Talk:Liza Koshy

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

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2018[edit]

I would like to change her picture, it is absolutly horrible, it is an unflateriing angle, think you 

                                                       -Gabbie Hanna Gabbie Hanna (talk) 16:04, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now: If you would like to change the photo, then please give a replacement. st170e 16:09, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the picture is horrid. Msprimeminister (talk) 03:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is not a particularly flattering image, but it is the only Free image that I know of. Do you have a better free image that you can upload? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:34, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

I noticed the infobox was missing. I could've sworn this article had, so I checked the discussion in the archive. Is the infobox not there because of the discussion? Thank you. Callmemirela 🍁 talk 03:25, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no WP:CONSENSUS to include an infobox in this article. If you look at that archived discussion, you will see many reasons not to include one in this article. See WP:INFOBOXUSE. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:25, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted your edit. It is astonishing that you would do that without first establishing a consensus to add the box. Here is the archived discussion referenced above so that other editors can easily find it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:11, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No consensus for an infobox here and it is not required. Jack1956 (talk) 07:28, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's absolutely silly to need consensus for an infobox to be included, but I'm not about to start an edit war, so here we are to discuss it. I think it should be added for multiple reasons, notably the birthdate and age template and years active fields, which are not available at a glance. I understand previous discussion has shown some users consider Infoboxes to be unnecessary (something I completely disagree with) because it contains info that's already in the lead of the article, but it dosn't have to be cluttered with extra info. RF23 (talk) 08:20, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No infobox for the reason put so eloquently above by RF23 at the end of their comment. Jack1956 (talk) 15:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Callmemirela: Removed with this edit about a month ago. jcc (tea and biscuits) 16:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And ping @Ringerfan23:. jcc (tea and biscuits) 16:51, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Would {{Template:Infobox YouTube personality}} be more appropriate? Although it states she is an actress, I believe her Youtube career should be first. I think that is what she is mainly known for, unless I'm wrong. Callmemirela 🍁 talk 19:35, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that any infobox in this article would be not only redundant, but misleading. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An info-box would be mere clutter and duplication. Stick with the existing consensus to omit such a thing. They can be useful in some articles, but not here. Tim riley talk 20:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And when would it be more appropriate to add one? Callmemirela 🍁 talk 21:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For example, it is appropriate to include an infobox in an article about a politician or athlete, where the infoboxes contain important information culled from the person's entire career that is not contained in the WP:LEAD section. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is just absurd. How would an infobox be misleading? And like I pointed out earlier, it would contain information that's not directly in the article, such as the birth date and age template and years active (giving the reader of the page information that's there, but not available at a glance). Plus aesthetically I think the picture looks better in an infbox than just sitting there. RF23 (talk) 21:46, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The birth date is in the first sentence of the WP:LEAD. "Years active" is an overused and largely unnecessary parameter, and, in any case, it is very easy to see this info in the first text section of the article, "Social media". Personally, I don't think that parameter should be included in infoboxes for most living subjects. Aesthetically, I don't think the picture looks better in an infobox box, so we can agree to disagree about that. There were some Arbcon cases about this. The rule Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes#Use of Infoboxes stated in those cases is: "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article by site policies or guidelines. Whether to include an infobox, which infobox to include, and which parts of the infobox to use, is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Continue with the status quo omission of IB. I see no arguments above that would overturn my thoughts about whether or not to include an IB here. None of the arguments are either compelling, or based in policy or guideline. The important information is in the lead, along with the supporting context that provides more understanding than the factoids-in-a-box do. – SchroCat (talk) 06:48, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no point in having an infobox when all that information is directly on the left, The Youtube stuff is obviously further down however the article states shes an Actress and Youtube personality which would indicate she's more known as an actress than a youtuber which would mean her acting career should take precedence over her Youtube career which would quite rightly mean the Youtube stuff in the infobox should be much further down - If we take away all of that youtube stuff you have a useless infobox (because like I said it's on the left),
There is no justification for an infobox at this present time and as there was consensus to remove we don't need to hash all of this out again, Case closed your honor. –Davey2010Talk 02:53, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Middle name, etc.[edit]

Can I put that her middle name is Shalia and she is of Malayali descent? I tried so on two separate occasions (with citations) and was shot down so lets talk about it in the talk page? Msprimeminister (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. New comments go at the bottom of Talk pages. Do you have WP:RSs that state clearly that her middle name is Shalia? See WP:BLP regarding this. As for her alleged Malayali descent, why do you want to be so specific? She is half-Indian. First of all, you would need to cite WP:RSs that satisfy the requirements of WP:BLP. In addition, however, this level of specificity is probably not Encyclopedic under the requirements of WP:BALASP. Please consider that we are writing an encyclopedia article, not an entertainment magazine or fan site. See WP:NOT. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:58, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
TV Guide shows her middle name (actually spelled Shaila), so I added it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, Please check the Wikipedia article Saint Thomas Christian names names, there you would find that Koshy is a Keralite Syrian Christian name and is used in Kerala, It is crystal clear that Liza Koshy's father is of Malayalee descent as it is mentioned that he is an Indian. For more details please check the Wikipedia Disambiguation page named "Koshy" there you can find Liza Koshy's name.....As for the protocol, I will try to find a reliable source, Thanks AARYA SAJAYAN (talk) 05:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:BLPSPS, you can cite tweets aslong as they are written or published by the subject of the article. And under the requirements of WP:BALASP, I would say that stating that she is of Malayali descent is not harmful to any individual or group, it is not sensationalist or in any terms political. (talk) 00:28, 04 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info box??[edit]

Can a person with account privileges add an info box because I think it would be useful, to show real name, subscribers, age etc. Regards Ruairi2222 (talk) 15:40, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the discussion about Infoboxes above. No infobox is desired in this article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:25, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2019[edit]

Liza Koshy

MarcoTevar (talk) 15:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 17:52, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image in Lead[edit]

As per the previous request attempting to change the image in the lead, can it be changed to this photo? It was on a 2020 YouTube video podcast by Ashley Graham and licensed in accordance with YouTube CC-BY. Iopezlove (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a much more recent (as well as a more flattering) photo.
User:Adam Cuerden, is this type of CC license adequate to allow us to use this image in the article? Thanks for any advice. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see why not. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to treat it a bit like one of those Flickr-reviewer things, and get an admin on Commons to document that the video was released CC-by, which may help if questions are raised in future, but I can't see any other issues, and it has the "This file, which was originally posted to an external website, has not yet been reviewed by an administrator or reviewer to confirm that the above license is valid. See Category:License review needed for further instructions." text at the bottom already, so hopefully will get done. However, that's not a problem for using it, it's just a precaution in case the video gets deleted, or they change their mind about labelling it CC-by: If we have that review done, we know it was licensed CC-by, which is not a revokable license.
But there is nothing stopping you using it right now, so go ahead. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 08:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you for your help! Iopezlove (talk) 11:48, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:License_review ed --GRuban (talk) 17:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn’t she have an youtuber infobox[edit]

why? Crimsonnosmirc (talk) 08:04, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is discussed above. Please read the discussion. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Koshy is a Keralite Syrian Christian (Saint Thomas Christian) Surname...[edit]

Koshy, is a Saint Thomas Christian name used commonly in Kerala. It has originated from the Biblical name Yeshua or Joshua. Why is it not mentioned in the article that Liza Koshy is half Malayali or that her father is of Malayalee descent when it's clear that Koshy is a Keralite Syrian Christian name...The name Koshy can be found nowhere else in the world especially when it comes to the fact that she is Indian..... Please include in atleast one sentence that she is half Malayalee... For further information please check the Wikipedia article which is well cited...Saint Thomas Christian names... AARYA SAJAYAN (talk) 15:52, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I'm not sounding professional but just a simple Google search "Is Liza Koshy a Malayalee" will lead you to a Twitter page where she clarifies with a post that she ia a Malayalee!!!!! I don't know if that is helpful or if it enough to cite that She is Half Malayalee.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AARYA SAJAYAN (talk • contribs) 16:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You mean this Tweet? https://twitter.com/lizakoshy/status/371070988068601856 "I'm malayalee from south India, Kerala!" Unfortunately, that conflicts with https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/hollywoods-new-digital-disrupters-15-rising-crossover-stars-1031740/item/anna-akana-hollywoods-new-digital-disrupters-1031707 saying she's a Houston native. Yes, I know she probably means that her Dad is Malayalee from Kerala... but she isn't actually saying that. Can you find something more definitive, where we don't have to speculate? --GRuban (talk) 17:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But (talk), Actually she is a US citizen that is why they mentioned she is from Houston, Texas,they meant that she is a Houston Native but her parents are migrants from Kerala and Germany....Thanks for letting me know!!! Let me try to find some more sources... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AARYA SAJAYAN (talk • contribs) 05:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And one more thing, Please check the Wikipedia article named Koshy, In that Wikipedia article it is clearly mentioned that "Koshy" is a Keralite Saint Thomas Christian name, Liza Koshy's name is also mentioned in that Disambiguation page...Thanks for letting me know about the Twitter page, I'll try to find more reliable sources... AARYA SAJAYAN (talk) 05:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liza_Koshy&oldid=1208028809"