Talk:Shriya Saran

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}
Why Shriya Early Career always descrice her beauty by ip users, also add their's phone number name and etc. Shriya's year of birth always change by ip users for no reason.

Information must be verifiable, and requires a reliable source - that is, not a blog. Please do not add information that cannot be verified.

In addition, the article needs to be neutral.

Also, please use the edit summary.  Chzz  ►  10:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Vishalshriya.jpg

The image File:Vishalshriya.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Sources and excessive citations

The article uses a lot of sources (websites) which hardly can be considered or reputable. Morever it uses somewhat excessive citations for things that hardly need an explicit citation at all (like her movies in the lead). Some cleanup and more critical handling of sources might be advisable here.--Kmhkmh (talk) 03:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

In addition to that the missing citation tags for plain undisputed fact like her birthplace that can be directly looked up on her website are a bit silly.--Kmhkmh (talk) 17:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually it's true that her birthplace is cited in the infobox and it's wrong in the article so I could have fixed that myself but this is a BLP so there is nothing silly about tagging WP:V non-compliance. If editors want to add material they need to cite sources. If they don't they should expect someone like me to tag it or remove it. The reason I decided to look at the sourcing is because someone added 'She is Kayastha(Srivastava) by caste'. Is that the case ? Who knows but someone will need to fix the mess that is generated by editors who won't follow mandatory wiki policies like WP:V. Citing one source at the end of an entire section while people add whatever they want to that section without citations isn't good enough. Statemenmts get separated from their citations. Verifiability is compromised. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

And Kmhkmh, why would you revert without reading the source ? The source does not support the statements. That is why they are tagged. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, there's a new source. I'll put it back. It contradicts the infobox source though for the place of birth. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:10, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The source I used is linked from her personal website and mirrors the information there, so I'd assume the basic facts regarding her birth, education, etc. should be correctly stated in that source. Btw. i did not revert your edit, but just edited the paragraph.--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I guess the infobox info needs fixing then. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Well it is true that editors should provide a source when adding content, but that does not mean they need to provide inline citations for every undisputed and fact, which is supported by the general sources anyhow. I understand that in an article like this one with many sometimes questionable changes from a large variety of editors there is a reason to be picky. However this article now develops citation style that is borderline ridiculous, like having a citation for all every single movie she's made. In other words there should be some sane balance.--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair points. I don't think the lead needs any refs. There shouldn't be anything in the lead that isn't in the article per WP:LEAD and the refs should be in the article body. This article isn't about anything controversial so refs in the lead seems like overkill. I'm not sure what you mean by 'general sources' but I guess you might mean the external links. I'd agree that you probably just need one source for all of the films. If it's an inline cite it should be named and reused so it will just appear once in the refs list. The article does seem to have an awful lot of sources given its size. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

With general sources I refer to anything (considered reliable), that is listed under references or external links and which is not an inline citation/footnote. Apparently some sources we currently use carry conflicting information, but probably worse many of the cited sources are not really reliable und often just (private) compilations of (unreliable) web material. Unfortunately I fell for that myself, the source I provided though being linked from her website is just such a compilation rather authorized information by Shriya Saran herself. I will clean out some of that stuff and reduce it to the actual information on her website. If somebody else wants additional information he should provide a realiable source.--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there are a lot of poor sources. The other thing that I notice is that the article has a lot of things like "opposite Pawan Kalyan", "starring debutants Ritesh Deshmukh and Genelia D'Souza in lead", "again alongside Tarun and Trisha Krishnan" and "with Zayed Khan and Vivek Oberoi which saw Abhishek Bachchan doing a special appearance". Since this is a biography of Shriya Saran and no one else I'm not sure why it matters who else was in the films. That info seems to belong in the articles about the films rather than here and it's probably already there. Sean.hoyland - talk 19:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I overhauled the section now and removed everything not being source by her official website. Personally I prefer to use inline citation/footnotes for paragraphs since it usually nicer for reading, but due to constant changes here I can see that having for footnotes for individual sentences might be useful, so I left that pattern as it was.--Kmhkmh (talk) 19:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Obscenity charges

I made this edit to the section, explaining in my edit summary that Obscenity charges: fix quotation, refs; using direct quotations; removed cquote which gives undue weight; remove info about other actresses, which is not relevant to this subject; rm 'officially taken in' - no meaning, no ref; duplication.

My edited version (A)

In 11 January 2008, a Hindu organisation based in Chennai lodged a police complaint against Saran, objecting to the outfit worn by her during the 175th day celebration of her film, Sivaji: The Boss. In a complaint, the Hindu Makkal Katchi (HMK) alleged that Shriya's outfit had 'offended Hindu culture'. Shriya public apologised to Tamils and Hindus, saying it was a "mistake", and that she had "great respect for the tradition and culture of Tamil Nadu [...] I was shooting for a Hindi film in Thanjavur. I came to the function directly from the shooting, [...] I was unaware of the repercussions because of the attire I wore during the function."

It was changed back by Pravinraj (talk · contribs) [1] with the edit summary, Undid revision 378633008 by Chzz (talk)even akshay kumar's article has tis kind of thing..why pple always undo a thing by saying it no not referable!!

The prior, and now reinstated version (B)

In 11 January 2008, a Hindu organisation based in Chennai lodged a police complaint against Saran, objecting to the outfit worn by her during the 175th day celebration of her film, Sivaji: The Boss. In a complaint, the Hindu Makkal Katchi (HMK) alleged that Shriya's outfit had 'offended Hindu culture'. The complaint was officially taken in by the police and is currently under investigation. Shriya is the fourth actor, after Kushboo, Shilpa Shetty and Reema Sen to face the fire of political parties and organisations in recent times. Shriya then tendered an unconditional apology for “wearing inappropriate skimpy attire”. Shriya has tendered a public apology, she said:

“ To all Tamils and Hindus across the state, I had make a mistake. ”

She also stated that:

“ I had great respect for the tradition and culture of Tamil Nadu. ”

Furthermore, she explained about her action:

“ I was shooting for a Hindi film in Thanjavur. I came to the function directly from the shooting, and I was unaware of the repercussions because of the attire I wore during the function. ”

I stand by my reasoning;

• The quotations in the current version fail the WP:V policy, because they are not directly referenced
• I fixed the referencing
• I used direct, attributable quotations
• I removed the 'cquote' template which gives this matter undue attention; in the context of the subjects whole life, the incident does not warrant such prominent attention
• I removed the names of the other actresses, because that information is not relevent to the subject of this article, and the connection with other incidents appears to be original research
• The phrase The complaint was officially taken in by the police does not make sense,
• I removed duplication.

Per WP:BRD, because I Boldly made this edit, and it has been Reverted, I now bring this to the talk page for Discussion; please indicate below if you support or oppose version (A) above.

Many thanks,  Chzz  ►  03:09, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I am inclined to revert to version A, but in the interests of WP:BRD I will first mention that of course version A is more appropriate for an encyclopedia. The style in version B of using extravagantly formatted quotes, along with a bolded emphasis, is not suitable for Wikipedia. Also, the effect in version B is to give an WP:UNDUE emphasis to the incident (if the incident merits such emphasis, it will be because of analysis in reliable sources of the significance of the issue; the quotes in version B are not part of any significant event). Johnuniq (talk) 04:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The added emphasis and weight given to this statement in version B is POV and unencyclopedic. The reverter's reasoning is also incorrect, as a. undue weight should be removed elsewhere, not readded here, and b. just because it is referenced doesn't mean it's encyclopedic. We don't have a 10-section bit on Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky's controversy in Clinton's article, because it doesn't belong there. If there was one, we would remove it, not expand the issue to other articles. —fetch·comms 17:47, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I think we shouldn't lose track of the big picture, imho both versions are basically ok. The difference is mostly marginal and due to personal taste.--Kmhkmh (talk) 20:13, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I have restored version A due to the policy-based arguments presented above. I have also tweaked the wording and removed the subheadings in the "Controversy" section since an encyclopedic article has no need to draw attention to individual and rather petty issues. The "Controversy" section needs to be rethought (we generally do not use them; if the material is significant according to reliable sources, integrate it with the article). Johnuniq (talk) 02:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm happy with your edit, Johnuniq – I understand your re-wording to avoid "scare quotes" and repetition of ref. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  07:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

The A version by Chzz is definitely the good one! kotakkasut 18:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

References

Cleanup

Hi all. Major cleanup done to the article. Unfortunately, a lot of information had to be removed. If you want to revert it, please discuss it here first. - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 15:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm feeling kinda disappoint on your edits mainly because:-
1) The information is all about Saran maybe it is not well written but as a senior editor, I think you won't really face any burden in re write it.

2) I think you haven't go through any other indian actresses' article which has been a good article criteria, for an instance, Genelia D'Souza. This is because your edits especially when its about review from a prominent website such as Sify and the award winning website Idlebrain, I think you have ignored those websites but it doesn't mean you have to maintain all the websites that reviewed about Saran's performance, but I think I have only used those important website.

3) I also found that you have deleted the information of some of her movies completely. As it is the biography of a living person we should appreciate of their works with good reviews from the critics though it is a commercially failure.

4) I know that you are trying to "clean" the article to improve the quality but I can't understand when you editing her philanthropy section, you have removed some of her good works such as, adopting two child, her association with World Vision, her association with Joy of Giving Week and etc. This really hesitated me especially when you delete the information with verifiable source. As a human we should appreciate it and maybe I don't have the criteria to write it formally but you can do it.

5) Beside that, her other work section also missing with many information especially the those infos such as, she hosted the prestigious very first South Scope film award 2010, maybe the Sify's part was little over, her ramp walk for Neeta Lulla alongside Neetu Chandra and please I can't look for more information missing there but I hope you can do that since you have edit it so its your work to fix it.

6) I think this one is very miserable one, when you are making the cleaning up process you also had delete some of the sources!! Like this one "In 2010, Saran was featured in a poll conducted by Rediff that spotting about woman achievers in India and she was ranked among the top 5 actress." I had already fill the source but you have delete it so I think its your job to find it again!!

7) In a nutshell, I think you are not really bond very well with indian cinema. There is Bollywood, Kollywood,Tollywood, Mollywood, Sandalwood and etc. In India, all this cinema is major one and Saran currently acting in this cinemas. So all information from these cinemas is important especially about the heroes because in this region heroes are important as the directors are. Another thing, same goes to the other editors from other region from india except the editors like me who are from Malaysia but always been update in indian cinema. Please note this, that Saran always been enacted the role like glamor heroine without substance nowadays so some editor who dislikes her somehow likes to disturb the development of Saran's article so I think you does not need to approve their edits and follows their edits.

8) Sorry for being "so against" to your edits but please I have do all the edits before with neglecting my studies for only this article. I feel really disappoint with your edits because I sort of believe you very much thats why and please do not delete this its my hard work also sort of introduction.

P/S: This is not a personal comments just to realize you from what are you doing. (Pravinraj (talk) 02:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC))

---

Hey Pravinraj. Thank you for being nice about this, I appreciate it. Now I will reply in detail, when I get the time, but here are a few lines of reply:

• I have removed tons of references and movies details not because they were bad or non-notable but because they were unnecessary. An article that meets GA criteria does not have details about every single movie made by the actor, rather, only the most notable ones. That's why we have the filmography section!
• The article is closer to meeting the GA criteria after the removing of that information, than before it.
• Again, things like the ramp walk are completely unnecessary!

Please take a look at featured articles about actors and actresses, when you have the time. Don't let this interfere with your studies. Best Regards - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 06:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Pravinraj, I know that you have put a lot of good work into this article, and you want to defend it, but there are a couple of things you must understand. No matter how much work you put into something on WP, it is not you own, and anyone can change it. You must also play by WP rules. If your goal is to get this article to GA and beyond, we can help you, but you have to be humble about it. If you goal is to have the most comprehensive article about Shriya on the internet, then Wikipedia may not be the right place. Perhaps you should start a fan page on another web site. I recently got Dhoom 2 to GA status, and if people start messing with it, I will probably get mad, but again, it doesn't belong to me.

Looking at the Shriya article, I think that you should add more to the personal life section, and don't try to give the plot of every movie she is in, leave that to the movie articles. Also, like Amog said, try to focus on the movies that were most important in her career. Maybe add another picture of her in her most memorable role. Look at other GA actress articles. I looked at the Genelia D'Souza article, and I don't think its perfect either, but maybe the reviewer of that one was more forgiving, who knows. Just try to address what was in the GA review, and let others help without getting offended. Assume good faith. BollyJeff || talk 02:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Jeff, what do you think of this idlebrain website as a strong thrid party source? Site looks pretty dubious to me - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 14:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't look very professional to me; seems to be the work of a guy named Jeevi. I was told by other editors that a site needs to have editorial review to be considered reliable. I don't really know how you determine that. Aren't there guidelines on WP somewhere? I have tried to add sites that I have found out are blocked, so I am not the best guy to ask. BollyJeff || talk 14:55, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Haha, we've all been down that route! About the website though, I can't find a single "about us" link. It's so very cluttered. We should get an expert to look into this.How did you find out about this Jeevi person? - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 16:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC) I see his name repeated several times. Guess that's why - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 16:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we are almost there. Pravinraj, can you do these things?

• Fill fix up the first two paragraphs of the "Early career (2001-2003)" section, and explain better how she got started in modeling and movies.
• Put some dates on the modeling work in the "Other work and events" section.
• See if you can get another picture of her in her most famous role, dance, whatever.
• Verify all the links are still good and appropriate. I found some bad ones today.
• Add back whatever was the most important things that we deleted, if they are truly notable.

Do you agree, Amog? Can you go through the "Upcoming projects" section and check if WP standards are met, and then take down the banners? BollyJeff || talk 01:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Agree completely. Article looks great. I'll give it a once over and remove the tags in a bit - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 06:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

GAN

Isn't it a little too early to re-nominate? - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 09:09, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

You said it looks great. What else is needed? BollyJeff || talk 12:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Your suggestions like the extra picture might help - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 13:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

note: Considering the backlog at the GAN review page, I guess it isn't too early after all. Article can still be made even better in the meantime! - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 13:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Well there's no shortage of pictures out there: [2] [3] etc. She's a pretty girl. Its just that I don't know which pics are from which movies (except that first link), or how to get a nice one that you can actually use on WP without a violation. BollyJeff || talk 18:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

We could try and use already uploaded pictures like this - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 19:06, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Filmfare Best Female Debut

The "nominations" sub-section says that she was nominated for "Filmfare Best Female Debut Award" for Awarapan and is unsourced. I doubt whether there will be nominees for "Best Debut Awards". They are given specifically by choosing one actor by the jury. Also what is the necessity to mention "Debut films - in each language" under "notes" in the Filmography table. Everything is understood from the table itself. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 15:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

You are correct about the absence of debut award nominations, thanks. Since she is known for working in several languages/industries, I just wanted to highlight when she started in each. Those links are to the industry pages, which are different from the language pages, so I see room for both. If you still really object, you can remove them. BollyJeff || talk 15:53, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Just an opinion. You can mention the industry debuts, if it's a notable filmography or a partial one. Since this being a full filmography table I think it's not necessary. I can find links to various industries that she has acted in other parts of the article. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 16:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Most notable films

Someone please help identify which films of hers are the most notable and why. Specifically those not already listed in the text, especially from 2004, 2005, and 2010, or any other "obvious" ones that were missed. Oh, and reliable sources will be required. BollyJeff || talk 16:38, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

regarding rowthiram here. Can you please include the best reference from reliable sources such as Sify and not from unknown article!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ason27 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done - BollyJeff || talk 16:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Shriya Saran

Cyberbot II has detected links on Shriya Saran which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.thehealthsite.com/news/colgate-ropes-in-kareena-and-shriya-as-brand-ambassadors-for-their-new-toothpaste/

  Triggered by \bthehealthsite\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Replaced. BollyJeff | talk 18:27, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Shriya Saran. 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:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20120710195111/http://entertainment.oneindia.in/tamil/exclusive/2009/shriya-jeeva-movie-301209.html to http://entertainment.oneindia.in/tamil/exclusive/2009/shriya-jeeva-movie-301209.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721152719/http://portal.bsnl.in/intranetnews.asp?url=%2Fbsnl%2Fasp%2Fcontent%20mgmt%2Fhtml%20content%2Fentertainment%2Fentertainment14489.html to http://portal.bsnl.in/intranetnews.asp?url=%2Fbsnl%2Fasp%2Fcontent%20mgmt%2Fhtml%20content%2Fentertainment%2Fentertainment14489.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.hindustantimes.com/Meet-Bollywood-s-professor-brigade/Article1-697017.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msn.com/en-in/entertainment/gallery/santosham-awards-2015/ss-BBm4Dt7

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) 17:57, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Image change

Please attach some good image of Shreya of old times. She is extremely beautiful in old pictures. Please replace the picture. Here the face resemblance is not that close 43.228.95.154 (talk) 12:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

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

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

• Indian actress Shriya Saran.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)