User talk:Bollyjeff/Archive 1

Add comments here
Bollyjeff (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, must have been a mistake on my part. Definitely would not have intended to remove that part. I trust you made the appropriate corrections. And yeah it's a great film, along with My Sassy Girl and some others. It's weird I don't even like Romantic Comedies usually, but I love the Korean ones. Leonffs (talk) 01:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Can't say I have. I liked Slumdog Millionaire but I don't think that's considered Bollywood. Any recommendations? Leonffs (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Reply
Sources are very important according to WP:CITE and particularly WP:BLP. If I had more time, I would add sources myself. If you can source the article, then it's great. Everything that is likely to be challenged must be sourced. Thanks, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. :)
 * I definitely support goodwill, but believe it or not, there are people who are so bored that they start adding unsourced stuff which sounds rather logical, so that others would not instantly revert them. That's called sneaky vandalism. I've long ago stopped trying to take such things for granted. Anything must be sourced. Best, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  20:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Love Aaj Kal
No, I haven't seen Three Times, nor I have written that sentence. It was edited by some other user; I just rephrased that sentence. If you are sure it's not a remake, then you can remove that sentence.-- Managerarc   (talk)  14:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

what to do?
I saw that you put some notices to 79.158.152.90

He/she is messing up some pages that I follow with false info too. What do you do about someone like this? Bollyjeff (talk) 01:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, welcome to Wikipedia :)


 * You warn them, you can find warning templates at WP:VANDALISM. I think that they're using the account for spam/advertising purposes only so I've given them a final warning.  Any more edits and WP:AIV will be made aware.  Any questions please don't hesitate to ask me --5 albert square (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Do you know why Wikipedia doesn't require people to have an account and talk page before doing edits? Some of these folks do not have one, so there is no way to warn them. Bollyjeff (talk) 02:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Only just noticed this :)


 * People don't have to have an account to edit Wikipedia because Wikipedia believes that the encyclopedia should be available to everyone to edit. Sometimes you'll find that it is a registered editor making an edit but because they're only going to be on for a few minutes they generally don't bother signing in and they just edit under the IP.  I know I'm guilty of that sometimes!


 * Anyway, if an IP doesn't have a talk page then the work talk should appear in red, just like in this example. In that case just click on the red link, leave your message (preferably with an edit summary), click to save your message.  The IP will now be aware that they have a message and the talk link will no longer show in red.  I hope this explains things :) --5 albert square (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Kal Ho Naa Ho
Unfortunately the edits became part of a disruption campaign by a blocked user attempting the make a point. Sorry that you have inadvertantly become involved in that.

You are indeed correct in unbolding.

My apologies! Active Banana (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I've come here from another editors's talk page. Just a heads-up that if you find your good edits are being reverted please raise the issue on the talk page of the article. You may also wish to post at the talk page of a relevant Wikiproject to bring the matter to the attention of other editors. Please remember the three revert rule, it would be a pity to get blocked when it was avoidable. Mjroots (talk) 04:32, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Active Banana explained the situation already, but I wanted to follow-up myself. Your changes were caught up while dealing with another editor that is stalking another editor. The revert that I did was not targeted against you, but against the first editor. I did not check to see what your edits were about. Active Banana has restored your changes to the article. Sorry about that. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry
I did not want to revert you. I actually thought I was reverting the article to a version made by you. There is a vandal who keeps vandalising articles - I was sure I was reverting him. So again, I'm sorry. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  11:55, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeh, but we also have to understand that most of the Indian-related articles, especially those related to film are not as followed as articles related to foreign actors/films. If someone adds seemingly valid info which is unsourced and lacking in grammar, we cannot rely on the hope that someone will kindly come, correct their mistakes and source the info. It happened to me in my wikihistory that I tried to source someone's edits which appeared perfectly suitable and eventually these edits ended up being just sneaky vandalism. Therefore, if I find any new addition, I'll try to source and correct it if I have the time for it, but if I don't, I will have to revert it and keep our articles clean. Unfortunately, I'm not as active as I used to be several years ago. Take care, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: dealing with vandals
Re your message: I left a warning about their edits. The big message on the top of that IP's talk page and the multitude of messages means that the IP is what they call a shared IP. Multiple people are using the same IP address. Sometimes it is the same person, sometimes they are not. Sometimes the edits are good, sometimes they are not. In this case, most of the edits are bad, so I'm going to guess that this is IP address assigned to a public computer or access point of some sort. All of the warnings are for different times somebody has used the IP address, but none of them have used it for long enough to warrant a block. The edits from the IP are very infrequent, so these editors slip by with a single warning. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Re your message: Sometimes. =) I think the problem is that the person behind the IP stopped after the final warning and then there was a gap of a few days between the final warning and the next edit.  The assumption with shared IPs is that if there is a gap of several days, that is it likely a different person.  I do agree that this IP has been a long term problem and probably should be blocked.  If they vandalize again, I'd be happy to block them. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Cinema of India
Thanks for reverting my recent action with a clear explanation in the edit summary. The original unexplained change makes sense now. Mirokado (talk) 19:50, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey
Jeff, I like your work, thanks for the help on Bollywood. I miss the days when I had full time to edit articles, and those days when I used to expand the Bollywood article on a daily basis and create film articles. I'm glad to know that people like you are becoming a great part of this project. Cheers, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  19:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't want to turn it into a debate. Both versions are accepted in different places of the world. My English, as you may notice, is British. Here and here you can see different approaches all of which are accepted. Generally, in specific sentences which discuss a particular couple consisting of two people, "are" makes more sense in that context. The pronoun in fact will always be "their", not "its". I turned to VP here and people differ in their opinions. Anyway, I am not going to make a big deal out of that, so if you want to revert me, feel free to do so. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Partner (2007 film)
I have requested temporary protection. Let's see!-- - M4nag3r(-)rC   [Reply]  08:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources
Reliable sources are those with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. Most news organizations, standard (not self published) books, items that have been peer reviewed or passed edtorial board review are generally valid sources. Entertainment websites, not so much. Hits from news.google.com (except for the blogs) and books.google.com (except for Inc Icon) are generally good sources. Active Banana   ( bananaphone  18:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

An award

 * Again, good job! I'll take a look and make some copyedits. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  09:44, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: GA Review page
I think the appropriate place is on the article's talk page. If you can find instructions detailing otherwise, I will removed the CSD tag, :) PoinDexta1  |  Talk to Me  22:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm wrong. Removing the CSD tag now. PoinDexta1  |  Talk to Me  22:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Hindihood
It is of course practically the same since Hindi cinema is Bollywood and Bollywood is Hindi cinema. I also find the name a bit demeaning, and I prefer referring to it as Hindi cinema, and not Bollywood, which makes it sound really a miserable copy of Hollywood. However, the name has been used to the hilt to describe the Hindi film industry and that's how it's mostly cited in the western world. I think either way is good. But this guy is also changing quotes, templates and links, which make them inaccessible, so I had to revert him. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  18:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Dhoom 2
Excellent work on the GA! Would love to see Sholay promoted to GA. Good to see at last somebody is doing some good work on Bollywood films...♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Many congratulations
Fantastic work, you really keep surprising. I hope Sholay will get there but at that point I got really busy and I actually thought I'd look for some worthy source. Let's see if I can find something which will help us make a comprehensive article about the film. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  16:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well only book sources - I remember reading some book which had many details about the film, including its production, its release, and the reception in the press. Can't find it yet. Which other articles are you considering for improvement? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  22:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Shriya Saran
Hey Bollyjeff! I could really do with some help on that article. Plus maybe you could look into this? - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 16:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I really don't know anything about the woman either. All I did was a grammar/importance copyedit. I'd love a third persons intervention in the talk page for now. Then perhaps, when you aren't very busy, a copyedit on the actual article? - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 17:12, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent work on the article! - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 18:49, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Rangeela
Hi, first of all congrats for your works on Bollywood films. Regarding Rangeela, Singer Anupama's name was mistyped as Anupama Deshpande by the Indiafm and this was followed by other sites. Some of them even credits "Chandralekha", magnum opus song of Anupama to Anupama Deshpande. Anupama Deshpande is a Bollywood singer and she doesnt sing Western. She has not sung a single song for Rahman. Many of singer Anupama's songs are wrongly credited to her. In Rangeela also, the songs are by Anupama. If you have a casette or CD, you can see the singer credited is simply "Anupama", but Anupama Deshpande is usually credited by her full name itself. I had conducted a thorough research regarding this when I created the page Annupamaa, which has nearly all songs of Anupama listed.Arfazph (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Iam trying to find a link, but i don't know whether I could find one.Arfazph (talk) 16:27, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

My Sassy Girl
You asked "How is this based on actual events???". I don't know, I added the category because of the claim in the first paragraph of the article. But since you asked, I did some quick research -- the story started as a series of blog posts by Kim Ho-Sik. They were presented as true diary entries, chronicling his relationship with a "sassy girl". The original Korean blog posts can be found here: http://blue.utb.edu/tyi/Korean/yubgi/yubgi01.htm (or so I am told -- I can't read Korean). An English translation is here: http://my-sassy-jihyun.blogspot.com/ (I'm not sure if it is complete -- it doesn't have as many parts as the Korean version). My web searching also implies a happy ending was added when the blog posts were changed into a novel, and then a film... Shadzane (talk) 22:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Cinema of India
Sure thing! Rollback rights have to be requested. A much easier alternative is to go to My Preferences->Gadgets, and enable Twinkle which gives you as much, or more power than rollbacking does! - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 17:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If that article is attacked one more time, I'm going to request protection for it - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 13:12, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am. There is a certain Indian one-upmanship mentality, which I have never really understood. Probably fueled by fanatic politics, or inferiority complexes. One thing for sure though, these edits are never going to stop. People are always trying to prove a point, and Wikipedia seems a wonderful place to do that. - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 13:34, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha! But that's the beauty of it :) Wikipedia takes a step back now and then, but two steps forward. That's why it's still so awesome, and Knol is dead! - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 15:28, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I have requested protection here - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 14:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Reply - Sholay
I checked it, and I myself have trouble finding the adjusted records of Sholay. You need not add a converted figure. We just have to add its original gross (not nett gross), and then explain how much it means nowadays. I'll have to check it first myself and then I'll give you an answer. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  10:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry - I did not notice your previous message and only now did I see your username on my watchlist. I'll see what I can do. Apart from that, I think the article, though good (and well done for the hard work!) is not there yet. I think we need to expand the section of critical response. I'll look for some other reviews too. Thank you, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:20, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, Jeff, it's hard for me to find any such data on any source. I think the best way to go as of now is to pick either BOI or IBOs and use it consistently. If BOI does not have it at this point, then IBOS's figures should be fine. I'll try to concentrate on critical reviews and I'll add them to the article in just a few days. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  22:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Sholay
Hi Bollyjeff! My name is Dwaipayan, one of the fellow wikipedians. I just come across somewhere that you are trying to get the Sholay article to GA status. I just wanted you to wish best of luck. I worked on the article to some extent several years ago, but did not have time thereafter.

Anupama Chopra's book is really a great source.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:04, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:language scripts
Dear Bollyjeff, please see the most recent administrative decision on this issue here. You can also refer to previous consensuses which established the guideline for both Hindi (Devanagari) and Urdu (Nastaleeq) scripts in Bollywood articles (poll, discussion 1, discussion 2, and discussion 3). I have explained my reasons for retaining the use of both scripts here. The administrator ruling the standstill in which no Urdu scripts can be added or removed from Bollywood related film articles even informed User:Mdmday about the decision and despite the warning, User:Mdmday attempted to alter scripts in Bollywood related film articles, as evidenced in Kal Ho Naa Ho. I am guessing you are not from the Indian subcontinent. You can usually tell from an individuals name whether or not they are Kashmiri, Punjabi, etc. Nevertheless, I added the Kashmiri script to articles which already stated that the individual was Kashmiri (for example, see their biography or the categories already existing in the page). Also, in several of the articles, I have provided indeed provided thorough sources of their ethnicity (e.g. Mushtaq Kak, Anupam Kher, Santha Rama Rau, Ravinder Kumar) to which your accusation is baseless. If you are in doubt, you can read the article on the caste in which you can further educate yourself on Kashmiri clan names (e.g. Mattoo, Kak, Kichlu). I hope this helps. Thanks, AnupamTalk 16:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Auto-Tune
Bollyjeff,

Sorry, but you keep on reverting the Auto-Tune article and removing my changes. I know how it might appear to you as vandalism or reckless editing, but I invite you to read my article and compare it with the old one and realize that mine serves as a more complete and comprehensive extension of the original. If you like, you can even verify my sources. Don't worry: I've done my research and this article is the real deal.

Mattheckatight (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Sholay
If you mean the imdb ref., it is inadequate. If you are referring to another reference, you need to be more clear. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 01:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You were already told by Marnette that the information was not appropriate, but you readded it anyway. The imdb ref, as I said when I removed it, is inadequate. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  02:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Shriya Saran GA review
I really don't know how we're going to replace all those Indiaglitz links. In most cases, there are no alternatives at all.

Judging by Pravinraj's recent activities, he is clearly aware of what's going on with the article, but is choosing to avoid it. - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 16:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I fully agree with your comment on the GA2 page. Perhaps Indian actor BLP's are best left as large incoherent walls of texts with single contributors. - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 15:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Good luck with that! For what it's worth, it was nice working with you on the article. Cheers - Amog  | Talk •  contribs 16:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Removing personal opinion of ending from Il Mare.
Bollyjeff: Thanks. Hello - I agree that it is best to not give an opinion of the ending rather than label it sweet or bittersweet. Did the person who labeled it bittersweet know that the man lived and that the end was light-hearted, almost funny. He never died and he wanted to know if she had time to hear a long story. Thanks for giving it a non-opinion status for those who haven't viewed it yet. Imcyrano (talk) 17:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC) Imcyrano (talk) 17:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Native script names in actor infoboxes
Hi! In accordance with what is the norm elsewhere, should we not have the names in native script for actors too. For example, for politicians, it is a fairly common thing. See Manmohan Singh. Thanks. Lovy Singhal (talk) 15:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)