Talk:Pharmaceutical industry in India

The validation of the Page: Pharmaceutical industry in India

In my opinion, the author of this page has forgotten to mention Cipla as an Indian Pharmaceutical Company. According to scrips 100, Cipla ranks 60, above Lupin and Dr. Reddy's which are ranked 66 and 72 respectively. Scrip100.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihar 25292 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

The broken link

I am not aware as what to do in this case. The following link (which has reference number two at the time) is broken. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 10:54, 23 October 2013 (UTC) The link - http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indian-pharmaceuticals-industry.pdf

The link: http://www.pwc.in/press-releases/its-india-calling-for-global-pharmaceutical-companies.jhtml -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Even if these links worked they are not appropriate to cite by Wikipedia guidelines at WP:RS. Information from press releases or company reports about themselves are not the kind of articles to cite. It is better to use research papers from a third party, like from an academic journal or book written by a scholar. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Many many flaws in the article

I think that the article has been written by personal opinions of some people. Much of the material has no reference given. It is very painful to read one sided opinions of some people. The article does not seen neutral at all. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Completely correct. I could help someone else work on this but I would not want to work alone to fix this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree with your opinion! I have added a tag because this page displays a non-neutral point of view many times in the article. I have specific concerns about the subsection titled "Patents" in the Criticism section. Would you like to collaborate to help this article be better? Coffeeking123 (talk) 23:13, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry see my comment above. ^ Coffeeking123 (talk) 23:13, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

@Coffeeking123: Good job with your recent edits. Sure, perhaps start a subsection here on the talk page to briefly share the idea, and perhaps we can collaborate. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry Thank you! For the patents subsection under the criticism section, the page brings up the example of the medication Sofobusvir and Natco. I have been trying to clean up this section and have this section have more of a neutral point of view by deleting opinionated statements.

Now that I have taken those out, I think that the article needs more details on the Natco case itself because it is very vague and confusing. Providing more objective details about the case can shift the article to a more neutral point of view. Coffeeking123 (talk) 22:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

"However, economic liberalisation in 90s by the former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao and the then Finance Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh enabled the industry to become what it is today." - there is no evidence for this, I am removing the line. The growth in 90s were driven by external factors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.41.115 (talk) 05:15, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

A new section 'Pharmaceutical policy of India' can be added

http://chemicals.nic.in/npp_circulation_latest.pdf This is the link where relevant document can be found. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 09:03, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

References for editors interested in improving this article

http://www.ibef.org/industry/pharmaceutical-india.aspx --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 07:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Pharmaceutical industry in India/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

== Comments by Mspraveen (talk · contribs · count) == Consider using citation templates to appear more in the lines of manual of style. Otherwise, the article seems to have comprehensiveness to be classed higher up on the assessment quality scale. Once this is addressed, consider seeking a re-assessment at assessment department. Mspraveen (talk) 12:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 02:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Pharmaceutical industry in India. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214113109/http://www.pwc.in/assets/pdfs/pharma/PwC-CII-pharma-Summit-Report-22Nov.pdf to https://www.pwc.in/assets/pdfs/pharma/PwC-CII-pharma-Summit-Report-22Nov.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100430232700/http://www.ircc.iitb.ac.in/IPcourse/patent.html to http://www.ircc.iitb.ac.in/IPcourse/patent.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120105082619/http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indian-pharmaceuticals-industry.pdf to http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indian-pharmaceuticals-industry.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120105080622/http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indias_pharmaceutical_industry.pdf to http://www.cci.in/pdf/surveys_reports/indias_pharmaceutical_industry.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://invest.telangana.gov.in/pharma/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Removing the "Neutrality of this Article is Disputed" Tag

When I initially came across this page, the "criticism" subsection was very subjective. Therefore I added a tag disputing the neutrality of the page. Now that I have deleted the opinionated statements and added more factual evidence with citations, I propose that we can remove this tag. Any thoughts? Coffeeking123 (talk) 01:14, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree, the tag can be removed now. Rvsingh12 (talk) 21:34, 31 July 2023 (UTC)