Talk:T. K. Chand

Requested move 6 February 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Number   5  7  22:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

T.K.Chand → Tapan Kumar Chand – Abbreviations should generally not be used for article titles—especially those involving WP:BLP. Tryadon (talk) 05:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Support but create redirects T. K. Chand Tapan Chand T.K. Chand to take over as NALCO Chairman In ictu oculi (talk) 09:39, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose as per commonname as the current title is the one most frequently used in the incline citations. Tiggerjay (talk) 04:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The position that articles shouldn't be titled as initials because of BLP frankly does not make any sense to me. Invocations of BLP for unusual things should endeavor to explain just how something is harmful. As a counterpoint to that, I'd like to point out J. K. Rowling, J. K. Simmons, R. A. Dickey, J. J. Watt... One could go on, but these are not relatively obscure people whose articles are at the "wrong" place because no one's noticed yet. If you want to take the concept of "initials should not be used in article titles" beyond living people, there's H. L. Mencken, J. R. R. Tolkien, E. E. Cummings, A. A. Milne... The relevant policy here is WP:COMMONNAME - is Mr. Chand more commonly referred to as "T.K." or "Tapan"?  The only reference provided in this discussion so far refers to him as "T.K.", as do several of the articles used as sources.  If another name is better for COMMONNAME, a case should be made showing that, but no such case has been made. Egsan Bacon (talk) 18:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The sources suggest "T. K. Chand" is the WP:COMMONNAME. But redirects should exist from the other options.--Cúchullain t/ c 18:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Maintenance tags
The article has two maintenance tags, and. One editor, Editninja16, has made a number of improvements to the article, but I'm not sure whether the tags should be removed yet - there's a relevant discussion at User talk:JamesBWatson. I advised Editninja16 to seek a consensus here but they did not know how to go about that, so I'm starting the discussion myself. Can people please indicate whether or not they think the notability and refimprove tags should be removed or kept? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: Discussion has been archived. Can now be found here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Supporting removal of notability tags. Editninja16 (talk) 05:22, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's unclear how you think an admin can help in this situation, . A discussion has just begun on the matter and you should wait a while for other editors to weigh in. I've posted a neutrally-worded note at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics requesting other editors to chime in. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am sorry for seeking admin help at this stage but the discussions have taken place at many places and I hoped admins could help since their views would weigh better. My apologies and thank you for the help. The discussion seems to have started. Editninja16 (talk) 06:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Chairman/MD of NALCO is obviously notable. I'll go ahead and remove the notability tag. I think refimprove can also be removed, and replaced with the inline citation needed tags if necessary. utcursch &#124; talk 16:22, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for removing the tag :: Editninja16 (talk) 06:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There is clarification needed tag in the Career section. Perform some action and then remove the tags.-- Vin09 &thinsp; (talk)   17:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think inline tags would be helpful. If Clarify tag is added, please also mention what needs to be clarified. --Tito Dutta (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Since it has been marked as clarification needed, should it be simplified or any other action is required? Editninja16 (talk) 06:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If you can provide reference and write it productive work culture, organizational restructuring all these includes in which field, may work I guess.-- Vin09 &thinsp; (talk)   06:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed jargons and added the field which you asked. Removed RefImprove and Clarification Needed Tags. Thank you for the helpEditninja16 (talk) 09:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC)