 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
https://news.besthinditech.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbazsamir32 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Removal of mention of Amit Agarwal
editThis sourced content was removed with this edit.
An Indian blogger, Amit Agarwal, runs the blog tech inspiration at www.labnol.org and maintains indianbloggers.org. He has been featured in the Wall Street Journal among other publications for his contributions to the Indian blogging scene.[1]
The cite is a Wall Street Journal blog: blogs.wsj.com[1] The ref is reused in the article. Amit Agarwal has an article on Wiki and is the interviewee on the WSJ ref. Should it be restored to the article? I will ping significant recent editors of this article. Note that there are few recent Indian editors of this article. Jim1138 (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- ^ a b Emily Veach (April 14, 2010). "Amit Agarwal on Blogging in India and Apple's iPad". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 4 July 2014.
- Also added a notice to Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics Jim1138 (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- It should be replaced, as far as I can tell. In addition to the WSJ ref, there's a BBC News source at the article, which checks out. The removing edit was by a now blocked sock, the latest in a series of socks abusing AFC to promote the name they replaced this with. Maybe they thought it might be less "noticeable" if they "swapped" people instead of adding one - who knows... Begoon talk 04:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, I went ahead and restored to "pre sock" edited version, and redid good subsequent edits. Seemed the most sensible thing to do. Begoon talk 18:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
- Wikilinked Amit Agarwal as there is an article. Jim1138 (talk) 21:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, yes. So there is, and I forgot that. Well remembered. Begoon talk 00:55, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Wikilinked Amit Agarwal as there is an article. Jim1138 (talk) 21:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, I went ahead and restored to "pre sock" edited version, and redid good subsequent edits. Seemed the most sensible thing to do. Begoon talk 18:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)