This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Art of Living Foundation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Art of Living Foundation. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Art of Living Foundation at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
I am seeing lots of contributions, welfare achievements of this organization being removed. We can just write a big book of human welfare contributions of The Art Of Living Foundation. Unfortunately, some of the wikipedian editors are posing threat about this article. I thought Wikipedia a great site and contributed more than $100. I should have not done this as Wikipedia is not writing a good article on this fantastic humantarian organization. I have done all courses of Art Of Living and it is simply fantastic and life boosting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimalleshk ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Information about Silver jubilee function which was largest event on planet, social welfare summary and activities need to be added. --Jai 16:28, 10 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimalleshk ( talk • contribs)
Please add all details regarding functions/events/awards. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
59.162.17.49 (
talk) 03:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
It is not advertisement - I don't think that there is any claim seems advertisement. Listing can't be considered advertisement. It is article regarding International Social NGO. Please go through GREENPEACE and other NGO Website! They are listing completely similar content and hence offering/social project can not be considered advertising. Project and other sections have links from popular newspapers of India and can't be considered poor referring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 08:38, 1 March 2013 (UTC) ( talk • contribs) 08:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
From 2010 - Lots of content is removed on the name of advertisement - which have proper references! Anyways, I have removed the advertisement markup as nothing significant left in the page. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 02:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Removed 2013 tags stating advertisement and references. It was fixed long back. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 11:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
There seems to be a great deal of trivial press promoting their courses. Is it enough to expand upon what's already mentioned in the article? How do we present it neutrally, when the reporting are puff pieces? -- Ronz ( talk) 16:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
See to WP:SELFPUB, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV. -- Ronz ( talk) 18:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what is meant by "puff" pieces but the newspapers, e.g. The Washington Post, are not trivial press. Newspapers in general report in a neutral and even skeptical tone (the Washington Post article is not exactly promotional if you take a look). The university articles are not promotional either, they just report students' experiences and they are informative because they indicate that these courses are happening on campuses and that students have something to say about them. As for the TV News pieces, are they considered "puff" press? The Fox piece is about real-life problems in schools and how schools are using the AOLF courses to address problems like bullying. The MSNBC is more descriptive for sure, it highlights how NY'ers are using the course to address stress but it interviews a Columbia Medical school professor so that seems really legitimate. Please let me know your thoughts. thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandonald ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 November 2009
OK - so what are your thoughts on these pieces? I see them as providing information and they do ask people about their experiences - many of these experiences are positive which is actually a good sign seeing that the Washington Post is a huge national newspapers - does that make the article puff? I've looked for other Articles on AOLF in the press and these are the only ones I could find, that is why they are up there. Please share your thoughts. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandonald ( talk • contribs) 19:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
So in order for something not to be a "Puff Piece" it has to be overtly critical, is that what you are saying? I am not using these pieces to talk about how great AOL is, I used them to VALIDATE that the courses are indeed happening in colleges and NYC etc... I did not cite or quote from them. To this end, it is fine to use them. In other parts of the article you quote from "Readers Digest" which is not a high-end journal, and it's a critical piece. Does that mean articles are only ok if they are critical? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.15.24.80 ( talk) 15:54, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Go ahead add the courses section but It should match wikipedia standards Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 06:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC) .
I recently found that article regarding courses and projects are deleted considering it as "advertisement". Surely it is about the work that NGO do - You can compare it with wiki pages of Greenpeace, Red Cross and many more. Please discuss on wiki page before deleting.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.17.49 ( talk • contribs)
Ok. Thanks. But it would have been great if you could have talked first that courses problem is having such problem or atleast in the comment(copyright issue). I will ask experts to write on it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 11:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
The media reports are not just puff pieces. The emotional clensing that happens in t he Art of Living Workshops is of the highest order. Reports are published by the Harvard Health Magazine (U.S.A.), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (New Delhi, India), NIMHANS (Bangalore, India). An editor must accept the reports by World Class Medical Institutes and Reputed International Dailies. There is no point ridiculing medical reports by independent agencies. User:Andy.went.Wandy —Preceding undated comment added 17:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Art of living is primarily an educational organization offering courses and programs. We have already acknowledged that in the statements about revenues etc. We need to expand on the section on programs and courses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.127.68 ( talk) 17:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
The previously mentioned promotional tone/slant detected by some editors may partly be explained by the article's reliance on references to materials self-generated by the AoLF and its associates. These fall into the realm of self-published sources and cannot be used to reference statements about the organization without some sort of qualifier (e.g., "according to the Art of Living Foundation's website..."). I have flagged some of the instances of this poor referencing, and there are yet others which I have left which are questionable and could be challenged. There is no lack of better secondary and tertiary references out there, and a rewrite and/or re-referencing of the article using those would be very welcome. • Astynax talk 18:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Wikipedians, why some of the editors have flagged this article as advertisements/publicity? Facts are facts. I have given citations for all guiness records and this has to be communicated to people. How can it be advertisements? Truth is truth. I have seen many articles in wikipedia where guiness records, acheivements of organizations are clearly written. May be some miscreants are flagging this article with publicity/advertisement tags. Please remove it.
Art of Living is world's largest NGO helping mankind. Lets do some thing good and support instead of pulling them down. Also the citations that I gave are getting removed. I always thought wikipedia to be a great site and have contributed $100. Hope you wikipedians do not shake the respect that I have for wikipedia.--Jai 16:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Content in the Criticism is not having any significant reference. Please provide significant references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 14:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Again asking for references regarding content in this section. Most of the contributors to this section is not having talk page and not a logged in user(only ip mentioned). If no significant found till Aug 25(IST). Then I am going to delete content which is not backed up by references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.17.49 ( talk) 11:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC) Thanks for refining content of criticism Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 04:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
It is wrong to cite WP:NOTNEWSPAPER and WP:UNDUE for the edited content. I do not agree with Ronz. Unless the points about proceedings of the Courts, intervention of the chief minister etc. are mentioned the content as criticism does not make sense. It is definitely not undue. May be it needs to be reworded. I want to edit this again. Parjorim ( talk) 05:48, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
NOTNEWSPAPER can not be applied simply because we are only using the newspaper article as a source & not putting in the whole news item as part of the article. It is not UNDUE because in present form the information of the event is incomplete. Anybody can file a PIL in a court of law irrespective of the pleas being true or non-true. But in this case the state government filed an affidavit in the court confirming that the land was indeed encroached. Now the question arises, why the foundation was not prosecuted inspite of the affidavit. Thats where it becomes necessary to mention that the foundation & ravishankar were saved because of Ravishankar's influence on the government machinery in particular the then CM of the Karnataka State. Parjorim ( talk) 08:10, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Please use WP:DISENGAGE :-)welll.....Just for once I would re-word the edits you have removed before moving on to any DR noticeboard. Parjorim ( talk) 11:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
You are right. I tried to find further sources & did found some but then reading those I realized that the intervention is about another land grabbing case. May be I would update that sometime later. 27.5.184.108 ( talk) 06:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
It is very important that people understand the difference between Religious and Spiritual Organisation. Particularly Art of Living is not a Religious Organisation; so please Don't include it in Hinduism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.17.49 ( talk) 07:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC) Yes! I do believe that tagging it as Hinduism is restricting its scope. It is global organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 15:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I believe that Sudarshan Kriya should have its own page as it is quite vast subject and lots of researches is done on Sudarshan Kriya. It impacts of physical, mental and spiritual level further it is very important and practiced widely by millions around the world. We can't add all details of research- impacts and related controversies in this article. Please let me know your views.
Can anyone please enter details about New Initiative by The Art of Living Foundation - Volunteer for a better India. Lakhs of Youths joined have Volunteer for a Better India is registered 15,000+ social activity in few months. I am initiating the section but request further details. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 11:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I added a section upon Volunteer for a Better India, but it was deleted. Andy.went.Wandy 1 mar 2013. —Preceding undated comment added 17:22, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Is anyone interested in adding such material in a manner that doesn't violate WP:NOT and WP:NPOV? Best to start here by listing some potential sources that are both reliable and independent. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Again, this is an encyclopedia, not a venue for promotion. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:14, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
This wiki page has gone through serious transformation. Lots of section and information has been deleted! Unnecessary things like including hate blogging website details etc. I don't think how it matters if art of living put case against hate group! This is not at all related to the foundation. Further Courses/Events/Projects/Activities everything is removed! I would request more attention of moderator to such users! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 07:48, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
This case is typical of one of the hate blog at WordPress. Please make me understand why Wikipedia started promoting hate blogs! There are hate blogs for almost all organization! It is not at all having place in Wikipedia. Art of Living filed case on one blog site; so should it be posted on Wikipedia that too of anonymous blogger! Doesn't Wikipedia encouraging hate blog by it! Please provide your views! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 03:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
STRONG REMOVAL: Related Discussion was related to Criticism section - However, still there are no references to promote hate blog by using some news articles in such a way and there is no way that this section should have entry in the article. I tomorrow damage something and they put complaint on me and I do settlement with the party - So will it enter in Wikipedia? Content should be wikified. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 18:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
STRONG REMOVAL: Complete story behind the scene: There were senior art of living teachers - who got great success with the course but however they started feeling that All success is attributed to me and not the technique(taught in the course). Success start running their head. So suddenly they started loosing the charm in matter of a year. Once Sri Sri Ravi Shankar visited that town then teacher told him that please ask others to respect him. Sri Sri replied that respect can't be forced it need to be earned. Then they started warning foundation that they are having art of living content(being one of 7500 teachers) and they will publish it; do negative publicity and also demanded extortion of about 3000 dollars to stop from blogging. So they started doing negative publicity. Refer to Commentary on Kena Upanishad. I wonder why some senior members of wikipedia board are more interested in putting this article as part of art of living wiki page so that people search for the keywords in Google and it can make hate blogs more popular which result in better indexing!!! Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 04:16, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
My question is very logical - How this section can contribute to wikipedia - what information it is having for or against organization! Read complete law suit it simply explain that bloggers started writing hate blog and at that time art of living foundation is not having copyright so ended up in settlement. But I don't understand that projecting such information in wikipedia will only degrade the quality. It is not about personal view - Even if I don't know about this foundation then also I would have pointed out what makes contributor think that any external blog information or law suit to stop someone from blogging directly related to the organization! Let other contributor put their view on this! Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 17:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry guys, I didn't mean to bulldoze discussion, I came across this page when logged out and made this edit before I noticed that there had been recent discussion about similar issues. If someone disagrees with this edit, feel free to open up discussion on it. My reasons for the edit are explained in the edit summary. rʨanaɢ ( talk) 19:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Please WP:FOC. Thanks!
Wikipedia:V#Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion begins with "See also: WP:UNDUE"
WP:IINFO begins "See also: Wikipedia:Notability." Wikipedia:Notability addresses NPOV multiple times, most importantly the last paragraph of its introduction: "These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list. For Wikipedia's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons."
WP:NOT#NEWS is similar to IINFO in that it begins with a link to Wikipedia:Notability (events).
So, since we're talking about content within an article rather the article itself, WP:NPOV (especially WP:UNDUE) applies and is probably our best way or resolving this. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please delete section "Land encroachment". This is False. Please refer to news articles http://www.deccanherald.com/content/185862/art-living-has-not-encroached.html
Few people wants to defame the organization for its role in Anti-corruption moviement. Please refrain from such publications where the court has not given any judgements. Sentiments of hundreds of millions is hurt. Amgupta2000 ( talk) 09:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
But to suit NPOV policy the article should include the declaration of the foundation about this issue. Otherwise seems more like a defamation. That's not the right way to accomplish npov. Also, since there is no legal resolution about this, the title "Land encroachment" is incorrect as it gives the impression of a statement. It should be more like "accusations of land encroachment" or something like that. Jmfalguera ( talk) 14:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I had added this section that were revert by User:Ronz. Reason given was "Sources are poor and event hasnt happened yet". IMO this section deserves a mention, it has been in the national news for the last 5 days now. ChunnuBhai ( talk) 06:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
ping User:Sitush User:Kautilya3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChunnuBhai ( talk • contribs) 06:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: WP:BOLDly moved.( non-admin closure) Eventhorizon51 ( talk) 19:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Art of Living foundation → Art of Living Foundation – Capitalisation - NottNott| talk Notify me with {{ re}} 18:18, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
The article has quite a bit typo errors and outdated information. It is as if it still exists in the time period of 2013. Only updating that has taken place is in already contentious Legal Issues where it has managed to speak as if its early 2016. Why is it that the edits in these regards have been undone? The River Rejuvenation has well cited by News reports, The World Culture Festival was widely covered by media both for legal issues and its magnanimity. If the article is to be neutral it should contain actual information and up-to date information, not based on bias some editors my have. Improving upon edits is one thing and completely undoing it is another. We owe it to the readers that they be presented with correct and up-to-date info. -- Santoshskcp ( talk) 09:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I had added some text to the page about Sudarshan Kriya. It has disappeared without any notification and reasoning. It was a factual information with sources from scientific journals quoted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shantanu Deshmukh ( talk • contribs) 04:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
The sources look rather promotional, even WP:NOTNEWS. I'll take a closer look when I have more time, but hope others will comment. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
The notice about undisclosed payments seems like an unsubstantiated allegation to me. Anyone has thoughts on why should it remain on the page? 71.245.186.73 ( talk) 05:10, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
I did not add the tag. I've not looked closely into why it was added. From what I see, it seems appropiate. If it's removed, a COI template should replace it. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:31, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The notice on the page says that the article reads like an advertisement and cites only primary sources. The first point may be subjective, but I don't see any primary sources in the references. In fact citing links from artofliving[dot]org seems to have been banned on Wikipedia. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 17:08, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
cites only primary sourcesThat's not what it says. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:11, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Requesting for comments on the pending issues on the article. It would be great if we could pinpoint where the issues exist so that we may address them. Merely stating that issues are there doesn't help fix the problems. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 01:01, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Merely stating that issues are there doesn't help fix the problems.As before, that's not the case here as even the most cursory of glances at this talk page shows. -- Ronz ( talk) 01:08, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
There has been a lot of discussion about the quality of sources used on the article. I am maintaining a list here to comment and discuss.
NewlyHookedToWiki (
talk) 22:55, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
1. Pandya, Samta P. “New Strategies of New Religious Movements: The Case of Art of Living Foundation.” Sociological Bulletin, vol. 64, no. 3, 2015, pp. 287–304. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26290743.
Although India specific. This article covers social projects in great detail. Defines the role of social services in spiritual practice promoted by the foundation. It also analyzes how the foundations used this as a strategy to reach out to people. Describes the role of local governments and their partnerships with the organization.
2. Visnikar H, Mesko G. Evaluation of The Art of Living Basic Course as the Anti-stress Program for police Officers in the Slovenian Police. Republic of Slovenia: Ministry for Internal Affairs; 2002.
There are many research articles covering the effect of "Sudarshan Kriya" practice on the foundations website [13], but this one particularly stands out as it describes their "Basic" course as a whole. May also be used a reference for AOL programs tailored for specific communities.
3. Tøllefsen, I., 2011. Art of living: Religious entrepreneurship and legitimation strategies. International Journal for the Study of New Religions, 2(2), pp.255-279. doi:10.1558/ijsnr.v2i2.255
This is a good article describing the global AOL movement as "religious" entrepreneurship, with a specific focus on Norway and Europe. It also has a good discussion on classification of Art of Living as a religious organization. Some this is relevant for the discussion above on this page. However, more importantly it is a good source to talk about programs and courses apart from the official website of the foundation. It can also be used as a reference for the movement being compatible to vedic philosophy. This article also has another interesting remark about how bulk of sources have been authored by those connected with the organization, and shares another common feature with the discussion here on Wikipedia. Several points may also be used in the criticism section here in the section about religious entrepreneurship and organization's offerings as "repackaging" of other forms of similar techniques found in Indian yogic culture.
4. Allen Salkin, "Emperor of Air". 2007.
https://www.yogajournal.com/lifestyle/emperor-of-air
Although this article is an interview it serves as a good secondary reference for many facts about the organization such as centers, number of visitors etc., programs and offerings along with medical research on them, and social impact projects. The only issue here is that some of the numbers maybe a bit dated given that it was written in 2007. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk • contribs) 23:13, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
5. Jacobs, S. (2015). The Art of Living Foundation. London: Routledge.
This book covers the foundation very well. Shows an example of what all topics should this wiki article cover. Should definitely be looked into. I don't have access to it, but browsed through table of contents. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 04:03, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
(alt) Shorter article by the same author: Stephen Jacobs, Inner Peace and Global Harmony: Individual Wellbeing and Global Solutions in the Art of Living, Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, 2014-10-01, Pages 873-889, ISSN 2000-1525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.146873
6. Chryssides, George D.. Historical Dictionary of New Religious Movements, Scarecrow Press, 2011. This has an entry of AOLF. pg 75. Important highlights:
@ Ronz, DMacks, and Ravensfire: I would like to invite you to review these references here. The can be used to significantly improve the quality of the article. I understand that I may be asking too much from you, but if we have a consensus on this we could have other editors to build on this. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 07:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
I didn't find any good citation for the following statement:
The Art of Living is a DPI NGO (Department of Public Information), which means it plays an active role in communicating and contributing to various United Nations goals (such as the UN Millennium Goals and the Stand Up initiative).
Please feel free to add it back with a proper reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Needs more info about partner organization. I have requested to whitelist artofliving[dot]org/us-en/partner-organization-iahv. This can be referenced to statement about IAHV. There is also a relevant media that can be used here - /info/en/?search=File:IAHV,_Jordan_Program_At_Syrian_Refugee_Camp.jpg which is used on the article on European_Union. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 03:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Should any of this be added to the page?
List of notable persons connected with the organization. These pages acknowledge connection with the organization Rhea Pillai, Niraj Gera, Maheish Girri, Gayatri Asokan, Swami Purnachaitanya, Bhanumathi Narasimhan, Pakhi Tyrewala, Pradip Somasundaran, Iman Mutlaq (IAHV)
List of related pages: Sri Sri Ayurveda, Gurudev: On the Plateau of the Peak, Sri Sri Centre for Media Studies, Sri Sri University, World Forum for Ethics in Business, World Cultural Festival
-- NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 04:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
The care for children section doesn't provide much details. The following may be added:
According to 2015 Tax returns filed by their American chapter, the foundation provided grants of half a million US dollars under Care for Children's Dollar a Day program. [16]. This increased to almost $US1M in 2016.
Although I am not too sure how cite this link [17] from ProPublica search tool.
NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 21:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
Section on cultural events has been removed. [18] Despite shortcomings, a few of those articles deserve separate articles on their own, such as World Cultural Festival. I am moving it here for a discussion. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 00:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Here's a complete list of awards: artofliving[dot]org/art-livings-world-records. We don't need to list them all, but at least its summary, plus mention of the fact they exist and the foundation emphasis on art and cultural needs to be specified.
Text which was found to be insufficiently paraphrased from the source material has been omitted from the article. Text which is added to an article ought to be in an editor's own words, using an editor's own phrasing. A listing of the problematic text may be found here. Spintendo 12:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
So there's nothing to say it's a UN or UNEP program. UN refs should ideally be dropped and the text should just say that they announced a campaign aligned with UN millennium goals. Hemanthah ( talk) 11:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
These kind of wordpress blogs are there for every organisation the size of AOL. It was never in news. For an organisation the size of AOL, It is unnecessary to advertise such trivial controversies on the main page. The said incident was never in news, Only 1 article was published in the entire internet. This looks like a deliberate attempt of advertisement of libel on the part of wikipedia editors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teja srinivas ( talk • contribs) 2022-01-26T03:13:35 (UTC)
Hipal Sir, the reference used in the line shows nothing to me. Ambalangirl ( talk) 06:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Art of Living Foundation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Art of Living Foundation. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Art of Living Foundation at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
I am seeing lots of contributions, welfare achievements of this organization being removed. We can just write a big book of human welfare contributions of The Art Of Living Foundation. Unfortunately, some of the wikipedian editors are posing threat about this article. I thought Wikipedia a great site and contributed more than $100. I should have not done this as Wikipedia is not writing a good article on this fantastic humantarian organization. I have done all courses of Art Of Living and it is simply fantastic and life boosting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimalleshk ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Information about Silver jubilee function which was largest event on planet, social welfare summary and activities need to be added. --Jai 16:28, 10 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimalleshk ( talk • contribs)
Please add all details regarding functions/events/awards. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
59.162.17.49 (
talk) 03:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
It is not advertisement - I don't think that there is any claim seems advertisement. Listing can't be considered advertisement. It is article regarding International Social NGO. Please go through GREENPEACE and other NGO Website! They are listing completely similar content and hence offering/social project can not be considered advertising. Project and other sections have links from popular newspapers of India and can't be considered poor referring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 08:38, 1 March 2013 (UTC) ( talk • contribs) 08:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
From 2010 - Lots of content is removed on the name of advertisement - which have proper references! Anyways, I have removed the advertisement markup as nothing significant left in the page. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 02:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Removed 2013 tags stating advertisement and references. It was fixed long back. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 11:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
There seems to be a great deal of trivial press promoting their courses. Is it enough to expand upon what's already mentioned in the article? How do we present it neutrally, when the reporting are puff pieces? -- Ronz ( talk) 16:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
See to WP:SELFPUB, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV. -- Ronz ( talk) 18:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what is meant by "puff" pieces but the newspapers, e.g. The Washington Post, are not trivial press. Newspapers in general report in a neutral and even skeptical tone (the Washington Post article is not exactly promotional if you take a look). The university articles are not promotional either, they just report students' experiences and they are informative because they indicate that these courses are happening on campuses and that students have something to say about them. As for the TV News pieces, are they considered "puff" press? The Fox piece is about real-life problems in schools and how schools are using the AOLF courses to address problems like bullying. The MSNBC is more descriptive for sure, it highlights how NY'ers are using the course to address stress but it interviews a Columbia Medical school professor so that seems really legitimate. Please let me know your thoughts. thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandonald ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 November 2009
OK - so what are your thoughts on these pieces? I see them as providing information and they do ask people about their experiences - many of these experiences are positive which is actually a good sign seeing that the Washington Post is a huge national newspapers - does that make the article puff? I've looked for other Articles on AOLF in the press and these are the only ones I could find, that is why they are up there. Please share your thoughts. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susandonald ( talk • contribs) 19:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
So in order for something not to be a "Puff Piece" it has to be overtly critical, is that what you are saying? I am not using these pieces to talk about how great AOL is, I used them to VALIDATE that the courses are indeed happening in colleges and NYC etc... I did not cite or quote from them. To this end, it is fine to use them. In other parts of the article you quote from "Readers Digest" which is not a high-end journal, and it's a critical piece. Does that mean articles are only ok if they are critical? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.15.24.80 ( talk) 15:54, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Go ahead add the courses section but It should match wikipedia standards Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 06:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC) .
I recently found that article regarding courses and projects are deleted considering it as "advertisement". Surely it is about the work that NGO do - You can compare it with wiki pages of Greenpeace, Red Cross and many more. Please discuss on wiki page before deleting.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.17.49 ( talk • contribs)
Ok. Thanks. But it would have been great if you could have talked first that courses problem is having such problem or atleast in the comment(copyright issue). I will ask experts to write on it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 11:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
The media reports are not just puff pieces. The emotional clensing that happens in t he Art of Living Workshops is of the highest order. Reports are published by the Harvard Health Magazine (U.S.A.), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (New Delhi, India), NIMHANS (Bangalore, India). An editor must accept the reports by World Class Medical Institutes and Reputed International Dailies. There is no point ridiculing medical reports by independent agencies. User:Andy.went.Wandy —Preceding undated comment added 17:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Art of living is primarily an educational organization offering courses and programs. We have already acknowledged that in the statements about revenues etc. We need to expand on the section on programs and courses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.127.68 ( talk) 17:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
The previously mentioned promotional tone/slant detected by some editors may partly be explained by the article's reliance on references to materials self-generated by the AoLF and its associates. These fall into the realm of self-published sources and cannot be used to reference statements about the organization without some sort of qualifier (e.g., "according to the Art of Living Foundation's website..."). I have flagged some of the instances of this poor referencing, and there are yet others which I have left which are questionable and could be challenged. There is no lack of better secondary and tertiary references out there, and a rewrite and/or re-referencing of the article using those would be very welcome. • Astynax talk 18:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Wikipedians, why some of the editors have flagged this article as advertisements/publicity? Facts are facts. I have given citations for all guiness records and this has to be communicated to people. How can it be advertisements? Truth is truth. I have seen many articles in wikipedia where guiness records, acheivements of organizations are clearly written. May be some miscreants are flagging this article with publicity/advertisement tags. Please remove it.
Art of Living is world's largest NGO helping mankind. Lets do some thing good and support instead of pulling them down. Also the citations that I gave are getting removed. I always thought wikipedia to be a great site and have contributed $100. Hope you wikipedians do not shake the respect that I have for wikipedia.--Jai 16:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Content in the Criticism is not having any significant reference. Please provide significant references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 14:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Again asking for references regarding content in this section. Most of the contributors to this section is not having talk page and not a logged in user(only ip mentioned). If no significant found till Aug 25(IST). Then I am going to delete content which is not backed up by references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.17.49 ( talk) 11:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC) Thanks for refining content of criticism Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 04:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
It is wrong to cite WP:NOTNEWSPAPER and WP:UNDUE for the edited content. I do not agree with Ronz. Unless the points about proceedings of the Courts, intervention of the chief minister etc. are mentioned the content as criticism does not make sense. It is definitely not undue. May be it needs to be reworded. I want to edit this again. Parjorim ( talk) 05:48, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
NOTNEWSPAPER can not be applied simply because we are only using the newspaper article as a source & not putting in the whole news item as part of the article. It is not UNDUE because in present form the information of the event is incomplete. Anybody can file a PIL in a court of law irrespective of the pleas being true or non-true. But in this case the state government filed an affidavit in the court confirming that the land was indeed encroached. Now the question arises, why the foundation was not prosecuted inspite of the affidavit. Thats where it becomes necessary to mention that the foundation & ravishankar were saved because of Ravishankar's influence on the government machinery in particular the then CM of the Karnataka State. Parjorim ( talk) 08:10, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Please use WP:DISENGAGE :-)welll.....Just for once I would re-word the edits you have removed before moving on to any DR noticeboard. Parjorim ( talk) 11:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
You are right. I tried to find further sources & did found some but then reading those I realized that the intervention is about another land grabbing case. May be I would update that sometime later. 27.5.184.108 ( talk) 06:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
It is very important that people understand the difference between Religious and Spiritual Organisation. Particularly Art of Living is not a Religious Organisation; so please Don't include it in Hinduism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.17.49 ( talk) 07:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC) Yes! I do believe that tagging it as Hinduism is restricting its scope. It is global organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 15:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I believe that Sudarshan Kriya should have its own page as it is quite vast subject and lots of researches is done on Sudarshan Kriya. It impacts of physical, mental and spiritual level further it is very important and practiced widely by millions around the world. We can't add all details of research- impacts and related controversies in this article. Please let me know your views.
Can anyone please enter details about New Initiative by The Art of Living Foundation - Volunteer for a better India. Lakhs of Youths joined have Volunteer for a Better India is registered 15,000+ social activity in few months. I am initiating the section but request further details. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 11:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I added a section upon Volunteer for a Better India, but it was deleted. Andy.went.Wandy 1 mar 2013. —Preceding undated comment added 17:22, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Is anyone interested in adding such material in a manner that doesn't violate WP:NOT and WP:NPOV? Best to start here by listing some potential sources that are both reliable and independent. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Again, this is an encyclopedia, not a venue for promotion. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:14, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
This wiki page has gone through serious transformation. Lots of section and information has been deleted! Unnecessary things like including hate blogging website details etc. I don't think how it matters if art of living put case against hate group! This is not at all related to the foundation. Further Courses/Events/Projects/Activities everything is removed! I would request more attention of moderator to such users! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 07:48, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
This case is typical of one of the hate blog at WordPress. Please make me understand why Wikipedia started promoting hate blogs! There are hate blogs for almost all organization! It is not at all having place in Wikipedia. Art of Living filed case on one blog site; so should it be posted on Wikipedia that too of anonymous blogger! Doesn't Wikipedia encouraging hate blog by it! Please provide your views! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari ( talk • contribs) 03:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
STRONG REMOVAL: Related Discussion was related to Criticism section - However, still there are no references to promote hate blog by using some news articles in such a way and there is no way that this section should have entry in the article. I tomorrow damage something and they put complaint on me and I do settlement with the party - So will it enter in Wikipedia? Content should be wikified. Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 18:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
STRONG REMOVAL: Complete story behind the scene: There were senior art of living teachers - who got great success with the course but however they started feeling that All success is attributed to me and not the technique(taught in the course). Success start running their head. So suddenly they started loosing the charm in matter of a year. Once Sri Sri Ravi Shankar visited that town then teacher told him that please ask others to respect him. Sri Sri replied that respect can't be forced it need to be earned. Then they started warning foundation that they are having art of living content(being one of 7500 teachers) and they will publish it; do negative publicity and also demanded extortion of about 3000 dollars to stop from blogging. So they started doing negative publicity. Refer to Commentary on Kena Upanishad. I wonder why some senior members of wikipedia board are more interested in putting this article as part of art of living wiki page so that people search for the keywords in Google and it can make hate blogs more popular which result in better indexing!!! Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 04:16, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
My question is very logical - How this section can contribute to wikipedia - what information it is having for or against organization! Read complete law suit it simply explain that bloggers started writing hate blog and at that time art of living foundation is not having copyright so ended up in settlement. But I don't understand that projecting such information in wikipedia will only degrade the quality. It is not about personal view - Even if I don't know about this foundation then also I would have pointed out what makes contributor think that any external blog information or law suit to stop someone from blogging directly related to the organization! Let other contributor put their view on this! Deepeshdeomurari ( talk) 17:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry guys, I didn't mean to bulldoze discussion, I came across this page when logged out and made this edit before I noticed that there had been recent discussion about similar issues. If someone disagrees with this edit, feel free to open up discussion on it. My reasons for the edit are explained in the edit summary. rʨanaɢ ( talk) 19:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Please WP:FOC. Thanks!
Wikipedia:V#Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion begins with "See also: WP:UNDUE"
WP:IINFO begins "See also: Wikipedia:Notability." Wikipedia:Notability addresses NPOV multiple times, most importantly the last paragraph of its introduction: "These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list. For Wikipedia's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons."
WP:NOT#NEWS is similar to IINFO in that it begins with a link to Wikipedia:Notability (events).
So, since we're talking about content within an article rather the article itself, WP:NPOV (especially WP:UNDUE) applies and is probably our best way or resolving this. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please delete section "Land encroachment". This is False. Please refer to news articles http://www.deccanherald.com/content/185862/art-living-has-not-encroached.html
Few people wants to defame the organization for its role in Anti-corruption moviement. Please refrain from such publications where the court has not given any judgements. Sentiments of hundreds of millions is hurt. Amgupta2000 ( talk) 09:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
But to suit NPOV policy the article should include the declaration of the foundation about this issue. Otherwise seems more like a defamation. That's not the right way to accomplish npov. Also, since there is no legal resolution about this, the title "Land encroachment" is incorrect as it gives the impression of a statement. It should be more like "accusations of land encroachment" or something like that. Jmfalguera ( talk) 14:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I had added this section that were revert by User:Ronz. Reason given was "Sources are poor and event hasnt happened yet". IMO this section deserves a mention, it has been in the national news for the last 5 days now. ChunnuBhai ( talk) 06:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
ping User:Sitush User:Kautilya3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChunnuBhai ( talk • contribs) 06:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: WP:BOLDly moved.( non-admin closure) Eventhorizon51 ( talk) 19:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Art of Living foundation → Art of Living Foundation – Capitalisation - NottNott| talk Notify me with {{ re}} 18:18, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
The article has quite a bit typo errors and outdated information. It is as if it still exists in the time period of 2013. Only updating that has taken place is in already contentious Legal Issues where it has managed to speak as if its early 2016. Why is it that the edits in these regards have been undone? The River Rejuvenation has well cited by News reports, The World Culture Festival was widely covered by media both for legal issues and its magnanimity. If the article is to be neutral it should contain actual information and up-to date information, not based on bias some editors my have. Improving upon edits is one thing and completely undoing it is another. We owe it to the readers that they be presented with correct and up-to-date info. -- Santoshskcp ( talk) 09:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I had added some text to the page about Sudarshan Kriya. It has disappeared without any notification and reasoning. It was a factual information with sources from scientific journals quoted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shantanu Deshmukh ( talk • contribs) 04:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
The sources look rather promotional, even WP:NOTNEWS. I'll take a closer look when I have more time, but hope others will comment. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
The notice about undisclosed payments seems like an unsubstantiated allegation to me. Anyone has thoughts on why should it remain on the page? 71.245.186.73 ( talk) 05:10, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
I did not add the tag. I've not looked closely into why it was added. From what I see, it seems appropiate. If it's removed, a COI template should replace it. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:31, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The notice on the page says that the article reads like an advertisement and cites only primary sources. The first point may be subjective, but I don't see any primary sources in the references. In fact citing links from artofliving[dot]org seems to have been banned on Wikipedia. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 17:08, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
cites only primary sourcesThat's not what it says. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:11, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Requesting for comments on the pending issues on the article. It would be great if we could pinpoint where the issues exist so that we may address them. Merely stating that issues are there doesn't help fix the problems. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 01:01, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Merely stating that issues are there doesn't help fix the problems.As before, that's not the case here as even the most cursory of glances at this talk page shows. -- Ronz ( talk) 01:08, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
There has been a lot of discussion about the quality of sources used on the article. I am maintaining a list here to comment and discuss.
NewlyHookedToWiki (
talk) 22:55, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
1. Pandya, Samta P. “New Strategies of New Religious Movements: The Case of Art of Living Foundation.” Sociological Bulletin, vol. 64, no. 3, 2015, pp. 287–304. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26290743.
Although India specific. This article covers social projects in great detail. Defines the role of social services in spiritual practice promoted by the foundation. It also analyzes how the foundations used this as a strategy to reach out to people. Describes the role of local governments and their partnerships with the organization.
2. Visnikar H, Mesko G. Evaluation of The Art of Living Basic Course as the Anti-stress Program for police Officers in the Slovenian Police. Republic of Slovenia: Ministry for Internal Affairs; 2002.
There are many research articles covering the effect of "Sudarshan Kriya" practice on the foundations website [13], but this one particularly stands out as it describes their "Basic" course as a whole. May also be used a reference for AOL programs tailored for specific communities.
3. Tøllefsen, I., 2011. Art of living: Religious entrepreneurship and legitimation strategies. International Journal for the Study of New Religions, 2(2), pp.255-279. doi:10.1558/ijsnr.v2i2.255
This is a good article describing the global AOL movement as "religious" entrepreneurship, with a specific focus on Norway and Europe. It also has a good discussion on classification of Art of Living as a religious organization. Some this is relevant for the discussion above on this page. However, more importantly it is a good source to talk about programs and courses apart from the official website of the foundation. It can also be used as a reference for the movement being compatible to vedic philosophy. This article also has another interesting remark about how bulk of sources have been authored by those connected with the organization, and shares another common feature with the discussion here on Wikipedia. Several points may also be used in the criticism section here in the section about religious entrepreneurship and organization's offerings as "repackaging" of other forms of similar techniques found in Indian yogic culture.
4. Allen Salkin, "Emperor of Air". 2007.
https://www.yogajournal.com/lifestyle/emperor-of-air
Although this article is an interview it serves as a good secondary reference for many facts about the organization such as centers, number of visitors etc., programs and offerings along with medical research on them, and social impact projects. The only issue here is that some of the numbers maybe a bit dated given that it was written in 2007. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk • contribs) 23:13, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
5. Jacobs, S. (2015). The Art of Living Foundation. London: Routledge.
This book covers the foundation very well. Shows an example of what all topics should this wiki article cover. Should definitely be looked into. I don't have access to it, but browsed through table of contents. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 04:03, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
(alt) Shorter article by the same author: Stephen Jacobs, Inner Peace and Global Harmony: Individual Wellbeing and Global Solutions in the Art of Living, Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, 2014-10-01, Pages 873-889, ISSN 2000-1525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.146873
6. Chryssides, George D.. Historical Dictionary of New Religious Movements, Scarecrow Press, 2011. This has an entry of AOLF. pg 75. Important highlights:
@ Ronz, DMacks, and Ravensfire: I would like to invite you to review these references here. The can be used to significantly improve the quality of the article. I understand that I may be asking too much from you, but if we have a consensus on this we could have other editors to build on this. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 07:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
I didn't find any good citation for the following statement:
The Art of Living is a DPI NGO (Department of Public Information), which means it plays an active role in communicating and contributing to various United Nations goals (such as the UN Millennium Goals and the Stand Up initiative).
Please feel free to add it back with a proper reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Needs more info about partner organization. I have requested to whitelist artofliving[dot]org/us-en/partner-organization-iahv. This can be referenced to statement about IAHV. There is also a relevant media that can be used here - /info/en/?search=File:IAHV,_Jordan_Program_At_Syrian_Refugee_Camp.jpg which is used on the article on European_Union. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 03:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Should any of this be added to the page?
List of notable persons connected with the organization. These pages acknowledge connection with the organization Rhea Pillai, Niraj Gera, Maheish Girri, Gayatri Asokan, Swami Purnachaitanya, Bhanumathi Narasimhan, Pakhi Tyrewala, Pradip Somasundaran, Iman Mutlaq (IAHV)
List of related pages: Sri Sri Ayurveda, Gurudev: On the Plateau of the Peak, Sri Sri Centre for Media Studies, Sri Sri University, World Forum for Ethics in Business, World Cultural Festival
-- NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 04:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
The care for children section doesn't provide much details. The following may be added:
According to 2015 Tax returns filed by their American chapter, the foundation provided grants of half a million US dollars under Care for Children's Dollar a Day program. [16]. This increased to almost $US1M in 2016.
Although I am not too sure how cite this link [17] from ProPublica search tool.
NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 21:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url=
(
help)
Section on cultural events has been removed. [18] Despite shortcomings, a few of those articles deserve separate articles on their own, such as World Cultural Festival. I am moving it here for a discussion. NewlyHookedToWiki ( talk) 00:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Here's a complete list of awards: artofliving[dot]org/art-livings-world-records. We don't need to list them all, but at least its summary, plus mention of the fact they exist and the foundation emphasis on art and cultural needs to be specified.
Text which was found to be insufficiently paraphrased from the source material has been omitted from the article. Text which is added to an article ought to be in an editor's own words, using an editor's own phrasing. A listing of the problematic text may be found here. Spintendo 12:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
So there's nothing to say it's a UN or UNEP program. UN refs should ideally be dropped and the text should just say that they announced a campaign aligned with UN millennium goals. Hemanthah ( talk) 11:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
These kind of wordpress blogs are there for every organisation the size of AOL. It was never in news. For an organisation the size of AOL, It is unnecessary to advertise such trivial controversies on the main page. The said incident was never in news, Only 1 article was published in the entire internet. This looks like a deliberate attempt of advertisement of libel on the part of wikipedia editors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teja srinivas ( talk • contribs) 2022-01-26T03:13:35 (UTC)
Hipal Sir, the reference used in the line shows nothing to me. Ambalangirl ( talk) 06:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC)