Talk:Vir Sanghvi

Wrong age
In the article, the author notes that Vir Sanghvi took editorship of the Bombay magazine when he was 17. He later says that he worked as the editor of Sunday magazine for 12 years. 17+12=29, and not 23 as the author notes. Someone must correct it.

Who is he? Does he really merit Wiki entry?
Not sure about this guy. Looks like an unpaid commercial. Jonathan.
 * No, this is not an unpaid commercial. He is an influential member of the Indian Media, being the editor of the one of the largest circulation papers in India. --Rev.bayes 00:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Before disrespecting the guy, at least do some proper research about him. Vir Sanghvi is probably the most charismatic and influential member of mainstream media in India. His views and beliefs are well respected by all segments and tiers of the Indian society. His place in the columns of wikipedia is fully deserved.Rakunited14 (talk) 18:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

His reputation is mainly created by his own media outlets. In political and journalistic circles, he is infamous as a 'paid news-broker' who hobnobs with the Congress government and gives biased coverage in exchange for monetary and other favours. The Radia tapes controversy merely happens to be the one instance where he got caught. How many more of those Counterpoint articles were bought and paid for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.16.187.194 (talk) 10:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

a columnist or a real sucker
Vir Sanghavi is a superb writer and brilliant journalist. Of course he deserves to be on Wikipedia. In fact it would be interesting to get more facts on the guy who has risen to this level all by himself and is not a conformist. He is actually one of the few journalists who can call a spade a spade, unlike pandering journalists who suck up to celebrities and politicians.

MU

as you can figure out this guy is a butt licker of national congress party. And most of his comments are sarcastic. I wonder if he has anything of his own to say except criticising others idea.
 * I am not going to try and reply to this comment, except perhaps say that you need to go and read the Wikipedia principles, and try to understand how Wikipedia works. It doesn't matter what you or I think. Is there a trustable reference to whatever somebody says?? --Rev.bayes 00:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Guys, He's perhaps the top guy in Indian media; and calling him names is not appropriate. He merits an entry in Wikipedia because of the top positions he has in media. And his business is criticising, as editors are not expected to just give news. Though many of his views are plain diatribe, they are well researched. Regards, Mrinal 125.19.3.2 11:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleting Commentary about Rude food
All the material in the section following Rude food sounded too much like an individual opinion, it was unreferenced, and it didn't have too much of pertinence. --Rev.bayes 00:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Career section cut and copy
This uncited section is troublesme, I found this exact same cut and copy at http://chefstales.com/2010/06/24/vir-sanghvi-visits-the-eo-hotel/ but it appears ours was here first, thoughts.. ? Off2riorob (talk) 19:19, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Balancing viewpoints
I have edited the article a bit to provide balance to the viewpoints.

Specifically, I have removed statements that represent opinions by the sources (opinions are not proof or fact, and therefore unencyclopedic), and provided context to the so called "dictation", by providing actual quotes from the article in question, pointing out why people believe that used Ms.Radia's statements. A careful reading of the entire paragraph shows a different picture (the points were, in fact, the crux of the case), but I have not stated that, since it would be my opinion.

One should remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a public forum or tabloid for opinions. The truth does not matter - only that that can be proven has a place here.

I am sure that my edits will raise the hackles of some editors, but I request tolerance - a rabidly judgmental article is just going to put the reader off. Also let us not forget WP:BLP.

Achitnis (talk) 18:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the whole issue is a partisan storm in a tea cup, imo the content needs trimming back to the bones. Off2riorob (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Vir Sanghvi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101120212618/http://bhadas4media.com/article-comment/7449-2010-11-20-02-28-02.html to http://bhadas4media.com/article-comment/7449-2010-11-20-02-28-02.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:15, 10 January 2016 (UTC)