Talk:Medha Hari

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Nupuram 19:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)I completely agree with Water Fish, a very valid point. In fact, when there are no pages devoted to prominent dancers such as Alarmel Valli and Malavika Sarukkai who have been awarded padma sri and padma bhushan (Note: these are not everyday awards like natya whatever), this dancer doesnt deserve a page yet. Apart from the fact that the dancer (or her publicity person) is trying to spam every other website that remotely mentions bharatanatyam, there is no other credibility that yields true value for this feature. Nupuram 19:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This article or section is written like an advertisement.
Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view per Wikipedia policy.
Mark blatant advertising for speedy deletion with {{db-spam}}. (help, talk)


On in.geocities.com/medhahari/about.html, we read: "All text on this page is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License" So, there is no copyright issue.

looks like a copy and paste job from in.geocities.com/medhahari/about.html. Christopher Mahan 02:49, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)


maybe he or she is the owner of the website, then would it not fall under GFDL

By definition, linking to webpages devoted to the promotion of a single dancer is spam. It is surely not helpful and is definitely advertisement. Moreover the wikipedia gives bibliography to textbooks dealing with topics. These Reference textbooks are not spam, they are treatise on a subject.

listing on open directory or Looksmart page or Google and professional directories like Narthaki.com, can be done, it is never taken as a criterion to validate authenticity or to be listed on an encyclopaedia. Wikipedia is well aware of such acts by people to legitimise their personal views.

Besides being featured 3 or more times in a newspaper or television is not a criterion to be on an encyclopedia. Many major newspapers and TV channels throughout the world promote young dancers by writing and presenting about them more than one time. if one was to make encyclopedia article about all of them, then they do not even qualify half as much as the virtuosos from conservatories around the world. But wikipedia does not entertain articles even about those virtuosos from great universities.

Medha Hari is probably a young dancer, and definitely not a major dancer. If that is enough criterion to be written about on the wikipedia, then in that case every music student in Julliard School and music conservatories and ballets would have to be written about, and that is definitely not meant for the wikipedia. Water Fish 07:34, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • Tagging this page as advertisement. the author is turning a deaf ear to many people's complaints. Medha Hari is *NOT* a well known dancer in bharatnatya circles. just having your own website is no claim to fame and certainly doesnt merit a page on wikipedia. this is blatant advertising at its worst.
  • and the newspaper which the author says is like Dance magazine or whatever magazine is far from anything like that...it is just a normal regular newspaper with a readership mostly restricted to one single state in the Indian Republic. It is nowhere even close to a truly national newspaper...though their tagline makes that very claim. and most importantly, it is NOT an authority on the subject in question. that having your name appear in this newspaper is a license to have yourself on wikipedia is totally, blatantly a LIE.


Maybe he or she owns the site. Then the image would fall under GFDL

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/e/d/Talk%7EMedha_Hari_4ab1.html"