Jump to content

Talk:Adani Group

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

Jomo Kenyatta International Airport Management

[edit]

There seems to be a dispute over a section on Jomo Kenyatta International Airport Management.

  • @Rteffect: wants the section in, and gave as an edit summary: The user [/Jynixafy|Jynixafy] shows is biased towards Adani Group and regularly promotes corporate propaganda.[1]
  • @Jynixafy: wants the section removed, and gave as an edit summary: all the edits have been made as per WP:NPOV and WP:V. There is no sign of bias in the content and all the changes have been followed accordingly. Undid revision 1239286610 by Rteffect.[2] In an earlier revert, the edit summary was Fails WP:OR WP:NOR.[3]

The section title is Jomo Kenyatta International Airport Management Scandal, and the section says: The Adani Group and the Kenya Airports Authority have been implicated in an alleged scandalous deal to manage the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport for a period of 30 years in a Build–operate–transfer move. The deal is to be financed majorly by Kenyan taxpayers with full control of the airport granted to Adani Group for the period stipulated. Notably, there was no public participation, no tabling of the deal in the national legislature and the move was brokered by ALG Global, a Spanish firm that was reportedly paid KES 160 million.

Source: Otieno, Bonface (18 July 2024). "Senator turns up heat on KAA over alleged JKIA agreement". Business Daily Africa. Archived from the original on 18 July 2024. Retrieved 18 July 2024.

My impression is that the section heading and the text contain editorialising by editors. The source does not say it is a scandal. Of the sentence that starts "Notably", the only bit that is supported by the source is that the deal was was brokered by ALG Global - the rest of the sentence is unsourced.

I think there probably ought to be a section on the deal - but it needs to be one where all the statements are explicitly supported by cited sources, and one without editor comments masquerading as cited facts.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:54, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have pruned away statements that are not supported by the source.[4] If you want to improve this section, you need to add information from other sources. If you want to the article to say that there is something wrong with the deal, you need to provide citations that explicitly support the critical statements.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toddy1 this OCCRP report is the best source and provides a clearer picture. Charlie (talk) 17:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to the Lead Reverted

[edit]

User: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)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation. You can restore your edits. Ratnahastin (talk) 13:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]