User talk:Zanthorp

:Creating an articlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article

: Sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox

: User page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_page

: sub pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Subpage

: upload image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload?uselang=ownwork

: The missing manual http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Wikipedia:_The_Missing_Manual/Editing,_Creating,_and_Maintaining_Articles/Creating_a_New_Article#Tutorial:_Creating_a_New_Article

:Photos upload using the "Flickr" link on the upload page or the "My Own Work" link If your using the "Flickr" link you need to go to [http://commons.wikimedia.org Wikimedia Commons] to upload the image using the [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload?uselang=fromflickr Flickr] option. If you are trying to upload the images at Commons it could be denying them because the copyright license says "All Rights Reserved" (Commons won't accept copyrighted images). If both the photos were taken by you the easiest way to upload them would be with the "My Own Work" link on the upload page above.

== Pie throwing article ==

Anyone wishing to leave a comment about the pieing article or the list of victims please post your comment here.

Zanthorp wrote:

Its probably best to delete material that belongs in an article, not a list, especially if the material is disputed.

Hi Zanthorp,

Since you commented on the edits I made about the Prem Rawat article, I thought I'd come over here and introduce myself. Mr. Beback wrote a nice note welcoming me to the Wiki edit world and he threw in some links on how to edit properly. But I don't understand why he reverted me. I was just paring out extraneous data but he seems to think it belongs.

If you agree with me, what did you mean by the above quote? And any tips on editing in general would be greatly appreciated.

Take care,

Gadadhara (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

:Welcome Gadadhara!

I am also new at editing. For a few years I have been reading articles on and off and discussion pages if they were interesting. I will have a look at the links Mr beback left for you. They could be helpful to me also. Your deletion of extraneous material was the right thing to do in my opinion, and especially so if the info is disputed. I tried to explain subsequently that to bloat listings with unnecessary information could turn them into mini articles, and that such a page with accompanying discussions could become difficult to manage or unworkable. Mr beback apparently disagrees. The page is not mine to dominate, so as I wrote over there, if you decide that you want to add facts that are in some way connected with the pie assault, go for it. I am quite happy to discuss editing or related issues if you wish. Rgds.--Zanthorp (talk) 17:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Zanthorp, sorry for the delay but I've been busy. You know, shots of lidocaine from my dentist and listening to the sound of the judge's gavel in court. Nothing major really, just a broken crown and a minor traffic incident.

Anyway, I appreciated your comments on my talk page. You posed some interesting questions. As far as the Peace Is Possible book, it's well worth taking a look at. I'm glad you ordered it. I've got a couple of copies and I've given away a couple as well. Let me know what you think of it when you get it. There's a lot of interesting anecdotes from Maharaji's early years. I'll tell you though, just the introduction of the book is phenomenal where she is describing M's first visit to the west when he arrives in London on June 17, 1971. So don't be a stranger, I enjoy talking about this topic.Gadadhara (talk) 13:09, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

:Thanks for the reply. The book arrived. I have also been busy, so have not finished reading it yet. Its a fascinating read. I wonder why Will Beback thinks it is not reliable. Do you think it would it be worth posting a note on his discussion page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Will_Beback] asking him to explain his opinion? I also had a quick look at the Wikipedia article about Prem Rawat. The book seemed far more interesting. Due to time constraints I didn't read much of the article past the reference to the Detroit pie throwing 35 years ago. Mr R was only 15 or 16 years old at the time. I have to say that he showed extraordinary composure and presence of mind in being able to cope so well at such a young age with an attempt to publicly embarrass him. Compare Mr R's composure with the reaction of NY Times journalist, Thomas Friedman[http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=sv6nvMUq10U]. Mr R continued the ceremony and had the good grace to forgive the attacker and ask that he not be arrested or harmed. Friedman left the stage in disgust without saying another word to the audience.--Zanthorp (talk) 14:49, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, Zanthorp, I will certainly give it a try. I think that it's worthwhile asking Mr. Beback why he thinks Peace Is Possible is not reliable. I don't know much about this pie incident but I do know some of the people who were featured prominently in the PIP book including one several months ago who told me that he held Mr R in his arms when he was just 12 days old. He's still an active student of Mr R and I think there are many like him who contributed to the book who are reliable sources of information. After all, Ms. Kagan didn't interview dead people for her book!

You'll have to let me know though. Should I start a new page about this issue on Mr. Beback's talk section or is there a place already there that I need to go to? Forgive me but I'm new to this talk page stuff.Gadadhara (talk) 14:03, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

:i'm also new to this. Looking at Bback's talk page I think the best approach would be to do what everyone else has done. Create a separate ruled off section at the bottom of the page with a heading above it. Its the same as adding a new section to an article discussion page. I've done this a few times and cheated my way around it by doing a copy and paste of the code for the heading of the previous section, then changing the text and typing in my comment, request or whatever. It worked. BTW, I have finished reading Peace is Possible. Sincerely, thank you for including that information on the Gloat List discussion page. I think it would be a privilege to personally know or even just to have met some of the people featured in it. I did a You Tube search for Prem Rawat and found video clips of his talks with Burt Wolf, the well known journalist also mentioned in Cagan's book. There is much in that book that is irrefutable and adequately referenced. I can't imagine why anyone would claim it is not a reliable source.--Zanthorp (talk) 13:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Zanthorp. I'll be posting about PIP on Beback's talk page and asking him why he doesn't consider it a reliable source or at least parts of it. I'd forgotten about the Burt Wolf interview but you are right, he is a journalist who interviewed PR and he's quoted in the PIP book or at least referred to. To me, any issue about the reliability of information contained in PIP must be dealt with on a case by case issue but you are right. I don't quite understand why someone like Mr. Beback would throw out everything contained in the book as unreliable. Since both you and I agree that there is some very reliable information to be discerned there, it's like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I know that Mr. Beback would not want to do that! Especially since I suspect that he's not read the whole book or if he has, I doubt that he's gone through it case by case to determine what is reliable and what isn't. Anyway, I hope to talk to you again soon. Take good care, Gadadhara (talk) 14:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

:This time of the year gets hectic. I'm way behind finishing an unrelated article. Best that I finish that first then get back to this topic. I'd be happy to work on it with you. Give me 3 or 4 weeks. I'll leave a message for you here, maybe start a new section under a new heading. Festive season is almost here again. All the best to you.--Zanthorp (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zanthorp/Bracing styles for steel string guitars

:Standard notice

Prem Rawat and related articles are under probation. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Prem Rawat. Please seek consensus on the article talk page before making contentious edits.   Will Beback  talk  16:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

::Yes, I fully agree. My approach always :) --Zanthorp (talk) 04:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 15:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

It looks like you accidentally enabled raw signatures:

1. Go to my preferences
2. Uncheck Raw signatures
3. Save

And all should be right in the world once more. :P Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 13:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

:ITS FIXED! I'M CURED!!! Thank you Zanthorp (talk) 14:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I see no breach of wikipedia policy with the current statement. If I am mistaken please do explain how this is the case and linking to the relevant policy. I reverted to the last stable version of the page as mentioned in the Protection Policy, which states that I am within my right to. I have quoted the appropriate section below and here is a link to the section which applies to content disputes:

::''Administrators may also revert to an old version of the page predating the edit war if such a clear point exists.

Although typically I do mediate disputes, I am acting in my role as an admin rather than a mediator, so I will not be getting involved in the resolution of this dispute. For that I recommend approaching the Mediation Cabal or the Mediation Committee. When the protection on the page ends I request that you continue with the discussion you started on the talk page so that an agreement can occur before editting that section. Once an agreement is made between the parties, please link to it in your edit summary. :-) Seddσn ^talk 14:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

:On a humerous note, do read m:The Wrong Version Seddσn ^talk

Could you explain why you've revoked your agreement to the ground rules, and what part of the ground rules you don't agree with? Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 08:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

• Spotted the reason. I assure you that things like this will not happen again, and I ask you to re-agree to the ground rules. Best, Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 08:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Steve Crossin requested that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee/Policy#The_privileged_nature_of_mediation privilege] be extended to participants in this mediation. The Mediation Committee has agreed with this and is willing to accept the mediation as a Mediation Committee case. I have agreed to assist Steve with the mediation. The Mediation Committee case page has been set up at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Prem Rawat 4. Would you be willing to sign in there? Sunray (talk) 20:44, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

:Yes, when possible, could you please look into the mediation, and sign in to the case. Best, Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 01:51, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

::Thanks Steve. I've signed up. --Zanthorp (talk) 07:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Zanthorp, we have received eight opening statements now. We are still awaiting yours and one other. How long do you think it will be before we have yours? It would be nice to get them all in the next two or three days. Would you be able let me know if you need more time than that? Sunray (talk) 20:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm taking a well earned break for a couple of weeks after opting out of the Prem Rawat mediation.

Its been quite a learning process. I've learned a lot about wikipedia's regulatory rules and guidelines and Wikipedia politics to some extent. Few things are as simple as they might first appear. --Zanthorp (talk) 08:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

There are rules andl guidelines that cover the way BLPs should be fairly written. At present they are scattered throughout a few related pages. Unfortunately there are some editors who ignore BLVP rules and guidelines in favor of rigid application of NPOV rules. The result can be to unfairly disparage the subject. The system is open to abuse by people who are hell-bent on making a subject look bad. I have seen this in action. --Zanthorp (talk) 08:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I have asked the Mediation Cabal to facilitate mediation on the subject of the disputed sentence in the lead and named you as an interested party.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-05-22/prem_rawat] Momento (talk) 01:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I have sent you an email, please read and reply, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 19:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I have made note that you decided to initiate an off line discussion instead of a public sharing of information. Not very cool, IMO. Did the two of you determine a strategy to toss another editor under the bus? Were the rest of the folks at the subject's support group involved? Very, very bad form, that. Regatta dog (talk) 03:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

:The email thing is set up with an old email account. I haven't changed the preferences yet, so didn't get the email. --Zanthorp (talk) 06:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)