User talk:Shshshsh/Archive 3

Veer Zaara Synopsis Revisions

I really don't understand WHAT your problem is, Shahid?? Why do you feel the need to keep reverting the VZ synopsis to a stupid version that RUINS the entire plot of the movie for those who haven't seen it?

What right do you have to exert total control and censorship over the Veer Zaara page? Furthermore, what exactly is your issue with my synopsis?

It's obvious that you have become drunk on your own sense of power, and think that this site belongs to you, when it doesn't. It belongs to the public, who have a right to edit and contribute what they wish. You have no right to censor other peoples submissions, when yours are no better. You seriously need to be knocked down a peg or two to get rid of your swelled head, so you can realize that you are not the end-all and be-all of Wikipedia sites you contribute to.

Why do you keep changing the VZ synopsis, and what right do you have to do so? This is NOT your website. It belongs to everyone, and everyone has a right to contribute what they choose. I have every right to edit it, if I think it should be improved. It is NOT vandalism! What right do you have to call my work vandalism, just because you don't agree with it? My version does not violate any copyright since I wrote it myself based on the official version as a guide.

First you say that its not encyclopedic, and that its like a fan story, even though it is based on the official version. Then you claim it violates copyright when it CLEARLY does not. What exactly is your problem?

It's not like your version is the greatest either. In fact I think it is just HORRIBLE! It totally ruins all the elements of surprise, completely giving away the plot. I don't understand why that is something that you are willing to do. Your version of the synopsis has ABSOLUTELY no consideration for readers who haven't seen Veer Zaara yet. Don't you realize that yet? Your terrible version, gives EVERYTHING away! After reading your synopsis, nobody will have any desire to see the movie. Is that what you want?

What gives you the right to do that??

(Benbrattlover 07:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

What Part of "My Synopsis is NOT copyrighted" do you NOT understand??

I don't know how many times I have to tell you this, but the synopsis I wrote is NOT, I repeat, NOT, once again is NOT copyrighted. I wrote it myself, using the official version as a guide, JUST as a guide.

Also if you're going to revert the synopsis to your stupid version at least have enough consideration to not tell the ending of the story and ruin the plot for those who have yet to see it. (Benbrattlover 02:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks

For the Barnstar Haphar 13:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to Your Question

You want a logical reason to remove the ending of the movie?

How about consideration for others, for one? Not everyone comes here having seen the movie, and if every single detail of the movie is given away, what will be the point of their seeing it? Giving away the entire plot does NOT make it an encyclopedic version. Just look at any regular encyclopedia. They give the basic information, and leave the rest of the information to specific books on the actual subject.

The same thing should apply here. Instead of giving away the entire plot, it should be just a basic synopsis of the movie, WITHOUT ruining the ending, as well as the characters, actors/actresses, and links to the related websites, and leave the rest for the reader to find out if they decide to see the movie.

I mean look at the promos and trailers for movies. They do NOT give everything away. They just give a basic idea about the movie, so that people can decide whether its something they want to see or not. But if trailers gave away all the surprises, just how many people would actually watch it? I bet, very few, OR NONE!

In the same way, many people (myself included) come to Wikipedia to get information about a particular topic. I might want information about a movie so I can decide whether to see it. But if the entire movie is already told to me in a few paragraphs, why would I want to spend 2+ hours actually watching it

You really need to think about stuff like that before flexing your administrative muscles and constantly removing other people's carefully written edits.

(Benbrattlover 17:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I see

I think it's best to remove names from the Bollywood article since there is no relevance. Films are what makes Bollywood. And as for Chori Chori, I'll ask you why do you have Lakshya mentionned in Preity Zinta's career? No nominations there. Or why do you have Jaan-e-mann in her career section? No nominations there too. Nomination isn't everything. Lots of actors get great critical acclaim but at the end of the day, no nomination. Yet, sometimes, it's their best work. Take Kamal Hassan's Chachi 420, highly-acclaimed. Yet, no nomination. So, that's no even an argument. Thus, Chori Chori is relevant as I've mentionned. Now, it would be a pity if we discuss about it for months. Move on. Btw, I can't believe JBJ is a flop, I thought it deserved an average status, at least. And did you see any new good movies? - shez_15

Rekha

Hey. It was moved a year ago to Rekha Ganesan. I can't really help with requested moves... because I'm not sure how it works (it has been changed many times since I last used it)... just try doing it again and make sure you follow all of the instructions... if there's consensus on the talk page of Rekha I can just move it from that... but, I don't want to do it right away since the move was so long ago and lasting for a year without anyone reverting is almost like consensus. But, in the end I don't think it's that big of a deal since it's only a page title and Rekha redirect to Rekha Ganesan. gren グレン 20:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moraima Secada

  • I was told that by one administrator but two other administrators have told me that these particular EL were acceptable. He was the one that put them in before you took them out. Callelinea 21:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem.. I was confused also.. One Administrator blocked me for a day and it took two administrators to unblock me and tell me that my references were ok as long as they were not spam. Hope that sort of helps you. Callelinea 22:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

National Film Award

The 2006 national film awards are under a court case and are being investigated. Therefore, it would be wrong on the part of us editors to edit any information on that. I'm removing your edit on the Best Actress page.

Sorry dude, but the award has till now not been awarded to her. the awards had leaked out before they were announced first, and later when cleared of all these charges, one of the jury member accused that the jury was influenced in awarding the coveted awards. the court case is still pending. therefore, no awards have taken place after 2005.

It was rumored that bachchan and sarika won the awards. might have won too. but the jury is facing these charges of being "influenced". the SC will take its decision now. last year, i think anand patwardhan and other documentary makers had filed a case due to which the awards got delayed. its true and sad too that no awards have been given out since 2005. regards Anant Singh 17:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kareena Kapoor

Why do you keep reverting my edits? Boxofficeindia & Ibosnetwork both have included K3G in Rani's success ratio and her biggest blockbuster. Rani & Kareena both did cameos in K3G & Don respectively. Just because it's not included in Rani's page, you don't want to include it in Kareena's page? I don't see the point in that. Who're you to keep reverting my edits. I am going according to both of those sites. Many actors box office impact have increased by just doing cameo's for e.g. Abhishek in Shootout at Lokhandwala has helped his ratio, even Aishwarya Rai's appearance in an item number in Bunty Aur Babli has helped her success ratio. IBN also included BNB has one of Rai's top grossing films. BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

I am not saying that Don is her hit but I just said that it became one of the biggest hits of 2006. If BOI & IBN can include that why can't I? No one except you said anything about this edit. BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

Oh I am sorry Shshshsh, I didn't see what you wrote on Kapoor's talk page. When you wrote look at talk page on Kareena's history, I thought you were mentioning it to your talk page. Sorry for being rude and now when I read what you had to write it makes more sense. Thank You!!! BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

Thank You for helping me with my edits on Kareena Kapoor's page!

Fair use rationale for Image:KHNHLS.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:KHNHLS.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FPT 11:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know

I don't blame you. And I just don't know what to do with Haphar. I don't even know why he's targeting Rani. He has no interest in the article but just to prove his point, he interferes again and again. I know. There is novelty in almost every film an actor does. Rani did her first period film with Hey Ram. That's not mentionned. But all I'm saying is whatever film I know is critically praised, should be mentionned in the actor's paragraph. And since there is some novelty in the role and a delay in the release date, there's something to talk about. So, what's the big fuss? Only if Harphar understood that. By the way, I'm just going to add Rani's Tera Chehra to her career. I can't believe I missed that. It was such a big hit and made her popular all over again before Saathiya happened. I think one of the reasons why Saathiya did well commercially is because of Tera Chehra-Rani fame. Anyway, I just had my wisdom teeth removed. That's why a long gap away from wikipedia. Now, I'm feeling much better. - shez_15

National Film Award lists

Hi, why have you reverted all my changes on the National Film Award articles? I had worked hard on standardizing all the lists, by making the table sortable (see Help:Sorting) and had applying the wikitable class.

The wikitable class (class="wikitable") is the standard look and feel for Wikipedia. All the featured lists on Wikipedia use this standard look and feel (except the ones involving color codes, e.g. some chemistry-related lists). Also, the "wikitable" class is rendered in different colors according to the skin selected by the user. On the other hand, hard-coding colors makes the table look very ugly for people who are using a different skin, or a different device.

The non-standard colors look very gaudy, while the "wikitable" class is the standard look and feel for Wikipedia -- it's much better than hard-coding the colors. The different skins render "wikitable" in different colors, thereby allowing the users to read the content in the colors they prefer. If you don't like the default wikitable style of a skin, you can change your own stylesheet (see Help:User style), instead of hard-coding the colors in the article according to your preference.

Also, "sortable" makes it easier for the readers to analyze the data.

I wanted to revert the changes straightaway, but I thought of asking you if you have any specific reason for using non-standard colors, and not using sortable. If no, it's better to go with "wikitable" and "sortable".

I guess you were not aware of in-built classes ("wikitable" and "sortable"). If you don't have a good reason, I'll revert the changes. If you don't like the table colors, you can change your own style (see Help:User style), instead of forcing hard-coded colors on other readers. utcursch | talk 15:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, bold and italics are fine for the winner's/film's name. Nice to see your great work on Bollywood-related articles. utcursch | talk 08:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fairness

I'm confused. You want lead actors to be first like in Veer-Zaara and then you also want seniors to be first like in Kal Ho Naa Ho and KANK. The rule I thought of before was that Rani as the lead actor of LCMD, so she should be above all the rest. And for Saawariya, you want Ranbir b4 Salman and Rani. Aren't they seniors? Aren't they playing supporting roles like Jaya? Make up your mind. To me, it seems you just want to disfavour Rani in every way possible. But then you want seniors to be first too in some exceptions. Then why not AB b4 SRK in Veer-Zaara and Rani b4 Preity. Make up a rule. It's so confusing. Either go with the film's casting list or IMDB or just make a wikipedia rule. And then if you want seniors first, then remember Salman Khan is 18 years senior to Ranbir and for thus, he should be credited first. There is no difference between 30 to 18 to 2 years of seniority. A senior is a senior. And if we are going to put the cast as per seniority who also is notable in the movie then Rani should be b4 Preity in all their movies and Jaya can be b4 Rani in LCMD. Otherwise, it's pointless to argue since exceptions will lead to personal bias. Now, think. Either you want seniors first, or the lead one first. Or the easy way out is to go by the film's casting or IMDB. Shabana Azmi is also senior to Ash but in Umrao Jaan, on wikipedia and on IMDB and in the movie, Ash is credited first. Why is it always a problem when Rani is? Any opinions? Again, I'm not fighting with you, just raising my concern? I'm in no way favoring Rani, I'm just in want of a just rule.

By the way, if bips_basu does anything wrong again, I gave her a last warning, after that, you can block her or him. I don't know how to. Thanks.

And Rani got really popular because of that Tera Chehra song which was a big hit and maybe that song was the reason why people went to see Saathiya in theatres and perhaps why she became brand ambassador for her first ever endorsement: Fanta. First, MDK released. Flopped. Then the song came out. Hit. Then Fanta came. And then Saathiya released in December. Hit and Critically-Acclaimed. All because of one song. Well, of course, there were other factors too. But the youth really noticed her from the song. And it became a trend for actresses to become a part of Sami's video. No big actress would do a music video but seeing Rani's fate, everyone followed. Namrata Shirodkar, Twinkle Khanna, Amisha Patel, Bhumika Chawala, Mahima Chaudhary, and many more. An interesting notion I never thought of before. But of course, there's no reference on the net to prove this theory, so I'll just leave it out of wikipedia. But isn't it interesting to know? - shez_15

Yeah but Ghulam got released before Dil Se. So there were two films. And if in HDJPK and in Veer-Zaara, where she played the supporting role, she was credited before Preity as per seniority. So, if the industry regards her as a senior to Preity, then how can you object? Seniority is seniority. I think it's best in your interest to put the cast on wikipedia as per the lead role. And for LCMD, you should have Rani b4 Jaya and for Saawariya, Ranbir b4 Salman. And Preity b4 Rani in HDJPK and Veer-Zaara. But if we're going as per seniority, then Rani benefits in Saawariya, HDJPK and Veer-Zaara. What do you say? I don't mind either way as long as it's fair where ever seniority is concerned. - shez_15
I'm not saying Tera Chehra made her a superstar. It did something good for her. Because when a pop song becomes popular, there is bound to be some popularity for the people featured in it. Like in Made in India, Alisha Chinai and Milind Soman appeared in it. And they became household names. People didn't know much about them. Milind Soman went on to become a supermodel and Alisha did good and then faded. But then Kajra Re made her important again. See how much a song can do for one. Just like that, Rani got popularity, first from Aati Kya Khandala, and then KKHH and then because of that, got many films and some awards and then when the movies flopped, she faded and then Tera Chehra made her accepted again, which followed the Fanta's honor and then Saathiya. Of course, Saathiya didn't become a hit because of that. But a lot of people went to see Rani after her great publicity from Tera Chehra. Why do you think Guru was such a big hit this year? It's more to do with the media speculation of the pair's marriage and engagement that did wonders for the film. Of course, the movie was good but lots of movies are good, yet they fail. Publicity can do magic. Why do you think Aap Ka Surroor is doing so well today? It's all bcoz of Himesh's publicity. Anyway, that's just stupid talk. On to business. - shez_15
If it is arguable, then it can't be settled. That's why the only way out is to make a rule where the people of wikipedia vote or put the cast as per lead roles since if you put them as per seniority, there will be exceptions which will cause arguments. And to avoid all this, just put the cast as per lead roles or as per IMDB or as per the film itself which is the safest option, in my opinion. Have a great day. - shez_15

You're not being fair again?

You don't have to revert Rani's page to Haphar just because we are having problems on wikiquote. Please don't bring our personal differences into Rani Mukerji's page. I thought you agreed with the Tera Chehra song. And you made your own edits. And once we fought on wikiquote, the next day, you change it to Haphar? What double-standards? Anyway, I'll put it back and hopefully Haphar will get past it. We need to progress and not fight over one petty issue. And as for casting, I'm fine with your wish. But again, who are we to judge? The film maker is there to put it how he/she wants as its his/her vision we are portraying on wikipedia. - shez_15

Veer-Zaara

I can protected the page for a day. If the problem persists, you can file a request at WP:RfPP. You can give the {{nothanks-add}} warning to the user using {{subst:nothanks-add|Veer-Zaara}}. If the user persists even after the warning, report the user to WP:AIV -- s/he will be blocked. utcursch | talk 11:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image taggings

You need to explain, in depth why the use of the images constitutes fair use, please read WP:NFCC and WP:FURG which have further advice. Sfan00 IMG 14:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:EkHiBhool.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:EkHiBhool.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever

You win. Do whatever you want with the credits. I have no problem. And Rani's filmography table is just perfect. And I don't get why are you cropping the page when it's exactly like Preity's. The rules have not been discussed yet and for that, it should not be changed but I still let Haphar change a lot. And now, he just wants to remove the core, I can't believe it. And you're supporting him. I don't get that. If you want trivia like on Preity's page with the brand ambassador stuff, I can put that on Rani's page but it's stupid since it will be removed. All I'm saying is that support me with Rani's page from Haphar. - shez_15

Ernst's message

A OK amigo. Don;t worry about theh mis understanding Great job to all involved -it was a long time coming -its looking great -thanks. But you say the other user is a sock puppet of a banned user? ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word for it. Seems strange he would want to try to fill in details one moment and vandalise something else out of personal preference -but the world is made up of strnage poeple!!! Thanks a bunch anyway for reverting any bad edits and correcting. Hey Have you thought any more about helping the Tamil list -its in pretty bad shape -I've been preoccupied with the American film list. All the best ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created a Bollwyood template :

♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Tamil-language films - it is just cleanup -most of the films are not even in the tables as yet. I know nothing about Tamil movies either! ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It just needs formatting and ordering I think -details can be added at a later date -its just I'm afraid they may be tagged for deletion soon enough thanks ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 11:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats perfect -exactly what needs doing- as i said in my previous comment "It just needs formatting and ordering I think -details (meaning actors/directors) can be added at a later date" . Someone with a knowledge of the films can add details on cast and genre etc like they did to the Telugu films. Thanks ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 11:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow I like Preity Zinta. Now there's one beautiful woman!!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 12:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check out some of her films on youtube later -it has a brilliant amount of indian films -this is how I am becoming familiar with the industry. -I have to say Bollywood movies are very entertaining and often have a lot of character! Zinta reminds me of an Indian Angelina Jolie - very attractive and a great actress. ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 12:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks for the Barnstar. I don't think I deserve it, but thanks anyways. :) Sorry for the late reply, I'm in Europe. gren グレン 22:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

Hello. I'm sorry but I totally disagree with you. This is an encyclopedia not a film magazine. Frankly there was too much gossip surrounding the controversy section, even in the personal life bit, Maureen Wadia having a problem with Zinta -- that's gossip. The controversy bit had stuff on Suchitra writing stuff on her blog and blah blah, we can't go into all those details. I had a feeling I might offend you by removing it, but it needs reducing. -- Pa7 19:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added my answer, have a look. -- Pa7 19:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Im apologize, if I offended you, Im just doing some quick editing. Im not even supposed to be on the computer but rather in bed. Sorry for the drastic edits and not saying hello, but do you see what Im trying to say about that section. OK, I won't remove it totally but can we cut it down a bit? -- Pa7 19:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that you are not in agreement with my proposition and opinions, in which case I will leave it at that and move onto other pages which could do with some improvements. -- Pa7 19:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are not like Shez15, and yes you have an opinion, as do I, as do everyone. Im not backing off completely, but Im just giving a proposition and hope that people will support me on that, in which case for now I will do nothing but wait. I respect you but Im not upset about our disagreement just for the fact that we both share the same passion for Hindi cinema, and therefore it is natural that one of us would disagree with the other. It is bound to happen, which in our case it did. Anyway, best regards and happy editing. -- Pa7 20:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KWK

It had to be written in prose, because wikipedia does not really accept lists. If you want to show what couples came on you can say the following guest came together: Shahrukh Khan and Kajol, Rani Mukerji and Kareena Kapoor.... etc etc. That's what I was going to do but I elaborated a bit and thought that just saying these people came together would be quite boring. But if we've got a written section now, I don't think they will mind if we have a list as well. -- Pa7 22:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, however if you see anything that needs improving then go ahead and do whatever. Best regards. -- Pa7 22:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, happy editing. -- Pa7 22:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I think adding Hindi words is more appropriate because in some chinese awards , they also discribe their Mandrain works , thanks Aung Phyoe

ShahRukh Khan raised by Hindus

With reference to your action of reverting my edit (13:13, 25 July 2007) that Shahrukh Khan was raised by Hindus for most of his life on the grounds that there was 'lack of sources', the following is an interview with Shah Rukh himself.

To make things easier, refer to the question: 'Is being Islamic an important part of your identity? Have recent events forced you to think more about it? '

He claims he was brought up by Hindus most of his life.

In fact this reference has been coupled with the statement I made. There is a topic too on this in the discussion page of the article. You may want to see it as there are other sources there too. Thnks for your time and have a nice day.--S3000 13:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats great!! Thanks and have a nice day.--S3000 13:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I refer to your action of removing my warning note against modification/removal of the statement that Shahrukh was raised by Hindus. Since including the statement, there have been numerous attempts to modify/remove it as many people don't believe he (from Muslim parentage) has been raised by Hindus (although there is a citation!!). I noticed by adding the note that recommended reffering to the discussion page for more information, the attempts to remove/modify the statement was significantly reduced. Whats your say ?? Thanks and have a nice day.--S3000 18:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your new note is brilliant. Thanks for your support, you too have a great day.--S3000 06:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Filmographies

Oh for filmographies absolutely this is perfect - (even the silver bar which gives it a touch of class) this is what I would like to see on every film bio articles rather than scruffy lists go ahead and sort as mmany as possible like this -this is a actor filmmaker goal. -some of the Indian filmographies are the best on wikipedia but somtimes backwards!!!

However not for the lists. The lists actually began in this style but the sheer quantity of films by year meant the left column looked ridiculous so we evolved the style you see today. If you see anything yu'd like to discuss in particularly give me a bell. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 11:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh absolutely i agree with you they shouldn't be split. I agree there are a lot of films but there is absolutely no problem with them on one page- it is much more managable on one page. If anything by 2009 we have too many films then it could be split List of Bollywood films:2000-2004 then List of Bollywood films:2005- but definately not by year -I'm going to redirect them back. OK? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 09:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to merge them back but split them by half decade in two lists 2000-2004 2005 (more films have been added now) - present not 7 lists ok? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 09:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored them fully. I want to keep them as concise as possible agreed? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 09:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes if you could add that it would be a great help ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it for you. Hey have you formatted any of the Tamil films yet? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However I would like to ask you to not shut off all the red links. Although it may not look as tidy - It is far more likely the film will get started if they are red linked. I had intended going through the Bollywood films and starting a few in the 1990s ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 13:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh your filmographies are perfect - the silver bar which gives it a touch of class. This is my ideal for every filmography on wikipedia. Some of the Bollywood articles have so much class. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 18:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood

Please avoid edit-wars. Don't remove sourced information just because you don't like something. Entire population of Afghanistan watch Indian movies, something you do not know.--Spock44 16:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you blind? What do you mean where are the sources? There are 4 links to each Indian movie made in Afghanistan or about Afghanistan, click on the link and read where those movies were made. Also read the 3 sources given in the paragraph for Afghanistan. I don't have to show you all this, you should be able to understand English and read them yourself.--Spock44 17:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am calmed, I tried to make the section more easier for readers to understand, by putting where most people watch the movies to the least places for Asia. It starts from India, spreads to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and then to Middle Eastern countries on the western side, and, Bangladesh, Nepal, China, and other South east Asian countries on the other side. Before, it was not in order. Also, before 1947, the border of India with Afghanistan was what is now the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, Durand Line. Indian movies influenced Afghanistan since 1930s or when they first began, there were Indian movie theaters in every city of Afghanistan, and until today there still are some. So, most people ONLY watched Indian movies in Afghanistan because Afghanistan never made own movies. You could say that about 50% of Afghanistan's population are able to speak or understand Hindi-Urdu language, especially since 1979 when about 6 million or so of the 30 million Afghans living in Pakistan for over 25 years. These people speak fluent Urdu language. So naturally they will watch movies that they can understand. Amnyway, I am just trying to help make the article look more professional written. I hope you think the same way. Thanks for understanding.--Spock44 18:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood stunners

Oh lordy lordy. Mallika Sherawat is out of this world -one of the best looking women I've ever seen. How on earth are women this beautiful created? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 18:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work - an award

The Indian Cinema Barnstar
I, Blofeld the Bald, award this Indian cinema Barnstar for your excellent and prolific work on Indian films and actresses and cleaning up articles to a high standard. Your're a credit to the industry. This is also for sharing my exquisite taste in beautiful actresses. As they say in Scotland "Ya doi'n good laddie"!

Riya Sen is another. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 19:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So are the 70s and 60 s and 50s and 40s etc empty!!!!! Remember it used to be a backwards list of bollywood films with just the titles ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 14:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PLease can you help clean up Aap Ka Suroor - The Real Love Story thankyou ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 15:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant stuff as usual!! Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 19:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Revert

Hello Shshshsh. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Recently, I have noted that you reverted my edits here. I am sure you were not aware that this issue was discussed in length here, among other places and it was decided that Urdu scripts etc. are indeed relevant in Bollywood film articles. It is helpful to understand the relationship between Hindi-Urdu and Bollywood when dealing with this subject area. Several Bollywood film covers that utilize Indian scripts give the two standard registers of Hindustani: Hindi and Urdu. You can take a look at some of these film covers yourself: Image:Awaaraposter.jpg, Image:Waqt 1965 film poster.JPG, Image:Sholayposter2.jpg, Image:Padosan film poster.jpg, etc. Other reasons are provided in the archives of Talk:Bollywood. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in the matter. With regards, AnupamTalk 00:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shshshsh. The language of Bollywood movies can be called both Hindi or Urdu. Perhaps the A Little About Language section in this article will give some insight on the entire situation. Please also see this article, which also addresses the usage of both Hindi and Urdu scripts in Bollywood film articles. I hope this helps! Thanks again for your reply. With regards, AnupamTalk 16:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Shahid!

I'm really impressed with your use page, it really gives some great points of view away. Regarding the Maddy article, I've cleaned everything up until the filmography. Give me 2 to 3 days to turn the table to suit the MOSLOW version. Are you a fan of Maddy? Universal Hero 20:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Trying to promote it to GA! Help me get some decent copyright-free images! Universal Hero 21:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your work is 99% polished the only thing I see is sometimes the awards section looks a bit untidy. You can use a ---- for the awards sections to seperate the different awards. See List of Preity Zinta's awards and nominations. PLease use this ---- on all award sections in actor award sections cheers ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 21:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other than this it might look better ina table like the silver filmographies. What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ;;"Expecting you?" Contribs 21:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:

This is what you wrote on my talk page: In any case, you will not respond to my messages, so, who knows, maybe you stick to the article talk page. Firstly I did not think to answer to your recent messages because, I thought the Zinta intro was fine, and secondly I have been working on the pages which need the most attention and finally, like the template says, Im busy.

So what if she spent three months in Melbourne. She's an actress, she has to travel around the world and shoot at different locations. Yes, it is an important aspect of an actors's career but location shooting is a production note. She spent a month in London for Jhoom Barabar Jhoom a month in Chandigarh for Mera Bharat Mahaan, do we add all these notes? As for the Hero thing, I don't remember removing it or the film being "claimed" to be the most expensive, so your gonna have to remind me about this.

Finally, I couldn't help but look at your user page and I saw the section titled Before and After. According to you, you have widely expanded the articles mentionned. I do admit you do a lot of editing on Zinta's page, but that is because you do it bit by bit and not on one go, which is what I do. I think that many other editors have contributed to the articles mentionned such as me, Plumcouch at one point, Zora when she was here etc etc. So basically for you to say, that you edited the "most and have widely expanded them more than every other editor", is a bit unfair. It is not my buisness what you write on your user page but you might offend many editors by saying that. When I read it, I honestly felt a bit offended, because I feel that I have contributed and added to the articles mentionned. Just my personal opinion. -- Pa7 22:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

If you had a problem with my memory capability then please tell me on my user page rather then questioning my lack of attention in front of everyone. This is what you said: Don't you pay attention to your own removals?. Honestly, I was really offended by this.

I did not imply that I did not appreciate your work and also I never meant to offend you by saying the stuff about bit by bit. But, there is a difference between being modest and being a bit boastful, you said: I was the one who fought with Shez_15 for everything. If not me you would come today and find Zinta at the bottom of every film cast, and Mukerji at the very beginning of EVERY film. Do you know how many fights I've had with Shez about cast credits even before you stared at Wikipedia? Me, Zora, Haphar and Plumcouch fought with him nearly a year and a half ago about his edits.

I remember adding the Bharat Shah case, expand it, do whatever with it and I will do what I need to, to make sure the page is in good shape.

You have accused me of being ignorant, as you said, As for your ignorance, you have ignored me so many times.... Well, Im very sorry to say this but you have been arrogant with the fact that you feel that some of the pages you edited are down to you. I was impressed with the National Awards thing, but there were loads of people who edited to make sure the pages are in trim shape. What you write on your user page is your buisness and for me to change things on your user page is wrong. All I told you was my opinion, in which case I apologize if it caused you any offence. BTW, I also edit on Wikiquote and added more then 30 quotes and references under my IP addrress. I guess we have reached a difference of opinion, I do not agree with your edits, you do not agree with mine. Just for the record, you have not annoyed me in any case, but I'd rather state my opinions rather then keep quiet about it. Our opinions of each other have probably changed, you thinking me as ignorant, me thinking you as arrogant. We were due to have differences with each other eventually. Again, I apologize if I have said anything to offend you. My opinions on the Zinta issue have been left on the discussion page. -- Pa7 15:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We both have opinions about each other, so what I can I do about that? About the user page thing, I do not know why you found that offensive, it's YOUR user page, why would I edit on it? I also remember explicitly saying sorry in my previous message so there would be no need for me to apologize again, unless I offended you again. Say whatever you need to on your accomplishments, I won't disrupt you again on that. -- Pa7 17:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, it's funny how quickly a person can express how much they dislike another person [1]. Oh well. -- Pa7 18:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, whatever. -- Pa7 19:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Art Films

Shshshsh, I just wanted to make something clear. I seriously don't get the difference between a so called art film and a critically-acclaimed film?? What is the difference between them??

Thanks: BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ
Thanks for explaining that to me. I never doubted your edits regarding the art films/critically acclaimed films I just wanted to know the difference between those two. Once again, thanks
Best Regards: BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ 19:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start again on Rani

I don't want Haphar to know this. But let's get on without him. JUst edit the page. And I'll be okay with it as long as you don't remove whatever Haphar removed. All about her childhood story and college. Just don't look at his edits. Go on and read and fix whatever needs to be fixed. I won't interfere. As for Khandala, I know you want it removed. I think it's the wording. Don't put performance. Put people noticed her because the song was popular. Thanks. - shez_15

Ok but thanks for listening! As long as you don't tell Haphar. I'm fine. I hope he doesn't know. But I told pa_7 to work on it too. So, just be reasonable and don't fight. I'm leaving Vancouver tomorrow. My college starts in a month and I'll be busy. I guess it's my last time on wikipedia and I want Rani's page to look decent and informative instead of having Haphar crop up its core. Thanks again. The reason why I'm asking to do this because I value your opinion and I hope you will be unbiased. Good luck with everything. You're doing a great job. Best Regards. - shez_15

Shahrukh Khan

Is there any particular reason you reverted [2] the edit I made [3] or was it just because you didn't notice it between the other edits? There is a template for links to DMOZ, so why not use it? -- Windharp 09:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

How dare you accuse me of double standards. You know what, I thought that the arguments were over between us but it's not my fault that you have problem with all my edits. After that argument I thought that was it, but now you've come out with this! Yes, I agree that I initially agreed for the list, but after looking at The Oprah Winfrey Show and The View, I thought the list was un-necessary. I did not realise that for me to remove the list, I had to go through you first! Frankly, I've got better things to do then to make "you look bad".

This is what you wrote on the Karisma Kapoor intro: She remarkably surprised critics and audiences with her performances in Fiza (2000) and Zubeidaa (2001). Since then, she has worked in several Art Films, which earned her critical acclaim, rather than commercial success. In 2003, Kapoor took a break from cinema and is likely to make her comeback very soon. Since Zubeidaa and Fiza, she starred in Aashiq, Haan Maine Bhi Pyaar Kiya, Baaz: A Bird in Danger, Ek Rishtaa: The Bond of Love, Rishtey and Shakti. She gave a critically acclaimed performance in the latter but the rest were commercial films. So how can you say that since Fiza and Zubeidaa she has worked in "Art Films"? That is why I changed the intro, I can simply turn around a say that your making me look back, but I know you've got better things to do as do I. Please keep your assumptions to yourself next time. -- Pa7 18:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You took the words right out of my mouth. I'll ask you to do the same thing: you also choose your words more carefully, because I don't respond well to rude comments either. I've had enough insults thrown at me before, it was not a nice moment for me and I did not do anything about it. If you agreed with the Karisma Kapoor why did you revert completely. I incorporated some of your edits into mine and you reverted fully? I think you should remove that "she remarkably surprised critics" because that indicates that we, the encyclopedia is speaking for everyone. Other people might not have been surprised by her turn in Fiza and Zubeidaa. I won't revert it for now anyways. The filmography thing I'll forget that. As for the directors, is it not enough to mention her films, characters etc. What's the point of adding directors, the only thing it will show is who she worked with, that's what the film link is for. -- Pa7 13:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, you may think I was being un-fair but that's your opinion, so I can't say anything to you about that. Like I said, I've got better things to do then to make you look bad. However it seems that you have been reverting my edits whenever as well, so are you being un-fair towards me? I guess I can ask that question since you asked me? -- Pa7 14:06, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What did you mean by this: It was exactly what you wanted to say, but I said it - not you - Pa7 14:16, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that I was trying to make you look bad then I can't do anything about that. In that case Im sorry. I don't usually apologize when I don't think I need to but if that will end the arguments between us then Im willing to take that step. I won't expect you to take that step so I'll take it instead. You carry on doing what your doing and I'll carry on doing what I'm doing. Just for the record, Im not reverting any of your edits to spite you -- I may be defensive but Im not that low. You have every right to revert whatever you don't agree with, just like I do. None of us have ownership over the articles, so whatever you add or I revert may not be agreed by a third party, just keep that in mind. If I do happen to revert or add anything that you don't find appropriate then we can discuss it with civility. This is the first time that I've been accused of reverting someone's edits to spite them, I really hope it's the last time. -- Pa7 23:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As said, my reason for apologizing was to end this stupid and tiresome argument. That's it!! Got the message about the flags, will remove if I come across any. -- Pa7 23:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Next time I won't bother. I can't believe that even though I apologized you threw it back in my face. Forget this, what's the point of reasoning with you anymore. This is absoulutely ridiculous. I can't deal with this anymore. Just forget it. -- Pa7 00:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anything furthur that I say will offend you because Im at the point where I feel like swearing at you. Obviously Im not going to do that as I do not even know you and I don't want to personally attack you. Forget the apology, you don't need it and I regret giving it. I did not know that it was necessary for me to give a genuine reason for a apology, even though for the ending of the argument was not a good enough reason for you. Oh yes, in the future please do not question my lack of understanding by saying You didn't even understand your acts. I can simply say the same thing to you but I have enough respect and manners not to say that. -- Pa7 00:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can write whatever mate, but do not personally attack me. That's all Im requesting. So that this argument FINISHES FOR GOOD, and vise-versa. If I correspond with you from this point it will be regarding matters about the articles, because we literally hate each other right now, it does not mean we cannot act professionally regarding the content of articles. I hope this whole mess has ended now. Thank you. -- Pa7 00:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intro expansion

OK, I've cut off the whole thing. Can we please try and work together now? I know you asked me earlier for help on the Zinta intro. I did not reply to that message but I've started something on that. I've added that she won the Filmfare Award for Kal Ho Naa Ho. The sentence I was going to add was After a number of successful films she won the Filmfare Best Actress Award for her performance in KHNH. Then I removed successful because I do not think that her films were successful before KHNH. I will do some source checking on that bit, but what do you think? Is there anything you can add to that? -- Pa7 01:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Madhuri Dixit

Hi Shsh:

I noticed this morning that you had deleted entirely (reverted) extensive edits I made only yesterday to the Madhuri Dixit article. I had added biographical information, illustrations, etc. You erased all of it. It was pretty heartbreaking! Your note, "Too much unreferenced stuff. She wasn't acclaimed for SONGS etc," did not address the substance of your deletion (in fact, the "songs" paragraph you cited was not even one of my additions -- it was already there! In an attempt to address your concern, however, I have moved it lower in the story).

As you note on your personal page, I too am a busy person. But yesterday, for a change of pace, I enjoyed a rainy day of improving the page on one of my favorites -- now, I do not claim perfection, but I do believe I improved the page significantly, and -- to be frank you -- your breezy deletion of the whole thing less than 12 hours later came as a bit of a slap in the face! At first, in fact, I suspected outright vandalism by some anti-Indian trouble-seeker. But then, upon reading your personal page, I saw you were an intelligent and thoughtful person and so I decided to contact you and discuss this intelligently.

I agree with your stated mission here. Like you, I too "want to help the Bollywood pages. I think they're really deprived." Also like you, I count both Smita Patil and Madhuri among my favorite actresses. (In fact, I also extensively expanded Smita's page yesterday as well; I invite you to have a look and share your comments and suggestions -- but I do beg you not to summarily erase my work there as well!)

As a professional editor and publisher, I believe I can contribute something of value here. Since our interests and goals at Wikipedia are so similar, and since you have spent much more time here than I have, I would rather work with you than against you. If you have questions, comments or suggestions on my work, I am all ears. I am a great believer in learning from everyone I meet. I hope you will contact me. However, I would respectfully request that you do not simply delete hours of someone else's work for a mere lark or difference of opinion. Let's work together to improve Wikipedia's Bollywood coverage, shall we?

Respectfully

Devi

Hi Shahid

Nice to meet you; however, your remarks and actions have left me with many questions indeed. To take them one by one, you wrote:

      • Devi, first of all welcome to Wikipedia. I really appreciate your hard work ***

Thank you, but surely you will understand if I observe that your actions -- namely, a (second) wholesale round of "Revert" clicks -- could arguably be said to belie your words?

      • and I'm sorry if I offended you by reverting your edits. ***

I'll accept your apology, and assume that it also extends to your doing it again, including the Smita Patil article I was kind enough to bring to your attention?

      • But your edits are not encyclopedical in some ways. ***

In which "ways"? Judging by the wide array of "encyclopedic" styles on display at Wikipedia, including throughout the Bollywood pages and specifically in your own work -- so I think you might agree that "not enclyclopedical" is a very subjective judgment that could just as easily by strategically employed for entirely (or mostly) personal reasons?

What I am trying to figure out here is whether your work (not necessarily you personally; but whatever self-appointed guardians of "Bollywood Wikipedia" might be). Please be honest: Are the edits you've made here serious, or just random? Your words and personal page seem honest, logical and well-meaning, but your actions seem gratuitous and subjective, not to say bullyish (in the sense of, "This is my/our turf; let's kick the new kid around a bit.")

I am not looking for an unpleasant encounter. The Smita and Madhuri articles -- as they were when I encountered them -- were sparse, loose and poorly done. They were very definitely "not encyclopedical." Because I had some personal knowledge and interest on the topics, I therefore decided to contribute -- that's what Wikipedia is for, no? That's how it grows and slowly improves. My improvements may or may not have been perfect (and/or necessary) in your personal opinion, but they were not done within the "fiefdom" of one of your personally built actress pages. Having worked, as I mentioned, as both an editor and an attorney in the publications field for many years, I believe I can assert quite accurately that wholesale deletion of this kind, accompanied by incongruous words of goodwill, are invitations to problems (and decline in overall quality) to say the least.

You see, for example, today I was preparing a comprehensive table of Smita's roles, large and small, release dates, award, etc., to add to her Wikipedia page. I now return to find all of my other edits arbitrarily (again, I hope, not to say maliciously and intentionally) erased (and this after my specific request for you to abstain pending further discussion) -- so I ask you this: What is my motivation for working further and posting the improved filmography when you (or some other self-appointed judge; I believe I am correct to assume that you are not a formal employee of Wikipedia?) may simply come along and arbitrarily "decide" that the present, incorrect one was "better"?

My starting point in approaching an article like this is that such creations should be a continual work in progress, with many interested parties continually tweaking and improving accuracy and expanding content over the months and years. Your approach, on the contrary, seems to be simply bombing an article back into the stone age [i.e. "revery to previous version] if, on first glance, it fails to meet some amorphous "encyclopedical" criteria according to your personal tastes and opinions of the moment. Forgive me if I sound angry or accusatory; I am not -- but yes, I am confused and concerned.

You see, I simply do not understand: If I've stumbled into some "boy's club" of a few people who are self-appointed guardians of their own opinion, I have no desire to be their/your football. I don't mind the work, and I don't mind the rules -- but the "rules" as such seem (again) arbitrary and entirely subjective.

Please do not interpret my words as hostile -- I am honestly confused and disheartened by your actions, that -- despite words of well-meaning comradeship -- seem arbitrary and casually applied. I came here of my own goodwill and personal interest, and would like to work with like-minded persons -- if you are simply trying to show me the door, kindly be direct about it! I would rather get an honest bum's rush than a false welcome.

      • Adding quotes about actresses in the intro is not necessary ***

According to whom?

      • and before adding them we have to make sure they're actually necessary or notable. ***

"we" meaning whom?

      • When you're writing something please try to remind yourself that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and everything you're adding has to be selected before. ***

selected by whom? by you? by some other identifiable individual? again and again, my question is simply -- by whom and on what authority? It is not a case of my simply being "difficult"; it is an honest and central question for me so that I do not waste significant amounts of time on business such as this.

      • If you're adding a quoted part of a critic review for some role of Smita Patil, it is good but not more than that. ***

This I can appreciate as a substantive (and therefore followable) guideline -- but again, who has set this guideline? and where? and who is the arbitrator? you? and what if another arbitrator disagrees? Do you simply delete and revert each other ad infinitum?

      • Apart from it, all the images you have uploaded are not permitted. ***

Here, you see, is another instance of your stating as "fact" something that is, at best, your own tentative opinion and unofficial judgment. I do speak with some authority -- as a practicing attorney for the past 16 years, I have more than a passing familiarity with copyright law, and in this case I must respectfully disagree with your opinion. The screen captures are (very) arguably, and almost certainly, "fair use" and documented as such.

The only party legally qualified to make the summary judgment that you took upon yourself is the copyright holder, who is entitled to (but never would, in my experience, in such a case) challenge fair use.

So now what? Do I click undo again, so that you can click undo again and I can undo again, ad infinitum? Do we come to an agreement that you will not delete my edits, except after specifically indentifying and discussing honest disagreements? Do we take it to Wikipedia's Bollywood cabal? Do we arbitrate? Do we request mediation? Or do we come to some good faith agreement?

      • I hope we could work together in a professional way, if you need some help with anything, don't hesitate and contact me. I'm here to listen and discuss. My best regards, --Shahid ***

I would like this too, if you are willing to show it in actions -- and not just say it in words. Again, I refer to your personal page and hope I have found an honest man. Otherwise, it truly is just gratuitous bullying and timepass, it would seem.

Very truly yours ...

Devi

Cleanup

Wow that an essay above!!!! I've come across Raj Babbar. The film is a shambles and in capital letters!! Please can you fix it when you can cheers! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 20:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then Happy Birthday!! How old?? I'm glad there is someone I can rely on. I've just had to continue with the Bulgarian film list. Soembody promised they would complete it -this was three months ago and they didn't do a thing!!!! What I've done in five minutes they couldn't do in three months!! Have a great day. Any plans? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 10:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Zinta intro

She had her biggest commercial success with Yash Chopra's romance Veer-Zaara (2004), and was praised for playing roles of Indian modern women in international hits like Salaam Namaste (2005) and Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna (2006). I like this sentence but I don't think we should include the fact that she played a strong, independent woman. Seeing the roles she did prior to those films, I think they were the roles that were different and praisable. KANK she was supporting and she was probably one of the few actors who escaped the critics chop so including this would be fifty-fifty. I think it would be better to include that she turned her career around professionally in 2007 by working with critically acclaimed directors. What do you think? Also, Im not going to be on Wikipedia for abit, maybe on and off, so could you please keep an eye on the Chak De India page. A whole bunch of anons keep adding all sorts of crap and I've had to revert most of their edits. I've referenced the whole of the response section, but I have a feeling someone will revert it or mess it up. Could you keep an eye on it? Best regards. -- Pa7 18:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Highest-paid actresses

Hello Shshshsh, I just wanted to let you know that you've done an excellent job with Preity's intro. Pages of Hollywood actresses like Angelina Jolie and Julia Roberts have indicated that they're one of the highest-paid actresses; I was wondering if we're allowed to indicate this fact on Bollywood actresses. Oh by the way, Happy Belated Birthday!

Best Regards. -- BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ 20:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thanks Shahid for your input. I will certainly use your advice. I was thinking of adding the Star Screen Awards (definitely) and IIFA (not sure) awards to the other awards section in the {{infobox actor}}. This is because "the entire nomination and selection for the Screen Awards is done by a panel of distinguished professional from the industry itself—in a manner similar to that of the Oscars. And the criteria for winning is professional excellence, not just popular view. A Screen Award is thus considered the toughest award to win and is therefore most coveted award in the industry." (From the film's page) As for the IIFA awards, I've heard that the winners are chosen via the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. What do you think? I am not sure about adding the IIFA awards, but I think that we should add the star screen awards to the awards =)

Best Regards. -- BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ 20:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see what you're saying!! Thanks BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ 21:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of adding it to the actors' infobox not the template. Right at the bottom of the template you can see that you can add other awards that the actor has won awards =), so I was thinking of adding at least the Star Screen Awards. Other awards in India are not really important. If you want us to consult someone else then we could, but I don't think we should add it to the template, just the infobox of the actors. BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ 21:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think that you're correct. Adding too many awards to the infobox will look really bad!! It's fine the way it is! -- Rahul 21:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kareena's intro

Shahid! In Kareena's intro, do you think that I should input the fact that her releases after K3G failed to do well until Chameli came along. In the lead, I was thinking of pointing out K3G (her biggest success so far), Chameli (turning point), Dev & Omkara (critically acclaimed performances). If you have time, could you please help me with Kareena's intro. Thanks. -- BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ 21:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC) P.S. You could call me by my first name, RAHUL.[reply]

Shahid, I expanded her lead. What do you think?
Kareena Kapoor (Hindi: करीना कपूर, born 21 September 1980) nicknamed "Bebo" is a four-time Filmfare Award-winning popular Indian actress who appears in Bollywood movies.
After making her debut in the 2000 film, Refugee, Kapoor achieved her first commercial success with her second release, Mujhe Kucch Kehna Hai (2001). Her performance as a cosmetic beauty in Karan Johar's melodramatic Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham (2001) was praised and the film turned out to be her biggest commercial success. After a not so successful attempt at achieving box office success in 2002 and 2003, Kareena began taking on more serious roles. Her portrayal as a sex-worker in Sudhir Mishra's Chameli (2004) proved to be the turning point in her career. Her performance in critically acclaimed films like Dev (2004) and Omkara (2006) were praised and fetched her two Filmfare Critics Award for Best Actress.
During her career years, she has appeared in many films, majority of them bringing her critical success rather than commercial success. Despite this fact, she has emerged today as one of the top and most versatile actresses from the industry.
Rahul 22:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Shahid! Rahul 22:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lata Mangeshkar

No problem. You're right. utcursch | talk 10:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I take it we both agree that her professional turn in 2007 should be mentionned. The independent woman thing can be used but it's gonna need tweaking because some people may not agree that they were the roles that brought out her acting ability. I like SJB to Ghosh but this is probably because I have not seen any of his films. CDI looks good and it's about time that a film about the national sport should be shown. I still like JBJ, bought it on DVD a week ago! Hehehehe! You have a good birthday? -- Pa7 18:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ednita Nazario

After a more careful read of WP:Flag, I can see why you would remove the flag: the nation issue. Regardless,although Puerto Rico is a commonwealth of the US, it is still a separate entity. There are some distinctions. Rather, Puerto Ricans have US citizenships. Further, there is also a WP:Puerto Rico]] project and therefore, the US and PR are separate enough to warrant the use of the flag.--Charleenmerced Talk 18:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hmmmm.. I agree that we can now talk to each other with civility, it's in fact a relief! Glad to know you had a good 20th.

I haven't seen any of Rituda's film's. They did not really appeal to me but I'll definently watch The Last Lear and Barua's film as well. I haven't seen MGKNM, but from the reviews Anupam Kher gave a killer performance. Yep, Im also waiting for Madhuri's film, she looked beautiful in the promo. LCMD looks quite good, I liked Parineeta so I'll probably like this one.

About the intro's can we add that Zinta has won two Filmfare Awards, one Screen Award, one IIFA Award or is that too much? If it is added then I have a feeling people might include all the other odd awards. Like you said it's not really priority number one right now so we discuss whenever. Regards. -- Pa7 20:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Con Todo Mi Amor

Yes, you are correct that I look for articles to improve by patrolling random articles and new articles. When appropriate, I include editorial templates like the sources template. This is how I choose to improve the project, and I don't particularly appreciate people interfering with my edits and then threatening to go to admins. I am reinstating the appropriate template on the articles in question. I expect they will remain or sources will be introduced before they are removed. Erechtheus 17:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, also, you're wrong about I'm Your Baby Tonight -- there are citations to two professional reviews. Those are perhaps the best sources to cite for album articles. Erechtheus 17:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Directly from WP:A -- "Editors should provide attribution for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. The burden of evidence lies with the editor wishing to add or retain the material. If an article topic has no reliable sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." You may consider my addition of the template my challenge of the material. Erechtheus 17:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I guess the film will be out later this year (October probably), as its premiering at the Toronto International Film Festival in September. I think it will be nice to see Zinta in a salwar kameez cause they really suit her. OK, we'll stick to NFA and Filmfare for now, it was just a suggestion. Regards. -- Pa7 17:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]