Jump to content

User talk:czar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 90.196.204.46 (talk) at 17:58, 5 October 2015 (→Deletions of Nvidia tech-demos). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


I am obsessed by the plain facts:
writing them literally down
is all the poetry I can.

Know that I esteem my editorial independence. Even as

I reject payment to edit or advocate on anyone's behalf.


Declarations



    Hi Czar. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. It mostly follows the lead section; how does it look? - Dank (push to talk) 23:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks fine—thanks! I appreciate it running on an anniversary of its release. I removed some of the gerunds and would fiddle around with it some more but don't want to break anything. More or less fine as it is. Thanks again. czar 23:48, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Happy to help. That looks good. If you want to fiddle some more, I'll have a look. - Dank (push to talk) 23:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Vegetarian Campaign Nepal

    Hi, Deleting this article with just a single delete vote does not seem to be acting in accordance with finding genuine consensus. Could you please re-open the discussion? AusLondonder (talk) 03:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vegetarian Campaign Nepal was open for three weeks (the maximum, and two weeks longer than usually necessary). If you have new evidence to share (secondary source coverage), I'd recommend starting with that. I'm fine with restoring the draft to your userspace, if you want to work on it, but I would ask that it go through the Articles for Creation vetting process in the future. (Also there was not just a "single delete vote"—the nominator counts and AfD is not a vote. There was no substantial opposition to deletion.) czar 15:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The Zookeeper's Wife (film)

    Hello czar! Please merge Draft:The Zookeeper's Wife (film) into The Zookeeper's Wife (film) — Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    ✓ done czar 04:18, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    S. Srikanta Sastri (Ruthless deletion)

    Dear Editors, I logged in only today to find to my shock that the page on India's foremost historian has been deleted as and I quote "Google Scholar does not have enough citations". !! While I agree that the academician section may have been a tad offbeat, it does in no way warrant ruthless deletion of an entire page. Let me go on record in saying that 1) He is a historian of no trivial importance. 2) Having died in 1974 and having penned most of his book (if not articles) in Non English languages before the Internet Era, Google Scholar obviously cannot have citations! 3) The Star line up of his students who by their own merit have Wikipedia Pages dedicated to each of them bear testament to his fortitude and greatness as a teacher. 4) The historian who was quoted on Berlin Radio by Goebbels along with Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan cannot (for the love of God) be trivial. 5) Western perceptions of Notability need not hold ground in the orient. At best this action comes across as severely racist. Wonder what this will do to Wikipedia's standing in India and the East. ! 6) Notability in terms of outgoing and incoming links is a mundane concept especially when dealing with personalities of yesteryears. 7) WHile the page has been ruthlessly and racially discrimnated, the priceless group photographs of that Golden Age serve their purpose on other Wikipedia Pages. In fact Wikimedia Commons has given a good images badge ! 8) If Notability is the question, why then would 42 western libraries stack their racks with is books. Good Heavens. ! 9) Why would his thirty year old books undergo reprint even today to find a vast audience in India and abroad. ? 10) WHile Pornstars in the west find Wikipedia pages, a learned, reputed scholar and polyglot of enormous intellect finds no place here, because he is not noteworthy.!! Racism at its best. 11) I hope better sense prevails. MOdifications are most welcome. but deletion is arrogance personified. We can concoct a thing or two. But to fabricate 10 books, 300 articles, to imagine 20 monographs and materialise 20 odd group photographs from the Golden Era of University of Mysore is indeed a trick that would put Houdini to shame. I implore you to restore the page. Advise us on the requisite modifications and we will certainly visit those concerns. We are not fanatical. Give Wikipedia a chance to be genuinely global. Western perceptions need not be the only perceptions the world sees. Hope justice can be done. Otherwise We for one would lose all inclination or interest towards a "Western Wikipedia". For the Love of God, He is not a "Borderline Academic". We remain yours Affectionately.Rkkrupa (talk) 05:03, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    It went uncontested for three weeks, so I don't know about ruthless. As noted via the soft delete, I'm happy to restore the page to your userspace if you want to work on it, but it will need to be much less promotional before someone will accept it back in article space (i.e., completely rewritten, more reliant on secondary sources than primary source citations of his work). As for everything you said about Google Scholar, I noted it myself at the discussion page so I'm not sure why you're bringing it here. I don't think anyone has it out for the guy—the article was just a mess. Take care, czar 05:13, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    How does one go about rewriting this article from scratch (albeit with same media content as before)..? Is it allowed.? And can you clarify as to what you mean by secondary sources vis a vis primary source citations of his work..? Thanks. Rkkrupa (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I've restored the page to Draft:S. Srikanta Sastri. You can either work on it there or on a new draft in your userspace (e.g., User:Rkkrupa/Sastri). Feel free to reuse or wipe out chunks of the text. For the difference between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, see the overview at WP:PSTS. The Sastri article should be written from secondary sources—biographies and other writings that have editorial distance from the writer. The sources should be reliable as well, as in having some editorial and fact-checking control over what is published. Those are good sources for an encyclopedia article. (Distance from the subject would also mean not stuff written on his website by his family members.) I'd wipe out almost all of the citations to Sastri in the draft. It's fine to have a bibliography section of his major works (I would suggest making it a "Selected bibliography" of his most important works so as not to presume completeness) but the source for claims about his work, the impact of his work, and his life should be biographies and not his own works. His own writings can be used with the limitations set at WP:SPS (as a self-published source, mainly for small, ordinary statements of fact). For example, statements like "vast repertoire of historical knowledge saw him author works with far-reaching influences" should likely just be removed. "Vast repertoire" and "far-reaching influences" are peacock terms that should be stated more plainly/directly in an encyclopedia. And if his legacy is even slightly so praiseworthy, those types of extraordinary claims require extraordinary citations: they should be cited in a reliable, secondary, independent source that says so. I do think it's best to use the previous draft as a guide but only write directly from secondary sources as if the previous draft didn't exist. My 2¢. It's fine to re-use the media content (such is the nature of free-use images) although the personal website source of those copyrighted images should make it clearer that it indeed holds the copyright from each individual photographer... It's kind of a stretch that all the book covers and every image from every stage of his life is owned by his family and not the original photographers. czar 12:57, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you. We will attempt to adhere to your recommendations. There are close to 110 images and 11 Audio recordings that the family does not hold copyright to. The rest, the family owns them whole and sole. Some of these are on wikimedia Commons. We request some time be allotted for these revisions as they need to be done from the basics. We will try to stick to encyclopedic terms of writing. There are numerous biograpahical pieces on him by close to 12 different authors in Kannada (South Indian Language) and a few in English by 3 different authors. Sadly, these are in print and not available online as digitised sources to link to. How then do we showcase these books as sources for his biographical information..? Kindly illuminate us on this. The Academician section will be scrapped. Group photographs will be retained. Bibliography will be limited to only list of books. The long list of articles will be deleted. Thank you again for your consideration. Apologies for delayed response to notice for deletion.Rkkrupa (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Deletions of Nvidia tech-demos

    Bit of a mundane subject but you've replaced two articles that are (to my eyes) "a trip down memory lane" (and I was hard ATI back then) and given them pointless redirects.

    It is far easier to re-write something than start from scratch, please take the time to fix stuff and not leave some silly redirect behind (otherwise leave it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.204.46 (talk) 16:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a trip down memory lane. There are other websites to document technological moments in history that do not have enough sources for their own encyclopedia article. As for whether the topic is "pointless", I think the secondary sources have already spoken (that is, by not speaking). Burden's on the editor to source their contributions, not on everyone else. czar 17:50, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    RE Orb-3d to, you bastard. And of course not but everything it documents is a trip down someone's "memory lane", there are now gaps missing.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Czar&oldid=684280165"