Talk:Hindi cinema/Archive 8

Length of the article
This article is even longer than the Cinema of the United States article. Does it require all that info which is present?? Some of it borders on wp:trivia so I suggest some sections like the Dialogues and Lyrics be removed. Secret of success (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, a lot of this is trivia, but as you can see, we have pretty much one uber-nationalistic person with a severe case of Aspergers syndrome controlling the entire article so no proper clean up can ever be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.162.130.157 (talk) 06:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Influence of Bollywood
I get the impression that a lot of content in this section is severely exaggerated and needs some clean up. There just seems to be a lot of insignificant trivia and far fetched opinions. Also, Shahid seems to have hijacked this entire article, so it's no surprise that the Influence of Bollywood section is so exaggerated. The nationalism here is just blatant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.162.130.157 (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Agree. The article needs a thorough housecleaning. Many of the overly-detailed sections should be spun off into separate articles. I just haven't had time -- or the courage. I suspect that any changes to the nationalistic slant would be fought fiercely. Zora (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 June 2012
"Bollywood" ain't a "Musical Genre" strictly speaking... (check this Wiki out on FB to know what I am saying).

124.183.250.145 (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please provide a request. Ryan Vesey Review me!  20:42, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Using British spelling
One editor has decided to change center to centre. I haven't been editing heavily for a long time, but I seem to recall that the policy is to leave the spelling (AmE or BrE) as it has been for the majority of the life of the article. I vaguely remember spelling wars, with various people trying to convert whole articles to AmE or BrE spelling because that was RIGHT. Before I undo his edits, can someone tell me what the policy is these days? Zora (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * India-related articles should have British spelling. That's from my FAC experience. I still don't think it's such a big deal but consistency is a must. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * But that's your OPINION. What's the WP policy? Zora (talk) 01:30, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It is NOT my opinion, as I said, it's from my FAC experience. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  09:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Answering my own question. The Wikipedia Manual of Style says that articles with strong national ties should use the English variety of that nation. American articles, AmE, British articles BrE, Jamaican articles JamE, etc. So if it's a question of spelling, the prevalent Indian spelling should be used. I'm not at all sure that InE consistently uses BrE spelling. It's a beast all its own.

BUT, there's another applicable section of the Manual of Style that says: "In general, disputes over which English variety to use in an article are strongly discouraged. Such debates waste time and engender controversy, mostly without accomplishing anything positive.When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change. When no English variety has been established and discussion cannot resolve the issue, the variety used in the first non-stub revision is considered the default. If no English variety was used consistently, the tie is broken by the first post-stub contributor to introduce text written in a particular English variety. The variety established for use in a given article can be documented by placing the appropriate Varieties of English template on its talk page. An article should not be edited or renamed simply to switch from one valid use of English to another. Editors who alter an existing variety can be advised of this guideline."

The article has used "center" for years. There's no particular reason to change it at this point; no English or Indian reader is going misunderstand it. Now if the question involved a word or usage that was strongly characteristic of the Mumbai film industry, I would say change it to the Mumbai English spelling or usage. Something like "time pass" might qualify. I hear that phrase a lot in discussions of movies :) Zora (talk) 02:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You can see many of the India-related FAs and all of them use British spelling - that's been the common practice, and why is it such a big deal that "center" was used for years? I do think it's written somewhere but I'll have to check that. Maximum I'll look for more opinion on the Indian Wikiproject noticeboard and see what others think, but I believe British spelling is the way to go. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  09:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Hindi or Hindi-Urdu
A new editor changed Hindi to Hindi-Urdu. Shshshsh predictably reverted. I reverted that. Shshshsh will doubtless revert again. I'm not sure what I'll do.

Linguists, the scientists who study language, say that Hindi-Urdu is one language, with two different registers. (So does the Wikipedia article on the subject.) Communalists and nationalists on both sides of the Pakistan-India border are sure there are two different languages. No amount of appeal to science is enough to convince them. I've run into this same argument over on Quora, and the same reasoning: "I *know* that the languages are different, everyone thinks they're different, the linguists don't know anything." As there are relatively few linguists in the world and millions of people who agree with Shshshsh, the rules of engagement on Wikipedia ensure that opinions that are wrong, but popular, will win.

It's too bad. Zora (talk) 17:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Shshshsh reverted; his argument is "don't start an edit war." If Shshshsh reverts any changes that threaten his preferred language, who is editing warring? How about a compromise? Whenever Hindi is mentioned, add in parentheses, (or Hindi-Urdu, as preferred by linguists). That would put both views, the popular and the scientific, out there. Zora (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The article's used Hindi for years - it cannot be changed without any consensus to do so. I don't think there'll ever be such consensus - as all sources clearly state that it's the Hindi language film industry even if they mention the use of Urdu in it. One great example is found in the lead - Encyclopaedia of Hindi Cinema by Britannica, and the films themselves always have certificates, all of which mention the language as Hindi. Yes, I care little for linguistic analyses right now - what matters is sources and facts. The presence of Urdu in Hindi films is mentioned in the article, by the way - take a look - there's much more to this article than just an introduction. We've discussed it here for months in regard to scripts, and no consensus has ever been reached. I'm not going to spend hours on this talk page again to repeat everything like a mantra, sorry. I've had my say. Let others join another exhausting discussion if they like, or take it to RfC (which I don't think will help much either, but anyway). Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  08:11, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you have blocked everyone who wants any change. You insist that we have to have a consensus, which seems to mean that we must get you to agree. You state that you don't CARE what linguists say (or, evidently, what the other articles in this encyclopedia say) because there is a strong popular feeling in favor of using just the word "Hindi". Well, of course there's strong popular feeling. Communalists on both sides have been using language as a proxy for Hindu-Muslim conflict ever since the 19th century.

I'll take some responsibility for the initial mistake. Much of the language and organization of the basic article is mine, created in 2004. At that time I was a newbie WP editor and a comparative newbie to watching and understanding Bollywood. I then believed that there were two languages, Hindi and Urdu, and edited under that delusion. As I read and learned more, I changed my mind.

However, many people (Indian and Pakistani) find it difficult to change their minds and admit that THEY (the people with whom WE are in a near-constant state of war and hostility) speak the same language that WE do. The dogma of nationalism, as imbibed from the West, teaches that states are defined by language communities (hence agitation to divide Indian states into language communities, such as the Telangana movement). If there isn't a common language, we'll insist on one. If there is one that we share, we'll deny sharing it. We'll make every effort (coining new Arabo-Persian or Sanskrit vocabulary words, using different alphabets) to differentiate OUR language from the same language as spoken by THEM. I find this sad and silly -- just as I find the English-only bigots in the United States to be sad and silly. Zora (talk) 09:12, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I just noticed that your edit summary says that you suspect JimmyS900 of being a sock puppet. Of whom? Are you accusing me? Zora (talk) 09:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Zora, calm down, you're jumping too vigorously. Due to the violent history this has written, I thought I'd take a peek in here. After spending a long time going through all discussions, here is my conclusion: The Hindi used in Bollywood does have a slight Urdu influence. While mentioning Urdu in the article to a small extent would be of no harm, replacing Hindi with Hindi-Urdu might be taking things too far, and make it too biased. No one refers to Bollywood as the Hindi-Urdu film industry. No one calls the language as Hindi-Urdu. What more do you need? Come on, after all its such a small issue that doesn't require this much amount of discussions that comes to the same thing again and again. Secret of success (talk) 15:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Secret, your answer ASSUMES that Hindi and Urdu are separate languages. If you assume what is popularly believed, but scientifically untrue, you are acquiescing in the use of the Bollywood article for nationalistic and communalist ends. As for the slight Urdu influence -- I assume you're talking about words that you perceive as being poetic and Persian-derived. What you ignore is the very large proportion of basic Hindustani vocabulary that is of Perso-Arabic origin. I've been looking hard online for exact numeric estimates and haven't found much -- 30% was one figure. But I can certainly believe that, as I have a limited Arabic and Persian vocabulary that I *recognize* in Hindi. If you think "kitaba", book, is pure Hindi ... it comes, via Persian, from the Arabic root ktb, book. Hindi-Urdu, as I understand it, is Prakrit grammar and basic vocabulary heavily mixed with Arabo-Persian and Turkic loanwords. That's why one early term for it was rekhta, mixed speech. It was a PIDGIN, such as we speak here in Hawai'i: simplified English grammar with many Hawaiian, Japanese, Chinese, and Tagalog loanwords.

The scientific, linguistic POV should be found SOMEWHERE in the article. Trying to censor this in favor of popular belief is just not encyclopedic. Zora (talk) 05:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Having a common origin from Arabic and Persian does, by no means imply that Hindi and Urdu are the same languages. The Indian government recognizes Hindi and Urdu as distinct languages (see here the eighth schedule of the Indian constitution) i.e. Urdu is an official language in Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh, but I believe you are familiar with the fact that the "Hindi-belt" extends all over North India, even to some extent in the eastern and western parts. The logic of common-origin, and hence same language is, I'm sorry to say, sillier than saying that Tiger Woods is a forest in India. Even Hindi as an origin in Sanskrit and derives its vocabulary from it to a large extent, can you go around preaching that Sanskrit-Hindi is one language? Secret of success (talk) 06:04, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

The Indian government classifies languages as it does for political reasons. Indeed, it has done its best to Sanskritize Hindustani into shudh Hindi by proposing new words to replace despised Persian and English loanwords. Trust it to define languages? Hah. That's like trusting the US Republican party to tell the "truth" about global warming. Zora (talk) 06:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, despite the fact that I appreciate your sense of humor, the truth is that this discussion is going nowhere and all you are giving is your personal analysis of linguistics, which is not what this site depends on. Secret of success (talk) 12:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The discussion is going nowhere because some minds are closed. I've changed my mind on this issue, as noted above. I changed it because I read information easily available in books on Indian history and languages, and also on the Wikipedia pages on exactly these topics. Zora (talk) 21:13, 23 October 2012 (UTC)