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. |
Archive 1 |
i flagged up on the BKWSU page this the om mandli was not actually the committee
this is factual erroneous and i think you will find it difficult to substantiate against even the Bkwsus own material ,,what is your actual knowledge of this organisation?
i wont argue that Kripalani is notable enough but shouldn't the page be in his own name?
i challenge the use of Dada Lekhraj as , by comparison, it would be a little like having a page on Josef Stalin title "Uncle Joe".........sorry bad example i know.........dada was not his name..........in engligh it is a bit like saying "uncle lekhraj"
but thanks for the good work on the citation , i did not know how to lay them out Green108 12:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
The reference for "1884" birth years is a single book published in 1938-39 book which seems to be out of print (Radhe, Om (1938). Is this justice? Being an account of the founding of the Om Mandli & the Om Nivas and their suppression, by application of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1908. The Phermacy Printing Press, Karachi. p. 154.). There's no way of verifying this book which is not available anywhere (including Amazon).
On the other hand there are at least four books, which state the birth year as 1876:
These books can be viewed at Google Boook Search. Also, several other sources mention the birth year as 1876: [1] [2] [3] etc.
Also, I doubt that the Om Radhe book actually mentions his birth year. The "1884" source seems to be a forum thread from brahmakumaris.info that tries to project BKWSU as liars.
I don't really know whether BKWSU is lying or not, but published sources are certainly more reliable than a forum post on an anti-BKWSU site. utcursch | talk 13:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
you can download it from brahmakumaris.info in full or can find copies of it in libraries and other public resources. just becaue you did not try hard enough does not exclude it as a source
you are making erroneous and misleading statements here, sorry Green108 10:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me for saying, but this is another example of where, if you have no expertise in the topic, you really ought to err on the side of caution and discuss changes first.
The problem with the recent bibliography, is that academics have all depended on facts, figures and a version of the history as given by the Brahma Kumaris themselves. Primarily from the hagiography (biography idealizing its subject) of Lekhraj Kripalani called Adi Dev by one of his financially supported followers named Jagdish Chander.
It is also an example of the problem in relying on internet based research.
If you look at the actual text of "Struggles and Sorrows; The Personal Testimony of a Chief Justice" by Justice Hardayal Hardy (p 37 to 39) rather than depending on google snippets, you will read;
"Another case I did involved Dada Lekhraj Kripalani of Hyderabad who owned a jewellery shop in Calcutta. He sold his shop and returned to Hyderabad with approximately Rs 10 lakhs as his assets. He bought a house and settled there. Dada Lekhraj was about 54 years old."
This was in 1938. As Justice Hardy was not only Lekhraj Kripalani's counsel but went on to be the Chief Justice of India, I think we can consider his work to be reliable and authoritative.
Additionally, we have a precise valuation of his wealth at 10 lahk Rupees, Is this correct, I equate that to be;
However, based on 'Britain and the Indian Currency Crisis, 1930-2': A Comment Carl Bridge from The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 34, No. 2 (May, 1981), pp. 301-304;
1,500,000 Shillings or 75,000 Pounds (12 Pence to the Shilling, 20 Shillings to the Pound)
According to 'Inflation: the value of the pound 1750-2002', 2003 by Grahame Allen Econmic Policy and Statistics Section of the House of Commons Library, the purchasing power of a pound in 2002 compared to the pound in 1930 was 40.2 times (comparing a current price index of 695.1 to 17.3). So, an estate of 75,000 Pounds then would be worth about 3 Million Pounds now. A lot but not enough to make him one of Indian's richest man at that time.
i will attach a copy of the full text, you may delete it if you wish..........excuse the formal style ,but if i have to assert my credibility in comparison to the constant attacks and allegation , then i would like to do so fairly...............i think we will also find out that Is this Justice? was not written by om radhe as well ,but that is for another day Green108 18:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lekhraj_Kripalani/Hardy
Utcursch.........look, if a book is dated 1938 or if a document in a book is clearly dated 1938 and its says his age is 54 it is neither original reseasrch nor rocket science to say his date of birth is 1884.
There are 3 sources of this. Hardy who was his lawyer written in the 1980s, Radhe who was his number two collaborator in the 30s and Chander who was his chief spokesman in the 1970s
which of these books have you actually read?
Chander actually said 55 whereas the two others sad 54 but the actual age would depend on which month of his birth was Green108 10:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
you have not read the book carefully enough , its is possible to date exactly by the correspondence between Om Mandli and mr Tauton in which it is referred to........its 1938 . Hardy was acting as Kripalani's advocate at this time....
1938 minus 54 is 1884
given that it was written as the events unfolded and during his lifetime by his partner , i think we can accept it as the reliable version . it was jagdish chander in a 1970s hagiography that wrote 55............
if as an atheist you do not know the organization , you will not understand the significance of this and why the Bkwsu is trying to re-write their history and his age , there is no point trying to confuse the issue to win your point
it all has to do witht he channelled messages from God through their mediums that said God entered his chosen medium when the age of his body was 60 years old........this is the source of the problem , Kripalani was not 60
after his death they gradually when into re-write mode and all the modern academics have copied the PR version of their history , it all has to do with the dispute with their AIVV Green108 15:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Here it is.
I was wrong, it was not the Collector Taunton, it was U.M. Mirchandani the District Magistrate
2 July 1938, "Please let me have the list of members of the Mandli and the guardians of the children in the Om Nivas School".
4 July 1938, " Enclosed please find the list of Om Mandlie members and guardians of the childreen living in Om Nivas." Signed Om Radhe.
Lekhrak Kriapalani aged 54
I take to the time to copy this out to emphasise the difference in the manner you work and the exactitude I work. In July 1938, Kripalani was aged 54, as confirmed by his advocate of the time at a later date Green108 15:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi IPSOS. Good to see you back. I trust you had a good break.
I'm still not clear on the need to refer to "Kripalani" throughout the article. Could you please indicate what policy or guideline supports the rationale, "we do not use terms of endearment or devotion to refer to the subject, we use their last name".
From my side I found the following,
Certainly, no literature from the BKs would refer to "Kripalani", nor do any of the reliable sources or books such as Walliss so anyone searching would most likely search for "Dada Lekhraj" just as they would search for "Sai Baba" and not his real name, "Sathyanarayana Raju". Certainly "Baba" is also a term of endearment.
Would appreciate if you could explain. Thanks & regards Bksimonb 11:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Proposal to rename page according to WP:COMMONNAME. The page describes the founder of a religious institution in India. All the secondary references, and even primary references such as records of court documents and the memoirs of a Chief Justice refer to "Dada Lekhraj". Wikipedia will be setting a new precedent by referring to him throughout as "Kripalani". Although the main issue, as far as I am concerned, is the article body text, I am also suggesting that the article be named according to his most known name, "Dada Lekhraj", since that is most likely to be used as a search term to find this page.
The proposed move is actually to return the page to it's original name. It was moved to "Lekhraj Kripalani" without seeking consensus. Bksimonb 15:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like to propose some changes to a this edit. Most of it is sound, such as filling in more bio details, with a few exceptions.
Since the edit involves an indef blocked user who is in dispute with me, I am waiting one week for outside comments from uninvolved editors before making the changes. Both me and the blocked editor have COI. For further details about my COI see my user page.
Regards Bksimonb ( talk) 12:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Founder father is God Shiva. Medium is Lekhraj aka Brahma Baba. Age is not accurate according to advanced knowledge.
Your personal problems are not concerning me. Be stable in Drama. You are changing meaning to suit Brahmkumaris' version not to follow accurate knowledge. Agyani souls might be fooled but not gyani soul. You need studying Advance Knowledge, Shivbaba's Murli Clarifications at God Fatherly University to be understanding. See http://pbks.info/ with AIVV ( Januarythe18th ( talk) 00:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)).
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. |
Archive 1 |
i flagged up on the BKWSU page this the om mandli was not actually the committee
this is factual erroneous and i think you will find it difficult to substantiate against even the Bkwsus own material ,,what is your actual knowledge of this organisation?
i wont argue that Kripalani is notable enough but shouldn't the page be in his own name?
i challenge the use of Dada Lekhraj as , by comparison, it would be a little like having a page on Josef Stalin title "Uncle Joe".........sorry bad example i know.........dada was not his name..........in engligh it is a bit like saying "uncle lekhraj"
but thanks for the good work on the citation , i did not know how to lay them out Green108 12:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
The reference for "1884" birth years is a single book published in 1938-39 book which seems to be out of print (Radhe, Om (1938). Is this justice? Being an account of the founding of the Om Mandli & the Om Nivas and their suppression, by application of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1908. The Phermacy Printing Press, Karachi. p. 154.). There's no way of verifying this book which is not available anywhere (including Amazon).
On the other hand there are at least four books, which state the birth year as 1876:
These books can be viewed at Google Boook Search. Also, several other sources mention the birth year as 1876: [1] [2] [3] etc.
Also, I doubt that the Om Radhe book actually mentions his birth year. The "1884" source seems to be a forum thread from brahmakumaris.info that tries to project BKWSU as liars.
I don't really know whether BKWSU is lying or not, but published sources are certainly more reliable than a forum post on an anti-BKWSU site. utcursch | talk 13:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
you can download it from brahmakumaris.info in full or can find copies of it in libraries and other public resources. just becaue you did not try hard enough does not exclude it as a source
you are making erroneous and misleading statements here, sorry Green108 10:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me for saying, but this is another example of where, if you have no expertise in the topic, you really ought to err on the side of caution and discuss changes first.
The problem with the recent bibliography, is that academics have all depended on facts, figures and a version of the history as given by the Brahma Kumaris themselves. Primarily from the hagiography (biography idealizing its subject) of Lekhraj Kripalani called Adi Dev by one of his financially supported followers named Jagdish Chander.
It is also an example of the problem in relying on internet based research.
If you look at the actual text of "Struggles and Sorrows; The Personal Testimony of a Chief Justice" by Justice Hardayal Hardy (p 37 to 39) rather than depending on google snippets, you will read;
"Another case I did involved Dada Lekhraj Kripalani of Hyderabad who owned a jewellery shop in Calcutta. He sold his shop and returned to Hyderabad with approximately Rs 10 lakhs as his assets. He bought a house and settled there. Dada Lekhraj was about 54 years old."
This was in 1938. As Justice Hardy was not only Lekhraj Kripalani's counsel but went on to be the Chief Justice of India, I think we can consider his work to be reliable and authoritative.
Additionally, we have a precise valuation of his wealth at 10 lahk Rupees, Is this correct, I equate that to be;
However, based on 'Britain and the Indian Currency Crisis, 1930-2': A Comment Carl Bridge from The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 34, No. 2 (May, 1981), pp. 301-304;
1,500,000 Shillings or 75,000 Pounds (12 Pence to the Shilling, 20 Shillings to the Pound)
According to 'Inflation: the value of the pound 1750-2002', 2003 by Grahame Allen Econmic Policy and Statistics Section of the House of Commons Library, the purchasing power of a pound in 2002 compared to the pound in 1930 was 40.2 times (comparing a current price index of 695.1 to 17.3). So, an estate of 75,000 Pounds then would be worth about 3 Million Pounds now. A lot but not enough to make him one of Indian's richest man at that time.
i will attach a copy of the full text, you may delete it if you wish..........excuse the formal style ,but if i have to assert my credibility in comparison to the constant attacks and allegation , then i would like to do so fairly...............i think we will also find out that Is this Justice? was not written by om radhe as well ,but that is for another day Green108 18:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lekhraj_Kripalani/Hardy
Utcursch.........look, if a book is dated 1938 or if a document in a book is clearly dated 1938 and its says his age is 54 it is neither original reseasrch nor rocket science to say his date of birth is 1884.
There are 3 sources of this. Hardy who was his lawyer written in the 1980s, Radhe who was his number two collaborator in the 30s and Chander who was his chief spokesman in the 1970s
which of these books have you actually read?
Chander actually said 55 whereas the two others sad 54 but the actual age would depend on which month of his birth was Green108 10:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
you have not read the book carefully enough , its is possible to date exactly by the correspondence between Om Mandli and mr Tauton in which it is referred to........its 1938 . Hardy was acting as Kripalani's advocate at this time....
1938 minus 54 is 1884
given that it was written as the events unfolded and during his lifetime by his partner , i think we can accept it as the reliable version . it was jagdish chander in a 1970s hagiography that wrote 55............
if as an atheist you do not know the organization , you will not understand the significance of this and why the Bkwsu is trying to re-write their history and his age , there is no point trying to confuse the issue to win your point
it all has to do witht he channelled messages from God through their mediums that said God entered his chosen medium when the age of his body was 60 years old........this is the source of the problem , Kripalani was not 60
after his death they gradually when into re-write mode and all the modern academics have copied the PR version of their history , it all has to do with the dispute with their AIVV Green108 15:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Here it is.
I was wrong, it was not the Collector Taunton, it was U.M. Mirchandani the District Magistrate
2 July 1938, "Please let me have the list of members of the Mandli and the guardians of the children in the Om Nivas School".
4 July 1938, " Enclosed please find the list of Om Mandlie members and guardians of the childreen living in Om Nivas." Signed Om Radhe.
Lekhrak Kriapalani aged 54
I take to the time to copy this out to emphasise the difference in the manner you work and the exactitude I work. In July 1938, Kripalani was aged 54, as confirmed by his advocate of the time at a later date Green108 15:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi IPSOS. Good to see you back. I trust you had a good break.
I'm still not clear on the need to refer to "Kripalani" throughout the article. Could you please indicate what policy or guideline supports the rationale, "we do not use terms of endearment or devotion to refer to the subject, we use their last name".
From my side I found the following,
Certainly, no literature from the BKs would refer to "Kripalani", nor do any of the reliable sources or books such as Walliss so anyone searching would most likely search for "Dada Lekhraj" just as they would search for "Sai Baba" and not his real name, "Sathyanarayana Raju". Certainly "Baba" is also a term of endearment.
Would appreciate if you could explain. Thanks & regards Bksimonb 11:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Proposal to rename page according to WP:COMMONNAME. The page describes the founder of a religious institution in India. All the secondary references, and even primary references such as records of court documents and the memoirs of a Chief Justice refer to "Dada Lekhraj". Wikipedia will be setting a new precedent by referring to him throughout as "Kripalani". Although the main issue, as far as I am concerned, is the article body text, I am also suggesting that the article be named according to his most known name, "Dada Lekhraj", since that is most likely to be used as a search term to find this page.
The proposed move is actually to return the page to it's original name. It was moved to "Lekhraj Kripalani" without seeking consensus. Bksimonb 15:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like to propose some changes to a this edit. Most of it is sound, such as filling in more bio details, with a few exceptions.
Since the edit involves an indef blocked user who is in dispute with me, I am waiting one week for outside comments from uninvolved editors before making the changes. Both me and the blocked editor have COI. For further details about my COI see my user page.
Regards Bksimonb ( talk) 12:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Founder father is God Shiva. Medium is Lekhraj aka Brahma Baba. Age is not accurate according to advanced knowledge.
Your personal problems are not concerning me. Be stable in Drama. You are changing meaning to suit Brahmkumaris' version not to follow accurate knowledge. Agyani souls might be fooled but not gyani soul. You need studying Advance Knowledge, Shivbaba's Murli Clarifications at God Fatherly University to be understanding. See http://pbks.info/ with AIVV ( Januarythe18th ( talk) 00:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)).