User talk:Shshshsh

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome to my talk page! Please leave a message and I will reply to you as fast as possible!:)

Archives

Archive 1

Hi

Hello. Thanks for the welcome back message. Yes exams are finished but still got some assignment work to do. I guess you have been busy with Mukerji's page. Personally I still hate the page but Im not gonna edit until I find out properly what you and Shez15 have been doing. I noticed Shez15 has changed the cast order again! If he carries on, Im gonna have to ask for some admin help or soem opinions from WP:INCINE. Thanks again for the message. Best regards. BTW, your talk page is 72KB long, you need to archive. -- Pa7 18:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well

Well, obviously these no.1 terms don`t interest me at all bcoz Rani is No.1. KBC doesn't decide that. Filmfare Magazine lists her No.1 everywhere. Boxofficeindia has even put her at the top even though the site is biased. She is the only actress besides Ash who's been in the power list. Preity, not so much. Never. And you still call her one of the biggest names when she hasn't even come to the top ten. Anyhow, you know and I know. I just don't like when you ignore the facts. So, I didn't know abt the Hum Tum thing. Thanks for telling me. But the award was for 2005, then how come Hum Tum? Confusing. So, I guess you're not putting Bollywood Movie Award for Black even though her references say that. Well, I don't mind. So what are you doing now? Please go on Ash's discussion page and tell them to leave it Bachchan. We just need one more editor. Thanks. - shez_15

Sure

I don't want to talk about it either. I'm not sure about the Black fact but I know that she won Most Sensational to the best of my mind recollection. Anyhow, it doesn't really matter. We're just switching the facts because Bollywood Awards don't put their records properly. Plus, I think those awards are extremely biased. They ask everyone to come but whoever shows up for a performance, gets an award. It's so pre-judged. I mean Preity never showed up. She deserved one at least. I'll help you with Bollywood Awards now. - shez_15

Hey

I just added Choreography and Costume Designer to the page. It doesn't tell me which song won for choreography though I can guess but we don't have facts. So, I guess movie is fine. I'm sorry about that it's just pa_7 is after me for some reason. She just hates Mukerji and she's been complaining about me to everyone. She has no other thing to do, I guess. Anyway, I gotta go. I'll help you some other time. - shez_15

Hi there

Hello Shahid. I have seen your work on the Bollywood Award pages -- good job. Just make sure the awards are properly referenced. Some people can get the wrong idea about who has won which award. Yes, I did remove the fashion and stylist stuff from the Mukerji page and as soon as I did that it was reverted and I was accused of vandalising the article. Doesn't really matter to me but simply to let Shez15 carry on, but I am going to get some opinions from WP:INCINE and some more professional editors. In The Last Lear it says on the many articles I googled for that Zinta plays a bad actor and not a villain role which is why I changed it. There is a big difference. Im really looking forward to this film as Rituparno Ghosh is a brilliant director. There's a lot of good movies out this year. I saw the trailer for Jhoom Barabar Jhoom -- looks interesting. I especially want to see the Chelsea football team in the film. The one film Im especially looking forward to is Aaja Nachle with Madhuri Dixit. She looks amazing in the film. So, what films you looking forward to this summer? It was good catching up. Best regards. -- Pa7 16:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Don't worry about the removal of my messages, just add them back on and ignore it. Yes I've seen most of the film you mentioned except for Raincoat, but I liked Aishwarya Rai's look in the film, very de-glamourized. I've seen Inteha and I feel Vidya Malvade is a brilliant actress, she has a classic look to her which reminds me of the great actresses of the 50's and 60's like Madhubala and Meena Kumari. Chak De India looks good. Madhuri Dixit is my all time favourite actress. She is the best actress Bollywood has ever created. Like yourself, I have grown up watching Bollywood movies and Madhuri was always at the top of my list. A lot of good films are out this year, Bollywood and Hollywood alike. I saw Spider-Man 3 yesterday which was brilliant. I saw on Boxofficeindia.com that it has had the biggest opening for a Hollywood film in India. I have not see Ta Ra Rum Pum because honestly the film does not really appeal to me. I liked Hum Tum but this film does not really look interesting although I heard the reviews have been good. Shilpa Shetty definently got a career boost with CBB, I watched the programme everyday and once I saw that Jade Goody had left, it was obvious that Shetty would be the one to benefit. As for Preity Zinta, yes she has grown from strength to strength and will go down as one of the best Bollywood has seen. For the sections you told me about, well I think we can remove the Colbert Report because Zinta, Khan and Bachchan are probably mentioned in loads of skits and shows so there's not really any need for it. As for the popularity thing, Im not sure because people know she's popular but it may be necessary to mention her popularity in other places. I'd probably change the name of the section - something else like In The Media or something like that. Im not really sure, what did User:xC say about this section and what do you feel about this section? -- Pa7 18:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment on the template, I think I might add Yash Chopra's directorial filmography to it but Im not sure. Yes I saw what you did for the In The Media section. It looks ok, but I'd try not to add more to that unless it is totally reliable. Other than that it looks good. In answering your last question regarding the awards page, yes the awards look really organized and better. I needed to ask whether it is possible to change the sub headings on Zinta's page to 1998-2000 or 2000-present because many people differ in what they saw as her breakthrough and prior success. Tell me what you think? Best regards. -- Pa7 19:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how about these sub-headings:

1998-2002; Early career
2002-2004; Success
2005-present

What do you think? -- Pa7 19:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that by putting a word for each section is neccessary. Everybody knows she is successful as indicated by the intro so there is not really any need to emphasize it. That's what I think personally, but if you've got any other suggestions then please share. -- Pa7 19:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You know what, Im fine with the sub-headings. I know you told me to reply on the discussion page but Im kinda in a rush. I probably won't be working on that article for some time, unless it is totally neccessary. Im going on holiday next week. It's just for the weekend but it's my get-away from home. Also BTW, I think you should remove the brand ambassador stuff because that is advertising and it is not usually accepted on wikipedia. Best regards. :-) -- Pa7 20:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL!!! Thanks, I'll get over my jealousy of Rani Mukerji soon enough!!! It's funny because he acts as if I know her personally, when really I don't give a damn. Never mind he can say what he wants. I guess Shez and I have never seen eye-to-eye. Whatever, I don't care! Im going to Madrid next week so I'll still be editing for a few more days. What are you working on now? I want to expand Madhuri Dixit's and Tabu's pages. It's a shame because they are two of the best actresses in the industry and there is not much on them :-( Bye for now. -- Pa7 23:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See

I don't talk about other editors on your page or to anyone else. That's why I was mad when pa_7 was talking about me on your page. She still is. But I don't want to talk about her or talk to her. In my opinion, she just has a problem with Rani since the beginning but she still keeps on butting in when she hates the actress. Why would someone write on her page or keep interest in her when the only thing she knows is to remove every important fact. Anyhow, you're doing great. Although the brand ambassador stuff is never accepted on wikipedia. I put it for Rani but it was removed. So it's better to remove it before someone else removes it. I'm just busy. My graduation is on Thursday. I have no time at all. So I'll talk to you later. Just keep up up the good work. - shez_15

You had polls in the media section and also on the awards page. It's better to keep them in one place and the awards page is all about accomplishments. And as for the media section, it's better to put some important public appearance which was important. If you have any other ideas for it. Do tell me. Best regards. shez_15

Ok I understand but tell Xc that. She removed Rani's polls. By the way, the dimples make no sense in the media section. What's the co relation?

Akshay Kumar

Hello, got your message. I'll have a skim through the page tonight, I had a quick read right now. I think the page needs a bit of organizing and LOTS of referencing. Thanks for the heads up. -- Pa7 14:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Why are you keen on deleting Rani's press coverages. They've been on the page for more than two years. Preity's press coverages didn't make sense. They were not press coverages. Whereas Rani's are in format to her career graph. There is a time-line to it. And even if Xc deleted it there, why are you after Rani's page whenever you get the chance? You say you like her than why do you delete things from her page? Preity and Rani may be competing in real life but this is wikipedia, their articles are not competing with each other. Stop making them alike. Just because Rani has something on her page doesn't mean Preity needs to. And there are some things on Preity's page which I never copy from or delete just because they're not on Rani's. Plz stop this nuisance. So what are you working on now? I have my graduation tomorrow. So I won't be any help for the next few days. So busy. - shez_15

No

There's nothing wrong with putting K3G. It's a 20 mins role with two songs of hers just like Preity in Dil Se. If that movie is put in Zinta's filmography then so should K3G. A film like Kal Ho Naa Ho wouldn't be credited to Rani since it was 20 secs. But a 20 mins role makes it a part of the movie. Don't deny that. So it's 7 to 7. She has no 8 hits. If you go on her filmography which lists her top grossers in an order and it goes till 7. Her 8th grosser is Jaaneman which is not a hit. So, it's 7. But anyway keep it there. I don't really care. Don't delete Rani's intro. Plz. The only reason why I removed Preity's songs in item numbers is simply because they are not item numbers. An item number is where you dance in skimpy clothes to attract audiences into the theatres. It's a fast song but that doesn't mean every fast and popular song be put in the item number list. Bumbro may be popular but it's not an item number. Preity is not an item girl. And if you want to degrade her status to an item number then I don't mind. An item number by definition is when the actress shows some cleavage and dances to some extent in an arousing way for India's truck drivers and everybody. So those kind of people come to the theatre to watch the movie. But in Bumbro, Preity was covered from head to toe. Plus, she was part of the movie not an item girl. - shez_15

I also think you are user:84.229.101.137 who keeps putting Preity in the Bollywood article and also keeps putting Rani after Preity in the HDJPK article. Anyway, do what you want as long as you don't put anything false. I made the article item number and I know very well what's an item number. It's the weirdest thing to hear Bumbro as an item number or Jiya Jale which is a melodious song. Well if you want Preity in the Bollywood article, then I'll put her there. It's fine by me as long as you don't put her as popular in places where she's not like in China. Just stop this absurdity. Find me references and I'll believe you. Best regards. - shez_15

What?

I didn't want to fight you. And I'm still not. I'm just arguing with you because your edits on Rani's page don't make sense. You're the one who's going out of hands. I never put anything like stupid on Preity's page first of all. And the Commonwealth games were seen by millions of people. Salaam Namaste cannot even beat that. And it's only after that performance with Rani that Saif got coined. I also think it's stupid to put one name as this is the most popular person because you never know. You're telling me just because you travelled to a country and you heard her name by two or three people, you think she is the most popular actress abroad. That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Filmfare poll is like a Forbes poll and if it can be mentionned on Julia Roberts page, I don't see no harm on Rani's page. It was there before when the polls section was on the awards page. And it's okay to have repetition because the intro summarizes the page. Just like she has won six awards in the intro, it is stated in her infobox. There's repetition again. You didn't delete that. But you want to delete her success fact. Why? Now I haven't deleted Preity's fact about having the most hits even though it's not true. Why do you get so offensive on Rani's page. I know all other actresses are on that list but Rani is at the most top of all current actresses along with Kajol. Don't need to get angry over one fact. And I'll check the Namesake fact, I thought it was Hollywood since it's Mira Nair. But I'll check on that. Calm down now. Thank god you think Bumbro is not an item number. And I won't interfere on Bollywood's page. But I was shocked to see Preity's name everywhere when we all know Ash is the most popular when it comes to any country abroad. And Xc said not to put approximations or compare to any actress when it comes to salary but you can always put an amount if you have a fact that she was paid this much for this particular movie like on Hollywood actors' articles. I'm not saying she is the highest paid or even that she is one of the highest paid. It's just stating a fact on one particular pay. And as for press coverage. I didn't want to put that gift in the career section so I put in press coverage. And it is. It's an IANS interview which is copy pasted on various websites. I just liked glamsham because it had photos in it which makes it interesting. Thanks. -shez_15

Hey. Namesake was distributed by Fox Searchlight Pictures.[1] Isn't that Hollywood? I'll wait for your reply. Then it's a cross-over film? There's Kal Penn in it. Ah found it. Here's a ref. for it. [2]

At the end of the interview, they ask Rani if she's doing any Hollywood film. She says no but I was offered Namesake, meaning it is a Hollywood film. Even in Mira Nair's KWK interview, she says I don't know why people think my films are Bollywood films just because she casts Indian people in them and promotes Bollywood songs. - shez_15

I think you're misunderstood

Am I deleting the fact on Preity's highest number of grossing films? No. Even though, Rani and Preity have the same number. But why are you getting so offensive on Rani's page? Look, all I wrote is her pay for one particular movie, without comparing it to any other actress or without writing her off as the highest paid or even one of the highest paid, which is true. But I don't know why you keep reverting? The references you have are approximations as per the amount charged per film which is wrong to conclude because you can never know the exact changes in salary from film to film. Nothing is being said about Preity. Why do you take it so personally? For instance, I'm writing Mira Nair's film, you would erase that. Then you would erase the Hollywood film tag just because Preity's page doesn't say Hollywood. Just stop comparing the two actresses for once and let their own achievements speak for them instead having to cut Rani's Morroco fact. You're getting way too offensive on her page. I took your changes into considerations but I don't agree with most of them. For example, lenses? Why are you removing what preparation the actor is going through to come into his/her character? And the top heroines fact is that Rani and Kajol are the only current actresses on the top most part of that list. So, yes, every actress is compared on the chart, which is good. But we want to write off the top current ones as the major comparisons to the legendary actresses. I think you're over-stressing. Just let it be for now. And whatever changes you do want, talk them on the talk page first and I'll have other editors take on it. I even talked to Xc and let's see what the reply is. Whatever I put on Rani's page, don't take it as an offence to Preity's. There's nothing wrong with stating the facts. Just relax. - shez_15

Finally

The page finally looks great. Xc did a great job! And I think our misunderstandings have been resolved. Except that the pay was removed but I'll add it back. And I think Mira Nair or no, it's trivial. It's only a name. It doesn't take the whole page for space. Anyhow, the fact about her in the top heroines of all-time. I just wanna use that reference. It's got nothing to do with Amrita Arora or other small-time actresses. It's just to show her impact as she is on the top of the current actresses among the legendary ones. Maybe you can word it differently. Just see it. And I don't care about the lenses, it's on the Black article, so unneeded. And it was to cover up her beautiful eyes because the character wasn't supposed to be glamourous. And what else? There's repetition everywhere on her page. Her Filmfare awards are on the page as well, discussed in the career section. So it's okay to put that fact there even though it's on the awards page. Because not everyone reads the awards page. Plus, it's a rare achievement. I don't think any foreign audience with such a large number be willing to watch four movies of someone. It's huge. And no need to keep Sabyassachi. I just thought Rani promotes him a lot as she wanted him for Black, Baabul and now her new movie, LCMD. They're good friends. But who cares? Maybe we should just make a page for the guy and state that fact over there. Because I know he just started and he might be the next Manish Malhotra. I'm glad we're okay now. Please no more arguments or fights. I'm just busy with school stuff otherwise I would help you with other articles. Maybe at the end end of June. You're doing a good job. Keep it up. - shez_15

Hey there

Rani Mukerji has undergone some recent removals of content. You might want to have a look. xC | ☎ 16:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's just gossip!

Why would Shaad want to cast her when Rani did an amazing job in Saathiya? Plus, I know at the time whatever came on news channel. And to my knowledge, Rani Mukerji and Hrithik were supposed to be casted in the film. Rani accepted the offer. And then in an interview, she said I've just signed Shaad's film and we're waiting for Hrithik to accept the offer. I hope to work with him again after MDK. Our chemistry is great on-screen. Let's hope he takes the offer. I remember this word for word or almost. And as per you imagining Preity to be thought of in the role doesn't even make sense. She only did a complete Indian look for Veer-Zaara. She could never pull off the role in those clothes. Anyway, if you have a reference besides imdb, I'd be willing to let it be on the page. I didn't even know imdb was a user site until a week ago. And as per, 4 crore, I even heard that on Headline News. But for all I know, you could've put that Preity rejected the offer. And again, why would she turn down the offer as said in your trivia? Look over Preity's website, and if she was offered that role, it would've been made public in some article if it is true. Otherwise, how would people even know she was offered which she was not. - shez_15

Your note on my talk page

Well put, Shshshsh. I am just as shocked as you are. I agree with some of the removals, no doubt, such as fashion details and all that. But I have no words for the way he's slashed at the content. What worries me is that first it is Mukerji, next could be Zinta, Roshan, any of the Khans. Why, lok at the Sanjay Dutt page, its a bit of a mess. But rather than helping improve the content, he's just trashing it... I wonder how much of it he'd throw out.

What puzzles me is that FA class articles seem to have a different set of rules, while Bollywood bios seem to have some other rules. I have given concrete examples, but he simply ignores them.

From whatever I have seen on Shez 15's and his talk page, they have had problems in the past. But I don't see why he should do this to an article to hit back at an editor.

Why, even the two of us have had our differences. Me and you, Shshshsh, we've fought more on those talk pages than anyone else. But its always to improve the article, and I respect you as an editor. Same goes for Shez. This chap on the other hand, is simply throwing out content without any suggestions how to improve it.

I have certain family problems to deal with. I'm not saying this asking for sympathy, but just to explain that I probably won't be able to spend that much time on WP as I could have earlier. I hope you could save some content from these pages. Wish you all the best,

Regards,xC | ☎ 07:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm busy

I don't want to argue over petty issues. So, whatever. Keep the trivia despite what I believe which is that's not true because I was following every interview at the time Bunty Aur Babli was in pre-production. And I never heard Preity's name concerning the film. I'll just say keep the fact. Keep working hard. Ttyl. shez_15

you're busy but you have the time to make other things.--Shshshsh 22:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Shahid, how you been? Looks like you have been busy, I had a quick look at the Rani Mukerji page and saw what happened. I have corresponded with User:Haphar on several occassions last year. He helped me out on one of the Bollywood pages. I agree with some of the edits he made but not all of them. I will talk to him later. Just to let you know, I won't be editing on wikipedia for some time. After I got back from holiday I was hospitalized. Im going through surgury next month, so I'll be away for some time. I won't comment on the Mukerji issue today, I'll probably do it tomorrow. There a few pages I want to sort out for now. I think you asked whether The Namesake was a Hollywood film. I've always thought it was but it looks like that issue has been sorted. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Gossip and speculation

Hello. As you requested I have not totally cut down the stuff about Zinta's gossip and controversies. I've done a few bits of editing. I understand that you worked really hard on it but Wikipedia does promote actors and we do not speculate about who hates them and who accuses them of stuff. The alleged affair stuff really needs to be cut down because it's pure gossip and this is an encyclopedia. Im also going to change the intro because critically acclaimed performances can be maninstream cinema eg Rani Mukerji in Black. Im just letting you know. Best regards. -- Pa7 17:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added my input regarding the Mukerji article on the discussion page, please have a look and add your opinions. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Im fine, thank you for asking and also thanks for the lovely message regarding the surgery. Regarding the polls section on Mukerji's page, I really do not know what to do with them. Personally I think it would be better to put it in the awards and nominations pages because polls are trivial. I really don't know, will have to get some more opinions on this. Best regards. -- Pa7 20:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know

That's great! A new record for IIFA History. So thanks for your help on Rani Mukerji's page. Where's Haphar now? Why isn't he editing since it's because of him we were in an edit war? - shez_15

Sorry, I just had to revert everything to Xc's version because Haphar had removed most references whereas your version contained those statements, except not having the refs. So, please edit again. Thanks. - shez_15

Sandbox2

Hey there,

Thanks for adding your notes to the talk page on that sandbox!

xC | ☎ 10:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome:) --Shshshsh 10:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood

Shahid, why do you keep removing Rani Mukerji's name from Popularity in Asia when you do know she is the most successful and one of the most popular. There are no particular names of Preity Zinta or Madhuri Dixit mentionned in the references, but I've let you keep that statement. Just don't remove Rani's name. Thanks. - shez_15

Oh God!

What is your problem now? Look I respect you but I don't agree with your edits. Why would you remove Rani's name from the Bollywood article? I don't get it. Are you trying to demote her? You do know she is one of the most popular Bollywood personalities today. Plus, the reference doesn't mention any names for the statement. However, there is another ref. in the prior sentence which does. But why don't we add Ajay Devgan and other names as well? And why have you added AB. He's not mentionned anywhere. So why not Rani? Again, the ref. is for 2005. We are in 2007 and popularity changes in a small gap of time. I know I changed my preference of Urmila Matondkar in 2003 to Rani Mukerji in 2004. Thus, the top names should be mentionned. In KANK, I was just on the IMDB page and I was going from a link of Rani to Preity's to see any new films on hand and I went throught the page of KANK and saw the casting has been changed since she was the supporting actress and I guess Abhishek won a lot of accolades for his role. So please don't change the casting since we are trying to follow a simple code of conduct. IMDB is the official way how we cast people on wikipedia. Although I think it should be how the film does it but all editors agreed to IMDB. And as for picturization, even pa_7 put SRK and Rani in Rock N Roll. Because picturization means who was shown in the video amongst the lead cast. When you see the video, you see them. Thus, there names are there to cite facts. I agree I'll discuss the changes on Rani's discussion. Thanks. - shez_15

Why are you getting so mean?

Why? I don't get it. Anyhow, I don't care about the picturization but I do care about casting as it should be done in a standard format way. Of course, there are hundreds of articles which are not put as per IMDB but when I do know if something is not done as per imdb, i do change it. In this case, I didn't know about B&B and Yuva. So I'll change it. In fact, I'll go through all of Rani's films and put the cast as per imdb. So there is no further problem. End of discussion. Following the film casting is the ideal way since it puts the end to the argument. The actors are fine with it. So, should we. And as for KANK, why should Preity be b4 Abhishek when AB Jr. won more accolades than her and when he is the supporting actor, which goes before the supporting actress? Anyhow, for now I'll put everything to IMDB. Whatever I can find. Thanks for the update. - shez_15

I don't know

They told me IMDB when I told them it wasn't right. The only solution is taking it from the film. I have a lot of DVD's and can go through them. And it's only for the lead cast. Plus, it's the only official way. But for now, I'll do IMDB. - shez_15

Ok fine you're not mean. But be helpful here. Don't change cast until we decide on something. And why not films? It's the most suitable but it's something out of reach. But I'm sure popular films can be easily listed. As for now, just go as per imdb to avoid complications. Thanks. - shez_15

I know. But for now, Kareena is gonna go before Rani as per the rule. - shez_15

Oh Veer-Zaara's casting has been changed too. I don't know now. You better ask them to find a rule. Because I'm tired of switching from one way to another. For now, I'm just putting all of Rani's movies as per imdb and you should do Preity's. And of course, we won't agree on how the casting is done on some of them and then we can ask for a new alternative. - shez_15

What?

You're funny sometimes. Why would it cause a war? I'm just following wikipedia rules. And there will be no edit fight until someone changes the rule. For now, let's just leave everything as it is. For Rani's films, I've put them as per imdb. I hate the fact she's casted under Kareena and Vivek whereas in the movie, she's listed before them. So, it is unfair. But I'm gonna leave my personal differences aside, and follow rules. If the rule changes, we'll put an edit war then. - shez_15

Veer-Zaara

Veer-Zeera and crediting. I think we should always credit in the same order as the film itself does it. I don't have a copy of the film but if it puts Rani first then we should too because it is likely original research (although not a huge deal) to re-order the lists to fit what we believe represents the most important actors in a film. If we do that it opens the door to fanboys saying "well I think Farida Jalal was more important than Salman Khan in KKHH" and someone else arguing for Johnny Lever being the most important supporting actor. If film makers use seniority credits then there is no reason we shouldn't. There is no way we can standardize credits without getting into arguments about it. I'll also post something to the Veer-Zaara talk page. gren グレン 18:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm arguing the opposite of what I did on that talk page. The DVD cover says SRK, Preity & Rani. Which seems to put Rani third, but the credits apparently have it the other way. gren グレン 18:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know Zora and respect her opinion... and I really don't disagree with you. We are not here to respect seniority. The issue is, I prefer not to have editors judge which actors are more important in a movie. In the case of Veer-Zaara it's obvious, but in other cases it may not be obvious and I can see situations where we get into edit wars about "who is more important in Waqt (1965 film)? How should we credit them? By using an official cast-listing you are not choosing seniority over importance in the film since not all cast listings are chosen by seniority--what you are getting is a clear answer that avoids edit wars. I understand it can be difficult to access cast lists since IMDb is not necessarily correct, but, on the rare occasion that there is an argument I am sure that some editor can find a copy of the film and watch the order and tell us. I understand what you're saying and my personal preference is for most important in the film but I am not making policy based on this one article. I am trying to make a policy which will avoid edit wars on other articles where most important is not always clear. But, since I am not involved in changing the cast ordering you can more or less ignore me if you want. gren グレン 09:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you all PLEASE stop trying to change the synopsis on the Veer Zaara page. I am sick and tired of having to fix it each and every time I come online. No offense, but your version of the movie synopsis is STUPID! It gives away all of the important key scenes and totally RUINS the whole plot for everyone who has not yet seen this GREAT movie.

Now my version of the synopsis comes from the OFFICIAL Veer-Zaara page on the Yash-Raj Films website. It is a authentic synopsis that leaves elements of surprise for any readers who have yet to see this movie.

PLEASE do NOT change the synopsis again! Everytime you change it, I'll just keep fixing it, because your version is a horrible synopsis and ruins a good movie for anyone still planning on seeing it.(Benbrattlover 19:38, 29 June 2007)

How many times must I explain this to you. My synopsis of Veer Zaara is NOT copyrighted. It is only BASED on the official synopsis. It is NOT copied from the official synopsis. So it is NOT copyrighted. I wrote almost all of it myself. So STOP deleting it and reverting to your STUPID version! I am getting sick and tired of coming to this site each day to see my work undone each time. STOP changing it! My synopsis is NOT copyrighted, even if I did copy the official synopsis, word-for-word, which I didn't. I wrote the synopsis based on the official version, but I wrote it myself. So STOP changing it!

(Benbrattlover 12:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

For the LOVE of GOD, STOP changing the Veer Zaara synopsis! No, I am not happy with your latest edit, because it STILL gives away the entire plot of the movie, and RUINS it for those who haven't seen it yet! THAT is THE POINT! My synopsis KEEPS the element of surprise for those wanting to get info about the movie without destroying the entire plot, like you keep doing!

PLEASE STOP changing the Veer Zaara synopsis!

(75.46.13.248 22:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Rani Mukerji

I've added my opinions on the issues, I just feel that there is no point in discussing especially when everything that was removed is slowly added back into the article. Please have a look. Thank you. -- Pa7 16:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JBJ

No, I did not try to put bad reviews. I watched the movie and I personally didn't like it and when I read the review, I thought I had the same opinion, so it must be okay to help around. So, I put it there. I didn't mean to offend. If you remove it, it's fine. But you should see the movie for yourself. Amitabh Bachchan is totally wasted. But I'm just concerned to make a rule as to which critic is a good one and not just writing rubbish to gain momentum. I think this is a valid point to be discussed. Don't you? - shez_15

What did you think?

Hi, I watched Jhoom Barabar Jhoom today. Have you watched it yet? I actually liked it, but it could've done with some trimming down. AB Jr and Preity Zinta make such a cute couple, I hope they do more films together. I've totally fallen in love with the song "Bol Na Halke Halke", it's so beautiful. The choreography was amazing in the film, and the music was brilliant. I think Amitabh Bachchan was wasted and definently not needed. I love the part when Alvira and Laila are swearing at each other in Hindi. Apparently the film has not been doing well in India, but that's what happened to TRRP - bad start but good finish. Tell me what you thought of the film? Favourite scenes, actors etc, best regards. -- Pa7 00:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I think we are finally not arguing as we have been for the last past weeks. I like it this way. And sorry if I wrote that to gren but I thought you were doing it to favour her since you put leading for SRK, supporting for Rani and leading for Preity which just made it look so unorganized and stupid. Anyway, I don't know how the casting will go but my suggestion is we keep with IMDB for the most part and for films like Karan Arjun, etc, we should find the film casting. I think the film casting is the only official way of putting it all together with no biases attached but that of the film maker himself. But one thing is clear, the film maker is not stupid enough to put Divya Dutta above SRK in Veer-Zaara. So, at the end of the day, he/she knows how fair he has to be. But whatever, the case might be, it's best to stick to this for whatever movies we can find on the internet so as to have a proof on a talk-page, in my opinion. And for your removal on Bollywood page, plz read the whole ref., it clearly says:

"When he introduced me to his counterpart from across the border, Mr Singh insisted that I be invited to Pakistan. They (The Pakistani dignitaries) said they'd love to have me in their country any time I want. And I'd love to go! President Musharraf and all the other delegates said I'm very popular in Pakistan."

And as for JBJ, I was thinking it was going to be the best movie of the year and that's why I went on the opening night but I just didn't like it. Although, I must admit the songs are incredible. Lara Dutta was amazing. Her French accent was top-notch. I speak French, so I know when it's fake or good. It was well picked up by her. And the house was full when I went, so I don't know why the movie's not doing well. There were people from all age groups. Maybe it will find its way, who knows? I can't wait for Chak De India, it was such a funny preview. - shez_15

Bips_basu seems to be an aggressive user. Plz watch her or him. The user seems to dislike Preity Zinta and Akshay Kumar from what I've seen with his edits on Dhadkan and Preity's page. What can we do with this user? - shez_15

User:Bips_basu

Hey there

I saw your warnings on this user's talk page while on RC patrol. Although it seems a small number of the user's edits are constructive, the rest are clearly bad faith. The next time the user disrupts any of the pages, don't bother giving informal warnings, report it straight to WP:AIV. Just thought I'd drop by with a bit of friendly advice cuz I get the feeling this user's vandalistic edits aren't a one-time thing.

Great work watching those pages, happy editing!xC | ☎ 07:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the film credits, I'm afraid I disagree with you. I've run Google ragged looking for a reliable source of film credits/cast listing which everyone would agree with, but I've got nothing. IMDB diluted its credibility by opening its doors to the public.

Some interesting suggestions I've got while discussing this were to sort names on the basis of-

Alphabetical order
Screen time
Importance of role
Seniority (ie. years in the industry)
Independent sites eg.IMDB,Yahoo,etc

Here's the problem. Screen time by itself does not say much about the importance of the role. Importance of the role by itself is subjective because everyone feels differently about how a role ties in with the rest of the script. Lastly, seniority can also be misleading. For example, an actor with a phenomenal debut could recieve greater acclaim in the same movie rather than an established actor who gave a mediocre performance.

With independent sites, the issue is simple - quality control. IMDB has dropped its standards nowadays. No other site is even close to being as comprehensive. It is extremely difficult to rely on any one site, and the fact remains even that site could have made a mistake. Then what?

For the main cast, I support listing by alphabetical order. Supporting cast, unless they have a notable role/plot requirement, shouldn't even be noted in the article since they are not all that important anyhow. The main cast rarely exceeds a dozen, even in the most extravagant films. Those names can be easily sorted alphabetically.

Of course, if you have any other views or suggestions about this, do drop a line on my talk page. Regards,xC | ☎ 17:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I really liked the film even though it got bad reviews, it's a true masala flick. I saw the promo for Chak De India - what a long trailer! But I liked the trailer for it's unique style and I really wanted to see Vidya Malvade, I think she's beautiful. Hope your doing well. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HI please can you help fill in List of Bollywood films like List of Bollywood films: 1990s thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 19:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I need to format the 2000s films in to the tables -but much of the work needs doing on the tamil film and other -I don't know if your interest lies outside Bollywood or not. I created the layout of much of the lists which I am compiling by country (I'm at present doing American film!!) The lists when completely full will be highly encyclopedic resources for Indian film - I guess as you say there are many films missing. Keep up the good work on Indian films anyway and any work you can do will be more than appeciated ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 20:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL

You would change CCCC and KANK if you were logged on. So you admit. Btw, they were changed too. So were you the one who was attacking Rani's IMDB page. That's really sad if it's true but I have no proof so I won't argue. I'm still saying we should keep IMDB for most films as it is the largest and the site already used for every film on wikipedia but for movies which have official references for casting, they should be placed in that order since they are official. And I'm saying I can find more refs. for more official casting once I have a get-go. Till then, I'm just going to go along with IMDB for now. Thanks for your time. - shez_15

Can you all PLEASE stop trying to change the synopsis on the Veer Zaara page. I am sick and tired of having to fix it each and every time I come online. No offense, but your version of the movie synopsis is STUPID! It gives away all of the important key scenes and totally RUINS the whole plot for everyone who has not yet seen this GREAT movie.

Now my version of the synopsis comes from the OFFICIAL Veer-Zaara page on the Yash-Raj Films website. It is a authentic synopsis that leaves elements of surprise for any readers who have yet to see this movie.

PLEASE do NOT change the synopsis again! Everytime you change it, I'll just keep fixing it, because your version is a horrible synopsis and ruins a good movie for anyone still planning on seeing it.(Benbrattlover 19:29, 29 June 2007)

Once again, PLEASE STOP changing the Veer Zaara synopsis to your STUPID version! Your version is just HORRIBLE. If someone read that, wanting to find out a little about the movie before watching it, your synopsis would TOTALLY RUIN it for them, and they'd never want to see it!

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?? Don't you have any consideration for people who might want to see this movie??

PLEASE STOP changing it to versions that destroy the entire plot and surprises of the movie. You're wasting your time changing it, because each time you do, I will keep on fixing it so that those people who are waiting to see it, don't have the entire story ruined by reading your terrible synopsis. (Benbrattlover 22:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

For the LOVE of GOD, STOP changing the Veer Zaara synopsis! No, I am not happy with your latest edit, because it STILL gives away the entire plot of the movie, and RUINS it for those who haven't seen it yet! THAT is THE POINT! My synopsis KEEPS the element of surprise for those wanting to get info about the movie without destroying the entire plot, like you keep doing!

PLEASE STOP changing the Veer Zaara synopsis!

(75.46.13.248 22:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hrithik Roshan

RE: This edit

Wow, exactly what I was going to remove! Lightening speed, keep at it ;) xC | ☎ 17:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks xC!:), --Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look

Look I'm tired of arguing over petty issues. But if history were to be checked, Rani always came before Preity in all their movies together. Anyhow, I'm just saying we should keep the IMDB format since it's the one used for every movie. We can't go and change all the cast lists of all movies and check them over and over again. And for movies which have official casting from the movie, those articles are lucky. And stop removing Chori Chori from Rani's career page. It might not be an important movie but it was an important role. And for that, we need to mention it for the actor's sake. Thank you. And let's stop fighting. Rather focus on wikipedia articles. - shez_15

Actor box

Hi Shshshsh. Unfortuntately despite me being the creator of WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers even I don;t have the authority to edit the contours of the actor template -it is extremely well protected. I'll ask an admin to add it. Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 08:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done -I've requested it. I've noticed some unpleasant comment son your talk page. Always report personal attacks to admin. Sometimes I wish I had accepted adminship but I declined it as I didn;t want to be too occupied. People should never tell you in such a way how to edit I suggest you report Benbrattlover to User:Punkmorten or somebody. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 09:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying

You're just avoiding what I'm saying. Actors may be listed in order of appearances in some films but as you know, in HDJPK, CCCC, V-Z and KANK, the actors were listed as per the film maker's choice and for that, we should respect their decision of however they might put them. And I still think IMDB should be kept for the purpose of its history. But for new movies, maybe we can find a new source. Just an idea. And as for CC, the movie may not have done well at the box office or it may be critically panned but Rani's performance was praised. [3][4] [5] Please do your research first. Her performance was praised. "Rani is exuberant". "Chori Chori is a Rani Mukerji film all the way. The actress pumps life into the gregarious Khushi without making her too boisterous. Her hilarious take off on Bollywood's actors is one of the best moments in the film. Rani flows with the script as she smoothly reveals the happy, vulnerable and emotional facets of her character." Plus, only one sentence for the year 2003 doesn't seem fit. And for that, we need to put it in the article. - shez_15

Veer Zaara Synopsis Revisions

I really don't understand WHAT your problem is, Shahid?? Why do you feel the need to keep reverting the VZ synopsis to a stupid version that RUINS the entire plot of the movie for those who haven't seen it?

What right do you have to exert total control and censorship over the Veer Zaara page? Furthermore, what exactly is your issue with my synopsis?

It's obvious that you have become drunk on your own sense of power, and think that this site belongs to you, when it doesn't. It belongs to the public, who have a right to edit and contribute what they wish. You have no right to censor other peoples submissions, when yours are no better. You seriously need to be knocked down a peg or two to get rid of your swelled head, so you can realize that you are not the end-all and be-all of Wikipedia sites you contribute to.

Why do you keep changing the VZ synopsis, and what right do you have to do so? This is NOT your website. It belongs to everyone, and everyone has a right to contribute what they choose. I have every right to edit it, if I think it should be improved. It is NOT vandalism! What right do you have to call my work vandalism, just because you don't agree with it? My version does not violate any copyright since I wrote it myself based on the official version as a guide.

First you say that its not encyclopedic, and that its like a fan story, even though it is based on the official version. Then you claim it violates copyright when it CLEARLY does not. What exactly is your problem?

It's not like your version is the greatest either. In fact I think it is just HORRIBLE! It totally ruins all the elements of surprise, completely giving away the plot. I don't understand why that is something that you are willing to do. Your version of the synopsis has ABSOLUTELY no consideration for readers who haven't seen Veer Zaara yet. Don't you realize that yet? Your terrible version, gives EVERYTHING away! After reading your synopsis, nobody will have any desire to see the movie. Is that what you want?

What gives you the right to do that??

(Benbrattlover 07:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

What Part of "My Synopsis is NOT copyrighted" do you NOT understand??

I don't know how many times I have to tell you this, but the synopsis I wrote is NOT, I repeat, NOT, once again is NOT copyrighted. I wrote it myself, using the official version as a guide, JUST as a guide.

Also if you're going to revert the synopsis to your stupid version at least have enough consideration to not tell the ending of the story and ruin the plot for those who have yet to see it. (Benbrattlover 02:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks

For the Barnstar Haphar 13:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to Your Question

You want a logical reason to remove the ending of the movie?

How about consideration for others, for one? Not everyone comes here having seen the movie, and if every single detail of the movie is given away, what will be the point of their seeing it? Giving away the entire plot does NOT make it an encyclopedic version. Just look at any regular encyclopedia. They give the basic information, and leave the rest of the information to specific books on the actual subject.

The same thing should apply here. Instead of giving away the entire plot, it should be just a basic synopsis of the movie, WITHOUT ruining the ending, as well as the characters, actors/actresses, and links to the related websites, and leave the rest for the reader to find out if they decide to see the movie.

I mean look at the promos and trailers for movies. They do NOT give everything away. They just give a basic idea about the movie, so that people can decide whether its something they want to see or not. But if trailers gave away all the surprises, just how many people would actually watch it? I bet, very few, OR NONE!

In the same way, many people (myself included) come to Wikipedia to get information about a particular topic. I might want information about a movie so I can decide whether to see it. But if the entire movie is already told to me in a few paragraphs, why would I want to spend 2+ hours actually watching it

You really need to think about stuff like that before flexing your administrative muscles and constantly removing other people's carefully written edits.

(Benbrattlover 17:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I see

I think it's best to remove names from the Bollywood article since there is no relevance. Films are what makes Bollywood. And as for Chori Chori, I'll ask you why do you have Lakshya mentionned in Preity Zinta's career? No nominations there. Or why do you have Jaan-e-mann in her career section? No nominations there too. Nomination isn't everything. Lots of actors get great critical acclaim but at the end of the day, no nomination. Yet, sometimes, it's their best work. Take Kamal Hassan's Chachi 420, highly-acclaimed. Yet, no nomination. So, that's no even an argument. Thus, Chori Chori is relevant as I've mentionned. Now, it would be a pity if we discuss about it for months. Move on. Btw, I can't believe JBJ is a flop, I thought it deserved an average status, at least. And did you see any new good movies? - shez_15

Rekha

Hey. It was moved a year ago to Rekha Ganesan. I can't really help with requested moves... because I'm not sure how it works (it has been changed many times since I last used it)... just try doing it again and make sure you follow all of the instructions... if there's consensus on the talk page of Rekha I can just move it from that... but, I don't want to do it right away since the move was so long ago and lasting for a year without anyone reverting is almost like consensus. But, in the end I don't think it's that big of a deal since it's only a page title and Rekha redirect to Rekha Ganesan. gren グレン 20:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moraima Secada

I was wondering why you removed the references to the article Moraima Secada. Callelinea 21:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was told that by one administrator but two other administrators have told me that these particular EL were acceptable. He was the one that put them in before you took them out. Callelinea 21:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem.. I was confused also.. One Administrator blocked me for a day and it took two administrators to unblock me and tell me that my references were ok as long as they were not spam. Hope that sort of helps you. Callelinea 22:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

National Film Award

The 2006 national film awards are under a court case and are being investigated. Therefore, it would be wrong on the part of us editors to edit any information on that. I'm removing your edit on the Best Actress page.

Sorry dude, but the award has till now not been awarded to her. the awards had leaked out before they were announced first, and later when cleared of all these charges, one of the jury member accused that the jury was influenced in awarding the coveted awards. the court case is still pending. therefore, no awards have taken place after 2005.

It was rumored that bachchan and sarika won the awards. might have won too. but the jury is facing these charges of being "influenced". the SC will take its decision now. last year, i think anand patwardhan and other documentary makers had filed a case due to which the awards got delayed. its true and sad too that no awards have been given out since 2005. regards Anant Singh 17:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kareena Kapoor

Why do you keep reverting my edits? Boxofficeindia & Ibosnetwork both have included K3G in Rani's success ratio and her biggest blockbuster. Rani & Kareena both did cameos in K3G & Don respectively. Just because it's not included in Rani's page, you don't want to include it in Kareena's page? I don't see the point in that. Who're you to keep reverting my edits. I am going according to both of those sites. Many actors box office impact have increased by just doing cameo's for e.g. Abhishek in Shootout at Lokhandwala has helped his ratio, even Aishwarya Rai's appearance in an item number in Bunty Aur Babli has helped her success ratio. IBN also included BNB has one of Rai's top grossing films. BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

I am not saying that Don is her hit but I just said that it became one of the biggest hits of 2006. If BOI & IBN can include that why can't I? No one except you said anything about this edit. BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

Oh I am sorry Shshshsh, I didn't see what you wrote on Kapoor's talk page. When you wrote look at talk page on Kareena's history, I thought you were mentioning it to your talk page. Sorry for being rude and now when I read what you had to write it makes more sense. Thank You!!! BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ

Thank You for helping me with my edits on Kareena Kapoor's page!

Fair use rationale for Image:KHNHLS.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:KHNHLS.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FPT 11:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know

I don't blame you. And I just don't know what to do with Haphar. I don't even know why he's targeting Rani. He has no interest in the article but just to prove his point, he interferes again and again. I know. There is novelty in almost every film an actor does. Rani did her first period film with Hey Ram. That's not mentionned. But all I'm saying is whatever film I know is critically praised, should be mentionned in the actor's paragraph. And since there is some novelty in the role and a delay in the release date, there's something to talk about. So, what's the big fuss? Only if Harphar understood that. By the way, I'm just going to add Rani's Tera Chehra to her career. I can't believe I missed that. It was such a big hit and made her popular all over again before Saathiya happened. I think one of the reasons why Saathiya did well commercially is because of Tera Chehra-Rani fame. Anyway, I just had my wisdom teeth removed. That's why a long gap away from wikipedia. Now, I'm feeling much better. - shez_15

National Film Award lists

Hi, why have you reverted all my changes on the National Film Award articles? I had worked hard on standardizing all the lists, by making the table sortable (see Help:Sorting) and had applying the wikitable class.

The wikitable class (class="wikitable") is the standard look and feel for Wikipedia. All the featured lists on Wikipedia use this standard look and feel (except the ones involving color codes, e.g. some chemistry-related lists). Also, the "wikitable" class is rendered in different colors according to the skin selected by the user. On the other hand, hard-coding colors makes the table look very ugly for people who are using a different skin, or a different device.

The non-standard colors look very gaudy, while the "wikitable" class is the standard look and feel for Wikipedia -- it's much better than hard-coding the colors. The different skins render "wikitable" in different colors, thereby allowing the users to read the content in the colors they prefer. If you don't like the default wikitable style of a skin, you can change your own stylesheet (see Help:User style), instead of hard-coding the colors in the article according to your preference.

Also, "sortable" makes it easier for the readers to analyze the data.

I wanted to revert the changes straightaway, but I thought of asking you if you have any specific reason for using non-standard colors, and not using sortable. If no, it's better to go with "wikitable" and "sortable".

I guess you were not aware of in-built classes ("wikitable" and "sortable"). If you don't have a good reason, I'll revert the changes. If you don't like the table colors, you can change your own style (see Help:User style), instead of forcing hard-coded colors on other readers. utcursch | talk 15:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, bold and italics are fine for the winner's/film's name. Nice to see your great work on Bollywood-related articles. utcursch | talk 08:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fairness

I'm confused. You want lead actors to be first like in Veer-Zaara and then you also want seniors to be first like in Kal Ho Naa Ho and KANK. The rule I thought of before was that Rani as the lead actor of LCMD, so she should be above all the rest. And for Saawariya, you want Ranbir b4 Salman and Rani. Aren't they seniors? Aren't they playing supporting roles like Jaya? Make up your mind. To me, it seems you just want to disfavour Rani in every way possible. But then you want seniors to be first too in some exceptions. Then why not AB b4 SRK in Veer-Zaara and Rani b4 Preity. Make up a rule. It's so confusing. Either go with the film's casting list or IMDB or just make a wikipedia rule. And then if you want seniors first, then remember Salman Khan is 18 years senior to Ranbir and for thus, he should be credited first. There is no difference between 30 to 18 to 2 years of seniority. A senior is a senior. And if we are going to put the cast as per seniority who also is notable in the movie then Rani should be b4 Preity in all their movies and Jaya can be b4 Rani in LCMD. Otherwise, it's pointless to argue since exceptions will lead to personal bias. Now, think. Either you want seniors first, or the lead one first. Or the easy way out is to go by the film's casting or IMDB. Shabana Azmi is also senior to Ash but in Umrao Jaan, on wikipedia and on IMDB and in the movie, Ash is credited first. Why is it always a problem when Rani is? Any opinions? Again, I'm not fighting with you, just raising my concern? I'm in no way favoring Rani, I'm just in want of a just rule.

By the way, if bips_basu does anything wrong again, I gave her a last warning, after that, you can block her or him. I don't know how to. Thanks.

And Rani got really popular because of that Tera Chehra song which was a big hit and maybe that song was the reason why people went to see Saathiya in theatres and perhaps why she became brand ambassador for her first ever endorsement: Fanta. First, MDK released. Flopped. Then the song came out. Hit. Then Fanta came. And then Saathiya released in December. Hit and Critically-Acclaimed. All because of one song. Well, of course, there were other factors too. But the youth really noticed her from the song. And it became a trend for actresses to become a part of Sami's video. No big actress would do a music video but seeing Rani's fate, everyone followed. Namrata Shirodkar, Twinkle Khanna, Amisha Patel, Bhumika Chawala, Mahima Chaudhary, and many more. An interesting notion I never thought of before. But of course, there's no reference on the net to prove this theory, so I'll just leave it out of wikipedia. But isn't it interesting to know? - shez_15

Yeah but Ghulam got released before Dil Se. So there were two films. And if in HDJPK and in Veer-Zaara, where she played the supporting role, she was credited before Preity as per seniority. So, if the industry regards her as a senior to Preity, then how can you object? Seniority is seniority. I think it's best in your interest to put the cast on wikipedia as per the lead role. And for LCMD, you should have Rani b4 Jaya and for Saawariya, Ranbir b4 Salman. And Preity b4 Rani in HDJPK and Veer-Zaara. But if we're going as per seniority, then Rani benefits in Saawariya, HDJPK and Veer-Zaara. What do you say? I don't mind either way as long as it's fair where ever seniority is concerned. - shez_15

I'm not saying Tera Chehra made her a superstar. It did something good for her. Because when a pop song becomes popular, there is bound to be some popularity for the people featured in it. Like in Made in India, Alisha Chinai and Milind Soman appeared in it. And they became household names. People didn't know much about them. Milind Soman went on to become a supermodel and Alisha did good and then faded. But then Kajra Re made her important again. See how much a song can do for one. Just like that, Rani got popularity, first from Aati Kya Khandala, and then KKHH and then because of that, got many films and some awards and then when the movies flopped, she faded and then Tera Chehra made her accepted again, which followed the Fanta's honor and then Saathiya. Of course, Saathiya didn't become a hit because of that. But a lot of people went to see Rani after her great publicity from Tera Chehra. Why do you think Guru was such a big hit this year? It's more to do with the media speculation of the pair's marriage and engagement that did wonders for the film. Of course, the movie was good but lots of movies are good, yet they fail. Publicity can do magic. Why do you think Aap Ka Surroor is doing so well today? It's all bcoz of Himesh's publicity. Anyway, that's just stupid talk. On to business. - shez_15

If it is arguable, then it can't be settled. That's why the only way out is to make a rule where the people of wikipedia vote or put the cast as per lead roles since if you put them as per seniority, there will be exceptions which will cause arguments. And to avoid all this, just put the cast as per lead roles or as per IMDB or as per the film itself which is the safest option, in my opinion. Have a great day. - shez_15

You're not being fair again?

You don't have to revert Rani's page to Haphar just because we are having problems on wikiquote. Please don't bring our personal differences into Rani Mukerji's page. I thought you agreed with the Tera Chehra song. And you made your own edits. And once we fought on wikiquote, the next day, you change it to Haphar? What double-standards? Anyway, I'll put it back and hopefully Haphar will get past it. We need to progress and not fight over one petty issue. And as for casting, I'm fine with your wish. But again, who are we to judge? The film maker is there to put it how he/she wants as its his/her vision we are portraying on wikipedia. - shez_15

Veer-Zaara

I can protected the page for a day. If the problem persists, you can file a request at WP:RfPP. You can give the {{nothanks-add}} warning to the user using {{subst:nothanks-add|Veer-Zaara}}. If the user persists even after the warning, report the user to WP:AIV -- s/he will be blocked. utcursch | talk 11:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image taggings

You need to explain, in depth why the use of the images constitutes fair use, please read WP:NFCC and WP:FURG which have further advice. Sfan00 IMG 14:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:EkHiBhool.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:EkHiBhool.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever

You win. Do whatever you want with the credits. I have no problem. And Rani's filmography table is just perfect. And I don't get why are you cropping the page when it's exactly like Preity's. The rules have not been discussed yet and for that, it should not be changed but I still let Haphar change a lot. And now, he just wants to remove the core, I can't believe it. And you're supporting him. I don't get that. If you want trivia like on Preity's page with the brand ambassador stuff, I can put that on Rani's page but it's stupid since it will be removed. All I'm saying is that support me with Rani's page from Haphar. - shez_15

Ernst's message

A OK amigo. Don;t worry about theh mis understanding Great job to all involved -it was a long time coming -its looking great -thanks. But you say the other user is a sock puppet of a banned user? ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 10:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word for it. Seems strange he would want to try to fill in details one moment and vandalise something else out of personal preference -but the world is made up of strnage poeple!!! Thanks a bunch anyway for reverting any bad edits and correcting. Hey Have you thought any more about helping the Tamil list -its in pretty bad shape -I've been preoccupied with the American film list. All the best ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 10:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created a Bollwyood template :

♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 10:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Tamil-language films - it is just cleanup -most of the films are not even in the tables as yet. I know nothing about Tamil movies either! ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 10:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It just needs formatting and ordering I think -details can be added at a later date -its just I'm afraid they may be tagged for deletion soon enough thanks ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 11:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats perfect -exactly what needs doing- as i said in my previous comment "It just needs formatting and ordering I think -details (meaning actors/directors) can be added at a later date" . Someone with a knowledge of the films can add details on cast and genre etc like they did to the Telugu films. Thanks ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 11:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow I like Preity Zinta. Now there's one beautiful woman!!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 12:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check out some of her films on youtube later -it has a brilliant amount of indian films -this is how I am becoming familiar with the industry. -I have to say Bollywood movies are very entertaining and often have a lot of character! Zinta reminds me of an Indian Angelina Jolie - very attractive and a great actress. ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 12:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks for the Barnstar. I don't think I deserve it, but thanks anyways. :) Sorry for the late reply, I'm in Europe. gren グレン 22:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

Hello. I'm sorry but I totally disagree with you. This is an encyclopedia not a film magazine. Frankly there was too much gossip surrounding the controversy section, even in the personal life bit, Maureen Wadia having a problem with Zinta -- that's gossip. The controversy bit had stuff on Suchitra writing stuff on her blog and blah blah, we can't go into all those details. I had a feeling I might offend you by removing it, but it needs reducing. -- Pa7 19:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added my answer, have a look. -- Pa7 19:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im apologize, if I offended you, Im just doing some quick editing. Im not even supposed to be on the computer but rather in bed. Sorry for the drastic edits and not saying hello, but do you see what Im trying to say about that section. OK, I won't remove it totally but can we cut it down a bit? -- Pa7 19:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you are not in agreement with my proposition and opinions, in which case I will leave it at that and move onto other pages which could do with some improvements. -- Pa7 19:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are not like Shez15, and yes you have an opinion, as do I, as do everyone. Im not backing off completely, but Im just giving a proposition and hope that people will support me on that, in which case for now I will do nothing but wait. I respect you but Im not upset about our disagreement just for the fact that we both share the same passion for Hindi cinema, and therefore it is natural that one of us would disagree with the other. It is bound to happen, which in our case it did. Anyway, best regards and happy editing. -- Pa7 20:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KWK

It had to be written in prose, because wikipedia does not really accept lists. If you want to show what couples came on you can say the following guest came together: Shahrukh Khan and Kajol, Rani Mukerji and Kareena Kapoor.... etc etc. That's what I was going to do but I elaborated a bit and thought that just saying these people came together would be quite boring. But if we've got a written section now, I don't think they will mind if we have a list as well. -- Pa7 22:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, however if you see anything that needs improving then go ahead and do whatever. Best regards. -- Pa7 22:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, happy editing. -- Pa7 22:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I think adding Hindi words is more appropriate because in some chinese awards , they also discribe their Mandrain works , thanks Aung Phyoe

ShahRukh Khan raised by Hindus

With reference to your action of reverting my edit (13:13, 25 July 2007) that Shahrukh Khan was raised by Hindus for most of his life on the grounds that there was 'lack of sources', the following is an interview with Shah Rukh himself.

To make things easier, refer to the question: 'Is being Islamic an important part of your identity? Have recent events forced you to think more about it? '

Interview with Shah Rukh

He claims he was brought up by Hindus most of his life.

In fact this reference has been coupled with the statement I made. There is a topic too on this in the discussion page of the article. You may want to see it as there are other sources there too. Thnks for your time and have a nice day.--S3000 13:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats great!! Thanks and have a nice day.--S3000 13:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I refer to your action of removing my warning note against modification/removal of the statement that Shahrukh was raised by Hindus. Since including the statement, there have been numerous attempts to modify/remove it as many people don't believe he (from Muslim parentage) has been raised by Hindus (although there is a citation!!). I noticed by adding the note that recommended reffering to the discussion page for more information, the attempts to remove/modify the statement was significantly reduced. Whats your say ?? Thanks and have a nice day.--S3000 18:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your new note is brilliant. Thanks for your support, you too have a great day.--S3000 06:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Filmographies

Oh for filmographies absolutely this is perfect - (even the silver bar which gives it a touch of class) this is what I would like to see on every film bio articles rather than scruffy lists go ahead and sort as mmany as possible like this -this is a actor filmmaker goal. -some of the Indian filmographies are the best on wikipedia but somtimes backwards!!!

However not for the lists. The lists actually began in this style but the sheer quantity of films by year meant the left column looked ridiculous so we evolved the style you see today. If you see anything yu'd like to discuss in particularly give me a bell. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 11:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh absolutely i agree with you they shouldn't be split. I agree there are a lot of films but there is absolutely no problem with them on one page- it is much more managable on one page. If anything by 2009 we have too many films then it could be split List of Bollywood films:2000-2004 then List of Bollywood films:2005- but definately not by year -I'm going to redirect them back. OK? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 09:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to merge them back but split them by half decade in two lists 2000-2004 2005 (more films have been added now) - present not 7 lists ok? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 09:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored them fully. I want to keep them as concise as possible agreed? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 09:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes if you could add that it would be a great help ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 10:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it for you. Hey have you formatted any of the Tamil films yet? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 10:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However I would like to ask you to not shut off all the red links. Although it may not look as tidy - It is far more likely the film will get started if they are red linked. I had intended going through the Bollywood films and starting a few in the 1990s ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 13:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh your filmographies are perfect - the silver bar which gives it a touch of class. This is my ideal for every filmography on wikipedia. Some of the Bollywood articles have so much class. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 18:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood

Please avoid edit-wars. Don't remove sourced information just because you don't like something. Entire population of Afghanistan watch Indian movies, something you do not know.--Spock44 16:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you blind? What do you mean where are the sources? There are 4 links to each Indian movie made in Afghanistan or about Afghanistan, click on the link and read where those movies were made. Also read the 3 sources given in the paragraph for Afghanistan. I don't have to show you all this, you should be able to understand English and read them yourself.--Spock44 17:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am calmed, I tried to make the section more easier for readers to understand, by putting where most people watch the movies to the least places for Asia. It starts from India, spreads to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and then to Middle Eastern countries on the western side, and, Bangladesh, Nepal, China, and other South east Asian countries on the other side. Before, it was not in order. Also, before 1947, the border of India with Afghanistan was what is now the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, Durand Line. Indian movies influenced Afghanistan since 1930s or when they first began, there were Indian movie theaters in every city of Afghanistan, and until today there still are some. So, most people ONLY watched Indian movies in Afghanistan because Afghanistan never made own movies. You could say that about 50% of Afghanistan's population are able to speak or understand Hindi-Urdu language, especially since 1979 when about 6 million or so of the 30 million Afghans living in Pakistan for over 25 years. These people speak fluent Urdu language. So naturally they will watch movies that they can understand. Amnyway, I am just trying to help make the article look more professional written. I hope you think the same way. Thanks for understanding.--Spock44 18:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood stunners

Oh lordy lordy. Mallika Sherawat is out of this world -one of the best looking women I've ever seen. How on earth are women this beautiful created? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 18:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work - an award

		The Indian Cinema Barnstar
		I, Blofeld the Bald, award this Indian cinema Barnstar for your excellent and prolific work on Indian films and actresses and cleaning up articles to a high standard. Your're a credit to the industry. This is also for sharing my exquisite taste in beautiful actresses. As they say in Scotland "Ya doi'n good laddie"!

Riya Sen is another. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 19:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So are the 70s and 60 s and 50s and 40s etc empty!!!!! Remember it used to be a backwards list of bollywood films with just the titles ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 14:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PLease can you help clean up Aap Ka Suroor - The Real Love Story thankyou ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 15:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant stuff as usual!! Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 19:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Revert

Hello Shshshsh. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Recently, I have noted that you reverted my edits here. I am sure you were not aware that this issue was discussed in length here, among other places and it was decided that Urdu scripts etc. are indeed relevant in Bollywood film articles. It is helpful to understand the relationship between Hindi-Urdu and Bollywood when dealing with this subject area. Several Bollywood film covers that utilize Indian scripts give the two standard registers of Hindustani: Hindi and Urdu. You can take a look at some of these film covers yourself: Image:Awaaraposter.jpg, Image:Waqt 1965 film poster.JPG, Image:Sholayposter2.jpg, Image:Padosan film poster.jpg, etc. Other reasons are provided in the archives of Talk:Bollywood. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in the matter. With regards, Anupam^Talk 00:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shshshsh. The language of Bollywood movies can be called both Hindi or Urdu. Perhaps the A Little About Language section in this article will give some insight on the entire situation. Please also see this article, which also addresses the usage of both Hindi and Urdu scripts in Bollywood film articles. I hope this helps! Thanks again for your reply. With regards, Anupam^Talk 16:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Shahid!

I'm really impressed with your use page, it really gives some great points of view away. Regarding the Maddy article, I've cleaned everything up until the filmography. Give me 2 to 3 days to turn the table to suit the MOSLOW version. Are you a fan of Maddy? Universal Hero 20:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Trying to promote it to GA! Help me get some decent copyright-free images! Universal Hero 21:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your work is 99% polished the only thing I see is sometimes the awards section looks a bit untidy. You can use a ---- for the awards sections to seperate the different awards. See List of Preity Zinta's awards and nominations. PLease use this ---- on all award sections in actor award sections cheers ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 21:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other than this it might look better ina table like the silver filmographies. What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{;;"Expecting you?" Contribs} 21:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:

This is what you wrote on my talk page: In any case, you will not respond to my messages, so, who knows, maybe you stick to the article talk page. Firstly I did not think to answer to your recent messages because, I thought the Zinta intro was fine, and secondly I have been working on the pages which need the most attention and finally, like the template says, Im busy.

So what if she spent three months in Melbourne. She's an actress, she has to travel around the world and shoot at different locations. Yes, it is an important aspect of an actors's career but location shooting is a production note. She spent a month in London for Jhoom Barabar Jhoom a month in Chandigarh for Mera Bharat Mahaan, do we add all these notes? As for the Hero thing, I don't remember removing it or the film being "claimed" to be the most expensive, so your gonna have to remind me about this.

Finally, I couldn't help but look at your user page and I saw the section titled Before and After. According to you, you have widely expanded the articles mentionned. I do admit you do a lot of editing on Zinta's page, but that is because you do it bit by bit and not on one go, which is what I do. I think that many other editors have contributed to the articles mentionned such as me, Plumcouch at one point, Zora when she was here etc etc. So basically for you to say, that you edited the "most and have widely expanded them more than every other editor", is a bit unfair. It is not my buisness what you write on your user page but you might offend many editors by saying that. When I read it, I honestly felt a bit offended, because I feel that I have contributed and added to the articles mentionned. Just my personal opinion. -- Pa7 22:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

If you had a problem with my memory capability then please tell me on my user page rather then questioning my lack of attention in front of everyone. This is what you said: Don't you pay attention to your own removals?. Honestly, I was really offended by this.

I did not imply that I did not appreciate your work and also I never meant to offend you by saying the stuff about bit by bit. But, there is a difference between being modest and being a bit boastful, you said: I was the one who fought with Shez_15 for everything. If not me you would come today and find Zinta at the bottom of every film cast, and Mukerji at the very beginning of EVERY film. Do you know how many fights I've had with Shez about cast credits even before you stared at Wikipedia? Me, Zora, Haphar and Plumcouch fought with him nearly a year and a half ago about his edits.

I remember adding the Bharat Shah case, expand it, do whatever with it and I will do what I need to, to make sure the page is in good shape.

You have accused me of being ignorant, as you said, As for your ignorance, you have ignored me so many times.... Well, Im very sorry to say this but you have been arrogant with the fact that you feel that some of the pages you edited are down to you. I was impressed with the National Awards thing, but there were loads of people who edited to make sure the pages are in trim shape. What you write on your user page is your buisness and for me to change things on your user page is wrong. All I told you was my opinion, in which case I apologize if it caused you any offence. BTW, I also edit on Wikiquote and added more then 30 quotes and references under my IP addrress. I guess we have reached a difference of opinion, I do not agree with your edits, you do not agree with mine. Just for the record, you have not annoyed me in any case, but I'd rather state my opinions rather then keep quiet about it. Our opinions of each other have probably changed, you thinking me as ignorant, me thinking you as arrogant. We were due to have differences with each other eventually. Again, I apologize if I have said anything to offend you. My opinions on the Zinta issue have been left on the discussion page. -- Pa7 15:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]