia is okay too if the treatment over there isn't bad.Pat Palmer (talk) 09:17, 28 February 2023 (CST)
- The dead red was really bothering me, so I replace them with live external hyperlinks. Is that OK? They aren't exactly direct links to the named topics inWikipedia, but close enough. Thanks. Jack S. Byrom (talk) 10:03, 28 February 2023 (CST)
- There is a convention of not including external hyperlinks in the body of the article itself. External links can be part of a reference, or on the External Links tab. If you'll restore the red links, I will put some stubs in place shortly (probably tomorrow). Sorry about that. Or leave them, I'll do it tomorrow (famous last words, he he). Pat Palmer (talk) 10:11, 28 February 2023 (CST)
- oh, I see. Thanks for tolerating my editor OCD. It's a diagnosed condition. LOL. Jack S. Byrom (talk) 10:16, 28 February 2023 (CST)
why this article is here
There has been a Wikipedia version of this article for years, but it has been consistently biased against Swami Kriyananda in favor of the view of Self-Realization Fellowship, apparently, which ejected Swami K. many years ago from its organization. I have rewritten it here to be more balanced. I was particularly concerned about the summaries of legal issues regarding SRF versus Ananda and Swami K. Some of the writing on the Wikipedia entry was blatantly wrong and misleading, regarding legal decisions, which are a public record... misrepresenting federal District Court of California legal decisions on 1st amendment issues, and copyright rulings is a very serious editorial sin, in my book. That grievous error has been corrected here. Jack S. Byrom (talk) 10:59, 28 February 2023 (CST)