Talk:Harikumar Pallathadka

Scope of this article
This article is not the place to list all the RTI applications that the guy has made. We need sources that discuss him as a person rather than merely mentioning his name in passing. How can we possibly assign weight to in excess of 2500 applications unless we have such secondary sources? - Sitush (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I've just reverted the reinstatement made on 16 January. The edit summary then was "for review" but a fortnight has passed, no obvious reviews has taken place and the poor content referred to above was just hanging there. Please discuss before reinstating once more. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ... and again. Please discuss - you do not own the article, as indeed you claim in the headers to this page. - Sitush (talk) 09:20, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Sure and agreed. Of course nobody owns anything in Wikipedia. I understand your concerns and I will sincerely try to re-write the whole article in a day or two. Will take care of WP:NPOV. Later, we will discuss the things here. Thanks. -- Bharathiya (talk) 07:47, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I have edited the article and published the edited version.

IMHO

1) The Family details such as name of the father and mother is allowed in good faith unless challenged or objected or there is strong reason to believe that the details are wrong.

2) The links / pdf files / decisions from Government websites are reliable references. And also the documents officially issued under RTI by a Government official are reliable references. (irrespective of website it is uploaded or its online sources)

3) Multiple links of the same news are allowed because some newspapers routinely remove the contents while some others retain for a long time. Since there is no way to know which paper has what practice multiple links must be allowed as to keep the article alive.

4) List of books written by him may be allowed as all books have correct ISBN's and have online presence including major websites like Amazon. This proves that the information is correct.

5) Gallery is allowed because: 1) it is not a personal gallery, 2) people in the photos are notable and also on wiki, 3) all the photos have been released under creative commons license and on wikipedia or wikimedia, 4) Such galleries are commonly allowed on wiki.

6) Yes, Highbeam Research is a subscription required research and archive site. However this website is one of the highly recommended and accepted reliable source of references on Wiki.

I sincerely hope that now the article is neutrally update. If you have any more challenges, kindly discuss. Thank you. Bharathiya (talk) 11:18, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * You have completely missed my point and seem to be demonstrating ownership issues, despite the note at the top of this page. More, it seems likely that you are connected to the Pallathadkas, juding by your almost single-purpose contribution history. Might I suggest that you discuss each item and gain consensus before amending the article? - Sitush (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * For example, while I have no problem with the Books section being reinstated if they are not of the self-published variety and if the ISBNs do check out (Political Ethics of Chanakya" - ISBN 978-8191097702 is not at GBooks, Amazon or worldCat, for example), I object strongly to "He hails from Pallathadka, a hamlet in Kasaragod district of the State of Kerala in India. He is a Havyaka Brahmin. He is the eldest son of late Pallathadka Shankaranarayana Bhat and Shyamala. - that is a gross violation of WP:BLP because it is unsourced. - Sitush (talk) 18:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok fine I agree. Thanks. Bharathiya (talk) 07:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Have now removed the unsourced statement and unsourced book. Hope now it is ok. If you still have any objections, plz discuss. Thank u. Bharathiya (talk) 07:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The gallery is unnecessary. We do not usually show numerous images of the same person unless there is some evolutionary merit, ie: a notable shift in activities or age. They are basically undue and usually fancruft, as I think is the case here. Instead, we tend to use the Commonscat template and ensure that the images are at Commons. I've not even bothered checking whether the licensing etc of the gallery images is correct, although I'm willing to bet that some should be deleted entirely from WMF servers for that reason. - Sitush (talk) 08:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually, I've just had a quick click-through and it seems that the images are yours. That suggests a WP:conflict of interest, which would explain your issues of ownership. Why not just select a single decent portrait image (or take one, since you seem to know the man) and use it in the infobox. Then select one decent group shot/picture with a notable individual and use that in the body of the article? - Sitush (talk) 08:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I would like to humbly say it again that there is no standard rule against galleries, and that is true especially when people in the photos are notable individuals. However I will remove 2 photos from the article and keep the remaining photos. However, I do not have any portraits of him, so i cannot use them. Further I would like again to keep the sentence "He hails from Pallathadka, a hamlet in Kasaragod district of the State of Kerala in India." in the history category as almost all the references mention and confirm the same. Thanks.-- Bharathiya (talk) 08:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * If you have a reliable source for the statement then cite that source. The gallery is going to go: you have an apparent conflict of interest and it is not an acceptable section because it is not informative/encyclopaedic. It is perfectly possible to explain that X, Y and Z have met with Pallathadka without inclusion of poor photos from fans etc. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, Fan photo does not amount to be a conflict of interest. If someone supports something it does not mean that he has a conflict of interest on the same. If I have adopted this article that does not mean that I have a conflict of interest on this article. This is like saying every citizen has a conflict of interest on their PM or their elected leader. And every citizen has a apparent conflict of interest on his motherland and it's related issues. Kindly explain. Thanks Bharathiya (talk) 12:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * And something will have to happen with what remains in the books section. They are published by Lambert Academic Publishing and are clearly vanity publications. - Sitush (talk) 09:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry sir, I beg to differ and I humbly challenge you on this. IMHO books with valid isbn number, reliable sources (in this case we have German National Library Catalogue (https://portal.dnb.de/opac.htm?method=simpleSearch&query=Harikumar+Pallathadka)) and Amazon listing which is more than enough to keep the listing of books written by a person. The publisher does not even matter and it is your personal opinion. Thanks. --Bharathiya (talk) 12:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Being listed by Amazon means nothing. It doesn't even mean that they stock the things (indeed, they won't because it is print-on-demand stuff). Similarly, having an ISBN means nothing: most publishers in most countries now subscribe to the ISBN schema, which is merely a unique identifier. Would we list his car just because it carries a registration number issued by his government? The photos are going, the books are going and, yes, quite a lot more is going to be removed also, if only in accordance with PEA - some of the wording is atrocious WP:POV. - Sitush (talk) 13:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Sir, Please Do not try to enforce your prejudiced views here. Amazon is a reliable source and being listed on amazon is not a privilege that every book enjoys. It clearly means the book as per global standards exists. Having ISBN makes it unique. Being in German National Library Catalogue gives enough reasoning to list the books of a person. Books and cars are two different things. Book is a creation or creative work. It has its own value. We are discussing here. You are being authoritarian with the statement "The photos are going, the books are going and, yes, quite a lot more is going to be removed also". You will achieve nothing by pulling in your personal opinions and point of views here. I have respectfully edited the article taking into consideration you healthy and constructive suggestions, but dont take it for granted and bully Wikipedia on what appears to be right for you. Nothing is going based on your bullying. Provide exact rule of Wikipedia based on which you talk about removing the gallery and book list. Thanks. -- Bharathiya (talk) 15:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * This is simply not the way we work. There are a number of problems.
 * 1. His books. They are indeed published by a vanity press, our article says "VDM's publishing methods have received criticism for the soliciting of manuscripts from thousands of individuals, for providing non-notable authors with the appearance of a peer-reviewed publishing history, for benefiting from the free contributions of online volunteers, and for insufficiently disclosing the free nature of their content." If we are to include them, and I don't think we should, we need to make it clear that they are self-published with a link to our article on the publisher. The publisher definitely does matter. And you say that being listed in the German National Library Catalogue and Amazon means that they are what, something special? All German published books are in the national catalogue, and Amazon publishes a number of this publisher's books themselves. A listing on Amazon means absolutely nothing in terms of Wikipedia.
 * 2.We don't need multiple links, dead links aren't going to kill the article, see WP:DEADLINK.
 * 3.I have no idea what you mean about Highbeam being a reliable source. I guess you can use it for an article about Highbeam, but it isn't a source. I an others use it to locate and read sources. It doesn't belong in the citations.
 * 4.Galleries - see WP:GALLERY, eg "Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). However, the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject. Images in a gallery should be suitably captioned to explain their relevance both to the article subject and to the theme of the gallery, and the gallery should be appropriately titled (unless the theme of the gallery is clear from the context of the article). Images in a gallery should be carefully selected, avoiding similar or repetitive images, unless a point of contrast or comparison is being made. " These are just basically publicity shots which don't seem to relate to the main activities of the subject. And we don't put 'Dr.' in front of people's names, by the way.
 * 5.Government documents need to be handled carefully. They are WP:Primary sources and "may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the source but without further, specialized knowledge." It absolutely matters what website they are on, we cannot use non-government websites for government documents. (And that applies to for instance Riseupnet, we can't use documents hosted there).
 * 6.The language is POV, eg "Through his persistent efforts", "Due to his constant efforts", etc.
 * 7.I also think the RTI stuff can be heavily condensed. Dougweller (talk) 16:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for your kind review and fine editing, sir. The following line may be reinstated "His RTI applications on pending cases and under trail prisoners revealed that a more than 30 million cases are pending before various courts in India (as of 2006) and about a quarter million under-trials are languishing in the jails across India (as of 2006)." Because the source indeed mentions his name in the second half (http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/india/Nearly-30-million-cases-pending-in-courts/Article1-224578.aspx).

IMHO the tags can now be removed as it has been sufficiently cleaned/toned down by our friend, User:Dougweller, the Administrator. Bharathiya (talk) 11:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harikumar Pallathadka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130930050007/http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Maharashtra/This-man-keeps-digging-out-official-information/Article1-224057.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Maharashtra/This-man-keeps-digging-out-official-information/Article1-224057.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:17, 30 October 2017 (UTC)