|
[[Image:Chithram.jpg|frame|right|Chithram]]
'''This is part of [[Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion/Proposal]].'''
'''Director:'''[[Priyadarsan]]
==2 (unsourced biographies)==
:'''Biographical articles that do not explicitly cite a source; and that are about persons who now are (or now would be, were they still alive) aged 25 or under, or whose age is not given and cannot be inferred from the article to be over 25 now.''' should be added to the criteria for speedy deletion.
* Citing sources should be interpreted broadly in this context, and include informal citations. An external hyperlink to a web site about the person, a pointer to news coverage of the person, and an ISBN reference to a book written by the person (which is presumed to contain an "author autobiography" of some kind) all count as citing a source of biographical information, for example.
* Where a date of birth is not given, reasonable inferences should be drawn from what is given in the article. A subject who has been married for 30 years and a subject who was elected to public office 15 years ago both must be over 25, for example.
*The age limit is somewhat arbitrary, but has been proven to eliminate a substantial number of false positives.
*For a case study, please read [[User:Uncle G/Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Unsourced biographies]].
*This proposal partially overlaps proposal 1. That is not in and of itself a problem; individual articles can fall under multiple speedy criteria (e.g. a one-sentence attack page about an unremarkable website).
*If you are unsure about this proposal, consider that there is a proposed [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/Test run|test run]] to try it out for a month.
'''Cast'''
'''[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit&section=2}} vote] – [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discuss]]'''
[[Mohanlal]] (Vishnu)
==Votes==
===Support===
# Although I'd prefer to see dead people excluded from this criteria. [[User:Pburka|Pburka]] 4 July 2005 15:23 (UTC)
#<font color=#00A86B>[[User:Android79|<small>A</small>и<small>D</small>я<small>01D</small>]]</font><font color=#B87333>[[User talk:Android79|<small>TALK</small>]]</font><font color=#0047AB>[[Special:Emailuser/Android79|<small>EMAIL</small>]]</font> July 4, 2005 15:59 (UTC)
# <s>Puzzled by the age thing, I see no need for that distinction, but</s> proposal is much better than status quo and has my support. [[User:Naturenet|Naturenet]] | [[User talk:Naturenet|Talk]] 4 July 2005 16:30 (UTC)
# I presume the age thing arises for two reasons. To be honest, most people haven't accomplished much by the time they're twenty-five. (There are some notable exceptions, of course.) Second, most of the vanity junk is inserted by young people with too much time on their hands. (Young people with too much time on their hands also contribute a lot of good stuff, but we're not going to delete those articles.) Plus there's Uncle G's empirical evidence that it would work. [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades]]([[User_talk:TenOfAllTrades|talk]]) 4 July 2005 17:49 (UTC) > (not a vote) Thanks - that explains it nicely.[[User:Naturenet|Naturenet]] | [[User talk:Naturenet|Talk]] 5 July 2005 07:41 (UTC)
#I trust admins will apply obvious common sense, but Uncle G's study shows this will get rid of lots of crud. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] 4 July 2005 17:55 (UTC)
#If we can't trust our admins on this, we just need better admins. --[[User:A D Monroe III|A D Monroe III]] 4 July 2005 19:19 (UTC)
#Uncle G's case study convinced me to try it, but I worry about actors and performers who can often become notable at a young age. [[User:Dragons flight|Dragons flight]] July 4, 2005 20:42 (UTC)
#It reads odd to me, but I see what it's saying. '''[[User:Humblefool|humble]]'''[[User talk:Humblefool|fool]][[Special:Randompage|®]] 4 July 2005 20:44 (UTC)
#Imagine the load that will be taken off VfD... [[User:Dmcdevit|Dmcdevit]] 4 July 2005 23:23 (UTC)
#[[User:Petaholmes|nixie]] 4 July 2005 23:50 (UTC)
# impressed by the study supporting it [[User:JesseW|JesseW]] 5 July 2005 00:19 (UTC)
#Weak support, per A D Monroe III's reason, but I think that we need to specify that if the subject of the article has been cited by (not just local) news media, then they are not a speedy candidate. --[[User:Idont havaname|Idont Havaname]] 5 July 2005 00:20 (UTC)
#The empirical evidence backing this up are utterly convincing (even if the age thing is a little arbitrary). -[[User:Splash|Splash]] July 5, 2005 00:35 (UTC)
#Agree with Splash. [[User:NatusRoma|NatusRoma]] 5 July 2005 01:09 (UTC)
#Uncle G's case study strongly suggests allowing admins to speedy this class of article will not result in articles being deleted that would otherwise have been kept. [[User:Denni|Denni]][[User_talk:Denni|<font color=#228822>☯</font>]] 2005 July 5 01:58 (UTC)
#Support, with faith that admins will seek to confirm notabilty before bringing down the hatchet (and with knowledge that the hatchet needs frequent swinging). --[[User:BDAbramson|<font style="background: lightgreen"> BDAbramson</font>]] [[User talk:BDAbramson|<sup><b>talk</b></sup>]] July 5, 2005 01:59 (UTC)
#Weak support - not everyone gets a book written about them. Still a good idea though. [[User:Alphax|Alphax]] <sup>[[User talk:Alphax|τ]][[Special:Emailuser/Alphax|ε]][[Special:Contributions/Alphax|χ]]</sup> 5 July 2005 02:17 (UTC)
#*See [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
#<span id=mikkalai></span>Yes. If a person is of limited notability, the verifiablity is of major issue. But the phrasing ''"do not explicitly cite"'' must be amended by '''"or the source is not readily available"''' (I do really hate VfD nominators who are too lazy to run a google search first.) [[user:mikkalai|mikka]] [[user talk:mikkalai|(t)]] 5 July 2005 03:00 (UTC)
#[[User:Gadfium|gadfium]] 5 July 2005 03:08 (UTC)
#<s>Brilliant proposal from Uncle G. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' 5 July 2005 03:13 (UTC)</s>
#[[User:Cryptic|Cryptic]] [[User talk:Cryptic|(talk)]] 5 July 2005 03:38 (UTC)
#[[User:Fuzheado|Fuzheado]] | [[User talk:Fuzheado|Talk]] 5 July 2005 03:45 (UTC)
# [[User:Xoloz|Xoloz]] 5 July 2005 06:33 (UTC)
#'''Conditional'''. Subject to the inclusion of [[User:mikkalai|mikka]]'s additional phrase (see [[#mikkalai|above]]). —[[User:TheoClarke|Theo ]] [[User_talk:TheoClarke|(Talk)]] 5 July 2005 08:00 (UTC)
#Support after reading Uncle G's excellent analysis. --[[User:Grutter|G Rutter]] 5 July 2005 08:49 (UTC)
# '''Support'''. It shouldn't take a week to get rid of what everyone is going to vote delete on anyway. [[User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel]] 5 July 2005 14:46 (UTC)
# '''Support''', proposal is backed by solid research. [[User:Mr Bound|Mr Bound]] July 5, 2005 20:43 (UTC)
# '''Support'''. Research is solid. This takes out college and high school vanities, which are by far the most common types; thus the age limit is not arbitrary, but eminently practical. --[[User:Scimitar|Scimitar]] 5 July 2005 23:16 (UTC)
[[Nedumudi Venu]] (Kaimal)
===Oppose===
#Newbies never include sources, there are any number of notable young actors and musicians would who be deleted under this criterion. [[User:Kappa|Kappa]] 4 July 2005 16:15 (UTC)
Renjini (Kalyani)
#*Actually, Uncle G's statistical analysis of VFD practice show otherwise. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] July 4, 2005 17:18 (UTC)
#*Disputed that that is actually the case at all on [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
# I object primarily because the wording of this item was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion/Proposal&diff=next&oldid=18127034 added] by [[User:Radiant!]] without discussion prior to this vote being opened. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 4 July 2005 19:02 (UTC)
== Plot ==
#*There was a good discussion in [[User talk:Uncle G/Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Unsourced biographies|Uncle G's user space]]. -[[User:Splash|Splash]] July 5, 2005 00:35 (UTC)
Vishnu([[Mohanlal]]) is a prisoner who has escaped from jail after sentenced to death.He is a photographer and accidentally kills his wife.His son needs medical treatment and to find the money required for the treatment,he escapes from the jail.
#Too much valid stuff could slip through the cracks. [[User:JYolkowski|JYolkowski]] // [[User talk:JYolkowski|talk]] 4 July 2005 20:44 (UTC)
#*Challenged on [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
Kalyani is the daughter of a rich person and her lover ditches her once he came to know that Kalyani's father won't give her a penny.But her father changes his mind and plans to meet her.Her uncle Kaimal([[Nedumudi Venu]]) gets worried because her father has a weak heart and if he happens to know that her daughter's lover deserted her,he may suffer from a cardiac arrest.So he suggest that for the time being,let some one act as her husband.And Vishnu is selected to act as Kalyani's husband.After some initial quarrels,Kalyani finds the goodness of Vishnu and love blooms between them.
#Wording is too rigid and confusing, in my opinion. I share Kappa's concern as well. Prefer Proposal 1. [[User:Blankfaze|{{User:Blankfaze/sig}}]] 5 July 2005 03:39 (UTC)
#*See [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
The warden from the prison([[Soman]]) is searching for Vishnu in the meanwhile and finally locates him.Vishnu finally tells everything to Kalyani and keeps his child in her custody.He then goes with the warden to the prison where the gallows is prepared for him.
#This is a tricky proposal. Even if statistical analysis shows the value of this proposal, I'd rather be on the safe side. [[User:JoJan|JoJan]] 5 July 2005 08:49 (UTC)
#Many articles don't refer to "sources". Besides, how reliable are "sources" anyways? And why age 25? [[User:PeregrineAY|PeregrineAY]] July 5, 2005 10:01 (UTC)
#*Answered on [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
The movie was remade in Hindi as Chori Chori with Midhun Chakravorthy in the lead.
#It pains me to change my vote to '''oppose''' in protest of [[User:Radiant!]]'s vote-tampering. This election is no longer legitimate. — '''[[User:Philwelch|Phil]]''' ''[[User_talk:Philwelch|Welch]]'' 5 July 2005 10:11 (UTC)
# '''Oppose''' - speedy-delete if they're clearly *not* notable (for example: "John Doe is a student at XYZ high school"), but if it just can't be inferred from the article whether a person is important or not, then take to VfD so that there can be a longer discussion (if necessary). -- [[User:Schneelocke|Schnee]] (''[[User talk:Schneelocke|cheeks clone]]'') 5 July 2005 12:07 (UTC)
#*Questioned the possible confusion of this proposal with proposal 1 on [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. This should fall under the scope of ''unremarkable people'' judgments. — [[User:Ram-Man|Ram-Man]] <sup>([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new comment]) ([[User talk:Ram-Man|talk]])</sup> July 5, 2005 14:23 (UTC)
#*And if "unremarkable people" doesn't pass because it introduces subjective estimates of "notability"/"importance" as a speedy deletion criterion, like "vanity" didn't pass before it? Again, see the discussion of the conflation of this proposal with proposal 1 on [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)
#Utterly baffling proposal. If an article lacks references, the solution is to ad references, not delete it. See also [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/Z]] --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]]|[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 5 July 2005 14:58 (UTC)
#*The generalization "If an article lacks references, the solution is to ad references, not delete it." is, quite simply, untrue. A long discussion refactored to [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 19:05 (UTC)
#Cruft — '''[[User:Bcat|Bcat]]''' ([[User talk:Bcat|talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/Bcat|email]]) 5 July 2005 15:39 (UTC)
# [[Clifton d'souza]] and the like ought to go through VfD. Just like [[Cortez Peters]] - the article as it was when VfDed [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cortez_Peters&diff=15242513&oldid=14530755] did not have a source nor did it give any indication of age. Peters, however, is an entirely appropriate subject for an encyclopedia. -- [[User:Jonel|Jonel]] | [[User talk:Jonel|Speak]] 5 July 2005 15:51 (UTC)
#* Note that editors state in VFD that articles such as [[Clifton d'souza]], rapidly heading towards garnering a unanimous consensus to delete as such articles do, ''ought not'' to go through VFD. I'll see your [[Cortez Peters]] and raise you [[Paris Hilton]]. Even [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paris_Hilton&oldid=1866234 the ''very earliest version'' of Paris Hilton in the history] cited sources by citing news coverage (specifically, the ''[[National Enquirer]]''). [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 18:29 (UTC)
#** I'm again utterly baffled. How does the fact that some articles appear with references in the first version make it okay to speedy delete articles that don't? I feel as if I've fallen down a rabbit hole, it just doesn't make any sense. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]]|[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 5 July 2005 18:48 (UTC)
#*** For the utterly baffled: [[User:Jonel|Jonel]] is talking about false positives. I'm pointing out that the rate of false positives is very low, and showing that there is a far larger number of true negatives (and am using examples drawn from the "any number of notable young people" that [[User:Kappa|Kappa]] was referring to, to make the additional point that whilst in theory a friend-of-Avril-Lavigne could write a speedily deletable article on Avril Lavigne the tie-stealer, in practice such articles about "notable young people" can ''and do'' turn out to be true negatives, because they ''will'' reference web sites, news coverage, books, magazine interviews, and so forth). [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 19:22 (UTC)
#**** And I say the rate of false positives is still too high. Your data shows that more than 10% of the articles that met this criterion received ''no consensus to delete''. That is way more than enough for me to say that these should go to VfD. I disagree with [[User:Pedant|Pedant]] and yourself that articles such as the one about Clifton should be speedied and note that none of the other six "delete" voters at this point made any reference to it being speedied. -- [[User:Jonel|Jonel]] | [[User talk:Jonel|Speak]] 6 July 2005 01:07 (UTC)
#*** I trawled the June 10 deletion log (the date chosen at random) for bio keeps and got three people whose ages were not listed in the initial article, whose initial articles didn't contain references and were presumably speedy candidates under this rule (and if they're not and I'm an administrator can you tell me how you'd trust an administrator to implement this rule). Those three articles, all listed on the same day chosen at random, are now good articles. Speedying is supposed to target complete no-hopers. Losing three good articles a day to one single speedy rule is not acceptable in my view. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]]|[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 5 July 2005 23:36 (UTC)
# '''Oppose'''. If an article lacks references references should be provided. An article which asserts notability but doesn't provide a source for it would seemingly fall under this criteria. -- [[User:Joolz|Joolz]] 5 July 2005 17:26 (UTC)
#*Discussed the apparent conflation of proposals 1 and 2 here on [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|the discussion page]]. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 18:29 (UTC)
#[[User:Acegikmo1|Acegikmo1]] 5 July 2005 19:13 (UTC). I don't like these criteria. I think that articles which would be deleted under this policy would almost always fall under proposal #1, which is more clear and comprehensive. [[User:Acegikmo1|Acegikmo1]] 5 July 2005 19:13 (UTC)
#Rules that are rigid and arbitrary, like this "25" rule, are the antithesis of wiki. [[User:Pcb21|Pcb21|]] [[User_talk:Pcb21|Pete]] 5 July 2005 19:21 (UTC)
#*Are you seriously suggesting that the criteria for speedy deletion, which does not involve debate, ''should'' be vague and subjective? [[User:Gwalla|<nowiki></nowiki>]] — [[User:Gwalla|Gwalla]] | [[User talk:Gwalla|Talk]] 5 July 2005 21:22 (UTC)
#The age restriction is ludicrous. --[[User:Sn0wflake|Sn0wflake]] 5 July 2005 19:28 (UTC)
#*The age restriction ''prevents false positives''. Please look at the study and see the increase in the number of false positives when the age restriction is removed. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 5 July 2005 19:55 (UTC)
#**While I do respect you and your research, which I have read and found very accurate, it is of my belief that once this is made a CSD criterion, it will become obsolete. Vanity articles will always be vanity articles, there is no way to hide that, but age can always be changed with no consequence whatsoever. I can almost picture the same vanity articles we have today on the Wikipedia, but with a standard birth date of [[1969]] on each an every of them. Bang. There goes the criterion. So I remain on the opposition. --[[User:Sn0wflake|Sn0wflake]] 6 July 2005 00:20 (UTC)
#Ridiculously instruction-crept way of writing "college students annoy me" - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] 5 July 2005 21:42 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. 25 years is arbitrary and I agree with most of the other objectors. Lots of new articles don't have sources, and are no worse for it. [[User:Dbiv|David]] [[Image:Arms-westminster-lb.jpg|25px]] | [[User talk:Dbiv|Talk]] 5 July 2005 22:33 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. Many new articles don't have sources, many new wikipedians don't know that they're expected. Since most articles usually get listed for VFD/CSD within a few minutes of their creation, there's been little chance for other wikipedians to suggest that citations be added. Indeed, as a brief survey detailed at [[Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/2]] shows, the majority of articles on under-25-year-olds we have here today started their lives as referenceless articles, and often continued, even to this day, as quite extensive articles which happen not to have references. Under this proposal, articles such as [[Tutankhamun]], [[Joan_of_Arc]], [[Johnny_and_Luther_Htoo]], [[Elián_González]] could have been speedied. — [[User:Asbestos|Asbestos]] | [[User talk:Asbestos|<FONT COLOR=#808080>Talk</FONT>]] 5 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)
#*[[WP:AGF]] - do you really think an admin would speedy any of those? Come on. You're scaremongering. --[[User:FCYTravis|FCYTravis]] 6 July 2005 01:29 (UTC)
#--[[User:Mononoke|Mononoke]] 6 July 2005 00:26 (UTC)
| 