text:
Brendan Taylor

Brendan Ross Murray Taylor (born 6 February 1986) is a Zimbabwean former international cricketer and a former Zimbabwean captain, who played all formats of the game. Taylor is a right-handed batsman but is also an off spinner. In 2015, former Zimbabwe captain Alistair Campbell described Taylor as "our standout player for the last seven or eight years". He is known for his unorthodox shots especially his ability to play upper cuts over the third man and ramp shots with elegance and are often considered as his trademark signature shots. His style of play and ability to make substantial contribution with the bat often drew comparisons with that of Andy Flower. He represented Zimbabwe in four ICC T20 World Cup tournaments in 2007, 2010, 2012 and 2014. Also, he represented Zimbabwe in three ICC ODI world cups as well in 2007, 2011 and 2015.

He captained Zimbabwe in ODIs until 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup, having taken over the reins from Elton Chigumbura after the 2011 Cricket World Cup. He became the first Zimbabwean batsman to hit back-to-back One-Day International (ODI) centuries (128 not out and 107 not out), achieved against New Zealand in October 2011. He repeated the feat again at the 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup. He was selected to play Twenty20 cricket for the Wellington cricket team as an overseas player in New Zealand's HRV Twenty20 Cup in December 2011. His 433 runs at the 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup set a new record for Zimbabwe in any World Cup. His 11 centuries in ODIs is also a Zimbabwe record surpassing Alistair Campbell's 7.

Taylor quit his national side soon after the 2015 World Cup but on 14 September 2017, he terminated his contract with Nottinghamshire to return home to Zimbabwe. It was announced that Taylor had decided return home and play for Zimbabwe for personal reasons.

In November 2018, Taylor became the first batsman for Zimbabwe to score a century in each innings in a Test on two occasions. In October 2020, in the first ODI against Pakistan, Taylor scored his 17th century in international cricket to become the batsman with the most centuries for Zimbabwe across all three formats. Due to all these achievements, Taylor is often regarded as one of the finest batsman of Zimbabwe in the modern era. In July 2021, during Zimbabwe's home series against Bangladesh, Taylor played in his 200th ODI match. In September 2021, ahead of Zimbabwe's third ODI match against Ireland, Taylor announced that he would retire from international cricket following the match.

In January 2022, he made a revelation about his forced involvement into spot-fixing due to the circumstances he had to deal with and stated that he will be facing a lengthy international ban for failing to report details related to it on time. Later the same month, Taylor was banned from all cricket for $3 1/2$ years by the International Cricket Council (ICC).

Early years
Taylor was nurtured by Iain Campbell, the father of Zimbabwean Test cricketer Alistair Campbell, at Lilfordia School near Harare. During his teens, where he attended St. John's College (Harare), Taylor emerged as a regular choice for national age-group teams and played in two Under-19 World Cups. He made his first-class debut for Mashonaland A at the age of 15. The very next year, he shot to prominence by scoring 200 not out in the B Division of the Logan Cup. Strong domestic performances and a mass exodus of top-level players forced Taylor into the national team at the age of 18 against Sri Lanka in 2003–04. He made his ODI and international debut against Sri Lanka on 20 April 2004 at Bulawayo ad opened the batting alongside Vusi Sibanda but had a tough start to his international career after being clean bowled by Chaminda Vaas for duck on his debut. He made his test debut a month later on 6 May 2021 against Sri Lanka in a losing cause.

Taylor made his debut for Zimbabwe at a time when many of the country's leading players rebelled against Zimbabwe Cricket (formally known as the Zimbabwean Cricket Union) and made themselves unavailable to represent the side. Consequently, to fill the gap, many young players were prematurely brought into the team, which weakened the side, especially at Test level. Taylor was one of the youngest and most promising in this lot. In 2006, despite not having signed a new contract, he was selected in the national team. Soon, he took over the wicketkeeping responsibilities as well following the temporary departure of Tatenda Taibu. He shot to international prominence after his 60 not out helped Zimbabwe achieve a five-wicket upset over Australia in the 2007 ICC World Twenty20.

In July–August 2007, Taylor was re-selected for the Zimbabwe Select team against South Africa A, having not been available against India A. He scored just 15 runs (2 and 13) in the second first-class match, having been overlooked for the first game. With Tatenda Taibu back in the team, Taylor was no longer needed behind the stumps. In the ODI series against the full South Africa team, the entire Zimbabwe squad performed above themselves (including their highest ODI score against South Africa), but falling short on all 3 occasions. Taylor too had a good series, ending as the 5th highest run-scorer, with 105 runs at 35.00. Taylor's first Twenty20 outing was against Eagles in September 2006 and the second was versus Bangladesh in December 2006.

Defeating Bangladesh, 2006
In the third ODI of the Bangladesh tour of Zimbabwe (2006), Taylor played a crucial role in a Zimbabwe win. A close game throughout, Zimbabwe required five runs from the final ball, effectively meaning a six needed to be hit to win the game. Taylor successfully hit a six off the bowling of Mashrafe Mortaza on the last ball, giving Zimbabwe the victory, and contributing to their series win. Taylor remained undefeated on 79 off just 72 balls and also awarded the man of the match for his match winning efforts with the bat.

The ICC World Cup 2007 campaign
After a relatively unsuccessful series at home against Bangladesh in February 2007, in which there were some concerns over his commitment to the team, he was still selected for the 15-man squad to tour to the West Indies for the World Cup. With over 60 ODIs under his belt, he is the team's most experienced player.

After a decent World Cup campaign, including 87 runs from 3 matches at an average of 29.00 (including a half-century; 50), Taylor went to play club cricket in the Netherlands, despite a ruling by the Zimbabwe Cricket board that any player leaving the country to play club cricket would be overlooked for selection.

Defeating Australia, 2007
Into the action early, Taylor caught Matthew Hayden off then bowling of Chigumbura. Taylor was also involved in a first class stumping, which saw Andrew Symonds depart. Taylor also made a crucial run out, with only one stump to aim at, to dismiss Mitchell Johnson.

With Zimbabwe restricting Australia to just 138, by Twenty20 standards a poor score, Taylor also opened their innings. While Vusi Sibanda got the ball rolling with several quick boundaries, Taylor was the key man, and batted out the innings. With both teams reasonably even placed for the first dozen overs, it was when Brad Hodge came on to bowl his gentle offspin in the 15th over that Taylor turned the match in Zimbabwe's favour. 15 was scored from the over, including two massive sixes by Taylor, the longest of which went 77 metres. With 12 runs required from the final over, Taylor played a cheeky sweep which ended being 4 from the first ball. Followed by a single, a two and another single, Zimbabwe needed 4 runs from 2 balls with Taylor facing, Chigumbura at the non-strikers end. With a ball to spare, 4 leg-byes were scored, with the ball running down to fine leg. Taylor ended with 60 not out from 45 deliveries. His fine all round performance with the bat and gloves won him the man of the match award.

In June 2008, Taylor joined the Lashings World XI based in England. This was seen as somewhat controversial due to reports of tension between Taylor and Zimbabwe Cricket Board, as a result of the board's policy of denying players to play abroad.

Against South Africa, 2010 and thereafter
Brendan Taylor scored 145 not out against the South African cricket team he carried his bat throughout the ODI innings and became only the ninth person to do so. South Africa scored 351/6 and Taylor scored 145 of 136 deliveries as Zimbabwe managed 287/6, yet again performing well with the bat but poorly with the ball. That knock proved something of a turning point for him, and he struck another century in the same year against Sri Lanka and proved Zimbabwe's stand-out batsman at the 2011 World Cup, with his upper-cut to third man being described by ESPNcricinfo writer Osman Samiuddin as "one of the lasting images of Group A".

2011 World Cup campaign
He was also part of the squad for the 2011 Cricket World Cup where he ended up being the third highest runscorer for Zimbabwe with 170 runs in six matches. He was known for his counter-attacking knock opening the batting in a match against hosts Sri Lanka during the World Cup where he top scored for Zimbabwe with 80 off just 72 balls and added a crucial 116 run partnership for the opening wicket alongside Regis Chakabva. The 116 run stand also remains the highest opening partnership by a pair for Zimbabwe in a World Cup match. Despite the duo's valiant effort with the bat, Zimbabwe crumbled to 188 in a run chase requiring 328.

Return to Test cricket, 2011
Following poor performances in the 2011 Cricket World Cup, Taylor was appointed captain of Zimbabwe on 24 June 2011, taking over from Chigumbura. He captained the side on their return to Test cricket, against Bangladesh, at the Harare Sports Club on 4 August 2011. In the first innings of the match he scored 71 and during the second innings he scored 105* and he then became the second Zimbabwean after David Houghton to score a century in his first match as captain, Zimbabwe sealed a 130 run victory and Brendan Taylor was named man of the match for his century.

New Zealand Series, 2011
In the ODI series of New Zealand's tour to Zimbabwe, Taylor unleashed his best form to date. In the 1st ODI, he scored 128* rescuing Zimbabwe from a precarious position to a respectable 231. In the next match, he scored another century (107*) leading the charge from the front again and in the process, becoming the first ever Zimbabwean batsman to score back-to-back ODI tons. However, he did not receive any support from the other batsmen and despite his tons, Zimbabwe lost both the games. In the final ODI, chasing a sizable 329 to win, Taylor set the tone of the chase with a brisk 75 off 65 balls, which enabled Malcolm Waller and Elton Chigumbura to give Zimbabwe a famous win. With 310 runs in the series at an average of 310.00 and a strike rate of over 100, Taylor was adjudged the Man of the Series. His 310 runs was at the time the record number of runs in a three-match ODI series. He scored 50 and 117 in the one-off test match. By the process, Taylor became only the second Zimbabwean batsman after Kevin Arnott to score a century in the fourth innings of a Test match, and contained 5 huge sixes. Despite his half-century and his second Test cricket ton, New Zealand outlasted him to win a thrilling match. Despite that, Taylor said that his team will continue to play aggressive, attacking test cricket which drew widespread praise from all quarters. In 2011, as a result of his fine performances, he was named the cricketer of the year and the batsman of the year.

He was nominated as one of the nominees for ICC ODI Player of the Year 2012 mainly for his significant performances against New Zealand in 2011.

West Indies and Bangladesh, 2013
Taylor only managed to muster a total of 33 runs in the two Tests against the West Indies, at an average of 18, in a Test series where Zimbabwe were comprehensively beaten by the home side, he also performed poorly in the ODI series, scoring 47 runs, averaging 15.66 with a high score of 39. He also played in the T20 series, only scoring 4 runs in 2 matches.

Taylor performed much better under home conditions against the touring Bangladesh in April 2013. He topped the test batting averages for the two Test series, average over 106 a match, with a high score of 171 in the first Test at the Harare Sports Club, leading Zimbabwe to draw the Test series 1–1. In the first Test, he scored twin centuries in both the innings and became the third Zimbabwean to score twin centuries in a same test match.

In the subsequent ODI series, he captained the side to a 2–1 victory in the tournament, although failing to replicate his scores from the Test series. He also led Zimbabwe to draw the T20 series against Bangladesh 1–1.

2015 Cricket World Cup
In the 2015 Cricket World Cup, Taylor scored two back to back centuries and became the first and only Zimbabwean cricketer to score back to back centuries in a same World Cup campaign. The first one was against Ireland, where he scored 121 runs from 91 balls. Before the last group stage game against India, Taylor decided to retire from One Day internationals at the mere age of 29. In his last match Taylor scored 138 runs from 110 balls. He was congratulated by both his team and the opposition team India after he got out. Veteran Indian commentator Sunil Gavaskar referring to Taylor's knock of 138 against India, claimed it as one of the best ODI innings that he had ever seen. He was included as a bench player in Cricbuzz's "ICC World Cup 2015 team of the tournament".

He was adjudged as the leading runscorer for Zimbabwe throughout the 2015 World Cup tournament with an aggregate of 433 runs in six matches at an average of 72.16 and was also the fourth overall run-getter during the course of the tournament behind Martin Guptill, Kumar Sangakkara, Shikhar Dhawan and AB de Villiers. He also became the first Zimbabwean to score 400 or more runs in a single edition of the World Cup.

During the 2015 World Cup, he along with Sean Williams put on Zimbabwe's highest fourth wicket partnership of 93 in a World Cup match which came against India. In the same tournament, he along with Sean Williams added Zimbabwe's highest ever fifth wicket partnership of 149 in a World Cup contest against Ireland.

Taylor signed for Nottinghamshire for the 2015 English cricket season. It was later revealed that financial security concerns among Zimbabwean cricketers was the reason behind Taylor's retirement from international cricket as well as that of Kyle Jarvis; another Zimbabwean cricketer, Craig Ervine, had rejected a central contract with Zimbabwe due to the same reason. It was also part of the reason why Zimbabwe-born Gary Ballance emigrated to England, and started representing England instead.

Test career
In the Test arena, Taylor's performances were somewhat below what one would expect of a player at Test level. However, this was attributed to his young age and premature elevation to the national team. However, since Zimbabwe's return to the Test circuit, Taylor has shown remarkable maturity, both as the side's leading batsman and captain. He scored two Test centuries and when he scored a century in the fourth innings of the Test match against New Zealand, on a fifth day pitch, (inclusive of 5 huge sixes), he became the second Zimbabwean after Arnott to score a fourth-innings century in a Test match. Taylor has announced that his team will continue to play aggressive, attacking test cricket which drew widespread praise from all quarters. He also scored two half-centuries, 71 against Bangladesh and 50 against New Zealand.

Although Taylor is primarily a top-order batsman, he has been in the past been successful as a part-time off-break bowler. He was Zimbabwe's first choice wicketkeeper, but gave up the wicketkeeping gloves after the return of Taibu behind the stumps. Following Taibu's retirement in July 2012, Taylor sometimes keeps wicket in ODIs and T20s but not in Tests.

Return to international cricket, 2017
On 14 September 2017, Taylor was released from his county deal with Nottinghamshire due to family reasons, thus eligible to play for Zimbabwe again. After 10 days of rest with the family, Taylor joined with Zimbabwean training camps for the upcoming international tours. In October 2017, he was included in Zimbabwe's Test squad for series against West Indies, and played both matches. He only scored a single fifty in four innings, whereas Windies won the series 1–0.

In November 2018, during the second and final test match against Bangladesh which was held in Sher-e-Bangla National Cricket Stadium he went onto score twin centuries in a losing cause as Bangladesh secured a comfortable 218 run win despite his valiant efforts with the bat. He also became the first batsman for Zimbabwe to score a century in each innings in a Test on two separate occasions.

He was named in Zimbabwean squad for the 2018 Cricket World Cup Qualifier and was also the leading runscorer during the competition with 457 runs.

Domestic and T20 franchise career
Taylor has been playing in Zimbabwe's domestic first-class competition, the Logan Cup, since 2002. His domestic one-day debut came for Mashonaland in December 2003.

In the domestic circuit he is one of the most reliable and successful batsman, and in 68 first-class matches, he already has 4,719 with a highest score of 217 and a batting average of 39.99. In List A cricket, he has played 184 matches, scoring 5,528 runs, with a personal best of 145*. His average in those matches are 33.30. In Twenty20 cricket, he has 1,307 in 47 matches at an average of 33.51.

Brendan Taylor was one of the star players in the 2007–08 Metropolitan Bank Twenty20. Taylor missed out on that elusive Twenty20 century by 15 runs when he scored 85 not out against Southerns in the second match of the tournament. Batting first, Taylor opened the batting and guided the Northerns to 3/227 after 20 overs, before going on to record a massive 158 run win. He also scored a second half century, 63 not out, against Centrals, a match Northerns won by 9 wickets with 6 balls to spare. Taylor was the second highest run scorer of the tournament, smashing 168 runs at an average of 84.00.

He scored 95 in his only appearance for Northerns, in the 2008–09 Logan Cup. His team won the match by a massive innings and 290 runs.

In the 2011–12 Stanbic Bank 20 Series, Taylor overcame a blistering ton by Chris Gayle to lead his team Mid West Rhinos to victory. The 171-run massive chase turned out to be a seven-wicket win with three balls to spare, mostly due to Taylor's match-winning knock of 75 in which he shared stands of 56 with the New Zealander Lou Vincent, and then a match-changing 105 for the third wicket with Gary Ballance, who made a quickfire 67 off 34 balls, including four sixes. It was the Rhinos' first win of the tournament.

Taylor was given a contract to represent Wellington as an overseas player in New Zealand's HRV Twenty20 Cup in December 2011. He made his debut for Auckland in the 2011–12 HRV Cup game against Wellington. Wellington went on to finish bottom of the ladder, with just two wins from 10 games, but Taylor was the side's highest scorer with 207 runs, and the eleventh best overall.

In 2013, Taylor was signed by the Chittagong Kings for $30,000. The King's got off to a poor start, however Taylor was one of the highest scorers in the league during this stretch. After the first 5 games, Mahmudullah resigned as the King's captain and Taylor was charged with the captain's duty. With his experience from leading the Zimbabwe National side and Uthura Rudras (Sri Lankan Premier League), Taylor led King's on a 4-game win streak. While on the hot streak, Taylor was the team's leading scorer and 3rd in the league with 316 total runs. Kings ended up reaching the BPL Final, but due to illness Taylor had to return home. Taylor-less Kings came up short in the final, finally losing to the Dhaka Gladiators.

On 13 March 2015, Taylor signed as a Kolpak player for Nottinghamshire, on a three-year contract. On the same day, he announced his retirement from international cricket.

In October 2018, he was named in the squad for the Khulna Titans team, following the draft for the 2018–19 Bangladesh Premier League. In December 2020, he was selected to play for the Rhinos in the 2020–21 Logan Cup.

Post-playing career and spot-fixing
On 24 January 2022, Taylor posted on tweet saying he had been approached to spot-fix by a group of Indian businessmen in October 2019, and he initially could not refuse the offer. He was invited by an unnamed Indian businessman to discuss in detail about sponsorships and the potential launch of a domestic T20 competition in Zimbabwe. The invitation came at a time when Zimbabwean players had not been paid their salaries for about six months.

He revealed that he was blackmailed and cornered by the businessmen in order to make him forcefully engage in spot-fixing after they threatened him that they would leak photographs of him taking cocaine. Taylor agreed to do it by accepting US$15000 as bribes in order to ensure the safety of him and his family, and admitted that he had taken drugs, but also insisted he became a victim of substance abuse. He admitted that he foolishly took the bait after taking cocaine when he was drunk. He admitted that he did not report the incident to the International Cricket Council (ICC) for about four months, and said that he would check into a rehabilitation centre for substance abuse. He insisted further that he will be sanctioned with a multi-year ban due to his delay in reporting of the spot fixing plot.

Taylor also admitted that he had failed a drug test following his final international match, when Zimbabwe toured Ireland in September 2021. He also stated that he had "beaten a few" other drug tests in the two to three years prior to his final match. Zimbabwe Cricket issued a statement to say that they were aware of the investigation, and would wait until the ICC publish its findings before making any comment.

On 28 January 2022, Taylor was banned from all forms of cricket for $3 1/2$ years, after he was found to have breached the ICC Anti-Corruption Code and the ICC Anti-Doping Code. The following day, Zimbabwe Cricket said that they were "extremely disappointed" in Taylor's actions and that he had "let cricket down".

title: Brendan Taylor


text:
User:Monyc14

MONYCAR

A Girl who studies in Caritas Don Bosco School,Who lives in Blk 4 Lot 2 Ph1A San Lorenzo South  Sta.Rosa Laguna  Beautiful, Kind, Loving and Caring. She is now 10 yrs. old and she is in grade 5.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User:Monyc14


text:
Talk:Islam in Malaysia

Christianity

 * The spread of Christianity is a particular sore point for the Muslim majority, and as such, the Government (despite being of a plural composition, but the Malay component, UMNO, always has the final say) typically drags its feet when it comes to approving Churches, and often they will disapprove the setting up of Churches outright. In some cases, they have even resorted to demolishing churches in Muslim-majority areas, and setting up mosques in Muslim-minority areas.

Is this based on fact or simply an allegation? Especially the italicized parts. This article reads more like criticism of Islam in Malaysia rather than an unbiased presentation of Islam in Malaysia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.25.134.2 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 26 September 2007

 * Doubt that it's fact. Selangor has more temple per capita compared to mosque. Some of the information were also taken from anti Malaysian Government sites such as the ones that stated "More than 30 temples were demolished" when the temple caretaker was already paid compensation and was told to move as the temple was on private land.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.139.161.191 (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Edits
I edited the language and readability, plus added some facts althouth it is still up to many more furnishment for higher encyclopedic standard. Ongengwai 06:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

So why is preaching Christianity to Malays not tolerated? Shouldn't all individuals have open access to learn which faith they wish to investigate further, rather than being tied in my constitutional and familia constraints??? Retcon

View points should not be included into an article attempted to be encyclopedic, regardless if you agree or disagree with the coming of facts. Ongengwai 02:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Culture section
While Malaysian culture is not my area of expertise, could someone more knowledgeable possibly add to or edit the cultural impact section so that fully half of it is not comprised of information solely on women's dress? --Liquesce 20:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Failed Good Article Status
This article was rejected for good article status because it is poorly written. Sentences in the first paragraph epitomize the choppy nature of the sentence structure and much of information presented in the article relates to Islam in general rather than Islam in Malaysia. joturner 01:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

MyKad
Please see my comments in the talk for MyKad. Specifically, is it true detailed religion info is included? I was under the impression this was planned, possibly even before MyKad but was abandoned and instead it is simply printed if you are a Muslim (I guess it's on the chip as well). If I'm correct, non-muslim is not printed but it's a given since it's an either/or. Nil Einne 18:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Apostasy from Islam in Malaysia
The first paragraph
 * In recent years this topic has started to create a debate within Malay society and politics. The most documented case was that of the Sky Kingdom which was seen as the litmus test for religious freedom.

Can anyone actually get a quote for the above? I would hardly call it a litmus test. While I personally believe Sky Kingdom should have been left alone, they appeared to be harmless enough even if extremely bizzarre. However the way cults & sects are treated in many countries is often different from the treatment of religions considered more normal probably even more so in countries with uneasy religious issues. If anything, the Muslims converting to Christianty issue would be a far better litmus test IMHO.

Also for the later info on converts
 * Original source of this information in Malay [1]

The soruce is the Harakah (PAS paper). As such I would say it's info should be treated with care and at least a warning given... Nil Einne 19:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

- There is nothing the merits the deletion of this chapter. It is valid info and should remain. The Sky kingdom quote wull be added.

Issues missing
There are some issues missing or not covered in sufficient depth IMHO such as:
 * Malay bible
 * Preaching to a Muslim
 * Marriages between a Muslim male and a non-Muslim female and the corresponding effects on divorce
 * Islamic education (Pendidikan Islam) in schools
 * Orang Asli? (I'm not sure if this should be mentioned or not, the fact that Orang Asli in the Peninsular are not considered Bumiputra surely has something to do with the fact that they're not Muslim though?)

And probably numerous other things I forgot. The short-lived ban of the Iban bible should also be mentioend (it's already mentioned in the Iban article). Some of these may best be covered in other articles but better links provided. Nil Einne 19:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Bumiputra 'conversion

 * However the reverse is not legally true; one does not legally become a Bumiputra by converting to Islam

While this is true, it is explained later that evidently you can become a Bumiputra (or specifically a Malay) if you live like like a Malay (which includes coversion of course) so I think we need to clarify the introduction Nil Einne 19:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Bumiputra includes natives of Sabah and Sarawak, indigenous peoples and Malays. So that is a wrong statement.

As regards one "becoming a Malay", there is no case law that has settled this issue. Unfortunately, I don't remember the book where I read it from.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.25.134.2 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 26 September 2007

 * I would disagree on your first point. While you're correct various non Malay native people of Sabah and Sarawak are also Bumiputera, that's largely irrelevant. Since a Malay is generally consider by definition a Bumiputera, if you can become Malay, you can become Bumiputera unless there's such a thing as a non Bumiputera Malay which I'm pretty sure is even less accepted then the idea of becoming a Malay. The fact that you can't become a non Malay Bumiputera may be considered somewhat unfair, but it doesn't negate the point I was making i.e. that you can probably can become a Bumiputera, by conversion to Islam (if necessary) and a bunch of other things so that you become a Malay and therefore a Bumiputera. Note that I made clear in my original comment I mean specifically a Malay which you can become. The question of being a Bumiputera is relevant here because the issue which started this is that for a Malay, conversion away from Islam means they are no longer recognised as Malays and therefore as Bumiputeras And the article mentioned at the time, that conversion to Islam doesn't make on a Bumiputera. Which may be true but ignores the fact that conversion to Islam combined with whatever else is considered necessary can probably make one a Malay and therefore Bumiputera. Nil Einne (talk) 20:09, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Copy edit performed
I rewrote the introduction and rearranged some of the material so the sections would cover specific topics. It seems like some sections need to be filled out, for example, the History section. I think the structure of the article needs to be clearer. I put Apostasy under Islam forms because I could not see another place to put it and it could not be a top header on its own.

I found and removed several broken links.

The whole article need good references. See the following Wikipedia policies:

KarenAnn 17:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Verifiability
 * Reliable sources
 * Citing sources

Maybe put about public holiday related to islam like Hari Raya Aidil Fitri, Hari Raya Haji, Awal Muharam, Mulidur Rasul and Nuzul Quran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.124.28 (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Manhaj Islam Hadhari
There is an IP intent on blanking this section on the basis that this version of Islam is now discouraged by the current prime minister. I have reverted their blanking and requested page protection. However, I have to say the section is quite lacking and POV. Also, if this sect is currently discouraged/ not practiced, the article should say so. ʝungle jill  23:32, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well the section has been removed by someone else. I have withdrawn my request for protection. ʝungle  jill  00:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That was me. As I explained on your talk page, it was entirely unsourced and therefore had WP:BLP issues. If sources are added for the first paragraph and the quotes, it can go back in if desired. -- Neil N   talk to me  00:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Removed sentence
I removed the sentence "Many Malay parents also fit tudungs onto their babies to get them used to it as early as possible." in the picture box of the girls wearing the headcovering. There is no reference given for this statement so it seems to be merely an assumption. Please add a reference before putting it back in.Meaniem (talk) 23:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Islam in Malaysia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110610122035/http://www.jeffooi.com/2007/07/merdeka_50_years_of_islamic_st.php to http://www.jeffooi.com/2007/07/merdeka_50_years_of_islamic_st.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130509022407/http://www.bt.com.bn/art-culture/2010/07/13/zheng-he-and-islam-southeast-asia to http://www.bt.com.bn/art-culture/2010/07/13/zheng-he-and-islam-southeast-asia
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130719104727/http://www.19.org/2810/quranists/ to http://www.19.org/2810/quranists/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:25, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The file on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for deletion. View and participate in the deletion discussion at the. Community Tech bot (talk) 21:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Islam in Malaysia


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Tacos

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 01:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Don Tacos
Another Japanese snack food not notable enough to have its own article in the Japanese Wikipedia.
 * Delete or merge. Dforest 06:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Did they fail an AFD? Kappa 15:47, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete If not in Japanese wikipedia, cant be that notable.  Ban e  s  10:12, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * How much do you know about the Japanese wikipedia? Kappa 15:47, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That they have 146,849 articles, and yet somehow managed to overlook this particular snack food. I wonder why? --Calton | Talk 05:20, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * They also didn't have an article for Kyabetsu Taro until yesterday. After I translated it into Japanese it was put on a list of "new food-related articles". Maybe I'll do "Don Tacos" next. Another one today, Japanese map symbols, was not on Japanese wikipedia either, it was a red link on one of their pages, and I translated that into Japanese (it's since been heavily added to by another editor). If you'll look on my user page under "Japanese Wikipedia" you'll find two more examples of articles about Japanese language which didn't exist there until I translated them. As a matter of fact, several of the articles on Japanese language here in the English wikipedia are a lot more comprehensive than theirs. So, it seems, strange but true, Japanese Wikipedia is not yet the fount of all human knowledge. But anyway, thankyou for your comments. --DannyWilde 06:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Why look, THAT article is up for deletion also. And the fact that you added it to the Japanese Wikipedia means nothing -- hell, it means less than nothing; having to gin up a rationale doesn't exactly help your case. --Calton | Talk 06:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm very sorry, but which article are you referring to? I have just checked the Japanese version of kyabetsu taro, the Japanese map symbols article, and the English map symbols article, and none of them have notices saying they are being put up for deletion. Is there something I'm not aware of? --DannyWilde 02:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Without putting words in DannyWilde's mouth, I think the point he was making is that using the presence of an article in the Japanese Wikipedia as a litmus test for cultural validity in Japan is not foolproof. Otherwise, we have to say that Pikachu is not culturally significant in Japan, since it doesn't have a page of its own in Japanese (but it does in several other languages -- are you planning an AFD for those too?).  In Japanese, it is relegated to a catalog list of other pokemon characters ja:ポケモン一覧 from a redirect.  I'm not against merging the snack foods in a similar way (or, the plethora of pokeon characters that populate the en wikipedia), but I am against deleting an article with >30k google hits.  - Neier 08:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, exactly. For example, "edomoji", a type of Japanese lettering used in sumo, kabuki, and other Japanese arts like rakugo, was not in the Japanese wikipedia until I translated it. There were just some red links. Edomoji are undoubtedly culturally significant by any standards, and they just weren't there at all. Absolutely nothing existed in the Japanese wikipedia until I made that article. Whether it's in the Japanese wikipedia or not means nothing, really, since there is no guarantee that the Japanese wikipedia is comprehensive. I suppose Dforest would suggest deleting the edomoji article from the English wikipedia too, if he can't find enough links about edomoji in English on Google. --DannyWilde 02:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep 31,600 Google hits in Japanese makes it a notable snack. Fg2 10:54, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Sure it's a stub, but it has potential for expansion. Many snack foods have an article in Wikipedia. CES 12:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * But do some deserve to be here? --JAranda | yeah 16:48, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete snackcruft. I cannot imagine how this could be expanded except by adding the most trivial of details. They're just Japanese tortilla chips, basically. --Calton | Talk 13:15, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep until I see an afd for Pringles and Doritos - Neier 13:48, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep a step towards our goal of universal access to the sum of human knowledge. Kappa 15:47, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I dont think human knowledge wants to know about this nn snack food --JAranda | yeah 16:48, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Am I not human? Do I not suffer when knowledge is taken away from me? Kappa 17:18, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Im not saying that your not a human I dont know where u got that from . But this is not knowledge basically. Do you want to know what kind of flavors this chip has if it has a nice history to it i will keep but this practicly has no useful learning info. --JAranda | yeah 17:37, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I want to know what people in Japan eat, yes including what flavors their tacos have. Why shouldn't I be able to find that out?Kappa 17:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The flavors are not particularly notable - cheese, and mexican chile (aka salsa). It's a Doritos clone. It doesn't need its own article. Dforest 04:47, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * So I shouldn't be able to find out what Japanese people eat? Kappa 04:51, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * If you think reading a substub about an off-brand knock-off snack will teach you a thing about Japan, you have a very peculiar definition of knowledge. --Calton | Talk 05:20, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You, and others, might find out better if stubs like this one were moved to an article about Japanese snack food. Which is better: hundreds of sub-paragraph stubs or a comprehensive article? Dforest 05:01, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that an article on Japanese snack foods would be a good idea (if it doesn't exist somewhere already), but how can you advocate either deleting stubs that have information of interest or merging the information with an article that doesn't exist? How can you merge one thing with nothing?  Sounds the same as deleting it to me.  If you're so concerned about the creation of an article on Japanese snack foods, why don't you create one yourself?  That would be more productive than holding these votes where there is an obvious interest in the articles, as the vote count suggests. CES 11:47, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The idea in listing it here is to judge its interest. Personally, I can't imagine why this Doritos clone is more noteworthy than all the other thousands of Doritos clones out there. Dforest 01:01, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Neier - helps to address regional bias CLW 15:52, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn snack food --JAranda | yeah 16:48, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep and please try to reverse our systemic bias here 32 thousand hits is a lot so why is this non notable that does not make sense Yuckfoo 17:12, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I count 225 unique hits. Where did this "32,000" number come from? --Calton | Talk 05:20, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Did you google for English or Japanese? I got 30,500 just now.  Neier 08:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. No comment on Dforest's motives will be made. --DannyWilde 22:10, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * My motive is to move these stubs to a more useful and comprehensive article on Japanese snack food. There are literally thousands of Japanese snacks that could be mentioned here, and in my opinion they do not all deserve their own articles. Dforest 01:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * So why is it here in AFD? Kappa 01:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Because as of yet, there is no suitable place to merge them. Dforest 01:43, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Than create a place to merge it to and don't try to delete it. Deleted articles can't be merged. - Mgm|(talk) 09:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Right now there is very little to merge. Perhaps you could suggest a place?   There are certainly Japanese snack foods worth having their own articles, but I can't imagine this being more than a stub, so I listed it here.   Can you suggest a better place to discuss merging Japanese snack stubs?  Dforest 10:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as notable Japanese snack. Capitalistroadster 23:27, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep 32 thousand hits. Stubby, but certainly notable. - Mgm|(talk) 09:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 225 unique hits, according to Google. --Calton | Talk 05:20, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge into a larger article on Japanese snack foods. Logophile 15:04, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge We definitely need an article on Japanese snack foods, but do we really need a bunch of individual stub articles?  I don't think so.  A redirect to a larger and more comprehensive article on Japanese snack foods would serve just as well until someone is both able and willing to write an full article on this particular snack food and its culrutal signifcance in Japan.  Caerwine 22:46, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I live in Tokyo, and, to be blunt, I find this whole discussion bordering on the insane -- There is no cultural significance to this particular snack food, any more so than Belgian or Dutch Doritos knock-offs (and yes, they exist and I've seen those). Pocky Sticks, yes; Calpis, yes; Taco rice, yes; Don Tacos, no. (forgot to sign: --Calton | Talk 06:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC))
 * I have no idea whether Don Tacos are culturally significant. If you are going to delete or merge articles based on their "lack of cultural significance", good luck, you only have about 700,000 articles on Wikipedia to delete until you are finished. Let's hope no one makes anymore articles about snacks in the meantime, otherwise you certainly will have your hands full. --DannyWilde 06:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Buh? That was the biggest load of non-sequitor I've seen all month. To quote Wolfgang Pauli, "That's not right; that's not even wrong." So your false dichotomy is EVERYTHING is culturally significant or NOTHING is culturally significant? Because that's the only meaning that makes even the tiniest shred of sense in that context. --Calton | Talk 06:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact it was my poor attempt at humour. I'm sorry you don't like the article and feel it is not useful to you, but I think that this information could be useful for other people. It would be a shame if the information were deleted, I think. It could be merged into a larger article, perhaps, but I don't see what harm it is doing as a small article in its own right. Quite often, merged articles end up being rather unreadable and unfocused. Take a look at Planet of the Apes, where the article tries to extensively describe a novel and a rather different film in the same page, with rather poor consequences for readability and focus. As for significance, Wikipedia contains things like individual articles for every single episode of the Simpsons cartoons, individual articles on particular trees, and individual articles on streets and roads in cities. I don't see why it can't tolerate a few dozen articles on the snack foods eaten by a country with a population of 120 million people. Most of the Japanese snacks don't have particularly much in common with each other anyway. The wagashi article already deals with traditional Japanese sweets, and then there are individual pages for most of the wagashi anyway. The List of Japanese snack foods could be extended into a longer article if there is some common point in all of these snacks which needs to be dealt with together I suppose. Anyway I say to people who are interested in doing that, why not go and edit the relevant pages, instead of discussing doing it here? Actions speak louder etc. --DannyWilde 02:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
User talk:Arti1983gmail.com

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Qaz  ( talk ) 06:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Arti1983gmail.com


text:
User:Maestrosync/Notes

Template_messages/User_talk_namespace substing with ... |article_name|subst=subst:}}

title: User:Maestrosync/Notes


text:
User talk:Geeds

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Qaz  ( talk ) 06:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Geeds


text:
Hibiscus (entertainer)

Hibiscus (born George Edgerly Harris III; September 6, 1949 – May 6, 1982) was an American actor and performance artist. Starting his career in New York City, he moved to San Francisco, where in the early 1970s he founded the psychedelic gay liberation theater collective known as the Cockettes.

He was widely seen in Flower Power (1967), a photograph taken during a major anti-Vietnam War protest in Washington, DC. He was photographed putting flowers into the gun barrels of the MPs.

Early life
Harris was born in Bronxville, New York in 1949 to George Harris II and Ann M. Harris. The family moved to Clearwater Beach, Florida. The Harris parents became interested in theater and began performing with a local community theater called "The Little Theater". George and his siblings started a children's theater troupe, the El Dorado Players.

In 1964, the family returned to New York. Harris appeared in commercials, and started acting in television. In 1966 he performed in an Off Broadway play titled Peace Creeps by John Wolfson, with Al Pacino and James Earl Jones.

In 1967, George Harris III and his father appeared in New York in the Off-Off-Broadway play Gorilla Queen by Ronald Tavel.

War protest
On October 21, 1967, Hibiscus (then George Harris) joined the March on the Pentagon, an anti-war march intended to "levitate" the Pentagon. He appears in Bernie Boston's Pulitzer Prize-nominated photograph, Flower Power; he was the turtleneck sweater-wearing protester photographed putting flowers into the gun barrels of a soldier of the 503rd Military Police Battalion (Airborne).

Boston recalled the moment in a 2005 interview in Curio magazine: "'When I saw the sea of demonstrators, I knew something had to happen. I saw the troops march down into the sea of people, and I was ready for it.' One soldier lost his rifle. Another lost his helmet. The rest had their guns pointed out into the crowd, when all of a sudden a young hippie stepped out in front of the action with a bunch of flowers in his left hand. With his right hand he began placing the flowers into the barrels of the soldiers' guns. 'He came out of nowhere,' says Boston, 'and it took me years to find out who he was ... his name was Harris.'"

1960's counter-culture member Paul Krassner, in a blog entry he did not post until a week after Bernie Boston died in 2008 (and three years after Boston was quoted in Curio), states that the young man in the photo was Joel Tornabene, a leader of the Youth International Party; in addition to Boston, both Harris/Hibiscus and Tornabene were dead before Krassner posted this statement.

The Cockettes
Hibiscus, whose full beard, vintage dresses, make-up and costume jewelry created a defiant look, even by later standards, embraced drag and drugs as paths to spiritual liberation, and attracted a group of like-minded hippies who loved show-tunes, dressing up, showing off and dropping acid, and became The Cockettes.

The Cockettes decked themselves out in drag outfits and glitter for a series of legendary midnight musicals at the Palace Theater in San Francisco's California North Beach neighborhood. They quickly became a "must-see" for San Francisco's gay community, with their outlandishly decadent productions like "Journey to the Center of Uranus", "Tinsel Tarts in a Hot Coma" and "Gone with the Showboat to Oklahoma". Two notable Cockettes were the disco diva darling Sylvester and the "queen of B-movie filth" Divine, who sang "If there's a crab on Uranus you know you've been loved" while dressed as a psychedelic crab queen.

When the Cockettes wanted to start charging for their shows, Hibiscus left, believing all shows should be free, and formed the Angels of Light in San Francisco, which gave many free theatrical performances in the early 1970s in San Francisco and New York City. After moving back to New York, he put together a number of off-off Broadway revues, of which Sky High ran the longest. He also appeared in a daytime soap opera under his birth name. In the early 1980s, he and his sisters Jayne Anne, Eloise and Mary Lou and brother Fred, formed the glitter rock group "Hibiscus and the Screaming Violets", supported by musicians Ray Ploutz on bass, Bill Davis on guitar and Michael Pedulla on drums.

Hibiscus died of Kaposi's sarcoma due to complications from AIDS on May 6, 1982, at St. Vincent's Hospital in New York City. He was an early AIDS casualty; at the time of his death the new illness was still referred to as GRID.

title: Hibiscus (entertainer)


text: File:KRLXLogo.png

title: File:KRLXLogo.png


text:
User talk:Chivu144

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Qaz  ( talk ) 06:44, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Chivu144


text:
Talk:Right Livelihood Award

Philatelist or Philanthropist
The section on "History" (oldid=749166108) starts with: "Jakob von Uexküll, the philatelist,...", which would be someone who collects stamps. I would believe it should be "philanthropist" instead (like mentioned in the article introduction), but I leave it to others to get this right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.216.226.93 (talk) 14:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Philatelist is correct. He sold his stamp collection. --Dr Oldekop (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Intent of organization's name
Was the award named after the identically-named concept in Buddhism? --Dpr 06:44, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes. See .--Old Moonraker 07:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh, sorry, but Bullshit!
 * What the cited article, by a Sri Lankan admirer of the most recent award says, in relevant part is these two complete 'graphs:
 * The funds for the Right Livelihood Award were secured by von Uexkull selling his prized collection of stamps for about a million dollars. The name Right Livelihood would strike a familiar note to those acquainted with Buddhist philosophy.
 * Von Uexkull being a philosophy graduate from Oxford has been struck by this name Right Livelihood appearing in Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path.
 * That is, one presumed Buddhist surmises that all Oxford "philosophy graduate[s]" study the major eastern religions. (Perhaps that is Commonwealth English for "philo major" -- but our bio Jakob von Uexkull says he "graduat[ed] in Philosophy, Politics and Economics", aka "Modern Greats", "a modern alternative to Classics (known as Greats)".)
 * So a gentlemen who might be offended if he encountered
 * the Eightfold way (physics), or
 * the Eightfold Path (policy analysis), or
 * "Right Livelihood" used in the sense of any livelihood thought of as being correct, or
 * Right Livelihood in any sense that dismissed the efficacy of any or all of the other 7 elements,
 * decided, based on a factual mistake and unreasonable assumptions, not that Uexkull intended to evoke Buddhism, but that he "has been struck by this name" as "a familiar note".
 * In fact, there is no evidence in the ref that the foundation was named after anything Buddhist.
 * (It's too bad, but no big deal, that there's been confusion. But my tone may be infected by the possibility that that bad info influenced the following contrib by Ninjagonzo; if so, please make the slight effort necessary to discounting my tone.) --Jerzy•t 23:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

''The following contrib was made, immediately below Old Moonraker's 07:32, 8 November 2007 contrib, at a time when they were both in the lead section of this talk page. The juxtaposition could logically have been intentional, as discussed below. --Jerzy•t 23:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) '' hello! i just put some changes in the article, because i like its motivation, and i thought the text was pretty much criticizing it; should it not be completely neutral? greetz, ninjagonzo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninjagonzo (talk • contribs) 00:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * NG refers to their own edit 19 minutes earlier, which has two portions:
 * It removed the factual statement
 * (It uses its name without prominently explicating any relationship between the name and the Right Livelihood element in the Buddhist Noble Eightfold Path.)
 * This statment is needed, in the absence of solid evidence for simply lk'g to Noble Eightfold Path, i.e. evidence that the organization intends to evoke the RL that is part of NEP:
 * with no lk, we conceal from those who know nothing of Buddhism the plain fact that many people who hear of RLA react to it based on the assumption that it intentionally evokes Buddhist thought;
 * with a lk and no dislaimer, we imply that intention without evidence of it.
 * It replaced a factual statement about RLA's lack of connection to Nobel Prizes with
 * The ceremonial event takes place in the Swedish parliament usually during the first week of December, and the award is therefore often referred to as the "alternative Nobelprize".
 * That replacementwould deserve a fact tag on the word "therefore", if it were not an attempt to deny what most readers would assume is likely, from the facts it replaced: that the term "alternative Nobel prize" is an attempt to make a claim of similarity, if not to also implicitly disparage the judgment of the Nobel committees by asserting the need for an "alternative" to their judgment.
 * "Unfortunately", something I didn't know when I wrote my version turns out to be clear: that the use of the term reflects Uexkull's dissatisfaction with the Nobels, the rejection of his proposals by the those responsible for the Nobels, and his org's choice to associate itself unilaterally with the Nobels. Our bio of hims states:
 * He created the awards out of a recognition that Nobel prizes were relatively narrow in scope and usually recognised the work of those in industrialised countries.
 * (Never mind that you can't "recognize" something that is not true, so that passage endorses his PoV: "out of a recognition" must be replaced by "because he believed".)
 * I am reverting NG's entire edit with an undo, and will deal with the evidence that is new since my previous edit of the article "at my leisure", which in this case will begin in about 5 hours.
 * NG, i advise you, when you like something, and "[think] the text was pretty much criticizing it", to make more effort to distinguish between facts that invite conclusions you dislike, on one hand, and expressing a PoV on it, on the other. It's crucial here.
 * --Jerzy•t 23:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The edits that have been replaced appear to require citations. There seem to be citations evidencing a connection with the Buddhist path, however tenuous; there are no citations evidencing a lack of connection - on this basis, I have removed a claim that the connection does not exist. There was also a mass of repeated material; I have removed duplications and condensed (and made more precise) the text. --Hgilbert (talk) 00:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The most important thing to say is what i said above: you can't have a proper article on the "Right Livelihood Award" without a link to Noble Eightfold Path (since Right Livelihood is a Rdr to that article). There was one, and you removed it.
 * As a close second, it should be said that there was no "claim that the connection does not exist" in the removed sent:
 * (It uses its name without prominently explicating any relationship between the name and the Right Livelihood element in the Buddhist Noble Eightfold Path.)
 * but rather a verifiable fact: on their entire site, the only reference to 8-fP is a personal statement by a Buddhist recipient. Facts speak for themselves, and should not be excluded just bcz awareness of them will persuade most readers to opinions that are not immediately verifiable facts; much less may a fact be excluded on the basis of "tenuous" "evidence" of something that the solid fact does not rule out.
 * If the facts are insufficiently relevant that can be a reason for exclusion, including facts that are so awkward to state that doing so distracts from more important aspects. I think in the long run, that would be true of the sentence in question, but it seemed to me a good work-in-progress line that is true, and gives a reader a handle on an aspect that should in the long run be dealt with better, when better information is at hand.
 * As to better information, Die Erfolgsgeschichte einer Briefmarkensammlung, or "Success Story of a Stamp Collection" was a program of Westdeutscher Rundfunk (call it "Radio Cologne, Germany" if you like). That page lks to a transcript in which Jakob von Uexkull says (in relevant part)
 * Es gibt sehr viele falsche Livelihoods, das muss man ganz klar sehen, es gibt sehr viele Menschen, die heute so falsch leben, dass für andere nichts mehr übrig bleibt, und besonders für unsere Enkel nichts mehr übrig bleibt. Und Right Livelihood, das ist ein Begriff, der aus dem Buddhismus kommt, ich bin also kein Buddhist, ich schätze aber sehr diese Einstellung dass man nun sein gesamtes Leben richtig führen sollte, dass ich leicht auf der Erde lebe, nicht mehr als meinen fairen Anteil der Ressourcen er Erde verzehre, das war für mich dieser Begriff.
 * My rough translation is
 * There are a great many wrong livelihoods -- one can't help but see that clearly -- there are a great many people living so wrongly, that nothing is left for others, and especially for our grandchildren. And Right Livelihood -- that is a concept that comes from Buddhism; I am not a Buddhist, but I value greatly this attitude that one now must lead the whole of his own life correctly, that I live lightly on the earth, consuming no more than my fair share of the earth's resources -- that was what this concept came to for me.
 * That is not a confident translation, but IMO it points the way quite concretely to an improved way to deal with the Right Livelihood elephant in the Right Livelihood Award living room:
 * (The organization's founder has said that the Right Livelihood doctrine in Buddhism is a compelling ethical idea for him.)
 * That avoids the potential for suggesting to Four Noble Truths-aware readers that this is a Buddhist foundation, and to the rest that the foundation invented the "Right Livelihood" concept. My inclination is to insert something along those lines now, and seek verification from a more competent linguist that the transcript fully supports it (thru en:'s translators, or on the talk page for the German-WP version: since we are fully aware of that need, it would seem silly to me to stick a fact tag on it. (But i can live with silly.) --Jerzy•t 08:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Good solution. Better than my cite, above, which you describe as "Bullshit"! Genuine apologies if it was the cause of the contended edit by User:Ninjagonzo, which has rightly been reverted. --Old Moonraker (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Tnx, but my biting NG, and perhaps you, suggests that any apologies are due from me. I've been coming on pretty strong on this, and i hope others can carry the work on. Jerzy•t 17:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Outdent] I don't feel bitten—apologies absolutely not necessary for what I took to be a light-hearted remark. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

That the name of the organization is based on the Buddhist principle is clear from the organization's own website, which explicitly cites the Noble Eightfold Path on this page: https://www.rightlivelihoodaward.org/honour/about-the-right-livelihood-award/what-is-right-livelihood/ In my opinion a reference to this effect (e.g. citing the Noble Eightfold Path as the source of the prize name) would be entirely appropriate--indeed it seems remiss not to have it in the article somewhere.Chillowack (talk) 19:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
notice removed from the article page:
 * "...Little known award with big ambitions, but little actual notability. Manages to get space in the Parliament building once a year, but is it really otherwise notable? Also, its attacks on the Nobel Prize to raise itself up don't seem the actions of a really notable award. Adam Cuerden talk 19:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)"

I can agree with much of the above, but speedy deletion criteria do not seem to apply. The piece could, of course, be nominated for the normal WP:AFD procedure. If haven't seen any evidence of attacks on the Nobel, merely attempts, quite possibly without merit, to latch on to the fame surrounding the major prize. The movement's claim to notability lies chiefly in the recipients: there is a substantial list in "What links here". Should it come up for discussion, I will offer a weak "Keep". --Old Moonraker 21:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Afterthought: If the Wikipedia article goes, the www loses one of the few places where you can read that the award is presented in a room in the Swedish Parliament building, and not an award from the Swedish Parliament. Perhaps that needs to be given more emphasis. --Old Moonraker 22:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm. you have a good point. (though it wasn't actually a speedy deletion, just a proposed deletion, which is not quite the same, though you were quite right to remove it since you think it should be kept) And I feel guilty for nominating it, because, well, a lot of the people who won it (with a couple really out there exceptions - George Vithoulkas?!?!) are indeed doing good work. But, still, even though the people it's awarded to are largely worthy of awards, and notable, is the award itself notable? Adam Cuerden talk 18:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your measured reply to my action in deleting your proposal. I did read WP:AFD (twice!) but I'm still a bit hazy about the different deletion categories. It seems that I have misunderstood your intention — my apologies.

 * I would certainly like to see some new, sourced information to determine your point concerning the organisation's notability: as you say there could be a risk of the organisation being famous because of its winners, and the winners being famous only because of the award! I looked at the page a few months ago and I tried to determine this at the time, without success. I'd be very pleased if someone else could have a look around. Ultimately, if the article were deleted, its purpose might be filled by the existing "Right Livelihood Award Winners" category, but the category is pretty meaningless without its article and presumably would go as well. At present my view remains at "keep".

 * As regards Vithoulkas — well, this is an alternative award, isn't it!  Old Moonraker 19:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In a nutshell (Yes, it's confusing)
 * "speedy" means "usually as soon as an admin takes note, and with no discussion needed"
 * "ProD" means "not for 6 days, and not at all if any objection is raised"
 * "AfD" (which often follows an objection to ProD) means "substantial consensus, tested over 5 days' discussion, unless early discussants find early discussion makes the ultimate consensus blindingly obvious"
 * --Jerzy•t 05:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * A colleague noted to me today this ancient discussion, prompting me to reread it. I belatedly note that my contrib of "05:54, 29 October 2007" (just above, at this writing) is in part vague, and possibly misleading (not abt Anth'y, but about ProD and my saying amibiguously
 * "ProD" means "not for 6 days, and not at all if any objection is raised"
 * I might better have said
 * "ProD"   means [This is a] proposal to delete [the article on which the template is invoked, but "not [until] 6 days [have elapsed], and not at all by reason of this proposal if any objection is raised by any editor -- even if only the creator objects. (And a failed ProD does not IMO preclude another ProD on the same article, rare tho that is; further, an AfD is a very common response, by the same or another nominator, to a ProD failing bcz of an objection, and hard to imagine if no reason has been offered for objecting.)"
 * --Jerzy•t 18:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I see this article has previously evoked puzzlement from neutral editors trying to figure out (basically) WTF???? "Right Livelihood" award or "Alternative Nobel Prize" is an anthroposophical project, it's followers of Rudolf Steiner. Moonraker wrote: "a risk of the organisation being famous because of its winners, and the winners being famous only because of the award!" - You put your finger on it. There are obviously many well intentioned, even prominent people involved. The "award" itself is essentially bogus.

I have proposed for deletion numerous other articles posted here by anthroposophists promoting their own projects, and attempting to create a public image of anthroposophy as noble and socially beneficent. The reality is quite a bit more complicated. This article too should be deleted - it apparently only got away the first time because it takes quite a bit of digging to uncover the tangle of associations that explain who these people are and what their gig is, passing out "awards."DianaW 15:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I still believe that the quality of some of the beneficiaries warrants the WP:NOTABILITY of this article, although I accept DianaW's point that the organisation could well be a vehicle for self-promotion or self-fulfilment, rather than any genuine attempt to save humankind through their "alternative lifestyles".

 * Potential readers may hear of the award, look it up and come upon the (hopefully) objective study on Wikipedia. If this article weren't available, there is nowhere else that offers even our limited degree of scepticism. I asked, above, if some clearsighted editor could take a fresh look at the piece. Incorporating Diana's point, if suitable citations were found, would be an edit in the right direction towards an overall balance. --Old Moonraker 21:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The organization is both a vehicle for self-promotion *and* a genuine attempt to save humankind, IMO, but I don't think that's what determines whether something is notable per wikipedia standards. You may be right that the notability of some of the beneficiaries makes the article itself worth keeping. The other issue, however, is that this is one of a "family" of Steiner/anthroposophy-related articles that were the subject of an arbitration back in January. Anthroposophical editors were instructed to remove all material that could only be sourced to anthroposophical sources. Anything published by anthroposophical presses, anthroposophical web sites, etc., would for these purposes be considered "self-published." I doubt it is going to be possible to keep some of these articles, because as in this case, there aren't many other references - the rest of the world just doesn't agree that they are notable. There are dozens of articles in this family of articles that have sat here for months or years in this condition; this is why I've been putting up notices saying they need to be brought up to speed with appropriate references or it's time to start deleting them.DianaW 01:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You're overdoing it, Diana. Waldorf- or anthroposophy-related articles are articles describing activities in some sense coming out of anthroposophy.
 * This article, as far as I'm aware of is not such an article, as little as it is an Astrid Lindgren-related article, belonging to a "family of Astrid Lindgren articles", or a "family of Daniel Ellsberg-related articles" because Astrid Lindgren and Daniel Ellsberg at different times have been given the Right Livelyhood Award. The only relation it has to anthroposophy is that the organization it describes at one time (2003) gave its award to some activities coming out of anthroposophy, the same way it has given its award to all sorts of activities and persons. That's all.
 * The only thing your comment reveals is the depth of the personal antipathy you seem to have towards anything expressing the slightest sympathy or appreciation of things related to anthroposophy and your efforts to semingly have any article even mentioning something related to anthroposophy deleted from Wikipedia. Thanks, Thebee 13:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Two comments (that cut in the opposite direction from some of my comments in a subsequent section):
 * WP:ArbCom decisions are the only case where i for one can imagine myself approving of exceptions to the following principle:
 * WP never requires for its success that anyone make an edit that it is not their choice to make, and no one should ever be told to do so (AFAI can imagine) except by ArbCom, applicable to a specified list of users (and perhaps their socks) and as a condition for avoiding blocking or banning, for the purpose of demonstrating good faith when it has appeared to be absent.
 * If there was a decision that a class of edits are unacceptable, fine if you remove them, and fine if editors who have previously made them are threatened with blocking or banning if they should continue. But no statement should ever appear on an article talk page that a group of "editors were instructed to remove all material that could only be sourced" in a certain way. That is off topic here. If the ArbCom's order is being flouted, go to WP:ANI, not saying "... were the subject of an arbitration back in January", but instead with a lk to the ArbCom case and to the edits in question, and request enforcement of the penalties specified in ArbCom's verdict.
 * The tone of the negative characterizations above of the authors in question disturbs me, and i remain incredulous of it being justified. As i hint below, i'm not a much of a "spirituality" fan: i consider that disciplines that emphasize such a focus, beyond what is typical of people who are doing their part to make the physical basis of their society run smoothly (and is also common among many -- perhaps most -- people who instead have other livelihoods, callings, or personal enthusiasms), present their adherents with serious intellectual, cognitive, and moral pitfalls. And i don't find it unreasonable to examine the evidence of hidden intentions of writers whose work benefits such hate- and greed-filled phenomena as scientology and neo-nazis. But i await any evidence that such scrutiny would be justified because anthroposophy's reputation would be enhanced by the articles in question. (I hasten to note that it is not clear that the need for scrutiny is being attributed to the fact that the authors are anthroposophists: i may be misreading the tone that makes me read the intention behind speaking of "digging to uncover the tangle of associations that explain who these people are and what their gig is", and if so IMO the author would be wise to make more specific allegations.)
 * In any case, i'd like to describe my own limited hearsay understanding of anthroposophy, which makes it seem to me unlikely that there is a significant group of anthroposophists attempting to use WP to propagandize on behalf of anthroposophy, even to the extent that i have noticed Christians (especially creationists), Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists doing for their respective beliefs. I made it sound (below) as if i had known parents of anthroposophical-school students. Excavating memories decades old, i find myself in fact unclear whether i spoke to present or former students, their parents, parents who knew parents of such students, or peers of such students. In any case, i did speak to members of one family about the content of the curriculum of the nearby anthroposophical school, and learned that:
 * teachers taught one grade at a time, but followed the same class of students thru the grades;
 * cultural subjects were taught in an unusually unified fashion, focused on a form of immersion: a given class learned language, music, literature, and i suppose politics, geography, and customs (and perhaps history of philosophy) through the lens of a single culture over multiple years (if not for their entire studenthood); the example i heard of was a European culture (that appeared to have no particular relationship to Steiner's life).
 * More strikingly, a liberal activist and technical professional i knew, with a history of third-world development work, a very straight job, and a strong interest in meditation, had personally explored a number of forms of at least semi-intentional communities, at least in many cases centered on religious and philosophical models, and found it worth remarking that the anthroposophists had a doctrine that taught them that their role was to operate anthroposophical schools, teaching a secular curriculum in a way that fostered a sense of community among the students, but not teaching about anthroposophy, in the belief that the mode and content of the education bettered the world, but presumably that the propagation of their doctrines was either better done by other means, or less important than the educational calling.
 * I mention these matters because it suggests to me that anthroposophists as a group are unlikely to try to promote anthroposophy in the sort of dogged way that would lead to a ArbCom process, and that the editors who are the subject of any such ArbCom ruling are more likely to be some sort of fringe or former or heretical ones (even if encouraged by anthroposophist ideas about the spiritual to manipulate WP "for the greater glory of" something), than part of a body or movement whose associations it would be fruitful to trace. If i am right, the effort to "dig out" the editor's "gig" becomes tricky and probably ill-conceived.
 * --Jerzy•t 07:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * There's an invitation (above, 15 July) to provide evidence of anthroposophists using RLI to promote their own projects. None was forthcoming and, in view of Jerzy's explanation of anthroposophist philosophy, there probably isn't any. My question below regarding its inclusion is answered completely. --Old Moonraker 07:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

"Widely known as"
> "Sometimes called" == 2 citations do not serve to establish wide usage. GTests show Which is to say, I think it is an objective fact that what we have here is most people who consider "Alternative Nobel Prize" applicable are among the 2 out of 11 who prefer to avoid the overwhelmingly accepted name. IMO that objective fact strongly suggests an effort to create confusion and increase the award's apparent significance, via deception about how significant it is generally considered. Can such a thing work? Well, "Fortunately Dr. José Antonio Abreu has just got the Nobel prize for his notable achievement" (a false assertion in an essay, by an international professional musician from the Abreu program, on a substantial-looking site for a theatrical film) seems to be a case of such confusion and exaggeration. And (tho I've known some very principled people to send their children to Steiner schools), the core emphasis on producing natural-science-like certainty about a "spiritual world" heightens my sense of the "Alternative Nobel Prize" term being part of a willingness to lie "for the greater glory of" some god-talk. --Jerzy•t 05:54, 29 & 03:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC) ( supplying forgotten ext lk)
 * 121K hits on "Right Livelihood Award" -"Alternative Nobel Prize"
 * 20K hits on "Alternative Nobel Prize" -"Right Livelihood Award"
 * 30K hits on "Alternative Nobel Prize" "Right Livelihood Award"
 * 70% don't use the Nobel ref
 * 60% of those who use the Nobel ref omit the predominant name, and account for 18% of articles mentioning either or both.
 * Jerzy's suggestion for the minor change to "Sometimes called" better reflects usage, and should be implemented. Now, what please is the back-story with "anthroposophy" and "Steiner"? There's a conversation above on the issue but nothing in the article explaining it. Is it significant? --Old Moonraker 07:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * By implementing my own suggestion, i pretty much finished a very long suite of edits on this and José Antonio Abreu and El Sistema, about 5 minutes before you finished your comment. Rudolf Steiner and Anthroposophy both have articles, which i haven't read beyond the phrases i cribbed in my first sentence of my last graph (above) in my 05:54 edit. I don't know what the basis is for asserting that ANP is connected to them, and i hope i didn't imply more than my working assumption that those who asserted the connection have something that looks like evidence. --Jerzy•t 03:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Old Moonraker 07:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

 * There is no institutional connection whatsoever between the Right Livelihood Award and the anthroposophical movement; however, as stated above, in one particular year several anthroposophical organizations and individuals received the award on the basis of their public service work. Hgilbert 17:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Outdent] Thanks, again. --Old Moonraker 18:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Article title
Article titles states: "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it instead uses the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources."

This prize is most frequently referred to as the Alternative Nobel Prize in English-language reliable sources.

For example:

Google News Archive:

 * 2,850 results for "alternative nobel prize"
 * 2,010 results for "right livelihood award"

A standard Google web search:
 * 904 000 results for "alternative nobel prize"
 * 368 000 results for "right livelihood award"

Der Spiegel and the BBC state that the prize is "widely known as the Alternative Nobel Prize". The prize is described as "commonly known as the "alternative Nobel prize" in the The Guardian. The IANS describes it as "widely known as the Alternative Nobel Prize". The Globe and Mail describes the prize as "known as the alternative Nobel Prize". The Toronto Star describes the prize as "more commonly known as the alternative Nobel Prize". The Jerusalem Post describes the prize as "known popularly as the Alternative Nobel Prize". The Canadian Encyclopedia describes the prize as "known as the 'Alternative Nobel Prize'".

I also note that the prize is titled Alternative Nobel Prize in the French and other Wikipedia editions.

Per Wikipedia:Article titles, I'm moving this article to its common English name. Kjellgno (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

 * I strongly disagree with that move and consider it a very bad idea. The "alternative Nobel prize" is NOT the common name of this award. There is actually a reason why English news media use this name mostly in quotation marks. The whole thing is not much more than a marketing coup of the RLA foundation. They like to call themselves "alternative Nobel Prize" (in quotation marks), use it in press releases, and so it ends up in the media (in quotation marks). The only media that really go for that are the German media (actually the only ones really paying attention to the RLA), which explains why Der Spiegel does it without quotation mark. It may be commendable that this foundation gives out such a prize. But it is a prize which draws little international attention (except for Germany) and tries to make itself bigger than it is. This prize never had what it takes to be a Nobel Prize. Von Uexküll had only 1 million dollar when he started the prize, which would have required a 20% interest rate to hand out a Nobel Prize ever year. It is simply not true that the proposal only failed because of the Economics Prize debate. Even if the Nobel Foundation had been willing, there would have never been enough money to add a new prize. --Hansbaer (talk) 05:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The sources cited above demonstrate that Alternative Nobel Prize is the common English name of the award. Kjellgno (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Four years ago a very similar identical discussion took place just one chapter above this one. The same arguments were used. Now you come four years later and make the move without any discussion. You gave other users exactly 2 minutes to give their opinion on your decision! Sorry to say that, but this is pretty bad style. You could have at least waited for some discussion to take place. And, by the way, the word "necessarily" leaves room for interpretation. The press sources are in most cases based on the press releases of the RLA which in turn use the ANP wording in quotation marks. I'll stipulate that this marketing activity has been successful, but I still disagree with the whole style changes of the article which have been introduced lately. The whole thing has become too much a comparison with the real Nobel Prize. Besides the introduction of this more or less self-chosen name the RLA has virtually no parallels with the Nobel Prize. To compare it even to the Economics Prize is ludicrous. --Hansbaer (talk) 21:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The discussion above is ludicrous, both because it mostly focuses on some false idea that the prize is somehow part of the Waldorf movement and some absurd speedy deletion proposal (it's one of the world's best known prizes with articles in 27 Wikipedia editions). Also, the discussion does not cite sources to any significant extent and is not based on policy (such as the policy on article titles), and in any event, such an old discussion is of limited relevance today. If Alternative Nobel Prize is the most widely used name as multiple sources state, then there is really only one acceptable solution per naming policy (Article titles) and hence not really need for further discussion, unless someone come up with arguments based on sources and policy that contradict this -- in that case, I would be happy to agree to move the article to whatever name is most widely used. The article was moved right away because the evidence for the current title being the common English name was very strong, and I've not seen any sources contradicting this in this discussion either. How the prize became most widely known under the name it's most widely known, is not really interesting in this regard (again, see Article titles), even if it was the result of "marketing", it wouldn't change the fact that it is the most common English name, to be used as article title per Wikipedia:Article titles#Common_names. As far as I'm aware, however, the name was initially adopted by the press in the 1980s. Kjellgno (talk) 08:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, the discussion above makes one important point: it is not necessarily sufficient to simply make the Google searches. Your results do not reflect to which extent the two names are used alongside, and it is not sure that the term "alternative nobel prize" does always mean the RLA. To move an article is a big step and should have been done after a discussion not before one. Anyway, as I said I'll stipulate that the introduction of the name - by whose force is open for interpretation - has been quite successful. The few journalists that actually attend press conferences of the RLA spread it effectively. Nobody has ever dug further into the real background of the whole thing, and so we have to take the word of the RLA foundation about the origins of the name. As I mentioned before, my objections are now first and foremost on the article's content. If we base the entire article on sources which come directly or indirectly from the RLA itself - and that is most certainly the case with agency-based press articles - we follow the RLA foundation's interests, as noble as they may be. The article shouldn't be a RLA self-presentation and certainly not a comparison with a prize which it aspires to match but has otherwise nothing to do with. --Hansbaer (talk) 08:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose the move and calling for a RV. The article specifically lists the organisation's differences from the Nobel. Some of Hansbaer's points are new to me, but I find them very persuasive. --Old Moonraker (talk) 07:10, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The "organisation's" differences from "the Nobel" (foundation? prize? Alfred himself?) are irrelevant for the article title. The only thing that's relevant for the article title is what is the common name in English, per Article_titles, not whether it's "official" and not whether you think it's "correct". For example, the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences is titled "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, which is not the official name of the award, nor is it a Nobel Prize, and which is a very "incorrect" title indeed. Kjellgno (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not entirely true. If the common name of the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel would be the article title in that case, it would be Nobel Prize in Economics, because that's the overwhelmingly used name. Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is simply a shortened version of the name, not an alternative name for it. Furthermore, a considerable share (if not the majority) of the sources which use the ANP as name do it in quotation marks, which indicates that they are not really comfortable using it as it is not the "real" name of the prize. The Economics Prize however is frequently called Nobel Prize in Economics without any distinction to the real Nobel Prizes. --Hansbaer (talk) 11:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * As having been to most of the major press events in connection to prizes in Stockholm, I also strongly oppose the move of the article. Even though media persistantly calles it a Nobel price, it is far away from it. It is not even presented by the king or any other member of the royal family, which all big prices in Sweden are [Crafoord, Göran Gustavsson, Astrid Lindgren ('Children's Nobel prize'), Polar music prize ('Music Nobel Prize') etc.]. --Prolineserver (talk) 09:57, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * "it is far away from it" -- That appears to be just your opinion, i.e. not supported by any sources and not even relevant to the discussion on the article title, which should be based on what reliable sources say is the common English name. If the media "persistantly calles it a Nobel price" (actually, they call it the Alternative Nobel Prize, not a Nobel prize as such), then that's the title we need to use. What's relevant is sources and the naming policy, i.e. Article titles. The sources, for instance the Toronto Star, say that the award is "more commonly known as the alternative Nobel Prize". Whether the prize is presented by Carl Gustaf has nothing to do with the article title either; actually, I would imagine the RLA foundation would not want to be associated with Carl Gustaf, in light of the nature of the award. Kjellgno (talk) 12:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Article titles suggests a search in scholarly sources. The vast majority of these name the award "Right Livelihood Award"; some but by no means all then add that it is also, or better, known as the Alternative Nobel Prize. The fact that they name RLA first implies to me that it is the primary name of reference. Still, the fact that many quality sources do say the award is better known as the ANP gives a level of support that cannot be ignored to using this as the title.
 * In the end, since both names appear to be used, I don't think it matters much which is chosen as a title; it may be a case to flip a coin. Either way, the first line should mention that the award is also known as...hgilbert (talk) 18:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Which scholarly sources do you mean? I'll admit it is a borderline case, but it has to be taken into consideration that the name is to significant parts manufactured and that it is in a large part of cases used in a non-distancing manner, i.e. without quotation marks. If its really flip a coin, than the actual name should count.--10:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hansbaer (talk • contribs)

 * Wikipedia:Article titles does not support the notion that names are disqualified if they are "manufactured" (most names could probably be said to be "manufactured"), and I've not seen any sources supporting the claim that the popular name of the award is "manufactured" either. I think the current solution is a sensible compromise that gives both names the prominence they deserve, mentioning the official name before the popular one in the main text and infobox, while using the popular name as title. Kjellgno (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

 * That's not what I meant - I'm aware that the origin of the name is not relevant. The name is used in many cases side by side to the official one, and if it is really flip a coin as Hgilbert stated, then the official name should count more than the PR name. --Hansbaer (talk) 13:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The arguments for moving this award from its actual name to something it is sometimes called are not convincing. "Alternative Nobel" is something for headline writers and popular press, not exactly the WP:RS that we need. "Alternative Nobel Prize" is a suitable redirect rather than a suitable article name in an encyclopedia for this article. The POV-ish character of the "Nobel" name is also rather obvious (wish to "tag on" something more famous...), and I note that the move was made by something of a WP:SPA with few edits. Tomas e (talk) 00:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I also oppose changing the title to "Alternative Nobel Prize". The phrase is not unique. Other prizes that sometimes are called "Alternative Nobel Prize" are "Ig Nobel Prize", "Confucius Peace Prize" and "America Award in Literature". David A se (talk) 15:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

 * I Oppose for similar reasons. No doubt the prize owners or fans want to magnify its importance, but it has no connection to the Nobel prizes - please don't mislead readers. I would also point out that many google hits for "Alternative Nobel" actually discuss other prizes, not this one, so the WP:COMMON argument fails too. bobrayner (talk) 19:13, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I saw this on my watchlist due to David A se's edit, but it looks like this thread is much older. I should have noticed that before. Sorry. My opposition still stands. bobrayner (talk) 19:15, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

 * There's absolutely no way the article should be moved to "Alternative Nobel Prize". That's not what it's called. It does have an actual name. Having a redirect, as we do, may possibly be appropriate, but I'm not even sure about that. Bishonen | talk 15:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC).

Edward Snowden in the lead
Snowden is one of the most widely known Right Livelihood laureates, as well as one of the most recent. I don't understand why User:Bobrayner removed him from the list in the lead. The edit summary ("meh") doesn't explain it very clearly. I've restored him. Bishonen | talk 15:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC).

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Right Livelihood Award. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110811061052/http://www.rightlivelihood.org/award.html to http://www.rightlivelihood.org/award.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140303235727/http://www.government.se/sb/d/17191/a/225032 to http://www.government.se/sb/d/17191/a/225032
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620110022/http://rightlivelihood.org/history.html to http://www.rightlivelihood.org/history.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080110104454/http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/11/08/fea01.asp to http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/11/08/fea01.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:57, 5 December 2017 (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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:52, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Ivan Velasquez Gomez Portrait.jpg

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Logo of International Memorial.svg

Use of flags
SOS Méditerranée is one of the 2023 laureates - at the moment I've added the European flag as the organisation is described as being European on its own Wikipedia page - but wondering if this is best practice, or if I should replace the Europe flag with the flags of France, Italy, Germany and Switzerland, where its headquarters are located? Marluliaq (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Belaboring the issue.
I took the liberty of adding clarity - several sentences repeated the NP connection - OR not - I left this as an NPOV article but repeating the same thing in a different way - seemed to add no apparent value - the point was made in the first statement about the subject. BeingObjective (talk) 05:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Right Livelihood Award