This page was proposed for deletion by Sciencefish ( talk · contribs) on 30 June 2024.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sini Shetty article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Beauty Pageants Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Beauty Pageants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of beauty pageants, their contestants and winners on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Beauty PageantsWikipedia:WikiProject Beauty PageantsTemplate:WikiProject Beauty PageantsBeauty Pageants articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. India Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles Fashion Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article: You must be logged-in, have 10 edits and an account age of 4 days Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Please note as above, this is not a forum or page for discussing the article subject. Sciencefish ( talk) 14:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I think it's in the rules that an article can be improved with unsourced content that seems noncontentious to the article's editors. 50.107.186.102 ( talk) 18:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

While maybe having the deletion petition ignored, it seems this new editor without any stated reasons and maybe being based on their misperceived editorial disputes over Wikipedia's inline citation requirements (that seem to be clearly organized) that's been going on here, just declared the whole subject as a contentious blp, seemingly to violate any normal editorial process being highlighted and that is said by them as being required now - that I'm now stating was what was/is being followed by a disputed editor (apparently to this editor solely myself not them in this arbitration remedies design) for what are the contemplated established rules for Wikipedia, before this move from this editor that's being questioned under what also seems a normal editorial process of trying at discussion on the article's main talk page. I'd like further explanation for this questioning of their process from this editor as to what rule they are using to declare this blp a contentious topic other than if this is being asserted as caused by an editorial dispute over the potential assertion that in fact easily verifiable noncontentious material for a blp can be agreed upon by an article's editors and used to improve the article without it having an inline citation if never challenged by any editor. In this case, having been discussed and attempted, being what this all is discovered to have been about and what occurred here as a dispute over those facts and some editors not wanting to follow these rules and finding easily verifiable noncontentious material that improves the article contentious among other problems asserted quickly without much back and forth. 50.107.140.133 ( talk) 12:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC) reply

If you disagree with this decision, please take it to appeal as stated at Wikipedia:Contentious topics, this talk page is not the place to do it. Sciencefish ( talk) 13:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC) reply

"The appeal process has three stages." "Ask the administrator who fist made the contentious topic restrictions..." "If the editor is blocked, the appeal may be made by email." It seems that on the main talk page like this is fine. It's not really an appeal but further discussion about improving the article and what are Wikipedia's rules on inline citation requirements. It seems this editor did single out my last work at trying to improve the article, which have been minor in amount and persistence up to here, but your article deletion work hasn't been addressed yet? 50.107.140.133 ( talk) 13:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC) reply

If you really "think it's in the rules that an article can be improved with unsourced content that seems noncontentious to the article's editors", then cite the policy in question and link to it. Because I'm certainly not aware of any. Daniel Case ( talk) 02:58, 29 July 2024 (UTC) reply

For now I'd rather have easily verifiable noncontentious material that improves the article that is not challenged by any editors as what's contemplated as being allowable following Wikipedia rules to be edited into an article without having an inline citation. "Responsibility for providing citations" All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material... Using inline citations, provides reliable, published sources for all: material whose verifiability has been challenged contentious matter about living and recently deceased persons. Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source. Do not leave unsourced or poorly sourced material in an article if it might damage the reputation of living people. Only from wp:proveit. Since you've found any and all material contentious about the living subject of this article as the action needed against this contemplated kind of possible ruling that left unchallenged material can remain in the article with no inline citation (where other types of editor reactions such as citation needed can be used also etc.) it would seem along with your unawareness of their possible use (no inline citation needed ruling) you're now also unaware that noncontentious material can exist also? It would seem with some editors around it can be the case to assume something you'd use to improve the article without an inline citation will certainly be challenged making it contentious. 50.32.113.188 ( talk) 00:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC) reply