Talk:Raheja Developers/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Raheja Developers. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Untitled
Raheja developer but this developer has no fund to complete the project.. And some brokers commission also seized by this Raheja developer.So we are requested to all don't book flat or plot anything to this raheja Developer... Raheja Developer chor Hain.
Negative content
Why leoaugust is deliberately trying to post only negative content about this company?Sanjeev.08 (talk) 04:52, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- It looks like he was adding it because it had been on the news. I'll warn you up front- we cannot have only positive material in an article. If something has gained negative attention in the media enough then it should be covered in the Wikipedia article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:43, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- What I understand and have heard is organisational war happening here. Thankfully it has been protected. However, I have one concern regarding this link: It’s Builders Vs Buyers in the Indian Real Estate Industry. The link is actually a blog and not a new article. How to go around that? -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 09:09, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not all blogs are bad. That one appears to be hosted by Forbes, which suggests that some editorial oversight goes on. As such, it should be ok. Although I'd prefer a hard news story to a blog any day. - Sitush (talk) 14:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- What I understand and have heard is organisational war happening here. Thankfully it has been protected. However, I have one concern regarding this link: It’s Builders Vs Buyers in the Indian Real Estate Industry. The link is actually a blog and not a new article. How to go around that? -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 09:09, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
News sites
I edited some facts yesterday, but someone said that there is no evidence for political stunt. I want to say that there is also no evidence for proving this project as a scam. If both of us are correct, then according to me this paragraph should not be on wikipedia as it is just an article of news sites. So it might be present on news site, but can not be on wikipedia. If I am wrong please correct/insist me.Aarvig (talk) 04:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Dear Aarvig, could you please document the change you did her so that we can reach consensus; by inviting other editors who have contributed so far. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- We are not attempting to "prove" anything. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present verifiable material with a balanced, neutral, point of view. If independent news sources report something, then that can be included in the article. We do not need to prove that what the news source is reporting is true. Therefore, if news sites are stating it is a scam - then that's what goes in the article. If others report it is a political stunt then that too goes in the article. QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:32, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Spelling and out-of-date? URL
Reference [1]
title=Busness Week: Raheja Devpers Ltd
probably should be
title=Business Week: Raheja Developers Ltd
Also, the URL
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=42411522
actually goes to
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=42411522
86.171.199.114 (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because I don't see any strong evidence of vandalism. --Leoaugust (talk) 11:25, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
- I have removed the deletion request. The issues is purely one of POV-pushing by people with vested interests - they have been trying to sanitise this article ever since it was changed from the puff piece that they wished to see here. - Sitush (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
- Sitush, I'd probably recommend upping the protection to where the changes have to be approved by someone. I haven't been back to this article in a while, but I will say that it might help deter the COI editors somewhat. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
- Sitush and Leoaugust are two from side who are removing positive and posting negative while TheRedball and Karthikndr are from other side who are removing negative and posting positive. Is it ok with Wikipedia to have this kind of edit war? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarvig (talk • contribs) 04:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
I again submitted for removal of this article. I request some other person to check my request who is not involved in VendalismAarvig (talk) 06:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- It will not get deleted so stop trying. You may request deletion at WP:AFD, however, I would say it is highly unlikely to result in deletion. Why? Because you do not have, or at least haven't made, any valid case for deletion. QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Suggested changes
| tldr, full of WP:TPG violations, and went no where Jytdog (talk) 10:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
Statement "Raheja Developers were named in a sting operation relating to corruption by investigative portal Cobrapost." is clearly a WP:OVERCITE, only reference of Cobra Post is sufficient. The page contains lots of sources which do not meet WP:RS (for example: this and this). These have no verification policy and only quote other sources which have already been covered on the page. In the awards section, Raheja has been winner of the following awards: Best Project Execution, CRISIL Real Estate Awards - 2010 for Raheja Mall[1] and Real Estate Award for Best Residential Property (More than 1 lakh sq feet) - 2008 by CNBC Awaaz-Crisil Real Estate Awards for Raheja Atlantis[2] Also the Forbes India paragraph at the bottom of the page contains press release which has nothing to do with the statement. It may be removed. References
--Mr RD 20:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Dear Mr RD (talk) You have a good opportunity to find the truth about the Company Raheja Developers, because you must be in direct contact with the company. You must be getting paid well, but you are also being very misguided. And would appreciate it if @Sitush: could ensure that I am not crossing any lines.
Leoaugust (talk) 18:27, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
@Mr RD:
|
Conflict of interest
I have just reverted the changes made by Mr RD (talk · contribs), who has been paid to edit this article. I acknowledge that they have declared their conflict of interest and I also acknowledge that it is quite probable that this article is skewed against the subject due to the involvement of people who have not admitted having a conflict.
The article is a mess and has been plaqued by non-neutral editing for months, perhaps even from its very origin. It needs a very careful review of sources and a very strict approach to WP:RS (one of the bigger problems of sourcing here has historically been the use of recycled Raheja press releases, for example). No-one - literally, no-one - who has a conflict of interest should be editing the article. They should propose changes here. - Sitush (talk) 01:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Sitush, that was well done. Jytdog (talk) 10:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Request edit on 5 March 2016
 | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Some or all of the changes weren't supported by neutral, independent, reliable sources. Consider re-submitting with content based on media, books and scholarly works. |
In the history section, kindly add:
"In 2008, Tata Housing Development Company and Raheja Builders invested Rs 700 crore in developing a residential project, Raisina Residency in Gurgaon.[1] According to a press release issued by Tata Housing, in 2009, Raisina Residency received Gold Certification from Indian Green Building Council (IGBC), Green Homes rating, making it the first project to receive a gold certification in the residential space from IGBC.[2]
In August 2015, Raheja Developers tied up with BookMyHouse.com to sell its apartments.[3]"
References
- ^ "Tatas, Rahejas to invest Rs 700 cr on residential complex". Business Standard. New Delhi. PTI. 7 August 2008. Retrieved 4 March 2016.
- ^ "Tata Housing's Raisina Residency bags IGBC gold certification". Business Standard. Mumbai. PTI. 14 July 2009. Retrieved 5 March 2016.
- ^ ETRealty Bureau (6 August 2015). "Raheja Developers ties up with BookMyHouse.com, books 500 apartments online". Economic Times. New Delhi. Economic Times. Retrieved 5 March 2016.
- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr RD (talk • contribs) 19:03, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- We will not use press releases as sources (and please do not make future edit requests cited to press releases) and the last item is trivia. See WP:NOTNEWS. Jytdog (talk) 19:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- Source was Economic Times which took verified news from PTI.
- Please sign your posts. I won't do that going forward, and I won't respond if you don't. Your own content says the content from a press release and the Business Standard just regurgitates it - there is no reporting there. Jytdog (talk) 19:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- Dear Jytdog, first of all I'm extremely sorry for such late reply; I was on holidays. I must have missed my signature while copy-editing my previous comment. Now, regarding the Gold Certification rating, it is a press release from Tata Group (which is considered as one of the most reputed conglomerates of India). I do not think this come as any extraordinary claim that's why I included it. Please let me know if I'm wrong. I found it on Business Standard article which took information from PTI which ultimately took the news from Tata's press release.
- Please sign your posts. I won't do that going forward, and I won't respond if you don't. Your own content says the content from a press release and the Business Standard just regurgitates it - there is no reporting there. Jytdog (talk) 19:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- Source was Economic Times which took verified news from PTI.
- Also please let me know if there are problems with my other statements. Happy to help, Mr RD 17:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- The origin of the press release is irrelevant. Secondly, you misrepresent the piece, which says that Tata received the gold certification, for its residency. ("With this certification, the Tata firm becomes the first company in India to receive a gold certification in the residential space...") And if you cannot see that the incorrect content that you proposed about the development getting some "gold certification" is intended to promote Raheja, then I will have to consider filing a COIN or ANI case to get you topic banned from this article, as that would mean that you are utterly incapable of editing neutrally on this topic Please acknowledge that you have misrepresented the source and attempted to promote Raheja here. Jytdog (talk) 17:14, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Raisina project was a partnership project between Raheja and Tata. As far as I know, it is the project that got the award not the company. That is why I mentioned it. Please correct me if I'm making some mistake here. Mr RD 17:39, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- I already did correct you - I even re-linked to the source and quoted it.' Last chance - acknowledge that you misrepresented the source and did so to promote Raheja, and say that you will not waste the community's time with this sort of thing again in the future. Jytdog (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- It was a complete misrepresentation by Mr RD (talk), who has the benefit of being able to double-check with Raheja Developers, rather than playing petty semantics with published articles. The Raisina project was first launched by Raheja Developers who had purchased the land. But, Rahejas failed in marketing and selling the project. The project was then taken over by Tatas, who did EVERYTHING from marketing to constructing. Rahejas had absolutely no role in the project, except that their logo is on the marketing materials of the project by virtue of them being the land owners. Every award won or certification received is for Tatas, and Rahejas are just piggy-backing on the Tata brand. Rahejas had absolutely no role in the development of the project. Mr RD can easily confirm with Rahejas, and all the explanations that he is giving here are absolutely false. Leoaugust (talk) 18:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- In that case I apologize for my mistake and wasting your precious time. Mr RD 18:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Volunteer time is precious - it is what makes this entire project work. It is not something you should dismiss sarcastically and definitely not something you should abuse by misrepresenting sources to promote your client. Jytdog (talk) 19:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Dear Jytdog, Sorry if it appeared sarcasm to you, it genuinely wasn't. I appreciate what all Wikipedia editors are doing for greater community good. I request you to kindly let me know if there is any problem with other two statements. Thank you Mr RD 17:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Volunteer time is precious - it is what makes this entire project work. It is not something you should dismiss sarcastically and definitely not something you should abuse by misrepresenting sources to promote your client. Jytdog (talk) 19:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- In that case I apologize for my mistake and wasting your precious time. Mr RD 18:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Raisina project was a partnership project between Raheja and Tata. As far as I know, it is the project that got the award not the company. That is why I mentioned it. Please correct me if I'm making some mistake here. Mr RD 17:39, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- The origin of the press release is irrelevant. Secondly, you misrepresent the piece, which says that Tata received the gold certification, for its residency. ("With this certification, the Tata firm becomes the first company in India to receive a gold certification in the residential space...") And if you cannot see that the incorrect content that you proposed about the development getting some "gold certification" is intended to promote Raheja, then I will have to consider filing a COIN or ANI case to get you topic banned from this article, as that would mean that you are utterly incapable of editing neutrally on this topic Please acknowledge that you have misrepresented the source and attempted to promote Raheja here. Jytdog (talk) 17:14, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Also please let me know if there are problems with my other statements. Happy to help, Mr RD 17:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
{{od}]Wikipedia is not a news site or a company web page, recording regular events in the life of a company. It is an encyclopedia that records accepted knowledge of enduring interest. It is WP:NOTNEWS. Jytdog (talk) 17:48, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Jytdog (talk) The causality is not as definitive as implied in the sentence "It also worked with Haryana Urban Development Authority on affordable housing in Sohna region of Gurgaon in January 2015, in the face of low demand in premium real estate." HUDA is a govt body that launched affordable housing scheme to encourage construction of low cost housing for the lower-income sections of society, and provided certain tax breaks and relaxations in building norms. It was not directly tied with the worsening market situation of real estate in general, but more of a socialist endeavour by the govt. The price reduction that Raheja provided in its Sohna project was related to market pressures as even at that low cost there were few takers for the project; and moreover that specific project where prices were reduced did not fall under the "affordable housing" scheme of the govt. So, it might be better to just state "It also launched the Krishna Housing Scheme (http://www.raheja.com/raheja-krishna.asp) in Sohna in January 2015 under the affordable housing policy of Haryana Government (http://tcpharyana.gov.in/notifications%20&%20judgements/Notification_AFFORDABLE_HOUSING_POLICY_2013_Finalised%2018.08.2013.pdf)" and drop the "in the face of low demand in premium real estate" part. But, in spirit, you are right about the fact that Rahejas entered the affordable housing segment because of the dwindling demand in their premium product offerings. Leoaugust (talk) 01:56, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
- OK with a few tweaks. Jytdog (talk) 02:16, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Edit request - 14 April 2016
| This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [see below] |
Kindly add the following under awards section:
- 'The Times of India Real Estate Icons of National Capital Region 2016', a Times Group felicitation.[1]
References
- ^ "TOWERING ACHIEVEMENT - THE REAL ESTATE ICONS OF NCR". The Times of India. New Delhi. 9 April 2016. Retrieved 14 April 2016.
-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr RD (talk • contribs) 10:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC
- Please sign your posts. II won't add any reference to Wikipedia that is in all caps. Additionally this a press release about a coffee table book published by the Times Group. Please don't bring content sourced to press releases; it is promotional. We have talked about this before - please try to avoid sourcing content in Wikipedia to press releases. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Edit request - 10 June 2016
| This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. A consensus could not be reached. |
Mr RD 23:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Kindly add the following to the Investigations and legal challenges section before last paragraph (After The notice informed all other buyers, who were not yet part ...):
In May 2016, a group of buyers of Raheja Atharva and Raheja Vedanta who had filed the petitions on behalf of 130 buyers claimed that they have reached out of court settlement after meeting Additional Chief Secretary (town and country planning) in Chandigarh.[1][2]
References
- ^ "Homebuyers in Raheja Vedanta, Gurgaon, reach settlement with builder, will withdraw court cases". Hindustan Times. Gurgaon. 21 May 2016. Retrieved 10 June 2016.
- ^ Sanjay (20 May 2016). "वेदांता प्रोजेक्ट खरीददारों को राहत". Punjab Kesari. Gurgaon. Retrieved 10 June 2016.
Mr RD 23:05, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Objection to the above Edit Request - The news summary from the article is selective, and deliberately misleading. A perusal of the full article in Hindustan Times shows that only some buyers in project Vedanta have settled, and NONE of those in Atharva have withdrawn cases. Further, only a majority of buyers in Vedaanta have settled, not all as the summary in the "edit request" posits. Also, the article in Punjab Kesri is very clear on it, and does not even mention the Atharva project at all, though both articles are reporting of the same press conference. The relevant lines from the Hindustan Times article are
- Headline - Homebuyers in Raheja Vedanta, Gurgaon, reach settlement with builder, will withdraw court cases (It does not mention Atharva, and none of the buyers from Atharva have settled.)
- Apartment owners of Raheja Vedanta had approached the Delhi High Court (The news report is wrong as the case has not been filed in Delhi High Court, but in Punjab & Haryana High Court.)
- However, on Friday, Joe Saggar and Raj Kumar Khanna, who had filed the petitions on behalf of 130 buyers claimed that they have reached out of court settlement. (For clarity, there are 2 cases filed by buyers of Vedaanta against Raheja Developers - one in Punjab & Haryana High Court by Joe Saggar & Raj Khanna ONLY, and another by 130 buyers which includes Joe & Raj in National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, NCDRC. The case by Joe & Raj has been withdrawn from the P&H High Court, but the case still is continuing at the NCDRC with little over half of the 130 members dropping out with Joe & Raj. It is misleading to imply that all 130 buyers have settled.)
- A majority of the 130 litigants has agreed to the settlement after the builder agreed to their demands, Khanna said. (A MAJORITY of the buyers have settled, not ALL as the Edit Request is stating.)
Mr RD is in possession of the full facts as he is in direct touch with the builder. He has deliberately chosen some sentences, and suppressed others, to give an impression that is at odds with the reality that he is fully aware of.
The actual situation, not for posting on Wikipedia, but to understand the news reporting and Mr RD's misleading Edit Request is as follows.
- Raheja Atharva buyers (numbering 103) have filed a case in Punjab & Haryana High Court, and also a case at the National Consumer Disputes Resolution Commission. Not a single person has withdrawn here.
- Raheja Vedaanta buyers numbering 130 have filed a case in NCDRC, and about 70 of them have withdrawn their case, while the case is continuing on behalf of the others. Raheja Vedaanta buyers Joe Saggar & Raj Khanna had filed a case in P&H High Court which they have withdrawn, but on May 24, 2016 five other buyers from the group of remaining at NCDRC have taken the same complaint of Joe & Raj and after adding more grievances filed a new case at the P&H High Court against Raheja Developers.
Not only is Mr RD's edit misleading about the real situation, it is also misleading summary of the newspapers that it purports to refer. Leoaugust (talk) 04:13, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hm. The request does seem to be a misrepresentation of what the report says, although there are also potential issues on the other "side" of the argument because Leoaugust is providing competing info that may be correct but is unsourced. Fortunately, we know that there is only one decent newspaper in India and it is not the Hindustan Times - basically, we should pretty much discount anything not reported by The Hindu. The pair of you might nonetheless benefit from a read of WP:VNT ... and Mr RD really should consider withdrawing entirely from this article because their paid conflict of interest is now blatantly affecting their efforts here. Leoaugust has claimed not to have a conflict but that, too, is beginning to appear suspect.
Is there not some middle ground here? Could we say something that emphasises some people have settled, for example? - Sitush (talk) 06:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sitush thanks for commenting. Just a couple of procedural notes. Mr RD has every right to post suggestions on Talk and indeed that is what we want paid editors to do. And Leoaugust has declared a COI (see tags at top) and is also welcome to comment here on the talk page. Will look at the request and reply in a moment... Jytdog (talk) 06:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- I am well aware of the procedure but when it descends to this level of misrepresentation it is scary. The only positive is that we have one from each side, fighting each other. - Sitush (talk) 06:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, firstly, I'm not in direct contact with Raheja Developers as said by LeoAugust. I'm hired by a PR agency who work on their behalf. I've disclosed the name of the person who hired me. I am not entirely aware about the the legal proceedings and their numbers like any of you except Leo who happens to know these information. I'm not even sure if they are right or wrong. Therefore, I can not comment on that. As far as my request go, I specifically quoted a group which represented the buyers (By that I mean, Joe Saggar and Raj Kumar Khanna, who had filed the petitions on behalf of 130 buyers as mentioned in the news article). On other issue I also tried to see the govt. website in this matter regarding the number of cases. The website appears to be outdated to me as no recent legal proceedings were recorded in there. To me this issue seems like more of government infrastructure related than the fault of buyer (but again who am I to decide?). Mr RD 19:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- I am still looking at this and the current content in our article about this. pls be patient. Jytdog (talk) 19:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, firstly, I'm not in direct contact with Raheja Developers as said by LeoAugust. I'm hired by a PR agency who work on their behalf. I've disclosed the name of the person who hired me. I am not entirely aware about the the legal proceedings and their numbers like any of you except Leo who happens to know these information. I'm not even sure if they are right or wrong. Therefore, I can not comment on that. As far as my request go, I specifically quoted a group which represented the buyers (By that I mean, Joe Saggar and Raj Kumar Khanna, who had filed the petitions on behalf of 130 buyers as mentioned in the news article). On other issue I also tried to see the govt. website in this matter regarding the number of cases. The website appears to be outdated to me as no recent legal proceedings were recorded in there. To me this issue seems like more of government infrastructure related than the fault of buyer (but again who am I to decide?). Mr RD 19:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- And Mr RD, appreciate your reply. Can you please take this opportunity to check the facts with Raheja Developers? There is no reason why you cannot seek clarification from the PR Agency/ Raheja Developers once this matter has been raised. The aim is to verify the information once an objection has been raised. Thanks. Leoaugust (talk) 07:53, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
- And a couple of articles referenced on the WikiPage of Raheja Developers seem to have been removed from the Forbes website. Seems that the PR Agency is doing its job well :-) The removed articles and the buyer comments can be seen archived at Archive.Org
- Reference 36 - https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://forbesindia.com/blog/business-strategy/its-builders-vs-buyers-in-the-indian-real-estate-industry/
- Reference 28 - https://web.archive.org/web/20151222120037/http://forbesindia.com/article/special/pmo-asks-haryana-to-probe-complaints-against-raheja-developers/39249/1
- Leoaugust (talk) 08:26, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
- Marked this edit as declined due to no consensus being reached. There was extensive discussion this June but no progress has been made since. Altamel (talk) 03:13, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Fully protected edit request on 14 October 2016
 | This edit request to Raheja Production has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A protected redirect, Raheja Production, needs redirect category (rcat) templates added and to be focused to an article section. Please modify it as follows:
- from this:
#REDIRECT [[Raheja Developers]]
{{This is a redirect}}
<!---->
- to this:
#REDIRECT [[Raheja Developers#Raheja Production]]
{{Redirect category shell|
{{R from merge}}
{{R from subtopic}}
{{R to section}}
{{R printworthy}}
}}
<!---->
- WHEN YOU COPY & PASTE, PLEASE LEAVE THE SKIPPED LINE BLANK FOR READABILITY.
The {{Redirect category shell}} template is used to sort redirects into one or more categories. When {{pp-protected}} and/or {{pp-move}} suffice, the Redirect category shell template will detect the protection level(s) and categorize the redirect automatically. (Also, the categories will be automatically removed or changed when and if protection is lifted, raised or lowered.) Thank you in advance! Paine u/c 01:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you, Martin! Paine u/c 13:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Raheja requests support
At WP:OTRS ticket:2017041210013139 a representative of Raheja wrote to Wikimedia New York City with legal and editorial concerns. I referred them to this talk page and to WMF legal. I wanted to make a note here about the communication. I told them that Wikimedia NYC does not have any particular ability to respond to their requests. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:20, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Rahejas have already filed a criminal & a civil case against Wikipedia in India. They seem to have started the page as a marketing page, and have been trying to shut down the page been ever since other volunteers have started editing this page. Right response from NYC, and let the Indian Courts find the way forward. Rahejas are basically forum shopping. Details of Raheja cases can be found on this website http://services.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindia/cases/case_no.php?state=D&state_cd=14&dist_cd=6. For the 1st case click on the given link and Choose Court Complex, then District & Sessions Court Complex, Gurgaon, Case Type as Cs (Civil Suit), Case Number as 1574, and Year as 2016. For the 2nd case against Wikipedia Choose Court Complex, then District & Sessions Court Complex, Gurgaon, Case Type as COMI - COMPLAINT IPC, Case Number as 491, Year as 2015. Leoaugust (talk) 17:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- In fact, there is something else of interest, as in the same court that Rahejas have filed cases against Wikipedia, over 100 buyers of Raheja's homes have filed criminal complaints of cheating and fraud against Raheja Developers. The details can be seen at this link http://services.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindia/cases/ki_petres.php?state=D&state_cd=14&dist_cd=6 Choose Court Complex, then District & Sessions Court Complex, Gurgaon, Petitioner/Respondent as Raheja, and Year as 2017. You can find the list of over 100 complaints against Raheja Developers. Leoaugust (talk) 17:50, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
The 100 complaint which Leoaugust is talking have been filed by few investors who have not paid the basic price of apartment and are not taking possession of apartments just to avoid maintenance charge, apartment payment etc. refer to orders passed by the court: "....monetary disputes between applicant and the respondents/developer, direction under Section 156 (3) Code of Criminal Procedure is wholly unwarranted. Resultantly, prayer stands declined." http://services.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindia/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=/orders/203800001472017_3.pdf&caseno=COMI/147/2017&cCode=3&appFlag= — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmsingh2000 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Doesn't really matter, both of you. We should not be using primary sources such as court documents. - Sitush (talk) 16:43, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Raheja's Clarifications on Allegations with Proofs
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A wall of ramblings and legal threats combined with merit-less accusations of extortion against other Wikipedia editors.
|
|---|
|
This is in regards with our Wikipedia page “ Raheja Developers”; where number of allegations have been put on us which are absolutely baseless and without any merits. I am pained to inform you that since last quite some time this page is being misused by some of the blackmailers and extortionists looking to make illegal money from the organization. Some of these Wikipedia editors are Leo August, Tokyo Girl, Sitush etc. With extreme disappointment ,I would also like to inform you that the company is not given access to edit the page. Every time we or our well wishers whosoever tries to edit it are either blocked or denied access. It is indeed unfortunate that the company cannot post its own clarifications on the subject matter by way of versions, comments, links or documents. Only negative reports are being posted disregarding the good work being done by us. It seems the page is being administered by editors himself who seemed to be hand in gloves with the extortion racketeers in the garb of administrators/editors. The trade mark or logo of the company which is being used on the page is without any permission from the company. Raheja has registered trademark which cannot be used by anyone, or published, transmitted, reproduced without permission of the company. Although the page has been created but the company itself is denied access and instead it is being managed by extortionists against whom FIR and court stay orders are already issued. Hence, it is essential to provide the company either with the password or the edit rights as the page belongs to them. All the efforts by the company in trying to edit it correctly have gone waste and incurred huge losses in its business. In order to prove all the said allegations are without merits and false, below mentioned is company’s version/clarification against each of them point wise. The RED colored statements are what is currently on wikipedia Page of the company. The BLACK colored statements are company’s clarification and the GREEN colored statement is for Wikipedia’s perusal and necessary action. Wikipedia editors, therefore, are requested to remove all the above bogus allegations immediately from the page as such derogatory unwarranted remarks against the company effects its business and well being. It is poisoning, seriously damaging and harming the happy and loyal customer base of Raheja developers. This has caused serious loss of goodwill, money which in no way could be compensated in terms of damages. Once again I would like to reiterate that it is extremely disappointing to know that the company cannot post its own clarifications on the subject matter by way of versions, comments, links or documents. Only negative reports are being posted disregarding the good work being done by us. I humbly request you to do the following: 1. Delete Raheja Developers Page 2. Remove the trademark of the company 3. Clarify the allegations on the company point wise Or deal with contents posted with factually correct information within next 72 hours. FOLLOWING IS THE GOOGLE DRIVE LINK OF ALL THE COPIES ATTACHED AS DOCUMENTARY PROOFS AGAINST EACH ALLEGATION: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B1i3oguoPLmJc2RXeW5QRXp5RFU
The company has received several awards including Euromoney awards, but has been subject to investigations and legal challenges on several occasions. Apart from being awarded best developer in India by Euromoney for the years 2012, 13 and 14 and 2016, the company has received over 100 other prominent national and international awards and is amongst the most awarded developer in the country. OPP (UK) has awarded the company as Best developer worldwide. The list of few of these prestigious awards includes Golden Peacock Award, CNBC Awaaz real estate Awards, Zee Business -RICS real Estate award, Asia Pacific Bloomberg Google awards, Cityscape Real Estate Award, NDTV Profit SAARC for Commercial and Residential Projects, ASSOCHAM and NAREDCO CSR award, top ten builders in India by Construction World Magazine, Asia pacific property award and Vishwakarma CIDC awards. Below are some of the Reference Links stating the same:
1. Copy of various awards and certificates is also attached as a proof to substantiate that the company is receiver of these awards. The allegation on the company of being challenged legally on several occasions is utterly in disregard. Some of the white collared extortionists have been trying their best to blackmail the company for money through online and social media negative campaigning. These charges against the company are manipulated and suitably edited to defame its name publically for personal gains. There have been registered FIRs in police against them where it has been proved categorically that they are demanding around Rs. 40 lacs. There has been a court stay order against them where they are warned not to write anything negative about the company 2. Copy of money demanded by these blackmailers through email is attached 3. Copy of the FIR against them in local police station and 4. Copy of the court stay order against them is attached for your reference with this mail. Wikipedia to incorporate these awards too on the page along with Euromoney. Investigations and legal challenges Tax Affairs Raheja Developers were named in a sting operation relating to corruption by investigative portal Cobrapost.[13][14][15][16] Based on this, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, ordered a probe into Raheja and 34 other developers.[17][18] Citations # 13,14,15,16,17,18 The charges of corruption on sting operation were found to be absolutely baseless. Nowhere in the reference links it mentions company’s name, instead the story talks generally about developers who were part of it. After investigation, the income tax department closed the case and no further action was pursued against the company. This can be verified from income tax department under Government of India. You may verify from here: http://office.incometaxindia.gov.in/administration/Pages/tax-defaulters.aspx (13.a,14.a,15.a,16.a,17.a,18.a) Wikipedia to remove it Raheja Developers Ltd were also target of a tax raid by Indian Income Tax authorities in February 2010; tax evasion amounting to ₹80 crore (US$12 million) was unearthed at that time. The tax case mentioned above is subjudice in Supreme Court and the decision is pending. Till then no one can hold the developer accused of the said charges. Wikipedia to either remove it or edit as per the statement above. Kathputli Colony In 2009 Raheja won a contract from Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to improve the slums at Kathputli Colony in Shadipur, where the company would build 2,800 flats for the poor people of the area and in return receive 10 per cent of the land for commercial use.[20] However the project could not be started due to the refusal of slum-dwellers to move out to allow re-development.[21] This policy failure was acknowledged by the DDA.[21] Citation # 20,21 Most of the slum dwellers of Kathputli Colony have already shifted at the transit camp voluntarily and are happy with their stay. Links of slum dwellers who have comfortable life at transit camp ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umq6U3rqvQE ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4fwGUBpI6k ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1BjdJYr1Dw ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf8N-BAEnIw Facilities at Transit CAMP ➢ http://www.kathputlicolonydda.com/transit-camp.asp links showing Slum Dwellers have moved ➢ http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/Kathputli-Colony-residents-%E2%80%98slum%E2%80%99-it-for-a-better-future/article17009562.ece ➢ paper.livehindustan.com/story.aspx?id=1679727&boxid=119805140&ed_date=2017-01-19&ed_code=1&ed_page=3 ➢ http://epaper.navbharattimes.com/details/27773-54740-1.html ➢ http://epaper.jagran.com/ePaperArticle/19-jan-2017-edition-Delhi-City-page_4-3078-5083-4.html ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_XUY3tIkmw Wikipedia to correct and edit accordingly
Wikipedia to either remove it or edit accordingly. AAP further alleged that the contract was a way to give the company prime real estate at a low cost under the guise of assisting the slum dwellers, who state that they were forcibly evicted from their homes.[24][25][clarification needed] Citation # 22,23,24,25 However, after realizing and understanding the whole concept of slum redevelopment in 2016, the same party (AAP) member Ashish Khetan wrote letter to Mr Venkaiah Naidu, Minister Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation to shift the slum dwellers immediately so that the project is completed on time. Some of the leaders of slum mafia who are running commercial interests/ shops and who have rented out their multiple jhuggis on Governments land and are earning illegally are the ones who are creating false propaganda and instigating others not to shift. If the slum is removed and people get apartments, there income would stop. 22.a, 23.a, 24.a, 25.a Reference Link of AAP writing to Shri Venkaiah Naidu, Minister of Urban Development is reproduced below: 1. http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/Kathputli-Colony-residents-%E2%80%98slum%E2%80%99-it-for-a-better-future/article17009562.ece 2. http://epaper.navbharattimes.com/details/27773-54740-1.html 3. http://epaper.jagran.com/ePaperArticle/19-jan-2017-edition-Delhi-City-page_4-3078-5083-4.html 4. http://epaper.livehindustan.com/story.aspx?id=1679727&boxid=119805140&ed_date=2017-01-19&ed_code=1&ed_page=3 Wikipedia to remove the same and edit accordingly. RAHEJA ATHARVA, GURGAON In 2014, the Prime Minister of India's Office ordered a probe relating to alleged irregularities in a Gurgaon housing project named Raheja Atharva.[26] Raheja Developers were quoted as blaming HUDA for the delay over construction of infrastructure like road connectivity, water and sewerage. Citation #26 However, the said PMO probe was nothing else but forwarding of a letter received like thousand other letters which are addressed to PMO. The complaint under the letter was investigated and closed. Thus; Forbes removed the content and the link from its website. Wikipedia to remove this. On 16 December 2015, on basis of complaint by the Atharva Owners Welfare Association, an inspection was carried out by G. R. Goyat, Chairman of the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee,[27] and Citation #27: The alleged Atharva Owners Welfare Association is an association formed for the welfare of residents of House No 63 Laxmi Vihar Apartment, H-3 Block, Vikas puri, New Delhi-18. The said association is illegal not meant for residents of Raheja Atharva group Housing Colony. On enquiry in the complaint, State Level Expert Appraisal Committee found no merits of any illegal construction at the site and thus dismissed the complaint. While replying on behalf of SEIAA, the Director General, SEIAA stated that the allegations appear to be false media reporting. 27.a Copy of the SEIAA reply clarifying the above is attached for your reference. Wikipedia to clarify or remove it. 0.8 acres of the Atharva project was sealed as it was illegally constructed without any Environmental Clearances.[28] Citation # 28: The said report as stated above by the local newspaper was false as no sealing of 0.8 acres has ever happened under any order of MOEF. There is no issue with environment clearance in Atharva. The reply filed by Environment ministry in high court clearly establishes that there was no violation of any type. The case was subsequently closed/dismissed based on replies of all the departments. 28.a Copy of Environmental Clearances is attached for your reference 28.b Copy of Affadavit of MOEF in High Court is also attached. Wikipedia either clarifies or remove this link. Further, the news report states that instead of 520 apartments for which permission had been obtained, around 700 apartments had been constructed without obtaining the Environmental Clearance. And, instead of the 30 per cent of green space indicated by the approved plan, the builder had left only around 15 per cent.[citation needed] The news on this page that states “CITATION NEEDED” reports that 520 apartments were only approved and that instead 700 were constructed is absolutely baseless. The Environment clearance was for built-up area of 157918.34 sq mtrs in the project. As per government policy of the FAR and Density norms, the building plans were approved by competent authority. Accordingly, as per the approved / sanctioned building plans, the apartments were constructed in the project. After inspections and verification by various government departments, the Director General, Town and Country Planning granted two OC certificates. The company has not exceeded the built up area of 157918.34 sq mtrs. As the built-up area in the project is above 150000 sq. mts., the project falls within the category 8(b) of EIA notification, 2006 which is valid till the completion of project. This was clarified by the Member Secretary, SEIAA, Haryana vide letter dated 14.3.2016. Mr. Alok Verma of the alleged illegal Atharva Owners Welfare Association filed complaint against Member Secretary, SEIAA, Haryana for issuing the clarification. The said complaint was heard by SEIAA members on 01.03.2017, the same was dismissed since no merit was found by SEIAA, Haryana in the 100th Minutes of Meeting in Item no. 28. The same is reproduced for your reference as under: “Complaints against member secretary SEIAA, Haryana for issuing a letter dated 14-03-2016 against the law of Raheja Developers Limited for their project Atharva, sector-109, Gurgaon……………..After perusal of the original file record, comments of Shri S.K.Goyal, Ex- member secretary SEIAA reply filed by M/S Raheja Developers , complaint, authority has come to a conclusion that there is no merit in complaint. The allegation of not having proper green space as per approved plans is incorrect and baseless. The reply filed by Director General, SEIAA in the CWP No. 6419 of 2016 clarified that green area space is as per the Environment Clearance. Apart from this the green area space has to be checked at the time of completion of the project. This calculation is pre-mature and do not form any basis. The builder in his reply has also cleared that the green space is more than 30% in the project. 28.c Copies of both the Occupancy Certificates with tables clearly showing the approved units is attached for your reference 28.d Copy of Clarification regarding Category of Project Raheja Atharva, Sector-109, Gurgoan and revalidating of Environment clearance dated 01.04.2009 is attached 28.e Copy of the builders reply to the High Court is attached 28.f Copy of 100th Minutes of the Meeting is also attached Wikipedia to remove or clarify this. 43 buyers of properties in the Atharva project filed a lawsuit against Raheja Developers with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).[29] Citation # 29 On the basis of replies submitted by various departments contrary to the allegation as alleged in CWP No. 6419 of 2016 filed by Atharva Owners Welfare Association, the alleged Association opted to withdraw the CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO 6419 OF 2016 AND CM NO. 4653 OF 2017 and same was dismissed vide final judgment dated 30.03.2017. 29.a Reference link of the dismissal from High court is mentioned below. https://phhc.gov.in/enq_caseno.php?var1=CM&var2=4653-CWP&var3=2017 Most of the customers of Atharva who had filed cases against the developer before NCDRC, have withdrawn their complaints finding no merit hence its dismissed as withdrawn. Wikipedia to remove or clarify this. Following this filing on 22 July 2014, an additional 24 cases involving over 750 buyers have been filed by home buyers of Raheja Vedanta, Raheja Navodaya, Raheja Atlantis and additional buyers in Raheja Atharva at the NCDRC as of 3 January 2016, with Raheja being the respondent.[30] Citation # 30 Residents of Vedaanta are a happy lot. 30.a Picture of their happy moments is attached for your ready reference. They fell into the trap of social media racket of Wikipedia editors and latter realized that they have fallen into it. Most of them have withdrawn cases and are happily living in the complex. Wikipedia to remove it or clarify. On 7 October 2015 a public notice was issued, and published on 22 October 2015 in the Hindustan Times, regarding complaint of Raheja Vedaanta buyers against Raheja Developers Ltd at the NCDRC. The notice informed all other buyers, who were not yet part of the Vedanta case against Raheja Developers to join the 110 buyers who are part of the 2015 case before NCDRC.[31] Citation # 31 they have withdrawn cases as stated above. In fact they along with their leaders held a press conference to announce that there is nothing wrong in the complex. They are quite satisfied with the amenities and other services provided to them in the complex. 31.a Copy of Links of the press conference held by them is reproduced as under: Reference Link 1. http://www.hindustantimes.com/gurgaon/homebuyers-in-raheja-vedanta-gurgaon-reach-settlement-with-builder-will-withdraw-court-cases/story-7iL5IdJlZvpHWX594xjSUM.html 2. http://www.raheja.com/images/pressCoverage/gurgaon-city-21may16-big1.jpg 3. http://www.raheja.com/images/pressCoverage/dainikbhaskar-21may16-big.jpg 4. http://www.raheja.com/images/pressCoverage/doc199-21may16-big1.jpg FINALLY, THE HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE CASE THROUGH ITS ORDER NUMBER 25357 OF 2016 DATED 8TH DECEMBER, 2016 31.b Copy of the high court case dismissal link is reproduced as under ➢ https://phhc.gov.in/enq_caseno.php?var1=CM&var2=4653-CWP&var3=2017 Wikipedia to remove it. On 15 June 2015 an investigation was ordered into the Raheja residential project called Shilas (the name of some towers in the Raheja Atharva complex) by HUDA, after an inspection revealed that the fire safety systems in the 700-apartment complex were non-functional.[32] Citation # 32 The allegation of non functional fire safety systems in Shilas which is part of Atharva project is again baseless as the developer has a valid Fire NOC from the fire department. The media link claiming the same is false and without any proofs. Since there was no merit found in the case, the same was dismissed and Fire NOC was renewed. 32.a Copy of FIRE NOC is attached for your ready reference. Wikipedia to remove it. An episode of Truth vs Hype by award-winning anchor Sreenivasan Jain broadcast on 13 February 2016 on NDTV described some issues being faced by buyers in Raheja Developer projects.[33] (Video segment at 10:41 minutes into the program.) Buyers in Atharva and Vedaanta pointed out that the projects did not have valid fire safety clearances in the projects. During a recent fire in the Atharva complex, the fire department was not notified, and neither were the fire tenders called, for fear of violations being detected. The buyers also pointed out that there were towers which were built in violation of the fire safety codes, and there was no setback roads around them, and fire tenders could not reach those towers at all. It was also pointed out that though Environment Clearances had lapsed in the projects, the projects had illegally obtained Occupancy Certificates. Citation # 33 Regarding the episode Truth vs Hype, it is clearly visible that the issues pertaining to both these projects Atharva and Vedanta are misrepresentations and are highly unwarranted without any merits and could not be established at all. The status reports of Environment clearance, Fire NOC, OC which was granted by department after receiving the Internal Public Health Services Report from Superintending Engineer, HUDA, Chief Adminstrator and Director General, Town and Country Planning are found to be perfect and legally correct. Regular fire drills are conducted at Atharva/ Shilas and Vedanta keeping in mind the safety of the residents. All the clients and Government agencies are invited to participate every time it is being demonstrated. 33.a The You tube links of the same are as under ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCpTqQb8hoA ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__YssZ6UqUg ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V-KkQPcTPE ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuU9Si7oIw0 ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI52dvl9DlM ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI52dvl9DlM ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvEzpm137tQ Raheja challenges that its fire safety and audit systems are amongst the best in India as on date. It is clearly evident that the above page edits are purely done to malaise the developer’s image publically by white collared extortionist. The High court has already dismissed the case filed by complainants separately in both these projects finding all the allegations baseless without any merit. Wikipedia to clarify or remove this. The buyers in Atharva project further alleged that the builder had showed them large green areas in 2007, and plans to build only 440 apartments, but the builder did not honour that promise. In an area that was designated as a green park, the builder had constructed a series of high rise towers called Shilas, taking the total number of apartments to 700. To meet the statutory requirements of green areas, the builder had overnight covered tennis courts with grass, and had installed plastic grass in other areas. The buyers also alleged demands for exorbitant additional costs: Raheja wanted to charge them Rs 2,4 million more than the agreed Rs 7.2 million price, even though the project was not complete in 2016, five years after its planned delivery date. The buyers also alleged that their "super area"[clarification needed] had increased, collectively for the complex by over 50,000 sq. ft., and the builder was charging them for this without being able to explain the cause of the increase. The clarification on the Green spaces provided and total number of apartments in Atharva has already been replied above. As per the Application form submitted by customers and further in the Agreement to Sell, it was clarified that sale of apartments was on the basis of tentative super area. The actual super area of each apartment would be calculated after completion of construction and at the time of possession of Apartment. The Super Area of project was calculated by independent Auditor Architect committee. The builder has already clarified that the area mentioned are actually correct and there is no merit in the claim. The super area calculation audit certificate signed by independent leading architects of India also certifies that the areas charged to the buyers by developer are correct. 33.b Copy of the Area Audit report is attached for your reference. 33.c Copy of registered declaration deed that corroborates that the areas are correct is also attached. The said association or buyers who have been making these complaints are group of buyers who have formed illegal associations and none of the members actually stay in the complex. The actual association of Atharva is called “Atharva Residents Welfare Association” which is registered with registrar of the societies. Infact, the actual association has no grievances which was formed legally as per apartment ownership act, Haryana. More than 400 customers are living in these complexes and have no complaints with the builder. Following are being attached to substantiate all the above 33.d Copy of Registered Residents Welfare Association 33.e Copy of Cancellation of illegal Residents Welfare association 33.f Copy of Customer Testimonials, amenities and meet Wikipedia to remove or clarify. Navin Raheja appeared on the programme and objected to all of the allegations made by buyers. He claimed that though he had completed the project, the buyers were unwilling to take possession of the apartments as their monthly maintenance charges would start immediately. He also claimed that the buyers had misrepresented the situation about the Environment Clearances, Fire Clearances, Occupation Certificate, and the lack of statutory green areas. Mr. Raheja, CMD, Raheja Developers has time and again proved it to different media agencies that there have been no irregularities in any of these projects. And since the real estate market is in lull, these buyers do not want to pay for their maintenance and other service charges. The current market reports about the above scenario are self explanatory. Mr. Raheja is one of the very few responsible developers who has delivered all his projects due till date. His company has completed over 7200 units and 5500 units are on fast track to completion. He is currently serving as the chairman of advisory council of the National Real Estate Development Council and also the Chairman of the Housing and Development Council of the FICCI before having been chairman of Assocham council. He has chaired several national and international delegations along with the many State ministers and Presidents of the Country in the past. 33.g Link of his participation leading the delegation as chairman of Assocham and Naredco are as under: ➢ http://www.navinraheja.com/photo-gallery.asp ➢ http://www.raheja.com/md-events-dtls.asp?id=97&prYear=2011 ➢ http://www.navinraheja.com/images/pg56-big.jpg. ➢ http://www.raheja.com/md-events-dtls.asp?id=153&prYear=2012&mon=Dec Wikipedia to please add Mr. Raheja’s contributions also to real estate Forbes allegation Forbes India alleged in 2015 that Raheja Developers [34] indulged in strategic lawsuit against public participation to stifle criticism of its business practices.[35] Ciation # 34, 35 Founding the above irrelevant and without any merits, forbes has removed this link and the content from its website. However, it is imperative to state here that Raheja Developers has an effective customer relationship department that looks minutely in every complaint of a customer. The satisfaction index of such clients is extremely bullish and the practices that the builder follows are par excellence. The developer has completed more than 7200 units. 34.a The reference links stating its practices and customer possessions are as under: ➢ http://m.economictimes.com/magazines/transparency-efficiency-to-be-the-turning-points-in-real-estate/articleshow/10285133.cms 35.a Pictures of clients taking possession in a collage Wikipedia to remove or clarify. Raheja Productions Raheja Production is a film production house developed by Raheja; it produces nature documentaries as part of the corporate social responsibility activities of his company.[36][37] Citation # 36,37 World Wildlife Fund on Navin Raheja The world wildlife fund has published a book in appreciation of Mr. Navin Raheja, CMD, Raheja Developers contributions for saving the tiger. 36.a Wildlife Awards Mr Navin M Raheja has got appreciation for his work in wildlife. He has been honored with Ramnath Goenka Award for environment reporting, Green Man Award for “The Rise and Fall of Ustad”, “ Desham Save the Tiger award, Kirloskar Vasundhara International Film Festival award for Rise and Fall of Ustad and Kirloskar Vasundhara International Film Festival award for On losing ground. Link to awards ➢ http://www.ptinews.com/pressrelease/15695_press-subMr--Navin-Raheja--Chairman-Raheja-Developers-Awarded-as-Green-Man ➢ http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/full-list-ramnath-goenka-awards-for-excellence-in-journalism/ Raheja Production is a film production house developed by Raheja. It produces documentaries on wildlife and environment conservation as part of the corporate social responsibility activities of his company. Mr Raheja, the CMD, is involved big time with writing stories on Indian flora and fauna for many magazines and newspapers to educate people. The company has run over more than 120 shows worldwide on different channels like ABP News, National Geography and DD News highlighting various environmental issues. Some of the links of his articles, videos are produced below: 36.b Wildlife Articles ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/tusker-tales-115320?NID=178932 ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/leopards-around-delhi-59938 ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/the-first-encounter-123052?NID=236356 ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/tigers-love-118834 ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/in-the-search-of-man-eating-leopard-of-uttrakhand-110939?NID=164662 ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/why-tigers-become-man-eaters-53401?NID=93775 ➢ http://www.millenniumpost.in/sundaypost/routes/the-tiger-cubs-of-pataur-218277 ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-Feb2017/index.html ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-March2017/index.html ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-Dec2016/index.html ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-July2016/index.html ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-June2016/index.html ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-March2016/index.html ➢ http://www.airports-india.com/emag-Feb2016/index.html 36.c Wildlife Videos ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkly8568r7s ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8LQzGKCkpg ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twhn_92NDLE ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2NRif9i_TU ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twhn_92NDLE ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2CCj_3Bm_U ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUTHHS7SL6E ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq2aCwDP0tY ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyAa5yfHoME ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkly8568r7s&t=319s ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2NRif9i_TU&t=33s ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcvOkKU7xTA ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuDQzgEhldU ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2CCj_3Bm_U ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuDQzgEhldU ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy8tzFWG4kY ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmuc07Oh7oY ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZZTOdi3VCs&t=13s ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNoU3RC0bYM ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNoU3RC0bYM ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIabVsESg94 ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq2aCwDP0tY&t=11s ➢ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFc6cdkOu-Y 36.d PIL in Supreme Court His PIL with title No. 47/1998 in Supreme Court Of India since 1997, has succeeded in delivering several orders that were instrumental in turnaround of tiger conservation mission in India. Please find below the PIL link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/513132/ 37.a CSR and other initiatives Raheja Developers was the first developer to ensure education, welfare and meals of worker/ slum children on sites as well as in Ashram run by him. This is sheer manifestation of, not only his contributions in regards to real estate business arena but also his commitment towards environment and entire society striving and aspiring for better living space, in tandem with diverse flora and fauna. Corporate social responsibility • House of Raheja provide their onsite workforce with all the necessary safety equipment like helmets, safety nets and shoes with resistant soles. • They provide free wholesome meals once in a week to all the workers. • Workers on site are trained to improve their efficiency in order to progress and live a more responsible life. • The company sets up day care centers at every construction site for the children of their Onsite workers to provide them with primary education. • The company provides 3 meals a day, pair of clean clothes and books to read to every child of the workers, a step ahead in the direction of making them a much more responsible citizens of tomorrow. • Raheja's run Gayatri Sansthan an NGO as a social initiative to educate children from unprivileged class of the society. The institute imparts primary education that includes learning of subjects English, Maths, Hindi and computers. They even train children with yoga and yagna thereby adding virtues to their lives. 37.b Environmental Responsibility Under the guidance of Mr. Navin M. Raheja, a keen naturalist and environmentalist, Raheja Developers abides with strict norms and regulations in their working which makes them develop commercial and residential structures that leave least environmental footprints. The ecological mechanism used by Raheja's in construction includes: • Rain Water harvesting and reuse of Sewage water for landscaping • Use of double glazed, thermally insulated and tinted glass for Windows • Use of photo voltaic cells to generate solar energy • Use of non toxic biodegradable materials in construction activity • Use of energy conserving light fittings like CFLs across India. 37.c First Slum Rehabilitation Project in Northern India The first of its kind, Slum Re-development Project at Kathputli Colony is spread over 5.22 acres & is being developed by Delhi Development Authority under PPP model with us. In a move to provide better living condition to the poor, this development will set a benchmark making Delhi a slum free state. The project envisages construction of 2800 EWS units for rehabilitation of squatter families of Kathputli Colony. Wikipedia to add his contribution towards society on this page These are some of the contributions of Raheja developers to society. Instead of only showing negative coverage, the company assumes that these initiatives taken by it should also get highlighted on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zair.nik (talk • contribs) 06:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC) |
Comments
|
|---|
|
Finally Raheja Developer got huge relief from Punjab and Haryana High Court Civil Writ Petition filed by Atharva Owners Weflare Association vs State of Haryana and others has been dismissed.... https://phhc.gov.in/enq_caseno.php?var1=CM&var2=4653-CWP&var3=2017 . The so called Atharva Owners Welfare Association had fear of dismissal of writ petition, they opted to withraw... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmsingh2000 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Improvements to the Raheja Atharva, Gurgaon section
The Raheja Atharva, Gurgaon is a bit of a mess, with outstanding cite requests, confused chronology and some issues tagged as needing clarification. Furthermore, it does not seem to take account of reports such as this, which appear to indicate that at least some measure of settlement has been achieved in the dispute(s). - Sitush (talk) 15:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
And this book might be useful for the Kathputli section. It's usually a good thing to use reliable books rather than news sources, where possible. - Sitush (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- The issue of this link in "Hindustan Times" has been discussed earlier on the talk page, and no consensus was achieved on posting it. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Raheja_Developers&diff=next&oldid=724758602 -Leoaugust (talk) 17:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. So has anything been settled or not? I can't recall the last time you provided anything about Raheja that was not detrimental to the image of the company, and yet the company, despite all the alleged issues, continues to operate. I know the property world is corrupt everywhere and that India is a country particularly susceptible to corruption, and I also know that Indian legal and other dispute resolution processes are long-winded beyond belief ... but nonetheless something doesn't ring true here. - Sitush (talk) 17:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- No updates in the media. All that has been published are Raheja's ads, and sponsored articles in supplements like "HT Estates" & "Times Property." So, it is hard to bring anything on record into Wikipedia. This is a corrupt builder, and not very newsworthy. -Leoaugust (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Ok. It's all very strange. - Sitush (talk) 18:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
by above comment/ discussion it reveals that Leoaugust has conflict of Interest against Raheja Developer this is evident from his statement....This is a corrupt builder, and not very newsworthy.
Finally Raheja Developer got huge relief from Punjab and Haryana High Court Civil Writ Petition filed by Atharva Owners Weflare Association vs State of Haryana and others has been dismissed.... https://phhc.gov.in/enq_caseno.php?var1=CM&var2=4653-CWP&var3=2017 . The so called Atharva Owners Welfare Association had fear of dismissal of writ petition, they opted to withdrawn...
- Like I said to you an hour or so ago, we can't use court documents. Stop it, please. We've got enough crap on this talk page without you adding more to it. If something is not directly related to improving the article and/or cannot in fact be used to improve it, there is no point raising it. - Sitush (talk) 18:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
If it is evident from the clarifications of Raheja contributor that logo has been use without their permission same be deleted. Even if Raheja developers page has been create by same one with motive to defame and cause harm be deleted. The policy of the Wikipedia foundation is to share information. The platform is not for misuse and defame anyone
A balanced version...
I took my time and after evaluating all the sources and WP:WEIGHT(esp. in case of an article where almost all the major contributors have COI one-way or the other), I have heavily edited and trimmed the article. @Sitush and Leoaugust:--Take a look!Winged Blades Godric 03:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- I think it is ok. Thanks for doing that work. Jytdog (talk) 04:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- Brutal trimming, but I concur. -Leoaugust (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- I probably would have retained something about their involvement in the Kathputli affair, which was the only farrago of which I am aware that hit international headlines, but otherwise ok. - Sitush (talk) 08:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- Brutal trimming, but I concur. -Leoaugust (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Sitush, we are not here for personal involvement in the page. By our personal involvement someone else may seek personal benefits. Such things must not be encouraged. we all are just contributing here our thoughts, idea and knowledge. This page seems to be a fight between Leoaugust and other editors with this Raheja Developer, it may be for their mutual gains and growth. My point of view is remove and delete the entire Raheja Developer page.
Apart from this if the contribution is unbiased must be encouraged everyone was new at initial stage. It is all that matters is his contribution — Preceding unsigned comment added by Appmarch (talk • contribs) 09:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
If it is evident from the clarifications of Raheja contributor that logo has been use without their permission same be deleted. Even if Raheja developers page has been create by same one with motive to defame and cause harm be deleted. The policy of the Wikipedia foundation is to share information. The platform is not for misuse and defame anyone
I do not agree with Sitush, violation of any law whether applicable in India or in any other country must not be allowed on Wikipedia platform. Any thing which has been edited or created without approvals must be deleted Rmsingh2000 (talk) 17:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Making a final attempt to contact User:Rmsingh2000; Rmsingh2000‚ your own talkpage is here. Are you not aware of that page? Please go there now and read all the posts urging you to sign your posts on talkpages, and start complying. It's frankly a bit useless to post on talkpages and not sign, because then other people won't know who said what, or even where posts end and begin. It's becoming disruptive. Bishonen | talk 16:55, 25 April 2017 (UTC).
- I agree that the page itself must be deleted, rather than improved. In this age of Trump why even bother thinking through because everything is great, and the sole purpose of everything is just entertainment. There is only a slim chance that someone will provide a countervailing view of to what Raheja's agents will write. Better, shut the page down rather than to allow them unrestricted play. -Leoaugust (talk) 10:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- I take back my "delete" vote, and think the page should be retained even if only in a skeletal form. Raheja Developers and their good/bad deeds will not go away. Updates can be made to the page as further developments take place in the future. -Leoaugust (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I vote for deletion of the Developer page. It is not of an importance few editors may be paid by this Developer may have added some clarifications, this material is nothing by advertisement on Wikipedia portal. This kind of acts must not be permitted on Wikipedia platform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Appmarch (talk • contribs) 19:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- A note that, per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiaccnt1234, Appmarch and Rmsingh2000 are confirmed sockpuppets. Another pair to add to the long list. - Sitush (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Logo
One of the things the alleged Raheja contributors have been raising of late is a desire for us to remove their trademarked logo. Now I know that the image was uploaded by someone who claimed to have permission from the company and whom our SPI determined to be pro-Raheja socks, some at least of whom were being paid, but I'm still a bit wary of their claim regarding permission. In any event, we don't actually need the logo - it is more of a courtesy thing to aid identification. Should we remove it and then request deletion of the file as it complies with WP:NFCC but is not in fact used?
This is nothing to do with the numerous threats and wild accusations that have been made. I am not worried about them but I am genuinely dubious regarding the status of the logo. - Sitush (talk) 13:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Remove and delete:-Per Sitush.Winged Blades Godric 13:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - then again, the entire point of NFCC is that we don't need permission? Or, at least, the WMF is satisfied that it can host images under the NFCC procedures, regardless of whether or not the uploader might have broken a law in India. I hate trying to work out what happens with images - it's all far too confusing for me. - Sitush (talk) 14:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think the logo even qualifies for copyright - see Template:PD-logo. Black Kite (talk) 10:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
The comments of single-purpose and/or newly-registered accounts on this talk page are clearly unlikely to be worth consideration. - Sitush (talk) 09:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
|
|---|
|
If it is evident from the clarifications of Raheja contributor that logo has been use without their permission same be deleted. Even if Raheja developers page has been create by same one with motive to defame and cause harm be deleted. The policy of the Wikipedia foundation is to share information. The platform is not for misuse and defame anyone — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmsingh2000 (talk • contribs) 08:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC) I do not agree with Sitush, violation of any law whether applicable in India or in any other country must not be allowed on Wikipedia platform. Any thing which has been edited or created without approvals must be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmsingh2000 (talk • contribs) 08:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC) It is clear from the entire editings on this page that the page of Raheja Developer has been created just for misguiding public at large. Wikipedia is not for uploading day to day business activities of any organization. From all conversations on this talk page it is proved that logo has been used without permission be removed and deleted. What if the entire page of this Developer is removed. I am of view the entire page be removed this Raheja Developer must be using it for its marketing purposes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Appmarch (talk • contribs) 08:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC) |
Black Kite has a good point. I'm happy to drop this, deferring to those who are more au fait with such things. I did say that image stuff is not my strong suit! - Sitush (talk) 23:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
New References for Environmental Issues
- Could I also suggest a couple of articles regarding National Green Tribunal against Raheja Developers for environmental violations? http://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/regulatory/ngt-notice-to-raheja-centre-state-for-flouting-green-norms/55236841 and http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/ngt-builders-regulations-space-environment/1/802126.html -Leoaugust (talk) 11:59, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- What has this got to do with the paragraph about companies with whom Raheja has worked/partnered? Honestly, Leoaugust, it seems that every post you make here is an attempt to dig up dirt. I know there is a lot of it but we removed a lot a few days ago and now you seem to want to bloat the negativity again. You've acknowledged a conflict of interest, I think, but that is not carte blanche to continue some sort of campaign. - Sitush (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- You are right, as I should have started another section. Due to COI I am not making any changes, but just suggesting them. It is for the other Editors, including you, to take cognizance (or not) of what I write. The context of this is the Environmental violations in the Raheja projects that were mentioned earlier. These are 2 new updates of the same. This was earlier discussed extensively in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LaGZCUP_gw If it still does not merit a mention, so be it. Truth is stranger than fiction - fiction has to make sense and be balanced, truth does not. So, apologies if I am coming on too strong. - Leoaugust (talk) 12:44, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Euromoney
About this
- Awards
From 2011 to 2013 Raheja won the Euromoney real estate polls for "best developer of India".[1]
References
- ^ "DIPP circulates Cabinet note on relaxing FDI in housing sector". The Indian Express. 21 September 2013. Retrieved 2015-02-06.
So i looked at Euromoney, and I didn't find these awards. It is a wierd publication so I might have missed it. but the indian express mention of this is kind of churnalism-y. do we have any other sources for this, closer to Euromoney perhaps? Jytdog (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- There are tons of Indian sources [2] for 2016 with some quoting the earlier years as well (though they could have lifted the 2011 to 2013 years from Wikipedia - the Indian press tends to use this site as a substitute for research). --regentspark (comment) 02:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Yep and that is not what i asked for. Jytdog (talk) 02:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have never found it. I thnink it has been mentioned before - at one point there were a large number of awards listed but they were removed as fake or industry back-slapping etc. - Sitush (talk) 07:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- The results of the "by country" survey 2013 are here (similarly for other years), behind a paywall. I tried signing up for a free trial but unfortunately that does not grant access to the archive. Are you saying that the 2013 "by country" survey shows another winner for India, or does not list India at all? Or just that you couldn't find that page on the Euromoney website? Huon (talk) 07:48, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) My trial has long since ended but I can still see the initial search results. They are definitely listed in the rankings for the 2012 Real Estate Survey (whatever that is?) but without full access I can't recall what significance that may have. - Sitush (talk) 07:50, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I've just removed the mention of the Euromoney thing from the lead. Since Jytdog removed the bit in the body, the bit in the lead is now completely unsourced - WP:LEAD / WP:V. - Sitush (talk) 12:44, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- If we are digging into dead links to see if they are relevant to the Raheja Developers story, can I suggest 2 links. Please also look at the numerous comments at the bottom of the articles (esp 2nd link) to evaluate their relevance. They are https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20151127025440/http://www.forbesindia.com/article/special/pmo-asks-haryana-to-probe-complaints-against-raheja-developers/39249/1 and https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20151119072736/http://forbesindia.com/blog/business-strategy/its-builders-vs-buyers-in-the-indian-real-estate-industry/ -Leoaugust (talk) 08:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- The results of the "by country" survey 2013 are here (similarly for other years), behind a paywall. I tried signing up for a free trial but unfortunately that does not grant access to the archive. Are you saying that the 2013 "by country" survey shows another winner for India, or does not list India at all? Or just that you couldn't find that page on the Euromoney website? Huon (talk) 07:48, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have never found it. I thnink it has been mentioned before - at one point there were a large number of awards listed but they were removed as fake or industry back-slapping etc. - Sitush (talk) 07:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Yep and that is not what i asked for. Jytdog (talk) 02:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Raheja Productions
Since this edit removed the section about Raheja Productions, what is to be done about the redirect from Raheja Productions? I'm not sure why the simple statement was removed - it is not in doubt. - Sitush (talk) 12:48, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- This recent stuff is brilliant. People with little previous involvement with this article sweep in, cut it and bugger off. Nothing more is heard of them when queries are raised. I'm almost tempted to revert the damn lot. - Sitush (talk) 23:55, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- Anyone? - Sitush (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- I found the Raheja productions content to be lame. The article was not notable and the redirect was just do ....something with it. It really has nothing to do with the development company. If we had an article on Navin Raheja it could go there, I suppose, but that redirects here too. Jytdog (talk) 19:55, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- So delete the redirect. I am still unhappy with some of the removals, as per the discussions above. In particular, the removal of the one thing that Raheja were involved with and that actually got international attention. - Sitush (talk) 23:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Quality of references
I'm unhappy with the quality of references in the current revision of the article and will shorten it to get rid of the unreliable and non-independent ones. In particular:
- Bloomberg is a business directory whose editorial oversight is at best dubious. It's also cited for content it doesn't confirm and in part contradicts.
- "Tata Housing to develop 200 lakh sq. ft." has mostly quotes by involved personnel, no coverage of Raneja by The Hindu itself.
- Lessard Design is a broken link that the Wayback Machine cannot recover because the site's robots.txt forbids it; it wouldn't be independent coverage anyway.
- Reference 4 repeatedly timed out on me, and due to the rather unimaginative title of "Times of India Publications" I have no idea what it's supposed to be.
- Reference 5 finally is a source that looks reliable to me and says what it's cited for.
- This is an ad (compare last sentence: "As on date Pictures shown in the ad are artistic impression only."
- References 7-9 look good to me.
- Reference 10 is a government document, a primary source. A secondary source would be needed.
- I have no idea what this is, but it doesn't have so much as a single sentence of human-written content about the company.
I'll stop here with listing the problems in detail. Some serious pruning is in order. Huon (talk) 23:02, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- Don't. You need to be very careful here unless you are familiar with the history. I, too, have had doubts about the article and I've had them for a long time but the convoluted history needs careful consideration, not a quick review. I've no idea if you have access to OTRS but I do know that Radeja associates have been trying every method possible, including that resort, to get their way here. This article has been at ANI, DRN, SPI etc and somewhere along that route will have been looked at by a good few people. It has also been subjected to a massive sock/meat effort. So, yes to a source review but no to a unilateral effort. - Sitush (talk) 23:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well, it seems you did it. I reverted. Look, I know better than most that this article has been skewed and that most of the contributors - usually socks - have been an absolute pain in the arse but that doesn't mean we should strip it back any further than was recently done. It has been under quite a lot of scrutiny from people who most definitely are not acting for Raheja and I am somewhat astonished that so many apparent "faults" have been found. I know for sure that at least one of them was ok, even if it is now unavailable - I checked it myself, ages ago. - Sitush (talk) 23:47, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- You are right about your #6. I am off to bed but happy to see that go if others agree. - Sitush (talk) 23:50, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well, except for the point that L&T (whoever they are) do appear to have been involved in the Aranya project. Perhaps search for better sources before deleting? - Sitush (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have pointed out specific problems with the first few references above. The others were no better but I ran out of patience listing all the flaws. I went through every single one of them and removed what I found to be clearly unreliable or clearly irrelevant, such as multiple articles that did not mention Raheja Developers at all. If you think I went too far, you're welcome to point out which of the references I removed were good, and to re-add the content based on those references. For example, do you consider it appropriate to base content on an ad? If not, why did you re-add the ad reference? Do you consider it appropriate to use references that don't mention the subject? If not, why did you re-add several of those? Do you consider it appropriate to base content on the announcements of company spokespersons? If not, why did you re-add several sources where all the information was directly from such spokespersons? And regarding "perhaps search" - the burden of evidence is on the editor who wants content included. For one issue I actually did look for a better reference and found one, but you apparently prefer not to have it in the article. Huon (talk) 00:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I was uncomfortable at first but i think the additional trim here was an improvement. Jytdog (talk) 01:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- And I still say that given the history of the article Huon came in like a bull in a china shop, rhetoric and all. I promise you, at least one of those removed sources was ok but is now dead. This isn't an attempt to turn the article in Raheja's way - just look a couple of sections above where I said we should reinstate the one event (Patpuli Colony) that has been reported internationally (and which was damaging to the company), yet no-one responded. - Sitush (talk) 07:04, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Sitush (talk) that the Kathputli Colony Slum rehabilitation project is worthy of reference on the Raheja Developers page. A quick Google News Search with the keywords Kathputli Colony, DDA, Raheja, etc will reveal a lot, esp that has happened in the last 3 to 4 months. In fact, a documentary was made on this http://www.twdfilm.com/ - called Tomorrow We Disappear. The basic story is that in the garb of slum rehabilitation the Delhi Development Authority & Raheja Developers conspired to remove the slum dwellers from their homes with promises of apartments in the newly developed project. Only about 500 or so of the 3200 slum dwellers were swayed by these promises. The stand-off continues. Some of the recent articles on this subject are http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/High-drama-at-Kathputli-Colony/article16907977.ece http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/kathputli-colony-puppets-on-a-string-4476288/ http://indianexpress.com/article/delhi/delhi-mcd-polls-swaraj-india-candidate-dilip-bhatt-fight-keeping-homes-intact-4625628/ http://indianexpress.com/article/india/delhi-tempers-flare-as-dda-police-try-to-relocate-kathputli-colony-locals-4436162/ and a quick search will reveal many more. Sitush also dug up references in many books of Kathputli and the ongoing stand-off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leoaugust (talk • contribs) 07:40, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- It would help if I got the name right :( One of the international angles I found was March, Stephanie. "Slum artists refuse to leave as Indian developer attempts to bulldoze homes in New Delhi". ABC News Australia. We do, of course, have Kathputli Colony. - Sitush (talk) 07:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Here it is in Time Magazine http://time.com/12073/india-kathputli-colony-of-street-artists-to-be-demolished/ and here in the Wall Street Journal blog https://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2014/03/06/magicians-slum-wont-disappear/ -Leoaugust (talk) 07:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- The removal was in this edit. The section was a mess but the significance of the involvement cannot really be disputed. - Sitush (talk) 12:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- It would help if I got the name right :( One of the international angles I found was March, Stephanie. "Slum artists refuse to leave as Indian developer attempts to bulldoze homes in New Delhi". ABC News Australia. We do, of course, have Kathputli Colony. - Sitush (talk) 07:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Sitush (talk) that the Kathputli Colony Slum rehabilitation project is worthy of reference on the Raheja Developers page. A quick Google News Search with the keywords Kathputli Colony, DDA, Raheja, etc will reveal a lot, esp that has happened in the last 3 to 4 months. In fact, a documentary was made on this http://www.twdfilm.com/ - called Tomorrow We Disappear. The basic story is that in the garb of slum rehabilitation the Delhi Development Authority & Raheja Developers conspired to remove the slum dwellers from their homes with promises of apartments in the newly developed project. Only about 500 or so of the 3200 slum dwellers were swayed by these promises. The stand-off continues. Some of the recent articles on this subject are http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/High-drama-at-Kathputli-Colony/article16907977.ece http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/kathputli-colony-puppets-on-a-string-4476288/ http://indianexpress.com/article/delhi/delhi-mcd-polls-swaraj-india-candidate-dilip-bhatt-fight-keeping-homes-intact-4625628/ http://indianexpress.com/article/india/delhi-tempers-flare-as-dda-police-try-to-relocate-kathputli-colony-locals-4436162/ and a quick search will reveal many more. Sitush also dug up references in many books of Kathputli and the ongoing stand-off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leoaugust (talk • contribs) 07:40, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have pointed out specific problems with the first few references above. The others were no better but I ran out of patience listing all the flaws. I went through every single one of them and removed what I found to be clearly unreliable or clearly irrelevant, such as multiple articles that did not mention Raheja Developers at all. If you think I went too far, you're welcome to point out which of the references I removed were good, and to re-add the content based on those references. For example, do you consider it appropriate to base content on an ad? If not, why did you re-add the ad reference? Do you consider it appropriate to use references that don't mention the subject? If not, why did you re-add several of those? Do you consider it appropriate to base content on the announcements of company spokespersons? If not, why did you re-add several sources where all the information was directly from such spokespersons? And regarding "perhaps search" - the burden of evidence is on the editor who wants content included. For one issue I actually did look for a better reference and found one, but you apparently prefer not to have it in the article. Huon (talk) 00:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Huon, your #2 rationale - Tata Housing to develop 200 lakh sq. ft." has mostly quotes by involved personnel, no coverage of Raneja by The Hindu itself.
would be relevant if this was a discussion at AfD regarding notability of the company (lack of independent coverage). However, even self-published sources do have a limited application in articles for points of fact. That AEDAS were involved in not in dispute, I think, and The Hindu is arguably the only decent national newspaper left that operating in India, certainly the best. You'll find other coverage about it, such as [3], but more significant is that both Tata and AEDAS themselves acknowledged the connection regarding the Raisina Residency, hence things like this. No-one is damaged by inclusion of the point, nor is it apparently in dispute that AEDAS are a significant architecture firm. The way it stands at present, we're mentioning an outfit for which we do not even have an article but ignoring one for which we do. - Sitush (talk) 08:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Sitush (talk) The reference suggested [4] says "is to be jointly developed by Tata Housing and Mumbai-based Raheja Developers." Notice it says Mumbai-based. This Raheja is not Mumbai based as has been clarified at the top of the WikiPage page as "Not to be confused with Raheja Universal." Further, the story of this project is as follows. Raheja Developers got the licence for this project and called it Raheja Raisina Residency http://www.udayhomz.com/gurgaon/p-raheja-developers-raisina-residency-sector-59-560.php They tried to sell it but failed. In 2008 Tata Housing was planning to start operations with minimal expense. Tata is a trusted brand in India, but they did not have a presence in housing market. So, they took over the project from Raheja and did EVERYTHING in the project. Raheja's name was appended as they had the licence in their name - nothing else was done by Rahejas. You will not find any source that will say that they were really co-developers. In fact, if you visit the Raheja Developers Youtube channel where they give regular construction updates of their other projects - there is not a single video of construction update of Raisina Residency, because they did nothing there. https://www.youtube.com/user/rahejamedia/search?query=tata -Leoaugust (talk) 12:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I'll accept the Mumbai-based bit but the rest sounds like a lot of synthesis to me and I'm still astonished that someone as critical as you had allowed it to stand for so long if it is wrong. The cite I mentioned specifically has a quote from Navin Raheja. - Sitush (talk) 12:32, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Aim was not to deny that the project was Raheja-Tata collaboration. But, just to point out that maybe that Hindu page was not drafted very carefully. It generally happens when the editorial oversight is weak. If it is of value to tell the Raheja story, I will support its inclusion. -Leoaugust (talk) 12:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I'll accept the Mumbai-based bit but the rest sounds like a lot of synthesis to me and I'm still astonished that someone as critical as you had allowed it to stand for so long if it is wrong. The cite I mentioned specifically has a quote from Navin Raheja. - Sitush (talk) 12:32, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Sitush (talk) The reference suggested [4] says "is to be jointly developed by Tata Housing and Mumbai-based Raheja Developers." Notice it says Mumbai-based. This Raheja is not Mumbai based as has been clarified at the top of the WikiPage page as "Not to be confused with Raheja Universal." Further, the story of this project is as follows. Raheja Developers got the licence for this project and called it Raheja Raisina Residency http://www.udayhomz.com/gurgaon/p-raheja-developers-raisina-residency-sector-59-560.php They tried to sell it but failed. In 2008 Tata Housing was planning to start operations with minimal expense. Tata is a trusted brand in India, but they did not have a presence in housing market. So, they took over the project from Raheja and did EVERYTHING in the project. Raheja's name was appended as they had the licence in their name - nothing else was done by Rahejas. You will not find any source that will say that they were really co-developers. In fact, if you visit the Raheja Developers Youtube channel where they give regular construction updates of their other projects - there is not a single video of construction update of Raisina Residency, because they did nothing there. https://www.youtube.com/user/rahejamedia/search?query=tata -Leoaugust (talk) 12:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Comment--I would like to advice everybody(self included!) to follow the banner at the top of the talk--Be bold but not reckless.@Huon:--I woul kindly advice you to do a bit of research on Indian WP:RS.For, somebody claimimg--
due to the rather unimaginative title of "Times of India Publications", I have no idea what it's supposed to be.
a bit of pre-research can come handy.Also, Ref 9 is a gov. source verifying the fact it is used to cite.Winged Blades Godric 14:50, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'm familiar with the ToI; that's not the issue. The issue is finding the specific article. If that source had had more metadata - say, the name of the article, the name of the author and the publication date - there would have been a chance of recovering it when the link is broken. The chances of finding the right source with only a title of "Times of India Publications" are... low. Can you tell what that article was about? Can you find it so we can verify if it indeed supports what it's cited for? On an unrelated note, instead of that government source, I actually supplied a secondary source. You removed it. Why? Huon (talk) 20:01, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Legal issue
Someone wrote into WP:OTRS voicing a legal concern at ticket:2017062710013134. I directed them to contact legal@wikimedia.org. I understand that various people have raised legal concerns in the past. I would advise anyone who receives a legal concern about this organization to direct it to the Wikimedia Foundation legal team. Legal concerns, as always, are beyond the ability of Wikimedia community volunteers to address. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:30, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Recent News Items
There have been some important developments regarding Raheja Developer. Is it appropriate to update the main page to reflect
- Delhi Court Calls For Status Report On FIR Against Raheja Developers As Home Buyers Cry Foul [5]
- And in the same Raheja Revanta project of the builder the Real Estate Regulatory Authority has ordered for a complete refund of the aggreieved buyer - pdf linked here [6]
Leoaugust (talk) 04:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Insolvency Case Update
As per the NCLAT order dated on 23rd September 2019, a stay order has been put by the Appellate body[1]. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal]] is assigned by The Central Government to hear appeals against National Company Law Tribunal which supersedes the previous order. My edit was not based on a personal opinion, but a factual representation of legal proceedings. If the article is not updated accordingly, it needs to be recognized as an article which needs to be updated.
Prof Pandaa (talk) 13:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- We will update, once NCLAT pronounces final verdict. We are not a news feed. Your edit read as if the insolvency case was dismissed altogether, whereas in reality, an interlocutory injunction was passed against the concurrent enforcement proceedings pending final judgement. Nothing remotely extraordinary in the legal circuit. ∯WBGconverse 08:06, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- It took me a while to understand the murky atmosphere in this page due to the amount of paid contributors, and I was updating this article like most articles related to NCLAT. Having understood all of that and your opinion on We are not a news feed I also would like to tell you about the relevance of an NCLAT order in any mention of insolvency.
Furthermore, you need to consider Wikipedia:Collaboration first and creating harmony needs to be a priority, and I hope the "we will update" includes me as well. I agree that the edit needs to take a different form if it suggested dismissal of the insolvency proceedings. Dhonyobaad.Prof Pandaa (talk) 19:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
References
Page for deletion
I have removed a ProD by Vishal210891. The reason given was "As we don’t want Infringement of our rights by being presented by pseudo accounts who do not represent our company or has any relation...This is illegal!". So Vishna wants to prevent content being added by editors who are not associated with the subject. That is not a valid reason to delete an article. Maproom (talk) 08:50, 15 February 2020 (UTC)