Andries wrote passionately and eloquently about the difficulties of writing a Wikipedia article about a controversial New Religious Movement (or "NRM", as sociologists like to say).

The chief problem he mentions is "satisfying the ex-followers" who regard the group founder as a charlatan.

I have also tried several times to intervene or mediate between pro-Rawat and anti-Rawat contributors, but I guess the article keeps getting locked due to edit wars.

I can only suggest that we continue to try coaching the contributors in the skill of "writing for the enemy". That is, ensuring that the article as a whole, as well as each paragraph and sentence, is organized and worded so that ANYONE, no matter how sharply polarized their opinion, will agree that the article is accurate.

I wish the [[Sun Myung Moon]] and [[Unification Church]] articles could be models for this. I have worked hard over the past 2 or 3 years to ensure that they always kept a balance between "raving loony support" and "rabidly adamant denunciation". The mainstay of my strategy has been to EDIT SLOWLY.

When someone trashes the article (as I conceive it), I avoid wholesale reversion -- because I am an interested party. Instead, I discuss (most) changes on the talk page and (usually) make one small change at a time. I avoid buzz-words in edit summaries like 'NPOVing the text' in favor of specifics, like "attributing claim of divinity to his right-hand man Bo Hi Pak" or "attributing claim of corruption to Congressman Donald Fraser".

Sometimes it can help to mention the controversy in the introduction to the article. Like:

* Prem Rawat was called "the perfect spiritual master" by his followers in the 1970s, who gave him the title Guru Maharaj Ji (or Maharaji). Ex-followers criticize him vehemently as a charlatan who has misled thousands of people with [[cult]] propaganda and complain bitterly that many people, deluded by his claims about saving mankind, wasted many years of their lives."

Please don't give up! I know it's hard and frustrating, but it really is possible to bring peace to a war-torn article. A prime example is the [[Chilean coup of 1970]]. No action by the Arbitration Committee was needed to settle that, and it's been stable for the last 2 months!

Let's keep at it, buddy!!

Ed Poor