Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medha Hari

Medha Hari was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion

 about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. 
 Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that 
 this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was inconclusive, 
 therefore the article was kept.

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.

There are several or should I say numerous young people far younger than age of 13 who are virtuosos. A lot of the students in Julliard School are below 8 and 9 years old. Several articles about these kids come in the New York Times and other prominent newspapers around the world. To write article in an encyclopedia about a person, the person has not only to be a virtuoso but also stand the test of time. That is the reason one does not find articles written about just anybody who is famous. An encyclopedia article is written about a person who retains brilliance over a long time. If a young talent lasts for several decades with the same brilliance then an article could be written about that person. Just being a prodigy does not qualify. One needs to retain that virtuosity for decades before receiving lasting acclaim.

The wikipedia has artilces about prodigies who retained brilliance over decades. Violinists like Yehudi Menuhin were prodigies. Infact Yehudi Menuhin gave his first performance when he was 7 years old. But his entry into an encyclopedia was made only after several decades of continious performance.

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.

the inward links to that page has been created by the same author, it is very easy to create several links to a spam on the wikipedia. One should not be deceived by them.

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. Water Fish 12:02, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Delete

1. Delete. It is merely a spam to promote DVDs, etc. --Rrjanbiah 12:08, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
2. Delete: A young dancer with a website. Geogre 16:32, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
3. Delete. Non-notable. RickK 23:39, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
4. Delete. It is absolutely spam and advertisement Water Fish 05:06, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
5. Facts may be worth icluding in a merger of the Bharatanatyam and Bharathanatyam dancer pages. Otherwise delete as not notable and/or possible spam/advertisment. AtonX 12:11, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
6. Delete: Well, it looks like Medha Hari has manged to get one of the marketing managers - using WikiPedia, Hindu and many other opportunities to promote. I suspect, it is the marketing manager $$gaining$$ through the efforts of popularizing her. If the WikiPedia author(s) is really serious with out any bias to write about Bharatanatyam and Tamil culture, s/he can get older pictures of Bharatanatyam placed widely on wiki - instead of Medha Hari's all over. This is THE most controversial wikipedia entry I have come across so far. --Pinecar 01:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep

1. Do not delete. First of all, Bharatanatyam is not merely a "dance", so the comparison is absurd. Bharatanatyam is a sacred discipline.

Please try to find me a "kid" who was published 3 times by the age he was 13 in the New York Times and MOST other NATIONAL newspapers and MOST specialized editions such as the Dance Magazine, and was featured on CNN and ABC.
Besides, try to find another kid who is believed to be an incarnation of some heavenly being. It is a matter of religious importance, and if you are Jewish, you do not need to delete the names of importance of other religions.
Thegist 03:14, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This is the above user's first edit. RickK 05:19, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

1. Do Not delete

My name is Hemamalini Raju from Pondicherry. I have been awarded the highest Bharatanatyam title, Kalaimani, by the state of Tamil Nadu. I witnessed one recital of Medha Hari, and want to say that she is veritably exceptional artiste that deserves to be included in any encyclopedia. Any senior dancer would be proud to have such magnificent photographs and video clips on their websites.

It is true that history has known a dozen or two of equally exceptional Bharatanatyam dancers who became famous at a very young age, e.g Balasaraswati, and I wanted to include them too. But now I feel that people are so hostile here that I am greatly discouraged from adding any other materials to Wikipedia.

Finally, I want to add that I have just added on Bharatanatyam a link to other dancer's web page where the most important hand gestures, mudras, were given descriptions and photographs, but the users Rrjanbiah and Water Fish erased all external links indiscriminately. They are vandalising all pages. They are only good at erasing. Again, I am very discouraged.

Bharata natyam 15:06, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hema, please don't get discouraged and don't lose your patience. Significantly, it is very interesting: you want to have a page for Medha Hari but didn't contribute anything for the so called legends such as Rukmani Devi or Saradha Hoffman... Certainly unbelievable gesture from a Pandichery girl who was awarded Kalaimamani (or Kalaimani(?)) by Tamil Nadu government?

So, do you agree that you're actually 219.65.124.***, User:Geosammie, User:Serge56, User:RalphWWW, User:JuliaJ, User:Thegist, etc??

As you seem to be more interested in contributing to Wikipedia, don't you have a photo which doesn't carry the name of the site? Why are you deleting the reference texts? Why are you so particular in giving links to DVD sites? Do you think, those links are better than one at http://dmoz.org/Arts/Performing_Arts/Dance/Classical_Indian/Bharata_Natyam/ ? Why are you complaining British rulers for the insane devadasi system which was invented by religious crapists especially upper class crookeds?

You may want to read other Wikipedia articles and how the images are used, how the links are given, the quality of such links, etc. You may want to learn Wiki markups. Or better you may create a temp page and contribute at Bharatanatyam/temp; then once it is approved at Talk:Bharatanatyam, we may get it replaced with the article.

You may also want to look at How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style, policies, help pages, village pump.

Since, you're a scholar in this field, we're expecting good quality articles from you and we believe that you can. Please stay here and enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Let the world be benefited more out of your work! Regards --Rrjanbiah 17:20, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

   Rrjanbiah (are you the same as Water Fish?), I only found Wikipedia yesterday through Yahoo when        
   I looked for Bharata Natyam pages. 
   To satisfy your curiosity, I was awarded the title of Kalaimani by the Tamil Nadu government    
   before I moved to live in Pondicherry. I am originally from the Thanjore area.
   I have to add that I have never seen such a narrow-minded and paranoid person as Rrjanbiah/Water 
   Fish.    
   Rukmani Devi, even though she only started practising Bharatanatyam after the age of 30, surely    
   deserves being listed on Wikipedia as one of the reformists, not as a great performer. But you  
   wrote that she only 'commercialized' Sadir, which is not true. I do not feel inclined to write if 
   such barbaric people as you are erase everything simply because you don't know what you are   
   talking about. 
   * You ask, 'Do you think, those links are better than one at  
    http://dmoz.org/Arts/Performing_Arts/Dance/Classical_Indian/Bharata_Natyam/ ?'
   1. Isn't it the link that you constantly erase?
   2. I personally added a link to the Mudra's web site
       So, what is the point?
   The point is that Rrjanbiah-Water Fish erase everything wholesale. Myself, I never 'deleted the   
   reference texts'.
   'You say that devadasi system which was invented by religious crapists'. I believe that only   
   a Muslim extremist can have such a hatred towards the devadasi. However, I have to admit that the 
   devadasi system has been being corrupted (if I can use such grammar!) partly by 
   'religious crapists' since several hundred years ago.      
 
  Thanks for advise (you may create a temp page and contribute at Bharatanatyam/temp; then once  
  it is approved at Talk:Bharatanatyam, we may get it replaced with the article). Why don't 
  you yourself try to contribute in this way? I can only see that  you have nothing to 
  contribute
  Bharata natyam 02:25, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 

• • User's only edits are to Bharatanatyam and this page. Possible sock puppet. The Wikipedia is being spammed all over the place with links to Medha Hari. They should be removed as well. RickK 23:22, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

   RickK, I only found Wikipedia through Yahoo yesterday and, as I am a Bharata Natyam 
   teacher, I naturally looked at everything related to Bharata Natyam and classical Indian dance on  
   Wikipedia, so this is how I found Medha Hari's article here. 
   Why I don't add anything related to the nuclear science is because I understand as much about it 
   as Water Fish/Rrjanbiah understands about Bharata Natyam.

. Bharata natyam 02:36, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

1. Keep. Seems reasonably well-known in her field in India, which is comparable to many of the lesser-known actors we have articles for. A performer getting coverage in national mainstream media is notable. Article could use a more neutral tone, but that's Cleanup, not VfD.Niteowlneils

PS (from above) "...but also stand the test of time..."?!? Then WTF are all the recent reality game show losers doing here? What about all the movies, books, albums, etc. that have articles that haven't even been released yet? Niteowlneils

1. Keep. Glowing profile from 2002 in The Hindu, an English-language newspaper of record [1]; at least four other references to her at that paper's site, as early as 2001. Whether she is young or not, she has been noteworthy to a world-level newspaper since 2001. Whether she is being link-spammed or not, she is worth an article. She, and our mandate, both deserve that we vote on her rather than any spate of ill-advised editing by her supporter/s. Samaritan 09:24, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Comments

• Comment - I have no idea of how noteworthy or not this dancer is. However, I do note that her website has been the subject of what looks suspiciously like spamvertising attempts on Wikipedia in the past. I had this discussion a couple of months ago with someone who was adding copyrighted images of her to a large number of Indian dance-related pages, along with many links to Medha Hari's sites and mirrors of those sites. When I listed the images on copyright problems, the copyight notice on her website immediately changed to saying that the images were permitted to be redistributed for non-commercial use. When I explained that this was still incompatible with Wikipedia's GFDL and listed them as possibly unfree, the copyright notice on her website immediately changed to its current version, licencing the images under the GFDL! All this despite the user in question claiming no direct connection with the website, and never contibuting anything ever again after the copyright issues over these images were resolved.... Since, then, however, an anon (219.65.124.156) added links to more Medha Hari mirrors to Image:Bharathanatyam.jpg. --Rlandmann 06:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Comment The user id User:RalphWWW, User:Geosammie, User:Serge56 User:JuliaJ, User:Thegist, User:Bharata natyam were all created since 13th november 2004. It seems they are all created by the same person who has done considerable vandalism from 219.65.124.*** on the bharatanatyam page, and also by creating the spam Medha Hari on a young performer. It seems this person makes different user id and creates support for himself in vote for deletion, request for page protection of bharatanatyam page with spam etc.

User:Bharata natyam says he never deleted references. But he was the one who reverted to the version with pictures and so called resources. Check the history page of bharatanatyam 14:28, 15 Nov 2004 User:Bharata natyam (reverting to the page with external links and with the picture of Bharatanatyam dancer). So User:Bharata natyam did delete the references.

The national newspaper The Hindu, sells mainly in the Indian city of chennai. It has a section for local news and local cultural events of that city. This section presents a lot of young dancers from time to time. If one were to make pages on all of these performers then the wikipedia would be a performers directory. Water Fish 17:55, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Comment:

Today I spoke to few people at Kalakshetra (http://www.kalakshetra.net/) including the Director, very well known place for Bharathanatyam. They all don't have any idea about Medha Hari or Smt. Kalaimani Hemamalini Raju Teacher of Bharata Natyam of Thanjavoor style Pondicherry (India). They're also not aware of the Kalaimani award, but they all know only the Kalaimamani award. They also said they're not aware of anything about Krishna Iyer, but to their knowledge Bharathanatyam was revived by Rukmani Devi. If you don't trust me, you may check the contact section of Kalakshetra webpage and feel free to contact those scholars.

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page. I presume, it is the group of people who belongs to different cult of Bharathanatyam and promote it differently. I also feel that the User:Bharata natyam might not be a girl especially who must not be a guru.

As User:Water Fish said, The Hindu is South Indian based especially in cities like Chennai where only majority/fair number of the people read English newspaper. As said, it is not a magazine; it is a daily--which carries some column on dance, entertainment, etc. They will definitely publish any article related to these if you send them; otherwise they won't be having any news for these columns, especially country dance like Bharathanatyam. As it seems to be a cult, they will usually promote and get it published.

By looking at this diff, I understand that User:Bharata natyam doesn't seem to erase the reference text. But, at the sametime looking at the history and the response from User:Bharata natyam (which are related to previous discussions and edits), I presume that it is a sock puppet of User:RalphWWW, User:Geosammie, User:Serge56, User:JuliaJ, User:Thegist, etc.

As suggested by User:Bharata natyam, I'm thinking of contributing at Bharatanatyam/temp until the attack is over.

Please look at page history and talk history. It is under attack by so many people. The images I have added (without site name in it) have been reverted and also criticized. Other wikipedians may comment at Talk:Bharatanatyam regarding the images, I have no idea about the criticism. Thanks. --Rrjanbiah 06:40, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)