User talk:Beccaynr/Archives/2021/April

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Your guidance for a user

Hi friend, have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aamir Peerzada. Plese dont vote there as others may misinterpret it as canvassing. I dont want to have another headache again! This userJammumylove seems to have taken things personal against me because I always stood oppose against them and had rescued 3 or 4 articles which they nominated for deletion. As an uninvolved user, I request you to give some guidance to them regarding out notability guidelines. Because things are out of my hand. When I try help them, they seems to have took it personal. Also tell them that despite both of us had different opinions in several AFD's, we always share that mutual respect and friendship. Hope you will do this soon. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 06:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kichu, I needed to sleep first, so apologies for the delay :). And I have a few thoughts. First, they appear to be fairly new, so it looks like WP:BITE applies, including, Remember, this is a place where anyone may edit and therefore it is each person's responsibility to edit and complement, rather than to criticize or supervise others. In AfD discussions, based on my experience, I think it can be helpful to keep the focus on the article, sources, guidelines, and policies, because I think discussion aimed at an editor, per WP:AVOIDYOU, may be taken personally (perhaps even more so by newer editors), even when it is not intended to be personal criticism, and it can distract from discussion about the article. Per WP:CIVIL, Even if you see the comment as ridiculous, he or she very probably doesn't, and expressing ridicule is likely only to offend and antagonise, rather than help.

With regard to the notability guidelines, I think AfD is a forum that allows for learning by experience, and the example you link above seems like a good one - an editor can make their good faith interpretation, that they may have developed on their own or seen someone else use where it appeared to have been helpful in a discussion, and it may take time for them to see it not work and to adjust their interpretation. Before then, I think they are entitled to try, even though we may agree it does not support their !vote or nom. If it seems to become an ongoing disruption at AfD, there are other forums available to address that concern, but in the meantime, I believe the guidelines are open to good faith interpretation, and ultimately subject to WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS.

As to your concern that they may be taking your opinions personally, there are templates available at the Kindness Campaign that you may want to consider using on their Talk page to express your feelings of mutual respect and friendship. I feel that kind of message would be better coming directly from you than from me. Beccaynr (talk) 17:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Beccaynr/Elsa D'Silva

Userfied per requestSpartaz ^Humbug! 09:36, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Mahrukh Inayet for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mahrukh Inayet, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahrukh Inayet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Anubrato Mandol

Hi, I'm TTP1233, this page creator, could you please check this article and assure me how much percentage is there for passing this article as it has significant press coverage. And I added some book resources as well. Please tell me of there is any wrong.TTP1233 (talk) 06:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, TTP1233, I plan to review the article more and offer more feedback, but it will take me some time to review the sources. In the meantime, I moved the Personal life section, and moved some information from the Personal life section into the Career section. If there is information about Mandol's early life and education available in the sources, I think it would be helpful if this information was added to the article. An example of how an Early life and education section could look is in the Divya S. Iyer article (which I am still working on, because there is more to add in the Career section). Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi TTP1233, as a follow up, my starting point for assessing sources to support WP:NPOL notability is the footnote after Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage, which includes, A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. The WP:NPOL guideline also states, Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. I have not yet reviewed all of the sources, but I wanted to provide my opinion about WP:NPOL and WP:GNG so far - overall, I think more information can be added from the sources already in the article to build more encyclopedic content, and it looks like more research would help develop the article.

Source review

In the Handbook of Internal Migration in India, edited by S. Irudaya Rajan, Sumeetha M., it appears that Mandol is discussed on two pages of the book, so this would not support WP:NPOL notability, but it might support WP:BASIC notability, because that guideline includes, If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability.
Y I was able to find an archive link for the News18 article, Meet Anubrata Mondal, Didi’s Trusted ‘Keshto’ Who Gave Sleepless Nights to BJP's Babul Supriyo & SS Ahluwalia, which needs updating in the citation, but it is focused on him and supports the biographical information in the article about his popular name ‘Keshtoda,’ as well as his reputation, and some information about his family - I think this is 'in-depth' reporting that can help support WP:NPOL and WP:BASIC notability for the article.
By contrast, the article from The Statesman, Anubrata Mandal at it again, declares candidate without confirmation from TMC appears to be routine coverage, and does not appear to have the kind of context and background information that would help make it in-depth coverage.
In the book, One vs All: Beware Mr. Prime Minister, It’s India Impossible!, there is a brief mention of Mondal and his political influence, but I do not have access to the entire book to better determine the context; at best, it may help support WP:BASIC notability, because it does not appear to be in-depth coverage.
This source: HC slams govt for Anubrata inaction suggests that a subsection can likely be developed in the Career section of the article, with additional sources, preferably not from the Times of India, per WP:TOI. There are a variety of news sources, including The Quint, LiveLaw, The Indian Express, The Hindustan Times, and even Scroll.in, that in my experience, routinely report on legal proceedings in a comprehensive and neutral manner, and could be used to develop a section of the article on this topic, because I expect there is significant press coverage about it.
Y For The importance of being Anubrata Mondal by The Hindu, this article is focused on Mondal, and similar to the News18, is a feature article on him, although it has less biographical information. I think it helps support notability per WP:NPOL and WP:BASIC.
I am not able to access the book 'The Bengal Conundrum : The Rise of the BJP and the Future of the TMC,' but this might support WP:BASIC notability, depending on the amount and depth of coverage.
I think the article Mamata defends murder-accused leader Anubrata Mandal is a good example of why it is better to not rely on the Times of India, because of how some of the legal issues are described - it appears that some allegations are described as facts, and that raises a concern about biased reporting. Even though this article is focused on Mandol, I do not think it will help support WP:NPOL or WP:BASIC due to reliability concerns.
By contrast, the Hindustan Times uses more neutral language in describing Mandol's actions, in BJP supporters, cops clash in Bengal town during Hanuman Jayanti rally. This article is not focused on Mondal, so I do not think it will help support WP:NPOL notability, but it is more than a trivial mention because it includes some background context, so I think it will help support WP:BASIC notability.
This Telegraph article, Anubrata gets security boost is focused on Mondal, but it does not provide much context and it reads like routine news coverage, so it does not appear to be very helpful for WP:NPOL, and it may only provide slight support for WP:BASIC notability.
Y This Indian Express article, Birbhum’s strongman — Anubrata Mondal explains why he talks of bombs and candy, includes reports on allegations in a neutral manner, and focuses on Mondal, so it seems at least somewhat helpful for WP:NPOL and WP:BASIC notability. The interview part is a primary source, and per WP:BASIC, Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject.

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 03:21, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Sir could you please explain the comment you did on this draft. I didn't understand. Some neutrality source is there, and there is no TOI resources.TTP1233 (talk) 11:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi TTP1233, I added another comment at the draft to explain my opinion more. I think biographies of living persons are challenging to write, especially for controversial figures. Beccaynr (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

I have removed all controversies part and TOI resources and expand carrer part, his personal life has no details. TTP1233 (talk) 07:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Jassa Dhillon

Hey beccaynr, this Draft:Jassa Dhillon seems good. The subject has enough sigcov snd passes GNG. But it reads like CV. I would have improved, but Im so exhausted now and has currently stopped content creation for now. I may quit the job tomorrow and will be back as before. For the time being, can you give a try here.? Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:00, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kichu, I tried, but I'm not sure how much help I have been able to provide. I was not able to find much to add to the article. But I hope you are able to rest and recharge soon! Beccaynr (talk) 04:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Divya Gokulnath list of awards

Please follow WP:LOW, which says that lists of works should be in chronological order. Awards should be the same when they aren't on a separate article with its own sectioning. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi AngusWOOF, I was just writing you a note on the article talk page, so let's continue the discussion there. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 01:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Friend

Collapse per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix man

Hello friend! Hope you are doing great. I've created a draft on Draft:Deepinder Goyal., who is the founder and CEO of Zomato. Can you please have a look? Some problems are pointed by the reviewer. Actually, I don't understand that.

Thank you YogeshWarah^Talk 07:45, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yogeshwarah, I will plan on reviewing the article later today. Cheers, Beccaynr (talk) 18:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I want to tell you something

Brianna knickerbocker Are you sure the year of birth is not correct? According to voice123 it is always true.

https://voice123.com/vodb/briannaknickerbocker

Actually, if you look, he was born in 2001 and not in 1994. birthplace Los Angeles, California, Look again if you are sure — Preceding unsigned comment added by NovaPlaycer (talk • contribs) 21:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

NovaPlaycer, the Voice123 Terms of Service and Disclaimer states, Voice123, Inc. assumes no responsibility and in no way make any representations, warranties, or covenants as to the accuracy of the information contained on the Site, in any of the pages or emails published in relation with Voice123, Inc., or with respect to any talent services. Not all Voice123, Inc. Voice Actor profiles are created directly by the talent professional, some of which are acting as agents or managers for the talent. You are responsible for conducting your own investigation into the talent, including regarding any and all claims made by prospective talents, agents, or clients, so from my view, the website is saying it is not always true and other sources are always required to verify the information posted on the website. Voice123 specifically states it is not a reliable source, so it cannot be used per Wikipedia policy. Also, as noted in one of the edit summaries, Knickerbocker is obviously not 19 years old, and a review of her verified career seems to support that conclusion. And in a 2018 interview, she says she is "originally from Pittsburgh." I hope this helps better explain why I removed the information and source. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 23:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Tara Downs

On 13 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tara Downs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tara Downs co-founded the Tomorrow Gallery in a converted paintball studio in Toronto? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tara Downs. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tara Downs), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Help prepare Draft:Ranveer Allahbadia

@Beccaynr, I want to make Ranveer Allahbadia, but do not understand how to start. Please help me make it. I have found some sources which will help in making. 223.238.214.14 (talk) 08:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

You can start here: Help:Getting started, thank you. Beccaynr (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited G. Dhananjayan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anjaan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

One more help

Hi dear Beccaynr. See this discussion [1] and this Draft:Maharani Jaiwanta Bai. I think this is passing GNG. But I have some doubts regarding the reliability of sources. Can you help me in analysing the sources so that I can double check on it. I hope I am not disturbing you:) Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 12:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kichu, I am always happy to review your referrals when I can, and I reviewed this article but got delayed before I could write my reply to you. I removed unreliable sources and noted this in the edit summaries, and it took me some time to figure out how to address a copyvio concern for the image in the infobox. I did not remove a possibly self-published source, but I think this issue needs further attention. In my own initial research, I have not been able to find much about her, but it may be that offline sources and historical texts are needed. Beccaynr (talk) 18:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

What is your opinion about this [2] Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 00:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kichu, I have made a few edits on the article to trim information and sources that did not appear to be directly related to the subject, and a source I determined to be unreliable, and I am still researching, but in the meantime, I was reminded of User:Vincentvikram's developing essay on Contextualization after I found this: "In a span of 25 years of Manipuri cinema up to April 1997, Manipur produced only 28 feature films." However, this source does not name the subject or his films, and instead lists other people as "the torch bearers of Manipuri Cinema." My concern is that it could be impermissible WP:SYNTHESIS to use this source to imply a conclusion about notability that is not made by the source, even though it otherwise seems remarkable that he made some of the few films during this time period. I plan to continue to research to see if there is more that can be found, but it has been challenging. Beccaynr (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Thats what Im also saying. I was not able to find any reliable source which even make a mention about the subject. I dont think the subject would become notable in the near future. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 14:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kichu, apologies for my delayed reply - I tried one more time to find sources, and besides The Hindu article already in the article, the e-pao website mentions The Sangai Express for an article about his book ("Book released Source: The Sangai Express. Imphal, October 11 2018") and about his award ("This news was published at The Sangai Express on February 08th 2021"), but I was not able to find them. Beccaynr (talk) 23:26, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

You should be a member at AFC

Hey Beccaynr. You have plenty of knowledge about our notability guidelines and has good experience at several AFD's. So Wikiproject AFC needs users like you as the reviewers. It really does! I was wondering why you are still not applying for the membership. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 03:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kichu, thank you for saying so, and I actually started participating in AFD because I was interested in becoming an AFC reviewer and read somewhere that AFD is a good way to gain experience. While I have some things coming up over the next week or two that may keep me from starting the process, I will look into it more, and thank you for the encouragement! Beccaynr (talk) 05:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Julie Nolke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KQED.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Continuing our discussion here

Your comments :The sources in the article and sources that are not in the article but are listed in the 'Press & Media' section of her blog, it appears that she has WP:BASIC notability as a 'blogger-turned-writer,' due to the amount of coverage in multiple independent and reliable sources, and it is this 2016/updated in 2017 article in The Hindu that seems to truly help weigh in favor of her notability, because it is in-depth, focused on her, and helps show the coverage has been sustained over time. Because notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY, it seems that even though the article is small, it could be enough to justify keeping, although it would be helpful to incorporate more sources, including the ones referenced on her blog. One of my challenges as a researcher is that I do not have easy access to non-English sources, so I am not able to conduct a full search of articles that may exist. So overall, I think a case for WP:BASIC notability can be made, but additional sources should be incorporated, starting with the ones referenced on her blog and additional sources that may exist in other languages. Please let me know if you have any thoughts or questions about my review. Thank you again, :)

My notes: Thanks for taking to the press and media section - that definitely builds the case for WP:Basic. However, with only two Hindu Sources (One in-depth and other still okay), I was not convinced on WP:Basic. If we would allow for that, so anyone having minor connections with a reputed publication should be able to get a couple of articles done and claim notability. However, with your guidance on more coverage in print, I am convinced about WP:Basic. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Cheers, Nomadicghumakkad, and I felt like I could understand and fully appreciate your concerns with the article, and it was not until I found those additional sources that WP:BASIC notability appeared to be supported. Thank you for following up, and congratulations again! Beccaynr (talk) 03:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Explaination of my recent editing

@Beccanyr: hey so I removed some content from Debattama Saha because it makes the article not perfect and the references are so many (which is not required) another thing which is I removed from article is typo which is very bad. There are so many Grammatical mistakes in the article which makes article not readable. Yes I did a mistake by not writing my edit summary. Unknownnreasonn (talk) 09:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Unknownnreasonn, thank you for your comment. I also had reverted your revisions (diff) because some of the removed content has been discussed on the Talk page of the article, and there appears to currently be consensus about it being included, so further discussion can happen on the Talk page. In addition, some of the removed references are there to help the reader quickly find relevant information about each acting role. This article is currently subject to an Article for Deletion discussion, so some of the removed references also help quickly show how she is notable per WP:NACTOR; specifically, that she Has had significant roles in multiple notable [...] television shows. This is also why each role is summarized in the lead, per MOS:LEAD, and as discussed on the article Talk page. I am also concerned about the edits that you made to the citations, and specifically the removal of the author information and the dates of publication, which are also included to help the reader. I encourage you to specifically discuss your concerns on the article Talk page, because we can talk more about the content of the article there. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 15:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)