Talk:From Bhagwan to Osho: What's in a name?: Difference between revisions

From The Sannyas Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
m (Rudra moved page Talk:What's in a Name? to Talk:From Bhagwan to Osho: What's in a Name? without leaving a redirect)
(No difference)

Revision as of 03:51, 7 October 2015

re The WJV examples :

wouldn't it make more sense to move #5 and #6 to position #1 and #2 ?

also, #2 sannyas.net is no longer online. when did you find that ? i just send Mitra (the sysop) a message to find out if sannyas.net is permanently down. --Rudra (talk) 02:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


The numbers are their rank in a g**gle search. I'm not sure it would make any sense to move them around. I could roll the dice and keep trying different searches. I did just now and the results were: lots of different ordering, and gone are 5, 6, and 10, replaced by a different osho.com WJ quote, Allah to Zen and one of Vedant's books, the one i referred to as having a bad copy. Mitra is not only still there but is up to #1. His site is still on the air, even if inactive. Possibly g**gle gives points in their algorithm for historic value. I dunno -- doofus-9 (talk) 06:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


Hey Rudra, you've made a hash of re-organizing the WJV examples. Now:

1. The claim that the top ten hits are there is no longer true, because you've removed sannyas.net. That site is NOT offline. It is still there. Did Mitra ask you to remove this ref? The point is to show how alike all these supposedly independent sites are.
2. The claim that numbers represent g**gle page ranks is also now not true, they have been moved out of order.
3. Now that the order has been changed, internal refs to # this or that are now wrong, eg "#1, osho.com, is of course the "official" site, ie emanating from the office of the org that runs HQ, Osho's former Commune. So, #1 is completely a copy-paste, with one word removed for continuity purposes." The old number one that was a copy-paste of the official org (now #1) is now #3, oshonews.com.

There may be more, that's what i can see at the moment. Was there really a need to change it? -- doofus-9 (talk) 00:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


oops, didn't pay attention here. did not click that they were google top tens. so, rolled it all back. don't you love rollbacks?

it all started because sannyas.net went offline for a long time. and yes, rankings seem very tempramental;) doing 10 searches with "osho oceanic james" gave me 6 different rankings. --Rudra (talk) 10:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


Thank you. Some good has come of this though, i have seen the point of re-organizing the WJV examples because they were basically a big bulky boring thing that took up a lot of space in this article. And they were only scratching the surface of demonstrating the copy-paste similarity, even with all the space they were taking. So i created a new page with them + way more examples, and a more streamlined presentation, and without bothering about G**gle page rank, and now it's all at Website survey regarding Osho's name change. And i found a few sites leaning more to the Osho's words / Japanese Zen master version, so they are included too. So it's all good. -- doofus-9 (talk) 03:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


this whole section :
"They didn't wait long! Deeper analysis of this pub data here, on its own page, or in the discussion page will explore some more speculative inferences that can be made.

With the stickers inserted in already-published books, research is ongoing, comparing stickers to acquisition dates to try to determine a change-over date there. As such dating will sometimes depend on hard-to-verify memories, that will be a bit more nebulous and take some time. It is expected that sticker data will approximately confirm the pub data."

sounds all very very chit chatty. either we know or we don't.
can we take that out?

--Rudra (talk) 16:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


This section you want to delete was not intended as chatty but was serving a function of reminding me of stuff to still deal with. I have a record elsewhere so i'll delete them. Sorry about leaving them for so long :-) -- doofus-9 (talk) 03:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)