Talk:Vairagi tradition: Difference between revisions

Untitled

Bairagi is a caste of Hindus whose members follow the Visishtadvaita philosophy Propagated by Ramanuja, mostly popularized by Ramananda in North India, Dvaitadvaita philosophy Propagated by Nimbarkacharya, the Shuddadvaita philosophy Propagated by Vishnuswami, mostly popularized by Vallabhacharya in North India, Dvaita philosophy Propagated by Madhvacharya.

References

Fraud article

This article is total fraud - bairagi as a caste refers to "bairagi" = Vaishnava renunciates whom became householder and thier seminal lineages. the article has worked hard to mask this and depict all Vaishnava sanyasi belong to a "Bairagi" caste - sanyasi by default have given up thier caste — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.250.255.218 (talk) 17:47, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

The Probable corresponding Hindi article is [1] which doesn't have any sources. Having a touch time to establish credibility of this.

Palmsandbeaches (talk) 08:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

No this article is not fraud. It is written on the base of historical records. Bairagi also known pujari, mahant, Vaishnav brahman etc. Gupta Ynr (talk) 01:39, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Is swami and goswami same?

I don't think goswami should be added in bairagi article as they are different from swami. Dekosthaz (talk) 10:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes Goswami is a Title Used by the Vallabha Vaishnav (Pujari of Nathdwara Temple) Present Goswami Of nathdwara "Goswami shri rakesh ji Maharaj" his successor " gusainji Vishal bawa ji" Gupta Ynr (talk) 01:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bairagi Akhara, Haridwar.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://radha.name/news/general-news/urdhva-pundra-vaisnava-tilak http://radha.name/images-gallery/different-marks-tilaks. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 11:56, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Article is Based upon Historical Records

This Article is Totally Based on History Records & Reference. Please Check These References in the article. Gupta Ynr (talk) 07:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

The article is a complete mess & you keep making it worse because you want to push a glorifying view & you seem to be ignorant of most of our policies and guidelines. Please look at your own talk page. - Sitush (talk) 10:29, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Why are there all these edits? I assume there is a disagreement about article content. If a particular edit is undesirable, please identify it and explain the problem in simple terms that an uninvolved passer-by can understand. I might be able to help resolve problems if we can focus on a small number of points. Johnuniq (talk) 05:15, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Johnuniq, it is every edit made yesterday. In my case, I provided summaries. - Sitush (talk) 07:01, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, see Gupta Ynr's user talk page for yesterday. I am on mobile & providing different etc for a swathe of problematic edits is near-impossible ... but Gupta shows no sign of listening & has ignored warnings from others. They are pushing the glorification of the Bairagi community. - Sitush (talk) 07:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

• For "different", read "diffs". - Sitush (talk) 07:06, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but I would need to understand a couple of precise examples before taking action. Could you pick, say, two egregious examples and explain them here. I would invite Gupta Ynr to respond and explain why the edit is justified in accord with WP:P&G. Johnuniq (talk) 07:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

I have just made 3 or 4 edits with extended summaries for this purpose. - Sitush (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

As I go through the Hindi sources, I am starting to agree with the comments in the Fraud article section above. Despite Gupta Ynr's assertion there, the Bairagi do not appear to be a caste & there is increasing doubt about what they actually are, if indeed they are anything cohesive at all except in their own heads. The sources are being abused. - Sitush (talk) 07:57, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Agree with you that sources are abused(although I am only reading English sources). Also, a number of sources classify them as a backward community.LukeEmily (talk) 08:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

I am pretty sure it is at best a Vaishnavite sect, not a caste. Anyone can be a Bairagi simply by professing a particular faith, and anyone can adopt a name for any reason they choose (so, not all Swami's are Bairagis etc). But if Bairagis can succeed in persuading governments that they are a caste etc then they are more likely to get reservations, which is the aspiration of many Indian people because of govt jobs for life etc. Gupta Ynr seems to be on a mission to promote Bairagi in the way across a multitude of articles, making Wikipedia a means of legitimising the claim. It has happened before on WP & is one reason we do not consider govt reservation lists to be indicative of anything much. - Sitush (talk) 09:04, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Gupta Ynr, what the heck are you doing? Yet again, despite warnings etc, you are removing valid tags. There seems to be consensus on this talk page (not just this section) that the article has major issues. Fixing/validating the sources is a prerequisite to resolving those issues. - Sitush (talk) 09:17, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Gupta Ynr, you have been told very recently that Raj era sources are not reliable, so why do this?. - Sitush (talk) 09:30, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

I am giving up until Gupta Ynr is blocked. They are causing massive damage across a lot of articles, they know talk pages exist (they have even used this one), and seem to have no intention of collaborating while pursuing what is clearly a POV mission. - Sitush (talk) 09:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Page needed

@Gupta Ynr: Why did you remove {{pn}} in diff? Your edit summary was "See references" but when I look at that reference I see a Google description of a book saying it is 1948 pages. A reference should specify where the information is found. That can be fixed later, but you appear to have repeatedly removed {{pn}}—why are you doing that? Johnuniq (talk) 10:39, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

https://books.google.com/books/about/Kab%C4%ABra_ke_kucha_aura_%C4%81locaka.html?hl=hi&id=Sava3i869KEC Gupta Ynr (talk) 14:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Bairagi people

Among the many problems introduced by Gupta Ynr, it seems that a page move or usurpation at Bairagi people has caused its talk page to link here rather than to its own space. At least, that is how it appears on the mobile app. I have just gutted the mess at that article but can anyone fix the talk page issue? - Sitush (talk) 12:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Sitush, Done. Fixed the redirect. Gupta Ynr, why are you removing sourced content from academic sources and quotes like [2] and [3] and [4]. You are also misrepresenting the sources Gupta Ynr in those edits. Thanks LukeEmily (talk) 14:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:34, 6 August 2021 (UTC)