Jump to content

Talk:Arijit Singh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arijit Singh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tone Comment

[edit]

Even though sourced, the article reads like a massive promotional piece. Decreasing the hyperbole and maybe adding some criticism would be helpful. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Welfare State ‖ 18:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality of this article is diputed

[edit]

This article has serious issues of neutrality as per Neutral point of view. Whole article is written from a fan's point of view and contains statements which are highly disputed like in the lead section, it reads, His singing as well as his voice quality is considered as melliflous, soulful and melodious. It further reads, His voice is described as a voice that penetrates the soul. In career beginning section it is written, Bhansali informed him that he is a "Great singer" whether he wins the show or not it doesn't matter. Likewise, it says, Arijit Singh killed this one with his vocals. Somewhere in the middle it says, Very few musicians have appropriately exploited the mammoth talent that Arijit possesses, as much as Vishal does. At some point it says, his voice has the "Magical Power to heal and soothe the soul of people. In short whole article gives the image of a fan site.

I invite all the concerned editors to join me in this discussion to resolve the issue of neutrality.-Umair Aj (talk) 21:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

- Hi Umair, at the lead I have removed the statement like "His voice has the power of creating blissful relaxation" even though it was sourced but accordingly was not encyclopedia. But other contents on lead have multiple citations and are strongly sourced

Likewise, I removed the statement that "Industry reports wrote Arijit Singh Killed this one with his vocals" it was about the artists rendition of "Janam Janam song , I removed it as the industry reports didn't indicated a particular and reliable newsmedias name.

Secondly the statement that "Sanjay Leela Bhansali" saying that Arijit is a great singer is from an interview that he gave to the one of most reliable news media , which has an archived citation. The statement of Bhansali is in the early life section which is important according to encyclopedia view

Thirdly the comment that "Very few musicians have appropriately exploited the mammoth talent that Arijit possesses, as much as Vishal does was about the review of the artists song rendition from Rangoon film, it was a review of his sung songs from Rangoon in section 2017- , the statement was well sourced and from reliable source.

And lastly the content his voice has the "Magical Power to heal and soothe the soul of people is a statement of Indian news media NewsX, a reliable source describing the artists vocal texture according to it's observation. The statement is placed at it's appropriate place where other news agencies, media groups and Indian public figure have also commented about the artists vocal texture for eg the statement- "Shekhar Ravjiani wrote his vocal texture is brilliant" . I think there is no problem about it as it are opinion about "News Media" and Indian notable public figures Those comments altogether forms a section ,if we attempt to remove it ,we have to delete the entire section.

I hope I have addressed your concerns . Anoptimistix (talk) 07:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Anoptimistix, please do not remove the tag as this issue is not mine but as per the Wikipedia's policy. Mind it this policy is non-negotiable, and the principles upon which it is based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, nor by editor consensus. Any statement whether properly sourced like a few I mentioned are against the policy and they are supposed to be removed. This complete article is written from a fan's point of view and needs to be re-written. Such statements like Magical Power to heal and soothe the soul of people are against the basic policy of Wikipedia and this article is full of such statements no matter how properly they are sourced. So I am going to remove a few rest you can also contribute.-Umair Aj (talk)

 Comment::: These statement "Magical Power to heal and soothe the soul of people" was by an Indian mainstream news media NewsX and was wellsourced, however I have corrected it's tone per WP:POV by simply replacing it by the word "soothing". Anoptimistix (talk) 10:36, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent attempts of removing the letter by Indian artist Armaan Malik on the Impact & Recognition section was made by the editor Umair Aj, Here is the evidence The letter received significant amount of Indian news media coverage from the Indian Express. The citation was archived and was reliably sourced, however contents and formatting of the letter was removed by the editor Umair Aj, stating neutrality. The editor also deleted the citation and placed citation needed tag. It appears to me that it was a deliberate attempt to make it look unsourced and vandalise the section. As an editor, I respect wikipedias neutrality guidelines but an archived well sourced letter published from a reliable news media by an artist to another artist should be placed at the relevant section of an article. How can this be non-neutral or promotional ? Anoptimistix (talk) 11:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, you really don't have any idea what the WP:POV is all about. You seem like a great admirer and a fan of this singer, so feel free to start a fan site but Wikipedia is not that kind of a place. The statements I removed are all promotional and from a fan's point of view. Please read WP:ASSERT. If you want to apprise yourself on the subject, do read WP:VAGUE. You can't just go against the basic policy of Wikipedia.-Umair Aj (talk) 16:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Umair Aj: I am not a fan of this singer, for your information I have patrolled 100s of new pages about wide range of topics, reviewed pending changes and edited articles about various topics . I respect you as an editor and for being a valuable contributor. I know Wikipedia's neutrality policy and understand and respect it's core policies but seems you may not have fully understood Wikipedia's neutrality policies that's why you were promoting Pakistani singers on the article of singing and were warned by an administrator on Edit warring noticeboard and your talk page respectively. Coming on the article I am not talking about removing any poorly sourced puffery , but I am against removing reliably well sourced contents For example please look here You deleted content as well as reliable citation here. The content was a statement in the form of open letter, which was formatted by another editor as it is was the statement in the Indian Express. It was there in the impact and recognition section as it received significant amount of coverage by the Indian Express. The statement had a well sourced reliable archived citation. Can you please answer ! what was the purpose of deleting the citation, isn't it vandalism ? Anoptimistix (talk) 05:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Listen Anoptimistix, this is exactly the reason why you actually don't understand the Wikipedia policy regarding WP:ASSERT. Please read WP:VAGUE and take some time off to apprise yourself on the subject. You are adding Peacock terms in the article and according to the policy these terms must be removed no matter how well cited they are. So my advice for you to spent some time on educating yourself and in the mean while please feel free to start a fan site for Arjit Singh. I understand you being an Indian find it very difficult not to praise you favorite singer on Wikipedia but that's not Wikipedia meant for and I shall definitely guard it's policy against any sort of vandalism.-Umair Aj (talk) 09:43, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


@Umair Aj: No dear brother you have got me wrong :) I was only against Deletion of reliable citation. I have read and understood all core policies of this great encyclopedia. No where it is mentioned that contributors are permitted to delete a reliable citation and replace it with citation needed tag. And you mentioned nationality ! I Love and respect all nationalities and their cultures. For example few days back some abuses were written on the Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif's article. I reverted all those and requested indefinite confirmed protection. And a sysop (admin) protected the page. If you have any more queries about me feel free to visit my talk page.

Anoptimistix (talk) 16:00, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, you again assumed wrong. Please read my above statement again, Peacock terms must be removed no matter how reliably they are cited. I am assuming good faith in your edits but on the contrary just advised you to read the policy again. I hope next time you will be careful in adding such terms to Argit Singh.-Umair Aj (talk) 00:46, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Umair Aj: Please go through Wikipedia's Verifying policies. Wikipedia's policies encourage editors to cite sources. How can referencing or adding sources can be vandalism ?. The references which I added were from reliable and reputed news media Indian Express and those were archived. If you have any objection about references please talk ! Please don't falsely accuse me for vandalism. As far Wikipedia's policies state vandalism it means Deliberate removal of content with an intention of damaging an article and it's content . Please understand the meaning of vandalism. Adding references are not vandalism. Hope it clears your confusion regarding vandalism. Have a lovely day ! Anoptimistix Let's Talk 16:11, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anoptimistix, now it looks that you have started to understand the basic policy of Wikipedia. I don't mind you adding resources but if those citations are peacocking, then I have to remove the statement like I just removed a POV statement. So I am going to correct this article according to the policy and please keep in mind that your are about to be blocked as per Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. So please do not revert my edits. This article has a complete list of issues like impartiality of tone and undue weight, peacocking, and overuse of quotes.-Umair Aj (talk) 19:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Umair Aj Next time please ping me before inviting me for a discussion here. This is the code for pinging {{ping|User}} replace user with my username I think you have some misunderstanding on WP:ANEW Admins didn't warned me a block alone. As far as I can read there an admin commented that you are deleberately deleting references and a block is near for you. And later another admin cautioned us both and ask for discussion and On the WP:ANEW Admins have said that references should not be deleted or removed ! If you have any accuracy doubts relating to citation please discuss on the talk page and notify the author before deleting it. Persistently deleting citations appears to be vandalism. You are persistently deleting citation. Please don't vandalise wikipedia' articles. Articles are a result of mutual hardworking of several contributors. You are free to remove poorly sourced puffery or promotional statements. But please don't delete facts and important contents without reaching consensus. Please read Wikipedia's consensus policy it may help. And please don't reflect your personal disliking on Wikipedia. This is a volunteer project where contributors across the world strive to spread information by improving the article, expanding it and fixing references etc. Discuss on talk page first and Notify concerned editors before deleting fact based contents Anoptimistix Let's Talk 08:43, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, still you are not getting the point. This whole article is almost a fan site. Please take some time off and read impartiality of tone and undue weight, peacocking, and overuse of quotes. You have actually spoiled the shape of this article because being a fan it does not mean to vandalize Wikipedia. Please keep in mind that you are about to be blocked as per Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. I hope now you will pay some heed and will apprise your self on the policy.-Umair Aj (talk) 12:41, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 31 external links on Arijit Singh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Massive quote in Impact and recognition section needs correcting and formatting

[edit]

There's a large, bolded quote in the Impact and recognition section. Problem one is it shouldn't be bolded and probably should be in-line at most. Problem two is it's copied incorrectly from the source text. Ravensfire (talk) 20:58, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The second external link should also probably be removed - no way that meets the WP:EL criteria. Ravensfire (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ravensfire,I agree with you. Actually this article is written from a fan's point of view and also has serious POV issues. I have removed some large, bold promotional statements. You can also contribute to make this article according to Wikipedia's guidelines.-Umair Aj (talk) 21:25, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article really needs a great deal of clean up as complete article is written by a fan and has serious issues of impartiality of tone and undue weight, peacocking, and overuse of quotes. I have done some clean up but there is a dire need of re-writing the whole article.-Umair Aj (talk) 08:16, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

[edit]

Anoptimistix and Umair Aj. I've looked through the edits since the page was unprotected. I would agree that the promotional material was a bit too much and needed fixing. However, there were several problems with the way it was removed.

"rendition in the song sounds as "he's on autopilot" " was replaced with "voice impressive". That changes the meaning completely as a person being on autopilot means that they are not really paying any attention to what they are doing. In is generally seen as being negative but changing that to impressive turns it into a positive.

"Chauhan is a great singer, a great musician and a big icon in India. Being compared to him makes me tremendously happy" was changed to "Chauhan is a good singer, a good musician and a big icon in India. Being compared to him makes me happy". That is a direct quote and can't be changed. Also that is a quote by Singh and not about him.

"Nobody Knewed Arijit Singh at that time, he was an immensely talented boy, He would just sit in the studio with a guitar.I would simply gaze at this marvel." was changed to "Nobody Knewed Arijit Singh at that time. He would just sit in the studio with a guitar." Again that is a quote and should not be changed.

Two sentences by Armaan Malik were removed but some more was left in making the section confusing.

"versatile and has a soulful voice". was changed to "versatile voice". Again a direct quote that should not be changed.

I also made a few MOS edits. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:29, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CambridgeBayWeather, you are absolutely right about it and your edits are appreciated. Actually this complete article is written from a fan's point of view and requires a great deal of clean up.-Umair Aj (talk) 12:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CambridgeBayWeather Thank you for responding to my request and countering vandalism as per Original wording policy, your efforts of counter vandalism is greatly appreciated. As you have observed after your protection Lock's expiry Umair Aj vandalised so much content,formatting etc initially they were persistently deleting references now they are deleting contents and misinterpreting the guide of Peacocking guide as the guide says that only "unattributed" contents are peacocking. If you notice their recent edits they are also deleting contents especially music related articles like songs with which Singh is associated and also over tagging them. I think they strongly dislike the person, they may come back to vandalize the article again. However Cambridge, I once again thank you for your counter-vandalism effort. Anoptimistix Let's Talk

Anoptimistix, you have really amused us a lot. Being a fan of Ajit Singh, you can't just add promotional material because it is against Wikipedia's policy. Please read WP:POV. I have removed the peacocking and so did CambridgeBayWeather. Please start a fan site for Arjit Singh but here we have to maintain a Neutral point of view. Please take some time to read basic policies about Wikipedia and don't feel offended. Please also read undue weight.-Umair Aj (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Umair Aj Well I do not want to stretch this argument any further, but as your are accusing me I have to defend myself. First of all you were persistently deleting references and well sourced contents from this article, now you are violating Original wording Policy by changing original quotes to deceive users. From your recent edits eg placing advertisement tags on songs article with which Singh is associated which were not even edited by me like Muskurane and Sooraj Dooba Hain, it seems you have some strong disliking for Singh and his works, a thread from quora had explained me the reason for your unconstructive edits, Quora thread about Singh driving out Pakistani artists from Bollywood.

You recent edits and acts of vandalism on pages related to Singh indicates your strong disliking for him. Feel free to visit Singh's social media accounts and express your disliking, but this is an encyclopedia which contains facts with references. If not me than any other editor like CambridgeBayWeather will revert your unconstructive/vandalism edits. And about basic policy I am more informed, without being informed about basic policy I couldn't have done so much work here. From your sockpuppeting history I come to know, how much you care for Wikipedia's policies. Anoptimistix Let's Talk 08:45, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anoptimistix, you are a strange personality who even doesn't understand Wikipedia's policy. Please read Neutral point of view. You are still not getting the point that your edits are reverted not only by me but also by other editors. Here the issue is simple that you are using this article for promotional stunts and we are telling you again and again that its the violation of Wikipedia's policy. There is no about about you being great admirer and a fan of this singer, so feel free to start a fan site but Wikipedia is not that kind of a place. The statements I removed are all promotional and from a fan's point of view. Please read WP:ASSERT. The songs you have mentioned are all promotional stunts and about to be deleted according to deletion policy. Please keep in mind that your are about to be blocked as per Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring in case next time you vandalized. Why don't you take some time off and please read impartiality of tone and undue weight, peacocking, and overuse of quotes.-Umair Aj (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed issues of being fansite and requiring copyedit

[edit]

The objective of maintenance tag is to notify the editors that the article requires improvements. The first tag place was {{advert}} tag. The user who placed this tag didn't specified which content reads like an ad so I have boldy removed it as it appeared Over tagging. Further there were too many citation needed tag placed despite having citations, appears to be edits by disruptive editor removed it per WP:DISRUPTSIGNS. The issues of being fansite and requiring copyedits were genuine, per this revision [1]. I hope that I have fixed those issues. Thank you Anoptimistix (talk) 03:40, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Anoptimistix (talk), )[reply]

The impact and recognition consisted of direct quotes by Notable Indian People and is per faithful production of original quotes policy Anoptimistix (talk) 03:46, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those quotes are well sourced, but the one which currently doesn't not have any source, initially had sources cited to Twitter, so they were removed (as social media opinions are not considered as reliable on wikipedia) by other editors. If someone gets reliable source for those quotes please add it.Anoptimistix (talk) 03:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article has multiple issues

[edit]

This article has serious issues of impartiality of tone and undue weight, peacocking, and overuse of quotes. On this page, many editors have shown serious concerns regarding the neutral point of view. I am restoring the maintenance tags removed by a fan of Arjit Singh. I also invite other editors to resolve and fix these issues.-Umair Aj (talk) 20:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added a couple of issues:

  • The lead is too long - the list of awards and list of songs are inappropriately placed in the lead, which should be a short, prose summary of the article.
    •  Done - Mostly addressed by Godric on Leave, although it would be nice to get all those references out of the lead. The lead is only supposed to cover information cited elsewhere in the article, so shouldn't need any references at all. I can have a go at fixing that when the rest of the article has been trimmed and it's clearer how to arrange that info. -- Begoon 04:39, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is too long - it contains far too much excessive detail, making it difficult to read. This applies in general, throughout the article, but the "Impact and recognition" section is a striking example - we don't need a quote from everyone who ever said anything good about this person.

In general, I don't like to just "tag" like this, but I'm hoping editors more familiar than I am with this subject will be able to do a better job of addressing this than I would. Thanks -- Begoon 22:59, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did remove {{advert}}, though, as unnecessary. Addressing the listed issues should be sufficient. -- Begoon 10:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Almost certainly linking to the wrong person in the article

[edit]

The subsection Life of the article says "Arijit idolised musicians like Ghulam Ali Khan, Ustad Rashid Khan, Zakir Hussain and Anand Chatterjee. He also enjoyed listening to Kishore Kumar, Hemant Kumar and Manna Dey".

The link to ghulam ali khan is to a Mughal painter.

I think it should be liked to either Pakistani Ghazal singer Ghulam Ali Khan, or to Bade Ghulam Ali Khan. I don't know which one, but it is definitely not to the one it is pointing to right now.

I am new to wikipedia, so I am just letting you people know about this.

Sanjekhare (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the source, it says Bade Ghulam Ali Khan.

Sanjekhare (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sanjekhare: Please provide a source to accept your changes. -- HindWikiConnect 04:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please ignore the previous comments.Thanks for spotting the error and I have fixed it.Winged BladesGodric 05:54, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And, in case of any doubt, the fix obviously links to the correct target. All that was necessary to establish the correct link target was to read the reference at the end of the sentence, which says: "Arijit idolised maestros Bade Ghulam Ali Khan...". Thanks Godric. -- Begoon 05:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In the Sanjhekhare's suggestion, He said that he think it should be liked to either Pakistani Ghazal singer Ghulam Ali Khan, or to Bade Ghulam Ali Khan. He don't know which one, but it is definitely not to the one it is pointing to right now. Then I said him to provided a source, who proves which one.-- HindWikiConnect 06:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Are you incompetent? The source was there for ages, in the article, perfectly specifying the part. Ghulam Ali.And, Sanjekhare had clarified the target explicitly before your ridiculous comment.Even, if he had not mentioned the part. person, it would have taken seconds to go the source and verify it.Winged BladesGodric 06:26, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problem regarding Arijit Singh's divorce

[edit]

For so many years, it is written that Arijit Singh was divorced to Koyel Singh in 2013, but it is totally wrong. The source is also almost unreliable. Everyone made today's Koyel Roy as Koyel Singh(as surname changes after marriage). It is a huge misunderstanding. It is sure that his first marriage was with a co-contestant of Fame Gurukul, and anyone can check that there was no Koyel Singh in the contestant list. Actually, he married with Monica Gadgil. --SouravDas1998t@lk to me? 19:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, per WP:BLP, we shouldn't be mentioning this at all, unless it's discussed by reliable sources as being particularly relevant to his public life. I already removed the divorce details from the infobox on this basis, but now you point it out I realise it's in the article body too, so I'll remove that now. Thanks. -- Begoon 02:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INDICSCRIPT

[edit]

WikiProject India's style guide does not permit the use of Indic scripts in the leads or infoboxes. I've removed content contravening this guideline several times from this article, and each time it has been replaced. At the end of the day it is a project guideline, and if editors of this article form a consensus not to abide by it here then so be it, although imo that would rather undermine the point of having the guideline, and thus would be better discussed at WikiProject India. I'm not going to continue reverting it, so editors here should decide what to do. Thanks. -- Begoon 01:55, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive number of citations

[edit]

This article has excessive number of citations which makes it very difficult to point out the sources. Also, the cited sections contain inappropriate citations which repeats the same subject over and over. (Farooqahmadbhat (talk) 13:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

More images

[edit]

This article needs more good images, including the one at the infobox. Please consider adding some in Wikimedia Commons. Justlookingforthemoment (talk) 10:34, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give a brief indication of where you have already searched for suitable, free images, to avoid any duplication of effort? Thanks. -- Begoon 02:49, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Essay on my favourite singer

[edit]

Arijit singh 103.49.254.88 (talk) 14:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arijit kids info

[edit]

Hi,

Can I add that Arijit Singh has two sons with Koel Roy and one of his son's name is Jul and that he has a stepdaughter according to this article?

https://bollywoodshaadis.medium.com/arijit-singhs-love-life-and-two-marriages-reportedly-his-first-marriage-didn-t-last-even-a-year-3302e3c8bf45

Abrovbo (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About lead

[edit]

There's a lot of overpraising in the lead and there are big statements which aren't supported by the sources attached even in a neutral way. It seems like an issue of impartiality of tone, undue weight, and peacocking. "He is noted for his ability of performing songs in diverse music genres" that simply means he is versatile so why the exaggeration? and is "acclaimed for his significant contributions to the contemporary Bollywood Music" and sources aren't anywhere talking about his contribution in music in general. Next, "Singh is widely considered as one of the best singer in the history of Indian cinema" - such big statements needs to have proper source but here none of the source attached are calling him "Greatest of All Time" at first place. There isn't one specific mention about it.


JabSaiyaan (talk) 06:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arijit_Singh&oldid=1220671535"