Talk:Filmfare Award for Best Actress

Best supporting actress info doesn't belong here
Why do we have an identical table both here and in the supporting actress article? That causes maintenance issues. And why do we have to combine BA and BSA wins and nominations here and there as well? Now we have other editors trying to add in best villain, etc. all the time. I think the same issues exist on the male actor side as well. I think we should simplify things and go with just the wins and nominations in the given category only. Comments? BollyJeff ||  talk  22:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Initially it used to have only the relevant category, but a few months ago an anon added the other category as well, which is clearly designed after the tables appearing on pages related to the Academy Awards. If you had asked me about this three months ago, I might have been in agreement with you, but today I personally am not categorically against this version because it makes clear who the overall record holder is. For instance, Jaya Bachchan won three Best Actress awards (which is not a particularly remarkable feat in this category) but she also won the Best Supporting Actress award thrice, which makes her overall the most awarded actress in the major acting categories, which I think is rather noteworthy here as well. The major awards at any award function are Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor, particularly nowadays because the other categories have been officially withdrawn. If people add it, then they can be reverted, and a discussion can be made here so that we have something to cite. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  23:16, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well alright, since it's mimicking the Academy Awards format, I am okay with it. That also provides precedent for allowing 'Best' and 'Best Supporting' awards only. BollyJeff  ||  talk  23:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Sadhna vs Madhumati
There seems to be a bit of a confusion over which film Vyjayathimala won the award for. I made a reasearch on that a month or so ago and I'm pretty sure she got it for Sadhna.

Basically, there are two sources which say it's Madhumati:
 * The official indiatimes site
 * Bollywood Hungama

According to IMDb, however, it is Sadhna.

I thought we should go with the official site, but then see what I found on my research:


 * The official site (Filmfare magazine, for that matter) wrote in a recent article: "Madhumati did not win any major acting award and managed its impressive tally of awards through technical wins." (the article lists all the 9 awards Madhumati won)
 * Another Filmfare article, which actually documents the function, says: "Vyjayathimala finally made peace and happily accepted the Best Actress trophy (Sadhna, 1958)."
 * A Rediff review of Madhumati saya she won it for Sadhna.
 * The ultra-credible book Encyclopaedia of Hindi Cinema, published by Britannica, also says it's Sadhna in an entry about the actress.
 * The 1983 Times of India directory says Sadhna too!

Most importantly, Madhumati has always been known for its 9-award record, which, combined with so many reliable sources saying she won for Sadhna, makes me strongly believe she actually did get it for Sadhna and not Madhumati. I think it is all the result of a confusion which happened because Madhumati today is one of her most celebrated films, more than Sadhna, which she most probably won the award for. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  22:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Records
Someone keeps adding that Rani Mukerji has the highest number of Filmfare Awards in history, which is totally incorrect. The calculation of records on this page is based only on Best Actress and Supporting Actress awards, which are the two main acting honours. The critics awards are a separate section altogether and that's where other records have been set, else many others would have been here as well. For one, Jaya Bachchan also has two special awards for Uphaar and Hazaar Churasi Ki Maa. Would that make her the most awarded? No! The number of awards an actor has won can be mentioned on the actor's page, that's it. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  19:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Nutan Hindi Movie Actress (14).jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:07, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Nutan Hindi Movie Actress (14).jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Zinta MIFF11.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:53, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Waheeda Rehman in Chaudhvin Ka Chand.jpg

Condensation
The achievement list is still a pain to read with all the over-linking (I understand it's for easy access, so I kept it), but I at least tried to cut down on the wordiness and repetition. I removed the top winners and nominees paragraphs that were wholly covered by tables (including the Dixit streak) and moved the tables to the front to compensate. Meena Kumari para was moved a bit down because it's about nominations, not wins. Obvious things that one can trivially derive from the listed information were cut, like "2/3 people". No more "maximums" because it implies a limit; by stating something is unique, no long explanation about "no other" is needed, etc. Rani Mukerji numbers were wrong per her awards page. The Vyjayanthimala para was a bit strangely worded, I hope I got the meaning right. I don't insist on replacing "superlatives", but the word felt strange to me. Some "actresses" were changed to "people" not out of feminism, but to avoid repeating the word too much with award names very close.

I don't believe I cut out any factual information - if I did, that was wholly unintentional. Feel free to adjust as needed, but since this took considerable time, please don't revert in whole without a very good reason that I might not have considered.

EDIT: I apologize about the unhelpful diff. Had I known it'd turn out this way, I'd have done the changes in pieces (I compared previews to the original in another window and never looked at the diff). Reverted and redid in pieces, diff is useful now. Gamapamani (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Since there haven't been any objections to the previous trimming, I've taken the liberty to pare down even further. This is now a more than 30% reduction of the records section (nearly 40% in visible text) compared to when I started. Let me know if this is too much. For me personally, this kind of style is much easier to scan for tidbits than wordy prose is. I hope acronyms are acceptable, at least BA and BSA are commonly used with other awards. Since this isn't about promoting any particular actress, I restructured all items to start with "what" rather than "who". I can put back the counts of people with particular achievements, but I think there are few enough for those really interested to count on their own in a few moments. Since I've cut so much other clutter already, I added the years to collectors, since most other items had them. The word "collected" and statements about Mukerji should make it obvious the wins weren't in the same year.The Dixit streak is back in the list, to clarify 10 nominations vs 8 years.
 * TBH, I'd really like to take out the over-linking, but I take it this would be objectionable? Gamapamani (talk) 10:20, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Gamapamani: Good job, finally someone is cleaning up this messy page. Thank you. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  12:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, sir! So would you say it's OK to remove the over-linking in the textual part? EDIT: @Shshshsh It just dawned on me that replying doesn't notify on its own. Gamapamani (talk) 12:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, I went ahead and removed over-linking too, so people can at least compare which way is better. Undo is easy. Gamapamani (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)