User talk:Shez 15

I will respond on this page to comments, unless you ask that I respond on your talk page.

Welcome! (I can't say that loudly enough!)

Welcome and India related links
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Please use edit summaries and Show Preview button more often. Welcome!! --Gurubrahma 10:46, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Civility and Wikipedia etiquette
Hi, a few editors have brought some of your edits to my attention as potentially inappropriate for Wikipedia. After looking at them here and here primarily, I must agree that these comments that are very inappropriate. Let me explain why.

Wikipedia has very strong policies about being civil to other contributors, and particularly in not making personal attacks on other contributors. Telling Zora "you're acting childish and i think it's because you're having heavy periods" is appallingly rude. Similarly, telling another editor that Zora "knows nothing" is also rude, and uncalled for. If I weren't sure that you are a relatively inexperienced user, and possibly unfamiliar with what is expected of Wikipedia editors, I would likely have blocked your account temporarily for these comments.

It's easy to say things that are inappropriate when you're in an editing conflict with another user. But I would urge you to think before you hit the save button. It's a good policy to simply not comment on other contributors; try to focus on commenting on article content only. Everybody gets into disagreements sooner or later here, that's the nature of this place. You don't have to necessarily agree with Zora, or other users. You may not even really like them. But you must treat everyone with civility no matter how you feel about them. If you don't, you will find yourself in trouble.

Also, I feel as if another of your comments needs a little bit of guidance. You said "I'm sure Zora can take care of other pages. In addition, it is not her interest. I dedicated myself to this page and should be the only one who should grant changes." This is a very misguided notion, but one that's fairly common among new editors. Noone owns any article on Wikipedia. Nobody, regardless of their level of involvement in an article, may "grant changes." Wikipedia has guidelines warning editors that noone owns any article, please take a look at them. And remember that every time you click the save button, there is a disclaimer at the bottom of the page that says If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. So remember that nobody owns any article on Wikipedia, even if they wrote it from scratch. Wikipedia's a collaborative effort, and anyone is welcome to edit anything as long as their contributions are done in good faith.

Thanks. · Katefan0 (scribble)/ poll 13:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Response
I will wait until I get some opinions from participants of WP:INCINE before I edit on that page. -- Pa7 17:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

B.O.I.com
There is no reson not to believe in BoxOfficeindia India. Aish did nothing special in 2001. Moreover, BOI doesn`t go as per success and popularity as an actress, it goes as per sale ability in all over the world. In 2004 Rani was the big star of the year, but Preity was listed first because Veer Zaara was the biggest hit overseas and Preity was the lead in this film. In 2005 Rani was the biggest star of the year. Bunty aur Babli was a national wide success and of course the super acclaimed Black which gave her all the possible awards in india. That`s why she was number one. However, neither bunty aur babli nor Black weren`t successful across India. Salaam Namaste was. SN was a world wide success That`s why Preity was the first, even when Rani is n. one. That`s a proof that BOI is reliable. It doesn`t know popularity or success or critics or whatever. It knows just numbers.

Sorry but all of us go as per B.O.I. It doesn`t give us nothing absurd or ridiculous. Yesteryear we have seen very much of blockbusters and hits and that`s what everybody was saying in every single Party, ceremony and talk-shows. As for Badal, it was a hit. When Sunny and Bobby appeared in KWK, Bobby just wanted to say that Bichoo and Badal were hardly and sharply criticized. That`s why Bobby said what he said.

So I go to the highest paid. I have already told you that B.O.I goes as per average (the mean) status in the case of actors payment. The numbers in B.O.I can even be symmetrical. The matter is that Aish is the highest paid in India, While Rani and Preity are the second highest. It doesn`t even important how many Preity gained for Jaanemann. Imdb just didn`t mention that. As I said yesterday, Jaanemann was bigger budget than Baabul so I believe it can be possible Preity charged a big sum.

But I just told you that I wanna wait for it. Now thank you for listening and for arguing in such pleasant way. --Shshshsh 12:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh Please!
'''Now Please pay attention to every single word. With this message I want to finish all our arguments of Rani Preity Preity Rani and who is the better. In fact both of them wonderful.'''

First of all Preity`s tamil films were hits so her success ratio only will increase if we add them. Second, Filmfare is a gossip like all the gossips. Third, Box office india is a very reliable site. I told you Salaam Namaste was a hit in india & superhit overseas, that`s why Preity was considered the biggest star because the site is going as per world wide success. B&B was hit in India and it had nothing special in abroad. Black was an average film everywhere. It was very much acclaimed but it can`t make Rani number 1 in the B.O, Just because SN was bigger than both B&B and Black in the India + overseas together in general.

No Entry was the biggest hit. It`s a fact. It was a super hit. In Zee Cine Awards everyone can say everything. You can`t rely on words. Just important to note that the evening was like salute to Yash Chopra so everybody will say it was the biggest hit. Mallika Sherawat also said in KWK that Murder had been the biggest hit of 2004 and we both know Veer Zaara was. The cast order in VZ goes just as per seniority, nothing else. Rani started her career 2 years before Preity. Just to note, before Preity`s debut Rani had only one film, which was a flop, so I don`t consider her as so senior to Preity. Now about Veer Zaara. You said Rani`s role was more important then Preity`s. The only truth is that Rani had nothing to do in this film. We hardly saw her between the scenes. Preity was way way more notable than her. I don`t even know why I`m telling you that. Everybody knows that. The film dealt in the love story, not in Rani`s revolution for Pakistani women, like you think. Preity performed all the songs, her name is in the title, and the film ends with her and SRK. Rani was just a springboard. Her role firstly offered to Aish (and that`s as per IMDB so don`t tell me the opposite). Preity was the first who signed for the role of Zaara because Yash Chopra was enchanted by her. He wanted Rani just because he likes her too and gave her a little role of 45 minute role. That`s why Preity was the first in B.O.I again. VZ was a world wide success and Preity was the lead, Hum Tum wasn`t, that`s why Preity passed over Rani in this case again. Her name was ZAARA. She received also good reviews for Laksh. Just important to notice Preity began with strong roles from the very beginning of her career (Kya Kehna, Sangharsh, DHT, CCCC). Even in Chori Chori Chupke Chupke she was more notable than Rani. The film is like sorrounds her own life story, although Rani was the lead. She is the one who goes over a big transformation along the film, She sings the title song, she has the same lengh time as Rani, she is the pregnant, and the last scene belongs to her. And you can`t say the opposite in this case too. Preity stole the show. I know that and you know that. Her story in the film is very touching. Go to IMDB and take a look at the users comments. You`ll see other people think the same.

In the B.O Preity does the same as Rani. Absoloutly the same. Both of them can`t do hits out of dharma and YRF. Their names always come together. Because there is no difference between Rani`s & Preity`s abilities in the B.O in the last years. Every year hit and flop. Rani had 1 hit more in 2004 just like Preity had more in 2003. They are even criticized together in this issue. See here. That`s why Preity can`t charge less than Rani. I believe in B.O.I. Just like we go as per IMDB here,(and I know it makes you upset because of the cast in VZ) we go as per BoxOfficeIndia.

Although Rani was number 1 in the last three years, Preity was always number 2 and that`s a big achievement, and you can`t ignore the fact that she is a wonderful actress although you hate her (that`s what I`ve seen from your edits in the past, but I`m here and I won`t let you do it again). In 2003 Aish wasn`t the number one. Preity was. so don`t tell me that again because I have the proof. Like I said in the past, Preity has done more in her 9 years in the industry than Rani in her 11. I`ve seen all the Preity and all the Rani films. I love all the Preity films, and although I love most of Rani`s films like black, saathiya, hum tum, chalte chalte, veer zaara, yuva, KKHH but I also dislike some films and let me tell you films like mehndi are the worst films ever made in bollywood. I love Rani as an actress, but I love Preity more. And you have to understand that there are actresses like Manisha, Karisma Kapoor, Urmila, Rekha, Madhuri and Tabu. All of them just brilliant in every film they do, they had the biggest roles and their act abilities and movie performances are way way better than Rani`s or Preity`s or Kareena`s.

And I repeat one more time. Rani could earn 4 crore for Baabul, but in B.O.I it is proportional. They make the mean between all the payments in all the films. There is no importance how many an actor charges for a film. The importance is how many he charges in general, and every other site will tell you that. You can see it here. The IMDB site can even be wrong on its trivia. It didn`t give us the salary of Preity and Aish, so u can`t say things for your own. Even if you show me that Preity charged less than Rani in Baabul (and I repeat it can be wrong), You can`t write what you have written, Because highest payment goes as per general payment. Even in your references given it`s not written that Rani is the highest paid, so they don`t verify your calaim. So it can`t be left there. She is undoubtly one of, but not THE highest.

To be honest, it doesn`t interest me very much. The fact that some actress is the highest paid doesn`t mean she is the best. Kareena for example was the highest paid from the very beginning of her career, When she hasn`t done nothing special.

I know this message can bring a new cahin of arguments, but I had to tell you all that, like you have told me all your thoughts.

So as for the highest paid, when Preity`s page will be available I will write there that she is the second highest paid after Aish. That`s the only truth. If you write me a new message try to be polite please. Best Regards --Shshshsh 20:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

OK
First of all thanks for keeping the pleasant talking manner. Second, I do like Rani, and very much. Third, I just said that it could be possible that Imdb is wrong. I didn`t tell you they lied. Now, every actress receives her payment some time before the release date. You have only one reference where it is written she received 4 crore. OK. But who has told you she is the highest paid? IMDB didn`t give us the charge of Preity or Aish, so you can`t know certainty that Rani is the highest paid. Even in apunkachoice it is written: "At a rumoured Rs 2-2.5 crore, she's among the highest-paid actresses." That`s why I don`t agree. I`m not the one who has to bring you references pointing out that Preity or Aish charge more. You are the one who has to bring references marking that Preity and Aish charge less. If you don`t do it, you can`t write things for your own, it`s not fair. I wrote in Preity`s page that she is the second highest paid after ash, along with Rani. Since I have the references for it. I don`t know how many she gained for Jaanemann. It could be more or less. But I still don`t know. If she charged more, so Rani would be the highest paid. If she charged less, so she wouldn`t. So please find soueces. As for now. I`ll change the fact. Please try to understand.

I just don`t want wrong information. In fact I`m happy Rani and Preity are the highest paid. I hope you understand. Best regards. --Shshshsh 11:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

OK
OK, we leave it for NOW. But it`s still better to find another reference marking that Rani is the highest paid. This B.O site you gave me is good but I still believe in B.O.I more. A film can be among the highest grossing films of the year but is still could be a flop. In fact the information in both of them is almost the same in the case of grossing charts. Ok, so I`ll look for Rani references. who knows, maybe I could find something. And I won`t remove Preity`s trivia in the case of the highest paid because I have three reliable sources. when you bring me the proof that Rani is definitely the highest and charges more than Aish and Preity I`ll remove that. You still haven`r done that. I have left your Rani trivia temporary, but no way to remove Preity`s. I believe that if rani had been the highest, it would have already spread everywhere, and you don`t even have one reliable source that pointing out: Rani is the highest paid. Anyway, we leave it for now. Thanks --Shshshsh 09:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
OK fine! I`ve seen your version to the intro, and it definitely satisfies me. You`re right. It was really a bit messy. Thanks for the help. I`m very happy we`re talking and discussing in this manner. As for the highest paid. I told you we will wait a bit. I believe that if she is really the highest paid, it will be published very soon. Thanks again! --Shshshsh 00:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes
We allowed to use references from youtube as long as you don`t use it in the external links. Pa7 for herself told me that, so it`s OK. --Shshshsh 12:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

One more thing. I`ve changed the background section in Rani`s page. It was full of admiration, unsourced statements and films that don`t even appear in Imdb. Please try to understand. You can change or rewrite, but please don`t revert or return false information.--Shshshsh 14:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

OK
OK you don`t mind my edits. No problem. I just got confused so I can be wrong too. So I`m sorry. You don`t have to get into war. Now please take a look at the sentence which marks SRK thought she was talent etc. I have also seen the movie and I think she was quite good in her role as a debutant and she proved herself (even more than in KKHH). I think she is talented and you think she is talented. So what? don`t you think it`s not matching for the article? And who knows maybe he hasn`t seen this movie at all? The article has to stay neutral. You can`t write things like this. writing that he has just recommended for her is enough. Think of this please. Anyway I don`t want to edit now. It`s too late. So good night to you and don`t be angry. --Shshshsh 21:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

HI
When an actor has more than 10 trivia facts it is considered as too much. We intend to reduce the number of trivia facts and integrate it into the other sections in the article. For example, the friends facts in both of the articles could have transfered into the personal life sections. I`ve seen your work in Rani Mukherjee`s and Preity Zinta`s pages. It was fine in the former but not so in the latter. Fortunately, user:Shshshsh has transfered some trivia facts into the Personal Life, Career and Popularity (new one) sections and now it is quite good. As for the images. There are no free licensed images for the actresses. I know, they are very popular and a lots of fans would like to see images in their pages. We have to wait a little bit in this case until we find a new free licensed images. Now, User:Yamla is watching these pages so she will remove every unfree image. She has already protected Zinta`s page once. So please don`t add unfree images for yourself, because she can warn you or even block you, and if she finds new unfree images in Zinta`s or Mukherjee`s pages she will even protect their pages for a long period. I understand you like these actresses. I like them too. But we have to wait. --Roniron 15:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello!
Dear Shehzad! I don`t get angry with every little thing. When Rani`s and Preity`s pages were tagged you made some edits on their pages. I liked the one in Rani`s page, but I thought the Preity edit was bad cause you have removed much of the facts not only from the trivia section integating them into the main article, but even some important facts from the career section. I wasn`t angry. I reverted your edits and that`s OK. However, in you last edits you have removed some unnecessary references from Preity`s filmography and I thought you`ve done a nice good job, cause` you didn`t get lazy to transfer them to the movies` pages. So it`s OK. Sorry for not responding your last messages. I was very busy. Talk to me. Best regards! --Shshshsh 13:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Shez, I have also transferred very briefly most of the trivia facts of Preity into the Popularity and the personal life sections/ Unfortunately, their intent is to conceal the trivia facts completely. But I have no idea where could we integrate the rest facts of Rani. I wish you had:-) --Shshshsh 20:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi again!
Sorry Shez but I disagree with you. Missiom Kashmir was the third highest grossing film of the year, while CCCC and DHT were much appreciated. Don`t ignore the 2001 and 2002 years, because they are very important milestones in her career. In 2003 she signed for the biggest films of the year and the biggest roles.

Don't you think that if she hadn't had appreciation for DHT in 2002 she wouldn't have been signed for her next high profile films? One more thing is that people who read this career section may wonder how can it be possible that after 2000 successes we jump into the 2003 year without any mention of 2001\2. We can't ignore that. these films were definitely important milestones in her career. If it had been bad performance she wouldn't have made KHNH, KMG and Armaan in 2003. Don`t you agree?

I made the career section very briefly, so now I`ll remove MK from the popularity section and make some fixes. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 06:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I also want to create another section for tour satages and cannes because it doesn`t have to be in the career section. At the beginning I wanted to title that in other names but now I have decided to title it as commitments like in Rani`s, Shilpa`s and various hollywood actresses. I`m telling you that because I don`t want you to get angry telling me that I am copying you ideas. If it had been used only in Rani`s page, I wouldn`t have used it at all. --Shshshsh 07:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Average?!
User Plumcouch has edited Rani`s page. He removed the promising projects because they weren`t promising at all. Apart from it, As I wrote in the page, Don`t change facts please (it wasn`t directed to you, but in this case I ask you the same). Most of her films were flops, averages, disaster. So in general Did not do well. It`s quite good. Every actor comes across failure. It`s better to write true facts than false glorification. Anyway, tell me what do you thing. It`s important for me in this issue. And please do something with London Dreams coz I just tired to revert this vandalism. Thanks --Shshshsh 21:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Request
As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, and WikiProject pages. To do so, simply add four tildes ( ~ ) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info, read Talk page guidelines. Thank you. xC | ☎  04:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Once again!
I`m very tired to argue. I don`t want to fight anymore who is better, more successful etc. You`re a fan of Rani and hate Preity. I`m a fan of Preity but I like Rani. There are bigdifferences between us. After much of war messages about supposed rivalry between the two (which does not exist at all, by the way) we have become reconciled. We started atguing in a very nice friendly and health way.

Sorry but you are exaggerating a lot! what have I said?! nothing at all! Just that we can`t write average coz average is still remains a kind of success and most of her films were flops. So I suggested to write DID NOT DO WELL instead. So you agreed and this is the end of the story.

For me, Rani and Preity are the best actresses of the industry. Way way better the all the actresses of this generation like Aish and Kareena. Aish was famous because of her beauty pageant status and Kareena, because of her family. Rani too, but her father wasn`t so successful and she didn`t want to became an actress at all, so we can say she is different. Preity came from nowhere. And I think it`s a good fact rather than bad. you said Preity needed luck! but every body needs it. Rani also didn`t desire to become actress. Her mother wanted it. With the time she became better more and more. Her act abilities weren`t so good at the beginning. She had luck of being from actors family just because it gave her the opportunity to start acting. In 2002 she already was brilliant. I think Saathiya is one of her best performances. So it`s fine.

So please Shez. Let`s forget it. And please stop attacking Preity in your messages to another users like Xcentaur and Ekantik directing them to Preity`s page instead of Rani`s. That so bad and unprofessional acts to inform on someone just to feel satisfied. I don`t get your mind. Anyway, talk 2 me, best regards. --Shshshsh 10:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way, what is this next strange message? How are you related to Rob? LOL, I think they got confused.

Here we both go!
Look, we have worked so hard on the pages of Rani and Preity and now some other users want to change it completely. Anyway, I hope they do it in the best way. Sorry but it`s not right. Preity`s article is not copied from Rani`s. I always tried to make it in the most origianl way. In general, my edits inspired by articles of Hollywood stars. Their articles are way way more invested than the Bollywood articles. As I said on Preity`s talk page, Bollywood actors are so deprived compared to Hollywood stars here on WP.

About the wedding, yeah it was strange that Rani and SRK didn`t come. I was shocked! I know Aish doesn`t talk to Rani. In addition, I think she is jealous of her success in the last years, cause she was forgotten by Sanjay Leela Bhansali who is working now with Rani. And I don`t know, but why doesn`t she talk to SRK? Weird.. --Shshshsh 10:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi again!
To be honest, this wedding was too boring for me. So reduced and little number of stars. Although Preity was there and she was brilliant, she was the only I looked up for. I expected something better. I`m still shocked for Rani`s, Srk`s and Hrithik`s absence. Never mind, they lost that (Abhi-Ash). Like the Zee Cine Awards of this year. So empty. Most of the awards winners didn`t attend the evening. Kajol, Hrithik, Akshay, Kareena,, Ayesha Takia and even Rani weren`t present. Anyway, I`m very happy that at least Preity is always seen everywhere.

Now for Rani, have a look on Plumcouch`s talk page. You will see that our thoughts and opinions are identical. I really think it`s strange. There will be a big contradiction between WP and other net sites if the film remains there. It should be kept like it was before in your edit. I will support you on Rani`s talkpage cause it is very important to me as well.--Shshshsh 10:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

of course
Firstly, I think your idea to make a separate section for the awards won is quite good. I thought about that earlier when I saw Shabana Azmi`s fimography page and a lot of discographies` separated pages of american singers. I think it`s great. I didn`t think we can do it for awards, but now is quite good. In the actors pages there will be only popular awards, and in the awards separate page you can write all the awards + nominations. And no, the nomination list doesn`t make an actor loser. Not at all. They mark that he received appreciation for his work. You know, not every actor receives nominations. There are so much actors in india and believe me there are few that we don`t even know their names, although they are brilliant. Nominations just express an actor`s acclaim for this or another film. If to be nominated for an Oscar is so big honour, why being nominated at filmfare is lose. I don`t think so.

As for Biyar Phool, I think this film does not exist. I looked for this in the net and it seems that your reference is the only one. --Shshshsh 10:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

OK
Yeah it`s really stupid. It was mistake to put it there since it caused much of troubles. Anyway, it`s better to remove it and forget it. I think Rani for her own soesn`t remember this film:-) According to every other net source RKAB was her first film and now there is a big wrong information. She hadn`t worked in 1993-1995 (if she had done this movie at all) so I don`t know. I hope it`ll resolve as faster as possible.

As for the awards, don`t worry. If the awards page creates I`ll take care for the nominations and add them in gradation. Thanks.--Shshshsh 23:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Preity-Raniz
Sorry but I don`t want to open this issue again. It was seniority and nothing else. Not all the filmmakers use this format, but YRF, Karan Johar, Abbas-Mustan etc. Go as per seniotity. Look Hum Tumhare Hain Sanam. Salman was credited before SRK when SRK was the main lead, and he definitely wasn`t more successful than him. Manisha and Sonali had very little roles in their films with Rani. There are supporting roles from first grade and it refers to Rani and Preity`s roles together, and there are from second grade like Kiron Kher in VZ and Big B in KANK. The second grade like Manisha`s, Sonali`s and even Mahima`s in Dil Hai Tumhara is not going as per seniority. In the case of Abhishek. Everyone knows that the male is always credited before the female. Or you wanna tell me that Abhi`s role was more important in KANK than Rani`s?

Like I said b4. In VZ Rani had nothing to do. She was a springboard. Nothing else. In fact, Preity`s name was ZAARA in the film and she was the main lead, while Rani had just a 45 minute role without any song. Why do you think Chopra didn`t cast Rani for the role of Zaara? Because Preity was his first choice. He didn`t even wanted her for the role. He wanted Ash.

I`ll tell you more than that. In all their films together exept KANK Preity was more notable. In HDJPK Preity was the main lead and I don`t see nothing notable in lying down half of the film. Preity was more promising in that point of time, that`s why Rani was the supporting. And it was as per seniority there too. It will be stupid if we cast a two-years actress b4 a 4 years actress. As for CCCC you admitted for your own that Preity was more notable. And one more thing, Rani became popular only in 2004 with VZ and HT, while Preity saw success from the very start of her career with KK and soldier. HDJPK wasn`t so big film so I don`t care for it anyway.

As for the feud, Rani is always attacking Preity when Preity is not present in the place. She was jealous of her always and of course in 2003 when Preity was the most successful actress for all intents and purposes. Rani wondered why Preity got the role of Naina and even the not so big role in KMG. She achieved popularity in 2004 of course but she couldn`t forget the previoust years, that`s why she behaved like she behaved. In KBC Rani was so quiet and didn`t dare telling Preity nothing bad. For me it`s a kind of hypocrisy. Preity is very straight and you know that very good. If she thinks something, she definitely will tell that. Now they`re both in the same status. The days of Black and B&B are over. Even in 2005 Preity was rated the most famous and popular actress in the world in the BBC poll (I have the ref). Every actress and her own success. I was travelling abroad and in very much places in the world Preity is the biggest Indian star.

Please don`t continue arguing for seniority, notability and popularity, I`m not interested. It is also can be considered as POV So please without arguments. I think we have done that enough. It was so nice to talk to you in the last days. It will be better to keep it like this because I don`t wanna fight anymore. Best Regards --Shshshsh 13:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

And don`t you think we should leave the popular awards Filmfare, Stardust, Screen, Zee cine, Iifa in the page of Rani despite having a separated article? Meanwhile, I`ll start to look for nominations in a few days.

Sorry but here you`re exaggerating. Rani the role of Manisha? Who told you specifically Manisha`s role? I don`t believe at all in this reference and I don`t know what`s the relation of this to her career but if you have the reference so I won`t protest, but let`s be honest. Rani couldn`t do the role of Manisha in that point of time because she wasn`t able at all. We leave the sentence which marks "she offered a role" but please don`t invent things for your own. I don`t even know if she offered the role of Preity. To me it is the strangest thing I`ve heard in the last few days. For the first time I`m hearing that. Anyway I would like to discuss it. And one more thing is that Ratnam planed to work with Koirala in all of his films of those times. She is his favorite actress so how she could be his second choice?. --Shshshsh 19:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

OK Fine.
I won`t argue anymore. I`m now working on different pages. I`ve created some pages in WP but now I don`r have time for it so I prefer editing and fixing. I have already expanded widely Urmila`s page, Alisha Chinoy page etc. I don`t know which role Rani was offered but it still strange. I don`t think that brilliant actress like Manisha would be his second choice after she won him and herself acclaim for her performance in Bombay. Anyway we leave it like this for now. Thanks. And the Popularity section of Preity goes back. Thanks and Best Regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shshshsh (talk • contribs) 04:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

Hi
I just find it important to note and quote you what exactly Preity said in KWK: " Out of all the actresses of my generation I have worked with Rani is the best". So she has never said that Rani is better than her. I don`t think an actress would make herself inferior to another actress. Preity just said that Rani was the best among the other acresses of her generation she had worked with, and I totally agree with her cause I think the same, but honestly I don`t think Rani is better than Preity, although she is wonderful actress. Anyway thanks for the support. Yes, the Indian cinema is very popular today, but if I have reference specifically for her where she is mentioned in so admirable way so why not use it. I believe Rani is popular there too, but her name is not mentioned there, so I couldn`t have added it to her page. And Preity`s name is Preity, not Preetam. Preetam is a man name at all and those references which you have demonstrated in her page are not useful, cause their content is wholly copied from Wikipedia of earlier times. Thanks and Best Regards. --Shshshsh 16:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S: TRRP releases tomorrow. I`m so excited. Aren`t you? When will you see the film?

An Automated Message from HagermanBot
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 23:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

OK
Thank you!

As for the reference. I don`t go as per refernces in this case. I told you what I exactly heard from Rani cause I have the source here, yes. I have something like 10 episodes of KWK on my computer and this one among them. I quoted you exactly what she said. Plus, this cite is so unreliable and gives so wrong in formation. You can see below it is written that Rani and Kareena both preferred Abhishek above Hrithik, while Rani said "both". And thanks for being so nice.

As for the success in Kabul, we`ll see what we we will do after the page unprotects. Best Regards.--Shshshsh 04:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

WOW
WOW please tell me hoe it was ehrn you be here. I think I will se it in 4-5 days. I am very busy, but I`ll buy a ticket very soon. WOW I`m so jealous of you. I have seen people comments in indiafm here. last year, I`ve seen KANK in the day it released, but now I`m so busy. I think I`ll download it b4 I have time to see it. BTW, where have you seen that? --Shshshsh 18:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Design
I will see the movie very soon, and after your recommendation even more.

Sorry Shez but it really ruins the page. We get nothing on the films. We had the hair styles of Armaan and Laksh but in the trivia so we decided to remove it, I thought on some new section for Preity`s look. Why don`t you create a new section for Rani? --Shshshsh 08:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

HI
First of all, as I talked with xC, we have decided to put the polls back to the article. It`s not an award, therefore we can`t use it there. As decided by many other WP users, salary mention is unnecesarry and will be removed from all the pages, including Ash, Kareena, Rani and Preity. BTW, we have come to decision with xC in the case of popularity section. Kabul will be removed, while Marie claire and Colbert remains there. Marie claire is an important magazine and the matter is that she was the first in this magazine to be sold in India for the first time. Colbert Report is a good expression to her popularity. BTW, Rani was also mentioned there so we have to add it to her page too, but I don`t know where. So please take care of this. In the case of success ratio, it remains there, but the hits number will be removed..

In the case of Rani, in a second thought, the design information could be useful, so we only have to rewrite it a bit. Moreover, we have to write about TRRP. Her role was inspired by her mom in real life and it`s important to note that. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 13:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

PS BTW have you seen the first look of Jhoom Barabar Jhoom in the YRF site? WOW looks so promising!

Hey there
Hi

I'd like to request your inputs on Preity Zinta. This is the same discussion of the In the media section. The older discussion has been archived, as it was huge. You'll find it at Talk:Preity Zinta/Archive2. The revised version of the section could do with your suggestions.

Best regards, xC | ☎  02:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello!
Yes I know Rani`s page needs the nominations but I`m very busy now. Tomorrow I`m very busy, so I`ll do it either tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. By now I have enough sources to do it. I`ve recently posted my comment on Rani`s page as for her name, and please don`t object having the colbert report in Preity`s page. I know you dislike Preity but you know and I know they mention only the big stars. So they mentioned Big B, SRK, Rani, Vivek, Salman and Preity. I know it`s unnecessary to add it into the BB and the SRK pages cause they mentioned some supposed feud between the two but the rest could be there at all. It expresses their popularity. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 14:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

That`s all!
OK I think the same on Rani, she is average looking and good performer. I don`t think Ash is a bad actress. Yes, she became an actress just because of her beauty satatus, but later she performed well. HDDCS, Raincoat, Josh and the last provoked were nice. In Devdas she was also good but I preferred Rani in Saathiya.

For me, Preity & Rani are better. I remember them since the latest 90`s. I`ve seen all of their films. For me Preity is very original actress and I like her very much as a personality. She is very bubbly, funny, sincere and straightforward, as well as brilliant actress. I think Rani and Preity are the biggest actresses of our times. Like Madhuri and Kajol of the 90`s.

Now, I added nominations on Rani`s page as much as I found. I`m working now on Bollywood awards and creating winners` pages.

BTW, xC has removed most of the languages from Rani`s page. I`ve reverted. I don`t get it. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 16:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

The Movie
Shez I`ve seen TRRP. It was very nice. Not as good as Hum Tum, but still there were very much of exciting moments. I liked that.

Now about Bollywood Movie Awards. Rani didn`t win for Black. Urmila did for Maine Gandhi Ko Nahin Mera. You can go to the official site. Then you`ll se that Urmila won. BTW, the picture in your reference is described as from 2005. So it means, an award for 2004 film, which is Hum Tum. Thanks and Best Regards. --Shshshsh 16:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Bollywood awards.
Sorry Shez but it`s stupid to say that someone prefers Urmila above Rani in this case. Rani was the best actress of the year for all intents and purposes. BTW, none of your sources given does not tell us that she won Bollywood award for Black. Urmila won and it`s a fact. Your references only convinced me more that she didn`t win for Black. That`s how it appeares in the official website and your sites, where is not written that she won this award for black, only highlight the truth and the truth is that Urmila won. I don`t think it`s a big deal cause Rani won all the possible awards for Black and I think that she doesn`t even care about it.

As for the critics, Rani won the critics as per the official site. I don`t change facts. Karisma won the sensational award only. Critics is higher than Sensational so you have to be happy rather than creating new concerns for youself.

Of course I will help you:-) I moved the page, therefore I think it is my responsability to change the other named. It was a really purposeless act to move her page from the outset. It caused only unnecessary troubles.

As for the nominations, Shez I`m not changing facts. I`m going as per facts. I wrote just nominations I`ve found. I don`t wanna invent new nominations which could be wrong or false. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 23:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S I don`t wanna interfere as for now in Ash`s page. In my opinion she has to remain Rai cause she is known like this world widely.

P.S2 And OK I won`t delete nominations if you wanna find sources.

P.S3 And Please stop messing with casts claiming deviously that you`re changing her name. I won`t tolerate it anymore. You`ll be reported if you continue.

OK
Look you can say n. 1 here and n.1 there but it is just your personal opinion. For me and for many other people Preity is n.1. In KBC Rani wasn`t the queen of the evening, Preity was. She answered all the questions while Rani answered only few easy questions at the beginning. You could also see SRK has shown respect to both of them in the same manner. Even Rani and Preity were nice each to other and there was no tense in the air. Rani and Preity have already made their place in the industry. So these n.1 terms don`t interest me at all. And this is not the thing that bother me. Your acts were bad. you changed the credits of Imdb to your own wish. VZ, KANK etc, just to emphasize Rani. That wasn`t appreciated and you really dissapointed me. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 12:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S: If you gonna answer me, please without arguments who is better etc. I don`t wanna open new arguments.

P.s2: You got confused. Rani won the GIFA award for Hum Tum, not for Black. There was no ceremony for 2005 films at all. And I`ll find the references for Preity, don`t worry. Anyway thanks for being polite. I like you for that.:-)

Cast change (again)
I see you removed my previous message and you'll probably remove this one but again do not change the cast because you prefer the actress like you did here. I also looked at your recent edit history and it seems that you have done that to most of the film Mukerji stars in. Please do not do that again and stick to imdb to avoid arguments. -- Pa7 18:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Well
Well your references don`t tell us that she won the award for Black. They only convince me more and more that she didn`t. If you see the section of 2006 awards in your references, you won`t find Bollywood award for Black. Urmila won and it's a fact.

Filmfare doesn`t interest me at all. Everybody and his own opinions. Both of the actresses have their share of fans arround the world. Filmfare, Stardust etc etc are just gossip magazines like all the other gossips in the world. Filmfare doesn`t determine nothing, it is a little poll so I don`t care and don`t mind for its results. Filmfare can bring you that Rani is n.1 and another magazine would give you Aishwarya.

Both of the actresses have their own place in the industry, like I said. When you see today Hema Malini and Rekha you don`t count who was better in her time. Here I close this issue and Please don`t write me anymore aboust this. I`m not interested.

I`d like to work now on the awards of Bollywood awards and add them to the winners` pages. You can help if you want. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 20:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks:-) --Shshshsh 20:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

What is this?
How dare you remove things from my talk page?! How could you remove Pa_7's message? I'm just shocked!! --Shshshsh 21:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm
Im sorry! I did not realise that my editing was sooooo bad that it would cause some sort of distress to you! However, to clarify, I WAS NOT VANDALISING THE ARTICLE!!! That's definently not my style. What the hell does designers and how she looks say about her life, most of that is all gossip. How was I making the page look more un-organized by changing KKHH to Kuch Kuch Hota Hai in the info box. For somebody who does not know Bollywood movies, they should know the full name of the film and not the shorter version! Also if you delete a message that I sent you then I don't care. But don't delete snippets of my message from other people's discussion pages. Finally, Wikipedia is a on-going project where every article needs improving, I chose to do the music box on Jhoom Barabar Jhoom because I wanted to, I don't see how me making one edit simplifies everything that I do on Wikipedia. I don't own the articles. Also putting Rani Mukerji before Saif Ali Khan is good because it sounds better - WHAT'S THE POINT! -- Pa7 16:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * LOL! Just carry on mate because that will make it easier for me to gather the evidence that you have been attacking me and ultimately get you blocked. Read WP:CIVIL if you have the time. I don't need to justify myself to somebody who is rude, offensive and has not learnt from his past lessons. Thinking Im jealous of some Bollywood actress is silly, petty and just plain stupid. But then again you have accussed most the editors of that dim assumption. I suggest you open a fansite dedicated to the actress and count how many hits the site gets. Oh yes, if your gonna be rude then don't bother sending a message. Good luck! -- Pa7 20:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * P.S -- considering how horrible it seems to you to have Rani Mukerji after everyone else in the cast, lists, references etc etc may suggest your jealous for every cast member who is credited before her or your a die-hard fan. One of the two? But then Im not going to accuse you of something as stupid as that, just like you have accussed me of the same assumption. Hmmmm I wonder...? -- Pa7 20:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello!
I removed part of the popularity like Europe and Russia, but one country remains there since we see people know her there.

As for the GoAir ambassador, we leave it for now. I need another consultation for this. The point there is the press speculation, so I would move it to the controversies section, if this didn't match there. I need a little bit of time, since I'm very busy now.

I have a little thing to advice to you. Please think and realise, your arguments with Pa_7 are just nonsenses and waste your and her time. She is a great editor, so your accusations tastelessness. You also removed her message to me, which was really incorrect. I tell you that cause I respect both of you. I thoght your past tiffs have come to an end. It is just pity. We have to help each other, rather than arguing all the time about who is better and who has to be listed first. Personally, I won't argue about that anymore. I'm just spending my time, I have much more important things to do. Thanks, best regards. Talk2me. --Shshshsh 21:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Rani Mukerji
In this edit you removed Template:MOSLOW. Please don't remove cleanup templates until things are cleaned up. The list is still in reverse chronological order so things have not been fixed. Thanks. gren グレン 10:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello!
Yes I have to look for more media facts. I think polls have to be in the media section rather that in an awards page. Mmm I have to go.. talk to u latter. --Shshshsh 03:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Listen...
Just like you had your opinions according to what Pa_7 said, I have mine. Xc removes press coverage from Preity's page, so I thought it is not permitted. No problem I'll add it back. BTW, I didn't create it.

According to this site (which you brought here) in the adjusted version Preity has 8 grossers and Rani 6. According to the unadjusted which we use in Preity's intro, Preity has more, because she has more films that grossed more than 25 RS. So in all the cases Preity is the most successful at the Box Office. So Rani doesn't have Veer Zaara but she has K3G where she had only a cameo and it is not included. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 10:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Item Number!
Hi, I see an anon added Preity songs as Item Numbers. He's right. Armaan is also but I don't know. I removed it. I see you reverted his edits and removed Preity (so surprising) and another anon added it back. Saajan and of cource Bombro have no relevance to the plot of the film they taken from. Preity became famous for Bombro. So please don't remove it once again. Best Regards. --Shshshsh 22:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry?????
''Her career includes the top grossing films which have collectively placed her amongst the top heroines of all-time. '' - Shilpa Shetty also appears there, Esha Deol also, Kareena, Preity etc etc so that's non-notable.

Preity has 8 grossers, and it's not important whether one is flop or hit. No, K3G is nothing. It's a cameo. She was credited in the end of the film. She had only one song and three scenes. And YOU don't own Rani's page. I like the actress and I won't let you violate it and vandalize it. It is an encyclopedia here, not your fansite. The Filmfare fact appears in the polls section so stop adding it to the intro. BTW, it's a gossip like all the gossip. In 2003, Kajol was placed 4th or 5th. Why? she didn't do NOTHING in this year.

Mmm, Rani admitted that she is the best. Her words are not reliable and she is not regarded as N. 1. As you see Preity has the biggest success at the Box Office. TRRP was average. Every actress and her success. and you can't say nothing in this case. The popularity changes with every instant. So don't put Admitted. Put declared. And As already known by... is unnecessary.

Please be aware, that Bollywood is a big article about cinema, your obsessive and unreferenced edits there are just unnecessary and can make some admins aware of your Rani glorification. I can report on you for something like this. You removed Australia fact about SN and removing Preity's name in every place, while her name is referenced and Rani's not. Preity is more popular than Rani abroad. You can't change it. I know that for a fact cause I was travelling abroad very much, and I have an important reference for it. BTW, Rani is not popular in China, I have never put Preity's name in China cause your reference from Apunkachoice is invalid and apunkachoice is even unreliable source. And if we talk about Australia, Preity is the most successful actress in Australia. Not Rani. Salaam Namaste, to only was shot there but was also a huge hit there. I didn't remove Rani's name but I removed popularity. We can remind names as BTW but not always as a popularity names. It is unencyclopedic. Don't you dare removing Preity's names or reverting the page, cause you'll be in violation status. And no one word about popularity in my page cause I won't read it.

Do whatever you want in the IN page. I don't put a damn. Put Rani's name (although it wasn't an Item Number and Jiya Jale was kind of). I want to have progress, I'm creating new pages of films and directors, my edits can't focus on Rani and Preity, but I still won't let anyone to put fangush there.

Me? IP? How dare you accuse me? For your inform it's a personal attack. And don't forget how many times you vandalized Preity. Don't forget How you put She is stupid in her page. Just shame on you. You were also accusing Pa_7. Please don't talk to me anymore and direct your edits elsewhere. I'm not interestred in reading your useless messages. --Shshshsh 07:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

RE
I have written my comments on the bit I edited on the Rani Mukerji discussion page. -- Pa7 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

OK
Listen don't tell me Preity's fact on highest grossing films is not true. It is. Rani had a S.P and that's how it was written in the end credits, and BTW she had only 15 minutes role while Preity had a bigpresence in Dil Se, so it's a bad compare.

SALARY of all kinds is not permitted anymore. Some users were talking about that in different pages like SRK's and the conclusion was - not to use it. xC said that clearly. You want to add it all back? write that Rani is the highest paid, I'll write that Preity is secong after Aish... Please STOP adding it. Try to advance if you're so busy rather than reverting the same things.

I did a little clean-up on Rani's page. Have a look. --Shshshsh 08:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hollywood is the AMERICAN film industry. Nair's films are considered as Asian-American films, but Holywood? I don't know. Even in Mira Nair's page or any of her films you'll never see "Hollywood". You know what? I don't really care. Keep Hollywood. Marigold is Hollywood for all intents and purposes, it was distributed by Hollywood companies such Nu Metro Productions which was the distributor of Oscar nominated films like South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut. It was also PRODUCED by Hyperion Pictures, which is completely Hollywood. and in Salman page you can see Hollywood. but I still prefer writing foreign in Preity's page for now. I like it like this. --Shshshsh 17:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

OK
I just didn't understand the point of Hollywood. I said that's OK, keep it. Preity offered Marigols which is also Bollywood, but I don't care, I don't want to write Hollywood. I'm not comparing. Both of them had been offered Hollywood films but they turned that down so good for them.

OK keep the salary, I saw the Tom Cruise page, and he also has payments without mention of status, so that's OK.

The lenses in Black weren't been used to cover up her trademark greenish-brown eyes. It was to squint her eyes and make her strabismic.

Oh Shez, Sabyasachi Mukherjee - why do we need that? why do we have to ruin the page? it is so unencyclopedic.

Why Mira Nair? It belongs to the film page. Mmmm but it is a famous name so it good for the page to have it. OK so we leave.

Marocco appears in the awards page. We don't use specific information twice for an actor. It is not that she won Filmfare or Screen award. Unnecessary.

And I don't get offensive on Rani's page.

Best Regards, --Shshshsh 08:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

LOL
Hi dear! If you want to know, every update is done in the end of each year. Preity is still in the top of this list. I can't revert your edits. But even the site didn't put Rani first cause the total update comes in the end of the year. Yes xC did a great work. Best Regards, --Shshshsh 10:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey there
Hi!

Thank you so much for the barnstar! It was very sweet of you, and its always nice to know when your edits are appreciated :)

Thank you for the kind words and encouragement,

My best regards, xC | ☎  05:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Rani Mukerji
You might want to have a look at the article and its talk page. storm brewing... xC | ☎  15:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I do not know what to say to this chap. Honestly. Ignoring FA class examples and then slashing through the content without any clear logic seems quite odd to me. His removals remind me of the proverb throwing the baby out with the bathwater - in trying to remove fangush, hes chucking out valid content as well.
 * I'm afraid I can't stay online tonight. I have a few family problems to deal with, and its difficult for me to keep returning to have a look at this page.
 * I could have still tried to, but I am hurt by his statements that I am trying to throw in fangush into this page.
 * If you could wring out any logic from him for these removals, please do. Best of luck, and take care xC | ☎  18:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

AGF
Let me put some of the words you have been using into perspective:- "Your welcome. But this Haphar guy seems pretty upset. I don't even think he cares about the article, he just wants to be nosy and see what we've been doing for the past. He came before to attack the article a year ago. Where he just didn't want the mention of every film and removed Chalte Chalte from Rani's career, saying it wasn't a hit. Then, he never showed interest in the page and left. Now he's back. I just hope he has a point. So far, I seem to think he was bored and just wanted to see where Rani's page had gotten. I just don't understand his purpose. Well, now we're in an edit war"
 * This above is you on your friends page talking about me. please do remember the principle AGF. Well if you expect me to listen to discussions, I expect you to do the same, we had discussions which involved you,Zora, Pa7, and myself, where most of your attempts to add everything and more in the Rani article as fan gush was the cause of a lot of concern. There were discussions and there was unanimity among all the other editors that you were wrong, but that did not stop you from putting your version in repeatedly, then the page was well patrolled and I left it because your attempts to turn the page into a fan site was being controlled. The situation has changed and you have again reverted the page to a fan site. Now you potray as if you do not know where I am coming from or what my logic is for removing this content ? Let me state that the article should stick to relevant topics and remove fan gush- which means remove tales of her makeup/ her preperation for roles and offers she turned down due to non availability of dates as well as attempting to list every film she has worked in- please do that in the filmography section. This was what was discussed with you one year ago, and it's a repeat of the same so please do not act the ignorant victim and do not assume motives. The motive is to get the article to a standard which is not like a fan site. Which is what it was. Haphar 09:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Shez try and grow up, it is about time. You have been slinging comments quite freely here,the latest being on my talk page and they are bordering on the obnoxious. If you can stick to avoiding personal remarks we can have some progress or we can look to make comments on each other.
 * Now moving on to the content (if you are interested and are not focussed on only trolling) By all means remove whatever fan gush you want from the Preity page. And the actor pages as a rule do not have a mention of all their films in the passage itself. The majority do not. You can get some articles with a lot of mentions, and I can get you a lot of articles that do not mention all the films in the text itself. I have not been involved in the Preity page, I have been here which is why I am editing here. About your Preity vs Rani logic-Well I do not see you on the Madhubala page though you are on Rani, and Madhubala's page does not have every film mentioned in the text, so by your own logic why are you not mentioning every films of Madhubala in her article ? could it be you do not really care about Madhubala or her article ?- Could it be that I feel the same way about the Zinta ? And speaking of biases, well people with biases should not comment on others. Having said that I have no aversion or dislike for Rani,I got involved in a discussion about a year ago and have it on my wachlist. There was a consensus then that all films do not have to have a mention on an article's page ( and some actor pages that I had created too got a lot of films removed). Just applying the same standard. If the film is not relevant to the career it does not really merit a mention. If the consensus (and that is not just the two of us here) changes on that approach, so be it.  And please do not bother to reply if you have some more personal remarks to make. Haphar 10:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

OK
Don't worry.. I will.

You are invited to look the talk page of Rani. Best Regards, --Shshshsh 11:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Shaadiposter.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Shaadiposter.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Re. Rani Mukerji
Shez these comments of yours are not quite the kind that would make people listen to you - , , . Personal remarks and derogatory personal POV dominate. And someone who refused to listen to 4 editors- ie zora, Pa7, Plumcouch and myself for over 3 months is talking of people not listening ? And please do not respond / leave any more of your comments on my talk page as you cannot refrain from putting your opinionated remarks that do nothing to resolve the issue and only contribute to making the issue personal and not based on the article. The issue can be discussed on the article talk page. Haphar 08:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey there
Hi!

How've you been?

I've found that a lot of the things that so many editors discuss again and again is due to the simple reason we don't have a clear set of policies and/or guidelines related to filmbios.

I don't profess to be an expert on the subject. However heres a page of some of the problems I've come across - User:Xcentaur/Sandbox2. I'd appreciate your comments on its talk page and any suggestions how to get the community to discuss this further.

Thanks, xC | ☎  13:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Rani won!
Yesterday Rani won the award for best actress at IIFA! Best Regards:) --Shshshsh 11:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Do whatever you want!!!
Shahrukh Khan, Ajay Devgan, Sunny Deol, Aishwarya Rai, Preity Zinta, Madhuri Dixit - all these names appear there. Rani does not.

You want to go as per Imdb? go! I didn't know that the cast has changed there and I don't get your mind to change cast when it comes to Preity. I also saw B&B in IMDB and YUVA in IMDB, but I didn't change. I believe you had also seen but you didn't care. So what? There are certain things we can't go according to. I got into conclution that IMDB is no longer suitable for wikipedia. Users endlessly mess with casts. IMDB became popular and now everybody is logged there. There are certain important films which are in advanced production statuses and IMDB hasn't yet added them. The IMDB format was the way of users like Plumcouch and Zora to make understand that we can't credit according to the film credits.

Filmmakers play games with cast order, as per seniority, as per appearances order etc etc etc... Here we have to write about a film and give always the credits for the main characters and then the supporting (unless the supporting actress or actor is senior to the main actor im more than 10 years like in case of Devdas). We can't go as per film credits, most of them make people confused. Here on Wikipedia we introduce information for readers, not directors' commitments for their actors.

I'm going to ask WikiProject Indian cinema and if the case goes further I'll turn to an arbitration case to comment. I think we have to find another reliable site which has entries for all the Bollywood films.

See my reply to your one in Rani's talk page. I won't concede. This "Media" detail is not notable. If you want I'll turn to Haphar.

In KANK, Rani and SRK were not picturised in RARS and WTPT. They were not part of the entire song and clip. If you don't understand the definition of picturisation, that's not my problem. We can also add all the guests you see there during the song RARS. LOL. What do you think? Maybe you can add SRK's and Rani's name to the RARS song in the end cause they were a little part of the clip song. Amit, Abhi and Preity sang and danced. SRK and Rani just were shown in the party. Putting SRK and Rani before Abhi and Preity in the song it's stupid cause they have nothing to do there exept standing and wishing to run away home.

Byeeeeee! --Shshshsh 18:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Feel freeeee
Feel free to go as per IMDB. I don't trust IMDB anymore. Users change the cast every instant. Like Plumcouch told me, that's not right.

IMDb was the way of users like Zora and Plumcouch to convince you that we can't use is as in the film. In fact, I'm going tomorrow to Wikiproject India. See you there, --Shshshsh 20:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Hello. I know we haven't always got along and half the time were arguing, but you don't have to give up Wikipedia totally. Im quite busy myself nowadayz, but will make the odd edit whenever. First of all, what do you suggest for the Mukerji page and we'll go from there? -- Pa7 22:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Shehzad!!!!
Welcome back!!!

Listen I did work on the page of Rani and VERY MUCH. I've added reviews, expanded the lead and corrected overall, along with some other editors so you're wrong. And look through the history - you will see that clearly.

I had never edited it because of you, and didn't leave it when you disappeared. Sorry to say that, but the page looks now way better than before, at the time when it was ruled by you, Haphar and your tiring disagreements. Your glorification and Haphar's reversions in demand ruined the page, so it's OK now, cause it had had some peace and we finally could have worked on it. We have now peace. The article is long, comprehensive, and new news are not welcomed unless they're well approved.

User:Sunidhi123 makes some edits on the page, which again, ruin the page and its encyclopedical level. Please come more often Shehzad, but please be yourself: Shez_15.

I missed you in some ways, Shez. We had a lot of tiffs, but still, you're a great guy I think, without any relation to Wikipedia.

I saw Laaga of course - it was OK with good performances, a copy of Aaina but OK. Talk2me, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  06:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Task force roll call notice
Hello! Your username is listed on the Indian cinema task force participants list, but your user contributions show no activity within the past 18 months. Consequently, we've taken your name off of the list. If you still consider yourself an active editor of the task force, we encourage you to please add your name back to the Active Members list. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver Wikipedia 10th Anniversary Meetup


''The Interior cordially invites you to the Vancouver Wikipedia 10th Anniversary Meetup! It is being held at Benny's Bagels at 2505 W Broadway. Meetup will start at 6:30pm. Drop by for some Wikipedia-style conviviality and free gear! Feel free to forward this invitation to any Wikipedians who might be able to attend, and visit the discussion page to suggest activities. Hope to see you there and have a Happy 2011!

Blocked

 * For continued sockpuppetry I've bumped this block up to a month. Next time it'll be indefinite. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And for even more continued puppetry, it's now indefinite. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:Lachchi.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lachchi.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Meramann.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Meramann.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Pdhh.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Pdhh.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:48, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Rani Mukerji
This is a note to let the main editors of Rani Mukerji know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 21, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/March 21, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Rani Mukerji (born 1978) is an Indian film actress. Through her successful Bollywood (Hindi film) acting career, she has become one of the most high-profile celebrities in India. Mukerji has received seven Filmfare Awards from fourteen nominations, and her film roles have been cited as a significant departure from the traditional portrayal of women in mainstream Hindi cinema. Mukerji began a full-time career in film in 1997 and had her first major success with the 1998 romance Kuch Kuch Hota Hai. In 2002 she was acclaimed for her role in the relationship drama Saathiya, and by the year 2004 she had established herself as a leading actress of Bollywood with roles in the romantic comedy Hum Tum and the dramas Yuva and Veer-Zaara. She achieved further success for her leading roles in Black (2005) and Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna (2006). After starring in a series of unsuccessful films, she featured in the successful thrillers No One Killed Jessica (2011) and Talaash: The Answer Lies Within (2012). In addition to acting in films, Mukerji has been actively involved with several humanitarian causes and is vocal about issues faced by women and children. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Onthesetsofkank.jpg


The file File:Onthesetsofkank.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused, low res, no obvious use. No permission as well."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 11:06, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2022 (UTC)