Talk:Angana P. Chatterji

Self published sources
Regarding this edit and this edit, please see WP:SELFPUB: Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field. The mere fact that they are self-published is not sufficient to remove that information or the sources. -- irn (talk) 15:20, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It is all fair to remove what is self-sourced. We should not be reporting facts based on primary sources, and in this case that amounts to stacking the resume. Facts are relevant only if they are reported by independent sources, not personal website or unreliable opinion blog like "sacw.net". WP:SELFPUB: "It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities)," but statements like "also holds a PhD in the Humanities from CIIS", "retains her Indian citizenship and is a permanent resident of the United States", "worked as director of research at the Asia Forest Network, an environmental advocacy group", "joined the teaching staff of the CIIS in 1997", involve claims about others. Raymond3023 (talk) 15:21, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Those are all claims about the Chatterji. To classify them as claims about third parties is to fundamentally misunderstand what it means to make a claim. -- irn (talk) 15:44, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Such information needs to be backed by independent sources, otherwise it is not important for inclusion. Raymond3023 (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. That's the whole point of WP:SELFPUB. -- irn (talk) 15:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that the statements mentioned above are admissible under WP:SELFPUB. Raymond, if you want to contest them, you need to provide sources to the contrary. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:04, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not contesting, only asking for better sources, for some prevalent examples of similar removals, see David Van Wie and Mike Cernovich. You also can't find one FA article that has resorted to WP:SELFPUB. Raymond3023 (talk) 16:33, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The information in those examples was removed because the material was unduly self-serving. Chatterji's citizenship or where she was educated are not unduly self-serving. They're merely biographical. -- irn (talk) 16:40, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I assumed that you were referring to things more than just her citizenship and education, I have restored both now, and found a secondary source for citizenship. Raymond3023 (talk) 16:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to add back in the deleted "Diasporic Hindu Nationalism" section. The section refers to notable reports the subject has contributed to, and the citations go to those reports-- I don't think that's self-serving or self-citing on particularly contentious claims? I'll add newspaper references too.Torren (talk) 05:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Re-stored the content on relevant sections with secondary sources. Keep the recent discussion of biographies of living persons noticeboard in mind. Raymond3023 (talk) 05:36, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Torren's edits
Your recent edit summary was misleading. Concern is not only with self-published sources but also unreliable sources and ultimately some of the content was trivial. You are ignoring the consensus on WP:BLPN (Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive269) thread which was started by you. Everyone had told you that these sources and information included with them should be removed. Kindly abide by the consensus. Capankajsmilyo(Talk 17:33, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Torren's edits once again!!
Torren (who has declared a COI with reference to the article) is trying to erase relevant parts of the article.

Tatsuro22 (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Talk page archive showing Torren's past behaviour
Might be of interest in view of Torren's repeated attempts to remove legitimate information and sources:

https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Talk:Angana_P._Chatterji/Archive_1#Infobox_and_other_edits

Tatsuro22 (talk) 06:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Third opinion refused: The content issue has not been discussed. Please explain why you believe the material should be included or removed here.As suggested, it may also be relevant to bring it up at the BLP noticeboard if outside input is needed on BLP issues.For the behavioural issues, WP:AN/I may be more suitable (but beware of the boomerang). Regarding the issue of logging out to continue edit warring, see WP:LOGOUT. (Courtesy ping, , and . will also been notified) — LauritzT (talk) 18:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I have brought this issue to the BLP notice board, and am hoping for other eyes on this. I am ok for this article to be protected until a BLP admin can come review Tatsuro22's edits. Tatsuro22 is not the first editor (login created May 2022) to attempt to connect Fai to Chatterji though tenuous connections, and this continued effort puts reputations and people at risk, clearly a BLP violation. Tatsuro22's poor reading of the 2011 Atlantic article should not stand. I will not repeat the misinformed argument here as a quick search for "Chatterji" in the Atlantic article (it only appears once) will show that the article does not provide evidence of the "controversy" Tatsuro22 is trying to insert into this article. Thank you. Torren (talk) 12:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)