User talk:Juthani1/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.



Archives


Contents

Barnstar

The Exceptional Newcomer Award
Here is an award for your contributions to a wide variety of wikipedia articles, copyediting skills, and most importantly, the ability to collaborate with other editors. Wikipedia needs more editors like you. Keep it up and happy editing! Wheredevelsdare (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

SN views

Namaskar Juthani1. Can you please help me out, I have an exISKCON member of Sri sampradaya claiming that only views of Sri are accepted in Hinduism and making disruptive edits on svayam bhagavan page. I would appreciate your input and POV to create a NPOV in that page. Please feel free to comment on the section of the talk page. You input and representation of your views is appreciated, as you are a mature editor. Wikidās ॐ 11:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Juthani, I have a list for it. It will be very special if you can help to bring the article out of the constant editorial war and if this continues, I will need your kind assistance to contact an admin. It appears the primary purpose of that particular user is to make sure he puts down representatives of Gaudiya Vaishnava or ISKCON traditions by making disruptive edits. He claims to be in Sri Sampradaya, this why SN follower will be able to balance the view from Vishnu first perspective without putting down all the reliable evidence to Vasudeva-Krishna as accepted historically and in current traditions as Supreme. Such open minded approach will be very helpful. Wikidās ॐ 21:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Topic

The idea of the article was to illustrate an existing concept of svayam bhagavan (literary means Lord Himself) in a few specific traditions within Hinduism and contrast it with other views of similar kind, such as for example views of Sri Sampradaya, Madhva, Svami Narayana traditions, and how they see this concept relating to Krishna being supreme (or an avatara) or both. Wikidās ॐ 21:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I have put in again your edit that got lost with the volatile nature of article's changes. So your NPOV entry is still there. We need much more of neutral views there. Wikidās ॐ 13:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Swaminarayan

HI Juthani,

Please use the talk page of the article when we're talking about content. thanks. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 05:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Manchester

I have no relations with that project. Maybe you have mistaken me for someone else? This is the only project I know of with a similar title. Cheers~ DarkZorro 13:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck with the Wikiproject!- DarkZorro 13:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Did you need information about the WikiProject? Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 14:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Dark Zorro left a message @ a talk page I am watching, and I thought I could help (I couldn't), and I noticed your post there. I am a member of WP:GM. Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 15:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:ROBO userbox

Midorihana~いいですね? はい! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend and remember :"All men are created equal, but ambition, or lack of it, soon separates them." Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Yup! No problem. :) Midorihana~いいですね? はい! 01:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for getting back to you late, the smile is for spreading good cheer to other Wikipedians. :) Midorihana~いいですね? はい! 05:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Swaminarayan and rollback

You did know that the new page box you have at the top of the page creates an entirely separate page, not additions to this one, right? Personally, I have no objections to seeing groups on as many disparate faiths running as possible; in fact, I'd like to see as many as we have interested editors. I don't know enough about the subject one way or another to make any real statements, other than to say that we've had other comparatively large faiths, including Christian Eastern Orthodoxy, create groups which later went inactive. I have no way of knowing whether the same would happen here, but tend to personally err on the side of caution. That also, regretably, is probably the main reason why at this point I would question granting rollback. Your account apparently started in February, which makes you rather new. It took me a long time (about half a year, actually) of regular editing before I was able to differentiate between unsourced additions which were valid and vandalism or nonsense. There is a functional equivalent at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Twinkle which does much the same thing. You might consider using that initially. But at least in the beginning I would use it sparingly, and only in the case of clearly untrue statements about living people or blatant vandalism. I deal with a lot of religion content, and sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between the two. But you could definitely set up Twinkle and work with that. I've even heard some say they prefer that for its quicker reversion. You might want to check with the members of the Hinduism project to see if they would have any objections to your group using their banner and acknowledging the Swamanarayana group as a subproject. If they don't have any objections, then no one else really a reason to. John Carter (talk) 18:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on finding my page. Since you asked me to do this, here's the award:

{{User:Einsteinewton/Secret Prize}}

The Award for Finding Einsteinewton's Super Mega Awesome Special Secret Page
Juthani1 has found EinsteiNewton's Super Mega Awesome Special Secret Page. See if you can find it!

--EinsteiNewton 19:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Swaminarayan Project

I have placed a link to the discussion concerning the Swaminarayan Project on the Vaishnava Project Talk Page. I thought it might help to bring this to the attention of others Vaishnava editors. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Request

Iv noticed tht for every constructive edit u need to make atleast 10 for it to appear the way you want. I suggest u use the Show Preview button next to the Save Page button - that will save u frm making unneccisary edits. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure

The Hybrid's Secret Page Barnfish

Congratulations on finding my secret page without cheating. You totally reek of awesomeness dude! The Hybrid T/C

Congrats on finding my secret page :) Cheers, SeaBass TheOriginal 05:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Acharya

You once asked me why Acharyas of the Swaminarayan Sampraday are Householders and not Sadhus - I stumbled upon somethiong whiles finding a reference today [1]. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Swaminarayan Project

What are your thoughts concerning this project? I do believe that having a place for discussion, and a place for reaching consensus, could be necessary for such a large field of study. There are six commited editors. Do you have any thoughts on how to go forward? Please let me know if I can help in any way. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure 100 articles needed? I know of many projects that have far fewer than that - though they have at least two or three dedicated editors. Personally, I believe that it is the dedication of the editors that matters - though I agree with you that giving some time can't hurt the process. Please do let me know if I can be of any assistance during the meantime. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 03:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I know you have a developed a good understanding on how to consruct hight quality articles concering Swaminarayan. I will take a break from editing any Swaminarayan articles for now. Please let me know if/when I may be of assistance to the Swaminarayan Project. I appreciate all of your hard work on the various Swaminarayan articles. Happy editing in the meantime. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 06:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a discussion on the talk page of the Bhagwan Swaminarayan article. I would suggest first concluding the name of the article before warring with each other on use of the name in the article. Wikidās ॐ 17:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Im not sure really - i dunno whts right. Confused - thts the word Wheredevelsdare (talk) 22:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Laxminarayan

Iv started Laxminarayan Article as a stubby - dont hv much info - but will be expanding as and when I get some. Pl. expand the article if u hv the resources. Thanks, Wheredevelsdare (talk) 22:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

A suggestion - the more common English spelling is "Lakshminarayan" - should the page be moved? --Shruti14 t c s 02:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I have also left a message on Wheredevelsdare's talk page as well. Also note that Laxmi redirects to Lakshmi for the same reason. I will not make the move unless there is a general agreement. --Shruti14 t c s 02:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Y Done --Shruti14 t c s 03:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually I wanted to put the picture of the Laxminarayan Dev murtis at Vadtal, but did nt hv them - maybe I can put it on at a later date. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 09:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Just replaced the pic - put up the one with both Narayan and Lakshmi - if u mind juz revert it. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 09:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

JSN - When u hv the time pl. go thru the Swaminarayan temples page and gv me feedback - hv completed the overhauling. 23:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Under construction

In wikipedia no one owns articles. (see WP:OWN). Placing an underconstruction banner allows a reasonable time for someone to construct the article. Look at the template, the examples shown are 5 minutes, 30 minutes. 40+ hours is not reasonable to have something in main space under construction with no content. If you need more time, create at your leisure in user space. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you think

Juthani, Namaskar and namaste! I would say that just because Swaminarayan group does not have 100 articles, we should not give up. Lets create a common group. There are only a few traditions where Radha Krishna is worshiped, this can be a basis of a new group and we can focus on a number of articles with a biggest scope. Let me know what you think, Krishna Bhakti workgroup - a bigger and better scope? Wikidās ॐ 06:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Great! Im wondering how to refer to it. 'Krishna Bhakti workgroup' is my preferred option, but Krishnaism for the project is also a possible option. Of course 'Radha-Krishna traditions' is one way of putting it. Let me know what you think. Wikidās ॐ 20:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Disambag

On the disambag page Iv removed the navbox - hv never seen a navbox on such a page - just add all the pages u want to the list. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest we add the whole succession section on the Sahajanand Swami page to the sect page - it will cover everything. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, thats your MoS comment. Is it hard to just select the principal items from the navbox and copy them over to the disambiguation page?Wikidās ॐ 20:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

MoS? anyways Juthani1, its imp. info so needs to be on the Bhagwan page too. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

thts wht i wanna no - Wikidas - whts the ans. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, so now - Iv copied the succession to the sect page. Juthani1 has voluneteered to fill up the diabmbag. Anything left? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 21:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
About BAPS and Swaminarayan Gadi - might sound harsh - but its the truth. They were founded after he left for akshardham, and claim succession. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you think about a group or a project

Invitation to create a Krishna centered Hinduism project
Proposed project - Krishna worshipers WikiProject Invitation - lets create unity in diversity!
Proposal for discussion - May 2008

Juthani, Please, say what you think about it:

Just a few words... what may interest you and attract other editors across a wider spectrum of Krishna-centered or connected traditions in Hinduism?
From ancient to modern
You can join and make a difference!



UBX

It would be great if you did! I will add a line to the proposal page. Wikidās ॐ 21:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

UBX

{{User:Aeon1006/Userboxes/User Fatmouse}} ? Of course Radha Krishna for the picture... what do you think? :-) However I would leave it up to you to exactly figure it out. You are the expert.Wikidās ॐ 22:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC) I still of two minds as of the name of the box, what you think of 'this user is a member of Krishna Worship group'. Let me know what you think please. Wikidās ॐ 23:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Succession

To say that Sahajanand Swami established a line of Acharyas is not POV, but a fact. Has been accepted by the courts, again I refer to the Desh Vibhag Lekh. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 22:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Its a point of view, but one needs to balance it with another POV - both sourced and both valid. Wikidās ॐ
Wikidas, I dont know if you are well versed with the matter. The situation is thus. Bhagwan Swaminarayan made the Swaminarayan Sampraday and established a line of acharyas as successors via the Desh Vibhag Lekh. He also indicated this in other places, such as the Shikshapatri. When he left for Aksharham, he left the reins of the sampraday with the Acharyas and put Gopalanand Swami in charge of the Sampraday. Now, many years after this a sadhu of the Shri Swaminarayan Mandir, Vadtal, Yagnapurushji (later refered to as Shastriji Maharaj) and formed a sect of his own, BAPS. He was later excommunicated. His contention was that Bhagwan Swaminarayans spiritual successor was Gunatitanand Swami and not the Acharyas. The paradox is that Gunatitanand Swami had also left for Akshardham by then. Infact even Gunatitanand Swami, one of the main sadhus of Bhagwan Swaminarayan states “He who insults the temples, Acharyas, sadhus and satsangies will find his roots being destroyed and will inevitably fall from the satsang.” (Swami ni Vato Prakran 5, Vat 104). Now, I agree that since BAPS claims succession and is quite a large group, they need to be mentioned, but that sould not undermine the fact that the Acharyas were appointed by Bhagwan Swaminarayan himself and that BAPS and other groups only claim succession. I hope you get my point. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 23:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
If anyone was excommunicated that makes it POV as far as Wikipedia is concerned, since he will not accept the fact that Bhagwan Swaminarayan made the Swaminarayan Sampraday and established a line of acharyas and will have a different perspective on the matter. Onces there are two opinions with some comparable following its not a fact its a belief in Wiki. (I accept it as fact but that is my POV). Please understand I do not take one side or the other... Validity of appointment as a historical fact is mainstream POV and BAPS are a smaller POV, both need to be reflected with references. Do I make sense or is it OR:-)? Wikidās ॐ 23:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I shouldn't be talking here, but I completely agree with Wikidas. The POV needs to be balance with other POV. You have to mention Gunatitanand Swami in some way. Yes the Desh Vibhag Lekh says this, we don't reconizr it so it is definetly POV. Just add both.    Juthani1   tcs 00:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh no my friend, what is on is not POV but fact. I think the introduction to the succession is totally neutral and requires no change. It rightly mentions the acharyas first as they were appointed by Bhagwan himself. Then it goes on to mention tht other groups to claim succession. Remember, this includes all other groups not just BAPS. You may not know of this but before you came on there were a lot of edit wars bettn Sampraday and BAPS editors and this was reached out as a common solution. Pl. do not attempt to change it in favour of BAPS or any other group. You may refer to the archives of the Swaminarayan Page. The links were prob removed by an ex-editor who was earlier active - note the way he mentioned in the edit summary tht they had been removed to prevent edit wars. From the edit style I think I can guess who tht was, though I would not like to comment as Im not sure - m trying to find out. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 00:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

That appears to be a clear evidence of edit war on misunderstanding of WP:YESPOV. Even more reasons to have an active group that can deal with it. Wikidās ॐ 06:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:?

I understand your feelings but I hope u understand what I was saying. As Iv said before, I have nothing against BAPS, but you must remember that the Sampraday was the original orgainisation and it has scriptures backing it. You may not accept that, but that is totally different. I understand why you object to the claiming succession part, but remember that is NPOV. You cannot say the Sampraday because that would be ubsurd - it was set up by Bhagwan himself, and the succession was ratified by him himself, a fact accepted in court. Whereas BAPS and others do not have any such proof to back their claim, hence you can say that they claim succession.

Just to add to it, BAPS will always say that 2 groups the Sampraday and BAPS claim succession, but the truth is that the Sampraday is the original and the Acharyas are bonafide successors of Sahjanand Swami (A fact accepted by the Bombay High Court) and BAPS is a Breakaway faction claiming succession.

Now regarding this you and they have confused me. It says it is part of ISSO and that it is Vadtal of USA! Now ISSO actually comes under the Narnarayan Dev Gadi!!

Thts gr8. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 16:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Correct me if I am wrong. He, SN, approved acharyas at his time (a while back). He did not approve ALL acharyas after him. On the other hand I agree that the fact that the BAPS are breakaway faction should be kept, but their opinion should be cited. Is it okay? I will try to word it if you want - but I would rather want to have a confirmation from you first. Wikidās ॐ 16:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Juthani1, pl. state what u think it shld be before changing.

Wikidas: Bhagwan Swaminarayan has approved ALL the Acharyas after him - refer to the Desh Vibhag Lekh. Their opinion is cited, later on (there is a seperate section for them and Swaminarayan Gadi in the Succession section). Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, but that does not make sense (except in a religious faith based way). How a person can approve something in advance of 120 years? If its an element of faith, then it should be stated as such. Wikidās ॐ 17:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I understand, but what u say, but remember God has forsight. He knows the future, so he probably foresaw a problem and left the Lekh (which as I said covers ALL past, present and future Acharyas). This has been accepted by the Bombay high court (which means what I say is not POV but has legal standing, I am sure you consider a court NPOV and not biased towards the Sampraday). BTW tht lekh was written more than 230 years back, 1883 in the Vikram Samvat calendar.

On a diff note, Juthani1: I have replaced the images on the LakshmiNarayan page with an infobox having the Vadtal temple murtis. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Its not a place for a deep philosophical debate. As you said "remember God has forsight." He would know that BAPS will dispute the leadership? I guess its clearly an area of guesswork, we need to present both sides of the story proportionately to following of the both sides. Wikidās ॐ 21:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I agree on the debate part. You asked me how could he approve something so much in advance - I told u wht I felt - the real reason might be diff - but the fact of the matter is that he left the Lekh, which has been accepted by the courts.

Juthnani1- your edits on the disabig page are very much siding BAPS and not giving the true story. I have reverted the page to the claiming successorship part as even though it sounds harsh it is the truth and that cannot be disputed. If you have any problems with that, please cite it on the talk page and not revert it. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 00:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

AIV

Hey Juthani1 - just wondered why you reported Special:Contributions/Oam_shanti_shanti_shanti to WP:AIV when his last edits were in December 2006. Obviously, this person isn't a problem at all. Cheers —Alex.Muller 20:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

disambig page looks good

I think the page looks good. Its by far better then an average Disambiguation page, its only a disambiguation and is not essential. It should be linked into actual pages of course to work. Wikidās ॐ 21:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for a name

Juthani, After shortening the disambiguation (for your approval of course), I have suggested the move to Swaminarayan. Let me know what you think. Wikidās ॐ 21:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal

JSN,

As u prob know the Akshardham page currently is a disambig page. I propose that the Akshardham (Philosophy) be moved to just Akshardham with a note on top For more uses of Akshardham see the Akshardham (Disambig) page. The current Akshardham pg cld be moved to the Akshardham (Disambig) pg then. The rationale behind it is that Akshardham is the divine abode for Maharaj and everything else has been named Akshardham due to this, making the philosophy the main article. If you object to this, pl. let me know and I will not go ahead with it. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Akshardham: Point taken.

As for the disambig - dosnt make sense - BAPS has a sizeable following and should be mentioned on that basis. Its just tht I feel tht the truth shld be mentioned bout it. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 19:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW, in the Sampraday a follower is known as Swaminarayani - Swaminarayan is for bhagwan - how can we be known as that - I dunno bout wht u guys believe. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Well is not used much, we mainly say Satsangi - though ppl also use Swaminarayani. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Fine as long as u dont remove the Acharya part - that is imp. as its mentioned in the Shikshapatri. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Changed Sahajanand Swami to Swaminarayan: ppl no him by tht name. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Chicago Temple

Are these the same temple or diff - [2] and [3]. The second link has the pic of the Ahmedabad Maharajshri, so thts def part of Ahmedabad Gadi. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 18:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Name of the project

Juthani, I personally think that name of the project can be Radha Krishna sampradayas or Krishnaism. Radha Krishna and Krishna without ending does not sound right. I like the idea of a project with a separate assessments that will eventually grow into a portal. Let me know what you think about the name. Also an original proposal of Radha Krishna worshipers can be discussed at the discussion place here... Let me know what you think. I think being under such narrow scope (rather then the wide scope of Hinduism) Swaminarayana sampradaya pages will benefit. Wikidās ॐ 06:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Ñumbers

The Williams ref says tht the foll is abt 3.5 million, whiles the Indian Express rates it at abt 2 crore (20million), whch is why it was added. I suspect u thgt crore is hindi, its not its used in english in the subcontinent, instead of millions, lakhs and crores are used. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 10:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

No probs - this ref will prob help us, 20 million is a big number. Abt the Chicago temple, do me a favour, see the pic of it on the Swaminarayan Temples page and temme if thts the one u went to - Im pretty convinced now that there are 2 - I wanna decipher bettn the two now. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The one u visited was prob @ Wheeling - i dunno wht they come under as they mention both ISSO and Vadtal. Anyways, Iv added it to the list under Chicago - Itasca. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Indiana

Please do not erase my Indiana addition. It is an empirical fact that Indiana is the smallest state by land area west of the App. Mts. You have no logical reason to delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.158.1.254 (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Pramukh Swami Maharaj

Hello Juthani. I like to create articles on living religious leaders. Do you know of others like Pramukh Swami Maharaj or any of his associates (and/or disciples) who would are living notable BAPS religious leaders? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Smile

Thanx for signing my guestbook! since you were in the top 20.......

Junkmail!.. has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Junkmail!..!

Chicago

Cracked the puzzle. Wheeling is under the Vadtal Gadi, but for some reason part of ISSO too. Itasca is under Ahmedabad Gadi. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I dont hv a pic of the Wheeling temple - by chance if u hv 1 can u pl. upload? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Dont need to go there sp. 4 this. If u do go sometime Ill b grateful if u cld get a pic. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 10:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

4 HOURS! My god thts a looonngg drive. Do u do tht often? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

y0

Jai Swaminarayan bhai. Thanks for all the updates. I've been really busy with uni stuff so I haven't had much time for this place. Not sure if I'll be a regular editor no more, got a busy summer ahead too. About the POV thing, I understand. I've always tried to enforce that by referencing my work. Which is why (if you haven't already) you shouldn't make a Bhagatji Maharaj article. At least not yet. All of our article require a lot of work with references, it's key to being seeing as good and respectable around here. Take the work I had been doing for Akshardham (Delhi) in my sandbox (previous version: click here). It's what will help some people understand our sanstha, our articles. So they need to be informative to a good standard, y'know? Just my thoughts. The London santo agree with me (to an extent) also. Anyway, I'll be around now and again. Thanks again. -- Harish - 19:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Added my name to that workgroup thingy, hope it works out! -- Harish - 02:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK hook

The intro restates the hook. Nothing wrong with that, but there's no footnote. I didn't see any restatement of it in the article itself. So I can only describe it as uncited. Daniel Case (talk) 02:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to take so long to write back ... I was very tired last night. Instructions for inserting footnotes are at WP:FN#How to use. You may also want to use whatever citation template is appropriate ... {{cite book}}, {{cite web}} or whatever. Daniel Case (talk) 12:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Sahajanand Swami

No probs - ur right, I felt it too. Wht we can do is use the last pic on the page for the infobox and move this one down. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Radha Krishna

Do u guys (BAPS) have RadhaKrishna murtis too? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 19:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Template

The template red tiger commented on was Template:SwaminarayanTT not Template:Swaminarayan. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 19:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Ur user Page

Yes Mr. Forgot to sign again! :-) it looks fine. Server? Im using internet explorer ATM. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 19:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Jay Swaminarayan,

I m from SMVS (Swaminarayan Mandir Vasna Sanstha) located at Vasna / Ahmedabad / Gujarat / India.

I want to take a part in your project, and also want to create a page of SMVS. Pl guide.

Ksoni (talk) 03:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I rvv Swaminarayan Akshardham to Akshardham on the disambig. Its known as just Akshardham. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 10:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC) and also resized the tilak chandlo on the Swaminarayan Template to cover the whole right portion. Feel free to rvv if u dont like it this way. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 10:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC) and hope u dont mind my edits to ur sandbox 2. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 10:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Dint u read the above msg for the template? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)