Jump to content

Talk:National Law School of India University

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Notable Alumni

[edit]

Could someone who knows please add a list of "notable alumni"? --sol 08:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedia article, not NLS webpage on the net.

[edit]

Contributors, please note that this page is meant as an encyclopedia article on NLS, and not as a page for students of NLS to generally disseminate information on NLS. I don't think language like, "In addition our journals", etc., should be used in the article. --sol 14:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Motto

[edit]

Does anyone know if NLSIU has an official motto of any kind? --sol 14:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Promotional Part

[edit]
Please read the What Wikipedia is not section carefully WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your organisation, institute or firm.
Therefore, I have removed this part from the page.
"If you are a prospective student of NLS, please do not be deterred by the high fees. As the scholarship page on this website illustrates, availability of easy loans, and need based financial assistance by the University ensures that no student has had to leave NLS once he/she has got admission due to lack of finances. Ragging is also strictly prohibited on campus, and in the past years has been practically eliminated."
"and in the past years has been practically eliminated" (about ragging) <--- please cite sources. (Please read WP:CW and WP:NPOV)
I have removed the alumus link Alumni website because it does not work properly.
The alumini of the NLSIU has indeed been very successful in the legal arena as well as out of it. But, it definately requires proper sources to be cited. (I am not removing that part of the article)

This is just for the humour part: (and it is a POV of mine)

I completely believe that NLSIU is the best law school in India. There have been doubts about India Today's credibility after it reported that ILS Law College, Pune is India's top law college. Complete Bullshit!

--Andy123 12:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article tone-General Observations

[edit]

The article has been authored/edited by someone from the institution in a self promotion tone..use of words like 'our dedicated' etc..set the tone and style of the article. It is more like a prospectus/brochure than a Wikipedia article. It lacks references of the claims made. It gives out very common day to day activities (which are not necessary for WP article)in an effort to market the School. The article needs thorough rehaul immediately. Any other interested editors are welcome to join me in revamping the article. Brothers in Arms 17:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-encyclopedic?

[edit]

"Teams from NLSIU regularly take part in moot court competitions and parliamentary debates at an international level. In 1999, the NLSIU team won what is arguably the most prestigious moot competition in the world, the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition conducted by the ILSA which is held in Washington, D.C., every year. Furthermore, it has also won the Stetson International Environment Moot Court Competition conducted by the Stetson University College of Law in Florida. It has also regularly participated and made the break many times in the Willem C. Vis Commercial Arbitration moot (hosted by Pace Law School), making the quarter-finals in 2004 and 2005 (making the cut in second place), and has been a semi-finalist in the Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot. NLSIU teams have also been regular at the World Universities Debating Championship as well as the All-Asian Intervarsity Debating Championships."

Why was this removed? I believe it perfectly encyclopedic as it describes the activities of the NLSIU. Michaelas10 16:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any good law school would engage itself in these competitions or activities.It is not worth mention unless the author intends to market the school concerned. Secondly,the material is unencyclopedic since it absolutely lacks sources. WP is not a place for original reasearch. The points made out should be sourced from a verfifable material.(lacks references).
Brothers in Arms 10:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I don't understand the first reason you provided. As for the second reason, you can just tag it with {{originalresearch}} or {{unreferenced}} instead of removing the hard work of others. Michaelas10 12:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

....i would say..the part can be retained (after modification) if somebody tones it down n makes it simple.i thought u would understand what i meant by unencyclopedic..u being Barnstar longstanding member..Unencyclopedic..includes many things..this material is like 'lifted off' straight from a brouchure...it falls short of WP Standards. Brothers in Arms 18:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, this sort of information is up about EVERY Law School, and is unreferenced in all these places. This can't be referred to as unencylopedic, but merely claims that are unreferenced. It's simple enough to tag them as such and not REMOVE these changes, which is the argument you have made with regard to criticisms of the institution. Consider the fact that claims about moots and debates are what you're objecting to, and on the other hand you're for allowing comments of a defamatory nature remain.218.248.32.114 13:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mr. Anonymous,

Well i guess you would have noticed that i had relented and stuck to the WP policy by voting for removal of unreferenced material. Please read the link provided down here regarding wiki verfiability policy. Jimmy wales advocates removal of unverifiable claims vigorously.And NLSIU is no exception in this matter. However, in view of the fact that such an exercise would result in deletion of almost all the article (unreferenced and promotional in nature)i rather suggest to restrict the claims to simple statement of facts instead of elaborate description of its supposed achievements. Brothers in Arms 06:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ambush editing?

[edit]

A user who has been particularly active in editing the "NALSAR" and "Hyderabad" pages on WP has thought it fit to remove the adjectives "India's premier" preceding the words "legal institution" in the opening paragraph. I am not going to be childish enough to revert the change, and invite his/her comments on why exactly it is unwise to call a spade a spade on Wikipedia.

Your thoughts, sir?


Revamp of the Article

[edit]

This article needs an urgent revamp. All the claims made in the article from being a 'premier institution' of India to its rankings in India Today (an Indian current affairs Magazine published by the India Today Group) remain unsubstantied by any verifiable sources. Unless the interested editors of this article add citation to the claims they will be promptly removed to bring the article in line with WP standards. Remember no original research is admissible in WP articles. Brothers in Arms 09:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chimp Promiscuity on Campus

[edit]

Is it true that the campus is very well known for its open sexual orientation? Heard of unwanted pregnancies and lot of PDA amongst its male and female students? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.32.114 (talk) 16:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why Wiki has to make a note of those things.218.248.32.114 13:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Have you noticed that the IP address that asked this question is actually registered to the National Law School of India University? It makes it rather difficult to assume any sort of good faith for the question. 210.214.52.14 15:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True. The same IP address was involved in adding the defamatory criticism material. Obviously, there is some one using the NLSIU IP address to defame the institution. But please do not block this IP address as you may be knowing many people like me from NLSIU use a common 'squid HTTP1.1 proxy' to use the internet. However if vandal increases his activity in future the article may need protection lock. Brothers in Arms 17:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Blocking the IP address would only have the effect of preventing anonymous edits from that IP address. You would still be able to sign in if you wanted to edit. lone_twin 06:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the preceding response. I recommend that you read Wikipedia:Avoiding_harm and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not before you bring up these issues. This is not a gossip community, nor is such information encyclopedic. And, out of curiosity, why is the heading "Chimp Promiscuity on Campus"?! 210.214.52.14 15:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ha this is a funny charge. May be this guy needs to get some life. i guess chimps are well known for their aggressive sexual activity with all females in the group..i remember watching on discovery. Brothers in Arms 17:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

[edit]

This is addressed to the user 'Lone twin' and any other editor interested in deletion or edition of the content added to criticism section of the article. please rememember revert rules. If you have any objections to the nature of the content or otherwise please discuss here why it should be removed. WP always encourages contributions ..but please desist from deleting other contributions without sufficient explanation. Brothers in Arms 09:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely no authority for the criticism in question. Given that it claims that the administration has come under fire by right-wing groups and that "prominent locals" have "urged the Vice-chancellor and the Registrar to reduce the lawlessness of the law students and to bring in control the regular nuisance caused by the deviant behaviour of the students to an otherwise quiet and peaceful locality", there needs to be some authority for this. The language of the entire offending section seems to be a clear violation of WP:NPOV in the absence of authority, and the section on Alyosha Kumar being murdered "during a squabble over the outstanding dues for the drugs consumed" by him and his friends is not substantiated by the sources provided and is actually defamatory, given that it is alleging illegal conduct where no evidence has been provided of it. Given that the IP address making these edits is actually registered to the National Law School of India University, it seems that vested interests are at work here. I would recommend that the paragraphs in question be retained only if the language is made more neutral and proper sources are provided to back up all the facts. 210.214.52.14 12:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The material should be deleted as unencyclopedic. Please refer to Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence, and particularly Jimmy Wales' quote in that section. One could also argue that unsourced negative statements about NLSIU students should be deleted, as they are living people. In fact, given the IP address's history of vandalism, I'm inclined to treat this as grounds for a block request. lone_twin 12:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the three-revert rule doesn't apply here, under WP:3RR#Exceptions, since it is unsourced and libellous. lone_twin 14:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This matter just should not be on the page because claims such as the one dealing with the question of the deceased student and claiming that this was on the basis of some unpaid narcotics dues are completely unsubstantiated, even in the articles that are cited below. I believe that making such a claim is problematic enough, especially since it is one of the students of the campus in question. The criticism that the authorities seem to have received has in no way been recorded, and thus cannot find place in what is meant to be an encyclopedia and not some gossip rag tabloid. Also, the mention of a BJP MLA making statements such as the ones alleged have not been part of the news, if one searches the websites of local newspapers. The two paragraphs dealing with the so-called decadent attitude of the students and complaints of the local authorities and the one alleging illegal conduct on the deceased student's part should be immediately removed.218.248.32.114 13:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There seems to be no verifiable record to the potentially defamatory material added to the criticism. The two news paper articles cited give the information regarding the murder of the student. There is no proof to substantiate the claims of prominent locals, BJP MLA or the behaviour of the students of the campus. I recommend removal of these facts. But please retain the NPOV tag..i think the article fails to stand upto the neutrality standards of WP in other matters/claims. In fact, a large part of the article is unsubstantiated and makes unnecessary claims. Jimmy wales quote with regard to unverifiable material needs to be implemented thoroughly. I regret my previous actions but i think the best way to solve disputes of this nature is to discuss openly on talk page. WP encourages dialogue and negotiations to resolve disputes. Please make the necessary changes. Brothers in Arms 17:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Does Alyosha Kumar's murder merit inclusion on this page, though? Once we've removed the libellous material, the bare fact of his death seems rather out of context. Do you have any ideas on how this can be integrated more seamlessly with the rest of the text, or shall we just remove it? lone_twin 17:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is a good idea to add a trivia section and move down this fact to the section. This trivia section can include many other claims regarding festivals and competitions held by the institution. Last year there was a suicide death of one girl on campus after she hung herself with a noose. I'll check for any news reports to support the fact.But i am not sure of the WP outlay for information on Universities. Is a trivia section agreeable for an educational institution as it is in the case of an article on actors/actresses. Brothers in Arms 17:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Trivia sections are discouraged by Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Trivia sections. lone_twin 06:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brother in arms. I think you are a sick sick man/woman/loser —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.12.251.226 (talk) 05:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Nlsiulogo.gif

[edit]

Image:Nlsiulogo.gif 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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 15:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indian law needs help

[edit]

Could some of you Indian lawyers write a few things on the Indian law page? Or perhaps there's someone who might be good enough to email me a copy of your curriculum? I'm interested in contract, tort, unjust enrichment, labour, company and insolvency in particular. All the best! Wikidea 23:18, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism - Cartels in Law Firms

[edit]

I've removed some of the terrible sentence structure that seemed to made the Criticism section it's home, but I was wondering about one of the claims made that had had no substantiation since February 2007 - the cartels in Indian law firms and how these are blocking the graduates for other law firms. I think I'll give it a month for there to be some kind of citation for it before I take it down. It's been long enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.192.102 (talk) 06:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alumni

[edit]

Per WP:NLIST each member of the list requires a source, and needs to be notable. The entire list was unsourced, and mostly unnotable. I therefore moved it here. Feel free to restore any of them, but first, create an article about the person to show notability, and provide a source that they are alumnus.

  • Dayan Krishnan, Advocate, Supreme Court of India
  • Nikhil Nayyar, Advocate-on-Record, Supreme Court of India
  • Murali Neelkantha, Partner, Khaitan & Co., Advocates
  • Nandan Nelvigi, Partner, White & Case
  • Umakanth V., Former Partner, Amarchand Mangaldas, Professor, National University of Singapore
  • Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School
  • Ashwin Shankar, Advocate, Bombay High Court
  • Aditya Sondhi, Advocate, Karnataka High Court
  • Sidharth Raja, Partner, Narsappa, Doraswamy & Raja

--Muhandes (talk) 23:27, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Melgiri library 1.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Melgiri library 1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Melgiri library 3.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Melgiri library 3.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:NLSIU Rhodes.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:NLSIU Rhodes.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:13, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Melgiri library 2.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Melgiri library 2.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on National Law School of India University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:08, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chief Justice of India is not officially the Chancellor of the School

[edit]

The law as it stands today.

Please do note that since 2011 the nomenclature of the CJI is changed to "Visitor" from "Chancellor". Hence there is no Chancellor of the University today. Nevertheless the Chief Justice performs their duty as if they are one. So it should be mentioned in the article. I have brought this to the talk page because this is quite an urban myth among the school's network and so it should be done and dusted once and for all. Appu (talk) 20:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I assume no objections. Appu (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Law_School_of_India_University&oldid=1207965583"