User talk:Waleed Baig

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! 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! If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up very shortly to answer your questions. Don't be afraid to ask! If you would like to experiment with Wikipedia, I invite you to do so in my own personal sandbox (just follow the simple rules!) or in the Wikipedia sandbox. When you contribute on talk pages or in other areas, it is important to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Again, welcome! &mdash; ßottesiηi  Tell me what's up 19:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Shahrukh Khan, Salman Khan, Aamir Khan & Akshay Kumar
Hello, Waleed, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy your stay here. I noticed your recent changes to the articles of Akshay Kumar, Salman Khan, Aamir Khan and Shahrukh Khan. While I guess it's general concensus, that you can count Salman, Shahrukh & Aamir to the so-called "Three Khans" and that they rule the industry, I'm not sure you can say that about Akshay. I did a little research about him and noticed that he had one successful year so far, and if you visit "[BoxOfficeIndia.com]" you'll notice their comment that his newest release "Hum Ko Deewana Kar Gaye" is not doing that well. Also, Hrithik Roshan was also dubbed "the next Shahrukh" - and a series of flop followed. I'm sure Akshay Kumar is a great actor, and his current success is quite astonishing, but let's give him some time to establish himself as one of the four greatest actors of Bollywood - maybe the same thing happens to him that happened to Hrithik - or not. Only time will tell. Again, welcome to Wikipedia, --Plumcouch 10:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I do respect your efforts for the research,but i have gone through the history of bollywood.Akshay kumar's past has been much better than the khans.Many industrial experts have come to know that Akshay Kumar is the champion of bollywood along side the khans,he was another saleable block on the category as he had more success than khans in the early 1990's and throughout the 2000's.please refer to all of the following sources:- http://indiafm.com/news/2006/04/03/6925/index.html http://indiafm.com/features/2005/11/10/824/index.html http://www.radiosargam.com/news/stories/jan2006/013f.htm http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060414/asp/calcutta/story_6098845.asp these are not the only sources that have given me knowledge about the actor,there are others which i do not remember,so i apologise.

As for Hritik Roshan,he is in no match with the four of them as he still inexperenced. The four of them have been in the industry for more than 10 years and ruling the hearts of the audiences inevitably.


 * Hallo, Waleed, thanks for your reply. I have checked out the links you provided and two of them are interviews with the actor himself - and of course actors will only mention the best of themselves and promote themselves, so I'm not sure you can count that. As for the other articles: both of them are only mentioning a successful year 2005 and don't note any successes prior to 2005.  While I'm sure, Akshay Kumar is experienced and a long time around, he was successful only most recently and has not starred in any of the so-called "classics" (besides Dil To Pagal Hai, where he had a supporting role). For example, Sunny deal played in "Gadar" which is one of the most successful films ever, is more than ten years longer around then Kumar and yet, no one would call him a dominating force in Indian Cinema. Kumar was dominating in the year 2005, but had not as many hits as the Khans between 1990 and 2005. He has just risen to star status and it is not sure that he will be able to maintain that. Also, Humko Dewaana Kar Gaya had a disappointing opening and isn't doing so well currently. (See BoxofficeIndia.com) That doesn't make an actor a "dominating star". --Plumcouch 12:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC) PS. If you check out the Most-successful-movies-of-all-time-list you'll note lots of Khans, some Bachchans, but few Kumars.

I appreciate your whole hearted concern, I dont think ,I will be able to convince you any more so i step down from the protest.I thought it was essential for the best encyclopedia in the world to know the intrepretition of the bollywood experts that akshay kumar is in the same classification as the khans,and even more capable. best wishes (Waleed Baig 12:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC))


 * Just noticed that User:Zora removed all claimes concerning "Three Khans & a Kumar" - and I think she's right. If there's no note of it at all, just the comment that he/she is a superstar, people can forge their own opinions about who is on top and if it's a Khan or a Kumar - and it spares us lots of discussion ;). Anyway, best wishes to you too and I'll hope we'll see more of your contributions in the future, Plumcouch 13:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I am much obliged. (Waleed Baig 13:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC))

Claims to being a "superstar"
Waleed, I'm not sure that WP is in the business of declaring who is a superstar and who isn't. We have to be very careful about intruding personal judgements here. Even "star" may be pushing it. "Popular"? Maybe that's OK. Everyone has his/her favorites (including me) and if we're not careful, the Bollywood articles are going to turn into the kind of feuding I see online in other places. "Shahrukh is the best!" "No, Aamir is a better actor!" We have to try to use neutral language.

This is hard to do and I offend too. I was the one who put the comments re the Three Khans into the articles and I think you were right in seeing that this left out other actors -- particularly since all three Khans are getting older and newer stars are going to replace them sooner or later. So that's why I removed all those comments.

Most of us working on the Bollywood and Indian cinema articles get along fine, and I think we're all proud of the way these articles are shaping up. We're doing something that I'm sure is very helpful to all the foreigners (like me, eight years ago) discovering Indian cinema for the first time. So please stay and help! Zora 21:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC) Zora,You have contexted my modification quite wrong,because if you go to other articles, for instance Aamir Khan He is a prominent Bollywood actor or somebody like Bobby Deol He Is A Popular Indian Actor are exclaimed whereas akshay kumar a working indian actor,consequently it is not justified. Akshay Kumar is not claimed to be Superstar, He Is Formaly labelled as one, you will know this if you are a indian movie goer.I am very even-handed in my illustration of knowledge.As far as getting along well is concerned, i am very cool and appreciative of people's good work.

Casino Royale budget
Hi. I reverted your change to Casino Royale (2006 film) wherein you changed the film's budget to $72 million. What is your source for this information? When making such a change, you need to provide a link or source so that this can be verified. As it stands, the article connected to this statement indicates that the film's budget is more than $100 million, which contradicted your change, therefore it had to be reverted. Also, you should try to always include in the edit summary a brief explanation of what changes you have made and (whenever possible) why they have been made; I note from your contribution history that you haven't been using this feature. For examples of how edit summaries work, simply look at the History page of articles such as Casino Royale. Cheers! 23skidoo 11:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The IMdb is notoriously inaccurate in these matters. Only trust numbers officially released by the studio. 23skidoo 18:59, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Akshay Kumar
Hi, Waleed, it's about the edits you did to Akshay Kumar's article. While I'm always happy when people contribute, please try to stay as neutral as possible. All these things can be debated and are Point-of-View-statements. People can claim that Kumar's role in Waqt was only mediocre, that he's an average actor and that Saif Ali Khan led the Heat Tour - please just state facts. That Kumar has been successful, that he played various roles in various genres and that he took part in the Heat 2006. This will stop future edit wars. Also, lots of his movies are mentioned. Besides the fact that lots of backspaces are missing and there are some capital letters that don't belong there, it's not necessary to list a cpuple of movies, state that they were successful and list another couple of movies and state that there are successful, too. Just pick some movies -- generally, box office information belongs into the movies' article. Also, the comment about Dil to Pagal Hai is misleading: he didn't play opposite Madhuri Dixit as the male star, but opposite Madhuri Dixit and Shahrukh Khan. And mentioning only Dixit's first name doesn't tell most non-Indian readers who she is. Just my two cents on the topic - I will remove the POV statements though; they don't belong into a neutral article. Any comments from your side? Best regards, --Plumcouch 22:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "a very intense role"
 * "one of the most versatile actor who is expert actor in all kind of roles whether Action,Drama,Romance or Comedy which indeed is a rarity in The World of Cinema."
 * "He Led the Heat 2006 world tour"

Re : Akshay Kumar
I Understand Your Point And I Guess Your Right To a Degree But I Got Two Things To Clarify:-

1.Akshay Kumar Did Lead The Heat 2006 Tour As For Example Shahrukh Khan Led The Temptation 2004 Tour.


 * In order to remain as neutral and non-advertising of an actor as possible, I strongly recommend to avoid future edit wars to refrain from writing things like "lead a troupe". However, since until now, nothing happened, I suggest we leave it that way and change it when it starts to offend someone (an Ali Khan-fan, for example). Out of experience, I think there's nothing worse than battles between fans. To ensure that he's really the leader of the Heat 2006, why don't you provide a reference?

2.Akshay Kumar Made A Special Or A Friendly Apperance In The Movie Dil To Paagal Hai As For Example Salman Khan Did In The Movie Kuch Kuch Hota Hai.


 * The way it was written before, it sounded as if Kumar was paired opposite Dixit as a leading star, which was definitely not the case.

So I Would Say These Above Mentioned Statements Need To Be Set Right.

And Last But Not The Least I Would Humbly Want You To Make A Little Bit More Research On Akshay Kumar Becuase I Assume You Have Not Understood His Merit Completely.


 * To be honest, I don't care about his merrit. I try to handle his article as neutral as possible and view him as an actor who is doing his job - like every other actor out there, too.

Cheers!.


 * Best regards, --Plumcouch 20:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * PS. I didn't know you answer here instead of other people's discussion page. Could you maybe post a response policy or something on the top of the page so people know where to look for their answers to their questions?