Talk:Indian Institute of Planning and Management/Archive 6

message: Removing "world's top 15 business schools" as it is uncited. No source given that ranks all the participating schools as among the top 15. Replacing it with "several foreign business schools". Editing without clearing it on the talk page because it is uncited. For all other 'disputed' issues, I'll wait for a discussion before the edit.
Ponytailsnipper 06:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing uncited info from GOP section 

message: I have submitted this article for Arbitration, as I do not see how we can proceed. Konrad's attempts to work this out have resulted in major improvments, but we are moving back wards again.--Iipmstudent9 07:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, I'm game for arbitration. I believe now we have a VERY solid article, with a concentrated "controversy" section. Wiki arbitration is totally acceptable to me, and I'm ready. I guess we need parties from all views! Deepakshenoy 07:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Arbitration? Extreme step I think. Never really solves anything. But you must have your reasons I guess. Hate it when a Wiki becomes a battleground. Faylicity 10:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Actually, before that - what are your objections to the current content, IIPMStudent9? Deepakshenoy 11:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitration 

message: From the IIPM Libraries page, it appears that the libraries have over 10,000 titles. Where did the figure 25,000 come from? Is this referred anywhere? If there's no other reference, let's edit it to 10,000. Deepakshenoy 08:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Valid point Deepak. If there is no source for the 25000 number, I suggest an edit to 10,000 Faylicity 10:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Number of titles have been edited to 10,000 based on the valid points raised in addition to the fact that no source/reference had been provided to confirm the 25,000 figure. Bloggerbrigade 18:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  25,000 books? 

message: So, the controversy section is essentially a selection of all the critical remarks on IIPM over the past three months. That is a fair statement, yes? --Iipmstudent9 06:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's the section relating to the recently brought up issue, by certain print publications, that questions the truth in IIPM advertisements. It indicates that the claims IIPM makes on its print advertisements are allegedly untrue. The magazines that have unearthed information which has been provided, with additional links to relevant sources. Please note: these allegations CAN be refuted, by verifiable sources if such sources exist. Deepakshenoy 06:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  So what exactly is an encyclopaedia entry on an institution doing with alleged claims that some elements in advertsing may be untrue? Especially with over 30% of article space being devoted to it, and a link from the intro para, which characterizes it as a 'major contrvoersrsy'(there needs to be some justification for it being called a 'major' controversy)?--Iipmstudent9 06:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Many editors have felt it's important enough, and this has been mentioned here in the talk page. IIPM claims are UNTRUE, according to the magazines, and there are facts that point to them, mentioned and illustrated. Encyclopaedias must contain information and links that are pertinent enough for readers to know. According to me, the controversy section needs to stay, until IIPM addresses the points mentioned. The fact that it takes 30% of the article space is simply because there aren't enough points added to potential other sections - see the IIM article, you can add sections for each of the IIPM branches, and put some details about them. Deepakshenoy 07:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section 

message: A couple of points about the box -
1. M.K.Chaudhuri is mentioned as the Director in the intro, and as President in the box. Please decide on one and make it universal.
2. Schools over the world list only the number of permanent faculty members as their faculty strength. So let's reduce it from 500 to 250. 
OK?   Ponytailsnipper 02:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Have waited three days for a response to this proposed edit. No opposition. so making it. Ponytailsnipper 16:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the box 

message: These lines - "Planman serves FORTUNE 500 clients and India's largest corporations with its HR, Marketing and Strategy Consulting practices. IIPM faculty and students are also involved in the Great Indian Dream Foundation, a charitable organisation run by the institute which works towards creating education and removing poverty and unemployment." do not belong in the faculty section, or indeed in the IIPM article. They are giving information about Planman and GIDF. i think we should delete them. Ponytailsnipper 03:01, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there is no real relevance, earlier that used to be in a "sister concern" section, which was removed. Maybe we should have a separate section called "Faculty operations" or something. Deepakshenoy 07:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Have waited three days for a response to this proposed edit. No opposition. so making it. Ponytailsnipper 16:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faculty section 

message: "Infrastructure including classrooms, teaching aids, libraries, electronic libraries, IT equipment like Wi-fi and laptops, and leisure equipment like gymnasiums and swimming pools measure up to world class standards." This is a clear cut subjective opinion. What is the basis of it? Are there any globally defined and accepted benchmarks for infrastructure? I believe we should keep this article factual, and mention the infrastructure available, and add subjective opinions about it. Ponytailsnipper 03:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I Agree. Let's change it to something like "Infrastructure includes classrooms, teaching aids, libraries, electronic libraries, IT equipment like Wi-fi and laptops, and leisure equipment like gymnasiums and swimming pools (in the Delhi campus only). IIPM considers that it's infrastructure measures up to world class standards." I think we should also include infrastructure in EVERY single IIPM unit - like Delhi: Has swimming pool, auditorium, gym. Bangalore: Two/three storey building located in <place>. And perhaps a common section that mentions classrooms etc. I don't even think the branch libraries are big, but again, no original research. Deepakshenoy 07:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Have waited three days for a response to this proposed edit. No opposition. so making it. Ponytailsnipper 16:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infrastructure 

message: On CNBC's Uncovered, IIPM issued a statement saying they don't need an AICTE approval because they teach 'planning and entrepreneurship" which are non-technical and non-professional courses.
Sure enough, IIPM's own website mentiones "Post graduate programme in Planning and Entrepreneurship (leading to the award of the MBA degree from IMI)" - http://www.iipm.edu/academics-curriculum.html
Intro para of this wiki said "management and entrepreneurship". The management part is uncited. Am replacing it with "planning and entrepreneurship" as the IIPM website itself states.  Ponytailsnipper 18:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Management, but Planning