Talk:Ratan Tata

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

The article said that Ratan Tata would have been the richest Indian had he not established the Tata Foundation, which engages in charitable work. This is definitely a PoV statement as the claims made thereof cannot be verified. I have changed that to the current version Rao.tushar 10:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)rao.tushar

An excessive proportion of the text is devoted to -

[1] The (supposed) board-room tussle between Tata and Mody [2] The Rajan Nair incident

Surely there is more to the 65-yr-old Mr Tata's life than the odd entanglement with disgruntled employees.

This almost looks like a vanuty page. ςפקιДИτς 14:14, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Birthday, Mr. Tata !

If God granted me 3 wishes, they would be:

Wish No.1: God, please send back Mahatma Gandhi.

Wish No.2: God, please also send back Rajiv Gandhi.

Wish No.3: And, God, please never take back Ratan Tata.

Happy Birthday, Sir, and a Happy 2007!

Anju Chandel

[edit] Addition of the NELCO years, the TELCO labor dispute, the Russi Mody controversy and Globalization initiatives

Hi all,

      I propose the addition of the NELCO years, the TELCO labor dispute and the Russi Modi Controversy in the Career. Ratan has himself admitted that these three events defined his career growth path. Also, now Ratan is credited with the globalization of the Tata Group of Companies.

      We should include all of them as they shaped his life as a business executive.

Regards,

Venkatesh--Venkatesh 11:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I request people to contribute more to "Early days" section of this article. Ajay

[edit] Linkspam

Jergens

I have added a link to a compilation of recent articles on Ratan Tata, that are found on Parsi Khabar. I do not see any reason, why you should delete this and treat this as spam. You have deleted the link from the Parsi page too. I would appreciate if you dont do that without first looking at the link. Anyways this is the Wikipedia, and on what basis do you just go ahead and delete a link. Please discuss this here before you go ahead and delete it.

--arZan 21:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know who Jergens is, but if he's my hero if he's deleting linkspam. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collector of information, and is not a linkfarm. See also: WP:NOT

To answer your question: you're linking to ParsiKhabar is spam because it fulfills (for multiple reasons) the criteria as per Wikipedia:External_links#Links normally to be avoided.

It may also be a good idea for you to read Wikipedia:Spam#How_not_to_be_a_spammer.

-- Fullstop 12:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

ps: It also doesn't make sense to reinsert a link even though it has already been repeatedly removed. A link that that gets removed is probably not as valuable as you think it is.

pps: ParsiKhabar is also not - even in the remotest sense of the term - "Further Reading". It does not even remotely contain any information not already in the article, and even if it did, it would not be citable since a blog is by definition not a reliable source.

FullStop

You are resorting to the same baseless deletion that Jergens did. Who gives you the authority to decide what is and what is not spam. If you click on the link it takes you to a collection of articles that talk about the life and achievements of Ratan Tata that this article does not even scratch the surface of.

And thanks for providing all those boiler plate links. I have read them numerous times. This is not the first time I am posting on Wikipedia. So please be so kind and stop playing games.

arZan 17:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I've explained why the link to ParsiKhabar is spam, and the WP:pages I noted above explain why a link to blog is to be avoided. I'm sorry if you haven't understood what the purpose of WP is (or perhaps what an encyclopedia is) or why your blog isn't a linkable source or why your linking to it is a conflict of interest.

Notwithstanding that your edits (also those before your username registration) are for the most part simply reinsertions of the link to ParsiKhabar, your edit history is entirely irrelevant to the issue of whether your link to ParsiKhabar is spam or not.

a) A blog (any blog) is by definition a link to be avoided.

b) Providing a link that searches a particular webspace does not qualify as "Further reading" either. Such linking does not improve the quality of an article, ergo has no justification for being there. This would also be true for a link to Google with the search term, but at least that wouldn't be advertising for any specific particular site, which is precisely what your link does.

Please contribute to Wikipedia in a positive manner, such as adding information (properly attributed to reliable sources of course) to an article so making it more valuable to the reader. Such contributions would be most welcome. -- Fullstop 11:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)