Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lekin... 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 Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 05:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article Lekin... you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lekin... for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 12 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rudaali, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dimple Kapadia won the National Film Award for Best Actress for playing a professional mourner in the film Rudaali? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rudaali. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rudaali), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 15 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lekin..., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while playing a ghost in the mystery film Lekin..., Dimple Kapadia was forbidden to blink because director Gulzar believed it would make her feel surreal? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lekin.... You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Lekin...), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hi Shahid, hope you're doing well. could you do me a favor and take a quick look at this when you get the time?
(PS: I think you're one of the best copy-editors around and I'll love to have your inputs on it.)
On 23 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hamari Beti, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1950 Hindi film Hamari Beti, which featured Nutan's first lead role, at 14 years of age, was directed by her mother? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hamari Beti. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hamari Beti), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 8 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Juice (2017 film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2017 short film Juice, starring Shefali Shah as a middle-class Indian wife defying patriarchal norms, won two Filmfare Short Film Awards? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Juice (2017 film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Juice (2017 film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 10 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hum Log (film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Rajendra Kumar was supposed to play his first major role in the 1951 social drama Hum Log but was replaced a few days into filming? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hum Log (film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hum Log (film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Fun fact: each of the featured promotions were roughly seven years apart (biography in 2008, filmography in 2015 and awards in 2022). FrB.TG (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG Thanks so much! Indeed, seven years apart (the bio was first promoted to FA in 2008 actually, so you're very correct about the seven-year gap between each promotion). Right now working on Shefali Shah's article. I'm sure you've seen some films with her. Thanks again for the barnstar. Shahid • Talk2me14:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Much deserved. I have seen Shah in some films but so far only in supporting parts. Filmmakers didn’t tap into her full potential in those films but I’m happy to see she’s now finding a long overdue success as a leading lady. Do let me know if you take it to GAN or FAC. I’ll be more than happy to review it. FrB.TG (talk) 15:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rudaali 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 FrB.TG -- FrB.TG (talk) 13:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article Rudaali you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Rudaali for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FrB.TG -- FrB.TG (talk) 10:40, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article Rudaali you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rudaali for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FrB.TG -- FrB.TG (talk) 13:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Madhuri Dixit's Introduction Page
Madhuri Dixit's page
1. In the introduction section, 6th line - it is written as "Dixit's early career was shaped up mostly by romantic and family dramas before she expanded her repertoire"... This line appears to be vague and irrelevant. Infact in the beginning of her career itself, she appeared in the films like Parinda, Dharavi, Prahaar, Prem Pratigya etc. Which are neither Family Drama nor Romantic Films. Also writing such lines on a legendary actress page does not make any sense.
2. Noted by critics for her beauty, dancing skills, and strong characters - Instead of Strong Characters, it can conveniently written as Acting Skills which was there earlier as well. AIL601 (talk) 12:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AIL601: I disagree with you. Even in Parinda, she had a small role which was strictly that of a love interest. Prem Pratigya is an out-and-out romance. There might have been exceptions like Prahaar and Dharavi, but they were few and far between. The films that shaped her early career are Tezaab, Tridev, Dil, Saajan, Beta, Khalnayak, HAHK, Raja, and the likes. Strong characters is what I think suits better. I believe she is recognised as a huge, charismatic star, less as strictly an actor. Shahid • Talk2me13:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Madhuri Dixit's Introduction Page
Dear Shahid,
Every actor in the world grows at a pace & then evolves and especially in Indian Film Industry, people play supporting roles, two minute appearances etc in the forgettable films in the beginning of their careers and yet immediately labelled as actors.
How many actors in the mainstream / commercial Hindi film industry has had a diversified filmography in their early phase itself to be called as Great Actors?
By writing the phrase as "Early career being shaped mostly by some genre before expanding repertoire" in the introductory section of the wikipedia page of a legendary actor and labelling them like this devaluate them. This particular phrase is irrelevant and unnecessary. I strongly oppose this and request to remove it.
Hey bud, could you keep an eye out on this article that I had earlier taken to GA? A revert-loving fan doesn't really seem to understand how to keep the article's quality intact. Would really appreciate it. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 28 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nagina (1951 film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nutan, the lead actress of the 1951 A-rated suspense thriller Nagina, was not allowed to enter the film's premiere because she was underage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nagina (1951 film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Nagina (1951 film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hey man. I have recently expanded yet another actor biography, Oscar Isaac, and intend to take it to FAC in the near future. According to the article‘s history, I have authored around 80 percent of it so it only makes sense that someone else takes a look at it before I nominate it for FA. With that in mind, I was wondering if you could give it a go? That is if you have the time or inclination. I‘m not fully done expanding it yet, but I don‘t expect to make major additions anymore so you can start as soon as now. Thank you either way. FrB.TG (talk) 15:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG: Hi there, my dear friend. Thank you for this message. I wish I had a little more time to take part in this impressive project. I've been quite busy off late and the few minutes I give WP these days are spent on random corrections off my watchlist. If I get some free time, I'll be more than happy to give it a go. Shahid • Talk2me13:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG: Ohhh, I thought it'd have more time and I could support it too. I wish I had more time, I did nothing really. Brilliant work as always, way to go. Shahid • Talk2me08:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Polite requests
Stop complaining about how I'm "bludgeoning" while yourself feeling the need to respond to every single one of my comments with one of your own.
Please stop attempting to impose your proof by assertion by telling me to stop commenting about said arguments.
@RandomCanadian: In my first messages I did let you know I believe you mean well, but it started getting out of proportions and instead of letting the AfDs run their course, it seemed like you really couldn't accept others' disparate views and as time went by, just became increasingly involved and invested in one goals: to have these pages deleted because you know what's right. The ensuing intolerance to others' legitimate opinions made the process quite unpleasant. That's not how it should work. I have nothing against you, I really don't hold any grudge, and I still like to believe you mean well. But please, spare me these empty, senseless warnings. You know well they have no place here. You should better apologise for this hostile behaviour. Shahid • Talk2me18:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subhash K. Jha until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
All the sources on the articles are database sites. I would take it to AfD, but there is literally a 100 articles that are poorly sourced (starring Dharmendra/Mithun Chakraborty). Are these films well known, is that why they shouldn't be deleted? If so, where are the sources?
I understand that you want to save the articles, which is good. But just give me an input on whether these low-budget films were box office successes or not. DareshMohan (talk) 00:14, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@DareshMohan: Thank you for this message. The question is not whether these films were box office successes. I'm not sure notability should be directly associated with commercial success. The question is whether information on their box-office performance is provided to begin with, and I saw that many of them do have figures on Box Office India. Are they hits? Quite the contrary, actually, as one would expect with films which are essentially B-grade films. But sources exist. There are too many of those PRODs, and I'm too busy to have time for editing and digging in the archives these days, otherwise, as you might know from my history of improving articles at AfDs, I'd save as many as I can. Since I can't, and I'm not sure speedy deletion is the right course of action, I suggested that you consider AfD, hoping that someone would kindly do the job and save at least some of them. Shahid • Talk2me00:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, Shshshsh! The article you nominated, Shefali Shah, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gog the Mild: Thank you for your quick and effective management of the FAC process (not just of this article, but in general). SNUGGUMS: Thanks a ton for your helpful review, as always, and for this kind message. Shahid • Talk2me09:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well done Shahid, amazing expansion given what the article was before!! I didn't see the nomination, I'd have given it a massive grilling Sarvagnya/Fowler style haha. Just kidding! Good to see you pop up Krimuk it's been a while! ♦ Dr. Blofeld10:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Some changes" (you're welcome) would be ... capitalizing the word short? Removing the (unrendered) space near the end of that line, or that crooked 2 those in the infobox? "As written" templates? Oh, I know: we both really hate how some asterisks (bullets) have spaces after them and some don't.
I do not see that the policy you cite here re captions justifies what you did - captions must identify the subject. As for commas, irrelevant here. Shahid • Talk2me18:16, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doodoodave: Yes, but they aren't main articles in relation to the career section, but rather lists providing additional information. It would be a main article if it was something like Meryl Streep in the 2000s, which is cited here. As for the quotes, I just thought em dashes were more suitable in the specific cases where they're now used. Shahid • Talk2me19:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The basis of introduction and biography write ups of various people on wikipedia are different from each other despite being of same professions and with similar achievements. AIL601 (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AIL601: Didn't understand much what you're trying to say. The fact that other pages have problems doesn't mean this one should. If you support the addition of "influential" to the lead of Dixit, then I'm afraid you do not fully understand Wikipedia's goal and rules. Wikipedia isn't a film magazine, it doesn't use puffery but describes facts. We should describe facts. When I have more time, I'll add more of her achievements and stature. But not like that, "influential" is a terrible word for an encyclopedia. For the record, I love Madhuri Dixit. Shahid • Talk2me09:27, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably because she's such a big personality, a giantess of Indian cinema, people are often intimidated promoting core articles like her. Hope you're well! ♦ Dr. Blofeld21:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Please be aware of WP:ASPERSION. This recent comment was inappropriate for this AFD. There is not enough evidence presented, by you or anyone else at that discussion, to be accusing anyone of any sort of bias. Im not even saying you're necessarily wrong, just that you certainly need to a better job articulating and proving it. That aside, for your information, the creator of that article has recently had a lot of their article nominated for deletion because they were the subject of an ANI report a week ago, due to their excessive creation of unsourced/poorly sourced articles and violations of WP:CANVASS. That's likely the reason for the nominations. Anyways, please be more mindful of this in the future. Thanks. Sergecross73msg me00:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73: Hi there. Kindly assume good faith, if that's what you're supposedly asking from me (when the message is titled "Month Year", it is clearly written in a certain context, and I don't appreciate it even when it's coming from admins). I did not address anyone in particular, and I'm always very particular about that, but mentioned a problem that definitely exists, from my years of experience on WP and contribution to numerous articles on the project, and there are dozens of respected editors and admins like yourself who I can ping right here and who can attest to that on the WP:INDIA project as well (a recent AfD was closed where the admin clearly said they were well "cognizant of the issue of systemic bias" in their closing note). I am not going to be intimidated in any way into not expressing a general point of view, and you, with all due respect, should be very careful to not misinterpret what I've said. I've been repeatedly saying that I never blame deletionists - this is a larger problem which must be addressed. As for who created these articles - I frankly have huge respect for this person's hard work in creating all these pages. I just think of the amount of time and effort they've put on just selflessly contributing to WP. We have to support such people, to guide them and help them through the process. They do make mistakes when they're new to the project and not versed enough in its policies. We were all there at some point. Thank you for understanding. Shahid • Talk2me00:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of that changes how neither you nor anyone in that discussion provided any sort of proof or evidence that bias was playing a role in that particular AFD discussion. I'm not acting in bad faith or trying to intimidate you. You appear to have missed the part where I said you're probably right in a general sense conceptually. I'm telling you that you need to back up the claims you make in individual discussions. Serious accusations require serious evidence. You fundamentally and objectively failed to do so in that AFD, no matter how you slice it. Thanks. Sergecross73msg me01:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73: We appear to be in disagreement here. I specifically spoke against WP:SYSTEMICBIAS (due to "the editing community's narrow social and cultural demographic") - it's by the system, not individual bias and not one directed at someone in particular. No one is to be blamed in person, that's the idea. It could be applied even when Indians are those deleting them. I see several lists by foreign singers which are poorly sourced and no one seems to have considered deleting them. This is a cultural thing, I can assure you that, and I totally understand it, but it needs to be addressed on a large scale.
There have been so many AfDs of Indian films where WP:BEFORE was claimed while a simple Google search by editors would often show plenty of sources. I was actually happy with that at times because it would give me a new challenge. I've had some highly satisfying WP:HEYs and some of my DYKs started at AfD actually. AfDs can be very fruitful, but after a while, it becomes frustrating and not for the right reasons and not because of someone in particular. I agree by the way that my vote was probably not very detailed (I agree with your point about WP:ITSNOTABLE, I should have been more elaborate - I see it only now because you didn't ping me).
In this case, of course, there's this one user whose efforts have not complied with policy, I agree. But I strongly believe these pages can be saved. I believe in inclusivity on WP. Shahid • Talk2me01:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Let's look at this another way then. Your direct quote was "There's no way you can delete this list and want other ones kept." Why would you say this, unprovoked, to nobody in particular? Sergecross73msg me02:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73: Clearly it was a Generic you and I think it's quite obvious from how I wrote it - why would I ever address a nominator directly with a "you" without naming them? It doesn't make sense. When I want to address the nominator, I do it explicitly. Actually the "you" was referring to the Wikipedia project in general (it's Wikipedia who eventually deletes, not the nominator), that's why I proceeded with my point about systemic bias. You see, it's just a matter of perspective and good faith. I accept that you are not acting in bad faith, especially now that we're having this discussion (although I do highly recommend that when you write to more veteran editors, who do know the ways of the Wikiworld, you use a more friendly heading instead of that generic "Month Year" one which I know many immediately associate with a hostile warning), but I think that combined with my vote, which was indeed WP:ITSNOTABLE for once, my message could have looked a little antagonistic. I generally do expect huge amounts of good faith by admins. Shahid • Talk2me02:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again, it's not about "bad faith", it's that I fundamentally don't understand why you said that direct quote. Why would you say that, unprovoked, to no one in particular, when no one had done that, or even suggested otherwise? The comment doesn't make any sense contextually. It would be like if I had jumped into that discussion and saying "Hey, just a reminder, I don't want any personal attacks from anyone." There's obviously wide agreement personal attacks are not okay, but why would I say such a thing to a group of editors who had not said any personal attacks? Same applies to the statement that you did actually say. I don't understand. Sergecross73msg me02:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73: There's a list nominated for deletion, along with many others. I think I've explained it quite well above; this is not said to anyone in particular - this is a general observation about systemic bias, and the context is, indeed, systemic bias: "There's no way you (mind you, generic you, can be easily substituted with "Wikipedia") can delete this list and want other ones kept". I find this AfD as another example of a greater problem on Wikipedia, which is systemic bias, and I'm commenting on it. Wikipedia must encourage total equality for all lists of this sort from all countries, that was my point. There's no way you (yes, not you, Sergecross73, but a generic you) can keep other lists by foreign singers and have this one deleted. As I said, the nominator is not the one who deletes it in the first place, so it couldn't have been said to them. It makes perfect sense to me contextually. And your example isn't very fitting here to what I said or meant. I hope it's more clear now. If not, then it's clearly a matter of disagreement or misunderstanding, or both. Shahid • Talk2me02:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To be frank, your explanations simply doesn't make sense in the context of what you actually said. But as long as you understand not to cast aspersions, I've said what I needed to say. Sergecross73msg me03:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73: The fact is, no aspersions have been cast on my part, my message addressed a larger problem in a general context and it was a perfectly legitimate expression of disappointment from the project. I've been enough time in here to know the importance of good faith. Anyway, thank you for this message. Shahid • Talk2me09:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks amigo. I've seen a few of those but will rewatch sometime and see the others. I enjoy Raj's films too. Yes, all Indian films I mean! ♦ Dr. Blofeld12:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thak you today for the article, introduced: "Shefali Shah is an Indian actress who started on Indian television and for much of her career, acted sporadically in films, often playing character roles. Although consistently respected for her talent with awards and praise from critics, it was not until recent years that she gained wide recognition, starting with the internationally acclaimed series Delhi Crime on Netflix. Since then, her career has only been growing, courtesy digital streaming platforms, with substantial leading roles." - on her birthday! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shshshsh. You added the references "Trivedi 1994" and "Da Cunha 1995" to Dimple Kapadia, but neither work is defined in the article. Could you add the required cites to the Bibliography section, or let me know works these refer to? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 15:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Shshshsh,
I have added the link[1] for her being the Critics choice for best actress in 1992 for Drishti. If you notice the category mentioned in the 1992 awards is called "Outstanding Performance In A Non-Commercial Film." The same was mentioned in 1991, when Anupam Kher won it for Daddy, Hence, Dimple Kapadia was the first actress to win this award, not for Rudaali but for Drishti.-- GaiusAugustine
GaiusAugustine: Hi there! :) I know, I've seen it before. But there's a problem - this piece information seems like a mistake of theirs as it appears nowhere else. I will email Filmfare and ask them, because I've seen the video archives and it's not there, neither is it in any other source. Let's see. Shahid • Talk2me07:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you should understand that just citing stuff isn't enough - you need to gain consensus on the talk page. Let's discuss it there. I do not object to being convinced otherwise. Shahid • Talk2me09:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you know it quite well that she is called the Last Empress of Bollywood as well as Indian cinema. More of all before changing my addition you should make yourself sure about my editing whether it's wrong or not , The link which is attached in that funeral page states vividly that IT HAD ATTRACTED HIGHEST NUMBER OF MOURNERS. Please be decent and sure while making any comments. SANKURDAS (talk) 10:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, it is regarding this revision, especially the change of the header to - "Shift to low-budget cinema (1990–1999)". I'm confused whether it is a better alternative to the previous one ("Comeback to Bengali cinema (1990–1999)"). IMO, the section has a wider scope than what both of these headers are supposed to convey. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The section mentions a few Bengali films, and he received a National Film Award for one (Tahader Katha). The section also mentions the very notable Agneepath. The reason I didn't revert the change is because the section isn't heavily focused on Bengali films, but this phrase 'low-budget cinema' doesn't look nice. Kinda downplaying his achievements in that period. I believe a better title is necessary. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
।।।
Then " First female superstar" is what kind of title ? Isn't that journalistic ?
Wikipedia is not your own notebook or personal diary.
Just remember ,
People like you had defamed this Wikipedia with some baseless information.
As for example...
You replied me according to "Last Empress " but at the same time I specified that HIGHEST NUMBER OF MOURNERS' matter , you didn't come to that point.
More of all who are you to say that those sources are not reliable ? Then What WIKIPEDIA is ?
There are lot of statements where we can see [source needed ] , here i already attached 4 links .
More of all @Fylindfotberserk approved my addition ,you can check out talk page there .
By the way
Best will always be best , nothing matters what movie lovers like you state to defend your own favourites.
@SANKURDAS: "First female superstar" is cited by strong and reliable sources. Your puffery is not. As for "People like you had defamed this Wikipedia" - I don't know where you're taking this nonsense from, but this is clearly in violation of WP:NPA. Please refrain from making any other such comments. Shahid • Talk2me09:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense ! 😆
Then what should be termed to that person who repeatedly avoiding that highest mourners' fact ?
First of all you should read all the passage where i commented then reply...
I already stated that only you had this problem with that TITLE, already a Wikipedian approved this . SANKURDAS (talk) 09:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't get any reply button at the bottom of your comments.
Before replying justify your thoughts. Don't comment unnecessarily . If i said that one Wikipedian approved it then it's true . Already i stated his name . @Fylindfotberserk is that Wikipedian who approved it .
SANKURDAS (talk) 10:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SANKURDAS: I know that Fylindfotberserk approved your edit on Sridevi! I can see it myself in the page history. I'm asking where in the discussion you have consensus to add the Empress stuff. There's none. Shahid • Talk2me10:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
...
Who are you to ask for a consensus ?
Do you need a consensus to write that the Earth moves round the Sun ?
At first you said no one approved it . Now your tone is absolutely opposite.
Hello, i have already left a msg in his talk page of Varoon but he didn't reply. He continues reverting even when the sources are against him. He refuse to discuss and continues to push his own narrative. Arorapriyansh333 (talk) 10:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Varoon2542: You have been reverted. That a Prime Minister praised her isn't notable in the lead. It's just a random trivia. If anything, throughout her active history, it could have been more of an honour to the politician and not her, if you look at her influence, to even know her. Her first hit is not notable - she has sung literally thousands of hits, and we do not use the lead to chronicle her entire career. I suggest that you work out a better version on the talk page and achieve consensus to include what you think should be there. Shahid • Talk2me09:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taran Adarsh (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Very kind of you Gerda to think of Shahid! ;-) Adarsh was kept Shahid, but based on your "I couldn't agree more" though we shouldn't really have the article as he just doesn't have the detailed coverage. ;-) ♦ Dr. Blofeld09:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HPU alumni category of Preity Zinta
Hi Shshshsh, I saw you had reverted my adding of the category 'Himachal Pradesh University alumni' to Preity Zinta. She indeed is an HPU alumni, since she studied from St. Bede's College, Shimla, which comes under HPU. I have thereby reverted your edit. Best wishes. Apandeyhp89 (talk) 09:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Shahid. I see you have made an addition of this fact in the main article; thank you. But somebody called Dr. Blofeld has again reverted my adding of the category 'Himachal Pradesh University alumni'. What to do? Apandeyhp89 (talk) 10:08, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I honestly don't get what "no need to remove the sources" was supposed to mean in the comment to your undo of my edit. I removed nothing, only added the reference to an interview posted under an official BBC YT account which (a) covers the genesis of the tape in some detail, and (b) clarifies that it's an audio tape (and even why) - unlike the Munshi book that (a) barely mentions it and (b) leaves the erroneous impression that it's a video tape. Removing the word 'tape' is of course fine, I just thought 'Exercise audio' looked ambiguous/weird without it added. 82.131.19.108 (talk) 10:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry, my bad. I thought you had removed the source from the book. As it stands now, I'm not sure the interview form YT is needed, but feel free to re-insert it. Shahid • Talk2me11:00, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying the situation. Now it makes sense and, np, stuff happens. I put it back because I think it has some added value compared to the book ref. 82.131.19.108 (talk) 05:16, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BTW I much appreciated your suggestion, but I have some higher priority side projects and knowing myself it'd be tempted to spend too much time here if I made an account, so have refrained for now. :) I've already spent way too much time recently catching up on everything Rekha after seeing her steal the show in the 2-hour Indian Idol special from 2021 dedicated to her. I don't usually watch these types of shows but this was absolute fire, that dance number of hers alone (at 66!) was something else! I have no idea why she's not doing any movies... Sorry if I've been annoying you with too many suggestions about her pages! 82.131.63.86 (talk) 17:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, no annoyance at all. I haven't seen the Idol special but you've made me curious to catch it. Your suggestions are most welcome and constructive. And I can't agree with you more about Rekha's absence from the movies, especially considering the good material available to women her age - as we see with Dimple Kapadia's recent parts. I would still recommend that you open an account, it doesn't mean you have to be too active, but it will give you certain privileges and have a track record of your contribution. Shahid • Talk2me23:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Part 1, part 2 on the official YT channel (both have over 20 minutes of cuts despite being listed as Full Episodes by SET). The full show is currently on Dailymotion in four parts, but not on an official account, so not linking it here (look for 3rd and 4th April 2021). Most of the best clips are also separately on YT on the official account. Some of the singers are excellent too, but she's the one breathing the fire into the whole thing and making it maybe even better than a movie! It's been like 2 months since I saw this and I still can't stop myself from rewatching a clip or two pretty much daily, lol. 82.131.63.86 (talk) 03:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shahid, that's sad about Preity. Is she not getting parts due to ageism in the industry in favour of actresses in their 20s and 30s or has she turned her back on film and concentrating on her work as an entrepreneur? That businessman she was with seemed to change her. Do you still watch new films in Bollywood or has the industry gone downhill like Hollywood? I can count the number of new films I've seen since 2020 on one hand! ♦ Dr. Blofeld14:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld: Hi Blof, no no, I think she made a conscious decision to quit films. She never really wanted to dedicate her life to acting. She is just not that kind of person. Films were probably just a phase in her career, and I can understand that. She was never the cinema-breathing movie buff type. In one of her interviews she actually said she hardly watched films as a child. Mind you, she is an educated woman - BA and a master's program or whatever it is that she took in criminal psychology. Her film career was a good steppingstone for what she does now. I obviously feel sorry that she doesn't act anymore. She's a charming actress and it would be nice if she made a film at least once in a few years like Kajol used to. She could easily lead one of those web shows and do a great job of it. But she lives in LA, she has a family and it's probably not her thing. Even Dimple Kapadia has said many times there's a huge effort in making film for her. It's not an easy job.
I think Hindi films have gotten significantly better, and if you include the stuff on the streaming platforms, it's just pure bliss. The material there is much better. You should give Delhi Crime a try. Shahid • Talk2me00:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The opposite from Hollywood then which has gone down the toilet! That's good that you're still enjoying the new films! I always liked Preity, and enjoyed the 2000s films of hers I've seen. Doesn't look like Bipasha Basu is doing anything now either!! Probably busy raising her child! ♦ Dr. Blofeld07:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, many of them, not just her. Most of these girls grew up in traditional families where a woman's duty couldn't be clearer even if she's a working woman. So even the raciest girls end up settling down, maturing and probably getting closer to their roots to realise what matters to them most (at least in the early stages of their family life). Preity for one is not really like that, she's a feminist of sorts, she's just changed her career path, but she is quite busy. Shahid • Talk2me09:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Joining in on a conversation uninvited after a month. I agree that Andhadhun was a fantastic film and am really glad to see Tabu doing so well. Other recent films that I loved were Drishyam (also with Tabu in it) and Raazi, both top-notch thrillers. FrB.TG (talk) 20:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wholeheartedly agree with the bit about Tabu, and I'm very happy that she hasn't fallen yet another victim to Bollywood's sexism and ageism against actresses who aren't in their 20s or early 30s anymore. I've been meaning to bring her article to FA status for quite a while now but haven't gotten to it yet. I plan/hope to start working on it by December as I will have more time then. FrB.TG (talk) 13:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree with you. What a great idea to work on her page - I actually expanded her lead and collected sources from here and there to do the same. I wish I had more time to join you in the process. Shahid • Talk2me13:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shshshsh. Since the time Miss India started, there is a rule that no contestant below 18 years of age can participate. So how did Miss Juhi Chawla won the Miss India contest at age 16? Can you explain? Why would they just allow her and no one else to participate at the age of 16 and break their rule just for one year in 1984? Even right now in 2023 only girls above the age of 18 can participate in the competition. Just check out the qualifications required to participate in Miss India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A1B3C5 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@A1B3C5: I don't know that there's such a rule, but it's WP:OR which we don't follow, multiple sources show that she was born in 1967. We should follow them and not reject them based on some random Hindustan Times article. We need stronger sources. Shahid • Talk2me14:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, do you really think that these pageants were really that strict about their rules? I don't believe they really followed any rules to begin with. Priyanka Chopra for one was 17 when she won on 15 January 2000. Naina Balsaver was even younger when she won in 1976. Shahid • Talk2me14:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello there, thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2024! ♦ Dr. Blofeld19:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Despite all the problematic wins at this year's Filmfare, the one that made me happy was Shefali win for her tremendous perf in Three of Us. It's been a joy to (finally) witness her get such well-written parts and be rewarded for them. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 11:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krimuk2.0: So true. Other than that though, the awards are as predictable and pointless as they've been for decades. The lead acting awards are just funny. The same names, for the same popular films. They're just awarding personalities, not performances, and it reeks of commercial pressure. Also, to give Rani the award for this poor film, is an insult to her talent, because she is a fantastic actress and it may mislead people to think it is indeed one of her best. I so wish she would pick better roles on OTT platforms, including series or films like what Kareena recently did in Jaane Jaan or Vidya did in many of her films. She deserves so much more. Shahid • Talk2me12:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I hope she does. Things have never been better for 40+ actresses in India than they are now. I hope it only keeps getting better with time. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 15:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krimuk2.0: Thank you, a very nice list of films. Three of Us is stupendous. I can't think of a more skilled actor for such films. I wish I had time to see as many films though, quite busy professionally. Jaane Jaan, which I mention above, is quite watchable. Gulmohar is indeed very good, so is Ghoomer. Goldfish is excellent. I really want to watch Joram. Have you seen Rocky Aur Rani? Shahid • Talk2me21:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't fond of Jaane Jaan -- I think the Drishyam films and the recent Merry Christmas were far superior. As for Rocky Aur Rani, I really enjoyed it as a commercial film, but I don't see it as an awards player, except for perhaps Ranveer's hilarious perf as a male Poo. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krimuk2.0: All True. Agree about Jaane Jaan and I considered Rocky Aur Rani a sort of rehash of K3G. Ranveer is always highly energetic and enjoyable. I take Merry Christmas as another recommendation. @Dr. Blofeld: Good seeing you. Shahid • Talk2me10:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great film! The most recent I've rewatched is Now, Voyager, Fistful of Dollars, Rear Window and Banana Peel. I've seen so many now that I have a rough idea of what all the real classics are at least from 1888 up until 2000. But still discovering good films from the past! I suppose a big part of it is that it's the nearest to going back in a time machine and capturing things back then. I'm particularly fond of the 60s and early 70s era in particular. ♦ Dr. Blofeld12:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Chirag Kahan Roshni Kahan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Sorry to bother you sir, but since you've been recently policing Filmfare Award for Best Actress, could you maybe give me some feedback on the talk page there about my latest changes? I'm not confident that no reaction since 2 days ago means it's all OK, maybe no one with interest has seen them yet. Anyway I went ahead with more tuning today. Gamapamani (talk) 12:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the heading Career Fluctuations (1999-2001), it says: Conflict broke out between Khan and the other partners of Dreamz Unlimited over the failure to cast Juhi Chawla in their 2003 production of Aziz Mirza's Chalte Chalte, and they parted ways, despite the film's success. Where in the source associated with this sentence explains the conflict? Because I've heard that Aishwarya Rai Bachchan was selected initially but was dropped and Rani Mukerji replaced her. In fact, this Rediff source itself says "Aishwarya Rai was originally signed on as Priya. Rani replaced her after Salman Khan interrupted the film's mahurat shot and created a scene, accusing Shah Rukh of getting too friendly with his girlfriend." Where in the source does it mention about the conflict between SRK and Juhi? We are the Great (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of Chalte Chalte, if you're free to reply or anything, after answering my question, can you please find more sources for the film, especially the Mid-Day source? Thanks to your effort, I was able to find its review of Hum Tum, also starring Mukerji. We are the Great (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Raataurdin.jpg
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Raataurdin.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayank Shekhar until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sukanya Verma until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld08:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.JPG)
