Talk:Karisma Kapoor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Top ten[edit]

Whenever I see that "top ten" I'm going to remove it -- it's pure journalistic ephemera and doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Zora 07:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zora's edits[edit]

I removed the notable roles -- that's personal opinion. I might find different films "notable." I removed all of the trivia, which was unreferenced and a mix of fangush and ephemera. I rewrote for clarity. I removed all mention of romance with Abhishek Bachchan -- that was unreferenced, it's gossip, and I think it contravenes the WP:BLP policy. Zora 09:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Shahid • Talk2me 17:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:KarismaKapoor.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:KarismaKapoor.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:KarismaKapoor.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sunjay Kapur or Kapoor?[edit]

Google search provides 13900 hits for "Sunjay Kapur", while 5250 for "Sunjay Kapoor". Plus this is his commercial profile at his employer's website. His twitter account, Lindin also. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some of your sources say "Sunjay", while others refer to him as "Sanjay"--Isaacsirup (talk) 03:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, my mistake, I wrote sanjay here, but the sources, I have cited refer Sunjay. I have edited it now. Also the google hits numbers are also for Sunjay.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:38, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And remember Sanjay Kapoor with a and oo is a different person.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:41, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Some sources such as this(indiatoday) and this(oneindia) refer to him as "Sunjay Kapoor"--Isaacsirup (talk) 03:43, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know some sources refer to him using Kapoor. I get that. Thats why I have opened this discussion. And If you have not noticed, I have mentioned above that there are 5000 hits for Kapoor. But my point is Kapur is his real name, as first it gives 13900 hits and it is the one used by him on his twitter, linkedin, and his command profile.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 03:52, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Of the 13900, most are unreliable. Those twitter and Linkd profiles are not his, as they are not confirmed.--Isaacsirup (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
what about his company page? and you think the reference you provide is reliable? If you are going to say that your references are news article, then I can equally cite more number of newspapers. Btw, how do u deduce that most are unreliable? In such cases, we on WP mostly uses google hit counts.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 04:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Company page can be wrong--as it might not be written by Sunjay/Sanjay himself. His children' surnames are most probably "Kapoor", but this cannot be verified also.--Isaacsirup (talk) 04:45, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
wow.. company page is also wrong. and the citation you provide is correct then? --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 04:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am now going to change it to Kapur, as I have verified by logging into my twitter account. Although his account does not carry verified symbol, but he (on this account) is being followed by plenty of people who have verified accounts, such as Ratan Tata, Narendra Modi, Sam Pitroda and most of main Indian news sources such as NDTV, HT, TOI etc. You can also verify this and please do not revert it agian, until you have more stronger counter evidence.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OneIndia and IndiaToday are reliable sources--Isaacsirup (talk) 05:21, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
did you read, what I wrote above?--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OneIndia and IndiaToday are reliable sources. He is most probably not on Twitter. They are probably following the wrong person. A fake twitter-account of Ranveer Singh had over a million followers and even got media-coverage regarding comments made about Salman Khan and the film Ek Tha Tiger through that account--Isaacsirup (talk) 05:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ok, I am not going to comment further, as you seem to have taken it personally and are hell bent on proving that you are right and others are wrong. You are rejecting every evidence, much more reliable as wrong and your oneindia and IndiaToday as correct. For your satisfaction see this, this and this. These are references from your so called reliable sources only that uses "Kapur".--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 05:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
His name varies even on the same media outlets. (indiatoday) and (oneindia). Haaaaaahaaaaaaaahaa!!--Isaacsirup (talk) 05:44, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Children surname[edit]

For that, we need to find some good sources. Traditionally surname goes by father's name, but of course it is not necessary.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 06:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This guy' name varies, but it should be consistent with his children' surnames. I guess, unlike her sister, Karisma Kapoor did not change her name because her husband's last name is also "Kapoor"--Isaacsirup (talk) 06:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am amused that you are ready to derive father's name from children name.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 06:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably his children' last names also vary or will vary in the coming future. But his and his children' last name should be consistent in this article.--Isaacsirup (talk) 06:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency is good, but do you want really to ignore all evidence in favour of Kapur, just because his children's name are written using "Kapoor"? Statements written on WP are not reliable, until they are backed by reliable sources. Since name of children are not reliable, there is no reason to go with that instead of reliable evidence I provided above. I had asked you to provide some good reliable references before reverting. But you want to go with unreliable sources. This behaviour of yours comes under disruptive editing.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 08:06, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Karisma Kapoor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Filmography[edit]

There is a separate filmography page Karisma Kapoor filmography so no need to have the same here. - Managerarc™ talk 12:36, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revert edits[edit]

I have reverted her edits to a previous version, that was improved for a brief time. I think that the previous version was a good article because it had the truth of Karisma's persona. I anyone have any problem and want to discuss anything with me, then leave a message on my talk page. talk. Ayeih Na (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Karisma Kapoor[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Karisma Kapoor's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "top actresses":

  • From Hema Malini: Top Actresses. Box Office India. Accessed 8 January 2008.
  • From Preity Zinta: "Top Actress". Box Office India. Archived from the original on 4 December 2013. Retrieved 8 January 2008.
  • From Rekha: "Top Actress". Box Office India. Retrieved 8 January 2008.
  • From Rani Mukerji: "Top Actress". Box Office India. Archived from the original on 17 October 2013. Retrieved 8 January 2008.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 14:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Telugu link[edit]

change ((Telugu)) to ((Telugu language|Telugu)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:541:4305:C70:61B2:D7F3:94D7:81FE (talk • contribs)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 15:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Karisma Kapoor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Karisma Kapoor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:19, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Potential edit war[edit]

Hi, @Krimuk2.0 and Aapkai Pitta Gee: Sorry for pinging like this but why don't you two sort it out over here instead of reverting each other? I know I've no right as I am no admin or whatever, but please cooperate. Thanks Vivek Ray (talk) 14:24, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removing unsourced information is not edit warring. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image[edit]

There's a dispute going on about which image to use for the lead. Here's what has been in the article of late, starting on January 1 in order of when they were added. Note that the first image has generally been the lead image and has been reverted back to it several times

  • from Dec 2012
    from Dec 2012
  • March 2016
    March 2016
  • June 2012
    June 2012
  • March 2013
    March 2013
  • June 2012
    June 2012
  • March 2018
    March 2018
  • march 2018 cropped
    march 2018 cropped

There are also more images at c:Category:Karisma_Kapoor

Can we please stop the reverting, start talking and come to a consensus on the images? I would ask that there be no further reverts until such a consensus develops. Pinging the various editors that have edited those images - @DMacks, DaanaPlaato, Sam.Johnanderson, and Luckstar23: Thank you Ravensfire (talk) 04:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The general preference for images of a living person in the lead is that they should be "natural and appropriate representatives of the topic" (MOS:LEADIMAGE). For a living person that tends to prefer a more recent image. Prefer, not demand. Of the images above, the June 2012 are just not good. Likewise, the uncropped March 2018 has too much going on, the watermark - not ideal in other words. The Dec 2012 is a good image, but it's over 8 years old at this point. Same with the March 2013 image, good quality, good lighting, but it's over 8 years old. I took the March 2018 and cropped it, hoping that would be a good compromise, but obviously failed given the silent revert. Quality-wise, the Dec 2012 and March 2013 images are a bit better, but it is a significantly more recent image. All together, that would be my preference, mainly because it is a more recent and thus a more accurate representative image of Kapoor. I haven't looked through the commons images for another option, yet. Ravensfire (talk) 04:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first image here [1] may be an option. It's a BH photo May 2018 and appears to meet the criteria for BH images on commons, and with a good crop, could work nicely. Ravensfire (talk) 04:25, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My main action was to undo a disruptive editor (now blocked) across the whole wiki. But my edit-summary sums up my thoughts about this image's specifics, in no particular order: "Newer image that is at least as high quality, more focused on *her* and less-distracting commercial background,". That was partially based on the fact that at the time of my edit, what you have as "from Dec 2012" was captioned "Kapoor at an event in 2013". I would reject out-of-hand nearly anything with an in-image/overlay watermark if there is any other option that is viable. So reject March 2018 but the cropped version of it is fine. Of the two June 2012, the one with microphone is fine, but the one standing is too much margin and over-exposed. Of the two most recent, both have odd lighting/focus, neither seems clearly better/worse than the other to me. DMacks (talk) 04:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Karisma_Kapoor&oldid=1194759745"