WCASY/John Noyce fails in bid to remove Wikipedia SY

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

The attempt by WCASY/John Noyce to remove www.adishakti.org links

from Wikipedia Sahaja Yoga has failed and the case closed:

 

Category: Wikipedia Medcab closed cases

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-12-16_Sahaja_Y\

oga#Continued_Discussion

 

i remember John Noyce telling me that the fight is still not over:

 

" This is the clone speaking, articulating slowly (the cloning process

went wrong, I only have 2/3rds of my vocal cords - also most of my

fingers on my right hand are fused, and I have a club-foot.)

 

I can only laugh at how bad your grasp of the situation is - do you

apply such methods of research into all your writing?

 

Also, the mediation hasn't concluded, nor does it overly-concern your

website -that's just your selective interpretation (glad to see that

that is consistent) at play.

 

Have a good one,

Sfacets "

 

 

Despite using false IDs and all the help he could muster John Noyce

lost and now cannot remove http://adishakti.org from Wikipedia. As far

as i am concerned this is a petty success and am not the least

concerned on the outcome. What i am really pleased about is being

presented with yet another piece of irrefutable evidence of WCASY's

struggle against the Adi Shakti and Her Divine Message. i could not

have asked for more. Thanks Violet for ferreting out this crafty fox.

 

regards,

 

jagbir

 

 

 

 

 

, " jagbir singh "

<adishakti_org wrote:

>

> Dear Devotees of the Adi Shakti,

>

> i received a FYI email concerning John Noyce, the official WCASY

> watchdog of this forum, who colludes with council members/country

> coordinators to remove any Sahaja Yoga links to www.adishakti. org.

>

> This is not the first time that John Noyce has been caught

committing

> an indecent act in public. It is no point trying to shame him

because

> he is too thick-skinned for any remorse or guilt feeling. The fact

> that he pretends to be a scholar doing research on the Adi Shakti,

> and yet continues deliberately deleting/editing evidence supporting

> Her incarnation Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi, leaves me flabbergasted.

>

> Appended below is a request made by Will Beback to stop Sahajhist

> (John Noyce) and Sfacets (JN's clone) from removing Wikipedia links

> to www.adishakti. org. It is but a reminder of the negativity that,

> fully swollen and blinded by its own power (ego), has not only

> _first_ silenced and then taken over Her Will, but is also trying to

> prevent the truth of Her Advent and Divine Message from reaching

> humanity. And i keep warning the faithful and those keeping vigil to

> sustain Shri Mataji's incarnation and legacy - DO NOT EMPOWER THIS

> NEGATIVITY THAT IS NOW FULLY SWOLLEN AND BLINDED BY ITS OWN POWER!

We

> are passing through the Tribulation and nothing short of unswerving

> and fearless dedication to Shri Mataji will see us through. Each of

> us must individually and collectively utilize our minds, bodies and

> wealth to defeat this negativity. And my pranaam to Will Beback who

> is doing just that. Those who fight for the Adi Shakti's victory on

> Earth will surely be rewarded by Her in the Spirit World! This _is_

> the Last Judgment and Resurrection. So have absolutely no doubt of

> the Adi Shakti's eternal gratitude for battling for Dharma!

>

> Jai Shri Ganapathy,

>

> jagbir

>

> Thanks Will Beback, whoever and wherever you are! Hope you will be

> back or have the will to be back monitoring JN's removal of links.

On

> my part i will be backing, and have the will to back you back to

> back, Will Beback. So keep on coming back at John Noyce till he has

> no will to be back. In the meantime all members are invited to

enjoy

> this Wikipedia: Mediation Cabal/Cases/ 2006-12-16 Sahaja Yoga

>

> i too will be back!

>

> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------

>

> Request Information

> Request made by: Will Beback · † · 23:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

>

> Where is the issue taking place?

> Sahaja Yoga and Nirmala Srivastava

>

> Who's involved?

> Sfacets, Sahajhist, Will Beback

>

> What's going on?

> Sfacets and Sahajhist push a particular POV and engage in ownership

> of the articles about a guru and her organization, topics with which

> they have conflicts of interest.

>

> What would you like to change about that?

> Editors should not remove properly-sourced critical information

while

> inserting poorly-sourced or unsourced self-serving material.

>

> Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?

> Any method is fine with me. I can be reached on my talk page or by

> email.

>

> Mediator (Somitho) response:

> I've accepted the case, and remind all parties to try to remain

> civil. Somitho 17:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC) I also would like to

> remind all parties to sign using ~~~~ Somitho 17:54, 18 December

2006

> (UTC)

>

> Ideogram:

> Is this dispute still active? Do you need another mediator? --

> Ideogram 00:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Somitho:

> Mediator is active, as well as dispute. I am awaiting ideal

solutions

> from all parties before I move along.

> -Somitho 00:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sfacets:

> At this point I can say I more or less agree with the state the

> article is in. The main points of contention appear to be external

> link/source related, apart from the disagreement arising over

whether

> the chakra table should be included in full or merely highlight the

> differences betwen the SY system and that followed in Hinduism.

> -Sfacets 16:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> Sfacets - are you back? Can we resume the mediation now?

> -Will Beback · † ·

>

> Sfacets:

> Hi Will, yes I am back (on and off), I don't know where Sahajhist is

> though - maybe we should wait for his return before continuing?

> -Sfacets 09:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> If he's returning then we can wait.

> -Will Beback · † · 18:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Somitho:

> Shall we give him 14 days, and if he does not respond. Continue

> without him, if needed; allowing him to reopen or come back at any

> moment?

> -Somitho 07:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sfacets:

> I'm not sure that is very fair, both because of the number of

editors

> involved in this case, and because Sahajhist should not be left out

> of the discussion.. .

> -Sfacets 10:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> Sahajhist appears to be back and editing one of the articles.[1] .

> -Will Beback · † · 17:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> I'm concerned about editing like this: [2]. Sahajhist is adding

> unsourced assertions that appear incorrect on their face, and

> removing sourced material that does not agree with the official

> viewpoint. This is the type of behavior that I think is unhelpful

and

> that we keep seeing from this group of editors.

> -Will Beback · † · 09:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sahajhist:

> Yes I'm back (tho not on a regular basis as I'm a writer/publisher

in

> the Real World) and my edits to the Nirmala Srivastava page are

> intended primarily to add references as requested by someone else.

> There is also some light editing to improve text. I dont see

anything

> controversial in this.

> -Sahajhist 22:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> Two of your edits in this new batch [Now retired from public life,

> Nirmala Srivastava from 1970 to 2003 travelled extensively across

the

> world spreading Sahaja Yoga, giving numerous public lectures, and

> interviews to newspapers, television and radio.] that I am concerned

> about are when you deleted a sourced assertion: She is also

> worshipped as " Shri Adi Shakti " .[3]

> And when you added an unsourced assertion that appears to be

> contradicted by various sources:

> Now retired from public life, Nirmala Srivastava from 1970 to 2003

> travelled extensively across the world spreading Sahaja Yoga...

> I have seen videos of her travelling in 2006, and I haven't seen any

> source that says she's now retired. Can you please explain why

you've

> deleted the first item, a source which has been deleted many times

by

> Sahajist editors? Can you explain how we can verify that she is now

> retired and wasn't travelling from 2003-2006 despite video evidnece

> to the contrary?

> -Will Beback · † · 00:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sahajhist:

> The last public lecture given by Shri Mataji was in Delhi, March

> 2003. The last lecture to Sahaja Yogis was also in Delhi, March

2003.

> All visits by Shri Mataji and Sir C.P. since then have been private

> family visits. I can understand cynicism on your part at that

> statement given that there are well-documented and extensive

> photo/video archives of their Australian, UK, Italian and US visits

> in 2006, on various websites. However, these are still primarily

> private visits. With regard to your first point, it is indeed true

> that Sahaja Yogis regard Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi as an incarnation

> of the Goddess. However in this context 'Shri Adi Shakti' is only

one

> of her Divine aspects. So any statement in the first para needs to

be

> wider. btw, shouldnt we be discussing this on the appropriate talk

> page?

> -Sahajhist 02:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> There's no way I could have known your reasoning because you didn't

> give any of that explanation in your edit summaries. What is your

> source for the information about the travelling and retirement? The

> issue is not so much the edits as the editing behavior. Pro-Sahaja

> editors, you and Sfacets in particular, add unsourced information

and

> remove sourced info. Regarding the 'Shri Adi Shakti' if it is

> incomplete then why did you delete it instead of adding to it? The

> repeated deletions of sources and external links without adequate

> explanation I requested this mediation. Is that an adequate source

or

> not, and if not then why not?

> -Will Beback · † · 03:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sahajhist:

> This discussion should be on the relevant talk page.

> -Sahajhist 07:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> No, only discussion of content should be held on article talk pages.

> This is a discussion of the editing behavior that is the subject of

> this mediation.

> -Will Beback · † · 08:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sahajhist:

> We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. If I can widen this

> slightly: I would suggest that the Nirmala Srivastava page be a

> straight-forward biography, leaving matters of theology such

as 'Shri

> Adi Shakti' to be dealt with on the Sahaja Yoga page. What is your

> view on this?

> -Sahajhist 00:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> The editing problems that we need to address here are that you

> deleted that assertion without comment, and what sources we can use

> to reference the theology. Why did you delete it? A complete section

> on theology, whether in the Srivastava article or the SY article

> would have to include using " Shri Adi Shakti: The Kingdom Of God " as

> a source, but that link has been removed countless times from the

> articles. Can we agree to use that as a source for Sahaja Yoga's

> theology and for views of Srivastava?

> Also, I gather from your statements that both you and Sfacets are

> residents of Melbourne, and hence members of the Melbourne

> collective. There have been problems with several unregistered

> editors from Melbourne. (most recently user:211.28. 128.27). Is

there

> a discussion of Wikipedia articles among the Melbourne Collective?

Do

> you know the individuals who are editing? They are a part of the

> problem and their editing behavior reflects poorly on all pro-Sahaja

> editors.

> -Will Beback · † · 22:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> WikiPossum:

> Why not ask them directly: symelb[at]. com.au

> -WikiPossum 11:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> OK, let's start with you. Are you rsponsible for any of the

> unregisted edits? What is your involvement here? Would you like to

> participate in a useful manner in this mediation?

> -Will Beback · † · 12:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> PS: Since user:211.28. 128.27 added a link to Sahajhist's blog it

> appears that the user is that editor. Sahajhist has been warned

> previously about adding links to his blog.[4][5] Is there something

> about our policies which isn't clear? Do you think they don't apply

> to you?

> -Will Beback · † · 23:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sfacets:

> I like your assumptions, misguided as they may be... there is no

> Cabal. (*looks at title*) oh.

> -Sfacets 00:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> Perhaps you and Sahajhist can clarify matters by indicating if any

of

> the unregistered edits were made by either of you. Or perhaps

there's

> one unregistered user in Melbourne making all of these edits.

> user:211.28. 128.27 appears to be an experienced editor.

> -Will Beback · † · 04:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Sfacets:

> The http://www.adishakt i.org website is a separate interpretation

of

> SY (although the author continues to use SY as a center point, he

> goes off on all kinds of tangents) and so cannot be used to draw

> information about SY theology from.

> That there are one or more editors from Melbourne editing the

article

> without signing in means nothing, and especially does not imply that

> they are " part of the problem " or that their " editing behavior

> reflects poorly on all pro-Sahaj editors " . Does that mean by

> extension, that every time an anti-Sahaj anonymous editor makes a

> change it reflects poorly on yourself and other editors? You seem to

> be implying that any edits I would make would be to push a POV,

which

> I have denied from the beginning.

> -Sfacets 06:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> Will Beback:

> The worship of Srivastava as Shri Adi Shakti is documented both on

> www.adishakti. org and on SY websites. Sahajhist suggests covering

the

> matter in the SY article. You seem to suggest that it would not be

> appropriate there, which puts us back at the Srivastava article. Is

> there are an orthodox theology in SY, and if so who are the keepers

> of the orthodoxy?

> Do we know that the unregistered users are not either you or

> Sahajhist? Sahajhist has remoevd info from an IP talk page on at

> least one occasion.[6] These unregistered users are the source of

> many problem edits, including ones which promote the scholarship of

> Sahajhist. If they are one person it'd be helpful if they'd register

> and even join this mediation. Maybe it's Sahajhist, maybe it's a

> third party. At least you can help us narrow it down.

> -Will Beback · † · 06:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

>

> http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Wikipedia: Mediation_ Cabal/Cases/

> 2006-12-16_ Sahaja_Yoga# Mediation_ Case:_2006- 12-16_Sahaja_ Yoga

>

> NOTE:

> John Noyce and company seem to have lost this case and cannot remove

> www.adishakti. org from http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Sahaja_Yoga

as

> is

> evidenced at the bottom of page under " Other sites " :

>

> Other sites

> Shri Adi Shakti: The Kingdom Of God

> Sahaja Yoga at the Religious Movements Homepage at the University

of

> Virginia. Not updated since 2001.

>

> This is what the mediator Somitho concluded:

>

> " I've added articles I want you each to work on, and let us know

why

> you feel they should be this way. Please do not edit each others

> articles or have outside assistance. The purpose of this is to find

> out exactly what originality you wish to contribute, along with

> handle the dispute at hand in a civil fashion. Hopefully the

> compromise we come to will include a piece of the old, and the

> new; by rewriting portions of the article. Please follow all

current

> guidelines and policy when doing this, remembering WP:NPOV and

WP:REF

> when doing so. "

> -Somitho 08:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Jagbir and Violet,

 

Here are some interesting files

 

Best regards

 

Nicole

 

 

--- jagbir singh <adishakti_org wrote:

 

> Dear All,

>

> The attempt by WCASY/John Noyce to remove

> www.adishakti.org links

> from Wikipedia Sahaja Yoga has failed and the case

> closed:

>

> Category: Wikipedia Medcab closed cases

>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-12-16_Sahaja_Y\

oga#Continued_Discussion

>

> i remember John Noyce telling me that the fight is

> still not over:

>

> " This is the clone speaking, articulating slowly

> (the cloning process

> went wrong, I only have 2/3rds of my vocal cords -

> also most of my

> fingers on my right hand are fused, and I have a

> club-foot.)

>

> I can only laugh at how bad your grasp of the

> situation is - do you

> apply such methods of research into all your

> writing?

>

> Also, the mediation hasn't concluded, nor does it

> overly-concern your

> website -that's just your selective interpretation

> (glad to see that

> that is consistent) at play.

>

> Have a good one,

> Sfacets "

>

>

> Despite using false IDs and all the help he could

> muster John Noyce

> lost and now cannot remove http://adishakti.org from

> Wikipedia. As far

> as i am concerned this is a petty success and am not

> the least

> concerned on the outcome. What i am really pleased

> about is being

> presented with yet another piece of irrefutable

> evidence of WCASY's

> struggle against the Adi Shakti and Her Divine

> Message. i could not

> have asked for more. Thanks Violet for ferreting out

> this crafty fox.

>

> regards,

>

> jagbir

>

>

>

>

>

> ,

> " jagbir singh "

> <adishakti_org wrote:

> >

> > Dear Devotees of the Adi Shakti,

> >

> > i received a FYI email concerning John Noyce, the

> official WCASY

> > watchdog of this forum, who colludes with council

> members/country

> > coordinators to remove any Sahaja Yoga links to

> www.adishakti. org.

> >

> > This is not the first time that John Noyce has

> been caught

> committing

> > an indecent act in public. It is no point trying

> to shame him

> because

> > he is too thick-skinned for any remorse or guilt

> feeling. The fact

> > that he pretends to be a scholar doing research on

> the Adi Shakti,

> > and yet continues deliberately deleting/editing

> evidence supporting

> > Her incarnation Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi, leaves

> me flabbergasted.

> >

> > Appended below is a request made by Will Beback to

> stop Sahajhist

> > (John Noyce) and Sfacets (JN's clone) from

> removing Wikipedia links

> > to www.adishakti. org. It is but a reminder of the

> negativity that,

> > fully swollen and blinded by its own power (ego),

> has not only

> > _first_ silenced and then taken over Her Will, but

> is also trying to

> > prevent the truth of Her Advent and Divine Message

> from reaching

> > humanity. And i keep warning the faithful and

> those keeping vigil to

> > sustain Shri Mataji's incarnation and legacy - DO

> NOT EMPOWER THIS

> > NEGATIVITY THAT IS NOW FULLY SWOLLEN AND BLINDED

> BY ITS OWN POWER!

> We

> > are passing through the Tribulation and nothing

> short of unswerving

> > and fearless dedication to Shri Mataji will see us

> through. Each of

> > us must individually and collectively utilize our

> minds, bodies and

> > wealth to defeat this negativity. And my pranaam

> to Will Beback who

> > is doing just that. Those who fight for the Adi

> Shakti's victory on

> > Earth will surely be rewarded by Her in the Spirit

> World! This _is_

> > the Last Judgment and Resurrection. So have

> absolutely no doubt of

> > the Adi Shakti's eternal gratitude for battling

> for Dharma!

> >

> > Jai Shri Ganapathy,

> >

> > jagbir

> >

> > Thanks Will Beback, whoever and wherever you are!

> Hope you will be

> > back or have the will to be back monitoring JN's

> removal of links.

> On

> > my part i will be backing, and have the will to

> back you back to

> > back, Will Beback. So keep on coming back at John

> Noyce till he has

> > no will to be back. In the meantime all members

> are invited to

> enjoy

> > this Wikipedia: Mediation Cabal/Cases/ 2006-12-16

> Sahaja Yoga

> >

> > i too will be back!

> >

> > ------------ --------- --------- ---------

> --------- ---------

> >

> > Request Information

> > Request made by: Will Beback · † · 23:04, 16

> December 2006 (UTC)

> >

> > Where is the issue taking place?

> > Sahaja Yoga and Nirmala Srivastava

> >

> > Who's involved?

> > Sfacets, Sahajhist, Will Beback

> >

> > What's going on?

> > Sfacets and Sahajhist push a particular POV and

> engage in ownership

> > of the articles about a guru and her organization,

> topics with which

> > they have conflicts of interest.

> >

> > What would you like to change about that?

> > Editors should not remove properly-sourced

> critical information

> while

> > inserting poorly-sourced or unsourced self-serving

> material.

> >

> > Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how

> can we reach you?

> > Any method is fine with me. I can be reached on my

> talk page or by

> > email.

> >

> > Mediator (Somitho) response:

> > I've accepted the case, and remind all parties to

> try to remain

> > civil. Somitho 17:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC) I

> also would like to

> > remind all parties to sign using ~~~~ Somitho

> 17:54, 18 December

> 2006

> > (UTC)

> >

> > Ideogram:

> > Is this dispute still active? Do you need another

> mediator? --

> > Ideogram 00:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

> >

> > Somitho:

> > Mediator is active, as well as dispute. I am

> awaiting ideal

> solutions

> > from all parties before I move along.

> > -Somitho 00:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

> >

> > Sfacets:

> > At this point I can say I more or less agree with

> the state the

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

 

________

India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new

http://in.answers./