Jump to content

Talk:List of Hindi film families

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

Untitled

[edit]

The list was getting just too long for the Bollywood article, so I split it off into its own article.

Some discussion of the links between the clans might be nice. Zora 05:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Couple of inaccuracies

[edit]

1.Om Puri is not Amrish and Madan Puri's cousin

2. Gulshan Kumar did not marry Anuradha Paudwal, though there were rumors about an affair which was in between the two.

Haphar 10:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of irrelevant information needs cleaning

[edit]
  • This list must be limited to individual names which made a career of their own in film industry, not because of nuptial tie or they are born in a family with a member in film industry.

Like, Shweta Nanda, her daughter Navya Naveli and Agastya Nanda must not get a place. Another example: Sara Ali Khan (Saif and Amrita's daughter) and Ibrahim Ali Khan (Saif and Amrita's son). Yashodhara Oberoi was not individually related to industry. And many other irrelevant informations. This is a encyclopedia not a fan site.

  • Families must have a downward hierarchical structure. S.D. Burman is listed under Mangeshkar Family, Asha was her daughter-in-law so Asha became a member of Burman family. Burman Sr. wasn't send to Mangeshkar family.
  • Some incorrect informations are also there.

Sushmita Sen is not a member or descendant of Suchitra Sen's family.

VivekTalk!! 01:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why this article should be edited, not deleted

[edit]

It exists because people kept adding this information to the main Bollywood article. It is indeed relevant to an understanding of the Bollywood film industry. All the red links need to be removed, as well as the idiocy about the Ganguly family.

It could perhaps be renamed and recast as an article on Bollywood film clans, removing the "list" format, which tempts editors to show off their knowledge of the film world by adding ever more irrelevant names.

Can't expect me to do it, as I've been outa here for months, and feeling better for it. Zora 18:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinked and unlinked names

[edit]

Should the list include all the names of people of all the clans? I am sure that any family that runs four generations deep will have hundreds of names to feature here. But, is that a goal? I'd rather propose to have people who already has an article on the Wikipedia, and remove the rest. If someone is notable enough to feature here, should also be notable enough to have his/her own article. I have a mind to start removing all non-notable names from the article within the week. So, if there's an objection, please, let be known here by that time. I really have found out that posting a proposition and waiting for someone to respond is a complete waste of time, and in case of Wikipedia, the response may take years to come. This doesn't need to wait that long. Aditya(talk • contribs) 16:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The redlinked and unlinked names are back. Aditya(talk • contribs) 02:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it. If you don't, I will. It would make sense to include the word "notable" in the description at the top. SchreiberBike talk 03:11, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. SchreiberBike talk 19:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting of list

[edit]

@Anushe.ahmed: A lot of the recent changes to the list have been great and I'm glad to see someone who knows the subject area working on it. I like the galleries of family members quite a bit. There are some changes that should be discussed though. Before recently, all names in the list were in the form * [[Firstname Lastname]] (reason for notability – relationship within family), but not all have the reason for notability. Recent changes have been in the form *[[Anil Kapoor]] --- Sunita Kapoor, [[married and maiden names|nee]] Bhambhani (m. 1984 - ''present'') for example. We could change the way all the people in the list are formatted, but changing some of them but not others makes the list inconsistent. The ASCII art format now under List of Hindi film clans#Kapur-Pathak-Shah family doesn't fit with how Wikipedia looks. The family tree recently added under List of Hindi film clans#Chopra-Johar family looks good to me, but looks complicated to set up. Also Wikipedia generally does not capitalize or abbreviate very much (see MOS:CAPS), so usually phrases like "First Wife" would be "first wife" or sometimes at the beginning of a line "First wife" and instead of "b.", we can just say "born".

Let's discuss the best format for the list here. Wikipedia has standard guidance for lists at MOS:LIST, and general writing rules at WP:MOS. No need to read all of that, but they are helpful.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  04:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying a table format. Please, check. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:27, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that works ok and adds clarity. I do like the galleries much better at the bottom of each family instead of before the text or table. Is "Gen one", "Gen two", etc. common in Indian English? To my eye, "1st generation", "2nd generation", etc. seem more natural. Keep up the good work.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:21, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The galleries which have been added have sometimes been at the top of a family's list and sometimes at the bottom. Also some red links and unnecessary abbreviations have crept in. If there is no objection I will move the galleries to the bottom of each family section, remove the red linked names and fix the abbreviations. Thanks,  SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Khan family (of Salim Khan)

[edit]

Hello @Kthen: It's great to have your contributions to the list, but I've removed them several times and want to explain why. As the introduction to the list says, "This page lists some of the notable clans and their noteworthy members" and notable is linked to the article Notability in the English Wikipedia. Based on the practice on this page and discussion above, we have decided to only list people who have an article about them in Wikipedia. This could be discussed again, but it has served as a good rule to keep the list manageable. Also, following Wikipedia's Manual of Style, we don't put things in bold very much and we don't place links repeatedly. So where you have added new people who don't have Wikipedia articles, I have removed them and I have undone some of the formatting changes you made. Thanks,  SchreiberBike | ⌨  03:08, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No boldface of names in the article, please

[edit]

No boldface of names in the article, please. It violates Wikipedia styles, policies, guidelines and traditions. If you are doing this repeatedly, then I expect that you are able to state your reason. If you can't show that you have an accepted reason then you may be suspected of unhelpful editing. Aditya(talk • contribs) 03:40, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unlinked names

[edit]

@Shachiindra and Aditya Kabir: Above there has been a consensus to not include unlinked names. Recently some unlinked and red linked names have been added and people have insisted on keeping them. Has the consensus changed? Should we allow unlinked and red linked names? Thanks,  SchreiberBike | ⌨  22:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think, we should add unlink name, because It will be more understable if we add unlink name. Shachiindra (talk) 04:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The original consensus have not changed. Unlinked and redlinked names pose a problem with WP:Notability. If anyone wants a name to be introduced to a list, it is wise to create the article for the name first. There is no scope for laziness when it comes to notability. Aditya(talk • contribs) 03:02, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Hindi film clans. 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) 13:30, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 March 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested. Dekimasuよ! 03:54, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– Per common sense. These are not lists of clans, but of families. In Indian terminology clans usually mean a sub-caste. The moves will be consistent with List of South Indian film families. —usernamekiran(talk) 18:54, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Precise information about clans, and sub-castes can be found at Jāti. —usernamekiran(talk) 18:30, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Better title?

[edit]

Not starting a move request because I don't really have a vested interest in this topic. But wouldn't 'List of Bollywood families' sound better? They mean the same thing but just thought I'd suggest this wording since it sounds better.--NØ 07:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the list should be named as Indian Film Families as it consists of families from Malayalam, Bengal, Kannada, Tamil and Telugu industry as well. (Ganeshiyer3000 (talk) 01:22, 5 January 2019 (UTC))[reply]

I agree the title should be renamed to Indian Film Families as it includes the list of families from the film fraternity from all over India. It's a more apt name. Aadirulez8 (talk) 23:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. This is definitely list of all Indian film families, not just Hindi films. Move Request. Atif.hussain (talk) 11:51, 27 November 2022 (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) 21:42, 30 December 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) 08:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

marlon

[edit]

live in jamaica singl 72.27.6.179 (talk) 02:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Hindi_film_families&oldid=1257274544"