This is an archive of past discussions with User:Krish!. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Krish, re: this edit, I've removed the claim of "box office success" as it's unsourced and it doesn't seem consistent with the data in the article. Typically (at least in western films), a film has to gross double its budget to be considered profitable. In the case of Anjaana Anjaani, if the film was made at a cost of 43 crore, but grossed 40 crore, it's difficult to see how it would be considered a success. Obviously if you have references to the contrary, feel free to reinstate, but I think some context would be required for readers to understand, since it's so atypical. Thanks and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
@Cyphoidbomb: First of all, I just added the plot summary in the lead of Anjaana Anjaan and nothing else. I didn't even touch the box office and budget claims. It's easy to point fingers right? All these things were present initially in the article but you chose this moment to put me down again. What do you want me to do? Leave this place?Krish | Talk06:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I genuinely don't know where the disproportionate defensive hostility is coming from, Krish. I haven't posted anything to your talk page in fourteen months, so where is this impression coming from that I'm constantly riding your ass and putting you down? My note above is an attempt at a friendly, courtesy explanation of why I reverted your changes. But since you deny even making the change that the diffclearly indicates you made, it's just confusion upon confusion for me. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:47, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
At the risk of irritating you again, in this edit I removed the "mixed" critical response summary, because the assertion was not attributed to a specific voice. Per MOS:FILM, "The overall critical response to a film should be supported by attributions to reliable sources." The WikiProject Film community prefers that we not act as critical response aggregators, and instead leave the summaries to the professionals. There are persistent concerns about editors accidentally confirming their own biases by cherrypicking reviews that adhere to their POVs and then summarising those selections, or accidentally confirming another editor's bias by showing up at an article and summarising the reviews that another editor has cherrypicked. Thanks, and again, it's nothing personal. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Re: this, thank you for the reference. The ICTF has historically expressed dislike for Filmibeat, though. I tend to look the other way if it's uncontroversial information like a film release date or something minor, but I think critical evaluation should be supported by something stronger. In goodwill, I won't revert, though if you happen to find a better reference down the road, adding it instead would be appreciated. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:01, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
@Kailash29792: What's "bizasialive.com"? My hope was that over the last few years the Indian film editing community would be (of its own accord and with little meddling from me) working toward vetting better sources through discussion about which sources have established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. Are we picking this reference because it's different and says something contrary, or are we picking this reference because it's well-known and trusted? If it's the former and not the latter, then I'd dump it. Most of the sources I see over the course of my gnoming are simply piss-poor cookie-cutter sites that say nothing about who runs them or what expertise the staff has in the field. Of the cookie-cutter blogs that do attempt to sum this up, most focus on the SEO geniuses behind the site rather than any sort of expert editor. Bizasialive.com has an about page, but apart from these people calling themselves senior editors, I have no idea what their qualifications are as Indian cinema experts. Two of them appear to be experts in hair gel. Maybe you have some insight? Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
@Kailash29792 and Cyphoidbomb: Well Anjaana Anjaani's SahiNahi page clearly proves that the film garnered mixed reviews . I know it is not a reliable source but it does help us to get the clear picture. Initially, I too had thought that it had mostly received 1.5 or 1 stars but after coming across that, I understood that I was wrong. Well, Indian publications claim that all of Rohit Shetty films had received mixed reviews but the truth is they are incredibly panned but super successful. What I mean is Indian media has a knack to judge films based on the box office gross. So if a panned Race 2 or Dilwale grosses 100 crores, they are suddenly counted among films with mixed receptions. I wish someone comes up with an aggregate sites like RT for Indian movies also.Krish | Talk05:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
There is ReviewGang, but I don't think it passes WP:RS. I think it is still possible for public to influence what content displays on RT. I recently sent an email to RT asking to create a page for Miss Malini (1947) and they did, but only with whatever details the IMDb page had. If we supply them with more reviews for films, they could add that too? Kailash29792(talk)06:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, they can and they will but the main problem is not many Indian critics are registered to RT. They have a specific criteria to choose reviews (only from registered critics). Even if they say added 10 reviews which are mostly positive or mostly negative, do you think its fair to the films? I mean Bajirao Mastani has a rotten rating on that site, so we can't use that. Can we? It is frustrating as hell. We can only add such stuff when majority of Indian reviews along with International are taken into account.Krish | Talk06:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teri Meri Kahaani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BBM. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hey, I see you blanked your user and talk pages, and I see that you're clearly unhappy. Going on offensive rants doesn't really feel justified though. I just wanted to say a failed FAC should not the end of the road. Take your time, cool down and then let me know if/when you feel up for another attempt, I'll be happy to help. NumerounovedantTalk21:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Hey! I have not given up! @Numerounovedant: I was just sad (not angry) that the FAC did not pass. I was surprised as how one oppose outnumbered six supports. That's it. And, I don't think I have the courage to another FAC for few more years, I am too much scared to try now. I blanked my page because I will be taking 1.5 year break from her, so I thought the pages were of no good and I removed everything. I be online for next 15 to 20 days and I have five articles to expand such as Dil Dhadakne Do, Bajirao Mastani (if possible; i am hoping to write an epic length article just like the film), Anjaana Anjaani, Don 2 and Gunday.Krish | Talk08:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Actually, your page could still be kept as your hall of fame, just add a tag like {{semi-retired}} if you are not gonna be so active in the near future. --Kailash29792(talk)09:26, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Is Mr. Khan playing a autistic character or someone like a Rohit Mehra in the film? The teaser left my mind numbed. Am i missing something? ** Pavan Jandhyala **11:02, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
@Pavanjandhyala: No the character is definitely not auttistic and I don't think he has the talent to pull off an autistic character. Tubelight seems like a copy of this film, in which the protagonist is a child, who is waiting for his father to return from the war. I think Kabir Khan tweaked it by making the lead a slighlty different, maybe Rohit Mehra like character and in this film, he is waiting for his brother to return from war. It might be different as there is a chinese kid and a chinese woman as well so who knows if they are his son and wife, respectively or his brother's. Several scenes are the exact copy of the original.Krish | Talk11:17, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello krish this is reforety! Recently i noticed that you made a change to collections of bahubali 2 movie. Kindly note that box office India is the officially recognised organisation for box office collections of movie. The source you quoted doesn't meet reliable source policies. Please discuss with me in my talk page. Reforety (talk) 09:38, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ssven2: Well, I have a lot of sources. I am hoping for a huge "Themes and analysis" section, since it contains variety of themes and has been widely discussed and dissected such as "Rape of Avanthika". Meanwhile, tell me how did you archived every source in just one click? Would you please do that for my FLs?Krish | Talk06:48, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
This gadget simultaneously archives all the references in an article, and is much more time-saving (click "Run bot" and choose either of the three options under it). I hope you find it useful. Login first though. Then use it. — Ssven2Looking at you, kid07:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you so much for archiving the references for all the FA/FLs that I've worked on. :) How did you manage to do that? --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:45, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, it only took seconds to archive the references thanks to this amazing tool. However, you should archive the rest of the sources. This tool only adds references which are already archived or saved in the wayback machine. It does not archive and add. So just archive the unsaved sources and run the tool. It will automatically add those references in your articles.Krish | Talk19:22, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
I am sorry but I don't have that much of a time to review any article. I hope you don't mind. Plus, I have deliberately stopped reviewing GARs and the last one I did was three years ago. By the way, I had never heard about this film and the article says its a 2015 flick. Was this an stalled production?Krish | Talk13:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Like Krish, I too don't have much time to review articles, but now that Miss Malini's GOCE editing is over (though I think it could have been done better), will you be willing to take up the GA review? --Kailash29792(talk)03:56, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Don (2006 Hindi film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pavanjandhyala -- Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Teri Meri Kahaani you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pavanjandhyala -- Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:41, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Mujhse Shaadi Karogi
Hello, Krish - I saw your request at the top of the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, and I just wanted you to know why I did not accept the assignment to copy-edit it. It is just that I have copy-edited so many Indian film articles, that I've got to take a break from them. I need the variety to make this volunteer job enjoyable. Please do not take it personally. I'm sure another editor will pick it up as soon as he or she is finished copy-editing another article. If no one accepts it soon, I will copy-edit it, so it will get done. Best regards, – Corinne (talk) 03:07, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dostana (2008 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kailash29792 -- Kailash29792 (talk) 07:01, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Well good to know you weren't laughing ok Divya Bharti but calling me dumb is stupid! I'm new here just keeping Divyas memory alive! Have sense and don't be calling people dumb! I already said my sorry to you! Waste me time to weirdo! Calling a girl dumb!? Lives in India! No sense! She was part of the cast in a way not in alive mode just a tribute! Smart one! No shame or sense calling people dumb even though they already said there sorry! Saradutt (talk) 22:29, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests
Hey there. I just wanted to let you know that you are only allowed to have two open request for WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors according to the instructions and you currently have three open requests. I would recommend removing one of them. Aoba47 (talk) 20:43, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
@Aoba47: Thanks for the information but if I can remember I used to put three articles earlier. Has it changed now? BTW, would you please review the sources here? It's been so long yet no one has done anything. I would appreciate your gesture.Krish | Talk05:23, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I think it was changed about a month ago since there was a large amount of new requests being made at that particular time. For the time being, the number of requests was reduced from three to two. I can definitely do a source review for that FLC, and I will try to have it completed by the end of the week by the latest. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my current FAC. Hope you are having a wonderful day so far. Aoba47 (talk) 16:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mujhse Shaadi Karogi you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pavanjandhyala -- Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:40, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Finally got an article on a character of Baahubali
Hi, an article has finally been created on Bhallaladeva (character) which seems like it can stay because it has more than 10 reliable references which discuss the subject of the article in question. It requires cleaning up, though, and your assistance will be appreciated. King Prithviraj II (talk) 10:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Krish! - You will have seen that I have completed the copy-edit you requested at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. I have a few questions and concerns for you (nothing major), but I'm going to take a break from copy-editing now and will leave the comments for you tomorrow. You might want to wait for my comments before you change anything, but that's up to you. – Corinne (talk) 02:59, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
O.K. Here they are:
1) First, you will see that I changed the tense of the verbs in the discussion of the plot (except for the initial backstory) from past tense to present tense. Usually, present tense is used to discuss plot details of a work of fiction. If you strongly prefer past tense, I suppose they could all be changed back again, but I recommend against it.
2) In the middle of the second paragraph in the section Alex Parrish#Accused, you have the following sentence:
Prior to the the election, the terrorist kills Natalie Vasquez and Drew Perales to force Alex into doing their bidding.
This sentence is a little confusing. The possessive adjective "their" is ambiguous. If "their" refers to Vasquez and Perales, how would killing them force Alex into doing their bidding? If they're dead, how can they tell Alex what to do? If you're using "their" to refer to "the terrorist", not wishing to reveal the terrorist's gender, it is also confusing because you're mentioning two other people by name in the same sentence. Besides that, you reveal in the very next sentence that the terrorist is a male, so there seems little point in obscuring the terrorist's gender in this sentence.
If you are really referring to Vasquez and Perales, I think you need to explain the situation a little more. If you are referring to the terrorist, I think you can use "his" instead of "their" – "his bidding".
She gains a rival in Natalie Vasquez (Anabelle Acosta), and initiates a romantic relationship with Ryan.
I'm wondering about the word "initiates" in the second part of the sentence. This verb suggests that Alex made the first move in the relationship, or was much more assertive in beginning the relationship than Ryan. If this is the case, and you want to emphasize that, then leave it as it is. If you merely want to say that she begins, or takes up, a romantic relationship with Ryan, then you might consider substituting "begins" for "initiates".
Later in the future events of Quantico, she becomes a CIA recruit.
I think you need to expand on, and clarify, this. "Later in the future events of Quantico" is not enough for readers who have not seen the show to understand what this section of the article is about. What's different about these episodes from earlier episodes?
(b) A little later in the paragraph you have this sentence:
It is revealed that she was recruited by the CIA as part of a covert mission to establish any potential threats within the agency.
I'm not sure what is meant by "establish any potential threats". I suppose I should be able to understand it, because I understand each individual word, but I don't understand it as a whole. Why would they want to establish a threat, or a potential threat? Why not just "uncover any threats within the agency"?
Prior to escaping the financial district area, she manages to expose the conspirators within the FBI and CIA that are deeply connected to the Citizens Liberation Front as well as the AIC.
Unless I missed it, I don't see an explanation of "AIC". In this sentence you say "the AIC" as if the reader ought to know what it is. I think you need to explain what it is, and spell out the full name of the group the first time you mention it, followed by the initials in parentheses. After that, you can use "the AIC". If I missed it, can you point it out to me?
6) You had two quote boxes. I changed them both to block quotes using the quote template because I thought quote boxes were discouraged. Now, I'm not sure, so I've asked someone who will know. When I get an answer, I'll let you know, and we can decide what to do.
7) There is one more thing I'm wondering about. I know this is not the article about the series itself, but still, you describe the entire plot of the series but nowhere do you mention episodes. Is that on purpose? I suppose, because the article is about Alex Parrish more than about the series, you don't have to go episode by episode, but, since you do spend quite a bit of time describing the plot, it might help readers to know which group of episodes is being described as you go through the sections. Just a thought. Also, unless I missed it, you don't say at the beginning of the article when the series first aired, and what years it ran. I think that would help your readers. Well, that's all. – Corinne (talk) 16:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks @Corinne: for your copy-edits. I really appreciate it. I have tweaked all of your above queries from the article and as far as the quoteboxes are concerned, yes we can use them. Now coming to your last question, I think its wise to answer that the storyline section mostly describes how the character moves ahead in the series, much like the plot in film articles. And, yes there is no need to say episodes name while describing the events. This is how most articles are here. Between, would you please look at the development and reception section again to find more mistakes? I am unable to see any but I am sure you will. Thanks again!Krish | Talk06:21, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I looked at your edits first; the ones where you merely removed material were fine, except that I don't know why you removed a comma that I had placed there. Usually, a comma follows an independent clause (complete sentence) before beginning another independent clause joined by a word such as "and" or "or", unless the two are really short. These two are somewhat short, so I guess it's all right without the comma. I made a few small changes to the sentences you worked on. – Corinne (talk) 16:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
