User talk:KailashParvat

Your username

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Technology-times-editor", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, service, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Foobar Museum of Art". However, you are permitted to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you individually (not your role), such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87", but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, service, or website, regardless of your username. Please also read our paid editing policy and our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please request a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, choosing a username that complies with our username policy. Alternatively, you can just create a new account and use that for editing. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Suyash Sinha (July 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Suyash Sinha 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All references are reliable and independent. They are from government records of US and EU patent offices, news agencies, Google Scholar, and renowned journals sponsored by IEEE and ACM. Please explain the rejection. KailashParvat (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patents are not secondary or independent, and only reliable in certain cases. See Wikipedia:Reliable source examples § Are patents reliable sources?. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:07, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are isued patents with 1000+ citations. Why is it not secondary or independent? KailashParvat (talk) 23:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These terms have specific meanings, which you can learn by clicking on the links above. (For convenience: secondary sources, independent sources.) Not all sources on Wikipedia are required to be secondary and independent, but primary or non-independent sources are unsuitable for some purposes – one of which is establishing notability, as specified by Wikipedia:Notability (people) § Basic criteria. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think i now understand.

So, going by the content - a peer-reviewed journal makes it all - reliable, secondary and independent. A citation of a patent is the same way. Am i correct? KailashParvat (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, do you mean citations outside of Wikipedia? Even if a published, reliable, secondary, and independent source cites a person's patent, that is usually not significant coverage of that person. Citation metrics of a published academic work may contribute to notability, as specified by Wikipedia:Notability (academics), but that guideline explicitly rules out patents. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you. Meant any articles published by third parties in peer reviewed journals that cite individual's seminal work. KailashParvat (talk) 00:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Technology-times-editor! 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! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Suyash Sinha (July 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Grabup were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Suyash Sinha 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.

GrabUp - Talk 05:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Suyash Sinha (July 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Johannes Maximilian were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

The referencing method used in this draft is based on examples, however, footnotes should refer to reliable sources to establish verifiability. It makes no sense to cite 10 sources in the lead section and REFBOMB the claim "[Sinha has made] notable contributions" if none of the cited sources discusses whether or not his contributions are notable. A very good example for the problem with this draft's referencing situation is footnote 10: It refers to Cision PR Web, which is a press release platform. The source does not even mention the subject. And it doesn't make any claims about any invention's notability. Best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 09:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Johannes for the actionable feedback. Please note that the citations in lead section are all reliable and secondary.

First: The particular footnote 10 you mentioned calls out the impactful nature of the company "Midfin Systems" founded by the person which is established in an earlier citation. It is a press release by one of the largest Telecom companies Orange Telecom which selected the company as part of its accelerator program called Orange Fab. My logic was it is reliable and secondary because it is a release by a third party about the company founded by the person. But perhaps i am wrong and happy to correct/remove that one.

Second: the inventions and publication pages have a number of citations by other papers and inventions which is a direct measure of the impactful nature of these inventions/publications with over 1000 citations.

please suggest what changes should i make here? KailashParvat (talk) 16:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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:Suyash Sinha 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.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 09:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Suyash Sinha (July 16)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

13 out of the 24 sources are patents. WP:PATENTS indicates that while they can be used to show that a patent exists, they're mere presence is not quite enough to prove invention. It would be far better if you can find a source that states this.

As per WP:PROF the scholar link on google scholar could be useful for citation metrics, especially for an academic in computer science field. However, Web of Science only indicate three citations; most of these citations are from one patent to another, so Google Scholar is highly misleading with regards to a citation count. (Patents are basically self-published, with the government office giving somewhat minimal overview of the content).

Please find more sourcing that is either secondary to the patent (there is an article or news piece noting that Dr. Sinha has significant patents of use), or additional information.

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:Suyash Sinha 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.

Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Suyash Sinha

Hello, KailashParvat. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Suyash Sinha, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]