Talk:Coromandel International

Reliable and unreliable sources

Currently (October 19, 2009), this article has 23 sources used as references, most of which don't pass the WP:RS policy. Here's how I see them:

1. sify.com - appears to pull from a database; not a published article
2. google.com - another database
3. icarda.org - press release
4. thehindu.com - usually a reliable source, but this appears to be a reprint of a press release
5. businesstoday.intoday.in - site is currently down, so I can't tell
6. enet.cflindia.com - subject's own web site
7. cii.in - marketing piece from the Confederation of Indian Industry
8. cii-iq.in - another marketing piece from the Confederation of Indian Industry
9. murugappa.com - web site of subject's corporate parent
10. vizagbuzz.com - this site's own about page (seen here) says they aren't reliable
11. thehindubusinessline.com - appears to be a press release
12. ias.ac.in - looks like a solid source, but it doesn't actually say much about the subject
13. ohio4h.org - press release
14. cseindia.org - promotional; doesn't actually say much about the subject
15. financialexpress.com - press release that isn't actually about the subject
16. financialexpress.com - another press release that isn't actually about the subject
17. thehindubusinessline.com - appears to be a press release
18. thehindubusinessline.com - appears to be a press release
19. thehindubusinessline.com - appears to be a press release
20. online.wsj.com - this is an actual article, but subject isn't mentioned until five paragraphs from the end
21. indiaprwire.com - press release
22. fao.org - database lookup that says nothing about the company
23. fao.org - database lookup that says nothing about the company

Without solid sourcing, there isn't an article. Right now, this article has little to no sourcing. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 01:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC)