Talk:Mukesh Ambani

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Iamvpc.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Encyclopadiac''
value of updating net worth on a daily/weekly basis ==

From the history, I gather that this article is being edited heavily to update net worth from Forbes on a daily/weekly. I believe this does not bring much encyclopediac value. I am looking for suggestions around this. -- DaxServer (talk) 10:17, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Pinging recently involved editors: @LohShiSan2004 @Badassboy 63637 -- DaxServer (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Not how I would choose to spend my time, but cannot see any policy-based objection, as long as editors are NOT adding {{increase}} or {{decrease}}. Edwardx (talk) 14:28, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Note: there's a larger active discussion here that would impact all articles using this parameter. Regardless, I concur that the {{increase}}/{{decrease}} is silly without a fixed period.Kuru (talk) 14:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to the discussion. -- DaxServer (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2021

Mukesh Ambani is the 10th richest person in the world as of 22nd July 2021 45.64.224.125 (talk) 10:26, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:46, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Spelling mistake on the second line

There is a spelling mistake in this article in the second line. "According to Forbes, he is the richest person in Asia with a net worth of US$102.1 billion[5] and the 10h richest person in the world, as of 14th October 2021." Instead of "10h", it should be "10th". Somlok2002 (talk) 22:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Done - thanks. Kuru (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Akash Ambani is now Chairman of Reliance Jio

Akash Ambani has been announced as the next chairman of Reliance Jio, and as such deserves a Wiki page of his own. https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/mukesh-ambani-resigns-as-director-of-reliance-jio-akash-ambani-named-chairman-11656412702503.html

Xooxwiki (talk) 12:38, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Still getting coverage because of Reliance and his own father. Try finding significant coverage that is rid of coverage about his father or Reliance. 122.170.159.6 (talk) 13:27, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I see that Pharaoh of the Wizards has restored the article but Akash Ambani still fails WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME. Reliance JIO is not in Fortune 500 companies that's why there is no need to automatically certify Akash as notable. Srijanx22 (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

The subject passes WP:GNG now.There is a lot coverage about him after he became chairman of JIO India's largest telecom company. Please take to WP:AFD if you wish.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:52, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Subject does not meet WP:GNG and "chairman of JIO India's largest telecom company" is not the criteria listed at WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME. Srijanx22 (talk) 13:22, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 

Please take to WP:AFD if you wish. There is lot of coverage to meet WP:GNG ,after he became the "chairman of JIO India's largest telecom company"Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Just slightly re-writing your already replied message only for having the WP:LASTWORD is disruptive. How come you don't know that? The article is on AfD now, and I hope you won't disrupt the AfD the way you have disrupted this conversation. Srijanx22 (talk) 03:44, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Responding to this message here, I would like to know where there was consensus to create the article in the first place? Per WP:STATUSQUO, the delete/redirect should be implemented after "no consensus" result. >>> Extorc.talk 04:51, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

• @Pharaoh of the Wizards: "no consensus" is not same as "keep". It means that there was no consensus on AfD to merge/keep/delete/redirect the article but it doesn't mean that a consensus cannot be established outside AfD. If you are not going to WP:COMMUNICATE then you should at least stop WP:GAMING the system. Your first step is to provide sources that are "rid of coverage about his father" as highlighted above and describe how this Akash Ambani passes WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME. Srijanx22 (talk) 14:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

My apologies for delayed response this page is not on my watchlist .The Afd ended as "no consensus" hence removed the redirect did leave a message to the user I reverted here and in article talk page. But will not revert you after again you made it a redirect.I leave it there for now will not editing this page for now. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:45, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

I will. If you think the AfD outcome was wrong, show up at DRV and make your case, rather than try and implement change against a non-consensus. Jclemens (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jclemens: You can make your case at DRV and support "Keep" there, but since it was a "no consensus" then we need to follow WP:STATUSQUO because this article was created in middle of the discussion. Show where we have consensus for creating this article in the first place? >>> Extorc.talk 16:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Only if an article title is create protected is a consensus needed to start a new article. That wasn't the case here. Jclemens (talk) 16:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

You are misrepresenting WP:NOCON as "keep". Here is the timeline:-

1) This discussion started on 28 June, to ask if an article can be created.

2) Another editor rejected such chances on 29 June.

3) On 3 July the article was created.

4) On 13 July another editor objected to the creation.

5) On 17 July same editor restored the redirect, got reverted, then the above discussion happened again, and no rebuttal against redirect was provided.

6) AFD started on 19 July and ended as "no consensus" on 8 August, which means that AFD did not help to decide the fate of the article.

Now we are back to the same point to restore the WP:STATUSQUO which is "redirect" for last 4 years. The stub you are restoring was created without consensus and in the middle of the ongoing discussion.

Again, can you show where we have consensus for creating this article in the first place? You know WP:STONEWALLING over false basis is not enough. >>> Extorc.talk 18:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

DRV closed as "endorsed" for "no consensus" than overturning to keep. This would mean that we can still restore the statusquo. But before doing that, I would analyze the sources that were used on AFD to support keeping the article.

This source is just like this one. Same wording, same photos, appears to have been created with same PR kit which they were provided with. Now these several sources[1][2][3] published during 28-30 June are re-write of each other and they even use same headings (personal life, education, etc.). AfD also provided almost irrelevant sources like this which also prove no notability. It makes no sense in saying that there was a quality in any of the sources. They are churnalistic and promotional.

If anyone wants to restore the article, they should provide atlist three quality WP:RS which are not churnalistic. CharlesWain (talk) 15:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Promotional Editing

Do NOT change the lead to a more promotional tone without discussion here.

A user attempted to make the tone of the lead more positive; the user has now been discovered as a promotional editor and banned permanently.

I've re-added the lede. DenverCoder9 (talk) 02:32, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

That is not strictly true.

You have reverted the lead to a version you created on 17:34, 29 May 2023. Out of the seven edits that you used to create that version, only one had an edit summary (notability). Your version was reverted by Maduant on 31 May 2023. The reversion of the text you added to the lead had an edit summary: WP:UNDUE WP:BLPBALANCE.^[4] The restoration of the text you deleted from the lead had an edit summary: Undid revision 1157594043 by DenverCoder19 (talk) needs better explanation than that.^[5] But you are correct in saying that Maduant has been blocked for undisclosed paid editing.

I do not see how Maduant being blocked justifies your version.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

I have restored the word "businessman" and the sentence about Time magazine that DenverCoder9 deleted on 29 May 2023. The sentence about Time Magazine was added by User:Neotaruntius on 19 May.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

That's true, not all were from Maduant. Many were, but not all, like the Time Magazine sentence.

Being listed as "100 most influential" in Time Magazine is clearly an accolade. It certainly isn't notable in the lede. DenverCoder19 (talk) 16:57, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Alma Mater

Why isn't Stanford listed as his alma mater in the summary on the right side of the page. He did not complete his graduate degree but there are many examples of undergrad and graduate school dropouts having their uncompleted degrees listed (i.e. Bill Gates Harvard undergrad and John F. Fitzgerald Harvard Medical School). LexiconLuminary (talk) 14:13, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2024

Mukesh Ambani is worth currently 120.8 Billion dollars. Thekingogog (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --AntiDionysius (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Ommprakashsahu 2409:4062:2E9A:DBAC:0:0:290A:E11 (talk) 15:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)