Talk:Indian Institutes of Management/Archives/2012

too superlative/self-glorious
Some of the words here are too superlative and unnecesarily glorify the iims... Need lotsa editing. doles 15:59, 2005 August 16 (UTC) IIM Lucknow

Agreed, this article reads more like a university prospectus or advertisement than a wiki. It violates the most principle rule of wikipedia: Unbiased facts only!!! I recommend a revamp as a user said. 182.178.12.86 (talk) 20:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits on IIMK
I recently rolled back multiple edits that clearly glorified the IIM K section and in once case even attempted to delete information in IIM B section. These edits were contributed by anon users. This is a request to those anon users to please review Wikipedia policy on edits and also sign their names on their edits.

Please see Policy_trifecta

doles 15:42, 2005 September 1 (UTC)


 * Today, there were more funny edits from someone who apparently loves IIMK too much at the expense of any love for other institutes. :-) doles 16:29, 2005 September 6 (UTC)

Who decides who the "elite" are?
India's elite institutes : IIMs ,IITs, AIIMS ... ok... NITs? ISI? who decides? why put it up in the first place.. --Keynes.john.maynard 20:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The case for a new IIM in Pune needs to be pushed faster
 The proposal for a new IIM in Mumbai or Pune has been gaining demand for a long time. Ideally the emerging commercial capital of Asia namely Mumbai needs an IIM in the city for obvious reasons. But the non avilability of sufficent real estate in Mumbai due to the densely populated chacaracter of the city, has made people to think that establishing an IIM in Pune makes more sense as it is the educational capital of Western India, and also a hub of several highly ranked educational institutions and research institutions. The proposal to establish an IIM in Maharastra in Pune needs to pushed faster and requiste steps taken to establish an IIM in Pune needs to be pushed to its logical and fruitful conclusion. 

IIM Delhi
Can someone also add about IIM delhi? -- seXie (t0lk) 19:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This article is about Indian Institute of Management, not Indian Institute of Metals. If you were looking for the IIT, that article is located at IIT Delhi. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 19:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Management of Poverty or Poverty of Management?
This Indian Institutes are Management of Poverty or Poverty of Management? vkvora 07:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Revamping the article
I am considering redesigning the entire article, specially in line with the article on IITs, since both give overview of institutions established with similar basic objective. LeaveSleaves (talk) 06:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Course Fee
I think it is good if we also add a paragraph on present course fee for various IIM's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.241.123.2 (talk) 06:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Controversial claims about reserved category students
There are claims that students getting admitted in reserved category scrape through and get placements only because of reservation policy of PSUs. This is a total misrepresentation. IF there are any studies which proved this, then please provide citations. Otherwise this material will be removed or rewritten. Shekure (talk) 12:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Repetitive terms; peacockery and stuff...
Hi there. I suggest that instead of mentioning even a line about the individual institutions, we simply provide a link to the main article of the individual institutions. This will help avoid repetitive information, peacock stuff being loaded, self promotional statements purely based on primary sources etc. Therefore, this article will simply have a lede with a summary paragraph about what was the philosophy behind IIMs being set up; and then links to all other individual institutions and nothing else. This way, we wouldn't have to keep checking for uncited claims that are being repeated across articles. If no one has issues, I shall go ahead and do this in a day or two.   Wifione    .......  Leave a message  06:07, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't necessarily agree. I think that since we are only talking about a rather small group of institutes, no harm is done by a few well sourced lines about the institute's establishment, size and specific features. This is how it's done (not necessarily very well) in Indian Institutes of Technology and IIIT. I agree the current state is overdoing it. I also agree that if IIMs were to become 30 institutes like National Institutes of Technology it might be a bit too much. What the article may need is a summary table like Indian Institutes of Technology and National Institutes of Technology have. --Muhandes (talk) 12:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Good analysis. Accepted.  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  02:28, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I created a summary table. The sections should now be trimmed to one or two sentences each. --Muhandes (talk) 09:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I started working on trimming, I hope you have time to continue it, cause right now I don't. --Muhandes (talk) 15:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I shall. But later after I get through the admin work. Thanks.  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  08:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 13:16, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Correction needed
Correction needed: The article talks about the contract for the Computer Based Test being handed to Prometric, which is then identified as the company that conducts the GMAT. That is false. Neither Prometric nor its parent company Education Testing Services (ETS) conduct the GMAT. The GMAT is conducted by the Graduate Management Aptitude Council (GMAC), a non-profit grouping of institutions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.202.254 (talk) 04:47, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I removed that claim. --Muhandes (talk) 08:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Eigth IIM
I think we can discuss the eighth IIM issue here. According all verifiable sources, IIM Ranchi is the eighth IIM but there are certain wikipedia users who keep on changing the edits to imply that IIM Rohtak is the eighth IIM. Please show a verifiable source, not your own deductive prowess, which says that IIM Rohtak is the eighth IIM.Wikyreaper (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2011 (UTC)wikyreaper


 * The links given in the article show that the date of inauguration of IIM Rohtak is June 30, 2010; and that of IIM Ranchi is July 6, 2010. Thus, IIM Ranchi seems to have been inaugurated and started operations a week after IIM Rohtak. Ergo, IIM Rohtak should be the 8th IIM (after C, A, B, L, K, I and S) and IIM Ranchi the 9th. Is there anything wrong in this? Aurorion (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Well the wikipedia guidelines say that " The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true". I think there are plenty of respectable news outlet which have called IIM Ranchi the eighth IIM but I have not found any mention of IIM Rohtak being the eight IIM. The inauguration date criteria seems to be the original research part, which may be true or may be false, but is not the point of contention here.Wikyreaper (talk) 06:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)wikyreaper


 * I don't agree this is original research. The dates are well documented and sorting by date of inauguration seems like the right sorting criterion. We sort by various criteria decided upon by consensus all the time, and that is never considered OR. To avoid confusion I made two changes. First, rather than saying simply "the eighth IIM", which may be seen as contradictory to sources, I said "the eighth IIM to be inaugurated", which is not, since the sources do not reveal their sorting criteria. Second, I added a footnote clarifying the issue. Feel free to improve or delete both if you think they are inappropriate. --Muhandes (talk) 06:57, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The inauguration date is verifiable and is supported by multiple sources. You are right that there are credible sources which vaguely refer to IIM Ranchi as the 8th IIM, but there are similar, equally credible sources for IIM Rohtak too (Example). Both IIM Rohtak and IIM Ranchi claim on their respective websites (Rohtak and Ranchi) that each of them is the eighth IIM. I think under such circumstances, we should go by the only objective measure we have to determine the order: the inauguration/establishment dates of each institute, which are not disputed. And by this, IIM Rohtak comes before Ranchi. Aurorion (talk) 07:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I am going to add that other sources say Rothak is eighth to the note as well. I repeat that I believe that in any case sorting criteria are an editorial decision and not a matter of research. --Muhandes (talk) 07:02, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * This clarification you added looks good to me. Aurorion (talk) 07:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Academics & Admissions
I had earlier deleted the Academics section because it was too brief with very little information. I also felt that because IIMs are primarily educational institutes, a brief info of the major courses offered should be in the lead. (The lead was also very brief earlier.) I have now re-created the Academics section, mainly with copy-pasted content from the pages of the individual institutes. The aim is to have a proper section with consolidated info about the academic programmes offered by all the IIMs. I also expanded the information in the Admissions section. Request help from other editors in improving these sections and the page as a whole. Thanks. Aurorion (talk) 19:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Make sure you read this guideline for copy pasting within Wikipedia. Copying within Wikipedia-- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 12:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Anbu - thanks, didn't know about this. Will make sure to follow this. - Aurorion (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)