The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Sathya Sai Baba is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Parapsychology, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ParapsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject ParapsychologyTemplate:WikiProject ParapsychologyParapsychology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
The recently added section "Anomalies and possible unnatural death" contains misinformation, based on short-lived rumors and conspiracy theories. Please remove the section. Anuradha Rao (talk) 14:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALL information is properly sourced and cited. the times of India, Indian express and other sources are reliable and credible.
the title accurately depicts the content. anomalies in the narrative provided by the police, ashram, trust and other agencies in relation to what information was printed or reported on.
much like the murders at ashram. facts, narratives and official stories don't add up. yet the various pieces of information are reported and documented. why don't you take down that page?
just because its been 13 years and things have been brushed aside and washed cleaned doesn't mean these events weren't reported on.
they appeared in the times of India.
this section does not reflect conspiracy theories but reported on events.
there is a "criticism " section is there not? why are those "events" or conspiracy theories not removed? some scenarios are plain redundant, willful character assassination and unproven lies. yet the section exists.
why? because it was written about and played a role in the information surrounding Sai Baba. although irrelevant or dated or based on opinion, it was written about.
as were the anomalies and pieces of information contrary to the "official narrative".
the section, as the "criticism" section, provides cited information that appeared in reputable news outlets and has a place, is relevant and although, difficult to swallow without getting emotional, it was written about.
your passions and emotions dont take precedent.
section is well cited, properly cited and from credible sources.
All misinformation and conspiracy theories on the page need to go, and not just the Anamolies.. section. Why are we hounding someone who spent every moment for the upliftment of humanity? It is not about editors'/readers' passions and emotions, but about truth and facts which a Wikipedia article should stick to, isn't it? Anuradha Rao (talk) 06:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sai Baba’s virtues, divinity comment and unfettered devotion to serving humanity is not in question.
The times of India and various other sources are, according to Wikipedia, reliable and credible. Criticism section, like I said, has events that are unproven and most likely untrue BUT still are reported on.
Therefore, when correctly cited and worded, appear in Wikipedia.
Same with this section.
if you feel all these sections should be removed then the “issue” is with you and your view, not the way it is presented - which as I have stated and also agreed by the person who Undid your edits - which is in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. J929 (talk) 07:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
please review previous talk page issues. most importantly the criticism section and see how much effort and time, consensus and argument went into getting a phrasing that would satisfy everyone.
try to edit the criticism section and you will find warnings not to edit certain parts because of these efforts...
that being said, emotional responses and opinions of what wikipedia is or is not does not justify removing a section - one that is well cited, sourced and worded. J929 (talk) 08:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the page reads much better now than it did earlier, thanks to the efforts.
Some of the cited sources in Anomalies part have attributed quotes to unnamed/unverifiable sources and have a speculative tone than factual reporting. Unilateral claims, reactions, rumors and speculation can be condensed into a few lines than given so much prominence. Anuradha Rao (talk) 02:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All the information is correctly cited from credible sources. If condensed and left unsourced, it will then look like a story/speculation etc.
You can condense the part and still cite the sources.
The problem is not with the citations but giving disproportionate space to ephemeral speculative reports arising in the wake of the confusion following the demise of the Guru. Anuradha Rao (talk) 10:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed a paragraph from the article, citing "Gunnar Otis, professor of psychology, University of Reykjavik" as an authority, from a book by Paul William Roberts. The encounter between Roberts and "Gunnar Otis" is said to have taken place in 1976, but the University of Reykjavik was founded in 1998. No professor of psychology with that name has ever existed in Iceland. 147.161.214.97 (talk) 03:00, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
