Jump to content

Talk:1999 Delhi hit-and-run case

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

POV concerns

[edit]

Removed PR related nonsense on another Sanjeev nanda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.71.129 (talk) 03:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Potential sources

[edit]

References

  1. ^ Witness' testimony turned BMW case
  2. ^ "Sanjeev Nanda's friend acquitted". The Hindu. Chennai, India. 2008-09-03.
  3. ^ Nanda gets 5 yrs jail, to appeal in HC
  4. ^ "BMW case: Sanjeev Nanda gets interim bail". The Times Of India. 2008-12-20. Retrieved 2008-12-19.
  5. ^ "BMW case: Sanjeev Nanda's plea rejected by Delhi High Court". The Times Of India. Retrieved 2008-12-19.
  6. ^ "BMW hit-and-run case: Sanjeev Nanda walks free from jail". Retrieved 2009-08-22.
  7. ^ "Nanda ties the knot". Retrieved 2010-03-09.

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no move Chihin.chong (tea and biscuits) 20:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC) Moved by User:Red Slash (talk)[reply]


Sanjeev Nanda → Sanjeev Nanda hit-and-run case (1999) – Does not seem to be a biographical article, and I am not sure if the person passes bio notability. The accident seems to be the cake of the plate! Tito Dutta (contact) 02:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the 1999 is unnecessary disambiguation as there are no other Sanjeev Nanda hit-and-run case articles.
There are also blog reports that keep getting entered about his alleged participation in a fairly recent high dollar corruption scandal - i havent looked for reliable sources to corroborate but if that is true than it should be left as him as an individual. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
+1 This would be an appropriate move for now, but it seems everyone would benefit if the article could simply be expanded with information beyond the hit-and-run case. --BDD (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move?

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, since the move review has been closed and nobody has expressed a desire to go back to the Sanjeev Nanda title. The present title is Sanjeev Nanda hit-and-run case, which everyone seems to be OK with. This leaves the present move request without a requester. Obviously anyone who still disagrees can open their own request and it will be heard in the standard way. EdJohnston (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Requested move/dated|Sanjeev Nanda}}

  • I'm not sure why someone moved it to the current title after the RM was closed as "no move". To make matters more complicated, someone else created a move review on the recent closure. After it is reverted, I hope someone can close the move review and then "relist" (or re-create) the request. George Ho (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suggest leaving the request open here until I get responses from User talk:Titodutta and User talk:SmokeyJoe, the only participants in the move review. See their talk pages for details. EdJohnston (talk) 15:45, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just can not understand what is happening here! Someone closes the previous RM as "not moved", then someone goes forward and moved it and again a new RM starts! The RM has no rationale other than some comments on the previous move. If you think the recent move was inappropriate, just move it back, this RM is not required. But, the move review I started needs to be nourished then! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 22:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Attempt to start a new article today

[edit]

An article was started today at Sanjeev Nanda (Entrepreneur). Since it didn't show any notability beyond the incident, I've redirected that page here. —C.Fred (talk) 23:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the article back and move protected it. Editors can seek a new RM discussion to try to change the consensus if they wish, but be sure to account for policies like WP:N, WP:BLP and WP:BLP1E. It may be possible that a new title should be considered that doesn't use the name of any living person. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. The problematic part seems to be this search result. It is Google's mistake that they are thinking the person's name is "Sanjeev Nanda hit-and-run case". I am unsure if there will be any difference if we remove the persondata and birth, BLP categories. --Tito☸Dutta 11:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even notice this part of your comment; I've removed the persondata and bio-related categories. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2

[edit]
I'm suggesting that our own policies recommend that we avoid the use of the person's name in the title. I'm not stating it explicitly, but I think it's something that should be considered. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:11, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Requested move/dated|1999 Gurgaon hit-and-run case}}

Sanjeev Nanda hit-and-run case → 1999 Gurgaon hit-and-run case – Per the BLP violation mentioned above. Relisted. BDD (talk) 21:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Tito☸Dutta 08:52, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I know I should be at least pretend to be uninvolved, I think the BLP issue really is important here; unless I see a solid objection in the next couple of days, I'll move this (and then try to rewrite the lead so it's clearly an event article). Qwyrxian (talk) 11:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved it to the new name (Delhi, as indicated by SpacemanSpiff). I'm going to alter the lead now to reflect this. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on 1999 Delhi hit-and-run case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1999 Delhi hit-and-run case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:23, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Redirect

[edit]

@122.160.103.253: Ah! Pressed enter before completing my points; so I'm going to continue here,

1. If someone search 1999 Delhi hit-and-run case, they don't search to get Hit and Run.

2. It's notable as well.

3. It has sources as well.

4. It has enough content so why redirect to other article? - INVISIBLEknock! 09:53, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjeev Nanda recreated

[edit]

FYI, Myfriendkrisna recreated a page on Sanjeev Nanda today. I've added a link to this article and the introduction to that article. Editors here may want to keep an eye on that new page also. —C.Fred (talk) 14:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1999_Delhi_hit-and-run_case&oldid=1196328049"