User talk:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ/Archive 11

Unexplained revert
Any reason why you reverted my edits to Sonam Kapoor? You may leave your reply here for me to read. Please do not start a revert war by reverting again. If you give a reason, I shall be glad to revert it myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.77.177 (talk) 16:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The reason I reverted your edit was because:
 * A) First and most of all, the source is unreliable; it is just a fansite.
 * B) So what if she was suffering from weight issues?? It is not like she was obsese or something and had to lose weight in order to live. If that was the case, then it would make sense adding it to the article.
 * C) What is the big deal if she lost weight for her debut film?? It is not like her role specifically demanded that she lose weight. She probably decided to lose the weight to look "good" on screen, which is the case for ALL of the actors and actresses in Bollywood.
 * --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 03:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

What's wrong
What's the matter? Dr. Blofeld      White cat 19:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I told you a joke. I showed you a German politician which looked exactly like a cross between TOm Jones and Julian McHahon. I thought it was funny but you archived your talk page shortly afterwards as if you disapproved. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 14:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I posted on July 26: "What do you get when you cross Julian McMahon with Tom Jones eh? A German politician? LOL!!" Dr. Blofeld      White cat 16:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC) Do you see what I mean LOL? He has McMahon's facial features with Tom Jone's perma tan and hair!

I noticed you were away but was suprised you missed it when you came back! Hey didn't you just come back from Bahamas? You were on holiday again? Dr. Blofeld       White cat 14:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Image
Hi Bollywood Dreamz, could you help me by getting an image of Amitabh Bachchan, from the song My Name Is Anthony Gonzalves of the film Amar Akbar Anthony. If possible the scene in which he comes out of the egg. Thanks.--Sanfy talk 10:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey buddy, it is only possible for me to get images of actors at public events. Sorry about that :( --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 14:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Heyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
How are YOU???? Did you like KI??? Shahid •  Talk 2 me  10:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey pal. Well honestly I have not seen the film yet. The only film I saw of late was New York which i found decent. What about you? What films have you seen recently? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine by me but there's one problem. The adjusted collection of IBOS network are not all correct, according to what I see here. Maybe they have updated their numbers. Have you noticed it? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  15:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But I guess it's better to leave it this way at least for one week because I see Mother India for example does not appear on the list at all, which is odd considering it was there before. I checked the Mother India page on the site, and its adjusted collections are not available, so I think it's better to wait with it. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  16:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I did not misunderstood. I know you were talking about unadjusted collections. I checked the links and it's fine by me.
 * WIthout any relation to that, I mentioned the IBOD adjusted numbers of all-time highest grossers. And it's great that you noticed it but decided not to update. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey buddy - they will certainly decline the request because the user is already blocked. Let's wait if this idiot comes again. Don't worry, if he comes again revert and ignore, and the page will be protected. Main hoon na yaar.
 * Seen Kaminey? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  19:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As a film and as of now, it is a moderate success, but it also depends on how it will turn out in the list. If it becomes the 2nd grosser or the 3rd grosser. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  08:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Happiness is a warm ref
Hell, yes, I'm happy...now. You'd be the first to agree with me, I'm sure, that if we didn't watch this article like a hawk, every Deepika-lover on earth would be adding unsupported nonsense. I just found out she's down with malaria, by the way. How horrible. --Milkbreath (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

A fan? Isn't everybody? I became acquainted with the goddess when I saw the trailer for Chandni Chowk, and I couldn't help but notice that she is the most beautiful girl who ever lived. That's all. There are better singers, to be sure, and better dancers by far, but...damn. I copyedited her article, and it's stayed on my watchlist. I've seen lots of junk get tossed in there, and I try to keep it tidy. --Milkbreath (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know that about the singing in Bollywood. You get in PR trouble for that here. I know little about it all, having seen just the few crossover movies like Bend it Like Beckham and Bride and Prejudice (which was a scream, by the way). And you're wrong about those other women, who aren't worthy to hail Deepika a cab. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

FA
Hello amigo. I'm afraid I am going to have to opt out of taking it to FA anyway. In my view it almost ready for FA three months ago, it needed minor copyediting I thought only. If my name pops up again trying to promote it David Fuchs and co will have a field day. I did get people to look over it and they agreed it was practically FA standard. It is those people at FAC stopping it only... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 17:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

re:Kareena Kapoor
Hi BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ - Great article. I just read through it and found it to be well written and interesting. I haven't had an experience with moving a biography to FA so I'm not certain what editors will be looking for, but I thought it was a good read. Is there a specific aspect you would like for me to check? -Classicfilms (talk) 03:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see. If there is a particular passage or section you would like for me to look at, let me know. -Classicfilms (talk) 18:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I made a few c/e to the article. Feel free to tweak what I have done, they are just suggestions. For the most part it is very well written. I do have one hesitation about the article, however. The "personal life" section is somewhat awkward. I removed what read to me as rumor and speculation which is not appropriate for a WP biography. I left the rest but truthfully, much of it still reads like gossip and rumor and keeping BLP in mind, I would frankly vote against the article for FA if the section were to remain intact as is. My suggestion would be to remove most of the section and combine it with family. All we really need to mention is what we know for certain - that she dated Shahid Kapoor for awhile and is now dating Saif Ali Khan. Where she is living and health issues detract from the quality of the article. Let me know if you have any other questions, -Classicfilms (talk) 03:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that User:Legolas2186's ideas are right on target. It doesn't really matter where you merge the section so long as you do so. As it stands, the section holds very few encyclopedic details and reads a bit like a gossip column focusing on rumors that really are not substantiated and I found to be somewhat inappropriate. Remember that a central WP rule is WP:INDISCRIMINATE - just because trivia is out there, it doesn't necessarily mean it should be included in an article. As for the two other biographical articles, to raise them at this juncture lends itself to WP:OTHERSTUFF. The point is that the WP is an encyclopedia and should consist of substantial facts about the individual involved rather than unsubstantiated gossip. I like most of it as I learned about her education and film career. But I really do feel that the rumors about her health are inappropriate and should be removed. There really isn't enough to keep the section as is so I would make the merge that Legolas2186 recommends, but focus on the relationships that can be substantiated and leave it at that. -Classicfilms (talk) 05:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That sounds great. I also left a message for Legolas2186 regarding this discussion. -Classicfilms (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Kareena Kapoor
Wonderful work on the article as I can see. It has improved a lot from the last time I visited. Few points:
 * 1) The main image also needs alternate text as per WP:ALT. Expand the describe in alternate image of the others. Simply stating as a man and woman doesnot visualize much.
 * 2) Try to merge the Personal life section in the main part of the biography. Reason being personal life sections always become hotbed for gossips and fancrufts by IPs and fans. Try to make it a part of the main biography since any relationship that Kareena has and is notable enough is a part of her career and work. Many of us are trying to do so as part of WP:BIOGRAPHY. For reference see Madonna (entertainer).
 * 3) Date format consistency. Use yyyy-mm-dd.
 * 4) Merge portions of the other works and in the media also. Appearing on Koffe with Karan and other reality shows are a part of her being an actor. The division should be like this,
 * Biography
 * 1980 - 1999 Early life and family
 * 2000 - 2003 Acting debut and breakthrough
 * 2004 - 2006 Turning point and critical acclaim
 * 2007 - presentJab We Met and other works

This is all I found at a look. Ping back if you have any other querries. --Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 03:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) The further reading section is not a part of the main references, hence donot need retrieved date.
 * 2) In the citations you are sometimes wikilinking some of the publishers and sometimes not. Wikify all of them.
 * 3) Check of disambig links for eg BBC.co.uk is not the correct page but BBC Online.
 * 4) Isn't there supposed to be influences section regarding Kareena's styles and iconography?


 * See what I mean. Classic films and legolas think it is a great article. Given the subject I honestly thought it was the best we could do too which is why I took it to FA after having worked on it before. I am certain minor fixes can be done by whoever but we've done the best we can on it. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 08:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Its a wonderful article that you are working on. You guys should be very very proud about what you are doing as part of India Wikiproject. Alas! I haven't been able to shelve that much of time on the Indian movies as I have recently started the Madonna Wikiproject and vehemently developing articles for GA. Well since you have planned to merge the personal life section, shall I create a draft of how it should be like after merging? I merged the Madonna BLP hence I have a fair amount of idea regarding which is WP:UNDUE and which is not. Now regarding teh iconography. As I have read numerous times, Kareena is admired for her classy sense of style and influence on the younger generation for being a role model. Generally a BLP should contain a section called Influences which talks about what the actors contribution has been from his/her field on the general public (+ve or -ve). The material is present in the article, but briefly. We just need to bulk it up. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 10:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ha ha. Don't worry dost, I'll get a draft ready for you with everything. In the meantime it is essential that the Influences section is developed, lest the article will fail at FA. The reviewers there are too snarky and rude especially if you come across User:Tony1 who is supposed to be the king of FA reviewing or something. It's always his choice which one should be promoted. So be very careful when faced with his rude comments. Me and some other editors have faced his snarky comments. Im late for home now. :) :) --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 13:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Phew! Well here it is. The draft of the merged version at my sandbox. Further work is needed for the reference formatting and the enlarging of the influences part. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 05:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I would support this version over the current one. -Classicfilms (talk) 13:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent)No problemo amigo! The reason I believed that merging themedia nad other appearances were necessary was because we were dealing it as a biography article and not as a careeristic overview. Maybe the flow of the article can be changed. (I'm not perfect with English) However, separating those parts to media and other appearances will again revert it to the previous problem of those sections being hotbed for gossips and non-notable things. Like I removed some parts like repeated appearances in Manish's show and same on Dus ka Dum. She was doing the same thing over and over, that will become undue weightage. And yes! please go ahead and copy it. Let me know once it is done. Also keep in mind the formatting issues. Those people at FA won't hesistate to point their fingers for any slight voerlook in these departments. Jai Ho! --Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 03:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Kareena Kapoor
Hello BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ, I am absolutely fine. I am sure you are doing well. Kareena Kapoor is an excellent BLP article. I am absolutely sure it will make it to FA status. I agree that I haven't been able to elevate any Biography article to GA/FA status. But that's primarily due to the lack of reliable sources, especially for those who attained fame recently. I am extremely well versed with the BLP protocols. I'll surely help it in my own way. I'll start comparing Kareena article with other FA/GA BLP articles like Madonna (entertainer), and explore the missing gaps. Thanks for inviting me, Kensplanet TC 09:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'll do it for each and every section if necessary. I am just comparing the article with other BLP FAs, which have been featured recently, and copy editing the prose as required in my own sandbox first, and then later modifying in the main article. Since you plan to nominate at the end of the year, we have ample of time, right? I'll keep posting issues on your talk, whenever I require your opinion. Thanks, Kensplanet TC 10:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

OMG
There are two actually - sorry - my watchlist showed Blof's name. Let me have a look. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  13:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Man I had this idea as well and I thought a lot about this one. IIFA and Screen are probably the best, but anyway (what about Zee Cine? Is it closed or what? Stardust is intended mainly to recognise newcomers but anyway). The thing is that I'm planning to do a new format and make a massive page move in the coming days so after that we'll add them - let's wait. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  13:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Kaminey is terrific ain't it? Who'll win Best Actors next year? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  13:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You seem to be a bit upset. ? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I promise you our Bebo will have a wonderful wikiarticle - although it's brilliant now - it will be even better. As you see, it was protected upon my reuest. I think you were absolutely right when sayinng that it's better to do things slowly. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You know the hell I went through with Zinta's FACs - and surprisingly the same happened when I started fighting on the Kapoor FAC as well, and some editor took it to FAC after making a few copyedits - a joke or what (although well intended).
 * Are there any recent Hindi songs that just captivated you? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I told him that it would be a very improper format in my view, so no, I don't think it is a good format for this particular article. I don't like a section be titled "influences and acclaim" and I don't think other work and the fact that she is, for example, a vegeterian has much to do with her acting career. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  16:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think her personal life has got much to do with her acting career. I don't believe it will flow well enough. Readers are generally interested to follow different aspects of person's life separately. However, as Logolas said, her relationships have been with actors only, so you may do as you wish. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * What's up pal? Seen my work on Filmfare categories? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  18:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh it's very upsetting. Seen Kaminey finally? Don't tell me you still haven't had the chance to catch it. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  18:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup I have - in my honest opinion, she gives Aish of Kajra Re a run for her money, and it will be interesting to see her dancing with Bebo. First collaboration after many years (I mean, the Pepsi ad). Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  19:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Definitely! Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

spam
I see you post too many spam links to external site for SEO. Please desist, else you will be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bot-tle-wik-ram (talk • contribs) 11:11, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Katrina-Kaif.jpg
File:Katrina-Kaif.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Katrina-Kaif.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 03:31, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
Why don't you apply for Rollback at WP:PERM ? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Long, long time
Rahul... sending you a big virtual hug, my dear wikibrother. Hope you're doing well, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  22:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the late reply . It has indeed been a long time and it's great to see you editing again. Hope you're doing well! --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 18:38, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:U, Me aur Hum CD.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:U, Me aur Hum CD.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

"Vijay Krishna - Yash Johar's Next Project" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Vijay Krishna - Yash Johar& and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 10 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678   06:20, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

"Imtiaz Ali's Next Project" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Imtiaz Ali& and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 10 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678   06:20, 10 August 2022 (UTC)