User talk:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ/Archive 13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

New message[edit]

Hey of course pal!! Don't worry I'll have a look at it as soon as I have the time for it. ShahidTalk2me 19:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well honestly I think it is completely unnecessary as it reduces the quality of the article. This will most likely be deprecated by FA reviewers as it indirectly serves as an endorement of the companies in question. I would never think of adding it to any article of this sort, though your hard work on it is noted.
As for the rest, I'm a bit busy but within a few days I'll start reading it and I'll offer you my suggestions separately so that you can make them yourself - that will be more comfortable. Good work. :) ShahidTalk2me 20:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Also Rahul - please avoid any kind of synthesis. I still remember some petty editors from her previous FAC who followed every source and just looked for an opportunity to make this article fail. Calling 3 Idiots a "welcome relief" when it is not explicitly stated by the sources is better to avoid. I read both articles and there isn't any indication to that. She just said 3 Idiots was more fun and it doesn't prove anything. It is my most sincere suggestion. Also, do try to save space as much as possible. Too many references are there and with her very active work in films you could later find it overly loaded (I say that from my own experience). Try to find joint sources which can support several claims separately. Don't worry, I'll later give you a more detailed feedback. ShahidTalk2me 20:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Do you mean she herself designs her clothes? ShahidTalk2me 08:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Shahid's right about the petty reviewers. They picked up on and invented dozens of "issues". That's why I gave up on it. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Synthesis means using or combining several sources to back up a claim and reach a conclusion of your own, which is unacceptable on WP. It also means adding info which is not explicitly stated by the sources themselves.
If, for example, you see a source in which it's said "Bebo played X, she played Y, she played Z" and you write down "Bebo is a versatile actress" - then it is synthesis.
Another example: if one source quotes Bebo saying "I don't like English" and in other source it says "Bebo stopped her English lessons" - and you end up writing "Bebo left her English lessons because she did not like it" - it's synthesis.
One more example: if one source says "Bebo was thoroughly criticised for all her films in 2003. Critics disliked the kind of roles that she did" and the other says "in 2004 Bebo started doing more serious roles" and you write "in 2004 Bebo started doing more serious roles because she was criticised for her roles in 2003." = synthesis.
The same problem with the quite unnecessary "welcome relief". ShahidTalk2me 17:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, exactly. ShahidTalk2me 20:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
In this case it does not make sense at all. Does it imply that she did not enjoy shooting for Kurbaan? And where does it mention that Avantika was a heavy role? I know I sound very annoying, but I'm actually saying it all for the article's success. I know you're taking it from Angelina Jolie's article, but in Jolie's case, Lisa from Girl, Interrupted was really a heavy character of a mentally unstable woman. The sources do not support what you are saying. I have yet to go through your new version, I'm just a bit busy these days. ShahidTalk2me 19:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

No I don't think.... I'm sure! :) ShahidTalk2me 18:05, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

What Shahid, that my birthday wasn't yesterday and you forgot, when I always remember yours, August 15 LOL. Dr. Blofeld White cat 09:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The message was for Shahid and I was kidding. I always remember his birthday for some reason. When is your birthday? The same birthday as my friend David. I wonder if I'll remember come Feb 16th!! If not then you can yell at me LOL! Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Kareena FA[edit]

The article has tremendously improved. I'm very happy with the structure and the biographic nature of the article that you have placed in your user area. I personally liked the fact that the personal life section was merged in the main biography (though I'm not sure if it was from the rearrangement that I did). First glance the article appears great. Here are my two cents.
  • The alternate text for the images, barring the infobox, seems inadequate. More explanation is needed. For eg, "A woman in a blue dress, leaning against a door and smoking" doesnot really portray any particular image. Try something like "A young woman with long, black hair smoking, holding the cigarette with her left hand. She wears a colorful dress and has bangles on her left hand. Her face is lighted from above, where she is looking." This gives the visualy impaired reader a much cohesive image to think about.
  • Look for wP:OVERLINK in the article. I found many.
  • Another concern is with the formatting of the sources. Online sources like Rediff, Boxoffice India, Bollywood Hungama etc are not supposed to be italicized, hence remove them. You can do it by making the work parameter of the {{cite web}} template like: work=''[[Bollywood Hungama]]''. This would remove the automatic italicization.
  • The Further REading section needs to be consistent with the formatting of the References section, especially dates. You can use the {{cite web}} template here also, rather than leaving them bare.
  • The section names like Debut and breakthrough (2000–2003) doesnot need the full expansion of both the years as they are in the same decade. Hence they can be shortened to Debut and breakthrough (2000–03) and likewise for the rest.
  • Try adding some more Free images from commons. At present non-free presides over the free one. I'm sure IndiaFM has pictures of Kareena at movie premieres etc, which can be definitely used. I hope you are aware of the IndiaFM commons right?
These are the things I found at glareworthy. Hope they help to get the article the bronze star. :) --Legolas (talk2me) 03:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page and I have emailed you dear Rahul. LOL. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

"Had a strong release". Sounds awkward to me... If you don't want me to help you just say so. Dr. Blofeld White cat 16:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC) That's why it needed changing. I misunderstood what you had written in saying it had a "strong release". Widely released you mean as opposed to success. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Ranbir Kapoor[edit]

Hi, that BLP seems to get a lot of rude demeaning vandalism, it is ongoing. If it continues we should look at protecting him for a few months with semi protection. Off2riorob (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


Since you have worked on Biographies before, would you like to comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Madonna (entertainer)/archive1? Share your inputs on it please so that any discrepancies can be eliminated. Thanking you. --Legolas (talk2me) 12:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I will most definitely do so after reading the article. Unfortunately, I haven't read it yet. -- Bollywood Dreamz talk 17:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

K3G soundtrack[edit]

Hi. I was fixing the table because the final } was missing and therefore it was all messed up. Also, I removed the extra songs that had been added. You have now put one of them back. I put only what was there on the official OST on itunes. Here is the link: You can see that it does not include "Vande Mataram", which is why I deleted it. Why did you think it should be there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bollyjeff (talkcontribs) 20:53, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

According to Bollywood Hungama, the song Vande Mataram was included in the film's soundtrack and that is why I added it back to the listing. Furthermore, I also have a copy of the film's soundtrack, in which the song appears as well. -- Bollywood Dreamz talk 19:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, fair enough. Hey, I am pretty new here and would like to ask you a few questions if I may. First, how do you get pictures to use? For example, the picture on Karan Johar's page is pretty bad. I read somewhere on here that pictures from flickr may be usable. There are some nice pictures of him there, but I don't really know what's usable and what's not. How does this work? Ex: How did you get pictures for the movie poster and soundtrack on the pages that you created? PS: I just checked Johars page and it was updated with a new picture just a couple of days ago (on the 10th by Sunnymalikuk). I wonder if this is gonna get taken down, because I saw the same thing happen to Mumtaz (actress). Her picture was there for a few days and then gone again. What's up with that? Bollyjeff (talk) 19:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
For all the information on images, take a look at Wikipedia:Images. The article also has links on how to upload an image and furthermore which images are acceptable or not. As for the image of Mumtaz being deleted, I believe that it was probably uploaded incorrectly and hence it was deleted. (It might have been that the user uploaded a screenshot of the actress from a movie, etc, and that is clearly not allowed on WP). On the other hand, it looks like the image of Karan Johar is actually the uploader's own work, and hence that is acceptable by Wikipedia. Cheers -- Bollywood Dreamz talk 19:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The first thing you mentioned is gossip at best and is definitely not notable. I'd suggest you to move on - forget what happened with her 10 years ago it's something she herself would like to forget (I'm also going to change Zinta's media section soon and remove many redundancies). These rumours appeared mostly in gossip magazines which make no sense today. However, her "arrogance" is still very much discussed, so if you want to research her image and put it into the article in depth, you can do it. I remember reading an article by Khalid Mohammed a few months ago in which he sharply criticised her primadonna-like behaviour, but I'm not sure you will be pleased to read it, though I am sure you will find some of the notes there true.
The second bit quite interests me and I think it is quite notable but it depends on what exactly her part in these books was. I think it's better to wait for the book's release if it happens soon of course, but it is a very good information and that is the kind of text an intelligent reader would be interested to read. What do you think?
Rahul, I'm sorry for not having yet taken a look at the article. I'm just so terribly busy in real-life (it's not unfamiliar to you as you are in quite the same situation so I'm sure you understand me:)) I'll soon take a move through IIFA Awards and will make the titles ready for submission in the filmographies. Take care, ShahidTalk2me 17:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Feankly? No. But I hope it is true.[edit]

... ShahidTalk2me 22:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

No, and you? ShahidTalk2me 07:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it is perfectly fine, but the trick is to find videos which will not be deleted. ShahidTalk2me 14:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:New Message[edit]

Well, your idea is not new, but it is a good one. However, I am unable to understand the criteria for ranking these films.... If you could be a little clearer on this issue, i would be delighted to support your cause.

AnkitBhattTalk to me!!LifEnjoy 14:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

IndiaFM ticket[edit]

Humor me. What do you do for uploading the images? Isn't ticket #2008030310010794 enough for it? Reply asap. --Legolas (talk2me) 12:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

So, for eg, for the picture in the article Aparna Sen, I uploaded it in commons with a {{OTRS pending}}. Now I send a separate mail to OTRS with heading as Ticket #2008030310010794 and give them the list of the images. But what do I say in the content of the mail? Just the list of the images would do? I see that you did a similar thing with the Kareena Kapoor infobox image, can you send me a copy of the e-mail you sent to OTRS so that I can see the format? You can send it to Thanks --Legolas (talk2me) 03:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


Hi, did you see I requested the Ranbir BLP to be pending changes protected and that it seems to be helping the article be protected? Off2riorob (talk) 14:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

It is a good thing that you decided to do that. The article has been vandalised countless number of times by a bunch of stupid editors and protecting the article has definitely made my job a lot easier :) -- Bollywood Dreamz talk 16:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, this new protection is very useful in such situations and you should consider requesting it on other articles with similar issues, many thanks for your work in this field. Off2riorob (talk) 16:36, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
I should be the one thanking you :) -- Bollywood Dreamz talk 16:43, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)