Talk:Territorial Army (India)

Content dispute about Captain Muthukrishnan Iyyappan

@114.79.170.56 and Adamgerber80: can you both join talk page now and state your reasons? Cheers. Sdmarathe (talk) 01:08, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Addition of Muthukrishnan Iyyappan as a notable member. Can the IP who is so insistent on adding this particular name, please explain how this person meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines to be included in the list under the notable people.

Even the sources provided are not adequate. [1] a WP:SPS, [2] which seems a reverse copy-right and questionable, [3] makes no mention and is random, [4] no mention and a WP:SPS, [5] no mention and questionable source, [6] is the only source which makes a mention but is unclear how this makes the person notable. Lastly, can the IP declare if they have a COI with this person or not. I strongly suspect, the IP is the person engaging in WP:PROMO. Adamgerber80 (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

This officer is the first ever officer of Territorial Army who was seconded to the Regular Army and was posted in Siachen Glacier, commanding a company of regular Army troops.

This officer was the first officer of Territorial Army who was posted in Defense Services Staff College, the most prestigious tri-services institution in the country.

I guess this is as notable, if not more, than motherhood statements in other sections claiming that some officers had the most number of decorations - or that some officer has joined from either railways etc.,

Quora is a highly peer edited forum and Aviation Defence Universe would not publish any article which has questionable standards. For the information of the editor who removed this section, Aviation Defence Universe is edited by highly experience former defence officers.

The editor who removed this section is not conversant with the Army press releases. No release would mention the name of the officer or his unit in any military operations. The articles are not random. They only refer to the incident mentioned in the article.

To make a person notable, he/she should have done something strategically important. This officer had created an avenue whereby, for the first time, Territorial Army officers can be laterally inducted into Regular Army. Also, he was the first officer to command regular army troops. Isnt it not notable?

The IP belongs to me, a former officer of the Territorial Army (India). I am privy to the information given - though I have no connect, directly or indirectly with the officer. I have heard him speak in a couple of occasion - but never spoke to him directly. And his videos are also available in Youtube.

Hence request that the section be included.

@Maratawarrior: Welcome to Wikipedia. First a very important point, you do not intersperse your answer with another editor's answer. This is not replying to an email but a discussion and for coherence please respond as I have rearranged it.

Now, Quroa is not WP:RS and this is Wikipedia guidelines nor does Aviation Defence meet it and seems to be a case of reverse copy. If you look at the other names on the notable list, each one of them has a page of their own and pass WP:GNG thus are included in the notable members list. We cannot include every person in the TA on Wikipedia and this list is limited to notable individuals (people who meet specific criteria on Wikipedia). This particular person does not qualify for WP:GNG, atleast not based on the references presented. My strong recommendation would be to first create an article on this office via WP:AFC. first the article is created then it can be added here. But I also strongly believe that a article on this office cannot exist since they do not meet WP:GNG guidelines in any shape of form. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: Thanks Adamgerber for your advise. I dont understand where I have interspersed my answer with another editor's. Please let me know about it. Please appreciate the fact that notability is not subjective nor is relational to any other members. In any case, every member feels unique in his/her own respect. But since you took up this topic, may I ask you to show me how a member claiming to have the highest number of decorations can be included without any supporting citing or references.

Again, As I said, this officer in question had created precedences. We are not giving a biography of this officer - like where he got commissioned, where all he served etc., for they are not noteworthy. But the fact which are given, that the was the first officer of TA to be in Regular Army, first officer to serve in DSSC, in Siachen etc., are definitely noteworthy. Please tell me how they are not noteworthy.

Thus this article should be included in the page.

@Maratawarrior: Please do not add the content back until this issue is resolved and this will take time (order of days/weeks). Please provide WP:RS for all claims you have made. Currently what we have to go on are WP:SPS and other sources which do not even verify the content claimed let alone establish notability. And please note, Quora is NOT considered a reference at Wikipedia. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 22:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: WP:RS is compulsory only for those claims which are "material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations". Please specify if the incidents mentioned in this article are / were challenged or likely to be challenged. There was a source of a magazine which was given regarding the officer's service in the Territorial Army and his contributions therein. We are not talking about Quora - but other sources too, where were cited inline. The very fact that aviation defense journal, a specialized journal on defense matters, published the content itself is an endorsement to the validity of the same. Hence, unless you have a specific reason to remove the same - with reference to its notability vis-a-vis other members mentioned in the same article, request you not to remove the same from the article. Let the content be there till someone comes with a challenge to the same. Thank you very much. Maratawarrior

@Maratawarrior: WP:RS is required for "ALL" content which needs to be added on Wikipedia. I have explained to you that there are multiple issues here, first that of WP:RS. You have yet to provide any mainstream media/book/journal which indeed verifies the claims made. Second if that of notability. You have yet to prove notability that too in absence of any WP:RS. Your edits are currently getting disruptive and WP:BLP violations. Please be careful and reach consensus here before you re-add this. Adamgerber80 (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Maratawarrior: Please reply to the points I have raised here. Your edits are getting disruptive. Adamgerber80 (talk) 12:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80:

Please find my replies below:-

1. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. This is what WP:BLP states. The material that is given here is not challenged. And also there are reliable and published sources which were cited. Just because the material in Aviation Defence Universe is same as that in Wikipedia does not take away its credibility. You are questioning the editors of that magazine and their judgement to incorporate this material in their magazine. Also, there is another article in Silicon Magazine which is also quoted in the article.

2. Regarding Reliable Source, the guidelines of Wikipedia states :-

The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:

The piece of work itself (the article, book) The creator of the work (the writer, journalist) The publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press) Any of the three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. These qualifications should be demonstrable to other people." WP:RS

Again, the article has inline citation which conforms to the above standards of Wikipedia. Both magazines, Silicon India and Aviation Defence, are being edited by people who are neutral and who are authoritative in relation to the subject.

3. By constantly removing an article, which you, in your judgement, decided that would not be appropriate, are acting disruptive. Kindly be precise in your objection. Please refrain from giving motherhood statements. You are acting as if you have a specific interest in the article. Please articulate your objection very clearly. Request you not to remove the article unless you have some specific objection to anything written in the same. Please let me know if there are anything which is incorrect, non factual or erroneous. If that be the case, I would stand corrected. Else, refrain from being vengeanceful and interfere in an article where you have no experience, expertise or knowledge. Maratawarrior

@Maratawarrior: Here is the reply:

(1) I still don't get what you mean by not challenged? Content has to have a source, period. It is not the case that one should furnish a WP:RS only when another editor requests one per WP:PROVEIT. Moreover, the aviation defense is a clear case of WP:CIRCULAR and not permissible. We have rejected even newspaper articles as references when in similar cases. The Silicon India magazine is the lone WP:RS and does not state all the content mentioned and by no means establishes the person as notable per Wikipedia standards.

(2) Answered the points you have raised here in point (1) above.

(3) I have clearly articulated my objection to this content based on Wikipedia policies. To reiterate, present a WP:RS apart from Silicon India and establish WP:GNG without which this content cannot be included. As I have clearly stated, I don't have any COI on this or any other article on Wikipedia but this, IMO, seems to be a case of WP:SPA now with a singular focus on adding a very specific name to this article. I am very happy to bring in an admin who can present their view of this discussion. Adamgerber80 (talk) 19:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80:

1. Why do you reject the content of Silicon India. Is it not a published source? What requirements says that there has to be certain minimum number of sources for wikipedia inclusion

2. You articulation is based on frivolous and unfounded justification which is preconceived with no notional or rational backing.

@Fish and karate and Sdmarathe: Dear sirs, can you please share your views on this? While I dont have a COI with this entry, as a territorial army officer myself, I do understand that the contribution of the said officer was very notable in the history of Territorial Army (India). Regarding being a case of WP:SPA, I had just created this account and hence very little edit outside this...but I have edited other articles too related mainly to defense. Thank you very much

@Maratawarrior: I am reiterating this for the last time. Silicon India is not a great WP:RS but even if we keep that aside and consider it, the subject still does not meet WP:GNG to be included under the notable members list. If you do wish to do so, establish WP:GNG. The only way you can do so is to provide multiple WP:RS and creating an article on that person. I won't be replying to this thread unless you bring something of substance to discuss. Currently, it seems that either you don't get Wikipedia policies or don't wish to adhere to them. Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Image imbalance

The article is imbalanced in terms of images. It has images only for the Notable members section, and there are 4 of them in a long queue, where 2 of them are not adjacent to text. I suggest to keep only 1 (max 2) images for the section. Jay ^(Talk) 15:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I want join torittorila army

how can I register or join 42.104.157.209 (talk) 21:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)