User talk:NorthAntara

Single-letter second-level domain[edit]

I spent a considerable amount of time gathering information for the edit I made. It is not reasonable to exclude domains solely because they are primarily owned by a single individual. This is an incorrect basis for exclusion, as the domains I listed were actually owned by two separate groups. If someone is capable of owning such a significant collection of single-letter domains, they should be allowed to do so. They may even own more than what is currently known. Furthermore, just because these domains are not in Latin script does not mean they are any less important than their English counterparts. Each of these domains holds equal significance. I was able to easily locate these domains and plan to add more that are currently in use in the future. Therefore, I urge you to reinstate them in their rightful place. Charlie717 (talk) 07:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is important to note that in making an edit to a Wikipedia article, knowledge of the language is crucial. If you were familiar with the language, you would have already included the most significant letters in the language in your edit. Charlie717 (talk) 07:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The point isn't that they're of some other language/script or that a single person owns many of them. In fact, I personally own 8 single-character Unicode domains; 3 are Latin-lookalike characters and 3 are unique in size, shape, or their effects on surrounding text (e.g. ဪ.com and ㆴ.com) -- 1 of them is on the list as it was added by another editor. The vast majority of the list is there because of the confusion they can cause when comparing them to Latin script and not because they *are* letters of some alphabet.

1) The names you added have none of those characteristics. Wikipedia:NOTDATABASE

2) Your claim of them having different owners is contradicted by your edit very explicitly noting their (single) owner. Wikipedia:PROMOTION

If you think there's some argument to be made for their inclusion, I welcome you to discuss it on Talk:Single-letter second-level domain. If the goal was for the list to be exhaustive, I would just take my list of every codepoint that is a valid domain and add them, but that is clearly not an appropriate or desired solution. NorthAntara (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both of your points are factually invalid.

1. First, they comply with all the characteristics required to be included in the list. The alphabets and numbers in Bengali are similar and sometimes identical to those of Devanagari (used to write Hindi), Odia, and some other regional scripts like Siddham. Look at the comparison of the Odia script with ancestral and related scripts. [1] If you closely observe the table, you will find what you are looking for and know exactly why I added them.

Some Bengali characters and numbers are similar to English, like the Bengali number 4, which is identical to English 8.

With approximately 300 million native speakers and another 37 million as second language speakers, Bengali is the fifth most-spoken native language and the seventh most-spoken language by the total number of speakers in the world. [2] Hindi is the fourth most-spoken first language in the world, after Mandarin, Spanish and English. If counted together with the mutually intelligible Urdu, it is the third most-spoken language in the world, after Mandarin and English. [3]

So, when talking about something with conviction, make sure you have the humility to know what you are talking about. Your owning 8 single-letter low-value IDNs is irrelevant to the IDNs I added. I speak 9 languages, including the ones I have mentioned, so I know what I am talking about.

2. Nowhere have I mentioned that a single individual owns them. I have said that they are "mostly" owned by a single individual. And the list I added was owned by two groups.

Upon investigation, I have found that only 3 individuals may own the Bengali equivalent of 26 English letters, but the majority stakeholder doesn't use them for any purpose. I have added almost all the domains in use that qualify to be included. I will add a few more shortly.

1. Odia script. (2023, March 10). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odia_script

2. Bengali language. (2023, March 19). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengali_language

3. Hindi. (2023, March 19). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindi Charlie717 (talk) 21:27, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussing it here isn't going to do any good. I am only one person - me agreeing with you (and for the record, I don't) wouldn't prevent others from reverting your changes. The only appropriate place for this would be on the Talk page for the article, where there could be some concurrence. NorthAntara (talk) 20:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jason Parker (cybersecurity) (June 5)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sohom Datta was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Is there any mainstream coverage of this researcher outside of the TechCrunch article? Might be a good idea to add it the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jason Parker (cybersecurity) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sohom (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NorthAntara! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sohom (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]