User talk:Bollyjeff/Archive 2

Shankar Ehsaan Loy Filmography
There's no need to paste all that stuff again since there's a discography page. Check the A.R. Rahman wiki to see what I'm talking about. I know what I'm doing because I'm the moderator of the SEL forum and one who created the discography and maintains it. So I request it you to revert it by yourself.

Regards,

HK 05:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harikrishnanpv.nair ans (talk • contribs)

Reply
Hey Jeff. It's not very difficult to compare edits and understand the deviousness of the human nature. The first guy asked you for help to disguise his identity and remove any suspicions from himself, but there's a technical feature called check user which some of the admins are authorised to use, and he was found to be a sock. This one is another guy I suspect, and it is merely due to the frequent glorification of Rajesh Khanna and articles related to him. A check will be made soon.

I congratulate you for the wonderful work you've been doing. I wish I had enough time to edit. I do try to contribute as much as I can. I would want to expand such biographies as Konkona Sen Sharma, Vidya Balan, who's been doing quite well off late, but it takes a lot of research time. In the meanwhile I'm formatting the remaining Filmfare Award pages, filling in the missing nominations and making it look more organised - so far I've done Best Actor, Actress, Music Director, Lyricist, Playback Singer (Male and Female), and now I'm up to Best Story. These categories will help me create different missing articles. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  09:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not look into the source, but I agree with you because such mistakes often happen. I say remove it if you like, I'll support the removal. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  18:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * See the history page of Filmfare Awards... Woahh... Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  20:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

SPI
Based on your post on my talkpage, can you file a WP:SPI? Also, take a look at User_talk:SpacemanSpiff as some more were brought to my attention. I'll assist with the adminly tasks after the SPI. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: 205.242.229.70
Reported at WP:AIV.---  Managerarc   talk  14:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Most of the user's edits are good faith and certainly does not constitute vandalism. Crew is not part of the MOS, so there is nothing wrong if it is removed. Regarding infobox edits, I think the user is using Bollywood Hungama as source and trying to change everything according to the website.
 * Well you can take up the issue at WP:ANI if you think so. Also I think that 205.242.229.70 and 205.242.229.69 are one and the same person. ---  Managerarc   talk  11:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

 * TB on my page too, please add to the SPI, I've blocked this one, but there might be some sleepers. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  10:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Anon
I don't think he's okay because he removes names, changes dates from DM to MD (as opposed to how it should be in India-related articles), and removes links. The crew section may not be totally necessary, but I don't think it hurts either, particularly in our articles most of which do not have proper filming sections and also because the infobox does not have some of the required parameters for other crew members, like costume design, art direction, choreographer and so forth. So his edits are not at all constructive. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  22:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Sharan Kapoor
As you know, Articles for deletion/Sharan Kapoor shows they are a hoax. Requests for checkuser/Case/Kapoorsharan shows that Kapoorsharan and several other nicks were blocked for sockpuppetry related to the hoax. It also shows the hoaxer has a variable IP, which means they can edit around the block unless a whole IP range is blocked, which the admins decided not to do. I opened Sockpuppet investigations/Kapoorsharan and the IP was blocked for a week for editing around the block. If you see the IP or other users re-adding the hoax, just start another sockpuppet investigation, noting like I did that this is a hoaxer editing around a block. Edward321 (talk) 00:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Sholay GA
I will be reviewing the article. First look, I'm not happy. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 08:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

How to find out what went wrong?
Copied from Media copyright questions to save here

Four images were deleted without warning from Krrish, which is a GA, so presumably the images were okayed at one time. The image pages do not exist anymore, so how must I know why they were deleted? Can't the image itself be removed but some evidence be left behind? Also, is there not a warning system of some kind? BollyJeff ||  talk  02:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * According to the deletion log all four were deleted because "F6: Non-free media file with no non-free use rationale". —teb728 t c 04:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The person who tagged the images with db-f6 should have added deletable image-caption to the captions but apparently did not. (S)he also should have left di-no fair use rationale-notice on the uploader's talk page. —teb728 t c 04:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The images have been made invisible by the ImageRemovalBot but their code can clearly be seen in this article history page. There used to be a bot that automatically tagged images for deletion at their use point but it is no longer working. The uploader was notified on his user talk page, which is a normal procedure. One way or another the images were all missing a fair-use rationale and in such an article it is unlikely that five non-free images would be acceptable. Having read it I don't see any critical commentary that would justify them being kept even with a rationale as they were likely decorative rather than essential to the reader's understanding of the topic. Their non-free status may have been missed, or ignored, during the GA but I don't see any comments about image use in the GA which was undertaken by three editors who may perhaps not be as familiar with non-free content criteria as they should be and have concentrated only on the prose. We jsut don't know but you are always welcome to have a deletion review or a non-free content review if you feel you have a case. ww2censor (talk) 23:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I am not the uploader, so I did not get any notice, I was only following the whole article, and did not see any warnings, which would have been nice, since maybe the original uploader is gone now. I saw the article history and tried to go to the image pages, ie. [[Image:Krrish stunt.jpg]] to see why it was deleted, to see if there was any fair use at all, but there is nothing to see there. Can you show me how to see the deletion log, at least? But, based on what you said above, maybe it had too many pictures anyway? It seems really stupid to me that these pictures cannot be used for this purpose. How could this possibly be costing the owners any money? If anything it is raising interest in the film, which could help them to sell more DVDs. Also are all these picture police paid by WP, or are they volunteers? What is the incentive to make WP articles less interesting? BollyJeff  ||  talk  23:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You can see the deletion log for File:Krrish stunt here. See Wikipedia’s policies on non-free content. (A major part of the reason for these restrictive policies is to make Wikipedia content reusable; using non-free content makes it more difficult to reuse articles.) Note that file was deleted for violation of item 10, which requires a non-free use rationale for each use of a non-free file—not for violation of item 2, which requires respect for commercial opportunities. (As ww2censor pointed out, no valid rationale could have been created because the use did not significantly increase reader understanding as required by item 8.) —teb728 t c 03:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * When you say reuse, do you mean like when I search the web for valid references to try and improve articles and I mainly find multiple other websites that just parrot WP articles back again? That doesn't seem very useful. They are often using various different old versions of the current WP article. Why do we need dozens of websites out there copying WP content? Does WP make money doing this? BollyJeff  ||  talk  11:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Under the terms of GFDL or WP:CC-BY-SA people may copy Wikipedia content (one, some, or all articles, or just a few paragraphs) to another website, a CD, a book, etc. Wikipedia wants to make it easy to do that. And no, Wikipedia doesn't make money on it. —teb728 t c 12:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

The images lacked any fair use explanation, and thus were deleted validly. If you check this revision, you can more or less figure out what kind of content they were. If you can make a plausible case that any of them was in fact necessary for the article and justified under WP:NFC, they can of course be undeleted. I'm not seeing such a justification, at least not at first sight. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not even for the soundtrack? It's pretty standard throughout WP to have pictures of soundtrack covers isn't it? I will try to ask this one more time: When I click on File:Krrish.jpg, I get a copy of the picture, plus fair use, links, can view history, etc. I was hoping to be able to see what information was there on the files that were deleted. Is this not possible? BollyJeff  ||  talk
 * It is pretty standard to allow one identifying image in the infobox of an article (provided that it could not be replaced by a free equivalent). That way readers can see that they are on the right article. For Krrish the identifying image is the poster. For a separate article on a soundtrack it might be the cover art. There is no need for identifying the soundtrack section in Krrish, for the poster identifies the article. In any case the image had no use rationale; so the image was not permitted.
 * To see the deletion log: In the “Toolbox” in the left sidebar click “Special pages”; then under “Recent changes and logs” click “Logs”; then select “Deletion log” in the dropdown, enter File:Krrish stunt.jpg in “Title” textbox and press Go. The log tells you who deleted it, when, and what edit summary (s)he gave. That is the only information available except to admins. —teb728 t c 12:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Wow, what you are saying just does not jibe with what's out there. I could name many GAs and FAs even that have pictures for soundtracks that do not have their own articles (in addition to other pictures as well). Anyway, thanks to all who replied for your help. BollyJeff  ||  talk  13:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

List of highest-grossing Bollywood films
The header that you added to Talk:List of highest-grossing Bollywood films points to an older discussion, Articles for deletion/List of highest-grossing Bollywood films, not the discussion that just finished, Articles for deletion/List of highest-grossing Bollywood films (2nd nomination). Also, how was the final result reached? BollyJeff ||  talk  13:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That appears to be a script error. I'll see about reporting it.
 * The keep closure was because there was a consensus in favour of keeping the article, in my opinion. Stifle (talk) 13:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Reply
There needn't be proof for an issue that is so old and it was already discussed and agreed that his original name (which was never changed officially) should be spelled Shahrukh on WP - that's why it appears so. That's not me, that's the other guy who has to cite sources for his claim, and btw, "calling himself" is one unencyclopedic piece of a useless phrase. I don't think he can add sources for the claim that all the books about him and all the films starring him spell his name as Shah Rukh. That's just incorrect. His films use different versions, so do books, and one Google check clearly shows that Shahrukh gives more hits. In addition, IMDb spells his name as Shahrukh, so this guy's claim has to be proved much more than it seems, and the burden of evidence is not on me. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  16:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm actually surprised you agree with the other guy because his statement (calls himself, credited in all his films, DVDs, books) is very incorrect and overly generalised. I don't think it can be simpler or clearer than that: his (original) name is Shahrukh and he is often credited as Shah Rukh. Just checked several of the DVDs I own - RNBDJ, Veer-Zaara, Chak De and others and all go with Shahrukh. Of course the argument here is not what the article will be named because it's been Shahrukh for years and moving it has even been disabled, but the way the other name is presented, and the guy's statement is flawed. I commented on the talk page, cannot do more than that. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:12, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * There are several discussions on the talk page which you may find if you go through the archives, but there was also one major discussion on a noticeboard which I'll try to find but it's been so long ago that it'll take time for me to find it. Actually, that's not what matters here. What matters is the fact that now the article is named as it is and moving it is not possible for these very reasons. And as I said, the issue is not the article's name, but the guy's text, which I do not agree with, and that's something I explained well on the talk page. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  18:08, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Another matter entirely. And for Shahrukh Khan or Shah Rukh Khan I don't think its really important. But usually for a naming convention dispute I would see which has the most hits under what spelling in google books. In this case Shahrukh Khan has 7400 hits and Shah Rukh Khan has 18,000 hits so I would probably go for the latter. Similarly a google search shows 5.2 million for Shahrukh Khan and 8.3 million for Shah Rukh Khan. However I believe in his films he is mostly credited as Shahrukh Khan so I think it should be based on what he is generally featured as on cinema posters/DVDs.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Re:User:Legolas2186
Well, for the sake of both the reviewer and the users that articles are nominated for GAN (like yourself, I think that Legolas should probably let someone else review them. I just hope he noticed my comment so that he and I could address the situation. GamerPro64 (talk) 02:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Mother India
Am currently improving this. This and Sholay ought to be good articles at least. You are invited to help me promote this to GA..♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I will try to improve Sholay over the next week. I'd then recommend we get somebody else to review it. It would be very nice to get both Sholay and Mother India up to GA as they are core articles for Indian cinema.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, its looking pretty good. One piece of advice though. When using google books paste the url e.g http://books.google.com/books?id=kfVdxiSm-aYC&pg=PA139#v=onepage&q&f=false into here and click load. It will instantly make a full reference for you. Please fill out the ones from google books in this way. SOmetimes you will have to add the page number if it doesn't show. If you like I will show you how to place google books and google book reference maker into your top itenrary programmed by your monobook for quick and easy referral. It makes high quality writing much more faster and you get more done using it.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, much better. If you can ensure they are all filled out and that the date naming system e.g 23 February 2011 not 2011-02-23 etc is all consistent across all references. Every source should contain info on title, publisher etc.

OK. Go into your preferences. Depending on whether you use a monobook or vector standard skin Click monobook js or vector js at the end. Copy the follow text and paste it in: The first is a quick link to google books to save you having to go externally. The second is your google book ref tools to quick draw up citations:

addOnloadHook(function {   addPortletLink('p-cactions','http://books.google.com/','GB','ca-gb');  }); addOnloadHook(function { addPortletLink('p-cactions','http://reftag.appspot.com/','GB ref','ca-gb ref');  });

OK save it. Now hold down Ctrl, Shift (upwards arrow on mine) and r if you are using Mozilla firefox browser. If you use Internet Explorer hold down Ctrl and F5 buttons. Now move on and the two highly useful links should be readily accessible at the top of your toolbar next to history, move, watch etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I think so because several book sources state that the film was intially scheduled for10th independence anniversary on August 15, 1957 but it didn;t happen. There is also mention of donation of salaries in early October 1957 shortly before the film was released. I suspect that either imdb or Bollywood Hungama copied each other in regards to release and the date is actually false. I will try to find a few sources to back up October.♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Even rediff says October 25!♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

No idea. But I think you are way too trustworthy of websites. Book sources are usually far more accurate. If you can find a sources or two which says 40 million then change it back, I'm only citing what is given in the book.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:40, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, just saw your message. Well the main ingredients for films are Plot, Cast, Script, Casting, Filming, Reception/release but if I can I try to find some info about its themes. Usually though I find that sources dictate what you should write about, in mOther India's case it has a lot on themes as themes are what are heavily covered in books.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Congrats
Jeff, congrats on the Sholay GAN pass. I'm very proud of you. I'll give you a barnstar when you get your third GA, because I already gave you one recently. :) Way to go, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  20:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh definitely it's far tougher to write a BLP on an actor whose work is ongoing, and the criteria is always very demanding. I learnt a lot from my experience on several BLPs. Right now, I've started working on the articles of Rohini Hattangadi, Shabana Azmi. I also started expanding the articles of Kajol and Vidya Balan, but left them midway. But trust me, the current state of articles related to Indian cinema is much better than it used to be, although we've got a long way to go.
 * Looking at the Shriya Saran article, it's not ready yet, frankly. A first glimpse shows such debatable sites like Newsofap.com, Andhravilas.com, Chitramala.com, sach.co.in, Idlebrain, behindwoods.com. Even thaindian and oneindia have not been supported by several editors on FACs. The career sections are very short and will need some work. I'll make some copyedits to the article. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking at the lead, there are just many redundancies. As for sources, I'm not an expert, but I can assure that those I've mentioned will be questioned in future. WP:RSN may be a good solution as it will make the work on the article more effective and will prevent problems. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Since Shahid couldn't, allow me to :) Congratulations on the Sholay GA!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that's the problem. A lot of them you can only access scraps of info. But when I do a google book search it usually picks up the pages in the books which gives you access to the paragraph. Some books though you can access the pages freely within reason... I'll have a look at this next film you wish to promote.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Book on it here. Unfortunately can't access it. You might pick up a copy from amazon.com for a reasonable price.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

You can buy the book for about $9 Pretty good price. Not sure what that is in rupees but reasonable I think, you are Indian right? ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Nope, I was able to access the info in google books...The book search at least turned up some paragraphs of info and the page numbers even if only very sparse. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Not really, it figures considering your high quality work it figured you were either American/Canadian or British and have a name like Jeff!. But your insatiable appetite for Bollywood movies indicates to me you are Indian heritage unless I am mistaken! Jeff is not very common amongst Indians LOL. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Wow that's rare.., although I like you am not Indian either! The vast majority of people editing Bollywood or any films on wikipedia are either Indian or of Indian ancestry. Very good to have somebody interested in writing good articles on them!♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

That might be because of place of publication. E.g I can't free view many publications in the US because google fear they may be bending copyright law so I can't access it in the UK where i live and vice versa. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Autumn-imh.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Autumn-imh.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Answer
You can, but only through mail. In the toolbox you will always see "E-mail this user", but of course you must have an e-mail of your own registered in your preferences, which I guess you have. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  11:36, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied. I totally agree with you. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  16:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Will need your inbvolvement on Priyanka Chopra and the talk page. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  16:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

why you reverted my edit from whats your raashee
hey i think you reverted award section fro whats ur raashee.well i added a correct section priyanka was nominated 4 best actress u can check list of awards won by priyanka.pls cooperate and make article full of correct infos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranbirk (talk • contribs) 15:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

wikipedia is for full information
hey its not about i award i will add few other nomination its about an actor who did so hard work ang got her nomination. readers should know even after flopp film priyanka was nominated for best actress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranbirk (talk • contribs) 15:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Armbrust WrestleMania XXVII  Undertaker 19–0  23:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks dear. I am picking him up because he is a biased Indian editor who intentionaly does not allow names of Pakistani playback singers in Playback singer wikipedia.Run ShshRun (talk) 20:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Names of Pakistani playback singers which Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  is removing out of his biased attitude again and again are Akhlaq Ahmed, Mujeeb Aalam, Saleem Raza, A Nayyar, Mehnaz, Naheed Akhtar, Alamgir etc. Now tell me why is he doing it??Sagretoy (talk) 01:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, you are also deleting Indian singers at the same time; that's not very nice is it? Maybe its because they are not very well know, and only the best should be listed in the main article. The rest should go in the specific lists. It would be great if you could take the time to improve the List of Pakistani film singers (its just a category now) to look more like List of Indian playback singers instead of edit warring. When you do that, no one will take you seriously. BollyJeff  ||  talk  01:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Jeff what he's doing now is no big deal. What he did in the past was. Anyway, thankfully he is now banned from Wikipedia. And he does not deserve any attention considering his constant vandalism and terrible insults. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  12:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm quite surprised by the use of "Double standard" in your post, and I would not really like people to use such terms when referring to me. First, I have absolutely no problem with his edit in the image caption, which is fine, but I disagree with the removal of period films in the lead, which is more of a small act of revenge. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:49, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * How did I ridicule User:Prajwal21 for removing something from Kapoor's article? Do tell me! --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 03:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * As I told you before, I wasn't sure as to why Shahid removed it on Chopra's article. However, it appeared like that on Kapoor's article for a long period of time without a problem, and I honestly thought that it was okay. For this reason, I thought that it was "pathetic" since he only decided to remove it from Kapoor's article when it wasn't allowed on Chopra's. --  Bollywood Dreamz  talk 15:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, not bad for just a few hours work. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I've begun working on Dil Se. You may want to work with me.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I will add more later from book sources.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:D2-ost.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:D2-ost.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 23:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No, not really. What do you feel that this image is actually adding to the article? Why does the reader have to see a picture of these five people, as they appeared on the album cover? Yes, there is a general consensus that album covers on album articles are acceptable, but this does not extend to where ever the album is mentioned. J Milburn (talk) 13:21, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If there was a separate article on the album, then no, I would have no objection to the use of the album cover there. If, as you say, it makes more sense for the information to be included in the film article, then so be it, but that doesn't suddenly mean everything that would be included in the album article can be transferred- equally, it would be silly to place the film article in album categories. Non-free content should only be used when its presence significantly increases reader understanding of the topic, as per the non-free content criteria. That is what I meant by asking whether it needed to be shown. J Milburn (talk) 13:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I aim to see the use of non-free content minimised- I don't have some kind of vendetta against films, soundtracks or Bollywood. We have a compromise between the use of non-free content and our status as a "free" encyclopedia in the NFCC, and so it's best that we try to stick to that. Decorating articles with non-free content that adds little cannot be a good thing. J Milburn (talk) 14:21, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Enthiran gross thread
Hi Bollyjeff. I've been keeping an eye on the thread for a few days now (though I don't really know anything on the matter to actually add to it). I do admit I was too lenient in the GA review for the film, and have been waiting for the thread to reach a conclusion to decide how best to go about things. If the discussion settles the issue so that a solution is found, then I shall seek a second opinion on the review; if not, then I will probably withdraw the promotion (and hang my head in shame), to allow for the issue to be settled. GRAPPLE  X  12:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I meant the gross numbers, yes. But I'll review all of the sources and see which could be discounted. Perhaps a second reviewer should look over it to see where I've gone wrong. GRAPPLE   X  18:24, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


 * RE: Enthiran issues - Umm, actually I'm refraining from doing any major edits at the moment as I'm a bit busy for this month (I'm quite an edit-addict) but will definetly resume editing by the beginning of May. Of course theres a lot to be done for Enthiran. In the meantime, it would be nice if someone else could get that cleared up otherwise I'll surely fix it all up once I'm back. EelamStyleZ (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I see you're working so diligently with the Enthiran article and I just wanted to thank you for that. I would have worked on all of that myself but just like it did for you, it would have taken a long time for me to finish it all up, and I wouldn't have been able to focus other tasks at hand outside Wikipedia. Once again thanks for your great effort! Also, although I nominated it for GA, I don't think it would be fair for me to take the credit on the Indian Cinema Task Force page - I believe that should now go to you! EelamStyleZ (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't even know if (and don't really think) there is any specific method to decide who gets credit to GA. But how I like to look at it as quality over quantity. Anyone can edit an article any amount of times but bringing an article to an academic level requires skill and greater effort. My work to Enthiran was just regular copyediting info updating and only a few tweaks during the GAN. But you've managed fix up a lot of other unseen problems in it, which is what I think counts. EelamStyleZ (talk) 02:23, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help on references
I'm out-of-date on reference formats and didn't have time to look it up. Thanks for fixing the Ganti reference. Zora (talk) 23:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Re Chopra
Please do the first step yourself. I do not have any preference on the matter, make your choice, I will support you. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  18:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Filmfare Awards South
Filmfare Best Actor Award (Tamil) is incomplete on wikipedia. Tha data is not available for several years. I suggest you to expand it. Even other categories are incomplete. Its very difficult to find sources from internet but am sure book sources wold be available. The data is incomplete before 1970s and some are missing in the 1980s and 1970s. For Bollywood (Filmfare Awards) a complete list of nomination apart from winners are available in filmfare website itself. But for Filmfare Awards South its incomplete. -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  14:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Amrita Rao's Office ( Kindly do not tamper with the actresses Wikipedia )
Dear Wikipedia user,( Bollyjeff )

We are upset with you constantly tampering with authentic

information about cine artist Ms Amrita Rao.

Each time we, from her office edit and enable correct information

about the actress, You re-edit and project to know better than her family.

We request you not to re-edit authentic information provided from our side.

We are sending you a request, if you tamper with the Actresses

Wikepedia once more, we will have to contact Wikipedia directly and

report your IP address.

Adrin & Abhishek

Amrita Rao's Office

mobile : 9920019494. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhishek2012 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

General: Preity.. Kajol related
Dont you think that wikipedia should NOT glorify people. It just takes away from its credibility. The articles should mention what their profession is and what their achievments are. To say that Zinta is lauded by the media for being fearless etc is laughable to say the least. The intro should mention her most popular movies and her most important awards(Filmfare in this case). Some random bravery does not merit a mention. Plus, what is all this thing with separate headings for her work from 2007 onwards. She isnt retired or anything.

In Kajol's article. GREAT amount of glorification. In the second reference that is cited, there is nothing to call her some legend or anything. That is why I removed it. All Bollywood personalities have great things written about them from time to time. That cant be used as a source to glorify them.

On Katrina Kaif's citizenship, I stand corrected. I remembered her mentioning something like that. You must be right on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bollywood shollywood (talk • contribs) 19:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Above.. contd
Hey.. If you believe that I am not qualified to make corrections, then at least you can! I think I made some valid suggestions. I hope you will act on them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bollywood shollywood (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Reply
I wouldn't say it's that big a deal, but she is a very senior actor and I believe deserves top-billing. If it was Amitabh Bachchan, no one would ever question this position, but she also has a very major part in the film (much larger than his part in Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna). Your take? Shahid •  Talk 2 me  21:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Well that's something I disagree with. The images shown on posters in many cases don't really reflect who should be listed how and where. Actually, for every film there are very often several different posters. So no, I don't think a poster should be taken as a guidance point. We generally should give the leading actors the top spots, and if the major cast includes a senior figure like Bachchan, then they deserve top-billing, I believe. Of course, if it's a movie like Dil Chahta Hai in which Dimple Kapadia has one minuscule role, it's a different story altogether.


 * Speaking of that, on Sholay, was it a conscious decision to list the actors in this way or you didn't pay much attention to it at all? Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think stardon has anything to do with who should come first, and it's not really an objective way. Because if we were to do it that way, we would also have to list Hema Malini above Amitabh (as it was actually done in the film), but it's clearly not at all the way it should be. What I do think needs another thought is Sanjeev Kumar whose role is clearly the leading in the film. I don't really mind, anyway. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  04:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Awards for producers
Check out this discussion and try to participate. -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  13:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Mass contributions/changes need review
I left this message at the India Film Task force, but not sure how often people monitor that. So I will repost here in the hopes that you or one of your talk page stalkers can investigate.


 * This person has gone on a massive editing spree across multiple articles and I dont know enough to know whether the changes are appropriate, but they looks suspicious.


 * Thanks! Active Banana    (bananaphone  16:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Re Aishwarya Rai

 * User:Bollyjeff, Nothing to worry! I knw the article isn't expanded after the previous nomination. But I have cited few unsourced statements which was mentioned in the previous GA review and still a few changes needs to be carried out. Once those issues are fixed, I'm pretty sure that there won't be any problem. I feel there is no need of withdrawing, since we are left with considerable amount of time. Regards. -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  12:08, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm using bare URLs so that it will be easier to add more ref wherever possible at this time and bare URLs are being formatted using a tool. Don't worry! -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  12:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The article claims that "Aishwarya Rai is only the fourth Indian actor after Amitabh Bachchan, Nandita Das and Shahrukh Khan to be chosen for an Order Of France". I'm not sure about this, since Sivaji Ganesan was the first Indian actor to be chosen for it (Chevalier) in 1995. -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  13:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Rowspan
You wrote "Manual of Style guidelines instruct not to use ROWSPAN in filmography tables". Can you show me where it says this? I have never seen it before, and I deal mainly with film and actor articles. I find that they cause a lot of confusion and probably would not mind them being banned; it's just that they are used everywhere. BollyJeff ||  talk  02:01, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ACTOR. I first started hating them as an editor because it's harder to add new entries (have to remember to bump the number...and that clutters the revision-diff display), then found that guideline which raises important readership points. DMacks (talk) 13:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will try to start removing them. I actually have mixed feelings because they look so good when they work. BollyJeff  ||  talk  17:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Kollyfan
I think he understood everything, anyway let's wait and see. -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  17:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the discussion to those projects. That's so unfortunate that the page being locked completely at his version. I've informed few users who helped the article to get GA status and I'm sure the response would be good. -- Thalapathi  (Ping Back)  02:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've put up my word on this issue at the Indian Cinema Task Force talk page. EelamStyleZ (talk) 06:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi! did you notice Enthiran, the same user came and reverted everything and is now he is blocked for Edit Warring. I guess he might be a sock puppet of User:Sreekar akkineni, the one who made disruptive edits in Tamil cinema article before a couple of weeks, and User:Kollyfan has also made some edits in Dasavatharam regarding gross and budget. I requested page protection and the page is semi- protected till 13 July, but what if the sock master comes back after that. -- Commander (Ping Me) 12:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Filmfare
Hey what's up, I see the new user (who's probably a sock), added Actor and Actress categories for the critics awards. I removed completely the original category, and now there are only two separate ones. I did that because today no one distinguishes between the two and more than anything that was the case with the Playback Singer awards - which were initially presented as one award common for both male and female singers until 1968 (I don't think there's any need for a separate page for a retired category which in itself was just expanded and divided). Anyway, there's a lot to do now with the actors who won the award. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  22:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's indeed a critics award, but was not mentioned as such - it was just under that section. The thing is that you must mention that it is a critics award when you give an award for best film, because there must be a difference between the main award and the critics award. Documentary is a unique award.
 * I did not at all know about any problem with Enthiran. Let me take a look. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  08:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your help about the edits. I am quite new in here so i don't know so much about that. Now i will try to do my best about the edits (minor and major). Thank you once again.

Planet Bollywood
Well, thanks for your suggestion. I have a software for the bollywood songs, so i am getting all the lengths from there.
 * Is Planet Bollywood a reliable source for music review? Torreslfchero (talk) 09:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks.Torreslfchero (talk)

Re Aishwarya Rai
Hi! Just have a look at and. The former says that "she only accepted the Telugu film, Mamagaru, in which she made a special appearance" while the latter also confirms that she made a special appearance in a Telugu film in 1991. Is it true? Can you just confirm it? -- Commander (Ping Me) 13:23, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Also check out this one -- Commander  (Ping Me) 13:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing out, I think she did not win the contest, many sources say that she was coaxed by a friend to enter the contest while none of them confirms that she won it. -- Commander (Ping Me) 14:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well but why did you revert everything, I expanded the modelling section a bit. -- Commander (Ping Me) 14:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The reviewer has said most of the stuff in the "International Media" could well be moved into "Awards and honours". What say? -- Commander (Ping Me) 06:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, just have a look at here. User:kollyfan has termed us as "vandalising criminals". Can we report that fellow to the admin -- Commander (Ping Me) 16:31, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for expanding the article. Just have a look at my sandbox. Is the Lead section okay? or something which is more important can be included. -- Commander (Ping Me) 16:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Never mind! Is the lead okay? or do we need to include something else. As far as Enthiran is concerned, I don't have any problems but it would be better if you also consult other editors who worked more on it. In the mean while, you can also have a look at Dasavathaaram. The article claims the film has made over ₹ 250 crore, supported only by The Hindu. No official statements were made though. Also will you be able to come up with the same formula for other articles like Ghajini, Dabanng and 3 Idiots. -- Commander (Ping Me) 16:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Maghadheera is yet another high grossing film in south India. IMO it must be highest grossing film in South India before Enthiran was released, since Andhra Pradesh has a wider range of audience than other South Indian states. -- Commander (Ping Me) 16:53, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Gross revenue dispute
His claim of nothing is reliable can't exactly be accepted, although there is a good reason to be skeptical. I don't mind a range of numbers if it should be a last resort and if everyone agrees on it. However, I'm wondering if that would compromise the article's encyclopedic nature. If a majority of our sources say 375 then I say we stick with that. As for Dasavathaaram, I'm assuming you're including the ₹200 in light of Kollyfan's requests. I don't think it would be wise to take his words into account as he is highly subjective, saying things like "this [source] seems more closer to reality". EelamStyleZ (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Eelamstylez has got the point! if a majority of sources say "something" it's better to go with that. I'm not willing to comment on the infobox but the box-office section can be re-written as suggested by Bollyjeff, since that would avoid problems in future. Commander  (Ping Me) 16:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Aish Ford Supermodel contest
Hey looks like she won the contest, but not the worldwide contest. The contest was held to select the representative from India to Ford Supermodel of the World. -- Commander (Ping Me) 07:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Dasavathaaram
Hi, Now that Enthiran page has stabilised, can you please look into this film? Unlike Enthiran this film has only 1 or 2 sources about box office figures. It suffered from heavy negative reviews and failed in Hindi and Telugu. Personally, I believe the total collections ranged ₹130 to 140 crore in its lifetime from all languages. But so far, I have got sources putting the gross in excess of ₹200 crore. Revert wars expected. Kollyfan (talk) 12:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Cast-list and bold style
Hi, Thanks for your inputs in this regard. Please note the cast-lists added is simple and contains name of actor/actress for each character/role. Table was used to improve the readability of the list. When additional information needs to be provided for any actor/actress/character, table cannot be used, as referred to the cast-list of film Sholay. Also, only table headers (not the contents) are shown in bold, without using any special formatting. Regards, Charan s05 (talk) 13:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion
Thanks for the edits on MPK but is it necessary to quote the songs title(i have seen many articles without quotes)?
 * Hi, could you please redirect Sunita Rao in this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suneeta_Rao), since she is better known as Sunita Rao.
 * ✅ - Created Sunita Rao as a redirect to Suneeta Rao. BollyJeff  ||  talk  15:23, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't know that before.

Hi, could you also redirect Sir (1993 film) for this article. Torreslfchero (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Why would you want to redirect from a more complicated title? I added Sir (film) to the Sir (disambiguation) page so someone can find it that way if they just type in 'sir'. BollyJeff  ||  talk  22:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox edit
Hi, always include the categories inside comments while working on your sandbox. -- Commander (Ping Me) 09:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Enthiran awards
Is it necessary for the awards to be stated in the link? They are present here. If a source is necessary, kindly remove it as I could not find one as this doesn't have an official website. Thanks a lot! Secret of success (Talk) 17:16 1 July 2011

Talkback
 Lynch 7  14:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Mamta Kulkarni
As you have an interest in Bollywood films can you clean this up? It needs to conform to WP:BLP standards. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  19:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Managerarc put it back the way it was. BollyJeff  ||  talk  01:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Acather96 (talk) 10:34, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Shriya Saran
In my view it is still not GA quality. The career section is still underdeveloped. I don;t care if 10 films flopped in a year you still need to cover them, or at least a few of them, Shahid may disagree on this though. Personally I never bought the fact that a film was commercially unsuccessful that you should ignore it. Compare the coverage in your article to my current GA candidate Dolph Lundgren. I think each film should be treated evenly unless it had a limited release or was a very low budget/independent picture really of insignifance. You have not mentioned a single film in 2005. At the very least you need to cover to subject matter and reviews of her performances in a handful of them. Same goes for other film and years you've dismissed.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Of course if I was writing an article on Dharmendra or John Wayne it would be impossible to write about every film. I did not say every film but just saying "all 11 films in 2005 flopped" is really not good enough. Personally I would state what the films were and then find some negative or positive reviews about her performance if she did actually have any in 3 or 4 of them. But I've written about every film Clint Eastwood was in and I intend doing the same to the Sean Connery article. Obviously number of films may often impose restrictions but I believe the career section is still too weak for Saran. ♦ Dr. Blofeld

Indiaglitz, Behindthewood, Idlebrain? Not the best.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:59, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Kabhi Kabhie name change
I was also looking at the Hindi version of the article while editing. Since the two words are same in Hindi name, applied the same to the English spelling too. Sincere request to revert this change, to conform with the name on the poster. Thanks, Charan s05 (talk) 10:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Reply
Hey nice job on the article. It's improved a lot - I'm not sure it's of GA quality. I'll read it first and then give you my input. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  16:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The article is generally quite decent - I mean - it's very well sourced, and that's its biggest plus there. I'm not sure it's very comprehensive though, particularly because the career sections are a bit too short. Having said that, everything is in context and looks neutral to me. And still, it needs a thorough copyedit.
 * I'll make some edits on it later, but first I think it's better to give you a few points:
 * I'm sure a strict reviewer would question the reliability of Idlebrain.com, Andhravilas.com, Newsofap.com, and even oneindia.com (it's been questioned several times in the past).
 * (B) If only you knew how many sources I deleted already for this reason. That's my biggest problem in expanding the article more; where to find good sources? Should I add info without sources?
 * I would create a "personal life" section, in which her current offscreen life would be discussed, even if it's brief.
 * (B) If I can find good sources.
 * And this brings me to the next point - "Controversy". Back in time I couldn't understand why some editors were so strongly against such sections, and now I totally agree with it. If there's a controversy worth mentioning it should be incorporated into a "personal life" section or somewhere else.
 * (B) sure
 * Some sentences which make no sense to me (just at one glance, and I'm mentioning specifically them out of experience):
 * "Her most notable 2009 release" (it's considered to be POV)
 * "The film created big hype among the audience in Kerala and was declared a super hit in the first week" (the first part of the sentence is totally useless).
 * "directed by Manikandan, a former assistant to director Jeeva" (the clause is irrelevant, unless there's a specific reason it is mentioned in relation to Shriya)
 * Beware of using the word "successful" too many times, and beware of using just that (I mean, care to specify which success a movie attained - commercial, critical, or both).
 * (B) Yeah, I can fix all of that.
 * That's all for now - more later. Let me know what you think. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  17:17, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * (B) Thanks for the input. As far as expanding the career section. How do you feel about mentioning every single film, etc.? I think its too much. I tried to mention only notable films. Granted I need to say why its notable, as you said above, but usually it means it did well at BO, or she received some recognition. BollyJeff  ||  talk  17:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

No, I didn't mean every film. I know that unlike Hollywood, Bollywood produces a lot of really non notable films which are not worthy of mentioning. However I find it hard to believe that not even one or two films out of 10 in 2005 are worth mentioning, even if negative reviews.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:08, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I am now mentioning 4 of the 10. I asked for help on the talk page to make sure no notable films are missed. BollyJeff  ||  talk  18:05, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Adjusted gross
Cool. I didn't know about the unadjusted gross on BOI. Regards, Scieberking (talk) 16:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Rowspan - saving to my page
See this discussion with another editor on this subject. Other editors are slowly catching on as well. BTW, welcome back; I hope things are returning to normal for you. BollyJeff ||  talk  12:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ya actually I was looking at the ACCESS issues, where I saw it. I forgot to post you that I'm fine with the Saran article. Lol, Bolly you are a bit late, I'm going on vacation again. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 12:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * What more do you think is needed on this article to go for GA again? BollyJeff  ||  talk  13:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * A restructure logically. Things like the controversy section, which is purely associated with Sivaji and hence a part of her career, should be merged in the appropriate section of the bio, not give it undue importance. Remember, controversy sections are always to be dealt carefully, we do not report something as controversy, we report in the passive and neutral tone what happened. If you ask me, I never-ever have the name controversy in any section title. Its also missing an influence section. As to who inspired Saran to be an actress, who's work is mostly attuned to her, who was her role-model etc. Its an important part of bio. Overall I feel its good and minor prose issues I'm sure the GA reviewer will point out. This is so much better than the Aishwarya Rai article. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 13:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment to Bollyjeff: It's good to avoid sections like "Criticism" and "Controversy" in BLPs, as pointed out by Legolas.
 * Comment to Legolas Other than the reference formatting what's bad about Aish's article. It's very comprehensive than Shriya Saran's I guess. -- Commander (Ping Me) 14:26, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Lol, content wise it lacks a lot. It was only that day I was browsing through Landmark in the film and music related books and on fashion, where I found many reliable content and critical assessment of Rai's career, looks, acting, her influences etc. Rai already has left a legacy in Bollywood cinema by being its most popular face ever, so content wise Rai's article is poor compared to Saran's article, which by virtue of being a newbie actress, is well-organized and comprehensive. I will totally revamp Rai's article sometime in future. Lastly, remember that books from reliable publications and authors are much more important for content addition than just random website links. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 14:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Ponnar Shankar (film)/GA1
I have reviewed this article and am willing to put it on hold for two weeks. You may be interested in making the needed improvements to it in the meantime.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:16, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Reply
Hey friend, unfortunately I have very little time to be on WP. I'll be happy to review the articles when I have a little more time. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  19:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

GARs
Wow, maybe I need to get you to review my next GA candidate; you seem like an easy reviewer. Or is it just much harder to get delisted? I have seen much better articles fail GA, and others get delisted. Did you actually look at my candidates and think they are representative of good articles? Would you pass them? I think you have to grade articles so that any GA article has a similar level of quality, no? I am not sure I understand what you want me to do to verify the sources, with the templates and all, but I have not been allowed to use those same sources in the past in a failed GA review. BTW, I also see reviewers complain about reference formatting as well, even down to consistent date formatting across refs. BollyJeff ||  talk  01:47, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't know enough about the articles or the sources to form an opinion on the specific articles.
 * On the other hand, I know quite a lot about the GA criteria, and most (but not all) of your complaints have nothing to do with the GA criteria. Fake criteria invented by reviewers is one of the major problems that the GA program has, and I oppose it whenever I encounter it.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I was just going by what I encountered from other reviewers in the past. I though that the method of style was important too, but apparently only 5 pages of it, as defined here. So what should one do when finding reviewers who are too strict? And also what specifically should I do to determine if these sources can in fact be used? I know several editors of Indian cinema articles that would say no because they have been questioned in the past. I'll just fix the formatting myself. The only thing I could find on Idlebrain.com is this. But the source that you showed me said a site cannot be blanket banned and must be evaluated for reliability on a case by case basis. Now how is that supposed to work? BollyJeff  ||  talk  12:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * When you encounter fake criteria like that, the first thing to do is to remember that (like yourself) the reviewer is probably just going by what someone else did in the past. The "fake criteria" problem is a problem that we want to fix, but not one that we really need to assign blame for.  Also, sometimes even if it's not technically required, it's still the kind of good idea that you'd want to do no matter what—so if that's the case, then why not do it anyway?
 * Then I'd point them at WP:What the Good article criteria are not. If that's not good enough, you can leave a note at WT:GAN to ask for help resolving the difference between the criteria and the reviewer's opinions.  You can also contact me or User talk:Geometry guy (the other major contributor to GACN) to ask for help directly.
 * As for identifying reliable sources: We have to go case by case for sources because how exactly you use the source is important.  To give a silly example, a children's book like The Very Hungry Caterpillar is an impossibly unreliable source for a statement about Albert Einstein's physics theories, but it's a 100% reliable source for a statement like "This children's book is about a caterpillar".
 * According to policies, a reliable source has these characteristics:
 * It has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.
 * It is published by a reputable publishing house, rather than by the author(s).
 * It is "appropriate for the material in question", i.e., the source is directly about the subject, rather than mentioning something unrelated in passing.
 * It is a third-party or independent source.
 * It has a professional structure in place for deciding whether to publish something, such as editorial oversight or peer review processes.
 * A standard, commercial celebrity magazine or gossip website would typically have most of these qualities. The fact that this class of scummy, muckraking publications pander to some of the worst qualities in humans, profit off the destruction of people's reputations, and report information of strictly dubious importance to the world is irrelevant.  In fact, some of them are feared by their targets specifically because they have formidable reputations for accuracy, and, consequently, whatever hateful, destructive claims they publish about you are highly likely to be believed by everyone who reads it.  (Others are merely rumor mills.)  I don't know enough about these sources to help you sort them out, but the question is always the same:  Is this source good enough to support the specific statement in question?  The question is never, "Is this the sort of respectable magazine that decent, moral people would be proud to tell their families they worked for?"  WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:31, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Helen (actress)
Special:Whatlinkshere does work on deleted and non-existent pages. Thryduulf (talk) 15:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you might want to request an AWB-user to fix them for you - see AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. It claims to be able to take input from a whatlinkshere list for find and replace jobs, but I've never used it so I'm not guaranteeing it! Thryduulf (talk) 15:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * An editor moved Helen Jairag Richardson back to Helen (actress) on 5 August. Comments about this issue were made at Talk:Helen (actress). If you think Helen Jairag Richardson is a better name for our article on this person, you should open a move discussion at Talk:Helen (actress) and make an entry about it at WP:Requested moves. The instructions are at WP:Requested moves. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
For reverting the vandal. I'm happy for you that you were not here in the era of, and his obsession with the Rani Mukerji and his daily insults claiming that everyone is jealous of Mukerji because of her success. :) Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  23:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Dev Anand
Can you check it and to your watchlist? A haunt of Shirik88music. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  14:41, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkbalk: User:SpacemanSpiff
&mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  15:05, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Bibliography of Hindi cinema
Made a start on this. Please add further books to build this up. Simply place a google book url into here, reverse the author listing so surname is first and click make citation, then simply remove the ref parts and the current date.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Sortability
What if there is nothing more to be mentioned under the "notes" section. I removed sortability for "Notes", since that column will be incomplete most of the time. Also most of the Hollywood actors' filmography follow that method. -- Commander (Ping Me) 12:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean it that way. See sortability for a column will be useful only if each and every entry is complete in that particular column. What if an actor has won only a particular award and there is nothing notable to be mentioned under the notes section. In that case sortability has no meaning. -- Commander (Ping Me) 10:04, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * See the project recommendations. It advises not to use sortability for "Notes" section, as it may lead to cluttering. -- Commander (Ping Me) 10:21, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If you apply sortability it leads to over cluttering. You can find out from the examples that are given below. Pls don't argue further. If you still have problems ask the ones who are very active in WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers -- Commander (Ping Me) 03:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, how do you say it makes no sense in applying sortability for roles. See notes are incomplete most of the times and they are optional. So it makes no difference if you apply sortability for that column. -- Commander (Ping Me) 03:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

my request is please expand Priyanka Chopra article
please expand priyanka chopra article as it is quite boring and irrelevant.it is not correct and it is because this article is mainly affected due to partiality of the wikipedians.please expand it and make it reliable.(Bollybuzz (talk) 04:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC))

Bodyguard
Hi. This User:Scieberking doesn't accept the fact that south Indian film industry has produced two of the highest grossing Indian films and says that Bodyguard is the second highest grossing Indian film. Please put forward your support in his talk page or at Reliable sources/Noticeboard.  Secret of success  Talk to me  12:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Views
Please post your opinions here, on whether Taran Adarsh is indeed a real critic or not.  Secret of success  Talk to me  05:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Madhuri Dixit
As you know i am attacking this page, i have few things to discuss & have put them on its talk page. Would require your views. Please help. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Here I'd started a discussion that you discussed with Animeshkulkarni on his talk page. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  16:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Tables
No opinion, that's why I didn't say anything. I think way too much attention has been given to filmogrpahy tables anyway!♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Taare Zameen Par
Hi. Could you kindly help sort out the issue of the gross figure of Taare Zameen Par, which is given as 131c but two contradicting BO sites give it as 88c. Shouldn't we add both in the page since there are no official sites for Indian BO figures, without anything in the infobox? Please see the talk page.  Secret of success  Talk to me  13:19, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tenshi no Koi
Hello! Your submission of Tenshi no Koi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. I will be helping to improve the article, so if you need any help, please feel free to contact me. Thanks! Lionratz (talk) 07:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply.

If you have any other question, please feel free to contact me. Nice working with you!--Lionratz (talk) 12:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) I changed this because this is one of the more common format of Japanese film artcles. I also believe that this is the best way as it reflects all the possible names for this film. The Japanese romanji is reflected after the Japanese characters. If you do not agree with me on this point, you can open a discussion on the article's talk page
 * 2) Ref 4 and 6 are different. Ref 4 is the film's profile on this website, while ref 6 is Shosuke Tanihara's character info on the same website. As for your comment that Shosuke's article that do not have these roles, I must say that his page is not really updated. If you refer to the  Japanese Wikipedia, you will notice that the English one is notably shorter. That is why I always say that articles on Japanese people are not reliable at all.
 * 3) Foreign language sources are needed in the case of this article, because they are the secondary sources that are the most reliable. Most of the English sources merely translate these (and might be highly unreliable, as I have discovered to my cost). And per WP:NOENG, foreign language sources are permitted.
 * 4) And lastly, no, DYK articles do not have to be as well developed as this. I had just improved it because it was in my area of interest. Hope you appreciate it.


 * I have forgotten to change the url for source 6. Thanks for pointing it out. And MOSFILM suggests that background information for the cast should be incorporated in the article, and I think that will make it more informative for the reader (seeing that the Shosuke page does not shed more light on this). As for your last point, I agree and I have re-added it back into the lead. And I'd advice you not to take my word 100%. If you really have doubts, you can contact native Japanese speakers like User DJAF or Sjones23 (users whom I've worked with before) to double-check. My Japanese is not really fantastic but I think my translation should be accurate enough. I am looking forward to working with you on this article!--Lionratz (talk) 13:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I will be happy to help you with that. Do let me know if there are any other articles that I can help with. Thanks! And to answer your last question, no, I haven't had a chance to watch them. Tenshi no Koi has a age restriction in my country and the DVD for Tada, Kimi wo Aishiteru is getting hard to find, although I have seen it before somewhere... If I have, I will let you know. Cheers!--Lionratz (talk) 04:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Jagjit Singh
This page is becoming havoc. Fan site! Previous condition was already darn bad. Plus now.... dont say a thing! Can you help? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 18:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

PC
I do not think polls can be considered an honour or an award. This of course can be moved to PC's media section, but this one too according to me should not be flooded with countless polls as I personally feel it's better to have some major polls and not all of them. After all, popular actors are always ranked on different polls in their prime and what sense does it make if we just list them?

If you still feel it should be there then go ahead and restore it for now, though I personally feel it would not do good as anons would start loading award pages with polls, where they certainly don't belong. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  23:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Tenshi no Koi
Orlady (talk) 12:02, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) You will find this one to be more interesting. Carry on! -- Commander (Ping Me) 18:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Kal Ho Naa Ho
Hello, regarding this, be aware that there is a trend of vandalism in which false company information is added to film articles and vice versa. It is likely a sockpuppet of ; see more information here. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

ImageRemovalBot potential problem
Someone changed the picture on Zeenat Aman from x to y (illustrative names). Ww2censor added a message saying that y may soon be deleted, which it was. I restored the article to use picture x. Then the bot comes along and removes image x from the article, which was an okay image. How can this be avoided? BollyJeff ||  talk  00:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you've got your timeline mixed up. If your "image x" is File:Zeenat Aman(L).jpg, and your "image y" is File:ZeenatAman.jpg, then what happened was:
 * User:Nraxit replaced "image x" with "image y"
 * User:Ww2censor marked "image y" as lacking a license tag
 * Ww2censor added a "this image may be deleted" caption
 * You replaced "image y" with "image x"
 * Nraxit replaced "image x" with "image y"
 * User:Nev1 deleted "image y" as a blatant copyvio
 * User:ImageRemovalBot removed "image y" from the article.
 * Everything appears to have gone as it should have. --Carnildo (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Sock
Thank you, Bollyjeff for filing an SPI. I'm frankly tired. I thought Shez would have anough as he once already had. Check out his changes, of much of the article is copied word for word from Zinta, most of the sources are unreliable, and there's a lot of POV and WP:UNDUE. Thanks anyway. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  11:11, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He closed it because he probably he didn't think a checkuser was necessary at all. He blocked the range, but let's see if it's helpful.
 * In order to file a new report, you go to WP:SPI. In the "Submitting an SPI case" section, you can see a field which has the following text: "Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SOCKMASTER". Replace "SOCKMASTER" with the name of the suspected user (just the name, as in Shez 15, not User:Shez 15), and then click on "Click to open an SPI case..." - this will automatically open a template, and you will then be able to file a new report within less than a minute. It's an easy process. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  13:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I really can't tell. This question should be directed to him... Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  13:28, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ra.One plot
Yeah. Just allow me to complete the plot. It'll be around 2000 words. THEN, I will get my scissors ready and edit it up to 700 words. I know this sounds totally dreamish, but trust me - I can do it, given enough time and room. And btw, you haven't seen Ra.One yet? How sad!  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 13:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, though I haven't used a sandbox in like one year :D. Will do soon enough.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 13:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shriya Saran
The article Shriya Saran you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Shriya Saran for things which need to be addressed. ASHUIND  12:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shriya Saran
The article Shriya Saran you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Shriya Saran for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself? ASHU</b><sup style="color:red;">IND  14:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey congrats! Keep up the good work :) -- Commander (Ping Me) 19:29, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Ya I know tat. It's a year's struggle. Most of the Indian films prior 2000, don't have sufficient online sources. Hindi films have a lot of book sources, where as south Indian films hardly have few sources. Now coming to the script issues, they are turning out to be a big headache in India-related BLPs. Since there are no specific policies on this, different editors have their own perceptions – Some say "Mother Tongue", while some say it might also be necessary to include the ethnic language and some people even say for an actor it's important to include the name in the language (Industry) in which he mainly works. -- Commander (Ping Me) 19:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

GAN
I have nominated Ra.One for a GAN. Just giving you the news.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 14:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello. I carried out my first GA review for another article, Friends with Benefits. I failed the article on the ground of lack of coverage and insufficient length in comparison to other film GAs. I just want to know whether I made the right decision. After all, I was a little jittery about unwanted backlash, but no such thing has happened.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 13:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * No, I failed the article because of a big lack of coverage regarding the topic. That is one of the GA criteria. The length of the article came because of the lack of coverage. And btw, I have also promoted my 2003 Afro-Asian Games to GA. While that's a sports article and therefore has slightly different perspectives, there isn't much difference. A broad and thorough article is required, though not up to FA standards. I did state that there are no other problems regarding verification, neutrality etc. but lack of coverage was a huge ---. That's all. Hope everything is clear. Cheers!  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 13:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmm, yes you are right about Salt N' Pepper. It does seem to have some unreliable refs. Good job! BTW, I've performed my second GAN review on the article Jud Süß (1940 film), and I passed it as it seems pretty up to standards, is complete, definitive, has excellent sources and good photos. Only a minor hold was required, and all errors were rectified very quickly. Would you agree with my verdict?  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 17:37, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Ra.One
Thank you so much :D. And a hearty congrats to you as well. Couldn't have done it without team effort na?  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 13:22, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Discussion
Hello. You have been invited to share your views and provide consensus on the matter of coloring regarding the current-running films of List of highest-grossing Bollywood films. Please go here to add your viewpoint. Cheers.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 14:59, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Re:Kaif RfC
Dear User:Bollyjeff, yes, it does seem that consensus supports adding the Kashmiri script in the lede, as other articles concerning Bollywood related film actress are (e.g. you mentioned the example of Lisa Ray). Also, I'm not really sure what you meant by you meant by your comment. The script that was in the article is the same name that she is popularly known by; it is just written in the Kashmiri orthographies. As Katrina Kaif echoes, "Katrina Kaif is my real name. Kaif is my father's surname, he is Kashmiri," she bristled. "When I joined films I decided to take his surname, since I felt people would be able to associate better with an Indian surname." Although one editor did suggest adding the script elsewhere, I am not in favour of doing so. Like the plurality of editors there, I strongly support adding the script in the lede following the precedent of other articles pertaining to Bollywood related film actresses (e.g. Dia Mirza, Malaika Arora Khan). I will ask for an administrator to close the RfC so as to remove any doubts of the outcome of the RfC. I will not object to your request to add "Katrina Turquotte" in the lede and can even add that in for you. Also, I will try to find the answers to your questions and add them in the article as time allows. I hope you had a Happy Thanksgiving. With regards, AnupamTalk 16:26, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand that you're opposed to scripts in general. However, usually only relevant scripts are given, not superfluous ones. If an actress is Bengali, a Bengali script is given; if she is Punjabi, a Punjabi script is given; if the actress is half-Bengali and half-Punjabi, both scripts are given. I've asked an administrator to close the discussion and after that occurs, I will restore the article to the consensus version. After this is done, we can both focus our efforts to more constructive tasks, such as researching the questions you posed on my talk page. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 16:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, I will follow your suggestion and just add it in the lede rather than reverting. Would you like me to add Katrina Turquotte in the lead as well? As far as Dia Mirza, it seems like she has a complex ethnic background and is proficient in all of those languages. I can understand why you would want to add Bengali. You can add the script there if you would like. Cheers, AnupamTalk 19:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Consensus
Hello. Please visit this section of the Ra.One talk page, and provide a consensus so as to decide the future of my proposition. I will be glad if you also mention some comments regarding how to approach this (undoubtedly) longer and more detailed review. Thank you.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF  Ankit Bhatt  WDF  16:47, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Dheera (film)
Hi, Bollyjeff. I invite you to take part in this deletion discussion. Thanks! EelamStyleZ (talk) 01:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Rajinikanth
464159657 is not my edit. Please do correct user comment when you give revert--Jenith Michael Raj ( talk ) 13:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Behindwoods news template
This is a template to generate a link to Behindwoods news article in your edits.

--Jenith Michael Raj ( talk ) 17:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Best Actress
Honestly I made a reasearch on that a month or so ago and considered changing it myself to Sadhna, but I forgot about it. I almost totally believe now she won it for Sadhna, though I too never knew how to take it really, because according to the official site and Bollywood Hungama, it is Madhumati. According to IMDb, however, it is Sadhna.

I thought we should go with the official site, but then again see what I found on my research - the official site writes in a recent article: "Madhumati did not win any major acting award and managed its impressive tally of awards through technical wins." (it lists all the 9 awards it won) Also, see what another Filmfare article documenting the function says: "Vyjayathimala finally made peace and happily accepted the Best Actress trophy (Sadhna, 1958)." As you see, on a Rediff review of Madhumati, they say she won it for Sadhna. The ultra-credible book Encyclopaedia of Hindi Cinema, published by Britannica, also says it's Sadhna.

Most importantly, Madhumati has always been known for its 9-award record, which, combined with so many reliable sources saying she won for Sadhna, makes me strongly believe she actually did get it for Sadhna and not Madhumati. I think it is all the result of a confusion which happened because Madhumati today is one of her most celebrated films. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  21:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Checked the 1983 The Times of India directory - and it says Sadhna too! Now I'm quite sure it's Sahna. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  21:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I see you like DDLJ - the film is nostalgia for me as well. It's not easy to expand an article about an Indian film which was produced prior to the 2000s. Good work. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  19:59, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Mine is at the moment Dimple Kapadia, which is definitely not an easy task because most of her work was so long ago and finding sources for it seemed almost impossible for me in the beginning. But I feel it's progressed and I enjoy working on it, though I'm quite short of time. Good luck to you. If I find some useful sources along the way, I'll either let you know or add it myself. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  20:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I wish I knew... Shahid •  Talk 2 me  15:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Twitter status message Template
This is a template to generate a direct link to the Twitter status message. You can use this template to navigate directly to the Tweet or to refer someone directly to any Tweet in your wiki. You can use this template freely wherever you need to refer any tweets/twitter users of Twitter for your external references or some other places. --Jenith Michael Raj ( talk ) 06:24, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Twitter_status

Consensus
Hello there. This notice is being sent to inform you that there is currently a consensus discussion going on here. It will be greatly appreciated if you could participate in this debate, as you have worked on this article before and are familiar with its working and history. Thank you.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 08:41, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Sher Khan
Could you kindly express your opinion here? Thanks.  X.One   SOS  09:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Ra.One Issue
Hello. Please comment here and put up your opinion regarding this issue. Your help will be much appreciated. Thank You.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 15:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

SRK EDIT
I HAVE PROOFS REGARDING THE FUTURE FILMS OF SRK! Want them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sohompramanick (talk • contribs) 18:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Huh?
What? Why, what happened? Am I being dragged to WP:WQA or WP:ANI again?  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 13:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh really? With the exception of answering Seeta Mayya, I have not abused anybody on Wikipedia. I suggest you read through my comments rather than picking out the choice words and branding me as a all-round abuser. And the reason why my comments are omnipresent is because, well, Seeta Mayya is running from one editor to other crying over her "fate" and my "murder feelings". Can't I defend myself at all?  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 13:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I have asked an administrator regarding blocking of users; I believe there is a method of self-blocking. I've had enough of seeing other editors go totally scot-free with their vile talk while I get under the hammer. And this time, I'm dead serious: I won't come back. Even if self-blocking is not possible, I think that you people will be able to gather enough material to get me blocked indefinitely. Wish you all the best; and please, do break the good news when it happens. In case you need any e-mail ID, its this: ankit_bhattacharji@yahoo.co.in.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 14:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * You needn't console me. I have made a request at ANI; I hope my wish is granted soon. Till then, I just wish to have nice, ordinary conversations. Cheers.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 14:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Sushmita Sen
I'm planning on working up some my brand of magic on the above lady? Wanna collabo on it? Would be a perfect Kolaveri di... :P — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 18:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Claps !!! Claps !!! Claps !!!
What a superb act and drama created by one and only Ankit !!! :O Kudos !!! :-) Seeta mayya (talk) 19:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Best of luck :-)

Seeta mayya (talk) 23:41, 13 December 2011 (UTC) <br style="clear: both"/>

Civility
Hey I'm getting some ideas in mind that Seeta Maaya is an another account by Guru coolguy. The later was earlier involved in dispute in the same article. I doubt that such an account by Seeta Maaya with hardly few contributions know very well about talk pages and all. That seems impossible as far as my concern because it takes some time to learn about talk page and discussion pages. -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 14:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Somonlast
Hi, I requested permanent block of this user Somonlast(User_talk:Somonlasttalk | contribs) as continuously vandalizing many pages. But admins didn't respond for my request. so i request you to intervene in this and to bring a solution. Thanks. <font style="font-family:Comic sans; font-size:15px;"> Abdul raja T  04:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Opinion
Would you mind weighing in your opinion here &mdash; Commander <font color = "Indigo" >(Ping me) 16:36, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge GA Review
Wait a second! Who is the reviewer of this article?? :P LMAO. Regards, Scieberking (talk) 23:14, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I meant that about Meryam90. Is she really the reviewer? ;) Well, Indian cinema has brought me nothing but trouble and accusations. I've been accused of being Pro-Aamir, Anti-Aamir, Pro-Salman, Anti-SRK and so on. This is the reason why I've quit, placed the notice and delete comments. I wish you the very best of luck. Scieberking (talk) 15:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Re:Scripts again
Dear User:Bollyjeff, thanks for the heads up! If I don't hear from you before then, I hope you have a Merry Christmas! With regards, AnupamTalk 10:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
 Wifione  Message 14:13, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * You're welcome. Its one of my favourite Bollywood films, too. <font face="Comic Sans MS"> X.One   SOS  06:39, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Sholay
Hey, I was just browsing through Sholay, and though I liked the article, I could find some glaring omissions in it, especially the popularity of some of the dialogues. Scenes like Veeru's antics on the water tank, and more importantly, Gabbar's dialogues (esp. "Kitney aadmi the?" and "Ab goli kha"). These dialogues have got a lot of coverage and have gained some kind of a cult status. Of course you know all this, and you probably have considered all this at the time of the GA review, or while editing the article. Can you let me know your views on the inclusion of this? Thanks!  Lynch 7  14:13, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree with you there; I hadn't noticed the Wikiquote link. Yeah, I know, there's no limit to which you can add those scenes (Sholay is full of famous scenes). I'm new to movie articles (evidently), and of course I'm trying to learn :) Thanks!  Lynch 7  05:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Article trouble
Hello, I have created the article Jessie (character) which is about the critically acclaimed character from the Tamil film Vinnaithaandi Varuvaaya and it's Telugu remake Ye Maaya Chesave with a lot of info. But I am not able to fit the image properly in the infobox. I know your aim is to clean up articles that have major errors in them, so please help. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The Drity Picture Plot
Hi Bollyjeff, Could you please comment over here. I got a little problem with one editor regarding the use of English.--Msrag (talk) 07:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month (COTM)
We used to have an active Collaboration of the Month (COTM) section on WikiProject India which we restarted in December. Currently we ask for two articles to be nominated/chosen for improvement each month. This December it was Mullaperiyar Dam and Manmohan Singh. The collaboration was successful in the case of the former but not in the case of the latter. Anyone can edit and improve the articles. Ideally they should be increased in quality to FA level but it is too premature to expect that kind of success with current levels of involvement. Nevertheless, I have made a proposal here for considering former GAs as one of the articles to be improved andthat it should be restored to GA level preferably. AshLin (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

RE: Bips
Thanks for notifying. It has been almost an year since I have been around in wiki so I am unaware of these rules. In fact, I seem to have forgotten lot of guidelines and syntaxes. Will remove the rowspans right away. Srin ivas  16:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)