Talk:Pankaj Oswal

Libellous/Inaccurate Content

{{adminhelp}}

• ErikHaugen (talk · contribs)

I flagged this for speedy deletion under {{db-g10}} because this article contains libellous content and is intended to damage the personal reputation of Pankaj Oswal. The article, about a living person, is also quite clearly not written from a neutral point of view.

The majority of the pages’ content relates to the Burrup Holdings business, in which Mr Oswal was a minor (less than 50%) investor. Even if this content is relevant, it should constitute a separate article. The page relates largely to the company’s operations, which should not be the focus of biographical articles.

Also, the significant ‘edit war’ that the page has experienced is of concern. Increased administrator oversight and intervention might improve the quality of the page.

In particular, the inaccuracies that I can observe are listed below:

Libel:

• ‘With over $860 million at stake, this was ANZ's biggest single impaired asset.’ (Unsourced) These allegations are not for a single asset in any case, but multiple assets owned by a combination of Mr Oswal and the company more broadly. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/palatial-bolthole-for-failed-fertiliser-king/story-e6frg8zx-1225992594511 • ‘Most notably Pankaj held senior management positions at Oswal Chemicals & Fertilisers Ltd when the company faced charges of a serious environmental nature.[14]’ The attached link offers no evidence that Pankaj Oswal held any positions at the company and also specifies that the charges were withdrawn by the investigating ‘State Pollution Control Board’, which was something not mentioned in the article. • ‘On 26 May 2006, there was an extensive toxic spill of approximately 79,000 litres of liquid aMDEA from the Burrup Fertiliser facility due to incorrectly set up equipment. Some of this chemical spill leached into the ecologically sensitive King Bay. Additionally, a large quantity of process gas along with aMDEA gas was released into the atmosphere.[19]’ This is entirely false and libellous, and the source contained is from the ‘Dampier Rock Art’ group who, as is visible, in reference 18 submitted to the WA government against the plant and is an ongoing antagonist of Burrup Holdings. The story cannot be digitally sourced to any article from ‘Pilbara News’. This is also false as the WA government did not take action and continued to license the facility. • ‘Court documentation revealed allergations by Fairworld Holdings that the Oswals had breached the Trades Practices Act by engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct during lease negotiations in 2007.’ My understanding is that, at most, this is false, and, at least, no reference is provided substantiating the statement and it therefore should not be included in the article. • ‘A report from The Australian highlighted possible deficiencies in the prospectus document based on the omission of certain financial dealings with related companies registered in the British Virgin Islands and other overseas locations. To access that information required examination of BOY’s financial records from 2006 to 2008. There appeared to be loans and debt forgivness to companies such as Double Time Enterprises, Katz Investments, Perrera, BizDev International P/L, detailed in the financials as enities related to shareholders and directors of Burrup without specifying who.’ This contains no source, but the Australian article in question should be here given the seriousness of the claims.

Contentious material which is completely unsourced poorly sourced or where the statement in the article does not accurately reflect the contents of the source:

• ‘By the latter part of 2006, there appeared to be growing rifts between principals of the Burrup facility, as well as difficulties with the gas supply contracts.’ (Unsourced) • ‘After extensive investigations, PPB referred allegations of a series of financial irregularities within the Burrup companies to the Australian Securities & Investments Commission. Given that the Oswals no longer resided in Australia, having relocated to Dubai which has no extradition treaties, ASIC did not pursue the matter.’ (Unsourced) • ‘Pankaj, through the marriage of his sister Shalu, is brother-in-law to Naveen Jindal, an active Congress Lok Sabha Member.’ (Unsourced) • ‘There were also claims that documents were falsified in relation to the plant completion date.’ This is a weasel word, offering no source of these claims. • ‘During this same period, Yara instigated action to try to compel Oswal to sell his share of the company. Yara only ceased this action prior to the proposed float of Burrup Holdings.’ This is unsourced. • ‘Pankaj Oswal called off the proposed float following an explosion at Apache Energy’s Varanus Island plant that severely impacted the gas supply essential to the ammonia production process.[32][33]’, the sources state that this was a company, not personal, decision. • ‘If successful, these claims may elevate Pankaj Oswal to one of biggest frauds in Australian history.’ This claim is based on invalidated findings and is clearly libellous.

Self-published sources:

• ‘Various comment boards opined that a negative aspect of the float was the Oswal's continued close control and operation of Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd.[31]’ – This source is to a fully open online forum about the company’s share price, and has no place on this personal biography page. • ‘In some quarters there were growing concerns relating to the activities of Pankaj Oswal and Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd. In this age of social media the creator of Burrupwatch[54] provides constant news updates of those activities. Burrupwatch has in turn been recognised and cited in various media stories.[55]’ The phrase ‘in some quarters’ is a weasel word, and the sole source of this claim is a small anonymously managed Twitter account dedicated to attacking Mr Oswal and is hardly fit for an encyclopedia.

Non-NPOV:

• ‘Those executives included finance director Raj Jeyarajah; legal counsel Basil Lenzo; corporate director Wolfgang Jovanovic; and commercial director Vinojit Ambalavaner.[9] Vinojit Ambalavaner now resides in Cambodia, where he is heading up the establishment of a new 2.2 billion fertiliser project.[10][11]’ This content, particularly the more recent business operations of Vinojit Ambalavaner is not of relevance to this biographical article and is included to smear Pankaj Oswal by association. • ‘There were growing concerns among the Pilbara community at the manner in which Mr Oswal, along with his partner Yara, dismissed environmental concerns and disregarded the significance of the rock art which is culturally important to the Aboriginal and Australian community.[20]’ – this sentence uses weasel words about who was concerned and links to a speech from an environment activist politician as its sole source. The politician, in his speech, says he has a ‘statement that is a little tongue-in-cheek’, indicating the flippant tone of the conversation, which was about Australian culture and not illegal activities. • ‘Another case involved Mr Vikas Rambal, a former friend and business partner of Pankaj Oswal who had been the Managing Director of Burrup before starting his own fertiliser venture south of Perth.[22]’ This is irrelevant to Mr Oswal and is inserted to attach guilt by association, this is made worse by the fact that reference 23 points out that Mr Oswal and Mr Rambal were distanced after Mr Rambal’s time at Burrup Holdings. http://www.dampierrockart.net/Media/2006-12-30%20Row%20clouds%20Burrup%20plant-West%20Aus.pdf • ‘Pankaj Oswal initially planned the float to occur in February 2008, however promoters UBS pulled the float due to the negative financial environment created by the GFC. By mid 2008 it was back on again. A great deal of fanfare accompanied the promotion of upcoming float of Burrup Holdings Ltd with the prospectus flashed across investor boardrooms in London, Paris, New York. Market commentators noted the favourable fixed costs and rising prices in the market for Burrup’s ammonia production, with some expressing interest whilst others cautioned investors that the profit potential had future uncertainty. Respected publication, Intelligent Investor, in an article 2 June 2008, indicated investors should avoid this float.[27] [28] [29]’ The language used in this passage such as ‘fanfare’ and ‘flashed’ is non-encyclopaedic. Additionally, Intelligent Investor is a small subscription newsletter and this post offers one person’s opinion and should not be promoted on this page. Additionally, this section of the article is not about Mr Oswal, but rather Burrup Holdings Ltd. • ‘Administrators, PPB have claimed that funds were diverted from Burrup to finance the Oswals lifestyle and the Peppermint Grove building project.[49]’ In this source, PPB here are legal representatives in a private court case and not objective administrators. PPB is also facing countering legal action from Mr Oswal over mismanagement. http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/wa/13814612/oswal-in-new-tild-against-receivers/ http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/judge-to-decide-on-burrup-inquiry/story-e6frg2qc-1226318852955 • ‘It is difficult to keep track of the deals involving Pankaj and Radhika Oswal due to their multiple forays into business partnerships and joint ventures. [66]This is non-beneficial in an encyclopedia. • ‘There can be confusion due to the fact that the business names of Oswal companies often closely resemble other larger well regarded organisations.’ This tone is unnecessary in an encyclopedia.

Irrelevant content:

• ‘Over a period of time there have been some legal matters presented to the courts relating to Burrup. For example, litigation instigated by Paharpur Cooling Towers involved Burrup as a guarantor for the construction payment on the plant's cooling towers.[21]’ As is visible in the source, Burrup Holdings’ fertiliser business was classified as a ‘stranger’ to the deal and were not a contestant in the court case. This incident does not belong on a page dedicated to ‘Pankaj Oswal’. • ‘Whilst living in Perth the Oswals embarked on a series of glittering events, the size and scale of which escalated with each passing year.[39] In courting the media the Oswals increased both their own public profile and that of Burrup Fertilisers.[40] The social pages of Perth newspapers regularly featured the Oswals.[41] The lifestyle included all the trappings of wealth including private jet, collection of 17 motor vehicles, homes in exclusive suburbs Mosman Park and Peppiment Grove, luxury yachts etc.[42] From 2008 as cracks began to appear in the Oswal empire, investigative journalists produced articles questioning aspects of the Burrup operation along with affiliated companies. Mrs Oswal attributed this negative media to racism.[43] Construction of a new residence in Peppermint Grove was to be the jewel in the crown for this socialite couple. Estimated cost of the endeavour,dubbed Taj on Swan, was to be between 55 million to 80 million once completed; and included 100 arches, 7 bedrooms, 11 bathrooms. , beauty salon, gym, and telescope room. The proposed pool was to be 10 times larger than the average Perth backyard. This building project came to a halt when receivers PPB were appointed to Burrup in December 2010.[44] In the months preceding this, Radhika Oswal pushed ahead opening outlets for her proposed Otarian chain of vegetarian fast food stores.[45] Radhika Oswal oversaw details of the Otarian project right down to the creation of staff uniforms by her preferred couture designer Turun Tahiliani.[46]’ The entire Lifestyle section is irrelevant and designed to place the Oswals in a negative light. In an encyclopedia like Wikipedia, the supposed number of rooms, cars and locals nickname’s for the residence, are out of place. Phrases such as the following are written in a tone not in keeping with Wikipedia’s preferred neutral style; ‘all the trappings of wealth’, ‘socialite couple’, ‘the Oswals embarked on a series of glittering events’, ‘the size and scale escalated with each passing year’ and the use of ‘etc’ to describe personal assets. The sources quoted are from tabloid style articles. In addition, the source does not mention anything about a ‘series of events’ nor ‘the scale of the events escalating with each passing year’. This part of the article simply engages in hyperbole, rather than providing facts. Also, the business and personal activities of Radhika Oswal do not belong on this page. • ‘The "Taj" remains unfinished and an eyesore.’ The author’s opinion of the visual aspects of this house is not relevant in an encyclopedia. • ‘Over the years, speculation has been rife about the financial relationship of Pankaj's companies to the business operations of his father, Abhey Oswal.[56] In Australia and India, commentators have voiced concerns relating to the vague and incomplete details offered in the annual reports of companies operated by Oswal senior and Pankaj Oswal.[57][58]’ This passage and these sources related to Mr Oswal’s father and not Pankaj himself and therefore do not belong on the page. • ‘During the course of various Burrup litigations, there have been revelations of the Oswals’ significant Australian Tax liabilities. Radhika Oswal owes over $186 million to the ATO which is one of the largest personal tax debts incurred in Australian history.[110] More recently another of Mrs Oswal’s companies, Comical Ali Militant Vegetarian was wound up due to unpaid taxes.[111]’ The only example here provided relates to a business participated in by Radhika Oswal and does not belong on Pankaj Oswal’s biographical page.

I apologise if I have miscategorised my concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MOvers76 (talk • contribs)

Use raise a number of very valid points. I'm in the process of cutting out large swathes of unverified, poorly verified, or non-neutral content. We probably shouldn't delete the article, because he seems (at first glance) to be more than notable, but we do need to fix the problems. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Alright, after starting to go through part by part, I see that this article is a festering pile of much much badness. Good sources are mixed with bad, things from good sources are cherry picked to put Oswal in a bad light, etc., etc. In order to comply with WP:BLP, I have stubbed the article, leaving only the lead paragraph and personal life (since I already did that section). Clearly, much information needs to get put back in the article.I will have to go back and look at all of the sources that meet WP:RS and see what I can actually say that meets WP:NPOV and WP:V. This is probably going to take quite a bit of time, and WP:BLP says we can't wait to get it right. I will come back to this when i can,. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Good evening. Firstly, there are additional sources available for the same information where you indicate that the source may not be adequate. My preference would have been a notation to add additional source material. This indeed happened some time ago where another editor placed (citation needed) within the context of the page. In due course I attended to that requirement by adding requested citation and deleting a small part of the sentence that could not be verified. Secondly, when taken in conjunction, many of the sources verify the overall information. Example, reference 4 lists the subject as senior management of Oswal Chemicals & Fertilisers. Another reference details the pollution problems with that plant at Orissa. A further source details a summery and timeline which show that charges were discontinued due to the sale of plant to another company. Further reference material is available, and certainly I would have attached same if (citation required) had been inserted where you felt the article required more verification. The subject was the instigator of the Burrup project and for the most part majority shareholder, and his actions are intimately tied to the company...it is impossible to separate the two and still convey a complete picture of the subject. Thirdly, the style of writing may not be perfect but with a little prompting here, a few suggestions here and there, I think the article could have been improved rather than reduced to a stub. I respectfully request that you re-instate the article with comments where you wish to see improvements, which will give me a working canvas on which to work rather than the the stub we now have. Thankyou for your time A fair go (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

A fair go, please understand the concern here that there might be poorly sourced negative information about a living person on this page—this is something Wikipedia takes extremely seriously. While it is less convenient to do it this way, that is probably a good trade-off. In any case, it should be relatively straightforward to go through the history of this article and view the diffs to see what was there before—I think you can feel free to restore chunks of it with the new sources as you're ready. Thanks!! ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 18:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I somewhat agree with ErikHaugen, though I think he's being much too mild. A fair go, WP:BLP information is different than other information--we are not allowed to tag negative or contentious information about living people. Rather, policy requires that it be immediately removed, and only reinstated with a valid source. Also, the rest of your paragraph is highly concerning. From a Wikipedia perspective, we absolutely must distinguish between him and his company. In cases where reliable sources explicitly state that he did something that was bad in some way, then we can include the information here...but when the information is specifically linked to the company, it can't. The one exception might be the case for companies where he and his wife were basically the sole employees (I think I saw something like that in the prior version), since then we can say that the person and the company are essentially the same. But there is no question in my mind that the purpose of the prior version was to paint Oswal in a negative light; this was obvious by the fact that it included negative things about companies he worked for that happened long before he even got to those companies. Further, the reliance on statements specifically made on unreliable sources by people opposed to him is another give away.

I will certainly endeavor to restore a full article--there's clearly enough coverage. But that's a long, hard task, so stubbing was the first step. Again, because this is a BLP, the rules are different--we cannot use the normal "incremental improvement" model. Instead, each thing we include must be verified and neutral from the moment we put it in the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:30, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Dear Qwyrxian (and other editors) Please understand this is the first article on wikipedia I have edited, and there are a great many things to learn along the way. The reason I became interested in this subject was because of the humor in some references. What I am good at is research. Happy to offer you many of the additional references that I have gathered along the way. We could debate all manner of detail, but I would rather be constructive & offer information that will assist to represent the subject fully. Really, what was on the page was only a fraction of the material available. To my mind all sources have value because they give a well rounded image of the subject. Without wanting to inflame further debate, the vast majority of articles on this subject do have both funny and "negative" info about the subject. Have always thought it would make a great book in the right hands, but that is another avenue to be investigated elsewhere. I am time poor at the moment so I cannot give the detailed responce that I wish to make to points raised at beginning of this discussion. Given that fact I will touch on just three matters raised *Environmental issues at Orissa plant 1999 to 2000...Oswal senior manager at that time...Oswal left India to settle in Aust 2001...Sale of plant 2003(from memory,will check)...Government dropped the charges the following year. *The tax liability incurred by Radhika Oswal was due to Pankaj Oswal splitting the division of share holdings Burrup(2007~will confirm year) *There are thousands of Australian businesses & individuals who go into recievership each year without so much as a whisper in the media. Why did this subject create so much interest? Lifestyle, pure and simple. In the early days the media were "courted" and so the subject's every utterance was reported in the social pages. Without this preamble related to lifestyle, the subject's later financial problems would not have made a ripple in the tabloids & we would not now be having this discussion. All information has a connection and flow. Sorry I must leave the discussion at this point, but gotta work to eat. Anyway Qwyrxian, if you do read all the articles hope you get a smile out of the funny ones...although I don't think I attached many of those. Talk to you soon. Best regards A fair go (talk) 12:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)