Talk:B. Jain
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
COI[edit]
This is somewhat notable. I'll do a little cleanup. utcursch | talk 14:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- This article was previously deleted as non-notable. You can read the AFD discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/B._Jain. The AFD was also listed at Wikipedia_talk:Notice_board_for_India-related_topics - editors who contribute to that noticeboard agreed that it was not notable. This incarnation of the article is, as far as I remember, a word-for-word repost of the AFD'ed material. Do I need to refile an AFD? Thanks, Skinwalker 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- I did have a look at the AfD. The article was probably written like and ad with no refs. I've cleaned up the article. B. Jain is quite notable in the homeopathhy circles in India (which has the largest homeopathic infrastructure in the world). The B. Jain books are recommended by several Indian universities for the Bachelor of Homoeopathic Medicine and Surgery course.
- They have several published books, many by notable authors such as Robin Murphy and Harris Coulter:
- The article was obviously written with a conflict of interest, but I've cleaned it up now. utcursch | talk 17:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- The article looks much better, but I'm still concerned that this publishing company does not meet WP:CORP requirements for inclusion. In particular, there is still a lack of reliable sources that demonstrate this company's notability. The books it publishes are not independent of the company, so they do not qualify as reliable sources. Also, wholehealthnow.com probably fails reliable source guidelines, since we have no idea as to its editorial policy - they seem to be a website that sells homeopathic paraphenalia. The references from The Tribune are best, I think. However, they seem to consist primarily of advertisement-like content about upcoming events sponsored by B. Jain. One of them baldly declares that homeopathy will cure AIDS! I realize that my knowledge of Indian media is, well, almost nonexistent, and that homeopathy is viewed more favorably in India than the west. For these reasons I'm not going to advocate for re-deletion just yet, but I'd really like to see a better demonstration of notability. My primary concern is that Wikipedia is being used as a vanity site for marginally notable figures and organizations in homeopathy, and we've seen several AFDs where that has been borne out. Cheers, Skinwalker 21:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, I'll try to find better sources; the Internet is still not very common in India, so it's hard to find online sources. I am not a fan of Homeopathy, and yes, several of books published by these guys might fall in the pseudomedicine category. But, the B. Jain group as a whole is notable enough. In India, homeopathy is still viewed as a scientific medicine system by most of the people, and B. Jain is almost synonymous with homeopathy publications. Their books, BHMS solved papers, journals and magazines are quite popular among Homeopathy practitioners and BHMS students. I'll see if we can some find better sources. Of course, the user who created the article should refrain from editing it. utcursch | talk 06:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strictly speaking, it does qualify for speedy deletion under g4; however, as it's been cleaned up, and sources have been added, I wonder if it's not better to leave as is. The Evil Spartan 17:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, I'll try to find better sources; the Internet is still not very common in India, so it's hard to find online sources. I am not a fan of Homeopathy, and yes, several of books published by these guys might fall in the pseudomedicine category. But, the B. Jain group as a whole is notable enough. In India, homeopathy is still viewed as a scientific medicine system by most of the people, and B. Jain is almost synonymous with homeopathy publications. Their books, BHMS solved papers, journals and magazines are quite popular among Homeopathy practitioners and BHMS students. I'll see if we can some find better sources. Of course, the user who created the article should refrain from editing it. utcursch | talk 06:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- The article looks much better, but I'm still concerned that this publishing company does not meet WP:CORP requirements for inclusion. In particular, there is still a lack of reliable sources that demonstrate this company's notability. The books it publishes are not independent of the company, so they do not qualify as reliable sources. Also, wholehealthnow.com probably fails reliable source guidelines, since we have no idea as to its editorial policy - they seem to be a website that sells homeopathic paraphenalia. The references from The Tribune are best, I think. However, they seem to consist primarily of advertisement-like content about upcoming events sponsored by B. Jain. One of them baldly declares that homeopathy will cure AIDS! I realize that my knowledge of Indian media is, well, almost nonexistent, and that homeopathy is viewed more favorably in India than the west. For these reasons I'm not going to advocate for re-deletion just yet, but I'd really like to see a better demonstration of notability. My primary concern is that Wikipedia is being used as a vanity site for marginally notable figures and organizations in homeopathy, and we've seen several AFDs where that has been borne out. Cheers, Skinwalker 21:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Bjain logo.jpg[edit]
Image:Bjain logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm past deletion consensus was reached in AfD[edit]
I'm unsure of the protocol but a prior consensus to delete was reached in AfD, wasn't it? I would have put a speedy tag up but don't know if that's ok as someone had removed it and put some sources in, but the past AfD decision was delete and by consensus, not unilateral.Merkinsmum 22:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- I held off on speedy tagging it because an editor in good standing rewrote the article. I am still waiting for better sources to be added - it still probably meets speedy deletion guidelines as it stands. Cheers, Skinwalker 23:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)