User talk:S.D.WIKI

File permission problem with File:Kumar Parakala.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Kumar Parakala.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 09:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Kumar Parakala

Hello, S.D.WIKI,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Kumar Parakala should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kumar Parakala .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Batard0 (talk) 11:07, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I intended to discuss a comparison of the old article with the new one to see if anything had been added to improve its notability claims, although I argued it still did not meet the WP:GNG requirements. Before that discussion took place, however, an administrator appears to have speedily deleted the article. Hence I'd recommend possibly taking it up with him/her. Apologies that I can't be of more assistance here. --Batard0 (talk) 12:56, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Batard0

Can you please tell me what is the next step that would be taken? I am relatively new to wikipedia. Would be great if you can please help.

First, I would recommend reading and becoming familiar with WP:N and specifically WP:GNG. People use these guidelines to decide who and what is and is not considered notable enough to have a separate article on Wikipedia. This way, I think you'll understand where these requests for deletion come from. Trust me, there's no ill will here or any desire to negate the hard work of new editors. It should, in fact, be the opposite, although we have to make sure articles are suitable under these guidelines. After reading the guidelines, I would suggest finding at least two sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and to add them to the article. These should be things like articles in large newspapers that are either about the subject or discuss him and his work in a significant way. Industry blogs, industry publications with a narrow audience, KPMG's website and press releases from KPMG should be avoided for the purposes of this exercise. If at least a couple of these independent sources can be found, I think you'll be good to go. I couldn't find them myself, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Hope this helps. --Batard0 (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Batard0...Really helpful information, Will work on it.

Hi S.D.WIKI! Unforunately I don't have time to walk you through the process right now, but there are numerous help options available. You can try the Help Desk, or live help chat for any specific questions. I also put together a guide for editors who have an affiliation with the subject they are writing about here: WP:PSCOI. The basic idea is to take as many of the substantial mentions of the subject as you can find in reliable secondary sources (books, magazines, newspapers, expert websites) and incorporate them into the article. It appears you have begun doing that. Keep going and I think the article will stand a good chance of remaining on Wikipedia. If for some reason it does get deleted, you can always have an administrator move the article to your personal userspace where you can continue to improve it over time, adding more sources as you do more research or more are published. Good luck! Ocaasi^{t | c} 05:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, S.D.WIKI. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! -- Trevj (talk) 12:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the Teahouse

Hello! S.D.WIKI, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! -- Trevj (talk) 12:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Trevj.. Actually i have been finding it difficult to find my way around. I have created the article "Kumar Parakala" and have been editing it within the wiki guidelines. It was nominated as AFD. I have interacted with a few other editors and added secondary reliable sources . It would be really nice if you can go through the article once and help me find out if there is still some problem with it. Thanks again.!!

Also, can a request to rename the page from Kumar parakala to Kumar Parakala because of a typo (P in Parakala was supposed to be in upper case and not lower) while moving the article makes it eligible to be nominated on AFD?

Two quick points:

When you sign your comments just use ~~~~. It will automatically put your name there and you don't have to type out 'S.D.WIKI' yourself.
An article would never be deleted just because of a typo in the name. That can be easily fixed, but it's best to wait until after the AfD discussion

I did forget to point you to the Teahouse; that's another great option--a community of mentors available just for new editors like yourself. Highly recommended! Ocaasi^{t | c} 13:47, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a reliable secondary source?

I have been researching secondary reliable sources to prove Kumar Parakala's ACS Presidency. Does this article from his alma mater website count as secondary. http://uninews.cqu.edu.au/UniNews/viewStory.do?story=4734 Please help.

Requesting someone to please look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumar_Parakala and help me with which reference could be a secondary link?

That university source is secondary and reliable for being accurate but it is not independent, as the university has an interest in promoting the success of its graduates. It could be used as a reference but it's not ideal to show notability because it's not independent of the subject (like a newspaper might be). For future questions about sources, please feel free to ask at our Reliable sources noticeboard. Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 19:33, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace draft

Hi, in cautionary anticipation of the Kumar Parakala article being deleted, I have copied the content to your userspace here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PriyankaLewis/Parakaladraft.

Should the article be deleted, you can continue to work on and improve the draft there in the hope that better sources will establish his notability in the future.

I do want to say that you've done an admirable job of trying to follow our policies and guidelines; I know it's a lot to learn and you're in a tough spot as a PR representative but I am pleased with your approach. There is a lot of concern in the Wikipedia community about paid/corporate/COI editors and you are perhaps receiving more attention because of that.

In any case, hang in there and keep learning. There are a lot of people willing to help you learn how to edit and interact in the community better. Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 19:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Ocaasi. You have been very kind. Wikipedia isn't so cold after all. :) Thanks again.