Jump to content

Talk:Sanki King

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SameStruggle (talk | contribs) at 05:08, 14 June 2020 (→Help required for clean-up & removal of banners). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sanki King is Wikipedia Editor!

I found that User:Abdullah Ahmed Khan aka Sanki King is himself Wikipedia editor. Ask him if you have any problems. :) Nizil (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like he's inactive here at the moment anyway. And he hasn't edited the article about himself, so no conflict of interest either. Sionk (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Though the original author of this article has concentrated all their efforts on this one subject and nothing else. It does make you wonder! Sionk (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nizil Shah Replying to your message on your talk page and this message together.
I don't know what you mean by style of writing. Almost everything in the article is taken from the third party sources which are news articles published on Sanki King, I did not write much from my own, what you read is what is mentioned in the articles. But you look more experienced than me so I would like you to fix this article and don't just leave banners or citations needed tags on the article. I just want to ask how is the source #7 "House of Pakistan" on the article is unreliable? The website posts news from all over Pakistan and is not a wordpress blog or anything its a legit website. So I want to know can a website not be used as a third-party source? I mean all the sources do they must be from a news publication or something that is coming from a news agency etc? From my experience, I don't think that's the case and real .com websites Can Be used as third party sources, but please shed some light on this.
Also the source #18 "Can't touch this" that you have also marked as "not given in citation", I used that source because the paragraph that it is used on starts with this "King is one of the early leaders of b-boying and parkour in Pakistan", and in that source if you read, it is clearly mentioned "The boys began with Pakor (the writer misspelled Parkour) – a skill that involved reaching from point A to point B in the shortest, quickest way possible. Twenty-one-year-old Abdullah Ahmed Khan, aka Sanki, was one of the pioneers." So I used this source in that context. I hope you get my point.
As far as Sanki King being an editor himself is concerned, that account does not look like a Secret Wikipedia Account, anyone can be a Wikipedia editor. But Sanki did not create this article and you don't see him marketing himself anywhere on his page or this article that I created. So let's stick to the point here and let's not throw sarcasm at each other like "Ask him if you have any problems :)", this does not improve anything. Someone just posted another banner as well that the article needs copyediting, like I said, I wrote the article in the light of the sources to the best of my abilities. But if you think it needs improvement, please do it and I might learn some things from those changes. I would like to ask Sionk to help improve the article if possible. Thank you very much. SameStruggle (talk) 03:02, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nizil Shah I have struggled with expanding this article, most of the edits I do on Wikipedia are adding citations to articles which are up for deletion due to lack of sources or expanding parts of an article . So if you can expand this article, and Im sure you can since creating 200 articles is a big thing, please do so. And also if you can provide me with (a) link(s) that can help me and guide me regarding expanding Wikipedia articles and make them legit, that'll be awesome. For now I'm going through the articles that you have created to see how you write. Peace SameStruggle (talk) 03:17, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nizil Shah Also I dont understand one thing, we've got 18 sources on this acrticle, 3 out of 18 SEEM unreliable and you have posted a banner saying Needs Additional Citations for verification, I mean what about all the other national and international sources? Gulf News, The News International, Express Tribune, DAWN?? I have seen articles with 5-6 sources with no banners on them. The whole world media doesn't have to verify an article does it? Please tell me what I am missing here. Thank you. SameStruggle (talk) 04:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I don't see a major problem with sourcing or grammar, so I've removed the clean-up templates. A number of people have already worked to improve the article. Everything is sourced, though admittedly some sources are much better than others. For example "Campus Diaries" seems to be only a student 'showcase', really a social media website - it could be used very sparingly, but generally the facts it cites can be found in the other (better) sources. Sionk (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request Edit

Sources to be reviewed and added to the article;

I gave two TEDx Talks, one in 2016 and the other in 2017:


Other sources:


I was a major part of Karachi Biennale 2017 (KB17):


Pehle Aap - collaborative project/exhibition in Mumbai, later exhibited at The Urdu Exhibit:

SameStruggle (talk) 08:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 22-JAN-2019

  Specification requested  

  • It is not known what changes are requested to be made. Please state your desired changes in the form of "Change x to y using z".
Change x to y using z
x A verbatim description of the old text to be removed from the article (if any)
y A verbatim description of the new text to be added to the article (if any)
z A reference which verifies the requested change
Example edit request:

Please change:

  • The Sun's diameter is 25 miles.  this is x 

to read as:

  • The Sun's diameter is 864,337.3 miles.  this is y 

using as a reference:

  • Sjöblad, Tristan (2018). The Sun. Academic Press. p. 1.  this is z 

When ready to proceed, please alter the {{request edit}} template's answer parameter to read from |ans=yes to |ans=no.
Regards,  Spintendo  16:25, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Spintendo: All of the above sources were never a part of the article and have been posted here not only to be added to the article as references but so that their content can be used to expand the article as well. Since I myself am Sanki King, due to COI I cannot suggest how and which sources should be used to expand the article. That's why I shared those sources so that editors can go through the sources, confirm their authenticity, and then make them a part of the article. SameStruggle (talk) 08:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SameStruggle: "Sources" are meant to confirm statements and claims made by an article. There is a section of external links, but I don't believe that's what you're asking for here, which is to add the listings of these links in the body of the article. But Wikipedia is not meant to be a collection of links. If there is no additional context to be placed with these URL's in the form of a narrative prose discussing them and their significance, then they need not be added to the article. Regards,  Spintendo  16:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Spintendo: There are two banners on top of the article. First one says "This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources." And the second one says that because of COI the article needs cleanup for a neutral point of view. The banners were added by the user @Yunshui: when he asked me who I was. I disclosed my identity to him on my user talk page and then over here as well and added this Request Edit template with the sources ONLY because of the banners added by Yunshui. I even tagged him and another editor GSS to bring their attention to the sources; there was no response. I asked Yunshui to go through the article end to end to see that it is already full of reliable sources and that the entire article is neutral. Did not receive a response and then you showed up. Now you are telling me that the sources cannot be added as they might be out of context even though I clearly stated that the sources can help expand the article further.
To me, the COI banner seems legit and after my disclosure I told Yunshui that I will not be directly editing the article again (as read in Wiki guidelines) but the additional citations banner seems like a bad call to me. The right thing for him would have been to see if the article really needed cleanup and additional citations and then proceed accordingly by doing what's necessary and remove the banners. I didn't see a single "citation needed" anywhere on the article which means that he did not even read the article entirely and placed the banner just like that. I am guessing he did it because it seemed obvious to him that the article MUST have issues just because there is a COI. So either you need to bring an editor to expand the article and use the sources mentioned above, add more citations, do the cleanup and remove the banners. Or someone who can read the article in its entirety, confirm my claims that the article is already neutral and well-cited and remove the banners. Best, SameStruggle (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help required for clean-up & removal of banners

@Koavf: @Sionk: Would really appreciate if any of you can help to improve/expand this article. I myself am Sanki King and I was editing this article with a direct COI. I have already discussed the matter in January and no bans were imposed on me, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SameStruggle, and I agreed to never edit this article again. The conversation on my talk page and the one on the article's talk page took place in January and no one has come forward to improve the article ever since. I can say with complete confidence that everything in the article is well sourced and unbiased and even the new links that I have shared above this section are all strong third party links. You can go through the article, all the references over there, the new ones over here and be the judge. I think except the very first link of Sanat Initiative, all links are working. Anyway, looking forward to a positive response. SameStruggle (talk) 01:43, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SameStruggle, I'm happy to help. COI things can be tricky. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SameStruggle: Please post specific things you want edited here and ping me. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:54, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: Can you please elaborate? Are you asking which specific links do I want in the article? SameStruggle (talk) 09:07, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SameStruggle, Yeah, sorry if I was confusing. If you post here what you need changed, then I can review it and see if I think that it can be changed the way you propose. So you could say, "This says I was born in Rome but I was actually born in Modena, here's a source..." ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:46, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: Actually, brother, the issue is not that I want something changed; I want new third party sources to be added to the article so that it can be made stronger and expanded using the new sources. For example, I gave a TEDx talk in 2016; I was a major part of the first Karachi Biennale in 2017; my work is a part of a major international art publication; major interviews; links of all of this can be found above. So, if you look at the sources above, none of them are or have ever been used in the article before. And like I have said before many times, even though there is a COI, you can go through the entire article and would not find any biased or advertisement-like statements. Proof of that can be seen in the recent edit of Sionk where he deleted the BLP sources template and wrote this as the edit summary "no apparent unsourced parts of this article, no reason indicated for adding refimprove template, so I've removed it (again))". Hope I have been clear enough. Thank you. SameStruggle (talk) 14:23, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


@Koavf: @Sionk: @Nizil Shah: Please help with the article and have the COI banner removed; it's been a year since I first requested assistance from you. I have continuously openly asked for an editor to go through the article and confirm its neutrality but I have received no response in 1 year. I am still confident that the COI banner based on the lack of neutrality is not justified because all the material for the article has been taken over the years straight from the sources by other editors and majorly myself and not a word on the article has been used from the outside to falsify any facts or use the article as a marketing tool. All of this can be confirmed by reading the article in its entirety and checking the citations. I wait for someone's response, thank you very much. SameStruggle (talk) 04:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New sources in the past 1 year:
SameStruggle (talk) 05:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sanki_King&oldid=962456567"