User talk:Pa7/Archive 2

Thank You

Thanks a lot! I really appreciate it! Hariharan91 07:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alka Yagnik

Hi, I saw you revision of the article. I think you have changed some important points, that dont appear clear any more:

here is the last revision before you changed it [quote] She was born March 20th, and is from a Gujrati family based in Kolkata in Bengal. Both her parents were well versed in classical music. She is classically trained, and has been one of the leading playback singers in Bollywood since the late 80's. She started her public career at the tender age of six, singing for All India Radio. 1. She got a hit song with her very first song released, in Laawaris, with the song Mere Angene Mein, from 1981. Her big break however came in 1988 with the song Ek do teen, in Tezaab, which made her and Madhuri Dixit big stars. The song brought Alka her first Filmfare Award, and she has since won another 6 Filmfare Awards for best female singer. Of today's movie singers in India, Alka is one of the biggest female singers behind the Mangeshkar sisters Lata Mangeshkar and Asha Bhonsle. [/quote]

while this is the last version, after you edited it:

[quote]Alka Yagnik (born 20 March in Kolkata, Bengal, India) is an Indian singer. She is born into a Gujrati family. Both her parents were well versed in classical music.

She is classically trained, and has been one of the leading playback singers in Bollywood since the late 80's. Alka began singing bhagans for Calcutta Radio at the age of six. She thought singing as a hobby but later thought about it as a profession. 1. She came to Mumbai and sang for the film Laawaris (1981) with the song Mere Angene Mein. She got her big break with the song Ek Do Teen from the film Tezaab (1988). The song turned her into a star overnight and went on to become a pop hit. She also received her first Filmfare Best Female Playback Award for the song.

Her voice has mostly been used for the younger generation of stars. She has done the playback singing for some of the biggest stars in the industry. [/quote]

if you look at the first point: this wasn't her first song recorded, and the song became a hit. I feel this is very important, even though she didn't become renovned for this. while you have written that she went to bombay and sang a song... she had recorded another song, but the song hadn't been released when laawaris-songs was released.

I hope I dont offend you, but I felt the previous revisions were better, as some meaning have been changed, and that you havent added any new info either. I hope you can change the article to previous revision, as yo probably made some effort to rewrite much of the article. and you can add new point there (if you have any) and read the refferences, and rewrite sentences if you feel they appear gramatically wrong. Regards --Dhirad 10:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rani Mukerji's page

Hey thanks on your summary help on Mukerji's page. The Personal Life section. I can write forever but it didn't make sense what I wrote initially so thanks for cutting out the crap. And yes, I do feel that Veer-Zaara's performance should be mentionned in her career section. It's one of the most rivatilizing presence ever felt from audience on screen. It's one of my favorite too. Though that doesn't matters, it was nominated and appreciated by critics. Plus, the movie was a super-hit. Again, I do believe that Mukerji's name should appear before Zinta on Veer-Zaara's page since the official website mentions it this way if you go to credits and if you watch the movie, it's the same order again. There must be reason for this. I think at wikipedia we should try to put names as deserved to be on movie's page. I didn't find any reference to Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega but I've seen the movie and I know Mukerji's name comes before Zinta. But I can't prove it to you unless you own the dvd, so I won't change it there. But please change the order on veer-zaara's page. I bet it doesnt even bother you but to me, it does. Anyway, I think the Accomplishments section is something fun. I'll come up with more facts later on but for now, it's good as it is. Thanks for your help again! --shez15 24:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rani

Hello, Pa7. Just noticed that Shez is at it again. Thanks for the heads-up. And I noted that you cleaned up Rani's article again -- great work! :) Of course, I'll help to keep each and any Rani-fancruft at bay. Best regards, --Plumcouch 20:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hey! I get your point now. But do talk to your editors about credits. I think they should simply be put in order the movie suggests. It's quite complicated at times. But let me give you an example: Madhuri Dixit was credited before Ash on Devdas's page here on wikipedia as well as in the film, so why can't Rani be listed before Zinta even though she may have a supporting role, it is equal in length and maybe the impact of the performance is slightly etched superior to Zaara's role. It's something different and well performed. Plus, the story is based upon good Pakistan and India relations. The character of Saamiya Siddiqui is withdrawn from a real life person, who happen to be someone I know and is someone important. The whole story is about her struggle as a woman in a country such as Pakistan, though it used fictional names and drew some entertainment, the purpose was to inform the audience of a woman's right to an occupation in male-dominated professions. Also, to influence people to accept women as equal to men. Saamiya defeats the man in court. When the casting was happening, Ash was approached for the role of Zaara but due to personal problems with Khan, she could not commit to the film and Mukerji also happened to be casted before her. Ash was the top actress at the time of casting. But then Preity was the third top actress and was given the role of Zaara. As producers believed no one better than Mukerji could portray the difficult role of Saamiya. If you see the interview with Yash Chopra, you'll know. Accordingly, the film credited Mukerji prior to Zinta because of the role's substance and the actress' seniority. Another example being, Khan, Kajol, Devgan and Mukerji were the original choice in KANK. But when Kajol declined the offer of the lead actress in the movie, Mukerji was uplifted as the lead and Zinta was given the secondary role. I hope you can understand Mukerji's seniority now. Again, if you do under-estimate the industry's rankings in Filmfare and various other magazines as claiming Mukerji at the top position for the last two years. And this year too, she will be slotted number one once again as undisputed bollywood queen. If rankings and box office stastics don't get to you, maybe awards for the lead actress for the past two years at almost every ceremony was handed out to Mukerji. And if you still don't get my point of importance and logic, then I can't help it anymore explaining. I also get your point but I think in this case, I have various reasons to put her on top of Zinta, while you have only one reason, that being of the lead role. Well then, you might as well change Devdas credits. And many more... Don't take it personal, I think you are really helpful and understanding too. You do well at your job. I just wished I could talk to you in person and discuss all these trivial matters. It would be easier for me because I don't express myself well in writing. Thanks again for your help on Mukerji's page. Just one more question! Could we add the Accomplishments section as on JLO's page. It's something fun and detailed. Trivia can be more personal while accomplishments can list professional achievement other than getting awards. Something like rankings, pay, box office records. Do consider my proposal. I'm also sorry about taking so much of your time with my long paragraph. But the Veer-Zaara thing does bother me. I can now understand Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega credits but Veer-Zaara was the story told by Mukerji, giving her the most important role in the movie, fighting for their love. Do consider! Thanks.

--shez15 22:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits!

Your edits have been helpful and I think I've kept most of your stuff on the page. Except the fact that I want to keep Accomplishments, the rest is all your writing. Thanks for your help again! I am also giving you another award for your work. I've cut most of the Personal Life area as you left it except the last part which is good writing and I hope you leave it intact! Good job!

--shez15 23:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand!

You know what! I just changed and added the accomplishment section but after reading what you said, I understand your point. So I'll remove the accomplishment section but i like the filmfare fact because it's a magazine I read and is perhaps the most influential Bollywood magazine in India. I'll just take the Filmfare facts and put it in trivia if that's fine with you. But i made the accomplishment section because if i put the filmfare fact, trivia gets big. But i guess, i'll go with what you said. On many actors' pages, magazine play an important role. I think I'll also add a Rani picture in a magazine. See Eva Longoria. Her page contains Maxim Magazine info. She was No.1 for two years. It's mentionned. So i guess, wikipedia allows to mention no.1 but i won't brag about. I'll write it in the way it's said in the magazine. Plus, I added new references since you didn't like the other ones. Thanks again for making it simpler! --shez15 14:51, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cooperation

Look, I cut down Accomplishments section only for you but it was a resourceful section on Rani's page. Now, everything can't work out if you boss around. What I put about Filmfare may be journalistic for you but it gives accurate and influential judgment and the one who is number one on the power list gets a Filmfare award! This is how important the magazine is. You may want to put these things on other actresses. But for now, it needs to be put on Mukerji's page because it is a great accomplishment! Magazine statistics are everywhere on any actor's page if you look around from Julia Roberts accumulation money at the box office to Eva Longoria's hot list. Don't delete my two sentences on Filmfare trivia! It's everywhere on the web if you search Rani Mukerji so why not on wikipedia? --shez15 16:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not Bossy!

I'm sorry if you took it that way. Actually, I couldn't find the exact wording. I meant you should listen to me too and not just give your opinion on things making them the final verdict. Anyway, I don't know why won't you put the Filmfare fact on Ash's page but if you want to, I won't mind. It's the same with Maxim Magazine's Hot List. Only Eva Longoria's page demonstrates her status as No.1. Angelina Jolie was No.4 but it's not on her page. It doesn't really matter. I am just too busy with my own life and whenever I find time, I add stuff on wikipedia and correct links on any Bollywood-related article. Look, if you want to put the filmfare fact on preity's page, just put it. I don't mind! A fact is a fact! I just need it to be there on Mukerji's page because I want her page to look good, full of details. The current Queen of Bollywood definitely deserves to be groomed.

--shez15 19:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Small problem

Hello, Pa7, just a small warning: apparently, there's an anon active who's trying to make Atlas shrug, aka wants to change all the things which has been established so far - and s/he's not happy with them. You can read about his oppinions on my talk page (last entry on the bottom of the page). So far s/he has only taken on actress Meera Jasmin's page, but maybe, s/he'll do certain things to other articles, too. He has been fairly civil so far, but s/he sounds pretty angry. Just FYI. Best regards, --Plumcouch 15:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Hindi Films

Hi, Pa7, about that article on Hindi films: I really think the categories cover that. The project and articles on Indian movies in generall has so much grown sind User:Zora started it - I think the red links will decrease day by day; it's only a matter of time. Best regards, --Plumcouch 19:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppet?

Hey, Pa7, I'm suspecting that User:Shez15 and User:70.71.234.81 are the same persons, considering their Rani-glorification. Isn't that a case of socket puppetry and should be reported? I mean, why doesn't Shez15 log in to make changes to Mukerji's article? Best regards, --Plumcouch 00:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know

I know it's impossible to get all the movies on one page. It can't happen but we can try to fill in the most we can. I'll go by letters. I'll do them some other time. But for now, I am trying to add ten or twenty more. --shez15 01:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Farah_Khan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Farah_Khan.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine!

That's ok. But do you really think you can add all the movies. It's quite impossible. Think about 1000 films made in India per year. Then think about 200 Hindi films. Then think about 100 popular films per year. Finally think about 50 years and more of Indian cinema. Anyway, I guess we can add the ones that already exist on wikipedia. And then let's see what we can do later. I'll help organize it too alphabetically. By the way, did you watch KANK. Wasn't it a great film? I really liked the beginning. I like Abhishek the best. Preity was also good in this one. I thought SRK looked old though. Well let's get started on that page. --shez15 12:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salman Khan

Hello, Pa7, there is a fan of Salman Khan's page who claims that Salman popularised the name "Prem" - while I think this is possible, it really needs a reference and belongs into an article like Prem (name) or anything. He wrote half a novel on the discussion page of Khan and I responded. Could you have a look? (Informed Zora, too - I think editors who are fans are the most difficult to handle.) Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 20:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC) Just some tiny PS.: I tried to talked to the fan, User:LuckyS - see his discussion page. I'm afraid it's a severe case of fan glorification. Look at Salman Khan's article[reply]

Hi, Pa7,

I cleaned up Salman Khan's article - but I don't think it will be left this way. We'll see.

As for KANK - liked it, but watched it with a happy and a sad eye. I like Mukerji, but not with Khan. As a SRK/Kajol-fan one could only imagine how the movie would've been with it's intended cast, SRK, Kajol, Rani, Ajay Devgan. However, the performances were superb, as were the guest appearances. I liked Amitabh Bachchan the most - he was so awesome. And Kirron Kher reminded me very much of her perfomance in Hum Tum. What about you? Do you like the movie? Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 16:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Film Festival

Hey, Rani Mukerji is coming to Toronto. I hope I get a chance to visit. I'm in Vancouver though. Anyway, I've added the ones I can think of for the films. So, how was KANK?

I know why!

I know they were all crying in the end. But what were they supposed to do, laugh at infidelity. LOL. It was really good in the beginning but the end was over-stretched. It is officially now on the top ten longest hindi films list. I read that article. I just felt sorry for Abhishek. But you know why she couldn't love him? It's because she didn't fit in his life. His lifestyle was completely different to her. They had also been childhood friends. It must be strange for her to see her best friend in the role of a husband. It is for some people. But the movie could've emphasized more on why they didn't fit in as a couple. But it's ok. You just have to analyze and understand the complications. Anyway, I put a new poster on Veer-Zaara's page. The poster on the cd covers. It has the main characters in it. Rani needs to be credited first. Why don't you guys get it? It's like a Devdas case. Madhuri is the supporting actress. We all know that but even on wikipedia here, she is credited before Ash, the lead actress. Plus, she is credited before her even in the movie. By the way, I just saw Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega again and in the end, Rani is credited before Preity but I have made no changes because it will upset you. But here, I must be firm. Rani is even credited before Zinta in the poster.shez 13:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kareena Kapoor

Hello, Pa7, just wanted to tell you about User:BLACKDRAGON who is mainly editing Kareena Kapoor's article. I cleaned it up, but he reverted everything. In order to prevent an edit war, I talked to him -- let's see, if he responds. It`s mild fangush (could be worse), several pictures with dubious copyright status and fan glorification. Maybe, if you have time, you could have a look.

Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 01:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares?

Who cares what you and I think. The point is that the film maker's decision how to credit the actors is not biased and very much important than what we think. I wouldn't mind Rani's name not to be mentionned before a supporting actress even though she might be the main actress. Films articles on wikipedia should give respect to the film itself. Whatever the circumstance, the best way to solve this is to leave it as the film intends it to be written. By the way, the poster and the movie plus the official website credits Mukerji before Zinta. Anyway, I don't get the point. Why won't you put the new poster there. It's not copyrighted plus it shows the main characters. Like on Devdas page, Madhuri, Khan and Rai are all on the poster, so why be unjust here? Again, I should point out that Dixit is credited before Rai! Why? When you do know that she is the supporting cast. Why? Are you being unfair to Mukerji because you like Zinta more? Why is there an edit war over such a small issue. I am not favoring anyone. If I may say, I saw the movie Kya Kehna again today, and at the end, the credits came as Saif Ali Khan then Chandrachur and then Zinta. And here on wikipedia, Zinta is credited before them! Why? You like her more? I think you guys are doing favoritism when you should act professional. I'm not a professional. So I may make follies but in this case, I rest my case as it is. Another thing: I know why Mukerji is credited before Zinta because she had the more meatier roles in both Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega and Veer-Zaara. Playing a coma patient and lawyer is not easy. Plus she is a more popular actress than Zinta. She was then and she is now. Let's face it! You know that too. shez 23:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rani Mukerji

Hi, Pa7, wrote something about Mukerji on Shez's page. Am really looking forward to how he replies. Have a look yourself, since it's on the bottom. If Shez states that the IP address who did some Rani-glorification is not him, I'll file a case on sock puppetry on him, since I know how it is done now. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 16:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. BTW, your discussion page is very long now. Why don't you archive it?

Futile Argument

If you want to put the cast order alphabetically then go ahead, it would go Khan first then Mukerji and then Zinta but that's stupid. We should go by the order as the film depicts it. At the end of the day, the film maker's verdict on how to put his star cast is the most influential and promising source. If that is the thing, then I must put Zinta after Mukerji in Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega and Veer-Zaara. You can see the french wikipedia where Mukerji's name is before Zinta for both movies. And I must put Zinta after Saif and Chandrachur in Kya Kehna as it is the case in the film. You must respect the director for his opinion. We don't matter! If you have any other retorts, do negotiate before editing. Thanks! Look now, I have left your new photo in KANK intact even though Zinta was already there on three photos, the main ones. I've also left your veer-zaara poster, now you need to cooperate. It can't be just your way. You never compromise even though I'm talking about sense. Look, I'm no professional, I may do favoritism but if you tell me I'm wrong here, I'll revert it myself. But for Veer-Zaara, Kya Kehna, HDJPK, I stick with the official way of doing it. Cast order as in film. If you want to put Zinta before Mukerji then you might as well put Rai over Dixit in Devdas! I have many other examples too. This is the most typical one! Thanks! -- shez 13:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for understanding! I appreciate and respect your opinion but you know that the article on wikipedia presents and provides information from the film. Therefore, the material cannot be changed. That's alteration and an insult to the film maker's choice of casting. Thanks for understanding! Yes, I have not changed any think on KANK with the picture you put. By the way, I just found out that Salaam Namaste was a disaster in India. It collected all its money from the overseas market. Good that you know now. -- shez 13:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine!

I am happy about Veer-Zaara, KANK, HDJPK, Devdas and the rest. The point of me giving credibility to the official website was to back up my idea on why rani should be before preity. I only needed to show you that the film was the most important thing but you wouldn't get it. That's why I had to use the poster and the official website as other indicators. But now, that the film is how we credit, I'm happy. We'll just wait how Baabul and Jhoom Barabar Jhoom is credited. In Kya Kehna, I saw the film. It's Saif, Chandrachur and then Preity as the cast order in the end. But I don't mind if you break the rule. Who's going to go on the Kya Kehna article? I think Preity is last because initially it was her first film. Anyway, whatever! Thanks for getting my point. By the way, you must know, I own the Mujhse Dosti Karoge dvd and Rani is very musch credited before Kareena. I think you're mistaken. I don't mind about KANK. It's fair now. And, in Mangal Pandey, I'm confused. I remember watching the movie in theatre. Rani was credited after Toby in the beginning but in the end, the credits come again and this time, Rani was before Toby. It's weird. I think it's only because Toby is there mostly in the beginning and Rani in the end. Whatever, I won't change the credits. I promise. I don't want another edit war. But MDK is wrong. Go watch the movie yourself. I hope you're happy. And about the Shava Shava song image, I only put that photo because I like the photo. You didn't let me put it on Rani's page. Remember? That's why I put it there. Plus, it has the two main heroes. It's not only Rani. So, I hope, we're clear. Now, I'm ready to do whatever you think is unfair. I'll revert it myself! I hope we're fine now. -- shez 12:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

News

I just found out that Preity comes from a Sikh family and her name when she was born was Preetam Zinta Singh. I think you should add that to the article. I don't want to meddle in. But I'm not sure. These stupid indian sites don't know much. They just put the star's name. Anyway, we should find out from which background she comes from. Go on French wikipedia on preity zinta and it says Preetam Zinta Singh. Wow! Such a cool name. It's so lovely. Great! -- shez 13:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is fine!

What are you saying? It's such a pretty name like Preity. Preetam sounds bubbly and fun. But yeah, I'm not sure if it's reliable. It is I guess only if she comes from a Sikh family but she never mentionned where she comes from. Maybe it is true. But it is a lovely name. If you can find something about her father being Sikh then maybe it might help. Because I've seen her mother and she doesn't look sikhni. Anyway, I'm happy how the things are and let them be as they are. For the new movies, let's just keep casting as imdb but when the movie comes out and however the casting may be, we'll put it that way. The rest is fine. I haven't edited anything you've done recently. I'm fine with the Veer-Zaara poster. Just let me know if there is a problem anywhere. I'll help. Let's focus on creating more and better articles. -- shez 12:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Rangdebasanti.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rangdebasanti.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --85.160.0.96 07:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again!

Hey thanks for editing out my stuff. You know, I sometimes get very interested and then go on and on about positions and philosophies. Thanks for cutting the crap. It's great to have you help me out. Thanks again. I just wished we could keep the magazine stuff but it's fine. Thank you. I'm so happy. Her page finally looks good and pleasing to read. It's all thanks to you. -- shez 14:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Solving billing problems

I put up a poll at the Indian cinema talk page -- do we have a consensus on following the IMDB billing order? I think that this would be the fastest and easiest way of resolving disputes. However IMDB lists the actors, we use that order. IMDB is online and available to everyone who edits WP. Please comment. Zora 12:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy

I'm glad you actually deleted the clutter because I know it was too much information to absorb. Now, I won't put those movie comments since they should be on the movie's page but can't I put journalistic information since it talks about only Mukerji and not her films. I guess since I'm taking those sentences out for you. Maybe I should add the one statement you have been deleting forever. Thanks. I'm glad the article looks much more professional thanks to Gamesmasterg9 who really improved the vocab and grammar. That is all I wanted you to do while I added info. But you have been helpful too. And Zora is back on the Veer-Zaara page. Explain her of the situation if you can. Thanks for your great help and please let me put this one last piece of information from Filmfare Mag. Eva Longoria, Jennifer Lopez and many more actresses have information about status from mags. So why can't Rani. Forbes comes up with lists and ranks annually! Are you saying Bollywood journalistic information is not good? So this is the last favor I'll ask you. I hope you don't complain. I don't mind if you want to put those pieces of info on Zinta's page. Thanks again! -- shez 22:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zora's version is nothing but summary

There is no appeal to the page. Zora just ruins the page by cutting all essences. I'm sorry but that's just my opinion. So, you think IMDB will change the order later on. No, I don't think so. And even if they do, then I'd like to put the current order if you do use IMDB format. Things would be so much simpler, if you go the film maker's way. But no, just because you want to put Zinta over Mukerji, everyone has to re-edit. Fine, do IMDB. I'd just change Jhoom Barabar Jhoom as of now. Secondly, I just saw Mahabharata's page and I didn't put Rani first. She was there first, I guess because she was the first one to be finalized. Now, I'm not even sure if she's doing the movie. I don't even care about that page because the movie has not even been started for shooting yet. Well, just do whatever you want. And I'll do what I want to do. But out of all you people, I admire you the most for coping up with me. And helping me out. You've been great except when it came to revert issues. Well talk to you later. Someone just changed the Veer-Zaara page to IMDB format. Well, I guess, we'll have to put everything to IMDB format then. It's agreed then. I hope you have no problems. But think for one second? Do you think that Salman Khan should be listed before Shah Rukh Khan in Hum Tumhare Hain Sanam when he was not even the lead? Or SRK should be listed before everyone in Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega when he only has a special appearance? I'm telling you Imdb is just random except the main characters on top. But go ahead. Use this format! Maybe we should implement it to Hum Tumhare Hain Sanam and Jhoom Barabar Jhoom just like you did on Veer-Zaara!

-- shez 22:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Double Standards?

So pritam zinta singh can have the phrase: "She is currently among the most successful actresses in the industry" in her intro but Rani can't have "is one of the most popular Bollywood actresses at present." Don't have double standards. You were okay with the page except the filmfare no.1 position fact. Zora has left it as it is ans so have other editors. You were okay with the page! Now you're going against your sense of right. Maybe to give more importance to zinta or I don't know. Just leave this page as it is. People are fine. There's nothing false about it. So please! -- shez 22:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello?

Well, you weren't that vocal. Were you now? And all of a sudden, you raise your voice! If this is not double standard, then what is? You said you didn't want the golden globe nomination stuff, which i thot was imp. but i deleted it for u. If you had a problem, you should have said it to me then. Now, I worked so hard for three months and now, you say it's not good when you used to correct my sentences everyday and bother me. But I took your criticism and made it your way. I added stuff and you put it in your own words. So, don't tell me, you weren't happy! Because you are the one responsible for both Zinta's and Mukerji's articles! If you want to help and improve the page, then don't delete information. Either change it to your own words or add something different. Cause I want the same number of references I worked for. If you want to do that, fine! But to erase someone's work when you were the one who supervised me is wrong. That too after a long period of time. You should have said something then. Anyway, now I know what kind of a person you are. -- shez 22:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry!

Sorry! I didn't mean it that way. I don't want to cause a fight. Plus, I really didn't know that unknown user was someone else. It's been a while that user was putting Zinta before Rani on HDKPK and Veer-Zaara. So i thot it was you bcoz in those days you were confronting me on the subject of credits. Anyway, I'm sorry. All i want to say to you is that whenever I put something on the page, why did you correct the grammar and just let it be on there. Why didn't you remove it then. Maybe, I would have put something different. Now, after three months, you expect me to let you guys take advantage of my work and just destroy it all. I'm just saying if you hate the page, then improve it by adding new stuff. You like the page when it's simple? That's just crazy talk. A good page has lots on info on it. Now, today, I added four references. If you could do that on Rani's page and provide good info, then good. If you can't then don't revert stuff. You should reciprocate info and not just destroy it all. Zora doesn't get that. I hope you do coz I've known you for a while and you seem like a nice person. If you have interests in the page and want to improve it, then do so by helping not by removing what you don't like all at once. That's all. I hope you don't take that in a negative way. I am just not good with words. I hope you can understand me through my writing. No edit wars! PLZ. Thanks. -- shez 22:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

Can we make Rani Mukerji's page somewhat like Diane Keaton's one. It's a beautiful article. That's why I keep adding facts and stuff to the article. If only someone can put those facts in real nice words and make the sentences interesting. But you guys keep reverting the work, making an excuse for fangush. If it's fangush, then why don't you take the facts from fangush and make a better sentence which is more subtle and appropriate. I don't think it's fangush. But everything on the page is true, so just take the references and use them to write better and long. References don't lie, that's why I've put reputed source. I already cut down on the Filmfare No.1 fact but even on Diane, Eva Longoria, JLO's page, there is a mention of rankings. And so many other articles. There's nothing wrong with it. You don't need to rank everyone. Just the top three or just the no.1 It's a great accomplishment. It's not just one source, you know. Every magazine puts her as No.1 for box-office power. I don't think that's fangush. If it were only one magazine, maybe favoritsm but when every top magazine of India, states the same, there is no fangush there. Anyway, do whatever. I just don't want Rani's page to be boring and brief like other Bollywood-related articles. If we start from here, maybe later on, the format can be used and other Bollywood articles can do the same and become more interesting. People don't even look at an article if it's short. There is no info. People tend to search somewhere else on google. Then what's the point of this article? Why not just delete it? Well, I can only do so much as to add info, you guys are editors who can write good and organize thoughts and convey subtle information. Perhaps, maybe even influence people. The old days are gone. Just because Madhuri's article is brief, doesn't mean Aishwarya's or Sushmita's need to be less than that length. People search the latest stuff. We need to improve our current actors and actresses pages. Then, we can move on to legends. Think about it. We can do such a good job. Only if you cooperate and we must not revert one other's work before discussing the problem. I already put so many references. I think it's fine for now. But we can do 50 by the end of 2007. Just think it through. You just need to read all those articles and put it all together in one article. Just go through the references. I'll ask plumcouch to help you. It would be great if Zora could. I'll ask her but I'm not sure. Thanks for reading this! -- shez 12:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Kareena kapoor traditional.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Kareena kapoor traditional.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 13:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of the Highest Order

Hello! Pa7,

I would like to bring to your notice, the persistent vandalism committed on actor Salman Khan's article by a long time negative contributor Plumcouch. [1]

Of late, he keeps deleting this key description in Salman Khan's career section- Khan has starred in a number of top grossing movies and remains one of the most successful movie stars in Indian Cinema. (The Mumbai based Hindi/Urdu language film industry, popularly known as Bollywood).

With this version of his own- Khan has starred in a number of top-grossing movies and remains one of the most successful movie stars in one of the regional Indian movie industries popularly known as Bollywood.

Most importantly, he has provided this (hate site/spam) link [2] as a direct reference to the statement- Khan has been romantically linked to actresses Sangeeta Bijlani, Somy Ali and Aishwarya Rai in the past.[1]

It didn't end there, he has asked a citiation for a well known fact- He is currently dating fellow actress and model Katrina Kaif.[citation needed]

Please look into the history of contributions to Salman Khan's article since its inception, by the user Plumcouch. You'll realise how he has been manipulating/ forcing his personal views on the article.

I have taken care of it for now, in future I would request you to kindly take a strong note of these developments. Thanks, --LuckyS 00:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)LuckyS[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sushmita.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Sushmita.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 23:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worried ...

Hello, Pa7, welcome back and a happy Diwali (though it's kinda late for this.) I have to admit, I was kinda worried when you disappeared for about a week. Somehow it's weird not to see your edits for such a long time. ;) Anyway, welcome back, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 21:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, Lucky. He's kinda the Shez version for Salman Khan's article. He keeps adding cluttering stuff to Khan's article like that explanation what Bollywood is, what language they speak there and that it is based in Mumbai, formerly Bombay. I have never read such explanation about Hollywood, that English is spoken there and that it is based in Los Angeles. That's what the Hollywood/Bollywood-articles are for, IMHO. Also, there have been changes of cast listing (Karan Arjun & Hum Tumhare Hain Sanam) and general Khan-glorification. Went to get a mediator (see Salman's talk page for that), mediator had his word, but Lucky added still his stuff. It's kinda frustrating. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 21:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea!!

Thanks! The page looks nice. Just one thing. What I meant by: she was the new success story of the Yash Raj Films was that Yash Raj Films made her popular and in demand. All her biggest hits have been with Yash Raj Film and the campaign put her on the map. Her career was going low-profile before Saathiya. Yash Raj Films have done a lot of films with her. Plus, Yash Raj Films is all about quality over quantity. They produce 3 films per year or so. Rani had MDK, Saathiya, Hum Tum, Veer-Zaara, Bunty Aur Babli with Yash Raj Films and now Tara Rum Pum. That's 6 films when Yash Raj Films have selective work. Plus the campaign distributed Black, Mangal Pandey and KANK. That's 9 films already. It's a big part of her career. We must mention Yash Raj Films. I'll just put them on there. You can word it better and elaborate. Thanks. And what's wrong with the beautiful Indian women list? It's great I think because it's not mostly Bollywood on the top ten. only 2 of them on the top ten. So, it's unbiased. I think we should have that there. Please discuss. And about the Zinta-Mukerji rivalry. All I have to say is watch Koffee with Karan on youtube.com Go watch Kareena & Rani on it. You will know what I mean. In public, they have to be diplomatic and nice to each one. They share a nice professional relationship. All I want to say is that they are not friends which the media used to think at the time of Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega. The media assumed and they said nothing. Now, when they are so popular and the media knows them a lot. They saw that they were not close friends. They again assumed they became rivals. But Zinta mentions they were never friends from the beginning. They have totally different personalities. Read Preity Zinta interviews in magazine issues and see her on tv, giving interviews, she specifically says, she is not friends with Rani at all. Plus, they share a similar career graph. They have done a lot of movies together. Rani, for one, I know is insecure when she is around Zinta. Have you not seen them together on stage? They hardly talk. Preity told on Koffee with Karan that they only say hello when they come on sets. That's all unless they have a scene together. There is competition between them even the illiterate people in India know that. It's not ever said openly but who says that? Will Zinta ever say I hate Rani? Or Rani saying I am better than her. Ofcourse not. But you have to infer. In the interview on Koffee With Karan, Rani came really close to saying Zinta is loud and irritating. See it. That too after when Preity on video said she is the best actress of their generation. Rani thought she was being fake and said that she has an opinion about everything. See that. Read the interviews and then you'll know. Before there was competition between Dixit and Sridevi, then Kajol and Karisma, then there were gossips about Sush and Ash which were never true but now, the fact abt them is totally true. Research please and then discuss. User:Shez_15

Image:Aishwarya Dhoom.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aishwarya Dhoom.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 18:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "Hi. Just got your message, I don't understand what the problem is. I specified the copyright holders, provided the source and a descriptive fair use rationale. Isn't that what was required?"

No. Please see WP:FUC. We are not permitted to use a non-free image solely to depict Rai. In addition, as this was a film screenshot, it could only have been used to illustrate and provide critical commentary on the film. --Yamla 18:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "Oh right. Sorry did not know. I just had a look at WP:FUC. In that case then yes delete the image. Sorry again."

Yeap, no problem. Warnings exist to point out where people are going wrong and I seriously doubt that anyone knows all the policies on the Wikipedia. No harm done, have a happy day! --Yamla 18:48, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

when yoy remove the page of Preity Zinta to this point, the languages and the categories are dissapearing! so please don`t do it again.

HEY!

I talked to Zora and she's fine with the polls since she is going to delete the page, it's better to add ranking info to the article of the person itself. If you want to add the rank to Zinta's or other actress' page, you can. I'm not touching it. I also worked on Bipasha, Karisma, Kareena and Sushmita's page. Check that out. I hope you don't have a problem with the polls. And what I mean by the new success story of Yash Raj Films, is not that she made them famous but the films made her famous. It's again an important part of her career since she has done 9 films with them, mostly big big hits. If you can paraphrase it differently, that's okay but do not delete the good reference. Thanks! User:shez_15

Hrithik Roshan

Hello, Pa7, just a small note: someone called User:Knbh has added Hrithik Roshan to the cast of about a dozen movies where he doesn't have a part (Shootout at ..., London Dreams, etc.). Just have an eye on eye on him, he may come back and try again. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 19:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton! Happy Halloween to you too! :) --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 19:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I'm okay with what you've done with the page, except that I don't like how someone has worded the career section. I think Zora did it way before. I think we could paraphrase it differently to make it more interesting. I tried the top half but I suck. You check? And I added more film festivals to the filmography. But they are all Casablanca Film Festivals, maybe I should remove it from the ones which already have a film festival. I dont know. You decide again? Thanks. How can I help? I worked hard on Basu, Sen and Kapoor's page! Are there any other interesting pages to work on? -- User:shez_15

Image:Tanuja.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tanuja.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Yamla 18:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Raima Sen.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Raima Sen.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 23:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

I'm sorry about the attacks on Zinta's page but I just felt that you were working more on her page than any other actress like Bipasha or Shilpa. You, as a professional should be worried about other articles too. I am only interested in topics concerning Rani. But I do help around other pages too once in a while when I find time. It's just that there are so many people attacking Rani's page, I feel like I'm the only one adding to that page. If you see, from references to filmography to the award section and to the career, media appearances, television appearances, trivia, accomplishments, personal life, I've added and improved those sections. I added the box to filmography cuz no one wud help me b4 and now, everyone copies the format of that pic. Like Preity's awards now. They put it in Rani's format. It's just so funny! Anyhow, I still feel Hero was not a hit and sometimes, I doubt boxofficeindia.com sources cuz they do come across as manipulating numbers. Anyway, a new problem now: Hariharan wants to cast people according to films and not IMDB. I said no! Cuz we guys had a big fight on this and I agreed on the IMDB format although I so don't want to. But the decision has been made. Now just bcoz Zinta is casted at the bottom on IMDB for jhoom barabar jhoom, we are not changing every movie's format. And if so, I demand Rani to be before Zinta on Veer-Zaara page then. As for Baabul pics, they dont have any good pictures, and I put Rani's cuz the movie is about her life and her situation and she is there with every other actor. Plus, i love the dresses. It's a new designer and it's probably the trademark of the movie as the news channel were talking abt yesterday. And for KANK, no more pics, I just wanted a picture of the main hero and heroine together. Thanks. -- shez 10:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjay Dutt

I understand that u reverted the page to what someone else did earlier but dude, everything that was on that page had external links which would provide enough info on him, its not one person's personal view that's being portrayed here. People from different backgrounds who check wikipedia should know what are the popular perceptions about a certain personality. As long as the comments dont authoritively say or assert that a person is such and such but merely report on the perceptions of the time while at the same time mentioning that they are popular perceptions, Wikipedia is as close to the facts as it can get. Someone looking at this page to figure out who sanjay dutt is should be able to understand what his image is like, its like saying amitabh is the biggest star of bollywood, can u quantify that statement ? u cant , there is no statistical analysis to prove that, but it is a common perception, so as long as someone says that amitabh is preceived to be the biggest star in bollywood, It does not make any sense to mess with the post. thanks.

Hello, there!

Hello, Pa7, sorry that I was kinda quiet the last days - am currently totally stressed out because of college. About a century ago, you posted on my discussion page and I didn't reply. Sorrysorrysorry. ;) Anyway, as fr recent vandals: not sure you noticed, but there's some user, called User:Sc4704. He's kinda -- difficult, as he doesn't communicate at all and posts completely unverified stuff on SRK's, Salman's and Salman's movies' articles. Banyantree banned him for disrupting Wiki, however, I'm afraid he'll start again when he'll get unbanned. Besides that, everything's peachy, I think. User:Ekantik suddenly appeared out-of-nowhere and, IMHO, I think his edits are really very good. Besides that, usual Shez-stuff and some serious Ajith Kumar-owning. I'm toying with the thought of cleaning up his article, however, to keep it clean, I might need some help. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 15:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Madhuri Dixit

Hello, Pa7, yep, heard about Madhuri's comeback too. She signed with Yash Raj and starts filming in January, I heard. Do you know who will play the male lead? I'm seriously rooting for either Shahrukh or Salman, since, IMHO, they had great chemnistry with her. Who would you like to see opposite her? Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 20:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]