Talk:Adani Group
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Adani Group article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
 | Adani Cement was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 June 2021 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Adani Group. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
| The contents of the Adani Foundation page were merged into Adani Group on 21 November 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Edits to the Lead Reverted
editUser:Ratnahastin has revered my six edits to the lead, and asked that they be discussed here on the talk page before being implemented.
Those edits were:
- Added links for "Supreme Court" to reference Supreme Court of India, Securities and Exchange Board of India, military drone, war in Gaza
- Removed " " after "~36,000"
- Removed sentence that is too detailed for the lead and is already summarized by the previous sentence. Readers can refer to the body of the article. The sentence that removed was: "According to bloomberg report the Supreme Court of India instructed SEBI to conclude its investigation into the Adani Group within three months, clearing the company from further probes in the Hindenburg saga."(with reference). The previous sentence was: "In May 2024, the Adani Group's market capitalization returned to over $200 billion after the Supreme Court directed the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to expedite its investigation."
- Capitalization of "bloomberg", add link for Bloomberg News.
- Remove India from Ahmedabad, India. It's already stated the company is Indian.
Please comment. ReferenceMan (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your explanation. You can restore your edits. Ratnahastin (talk) 13:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Hindenburg episode
editTwo points -
(*) Four months after the charges leveled against Adani, in May 2023, The then Finance Minister of Mauritius - Mahen Kumar Seeruttun - had completely trashed the hindenburg report and its allegations against Adani.
https://theprint.in/world/mauritius-minister-debunks-hindenburg-report-on-adani-group/1566589/
(*) On the 11th of August 2024 hindenburg came out with their second round of allegations against Adani this time including ones against India's current SEBI chief. Within the next 48 hours, Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) COMPLETELY removed the freeze on Adani Group stocks that they had placed in January 2023, when the first charges were made.
Why do neither of these appear in the article??? Anyone can see the pertinence of these two pieces/events.
Kindly requesting @Materialscientist @AquilaFasciata @Toddy1 @MainlyTwelve
Again pinging @Materialscientist @AquilaFasciata @Toddy1 @MainlyTwelve — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.134.78 (talk) Note: Sock blocked per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CosmicEmperor. Capitals00 (talk) 05:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Both of these aren't noteworthy to be included. A relatively insignificant minister in Mauritius whose verbatim quotes are copied and pasted from a syndicated ani/pti feed and then inclusion/exclusion of adani stocks from an index; are routine Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill news items, that shouldn't be included in an encyclopedic article. — hako9 (talk) 05:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Page Lede: Neutrality in Question
editThe neutrality of the lead section on the Adani Group's page has been called into question. It is recommended to review and discuss the removal of certain text in order to highlight differing perspectives. Engaging in a constructive discussion with other editors to reach a consensus is advised before making any necessary edits to ensure the page reflects a balanced and unbiased viewpoint. For quick reference; MOS:LEAD and WP:NPOV. Charlie (talk) 05:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- It needs to be reworded, so far all it is doing is summarising every controversy the organisation has been involved in, which are far too many to even list in the body let alone in the lead. Therefore I think we should shorten it to "Adani Group has been involved in various controversies over the years." We can also remove the citations as they are not needed in the lead per WP:LEADCITE if the content is backed by the body.- Ratnahastin (talk) 09:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Relocation of Allegations to the Controversy Section
editThe introduction of the Adani Group article currently includes detailed allegations and controversies, such as stock manipulation, political corruption, environmental issues, and other criticisms. While these topics are significant, I believe they would be more appropriately placed in the "Controversy" section rather than the introduction.
According to Wikipedia’s guidelines on maintaining a Neutral Point of View (WP:NPOV), the lead section should provide a balanced overview of the subject without delving into excessive detail or contentious points. Including such details in the introduction risks giving undue weight to controversies over the company's general achievements and business scope.
By relocating these points to the "Controversy" section, the article could maintain a more neutral tone in its introduction while allowing readers to explore the criticisms in a dedicated, detailed section. This structure aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines for clear, organized content.
I suggest we move the following content:
Allegations of fraud and market manipulation (Hindenburg Research report).
Claims of political corruption, cronyism, and tax evasion.
Environmental damage and actions against journalists.
These could be summarized in the "Controversy" section, which already exists for this purpose.
What are your thoughts on this adjustment? I welcome input and collaboration to ensure the article remains neutral and informative. JESUS (talk) 15:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)