Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ranvir Kumar Singh

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete Ironholds (talk) 00:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ranvir Kumar Singh

Ranvir Kumar Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing cited in article or available online to support the claims made for notability. He appears to be the CEO of a group of companies, all of which have been the subjects of a lengthy spam 'n' sockpuppetry fest, including by this article's creator. Borkificator (talk) 20:59, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep The article needs work doing to it but the individual is a significant entrepreneur who is worth keeping. Tagging for rescue.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 01:27, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - No evidence of notability, no sources to verify claims of notability made in article. SnottyWong spout 04:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - the only piece of RS coverage is the brief mention in the indian express article. Considering the extensive promotional effort and a walled garden being erected, delete and salt this topic.--Sodabottle (talk) 05:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Have helped to improve it some. I think that there is enough there now to save it from deletion. But obviously it still needs a lot more work.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 16:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have added and tried my best to improve this article. I will add more refrences and links. I will try to add more information and will try to make the artile more useful. I will request to have a look again and consider it removing from Deletion category.

The person is chairman and Managing Director of So many companies like Bharat Petrolium (BPCL), Taj Pharmaceuticals, Taj Group Many Companies, Mulberry Chemicals etc. I know there is lot to work and improve as i am a new editor but this effort shuld be considered.--Ranatalwar (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment There's some notability if he's Chairman of Bharat Oil, possibly (how notable are chairmen of big state corporations?), but otherwise things look a bit messy. What does "matriculated with invalid number" mean, for one. There are quite a few 'citations needed' (including that statement, whatever it means...). Possibly userfication might be an idea, but it would need someone to work with the creator on it. (No, I'm not volunteering, sorry...) And to Ranatalwar, it's no good appealing to everyone to remove this from deletion. The discussion usually lasts seven days, and the result depends on the closing admin's reading of the article and the discussion. If the article gets sorted out, people here can look again at it and possibly change their minds. We do, quite often, when an article is improved. Peridon (talk) 17:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment lots of work and refrences required for this article. Need some time to Do it. If People can add and improve they are invited and for = Peridon = "Invalid number" means that guy got so much marks that came as invalid result but later awarded with gold medal and cash reward. It was way back. but I am looking for News paper articles in 60s but unable to get it. I read it on his web biography which is no more available and now i am writing this article and facing problems.

I think a person is notable IF He had record to fight Elections. And Also if a Person is Chairman and MD of Indian OIL Gas Company which earns 1,719.98 crore (US$373.24 million) (2010) [1] Any ways I will keep the article updated with links and more information.--Ranatalwar (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment There appear to be two different people named R. K. Singh being referenced here. This newly-added reference says he got his Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering from Banaras Hindu University.[1] I recently removed a reference listing an R. K. Singh getting a PhD in Geophysics from the same university, on the grounds that it must be a different person. I also removed the unsourced claim that he studied cardiac surgery at Christ Church, Oxford. So he's a cardiac surgeon, a mechanical engineer AND a geophysicist? The geophysics degree would certainly tally with him running Bharat Petroleum, but R. K. Singh is not exactly an unusual name in India. Here are some photos of the head of Bharat Petroleum: [2] [3], and here's one of the head of the Taj Group: [4]. See the difference? So, which R. K. Singh is this article about? The head of Bharat Petroleum, or the head of the Taj Group? And which of them ran for Parliament, along with the other civic roles listed? Are we only talking about two people, or maybe more? Borkificator (talk) 21:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for now, I'm going to delete all references to the head of Bharat Petroleum, since it's starkly obvious to me that it's a different person. I'll leave the more ambiguous references in place for now: feel free to help me work out which R. K. Singh it was that ran for parliament etc. Borkificator (talk) 22:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I can see the diffrence i will update accordingly Thank you for informantion.--Ranatalwar (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have seen all the research Work :

For Help to make the article better in Future if any user considers it: Dr R.K.Singh - Ranvir Kumar Singh Chairman Taj Group of companies including Housing, Pharma, Agro and Chemicals. Relevent References Available on Google: http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=Taj+Pharma+Dr.+R.K.Singh&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=d774a698b7263073

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Taj_Pharma

THE INFO ABOUT THE CHAIRMAN IS ALSO AVAILABLE ON' 'www.tajpharmaceuticals.com 'www.tajagroprodccts.com' 'www.tajapi.com' 'www.tajlifesciences.com' 'www.tajhousing.com' 'www.tajpharma.com' 'www.tajdrug.com' http://www.tradeindia.com/credit_reports/show_ts.html?profile_id=1094503 http://www.indiacompanynews.com/post/view/3445/Pharmaceuticals-Industry-to-outsource-API-making-from-Asia/ and many more if you can find. Thank you all for looking at my article.

--Ranatalwar (talk) 00:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

more links related to pharma company owned by same person:

Long list of links about Taj Group commented out. Borkificator (talk) 10:38, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--129.234.235.35 (talk) 03:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I have read your comments But i thought it it noteable so i made the article. I have seen the links you people have posted.

And there has been some spamming also from some websites related to this company. I read about this company and a recent news: http://www.pharmaage.com/2010/12/28/taj-pharma-bags-fda-nod-for-topiramate/ From my openion the user should take up the deleted articles and make relevent pages according to their knowledge. But I was clrealy unware of the Case of spamming like this. So what ever will be decided by admin will be acceptable. Sorry for posting long list of links on delete discursion and on your talk pages. I was unware of the spam record. But i dont appreciate things like this. If someting like this sort has been done. its very bad for any company. I will take up some important communal and other corporate companies who are does not have this sort of issue. If some user can resque my artilce i will be happy and continue answering the comments. --129.234.235.35 (talk) 14:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC) --129.234.235.35 (talk) 15:34, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--Ranatalwar (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: no evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". HrafnTalkStalk(P) 17:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: article's creator User:Ranatalwar and 129.234.235.35 have been blocked as sockpuppets. Borkificator (talk) 12:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No significant coverage in reliable sources (plenty of mentions in Press Releases and from the corporate website, though that doesn't qualify.....). First Light (talk) 13:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete and salt this and any other as yet unseasoned titles relating to the Taj Group in view of the SPI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/ShantanuSingh198 When I commented above, I was assuming good faith. I am now assuming spam and/or vanity and bad faith. Possibly the author is a hapless employee ordered to perform this task. In view of the amount of sockpuppetry, I am inclined not to worry. Just to suggest that the hapless employee finds another but less cynical company to work for. I notice that the article is now considerably reduced, with the Bharat Oil bit having gone (inter alia). That was the cornerstone of my initial comment. Peridon (talk) 10:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would thank those who have tried to rescue the article - often a thankless task... I still feel that even if all the R.V. Singhs referred to are the same person (a bit like trying to sort J. Smiths) the article should go. Peridon (talk) 10:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just noticed something that looks as though it may favor a keep result (despite all the sockpuppet shenanigans). Taj Pharmaceuticals owns an American company called Mulberry Chemicals. Mulberry Chemicals is registered with the Drugs Enforcement Agency for the legal production of five controlled substances. That's a pretty big deal as far as the pharma industry is concerned. Is it possible that there is more than one Taj Pharmaceuticals? But then why is the Press Release on an Indian newswire.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 18:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
MulBerry Chemicals Pvt. Ltd is an Indian company. Googling for '" Mulberry Chemicals" "Drugs Enforcement Agency" ' gives zero results. They claim to have "regular clients" in the USA and "Our products are exported to many overseas regions like the USA". Here's a link to their products http://mulberrychemicals.com/products.htm Peridon (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are you suggesting that this URL http://www.indiaprwire.com/pressrelease/medical/2010122572909.htm is not a worthwhile reference?  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 22:00, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Taj bought Mulberry off REVIB about whom I can find nothing. They had bought Mulberry Chemicals off Mulberry Chem, from what I can see. The Mulberry site says they are two hours drive from Mumbai, and their name is an Indian company name. I can't find another Mulberry in the US. The Indian one doesn't mention being part of Taj on its site, but mentions trademarks being theirs and MBC's - whoever the heck THEY are. This is starting to remind me of an AfD involving a certain Hispanic American businessman, where things got extremely complicated. Note this "Taj Pharmaceuticals Limited today announced that its wholly-owned US subsidiary, Administration (DEA) as a narcotic raw material manufacturer." This is a press release, and inherently not to be wholly trusted. (Unless you really believe that Wash-O with Miracle Ingredient U235 does wash your whites so they glow in the dark.) With the profusion of R.K. Singhs we had until some pruning was done, anything is possible here. Peridon (talk) 22:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Always look at the small print or the bottom of the page: "India PRwire disclaims any content contained in press release". Nuff sed? Peridon (talk) 22:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If none of it is real then it is an extremely elaborate web of lies. They must have gone to a whole lot of trouble to fabricate an international pharmaceuticals company, multiple websites and press releases. Their websites aren't quality websites granted but they are still pretty extensive content-wise and the press releases are very well written with highly specialised content. The idea of fraud on this scale and at this level is frightening.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 23:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying there isn't something real - but that there's something very odd going on. I've seen one case here where someone actually created two online newspapers to back up the load of twaddle he'd posted. (Didn't work - couldn't fake the registration dates...) I sometimes wonder if one or more of the paid encyclopaedias try to discredit WP this way. Hoaxes that last some time get the press attention, but the other millions of articles that are quietly factual get ignored. Perhaps I'm cynical. (Hell, I AM cynical...) This lot seem desperate to get articles up (as was a certain person until the (well sourced) truth got added to the article and we all switched positions - us to keep and him to delete. What the game here is, I'm not sure. I'll keep looking. If you haven't, look at that SPI I linked above. That shows some of the effort being expended. It could be all spam, or all designed to show we can't get the facts right about some quite innocent company. Or it could be a plot by the Milk Marketing Board to take over the world... Peridon (talk) 10:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I, for one, welcome our new bovine overlords. Borkificator (talk) 10:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete ok you've won me over despite all the work I did to make this article acceptable I too am now convinced that it's a well orchestrated web of lies.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 12:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Nipsonanomhmata, for all your work on this. Borkificator (talk) 13:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. Peridon (talk) 13:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Thanks for putting up with me and for being kind to the spammer above.  Nipsonanomhmata  (Talk) 13:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ranvir_Kumar_Singh&oldid=1138281948"