Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prakash Neupane (4th nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Enough for me. I'm deleting and salting. Thanks everyone. Missvain (talk) 21:35, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prakash Neupane

[edit]
AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Prakash Neupane (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) winning some poem competitions doesn't makes anyone eligible for having an article on wp, only having one or two RS does'nt allows the person to be considered as notable, Other Experienced editors must discuss about this page !! Suryabeej (talk) 11:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment- I had AFD'ed the page after finding it had been AFD'ed 3-4 times and lacks sufficient refs, as the page wasn't refered properly, I now searched in depth and found few more wp:rs which I feel MIGHT allow him to pass GNG weakly thus I am withdrawing this AFD, I don't have objection if any other editor feels like afding it, but I feel it soft-passes the GNG criteria. Sorry My bad. Suryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 07:16, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well the new source you added is a copy of this source and you added this source which is written by same author who wrote most of his articles. And this is a contributor post. Don't know WHO or WHAT changed your mind and I feel something is wrong here. Regards. JAHANZAIBARIF 08:38, Sunday, December 29, 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Suryabeej (talk) 11:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Suryabeej (talk) 11:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: He's basically a musician not only a poet. All the news sources which are provided in the article are RS. [1] He has won awards and have released three musical album and has done musical tour which is enough to be here.[2][3][4] [5][6] and the article in wikipedia is since 2018 And a there's a questionable mark with your account as you put AFD first than again you did CSD and you were questioning with administrator about why article is live here. Owlf (talk) 12:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
well forcing to proof someone non notable as notable doesn't work over here and since you seem to have some special care for the subject ;), I would like to enlighten you with the fact that among all the rubbish links provided above just [7] this one is Okeish, Rest all are the Puff pieces (Clearly paid one including the Zee and Asianet without any byline everyone here on wikipedia knows it clear well that how Indian media can provide puff pieces so you can't force to show the subject as Notable because it clearly fails wp:musicbio and wp:rs both.Suryabeej (talk) 17:46, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also I Afded the article because I found it utter promotional and full of non reliable rubbish paid publication links, and when I saw it has been deleted again and again for 4 times and despite of that you recreated it I had to ask the admin what made it stay despite of all these :

Suryabeej (talk) 17:57, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would request you to kindly enlighten us with which source except The Hindu you find Reliable? Suryabeej (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're going Crazy here, the article was created via draft and according to COI I'm Nepali wikipedin so I've created many nepali musicians wikipedia and u created this one too and another thing is you can't vote for two times as you filed WP:AFD Abc News Nepal, Taha Khabar, Meroflim and other Nepali press are national media of Nepal which are reliable and pass WP:RS and aren't puffery. Being written in Nepali news sources it cannot be called as puffery and you're just registered here being iactive for few days and direct jump here in the article which I've created in wikipedia with lots of the article background resources which i had also never known made me amazed. Owlf (talk) 18:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Suryabeej- Just curious, what makes you think The Hindu is a WP:RS? nirmal (talk) 10:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nirmaljoshi: bro the answer to your this question is here, just check the list closely. :)Suryabeej (talk) 10:35, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Suryabeej:-Great!nirmal (talk) 10:51, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Suryabeej: striking the dele*te !vote, as you are the nominator and have already effectively !voted. --- Possibly (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Salt: Previously deleted multiple times and sources seems to be paid. A great finding in sources is stated by User:Praxidicae on this page showing many articles posted by same author but still the changes were reverted ignoring all warnings. JAHANZAIBARIF (talk
Note that the account is Newly created and just to vote. Might connect with the one who created AFD. 103.10.31.47 (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this IP editor claims to be User:Owlf.1 Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:28, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Or weak delete. It appears the subject has finally passed the notability threshold. The UPE is strong with this one, but competent too it seems, going by the sources that don't read right but, impressively, exist. Also impressive that this seemingly mundane subject seems to have attracted abusive editing on the delete side. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a UPE farm out there, that didn't get paid. Since, unfortunately, there is no community consensus on deleting UPE-tainted articles because they are UPE-tainted, I suggest we keep and try and regulate the addition of unsourced and weakly sourced puffery instead. Obviously, I have no objection to deleting it and salting, until an independent looking version is submitted to AFC, if that would be less taxing on the spam-fighters. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    PS. I wouldn't mind speedy keep and speedy blocking of nom and their sock either. Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Firstly, I want to ask why the creating user Owlf was blocked while s/he was actively taking part in discussion? How was the blocking administrator sure? I feel it is a kind of harassment to the user. While looking at the log of this user's contribution, it appears he has been making most of the edits on Nepalese actor/actress/musicians since long. Whether it was his hobby or he was being paid can only be judged but not proved. Secondly, regarding the article- its a usual case that Nepalese artists are rarely a topic of notable news or scholarly articles. Fortunately, current online media are providing some indication of their notability via some coverage. In this particular case of Prakash Neupane, the coverage in an Indian media 1 and some nepali music realted magazines are available, so it could indicate a soft keep. And i totally agree with Usedtobecool on why this subject is attacting abusive editing - is it the case of multiple paid editors? Regards! nirmal (talk) 10:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The answer to your question is here read it properly and you will come to know why was he blocked. Rest in talking about This Zee News From India ts purely a paid Article because it clearly lacks its source or say The Byline and although the JAHANZAIBARIF which seems like an SPA but have stated a very correct detailing about its source by Praxidicae over here. Suryabeej (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for mentioning. I already went through the items you mentioned before commenting here. And basically that was the main reason for my concern. This report is unclear, and blocking seems to be done hapazardly. Given that the user had been editing music/actor related articles since last few years, it becomes a suspcet that suddenly the account became compromized while editing this article. I have doubt. Plus, regarding this source discussion, it is also my concern. The sources should have been discussed/reopened by the Nominator in the talk page first before this CSD. Regards! nirmal (talk) 11:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it was not the complete history. Just the latest disruptive editing spree. Check their contributions. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:46, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Its sad that users are getting on fruitless disputes instead of using their energy for constructive edits. nirmal (talk) 01:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How you closed this nomination on behalf of a sockpuppet case archieve which is not even relevant ?? Like just curious to know what made you think like that?Suryabeej (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can a few more experienced editors take a look at this?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 16:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So you mean you're still comparing it to previous verison? when it was re-created via Draft. Do you think Nepali news doesn't meet WP:RS ? Owlf (talk)
ENOUGH. Discuss article content, not other editors. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits)
  • Admin comment - Another sockpuppet investigation has been opened regarding select participants in this deletion discussion. Missvain (talk) 02:53, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Hello there, I just want to make it clear that I'm not related to the nominator in any way. I saw a Facebook group post where a person named "Prakash Neupane" was offering news articles and wikipedia page creation service to people and asking them to pay money. When I searched his name on google, I found his wikipedia page that was already put under Afd. I checked some of his articles and found that they were published by the same Nepali author who was interacting to the posts on his FB account which brought me the doubt that this page was created by paid articles. The page was created by the same user and looking at the page edit history it seems that many experienced editors were against the page creation but don't know how he still managed to recreate it. I've a strong feeling that the account "Owlf" is owned by the subject himself. I found same thing was shared by Praxidicae on this page. I don't know if anybody will belive this or not but I take responsibility of everything that I said above and I leave the decision upto the Admins who are experienced. Thanks. User:JAHANZAIBARIF (talk)
Also if admins think that despite all these concerns the subject is eligible for a wikipedia page then no one should have a problem but I hope that a fair outcome will be made. Cheers. User:JAHANZAIBARIF (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So you're leaving your second message after the sockpuppet investigation you suddenly appear. So you mean Prakash Neupane posted on Facebook that he'll provide articles on Nepalese archive sites or deleted source than you directly came here to ! Vote by creating your account and you also know how to diff old sources. What a joke in wikipedia :D . Owlf (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JAHANZAIBARIF- Generally, Prakash is a common name and Neupane is also a common surname. So there could be misunderstanding. Just to be clear, can you share the link to "Facebook group post" or a way to verify your claim? Regards! nirmal (talk) 02:20, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nirmaljoshi- First of all I'm glad that sockpuppet investigation was completed for the second time. To answer your question, Well my doubt was right and the subject after reading my earlier comment here deleted his group posts. I feel sorry that i couldn't save that post where he was selling wikipedia page creation service. But i still managed to find his old posts which he couldn't find to delete. Watch | screen recording 1 here where the subject himself who thinks he is a noteable person is asking for help from Nepali wikipedia editors because he was afraid that his page will get deleted since many editors were against the page creation:D Watch | screen recording 2 here where he is looking for content writers to write articles for him. What a noteable person he is! I'm sure after seeing this comment he will delete these posts as well. Still you can check the links to his posts [8], [9]. It's sad that new user accounts on wikipedia are not considered credible.. JAHANZAIBARIF (talk)
Well I've seen many people or artists requesting help in the Wikipedia Weekly group every day but how does that prove that the articles are paid and written by other or self-published and the talk page discussions about articles which were removed before have not been completed yet. And about new accounts credibility.... anyone here is credible when they made constructive edits. Owlf (talk) 10:43, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the wikipedia rules say "Consensus is not based on a tally of votes, but on reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments". I think the proofs I provided are enough to prove that subject is himself involved in the spam campaign of this article and the articles are paid. And please don't forget to check this screen recording here :) Goup link is here Isn't offsite coordination against the rules?. After seeing these it's easy to assume that user Owlf is Prakash Neupane himself. Rest I leave upto the admins. Regards. JAHANZAIBARIF (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:52, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm here to discuss a Wikipedia article and about the notability of a Nepali musician. I'm not here to care or defend who posts what on Facebook, whose eating or not. I'm here to edit not to spread (this might be that, I feel that or it may be that) kind of rumours. And not only about these particular articles I've always defended when someone tags for the deletion discussion on the page which I've created. And about the articles which are been on discussion her User:Praxidicae on this page were also used by me on references to create VTEN and Manas Ghale who are also Nepali rappers. Owlf (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • COI- Owlf so as above here you have agreed that EVERY DAY here you see on some facebook group that people requesting for help and you are the creator of the page Prakash Neupane so this clearly indicates WP:COI case and thus I request Ser Amantio di Nicolao to have a look at the screen recording above where in one post verified account of Prakash Neupane is asking other wikipedia users to revert edits by you and there other editors are asking him in the comment section to inbox which I presume is for fixing the prices for the edits, Thank you JAHANZAIBARIF for providing the screen recording, also check COI edits by owlf, Thanks Suryabeej (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also request Praxidicae to have a look over here Suryabeej (talk) 11:03, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Being a Wikipedian yes I'm on Wikipedia weekly group and many editors here are on that group. And about everyday i see help requets doesn't mean that i'm connected with COI lol. Owlf (talk) 11:06, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IT CLEARLY SHOWS because request to edit different pages on multiple group by the facebook user account of prakash neupane like on some nepal related group and wikipedia weekly group as per the screen recording IT SHOWS THAT NEUPANE HAVE A NATURE OF COI and YOU are the one who created his pageover here after knowing the WP rules and having all those access clearly shows the missuse of WP POLICY, that clearly shows that you have a COI with Prakash NeupaneSuryabeej (talk) 11:10, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've created many Nepali articles based on musician, politics, movies, actors and I've been editing too, that doesn't mean being COI. :D Owlf (talk) 11:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I have been adamant about this through every iteration. Neupane is not notable, despite what many here claim and I pointed out extensively why on the talk page and past discussions regarding this very topic. Almost everything is written by the same author, even after having removed the content I mentioned on the talk page, the rest are either based on that paid for content or unreliable. For example, the best source is by the Hindu, which is copied from this source and was published a full 4 hours before appearing on their website. this is nothing more than elaborate marketing ploy by a long term spammer. YODADICAE👽 12:30, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Praxidicae: well I'm amazed how did you find 4 hours of gap time when there'sthis source not mention of time and anything at all and why would an editor[10] copies the same URL/title & pictures. That sites grab articles from other sites automatically which can be known by the pictures used on both sites and as far as I know The Hindu article is completely written by an editor which Wikipedia can verify through the sources and yeah I agree on some unreliable sources which didn't meet WP:RS were there but they were completely removed by and editor before while creating the article through Draft and some sources have vanished from the internet may be internet archiver could achieve that. Owlf (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because you can view it under "view source" and you've totally missed my point. YODADICAE👽 13:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well sometimes time varies might be you are wrong take a deep look as there it had mentioned in view source "The Hindu" as OG photo source and also has tagged "The Hindu" ['img data-variant="FREE" data-device-variant="" src=https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/music/taeus0/article31748951.ece/BINARY/thumbnail/prakashneupane2" Owlf (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even if I am completely wrong about the copy, my point still stands that the only "decent" source is the Hindu and that simply isn't enough. YODADICAE👽 14:05, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That might be enough for you but being a Nepali source that exists also do follow WP:RS that's the thing which I want to mention here. If you feel mainstream Nepali media sources are useless then i don't have any point to explain. Owlf (talk) 14:13, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nepali sources don't get a special pass of WP:V or WP:RS just by virtue of being Nepali. The rest are simply unreliable PR nonsense. YODADICAE👽 14:20, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the Google translated text of the 2nd of theses reads " Young singer Prakash Neupane's new album has been released on Fusion Digital Store. Prakash's new album has also been released on iTunes Store, Google Play, Amazon and Spotify. Click here to listen to Prakash's song on iTunes.Click here to listen to Prakash's song on Spotify.His songs are in rap and hip hop genres. He has also sung against Nepali social and political distortions and anomalies.As the use of CDs, VCDs or cassettes has disappeared in Nepal as well, the practice of releasing albums in digital stores has started commercially. Apart from that, songs and videos are also released through platforms like YouTube and Facebook.Prakash's new album Fusion has 7 songs. This is her second album after singing more than a dozen songs so far. Prior to this, in 2016, his album titled Prakash Tunes was released.His songs have been viewed nearly 2 million times on YouTube alone, while the song You Got Me has been viewed more than 1 million times. The songs of 21-year-old singer Prakash, who started singing at the age of 16, are very popular among the Nepali youth. Videos of his 9 songs have also been made public. To know more about Prakash and listen to all his songs, visit his website. " That conveys absolutely no notability. I would add the first source but it is no better. These are commercial plugs, nothing more.  Velella  Velella Talk   14:53, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nepali to English translations are not that much good, i think Nepalese editors knows better about Nepalese sources more than any other countries editors. Owlf (talk) 15:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know how to read nepali and the translation is almost okay, and google translation only give a basic translation of what it is already there, it can create its sentences of own. and that ABC Nepal which you are trying to portray ABC News is totally rubbishSuryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 15:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not trying to potrya as it passes WP:RS and you've claimed that you're indian editor before and from now onwards i'm not respondind yours any replies or talk which are always targetted to me and how the source come rubbish when Abc Nepal television is national television and news paper of nepal which also appears in wikipedia. Owlf (talk) 15:57, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally when 5 Nepali editors have claimed it as a reliable source, just Sticking with one word RUBBISH won't help all the time while doing deletion discussions here in wikipedia. Owlf (talk) 16:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
where did that happened ? that consensus? please enlighten us with it, we would be happy to see where this ABC NEPAl is stated under WP:RS?Suryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 16:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 23:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Prakash_Neupane_(4th_nomination)&oldid=1026899930"
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy