User talk:Wikipoirot

HAVE REMOVED THIS LINE. IT IS NOT REQUIRED AND AMOUNTS TO DEFAMATION - Jahnavi was born out of wedlock, when Boney was legally married to his first wife Mona Shourie Kapoor.

Have removed the bit about the 'alleged' affair between Sridevi and Mithun from the section Personal Life. The link-up, as it happens in all film industries, is an alleged and rumored affair and most of it was media hype. Such 'love affairs' are not facts but belong to the realm of speculation and gossip. Sridevi or Mithun have never confirmed any such affair or alleged secret marriage and adding such slanderous media rumors to this page amounts to defamation. Information about such love affairs and flings do not appear in the Personal Life section of other Bollywood actors anywhere on Wikipedia, so there's no reason for such malicious information to be added to Sridevi's page.

October 2016

Your addition to Sridevi has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. bonadea contributions talk 18:00, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:TRAILER

Hi there, re: this, I've cut the majority of this content. For starters, mundane marketing techniques, like poster releases, teasers, trailers, television appearances, etc. are not considered noteworthy enough for inclusion. Please see WP:TRAILER. Additionally, there was excessive attention paid to celebrities drooling over other celebrities, and I can't for the life of me understand why we'd have content in an encyclopedia that describes critical response to posters. It's so bizarre and trivial. We don't do that in film articles, and it comes off as extraordinarily promotional. Thus, the content has been removed. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Mom (film). While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Diff: [1] As previously noted in detail, we're not here to sell movie tickets and your additions of trivial content contravene WP:TRAILER and constitutes unambiguous advertising. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:52, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Marketing techniques adopted by a studio appear on several film pages here on Wikipedia - (Check out The Dark Knight (2008) page where an entire 'Marketing' section talks about all the pre-release strategies from Teaser release to Ledger obits). But I do agree with you that critical response to posters is avoidable. I have removed all that retaining just the info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipoirot (talk • contribs)

Yes, when there is sufficient justification. Per WP:TRAILER:

"A film's marketing campaign may be detailed in its Wikipedia article if reliable sources exist ... Since films are treated as commercial products, care must be taken to provide a neutral point of view.

Topics that can be covered include target demographics, test screenings, release dates, scale of release (limited vs. wide), merchandising, marketing controversies, and contending for awards. Do not merely identify and describe the content of customary marketing methods such as trailers, TV spots, radio ads, and posters. Instead, use reliable sources to provide useful commentary about a method, such as a trailer's intended effect or the audience's reported reaction to it."

So, which aspects of these guidelines are you addressing? A first look release is mundane and shouldn't necessarily be detailed. Salman Khan heaping praise on Sridevi doesn't appear meaningful here as all actors, while promoting a film, will engage in open admiration of co-stars. Big deal. Mundane. Obviously Sridevi would share the first look on her Twitter. What's the surprise? What is "viral" except a fluffy term that describes anything released to a wide audience. It's totally subjective filler, and promotional filler at that. The only thing in this restoration of content that would be observant of WP:TRAILER is the notion that the first look was received better in Pakistan than in India, which could be boiled down to a single sentence. Now how exactly does that compare to the voluminous detail at The Dark Knight (film)? Again, we're not here to sell tickets, so the drooling and fluff needs to go.

As a matter of procedure, please sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~. This will append your name and a time stamp like what you see at the end of my post. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:36, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Everything that’s ‘obvious’ isn’t always ‘mundane’. As pointed out, several film pages on Wikipedia have a section on Marketing with teaser and trailer details, hence the addition is valid. The Wiki guideline you have shared says ‘marketing campaign may be detailed in its Wiki article if reliable sources exist’ and that’s exactly what I have done. All the matter added here has been culled from reports by leading media houses which have been duly cited to corroborate the info. Since what I have added is purely factual, none of it is ‘subjective’ and the tone is entirely ‘neutral’. Salman’s comment is a big deal because he wasn’t merely drooling. It’s a significant comment coming from an actor in an industry that is male-dominated and that’s why it made headlines everywhere. The Wiki guideline also stipulates that it’s advisable to provide matter on a ‘trailer’s intended effect or audience’s reported reaction’. That encompasses Salman’s response, the teaser clocking million plus views and its effect in Pakistan. Finally, I doubt that content on a Wikipedia page can sell movie tickets. My sole aim here is to create a comprehensive page on ‘Mom’. Thanks. Wikipoirot (talk) 08:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm a bit late in responding, so my apologies there. To your point "several film pages on Wikipedia have a section on Marketing with teaser and trailer details, hence the addition is valid", sorry, that's a totally invalid argument. Lots of articles have typos. Doesn't mean we endorse typos. Lots of articles misuse boldface. Doesn't mean it's okay to misuse boldface. Lots of articles contain promotional language. Doesn't mean we endorse promotional language. Existence doesn't necessitate or even license inclusion. If the content contravenes established community consensus, it should be excluded until you can achieve a local consensus. If the content about trailers, first looks, etc has sufficient context that imparts some clear academic information other than "the trailer was released on X date and a celebrity loved it", which is what the guideline instructs with its example of the mysterious Cloverfield promotional campaign, then sure, it could be included. But "trailer is released and Salman Khan thinks Sridevi is wonderful" is pure drivel. You're welcome to seek out other opinions, perhaps at WikiProject Film, but barring that, consensus seems pretty clearly against the knee-jerk inclusion of trailer fluff. To your bolded point "if reliable sources exist", your argument is negated by the unambiguous discouragement of including customary marketing methods. The guideline doesn't say "Don't include customary marketing methods unless they're sourced." Rather, it instructs us not to add content about customary marketing unless there's a stand-out reason to do so. And no, Salman Khan is not the intended audience of the film, so it is disingenuous to suggest that his opinion belongs in that section. The detail about the reception in Pakistan is totally worth including! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)