Talk:Item number

Image copyright problem with File:Kodisvarankarishma.jpg
The image File:Kodisvarankarishma.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --16:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion continued from user talk
Hi there. You've done a great job on Item number up to now, but that table looks terrible. I didn't revert it (yet) because you and I have been kinda working together on this, but I really don't think a table is going to be appropriate for the info that is being presented here. Wouldn't you agree after seeing it? BollyJeff ||  talk  00:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't quite agree with you on this. The list was a complete mess and it was difficult for the reader to make out which was the name of the movie and which was the name of the song. Making a table (in the lay out I have created) makes complete sense because:
 * The information will be more clearly conveyed by virtue of having rows and columns.
 * It will be easier to add information that can establish notability through the "notes" and the "references" sections.
 * Unsourced info can be easily removed.
 * Other suggestions: I strongly suggest that we create a separate list article for a more exhaustive list thereby limiting the size of the list on this article. Trying to create an exhaustive list here does not make much sense frankly. Also could we merge the section in question with the example section? I am also considering renaming the "actors" column as "credits" as that would facilitate putting the names of the singers, choreographers, etc.
 * I would rather have you convinced before I go ahead with the work. I agree that the list does not exactly look pretty right now but that is probably because of all the empty cells in the notes and suggestions sections. I am sure once the list is done it will look fine. Cheers! --  Forty two  13:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * It looks bad when a row spans longer than a page, as it does in the 2010 range, because you have so many awards listed for Munni Badnam. Maybe list fewer and use the refs for the rest. Yes, all the blanks in columns 2, 5, and 6 look pretty bad. If you are actually planning to fill in many of these, which I suspect will be accompanied by removing non-notable songs, it should be okay. I would prefer to keep the examples section in there for songs that are especially notable or require some more explanation than fits in the table. If you want to move the big list to its own page, that's fine with me. In general, many editors frown upon large lists that aren't well sourced like in Bollywood songs, but if its eventually documented pretty well, it should be nice to not clutter up the main page. One more word of warning though, and this is another reason I was initially upset about the table. That table is pretty complicated with multiple rowspans and such. I fear that as other editors add songs, they will butcher the table. I have seen it happen many times. Anyway, have fun and again, nice work! BollyJeff  ||  talk  18:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You may notice that the table has gotten messed up already, as I said it would. Its just too complicated for the casual editor to understand. BollyJeff  ||  talk  15:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I intend to add this page notice to solve our casual-editor-messing-up-the-table problem.

Comments and suggestions are welcome.  Forty two  20:45, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The Talk:Item number/List backlog page has been created and the edit notice has been addeed.--  Forty two  14:28, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The list has been made into a separate article: List of item numbers in Indian cinema.--  Forty two  08:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Merge this page
Merge this page with Hindi dance songs, there can be a section in that article instead. Too many articles.Akhila3151996 (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Item number. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080407174943/http://www.cylive.com:80/viewContent.do?id=351 to http://www.cylive.com/viewContent.do?id=351&vt=pub

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand
What does this term even mean? Why is there a wikipedia page on it? What is the difference between a regular song that someone dances in and this?70.104.128.158 (talk) 02:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

generations

 * However, second generation South Asian females are more commonly featured in item numbers than males.

Second generation, meaning daughters of immigrants? If so, why is that? Is this a mistranslation, or a distinctively Indian use of the word generation? —Tamfang (talk) 00:44, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I wondered about that myself. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I think it comes in from Indian usage of the terms first generation and second generation. First generation emigrants are those who left the subcontinent to a different country. Second generation emigrants are those born to first generation emigrants. So, in this case, second generation south asians would be those who are born in different country to South-Asian parents. Kaisertalk (talk) 00:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)