Wikieditindia
Welcome!
edit
Welcome to Wikipedia, Wikieditindia! Thank you for your contributions. I am WereSpielChequers and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- How to write a great article
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
ϢereSpielChequers 10:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for the Welcome and the tips WSC. :) Wikieditindia (talk) 03:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Your recent CSD A7 tagging
editHello!
Your recent CSD A7 tagging on many articles related to biographies of Indian actors are being reverted by me as mostly all of them seem to be notale enough to stay. If your views contradict, please raise a AfD for them.
Also it seems that you are new to Wikipedia as editor and would hence suggest you to make constructive contributions. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 08:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Animesh,
Before reverting my edits I would urge you to see that they really require a biography in Wikipedia, an encyclopedia. For this I want you to prove the notablity of the subjects. That means significant coverage in reliable secondary sources or multiple coverage in reliable sources. That's what I get from WP:BIO. Most of the articles do not meet those. At best some passing mentions about their role in IMDB is the source for those articles. Correct me if I am wrong.
So the point is, I do not think an actor acting in multiple roles as notable enough to require a biography. That would be pursuing their profession much like a surgeon doing multiple surgeries or an advocate appearing for his clients. In the instances I urge you to provide WP:RS with substantial coverage how an actor is notable in his/her chosen field. Simply, being an actor( even in multiple films/serials) does not award notability.
I agree partially on the case of Sachet Engineer as he is discussed in some detail by the nxg/hindu website, mainly about his notability as a swimmer.So I will not revert your edit on that. But others which are pointing to imdb website will be reverted unless you provide the source for it.Regarding imdb website, I find no consensus on previous discussions, but generally editors agree that it(alone) may not be used to substantiate notability.
I would thank your suggestion as to be constructive, but alas, you yourself are not letting me here.:). BTW being constructive, may also mean adhering to WP:NOT and WP:CIVIL and helping to maintain the credibility of WP. Or did you mean any type of deletion is non-constructive? I don't think many editors will think that way. Wikieditindia (talk) 08:26, 23 February 2012 (UTC)- I have struck down the portions of revert as the issue of notability is contested by you (I think that it is not proper for CSD:A7, though I have not read anywhere such guideline.) So I will create AfD for those, but I urge you to reflect on the points I have raised. Or is it better to take it to WP:INB for discussion?? Because I see plenty of BLPs of non-notable persons from the Indian film/serial field. I am in not in any mood to not to AfD articles but as you are the only editor reverting all the CSD tags put by me, I think a consensus first may be tried here. Wikieditindia (talk) 08:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)The CSD tags are evaluated by administrators and decided upon whether to delete or not. And there is flaw there. Many admins dont even know anything about the subject but simply believe that the tag is right and without any search just delete this. Now what happens if an article is deleted? Cant we recreat it sometime? Ofcourse we can. But whats the point in going to square one again and again. I havent reverted all your tags. Thats because i lack knowledge about those subject. But i have reverted mostly all because your intentions werent helpful. A CSD-tag-per-minute does not show much of search gone on the subject. (Sorry if it hurts.) Arya Babbar was nominated for 2 prestigious awards. Notability sufficient. All Chak De Girls won Star Screen Award for Best Supporting Actress. Sagarika Ghatge was one of them. Plue she also has a mention of anothor non-cited award. Speedy deletion for Aashish Chaudhary really?!? On Sachet Engineer now you yourself agree. And your are welcome to help wikipedia by cleaning. But cleaning doesnt mean deleting alone. Pick one of these subjects and try and find more about them. I have come across few editors who are always ready to delete stuff as it is not sourced. But they do not try to see for sources. Your mass CSD tagging is the best example. And by constructive i meant the dictionary meaning "Constructing or tending to construct or improve or promote development". -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thats impractical for me alone to prove notability of 20-30 Bios for a Speedy Deletion tag. Tagging them is easy as you did it. AfDs sounds better as it gives time for me as well as others to prove notability. Mass disucussion on some forum is also ok with me. But speedy deletion, NO! -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I think you clarified on why you reverted CSD tags. So I am creating Afds for them. Even I dont think getting nominated for some award alone will make an actor notable. Regarding Sachet Engineer the article has in its lead more importance to being an actor, which is not properly sourced. And yes, it is better to discuss in AfD. :) And regarding the word constructive, I thought you had taken me for 'non-constructive' because I was apparently doing something non- "Constructing or tending to construct or improve or promote development' and I tried to clarify how I am constructive in suggesting deletions.Wikieditindia (talk) 09:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Aa.... I really do consider your this work as non-constructive; infact destructive. I though you got that the first time itself. Didnt wanna be so specific. But also dont want you to have wrong impression. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 11:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think I have erred in using the CSD for some articles that were poorly sourced. But I was not aware of the fact that administrators may immediately delete such tagged pages. Even if I knew,I might have thought they will do a good review while keeping the tag for couple of days. Let me be clear, I am not being destructive by nominating AfDs. Its only that I think we need better quality control here in WP particularly regarding BLPs. As I have noted in my User page, I could see biographies here in WP for anyone and everyone. So the matter between you and I is basically of perception of notability. Also, I keep in mind WP to be something equivalent of perhaps Britannica or Encarta. Think how many of these articles will feature in Britannica, OK even in an Indian Britannica?? So for me, most of the non-notable (as to absence of RS coverage on article reference) is some kind of promotion. And search google, most of these subjects are having only one reliable platform. WP. Nobody is questioning their right to exist in the inter-web but why WP? Start a blog, get into imdb, there are thousands of options. So that make we good. Alrt? Meanwhile I will try to tag pages for notability and will move them to Afd after a while. Yes, you can contest and I am more than happy to see the article in turn getting improved to meet the standards. So, I think you will not have to call me destructive anymore. Regards Wikieditindia (talk) 14:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well there is no such guarantee that the page will instantly be deleted. Because the admins do have to check if the tagging is appropriate or not. But i have seen few admins delete the pages on which discussions though seemingly dead is actually not dead but just slow going. After 7 days or so, they just care little about what we are talking. No! You are not destructive by Afding the article. Thats why i prefer these AfDs even more than PRODs. Because it is then that other editors who have not even contributed to that article get to speak about it. And as to comparision between other encyclopedias you should not forget that WP is ever growing unlike those. So at a certain point the articles' content as well as the articles over here are bound to cross the limit setup by others. But that should not be a reason for considering these articles as unworthy. You are welcome to tag articles for notability as well as AfD. I will surely try and improve these articles. But i would also request you to help on the actual content of the article and not just tagging them. We would be helped more that way. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think I have erred in using the CSD for some articles that were poorly sourced. But I was not aware of the fact that administrators may immediately delete such tagged pages. Even if I knew,I might have thought they will do a good review while keeping the tag for couple of days. Let me be clear, I am not being destructive by nominating AfDs. Its only that I think we need better quality control here in WP particularly regarding BLPs. As I have noted in my User page, I could see biographies here in WP for anyone and everyone. So the matter between you and I is basically of perception of notability. Also, I keep in mind WP to be something equivalent of perhaps Britannica or Encarta. Think how many of these articles will feature in Britannica, OK even in an Indian Britannica?? So for me, most of the non-notable (as to absence of RS coverage on article reference) is some kind of promotion. And search google, most of these subjects are having only one reliable platform. WP. Nobody is questioning their right to exist in the inter-web but why WP? Start a blog, get into imdb, there are thousands of options. So that make we good. Alrt? Meanwhile I will try to tag pages for notability and will move them to Afd after a while. Yes, you can contest and I am more than happy to see the article in turn getting improved to meet the standards. So, I think you will not have to call me destructive anymore. Regards Wikieditindia (talk) 14:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Aa.... I really do consider your this work as non-constructive; infact destructive. I though you got that the first time itself. Didnt wanna be so specific. But also dont want you to have wrong impression. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 11:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I think you clarified on why you reverted CSD tags. So I am creating Afds for them. Even I dont think getting nominated for some award alone will make an actor notable. Regarding Sachet Engineer the article has in its lead more importance to being an actor, which is not properly sourced. And yes, it is better to discuss in AfD. :) And regarding the word constructive, I thought you had taken me for 'non-constructive' because I was apparently doing something non- "Constructing or tending to construct or improve or promote development' and I tried to clarify how I am constructive in suggesting deletions.Wikieditindia (talk) 09:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thats impractical for me alone to prove notability of 20-30 Bios for a Speedy Deletion tag. Tagging them is easy as you did it. AfDs sounds better as it gives time for me as well as others to prove notability. Mass disucussion on some forum is also ok with me. But speedy deletion, NO! -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)The CSD tags are evaluated by administrators and decided upon whether to delete or not. And there is flaw there. Many admins dont even know anything about the subject but simply believe that the tag is right and without any search just delete this. Now what happens if an article is deleted? Cant we recreat it sometime? Ofcourse we can. But whats the point in going to square one again and again. I havent reverted all your tags. Thats because i lack knowledge about those subject. But i have reverted mostly all because your intentions werent helpful. A CSD-tag-per-minute does not show much of search gone on the subject. (Sorry if it hurts.) Arya Babbar was nominated for 2 prestigious awards. Notability sufficient. All Chak De Girls won Star Screen Award for Best Supporting Actress. Sagarika Ghatge was one of them. Plue she also has a mention of anothor non-cited award. Speedy deletion for Aashish Chaudhary really?!? On Sachet Engineer now you yourself agree. And your are welcome to help wikipedia by cleaning. But cleaning doesnt mean deleting alone. Pick one of these subjects and try and find more about them. I have come across few editors who are always ready to delete stuff as it is not sourced. But they do not try to see for sources. Your mass CSD tagging is the best example. And by constructive i meant the dictionary meaning "Constructing or tending to construct or improve or promote development". -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- I have struck down the portions of revert as the issue of notability is contested by you (I think that it is not proper for CSD:A7, though I have not read anywhere such guideline.) So I will create AfD for those, but I urge you to reflect on the points I have raised. Or is it better to take it to WP:INB for discussion?? Because I see plenty of BLPs of non-notable persons from the Indian film/serial field. I am in not in any mood to not to AfD articles but as you are the only editor reverting all the CSD tags put by me, I think a consensus first may be tried here. Wikieditindia (talk) 08:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Your recent edits
edit
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Your recent deletion nominations
editHello Wikieditindia. Have you noticed the reactions of other editors to your today's deletion nominations? I believe your intentions are good, but please bear in mind that Wikipedia is a work in progress, many articles are imperfect and it doesn't necessarily mean they should be deleted. Please, before you nominate any articles for deletion, read WP:BEFORE, WP:CSD and the basic notability guidelines. Also, always consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted. Thanks for your understanding. Don't hesitate to ask me if you have any questions. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:47, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Want to echo Vejvančický's comments. Consider this - if a biography is already a few years old here and you think the subject is non-notable, just nominate it for deletion, don't try to speedy it. You've made some bad ones.--Milowent • hasspoken 16:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Right, no speedies! Sorry if I was apparently destructive. I have commented above about my intentions :) Wikieditindia (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think you understand the wiki process. :) --- Jayanta Nath (Talk|Contrb) 16:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Sajith Raj
editHello Wikieditindia. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sajith Raj, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 already declined - getting good reviews is an assertion of importance. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 18:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest
editHello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.
As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.
If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.
You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.
ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)
Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. The Helpful Bot 01:45, 12 March 2012 (UTC)