Talk:Karan Johar

Please Do not delete the Recurring collaborators table
I created this many times ago... but someone deleted it... The Tables i inspired from Quentin Tarantino's article.. Its good anyway... May be needed.. Please, Try to Understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surper1988west (talk • contribs) 10:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think it looks good here. The format seems out of place; its too big. Why not just s simple list of names? It is something that will need constant updating and grow to an unmanageable size over time.  Besides, its really just trivia.  I say it should be removed.  BollyJeff  ||  talk  14:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Not only the format, but the existense of such a trivial table looks totally unnecessary in an encyclopedia article. It does not really matter how much he worked with whom. The prose whould reflect everything through the discussion of his work. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  18:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have added a table that regroups his work as producer/writer/director which also includes notes regarding awards/co-producers or other notable remarks. I suppose it looks much better than the one regarding his work with other names of the industry. --Meryam90 (talk) 12:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 November 2011
Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu

HasaraB (talk) 11:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

✅ assuming you meant to add this film to the table. BollyJeff ||  talk  13:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 March 2012
The earning shown for the movies,"Kabhi khushi kabhi gham" and "kabhi alvida naa kehna" are wrong they earned 	36,75,00,000 and 44,50,00,000 respectively(in rupees) REF: www.boxofficeindia.com

27.124.12.98 (talk) 10:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The figures stated in the article are WORLDWIDE GROSS the one you have put up are only the domestic net gross.--Meryam90 (talk) 12:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 January 2013
Karan Johar's next venture should be added to his works! SOURCE: http://businessofcinema.com/news/exclusive-shah-rukh-khan-siddharth-malhotra-in-karan-johars-next/56481

Vsareen (talk) 02:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 April 2013
In the 3rd line, it in incorrectly mentioned that "The four films he has directed", actually Karan Johar has directed 5 films by now-latest being Student of the year. This change would imply another correction, omission of the phrase "all starring Shahrukh Khan"

Vishmjan (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ I changed it to what I think was meant. BollyJeff  &#124;  talk  15:19, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2014
{{edit semi-protected||answered=yes In the filmography section, My Name is Khan(gross : Rs. 200 cr) has been given the verdict Hit while Student of the Year(gross : Rs. 71 cr) as Super Hit. It should be revesved

59.94.88.230 (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * {{Not done}}, where's the source for it? —Soham 16:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

is he sindhi or punjabi?
is he sindhi or punjabi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.63.143.107 (talk) 20:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2015
kaas aap mujhe bhi koi chhota sa roll de sakte j se sidhhart aur dhavan ko diya

125.21.198.50 (talk) 15:09, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

❌ This is the English Wikipedia - and all requests (if that is what it is) must be in English and cite reliable sources - Arjayay (talk) 07:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Filmography

 * Association
 * The Lunchbox (2013)
 * Baahubali: The Beginning (2015)

Karthikmy9 (talk) 12:53, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. What do you mean by "association"? Altamel (talk) 02:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Please remove any mention that Karan Johar is related to Yash Chopra's family
Karan Johar's mother is not Yash Chopra's sister, therefore Karan Johar is NOT Yash Chopra's nephew, nor is he Aditya and Uday Chopras' cousin. The Johar and Chopra families are simply very close family friends and collaborators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bebo1522 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2016
117.216.112.11 (talk) 07:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC) sir i am great fan of u. can i meet with u if u have some extra time.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: No request made —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:54, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Madharchodiet Network
Karan Johar is a member of the madharchodiet network and his movies are based on lives of people in Suriname and he should be prosecuted. Their contact is Faried Pierkhan Madharchodiet, who started stealing babies from India to start film scripts and movies in Suriname.

"The Man Who Let India Out of the Closet"
An opinion article by Aatish Taseer, titled "The Man Who Let India Out of the Closet", was published in the New York Times on 16 February 2017, also in the International New York Times print edition. I suggest its content may be relevant for incorporation in the Wikipedia article, certainly in being up-to-date. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:08, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Karan Johar. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111022195528/http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/features/2011/01/14/7016/index.html to http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/features/2011/01/14/7016/index.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:49, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Karan Johar. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120813080020/http://www.planetbollywood.com/Film/kkhh.html to http://www.planetbollywood.com/Film/kkhh.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2018
Change "Since 2012, he has served as a judge on the reality shows Jhalak Dikhhla Jaa (with Madhuri Dixit and Remo D’Souza), India's Got Talent (with Malaika Arora Khan, Kirron Kher, and Farah Khan) and India's Next Superstars (with Rohit Shetty).[20]" with "Since 2012, he has served as a judge on the reality shows Jhalak Dikhhla Jaa (with Madhuri Dixit and Remo D’Souza), India's Got Talent (with Malaika Arora Khan, Kirron Kher, and Farah Khan), Dil Hai Hindustani (with Shalmali Khalgode, Shekhar Ravjiani and Badshaah) and India's Next Superstars (with Rohit Shetty).[20] Abhirami49 (talk) 17:23, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 20:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Criticism
Why is there is nothing mentioned here about his criticism of casting and launching 'star kids' of bollywood. And also about his role and support to nepotism. Avian2201 (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Because nobody with an ounce of awareness for neutrality has figured out a way to do that in a way that doesn't sound like children yelling baseless accusations at Johar. Do you want to give it a shot? Use your sandbox. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey, I tried to have some basic idea introduced in the article but you outright removed it for not being good enough. I concede it wasn't a great detailed writeup, but I did add citations and made it as NPOV as possible. You could have made some improvements there, but you went ahead with removal of cited content. Again, I don't care strongly enough about the subject so I don't care to reinstate and fight over it, but since you brought this up here just wanted to let you. Thanks. GreaterPonce665  (TALK) 01:05, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I greatly appreciate your talk page comment. Look, I have nothing against you personally, so I hope you don't think my reversion is personal. Observing these edits, the entirely of the content was:
 * Johar has been accused of nepotism on multiple occasions by bollywood actress Kangana Ranaut[30][31] as well as others.[32] Johar has denied these accusations saying that he has not got any credit for introducing aspiring and new filmmakers to Bollywood.
 * Wikipedia aspires to bring neutral content to its readers. In this content, all that's here is an accusation of some vague wrongdoing, with no context about the specific accusations, who was affected, but balanced with a vague denial. (Although I must praise you for at least trying to present a contrary viewpoint.)
 * But what specific "nepotism" are you talking about? Which of Johar's personal relatives was hired, since that's what "nepotism" is. Did Johar hire his brother instead of Sushant Singh Rajput? Did Johar hire his mother instead of some other qualified actress? Did Johar hire his sister instead of someone else? There is ZERO context that explains what the accusations are, so any denial, which would normally be a refreshing contrast to an accusation, is pointless, since we didn't actually explain what the allegations were in the first place. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Of course, I understand this isn't personal. I fully agree that there's much to be said about what nepotism constitutes here, and could be additional line or two to explain the background. I don't know if the allegations are true or not (great thing about them is that you don't need any proof), I'm just going to state the allegations. If there's no proof given in the allegations, I of course, won't make up stuff. I'm thinking USA today style concise reports; no editorializing. Maybe I'll try to reintroduce this in article tomorrow, but tbh, I'm not sure, I'm just not as interested in this topic anymore. Thanks. GreaterPonce665  (TALK) 04:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I have reintroduced the criticism section taking into consideration the feedback you had given earlier. I hope this is up to the standards.Wistleblow (talk) 15:30, 07 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Nicely done! Thank you for that. I made minor tweaks and flagged one vague statement, the content about reports coming out. If we're trying to say that some actors or whomever felt that Rajput was let down by the industry, then it seems we should indicate who specifically said this. Like, "fellow actors ___ and ___ felt that Rajput had been let down by the industry". And maybe a quote? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:54, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance.Wistleblow (talk) 15:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Is it acceptable to quote from youtube videos or other less reliable sources for extra clarification?Wistleblow (talk) 00:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Good question. YouTube is a delivery mechanism, not a source. So we always have to look at the actual source we are citing. We also have to be very careful of linking to potential copyright violations. So I would never use a YouTube channel that isn't verified. We also have to consider what the source is. For uncontroversial content, I typically look the other way when we cite interviews on less-than-reliable sources, because it seems unlikely that Filmibeat (for example) would have lied about something the subject said, especially if the interview was filmed. Let me know if you have a more specific question so I can better guide you. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, I forgot. If you're going to cite YouTube, please use Cite AV media and it's always helpful to include timestamps and quotes when possible.}} Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Fake News about Early Life
In the Early life section, it statings Karan Johar got zero in The Doon admission test. This not true. He got 95 but rejected the Doonz School. I am of the same institution and have researching in the archives. Please remove misreportage of the untrue facts, which not reflect good on an intelligent man such as Mr. Johar. Wikipedia should not carry fake news, he did not got 0 in the Maths test. I am belonging to that school, nowhere I see in his report card. Please change it to facts, he got 95% and but did not want to go away from Mumbai to Doon Institution. No propaganda or fake news should be on the Wikipedia. Please remove I can't edit the page. Thank you kindly — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrictionNeutron (talk • contribs) 12:00, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I took a look at the source, and it does appear to be well sourced. Though, admittedly, it does seem rather trivial for inclusion but I'll leave that to editors who know something about this actor. --regentspark (comment) 19:27, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
 * First of all, take a deep breath. I don't want you to pass out. Now that you're calm, ❌. You should check the reference. The claim that he scored a zero comes from Johar's autobiography. See this. "I gave the test, but I was very bad at maths and got a zero in it. It was a multiple-choice test and you really can't get a zero, so I don't know how I managed that!" So if you're upset about the information, you should complain to Johar. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Please don't tell me to take deep breath. I'm taking deep breaths all the time, they teaching us yoga and meditation at the Doon. Now you listen me. I'm very calm person and not upset, but only want truth to win on Wikipedia. This is fake news! You say it coming from autobiography. I have done my researches on this and having some news for you (not fake). That auto is only fake news! Mr. Johar did not even wrote it, some POonam lady did it, look it up if you don't believe it - her name is Poonam Sena! How you feeling if somebody releasing autobiogurphy in your name and then making fake things up to show someone bad? You tell me first. This is efforts of many persons to bring down Mr. Johar. You will believe fake auto books that are not even wrote by Mr. Johar, but not listen me who is telling you the truth from Doon archive report card! Okay, if you not changing willing to change this fake news information, listen to regetspark editor above who is saying sensible things. This is very trivial for the WIkipedia page. PLease change it to 95, which is the only TRUTH, or removing it completely because trivial. Satyamev jayate. Truth should prevail.. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrictionNeutron (talk • contribs) 06:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Cypnhbomb, why you no reply me?? BEcuase you can't hear truth? Ok listen..I calmly requesting, if you remove this, I try to you get you some role (and good compnsation) in the next Dharma Productions film. You just change this and share your info or email. I will taking care of rest. Some acting experience necessary, but for you we make consession...okay ✅? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrictionNeutron (talk • contribs) 12:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't reply to you, because I have well over 17 thousand articles on my watchlist, and Karan Johar is not the most important subject of my focus. Please sign your posts with four tildes, by the way, like ~ . This will properly sign your posts. As for the matter above, whether or not Johar had a ghost writer, is irrelevant, unless you're trying to suggest that this was an unauthorised autobiography, which seems unlikely. Unless you can substantiate that claim, we would consider an autobiography a suitable source of uncontroversial information, as it is a primary source. That said, I don't care if the content is in the article or not—it seems likely it's a grave exaggeration—so if thinks it's trivial, I don't mind cutting it. But changing it to 95% would not be an option, since there is no way for anyone to verify that, and the change would constitute what the Wikipedia community calls "original research". Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the favour my brother! Because you been polite and caring, I will be honest also... I'm not from the Doon actually. But as promise I still try taking care of some role for you in Dharma. Share info or email and we take on from there...thank you very much brother once more. Signing my post with four FrictionNeutron (talk) 19:51, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, what on earth is this? I have just seen this exchange. Some random punter claiming to be, first, from Doon and then Dharma Production barges in (and disappears once the mission is achieved), requesting some information to be removed citing personal testimony, and we just go ahead with that? I have reinstated that well-sourced passage about Johar's early education. It isn't trivial. I see it as an important bit of information that not only sheds light on Johar's early failure in life (which will be useful should anyone want to take this to FA - he didn't always get what he wanted), but also reveals his social privilege through the fact that a headmaster of a prominent school felt the need to write a consolatory letter to his mother, something he wouldn't have done for the average Joe. In the current climate of Johar-bashing, the well-sourced information very much belongs in the article, as the well-referenced NPOV fact illuminates his early life, early failure, social privilege etc, and can be read either way, with condescension or pity, depending on where the reader's sympathies lie. If it needs to be removed, we need to have a discussion here and a consensus needs to form. It can't be done simply to pander to some walk-in who has access to "report cards"! With regards, MaysinFourty (talk) 11:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Whoa whoa whoa, the content wasn't removed to pander to anybody. Get your facts straight. It's a somewhat apocryphal tale attributed to a primary source, and also thought it was trivial, so I removed it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Also, MaysinFourty, your reference to "illuminates his early life, early failure, social privilege etc, and can be read either way, with condescension or pity, depending on where the reader's sympathies lie" is both WP:OR as well as against our biographies of living persons policy. It is original research because you're ascribing meaning to the event rather than providing reliable, independent sources that do so. It is against our BLP policy because it is negative information that is not reliably sourced to independent sources. I've removed it. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Cyphoidbomb, I stand corrected. My apologies. But, clearly, we differ on what counts as trivial, but perhaps not to the extent that makes arguing here worthwhile. And what you call Original Research was a talk page comment, not something I put into the article -- for which I only relied on a published book, which you in your edit summary patronisingly labelled "poorly sourced". Anyhoo, adios! MaysinFourty (talk) 14:26, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , while I have your attention, I'd like to broach another subject, selfishly. I created an article about a film I loved: Eeb Allay Ooo!, but it still doesn't appear on Google!? Why would that be and what can I do to fix it? With thanks, MaysinFourty (talk) 16:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If it helps, it does show up on google when I do a search. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:36, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2021
Why there is no mention of film Kalank (2019)? 103.60.160.213 (talk) 04:17, 8 January 2021 (UTC)


 * where do you want it to be mentioned? It’s mentioned in his list of filmography as a producer.defcon5 (talk) 05:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)