User talk:Ivygohnair

Welcome!

Hello, Ivygohnair, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! jaco♫plane 12:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re:Ivy Goh Nair

Hello, Ivygohnair. You are advised to work on your user page (User: Ivygohnair) Thanks. -- PFHLai 18:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello user PFHLai, Thanks for your comments. I have reworked on the page since your last remarks.

I find that there are a lot of gaps about Singapore literature in Wikipedia that I can assist in filling, as I have been around the literary scene much, much longer than you or the other singaporean contributors today. For instance, I wish to work on pages for Goh Poh Seng, Lee Tzu Pheng Kirpal Singh, Robert Yeo and other significant members of our literary scene which are not represented in Wikipedia at the present moment.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ivygohnair (talk • contribs) 20:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Need help, Ivygohnair ?

We need more knowledgeable people like you. Please feel free to contribute to any articles the way you see fit. If there is a problem, someone will either fix or tell you about it (or both) -- this is wikipedian way. BTW, As a courtesy for other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion).For further info see the talk page guidelines. Thank you.

If you need further help, please visit Wikipedia:Community Portal (lots of useful resources), or you may want to post {{helpme}} on your user talkpage.

Good luck. -- PFHLai 11:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ivy Goh Nair

I didn't delete any favorable comments. You don't need to be an admin to check the history of a page - you can check it here. By the way, I am an admin. utcursch | talk 09:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks a lot. I am sorry to have thought that it might have been you as you were the last person to comment. My sincere apologies again.Ivygohnair 09:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ivy Goh Nair

Below is the reply to the comment I put in User Utcursch talk page:

"Hey I just discovered that you hate the caste system and want to delete the "List of Famous Nairs" very badly. It leads me to wonder whether your "delete" vote on my page was not a conflict of interest since my name is nair. Believe me neither my hubby nor I are believers in the caste system, otherwise he would not have married me! But having said that I was puzzled that a "friendly" (as you describe yourself) admin would vote "not notable enough" (without giving any explanation whatsoever) for a book which was favourably reviewed by both the local and international press and caused quite a stir when it was first published because it was one of the first books considered "critical" of Singapore.Ivygohnair 17:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)"Ivygohnair 09:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ms. Ivy Goh Nair, I indeed hate the caste system very much (I'm neither Dalit nor Brahmin -- I am anti-caste person). But that was not the reason I voted "Delete" at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivy Goh Nair. Had that been the reason, I would have probably moved many other articles to deletion: C. Sankaran Nair, Chandran Nair, Kavalappara Narayanan Nair etc.(never heard of the phrase "going for the soft belly?")Ivygohnair 09:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Writing a book doesn't make a personal notable enough for Wikipedia. The fact that Ivy Goh Nair was written by your husband makes it less verifiable (please see Wikipedia:Autobiography). (Somewhere else in the wikepedia rules which are supposed to be only guidelines and flexible, it says that in exceptional cases the article can be edited by the author himself/herself or his agent. In this case both editors are experts in this field and eminently qualified to edit other notables in the field, whatever the relationship may be)Ivygohnair 09:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC) The only criteria for voting delete was non-notability -- please have a look at Wikipedia:Notability (people). I don't claim that I have excellent knowledge about journalism and literature in Singapore( sadly this is indeed the case!)e,Ivygohnair 09:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC) but Wikipedia:Search engine test indicates that you're not notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia: [1][2]. Most of the few search results that I got are from personal sites such as eurekster.com, ivygohnair.tk, brinkster.com etc.[reply]

On notability

(I read somewhere in the Wikipedia rules that when a book is not easily available it helps on judging its "notablilty", when a verifiable review is available on the internet. My book was reviewed by the Asian Wall Street Journal when it was first published and here is the link Review by Ian Gill I would like to point out to User Utcursch that even though this review appeared in my own official website, the Asian Wall Street Journal is not an unknown paper and the review can be verifiable from the archives.)Ivygohnair 09:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC) I have dropped a note at Wikipedia talk:SGpedians' notice board -- the discussion page for Wikipedians from Singapore and Wikipedians who are writing about Singapore-related topics.( this was done after the editors had requested the article to be withdrawn , therefore the motives of this user are called into question)Ivygohnair 09:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)I have invited them to to have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivy Goh Nair. Just in case the article gets deleted, I will suggest that the content of the article be merged to User:Ivygohnair (see Wikipedia:Userfication).[reply]

I hope that this issue doesn't discourage you from contributing to Wikipedia. Please don't take this as an insult. Everyday, Wikipedia gets lots of articles about various people, all of whom may not be notable enough (emphasis on "enough"). Thanks. utcursch | talk 08:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

I don't know why this debate is persisting as the request has been made a few days ago to withdraw the article by the editors themselves because the debate had degenerated into petty attacks and users deleting favourable comments. I read up Wikipedia rules and while admins are greatly appreciated for the work they do for the site (I am sure you yourself have done a lot) they have an even greater reponsiblity to be fair and even handed . . .User:Ivygohnair|Ivygohnair]] 06:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

In conclusion. My apologies to all the users from all over the world who wrote in to support the non deletion of the page Ivy Goh Nair. They can however find me at Google and other search engines.Ivygohnair 09:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NB THE ARTICLE "IVY GOH NAIR" WAS REMOVED AS A RESULT OF THE REQUEST BY THE EDITOR, CHANDRAN NAIR HIMSELF(MADE ON OCT 20)BECAUSE THE DEBATE PAGE HAD DEGENERATED INTO PERSONAL ATTACKS AND THE DELETION OF POSITIVE COMMENTS BY USERSIvygohnair 09:52, 24 October 2006

Happy Deepavali!

Same to you... Belated Happy Deepavali! utcursch | talk 08:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article

I've preserved the content of the article at your subpage: User:Ivygohnair/Ivy Goh Nair. You may chose to move it to User:Ivygohnair. In case you don't want the subpage, please include {{subst:csd|user request}} on the subpage. I hope this issue doesn't discourage you from using and editing Wikipedia. Please feel free to drop me a note in case of any clarifications. Thanks. utcursch | talk 08:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your comments on my talk page

Dear Ms. Ivy Goh Nair,

Your recent comments on my talk page ("never heard of the phrase going for the soft belly?") are almost like a personal attack. I'd like to point out it was not me who nominated the article for deletion. There was only one reason for article being nominated for deletion and other users voting delete: Non-notability. Writing a book and getting few reviews for it doesn't make a person notable enough for Wikipedia. Many books and their reviews are written every day -- that doesn't make the authors of those books notable.

I posted a message at Wikipedia talk:SGpedians' notice board three days before the deletion debate was closed.So, my motive should not be questioned (However it was some time after the editor requested the withdrawal of the article, so your motive is questionable!)Ivygohnair 13:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC) . I acknowledge that every notable person doesn't have a formidable presenece on the Internet, and I don't have much knowledge about journalism/literature in scene in Singapore. So, I decided to ask users who know better about Singapore. The reply from User:Terence Ong [3] confirmed that the subject of the article is not notable enough. In case of a favorable opinion, the article would have not been deleted.( what immense subjectivity! Do you mean that one young singaporean's assertion that he has not heard about me is the reason for for your judgement that a book reviewed by the international and local press so favourably is unnotable? You are entitled to have your own opinion of the notability of the page. But are you not abusing your authority as a admin to be the final arbitrator of an issue that didn't even need to be arbitrated as the creators had requested the withdrawal of the article? Even if we go along with allowing you to arbitrate, what was your criterion for doing it? Did you take a head count? (I had as many favourable comments as unfavourable ones), did you consider users who gave reasoned and intelligent comments more weightily than just someone who writes "off with her head, I never heard of her"? And why should Terence Ong (who recently posted:"I have to mug, my Maths is goyak and I need to practice it, I can't even solve some factorisation questions. :X Maybe after 27 October, but Loke Yew is not that notable after all. --Terence Ong") have the last say?)Ivygohnair 12:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC) If you feel my conduct was not right, or that the article deletion was not treated in accordance with the policies, you are welcome to file an RfC against me or on this issue (Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment for the same). Thank You. utcursch | talk 12:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User Utcursch,

I question the whole way that my article was treated from the beginning. I do not need to make a RfC against you because it is not a personal conflict with you. I have to insist that your posting a message on talk SGpedians notice board was done after the creator himself had requested for the withdrawal of the article. I just want to make the record clear that the final deletion of the article was due to our request and not for any other reason. BTW the average age of the users who go to talk SGpedians forum are so young that they understandably haven't heard of me. When my book was launched, it was not only reviewed favourably by the local and international press, it was also sold out. It did make a difference in the "history" of Singapore because it was considered one of the first "critical" books which was accepted by the authorities (refer to book reviews cited). (The then deputy prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong came to the book signing ceremony). Professor Tommy Koh the then respected Singapore embassador to the UN endorsed this claim (that the book made a difference) in the forward he wrote to the book. Wikipedia rules on Notability cites that when a book is not easily available, it would help to have reviews available for wikipedians on the internet. You just have to do a google search on Ivy Goh Nair to find the review by the Asian Wall Street Journal. While the review appeared on my own official website, the Asian Wall Street Journal is a reputable journal and can be verified in the archives. The fact that such a prestigious journal chose to review the book, does it not indicate that the book was considered "notable" enough?

Anyway the "Notability" of my page is not in question here as the article has been withdrawn. And even you have to admit that your personal judgment (and you have admitted that you are no expert in the matter) and the judgements of a few others (who have not elaborated on their reasons for delete, unlike my supporters) are not sufficient to determine notability. As the debate has been closed so early, I don't think that we can establish "notabilty" or "unnotabilty" . This is besides the point anyway. Ivygohnair 12:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]