Talk:Shilpa Shetty/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Personal life

Has she had a surgical operation on her nose - viz a 'bob'? It looks very different both in profile and from the front to the one she had in her early 'film' apearance - much more 'Westernised'. Reference required. A quick input: Shilpa Shetty was NOT born in Tamilnadu, she is NOT a Tamilian. She was born in Mangalore, Karnataka!.

You say she is a black belt in Karate - was made up to make her appear multi-faceted for film work, but she isn't - ask her to chop a breeze block on live tv, and unless its a stage prop thats already sawn thru, she wont be able to do it - its like all these languages she is supposedly fluent in too - utter lies I'm afraid -

I removed that section until it can be replaced by one with verifiable references. After the anon described her supposed current boyfriend as "future business tycoon", I realized that this could just be some deranged fan inserting himself as her date. Fans have done this in other Indian cinema articles. Zora 11:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

To Do

Well I did my thing as best as I could. Feel free to improve on it further, I've left some tips in the To-Do list about things that I couldn't do tonight. I'll probably be back to writeup all that stuff but hey, we see how it goes.

One thing I can't figure out is that dratted contents menu, it just won't move. Figured it out, it's hanging off that Cleanup Taskforce tag. Ekantik ^talk 06:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Big Brother Edits

Thanks to all editors who have been updating the page according to Shilpa's entrance into Celebraty Big Brother, but could I also ask everyone to pay attention to WP:MOS? The recent edits are good but the information is jumbled up. For example, the Awards section needs to be placed further down and above the Filmography section.

As an aside, the Mafia Links controversy is very long and I'll consider making a separate article for that, leaving just a brief description of it on this page. Anyway thanks very much. Ekantik ^talk 01:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, please leave in the Mafia link for the moment - its fair comment (unlike other things being discussed sadly). A friend works at C4 says huge number of calls to keep her in the house were made from call centres in India, paid for by ????? Ofcom have locations of multiple callers - OK OK, some people may have made 3 or 4 calls each, but who in their right mind would made 1000+ in under an hour?? Physically impossible! Leave it in, as its interesting and really gives a valid alternative perspective on her 'respectable' background in India.

I was also fascinated that she seemed to know Keith Vaz so well!!! Explains the hype with Gordon Brown in India - Newsnight reporters who actually live there couldnt find anyone who knew anything about the controversy on the day - which made the footage of a group of Indian men (perhaps) being paid to hold a protest banner and wave their fists at a camera in 'outrage' at her treatment, seems a bit , shall we say, stagemanaged?

Removed jati, advertising

I removed the mention of jati. Unless we have a quote from her saying that she is XXX and proud of her jati, we're pigeonholing her by caste, from outside. WP should not be complicit in the Indian caste system.

I also removed all material re being a "brand ambassador". That's advertising and WP doesn't do advertising. I rather suspect that we have a few advertising people at work here on WP, making sure that their corporate clients are mentioned. Zora 23:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually I was reponsible for doing much of the running around for information to add in this article. :) I don't mind the removal of references to jati, but the stuff about her being a brand ambassador of Romanov Vodka is well-sourced and is supported by RS. It represents an event in her career much like other stars may endorse Pepsi or whatever. I'll ask for an RFC. Ekantik ^talk 02:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I had a look around and I couldn't find anything in WP policies & Guidelines against mention of a subject's endorsement of whatever. The closest thing I could find is the 3rd point here: WP:NOT#SOAP. It's clearly about advertising a product in itself and doesn't say anything about whether an article subject's endorsement of something cannot be mentioned. Here are some other examples I could find:

• Britney Spears
• Beyoncé
• Pink

etc etc etc... Ekantik ^talk 02:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

What community someone belongs to is important in their upbringing. Iyer and Shetty are two different clans and are notable. The "i am XXX" is only required for categorization of people by caste, a practice I led a crusade to end.Bakaman 03:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps so, but why did you remove the Romanov Vodka/Limca information again? Ekantik ^talk 03:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Sigh Zora, you couldnt even get a discussion going on at Village pump, let alone a consensus about mentioning caste. Caste system and caste themselves are diferent. Regardles of what you think, most South Asians classify you by your caste. Call that racist/casteist/feudal or whatever you like, but caste unfortunately is the primary identifying factor for most Indians. Trust me i know better...

P.S Try discussing this with any Indian editor you trust (if there is any atall) अमेय आर्यन DaBrood^© 09:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother Information

Please, I've put a lot of work into this article (smartening up especially for the Big Brother entry) and I'd really appreciate if editors did not remove information willy-nilly that effort was put in to find. This is what the article looked like before I started working on it, and I'm sure everyone will agree that it has been much improved. Not wanting to blow my own trumpet but I was responsible for the majority of the improvement, running around researching sources, etc. So please take the time to consider if your removal of information is meant to benefit the article. I've already got the article semi-protected because of malicious vandalism.

As for Big Brother, I'm perfectly aware that whatever she does on "Day 2" (and the rest of her time for that matter) is superficial for the article, but bear in mind that this particular section has been tagged as current event with rapidly changing information. The idea is to gradually build up the section so that a complete record (with full references) will be kept to describe her time in Big Brother and the notable incidents thereof. So again, please, take the time to consider if your removal of information is helping or harming this article in the long run. Thanks. Ekantik ^talk 03:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! There's a huge amount of vandalism going on at the moment on the pages of all the BB contestants; I've watchlisted this page, and I'll keep an eye on your edits if I need to revert anything else. Squeezeweasel 20:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Picture

I don't think that the screenshot of her in Big Brother is very good quality, but it's worth keeping until a better variation can be found. I'm going to revert back to the smarter Romanov picture and move the BB picture down into the appropriate section. It's really a horrible picture which may be deleted soon since it has a delete tag on it anyway. Ekantik ^talk 14:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

We don't need two image; one is more than enough. A bad quality image of Shetty sitting in a chair doesn't improve the article at all. J Di ^talk 14:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Fine with me. But I'll keep my eyes open for a good shot, as I'm already doing. Feel free to remove it if you like, although there's no restrictions on image use as such (providing they don't take over the whole place obviously). Soon I'm gonna work on expanding the career section. Whaddya know, this might be a feature article someday! Ekantik ^talk 14:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I've already removed it twice, I'm not removing it again. Also, fair use images should not be used in excess and their use should not violate the fair use criteria. J Di ^talk 15:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah I see, the edit history only shows you removing it once so I didn't know. Ekantik ^talk 15:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Chronological order

I think that standard practice is chronological order, not anti-chronological orders, as is used now among others for awards and filmography. Andries 22:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. ^talkGiler S 12:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Remove vodka ads on sight

Someone keeps reinserting advertising hype re her appearances for a vodka company. I suspect it's an advertising person. Could the other editors PLEASE help me to keep advertising out of WP? Zora 18:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Zora, please read the above sections of this talk page. The information about Romanov Vodka is not advertising and is perfectly OK for a BLP article. It is perfectly alright for a WP BLP article to mention a star's endorsements of a product, as on the articles of other celebrities exampled above.

By the way, I was the one who did all the running around to find the information. Ekantik ^talk 01:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Springcleaning

I copyedited the article, removing more advertising, speculations re Big Brother, day-by-day reports on Big Brother (not appropriate here), and reduced the section on her parents' legal problems to the short para that is all it really deserved. I also added a sentence to put the whole fracas into perspective. Involvement with underworld figures might seem bizarre and evil to readers outside India, but for Mumbai residents and especially the film world, dealing with gangs -- and dealing with gang extortion -- is a daily affair. Zora 19:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't agree, this is not at all a springcleaning. How could it be a "spring cleaning" when I am the who added 99% of the stuff from this? Please read the above sections of this talk page: The Big Brother section has been tagged content will change rapidly so it is providing up-to-date information that will eventually be summarised in a short paragraph or two when she leaves the show, explaining the notable things that she did which will be properly referenced. In the meantime it is well-sourced and not at all speculative. This is not a question of owning the article, but a question of responsible editing.

The information about the Mafia links has to stay in because it is an ongoing controversy (a formal trial is due to start) which may warrant that section being tagged with a "current event" sign, we shall see. Although I agree that too much has been written about it (again, see talk page above) and the entire issue may deserve it's own article. I am currently looking into the possibility of this in view of the upcoming trial and most of it will be moved to the new article page if necessary. In the meantime I have taken great pains to get the information well-sourced so there is absolutely nothing wrong with it in regards to defamation vis-a-vis WP:BLP. It can be rewritten, sure, but you took away a hell of a lot of content and substituted it with a book reference that wasn't properly referenced.

I'm aftraid I didn't agree with your rewriting of the Career section either. It needs to be properly expanded (who removed the expansion tag?) with proper information that I am busily looking for, not just whether her films were flops or not. See Tom Cruise for an example of a good career discussion. It'skind of hard trying to dig stuff up on the Net about films gone by so that is why I am looking through my old editions of Stardust and Cineblitz for information. Ekantik ^talk 01:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

In spite of humungous content removals based on superficial reasons I think some good edits were made, and I have restored these along with proper copy-editing. Ekantik ^talk 02:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Angelina Jolie?

Was she ever as big as Angelina Jolie? or is it just nonsense? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.153.117.134 (talk) 19:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

I believe the reference was "Indian Angelina Jolie" though I can't remember who said it, Davina/Big Brother or Shilpa herself. However, she is definitely a Bollywood star. Ekantik ^talk 02:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

On Big Brother Shilpa said that she had been compared in India to Angelina Jolie because of an action movie she had made. 84.43.29.110 20:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Dean Morrison

Dubious tripe

"After Shetty had accidentally undercooked a chicken" - can a citation be provided that it was accidental and the text needs NPOVing. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Can a citation be provided that it wasn't accidental??? Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty" - dubious tag removed. Bassophile 21:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

why does someone who represents PETA have anything to do with cooking a chicken? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.225.130.194 (talk) 01:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Are all people who are a member of PETA veggies??? Bassophile 10:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

It was stated on the channe4 big brother website at the time that the person that switched on the "oven" in fact switched on the grill instead. Therefore the chicken was grilled by mistake rather than oven cooked. Shi;pa put it in for the correct time so she was not actually at fault as she asumed the person that switched on the "oven" had done so correctly.

Ill have to find some references but that is what happened.

Chulcoop 21:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Height

Once again... Changed her height to 5 9 instead of 5 10, as stated on her official website. Darkfearytales 19:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Odd... It had changed back to 5 9 when I went to do it... sorry all.

What official website? She hasn't got one. The 5'10 information comes from IMDb and is a more reliable source than a fansite (shilpa-shetty.com). Ekantik ^talk 01:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Right, ok, sure. IMDB is more reliable of course!!! How silly of me....

Caste, notable roles, vodka advertising

Ekantik, I left the long and boring legal controversy section -- we'll argue about that later.

I removed the claim that she belonged to a certain caste. WP doesn't do caste, any more than we do apartheid. If you can get a quote from her saying that she's an XXX and proud of it, we can put that in the article. But no one else should label her.

I removed the notable roles. That's POV. That's someone's personal selection of favorite movies. Someone else might pick a different list of movies. "Notable roles" should be removed wherever added.

I removed all references to vodka. WP is not here for advertising. I have been here for three years and I have been removing advertising every day. I'll remove it here too, and in any article where I find it. That is WP policy. A celebrity appearing in ads is simply not notable. Not interesting. Zora 06:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

You continue to misrepresent consensus and the effect of communities and clans rather than the four pronged jati system.Bakaman 15:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

If she's proud to be XXX, let her say so. Otherwise, it's a pernicious (and unreferenced) attempt to promote the caste system on WP. Zora 20:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

• Caste - ridiculous argument. Unless there is specifically something about ethnic references on WP policies there is no reason for the information not to be added. There is nothing at all about caste. Bunt is not a caste, and consensus must be gained.
• Vodka - another ridiculous argument, the information is not advertising, not to mention that there is nothing in WP policies and guidelines that rules against mentioning endorsements that a living person has done.
• Notable roles - I am not the one adding this information and I really don't care about it, it just makes the Infobox look good. However, I will argue that those roles are notable because she has won awards for them. If the same rationale is applied on other BLP articles then it can be applied here.

Feel free to seek RFCs about these things. I already have done. Ekantik ^talk 00:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thankyou for deleting the 'Racist Controversy' article, as there was no pont in adding it, but the Bigrother article is highly acceptable -Zora —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.189.251 (talk) 20:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

Why is someone adding my name to an anonIP post? Zora 20:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Removals

Please stop removing content about caste, vodka sponsorships etc before providing rationale on this talk-page. I do not appreciate my hard work being removed on superficial grounds from non-existent Wikipedia policies.

Show us where in WP policies this information is not to be mentioned, and see previous discussions on this talk page for further arguments as I do not appreciate having to repeat myself all the time. This article has now been semi-protected. Ekantik ^talk 04:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I have provided the rationale and you have completely ignored me. I will not let WP be used to promote the caste system or provide advertising space. I imagine that most editors would agree with me, if they knew of the dispute. The fact that most of the editors working on this article are Indian, and moreover that they seem to hold views not accepted by all Indians, is purely accidental.

Indian editors keep trying to sneak caste IDs into WP. I'll see about getting a policy that excludes them unless there is a reliably sourced quote from the subject saying that he or she belongs to that caste -- to be reproduced, in toto, in the article. If the subject wants to buy into that system, that's his/her choice. If he/she doesn't, then it should not be imposed.

If you wanted to say, in one sentence, that she was a "brand ambassador" (which is an Indianism, BTW) for a vodka company, that's pointless, but tolerable. Gushing description of her love for vodka, and prominent mention of the company name (in several places!) is pure and simple shilling for booze.

It strikes me as indicative of the late growth of mass advertising in India that the Indian editors would consider celebrity endorsements as newsworthy or notable. Editors from "the first world" have been bombarded with celebrity endorsements for so long that it's just noise. Vile advertising noise, to be blanked out if at all possible. Putting it in Wikipedia, which is explicitly non-commercial, is a gross error in judgment. Zora 05:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I just edited the Vidya Balan article and included a quote in which she states that she is an Iyer. Personal claim, sourced quote. The article doesn't say that she IS an Iyer, just quotes her as saying so. Zora 05:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I haven't seen any rationale except for "WP doesn't do caste". Where does it say that in WP policies and guidelines? If you want to seek a policy then that is another matter, but for now there is nothing that prevents caste/community being mentioned, nor is there any reasonable rationale for why it can't be mentioned.

The information about "brand ambassador" is quoted in the reference, why is there an objection? OK, so the company is mentioned twice (even though the second references shows Sami Lala as the president of the company) so I can remove one. Quotes from Shilpa are referenced to the article, there is no reason to remove them, but they can be. See? All that was needed was a simple rewrite if you had objections, rather than blanking the section altogether.

As for your views on advertising, there is a 'major difference between advertising on Wikipedia (advertising your own company/brand/service) on Wikipedia and mentioning celebrities' endorsements on their articlespace. The former is forbidden for obvious reasons, the latter isn't. Britney Spears, Beyoncé and others have mention of their endorsements and there is no reason according to WP:BLP why they cannot be.

I don't work on those articles, but if I did, I'd remove any commercial hype. I think that the editors who work on the celebrity articles are lot more tolerant of hype than the editors who work on clothing, say, or Hawaiian history. The majority of editors are hyper-vigilant about commercial links or anything that smacks of advertising. As I said, I've spent three years removing ads from WP. Zora 07:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, thanks for reminding me. I just found an excellent reference for Bunt and will insert it now. Apart from that, I think it is ridiculous to expect every single person to stand up and say "I am whatever" in order for it to be sourced. Ekantik ^talk 06:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

So, who declare who is an XXX and who isn't? As I understand it, there's no central authority and there can be strong disagreements as to who is entitled to call him/herself an XXX. When I was doing research for the Rajput article (most of which has probably been removed by now, by the Rajput chauvinists) I found that there were villages or clans who claimed to be Rajputs and other families that sniffed at them as fakes. It's verifiable if someone says in public that "I am XXX". That doesn't imply that other people will accept him/her as XXX, or that WP believes that he/she is XXX. Zora 07:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

It is not upto anyone to decide who is who. What matters on Wikipedia is citation and reliable sources. If a reliable source is cited to say XXX is XXX, that's the end of it. Anything else is a violation of WP:NOR. Ekantik ^talk 03:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Whatever addition that is made to the article should conform to Wikipedia's policies of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. If the reliable sources present the facts about her caste and the languages she speaks, we need to mention those facts, without leading ourselves as hagiographers. And Zora, could you cut down on targetting Indian editors part, please? Try to concentrate on the article, rather than making blanket accusations on our characters. Tragicomedian 08:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

So basically zora seems to be going at it alone, and the BLP thing applies to categorization not a wikilink to her family last name. Wikipedia is not your personal crusade for what indian pages should be, nor am I categorizing. We came to a consensus at WT:INB to remove caste categories and merely add a link to the community they belong to or listify the community members. Most editors didnt agree with you even at the village pump, nor will they agree with you at INB. Tragic speaks it best about "blanket accusations" though I'm sure he will soon be denounced as an "Indian imperialist/casteist".Bakaman 14:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I personally don't care if Zora is the founder of Wikipedia, because after 3 years of editing one would imagine knowing all of the important policies like the back of one's hand. I don't agree with the reasoning about advertising and/or caste especially since there is nothing in the relevant policies to support such contentions. Making drastic edits base don non-existent policies could be construed as vandalism and at the very least shows disrespect to other editors who may have done a lot of work to find out the information. Ekantik ^talk 03:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit

Suggestions: In the racism controversy section, where it says she speculated that she was the victim of racism, could you write "Shetty for the first time speculated that she may be the victim of racism" and then put what she actually said to the other housemate: "It is, in a way, I'm telling you." It has been misquoted in a lot of areas and should be cleared up. Also, when you write "later denied it," it makes it sound like she denied she speculated at all which isn't what she did. She acknowledged she's picked up a vibe, based on what's been said to her face, but appears (at time of writing) not to want to use the word "racist". ShillShell 08:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Why I find difficult to understand is, why is every little detail about the racist incidents we saw on television listed on the page there? Is it appropriate for this page? Why not take it to the UK Bigbrother page? Tragicomedian 08:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, those are only allegations now. BBC reports confirms the comments, but until it is declared by a competent authority, we cannot term any person as a racist, can we? Tragicomedian 09:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Please assume Good faith. Shetty has been in the diary room to clarify things the way she sees them at the time of writing. Of course, she doesn't have the "benefit" of knowing all the things that have been said behind her back like viewers do. Therefore she knows not what viewers have seen, but from her take on it at this time she has appeared willing to give one of the bullies "the benefit of the doubt." ShillShell 09:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

How did I not assume good faith. I have a right to discuss here, don't I? :) We can only go as per Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources. Also we should not put libel against people on this website, without it being confirmed. See WP:LIVING. Tragicomedian 09:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggested the changes above in light of events up to the time of writing. ShillShell 09:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Everyone has a good point to make, but please bear in mind that the section will eventually be pruned and moved to the 'Controversies' section when it's all over. As it is a current event and as Shilpa is one of the central characters in the event, I don't see any bar to "a lot of information" and so on but I would appreciate responsible editing of the section. As a matter of fact I think that the topic deserves its own dedicated article since it is definitely an event in itself. But eventually the whole section here will be summarised in a paragraph or two. Thanks. Ekantik ^talk 03:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the editprotected tag as the edit appears to no longer be required please clarify and relist if its needed. Gnangarra 14:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the racism section is very neutral.

--Freetown 02:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Why no mention of the use of the phrase 'White Trash'?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't say anything about her argument with Jade, when she also said some offensive things... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 15:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you list the things you say were "offensive" that could also "neutralise the racism controversy section on the article if included" and then we can see if they can be included? ShillShell 16:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The only things I recall her saying was, after being shouted and yelled at with profanities, Shetty said "You need some elocution lessons" and "I don't use that kind of language." After more vitriol against her, Shetty finally said "You know what, your claim to fame is this, good for you." I think these statements can and should be included as they were A) Advisory and B) Shilpa defending herself with dignity. Not sure whether the section is perhaps the right one though. Perhaps, as suggested in a previous post, it could go on an article more specific to this series of Celebrity Big Brother, perhaps in a section specific to this argument. ShillShell 16:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh ShillShell, you are incorrect - Shetty used the F word on innumerable occasions, and it was broadcast, it is available for download on the net - your recollection appears to be somewhat selective, and innacurate I'm afraid. The 'F' word is never a 'dignified defence' -

This is a problem with the other pages too, namely Jade Goody and Danielle Lloyd. As this page is about Shilpa, it is understandable why events are described in a Shilpa-centric way. I propose that a new article is written (called Big Brother Racism Controversy (2007) or something) so that the whole rundown and timeline of events can be provided. I definitely think this event is worthy of a separate article than can be linked to on all housemate pages. What do you guys think? Ekantik ^talk 03:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Such an article is now created. It is Celebrity Big Brother 2007 racism controversy. Trixovator 23:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

White Trash is a US colloquialism which historically refers to a subset of society in certain areas of the south US. It's like the US version of Chav. Chav isn't racist. Just 'cos the phrase White trash contains a colour, doesn't make it racist. Bassophile 10:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on for God's sake!! Yes, 'White Trash' is a coloquialism for America's white underclass (used mostly by whites) but in this context (usage by a non-caucasian person) it most certainly becomes racist! How the hell can it not be?? Jade's flipant derogatory comments about Shipla's culture and nationality was construed as blatant racism, when infact she made no reference to her race WHAT-SO-EVER! And Jermain's comments, which wasn't his only bigoted comment, gets defended! Unbelievable! Anti-Racism seems to be the new bigotry!!Noonday_Underground

There were other things Shilpa said within that argument, heres a run down, sorry for length. It is all available on youtube you know.. I have numbered the derogatory remarks or insinuations that Shilpa made throughout that one argument, but it was by no means the first time she made such comments. The argument started when Shilpa insinuated that Jade had used the stock cubes which Shilpa had apparently claimed as her own, in fact she claimed it was the only thing she had ordered for herself. So here Shilpa made an unspoken but very obvious accusation of theft (1). Jade responded that they had used some but she denied they belonged only to Shilpa and said they were everyones to share. Shilpa then insinuated that they (Jade and Danielle) had been deliberately wasteful with the stock cubes (2) (she couldnt find the cubes and noone could remember exactly how many they used but it later turned out they had only used two). Shilpa lectured them on how they should use stock cubes, telling them they had used them improperly, which they denied (3). Jade then responded that Shilpa had wasted an entire chicken by undercooking it. Shilpa responded that the reason noone ate the chicken was not because it was undercooked but because everyone had eaten too much rice, and refused any responsibility for the wasted chicken. Yes it all seems ridiculous but thats petty shared house arguments for you, ridiculous. Anyway, at this point, Shilpa demanded that people show her gratitude for cooking, and said "But I wouldn't expect gratitude from you" to Jade (4). Which might not seem much but she had been making repeated comments on Jades lower class status since they met, and in this argument so far she had implied Jade was a thief, then a waster of food, then an incompetent cook, then incapable of gratitude. So these things do mount up, and at that stage Jade began to lose her temper (she had in fact been calm until this point). Shilpa left the room and went to the bathroom where she checked her make up and hair, then the bedroom, where she applied more make-up. Jade meanwhile was shouting at the wall that Shilpa had lied and that it wasnt the only thing she had ordered. Shilpa came back in, freshly made up, and Jade called to her and said "why lie?". Shilpa responded that she was not going to argue with Jade, and said that this might be the way Jade does things, but not her(5). Again, she didnt verbalise much, but the implication from her tone, her facial expression, and her mannerisms, was very clear, that Jade was lower than Shilpa, and was petty. Remember, Shilpa started this argument over two stock cubes, and at this point she is basically telling Jade that she is petty for arguing about it. She tried to walk away, and Jade asked her again, "did you or did you not claim that the cubes were the only thing you ordered". Jade said if she had said that (which she did) then she was a liar, if not, then Jade apologised. Danielle was giggling at this point, which has been jumped on as bullying but given the absolute ridiculousness of the argument i think its hardly surprising that she laughed. Jo was hiding behind and hugging a cushion. Jade called Shilpa a fake and a liar again. Shilpa asked Jo to step in, and Jo laughed. Then Jo said, To be fair Shilpa, you did say that. Shilpa said, I am not finding this funny. At some point in all this Shilpa told Jade she required etiquette lessons (6), which was yet another comment regarding her lower class status. Shilpa tried to walk away again, and Jade was shouting, and Shilpa told her to "shut up", and Jade said "dont tell me to fucking shut up". Shilpa said "I dont use that kind of language" (7), making yet another class comparison between herself and Jade, and Jade shouted back "Good for you! Well I do!" and then "You're not in Neverland here, you're not no princess here you're normal. You are normal. You are normal Shilpa and learn to live with it. You need a day in the slums. Go in your community and go to all those people who look up to you and be real.", clearly a response to the number of derogatory class based comments made by Shilpa. At this point Shilpa pointed at Jade and said , "this is what you are famous for" (8), meaning, Jade is famous for losing her temper and for acting lower class, again a comparison between their class status as well as their careers, insinuating that Shilpa is more worthy of being famous than Jade. Ironic considering that what Shilpa is not mostly famous for is being on Big Brother, just like Jade. Sorry for the long comment, like I said, you can watch it yourself on youtube, but I think the various class based inferences and comments do need to be pointed out, and i count at least eight in this argument alone. I noticed them at the time, they made me feel very angry, but they seem to have been mostly missed by the middle class media, unsurprisingly.82.33.2.184 02:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

Well this is not the place to discuss the mechanics of what took place, sorry. There

are other forums for that. As for YouTube, unfortunately Wikipedia could perhaps not allow such material because - apart from it being original research - the clips are in all likelihood a copyright violation of the CBB show and could not be linked to from this page either. Ekantik ^talk 05:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, I'm currently involve din trying to get a separate article to discuss this issue (it deserves a separate article) so that would be the proper place to discuss it. With reference to WP:RS of course. Ekantik ^talk 05:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

It's to hot to talh about!--86.29.240.49 00:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It's to hush-hush to talk about!--86.29.240.49 00:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing called a Hindu language

The article mentions that Shilpa Shetty lives in the center of the "Hindu" language film industry. There is nothing called the "Hindu" language. It's the Hindi language. Please fix this egregious mistake which makes Wikipedia look clueless about the languages spoken in other parts of the world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.248.102.82 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. Static Universe 20:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

It's Hindi!--86.29.240.49 00:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Spelling mistake?

I was going to change the "United Sprits signs Shilpa Shetty for Romanov vodka" link to "United Spirits signs Shilpa Shetty for Romanov vodka" but the page in question uses both "sprits" and "spirits". Hmm...
138.243.129.4 03:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well obviously the correct word must be used: spirits. Hope that helps. Ekantik ^talk 05:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

to long

this discussion page is jus too long- alot of stuff from Ekantik please deleate some stuff- to much to read and handele sorry!!snookums —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.72.161.39 (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

I agree and I understand your point, but as there is extensive work being done on the article right now I don't think it is a good idea to move this into an archive just yet. It is only 36 kilobytes right now, and creating an archive may cause repetitions of previously discussed issues. When things have calmed down somewhat and when this page grows long then I wil certainly make an archive. Hope that helps. Ekantik ^talk 04:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Advertising

Ekantik, it is not vandalism to remove gushing advertising for a brand of booze. If it must be mentioned, saying that she was signed to promote vodka and giving a link is enough. If you think it's vandalism -- go ahead and report me. Zora 06:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I raised the issue at the Village Pump [1]. If it isn't settled there, we'll go to mediation. Zora 06:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

It is your opinion that the section in question is "gushing advertising". I even rewrote the section to remove Shilpa's own comment about the brand/deal although I am unsure if such things are not allowed in Wikipedia. I've already discussed this with you earlier on this talk page (Removed_jati.2C_advertising, Remove_vodka_ads_on_sight, Caste.2C_notable_roles.2C_vodka_advertising, and Removals). Within these 'four separate discussions you have not provided even one reference from any Wikipedia policy or guideline that supports your claim. I specifically told you that I was unable to come across any such, except for this: WP:NOT#SOAP (Point 3). That refers to articles about companies, organisations, brand names and such, not about their endorsements by various celebrities. I've also given you at least three articles that specifically mention the endorsements of particular celebrities: Britney Spears, Beyoncé and Pink. Just now I found out that there is an article dedicated to Britney Spears products.

So please, you do not have a single reference to support your claim and I'd really appreciate it if you could stop removing content based on your ideas of what Wikipedia should be like. I will not hesitate to file a vandalism report against you if you continue removing content without justification. This is disrespectful to other editors who have worked hard to find the information to include it. Ekantik ^talk 07:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Village Pump? Fine with me. Ekantik ^talk 07:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know Indian geography

I was checking the edits on this page and found that her birthplace was changed from Tamil Nadu to Karnataka. If someone could provide a source, that'd be nice. Xiner (talk, email) 00:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll certainly try. I saw it sometime ago but it may have been unwittingly removed, but I'll try to find it. Ekantik ^talk 16:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Notable roles

The notable roles were removed under the excuse of "no other actor has them and neither can she". In that case, please see Al Pacino, Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp, etc etc etc. The "notable roles" is part of the actor infobox template and should be filled in.

The question then comes up (regularly by a certain editor) that notable roles is personal opinion of the editor and not necessarily a notable role in itself. In response to that, I prefer to follow the rationale that if an actor has received an award for a particular role/film, that is obviously a notable role. It is thus not personal opinion if the actor receives a critical and peer-reviewed Award like an Oscar (Filmfare or similar in this context).

Thirdly, I personally don't care if this information keeps getting removed or added in, but I have noticed the behaviour of an anonymous editor who keeps re-adding that particular content. If someone removes it, someone else will come back and add that in. I personally believe that this information should not be removed, but there you go. I've also noticed a tendency with WP:INCINE to "downgrade" actor pages. This should not be done, as more content should be added. This is an encyclopaedia, people! Everything about a particular person should be known so long as the content is reliably sourced. Ekantik ^talk 17:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

How do we class a notable role. We can't decide what is notable! WP:INCINE are not downsizing the page but are trying to cut out all the fangush. I mean the intro to the article was horrible saying this and that etc. That's what the rest of the article was for! One sentence is enough to summarise her occupation. I also cut down the career section which was saying she acted with this actor and her character names were etc. That's not proper info, that's a whole list of statements adapted from the filmography.

I already told you, I am using the rationale that if the actor has received an award for a particular movie, we can deem that role as notable.

Also, you are wrong about limiting the into to one sentence. Please read WP:LEAD, there is no limit to what can be put into the lead paragraph providing that they bring up all the main points regarding the subject in question. Ekantik ^talk 16:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

It is also important to seriously consider what is "fangush" and what is not. I personally don't think that any of the deletions are fangush because I am the one who inserted most of the content into this page and was very careful not to insert fangush. Ekantik ^talk 16:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Wiki india cinema project discussed the notable roles and decided that they must be cut out. I frankly don't give a damn how Al Pacino, Johnny Depp's info boxes. Im trying to cut out all the fangush etc. A Rani Mukerji fan has been trying to add the same intro for her page. For now I've removed it but I will have to talk to others about the notable roles section. -- Pa7 19:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, but remember that this page is more of a BLP article than a INCINE article. As such, the biography MOS is the one we have to follow. INCINE hasn't got a specific MOS and even if it did, it is secondary to WP:BIO. Not "giving a damn" is not the way Wikipedia works, and there is enough precedent to keep a consistency within Wikipedia. Thus if other actors have notable roles then this should be applied across the board. The excuse that "notable roles is personal opinion", IMO, is flawed and not good enough to warrant removing notable information. Ekantik ^talk 16:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, feel free to seek an RFC. I already have done. Ekantik ^talk 16:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Rewrites

I'm afraid that I am going to strongly oppose any unjustified removals of the text. Wikipedia is an ongoing project and things need to be clarified rather than removed outright. I agree that since I last made my major edits, various mistakes and poor writing has crept in, and I am currently unable to keep a close watch and edit this article due to internet connection problems at home. When these are resolved I will certainly be back to update this article with any new information.

In the meantime, it should be noted that content removal (especially unjustified) can be viewed as vandalism. The only form of content removal that is allowed to take place regards unsourced controversial information as per WP:BLP. If any editor has a problem with the information on this article, they can rewrite it or clarify it if they can, not remove it. What kind of editing is that?

And yes, I also agree that some of this article has fallen into a poor state from how I left it due to irresponsible editing by other editors (connected to the Big Brother controversy). I have already made a complete subpage and will restore this information when I get back. I do not appreciate those "weasel word" templates being slammed just because some editor wants to insert his POV into the article. The racism section is going to be hoisted off into a main article anyway (as I've been saying repeatedly on this talk page) so it matters little. But the one thing I would like all editors to abide by is that unjustified removal of content should not be done. Ekantik ^talk 17:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I would also thank other editors to realise that work on this article is ongoing and removal of content is removing content that is waiting to be built upon. If these bad content-removals keep on going on then I will have to think about filing an incident report. Please stop vandalising the article without familiarising yourselves with WP:BLP and WP:LEAD. Ekantik ^talk 17:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I've been watching Celebrity Big Brother but I have not touched that section because frankly I think it is a huge mess. As for justifying my recent edits then here goes: I think the intro of the article was too long and was not needed. Wikipedia does not need a long intro to explain her occupation etc, especially when we have the rest of the article to explain this. -- Pa7 17:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Pa7, thank you, looks like we were both writing at the same time resulting in an edit conflict! :) Anyway I wanted to say that if you noticed, you'll see that I didn't just restore the content, I rewrote it to make more sense and relate to the rest of the article. Please do not remove content without seriously considering if such removal is warranted, bearing in mind that the stuff in this article is going to be built upon. Also, WP:LEAD should be read through as is it going to be built upon. I'd appreciate if you or other editors did not remove this content because more is going to be added and the entire section rewritten. I'd appreciate it if you could be patient and let the work be done, thanks. I appreciate your passion for editing nevertheless. Ekantik ^talk 17:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

According to WP:LEAD, the intro paragraph is meant to be a summary of stuff already said in the article. The idea is that the intro is a summary of the page contents which are expanded later in the article itself. Hence, if we include a sentence about Big Brother racism in the lead, this is expanded upon later in the article. I hope this is clarified, thanks. Ekantik ^talk 17:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

In The News

I hope editors are aware that this article appeared In The News recently. See the 'Major Achievements' section of my userpage for more details. Ekantik ^talk 19:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

First non-white winner

Does anyone have a problem with the phrase I added - "Shetty became the first non-white winner of Big Brother in the UK"? — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

What about Nadia, the transexual who won the regular Big Brother a few years back? I think she was Turkish, or something? But Shilpa is definitely the first Indian to win.Haych83 23:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Nadia is white. She's from Portugal. But someone changed "non-white" because they had some kind of problem with it, but it think that edit has been removed from the page history. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed it because I thought it was an unnecessary ethnic reference but I plan on re-writing that section and will certainly include that point if necessary. Feel free to continue editing it if you like but it would be nice to depend on a reference. Ekantik ^talk 03:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

How about this? http://www.themoneytimes.com/articles/20070129/shetty_first_non_white_winner_of_bb-id-102790.html — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes that looks fine. Good work. :) Ekantik ^talk 01:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, on second thoughts, that link is a blog and not a proper link, so it wouldn't fulfil WP:RS. Sorry. Ekantik ^talk 02:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

who wrote there death date of shetty is 28 january 2007 and death place is big brother house? i have deleted that.but it must be found out.

It is obvious vandalism and it has been removed. Ekantik ^talk 05:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Born in Tamil Nadu or Karnataka?

Much as I sympathis with your patriotic feelings, Shilpa was NOT born in Karnataka but in Tamil Nadu. There is a difference between being born somewhere and coming from somewhere else. There is even a reference included in the 'Background' section to support this, so please stop adding this erroneous information into the article. Thanks. Ekantik ^talk 04:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Racism cleanup

Whew! It's quite a task trying to cleanup this article especially the racism section. I'm aware that there is repetition of some things currently but this will soon be removed. I've done the best I could but it is still 'unfinished as it is pretty late here, so please bear with me while the cleanup continues tomorrow because important information needs to be split off into separate articles. Thanks. Ekantik ^talk 06:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty

My comments on the Big Brother house were taken out of context. People who know the real me will understand I'm no racist. --Danielle Lloyd 11:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, whether you really are Danielle Lloyd or not, I respectfully disagree. It may sound like a conundrum but one does not necessarily have to be racist to make racist comments. Suggesting that someone (anyone) should "fuck off home" is undoubtedly racist. Ekantik ^talk 03:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a note: User:Danielle Lloyd has since been blocked. --Dreaded Walrus 07:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Tulu/Kannada

The transliteration of Shilpa Shetty's name as being "Tulu-Kannada" in the lead paragraph is too much. Shetty's home language is Tulu, which is a separate dialect that happens to be written in Kannada script, and the fact that she speaks Kannada or is a "de facto" Kannadiga has no bearing on how an encyclopedic article should be written. The article itself mentions that her native language is Tulu and perhaps this is the only language that should be noted when inserting Indic script.

There is no need to mention "Kannada" to denote the language if it is already observed that the native language is Tulu. Otherwise by the same logic we should include non-english scripts for all the other languages she speaks according to the article. Thus, the recognition should be for the "Tulu" language as it has been for the past several months, unless there is a good and specific reason why "Kannada" should be mentioned. Thanks, Ekantik ^talk 02:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ok. For starters, Tulu is not a dialect of Kannada. Both Kannada and Tulu are seperate languages in their own right. As for what script/s should be added here(and similar articles), well, this is a debate that's been going on for a long time now. Sometime in late Nov-early Dec., a discussion was started on I think the Village pump or on India noticeboard or somewhere. I went on nearly a two month wikibreak after that and I dont know what came out of those discussions. I think we need to settle this once and for all on that page or we are going to be having the same/similar discussions on multiple talk pages.
• As for this particular article, I feel that Tulu is a must. As of now, I dont see Hindi there, but if I remember right, there used to be Hindi also some time ago. So if Hindi is to be used(presumably because she's acted in Hindi movies), then Kannada also would have to be used by that logic, coz she's acted in Kannada movies also with some of the biggest names in the industry. Sarvagnya 03:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Tulu is an independent language which happens to borrow Kannada script for writing. So a writing in Tulu is actually a writing in Kannada. That is the reason I added Kannada at the first place. As Sarvagnya as mentioned above, I vote for going with decisions that was made through discussions in India notice board.Gnanapiti 21:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

What I understood Sarvagnya as saying is that it is Tulu and not Kannada that should be mentioned in the article. I invited Sarvagnya to participate in this discussion because I noticed that he was the one who made the edit and his contributions are mosty to Karnataka-oriented articles. I also feel that Tulu should be retained and not Kannada, because it is Shetty's native language. The fact that Tulu is written in Kannada script has no bearing; I happen to be a Sindhi which is written in Arabic script, it doesn't mean anything except for the two different languages.

I also agree that this appears to be an issue that ought to be discussed thoroughly. But until then I guess we can agree that Shetty's native language is Tulu and that should be acknowledged in the article. Ekantik ^talk 02:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Since several days have gone by and there have been no further discussion/objection and based on the "expert" opinion of Sarvagnya that Tulu is a separate language in itself, and Shetty's native language, I have removed the reference to "Kannada" in the lead paragraph. Again, the fact that Tulu is written in Kannada script doesn't change the fact that Shetty is a Tulu native. Regards, Ekantik ^talk 04:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

GA potential

With a quick glance over the article, I think it could reach GA status. Look over the GA criteria, add a fair use rationale to any images that require it, and fix any citation needed tags before nominating. Good work so far and I hope it passes. --Nehrams2020 03:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for noticing. I put a lot of work into the article but I still think some of the controversy information (specifically about the "Praful Sarees" affair) could be split off into a separate article. One of the images has bene released under the GFDL license and another could use a FU Rationale. But thanks very much for your pointer, I'll definitely look into nominating this article for GA-status soon. Ekantik ^talk 04:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Ekantik. I've taken a look at the images as you requested. Commons:Image:Shilpa Shetty.jpg, the first pic here, does not need a fair use rationale, because the CC-BY-SA-2.0 is a free license compatible with the GFDL. The second pic, Commons:Image:ShilpaShettyPETA.jpg, has been released under the GFDL, which surprised me, but it was Commons administrator Jkelly who uploaded it so I trust that it has been negotiated with PETA already; no need for a fair use rationale there either. The third image, Image:BBHousemates.jpg, does need a fair use rationale, however, I am not sure yet that a legal fair use rationale can be devised that would let it be used in this article. Can you tell me what exactly is occurring in this scene with the four of them on the couch? — coelacan — 01:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The 1997 film Dus

I think the film Dus should be included in her filmography as she did appear in it even if it did not release or was never finished. I had added it in before but it was removed. Plus the article has enough info on it to be able to be include it in her filmography list. If it was just a very brief article with very little info then I would understand it not being included but I just found an official website related to the film which has a lot of info on the film and even has a screenshot of her appearance which can be seen here[2] Shakirfan 15:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

GA failed

Article has a trivia section which has been tagged since April 17, a request for expansion tag in the first section, the first two sections contains several cn tags, and the lead is weak—for instance her height, which is essentially trivia, is mentioned (see WP:Lead). The good news is there are no other actors/actresses in the GAC queue, so once these are addressed the article can go right back to the front of the line. Quadzilla99 17:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Filmography

What has happened to it? And at least spell the names of the films correctly.

Back to the slums

While ref 69 on tbe BBC site states that Jade said Shipa should get back to the slums she never actually said that. Tbe BBC are wrong. On the show itself (sorry but someone would need to look at the tapes, maybe youtube have the evidence?) Jade actually said something like "you need day in the slums". What she was stating was that she should see how the poor lead their lives before trying to patronise Jade and others for behaving in a working class manner.

She never stated that Shilpa came from the slums or should return there.

This has been widely inaccurately quoted.

Here is the youtube clip of this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVSvp5JJO4s

Also Jade herself expanded on this:

from 4.00 onwards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjwu418sYNM Chulcoop 20:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

References

I just wanted to mention here that I reorganised the references, because the diff looks a bit odd and could be mistaken for vandalism if someone glanced at it quickly.

Seraphim Whipp 16:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The reflist is broken. Someone please fix it. @pple 06:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)