Talk:Sreelakshmi Suresh/Archive 1

Archive 1

Speedy Deletion

Partly agree with Saralstalin, but we need not delete the page. However, this page need edits and corrections.

The girl sure deserve appreciation based on the fact she designed a website at the age of eight. The award given by the Indian Government is a prestigious award too. But all the international awards listed in Wikipedia page or in her websites are online web awards and not given by Any Government. Please use google for more details of these awards and we can see it is very easy to get those. These awards are given every day and the criteria is very simple too.

While we should appreciate her for the web design, we should also help people understanding what is an online web award and why it is not a truly 'International Award'.

- note added by InteractFly (talk) on August 02 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 06:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC).

This content is created by wiki user Gk00900, created for this particular article. I visited the links present in the site. Looks like someone is trying to boost up an ordinary girl. Anyway it is worth keeping this article Saralstalin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC).

If you read the article, this person actually sounds like a notable person. DON'T DELETE IT! However, we do need to move it to capitalise her surname Cream147 _{Shout at me for doing wrong} 06:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've moved it. Cream147 _{Shout at me for doing wrong} 07:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've put citation tags on it. If WP:RS can't be found within 24hrs, i'll put it up for AFD. Of course, even with RS, it might not meet WP:N -- feb^talk 19:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Disputed

I had nominated this article for deletion which was declined after considerable discussion. Here are my comments from the Afd discussion page which I believe highlight the dubious nature of the article.

I've have been doing some research on the article. I'm restating the major points from the article:

• "She has been noted as one of the youngest award winning web designers in the world". This is only cited by one obscure reference (which is a personal blog) and not by The Hindu
• The "Association of American Webmasters" who conferred her the title of the "World's youngest Web Designer" is not at all a notable institution. Their only representation on the internet is a website, which is poorly managed and designed for such an organisation.
• The organisations that she reportedly joined/created has not had any significant coverage on the media. And Cybrosys technologies do not report of any collaboration with Ms.Suresh on their website.
• The National Award she received is absolutely not the highest award for children in India. And interestingly that award was presented to 38 children that year. So we ought to have 38 different Wikipedia articles right? Awards like the Bravery award are much more important and have received more media coverage than the award she received.
• The real fun part are the other awards that she reportedly received. The major reference for the tabulated list of awards is this website of her own school which blatantly promotes her. Has any Wikipedian who has voted to keep the article researched on any single award she received? Here is somematerial for fun. I guess this is more than enough to prove the notability of the awards she received.
• Doesn't all this make a good reason to delete the article? Anybody with basic knowledge about the media and the associated bureaucracy in India wouldn't stand for this article. Somebody just wanted to promote an ordinary girl. Well I might be wrong and Wikipedia admins might decide to keep the article after all. What would the article be about? A girl who designed the website of her school? That her father is a lawyer and mother a home-maker? And that she received a not-so-famous National Award? Well I could write a better article on myself! Seriously I though that Wikipedia was about quality and not quantity in articles.

You should do that, write something about yourself. Can't think of anything to say? I always have that problem and then they always delete my article. Someday...

— Finemann (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

You've spent so much time on this article, why don't you fix it yourself? Here's what you've done so far: Nominated it for A7 and it was rejected. Nominated it for AfD and it was rejected. You've tagged it all up and now I'm sure the next admin who comes by will remove half of those tags since it has citations. Finally you've written a write up of all its problems almost the length of the article. It's things like this that turn me off Wikipedia -- you could have just fixed the article but instead you spend far more time in the policies worrying about labeling and noting its problems than actually writing. The whole point of the wiki was to create articles. Maybe actually contribute instead of wasting the time of all the real editors with your bogus deletion nominations that clearly shouldn't have even begun with. You were even told by an admin before all this that it would easily pass AfD. Seriously. Mkdw^talk 20:23, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mkdw, I really don't care about the article anymore. I've even taken it off from my watchlist. Asking me to fix this article is really lame! I mean I was the guy who nominated it in the first place. If I were to fix it, I'd probably remove much of the references except that from the major media in India. And since only a few parts of the articles are properly referenced to such sources, I'd probably remove much of the article content. And all the bogus awards that she reportedly received would be removed as well. Well what would be the result? Wikipedians like you would create a ruckus about this and would fill my talk page with vandalism warnings! Why should I even bother to do all that? And you tell me that people like me turn you off from Wikipedia. Well, to be frank articles like this really turn me off too! And to my knowledge no Wikipedia administrator told me that this article would not pass AfD. Thank you and lets not discuss this any further! I've had enough with this article already! — Finemann (talk)

Find sources

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

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Awards revisited

I erased the long list of awards, and just left a general reference. They seemed rather irrelevant, it's best to leave it be and not try to beef her up to be more than she is. Someone can revert it if they think it's important.Editfromwithout (talk) 23:49, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Disputed Again

I came across this news and Wikipedia article few years back and lot of questions came to my mind at that time itself. Later I checked many of the media coverage details including printed media, television interviews, Wikipedia links, wikipedia article deletion discussions, and all reliable news sources related to this article. Visiting this article page after few years, I am quite surprised to see the article STILL exist in wikipedia! Honestly, it was something shocking for me. Going through the three deletion discussions, it is very clear that the people started it explained it well, with details, links and sources. Wondering why did the majority didn't try to check what the people who were in support of the deletion meant actually or they never tried to understand what it is all about. To make things worse, I see messages from veteran members/admins of Wikipedia asking the people who started the deletion discussion to fix the article instead! Please do not ask me to do the same. I am here to explain and comment on why the article should be removed from Wikipedia. When all three of them tried their best to explain with valid points, it looks like majority went against it thinking as the article was there for few years and many worked upon it, let it be there. I strongly disagree on it as I am always in favor of quality articles in Wikipedia rather than quantity. Correct me if I am wrong.

I would like to list some points based on reliable sources, facts and links. I politely request all those people who think this article to be retained, to go through it and post your comments after reading them.

1. The girl in the article hear from hear Dad about another kid who is smaller than her - Ajay Puri - and his skills on web designing. She decided to learn web page design and started creating web pages. READ: Using Microsoft Front page which is a WYSIWYG editor and not HTML coding. That was at the age of eight.Now, every website she own or the news article claim two things, actually even Wikipedia had these but changed at a later stage. One - She is the youngest web designer of the world and two - she had extra-ordinary skills at a very young age. First claim. From her own words, it is wrong! She got inspired by the kid named Ajay Puri who is younger. And there is no official announcement or verification of this claim by her anywhere. Every site quoting the girl or the newspaper simply put the 'World's youngest web designer' caption. Glad this claim is removed from Wikipedia, however, this exist in all websites and media still quote that. Second claim, that is about the extra-ordinary skills and I guess that lead her to Wikipedia. Those who do not know about Microsoft Frontpage, I request you to check or get the basic details of the tool. It is one of the most simple and easy to use software tool. It is WYSIWYG editor. Nothing complicated and there is no extra-ordinary skills required for even a very small kid to lear to operate it. If that is an exceptional skill, I have a question. There are millions of software companies creating millions of software tools. So every youngest kid who work on them and make an output deserve a Wikipedia entry? Regarding the above two points, google has enough info and if people need more info, let me know. I will be here.
   
   
3. Every news article about her mention '30 International Awards' received by her. They are not any award but online web badges which anyone with a single web page will get. There is no complicated procedure or application. Most of them are a two page script where in the user type in the details and site URL in page one and they get the 'award' on the second page. Yes, it is that simple! The girl's website had all these 30 awards listed and people who had no idea about it thought its something very big and noticeable. But when people came to know about the so called 'international wards' or web badges, they questioned it. The links were disappeared magically! Proof from internet archiving here - http://web.archive.org/web/20090225030711/http://www.sreekutty.com/awards.htm Now, again, regarding the awards. From the above link - as an example - Webmasters Ink Web Award (USA) . Those who want it in 60 seconds or even less, try this - http://www.webmastersink.com/awards/enter.html Type in some junk values, site URL need not even exist. On next page, you can see confirmation that details has been sent, and same page, you will get a link to the 'award' that you just received. Yes, it is that simple. So there goes the story of '30 or more international awards'.
   
   
5. Almost all the news articles, video interviews and unfortunately even the Wikipedia mention something called - 'American Association of Webmasters'. As mentioned by another Wikipedia user in the deletion discussion, it is nothing but an award dispensing agency. Only difference is, we need to pay online to get the award. And it is not difficult at all. From their own link - http://www.aawebmasters.com/statistics.htm - total awards given during the period of 2002 to 2009 = 27732, total number of applicants during this period was 43081. That is, 65% of the people who applied for the 'award' received it! They also mention that award will be cancelled for the site which does not exist anymore or which does not display the award info. that means, even more awards were given to people on payment. And no awards were given after 2009, which is not clear. Above all, 'American Association of Webmasters' not an official body or they do not represent anything official. They just own a website which give away the awards.
   
   
7. The only note-able award the girl received was 'National Child Award for exceptional achievement'. This is the result of the '30 International Awards' and the media coverage she received based on it. Even if we agree on her capabilities and talents, there is nothing 'exceptional' about a small girl creating web pages using Microsoft Frontpage. As the other members mentioned before, the national bravery award for children has much more importance and that deserve a much more media coverage.
   
   
9. No additional information on 'Twilight Technologies' which the Wikipedia article refers as the company she own. Hard to believe that a software company does not have a website. And becoming the 'Director' of a company or 'C E O' or to signup some contract with another company - I am leaving it to the Wikipedia users to make the judgement. You decide whether it is some ' exceptional skill' of the girl or people behind her.
   
   
11. Many of the links in the article is either dead or they do not support any claim officially. Neither they prove that the girl has any exceptional skills.
    
    

Examples:

• http://mutiny.wordpress.com/2007/01/16/youngest-web-designer-of-the-world/ caption is 'Youngest web designer of the world ' but no proof or any support.

• 4th link, that of the 'Gulf News'. Caption is 'US honor for webmaster girl' which is quite misleading. US never honored this girl, but just the association mentioned above. The news is mostly based on what she mentioned and again, nothing to support the claims of proof.

• 6th news link, that of 'Arab News' is dead.

• 10th link, Twilight Technologies website does not exist anymore. Hard to believe that a software company does not have a website.

• 11th link is dead.

• 13th link goes to a website which she created! Wondering how that is something reliable in this article. And yes, that link still list all the 'international awards' she won.
  

I know it will probably be STILL impossible to pass the next deletion recommendation as people prefer not to check the details in-depth. This is not to insult or offend anyone out here. That is not my intention. As I mentioned before, less Wikipedia pages with quality will be much better than more Wikipedia pages with quantity.
--LVerina (talk) 11:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted self published sources and commercial links cleaned up have a look may be closer to wp:gng now Shrikanthv (talk) 06:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

The through checking by LVerina deserves attention. The claims of award by American Association of Webmasters - they give membership certificates if the members pay money - the fact is published in their own website!! One has to check for details. This article may be the best example of self publishing and "creating sources" (that is what wikipedia needs) and linking all the sources claiming the same matter. This article was originally created and developed by users - GK00900 and Satmin - and to this date, these two users have not contributed to any other articles!! - this can be checked in history of the article. The Photo of the subject is also self contributed (supporting claim that the entire article is selfpublishing material.) It is really surprise that how this article did not get deleted at first nomination. The subject may deserve a wikipedia page in future, after better achievements.Rayabhari (talk) 05:23, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion - 4th nomination

The article was nominated for deletion for the 4th time and the result was to keep the article. The archived debate can be viewed here. AFD discussions are solely based on notability rules of Wikipedia and nothing else (which I was not aware of). That is how the system works and the discussion does not consider other factors, proofs or supporting documents against the article. While I stand firm on every statement I made in the debate and in the article talk page, I respect the decision and not going further on this. As the deletion review and any other steps beyond this will again be based on the notability rules, it is better for me not to continue on the deletion process.
As the AFD discussion is over, I will try to edit the article, of course, in a constructive manner. Though I am 100% sure that the article as well as the whole story, is an un-ethical way to boost and promote a normal girl without any exceptional skills, I will not be prejudice on editing the article. --LVerina (talk) 07:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

International Awards (Web Badges) and reference to AAW

After the 4th AFD, the article was pretty much tidy up and clean. All un-necessary details and non-important reference were removed. After the recent edits, I see many of the lines removed are added back in the article. The main one being the 'International Awards' which in turn are web badges. The exact line is "She has received over 30 national and international awards". Had a discussion with the user who added the line back, and he replied that the citation (link to a local newspaper report) mention that point. As I explained well in the 'Disputed Again' section above, under point 2, how a web badge is not an international award, which is actually very similar to the e-greetings card we create in websites, I do not think it is a good idea to mention that in the article - unless we list the awards and it's importance with proof/links. Please correct me if I am wrong. Just because the newspaper mentioned the web badge as 'International Award', do we, Wikipedians need to mention the same in the article? That also without mentioning the name of the awards and it's importance. As far as I know Wikipedia has guidelines on awards and recognitions. One of the links I found is here. Again, please correct me if I am wrong, and please leave your comments on this.

Second point added back is - reference to the 'American Association of Webmasters' (AAW). There is no info I could find on the web or news regarding this association. Only info available online is, they are just a web badge or online award dispensing agency. Their awards or membership are not of any importance. Even their physical existence, credibility etc are not known. Unless we get some reliable info with proof/links, I do not think it will be a good idea to keep the reference to the AAW in the article. There are millions of such associations, most of them does not exist physically at all and having payment based membership. Do we need to mention all those in articles? Please share your views. --LVerina (talk) 09:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the statement, "She has received over 30 national and international awards"; none of the sources cited support that number. The Hindu's Young World article (reference 1) gives the number of awards as 27, but doesn't say what they are; the Gulf Times says she's received 17 awards, whilst the other Hindu article doesn't mention a figure. "She has received multiple awards" would be more in keeping with the references. As to whether we treat web badges as awards, well, that isn't really up to us. If the source calls it an award, we should also call it an award, period.

The AAW's awards do seem to be well-regarded in the web design industry (see Google News Archives for examples), but given the information provided on their own website (which, ironically, is horribly designed!), I would agree that they don't appear to have any sort of "official" recognition. It seems that membership is available to anyone willing to pay, and so isn't notable in and of itself; the fact that she is (or was) the youngest member seems to have been noted by only one source, and that in passing. I see no evidence of any vetting procedure for members, and so would conclude that her membership of this organisation is no more worth a mention than membership of her local library would be. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree on the first part, that even if we know they are all web badges which anyone can get very easily, as the newspaper mentioned them as 'International Awards', it should be mentioned in the Wikipedia article as 'International Awards' itself. I understand the 'Notability' and other related guidelines of Wikipedia regarding this.

Regarding the second point, yes, we get a lot of links when we search for 'AAW' in google, but as we can see, none of them give any reference or details of the association - AAW. All we can see is, some site displaying the badge/award in the site - as it is a requirement by the AAW - which helps AAW to get listed in search engines. My point was about the association, its physical existence, importance or notability. Could not find anything about that! --LVerina (talk) 10:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I have to stand with Yunshui on the matter of whether badges qualify was notable awards or not. It's not for us to decide but rather notable third party sources which say they do. The number should be revised to 27 but I think its a valid argument to list the number of verbatim '27 national and international recognitions'. As for the AAW, the argument is not whether the organization is notable or not. The information is relevant. Enough so for it to be included in multiple news stories. Biographical articles can contain as much information as possible if it directly relates to the person. Many articles even list personal preferences such as religious beliefs etc. The fact that the AAW is involved directly in her work for which she is notable should be information included. Lastly, your argument is largely based on the fact that you don't think much of the AAW. If this were an article about AAW then you might have a point, but its not. The pillar rule that divides original research and researched material is largely going with as close to the third party source as possible with out changing its context or content. For these reasons I am in favour of leaving above mentioned in but with the correct figures. Mkdw^talk 19:59, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for explaining it. I respect the Wikipedia guidelines and not going to edit those two lines. On a related note, I must thank you as this helped me to understand two of the most severe drawbacks of Wikipedia. Basically, anyone who is featured in one or two local newspapers get a wildcard and un-questionable entry to Wikipedia. And second, whatever the print media publish will be considered as the final word on Wikipedia. I won't be surprised now if the entire text with the long list of awards etc are put back. --LVerina (talk) 08:41, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

LVerina, two key distinctions you don't touch on that make a world of difference are: notable third party sources (not any source) and that the person must be mentioned in these notable sources over a period of time. If she had won the award and been mentioned in several notable media but never mentioned again, she would not have an article. The fact that there are years of articles about her pushes her over the threshold. Lastly, original research would be Wikipedia's weakest point if anyone could write what they believed and was not substantiated by respected professional research/writings. There is no value in articles from unpublished home fans opposed to 'published professional experts'. Almost the entire academic foundation relies on this principal of peer review. Mkdw^talk 22:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the first point in your argument above - The Hindu is a notable third party source, not question in that. But the misleading report which came in the local edition of the newspaper helped the people behind the girl to get a Wikipedia entry. If you know the system in India, you will agree that, once someone get featured in a newspaper, it is quite easy to get featured in other newspapers as well. Especially when the field is Information Technology and whatever people do are 'miracles' for the media over there. No surprise she still get featured in media and almost every media repeat the same lines 'she won International Awards'! Regarding the second point, it is not me or other users who point out the worthlessness of the article in Wikipedia, but the girl herself - or the people behind her - listed the names and details of the so called 'International Awards'. The link is still active and available for anyone to check. Her own link proves that the 'web badges' or 'e-greeting' like things were misinterpreted as 'International Awards'. That is not the result of my research but the girl herself put what she achieved.

As a person who obey the rules and guidelines of the system, I totally agree on these. At the same time, I believe, by blindly following the rules but not using any other level of verification (not any personal research but with valid/verifiable links and proof) we are moving towards quantity over quality. We will be able to create a lot of such articles and can boast about the number of articles in Wikipedia. Whether the numbers matters or the quality - time will prove! --LVerina (talk) 03:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

As we maintain the article mainly based on the sources (four newspaper reports), mentioning most of the awards are 'web awards' seems more appropriate. As majority of the newspaper report list the awards and clearly mention them as 'web award'. Also, majority of the newspaper report mention the number of awards as 17. Just an explanation of the two recent edits.--LVerina (talk) 16:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Yup, good edits. I changed it to 27 to reflect the most recent citation. The sources that list 17 are a few years behind the one that cites 27. It's not that they were wrong and we should go with majority, but likely they were outdated. After all she would have had 2-3 years to earn more. 19:46, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Notability

The issue of pseudo notability has been brought up several times at AFD and the result four times has been keep. As directed in the template, if the notability tag is contested you should take it to another AFD. Because the article has a precedent of 4 previous AFD nominations that resulted in keep, the notability tag is not suitable especially since it has reliable sources already. An AFD would be the place to contest the accuracy and ability of those sources to establish notability, and not the tag. Mkdw^talk 16:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I am aware of the history of this article. Besides you, this article is largely edited by a spa. It all started with the award Sreelakshmi Suresh received from the Association of American Webmasters, which itself is a non-notable award (check for any Wikipedia bio article which claims that the subject has won this award). She has then manged to get many more bogus web-based awards, that led to some coverage in children's section in The Hindu. Apparently there is no real notability associated with this teenager. She was not even locally notable, that's why the Malayalam Wikipedia deleted her page sometime ago. The article survived the AfD here because of your effort. You just followed blindly the notability guidelines. There can be few occasions where something apparently satisfies the Wikipedia notability guidelines without having a real case of notability. This is one of them. You failed to filter this out. You should have gone through User LVerina's argument more carefully. To me it looks like promoting an intelligent child by her close relatives through the media. The latest example can be seen from the source you added little while ago [1]. The title of this press report is "Bar Council to launch web site ". It claims that "Sreelakshmi Suresh, daughter of advocate M. Suresh Menon from Kozhikode, is the web designer." Now, the Wikipedia article says that Suresh Menon is a lawyer at Calicut Bar Council. What do you understand from this. It will be difficult to delete this article from Wikipedia if people blindly go by the notability guidelines because the pseudo-notability has now become the Wikipedia notability. That's why it succeeded at number of AfDs. In this context, I think the notability tag is appropriate here. Salih (talk) 17:32, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Renovation

I've reworked most of the article and fixed its NPOV and reference problems. I think this article is worth keeping around since she could possibly be the world's youngest web designer and current holds the title of 'world's youngest award winning web designer'. Mkdw^talk 10:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The organisation which conferred her this title is the "Association of American Webmasters" which is not at all a notable institution. I guess a simple Google search would prove that. — Finemann (talk) 10:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Removed reference to the 'Association of American Webmasters' as no additional info of them are available online/offline. From google search and also from their website, it is clear that their association is a 'web award giveaway' website. Can add the info back if anybody get reliable info on their physical presence and importance of their awards. Ref: Link 1 and Link 2 --LVerina (talk) 14:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Removed the 'Gulf Times' news link as they seems removed it. Guess they realized 'US' didn't honor the girl. Also removed link of the 'Suceess Stories' which is just a personal blog run by two people which has no notability or credibility. Still not sure why we give reference to the web badge give away site - "Association of American Webmasters" --LVerina (talk) 10:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Offtopic? Not exactly

Those who blindly follow the so called 'Mainstream media' in India and argue based on the reports in it, some links of interest for you all. Have a lot of examples, but just few for now.
Meet Mark Zuckerberg of India, Founder of WorldFloat !
India grown Social Network with 6 million users.
DESI ZUCKERBERG … BUSTED !
Yes, those articles has links to all major 'Mainstream print media' newspaper article. Classic example of how media works in India, especially publishing news related to Information Technology --LVerina (talk) 12:29, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Here are the articles about Mark Zuckerberg of India appeared in The Hindu Business Line and The Times of India. Unfortunately, sometimes the deception goes unnoticed. Salih (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Another (small but shows the 'reliability' of the media) one - Refer the link 1 and link 5 in the article page. They are of the same newspaper - The Hindu, published in February 2009 and June 2009. First one reads - "the Youngest Girl Web Designer in the world" and second one reads - "Ms. Suresh, acclaimed to be the youngest web designer in the State". Well, took them 3 months.--LVerina (talk) 10:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Dispute regarding Notability

I am new editor to Wikipedia. I will love to make Wikipedia a more dependable source of Information on the Web, so I am here to help you all the editors to contribute my best efforts to make Wikipedia more accurate.

I began with Verifying the Article and its References. I went through all the comments by experienced editors on this page. Strange to find out some new points. Please make a note of it.

1. Ref #5 that links to "The Hindu" clearly claims she is the "Youngest Web Designer of the State Kerala" and not so claimed "World".
2. The Award so long boasted of "American Association of Web-masters" is actually not awarded, they can be bought easily by paying a small sum of $25. Moreover
3. Moreover, her claim for Youngest CEO is completely fake as she has no employees and company is not yet registered.
4. Kindly note, she is not even claimed Youngest Web Designer in the World by any news-paper that she is world except Ref #4 of AsiaOne which is a non-notable source.
5. 30 of her so called International Awards are not achieved, they can be issued quite easily by making a single web page.

Note to the editors:

1. Wikipedia being the most trust-able information source, it does not suites Wiki to maintain such article that are used to boost once image and make false claims.

I am leaving it to the Admins and Editors of Wikipedia to review all its resources properly and get this moved to AFD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjoy64 (talk • contribs) 10:12, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... it is non-notable in nature --HJ000RT (talk) 11:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Surprise? Not exactly! On why this article is unpopular.

I have been following this article for quite long. I see the recent changes and only the 'expansion of the article' surprise me! Basically there are three types of users behind this article. One - editing/destructing it irresponsibly and doing vandalism. Second - Those who follow the 'rules of Wikipedia' and only those rules, so that the article will remain in Wikipedia as an example of how 'quantity wins over quality' sometimes. And third - those who have knowledge on the topic/field and think it is unpopular and of no use for the general public.

No harassment, pointing of fingers or personal attacks, but for me, it is quite surprising why people still believe this article is of any use for the public or whether the person mentioned in the article has any importance/relevance. The biggest strength of Wikipedia is same as the biggest weakness of Wikipedia, that is anyone can write on any topic in Wikipedia. A rocket scientist can write on medicine, a Doctor can write on sports and so on. Members of Wikipedia can write/manage an article, whether they have any clue on the field of that particular article doesn't matter. Sad to see such attempts wins sometimes and, this article is a perfect example of such a scenario.

Coming back to the particular article, I don't belongs to the vandalism group, so no plans to comment on it. That is bad and Wikipedia's policy of zero tolerance to vandalism is sure a good thing and effective. Now, regarding the third group mentioned above and number of deletion attempts in the democratic way. Those who really tried, spent a lot of time and effort on the article, checked a lot of things before coming to the conclusion that the article will not be any use to the normal Wikipedia users. Plus the main point in the article, that is 'The youngest web designer of the world' is not true and not recognized by any official body yet. All other things in the article are based on this point and the bubble bursts when the basic point itself is invalid.

I have (and many other members) explained it very well but let me give it a try again! With another example this time. Gmail is a product of google, for the purpose of email. They offer a huge space of 15GB for the users, for free. If users need more space than that, they can purchase additional space buy making payment. Google doesn't check anything, other than the payment status, to allot the space. Now, if some young person claim, that they are the youngest to use Gmail, almost all will brush it off considering it as a joke. And then if they purchase the additional space by making a payment and then claim something like - Google awarded me webspace - or - Google sent me an award (which is basically the receipt of the payment), the response from the people will be the same. But if some of the newspaper guys or general public is not aware of Gmail, or their monthly plans, can easily get confused on the claims. At this point, I believe it is the duty of good Wikipedia Samaritans to help them to clear the confusion and not to make it complicated! Doesn't sound complicated to me! In fact, a pretty simple and straight-forward thing.

Regarding the authenticity - Only a small number of the sources are of any good, like the newspapers and their online editions. Even they doesn't mention anywhere that which official body approved the claim of 'The youngest webdesigner of the world' except the bogus web site - Association of American Webmasters! An association without even having any contact information or physical, verifiable address! Every newspaper article starts with 'According to her parents...'

The sources - now I am really surprised to see the long list of sources! I can understand inclusion of newspaper links, but personal blogs and websites which anyone can create by paying few dollars for domain and webspace as Wikipedia sources? Examples - successstories.co.in (lists stories without checking authenticity, very similar to a personal blog), inspiringcitizen.com (blog of a couple), indiabookofrecords.in (not an official body but very similar to a blog by a small team led by one of the record holders!). It is quite easy to find thousands of such blogs or personal sites which has links and details of the 'miracle kid' mentioned in the article, but considering them as reliable sources for a Wikipedia article doesn't make sense.

We can create millions of such articles if quantity or number of articles in Wikipedia is our aim and not the quality or usefulness. Like the first user of any software product or the youngest user! It will flood the Wikipedia within minutes as there are millions of software companies and millions of products. As mentioned many times before by myself and many other members, if we blindly follow the rules and only them, it will not help the public. --LVerina (talk) 03:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

False claim - 'The youngest webdesigner of the world' - Bubble bursts, valid links to check

The whole article is based on a single, still not proved, claim that, the 'miracle kid' is the 'The youngest webdesigner of the world'. Please check the following links to see how the bubble bursts.

From the article page, one of the sources (which was approved by Mkdw^talk), reads - World's youngest Web designer "When I was studying in Class 3, my dad showed me a website designed by a young boy, Ajay Puri. He told me if I want, I can also design a website." Class 3, that is Grade 3, the girl is of the age 8 then. Now, google for 'Ajay Puri' and you can see valid, verifiable links which claims he started creating websites at the age of three and even Bill Gates, the then CEO of Microsoft congratulated him.

Links below

1. Hindustan Times, one of the leading newspapers in India - Ajay Puri - Designed his own website at age 3

2. Deccan Chronicle, another leading newspaper in India - Ajay became the youngest web designer

3. Press Information Bureau, Government of India, the most reliable source - Ajay Puri, the youngest web designer with the Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh

4. The New Indian Express, again, one of the leading newspapers in India - Cyberkid Ajay Puri, when he was less than three years old, had already designed his own website

5. The Tribune, another major newspaper in India - Puri was three years old when he created his website

6. Rediff.com, one of the leading news portals in India - The youngest 'Software Kid'/ Web designer in the world, at age three

7. His website, which has scanned copies of Indian newspapers/news magazines which includes The Hindu, Economics Time, Time of India etc (more than thirty links) - Scanned copies of Indian newspapers

8. His website, which has scanned copies of intentional newspapers/news magazines which includes Time Magazine, Khaleej Times etc (more than thirty links) - Scanned copies of International newspapers

Google and we will find a lot more. --LVerina (talk) 04:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Recent attempts at deletion

This article has been very unpopular for many editors. It has been the subject of multiple Articles for Deletion nominations, edit wars, blanking and mass deletion of content, and vandalism. Most recently, in addition to a number of those things, an WP:SPI that ended up in a number of accounts and IPs blocked for sock puppetry. I'm always surprised that this article receives so much attention. I can only estimate and attribute this to a conflict in ideologies about notability and inclusion criteria here at the English Wikipedia. This article, for some reason, has become one of many battlegrounds. I've largely been the strongest proponent for this article both here at the talk page as well as the AFD discussions. I've done so because regardless of the prestige of the awards or credibility or claims to notability, the article and its subject clearly meet our guidelines for WP:GNG / WP:SIGCOV. The article has reliable and independent sources and has a history of verifiable. I'm not a direct supporter of this article; if I were creating a privately produced encyclopedia, I likely wouldn't include this article. I am, however, an editor of Wikipedia, and strongly believe in upholding its notability guidelines. They are not perfect, but it is not for us to pick and choose which subjects we want these policies to apply to and which we do not simply because we dislike the subject or topic. Reliable and independent sources cannot be discredited using rationales based upon original research by our editors, nor should an article be stripped down in an attempt to remove relevant content, in an attempt to downplay or minimize its presence under our guidelines. It is for these reasons that I have been here to defend this article from these things. Mkdw^talk 19:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Does it mean, the false/incorrect/fake information will remain in Wikipedia forever? False claims will stay if few bogus sites and personal blogs says so? I never tried to strip down the article or remove relevant content. I tried to remove the false claims only. All the links I provided below are more reliable than any of the personal blogs like the links cited under the article. They are from national newspapers, Government of India, and international newspapers. Those are not my findings, but reliable sources which proves almost all her claims are false. Now please, please do not flood your reply with links to rules and regulations! Please reply on the specific article. I am no way interested in doing an extensive research on Wikipedia rules, but here to provide correct information to the users without violating any general rules. Thanks. --LVerina (talk) 16:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Youngest CEO - Not correct

It is not clear from any sources mentioned in the article page, that when did the 'miracle kid' become the CEO of a company. No details are available on her age when she became the CEO.

However, from her own website and from other sources - "The site, www.presentationhss.com was launched on 15-1-2006 by Sri. Binoy Viswom, Minister of Kerala, when she was only 8 years old and studying in 4th class."

From her official Facebook profile/page- "Born on February 5, 1998" and "Edesign Technologies (www.edesign.co.in) is my web designing company, started when I was 10 years old. "

Now, just doing a google search brought this.

Youngest CEO Harli Jordean - Youngest CEO Harli Jordean

I am sure there will be thousands of such CEOs under the age of 10, as age/qualification/knowledge is not a criteria for becoming a CEO in majority of the countries but just filling up some forms and paying the specified fee will do it.

Coming back to the article - It is quite shocking to see authors of Wikipedia to mention bogus/personal/blog sites as sources for titles like "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" etc without the reference to any official/reliable/verifiable/reputed resources like Guinness World Records as it is very clearly mentioned in World record page that "A world record is usually the best global performance ever recorded and officially verified". Not to offend, but I politely request the authors of the article to provide links of such official authorities when such records are mentioned - and not something like "According to her parents ..."

--LVerina (talk) 01:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth, particularly the section titled "But I know the truth!" and "Editors are not truth finders". She's recognized in the India Book of Records as the youngest web designer. While other sources may show examples of others who are younger, it's not for us as editors to synthesize the truth by removing information that is supported by reliable and verifiable sources. Lastly, per WP:V, when reliable sources disagree with one another, the solution is not to remove the content and sources that disagree with your opinion and the sources you have. We have policies that actually directly prevent that from happening. Mkdw^talk 16:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I was pretty sure you will revert the edits and will highlight the points like "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" etc again! Not pointing any fingers and not targeting you, let me make few general statements. I did go through the most useful and important page you mentioned. It makes sense too. Sorry but I suggest you to read that page again, it has nothing to do with the article we are debating on. Not related at all. There are people who are obsessed with rules and guidelines so much that they keep forgetting the most simple and basic thing - what Wikipedia is for! It is for giving correct and useful information to the public and not to help someone for shameless self promotion, that also based on fake/false claims. Sad, but have no other options I know. As most of those are seniors and have super powers! No, no plans for edit wars. I am sure it will not be taken in the right sense and there is high probability that my account may get banned! Quite surprising and flawed logic anyway! As per that logic, earth is flat, Sun rotate around earth and ships shouldn't go too far as they may fell down! I mean, these were 'correct' at some point of time, even though science proved them all wrong later! The logic itself contradicts, it is pretty much like - Men's high jump world record is 2.0 m, which was on 18 May 1912. Though it became 2.45 mtrs on 27 July 1993! So the 'miracle kid' will remain as "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" forever even though I very clearly cited sources which are more official/reliable/verifiable/reputed resources which includes an Indian Government website! Sounds quite funny to me, to say the least! People are adamant on references like bogus sites and personal blogs. Let Wikipedia get flooded with articles like this - "The youngest kid who wrote an email using Gmail", The youngest kid who used XYZ software of the company ABC" and so on, as those are more important than letting people know what is the truth and what are false claims. --LVerina (talk) 16:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I've updated the article to match what is normally done with conflicting information. As you point out, some of those individuals have claims to the title and I will look into seeing if they meet our notability guidelines for their own articles. Thanks for bringing them to my attention. Regards, Mkdw^talk 23:14, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I liked the way you edited! Few points/requests from my side though.
1. Please don't remove referenced information and/or source links without providing reasons. I see you removed many source links and text I added.
2. Please give equal weight to all. Example from your edit. Reg the person in the article - "Often cited at one time as being "World's Youngest CEO" and the "World's Youngest Web Designer" and Reg the persons I mentioned - "Some sources have named Harli Jordean assumed the title as "World's Youngest CEO". Often cited became Some sources and also the term assumed the title?
3. What do you mean by The title of "World's Youngest Web Designer" has sometimes since been accredited to other individuals, most commonly Ajay Puri? No reference by you on other individuals
4.Press Information Bureau, the official news bureau of India is the most reliable and official press bureau of India and no reasons were given by you on removing it! --LVerina (talk) 10:05, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Missed one point. Why referring Suhas Gopinath? He may be the "The Youngest CEO in India". We were talking about "World's Youngest CEO" and do we really need to provide a list of "The Youngest CEO" in each country? --LVerina (talk) 10:09, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

The statement and the reference matched. It wasn't irrelevant. Secondly, no, the article is about Sreelakshmi Suresh. The article is not about the Youngest Web Designer or Youngest CEO. You have made the article about that. Against WP:UNDUE and WP:BALANCE, arguably the whole second paragraph should be removed and replaced with the line "other sources have named others as holding these titles". When more than half the lede introduction is spent talking about other individuals on an article about one, then it's usually considered unbalanced. Also, exceeding 4 sources, especially on uncontentious statements, like "Harli Jordean as "World's Youngest CEO"" (which no one here is contesting), is considered WP:BOMBARD. Even then, you added the reference [2] to a sentence that already had it as a reference so now it was in there twice. Please make sure you're not blindly restoring references for the sake of reverting my edits. Against BOMBARD I'm going to keep all sentences to 3 references except for the last sentence in the Youngest section as it brings up two points. If you have a strong opinion on which reference to use then we can discuss it but I made a genuine attempt to keep references you have prioritized in the past (despite them being merely an image caption and not a news story with in-depth coverage as per WP:RS). I've also worked to spread the sources out from the lede to the body to allow differentiating sources to support the same piece of information. Mkdw^talk 17:51, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Nice and clever edits again! Especially keeping references to the age of the 'miracle kid' while removing the age and year of all others! All sources I listed clearly mention the age of the persons and there is no reason to display the age of some people while hiding those of some others. Example: Even the Wikipedia entry of Suhas Gopinath mention the age at which he became the youngest CEO, multiple times. Corrected some of your edits, for example "while others" is not needed as we are talking about two titles and not one. While I 'technically' agree that the other persons were titled later, it is incorrect. Read the interview of the kid (which is added as a link under the article) where she clearly mention the name of Ajay Puri. It reads -"When I was studying in Class 3, my dad showed me a website designed by a young boy, Ajay Puri. He told me if I want, I can also design a website." And she created the website after one year and still managed to get the title of "World's Youngest Web Designer". Magic I must say!

Regarding your comment "not blindly restoring references for the sake of reverting my edits". I have no plans to do it. My plan is not to revert your edits but to provide correct information to the people who use Wikipedia, based on sources available online and abiding the general rules of Wikipedia. Mentioning the reason for removing text or references will make things easy for us as well as other editors of Wikipedia. I know the whole article is worthless and only a promotional material, that also with false claims by the person/people behind the person, just that I couldn't succeed in exposing it as there are huge loopholes in Wikipedia policies.

Also, the long list of so called 'awards' (web badges which anyone will get without any formal requirements) starting with "Sixty Plus Education Award" to "ProFish-N-Sea Charters World Class Website Award" - shall we remove them all? As there is no reference in internet available and we are not sure whether such badges exist at all! That will make the article bit clean with some actual awards mentioned and not these funny looking badges.--LVerina (talk) 02:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)