Talk:Manav Gupta

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Manav Gupta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226000418/http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/earthoncanvas/manav.htm to http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/earthoncanvas/Manav.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://thenewsxpress.com/news/index/title/sunil-bharti-mittal-unveils-5-storey-high-mural-at-the-airtel-centre-in-gurgaon-
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120425051833/http://m.pressmart.com/Home.aspx?event=HTDelhi&dt=23072010&page=759_004&mdl= to http://m.pressmart.com/Home.aspx?event=HTDelhi&dt=23072010&page=759_004&mdl=
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120424041724/http://www.yourchennai.com/index.php/technology/science/769-sunil-bharti-mittal-unveils-5-storey-high-mural-at-the-airtel-centre-in-gurgaon to http://www.yourchennai.com/index.php/technology/science/769-sunil-bharti-mittal-unveils-5-storey-high-mural-at-the-airtel-centre-in-gurgaon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304002423/http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=51185 to http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=51185

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Intend to update the article through references from factual sources in adherence to Wikipedia: Manual of Style/Biography

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have noticed how this article has not been expanded since 2012 in terms of it's content. I intend to expand the article based on current affairs and news on Manav Gupta providing a factual series of events through notable references found on the internet and adhering to Wikipedia: Manual of Style/Biography and Wikipedia: Biography dos and don'ts.

I have done no original research in compiling content to write here, but have been as thorough as I could in cross checking the factuality of data from available sources. I am only adding reputed sources as references, but please feel free to provide me with a feedback of any errors or mistakes that I may make.

I have found catalogued lists and references (about 300+ citations) detailing and highlighting Gupta's bibliographic evidence as found on his website in: https://manavgupta.in/library/ If there is any reference that may not be reputed, please feel free to explore alternate references on the topic that lead directly to the reputable sources covering said area/field/event.

My methodology of approach towards expanding the article:

Step 1: -> Create Section "Life and Career" Move and place citations and text from existing article in respective subsections. -> Create Section "Notable Works and Projects" Move and place citations and text from existing article in respective subsections.

Step 2: -> Based on the content of the article, de-peacock the summary section and provide a factual summary of the article in it's Lead Section/Introduction.

Step 3: -> Update Infobox based on the Article.

Step 4: Hope that my work inspires fellow Wikipedians to contribute to this article and expand articles on Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts/Public art and all articles in Wikipedia: Biography of living persons that have not been updated to their current existence.

Cheers. Max roosevelt (talk) 09:25, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Discussion: Removal of template: peacock|date=May 2014

Hi, I'd like to start the discussion in removing the following template that was posted on May 2014:

As one can note, the article has had significant improvements following and adhering to Wikipedia: Manual of Style/Biography and Wikipedia: Biography dos and don'ts in the edit of 2023.

In adherence to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, I have done no original research on this subject. This is simply my contribution towards doing justice to topics such as biographies of living persons and adding to Wikipedia: WikiProject Visual arts. I'd like to believe that I have been thorough in citing notable references to any text placed in the article. The text used in the article does use facts and attribution to demonstrate it's existence.

I'd like to begin by adding a preliminary discussion as a justification for any terms used that need further clarity on why they have been included in my final revision of the article. Please note that I am open and receptive to any criticism on the matter and would sincerely appreciate your kind guidance and resolution on the same.

Cheers Max roosevelt (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

The banner was added over 9 years ago by @Freshacconci: who still seems to be an active editor, and who should have a chance to review the article to determine whether the {{peacock}} banner is still warranted. Dl2000 (talk) 23:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Probable AI generated content

Hi - I added the AI generated tag in response to the edits by Max Roosevelt above, largely added in several large bursts in 2023. While he does seem to have done some editing of the output, enough problematic text remains that I was able to find it with a quick WP:AISIGNS search; thus it needs review for hallucinations and puffery. (As I said he's done some of the latter already.) Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:43, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gnomingstuff,

Thank you for your note. As for my contributions in 2023, being an avid reader of Wikipedia for the last 15 years, I wanted to contribute to one of the earliest articles I had written and collaborate with users such as yourself to perhaps get it as close to the Wikipedia:Featured Article/Good Article formats. I found that the article hadn't been updated since 2013 and therefore I wanted to perform a structured effort to expand the article using factual, verifiable sources in accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography and other BLP guidelines. The content added was cross-checked against reputable references, and no original research or speculative material was introduced.

Given this context, the AI-generated banner does not reflect the current state of the article. The article is based on verifiable sources and structured editing methodology, rather than unreviewed automated text, so the banner can be removed.

As a footnote, I reviewed the article again (upon your suggestion) and ran the text by LLM tools to detect speculated language and the following summary came up:

"This text mostly reads like a curated, human-written article or catalogue essay, possibly polished with LLM help to smooth transitions and unify tone. It doesn’t have the “hallucinated facts” or generic fluff that pure AI-generated content usually shows — the level of event-specific detail is too high and likely came from documented sources."

In summary: I wrote the article, not an LLM, but I'll take it as a compliment. I would invite you to please collaborate as you so kindly did, for any/all sections you deem fit to improve text and tone so it isn't confused as being generated by an LLM, which wasn't the case in the first place.

Cheers

Max roosevelt (talk) 10:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gnomingstuff,

I see the AI-generated banner has been added again. At present, I don't see any specific policy violations, nor have any been mentioned on the talk page.

Also, as you may know, WP:AISIGNS is an essay, not a content policy, and perceived vocabulary patterns or “LLM-like” prose are not, in themselves, grounds for a maintenance tag. Content is evaluated under WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:BLP standards.

All material I added was based on published, reliable sources and cross-checked, in accordance with the above policies. And, at the cost of repetition, I did not use an LLM. If there are concrete issues — unsourced statements, synthesis, promotional tone, or factual inaccuracies — I’m fully open to reviewing them. But absent specific examples, maintaining the banner seems premature.

I’m happy to work collaboratively on any section that needs refinement.

Best,

Max roosevelt (talk) 13:52, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

This comment itself reads like AI was used. And frankly, I do not believe you. So, I restored the tag. The whole thing is full of promotional editorializing AI slop:

• explores the pivotal role played by the ark
• highlighting the mystical and poetic elements of his paintings
• Emphasizing the significance of each strand and string, Gupta highlights the intricate details within his artwork.

I could point out dozens more problematic sentences. Gnomingstuff (talk) 08:24, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Firstly, I wanted to extend the courtesy and respect to you as a fellow user of editing the article first, and then replaying to you. I was initially going to start by saying, "short of reciprocating your condescension, I don't know what'll convince you that I didn't use AI to craft my response." (You were being unfairly harsh) But during my edits on the article, your note on my talk page on me accidentally pinging you, told me you're perhaps capable of polite remarks and inputs. With that spirit, and hopefully one of mutual respect and collaboration, I submit to you the following:

1. I'm sure an avid user of Wiki such as yourself, would understand how we try to be as formal and unbiased as we can be during our time here, so please excuse my language. It's just how I write and frame things, its not LLM, it's me.

2. The 3 things you highlighted as AI slop, were literally quoted verbatim (and just-shy-of/adjacent) in reputed articles cited as sources throughout the article. Verbatim: "explores the pivotal role played by the ark" An author/art critic wrote that. I don't see how I could possibly help further be reframing it. But I ended up removing it altogether in today's extensive audit of the article given your note.

3. Ive edited the entire article adhering to all wikipedia guidelines. Please review it. Looking forward to your feedback, if any. For now, I hope I can go ahead and remove the banner.

Cheers,

Max roosevelt (talk) 18:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)