Draft talk:Dipak Giri

Regarding Disclaimer "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject"

Kindly help me how to remove the tag "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject." This tag is suggesting a clean up but not clarifying what to be cleaned up. Kindly guide me in this connection. Rohit1976 (talk) 17:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rohit1976: The tag is suggesting that the major contributor (you) may not be impartial. Please see WP:COI. You should declare your conflict on your user page. Other editors should review and fix the draft. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to know where have you found the ground of partiality. The entire article is prepared with valid references available on internet. Still if you think there is any information that seems to you to be partial, you should guide me. My brain is not working to detect partiality. I have gone through several times and also trying to bring clean up, if there's anything wrong. You have tagged this one so you know where problem is. Kindly guide me instead of giving me direction to go somewhere. I hope you'll comply with my earnest request. I hope you'll reply and guide me in the process. Thanks and regards Rohit1976 (talk) 20:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying there is a lack of impartiality. I'm saying because you have a COI, there may be a lack of impartiality. Your COI would prevent you from seeing it. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:36, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly remove this tag if you have just doubt of partiality. I have tried to remove it but it's not working and it has again appeared. I hope you'll remove this tag and make me free from worry. Thanks and regards Rohit1976 (talk) 21:16, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is not how this works. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rohit1976, I have some questions for you. a) Do you have any personal connection to Dipak Giri? b) Have you been approached or requested by anyone to create or edit a Wikipedia article about Dipak Giri? c) Are you affiliated with Dipak Giri in any capacity, such as a friend, relative, or employee? TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 06:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The answers of your questions are as follows:

a) I don't have any personal connection with Dipak Giri. I know him by his works which are associated with social welfare that has appealed me as much as that I'm here to create or edit a Wikipedia article about him and his works.

b) No one has approached or requested me to create or edit a Wikipedia article about Dipak Giri. It's works of Dipak Giri that I think may appeal anyone like me. I have come to know about him with his contributions to literature and society through his works and my interest in him has brought me here.

c) No, I'm not affiliated with Dipak Giri in any capacity, such as a friend, relative, or employee. However, I'm a great fan of his works. Through his works, I think like many others who have read his works closely, Dipak Giri has taken a much-needed effort to eradicate many social problems in relevance to our modern society.

I hope you will be satisfied with my answers and guide me to go forward with my article.

Thanks and regards Rohit1976 (talk) 09:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rohit1976: Could you clarify how File:Dipak Giri.jpg qualifies as your own work if you have no personal connection with him? TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This jpg was once uploaded by me and this one was collected from one of my friends who is also one of Dipak Giri's fans. I might have upload any of images available on internet but I did not because it might give the problem of copyright infringement in future. Rohit1976 (talk) 10:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used this photo at that time because I was ascertained by my friend that it was nowhere published. If this photo is at the root of all problems, I'll remove this photo. I need guidance. Rohit1976 (talk) 10:17, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will I remove this photo? Rohit1976 (talk) 10:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rohit1976: I need a detailed and honest explanation please. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I was on my way of preparing this article, I felt the need of a photo for this article. The content of this article undoubtedly bore my own originality with valid support of references available to me at that time but sorry to say, at that time I faced a problem as regards photo, though I found many photos of Dipak Giri while googling but no image was free from copyright. I thought the article would look better if I insert an image but my problem was how to find an image, free from copyright. Then I contacted some of my friends who also read works of Dipak Giri like me. I hoped they might have photo of Dipak Giri, free from copyright but I was disappointed because they also suggested me to use photo available on internet. However, after trying long, one of my friends shared this photo but now I'm sorry to learn that this photo is creating problem in my article. For me, content of this article is more important than photo. I'll remove this photo if you suggest me to do so. I need further guidance. Thanks and regards Rohit1976 (talk) 13:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fine! Now let's take a moment to evaluate the sources. Notability is established by reliable, independent, secondary sources. Sources that are closely associated with the subject—such as self-published works, links to book publishing houses, low-quality journals, articles influenced or edited by the subject, or book database websites—are generally considered unreliable. Also, interviews, while potentially informative, are typically seen as primary sources and do not contribute to establishing notability on their own. Unfortunately, the current draft leans heavily on these types of sources, which do not sufficiently meet the notability criteria under WP:AUTHOR and WP:ANYBIO. It lacks general notability guidelines. To be more specific, add only three good source than adding 27 sources. Notability requires quality sources, not just quantity. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 14:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope now you have no issue with COI. I have clarified why I have kept this photo in this article. Kindly help me removing this tag. As regards guidelines of notability, I'll decrease the number of citations and add only those sources which are comparatively better than the rest. I'll reexamine this article as per your requirement and then revise and resubmit. But what about this photo which has given rise the problem of COI. Kindly guide me in this connection also. Thanks for your valuable support and guidance. Regards Rohit1976 (talk) 15:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag is unlikely to affect this draft as long as you provide reliable and high-quality sources. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 16:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How will I identify which sources are reliable and high quality? I have reexamined the sources as per your requirement. Most of the sources which I have used here are from journals where reviews on Dipak Girir's works have been published along with many others. Now you're telling me these sources are not reliable and high quality. So far I know anything when published in peer-reviewed and non-profitable journals is reliable. A journal which is not peer-reviewed is questionable. Here I have used references mainly from peer-reviewed journals among which some of them are also non-profitable. It is beyond our understanding how a journal even after peer-reviewed and non-profitable is not reliable and questionable as regards its quality. Kindly guide me what sources actually do you mean as reliable and high quality? Thanks and regards Rohit1976 (talk) 16:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read carefully the following links: WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:SECONDARY. All the information you are asking has already been provided to you, multiple times, at these links. They have been on the draft decline notices, they are listed a few comments back, and multiple times on your talk page as well. Please don't waste our time asking questions whose answers have already been given to you. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to interrupt you. I have read and again read carefully. Here I have found the section "Predatory Journal" written the following words: "Predatory journals are very low quality and have only token peer-review, if any. These journals publish whatever is submitted if the author is willing to pay a fee. Some go so far as to mimic the names of established journals (Journal hijacking). The lack of reliable peer review implies that articles in such journals should at best be treated similarly to self-published sources. If you are unsure about the quality of a journal, check that the editorial board is based in a respected accredited university, and that it is included in the relevant high-quality citation index—be wary of indexes that merely list almost all publications, and do not vet the journals they list." It's right that I have used references whatever I have found available on internet without filtering which journals are predatory and non-predatory because I did not know which sources were to be used. Now, I have come to know many things which I'll keep in mind. However, I'm sure many of the references used from journals in my article are not predatory. Will I filter my article from wrong to right? I mean I'll keep only those journals which follow the policy of peer-review, non-profitability and the editorial board based in a respected accreditation university. Kindly tell me. If so, I'll ask no question. Only after revising this article that may take some time because I have to start everything from the beginning, I'll ask you before submission. But before that, I need to be clarified. So, I'm asking question. I hope you won't mind. Rohit1976 (talk) 17:35, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Birds said; once there is significantly more work supplied by non-COI editors, the tag can be removed. The tag isn't saying there's something inherently wrong with the article; it's saying there's something inherently wrong with the connection between the article and its significant editors. No amount of changing the article by an editor with COI will remove the COI tag. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:10, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not understanding what do you mean by "COI editors" and "non-COI editors". I've long been editing this article and trying to use valid references in support of my views and I've also clarified why I'm not to be counted within COI tag. In this article, none other than me is the editor so far I know, though I always wish to welcome valuable opinions of reviewers like you. Thanks and regards Rohit1976 (talk) 17:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

in support of my views is an inherently COI phrase. We do not care what you think about a subject. Again, please read WP:COI carefully and understand its meaning and stop asking questions you can get answers to by links you have already been provided. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for providing this link. But I have already clarified that my article is free from COI. Now my problem is associated with what references to be used and what not. Kindly shed light to this query. Will I filter and Just answer this. I'll ask no question and restart my article. However, before submission I'll be back again to trouble you again because this is my first article and I always wish to be guided from experienced reviewers like you. Just answer this query: I'll keep only those journals which follow the policy of peer-review, non-profitability and the editorial board based in a respected accreditation university as per your link provided by you? Rohit1976 (talk) 18:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You still aren't getting it. COI is about the author, not about the article. You have a COI in writing this article. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have already answered that I have no COI with the author when I have been asked by TheBirdsShedTears. I'm putting those here again:

a) I don't have any personal connection with Dipak Giri. I know him by his works which are associated with social welfare that has appealed me as much as that I'm here to create or edit a Wikipedia article about him and his works.

b) No one has approached or requested me to create or edit a Wikipedia article about Dipak Giri. It's works of Dipak Giri that I think may appeal anyone like me. I have come to know about him with his contributions to literature and society through his works and my interest in him has brought me here.

c) No, I'm not affiliated with Dipak Giri in any capacity, such as a friend, relative, or employee. However, I'm a great fan of his works. Through his works, I think like many others who have read his works closely, Dipak Giri has taken a much-needed effort to eradicate many social problems in relevance to our modern society.

Now, kindly answer what journals as references are to be used in the article. I've already asked you. Rohit1976 (talk) 19:12, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See my previous quote of your intentions. You have a conflict of interest. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:43, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this connection I have already discussed with TheBirdsShedTears who told me "COI tag is unlikely to affect this draft as long as you provide reliable and high-quality sources" and I wish to be clarified in this connection. Kindly don't make diversion from my present query. I'm again repeating: "Will I keep only those journals which follow the policy of peer-review, non-profitability and the editorial board based in a respected accreditation university?" Rohit1976 (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's painful that you're not answering to my original query and diverting me every time by bringing false claim that I have a conflict of interest. I already told you that what I had told you was just unintentionally told. Nothing is there in my article that reflects my conflict of interest. You should indicate conflict of interest in my article because before coming in discussion with you, you placed the tag COI in my article and did not make clear where you had found conflict of interest and when I asked you where you had found that I have conflict of interest, you are always trying to trap me diverting from the original point of discussion. When I discussed with TheBirdsShedTears, that discussion was healthy and fruitful. I wish a healthy discussion from your side too. I pray you to answer my query "Will I keep only those journals which follow the policy of peer-review, non-profitability and the editorial board based in a respected accreditation university?" and if you have any other suggestion, you may also add to my query but kindly don't try to trap me what I'm not. It's discouraging for a person who is writing for the first time. As a reviewer you should guide me but unfortunately you're trying to move me away from writing an article in Wikipedia by bringing false claim of COI over and again. Rohit1976 (talk) 13:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]