User talk:Suo motu

Promotional tone and unhelpful sources
Hello Suo motu, I noticed your edits at Venu Govindaraju. What you wrote there amounts to a piece of puffery; with edits such as these you added claims of greatness not supported by reliable third-party sources. The lack of such independent sources is a problem throughout the article, which is largely based on either statistics that you then interpret on your own, and on sources affiliated with Govindaraju. Consider for comparison this claim: "In only two of his 17 most significant papers he collaborated with someone whom he had not previously advised as a PhD student." That claim appears true if we accept the list of "impactful papers" (which does not come with a reliable source measuring impact), but it puts an entirely different spin on the basic facts. Giving the facts such a spin is not acceptable (and neither is it when you are doing it to give a positive spin). You may want to take a look at our guidelines on conflicts of interest, on the use of primary, secondary and tertiary sources and on original synthesis. Wikipedia content should be based on what reliable, independent sources have written about Govindaraju, not on our own interpretation of list entries and search results nor on his own CV or his own writings. Huon (talk) 19:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)