Template talk:Meher Baba

Untitled

I think it's traditional on navigation templates to first write the article and then add the name to the template. This is usually the case. The function of the template is to show people where relevant articles can be found quickly. If items were just added as a kind of list of possible subjects, navigation boxes would grow to unmanigable sizes and would not serve their purpose. Rather they would become lists of potential topics for articles, which defeats their purpose. So I suggest writing an article about Don E. Stevens first. Then once it is beyond stub stage it can be added back to the template. 72.204.46.220 (talk) 22:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I have removed Tom Hopkinson. The reason is that it is impractical to include all the famous followers of Meher Baba (there are 35 currently in Wikipedia), or all people who gave major contributions to his work. Thus the list is limited to his parents, most prominent figures in his life, and close mandali disciples. Dazedbythebell (talk) 18:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

New additions of non-articles

The recent additions of redirected links are not appropriate for a template box. It is meant for complete articles. Dazedbythebell (talk) 11:20, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Propose deletion of Family Section

Since 2 of the three members of Baba's family have been deleted, I propose to move the remaining one Sheriar Irani (father) to Associated figures. Dazedbythebell (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

A section for only one entry doesn;t make sense. His father can still go to section associated figures. I'll do this now. Hoverfish Talk 13:24, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Suggest delete section Organization

Having a section Organizations where Sufi Reoriented figures and not the Trust, which was deleted, makes no sense. It's like the only organization repreaenting Meher Baba is the SR. Hoverfish Talk 01:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

The SR group should be on the template somewhere though, seems M Baba founded and guided it, so it's part his work and legacy. Too bad the template has been carved down, losing some very good topics in the deletion process which has needlessly hurt the Wikipedia Baba collection. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Maybe under Legacy? Hoverfish Talk 10:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

And yes, quite a mess this crusade to clean Wikipedia from Indian "cults" created. Hoverfish Talk 10:04, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Legacy seems appropriate for the link. There are still a couple/few deletion pages open (I haven't kept track of how many). Since I've been active in saving what can be saved, I feel I must again mention that I am not a member of any Baba group or know anyone who is. I've only read a few pages of one of his books and attended one talk many years ago by one of his close associates, where I saw a piece of Baba's clothing. That's my total connection with this subject. My concern with the deletions of so many good pages is that Wikipedia has a very good collection on the subject, head over heels (could Baba do that?) compared to Britannica, and lessening that collection by targeting articles on his major holidays, for example, seems harmful instead of helpful to the encyclopedia. Your contributions to the deletion discussions have helped considerably in saving some of the pages, so please keep on hovering. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

I also don't belong to any group, and my edits on the subject in Wikipedia are 100% for the profit of Wikipedia and 0% for advertising any ideas of my fancy. If editors of a certain world-view consider the selection of articles about Meher Baba as "cult promotion", they are being very inconsiderate of other contributors, to say the least. Asd for the excuse of poor sources, I don't buy it. The articles could have been left with a tag for need of better sources was it not for the bias against the topic. And though I met sarcasm when I mentioned the systemic bias,[1] there IS such a bias due to the very instructions the Baba gave to his disciples and followers, but I don't know how it can bne recognized in Wikipedia. For no reason of faith of mine, I feel this should be recognized and some decision taken to protect this "good collection on the subject". Hoverfish Talk 14:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

So Baba's followers were asked not to "cause publicity"? I'm glad I'm not one of them then, because wouldn't Wikipedia pages be publicity is some viewpoints? And yes, all of this degradation of the subject by the nominator is the main reason I'd asked for all of their nominations to be discarded as there seems to be obvious bias in the language used and a tarring-with-the-same-brush on anyone commenting on the deletion pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:14, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Maybe @Dazedbythebell: knows the exact instructions, but in any case what is/was in Wikipedia is not "publicity" but information as free of POV, OR, and any sort of advertisment, as encyclopedic information requires. Hoverfish Talk 16:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Van Gansterer's film in legacy

Given the essential role of Meher Baba in the film Nema aviona za Zagreb, I support its presence under Legacy in the template. Hoverfish Talk 14:17, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I also think the plot in that film should mention in a more obvious way the pivotal role of the meeting with Meher Baba in the overall quest of the director and the repeated mentions of his message against the use of hallucinogenic dugs while researching the suicide of the youngster. Hoverfish Talk 14:38, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Gasteren wrote, "The appearance of the Avatar in my film is more than functional, it is necessary, to give all the other happenings and sequences the final and right dimension." Dazedbythebell (talk) 17:13, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Dhuni

The current article about the Indian Dhuni ritual has nothing to do with the practice among Baba's followers. There is not a "cleft in the ground . . . emblematic of the yoni or female vulva and generative organ." And among followers of Baba the dhuni site is not "dedicated to Shakti." Therefore I'm removing it. It remained here from a previous incarnation of the article that explained the practice among Baba followers. This one does not. Dazedbythebell (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Legacy

It is insulting to Meher Baba to have 'Don't Worry, Be Happy' as his legacy. It is a myth that Baba had anything to do with these words being put on inspiration cards around the time of his death. This was the work of a few zealots in the Bay Area in around 1967. 'Don't Worry, Be Happy' was not a significant teaching of Baba. It was said in an off-hand way. That he became associated with the phrase after his death is usually mentioned as a kind of scorn. The phrase is more truly the legacy of the enthusiastic Bay Area hippies that decided to put the phrase on posters and inspiration cards to proselytize with. Dazedbythebell (talk) 13:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)