Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force

Bollywood Awards

For a while now, I have been thinking of adding other awards (wins and nominations) to the filmographies of Bollywood actors – similar to that of their Hollywood colleagues. However, before doing so, I would prefer making a list of the so-called "notable" awards; by doing so it would restrict the awards we add, as well as eliminate the unnecessary debate later on when people add a bunch of other awards. To begin with, we have already included the Filmfare Awards and the National Film Awards as both of them are unanimously the oldest and most prestigious award ceremonies in India. In addition to that, I would also consider the following five as popular, annual, notable award ceremonies; the awards are listed in alphabetical order:

1. Apsara Film & Television Producers Guild Awards (Apsara)
2. International Indian Film Academy Awards (IIFA)
3. Screen Awards (Screen)
4. Stardust Awards (Stardust)
5. Zee Cine Awards (ZCA)

While looking through several books, such as this, it states that "one indication of the Bollywoodization of television is the amount of airtime that television networks tend to give to telecasting annual film awards - which have evolved into a mini industry." The book refers to the ZCA as "a major showcase for Indian cinema" and the IIFA as the "so-called Bollywood Oscars". This book says: "Some of the more popular [awards] include the Filmfare Awards, the ZCA, the Stardust Awards, the Indian government-sponsored NFA, and the IIFA awards". In addition to these sources, Bollywood Hungama, a popular website portal also lists the following five awards apart from other two awards which are no longer held. Leave me your thoughts! -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 01:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

An obvious support from my side is for IIFA awards; they are very notable IMO and receive a lot of press attention. Not very sure on the others, I'll check up a bit. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 05:16, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I support this - plus the BFJA Awards and Bollywood Movie Awards. What do you think about the Sansui Awards? Shahid • ^Talk2me 06:07, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

We cannot include all awards in filmography tables just because they all have an article. IMO NFA, FFA, State awards (for regional films) would be sufficient. I would also support the addition of IIFA, as they receive quite a lot of coverage in the media. BJFA can very well be be included, as it is perhaps the oldest award in the country. At one point of time awards like Cinema Express Awards and Filmfans Awards were also highly notable. Filmfans Association awards were given even before NFA and FFA. But these two are not being given regularly over the past decade. Other than these, I'm personally against the addition of other awards, as addition of those will only clutter the table. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

As of now i would oppose inclusion of all these awards. IIFA sure does get good coverage for being held internationally. So that probably could go. But there are others like BFJA which are given through ages. BUT, we dont have good references about BFJA. Their home site is like Coming Soon since ages. One test before including awards in filmography table we can do is to see if these awards category wise pages are well sourced and full with info. I deproded two BFJA category lists last week. If there are no good references available we will end up having awards only for superstars like Salman or SRK who are regularly covered in news. But then Supporting actors wont have those enteries at all. Thats bit uneven to see and hence should be avoided. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I guess there is adequate consensus to keep IIFA. BFJA is totally new to me, and I do agree that its awarding is shaky at best. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 10:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I personally feel all the awards mentioned by BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ are notable enough to be mentioned. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah they all are notable. They have their own articles. But do we have sufficient sources to maintain uniformity throughout? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 20:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

The Apsara and the IIFA Awards have their own official websites so listing the winners and nominees wouldn't be a problem. As for the other three awards (Screen, Stardust and ZCA), several reputable and reliable sources (such as Bollywood Hungama) publish the winners and nominees close to the time of the awards season. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 22:46, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Since no one has anymore comments, I am assuming that you guys are fine with adding those awards to actors' filmographies. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 01:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Not yet. Sourcing will be a big problem. I was told by a fellow editor that websites such as those listed above (Apsara and the IIFA) cannot be used because they are first-party sources, and therefore not reliable. I personally disagree with this assessment, and would like some comments about that from everyone here. If those are not acceptable, I am thinking neither would something like this for National Awards, which I have seen in lots of articles BollyJeff | talk 20:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh no! Bad!!! We are using the NFA issued booklet as the basic source on all related articles. WP:PRIMARY says "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source." So as long as we are only stating the fact that a certain award was received by a certain person and not making any analysis based on it, shouldn't it be ok? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes, those can be used for this particular purpose, no problem in that. Essentially, the awards websites ARE the only available reliable source for those awards, as any other (secondary) source will be based on the list of awards. There is no problem in using primary source for straightforward, descriptive statements of facts.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

As long as there are no analysis or interpretation done, I believe primary sources should be ok. At least, thats what WP:PRIMARY says. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 14:53, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

There exists no other way to find reliable sources for awards. In case of Academy Awards and see the sources used in all its sub articles. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Comment to Bollywood Dreamz As of now there is no consensus to add those awards. You cannot assume that every other editor is fine with adding these awards since no one commented anymore. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Not enough comments here to establish consensus, either on adding awards or on using official award sites as a source? I may have to take this to the film project to get more eyes. BollyJeff | talk 00:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure! Give us the link when you start the discussion. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Link is here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Best_sources_for_awards. BollyJeff | talk 16:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Centenary year

On 3rd May 2013, Raja Harishchandra the first full-length Indian feature film, would complete 100 years of release. The year would be observed as the centenary year of Indian Cinema. I am expecting some celebrations or events to happen on this occasion. (Govt has promised few things.)
We, at Wikipedia could also do somethings great on this project. Making our works reach the main page could be one such activity. As we celebrate full year, we don't have to aim any particular date. I am posting this almost a year beforehand as this would require quite a lot of efforts from all.

• Today's Featured Article: We all could concentrate on few articles that we think should appear on Main page. I think we have enough time to work on a seemingly good article. (All our current FAs have made their appearances once and i don't think we should/can use them again.)

Ra.One (Currently under Peer review after previous two FA reviews. Would most probably be FA by the time we want.)

Ilaiyaraja (Has had two FA reviews, but way back in 2007.)

• Today's Featured List: As of date we have no FL. But we could still try.

59th National Film Awards (Fairly good in layout. But no reviews till date.)

58th National Film Awards (Layout work also required. Reviews, none.)

• Did you know...: In case anyone makes new articles next year, try to match with some significant date and keep them on hold for main page appearance. In case you plan to write new article, work in user space and then only release when DYK criteria is met.
• On this day...: Probably many chances here. We would have to go through calendar and see events. For appearance in OTD we simply need to have articles in good shape. But we can not have trivial things like "50 yrs ago film XYZ released on this day."

• Events:

Raja Harishchandra released on 3 May 1913

Rabindranath Tagore wins Nobel prize in 1913 (date of presentation unknown)

• Births:

Gangubai Hangal: 5 Mar 1913 (No established connection with our Project. But still....)

Balraj Sahni: 1 May 1913

Bhagwan Dada: 1 Aug 1913

• Today's featured picture: I see no way.
• In the news: Can't predict.

Please add other articles that you feel might have good chance. Other suggestion, besides Project Aim Main Page are needed and hence welcome. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

Excellent proposal! We should work towards this. While Ra.One may become an FA, I suspect Ilayiaraja won't be there. There are other articles which can potentially become FA by then, such as Chak De India, Rang De Basanti and Kahaani. We should aim for a main page on that day.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

This proposal should be focused in order to get some of the things done. We have enough time in hand for at least few of them. IMHO, "Today's featured picture" would be the toughest one. Lets not only target Bollywood film articles for FA/GA. We have some of the editors like Vensatry, SoS or Karthik Nadar who have worked predominantly in Tamil cinema and can get some of the articles to better status but I see no one as of now for Bengali, Marathi, Telugu or Malayalam cinema. (Arfaz is blocked long back.)

Btw, I am not sure whether 58th National Film Awards can become FL or not as its 2 year old event. Senior editors should clarify on this so that I can work on it accordingly. 59th National Film Awards is awaiting an official catalogue. (One provided by DFF is darn corrupt!!). Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 14:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Vivvt's comment reminds me of Pather Panchali which was, and is, in a respectable shape.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh of course! Nothing specific to Bollywood. Its 100 years for the "Indian cinema". I am not aware of other language film article. Hence couldn't include any. Feel free to add to the list. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 15:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to see Kamal Haasan to be featured in the main page. The article, a GA is now in a good shape and has a lot of potential to become an FA. Also Kamal Haasan is perhaps the only actor in India to have tasted success in all major film industries. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Lets make a list of proposed article/list(s) and their current and expected status and track them over a period of time. Concerned editors can add their proposals. I would suggest to use project page than talk page as latter one gets archived regularly. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 11:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Lets collect all possible articles here in this week. Then sort out the ones which have good chances and then we can according begin our COTY. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Excellent idea. I was wondering, why not first and foremost work on Raja Harishchandra and make it an FA? Let's make that our top COTM. Other than that, there are numerous possibilities, but I feel that our aim (as part of this centenary) should be the improvement of quality of all Indian cinema articles; concentrating on a few to get to GA/FA status will be a parallel aim. How's that? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 11:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I dont think its possible to make Raja Harishchandra a FA, considering there arent enough sources about it. But there is a slight chance of making it a GA. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Excellent idea. Though not invited, I would still like to voice out my opinion on this matter. I think apart from all the other articles discussed above, we should try and get some of the Actors and Actresses articles up to FA status (GA atleast). IMO the top 5 living actors: Amitabh Bachchan, Dilip Kumar, The Khan Trio (Aamir Khan, Shahrukh Khan and Salman Khan) should feature on Main page. Though I acknowledge the immense contributions and super-stardom of Raj Kapoor, Sanjeev Kumar, Dharmendra, Manoj Kumar, Rajesh Khanna, Dev Anand, Shammi Kapoor and so on, I fear if we could get much sources on these actors since not much is talked about or published on these stars when compared to the top 5 I listed. Currently of these only Amitabh's and Shahrukh's article are the nearest GA candidates and all others have to be extensively worked on. Among the actresses, I don't care much since none of them have really made a huge impact in this male dominated industry except the likes of Shabana Azmi, Madhuri Dixit, Rekha,.. (Ohh there are plenty Waheeda Rehman, Asha Parekh and so on..). 'P.S: I'm not much into Regional Cinema and hence I could list only Bollywood names since my knowledge is only up to that.--Msrag (talk) 14:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks Animesh for taking this up well in advance so that project members have time to work on it. While I think that it would be the most fitting if the article on Raja Harishchandra was TFA, I don't know how many sources we're going to get for it. Ra.One and Ilayaraja seem to be the most developed, but I think if we have articles more fitting for the centenary. It would be better if an article on Raj Kapoor, Kamal Hassan, Rajesh Khanna or Amitabh Bachchan is up there. Or, why not work on Cinema of India? That would be perfect for TFA. Lynch7 17:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I was wondering why certain articles like Enthiran have not been talked about. That, at least to me, looks like a very potent future FA. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Mike is right. Something that would represent Indian cinema should be up there. A personality would be a good choice for that. In case of films, a classic from Category:Indian epic films should be good. But there isn't much that we can do about old films. We would be stuck (probably already are) with no more info. But Pather Panchali has a fair chance. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Pather Panchali would be a great choice, and I think Google Scholar will help us in getting more information since its an old and renowned film. There were two articles I really wanted to upgrade to GA/FA status: Mughal-e-Azam and Jodhaa Akbar. Both should not be too difficult to improve, I believe. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 06:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

A while back I was trying to improve Mughal-e-Azam, but there are few (and some contradicting) sources online. It would require offline research as well. Enthiran was actually a GA, but got delisted due to constant edit warring, especially over its earnings, which is still not resolved. I also think that Pather Panchali would be a good choice. Raja Harishchandra is really the one we want for the anniversary; or Cinema of India, but that's another one that receives too much unwanted attention from folks promoting the regional industries. BollyJeff | talk 12:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the late rely, was damn busy yesterday. One thing I could see is that all are supporting Raja Harishchandra to be a FA, so that it appears on the main page on its 100th anniversary. It would be great if Vensatry puts a mail in the Indian and English Wikiproject India mailing lists so that the discussion and the report reaches maximum. It will help us by bringing quality more and more editors. We might also see alot of admins there who will help us to feature it on the main page on the mentioned date. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 08:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Believe me, bringing Raja Harishchandra to FA is going to be very tough. Anyways, I'll not say that to be an impossible task. It requires lot of offline sources. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 09:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I too agree, but we have almost a year with us. Why can't we? Vensatry (being coordinator), can you put a mail in the mailing lists regarding this to reach the discussion regarding this to mass? We would get better views upon the discussion. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 10:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done Looking forward for more editors. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 12:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, I feel that Pather Panchali should be the best article to consider. The article is already well written, and with some more work we can definitely get it to that level. Smarojit (talk) 11:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Its a nice initiative I must say. What we can do, is we can select an article each month as COTM and improve it (making it as GA standard would be the minimum). At the end of 8/9 months (say around February), we can decide on the articles which can be promoted as FA and work towards the final goal. Concurrently, we can also work on the articles which are currently GA/A and try to get it promoted to FA. As, for the content, it should be a mix of Cinemas, Actors, Actresses, Film Directors, Singers (Songs and music are integral to Indian cinemas). Apart from improving the parent article, Cinema of India, we can work Amitabh Bacchan and Shah Rukh Khan, the most popular filmstars who are known outside, landmark films like Mughal-e-Azam, Sholay, Pather Panchali, etc. Regional content should also be given equal importance. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 12:05, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (Changing and adding)Raja Harishchandra needs to improved at least to be in a GA state to be in OTD. Cinema of India was in OTD on 18 May 2012 (100 years since release of shree pundalik). Even if Ra.One becomes a FA, we wouldn't want a film which has "worst film" in the FA blurb on this day. Improving Rang De Basanti which is A class is a better bet, IMO. Rang De Basanti seems to a GA state currently (will need work). The A class is a 2009 assessment. Kahaani is at GA quality IMO (GA review ongoing), but it may not be comprehensive till mid-2013 when all awards for 2012 are over. Pather Panchali, Sholay or Mother India (all GAs) may have good references due to age and influence. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Agree with Redtiger that Ra.One would probably be the worst representative of Indian cinema! Rang De Basanti, Lagaan, Sholay - anything is better. And Rang De Basanti being alreday A class, may be easier to work on. Lagaan would be good as well if someone has the book (Spirit of Lagaan), and can iomprove the article based on that. I do not have book sources on Pather Panchali anymore, otherwise that would be a great candidate as well.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Mother India (at least 1 white paper on film alone, many on general portrayal of women in Bollywood), Lagaan (at least 5 white papers on film alone), Pather Panchali (Satyajit Ray has many white papers on him, the film is always discussed) has references on jstor (google search, no access to jstor). Rang De Basanti and Sholay have few. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

IMHO, lets not make any article GA/FA just because there are lots of sources available on the net!! If film/personality is going to represent Indian cinema, it has to be good. I would not prefer having F/GA status for Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham... or Jeans than Piravi, Akaler Shandhaney or Do Aankhen Barah Haath and Umbartha, for that matter. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 18:19, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Among contemporary Hindi cinema, films like Udaan and The Dirty Picture stand out from the rest (and can be made into FA's); among regional cinema, we have several examples such as Deool, Noukadubi which could be worked upon, atleast for a GA. Smarojit (talk) 05:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Chak De! India and Kahaani would be the best choices IMO as of now (excluding the already talked-about FA possibilities). Many of the articles need work, and I'm more vocal for MEA and Sholay than for Lagaan or Rang De Basanti, which could wait for later due to their already better quality. What about some iconic films of Amitabh Bachchan? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 05:14, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I never read the article Mother India before. Just started to read it. It is superb. The lead is very catchy, unlike other run-of-the-mill film articles. IMO, this one could be a real gem, both a good melodramatic representation of Indian cinema, and pretty well written. The prose looks high grade. The references look good. Will have a detailed read later, But looks like it could be a little gem.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:12, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of Bengali cinema, what about Iti Mrinalini? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:02, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Iti Mrinalini, what an absolutely beautiful film. The best example to showcase the changing face of Indian cinema. Has my support. Smarojit (talk) 08:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

If the Wikiproject can make a book like [1]; chapter can financially support for the printing copies of that book -- naveenpf (talk) 07:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Book is a brilliant idea Naveen. Didn't know about this at all. But i don't see a set of articles as of now that can go in a book. We would be able to do that maybe after we finish improving the below mentioned articles. We can have books on classic films, current superstars, etc. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Plan

Ok. List is growing. Let's make some concrete plans. I am taking up the responsibility for the article Mother India. It has tremendous scope to become a featured article. I am in the process of obtaining two important books on/about the film. The article may need structural changes in places. We have time. IMO, 6 months would be a practical deadline for it. I would urge other users to take up some articles (individually or in groups). Kahaani is a nice example of collaboration that is currently taking place. That could be an FA as well in 6-8 months, even earlier. Any thoughts or plans?--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm beginning to formulate plans for Mughal-e-Azam and Jodhaa Akbar. Work will start as soon as this darned Ra.One gets wrapped up. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I've started work on Mughal-e-Azam, but the article is going to be one hell of a tough job. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 12:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

With official catalogue released from DFF, me and Animesh has started working on 59th NFA. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 17:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Can we all nominate ourselves as the main volunteers in the same table below? For eg., I just nominated myself and others on some articles based on the plans stated above. It gives a quick reference and helps us know who's working on what just in case we need to get in touch with the concerned primary editor of that article.--Msrag (talk) 06:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

That's a good idea. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 08:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Iti Mrinalini has also kick-started. I'm already cooped up with two articles now, but I shall try my best to help out on Mrinalini whenever possible. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:10, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

59th National Film Awards is up for Peer Review. All are requested to help in it. We will be taking up the 58th article only after this list becomes FL. (Would save time by avoiding unnecessary edits.) §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:49, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi All, Kahaani is up for Peer Review. All are requested to help expand/improve/cleanup the article to make it a possible FA. Thanks ...Msrag ^talk2me 05:58, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Listing

This list is strictly article-related; please do not add DYK or ITN candidates here. Please list the articles alphabetically, and italicize those entries which are for films. All suggestions are welcome, but they could ideally be discussed upon in the above portion before placing here.

Personalities Article Current Goal Volunteers Aamir Khan B GA FA Smarojit Msrag Bineet Ojha Amitabh Bachchan B GA FA  – Asha Bhosle B GA FA  – Chiranjeevi B GA FA Vensatry Dadasaheb Phalke Start GA FA  – Dilip Kumar C GA FA  – Dimple Kapadia B GA FA Shshshsh Hema Malini B GA FA  – Ilaiyaraja GA FA  – Kamal Haasan GA FA Vensatry Lata Mangeshkar B GA FA  – Madhuri Dixit B GA FA  – Rajinikanth GA FA Vensatry Raj Kapoor C GA FA  – Rekha B GA FA Shshshsh Salman Khan B GA FA  – Shahrukh Khan B GA FA  – Sivaji Ganesan B GA FA  – Vyjayanthimala B GA FA  –

Films Article Current Goal Volunteers 3 Idiots B GA FA  – Chak De! India GA FA Classicfilms Enthiran C GA FA  – Iti Mrinalini C GA FA Smarojit Kahaani GA FA Msrag Dwaipayan Lagaan GA FA  – Mother India GA FA Dwaipayanc Redtigerxyz Dr.Blofeld Mughal-e-Azam C GA FA Ankitbhatt Bollyjeff Pather Panchali GA FA  – Raja Harishchandra Start GA FA  – Rang De Basanti A FA  – Ra.One GA FA Ankitbhatt Sholay GA FA  – Sivaji GA FA  –

Others Article Current Goal Volunteers 58th National Film Awards List FL  – 59th National Film Awards List FL Animeshkulkarni, Vivvt List of accolades received by Ra.One List FL Ankitbhatt Cinema of India C GA FA  –

Superlatives in Filmfare Awards

Why Best supporting actor/actress awards are taken into consideration for calculating superlatives in Best Actor and Best Actress pages respectively. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 14:10, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it was similar to Academy Awards pages, but I do not like it. Some editors come in and try to add other awards into the calculation also, and it becomes a constant maintenance nightmare. I would vote to remove them, if this was an RfC. BollyJeff | talk 01:44, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, this is not a good idea. In case of Academy Awards, "Best Actor" awards included both leading and supporting roles until 1936. But Filmfare started giving "Best Supporting Actor" awards the very next year (1954). If this is the case some may also have to include "Critics Award for Best Performance". So there is no point in considering both categories for calculating superlatives. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 04:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Its very much misleading and does not add much value because its redundant to the corresponding page. Superlative should only include data for corresponding page and not all. And yes, maintenance is a pain. I would support the removal from all 4 pages. - Vivvt^Talk 04:42, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Count me in for the removal. If the page is for Best Actor, talk about Best Actor. Best Supporting Actor is irrelevant there. The combined superlatives are better suited for the actor pages rather than the award pages. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 05:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

"Best supporting actor" seems to there in "Best actor" to calculate an "Overall". If we remove Best supporting actor from Best actor, then "Overall" needs to be removed too. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Well I see there's pretty much a clear consensus here so I'm with you guys. Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Same here! §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 08:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Signpost request

I have put forth a request at Signpost concerning the Indian Cinema task force's centenary year plans. You can see the suggestion here. Do have a look and put your thoughts here about the move. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 08:12, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Great work Anit, that was the first stepping stone. Thanks! -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 12:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure, and thanks :). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

New film awards

I see that articles have been created for many relatively new awards for South Indian industries and wonder whether they are notable enough and deserve to have separate articles. Such awards include the Norway Tamil Film Festival Awards, Edison Awards (India) and Big FM Tamil Entertainment Awards in Tamil. Also the Suvarna Film Awards and Udaya Film Awards in Kannada and the Vanitha Film Awards and Mathrubhumi Film Awards in Malayalam, but I can't comment much about the other South Indian industries. The most recent inclusion has been the South Indian International Movie Awards, probably also the most notable one, that may get established in a few years. So which of these are notable that can be included in filmographies and which are not? Johannes003 (talk) 09:35, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

IMO, none of them deserves a place in filmography tables. However, they can be included in the "awards" sections of the respective actors/films/technicians. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 09:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)In my opinion, Awards which have received some attention of reliable source media or which are given by independent third parties are notable and can have their own articles. If both the clauses satisfy, its well than good. I use "some attention" because i don't expect The Hindu or New York Times to write about these new establishments. But maybe some renowned local newspaper at least should have noted these awards. I say "independent third party" because sometimes Award functions are hosted for killing time. Best example is STAR Parivaar Awards. They give awards to themselves. (That article is probably kept just because it passes WP:GNG. Media keeps printing all such rubbish things very fondly.) Now... should we include these awards in artist's biographies? Why not? They have received recognition of their work from some other people and i see no reason to exclude it. Should we include these home-made awards then? I would say avoid in case its very crowded in the article; but never ever use these awards for establishing notability of artist. Eg. if Kamal Haasan wins some award by these newbies i would avoid mentioning that amongst his other 50-something awards. But if someone has won only 8-10 awards, i don't mind adding one more out of these. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:04, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Vensatry. Filmography table no, Awards section...read my note above. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:05, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Is a separate article needed for 1st SIIMA Awards at this stage. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 17:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Merge with SIIMA. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 17:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I did once, but there is a user who is constantly reverting it. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 12:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

You may want to raise a merge proposal and discuss on the talk page to avoid constant reverts. - Vivvt^Talk 13:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Well... i too tried that. But have started the merger discussion now. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 13:54, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Even if its just formality, could you opine at the merger proposal? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:40, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The question was also whether the above mentioned awards do even need a separate article. I feel those Edison Awards and Norway Film Festival Awards should get deleted. Johannes003 (talk) 09:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Ghajinidetails

After ignoring and warning Ghajinidetails a number of times, I don't think we are at a situation to adjust anymore. His editing is getting troublesome, and his edit summaries are repetitive and often misleading. In response, he is totally non-communicative and has not bothered to act upon any of the problems which have been pointed out. Seeing his name and his edit history, this user is close to INCINE, so I thought of discussing possible action here. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 11:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Very true! The user sometimes has ok-ok edits but almost always coupled with "providing the much needed sources" as edit-summary. When you actually see whats done, there is an extra paragraph added 1, 2. Its annoying that we cannot rely on his edit summaries. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:18, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Take the user to WP:ANI, if their edits look nonconstructive even after multiple warnings. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:42, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether they are actually non-constructive, since some of his references seem valid. However, some other editors have clearly pointed out that he adds expired links as sources, which he has not stopped even now. I was undecided, and still am to an extent, since ANI would be a big step. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 09:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Few analysis here. Firstly, the user Ghajinidetails does not make section edits. He/She is contributing by clicking on the main Edit link on the page or is removing the section headings intentionally which is misleading and kinda looks like working in disguise. Secondly though he/she have been adding Edit summaries in close to 70% of his/hers edits, only 30% of that are meaningful and the rest are just auto-populated summaries provided by various browsers such as Chrome which proves that he/she is damn lazy and is not really bothered to update it. He certainly needs to be educated/informed/warned about the importance of Edit Summaries since he's been dealing with many major "vandal-magnet" articles. And yes, something def needs to be done....Msrag ^talk2me 08:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

But the user never talks. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 08:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

...Msrag ^talk2me 08:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Indian film songs articles

I have observed that there are several articles created for Indian film songs. These can be seen under Category:Songs by language, Category:Indian songs, Category:Hindi songs, Category:Tamil songs etc. Most of them are not notable enough and qualify for AfD under WP:NSONGS. Please express your opinion here so that article creation can be managed well for songs. IMO, redirect is not the solution. - Vivvt^Talk 17:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Normally NSONGS talk about charts to eshtablish notability, I doubt if we have a standard chart for indian songs. some reasonable measuring rod needs to be thought of. --DBigXray 17:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Are there any specific articles which seem to fail notability? If they do, then they should certainly be deleted. However, the notability of any song article is subjective, despite the presence of policies. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

the problem here is lack of objective measures. For example, the song "ooh laa laa" from The Dirty Picture is in AfD now. I personally think the song got enough coverage in media so as to deserve an article. But it is difficult to establish that going by the song notability criteria alone. On the other hand, another song, "mere hath mein" from film Fanaa, (also in AfD), although a hit song, does not probably deserve a separate article.

I think we need to ponder which songs got wider media coverage ( for whatever reason). I see many international songs having article, although apparently it seems they might not be notable. On the other hand, many Indian film songs, though extremely popular, lack an article as it is often difficult to establish notability. That is unfortunate.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

There isn't any chart for Indian songs. Atleast in present days. Some TV and radio stations come up with some top-20 list now and then but then they come up with some other show & this gets flushed. For old Hindi songs i would consider Binaca Geetamala's annual toppers as something that can (not should) have their own article or redirects. Awards are given to singers, musicians, lyricists and now choreographers. But there hardly is any award for the whole song as such. Is Zee Cine Award for Best Track of the Year an exception? Don't know what they mean by "Track". I would take it as "music". But Zee Cine Awards are themselves not that notable. And this all is just for Hindi songs. Non-Hindi songs would hardly fit these criterion. Only good way would be to check GNG. But that should exclude passing mentions like "Blah Blah song is awesome with music by PQR and dhinchak dance by XYZ" in the film's review. And don't just show Google hits. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Certain songs like "Why This Kolaveri Di", "Chammak Challo" and "Teri Meri" definitely deserve their own articles. Rest, has to be seen. I believe that any song which receives unusual coverage and enjoys major acclaim and popularity deserve their own article. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 05:21, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Songs like Hai Ye Maya and Dushman Mera (Don 2 song) certainly needs to be deleted. I dont get these points here.. What do I get to know reading the two articles of those songs..? Where is the notability and success factors mentioned in the articles..? Hardly remember any radio stations playing those numbers as frequently as "Ooh la la" from TDP. Anyways those pages just says ABC song is sung by XYZ and written by MNO which could've been mentioned in the soundtrack page itself. Why a separate article for that? BTW, I think "Ooh la la" should be improved and supported for a separate article though I agree the current state of the article is not favorable. ...Msrag ^talk2me 08:05, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree with Ankit, certain songs like Chammak Challo or Kolaveri do reach the mass and enhance its notability. Just adding something, other Indian songs generally doesn't reaches notability stage. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:40, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Why the hell are those two Don 2 songs having separate articles? They clearly fail notability. Heck, that films' soundtrack received a rather thanda response (with the exception of "Zara Dil Ko Thaam Lo", and even that was nothing eye-popping statistically). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:19, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

A song article should not exist just because a couple of people think it was a hit. Noted charts, like the different FM's should have mentioned the song significantly in their own lists and the songs should have received sufficient critical notice to establish notability. Like it has been said, an article, just to say that a song was sung by XXX and composed by YYY is purely meaningless and provokes other editors to create articles for the music they find "great". Now that several sites have started giving out music reviews, in which each song is separately discussed, an editor can just start an article, write a section named critical response and quote large amounts of text, making others feel that the song has to stay. Moving that aside, it is unfortunate that Indian songs have little online statistical publishing to verify their significance. One should also take into account that songs like Teri Meri and Chammak Challo broke records upon release, like the YouTube hits. Perhaps, we should restrict the criterion to create pages for single track release, record-breaking response verified by sources, and those which have won multiple awards. Secret of success (talk) 12:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hit song is and should not be the criterion. With lot of blogs, fan based sites available, there are lot of "Hit" songs available in the market!! - Vivvt^Talk 18:29, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with SOS. "YouTube hits" wouldn't be a good idea. We should take into account various parameters like critical response and awards consideration. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 18:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Gangs of Wasseypur

Hello, i would like to point that there is a bit of a confusion about whether Gangs of Wasseypur should have two different articles or not.As both movies were shot at the same time,it is being argued that ,that can be discussed in a sub-section of "release" section.Gangs of Wasseypurand Talk:Gangs of Wasseypur.Ayanosh (talk) 15:40, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I think here should be two articles. These are 2 separate cinemas. An example can be Harry Potter and Deathly Hallows part 1 and part 2, which have individual articles.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

So what should be done....?Should I move the page to two articles.I just wanted to make sure that no one merges the two articles back to the original one article.If no one opposes it in a couple of days i think i can safely move the article to two separate articles.Ayanosh (talk) 03:56, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that, this is a good idea, because the film was written as one, it was also premiered at Cannes as a single film, so i think we can work on a single article for the film, and i insist on mentioning the two different parts in the release section as i stated in Gangs of Wasseypur, but we can create separate articles for the critical reception of each film. I will soon start my work on the article, and i am open to other ideas. Bineet Ojha |BINEET| 17:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The Times of India

Do we consider TOI as a reliable source? I believe yes. Anon cited this on the Roja article. Going by the reliability norms, we should have no concerns for its inclusion. But then I doubt the reliability for the language being used in the article. It also mentions nothing more than published date. What say? - Vivvt^Talk 18:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed not all articles on TOI websites were written by TOI authors. For some time now, TOI has been including articles from other sources as well, like from haihoi.com and cinefundas.com. Only articles in which the author has been mentioned are TOI articles and can be considered as reliable. The above article is apparently from some other source. Johannes003 (talk) 09:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

On what basis do we differentiate between TOI and externally generated content? The above link apparently does not mention the site from which the info has been taken or how the article does not fall under TOI's jurisdiction. Secret of success (talk) 15:06, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, as I said the authors's name will be explicitly mentioned at the beginning of the article like here or here. I would only consider these ones as TOI content. Johannes003 (talk) 15:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

What is the expansion of "TNN" exactly? Quite a few news articles use that. Secret of success (talk) 16:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

"TNN" stands for Times News Network ...Msrag ^talk2me 09:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Bilingual films

The latest trend in the industry has been making "bilingual films", shooting a film in two languages simultaneously. It will be (more or less) the same film shot twice in different languages with a slightly different cast. But how to deal with these bilingual films? Create separate articles for each version? I'm strictly against this idea as it will be plain redundant but few editors have been doing exactly that. I feel if it's the same film with the same content one article would be sufficient. But then again if the films have different titles (like the recent Eega in Telugu and Naan Ee in Tamil), which title should be chosen as the page name? With many more upcoming films supposedly being bilingual films (though I suspect that most of these so called bilingual films are only being dubbed into the other language!), this might present us with a problem. Johannes003 (talk) 15:30, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I think there's little point creating articles for both too - and at times I guess it's just best to use common sense/acceptance to see the issue through. Maybe two separate articles are needed when the lead cast differs ie. Kuselan and Kathanayakudu or Unnaipol Oruvan and Eenadu. But in such instances like Eega and 180, where the lead cast is the same one article is apt.

About which title should be used - I guess we should just make a decision based on common sense, on where the film properly originates from - or what title is referred to most. Eega obviously has Telugu stars and crew, while others like Thoranai had primarily Tamil crew and hence the articles were named as such. I guess an emboldening version of the title in the lead is also fine. Editor 2050 (talk) 15:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

IMO, it is all right to have an article if a film has been shot simultaneously (not dubbed) and if the cast is different. But otherwise, I am against adding articles for other versions. At present, some have articles and some don't. Yaavarum Nalam was made in Hindi as 13b but I don't see any page for it. Some more examples for simultaneous make are Vishwaroopam and Vinnaithaandi Varuvaayaa. Its better if the latter has a separate article for the Telugu version, Ye Maaya Chesave as it would illustrate the critical commentary in a neater manner and take care of other issues like change in plot. For Vishwaroopam, most of the hype and marketing is concentrated towards the Tamil version, and these kinds of factors should also be a part of judging whether we need to initiate pages for simultaneous makes. Secret of success (talk) 16:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)