User talk:47.8.14.41

Welcome![edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 47.8.14.41, has made edits which do not conform to our policies and therefore have been reverted. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles. If you did not do this, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:

Help contents – the main help page.
Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017[edit]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:37, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello Sarah Welch:- Its not about better. This page contains info about things which Radhasoami has nothing to do. eg:- Krishna has nothing to do with Radhasoami, then why you are writing it. why it is your Ego to put unneccesary cencorship . Check facts. Dont write bogus. What i want to say that you are mistaken about the article Radhasoami. Why dont you check the facts with proper reference given. It is your ego that you are correct and others are wrong. Instead in your ego you have posted wrong information about Radhasoami. You can block or do whatever you want to but it is really surprising that wikipedia dont bother about bogus information posted on their site. Good luck with your ego and not understanding what I have to say. I am not going to make any more edits. Hypocrites!!. 47.8.14.41 (talk) 14:56, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The content you removed was based on reliable sources such as books published by academic publishers. Such secondary sources are what Wikipedia content should be based on. That's not a matter of ego but of verifiability. If there's some issue - if the sources are misrepresented and don't actually confirm the statements they're cited for, for example - you should explain that issue on the article's talk page. That doesn't seem to be the case, however: I had no trouble finding additional sources confirming that Radhasoami indeed refers to Krishna as the lord (swami) of his consort Radha. Huon (talk) 15:22, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello Huon , I am not going to make any more edits. Radha Krishna is Hinduism deity. and Radhasoami is the founder of Radhasoami Faith. Its a different sect in Hinduism. Try to understand and go through the reference.I am only trying to help produce correct fact. I am an Indian and follower of Radhasoami Faith. DO you really think you will know this better than me.In fact, I am from Agra, birth place of Radhasoami Sahab. The source you are citing might be interpreted differently. But I can assure you Radhasoami is different and RadhaKrishana is different. THE CONFUSION IS DUE TO SIMILARITY IN NAMES. Hope you will understand this thin difference. Radhasoami is different sect and adherents belonging to Radhasoami Faith dont worship krishna, instead they worship their spiritual master(who is believed to be representative of the Radhasoami(first guru SHiv Dayal Singh Sahab)). I am not going to make any more edits, I leave it upto You. If wikipedia is really sincere in their approach, Its you to bother produce correct facts. Atleast remove the Kishna line. You quoted Mark Juergensmeyer book- Mark Juergensmeyer did a simple research work on Radhasoami sect, but he did as an outsider. He didn't went into deep and didnt check real facts. I am posting few references here, hope yiu will read them. ref1)- https://plus.google.com/103821121989801859567/posts/F6w1NDC2Gpr ref2) http://www.santmat-thetruth.de/explanation-of-the-term-radhasoami.html Read the lines in ref2 -(Radha aad surat ka naam; Soami aad Shabd nij dham. Radha is the name of the primal soul current (Surat); Soami is the name of the primal source of Shabd or the Word.)

You might again say you have sources to confirm what you are saying, Then I will say again, IT IS DUE TO SIMILARITY OF NAMES. And I can assure you this being the follower of Radhasoami Faith and belonging to Agra(where this Faith started). Now its your choice. I did my part. There are many more errors in this page, but if You cant agree to this basic change, how can I expect to agree on others. So, you job to find the correct info. I hope you understand what I wanted to say. Best of your Intelligence. 47.8.14.41 (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter to Wikipedia what I know or what you know; what matters is what reliable secondary sources report. Those sources seem to agree that the name indeed is a reference to Krishna (and "The word radhasoami literally refers to Krishna as lord (swami) of his consort Radha" can't really be interpreted in any other way). Juergensmeyer is an academic who dedicated an entire book, published by Princeton University Press, to Radhasoami. If his research really were so shoddy that he got the basics wrong, you surely can point to peer-reviewed scholarly papers or other textbooks contradicting him. The website you point to and Google Plus, on the other hand, are not considered reliable by Wikipedia's standards since they are not subject to editorial oversight. I could write a Google Plus post that says the opposite. That doesn't mean anything. Huon (talk) 16:46, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello Huon , Juergensmeyer is a researcher and I BELONG TO RADHASOAMI FAITH. You still can't find the diff. I am only concerned about this coz its the name of our deity 'RADHASOAMI'.I am again citing a very credible source, hope you will go through it carefully.

Juergensmeyer is a academic but here is the book written (see page 6) by those who have lived with Radhasoami sahab. Lala pratap mentioned in page six was younger brother of Radhasoami Sahab and salig ram sahab was the chief deciple of Radhasoami sahab. This book is published by Soamibagh Agra,(from where it all started, i.e birthplace of Radhasoami Sahab).

See Page -40 Attributes to radhasoami naam. https://www.scribd.com/doc/118290685/Sar-Bachan-Radhasoami-Poetry-Volume-One

I hope your doubt is cleared now. There are more than 100 books where this can be cited but not all of them are available online. I find the above available online so I cited the source.47.8.14.41 (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are not anyone's personal blog / essay. Wikipedia articles summarize scholarship, published mainstream multiple WP:RS. You are mistaken about no mention of Radha / Krishna in the https://www.scribd.com/doc/118290685/Sar-Bachan-Radhasoami-Poetry-Volume-One you provide. It is there on pages 170, 41, etc. We cannot use it, however, because it is a primary source. Please review our content guidelines. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:29, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello Huon , content guidelines. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) Mention of radha krishna doesnt mean anything, how anything has mentioned and what it means is Important. If you fo through it you will find exactly what Radhsoami means. I dont know why you are ignoring it straightaway. This is your arrogance. your attitude is really painful, I am follower of Radhasoami Faith, cited the most authentic source. Still you dont want to change shows your nonsense attitude. You dont want to put the right thing just showing your ego that you can edit anything like a Boss without bothering what credible sources have been placed. Actually Juergensmeyer is white, so i understand white supremacy. You are a racist. Juergensmeyer knows better about Radhsoami than the Brother of Radhasoami himself. What a lunatic you people are. But none should refer wikipedia for any reliable information. You stupid people cant understand why anyone will bother to change the fact to real unless its real and also given proper proof.

If you want to change the facts, change it or do whatever the hell you want to. Dont reply me your stupid reasons. Racist. 47.8.14.41 (talk) 17:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please quit your personal attacks against Huon and others! Terms such as "your stupid reasons", "stupid", "arrogant", "your nonsense attitude", "lunatic you people are", "racist" etc are not helpful. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:49, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

content guidelines. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) You were totally not helpful sister, you gave so pain that you cant understand my one point even after citing credible sources. I give up my expectation to be understood by wikipedia team. Aynways I am sorry for using such words. But I refrain away from this topic now. But still if you will go through the previous talk on this page, you will find my points right and sources too.

See Page -40 Attributes to radhasoami naam. https://www.scribd.com/doc/118290685/Sar-Bachan-Radhasoami-Poetry-Volume-One

But even after going this source, you are not convinced, its your choice. Best of your intelligence. But please do not revert saying We will not do it. Dont hurt me anymore. I am sorry if you were hurted. May Radhasoami Sahab bless you. Amen. 47.8.14.41 (talk) 18:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, don't add the help template, if you wish to "refrain away from this topic now". If you still need help or further resolution, please try WP:TEAHOUSE or WP:ANI. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:14, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

content guidelines. Ms Sarah Welch (talk)

I wont bother you more. I am sorry for thinking that wikipedia is based on reliable info. But only one thing that- Why even after citing a credible source (Book written by Brother and chief deciple of Radhasoami Sshab). you still dont change it. Radha krishna and Radhasoami are two different deities. I am tired, you really made me weep today. Bye.

47.8.14.41 (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content is based on reliable sources. You and Wikipedia just differ on which sources should be considered more reliable. Wikipedia goes with secondary sources and considers academics among the most reliable sources available. Huon (talk) 18:52, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.