Talk:Kareena Kapoor Khan/Archive 1

Info on Kareena's films
Info on Kareena's movies is just saying that it is one of the top grossers... if you look at rani mukerji's career profile, you can see that it also says the same for her movie kabhi alvida na kehna. and her performances in yuva and fida are considered as one of her best roles of her career. so please stop deleting them. so far there is only about 6-7 and that is not that much.

You should've seen it before
I heavily edited it from what it was before. After I edited it, the vote for neutrality did not go. now someone has gone and put more things in it... and I think it has become biased again. I don't want to get into trouble by posting my original post, which I assure you was not biased,

Except the first line, this is pretty basic. And the first line is true, because sheis one of the highest paid bollywood actresses. See what the article has become now...

Kareena Kapoor (born September 21, 1980) is one of the most highly paid (Upwards of One crore per movie) actresses in Bollywood. She belongs to the Kapoor Family, which is one of the leading dynasties in Hindi cinema, and many family members work in the film fraternity. Kareena is the grand-daughter of Raj Kapoor, and the daughter of Randhir and Babita Kapoor. Her elder sister, Karishma Kapoor also works in the film industry, but was more of a glam actress than Kareena.

As against the general trend, Kareena had a very sober debut (no exposes, no kissing scenes) in her first movie was Refugee released in 2000 opposite Abhishekh Bachhan. It was an intense role which earned her instant recognition and won her the Best Debut Award from Filmfare. Her second movie Mujhe Kuch Kehna Hai also got good returns in the box office. She arrived in the industry in style, however, by bagging a role in Karanh Johar's Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham where she was portratyed as being a chic glam doll. She won accolades for playing the part of chameli opposit Rahul Bose in the movie with the same name about a prostitute. Her latest movies include Fida, and Aetbar.

She was in the news recently for an infamous kiss caught on a mobile phone camera, with actor-boyfriend Shahid Kapoor.

Editing the page
whoever is the fan editing the page, keep it neutral man. thins like "we wish her all the best of luck" DO NOT appear in an encyclopidea article. If you want to put all that on the net, start your own fan page or something.


 * As only a cosmetic editor of this article I'd like to point out that the other version has POV like "star overnight" however you remove a lot of information. Both are insufficient ways of dealing with this problem gren 03:34, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

hi i want

Removal of Neutrality
This hasn't been edited in a while, and I don't think that there is a revert war, so I am removing the tag.

Removal of picture
I have removed the magazine picture because of the distracting headlines. Pa7 17:46 25 January 2006 (UTC)

there seems to be a factual error...her father is randhir kapoor....not ranbir kapoor as the article currently states...going to fix that right now...

Rewrite
I removed unreferenced trivia and personal opinion and did some copyediting. I cut down the career section. A narration such as: She starred in film X and then she starred in film Y and then she starred in film Z ... well, that's impossible to read, and it basically repeats the filmography. The section WAS referenced, which is good, and I tried to move all the references down to the filmography. I may have missed some; if so, sorry. Let me know and I'll try to restore the refs. I don't want to waste all the good work that was done. More film articles should be as well referenced as this one! Zora 23:24, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello, Zora,
 * did another clean-up and tried to rephrase things a bit to prevent fangush. What do you think? -- Plum couch Talk2Me 15:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Um, some anonIP went through and restored a previous version, bit by bit. I'm upset that someone would throw away my work without even engaging in dialogue. I think you cleaned up the restored previous version, Plumcouch. I reverted to my rewrite, which I further amended (removing gush re Harvard, which I should have noticed earlier and didn't, adding note re birthdate controversy). Please take another look, if you would, and make sure that things are OK now. Zora 18:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

To the anon
Anon, in restoring your references, you restored your prose. We appreciate the work you did finding references, but the prose is a different matter.

Film gossip columns classify films as hits or flops. We really can't do that here. What's the dividing line? How much business must a film do to be a hit rather than a flop? It's much safer to use phrases like "didn't do well at the box office," which is vaguer than flop. Ideally, of course, we would be looking up actual figures for each film rather than generalizing. If you could do that (you seem to do well at online research), that would be real addition to this article (and to other Bollywood articles).

Saying WHAT roles she played in each film and WHO co-starred is just too much detail. It derails the narrative, which becomes a bumpy, boring progression from fact to fact. Ditto the endless repetition of "she got good reviews for X, and Y, and Z" -- let's put the review links in the filmography, and just summarize, saying that she's getting good reviews for her recent films.

But she may also be getting bad ones. I'm not sure that we're balanced here.

Comments that she wanted to be a lawyer, studied X, Y, and Z at Harvard -- I read that as self-serving hype designed to make her look good. All those claims seem to come from one interview -- with her. It's much safer to just list the schools she attended. If indeed she attended them. Some actresses lie like rugs, I'm afraid. That may be the problem with her birthdate, if she's put out a figure designed to make her look younger than she is.

It would help a lot if you would take a username and use the talk pages. Zora 00:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

age
Source sited for main Kareena page places her celebrating her 26th birthday in 2003. That was four years ago, so she is 30 now and that makes her date of birth 1977. (This is your recorded source on the main page, 1980 makes no sense) IMDB is also a more reliable because they are liable and do have to verify their facts. 1980 is less substantiated than 1977. Kareena was born in 1980. In this interview, she mentions that she is six years younger than her sister, who was verifiably born in 1974. I also know some of her batchmates from Welhams, so I'm pretty confident about this detail. Gamesmaster G-9 18:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * But can we trust actresses talking about their age? They know that they're going to be turned down for roles if they're "too old", so they lie. Do we have any sources that aren't Kareena? The IMDB (which is not always accurate, but IS widely consulted) says she was born in 1977, so if we put 1980, we're going to have people changing it back to 1977. I think it's safest to just mention the controversy until we can come up with a defensible figure. Zora 19:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that actresses regularly fib about their age (Rani Mukherji claimed to be 25 last year!), but unless we have something like school records, that is the best guess we can make. In this case, between something she herself said, and a third-party edited figure on IMDB, I think her word is the more reliable. Finally, in since most actresses prefer to reduce their age, and 1980 is the latest year of birth we have till now, I don't think there will be any dispute from her fans. I could also say that I personally know this to be true, but its obviously unverifiable. Gamesmaster G-9 19:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Major pruning
Just who was working on the article? Her press agent? It was full of hype and fluff. There's no need to repeat the filmography in the "Career" section, along with fulsome prose about how wonderful each of her performances were. Also removed notable roles, what is notable is personal opinion. Zora 08:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Don?
BOI is a good source for status definition, not for cast members decision. We are not giving force to cameos. That's why it wasn't included in Rani's page, and won't be included in Kareena's either. It was a mistake of BOI and INW to include that and we are not responsible for their decisions. It doesn't make sense to say "she had a small role..." since if she had a small role it actually does not deserve a mention in the career section. We are dealing with Kapoor's career, her successes, failures etc, but not with her special appearances. If the film had been a flop, no-one would have never included that in the career section. Rani Mukerji's page is important. No-one tried to include K3G in her career. The film was a hit for SRK, Kajol, Hrithik, Kareena and Mr & Mrs Bachchan. Not for Mukerji, just like Don is a hit for SRK and Priyanka. There is no importance whether she was included at BOI or not. It's a speculation from us to say that she had a role in this film. Don is not the success of Kareena, and she didn't take part in the main cast. It was a hit because of SRK and Chopra, not because of Kapoor. My new version is quite well: She also won favorable reviews for her item number in the hit movie Don . Best regards, -- Shahid •  Talk 2 me  19:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh I am sorry Shshshsh, I didn't see what you wrote on Kapoor's talk page. When you wrote look at talk page on Kareena's history, I thought you were mentioning it to your talk page. Sorry for being rude and now when I read what you had to write it makes more sense. Thank You!!! BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

She got best reviews for her dance !!!!!!!!.She was criticized by singer sunidhi chauhan for not putting upto expectation.Sunidhi said she was nowhere to be compared to helen in original don.She was just shivering.

Last paragraph
''After shooting for her film, Don, Kareena decided to take a long break from Bollywood. Although she did sign a few new projects during her break, she did not shoot for any of them. In March 2007, she resumed shooting for the film Kya Love Story Hai, in which she only appeared in an item number. The film which released in April 2007 won favorable reviews for her dancing again.''

I strongly disagree with this paragraph.


 * Shooting for her film, Don - Her film? It wasn't her film, and it was already discussed in the previous message I posted. I also can't really get.. What does the term Shooting do here? She was not shooting. She had a really little role.


 * Kareena decided to take a long break from Bollywood. - Break? Break is a term we use when it comes to be that some actor left the industry. She hasn't left the industry. She was shooting for new films. So she didn't take a LONG break. In addition, we are not here to write on the empty days an actor has.


 * Kya Love Story Hai - Here it comes to be an exaggeration. Don was a hit and she really was notable for her dancing there. KLSH flopped, and as per the film review, there is nothing special in her Item number there. Kapoor is a prominent actress today. It is stupid to describe her for her Item numbers. It lowers her status.

The best thing now is to write about her two-three upcoming releases, rather than writing that she is notable for Item numbers. It is quite laughable, -- Shahid •  Talk 2 me  13:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated peer review
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  •  Talk 2 me  15:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If this article is about a person, please add  along with the required parameters to the article - see Persondata for more information.[?]
 * When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (for example, change kms to km and lbs to lb).
 * The script has spotted the following contractions: don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

Reviews
I've removed the K3G second review.

As I wrote in the edit summary, if we use two quotes of reviews there MUST be a good reason enough to allow its usage for it. Here are the reasons:


 * Before introducing the points, We must consider that a film must be somehow notable (a big hit, won an award, was immensely praised, a milestone etc etc.) if we want to add two reviews for it. A film like Ajnabee can't be followed by two reviews to its credit. K3G is an important film in Kareena's career, yes, because it's her biggest hit, but here are the points:


 * Two reviews for the same film must be different and provide a different content which contributes to the context. In the K3G case, we have two reviews which are very similar and describe her as funny and entertaining and so on and on without anything special.
 * If we use two reviews, there is no way to use two LONG ones. One of them must be short, memorable and provide something special as an additional bonus.
 * Two reviews should also be used in case we have a mixed performance by some actor. I mean - NOTABLY mixed.
 * If one review makes the whole job, no need to use another one - it's a glorification.
 * Another good example of two badly used reviews is in the case of Refugee. Taran said all the BEST things on her - All of the all is brilliant, memorable, and impressing. And then comes another review which says again that she is natural and good, and only lowers her status as a good actress. Just see it! It's so funny!
 * In general, using two reviews without a good reason is bad because it can ruin the contex and confuse the reader whether she's good or not and make one question himself "Why two reviews? ...

These were the notes I've always considered in the very beginning when adding reviews to other pages. It's important. I want to help this article. I'm now looking for some interesting stuff for her, though not so notable so far. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  20:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Updated peer review
Very good indeed.

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  •  Talk 2 me  20:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (for example, change kms to km and lbs to lb).
 * There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
 * it has been
 * might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]