Talk:Byju Raveendran

The article on such a prominent entrepreneur is too short. (Shaheen Abdul (talk) 13:28, 29 June 2020 (UTC))


 * K 39.38.215.209 (talk) 11:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Considering to write in a more elaborate and properly sourced format. If the other editors of this page do not have any issue with it. (Shaheen Abdul (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2020 (UTC))

Needs a page on 'Decacorn', these new age business terms and popular notions needs to be added and updated in the wikipedia knowledge sphere (Shaheen Abdul (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC))

Notability concern and also Divya
Is Byju notable separate from the company he co-founded? Also Draft:Divya Gokulnath has a draft in process in a similar state. AngusW🐶🐶F ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:48, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You removed the notability tag when in fact you're the largest contributor to the article and may have conflict of interest. You may want to restore the tag, and let this discussion take its course. cc: . Murtaza.aliakbar (talk) 02:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , after the discussion at User talk:Murtaza.aliakbar where you accuse me of tendentious editing without evidence, your unfounded and untrue suggestion here that I have a conflict of interest, apparently for removing a notability tag that WP:MTR clearly states I could (with User:AngusWOOF reviewing the article after I removed the tag, which can been seen in the edit history of the article), and the discussions at Talk:Divya Gokulnath, I am taking a break from these discussions, but welcome any perspective User:AngusWOOF may have to share in the meantime. Beccaynr (talk) 03:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I didn't accuse you without evidence. The evidence is right here on this talk page and the page's edit history. Murtaza.aliakbar (talk) 04:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Expensive cleanup
you claim your reverts of my edit help maintain text-source integrity. This is trivially refuted: In 2015, as smartphone screen sizes increased, Byju's launched an app developed by Byju Raveendran. is supported by four sources.

1. FirstPost: Checks out. It does mention. My edit, which you reverted twice, captured this. This article, though, says nothing about. That's a cardinal syn.

2. Hindustan Times: Talks about phone screen sizes, but nothing about Raveendran himself coding the app:.

3. Bloomberg: Fails to support anything at all.

4. GQ: In fact claims something else entirely:  Though, created doesn't really mean developed (the latter has a very specific meaning than the former).

I don't get how the reverts are helping "restore text-source integrity" when in fact they are doing the opposite. Murtaza.aliakbar (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Your initial deletion of sourced content from this article was marked with an edit summary of "wp:integrity," and at first I reverted it with "Restore text-source integrity", and placed a warning on your Talk page. As I stated on your Talk page before you posted your comment here, I should have been more clear in the edit summary about why I also reverted your other unexplained edits, including the removal of content from reliable sources, but I have made this more clear in my next edit summary, as well as indicated that all of the sources refer to Byju as the founder or creator of the app. I am more than willing to work with you on revising this article, but let's talk about it on the article Talk page. Thank you. To further clarify my reversion, it also seems both unnecessary and unconstructive to add deprecated archive links to the article (and to this Talk page) for sources that are currently live, and it does not seem constructive to add Anglosphere to the text "English-speaking countries," when the source does not indicate this more specific meaning is intended. I also disagreed with your addition of italics for the title of the National Startup Advisory Council, per MOS:ITALICS.
 * Initially, you cited WP:INTEGRITY, and this guideline includes: The distance between material and its source is a matter of editorial judgment, and scrolling down on the page, there is WP:CITEBUNDLE, which includes, Bundling is also useful if the sources each support a different portion of the preceding text, which indicates citations can be listed at the end of a sentence when each supports a different portion of the preceding text. By contrast, now that WP:SYNTHESIS is raised as a concern, this policy states, Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source. Based on the sources and text, the cites at the end of the sentence are not WP:SYNTHESIS. I further do not see any basis within the sources to distinguish the description "develop" and "create," especially when a source uses the term 'develop,' as you note above, and I am unsure how this concern relates to my restoration of sourced information about the context of the creation of the app (i.e. smartphone sizes increasing), and Byju developing the app. The overall reason for my reversion is that I think it is important to include information about Byju's personal accomplishments in his BLP, and the deletions of reliably-sourced content appears to be unconstructive, and it further appears to be unconstructive to add deprecated and unnecessary archive links, the particular wikilink, and italics as noted above. Beccaynr (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You must know you are wiki-lawyering. I'll leave you to this article that you think is oh-so-well-crafted inline with whatever *section* of various policies you seem comfortable with. Enjoy. May other editors have patience that I lack. Murtaza.aliakbar (talk) 22:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Naming conventions
"In this Indian name, the name Raveendran is a patronymic, and the person should be referred to by the given name, Byju."

Should according to whom be referred to by the given name, in which contexts? We talk about "Einstein" and not "Albert", for example, although "Albert" is the given name. Likewise "Biden" not "Joe". Polar Apposite (talk) 16:25, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * This may be a question better asked at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 16:47, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Latest Net worth!!
Now Forbes mentioned his net worth as zero!! Kindly update!! 116.50.85.172 (talk) 16:53, 4 April 2024 (UTC)