Talk:Keyi family

message: Wikipedia is not a place to list family members. Socially notable persons of Keyi family can be listed here, not just because anyone is an advocate or a doctor. There are hundreds of members in the family and there is no need to list every one here. I don't know why Keyi1 is insisting upon adding few not so popular keyi family members here. --59.93.5.142 12:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia is not a place to list family members 

message: I am here in response to the request for a third opinion. One of the official policies of Wikipedia is verifiability. None of the material on this page appears to cite a reliable source. By doing so it is much easier to tell who is notable and who isn't. Otherwise it will just be an interminable argument between the two of you. If you cannot provide citations of reliable sources, this page may be deleted. Grouse 20:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keyi Family is quite notable family in Kerala state of India. Here is the link to news artcile that came in The Hindu newspaper . Another link from Kerala goverment website. What I was telling is that there is no need to list all non notable members in this artcle. --59.93.4.5 05:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understood that your point was twofold&mdash(1) another user is adding people that are not-notable; and (2) another user is removing people that are notable. While your complaint may be valid, it is not possible for most outside observers to be able to find the truth, because neither of you have followed Wikipedia's verifiability policy until now. My suggestion would be that you add a citation for the facts regarding the people you want to be included, and then point out here on this talk page the people missing citations so that User:Keyi1 may respond. Grouse 10:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third opinion 

message: The user (earlier from IP 59.93.18.242 and later from IP 59.93.4.5) was trying to add his personal details, which is against the policies of wikipedia. I have removed those details from the site, which has enraged the user and started vandalizing the site by adding the details about unknown and infamous people as family members and removing the genuine and accurate information. One of the edits made by the user is given below.
Quote:
C.P. Mohammed Ashraf Keyi a descendent of the great Keyi family and nephew of C.P.Kunhiahmed Keyi (former Ranjhi Trophy cricket player) is a hockey player who represented Tamilnadu state in Hockey national championships. He is a banker by profession working in State Bank of India, Chennai. His son Shoaib mohamed A.R is an upcomming hockey goal-keeper who represented Tamilnadu hockey in under-14 years
Unquote:
It is clearly evident from the above edit who has added non-notable persons and that the user is trying to promote someone through this site. It seems the user is not aware of the fact that the family has a high reputation in field of sports and games, not only as organizers but also as participants.  So many members of the family represented various state teams.
If the user is keen on self promotion, then I would like to advise him to launch a personal website. My humble request to the user is to desist from vandalizing this site or any other site in wiki in future and please don’t transform this medium a place to settle score with someone or vent personal ire against someone. Please try to contribute in a positive and constructive manner which will be helpful for everyone - Keyi1
:Personalizing this discussion and the actions of others is neither necessary nor helpful. I believe the way forward is quite simple. If you feel information is in the article that is not cited, please add  after it. If you feel information is in the article that should be kept, then please cite a source to prove its verifiability. This can all be done without ascribing motives or emotions to other editors. Grouse 14:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a place for advertising

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Avinesh. Instead of removing the notability tag, try and find more sources for the article. One source doesn't cut it. --vi5in[talk] 17:16, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: * Neither I have any particular interest towards this article nor do I care what is going to be the future of it. It may be deleted or keep. Because of thisHindu news, considered to be one of the notable vernaculars, which is also widely acceptable, I am not taking it to AfD. So, in this case, the notability is ok. But the problem is with article’s poor way of writing style and flooded with unwanted stuff. Therefore, I feel that other tags are ok, notability tag is inappropriate here. --Avinesh Jose   T   05:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Notability is established by a wide range of sources. Adding the notability tag alerts other users to the fact that this article needs more sources. Someone might be able to provide them. Also, adding the notability tag gives other editors a chance to improve the article before it is taken to AfD. So please, don't remove the tag. --vi5in[talk] 15:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems they are notable and historic family in Kerala. A simple google search also underlines it. Today morning I got one more Hindu reference, that I added to the article. If you still having doubt, take it to AfD and please do not add notability tag again. --Avinesh Jose   T   05:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you realize that that was the very reason that I added the notability tag? Do you seriously not understand the purpose of that tag? It's so that we can try to establish notability for an article and if that fails, take it to AfD. It's like saying you don't want me to use an axe to chop a tree, but I can use a nuke instead. Sheesh. --vi5in[talk] 00:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your time is much better spent finding reliable references yourself instead of sermonizing on notability, if you feel that strongly. It is clear that you simply added the notability tag without spending a thorough search. --Avinesh   T   04:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh wow! What a revelation! I guess we should just do away with ALL the notability tags, right? Seriously, did you add links immediately after removing the tag? No, you removed it and then asked me to take it to AfD, which made no sense whatsoever. So spare me the hypocrisy. --vi5in[talk] 22:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

text: By the way, I did do a google search which gave me a lot of mirrored information, but nothing substantial. There was a personal site for the family (fails WP:RS), a blog (also fails WP:RS), a link from The Hindu and one from the Kerala government. So I don't frivolously add tags. I have a pretty good reason. I really wonder WHY you take the addition of tags so personally. --vi5in[talk] 23:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Forget about their personal website and other blogues. That is none of the matter to be discussed. The reality is that the family is historical and a simple search much underlines it. Apart from two separate Hindu (reliable and independent sources per WP:N and WP:RS), other evidences can be found in Kerala related historical writings. As a history graduate, I remember, I had come across many such. That’s the reason why I am here. If you are not sure about something, it is better you don’t edit it.  --Avinesh   T   04:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, don't tell me what to edit or not edit. I'll edit whatever I damn well please. Secondly, if you're the history graduate you claim you are then you should find those sources and fix the article. Unfortunately we can't just take you at your word just because you read something about the family in a book somewhere at some point in your life. No, I can't 'forget about their personal website and other blogues [sic]'. The fact remains that there are only two reliable sources that are revealed in the google search. So why don't you back up your claims and actually present citations from "Kerala historical writings"? You'll actually be improving the article instead of blustering and wikilawyering incessantly. --vi5in[talk] 17:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not wikilawering. It is you who are wikilawering, bad faith edits, and added notability tag without proper search. If you still doubt, ask some expert hand here, just leave a note in Kerala Wiki project or leave the issue right away. Don’t pointlessly comment that I read something from here and there. What I said, and echo now is that apart from the two reliable Hindu references that (I already included that in the article), there are plenty of references available. I said that the family is notable Read this by a historian who commented that this family here played a role in the history of North Malabar and closely linked with that of the of East India Company in 1683. It is a well known truth or fact that is what I commented above that Your time is much better spent finding reliable references yourself instead of sermonizing on notability. Therefore, either you leave this issue and step out or try to improve the article. That’s all. --Avinesh   T   04:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'm not going to bother with this anymore since you obviously have a problem understanding what I'm talking about. First I added the notability tag, after you had added the one-source tag. Then you removed the notability tag inexplicably. I tried to make you understand what the notability tag is about, but you can't seem to understand and then you accuse me of not doing proper research. When I pointed out that there are only two reliable references from a google search you claim that you heard about the family in your history class. When I asked you to provide references you accuse me of 'bad-faith edits' and then still refuse to bring anymore links. It's quite evident that you have no idea what you're talking about. It's ironic that you accuse me of sermonizing when that's all you've been doing - blathering and blustering without any substance. If you are so concerned about notability, why don't YOU bring out these sources that you claim to have? It's as I said before. You ramble without knowing what you're talking about. --vi5in[talk] 16:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you are totally deceiving others and blindly arguing on your bad faith edits. As history shows, (1) I myself started working on this article by added ‘one source tag’ as I could not find anything else (But, I am sure that they are notable, otherwise I would have nominated it to AfD). (2) Later, you targeted my edit (as part of your current job in Wikipedia [targeting all my edits, no probs, go ahead]) and added the notability tag without any rationale. (3) I removed your tag, because I know that that they are notable and able to recall it. (3) You kept reverting my edits and adding notability tag without properly searching for it. (4) I added additional reference and removed your notability tag. (5) Now, you still in conflict with groundless talking. Otherwise, let a third person see the history of this article and comment. It's quite clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. In addition, if I am keeping ‘bad faith’ in your edits, did I remove other tags (tone & peacock) that you have added? As history shows, NO. --Avinesh   T   04:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding notability