User talk:103.191.205.1

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, 103.191.205.1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Siddharth Anand‎‎, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 08:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

Hello, I'm Archer1234. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Siddharth Anand, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you!  — Archer1234 (t·c) 08:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello 103.191.205.1. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Siddharth Anand, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:103.191.205.1. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=103.191.205.1|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 10:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Reliable sources

Regarding your recent edits to Siddharth Anand, you have cited some sources that are not or do not appear to be reliable. From WP:Reliable sources:

Articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.

Two non-comprehensive lists of reliable and unreliable sources can be found at WP:RSP and WP:ICTFSOURCES. If a source is not listed at either of those and if there is some doubt as to whether the source is reliable, then a query should be opened at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard (WP:RSN) where editors experienced with evaluating sources can assist with determining whether a source is reliable or not.

• IMDb – is an example of an unreliable source (see WP:IMDB, WP:IMDB/RS and WP:IMDB-EL). The citations to IMDb should be removed. Any claims that rely solely on IMDb must also be removed.
• tring.co.in – I doubt that this a reliable source but will ask for an evaluation of it at WP:RSN.
• indiasmagazine.in – appears unreliable and it admits that it peddles gossip.
• bollywoodmdb.com – appears reliable, but I am not sure 100% sure. I will ask for an evaluation of it at WP:RSN.
• zaubacorp.com – appears reliable to source some basic facts.

 — Archer1234 (t·c) 10:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

I have changed my mind. After looking more closely at tring.co.in and indiasmagazine.in I am confident in asserting that they are not reliable. I see no need to go to WP:RSN. If you want to go to WP:RSN on your own to seek support for declaring them reliable, you are certainly entitled to.

Absent anyone else raising any concerns about bollywoodmdb.com, I am willing to accept it for the time being, although it does not appear to support the claim (his grandfather wrote over 100 films) for which it is cited.

The zaubacorp.com appears okay, but it may not support fully the claim to which it is attached. I will have more to say about this in a follow-up post.

As explained above, the IMDb citations are not reliable.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 11:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Biographies of living persons (BLP)

As the article on Siddharth Anand is a biography of a living person (BLP), Wikipedia has special policy just for it (see WP:BLP). You should thoroughly read and follow that entire policy document. Here is some key information from the lead of that policy:

Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page, including but not limited to articles, talk pages, and project pages. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies:

• Neutral point of view (NPOV)
• Verifiability (V)
• No original research (NOR)

Wikipedia must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.

 — Archer1234 (t·c) 10:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Reversion of edits at Siddharth Anand

First, you MUST disclose your paid editing before editing any further.

Second, I will be reverting your recent edits [1] to Siddharth Anand for the following reasons:

1. Use of unreliable sources to support claims
2. Asserting claims that are not supported by the cited sources
3. Use of language that is not neutral (see WP:NPOV)

1. Use of unreliable sources to support claims

• IMDb [2] [3] – unreliable source cited to support various claims, while they may be true, need to be sourced to a reliable source.
• tring.co.in [4] – looks like so many other websites that peddle "Biography, Age, Net Worth, Career, Wife, Movies, etc" articles. Is cited to support the claim of birth date. Per WP:BLPREMOVE: we must remove birth date as no reliable source is cited to verify it (see WP:DOB).
• indiasmagazine.in [5] – yet another "Biography, Career, Age, Wife, Father, Family, Net Worth, Movies" website. It admits that it peddles gossip: About. Is cited to support the claim about spouse's name, that he has a son, and the son's name. So it all becomes unsourced and must be removed per WP:BLPREMOVE. Even if it was reliably source, we would remove name of incidental, non-notable minor children (see WP:BLPPRIVACY, WP:BLPNAMES, WP:MINORS, WP:NONAME).

2. Asserting claims that are not supported by the cited sources

• bollywoodmdb.com [6] – Is cited to support a claim about the # of films for which Siddharth's grandfather, Inder Raj Anand, was a writer, although the source does not appear to support that claim. Nor does it even support that claim that Inder Ray is his grandfather.

3. Use of language that is not neutral (see WP:NPOV)

• There is some non-neutral language throughout (e.g., "acclaimed", "he made an impact", "which was widely loved by kids and family audiences", "featured stars in much loved roles", etc.). If reliable sources say those things, then we can, (subject to due weight) report that, but we cannot say those things in Wikipedia's voice.

 — Archer1234 (t·c) 12:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

---