Talk:Naam Shabana

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

India: Cinema Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Editorials from IP

In these edits, IP 59.182.133.200 resubmitted content that they'd previously submitted from 59.182.162.199. The content is POV laden, for instance the phrasing "Considering that it is only a Tapsee Pannu film, which smacks of feminism and limited mass appeal, the collection during the opening weekend was fairly decent, with the 3-day collection being 18 crore." The editor is obviously just cramming their own editorial ruminations into the article, and these should be cut on sight. I've attempted to explain this to them here.

Re: this edit where the IP writes, "We should mention full budget including promotions. Otherwise comparison with collections will be like apples and oranges", this standpoint is rooted in ignorance of Wikipedia practices, since nowhere across WikiProject Film do we include promotions in a film's total budget. In fact, Template:Infobox film explicitly says (emphasis mine):

"Insert the approximate production budget of the film. This is the cost of the actual filming, and does not include marketing/promotional costs (e.g. advertisements, commercials, posters)."

So the community's stance on this is unambiguous and the IP editor's changes are inconsistent with community preferences.

Lastly, there are other problems coming from this user, like this totally absurd commentary at Poonam Dhillon so I have reason to be concerned about this subject's knowledge of Wikipedia practices, their general judgment and their ability to present neutral content in this collaborative encyclopedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]