Flyingphoenixchips

Nomination of Swadhin Axom for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Swadhin Axom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swadhin Axom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Kautilya3 (talk) 18:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024

Hi Flyingphoenixchips! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Paresh Baruah several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Paresh Baruah, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:44, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey thanks for replying. You mentioned there weren't any sources, so I added the sources for the same. Also made a note in the talks pages. thank you. Also for the other pages, I added discussion pointers. WIkipedia isn't a place for articles on how you would like them to you. Lets maintain neutrality Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Any categorisation has to rely on WP:SECONDARY sources, and there must be a large number of such sources to satisfy WP:CATDEF. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

What I listed are secondary sources. Journal articles are considered secondary sources, in political sciences Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Newspaper articles as first degree sources were used to support the claim, thank you Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 18:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Those articles only mentioned what Baruah or organisation said. They didn't put it in their own voice. And Baruah himself is not a reliable source for anything other than himself. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:02, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Kautilya3 (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

What I stated. POV should not be the criteria for deletion Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 19:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

I also have concerns with several of this editor's recent article creations, in particular Naara Aaba (notability) and T. Sakhrie (article formatting and reference formatting). Walsh90210 (talk) 01:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

For the T. Sakhrie I did follow the template. As for the organisation articles I wrote, for two of them, yes I do myself feel that they do not meet wikipedia's notability criteria. However Naara Aaba is indeed notable, with several papers written about the organisation, alongside case studies on the same by Harvard Business school @Walsh90210 Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)