Talk:Shah Rukh Khan

This is not a forum for discussing Shah Rukh Khan. Such messages may be deleted. Please discuss the article instead. Thank you.

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

182.178.0.58 (talk) 19:32, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pakistani sapoter

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Review notes

From this verion:

• Khan started his career in theatre, and he appeared in several television series in the late 1980s.
  • The sentence is phrased rather awkwardly, but more importantly, the Career section of the article begins with television, not mentioning a career starting in theatre.
• WP:NBSP needs review throughout.
• Switch in tense:
  • ... the Government of India honoured him ... the Government of France has awarded him ...
• Review throughout needed for "Currently" and missing as of dates, sample:
  • Khan is currently co-chairman of the motion picture
    • Should be something like, As of <year>, Khan is co-chairman ...
• Image captions that are full sentences should end in punctuation.
• Please review MOS:CURRENCY-- the first time the reader encounters the currency symbol, they need to be told what it is. Also deal with conversion and as of dates. Also, the first time the $ sign is used, the reader should be told if it is US$.

I will review it. BollyJeff | talk 01:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I am not sure exactly what you are looking for here. $ was shown as US$ the first time (and every time it's in a conversion template). It looks okay to me. BollyJeff | talk 01:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

• "Khan receives a large amount of media coverage in India, ... " D'oh. What film star doesn't? Does the source say this, or is it original research?

Yes, I think even by film star standards he gets a tremendous amount of press. I believe we say similar things about Pitt and Jolie.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:07, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Please remove the scroll box from the citations-- that invalidates them on mirrors, etc. I haven't looked at citation formatting since they are in a scrollbox.
• I picked one section to look at prose: Too much going on in this sentence:
  • Khan starred in seven films in 1995, the first of which was opposite Salman Khan and Kajol in Rakesh Roshan's melodramatic thriller Karan Arjun, which became the second-highest grossing film of the year in India.
• Too much going on in this next sentence, and why is it called his "release", when he was an actor. Did he produce it?
  • His most significant release that year was Aditya Chopra's directorial debut, the romance Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge, in which he played a young Non-resident Indian (NRI) who falls in love with Kajol's character during a trip across Europe.
• "Initially displayed antipathy"? Simplify ... was ambivalent, or something to that effect. Sentence is awkward.
  • Khan initially displayed antipathy towards portraying the role of a lover, but this film is credited with establishing him as a "romantic hero".
    • So, based on the first three sentences of one section, I suggest calling in Eric or RHM22.

RHM22 did a copyedit, and chose not to alter those 3 sentences, but I have changed two of them. I believe the term "his release" is very common for actor articles, is it not? Certainly on every one that I have been involved with. BollyJeff | talk 01:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

• ... In 1996, all four of Khan's releases failed critically and commercially, ... why?

I don't know why; it's just a fact to show that not all is roses here. BollyJeff | talk 01:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Just a start: I do not believe the prose or technicals (MOS) are at an FA-readiness level just yet. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I have addressed most of this now, and it has been copy edited by others as well. BollyJeff | talk 01:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Informal review

Hello, everyone. My name is RHM22 (talk), and I'm conducting an informal review and copyedit of this article by request. I have very little experience in the area of Indian cinema, so I will be able to assess whether or not the article is navigable from a novice perspective. I will add questions and comments here when I have them.

• These two sentences are very confusing: "Khan's first starring role was in Lekh Tandon's television series Dil Dariya, for which he began shooting in 1988. Because of its production delays, the 1989 series Fauji became his television debut." Is Fauji the same series as Dil Darya with a different title, or is it an entirely different work? Either way, it should be reworded for clarity, because the reader doesn't know which "if" is referring to.-RHM22 (talk) 20:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

• "Baazigar, in which Khan played the "consummate anti-hero"," this needs an attribution in-text. In other words, it should say something like "Baazigar, in which Khan played the "consummate anti-hero" according to X,"-RHM22 (talk) 23:14, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

• "India Today described him as an "energiser bunny", who "just goes on and on and on"." I would probably delete this as lacking relevance.-RHM22 (talk) 04:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Several times now, I've encountered the word "appreciated" used. I understand what it means, but it sounds a little unusual to me. Is it British or Indian English usage? If not, maybe something like "praised," "reacted positively to" or "reviewed favorably" would be better. Please ignore this note if such is common expression in British or Indian English.-RHM22 (talk) 05:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Why are the production costs for Devdas given in U.S. dollars but not Indian rupees? It should be consistent with the rest of the articles, preferably using the INR conversion template.-RHM22 (talk) 04:18, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

• "To provide an accurate portrayal of a suffer without disparagement..." This sentence doesn't make sense. It seems as though "suffer" is being used as a noun here, which is incorrect. Maybe "sufferer" was meant?-RHM22 (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

• "Although Khan's "unidimensional character" was criticised..." This needs an in-text attribution.-RHM22 (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

• Can the last sentence of 2010–present be updated?-RHM22 (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

• "In addition to his pre-film career television appearances..." I don't really like this wording, but I'm not sure how it could be improved.-RHM22 (talk) 21:51, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

That's all that I have for now. I didn't check the references, but the prose seems mostly good, in my opinion. There may be some assorted MOS issues. Additionally, there is some content that some reviewers might view as trivial or unnecessary.-RHM22 (talk) 22:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the terrific copy edit. I will see what I can do about your comments here. BollyJeff | talk 23:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Finished. BollyJeff | talk 01:03, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad to have been of assistance, and I hope that my edits were useful. I think it looks pretty good now, but of course, more eyes will be useful.-RHM22 (talk) 03:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Another informal PR

This is in pretty good shape already, although a good copy edit is probably needed to get the prose sharp enough to pass FAC.

• There's a few places where "Khan" is used which could be swapped for "he", just to lessen the repetition a little.
• There's a few places where there are three or four cites supporting something that doesn't look like it needs that much. Make sure that you trim down on the excesses without leaving anything vulnerable to challenge

Early life

• There's quite a lot on his family background that I'm not sure merits inclusion

Specifically? I would rather include properly source information now, to stave off editors from re-adding poorly sourced info later. There tends to be some "he is from my town" activity on these types articles about very popular Indian people. BollyJeff | talk 13:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

1988–92

• "which earned him considerable recognition": I'd add "according to ..." after that, just to be safe. (or strike the claim altogether as the next sentence makes it clear that the programme led to other work).
• "but he was not interested in film acting at the time": anything in the sources on why not?

1995–98

• "established him as an icon of romance in India": definitely some inline attribution needed for such a big claim

1999–2003

• "What is "a sub-company"?
• "Subsequently diagnosed with a prolapsed disc, he attempted multiple alternative therapies. None provided a permanent solution to the injury, which caused him severe pain while shooting several of his films" Should be reworked (possibly as one sentence broken with a semi colon), as it reads awkwardly as two.

I hope these help, but before a stab at FAC, I'd get a good copy edit on the article to iron out some of the less fluid sentences. I've not delved into the intricacies of the references, or seen whether the more technical niceties of the MoS need examining, as I'd focus on the prose first to get that right before you go onto other bits. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 10:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @SchroCat:, it helps, but I have a question. This article has been reviewed and copy edited many times already, but it still manages to some up short to some eyes. How does one go about finding someone capable enough to get it to the professional level needed for FAC? I am not an English professor. Should I send it back to the GOCE again, or is there another avenue to seek help? BollyJeff | talk 12:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Cheers @SchroCat:, much appreciated. Yeah the prose is something people keep mentioning, I've looked over it, so has RHM22. We need more pairs of eyes as Indopug puts it to really look at this and help copyedit it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2015

Thank You all the wikipedian to write an article about the famous superstar Shahrukh Khan.....By the way,as a regular reader of wikipedia, i want to edit this and add a few words that praises him alot.Please help me for performing this action.Again, thank you!! 117.194.252.179 (talk) 12:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I've declined this request. As the template states, you need to post after the template "a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". I would also note that "words that praises him alot" will need citation by reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

He doesn't need any more praise; that will only hurt the article. BollyJeff | talk 12:27, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Good source

I just came across a good source on Khan's career pre-1995 here. Bollyjeff you may want to use it. Cheers! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:56, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2015

I would like to write up something on Shahrukh khan as many things of his past movies and life are not stated here I know sooo much about him so if you dont mind i would like to be able to write something SMKUniverse (talk) 19:57, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 20:02, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The article is considered quite large already, whcih was an issue during the featured article test. There are other sub-articles that may already contain what you want. Please see Shah Rukh Khan filmography, Shah Rukh Khan in the media, and List of awards and nominations received by Shah Rukh Khan. If the information is not there, then please state exactly what you would like to add, with sources to back it up. BollyJeff | talk 20:07, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Edinburgh university

Maybe a mention of his honorary degree from Edinburgh Alexis Ivanov (talk) 06:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

It's in Shah Rukh Khan in the media. Doesn't seem relevant here. BollyJeff | talk 12:23, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

perhaps the world's biggest movie star?

flagging a WP:POV issue here, third sentence in the lead reads: "Khan has been described by Steven Zeitchik of the Los Angeles Times as 'perhaps the world's biggest movie star'." This guy is an entertainment news staff writer for the LA Times, pretty much a minor journalist of limited notability. Should it really be given prominence in the lead? It reads to me like promotional copy, and i don't believe the quote is appropriate for the lead. Are there any objections to its removal? Semitransgenic _talk. 18:14, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

It passed the scrutiny of both FAC and TFA reviews with this sentence in there. Why are you getting so upset now? I could probably find many more sources to back this up, but I am kind of bust now. BollyJeff | talk 19:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

not upset at all, saw the article on wiki front page, by chance, and was surprised to see what is essentially promotional POV in the opening paragraph of an FA. let's keep it in context. For example, if this Zeitchik guy said, "Robert De Niro is perhaps the worlds most famous actor" or, "Laurence Oliver is perhaps the greatest actor to have ever set foot on earth," or any number of similar questionable assertions, would we run with it in the lead like that? I don't think so. A sourced consensus statement, one that represented the opinion of a group of notable film critics, would be a different matter. Semitransgenic _talk. 20:07, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Does anyone else have an opinion on this, please? BollyJeff | talk 22:05, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

To me, it does look like promotional. There's not a universal consensus for "perhaps the world's biggest". Also, the world "perhaps" sounds a bit unencyclopedic for the lead section, even if it's a direct quote. Fideliosr (talk) 13:13, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Semitransgenic, but it can stay unless someone can find a better source/quote. (How do you measure the size of a star, anyway? Box office receipts? Fan surveys?) Brutannica (talk) 16:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

if the qualifier for "biggest" equals net worth, or revenue generated per anum, we need it presented in that context, however, it says already that he's "one of the richest actors in the world," but not "the richest actor in the world" so that's out. If it's a question of fame, we are suggesting, in terms of "biggest," that he is the world's most famous actor, again, dubious, and especially if based on that one quote. Semitransgenic _talk. 19:19, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations to all the contributors to this featured article. You deserve a lot of applause, recognition and appreciation. What a wonderful article.

  Bfpage |leave a message  09:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Additional content

Great article, but I'm actually kind of surprised there isn't more. There doesn't seem to be a sense for who SRK is as a person. What's his personality like? What do his costars think of him? What about some evaluations of his acting in general? I realize some of this might seem like fluff, but most other actor articles have it and for someone as famous as Shah Rukh Khan I would expect it. Brutannica (talk) 16:28, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Vital article

Also, why isn't this considered a vital article? I would think he's more important/visible/famous than, say, Ian McKellen. Brutannica (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC)