Talk:Sooraj Pancholi

Message
Actually, I want to make this article, but when I'm called a Page Creator A17nan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:21, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Jiah Khan court case
Hi I have removed that section you added. Not only is the spelling absolutely atrocious but the whole section itself is unbalanced. One of the core policies in Wikipedia is WP:NPOV, which the means the content must be neutral and provide a fair balance, which that section currently doesn't. You can add the section back in but it must be spelt checked and updated with additional content that provides detail on all sides in the event. Otherwise it need to will come out.  scope_creep Talk  17:24, 13 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, I have brought your message here. I think both side of the argument was fairly mentioned in the article. my last edit was:
 * "Pancholi was charged with abetting Jiah Khan's suicide by a court in Mumbai. Pancholi has denied his involvement in the incident and described his getting blamed for it as unfair. "
 * What would you suggest to make it more balanced?
 * Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 17:33, 13 November 2019 (UTC)


 * A couple of things re: this.
 * Any biographical content about a living person that is potentially libelous, must be removed per our BLP policy. So no, omission of the content isn't by default a violation of NPOV, especially when it's basically accusing him of taking someone's life.
 * That said, if there is a balanced way to present the content, which would include an accusation, details surrounding the accusation, refutation of the accusation, facts about the court case, court date, disposition of the court case if applicable, etc. then maybe it could be included, provided it's discussed first. However:
 * Many editors do not like "Controversy" sections, because they place undue emphasis on negative events, which some feel can run afoul of our neutrality policy. That doesn't mean that the content can't be included, only that we should perhaps try to find a better way to incorporate that content into the article, like into a Personal life section?
 * This version is insufficient. We don't establish who Jia Khan is, what her relationship with Pancholi was, how long they were together, when she died, what details led police to charge Pancholi, etc. You know, the Five Ws.
 * Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think Five Ws can be covered easily as there are extensive coverage. But I think that will muddle the issue more. Since Jiah Khan already has a wiki page, more details about her should not be needed here. If consensus is reached on answering Five Ws here, that can also be done. It can be mentioned under "Personal life section" as you suggested.
 * But again mentioning the incident in detail would lead to giving it undue weight.My only contention is the incident should be mentioned in short otherwise this section will become larger than rest of the article all together.
 * it must be mentioned though, even in one sentence as it is not rumours and gossips, he has spent time in jail with respect to the case. Unfortunate as it may be, even if he gets clearance from the court, this case will be attached with him as spending time in jail is a significant event.Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 18:42, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * If you want to propose phrasing that you think would be sufficient, feel free to, but based on your response, I'm concerned that there will be insufficient context for readers to understand the the important facts of the case, which would simply not be acceptable. I'm not proposing that we go into great depth to describe who Khan is, but we need a full picture to understand who is involved and what the controversy is. We don't use links as substitutes for clear prose. Consider something like:
 * "In 2013, Pancholi dated actress Jiah Khan, who committed suicide in June of that year. Based on Khan's suicide note, which blamed the couple's strained relationship as a reason for her death, Pancholi was arrested and interviewed under suspicion he aided Khan's suicide. In 2018 Pancholi was formally charged with abetting Khan's suicide. The criminal case was expected to begin in March 2018, but, it had not begun yet, which Pancholi blames on Khan's mother's refusal to proceed. Pancholi has denied involvement in Khan's death, describing himself as a scapegoat for her decision to end her life."
 * Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:46, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , your version certainly seems better. Thanks for putting in this much work on it. If agrees, this can be added.
 * Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 21:48, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * although if my original edit was insufficient and unbalanced, more information should have been added there or it could have been edited to make it balanced. Removing the entire thing is odd. Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a volunteer project. Nobody is required to add anything. If there is a problem, the problem can be removed until such a time as someone can devote time to fixing it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:26, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Excellent work, from an excellent administrator. , if you can wait until tomorrow I can do proper references on the text block, and then we can post it back in. Job done.   scope_creep Talk  00:42, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok and Ok Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 07:40, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Content
''"In 2013, Pancholi dated actress Jiah Khan, who committed suicide in June of that year. Based on Khan's suicide note, which blamed the couple's strained relationship as a reason for her death, Pancholi was arrested and interviewed under suspicion he aided Khan's suicide." In 2018 Pancholi was formally charged with abetting Khan's suicide.

The criminal case was expected to begin in March 2018, but, it had not begun yet, which Pancholi blames on Khan's mother's refusal to proceed. Pancholi has denied involvement in Khan's death, describing himself as a scapegoat for her decision to end her life." 


 * Thanks and   Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 17:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Two notes: I would probably changed "blamed on" to "attributed to", as it sounds slightly less judgmental on our part. Also, some people have a problem with the phrasing "committed suicide", as they feel it is stigmatising and suggestive of a Catholic sin or a crime. That said, these people's preference "died by suicide" feels like passive language, because it implies that some outward force caused her to die. I'm not a fan of the passive voice, as it tends to sound euphemistic. So I guess what I'm saying is prepare for some resistance to "committed suicide". Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:37, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2020
CHANGE AWARDS TO NONE, BECAUSE NON RELIABLE AWARDS. IndependentInformer (talk) 10:37, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Incomprehensible request because they appear to have their own article... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:41, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

No credible actor.
I propose speedy deletion due to:

• No notable works as an well-known actor.

db-person TheTruthExplorerZZ (talk) 12:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This article will not be speedily deleted as it clearly does not meet the criteria. You are welcome to nominate it at WP:AFD, but before doing so I highly encourage you to review the deletion policy. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 14:16, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

It meets the criteria for normal deletion. TheTruthExplorerZZ (talk) 14:33, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2020
3rd

}} TheTruthExplorerZZ (talk) 14:38, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add it to articles for deletion.

Non-notable actor, baised award program, only single notability exists TheTruthExplorerZZ (talk) 14:40, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If you want this article deleted, you're going to have to do the work of arguing that it qualifies for deletion at AFD. See also WP:BEFORE, so you know what to do prior to nominating it for deletion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please use AFD for that. ~ Amkgp  💬  15:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Suicide Note written by Jiah
SOURCE: Jiah's handwritten suicide note

The letter that had been recovered from Jiah Khan's house after the actor's death on June 3, 2013, has been included in the CBI chargesheet. India Today has got a copy of the same. Here's what the letter read:

[redacted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbasquadir (talk • contribs) 18:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've redacted the text because it is a potential copyright violation. See Talk:Jiah Khan for my comments about the suitability of this content to be included in the article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please don't post copyright violations on Wikipedia. Copyright also applies to talk pages.  Hut 8.5  19:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please, can you tell me who owns the copyright to Jiah Khan's suicide note? I'm not arguing, just trying to educate myself as to how to spot a copyright violation. Thank you. NedFausa (talk) 05:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Most likely her estate or her heirs. Copyright exists automatically unless you explicitly disclaim it, so if she hadn't killed herself she would own the copyright now. Copyright usually persists for some time after you die. Exactly how long it persists for depends on the country and the circumstances but a lot of countries have a rule of 70 years after the death of the author. In the US this is the case for recently published works, and since Wikipedia is hosted in the US we have to adhere to US copyright law.  Hut 8.5  08:18, 22 August 2020 (UTC)