Talk:NSEL case

Seasoned editors please guide how to improve the page Nimrodindia (talk) 17:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

No one interested in Editing this page?? Nimrodindia (talk) 03:28, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

This page is a mess. Someone please rewrite this to reflect an encyclopedic article instead of a running commentary. 122.166.156.246 (talk) 15:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Vandals please keep away as the changes will be immediately reverted back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimrodindia (talk • contribs) 08:43, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Rampant vandalizing by NSEL -FTIl guys. please stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urshah (talk • contribs) 11:49, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Editors please keep page neutrality on mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathmar (talk • contribs) 07:36, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Deathmar stop being a vandal. The content is built over 2 years not to be redirected to a 3 line page. Urshah (talk) 13:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

What is the purpose of a new page just to discuss something that happened to the company? Why can't it be a subhead on the original page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathmar (talk • contribs) 13:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

NSEL as an exchange is defunct and the scam page is important now. Don't bring your hidden agenda Urshah (talk) 05:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

NSEL page talks about the same. Merging the two would make sense. Agree with Urshah that it needs to be populated further Johnsonwatts (talk) 05:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Check my latest edits. The article is heavily biased and needs clean-up. Refer WP:Vandalism and WP:POV Adamtheroux (talk) 06:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Made a few more edits. Most of the citations are outdated and the case has moved to an entirely different direction. Biased viewpoints are supported by scans on scribd which are not worthy of citations. The page still needs a lot of edits to neutralize the tone as per Wikipedia guidelines. Adamtheroux (talk) 07:08, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

A few of scam masterminds agents are active on this page. Forcibly tried to redierct the scam page to NSEL (national Spot exchange ltd) page which is wrong as the exchange is non operational and it is scam that is being dealt with. Indianmatador (talk) 03:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Few imposters are trying to leverage NSEL scam to their advantage. Please refer WP:NPOV WP:MERGE WP:UNDUE to understand the page must be aligned as is National Spot Exchange Deathmar (talk) 13:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

The exchange is dead, the scam is alive. Hope people get this straight dope. Indianmatador (talk) 14:59, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

The article lacks balance and seems non-neutral. If you go into the details of the case, there's enough evidence that there cannot be one established viewpoint. Hence to blame any individual/ entity / organisation seems far fetched and possibly against WP: Vandalism For ex: there has been fresh evidence found that suggests black money being pumped in by NSEL brokers (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/stocks/news/nsel-scam-suspicion-mounts-on-brokers-routing-black-money/articleshow/51764899.cms) but that is nowhere been mentioned. This needs effective clean up and updating. Neutral viewpoints welcome. Johnsonwatts (talk) 05:35, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge with NSELJohnsonwatts (talk) 05:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

This article cannot be merged with NSEL as the exchange has gone belly up and the scam case lingers on. It's very clear Johnsonwatts is working for scamsters. Indianmatador (talk) 11:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

There is a section on NSEL brokers, any news on brokers must be put there rather than vandalizing the page 08:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indianmatador (talk • contribs)

Edits of 18 April 2016 clearly prove Jignesh Shah's men are vandalizing this page. Neutrality warning to be removed unless there is a discussion here. Indianmatador (talk) 17:20, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

This is a talk page Indianmatador, stop accusing editors and indulge in healthy discussions. The bias in this article is clear, instead of supporting the clean-up, you're interfering in the process. Request you to contribute towards Wikipedia neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathmar (talk • contribs) 05:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I second Deathmar. There are a few biased statements which are supported through self-published sources or news from 2-3 years ago. This article needs clean-up and probably deserves expert attention. Jennirich (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

All these editors Deathmar and Jennirich were just born to vandalize this page. (perhaps one person with multiple IDs) Clear Bias and hidden agenda of protecting scammers. Nimrodindia (talk) 14:56, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Those who have not contributed at all in building this page have hidden agenda and keep reverting the page to suit their needs Urshah (talk) 03:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Nimrodindia and Urshah : All the edits have been made under Wikipedia guidelines and in fact you've been trying to revert the page back to its biased form. If you keep doing that, the page will be deleted under WP:POV — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamtheroux (talk • contribs) 05:21, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Fake IDs trying to put the page into conflict. Kindly refrain. Jennirich (talk) 05:42, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

People like Jennirich Adamtheroux Deathmar (all same person) with agenda have been unleashed on this page. Obviously trying to save the scammers. CMshah (talk) 05:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Jennirich was born only a day back solely to vandalize this page. I've built it over last 2 years Nimrodindia (talk) 05:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Whoever feels the edits are unjust, please cite your reasons here on the talk page and don't indulge in conflict war. It will only result in the page being flagged. Nimrodindia, Urshah, CMshah and Indianmatador — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennirich (talk • contribs) 06:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Copied material

Just ran a copyvio check and found some noticeable material that is copied word-for-word from other sources. The link should give a good breakdown of the identified material. Anyone wishing to cleanup this article can add this to the bucketlist. Jolly Ω Janner 08:09, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Trying to clean up word-for-word copies. Nimrodindia (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 20 April 2016

For admin information:

This page needs the following edits:

• It needs the tag that self-published sources have been used as citations (Scanned documents on Scribd)
• The tonality of the page is disputed -- For example under one paragraph it is written that Jignesh Shah was the 'mastermind' of the scam, whereas there is not proof of that and going through the sources I've discovered that he was bailed on the basis of lack of proof.
• Again under the subhead -- Jignesh Shah's Arrest/ Involvement in the scam -- the tonality is debatable and the subhead should simply be -- Allegations on Jignesh Shah --
• Went through the links about PwC report on this issue and its content and intent have been rendered questionable and I think this should be included in the text.
• All these points are backed by citations and are factual. Yet, other admins have been deliberately trying to hide this fact and therefore I think they are personally targeting Jignesh Shah for some reason, even though his involvement in the case was never proven.
• Other editors are spreading propaganda through this page and targeting individuals using biased tone and aggressive disruptive editing which is basically against the Wikipedia policy.
• This is a neutral platform that deserves unbiased information and request all admins to help in the clean-up of this page. Adamtheroux (talk) 08:11, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Deathmar (talk) 06:31, 20 April 2016 (UTC)