User talk:Usernamekiran/sandbox2

Nizam of Hyderabad
Hi,

I copied the entire article to this sandbox, and then made some changes. I didnt add or remove any content, but i deleted and created some new sections. Would you like to help me improving this article? Thanks a lot. — usernamekiran (talk)  15:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Device notability
Hello again Usernamekiran.

I've read your incomplete, but interesting, essay, and have wondered about something... In the section "When should a device be considered as notable?", it says "if one or more", with the following: Then I realized that these are common claims made in promotional products (primary sources, though). I then wondered if "if two or more" would be better, or if perhaps it wouldn't be better if the first point ("It has received coverage in independent sources, which are not related to technology itself (eg: websites detailing technical specifications, reviews, or affiliated websites to the product)" was non-optional. I.e.: "An electronic device should be considered notable enough to have a stand-alone article if it has received coverage in independent sources, which are not related to technology itself (eg: websites detailing technical specifications, reviews, or affiliated websites to the product), and if it meets one or more of the following criteria:"
 * It has a revolutionary technology that sets it apart from other devices from its family.
 * It has made an impact on society/culture and/or on consumer market.

Of course, if it is assumed that those two aforementioned points are clear to be actual, not claims from primary sources, then my suggestion is probably inadequate. Another possibility would be to specify that those two points must be made by independent sources too:
 * It has a revolutionary technology that sets it apart from other devices from its family
 * It has made an impact on society/culture and/or on consumer market

Just ideas... Have a good day, and thanks for working on this, — Paleo Neonate  - 00:02, 17 June 2017 (UTC) I made some changes to the essay. Also, please free to edit the essay as you seem fit. (As I didnt understand much of your previous suggestion lol.) If it is required for wiki bureaucracy, then: "I, usernamekiran, hereby officially give permission to all wikipedia editors to make constructive changes to the essay's draft on this particular sandbox." — usernamekiran (talk)  19:30, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi sorry for a delayed reply, I didnt realise you commented here till a few minutes ago. As usual, your suggestions are very useful, and very much appreciated. I will work on them/on essay in like 8 to 10 hours. Thanks a lot again. :-)
 * I will get back at you (or "to you"?), after 8 to 10 hours.
 * PS: I like to go by usernamekiran. Its cuz of wikipedia that the first character is capitalised. :-| — usernamekiran (talk)  09:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no urgency whatsoever Face-smile.svg . Hmm I will try to remember, it's also a habit of mine to begin names with an uppercase letter, of course (but I see that your signature is indeed lowercase).  I wonder if pings still work without case-sensitive usernames, I tried that in this message.  Previewing,  appears to automatically restore the uppercase...  Thanks, — Paleo  Neonate  - 10:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey :-)
 * Hello again. I have made the proposed edit as you requested, please review and feel free to edit/remove, of course.  My point was that primary sources like promotional material commonly make these claims, but that independent sources are a better way to find out if that is really the case.  Thanks, — Paleo  Neonate  - 04:30, 19 June 2017 (UTC)