Talk:ZCBI

Content Dispute
(Copied from User talk:Saurabhmadan, the original editor of the article)


 * ZCBI has partnered the following organisations for providing education and Placements to its students, therefore we will have to mention the name of the companies and their lnks. No you don't. Wikipedia is not here to provide free advertising for your sponsors; nor is it here for what appears to be a non-notable educational establishment in the first place. Removal of templates without addressing the issues they raise is also frowned upon. The article has multiple problems; it has no citations and does not prove notability of the subject in question. I would ask that you address those issues first rather than providing what appears to be advertising for partners. --Blowdart | talk 11:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * OK we have a choice here really. Considering it's a new school with no citations (self citations from the school itself don't count - and I cannot find those scanned newspaper articles on the newspaper sites) it doesn't strike me as notable. The article itself is written like an advert,from the university web site. Take a look at Harvard, or even the University of Essex (one of the partners) and compare them to your v hence my massive pruning. To my mind after the pruning it still fails WP:Note, but at least it's not an advert and does not contain cut and pasted copyright violations ersion. There is no listing of faculty, the education offerings are not full of advertising text and so on. Your previous version just read like an advert or a prospectus; not a suitable tone for an encyclopaedic article. I would ask you again to please look at your edits and consider how much they look like an advertisement. --Blowdart | talk 12:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Sir, its just a full information pass on through your site. No its not in any ways an attempt to advertise but only to give the reaader full information about the subject. As for the references they are actual newspaper cuttings and you can check that with the newspapers themselves. This site has previously also allowed in various cases a few references of newspapers. You are right that its a new institute and its own sites cannot be considered as references but for the time being i request you to please let it be like that and may be within a week i can arrange for some more concrete references. Thanks in advance sir, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabhmadan (talk • contribs) 12:44, 4 June 2008


 * It is not encyclopaedic information and that is my problem. The content is taken from the "university" web site; which is a marketing web site. You fail to mention that intake has only just started; and thus acknowledge that the qualification may not have much standing. A list of faculty is not necessary and your citations cannot be easily backed up; and the cuttings are hosted on the university web site itself; which is not independent. Again I would ask you to look at how other educational establishments are listed, as well as the tone and wording; the article reads like a prospectus. --Blowdart | talk 12:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion
Blowdart is right on this one. The tone of this page is entirely inappropriate, so I'm going to revert back to the last good version. I'm still wavering on whether or not ZCBI is actually notable, and I'm having a really difficult time finding reliable secondary sources. Blowdart, would you want to mark this page for AfD, or do you think there's something worth saving here? &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi sir, please if you could help me edit the article removing the whole chunks in there will create more confusion than actually solving it.
 * Like what is a college if the admission procedure and the placements are not given. Also the faculty information gives an extra idea for the aspirants to choose or not choose the college.

What we can do is that we can cut short the article and just give the gist of everything if you want to. Hoping for a cooperative and positive response —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabhmadan (talk • contribs) 13:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Read WP:ADVERT - this is not the place for any of those materials. Wikipedia is not a place for advertisements; rather, this article should be informative. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Saurabhmadan, care to explain why you reverted the page yet again? &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Also my original edits correct a lot of the "bad" english, your continual reverts do the "university" no favours in that regard. You changed it so the award is only from the Swiss school. The university home page does not say this, it says that is optional. Something cannot be autonomous and yet part of Zensar Technologies.


 * ZCBI draws its synergy from the core strengths of technology leadership in Retail, Investment Banking, Insurance, Core Banking practices, Finance, Information Technology and Business Process Outsourcing. For more information on ZCBI refer the external links to zcbi website. is marketing pure and simple. It is opinion and not suitable.


 * You removed any explanation I added of what a PGP qualification stands for.


 * (And HelloAnnyong thanks for stepping up!)
 * --Blowdart | talk 15:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh, no problem. I'm just wondering where we want to go with this page. I've made several more changes to the page, but I'm still not satisfied with it, nor am I entirely sure if the topic is notable, or if it comes off as too much as an advertisement. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed; that was the object of my culling; to make it less like an advert in the hope that someone might find some claim of notability; or even legitimacy; although I'm not sure what makes a legitimate qualification. The PGP qualification isn't even listed in wikipedia anyway, which makes it all smell for me! --Blowdart | talk 15:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've just removed the previous projects section. The references provided demonstrate this is a new qualification, with the first intake being this year. If this is the case how can there be previous projects? --Blowdart | talk 15:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)