User talk:Bollyjeff

Peer Review of Bipasha Basu

Please help developing Bipasha Basu by peer reviewing it. Thank you Srinivas 12:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Don2 bo figures based on a tweet ? How lame ?

Please check out my edit request at Don2 talk page . The editors are using taran adarsh tweet for posting figures . How lame is that now ? Thanks.Seeta mayya (talk) 23:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Rowspans

Did you notice that sortability works even for tables with "rowspans". —Commander _{(Ping me)} 14:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ya, anyway it's good to avoid rowspans. Again if the IP makes disruptive edits, make a report at WP:AIV. —Commander _{(Ping me)} 17:36, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Preity

Hey Bollyjeff. Thanks for contributing to the Preity Zinta article. The info you added was actually there until a few months ago when Rahul (BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ) and I agreed that it is not very important and I removed it. My opinion is that stars appear regularly on different shows of this sort, and donating their winnings is quite the normal thing to do and is to be expected. Zinta, like many other celebs, has appeared on numerous such shows and always donated the money she won. Making a list of all of them or mentioning some would not make sense IMO, nor could it be classified "humanitarian work" as such. Your opinion? Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:55, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

LOL of course she had donated hers as well - I saw the show and it's actually there on YouTube if I'm not mistaken. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello

First of all I'd like to say I am sorry for my angrey behavior the other day, I was truly pissed and I lashed out. I do maintain the fact that none of the things I said were directed at u. That said, I have no objection to being friends if U still like that. The only friend I had here was Ankit and well, I guess U know the whole story of his departure. I deserved that block tho, I did go against Wiki rules knowing it well enough, but she just, pisses me off to no end, anyway, that's abt all I had to say. Cheers. --Meryam90 (talk) 14:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. but she did it with Ra.One and then just went away and came back to Don2 :P Oh! why must I suffer?! Just why?! :D No just kidding, I need to learn how to keep my cools really, I was good at it so far :P anyway, talking abt WP:crystal. Should we make a page for the new Yash Chopra film? filming started today.--Meryam90 (talk) 15:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

sources: NDTV & Intoday, and Talaash (2012 film) article was first titled Reema Kagti's Untitled Project --Meryam90 (talk) 15:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Well I think I do have enough info....The problem is, I actually never created an article and I don't even think I know how to. :S

I mean, look at Dhoom 3: Back in Action, filming will start at December 2012 and it already has an article. Btw, doesn't that fall under WP:Crystal? --Meryam90 (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks man, looks good so far, but I am sure it will grow bigger slowly as time passes. seriously, just released I am really kinda new to wiki...lol I just created my first article. :D Oh btw, I was thinking, Can Don 2 make it to GA now or does it need more work? --Meryam90 (talk) 18:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I know what U mean, but seems like a trend now to update every lil detail abt Box Office, esp for film released last year, I mean Ready, Bodyguard, Rockstar, The dirty picture, Ra.One and etc...I love how Hollywood movies just update the North America gross and the rest of the world's. Anyway, I've been thinking about that; getting a PR. Will list it then and see how it goes :D --Meryam90 (talk) 19:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Saqib Saleem

Can you check the above article and do a short copy-edit? Thanks in advance, — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done

Re: actor templates

Should i remove everything? -- Karthik Nadar 13:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Ohh! But still friend, I don't mind correcting my mistakes. Should I take effort to revert all my additions? Thanks a lot for poking my mistake. -- Karthik Nadar 13:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done: Will make sure not to repeat it again. :) -- Karthik Nadar 13:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

NOOO

What do you mean by "give up"? Don't tell me you you're retiring, because I am not gonna let it happen!! And what the... you mean by saying that you do nothing useful? This? This? This or maybe this??? I say take a one-day break, but you are one of the best editors working on articles related to Indian films right now, and if you give up... well, I'm not going to even think about it. Don't make me lost hope on this project. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

And once again: NOOOOOO!!! Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

And last time, I promise: NOOOOO!!! Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Take it easy. I meant giving up on reverting all the silly unsourced nonsense. I still want to do some useful stuff, but when I do something I like it to stay done. I feel its a waste of my time doing things like reverting x and y additions to a filmography because its not sourced or filming yet. It just comes back 5 minutes later. Anyway, thanks for the nice comments; I am not going anywhere. BollyJeff || talk 20:04, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

SIGH. Look, Wikipedia can be a bit uneasy at times, or often actually, but it's a phase. I've learnt to see it as a good experience to learning and I like editing even if there are tons of idiots on here. I remember when you started editing, you wondered why I was reverting so many editors with similar edit summaries. I'm sure you do understand it a bit more right now - it's just impossible to keep track of each edit and fix every mistake and teach every new user how to edit WP and what not to do. Many of them vandalise, many have some sort of agenda (adding POV, slanders or just load articles with scripts), and then, everything that needs to be fixed is left to just a few people who really want to see the project evolve. It's quite a task, and at some point you get fed up because you want to do contructive stuff. After all, my time on here is limited, and so is yours. I can say right now that unless the rules are changed significantly, nothing in this regard is going to change. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bollyjeff. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

X.One ^SOS 17:22, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Masala

He seems to be very intellectual. Keep warning for Blanking, if he crosses 4 warns, report him to WP:AIV. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:16, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Ra.One poster

I left a nice (but pointed) message on Bilaalu's talk page about the poster and your concerns, asking them not to revert it unless they get consensus on the talk page. Might also make sense to submit that image for deletion. Ravensfire (talk) 15:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Shriya Saran

Yes I do have those reference. Did you had ever visit the article on Saguni?? An article on Sify where Shriya had said that she was not approached for Saguni. [1]

About Hero, there is another article from The Times of India which confirmed that Yami Gautam will star in Hero replacing Shriya. [2]

A small request why can't you search the web instead of sending text to me?? For Nuvve Nenu there is plenty of sources, the controversy where Telangana protesters thrown stone on Shriya's caravan was ocured during the filming Nuvve Nenu. At least for this, please search yourself, I's currently working on the other article so please kindly figure out yourself. Finally, do not stick to the old facts do check the web in order to keep updating the facts in wiki.

(Ason27 (talk) 13:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC))

Instead asking me to do the fixation on Saguni's article, why no you do that?? By the way the filming of Nuvve Nena almost complete. The name of the film is under consideration but most probably it will be named as Nuvva Nena since many website had already mention about it. I wonder how can you hold so many good articles without surfing the web?? (Ason27 (talk) 14:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC))

Re Paranoia

As per the NFA archive, it says 'acting'. Source says "He has acted in Ketan Mehta's feature film Holi and a short film by Aditya Bhattacharya." Source also says he was assistant director on Manzil Manzil and Zabardast. I was not sure whether to include it or not.

As per rediff interview, you can say that it was acting in Paranoia. This is what Aditya Bhattachary said, "Aamir and me were classmates in school. In 1983, we had done a short film called Paranoia. We -- along with Mansoor Khan -- also had a band together. So we were good friends. He did not want to be an actor -- he was quite confused about what he wanted to do in life. Some people had their doubts about him, as he was short and had big ears. He was not star material. But I had absolute faith in him" (2nd page).

What say? Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 15:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 15:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Enthiran

Hello, Bollyjeff. You have new messages at Talk:Enthiran.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

X.One ^SOS 07:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Katrina Kaif

I have reverted your edits at the article for Katrina Kaif. I looked at the link you referenced and it states that "There is ultimately no consensus about which language to use." Furthermore, an RfC was recently held to discuss this issue for the Katrina Kaif article and that should be honoured. Thanks, Anupam^Talk 15:52, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I will be contacting him in the near future to address this issue. In the mean time the RfC should be respected. Thanks, Anupam^Talk 15:59, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to revert your other edits. I restored your other edits. I will contact the reviewing administrator and figure this out. With regards, Anupam^Talk 16:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I left a message on User:DeltaQuad's talk page and will see what he has to say. If I stand corrected, I will be more than happy to allow your to proceed. I just can't see how a mass removal of scripts is helpful. Also, even if your proposal passes, Jacqueline Fernandez is not Indian; Sri Lanka is a separate country. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 16:17, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I understand. If you feel an article should not really have a script then you can remove it. I think articles like Katrina Kaif can keep the script, since an RfC was specifically held on that issue. Feel free to keep your edits on the Lisa Ray article. Have a good day, Anupam^Talk 16:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Indic scripts

For film articles, "Indic scripts for film language and English translation". Is that the policy? I dont mind it. But then shouldnt IPA also be included? Because the purpose of having IPA on other articles was to facilitate non-indians to vocalize the jibber-jabber we do. Irrespective of what the article is, if the words are non-english they should be able to pronounce it. Isnt it? Also for English translation do we use references or we translate them ourselves? For example, You don't get Life a Second Time is not the real translation of ZNMD. Another example: Initially the article called it The one that moves is a Vehicle but then found IMDB saying That which runs is a car for Chalti Ka Naam Gaadi -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Replied - Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Bodyguard collections

Hi Bollyjeff . Would you please comment here (whatever you think is right). Providing the maximum possible gross figure for Ra.One which is an official number, and disallowing a third-party reliable source isn't fair for Bodyguard. Thanks in advance. Scieberking (talk) 05:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I will not fight over these types of issues anymore. See WP:DONTPANIC. BollyJeff || talk 13:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Alright, fair enough :) Greetings. Scieberking (talk) 14:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Sivandha Mann

Sivandha Mann (Red Soil) is the article of a Sivaji Ganesan film, created by me. Since my computer is in repair and I cannot do many stuff outside the computer (like uploading images or editing things easily), can you please upload an image of a CD cover to the infobox in it? Thanks for reading. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:36, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot dude. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Usage of free pictures in articles

Hi there, I noticed you reverted my edit of the article Dev Anand. I understand that the image I used was a non-free one, and you said that only free images may be used. Could you please explain the difference between non-free and free images? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireblazex3 (talk • contribs) 10:56, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Dhoom 2

I really appreciate the great work you did on this article; I just happened to come by this as a part of the GAs in the Indian Cinema task force, and decided to give a look. And frankly, I was rather unpleasantly surprised. Forgive me, but I must list out some things I saw extremely lacking in the article :-

• Dhoom 2 is a Hindi film, and hence a full-nation release. I cannot understand why there is only one line written about the national record (first week) and the rest of the box office section deals with Kochi, Chennai etc. whose collections contribute barely a fraction to the total gross earned by the film. In all ideality, the film's gross should be reported on a national scale, and that can be done using BOI figures.

• Initially, it had become quite the trend to use millions in Indian film articles; that practice, however, has long since expired and it has been agreed upon to use Indian notations crore and lakh. The fact that Dhoom 2 still uses 350 million-type figures is disconcerting.

• The INRConvert template is missing in several instances; this is a new development, so hopefully it should be rectified soon enough.

• The lead section mentions the worldwide gross as 1.34 billion; however, the infobox (and correct figure) shows 150 crore.

• The reviews section does not mention even one review from the Indian side; all of them are from the US. This is unacceptable by MOS:FILM standards, which clearly states that local film reviews should always be preferred.

Otherwise, the article seems worthy of the GA tag. I can understand that you worked on this article nearly two years back, and I'm informing you as a friend; had some other editor chanced upon it, he could have had the article demoted. I hope you can rectify these mistakes, as we certainly don't want to lose GAs, especially from Indian Cinema. Cheers! ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)]

Sure thing. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 18:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Nice work; however, I don't think you understood the box office section part. In Bollywood films, no article mentions any regional figures; its always something like (national) first weekend, first week, second week, third week (if big enough) and lastly the total NET (not gross) and worldwide gross. The Kochi-Andhra part shouldn't be there at all; I'll remove it, and change the gross India figure to net. The Indian reviews section needs tweaking and some additions, and I'll help out with that. I've struck out the parts completed, and hopefully I can dig up on BOI figures and add some stuff to the BO section. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 06:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Reply:

• Ah yes, I didn't replace it; I will, when I can dig up that info on the first weekend, week etc. collections. Being a rather older film, it'll be tough to find it.

• They aren't direct quotes? Oops. I thought they were. Argh! Now I have to go through all those reviews and find suitable quotes :(.

• The outdated part happens for every film actually; that's why its sometimes important to have a dedicated editor(s) on every film article so that periodically they can update the ranking. I did leave the part of it being the highest-grossing film of all time at its time of release; I don't think we can bypass this problem, its more or less a manual one. Even the recent films like Agneepath will back up in the rankings once some of the big Khan releases come, and subsequently its rankings will also have to be changed. Nothing that can be done with that actually.

Hope this helps. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

• Bollyjeff, this is Dhoom 2. I hope you remember exactly how many records this film broke at the time of release. For its time, yes those figures are absolutely notable and should be put up. The only problem is that the figures are rather difficult to find from RS.

• You could say that again; of all the articles, Ra.One needs a LOT of review cutback. Wouldn't you agree :D ?

• I don't think that's what is usually done; perhaps we can get a bit of consensus on this. That way, it'll be equally applicable to all film articles.

~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:49, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

So its enough to just write a line from the review; I'm not very used to that, and frankly I don't find that very good-looking. Besides, I doubt Dhoom 2 has too many reviews - at the maximum 10-15 (in contrast to Ra.One's 38). Right now, I think we should concentrate on finding all the major reviews and putting it in the article, otherwise technically the article fails the "Complete" criteria of GA. I really hate consensus-making, especially in films, and I'm looking for an excuse to avoid another fan-war. let's hope for the best. Btw, please take a look at the Ra.One reviews section and tell me what you think. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Somebody has changed the BO section of Lage Raho Munna Bhai, as its looking really stupid right now and has some terribly fanboyistic material in it. Perhaps we can get the best of both worlds, and use a big BO section and a big reviews section :D. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Exactly; its because some of these GAs/FAs are not maintained that the unfortunate article demotion takes place. The mindset is that once an article reaches FA status, its over; move on. And that's quite harmful in the long run (and more so for film articles). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:25, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Mukesh moved

Your views on move of singer "Mukesh" to Mukesh Mathur required here User_talk:Aurorion#Mukesh_moved --Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar

I noticed that you do a lot of work on Salman Khan's page. I appreciate your efforts. Would you please update his page about his surgery he had in the United States for his Trigeminal Neuralgia and the brain aneurysm that was discovered in India before he came her for surgery. I read Wikipedia, but am not into editing. If you would get his page updated , that would be wonderful. I'm a big US fan of his. Have a great day! Sfalumberjacks (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Move

Opinions are required here. X.One ^SOS 14:12, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of films considered the best for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of films considered the best is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films considered the best until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.. Thank you, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:16, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Request

Since you have contributed a lot to the article of Dhoom 2, will you please put your expertise into work again, and expand the article of Dhoom series ? |BINEET| 18:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bineetojha (talk • contribs)

Accusations

If you accuse someone of being a sockpuppet, please provide some evidence to back this up. Otherwise, I'll consider your little slur a personal attack. --FnH (talk) 09:24, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Request

Please follow this link. Thank you. |BINEET| 13:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bineetojha (talk • contribs)

Regarding Film fare award list

I will be very happy to discuss the matter regarding tabulation on Filmfare Award for Best Actor. I think tabulation enables better visibility, organization and condensation of data(maybe not the code size) on screen. Jpmeena (talk) 15:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Whats wrong ?

Why there is problem in mentioning controversy in Shahrukh wiki when we are mentioning controversy in Amitabh wiki. As honest wiki writer we should report everything without favor, prejudice, fear and fair in our reporting. Why to hide. I thought you being the most fair as I read your wiki work will be correct to all and will defend the freedom of free press and honest reporting.

Whoever this is, please sign your comments by typing four tildes (~). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review

This is to inform you that there is currently a peer review going on for the article Ra.One here. Your participation is most welcome. Regards, ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism/Edit War on Sholay Article

Hey Bollyjeff, Sorry to bother you, but this tamil wikipedian named secretofsuccess (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Secret_of_success) keeps removing hindi script from Sholay (and possibly other movie articles). The movies are in HINDI. You can't remove hindi script for the names of HINDI movies. Can you please tell him to stop vandalizing and possibly even give him a warning. Also, for further reference, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_with_official_status_in_India . Thanks for your time Bollyjeff. Please reply on my talk page if need be. Demetriusss (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Ra.One

Could you please explain why full stops are not needed for the cast section, as you cut them away with this edit? X.One ^SOS 10:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bollyjeff. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ra.One/archive2.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 04:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Rani Mukerji

Please look over Rani Mukerji's page. Shahid is trying to sabotage it. It's running for GA, I hope you can be of good help. - Whitneyhoustanfanforever 8 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitneyhoustanfanforever (talk • contribs)

Jeff, I am only a month old on wikipedia but I can sense what this Shshshsh has been conspiring. I am only adding reliable sources and work that has been there in the history but people have removed it like Shshshsh and it is valuable. You have made the Rani article deprived of all facts and I'm only incorporating that. You can use those stories somewhere but some people are just lazy and they revert edits without giving them a thought? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitneyhoustanfanforever (talk • contribs) 04:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey

You had no reason to strike some of your comments on User:Whitneyhoustanfanforever's talk page - the user is indeed a sock and is now indefinitely blocked. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:15, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Ra.One

Could you take a look here, go down to the bottom and see the problems regarding the critical reception section? I'd be much obliged. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 08:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Please take a look at the Casting and Filming section of the article. Is there any problem having the two images in it? Secret of success seems strangely against the addition of the photo. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:48, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, that Battersea Power Station was not mentioned in the text, so its probably not important enough to have a picture, right? BollyJeff || talk 14:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your sincere and diligent effort to revert vandalism on some of the celebrity pages that I watch. Keep up the great work. Wifione Message 15:18, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Ra.One

Bollyjeff, could you comment on the budget issue raised in the peer review? Thanks in advance. Secret of success (talk) 15:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• Of importance is the fact that you should strongly consider leaving a message (warning/welcome or other) at the talk page of the user whose edit you are rollbacking.
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

Wifione ^Message 18:17, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Your comment

What do you mean by saying "I would assume that SoS was improving the article, not trying to delist it"? Do explain, for I did not seem to understand clearly, or might have misunderstood it. The article did not deserve GA and I delisted it for that reason. Secret of success (talk) 06:21, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Bollyjeff, I suggest you explain what your comment meant. All this while you seemed to be thinking that I do not delist articles. I delisted the article because it deserved to be delisted. Was there any problem with that? If so, I suggest you put it forward. Secret of success (talk) 05:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Right, my apologies if I pressed you too much. I just wanted answers, that's all. With regards, Secret of success (talk) 17:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Chak De India...

I wonder if the time is right to push Chak De India to FA. Needs a clean up, updated refs and I think it worthy of a section that during the World Cup last year, the song became something of an anthem. But we need to find sources for it. I have a lot going on in real life so I come and go here but if you are interested in pushing it to FA let me know. -Classicfilms (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Again

Hello, Bollyjeff. You have new messages at Classicfilms's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: non-notable review for Barton Hollow

theupcoming.co.uk, not a notable review. SnapSnap 23:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You can't use just any review you found online. WP:ALBUM/REVSIT has a list of some sources of professional reviews. Also, check the Metacritic page for this particular album; with a few exceptions (Prefix Magazine in this case), most reviews are from reputable sources. Hope it was helpful. SnapSnap 18:24, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. :) SnapSnap 18:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Screen Award for Best Female Playback

Hi Bollyjeff, I'd appreciate your intervention on this page. There's a discussion going there, but I'm getting a bit fed up dealing with fans. This time a user says Alka Yagnik won the award while all reliable sources, including the official site, claim otherwise. The user's edits on the Alka Yagnik are also pretty amusing. Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:32, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey there's the source from The Tribune, which is totally reliable, and the official source mentioned Bhosle. Shahid • ^Talk2me 00:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Krrish

Ya sure. It has improved a lot, and I mean a lot, since its GAR. References 13, 30 and 37 still need justification for reliability. Also, the "home media" could be moved to release. I'll try putting up a complete review after I finish Players (film). Regards, Secret of success (talk) 05:49, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

No, just an informal review in the talk page. A peer review is not needed for such a small article. I am okay with ref 30, the reviews used seem to be authentic. Secret of success (talk) 13:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You might want to check out this. Beyond this, I think, lies the article's GA. Secret of success (talk) 14:49, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

You might want to consider expanding the lead. The soundtrack's composer needs to be included. A sequel is currently being filmed, not in development. Rekha and Naseruddin Shah deserve a mention. The production section contains info about development and casting, they need to be summarized. Date of release and no. of prints is necessary. Secret of success 10:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and the plot exceeds 800 words. Try limiting it within 700. Secret of success 10:46, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bollyjeff. You have new messages at Karthikndr's talk page.
Message added 15:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 15:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

List of highest-grossing Bollywood films

Okay, let me explain. You are obviously very well-versed with the copyright problems that the list faced, as a result of which we had to opt for a "extract" format. The "extract" format was adopted only for certain lists because those lists seemed to directly copy from Box Office India's website. However, the month-gross table is not present in the BOI website. If you carefully note, all the box office figures are from BOI.

Now, I remember Moonriddengirl as well as Mlauba (who implemented the 1,3,6,10 table format) decided to leave the month-gross table intact. The reason stated was "The said table is a creative extension of referenced box office figures which does not violate copyright". Meaning that even if the table is not there in BOI, the content of the table is from BOI and so the table is usable; in fact, its the only table we can use in full because BOI has no such listing. Of course, if what you meant was that I should add a reference for each box office figure, I can surely do that. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes there was WP:OR at the back of my head but I guessed that if an administrator (who is a part of the Wikimedia Board) found no fault, there was no problem. The list was compiled by me at a time when the entire Top 30 list was present; I had to go through the list and find the highest-grossers. Since then its been periodically updated. Yes yes, I know it sound a hell of a lot like OR but since the figures are all from BOI, and are there for everyone to see ... I don't understand what you mean by "adding a line or two about how the list was made". I can add references citing each film's box office figure. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

As I said, I went through the entire Top 30 list of highest grossers and checked the release dates of them. According to that I made the list. Its a good luck that all the months' top grossers were also top 30 grossers :P You mean I should write that in the article? "The list is derived from the Top 30 list of highest-grossing Bollywood films"? Regarding the Krrish thing, it is used even with Hollywood (List of highest-grossing films) that the LAST release to have passed the previous record is stated; if two such releases come in a single year then the higher grosser comes in the table. I doubt, however, that Krrish was the last film to beat Gadar, but I shall surely check. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:06, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Btw, Krrish netter 69.25 crores which is considerably less than Gadar's net of 75.5 crores. There is no question of Krrish having broken that record. And I checked through the BOI list, and the list in the Wikipedia one is perfectly correct. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:27, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, a perennial Hollywood-Bollywood problem. The difference in "gross" and "net gross" (simply Net) is that Gross is the actual amount a film earns at the box office. The Net is the final amount remaining after deduction of entertainment taxes. Such a difference doesn't exist in Hollywood. However, in Bollywood, we should use the "Net gross" (Net) figures alone. Gross can be added as a bonus information. To note, the worldwide theatrical revenue is "Gross", not "Net". Confusing, isn't it? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

My, so many inconsistencies! The opening week figure is completely incorrect, heavily inflated, and that's whether you take Net or Gross. Here is the list of all-time opening weeks; Krrish is ranked 26. Net - 29.67 crore, Gross - 41.56 crore. The article should have the net figures. In the same section the editor gave 75 cr first week, and then 69 cr total. Talk about contradictions! And there looks to be a lot of similar problems in the section. I'll see if I can clean up a bit. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 14:47, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The list is outdated, but the figures are accurate. I was just telling you how much Krrish earned in its first week; that amount certainly doesn't change with time :P No problem. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:10, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Well i'll try to clear the confusion :P Box Office India announces how much each film earns worldwide. That worldwide figure is a GROSS figure because its not possible to account for complex tax differences in so many countries. However, in India what matters is what the theaters and producers get at the end. And that is NET, not Gross. So, in the infobox, we should write the worldwide GROSS while everywhere else in the article, the NET values should be written. Note, there is no rule to keep out domestic GROSSES - you can add them if the figures are available, but remember that NET is always the priority. Actually, whatever BOI reports is the net; the gross is added later to the website. So yeah, you should write the 29 crore thing in the section but you should leave the 117 crore figure as it is. Hope this helps. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I am really sorry for the late reply; I was a bit busy. The actual film industry's method of calculating success is by a method called return of investment (ROI); it highlights all the revenue a film earns for the producers/distributors. That ROI model is used to calculate success of a film in the industry, so BOI works that way and ranks films by the distributor share as its the share that goes to the producers/disributors. A small example, My Name Is Khan has a higher net revenue than Housefull, but the latter's distributor share is higher. BUT, in Wikipedia, we always go by the actual figures. In case of Hollywood, its the gross; in case of Bollywood its the net. The distributor share is, again, ancillary information. I hope this helps :) ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Ra.One nominated for Featured Article

This notice is to inform you that I have nominated the article Ra.One for a featured article promotion. The nomination can be viewed here. Any comments are welcome at the article's or my talk page. Thank you. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:20, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Your AIV report

Hi Bollyjeff, could you add here a link to a guideline (which I presume exists somewhere) on what exactly a "release date" is? I've seen this argued all over, 0-day hacked leak, rushed release to respond to the hack, official release date (usually a Tuesday), released in another country before official release in main/home country, 2nd release with bonus track - so hopefully it's laid out in one place somewhere. I really think the IP you reported was acting in good faith, just misunderstanding, and you did give a pretty brief explanation mixed in with the vandalism warnings. I will keep an eye on them, and if they keep at it after a patient and full explanation, I will block them, or a AN/I or AIV report if I'm not around. Franamax (talk) 18:35, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

59th National Film Awards

With reference to the current National Awards announced, I have created an article 59th National Film Awards. As you are an experienced editor on wiki and on India film project, I would appreciate if you can review the article and provide some comments as per your convenience, it would be helpful to improve the article. Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 03:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks

WikiThanks

In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.2.110 (talk) 18:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Question

Its always good to reduce the size of the page as it loads quiet quickly. Anyways clicking on the edit option on that directs to Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Notable articles. SO, is there any problem in it? If yes, we can discuss now and decide! -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 02:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Sivaji

I don't think there was a need to undo the whole edit like you did in that article unless it was entirely controversial. Secret of success 06:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe so, but I was irritated at their continued ignoring of the message, and did not feel like weeding out what was good. BollyJeff || talk 17:16, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Expansion in list

I've been working on an expansion of the highest-grossing films by month table in the List of highest-grossing Bollywood films. Its there in my sandbox right now. Could you give your comments on it? Its not yet fully complete (some months require some additions) but just generally. Thanks, ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 05:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I think it looks nice, but is not verifiable, being comprised of a lot of original research. BollyJeff || talk 12:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

No, just like the original list (without expansion) the expanded list is derived from present lists on Box Office India. Here and all the yearly lists here were the sources, much like how the non-expanded list is derived from the same sources. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 17:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Fine, then add those two links as sources for the section. The section presently has zero sources, and needs some. BollyJeff || talk 18:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I will, once I complete the list :) Yes, the section lacks refs; I'll have to see to the other sections too. Cheers. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 08:18, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Would you mind taking a look at the expanded section here? I have added references and a more detailed explanation as well. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award Thanks for your recent contributions! 67.80.64.128 (talk) 22:57, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Krrish_3#Title

I don't think we need this section at all, do we? It barely has any content, and is rather immaturely written (the stuff about Rakesh Roshan clarifying it with two sites). The rest can be put under the production section, without a sub-section (due to lack of content), until expansion. What do you say? Secret of success 06:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

When it is abundantly clear that this really the title, like when theatrical posters come out, yes, but it doesn't hurt to have it there now; it's a stub article anyway. Given that people have been changing the title EVERY DAY, I really think it should stay there for a while. If you think it is "immaturely written", well you are free to change that, but it just paraphrases what the sources said. BollyJeff || talk 11:45, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

What good is it for two sentences to have a section? Does something like "Rakesh Roshan clarified with rediff blah blah...Rakesh Roshan also clarified with Bollywood Hungama" sound uh..normal? Completely against WP:NOT. Like I said, we can keep only the "casting" as a sub-section and remove the headers of all the other sections (music, title, etc.) and merge it at the beginning of the "Production", right? Secret of success 12:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The first sentence says Hrithik, not Rakesh, so I think it's good to have them both. But, do what ever makes you happy, okay? BollyJeff || talk 12:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

And what is the need to take that tone, pray? Secret of success 14:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

It amazes me how you get so wound up over seemingly little things. I don't know why you had to remove my addition, but whatever. This is not life and death stuff, its only a hobby for me. BollyJeff || talk 14:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I fail to comprehend which comment of mine gave an impression that I got wound up. What addition did I remove, please be explicit? I only bustled the contents above, as far as I can see. But no matter what, I can tell you, I never intended to avert this conversation, and I believe this is a result of a misunderstanding by you, as I have hardly seen any bad faith assumptions exerted from your side in the past. I hope you too feel the same way about me. With good faith, Secret of success 17:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Krrish series

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 16:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Rani's GA

I know right! And to think that she was termed "The Queen of Bollywood" a few years back. Smarojit (talk) 10:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Do not be a jerk by undoing something without having the correct knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ram ganguly (talk • contribs) 13:04, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Modest Barnstar
		You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 67.80.64.128 (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

congrats

congrats on ur recent qualifications. just one question: how do u get awards for every small work done by you? whereas i haven't got any despite my handwork in articles like Parasakthi, Pudhiya Paravai, Thiruvilayadal, Uthama Puthiran, Alibabavum 40 Thirudargalum and Kalyana Parisu? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:44, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Star award

Thank u very much for that award, I'll continue to work better. (I hope u checked the edit history of those articles, to see what I've been doing!) Kailash29792 (talk) 02:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes I did. BollyJeff || talk 02:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Screenshots

So what exactly is the consensus of the discussion? I guess it has to apply to Farhan Akhtar as well. Secret of success (talk) 15:31, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Gone. If you have an issue, please take it up at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Film_screenshots_in_actor_BLPs. I was told by some administrators there that the pics are not appropriate. The reasons are given there. BollyJeff || talk 15:57, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Images

I agree that the images in the Rani Mukerji, Aishwarya Rai article don't contribute anything significant to the subject matter. But what about the images being used in several other articles such as Kareena Kapoor, Preity Zinta etc? Should they also be removed, then? Smarojit (talk) 15:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Gone. BollyJeff || talk 15:41, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

For god's sake, please don't immediately indulge in mass removal just because you "feel" there is a consensus. Until the discussion ends, keep it as a standstill. I am reverting some of your edits for that reason UNTIL the discussion gets over. Secret of success (talk) 13:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey mate, she definitely has. ;-) Honestly, the images do not matter to me as much as the quality of the article, but I sincerely believe it does satisfy criterion #8 because no free images could show her during this period, arguably the most successful of her career, as opposed to the many other images you've removed. I find that it is irreplaceable, but then when consensus is reached, I'll be more than willing to accept the verdict, though I don't think it can automatically apply to all articles. Hope you're doing well. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I feel that the screenshot of Vidya in the The Dirty Picture needs to be incorporated in her article. Isn't that why a non-free image is for? To represent a completely different look of an actor; and nothing can be as "different" as Vidya Balan playing Silk. Smarojit (talk) 04:50, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you two guys bring up these examples on the questions page, to see what they say about them? And thank you both for being nice about it. I am only trying to do what is right. BollyJeff || talk 11:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Well I've known you long enough on this project to understand that everything you're doing is not without a reason and is only done to avoid any problems in the future. You have my respect for doing this. Right now I'm a little busy, will try to take part in the discussion when I have more time. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham...

It would be great if we could work together on the article. I have been trying to gather sources for quite some time; and would definitely do with some help. Thanks a lot for your initiative. Cheers. Smarojit (talk) 08:38, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. And yes, I have been a bit busy due to my exams, but I shall start work on the production section as soon as I can. Smarojit (talk) 05:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I am still working on the "Filming" section, so I should be done with that in a couple of days. I guess I'll start work on the "Themes" section soon, where the journal will surely come handy. Do you happen to have any more book sources? Because if we find some good books then we can include a lot more information! Smarojit (talk) 04:56, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Yep, all that will go in the Themes section, which I will work on next. I am also going to include a DVD Feature: The making of K3G next. And I also have my exams to give, so I guess I'll do all that when my paper gets over. Phew! :-D Smarojit (talk) 16:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I think we need some more information in the filming section. Do you know where we can get that from? Smarojit (talk) 04:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your Signature Breaks Templates

The two pipes (||) in your signature break templates. The pipe is part of the template syntax, and when you use your signature in a template, the parser reads the pipe as indicating the next parameter in the template. You should either remove the pipes, or replace them with the pipe template {{pipe}}, to stop them breaking the template syntax.

For an example see Talk:Krrish. Notice in {{GA nominee}} your signature is cut off half way, and the timestamp is coloured green? While this might seem minor, it does create problems when User:GA bot tries to parse the template. I expect that this may have affected other templates as well. --Chris 07:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hi, i want to take a kind attention on one of article named Divya Bharti. It has been developed by keeping grammar and all those required stuff.will you please take look to article?.also please leave your suggestion to make it good article.please do reply.thnksRavishankar (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hello Ravishankar, i saw yours and another User:Rpaigu's edits on the article. But i have reverted those. You should not remove the "citation needed" tags placed on the article without providing the citations. Also most important, this is ENCYCLOPEDIA. Not some fan forum. Hence stuff like "her film roles along with her screen persona contributed to a change in the concept of a Hindi film heroine", " Bharti was also an expert driver", "With her parents' permission, she signed up for both films", "That was the green signal for other film makers to enter the fray." and what not, should not be here. You should learn how these articles should be. You might wanna go through some better articles about Indian actresses. Try Dimple Kapadia, Preity Zinta, Vidya Balan, etc. Also go through what Reliable Sources are. IMDB, Flicker, enotes.com, gundogtimes.com, popcorn.oneindia.com are not reliable sources. In case of doubt feel free to ask me or Bollyjeff or any other experienced editors. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

thnks for your attention on my edits. will definitely follow the encyclopedic rule for further editing.keep guiding meMumbaifreaks (talk) 06:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)