User talk:Vipinu

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Vipinu, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Saiju Sreedharan, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Waggers TALK 12:24, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Saiju Sreedharan[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Saiju Sreedharan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. GILO A&E⇑ 12:44, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CREATIVE for the WP:Notability standard for film-makers. JohnCD (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: User:Saiju papayamedia[edit]

Hello Vipinu. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Saiju papayamedia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: request was not made by this account. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing relating to another editor's user page[edit]

I have been attempting to sort out the mess you have made of the editing history of User:Saiju papayamedia. It has been difficult to trace all the changes, as you have moved pages several times, between different userspaces, and article space. I believe, however, that I have finally managed to restore the original edits made by Saiju papayamedia to the history of his user page. Please don't move other editors' user pages again without good reason, and don't ever make sequences of moves of the same page, mixed in with moves of other pages you create and give the same title, as doing so can create a complete nightmare for whatever administrator tries to clean up after you. Also, please don't make absurd deletion requests, such as asking for deletion as an "attack page" for a page which has never contained any kind of attack, asking for another editor's user page to be deleted on the grounds that the request is made by that user, asking that a user page be deleted because the user's first name is the same as another person's first name, and so on. Such nonsense requests are obviously not going to be accepted, and they achieve nothing except wasting the time of the administrators who review them. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Vipinu. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Last but not least: All contributors must not contribute content that violates conflict of interest laws (just as all contributors must respect copyright). The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive is valid throughout the European Union. In a German court decision in 2012 (that also relied on the directive) regarding Wikipedia: "The court held that when a company edits a Wikipedia article, the resulting text falsely creates the impression that the edit has no business-related purpose. By implication, the judges found that the average reader of Wikipedia articles expects to find objective and neutral information." That is a very very important condition, comparable to the FTC Guide" that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experience of a party other than the sponsoring advertiser”. This expectation by consumers of neutral information on Wikipedia, requires that companies not write "their" WP articles for PR/marketing purposes.

Editors who are compensated for their contributions should make the disclosure by placing the {{connected contributor (paid)}} template at the top of the talk page of affected articles and filling in the parameters. They should also supply this information as part of a list on their user page of all their paid contributions.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. 80.168.236.223 (talk) 14:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saiju Sreedharan[edit]

Don't worry about all the confusion of page moves - it's quite hard to navigate WIkipedia, and it has all got sorted out.

Also don't worry about Google searches: now that the name is no longer on the Papayamedia user page, and the actual article has been deleted, they will quickly drop off Google's radar. I just did a search on the name, and the user-page didn't turn up till the fourth page of results, the article didn't appear in the first five pages.

As regards actually making an article for him, I must explain that Wikipedia is not a social-networking site where you make yourself a page or ask your friends to make you one. It is quite selective about subjects. The test is called Wikipedia:Notability and looks for references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Youtube, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? See also Wikipedia:Notability (summary).

The references I have seen for Saiju Sreedharan were only mentions that he had worked on one or another film: none of them were substantial coverage. It actually seems to me fairly unlikely that a film editor would be notable, in WIkipedia's sense, because their work is behind-the-scenes compared to directors or actors. If you want to try to make a page for him, you would do best to make a draft, using the WP:Articles for creation process. That way, an uninvolved user can review it and either accept it or give advice, and you will not have the problem of the article being posted and deleted and the deletion showing up on Google.

Having written that, I see that there is actually a draft at Draft:Saiju Sreedharan (2) which has today been declined on notability grounds. If you can find references with substantial coverage, add them to that and re-submit it. Read WP:Your first article for advice.

If you are the same person as user Vipinatwiki (talk) who has been working on that draft, please choose one account and use only that one, to avoid suspicion of "sockpuppetry".

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:49, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to "Saiju Sreedharan"[edit]

First of all, I would like to extend gratitude for taking this matter in hand and sorting out as well as my humble apologies for having caused the same.

I have been using Wikipedia for more than a decade now, and therefore I am clearly conscious of the purpose of Wikipedia, and for the most part I am certainly aware, that it is not a social media platform. Although I do agree with your views, that the chances of a film editor to achieve a certain "notability" is unlikely for the most part, due to the nature of the said profession. Having said that, I intend to continue with the drafting of the said personality "Saiju Sreedharan". Once I have confirmed myself with adequate citations and external sources, that the said personality has achieved this "notability" only then will I confirm this for submission as an article. Having said that, please do not consider that I am doing this because the said personality is an acquaintance of mine. I would want to submit my reasons for it, but unfortunately you might consider them as purely invalid. However I am pleased to know that "User: Saiju Papayamedia" will be taken out of the search listing for "Saiju Sreedharan".

I had also started another account called "Vipinatwiki" to start fresh on my expertise with contributing to Wikipedia articles. This account had been dormant for the most part since 2008 until recently a few weeks back. I also don't know the status of this account as it is said it is merged with User: Saiju Papayamedia. I kindly request if you could help me delete this account "Vipinu". Vipinu (talk) 16:23, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied at User talk:Vipinatwiki. JohnCD (talk) 20:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]