Talk:Indian School of Business/Archives/2012

Experience of Alumini

Any experiences from the alumini of ISB? Though a new school, ISB due to its affliation has been compared on par with the IIM's in India.

How does somebody who gets out of ISB fare in comparison to their peers in other colleges ? What is ISB's usp ?

Wikipedia is not a forum WP:NOT#FORUM. Kindly discuss such topics elsewhere on the web. Sbohra 12:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

ISB should expand and have more ISB's in various zones

ISB is presently only based out in Hyderabad, which is in southern India. ISB like IIM should infact establish its own brand by having a ISB in each of the 4 zones in large cities not having a IIM.

eg>
South Zone> We already have a ISB in Hyderabad
North Zone> ISB could be based in Chandigadh or Gurgaon
West Zone > ISB could be based in Pune
East Zone > ISB could be based in Bhubaneshwar or Jamshedpur

In this way we can have the extension of the ISB brandname to different zones in the country as well as ISB itself will be a name known all over the country and world.

Wikipedia is not a forum WP:NOT#FORUM. Kindly discuss such topics elsewhere on the web. Sbohra 12:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbohra (talk • contribs)

Fair use rationale for Image:ISBLogo.jpg

Image:ISBLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 10:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Is the site subject to vandalism? I know of atleast one user who has deleted stuff and is not remotely connected with ISB. Shantanu Rastogi, can I meet you outside??

I'm finding similar stuff -- people are removing (negative) material randomly. My2011 (talk) 18:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Isbindia.jpg

Image:Isbindia.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

news links and blogs

Please do not enter any more individual blogs or links to individual websites as this is in against Wikipedia policies WP:NOT#BLOG and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY. Instead consider adding information from these news articles and then state the relevant references. LeaveSleaves (talk) 05:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Review comments

Resolved

 – tried to follow this list and make changes My2011 (talk) 18:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

• 1) Remove Peacock Terms -

"eminent group of business leaders"; "the founders inspired the very best in business and academia to see their vision and join their cause."; "vibrant research environment"; The beautiful sprawling Indian School of Business campus; "It enjoys the locational advantage";"state-of-the-art facilities" "Student life at ISB is enhanced by" "top business schools" "well known for drawing some of the top leaders" "prominent personalities"

• 2) "Things moved fast from then on" compared to what? we could just say "In 2001" instead of flowery language above progress of the project.
• 3)"In the course of the last few years". specific years please. since article will exist for many years from now. someone reading it in 2015 will think last few years as 2012-2015
• 4) No citations in the "academic programs" section
• 5) Wikilinks for all colleges/universities mentioned in faculty section
• 6) Igniting the Genius Within - place within quotes or italicize
• 7) For more details visit: http://www.isb.edu/CLIC/IgnitingtheGeniusWithin.Shtml . remove this and put it in external links
• 8) wikilink Yogesh Chander Deveshwar,

Over all comment : parts of the article read like the institution's website. the tone has to be changed to neutral and factual.--Sodabottle (talk) 11:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Copy vio images, weasel word contents, promotional material, uncited information, primary sources

I have removed images that I found to be a blatant copyright infringement (at least one). I have removed paragraphs that are copy paste from web sites. I have removed promotional material, weasel words and non-neutral statements. Additionally, I have added various citation required tags. Please note that WP:Primary sources will not be preferred, especially if the source is the ISB website that is being used to support exceptional claims of placements and affiliations. Even otherwise, please do not give names of placements corporations or rankings or write paeans about the international leaders associated with ISB, unless the same is written in a dispassionate way without sounding promotional and only if this is supported by reliable non-primary sources. In case reliable non-primary sources are not found for the paragraphs where we have placed the citation required tags, then those paragraphs will be deleted soon. Please discuss any clarifications you might require. Thanks. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 04:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

---

Wifione, I can't find anything wrong with these paragraphs -- though I am new, so would appreciate your insight. What's wrong with them? I didn't write them, but just asking:

The school has been called “the McKinsey brainchild” for the close involvement of McKinsey & Company in its inception: co-founders and senior partners Rajat Gupta and Anil Kumar worked closely together and directed teams of McKinsey consultants to start the school. First, the Executive Board was formed of global business leaders: Gupta recruited U.S. leaders while Kumar recruited Indian leaders. Next, the ISB established formal partnerships with international business schools: Kumar recruited Wharton, while Gupta recruited Kellogg. The London Business School followed shortly thereafter. Finally, Pramanth Sinha, then a junior partner at McKinsey, was persuaded by Gupta and Kumar to take a leave of absence from McKinsey to be the school's first dean.

Rajat Gupta became the school's first chairman; he served on the executive board with Anil Kumar until both were entangled in the Galleon insider trading case from 2009-2011. Adi Godrej succeeded Gupta as chairman in 2011.

The Government of Andhra Pradesh welcomed the ISB into Hyderabad, laying the foundation stone for the campus in 1999. The Post Graduate Programme was launched in 2001 with an initial batch of 128 students, followed by the launch of the Executive Education Programmes. The school’s Hyderabad campus was inaugurated by the Prime Minister of India, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, in 2001. Its first graduation ceremony on June 24, 2002 was presided over by President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam.

Thanks -- My2011 (talk) 18:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Haven't heard from you so putting these back. I can't find anything wrong with them and am confused why you took them off without real explanation. Thanks My2011 (talk) 17:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

• Hi. Sorry for the delayed response. I have removed the consulting portal source and the cited material as the source is not reliable. You should find out the original Outlook Business source and then replace the paragraph. I am also removing a lot of uncited material. Please put them back only when you get reliable sources. Kindly read WP:Reliable sources guidelines for an understanding. Thanks. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 06:59, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Please confirm

There's an addition in the article on notable alumni. Please add truly notable alumni; to that effect, can you confirm how is Rohit Kaushik notable? Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message}

I didn’t do it. Suggest we kill for now. Any ISB alum is still <10 years out of b-school; unlikely to be notable (yet!) My2011 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC).

Thanks. I'm deleting the material right now; but in case the editor responds, I'd be open to putting it back in case the reasoning is logical. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 17:23, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent undo

My2011, My edit summary might have sounded rude. So advance apologies. I wished to mention that the box is intended to inform readers that the institution is unaccredited. Why would you say it is not meant to contain the same? Also, if you wish to write MBA equivalent, and similar stuff, get reliable sources that confirm the same. Please don't add that without reliable sources being there. I am sorry for undoing your edit with a crappy edit summary. Best. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 17:06, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Rajaratnam —> Gupta/Kumar

Hi there, 192.223.158.45/192.223.140.46!

My understanding is that:

• Gupta and Kumar created the executive board and first partnerships with Wharton/Kellogg
• They then asked business leaders — including Rajaratnam — for donations to help start the school and to join the executive board. They do not say they invested money themselves.

Your addition was:

According to Raj Rajaratnam, a Sri Lankan billionaire jailed for insider trading, Rajaratnam gave the school a million dollars to help found it, on the urging of Kumar and Gupta; he stated that he "later found out [Kumar and Gupta] never contributed any of their money, and are listed as the school’s founders. And I’m not even a fucking Indian."[39]

Can you help me understand how this means "the head of Galleon essentially saying that they founders lied…”?

Thanks! My2011 (talk) 15:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Wifione: latest edits

Hey there, good to see you again. I tried to keep as many of your edits in as I could. If you still have concerns let's chat about them one by one and flesh them out here (line by line if we have to). Any other editor is welcome to join. Thanks!! My2011 (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks for the edits. Let's take the article top down; thus, let's start by discussing the lead. Please provide me a clarification/references for these two sentences.

1. "The school is a public-private partnership founded by two senior executives of McKinsey and Company in cooperation with the Government of India and state of Andhra Pradesh, and led by a board of national and international business leaders."
2. "The school is notable for being the first Indian institution and youngest institution ever to be considered a top global business school by the Financial Times, ranking among the top 20 worldwide only seven years after opening"

Thanks. Wifione ^Message 18:23, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy new year! Sorry for the delay. Don't have too much time to reply, and I don't even remember if I even wrote these sentences. But a quick stab:

1. "1) school is a PPP 2) founded by gupta and kumar 3) state and national governments helped 4) lead by a board of business leaders" are repeats of other things in the article (except maybe #1, which I'm not sure about)
2. ft.com rankings, right? also ISB press blurbs

thanks, My2011 (talk) 19:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Historical rankings

I reverted an addition of historical ranking of the institute. First, I think historical ratings are borderline WP:INDISCRIMINATE. The current rating is the material factor. Second, the de-facto standard for WP:INEI is not to add historical ratings. This makes perfect sense when one considers we are already listing six different ratings in some cases. Listing them all historically is just going to be a bunch of numbers. --Muhandes (talk) 15:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Please don't remove the mention of controversies from the lead

Sandeep, Please read up on LEAD to understand why the controversies have to be mentioned in the lead. Kindly do not remove encyclopedic material supported by reliable sources. Please feel free to add sources that claim that these people have been acquitted. But you cannot remove the information about them being earlier indicted. Thanks. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 15:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the controversies from the lede because they do not seem to be live and important controversies for the school itself, but rather for the individuals involved, who have long since resigned from the school now. Additionally, the section in the lead was actually longer than the section in the controversies section! So I merged this all into the controversies section of the article. If we get consensus that these controversies are important enough to include in the lead, then I suggest we follow the guidance of WP:LEAD such that the section "be written in a way that makes readers want to know more" rather than telling them intricate details upfront, a violation of WP:UNDUE.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Great to see you here Mr. Wales. Your involvement should hopefully get more editors to comment. I'm in agreement with whichever way the consensus might be. My view is clear from my statement above. The source mentions that ISB is "running courses in violation of regulations of All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE)". Would you not believe this is a controversy worth a mention in the lead? Especially as the article does not mention it anywhere. I'm including this statement in the section on Accreditation and look forward to your reply. Kind regards. Wifione ^Message 05:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Your previous change seems really good Mr. Wales. I should just freeze the article here and call the crowd at ISB to show them that you've edited the article - it'll be electrifying news :):) But seriously sir, it's really wonderful that you keep on editing articles throughout our project. Thanks for the opportunity to interact with you. Kind regards. Wifione ^Message 17:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Wifione, was that THE jimmy wales?? wow.... My2011 (talk) 01:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources and need for citation

May I strongly encourage the editors of this page to use reliable sources for citing any claim? Might I also suggest that elongated sections (for example, timeline) and advertorial sections (for example, coffee with alumni) be removed immediately? This article has started looking like a pure and proper advertisement for ISB, with details of even when information sessions are organized, than a good Wikipedia article. Kindly work on it before I remove uncited information or exceptional claims and information cited purely with primary sources. Please feel free to write back directly to me or here. Wifione ^Message 12:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Query on my talk page

I'm copying a query left on my talk page and replying to the same here. Wifione ^Message 09:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wifione

I am not that old to Wiki and have contributed to the ISB page in the past. Going thru your latest changes, I have a few questions for you:

• What language did you find promotional on the page? Trying to learn more and more about Wiki, I have tried to oversee as well as add information that was neutral and factual in its tone
• Why do you consider non-accreditation by AICTE as a controversy? While you yourself have kept the info on the former Dean stating that ISB did not reach AICTE - why does need to be the intro and be regarded as a controversy?
• Between AICTE & AACSB - who do you think recognizes schools? AICTE is an Indian body that is concerned with meeting of fixed criterion and 'approves' institutes while AACSB is the oldest global accreditation agency.

Let me know your thoughts so that I can know the way forward in the future Regards, 2012smine

• Thanks for the queries 2012smine. Here are the replies.

• I think sections and material that provides details about having coffee with alumni and also about when the institution gives its admission information sessions are promotional in nature. If you read up on SPAM, it would give your our project's content guidelines on what constitutes spam and what does not.

• Non-accreditation by AICTE became a controversy for ISB due to a variety of issues, including the government mentioning in Parliament that ISB was one of those "identified as unapproved institutions which are running courses in violation of regulations of All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE)." The proper way is to not remove the controversial details from the lede, but to include more material that neutralizes the detail. May I suggest that one could include an additional line that ISB is accredited globally by AACSB?
• My view on what is good accreditation or bad accreditation does not matter. Out here on Wikipedia, you need to reliably source any material that can be challenged. WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:RS could be good starting points to understand these details.

Please feel free to write back for anything. Wifione ^Message 09:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, Wifione, just wanted to chime in. I haven't been looking at the page very much since we last ran through it. I think most of the stuff there is in fact sourced -- or pretty easy to find sources for -- but since you're obviously more invested in this you can correct me. Personally I don't believe AICTE nonaccreditation is an issue -- especially since we agreed it was resolved now? -- but you seem to disagree. Can you explain that point to me again? Hope all is well. My[2011] (talk) | 21:56, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

My revised view, I suspect, came with a review of the government of India note that this programme is not authorized under Indian laws; that's one reason I do believe it is a controversy and we should include the details appropriately. Wifione ^Message 02:14, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm still confused. Why does the program need to be authorized under Indian laws? They are a private university. And wasnt this issue resolved over a year ago anyway? My[2011] (talk) | 02:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

They're apparently not a university at all. They're an institution offering courses in India which the government of India says they are not authorized to offer. 2007,[1][2] 2010,[3] 2012, four days ago,[4] it's the same status. I believe if the government of the country where an institution is offering a programme repeatedly says that the institute is not authorized to offer the same, that is a controversy, especially with a multitude of reliable sources regularly confirming the same. Wifione ^Message 03:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Request for citations

Kindly provide independent non-primary citations/sources for the following sections:

• Hyderabad campus
• Fellow Programme in Management (FPM)
• Partnerships
• Research
• Scholarships
• Student recognition

I would request you to either provide independent sources or delete the exceptional claims. Thanks. Wifione ^Message 08:03, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm removing the claims not supported by reliable non-primary sources. Also, kindly discuss here why don't you wish to delete the controversy details from the article. Wifione ^Message 09:49, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Accreditation Controversy

May I suggest adding a new section on accreditation? The current presentation of this information is somewhat confusing IMHO. In particular, the ISB has never sought recognition from AICTE, and has additionally never used the words "degree", "diploma" or "certificate" in any promotional material or anywhere else. As such, ISB's stated legal position is that it does not come under AICTE's jurisdiction at all. The current state of the article seems to be biased in favour of AICTE, with no mention of ISB's position on the issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.206.168.182 (talk) 20:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

• There is a section on Accreditation already. Also, the section contains ISB's viewpoint thus, "As per ISB, it has chosen not to apply for accreditation by AICTE as AICTE does not approve one year programmes.". If you have more references with respect to ISB's accreditation stand, please just add into the article. I'll also add this line into the lead paragraph though. Wifione ^Message 02:52, 30 November 2012 (UTC)