User talk:Anmol.2k4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
My Wikistress is at all time high, wikipedia is full of people with POV,
They use it to make lies into truth,simply by using opinionated sources.
                                                                 
GOODBYE CRUEL WKIPEDIANS   
                                                                 
                         ,-------.                 /             
                       ,'         `.           ,--'              
                     ,'             `.      ,-;--        _.-     
               pow! /                 \ ---;-'  _.=.---''        
  +-------------+  ;    X        X     ---=-----'' _.-------     
  |    -----    |--|                   \-----=---:i-             
  +XX|'i:''''''''  :                   ;`--._ ''---':----        
  /X+-)             \   \         /   /      ''--._  `-          
 .XXX|)              `.  `.     ,'  ,'             ''---.        
   X\/)                `.  '---'  ,'                     `-      
     \                   `---+---'                               
      \                      |                                   
       \.                    |                                   
         `-------------------+                                   
Thanks for doing this to me

Contents

[edit] IIPM article

Anmol, I see your point. But please go through the Talk page of the article. All the content you are adding has been moved to a sub-page on IIPM controversy based on consensus. I am reverting your change for now. I am hoping you will not insert the Outlook sections back again. - Ganeshk 10:21, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Welcome and India related links

Hi

welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

Links for Wikipedians interested in India content

Newcomers: Welcome kit | Register: Indian Wikipedians | Network: Noticeboard | Discussionboard Browse: India | Open tasks | Deletions
Contribute content: Collaboration Dashboard - India WikiProject - Wikiportal India - Indian current events - Category adoptions



Welcome!! You can sign your name on talk pages by typing ~~~~ -- Ganeshk 10:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Anmol, You wrote "In Indian B-School community IIPM has criticised for spending money on full page advertisements in newspapers and business magazines." - Please cite examples. What do you mean by the "B-school community"?

"All Indian business (BUSINESS-TODAY,BUSINESS-WORLD and few political magazine (INDIA-TODAY-OUTLOOK have B-School Ranking on an annual or 6 month basis."

There are some 86 publications listed as business mags in English alone with the Audit Bureau of Circulation. There are several larger business mags (Business World for one and also the IIPM rags) which are not listed with ABC. Can you prove that all of them run annual or 6-month B-School surveys as you have sweepingly stated?

India Today and Outlook are newsmagazines not "political magazines" (you are thinking of the Organiser and Ganashakti when you say "political magazine").

"B-School Rankings have become a very big source of income to such magazine, one can find only one-third in such magazines for ranking and articles rest are advertisements."

You mean the edit:ad ratio in a magazine that carries a ranking is 1:2? Are you sure about this? Do you have any idea about the financials of major business mags? Are you sure that the issues on B-School Rankings become a very big source of income to such magazines? Can you cite any sources for this statement?

"IIPM is known to have spend annually around $ 1.2 million dollar, even then they have not been able to have 100% placements." Can you cite sources both for the ad spend numbers as well as for the placement ratios?

"Because Of institutes such as IIPM many top indian institutes (IIM Lucknow,IIM Kozhikode, IIM Indore, XLRI, FMS Delhi, BIMTECH Noida,JBIMS Mumbai,Symbiosis - SIBM, SCMHRD) have not participated in any of these rankings because most of them have policy that they are going to spend very limited money on advertisements and would like to have mouth to mouth publicity only."

Do you have any statements from the "top Indian institutes" you mention above that this is the actual reason why they don't participate in rankings?

Have you heard about the Wiki policy of no original research? I don't have to disprove anything you say - it's upto to you to prove it. By citing sources that are easily verifiable. Put up your sources or shut up! - 59.177.11.41

[edit] Response to 59.177.12.133/59.177.**.***

This is a reply to message posted earlier by 59.177.11.41. First on anmol.2k4 discussion page of all i have a page at wikipedia (I m not hiding lik you) Second , i doesn't take much of thinking why you are so much interested in IIPM, either you have too much time (may be unemployed) or you are being paid by IIPM.

and i have all the info you are so much interested about.

"In Indian B-School community IIPM has criticised for spending money on full page advertisements in newspapers and business magazines." - Please cite examples. What do you mean by the "B-school community"

Anmol.2k4: B-school community is something I'm part of and im sure you are not , does iit, iim, iis, mdi, or other top educational institutes in india spend money on ads for self promotion. Or look at Discussion page of IIPM many people there are from B-School Community, And i am living in a B-School and if you don't agree with me then i think you should start reading newspapers and mags. And explain why in thousands of educational institutions only IIPM has been attacked. I have very close sources in AICTE. SO I KNOW, and you don't.

"All Indian business (BUSINESS-TODAY,BUSINESS-WORLD and few political magazine (INDIA-TODAY-OUTLOOK have B-School Ranking on an annual or 6 month basis."

There are some 86 publications listed as business mags in English alone with the Audit Bureau of Circulation. There are several larger business mags (Business World for one and also the IIPM rags) which are not listed with ABC. Can you prove that all of them run annual or 6-month B-School surveys as you have sweepingly stated?

You mean the edit:ad ratio in a magazine that carries a ranking is 1:2? Are you sure about this? Do you have any idea about the financials of major business mags? Are you sure that the issues on B-School Rankings become a very big source of income to such magazines? Can you cite any sources for this statement?

Anmol.2k4:yes im sure about it because i read mags other than those of IIPM.buy a business Mag's ranking issue and if you cant notice the ratio of articles and news edits to advertisements then i cannot help you. And yes B-school ads in ranking issue are very big source of income BECAUSE B-SCHOOLS PAY A LOT OF MONEY TO THESE MAGS FOR THESE ADS,

"IIPM is known to have spend annually around $ 1.2 million dollar, even then they have not been able to have 100% placements." Can you cite sources both for the ad spend numbers as well as for the placement ratios?

anmol.2k4:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IIPM_Controversy#Advertising_Strategy sorces are from reputed newspapers and magazines

"Because Of institutes such as IIPM many top Indian institutes (IIM Lucknow,IIM Kozhikode, IIM Indore, XLRI, FMS Delhi, BIMTECH Noida,JBIMS Mumbai,Symbiosis - SIBM, SCMHRD) have not participated in any of these rankings because most of them have policy that they are going to spend very limited money on advertisements and would like to have mouth to mouth publicity only."

well i don't think there is need for statement.

when a magazine gave better ranking to institutes who have paid dor ads, above mentioned Institutes stopped participating in these ranking. Do you have more intelligent reason ??

but how about JAM mag or Business world .

Now these are question for you

1. From where did Malayendra Kishor got his matters in Science. 2. Is it Ethical for Arindam Chaudhari to study in IIPM,which is being owned by his father? 3. What made you think that I am not sure about all i write? 4. Do you have any statement or proof that IIPM has 100% placement,all the companies you mention in ad actually came to you campus and Mk Chaudhari and Arindam Chaudhari have all the degrees they claim to have. 5. Why is Sky blue. 6. Who are you. 7 Are you not working for IIPM. 8 What is your real name and location ?

when there are so many question about IIPM (you), who gave you right to ask others ?


Anmol

Who I am and what I do is irrelevant. You don't prove the truth of your statements by attacking the motives of somebody who questions them. You don't prove the truth of your statements by stating that you "know" something either.

In wiki terms you can only prove the truth of your statements by citing verifiable sources. this may seem strange to somebody who is as sure of the facts as you are but it is the rule of wiki-editing.

Please cite recorded verifiable statements by members of the B-School community. If you are a member of said community, identiy yourself in a source of mainstream media and say "I Anmol such and such, member of such and such state that IIPM has been criticised." You could very easily have done this since there are quite a few such quotes - you chose to go into a hysterical rant about being a member of some community and assuming I'm not.

If you have very close sources in Aicte - quote them. Don't say you "know".

Don't make sweeping statements - "all" Indian Business mags don't carry B-School surveys - many do. Calling Outlook or India-Today a political magazine is as silly an error as saying Einstein was a chemist. A wiki deals in facts - don't make verifiable errors.

You don't know the financial structure and income streams of Business magazines - or even if you do because you are an industry insider (doubtful given your classification of Outlook. India Today), these facts are not in the public domain. You haven't a clue whether the income from B-school survey issues is a "big source of income" - you may guess as much but you cannot prove this by citing facts in the public domain. So don't say it

Have you actually counted the edit:ad ratio in a reasonable sample of B-school survey issues? If so: cite it - say that in Business World 2004,2005 survey and Business Todays 2004,2005 etc surveys the edit:ad ratio was 1:2 across a sample of so many issues.

Where did you discover that B-schools pay to be included in these surveys - according to official statements by B-schools, the mags and the polling agencies, B-schools DONT PAY. I am very interested to know if there is a public statement on record to the opposite.

I have seen the ET articles too - why didn't you cite them? (The figure spent by IIPM is actually much higher if you go by rack rates)

I am not disputing the fact that many institutes don't participate in survey. Nor am I disputing that B-schools of repute dont advertise. However you are saying that they don't do this because "most of them have policy that they are going to spend very limited money on advertisements and would like to have mouth to mouth publicity only."

I'm not even getting into the fractured English in that statement. Can you cite any sources where a spokesperson for such institutes stated that this was their MOTIVE in withdrawing from surveys?

I have no idea about IIPM's placement ratios -- they have always avoided answering this question. You can infer from their evasion that they have low placements. BUT there is still no verifiable source for you to say what their placement ratios are. If you have such a source, quote it. I didn't make the statement, I am not arguing that it is false = but prove it.

2) According to MKC, he got it from the East Berlin School of Economics - the institute existed, it is now defunct and impossible to verify ( believe me I've tried and so have several other people).

3) I don't think so but how does that affect the facts - the entry states clearly that he studied at his father's institute. Let who reads it make up his/ her mind about the ethics.

4) Religious people are sure God exists. Atheists are sure God doesn't exist. You have to cite verifiable sources before you have a valid Wiki entry. It doesn't matter how sure you are personally.

5) No I don't but I don't have any proof to the contrary that I can cite. If you do, cite it.

6) read the wiki entry on the effect of sunlight travelling through the atmosphere

7) This is irrelevant - answer the questions I have raised.

8) No I am not

9) somebody who obviously knows a great deal more about both media and wiki standards than you do.


Anmol, Thanks for taking the trouble. What about the other 80-odd B-mags, which may or may not carry surveys at all? What about the other opinions you cited wrt placements, B-school motivations, blah-blah? I haven't asked for your id - I am not interested in your id - anyone can edit a Wiki. If AICTE is not prepared to make statements in the public domain, how can you calmly assert something on their behalf?

Regards, 59:177:11:41

[edit] Request,Nomination for removal Khalistan article

Are you sure you posted in the correct space?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Votes_for_best_User_page&curid=3942927&diff=45297005&oldid=42234763

Federico Pistono ✆ ✍ 19:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


sir I'm really very very sorry, it wont happen again, again sorry(i don't know exactly how i did that, guess i had too many tabs open).
and sir u have a very good site to , but it has some rendering problems with opera.
Anmol.2k4 19:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I see. What kind of problems, I'm curious. Plus, I would like to have perfect compatibility in all browsers.
Federico Pistono ✆ ✍ 08:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Khalistan

Thanks you for considering me for help. Unfortunately I will have to decline. I have not been following up the Khalistan article & do not have much knowledge about it. I would not like to tread such a delicate topic without some sound knowledge of it.
Thanks anyway
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 00:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Khalistan

Hello Sir I'm nominating this page for deletion because it is written with a point of view , excessive use of unreliable sources.and the title "Khalistan" is wrong for the topic because "Khalistan" does not exist,lack of support from resident Punjabi's and Sikhs in India, but there was a "Movement for Khalistan" and that is the right title for the topic, and i think this whole article "a new name" should be rewritten with the help of people from sikh community "in" India and other Indians, because this topic is related to politics/people of India.We all should understand Khalistan is not a political entity and having a article is not justified, Microsoft Encarta and Britannic encyclopedia don't have an article known as "Khalistan" but they do have articles on the movement that took place decades back, and i think there are also copyright issues involved with this article because big parts of this article are written on other peoples research. Many reliable sources are used to show "one side" of their view on the topic, there are also indications that organisations banned by US and EU are involved in providing their research on the movement.I am a strong supporter to have a stub on this topic , but im afraid that such articles on wikipedia have become mouthpieces for organisation which are known for disrupting peace (assassination of one of india's prime minister, twin bomb blast in New Delhi on the eve of Diwali) in Indian sub continent. This article requires your attention , please help. Anmol.2k4 18:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Replying to your points on the deletion of the Khalistan article:
  • We do not delete articles if there it is a POV. We strive to project the neutral point of view instead.
  • Why do you think the sources are unreliable? The sources are mentioned so that one can crosscheck on the data on the page.
  • lack of support from resident Punjabi's and Sikhs in India – we need more Indian contributors here on wikipedia. We have too few a number.
  • ...written with the help of people from sikh community "in" India and other Indians, because this topic is related to politics/people of India – If it is written only by the Indian Sikh community, it will be biased towards the community, which goes against the grain of our goal of having a neurally written article.
  • copyright issues involved with this article because big parts of this article are written on other peoples research – Information cannot be copyrighted. We can read the text, understand it, and rewrite it in wikipedia with the quotation of the source. This is allowed.
  • such articles on wikipedia have become mouthpieces for organisation – This is a recurring problem, but if the article is written from a neutral perspective, like the Kashmir part in the India article, vandalism and propaganda is greatly reduced.
  • ' This article requires your attention – I'm sorry but I've got to decline as I am really busy with other projects.

Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


Hello, as asked by you I had a look at the Khalistan article. However, I stopped after reading the introduction which I found IS rather biased, POV and will easily guile the uninformed into believing that Sikhs are hated in India. Rohitbd 08:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Concern regarding Khalistan article

sir i have read your message and i am very happy that at least you believe that there is problem with this article , i wanted the wiki community to rewrite this article because of the bias but people who don't know about Khalistan and sikh people are not able to see the problem, i hope Indians in wikipedia community are going to do something about it about it, right now afd has been removed from the article by an admin so i am trying to rename this article to "Movement For khalistan" or some thing like it as other encyclopedia have article on this topic but with different title, and there is bias and pov problems too. i hope you are going to supervise this problem because im very new to wikipedia.

Anmol.2k4 09:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Anmol,
Your concern is appreciated. Also there is no need to get alarmed since this sort of problems are bound to happen due to the open nature of wikipedia. I don't know much about khalistan. However I am sure with time someone knowledgable will eventually set the article right. In the meanwhile I have tagged the article for neutrality. Let's hope that someone takes note of it and hopefully makes it neutral - though tagging may also result in revert wars,long winded arguments, etc. Rohitbd 12:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] khalistan

i will lokk into the article.but i cant remove the article.you can contact the admins bhadani and pamri .but seriously, i dont think the article can be deleted.i know it was a emotional issue,but it cannot be erased permanently from history.and the fact is that many active members of khalistan are still living in countries abroad. i will see that the article is least provocative. thanks for contributing and suggestion.keep contributing more such articles.--Jayanthv86 10:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I thank you for your concern. But, in wikipedia we do not solve such issues so rapidly. Microsoft Encarta and Britannic may not be having what we have here, we set out our own example and standard, and we shall excell them in the long run. Any one may edit wikipedia, and some day, some one shall step into to make the things in order as reagrds the above page is concerned. --Bhadani 11:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Just to let you know you should not makes moves like the one at Beant Singh (bodyguard) by chaning the current version to a redirect and starting a new article. This loses all the previous history of the article. Instead please use the 'move' button at the top of the page. I've undone what you did and done it correctly. Your edits may have been lost.

Please read carefully the section [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]. We need to maintain this in all articles. Thank you. DJ Clayworth 06:22, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Anmol

Thanks for your message. Yes I understand that page moves can be confusing at first. You tried to rename Beant Singh (bodyguard) to Beant Singh (assassin) by making the first one a redirect and creating a new article at the second. This is not the way to do it, because all the history of the article is lost when you do this (it stays at the original name). What I did was to delete the new article you created at Beant Singh (assassin) and to move the original article to that name. I then copied the text that you put in the new article to the talk page, so that it wasn't lost.

I have no problem with calling the article Beant Singh (assassin). Assassin just means "someone who kills a prominent person", which is exactly what they did. However I do have some issues with the other things you wrote. The trouble is that there is dispute about the causes of Operation Bluestar; some see it as a legitimate operation to remove armed terrorists. Others as as organized killings of a religious minority by a government bent on oppressing that minority. The important thing here is that Wikipedia does not try to sort out which of these views is true. What we do is described in Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; in essence we don't try to decide which view point is true, we report all points of view. Only a few months ago I had to explan this to another editor editing exactly these articles, insisting that Beant Singh be described as a saint and hero for killing the 'evil' Indira Gandhi. If you look at the history I was just as insistent that their viewpoint was not presented as the 'true' one.

The second point is that to try to explain all the subtleties and viewpoints about Operation Bluestar and who thought what about it that takes a lot of space, so we try to do it in one place only - the article Operation Bluestar. For this article we don't get into the details about it. Instead we record the undisputed facts only. Here the undisputed facts are that Beant Singh killed Indira Gandhi in revenge for Operation Bluestar, and that he saw Operation Bluestar as an attack on his religion (we're not saying he was right, just that he saw it like that). There is a link to Operation Bluestar so readers can go and look up more details if they want.

Please do add more to Beant Singh (assassin) or Operation Bluestar or Indira Gandhi. As long as you remember the neutraility principle you will have no trouble. Thanks for your contrubutions. DJ Clayworth 15:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hey, thanks for the barnstar! I appreciate it. My goal for Khalistan article is only to make sure that it is not hijacked by a small minority and made into something that sounds like it is alive and kicking. I don't thnk I am ever gonna touch various POV in regards to the past lol. --Blacksun 15:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] last edit here in wikipedia

Due to the recent argument(talk:khalistan & Sukh RFA), false accusation & hostile nature of few wikipedians toward me i think it will be very difficult for me to coexist in such community, and im scared if i will stay he more such people may continue to bully me in future, i past whenever i made mistakes i always apologised for those and continued to contribute to the wikipedia. But i am not one of those people who apologise for others mistake. In the discussion above one can see that i gave away a lot of my personal information to prove that im behind NAT and share ip address with other students in our institute in fact i have also provided telephone number to our institute so that the community can confirm that i study there or not, is the ip address used by anonymous user to attack sukh is being used by the institute. But i don't think it is of any use as this argument has got too ugly and gone too far, therefore i have come to a decision that this will be my last contribution to the wikipedia.Anmol.2k4 12:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Anmolbhai please do not leave. You are mis-interpreting the situation, which I admit is a little too tense and provocative. Please calm down - I request you to stay and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Its an encyclopedia, dat's all. Don't be engrosed with POV and user disputes. Rama's Arrow 12:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
I apologize to you if you felt I was questioning your integrity. The fact is, with anon IPs there is always reasonable confusion and verification must take place. I only wanted to make you understand that Sukh had reason to feel that you were perpetrating personal attacks on him. Rama's Arrow 12:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
There is nothing to apologize for, all that was required in that situation. I have no hard feelings for anybody , i just did what i thought was right in this situation and i will take a break from wikipedia and when i will come back i will use a new user id and i hope that verification will be done soon. Anmol
Take a break for a couple of days and cool down you'll realise that these fights are no big deal. See you next week ! Tintin (talk) 13:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your concern and will do just that. Anmol
Yes - please take a break, calm down. I most welcome you to participate in building a great encyclopedia. Please don't leave. Rama's Arrow 13:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Btw - I'm sure the matter will be cleared and forgotten within a couple of days. No need to wait for months. No grudges. Rama's Arrow 14:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your concern and will do just that. Anmol
Hello, you shouldn't take the discussion personally, please forget this matter and stay, I will post the information from Reliance Infocomm as soon as they send it. Gsingh 20:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, please consider staying. I've replied to your post about leaving on Talk:Khalistan. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ping

Hey, still waiting for you to come back :-) Tintin (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sukh's RFA - Thanks!

Thank you for your vote on my RfA. Unfortunately there was no consensus reached at 43 support, 18 oppose and 8 neutral. I've just found out that there is a feature in "my preferences" that forces me to use edit summaries. I've now got it enabled :) Thanks again. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/n/m/User_talk%7EAnmol.2k4_76c2.html"