Jump to content

Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor/Santadas Kathiababa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
E Vicipaedia

Auctore "sockpuppet" nefario vel vandalistico; bibliographia dubiosa sine numeris paginarum; nexibus internis ridiculis, e.g. quoquo; nexibus bibliographicis ad situm commercialem directis, ergo delendis; nexu in nota subiuncta ad Vicipaediam Anglicam directo, ergo fidei indigno. Paginam his rationibus delendam suadeo. Sic iam postulat disputator quidam in pagina disputationis mea, cuius verba hic subiungo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:59, 12 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for writting in english. Please delete Santadas Kathiababa. I requested deletion (although an IP keeps removing it) because the article was created by a LTA, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Srabanta_Deb. Also my guess is they used machine translation to create this article. Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান (disputatio) 15:20, 12 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kathiababa really existed (https://thebangladeshtoday.com/?p=58610) and the Indian sections of Wikipedia did not delete the article about him, but yes, the links are bad and the first version of the article was clearly machine translated. It's probably easier to remove. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 19:17, 12 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, we shouldn’t keep an article created by LTA (see my link above). If any neutral person / non-sock creates the article afterwards that's ok IMO. আফতাবুজ্জামান (disputatio) 05:17, 13 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it's effectively been recreated now, though the sourcing could be improved. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:47, 13 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was hesitating because Demetrius and @IacobusAmor: had worked on the article and improved the text, but the creator was a known sockpuppet and the bibliography and references are not acceptable. I think, like Demetrius, that it is better now to delete. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:01, 13 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Machine translation isn't inherently evil. In any case, he may have more followers than do Maria Baker Eddy and Georgius Fox and may directly have influenced more humans than have several dozens, or even scores, of Roman Catholic popes, and therefore, on a relative basis, he wants an article here. Documentation on him, however, remains sketchy and should be clarified. I'm too busy at this hour, but maybe later. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:34, 13 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good points on both sides. Since the references still depend entirely on commercial links to bookshops, and since it is a reasonable principle that pages spammed across the Wikipedias by vandals and sockpuppets should be deleted (pour décourager les autres), and since the consensus is in favour of deletion, I'm going to delete the page. I will then recreate it in Iacobus's userspace with this disputatio page alongside it.
Iacobus, this leaves you free to upgrade the documentation and to reduce the profusion of internal links to the level at which they become useful. When you work on the references it might help to know that many, many older Indian books are available at Internet Archive (don't use the Wayback Machine searchbox that distracts you at the top of that page, use the main searchbox in the middle of the page! I expect you know that). Such books are easily found by searching for authors or titles, and text within those books is then easy to locate with the search facility on each book. These external links are quite acceptable, being non-commercial, and much more useful to our readers.
Feel free to move the page back to mainspace as soon as a reasonable standard is reached: you'll be the judge. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:42, 14 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, this is the text. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:51, 14 Martii 2024 (UTC)[reply]