Revision as of 13:29, 6 November 2023 editVaikunda Raja (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,866 edits →Annamalai Kuppusamy: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 11:10, 22 November 2023 edit undoAnomieBOT (talk | contribs)Bots6,590,854 edits (BOT) Remove section headers for closed log page. Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/DRVClerk | ||
(16 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Add a new entry BELOW THIS LINE copying the format: {{subst:drv2|page=<PAGE NAME>|xfd_page=<XFD PAGE NAME>|reason=<REASON>}} ~~~~ --> | Add a new entry BELOW THIS LINE copying the format: {{subst:drv2|page=<PAGE NAME>|xfd_page=<XFD PAGE NAME>|reason=<REASON>}} ~~~~ --> | ||
{{no admin backlog}} | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-archivedtalk" style="width: 100%; text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" | |||
====]==== | |||
|- | |||
! style="background-color: #f2dfce; font-weight:normal; text-align:left;" | | |||
* <span class="anchor" id="Annamalai Kuppusamy"></span>''']''' – The AfD is endorsed, and recreation (under any title) is disallowed, pending submission of a competent draft to DRV. The appellant is advised to be considerably more concise in future discussions, or their contibutions will be disregarded because of their bludgeoning, as I have done here. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 10:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC) <!--*--> | |||
|- | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | ''The following is an archived debate of the ] of the page above. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>'' | |||
|- | |||
| style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" | | |||
:{{DRV links|Annamalai Kuppusamy|xfd_page=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/K. Annamalai (I.P.S)}} | :{{DRV links|Annamalai Kuppusamy|xfd_page=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/K. Annamalai (I.P.S)}} | ||
The article was created by somebody in 2020 and was proposed for deletion within weeks on the ground that the article fails the ] and ] criteria and was deleted after discussion. | The article was created by somebody in 2020 and was proposed for deletion within weeks on the ground that the article fails the ] and ] criteria and was deleted after discussion. | ||
Line 44: | Line 51: | ||
*'''Endorse''' whichever deletion is being appealed. The real issue is what to do about the ] submissions, but DRV is a content forum. Has the appellant been given notice of the ] of ]? ] (]) 21:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC) | *'''Endorse''' whichever deletion is being appealed. The real issue is what to do about the ] submissions, but DRV is a content forum. Has the appellant been given notice of the ] of ]? ] (]) 21:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
*'''Allow recreation''' subject to a new AfD. '']'' and '']'' are both well-respected sources that are rated generally reliable at ], and while I'm not going to take a position on notability, the fact that they've each published of about this person in just the past year is a ''very'' good sign that a 2021 AfD shouldn't be the end of the discussion. (From a "substantially identical" perspective, a number of the G4s have just been bad speedies, pure and simple.) We shouldn't let understandable frustration with other people's conduct keep us from recognizing that Vaikunda Raja has a valid point here. ] (]) 22:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC) | *'''Allow recreation''' subject to a new AfD. '']'' and '']'' are both well-respected sources that are rated generally reliable at ], and while I'm not going to take a position on notability, the fact that they've each published of about this person in just the past year is a ''very'' good sign that a 2021 AfD shouldn't be the end of the discussion. (From a "substantially identical" perspective, a number of the G4s have just been bad speedies, pure and simple.) We shouldn't let understandable frustration with other people's conduct keep us from recognizing that Vaikunda Raja has a valid point here. ] (]) 22:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
⚫ | *:], I request you to take a look into the draft version, Thanks. - ]] 13:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
*'''Allow Recreation and Review of Draft''' by downgrading protection in mainspace to ECP so that a reviewer can accept it. ] (]) 03:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC) | *'''Allow Recreation and Review of Draft''' by downgrading protection in mainspace to ECP so that a reviewer can accept it. ] (]) 03:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
*'''Comment''' - This is probably the worst case of ]. But since the subject may be notable, the gaming of titles should be dealt with by sanctioning the editors, and not by means of ]. ] (]) 03:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC) | *'''Comment''' - This is probably the worst case of ]. But since the subject may be notable, the gaming of titles should be dealt with by sanctioning the editors, and not by means of ]. ] (]) 03:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
Line 58: | Line 66: | ||
**], I understand the frustration as a reader to go through long posts.I tried hard to cut-short further but failed since too many things are involved with this topic now. May be another thing is I am not proficient In English and so I need more words to express little perhaps, Sorry. - ]] 16:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC) | **], I understand the frustration as a reader to go through long posts.I tried hard to cut-short further but failed since too many things are involved with this topic now. May be another thing is I am not proficient In English and so I need more words to express little perhaps, Sorry. - ]] 16:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
***Well you could have cut all but one of those 7 bullet points. Everything except the 5th is totally irrelevant. ] (]) 18:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC) | ***Well you could have cut all but one of those 7 bullet points. Everything except the 5th is totally irrelevant. ] (]) 18:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
***:] It seems that by way of neglecting the other points you doubt his notability. The Basic criteria of ] reads that ''"People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."'' If the criteria is so, Annamalai is been reported in multiple, independent reliable sources (The Hindu, Indian Express etc) more or less 50+ distinct articles in the last one month. For example The Hindu alone had published 4 different articles on him in the last 48 hours alone! Leave aside the regional language newspapers which wrote 100s of articles.If not, I request you to make your point clear. - ]] 13:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | |||
*:Also I request you to go through the draft of the article as I had worked on it. - ]] 16:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC) | *:Also I request you to go through the draft of the article as I had worked on it. - ]] 16:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
*::] - Please notice that I have requested that the title in article space be partially unsalted (protection downgraded to ECP) so that a reviewer who reviews the draft can accept it if it is ready for article space. I do not review drafts in detail if the title is protected in article space, because I will not be able to accept them. So please wait five more days until this DRV is closed. ] (]) 20:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC) | *::] - Please notice that I have requested that the title in article space be partially unsalted (protection downgraded to ECP) so that a reviewer who reviews the draft can accept it if it is ready for article space. I do not review drafts in detail if the title is protected in article space, because I will not be able to accept them. So please wait five more days until this DRV is closed. ] (]) 20:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC) | ||
*:::] I value the insights and guidance you provide very much. Thank you. - ]] 13:30, 6 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
*I read this with intention to close it, but found no consensus to do anything. Having decided I wasn't going to close the discussion, I then changed mindset to 'dicussion contributor' rather than 'decider of consensus'. I agree with Cryptic that the draft is poor and not up to Mainspace standard. Considering the history of the titles and their repeated deletions, I am not of the opinion that ] applies here (ie. allow a move to mainspace and AfD), and I also don't think allowing a single reviewer to approve and move to mainspace (by lowering the title protection) is appropriate given the long history of articles being deleted for G11 and AfD reasons. My !vote is '''keep deleted''' with prejudice given the circumstances, and the only way forward for any person trying to recreate this is to come to DRV with a fully-complete draft and ask "is this worthy of mainspace?". I know this might be a departure from norms, but quite simply, the history of this article at its various titles is extraordinary. ] (]) 23:29, 18 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
*:'''Three main issues''' with this article/namespace are ''1. Alleged Illegitimate creations and repeated deletions; 2. Notability; 3 Quality of the content.'' | |||
*:# '''Repeated creations and repeated deletions:''' Beginners often shall not be aware of the detailed regulations here in Misplaced Pages. They began writing what they consider worthy. Assuming good faith, those who are experienced in Misplaced Pages should/shall verify the notability and credibility of the subject and the relevant sources before deciding how to act. The article/draft should be approved if the subject is notable. If the behaviors of the concerned users are not satisfactory, consider sanctioning them after proper notifications/warnings. As noted by ] and ] it is thoroughly unfair to decide upon the fate of the article based on the behavior of some beginners as in this case. So is he notable worthy of a standalone article? | |||
*:# '''Notability:''' Though he may not be notable when the article was first created what ] perhaps failed to notice are the later developments; especially when the person's notability gains substantially over the last couple of years. His notability increased so much so that Indian media covered him 24x7x365. Reputed, reliable and credible sources publish news articles on him almost on a daily basis. Iam a native of Tamil Nadu and I stand testimony (personal testimonies do not matter and this detail is just for clarity) to the fact that the current politics of Tamil Nadu revolves around a few people and Annamalai is among the top 5, unquestionably and that's what reflects in the scope of the media coverage. As suggested by ] the details in the current draft fulfill the ] as the subject has ''"received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."'' Apart from the draft, in the last 30 days there shall be at least 100+ news articles published on him from reliable, I repeat 'credible English sources' alone!. There shall be an additional 500+ ones in atleast 5 another regional languages published during the same period. One among the most reliable English print daily (]) in India 'The Hindu' had published 3 different articles on him on 3 different matters in the last 72 hours! But it may be argued that the draft is not up to the mark. | |||
*:# '''Quality of the draft content:''' For the argument that the quality of the draft is not upto the mark, the template '''{Tone|date=November 2023}''' is already in place and the page shall be improved collaboratively. Considering the Namespace's history, future edit wars/reverts shall be prevented by keeping the page under ]. But citing this as a reason to not promote the article to main space is unfair. For those who consider that the current draft is in a admiring tone I would suggest to get into the details of the cited sources. I just reflected the information there to my best. And, most of the sources cited including for personal details are among the highly reliable ones. Also, I am careful enough that I did not editorialize. | |||
*:Most '''Importantly and interestingly''' this shall perhaps be one among the rare cases in the history of English Misplaced Pages that the notability of a person is not only subdued but was also diverted to another person! With denying the general namespace 'Annamalai.K' for the notable person (Annamalai Kuppusamy) and allocating it for another one who is disproportionately less notable, hundreds of English Misplaced Pages readers are diverted to a wrong page every single day! This could be verified from the unusual traffic jump of the current page , the exact date when the former IPS officer Annamalai.K (who was ] now) joined politics and also from the subsequent daily traffic of the page of 700+ daily views. Apart from the election result page no news articles are found on him either online or offline and no google hits either! I wonder how this former One-time-MLA of Tenkasi K.Annamalai's notability is weighed against the multi-disciplinarian Annamalai Kuppusamy in the notability scale! The other page should be disambiguated appropriately ] | |||
*:] asked for "fully-complete draft"! Out of the 6 million+ articles in English Misplaced Pages, how many of them are fully complete?! Misplaced Pages is not where the contents are written by experts and are closed for another 5 years until the nex review. Is it legitimate to require "fully-complete" text on any subject in a collaborative project like Misplaced Pages where edits are made almost on a daily basis? | |||
*:'''IMHO''' the draft is ready to be upgraded to the main space. Additional copy-edits, rephrasing etc be made and that shall be done even after moving to main space either. - ]] 10:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
*::Clearly the advice from numerous experienced editors to keep posts and responses to shorter lengths has not been taken on board by the applicant, with another near-800 words to process above. Quite frankly, I don't care enough to go through it all. I disagree with the assertion in the final paragraph that the draft is ready for articlespace, and have little faith it can be brought up to the required standard. On that basis I don't believe it should be moved to articlespace, and will only reconsider my view should a "good" draft be presented (rather than the current "poor" one, to use Cryptic's word of choice). ] (]) 10:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
*::::<small>(Do I really call things "poor" enough to be remembered for it? I haven't in this drv, and it's more diplomatic than a lot of the words I think before they make it through to my fingers. —] 10:26, 19 November 2023 (UTC))</small> | |||
*:::(The editor has now contributed 3,037 words to this DRV, which is one of the more spectacular examples of ] that I've seen at DRV in recent years. When you consider that submitting Arbitration evidence is limited to 1000 words, including rebuttals, this number is just unwieldy. ] (]) 10:20, 19 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
*If we end up with an article here, it will be despite, not because of, the filibustering and repeated attempts at recreation. See ]. —] 10:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
|- | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | ''The above is an archive of the ] of the page listed in the heading. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>'' | |||
|} | |||
==== ] (closed) ==== | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-archivedtalk" style="width: 100%; text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-archivedtalk" style="width: 100%; text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" | ||
|- | |- |
Latest revision as of 11:10, 22 November 2023
< 2023 November 1 Deletion review archives: 2023 November 2023 November 3 >2 November 2023
|
---|
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it. |
The article was created by somebody in 2020 and was proposed for deletion within weeks on the ground that the article fails the WP:NPOL and WP:BLP1E criteria and was deleted after discussion. It seems not very unfair to delete the page at that point since he was just another IPS officer leaving service and joining a political party. Though it is very much evident that, he is more notable and not like every other hundreds of IPS officers as he was different and was famous. He recieves unusual media coverage atleast locally. But that doesn’t qualify enough to pass the WP:NPOL and WP:BLP1E criterias. Also the article presented then was more in a promotion tone. There was also a title conflict since there is another person with the name K.Annamalai. The nominator of the AFD himself “suggest to delete the article for now and wait till anything develops reason being[REDACTED] is not a soapbox and biographical host for every person” Consensus reached to delete the article ‘atleast temporarily’. BUT, things had changed substatially over time. He was appointed as the state vice-president of the Bharatiya Janata Party and was promoted as the State President a year later. From day 1 in his office until now, he is been in the headlines of leading, reputed Tamil and English, newspapers and electronic media in Tamil Nadu 24x7x365. He even reaches national headlines frequently. It could be verified online here Tamil, Malayalam,hindi and Kannada Wikipedias already has artilce on him and the traffic for the page in Tamil[REDACTED] gets 5 to 7 times the views on an average when compared to the article on the previous president L. Murugan, even though he is a union minister. I am elobrating all these things just to reflect upon his increased notability over time. Now the WP:NPOL criteria is met and he does not fit into the WP:BLP1E category. Even though the name space Annamalai.K is been already created for a former ‘1-time-MLA’ who was elected in 2001 and was very little notable comparably. Yet he was argued to be an elected representative. Apart from that he was nowhere near to ‘Annamalai Kuppusamy’ (whom we are discussing about) in the notability scale. (This is another discussion) For the argument that the tone of the then article is promotional, I have a different version which shall be uploaded (again it shall be discussed). For the citations – There are already tens of hundreds of news articles available on him. We will be able to add fare references from reputed sources readily. So it is very much unfair not to have a page in English Misplaced Pages on him now. - Vaikunda Raja:talk: 06:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
|
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
|
---|
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it. |
A previous deletion review recommended allowing recreation; however, I'm requesting restoration of the original article. There is a draft pending at Draft:Miles Routledge, and I'd like to have the original article back with its old edit history so that the draft at AfC can be combined into it. Dan Leonard (talk) 01:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
|
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |