Talk:Kiruba Shankar/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its doesnt make too much sense to have an entire wiki page dedicated to him. Looks like some kind of self promotional publicity. Okay agreed he blogs. But most of the stuff in his blog is bit and pieces taken from other sources. Much like Google news, except that Google news is automated. —This unsigned comment was added by 128.105.120.112 (talk • contribs) .

It is not self promotion since he has not created the article. The bio has enough information to prove his notability. - Ganeshk (talk) 07:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

it doesnt make sense dedicating a page to him, when so many people who create the products that he blogs about rather ctrl c , crtl vs about dont have wiki pages. You guys are making a demi god out of him. —This unsigned comment was added by 128.105.120.112 (talk • contribs) .

I am not sure why you doubt his notability. Please give reasons. He has already appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers (requirement for WP:V). If you feel many people do not have wiki pages, please feel free to create them. And thanks for your comments. - Ganeshk (talk) 17:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I know hundreds of people who has superb blogs and appear in numerous tech magazines and newspapers. BTW having a newspaper srticle is no big deal. May be we should create a web page for each of the IIM guys who have been placed on wall street, every Google employee who has designed a product, every microsoft employee, everyone who has a paper in a top tier conference and so on. My point is wikipedia is a free Encylopedia and we shouldn't just write in a bunch of hyped up stuff.

BTW I'm no lowly soul to create a page for each of these people. May be I should create one for you! —This unsigned comment was added by 128.105.120.112 (talk • contribs) .

I believe I have explained enough. If you still can't see why this bio can't exist, you could put the article for WP:AFD and see what others feel. This would be my last post of the conversation here. Ganeshk (talk) 19:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Good, now I can creat a 500 word plus, "biography" page on me! And I should mention that I haven't used TPs even once after coming to the US. Waah what an achievement! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.193.233.6 (talk • contribs). of 14.09.06

[edit] Kiruba who??

• I took a look at the categories. Just the Indian bloggers. I dont have anything against the category itself per se. But just because a 'nobody' blogs day in and day out for 'x' number of years doesnt bless him with enought notability to merit an article on Wikipedia.
• If a 'notable' person(like say, M J Akbar) blogs, then it makes sense to make a 'note' of it. Rajeev Srinivasan also just about makes the grade because he is a regular journalist/columnist at one of the biggest portals/websites in India and perhaps the world. That certainly is 'notable'.
• Kiruba who(??) is on the other hand, a 'nobody'. Blogging alone seems to be his claim to dubious claim of notability. It is not like he is the only blogger from his country or that he is the only one in the world who blogs about a certain topic or something like that. It is not like he's running something on the lines of slashdot or something notable like that(dont jump at me, I know slashdot isnt a blog). Basically, forget the person, even his blog is nothing special. For example, there was some blog during the recent Iraq war which was the only blog in the world that was reporting from ground zero and major news agencies were feeding off that blog. Kiruba and his blog have no such achievements to their credit. It is just another one of the zillion blogs on the net.
• And just because The Hindu mentions his blog in an article about the 'non-notable' blogging scene in India(not even India, just Madras) is no claim to fame. The Hindu and other Indian newspapers(even English ones) routinely cover such 'non-notable' events like some fancy dress competition for kids in some school for Krishna Janmashtami, some high school's annual day celebrations etc.,.
• Using these to establish notability is ridiculous and going on to write articles about such people and events is an abuse of technology and wikipedia. Gigabytes and terabytes may come cheap these days, but that is no reason to dump all nonsensical stuff reeking of vanity on wikipedia. Basically, as a thumb rule, I'd ask myself the question, "Will this article make it to the Encyclopedia Britannica?(even assuming the book ran into millions of pages and thousands of volumes)". The answer is an emphatic NO! Kiruba and his blog(considering their 'achievements' to date) will not make it into E.Britannica today or in the next 50 years or ever!!
• Also, I havent taken a look at the entries under the Bloggers category for other countries. But even if there are entries like Kiruba's from other countries, I hold that even they should be deleted. This is just plain and utter nonsense!! Come to think of it, I myself have represented a state of India in baseball. How many people in India have done that? So let me just trash the fact that 'Baseball in India' itself is 'non-notable' and nonsense, and let me go ahead and create a wikipedia article for myself!! Kiruba's name at best belongs in some article about say, 'Blogging scene in Madras' or some such article. Writing a whole article about this 'nobody' is simply an abuse of technology and resources. Super speedy delete. Sarvagnya 17:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I would like to stress that I don't know Kiruba in real life, neither do I read his blogs. Kiruba might not be the No. 1 blogger of India, and might not be as unique as he was few years ago, but he is not a nobody. The article on Kiruba doesn't exist because he has blogged "day in and day out for 'x' number of years". He was one of the first Indians to evangelise, promote and create awareness about blogging. He was ranked the No. 1 Indian blogger at Blogstreet for close to two years (he's No. 2 now). Recently, there were some bloggers who questioned his place among the top bloggers in India, and accused him of posting email forwards and using his blogs for self-promotion[1][2][3][4], to which he replied here. Kiruba was behind BlogCamp.in, which received media coverage[5][6][7], and sponsorships by Intel, Yahoo! India etc. The Hindu published it in the "National" section. In my knowledge, "fancy dress competition for kids in some school for Krishna Janmashtami, some high school's annual day celebrations etc" do not appear in the "National" section. Also, Kiruba is associate director of Sulekha.com. He has also written for DataQuest, Express Computers, Economic Times etc. All this leads to a Weak Keep, at least. My Speedy Keep is because of a single-purpose account making a series of AFD nominations without giving any concrete reasons (See Special:Contributions/Ed.del.bs). As about your criteria for an article existing on Wikipedia ("Will this article make it to the Encyclopedia Britannica?"), it is obviously flawed (I'll explain, if you want me to...). utcursch | talk 08:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)