Talk:Anil Agarwal (Industrialist)

Redirect

User: Bladesmulti, I turned this into a redirect because according to BLP notability criteria, article about a businessman should be created only if he is the head of a FTSE 100 Index company. There was no need for consensus here(see WP:BOLD). On an unrelated topic, may I ask why you have been stalking my edits so much? Jayakumar RG (talk) 05:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

It is better if you go for a AFD if you have any concerns with the notability. I don't find anyway to convince if that's your reason for saying that there was lack of notability. Page has many reliable citations, significant history of contributions. It is obvious that there is need of an agreement before it is turned into a redirect. Stalking? Read Wikipedia:HA#NOT. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Not harassment, but simple, inexplicable edit-stalking. It is standard procedure for turning a page into redirect if there is a lack of notability. Also, see WP:BOLD. Jayakumar RG (talk) 05:31, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't try to game the system. http://www.forbes.com/profile/anil-agarwal/ , http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/anil-agarwal-to-donate-75-of-wealth-for-good-of-society/article6449869.ece , http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/vedanta-s-agarwal-to-donate-most-of-fortune-to-charity/article1-1268680.aspx and thousands of other sources well confirms his notability. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Dont attribute motives to a user. There is community consensus that a businessman can have an article, only if he heads an FTSE 100 Index company. I was simply following consensus. If no such criteria were there, I would have taken the article to AfD. Jayakumar RG (talk) 07:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Since you have produced no argument for the article's notability, I am taking it back to a redirect. Jayakumar RG (talk) 16:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't have to uselessly argue you since this article is notable for under the criteria of biography. Consider self-revert, because I or anyone else will revert anyway. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:32, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I have shown based on prior consensus why the subject is not notable, and you have nothing to say to that. You haven't gone on your usual revert spree only because you are hitting 3RR at this point. Jayakumar RG (talk) 16:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

All you have done is, you have linked a guideline(Wikipedia:BOLD) that has to do nothing here. No where you seem to be confirming that a heavily notable biography like this person fails notability because he is a businessman and for a businessman you cannot create article due to some consensus.. I am still unaware of that consensus because you haven't linked anywhere. Do we need some more proof of your lack of competence? Bladesmulti (talk) 16:53, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, since you were so enthusiastic about reverting the redirect, I thought your confidence came from knowledge of the policy. I guess that is not the case. So here it is: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Business_people_and_executives. Jayakumar RG (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

It is just an essay, not a guideline. You consider your understanding of the word policy to be nil. Bladesmulti (talk) 17:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I consider no such thing. And, that is a result of consensus gained at AfD. You disagree with it because?? Jayakumar RG (talk) 17:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)