User talk:Divyan87

This is Divyan87's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: P.K. Narayana Pillai (March 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by User4edits was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please cite proper sources, not indexes in WorldCat.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:P.K. Narayana Pillai and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 09:14, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Divyan87! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 09:14, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Thanks for your notes. I am writing to clarify the notability of this particular author. He is a renowned scholar of Sanskrit and Malayalam literature. The citations I mentioned are not his but scholars and other notable figures who have reviewed his work. Additionally, he has won a Sahitya Akademi Award--this is the national prize for arts and letters in India (which I have linked). This should meet the eight academic criteria. Can you please clarify why the article has not been accepted? I have removed the WorldCat references. I have also added a number of secondary sources that authenticate credibility.

Best,

Divya Nair, Ph.D.

University of Illinois Urbana Champaign Divyan87 (talk) 18:55, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the author of these three citations:

Swami Tapsyananda, "Introduction." Dharmasāgarah: The Spiritual Sea: A Poem on Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa in Sanskrit with English Translation. P.K. Narayana Pilla. Trivandrum: St. Joseph's Press, 1990.
Pillai, P.K. Narayana (2022). Vishvabhānu [The Universal Light] (2nd ed.). Thiruvananthapuram: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama. pp. 20–21.
Pillai, P.K. Narayana (2022). Vishvabhānu [The Universal Light] (2nd ed.). Thiruvananthapuram: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama. p. 20.

To know more about notablitiy, please read the comments left by me on the draft. Regarding Sahitya Akademi award, you will have to provide reliable and independent sources for that.

Lastly,To answer Can you please clarify why the article has not been accepted? -- It has been not accepted for precisely the reason which is mentioned as a reason for not accepting. Hope this helps. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Divyan87, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 18:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Hi can you clarify what and where the AfC comments? I sent you a message as well. Divyan87 (talk) 19:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following part {{AFC submission|d|ilc|u=Divyan87|ns=118|decliner=User4edits|declinets=20240317091446|ts=20240317042610}}  {{AFC comment|1=Please [[WP:CITE|cite]] proper sources, not indexes in WorldCat. Thanks, <small> Please feel free to ping/mention </small> -- [[User:User4edits|User4edits]] ([[User talk:User4edits|T]]) 09:14, 17 March 2024 (UTC)}} Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T)

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions to Draft:P.K. Narayana Pillai has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. Nothing has been removed. But this is for your information to not try to game the system by changing author names to make it sound independent, or adding references that have nothing to do with material cited. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 14:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: P.K. Narayana Pillai (March 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by User4edits were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to

meet any of the eight academic-specific criteria
or cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth

Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

All sources are Self published or primary sources. Please see the message above, especially -- "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)".

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:P.K. Narayana Pillai and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 18:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Divyan87. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:P.K. Narayana Pillai, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. What is your connection with the individual, and how did you manage to get this this photo of his? Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User4editsThis is my grandfather. I do not work on literature in Sanskrit but in English and in English translation (I am also a scholar). The primary interest is to ensure that scholars working Malayalam and Sanskrit literature have access to knowledge about his contribution. This is the literary field so this entry is for purely educational purposes not profit. I work on English literature and Indian literature in translation. I am not being paid by any organization for this activity. The photo is from family archives. I see here that “These secondary interests are not treated as wrong in and of themselves, but become objectionable when they are believed to have greater weight than the primary interests. Conflict of interest rules in the public sphere mainly focus on financial relationships since they are relatively more objective, fungible, and quantifiable, and usually involve the political, legal, and medical fields. I acquired the photo from family archives. I have noticed that there is no Wikipedia entry about him even though his books were reprinted recently.” Thanks— Divyan87 (talk) 04:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User4edits

also as I mentioned, the poem Vishvabhanu won the Sahitya Akademi award in 1982 (this is linked on the entry; you can scroll down the list and you should see the name linked; however, when you click on his name there it takes you to a different P.K. Narayana Pillai; as such, this page is needed for disambiguation. The Sahitya Akademi is an independent award granted by a panel of judges and considered the highest literary honors in India, just for context Divyan87 (talk) 04:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Here is what you need to do:

disclose a COI
Bring reliable, independent, and secondary sources which show that this individual has received the said award.
In the draft, cut/remove the parts about his life which are not notable (and can not be cited independently)
Let me know once these are done.

I hope you will understand the importance of citing strong and credible sources (as said above) as a PhD.

Edit: Also, make sure you maintain a WP:NPOV.Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 04:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User4editsI thank you for your due diligence and hope you understand where I am coming from re: the necessity to disambiguate the false link to the other P.K. Narayana Pillai who did *not* produce the work attributed to him, for the sake of accuracy and preventing misinformation. All of the information that is included here is from secondary sources cited in the entry. I did not want to keep citing the same sources. As I noted, there is a Wikipedia entry on the Sahitya Akademi award directly linked which states that he received the award but as I mentioned in my previous message to you, that entry is linked to the wrong P.K. Narayana Pillai. This page would allow me to rectify that error. I understand you need external verification to authenticate that change as well. So, I will cite the secondary source (4 critical biographical introductions by different scholars) where it says he received said award as well for your reference. I will let you know when this is done! Divyan87 (talk) 04:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please specify which parts are not neutral. This can be culturally specific and thus can vary. Divyan87 (talk) 04:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am also from India. WP:NPOV in English is largely free of culture specific. You can use your best judgement to only put what is verifiable in RS sources. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 07:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I'm not sure about that as from a rhetorical standpoint different cultures view writing in different ways. I am not sure which parts are neutral, so please specify so that there is less miscommunication, regardless of where you are from. Thanks. 153.33.48.98 (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is simple. Use WP:NPOV language. You may also read this -- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch.

Also, consider Logging in to you account while editing. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 13:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to indicate which parts are not written in NPOV. As far as I am seeing it is neutral and stating the facts. As an editor, remember to be specific. Divyan87 (talk) 14:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have a COI, that is why I have advised you to

maintain a NPOV, in general
mention only what is verifiable.

Please go through this Help:Your first article to learn more in general. I see that you have not disclosed your COI yet. Please do it on your page and on the Draft talk page. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 14:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User disclosed the COI and it was moved to the draft talk page by me. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 14:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: P.K. Narayana Pillai (March 18)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by User4edits were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to

meet any of the eight academic-specific criteria
or cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth

Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Most of the references are self-published, such as "The Universal Light" (ref) where you have changed the author name from this individual to Nair, yet the cited chapter is "About Author". Please do not try to deceive. References with "my esteemed friend" are not independent. Further, you have put claims out of the blue like principal of such college, without any reference. Most of the references are not available to be cross- checked. The website you have cited [1] has no mention of Pillai.

Lastly, someone by the same name, similar achievements, same domain, and even listed the same book in his works (The Universal Light) exists at: P. K. Narayana Pillai.

You have a COI with the subject. Despite being a PhD, you are not able to demonstrate competence. Please understand.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:P.K. Narayana Pillai and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 14:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. ""The Universal Light" (ref) where you have changed the author name from this individual to Nair, yet the cited chapter is "About Author"." That is a separate essay by Nair in an edited collection that includes the poem. It is not self-published. It was published by the Ramakrishna Ashrama in 2022. Please check your editorial practices. Please carefully review my comments in the Talk.

2. "My esteemed friend" was a term used to indicate knowledge of the scholar in Indian scholarly terms. Please do not try to deceive.

3. The person who is linked with Universal Light is not the right P.K. Narayana Pillai as I told you. I have cited more than six independent sources. This is bullying. Divyan87 (talk) 17:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I am not sure how you are an editor but do not have access to JSTOR. I have linked the articles, you simply have to log in and cross reference. Divyan87 (talk) 17:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let us see some facts

Here Pillai, P.K. Narayana (2022). Vishvabhānu [The Universal Light] (2nd ed.). Thiruvananthapuram: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama. p. 20 is writtten by the individual himself; and here it conveniently changes into Nair. You then go on to cite this Nair multiple times on Draft.
I have repeatedly told you to not put anything which can not be verified, yet you have put sources such as https://orimssku.in/ which is nothing but the homepage of where you claim he has worked.

In light of the above, I am of the view that you are highly or perhaps too much motivated to get this draft on your grandfather published. Unfortunately, after my repeated kind and helpful words you have chosen to not only personally attack me, but also completely ignore the messages I was trying to help you with. Best of Luck. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 19:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see these facts:

1. Here Pillai, P.K. Narayana (2022). Vishvabhānu [The Universal Light] (2nd ed.). Thiruvananthapuram: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama. p. 20 is writtten by the individual himself; and here it conveniently changes into Nair. You then go on to cite this Nair multiple times on Draft. *NB: Nair is the name of the scholar who wrote the critical biographical essay introducing the work. The edition was *not* self-published. The publisher independently solicited the manuscript. You are mistaken. I have told you this multiple times. There are several other sources that verify the authenticity of the work's award and publication by the author as well. You are not a subject expert so please do not misrepresent yourself as such.

2. I have included that webpage not indicate that he worked there but to indicate where the library is. I can remove it. I have also linked the library directly on the Wikipedia page.

In light of my view, I think you are perhaps highly motivated (perhaps politically) to criticize this draft. There are hundreds of editors on this site, not just you. Your comments are unprofessional and discouraging to first-time editors. I am ignoring your messages because I do not find your mode of assistance helpful; please remove yourself from this draft. Another more knowledgeable and diplomatic editor would be needed.

Best wishes-- Divyan87 (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Divyan, if you want this to go up, keep doing what you are doing: find the secondary sources that talk about the man and his work. I tried to give a bit of a push in the publishable direction. I'll be back to help out. For the record: User4edits didn't do or say anything wrong here and I appreciate their time and effort, and please do NOT make accusations about them being politically motivated or whatever, OK? Drmies (talk) 22:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, thanks for your contributions here and for your push. As I have noted numerous times in this thread, I did not use a self-published source; the source was published by an independent press and the author was a scholar who was writing a critical biopraphical introduction in the same book that the poem was also reprinted in. That was an unfair comment. User then went on to say that I had "conveniently changed" the name to "Nair" when I did not "change" anything. That is the name of the scholar who produced the critical biographical introduction. The source is peer-reviewed by a knowledgeable team of scholars and pundits. It is not self-published and biased to suggest that. User also did not review the JSTOR article I cited which was freely available. These were my reasons for challenging their edits. There are now more than three secondary sources that confirm what this article is stating. I removed the website User said I should remove, if you look below and followed most of their first two round of comments. Divyan87 (talk) 23:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Divyan, I have no dog in this fight, and I prefer there be no fight in the first place. I have not looked into the matter of the alleged self-published source and I'm not going to--as you can see I've been going through the article piece by piece, and I'll see the source when I get to it. But please do not make accusations of "politically motivated"--that is very unlikely to be true. As for the JSTOR stuff, look at the citation templates I used and follow that. Don't do "nowiki" around the URL, that makes it only more difficult to access them. If you have more sources, put them in. Actually, what I'd like--and you can do this more easily than me--is a list of his published books. Write that up, put it in a "Publications" section, chronologically, and perhaps organize it by genre. And add as many reviews etc. as you can find. If we can get this in shape, we might could get your grandfather on the front page. User4edits, if you can help with this that would be great. Drmies (talk) 00:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies, thank you for your suggestions. I haven't had a chance to work on this but am on it today. I am not sure what "nowiki" around the URL means. I am preparing a list of his published works. I look forward to finishing this project. Divyan87 (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Divyan87!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I'm Dustfreeworld, one of the thousands of editors here. Below are some pages that you might find helpful:

While editing Wikipedia:

Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Be bold, but do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
Provide reliable sources to the content you add. If you are adding biomedical information, please follow this guideline.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.

If you have any questions, check out the Teahouse or ask me on my talk page. Please sign your messages on discussion pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, welcome! ----Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks @Dustfreeworld Divyan87 (talk) 21:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:P. K. Narayana Pillai (born 1910) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:P. K. Narayana Pillai (born 1910). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 05:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! Divyan87 (talk) 14:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]