Talk:Allegations against Sathya Sai Baba

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I like the way you have handled this and taken care of those references by putting them over here where they belong and not cluttering the main SS Baba page with them.

I suggest you transfer the paragraph beginning "The Dutch scholar Alexander Nagel" to the main Sathya Sai Baba article, because the content of this para seems to belong with SS Baba's claims about himself. I would put it after the "He can be seen in person" paragraph of "Practices".

I would be interested to know why you think readers need a long discussion of the allegations against SS Baba, as I would have thought most people simply want to know who he is, what he does, what he teaches etc rather than the opinions of a handful of disaffected ex-devotees. For comparison, Wikipedia discusses Jesus Christ but doesn't give 1/3 of the words to those who say the Crucifixion never happened.

Pachiaammos 10 May 2004 08:10


With regards to the length of this article and the allegations, I would rather compare it with Scientology%3A_Controversial_Issues than with Jesus. I have to think about moving the Nagel reference. The sex change of SSB is part of my story. Besides, it doesn't matter so much that this article is long. It is important that the article about SSB himself doesn't deal with the allegations too much. Andries 18:41, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that the Categorization under Hinduism should be removed, as the subject is far removed from Hinduism itself. Any opinions?

No, I do not agree that the subject is far removed from Hinduism. SSB claims to be an avatar of Shiva and Shakti, typically a Hindu claim and his teachings are for more than 90% Hindu, though he claims otherwise. Andries 22:33, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody explain what is wrong with the contents of this article that justifies a neutrality warning? I am aware that some current followers consider me biased, but bias of an editor is in itself not a good reason to give an article a neutrality warning. Andries 13:23, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I added a neutrality warning for the same reason it was added to the Sathya Sai Baba article. The discussion regarding neutrality and other issues can be viewed on the Sathya Sai Baba talk page[1] Thaumaturgic 16:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The external links on this page are excessive. Everyone agreed, including Andries, to limiting the external links to 5 each: Sai: Anti: Pro: Other: Reference

SSS108 03:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Allegations_against_Sathya_Sai_Baba&oldid=74152191"