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

re The WJV examples :

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

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

---

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

---

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

1. The claim that the top ten hits are there is no longer true, because you've removed sannyas.net. That site is NOT offline. It is still there. Did Mitra ask you to remove this ref? The point is to show how alike all these supposed independent sites are.

2. The claim that numbers represent g**gle page ranks is also now not true, they have been moved out of order.

3. Now that the order has been changed, internal refs to # this or that are now wrong, eg "#1, osho.com, is of course the "official" site, ie emanating from the office of the org that runs HQ, Osho's former Commune. So, #1 is completely a copy-paste, with one word removed for continuity purposes." The old number one that was a copy-paste of the official org (now #1) is now #3, oshonews.com.

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