Talk:Sahay family

Regarding deletion of unlinked names

Hello Bastun,

Most, if not all, of the notable members I provided are notable by Wikipedia's notability guidelines; they have been covered in biographical dictionaries and/or have received significant press coverage; I do not know why these members names' were deleted. They were literal rulers, high level civil servants (commissioners, magistrates), zamindars. Them being unlinked, in my opinion, has more to do with Wikipedia's lack of information on notable people from Bihar; rather than their notability. Localproblem7110 (talk) 15:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simple solution. Create their articles. Then add them. That's how this works. Don't remove tags without discussing, first. And no, minor officials are not inherently notable. If they have significant coverage in reliable sources, then there will be enough material to create articles for them. Until then, they shouldn't appear here, just as there no redlinks or unlinked names in most listicles/family articles. That's the opposite of what you're doing here, especially with that last line. I will be reverting. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your quick move to label these individuals as "minor officials" is not just dismissive, it’s ignorant of the context and insulting. These were not just random names—they were zamindars and high-ranking civil servants with documented historical impact. The real issue here isn't their notability; it's Wikipedia’s failure to adequately represent notable figures from Bihar. Instead of lazily deleting names, maybe some of YOUR effort as well should go into correcting this oversight by creating the necessary articles. It’s easy to criticize; contributing something meaningful takes more effort. Localproblem7110 (talk) 14:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, most, if not all, family articles have unlinked and/or redlinked named. No idea where you got that notion from. Perhaps we should take this to our overlords to decide; for I feel both of us are too biased. Localproblem7110 (talk) 15:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you agree to filing for a 3O, ie a third opinion? Localproblem7110 (talk) 15:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't see the need. I am editing within policy, as we are all supposed to do. Please, can you read Wikipedia:Notability (people) - especially the basic criteria, and WP:LISTBIO and WP:BLPFAMILY. Notability isn't inherited. High-ranking civil servants aren't automatically notable. Minor nobles aren't automatically notable. If they are notable in their own right, they will be notable enough to have their own article. With all due respect to Alok and Basant Keshav, Shweta Sinha, and the three of the five grandchildren of a deceased academic that you deemed worthy of mentioning by name, who are they and why would they be listed in Wikipedia? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. I think I understand now. You basically want me to create articles for the notable members I mention, right? I will do that.

And with regards to the names I mentioned, I found them on the sourced Times of India article. They were simply mentioned for documenting the lineage and succession within the family.

However, in the meantime, I still want to get a third opinion. Almost every family page has unlinked and/or redlinked names - I do not see why this one shouldn't. Localproblem7110 (talk) 17:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion discussion - 1

There is no need for all people mentioned to be notable by Wikipedia standards, so long as they are acceptably referenced. Wikipedia:Notability relates only to whether an article on a subject is ok for Wikipedia. Not all the content of the article has to pass that test, but it should all be acceptably referenced. Some of the people removed are referenced; others are not. But I'd avoid using "Notable" in the section name if some may not be. I'd also avoid calling the family "noble", an essentially European concept. Bastun, I can't see why you asked him to read WP:LISTBIO and WP:BLPFAMILY; I can't see either support all your removals. I suggest the properly referenced members are restored. Of course more bios could be created, but that is not essential. Hope that helps. Johnbod (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you very much! I'll take into account all your suggestions while making subsequent edits to this article. Localproblem7110 (talk) 20:43, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johnbod - I listed those sections of WP:NOTABILITY because of WP:DUE. Also see WP:NOTDIRECTORY, especially point 4. Can you clarify that just because someone happens to be mentioned in a newspaper article or obituary, we don't need to read about them in Wikipedia? Because certainly Dr. Radhika Pati Sahay, the last titular head of the Sahay family, died in 2012 without naming an heir. He is survived by his two sons, Alok and Basant Keshav, and his daughter, Shweta Sinha (née Sahay). He also left behind five grandchildren, including Aditanshu Sinha, Diptanshu Sinha, and Shreyansh Keshav. - cited to an offline copy of what sounds like a newspaper obituary - reads like trivia at best, veering into WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd skip the survivors, certainly. Whether a newspaper obituary counts as a WP:RS is questionable, if it is just a paid notice, as most are. But in an article on a family, recent members aren't exactly trivia, but probably raise WP:BLP issues. Johnbod (talk) 02:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. They won't be included. Also, does the article still face notability issues? If so, what could I do to improve on that matter? Localproblem7110 (talk) 06:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would hope not - I would oppose deletion. Obviously, the more refs the better, especially on the family as a whole. Johnbod (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. Thank you very much! I'll look for more sources - so that the notability issues on the top of the template don't find a place for themselves there. I'll keep you updated - once again, thank you. Localproblem7110 (talk) 13:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nicely improved. Keep up the good work!

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]