Talk:Roop Durgapal

Picture

Can some one please add a picture of Roop Durgapal on her page ?? several pictures are available on google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.97.36.186 (talk) 10:58, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Images used in Wikipedia articles must be available under an open source licence (such as the CC-BY-SA 3.0). The exceptions for fair use images do not apply to living high-profile individuals, so using a photograph from Google would not be permitted. However, there did happen to be a photograph taken by User:Starworld2013 and licenced under CC-BY-SA 3.0, and I have added that image to the infobox. --Joshua Issac (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Can you please add a recent picture of her on her wikipedia page ? Sanchi shekhar (talk) 04:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

New references

Can u please add two new references to ROOP DURGAPAL page

Valid Links are

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/Roop-Durgapal-to-quit-Balika-Vadhu/articleshow/46145203.cms

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/Roop-Durgapal-turns-into-a-snake-woman/articleshow/46596265.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roopfan (talk • contribs) 12:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Self-published sources

I have added information on the subjects place of birth based on information provided by the subject through her posts on Twitter. Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves says the following on the matter:

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as the following criteria are met:

• The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.
• It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities).
• It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject.
• There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity.
• The article is not based primarily on such sources.

These requirements also apply to pages from social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook.

How does that check out with the source? The source statement is a single sentence: "@dhundh i was born in Devbhumi Almora,uttrakhand :)" [sic]. This claim is neither unduly self-serving, nor exceptional. It does not involve any third parties or unrelated events. There is nothing to suggest that the claim is inauthentic (and the account used to broadcast the tweet receives frequent inward interaction from verified accounts like @ColorsTV). And the article is certainly not based on sources such as this one. Hence, using the source to back up the claim about the subject's birthplace is well within the reliable sources guideline. --Joshua Issac (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

My edit was partially reverted with the summary "Sorry but tweet a/c is not verified", despite there being no policy or guideline to only permit officially verified (blue-tick) accounts. In fact, consensus is that it is sufficient for Twitter accounts to be verified by reliable sources, if not by Twitter itself (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 60#Using twitter as a source for BLP info). @ColorsTV, the Twitter account of Colors TV, is verified by Twitter (with a blue tick). By the guideline I cited above (WP:SELFPUB), it is a reliable source on its own matters; in particular, it is a reliable source on identifying the cast of its own TV shows. Balika Vadhu is one of its shows, and Roop Durgapal is part of its cast. A quick Web search shows several such identifications of Durgapal's Twitter handle by Colors TV, e.g. [1]. This constitutes verification by a reliable source, so the above-mentioned guideline (WP:SELFPUB) also applies to the subject's own Twitter account, qualifying it as a reliable source for her birthplace, as I stated in my original post. Chander, would you share your comments? --Joshua Issac (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

@Joshua Issac: verified twitter a/c mentioned her, So that's not a mean the a/c is really her, may be there is a typo mistake (i.e roop123 or roop121).—And what about other editors who don't know about this.—Twitter a/c is currently not verified, and anyone can remove this tweet at any time as "not verified", and we can't explain it all the time. Chander 15:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@Chander: Concerns that it may be a mistake may be easily alleviated by confirming that the Colors TV feed has identified her nearly 100 times using the same handle (Google search). The whole reason of having the reliable sources guideline is so that we can rely on sources that fulfil the guideline; if we were to speculate on whether they are right or not beyond what the guideline specifies, then we would not need the guideline at all. As for how it can be explained to other editors, this is usually done using an explanation in the form of an invisible comment (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Invisible comments) next to the relevant part of the text and a link can be made to this section for any further discussion. --Joshua Issac (talk) 13:37, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Joshua Issac: "Invisible comment". I think it's a good idea! So i support you and allows you to re-add the content. Chander 17:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 Done. --Joshua Issac (talk) 20:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)