User talk:Meryam90/Archive 1

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Meryam90. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Lynch 7 04:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff I like here

You thought only twitter and forums have hate? Welcome to wikipedia.

You missed out someone. :D Hello, I've heard a lot about you and its an honour speaking to you, especially when its an issue of revert warring in an SRK article. :P Actually, though I don't encourage it, I like to see two editors fighting with fury and enjoying it, if it goes to an extent of a John Cena fighting Big Show. Coming to the point, I think the above editor was referring to WP:SELFSOURCE. I might have misunderstood it, but it says that "the material should not involve claims about third parties" when its coming from these kind of sources. If Taran publishes it directly in Bollywood Hungama, we can consider it but otherwise, no. Again, I'm a big fan of you, as you have managed to stand straight in your boots without stumbling in the dance floor. Please let me know if any other issues come up in the article, and though sometimes I may not participate, I would enjoy watching it. Thanks and regards! X.One^SOS 15:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Though I sometimes appreciate it, I recommend that you stop using bad language against editors, especially "Idiot". If someone uses bad language on you repeatedly, you can report him/her to an admin instead of replying with fire. Thanks. X.One ^SOS 15:36, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations for taking a wicket in the team of SRK paid editors here in Wiki. In case you didn't know there are still many more editors fans of SRK and have been constantly vandalizing other actors and their films articles in favour of SRK. One such prominent editor isShshshsh. All the very best for the war with him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by110.76.160.100 (talk) 10:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that it did, was sure it had beaten MNIK and had to wait for an official report. Hope that the link will shut the mouths of all SRK fans, some who happen to be our mutual enemies. :)X.One ^SOS 15:34, 31 December 2011

Nope, SRK deserves due recognition and respect... :P Still 5-6 of the top 10 highest grossing Bollywood movies belongs to him. And it's a pity that Ra.One and Don 2 articles pretty much read like semi-official fanzines. Happy New Year to you too, Karthik!Scieberking (talk) 14:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a second! Who is the reviewer of this article?? :P LMAO. Regards,Scieberking (talk) 23:14, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that about Meryam90. Is she really the reviewer? ;) Well, Indian cinema has brought me nothing but trouble and accusations. I've been accused of being Pro-Aamir, Anti-Aamir, Pro-Salman, Anti-SRK and so on. This is the reason why I've quit, placed the notice and delete comments. I wish you the very best of luck. Scieberking (talk) 15:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pity on Wikipedia Editors. I really don't understand whats going on here. I really didn't know that all the editors involved here in making this article a 'Good Article' can go up to this extent of even writing down 'Rumored' figures. The article says the television broadcast rights has been sold for Rs 40 crores by Star TV. But the reference provided clearly indicates that it is just "rumored to be...". Moreover from when did we started considering Koimoi.com a reliable source for such figures. I think almost all prominent editors here know Koimoi is more or less a biased site providing irrelevant numbers and figures. On reading the above discussions, I found that userMeryam90 is nothing but a mere SRK fan. She has no other job in the world other than editing articles of SRK and his films. All editors just keep telling others that Wiki is not a fan-site and its an encyclopedia. But whatever shes doing here isn't fan-ism? I have no personal grudges against her but I just want to highlight the way Wiki is working now has changed and in fact degraded. Can someone now please do justice to the article and provide a reliable source for the Television Broadcast rights. I still wonder how many such links are provided as a reliable source by such biased editors.--SM —Preceding undated comment added 09:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Chammak Challo

I have put up a chart with country and peak position of song in the country. A reference has also been provided. Check it out. AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 15:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great!! I am working on the production section as we speak. Should be done soon :) --Meryam90 (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. Let's keep continuing this good work, then maybe we may reach the levels of 4 Minutes :D. Best of luck for the production section, because I can't seem to find any useful information form the web. AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 15:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lol That may be a little tricky!! Btw, can we add a whole critical reception section and write all reviews written about the song? and should I add a picture of the press conference? What do U think? :)--Meryam90 (talk) 15:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may have noticed the fact hat both the photos you have uploaded have been tagged for deletion, provided you can give a proper fair-use rationale. I think it will be better if you concentrate on that part right now, otherwise we may lose two really good photos for the Ra.One related articles. AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 07:53, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed that. and provided a fair-use rational for both. bu they're still nominated for deletion? How come? --Meryam90 (talk) 08:13, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ra.One music

You can help me out to construct the soundtrack article. Happy Editing. Karthik Nadar (talk) 05:55, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am planning to! as you may notice, I'm already working on the separate page for the song Chammak Challo from the album! I am be more than happy to help, I think U should go ahead and merge them already :) --Meryam90 (talk) 05:58, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And regarding, Chammak Challo, nice work you have done. In near future, article must be a featured article. Will help you all out. Karthik Nadar (talk) 06:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am trying to get Ra.One to a a featured article standards, as you have seen, I've managed to develop it quit a bit even before release. I think this film is a huge milestone in Hindi cinema, so I am trying to give it its due. --Meryam90 (talk) 06:06, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boxofficeindia.co.in

I can find zero coverage per WP:WEB as far as I can see. I think while it's not ideally reliable for box office rankings and figures, it could be used for citing a certain video. The front page of the magazine shows STAR Gold logo, which perhaps indicates that it is connected to the channnel somehow, but the about page doesn't mention that anywhere.

On a sidenote, I'd asked you about Morrocan trance and stuff here, but I think you've missed the question. Scieberking (talk) 05:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check it out

Hey, see this. Force, the film is due on 30th, yet the so-called critic Taran Adarsh has released a review in his website on the 29th. It seems to me that he never sees the films he reviews or watches it in a pirated (leaked) print or DVD. Can he be used in film articles here? Doesn't this prove that he works just to promote rather than independently represent Bollywood? What do you think? Post your replies here. Secret of success ^{Talk to me} 15:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ra.One

In case you mistook my intention, I meant to make a new section titled VFX, NOT a new ARTICLE. If you would like to review your opinion, please do so at the talk page at the earliest. Thank you. AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 14:03, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New message

Even though we may have had our differences in the past, I would just like to commend the work and time you, User:Ankitbhatt and User:Karthikndr have put into making Ra.One the article it is today. Keep up the good work!!! (P.S. Ra.One is releasing next week. How excited are you? :)) -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 04:09, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ! No doubt, I m gonna go for FIRST DAY FIRST SHOW, at the same time also got task to update reviews:D. -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 04:41, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Bollywood Dreams, Thanks, feels very nice coming from U, and U have made as much impact on that article as we have. So thank U as well :D Well, I am VERY excited...but believe it or not, I will not be watching the film ant time soon, they don't release Bollywood here, guess I'd be waiting for the DVD :p --Meryam90 (talk) 12:52, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you from? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 01:07, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can we utilize the photo from this website? And btw, where are you from, that Ra.One isn't releasing???? AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 15:47, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Morocco...Bollywood movies generally don't release here :p and @Ankit, Golfnews is under copyright...--Meryam90 (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco? Wow, exotica :D. I believe Sex and the City 2 was shot there? Interesting. Are you Indian, by any chance? Because you seem really interested in Bollywood (especially SRK lol :D). And btw, it can't be used? Too bad. Perhaps i'll have to wait until the premiere photos come out. AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 18:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011 WikiProject Film coordinator election

Voting for WikiProject Film's October 2011 project coordinator election has started. We are aiming to select five coordinators to serve for the next year; please take a moment from editing to vote here by October 29! -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 09:08, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Return

Thanks a lot Meryam! Hope you had a good time? Btw, did you actually see Ra.One? Torrents are floating around the web since the day it released. AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 06:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a major problem with the INRConvert template. It's conversion figure (1 $ = 44.7 Rs) is grossly outdated. Current conversion factor is around 49 Rs. Can you update this please? AnkitBhatt^{Talk to me!!}_LifEnjoy 07:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Talk:Chammak_Challo#In_valid_fair_use.
Message added 18:01, 18 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:01, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Talk:Chammak_Challo#In_valid_fair_use.
Message added 14:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redtigerxyz ^Talk 14:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scrapbook

		The Scrapbook Invite
		Hey! It's good to see you! I have deeply cherished your warm friendship with me, and would like to keep a token of our times together in Wikipedia just in case I go out of touch with you. Hence, I cordially invite you to come and join My Scrapbook, a personal effort to keep all Wikipedians together and to promote WikiLove. I hope this invite receives you in hearty health, and that you can take as much pleasure writing on my scrapbook as I take when I remember you. Wishing an undying friendship, and a continued collaboration with you in Wikipedia. Cheerio! This invite is being sent to all those editors who have worked with me previously, and in the process have become great friends. Wishing everyone a great life and lots of WikiLove! My Scrapbook is no official WP page full of rules and regulations. It's just a part of my Wikipedia. To access it, you can go to my user page, open up the editing page for the user page and go to the (absolute) bottom. Feel free to write, post or simply tell me anything you wish, just as a way of remembrance and our friendship. This way, both of us will have something to take back and cherish. AnkitBhatt^WDF

Discussion

Hello. You have been invited to share your views and provide consensus on the matter of coloring regarding the current-running films of List of highest-grossing Bollywood films. Please go here to add your viewpoint. Cheers. AnkitBhatt^WDF 15:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fanaa

"Consus"??. As far as I know, there is no such word in English. Secret of success ^{Talk to me} 07:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, :P meant consensus--Meryam90 (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Isn't applicable since there is no consensus"? You forbid something only if there is consensus to do so. :P X-One ^SOS 15:06, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't talking about a WIKI consensus, I was talking about a consensus for Rotten Tomato...that usually means that there isn't enough review and therefor the rating of the site isn't applicable. Got it?!--Meryam90 (talk) 15:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just try to be a bit more specific in your summaries. Have a good day! X-One ^SOS 15:14, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

:P sorry, it was 3 am last night and I guess being sleepy and working on wiki isn't the best thing possible...Btw, I see u're trying to get ZNMD to GA...Need help? --Meryam90 (talk) 15:18, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. And, yes I am tryin to get that film to GA cuz its one of the few KK films I have seen without my back aching. Scieberking has posted some suggestions, which I am planning to work on in the coming days. X-One ^SOS 15:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Can't see you much on Ra.One etc. You didn't even sign your friend Ankitbhatt's scrapbook. How ya doin'? Scieberking (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, after the article got a GA, I kinda moved on. There isn't much info to add and there is no vandals around...what is there left to do really? except maybe wait till the final gross is out to add, so I guess, job well done (to all of us) most of SRK fans I know keep using words like epic, amazing, awesome and historic to describe it. :) As of now, I am stuck with midterms :/ and trying to work on SRK's wiki page. :P As for Ankitbhatt's scrapbook. ~~Oh Shit~~ o_O It slipped my mind completely :/ How are you btw? --Meryam90 (talk) 18:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as its epicness is concerned, I hope Don 2 would be a better movie... ;) BOI hasn't published the final worldwide gross yet, which is kind of strange, but the "You Asked It" section states that Ra.One is the fourth highest-grossing film ever. Good luck with your midterms. I'm doing fine, thanks. Scieberking (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Those descriptions were for the Ra.one Wiki page, not the movie :P Trust me, I hope too as well, I am one of those people who think the movie was a complete waste :P I've checked the time period it takes BOI to post the worldwide final gross and it seems it's 6/7 weeks. So it isn't strange really :) --Meryam90 (talk) 19:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you can use this image for stage performances section. Regarding BOI, Bodyguard's (itchguard as you may fondly call it ;) worldwide gross was probably published within 3 weeks. Scieberking (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this link you'd shared on Talk:Shahrukh Khan, SRK's pics may be hard to obtain and get proper license to use, but how about Salman's girl Katrina... isn't she really in public domain... :P

Actually This ^[1] was published on Oct 6th, "Itchguard" (lol brilliant name :P) was released on Aug 31st. So 6 weeks after release ;) As for this it's from Greenathon 3 (tv show), not a world tour stage performance, so can't use :( hey can I use one from his Indian awards performances then? (that might be easier to find!). I am just so bad at this licensing thing on Wiki...*facepalms*. And LOL about the Karina bits, when will Bollywood get rid of her anyway,! :P (can't believe her next film is with Yash Chopra) Bloodywood is really mad :P --Meryam90 (talk) 20:22, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you can use almost 80% of the images from Bollywood Hungama, but with a proper license using Wikimedia Commmons. There are hundreds of 'em (from page 1 to 40 and so on). Regarding "Karina" bit, is she some sort of crossbreed of Kareena and Katrina :) Bollywood can't get rid of her until and unless an equally beautiful, exotic and charming Morrocan beauty like Emmanuelle Chriqui (or maybe yourself) makes a smashing entry into Bollywood :P Scieberking (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chammak Challo

Instead of jumping in to support your friend I suggest that you understand the term "copyright" and how it affects Wikipedia. Firstly there is a reasonable article at Copyright which will explain the basics. There are additional comments at your friend's talkpage. With regard to how this affects WP you should read copyright, WP:COPYOTHERS , WP:COPYRIGHT and Wikipedia:Copyright violations. There are probably another dozen guidelines along similiar lines which I am unfamiliar with. I have again removed the copyright infringement. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is fine if there is actual copyright violation (including all digital samples), but please avoid copyright paranoia and diagnose the signs in yourself - "There is no such thing as "Fair Use," only "No Use". When any room for doubt exists in the copyright status or acceptable use of a particular article, those suffering from copyright paranoia will become overwhelmed with a self delusional fear of ill-defined, future consequences and lash out in self defense by deleting the material without first engaging in discussion." :-) Thank you. :D

furthermore, please check Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry and I quote: Quotations of the work within the analytical framework can fall into the fair use provisions within US copyright law (and to a lesser extent fair dealing and related concepts within other jurisdictions). Such quotations can be done through inline text, block quotes, or (in the case of a song) inclusion of an image showing part of the sheet music. However, how much of a song you can quote is open to interpretation, but you should avoid copyright paranoia.

Would that be all? --Meryam90 (talk) 21:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where was the analytical framework to support the quoting of the lyrics? Not there. So the rest of your quoting above is irrelevant. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because the song uses the blend of different languages at once in a Bollywood song. Basically, Hindi and south indian, which ceated a trend at the time, DNA even wrote an article about it [1]. The Lyrics were added as a dimonstration to some of the Rap verse Indian audience weren't familiar with as well as the importance of the aspect stated above. Eeven the title of the song proved to be a wide discussion topic at teh time of it's release. --Meryam90 (talk) 22:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, Richchoncho, refrain from accusing other editors of "jumping to help their friends". While warm friendships exist in WP, when it comes to editing it is strictly business. Second, you are speaking to well-experienced editors who do not need a lecture from you regarding copyrights. Actually, quite the opposite. Third, while I did not hear of Copyright paranoia since the List of highest-grossing Bollywood films controversy, I seriously hope you do not go into overdrive to prove yourself. Please keep calm and stable (and neutral). Cheers. AnkitBhatt^WDF 12:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it is strictly business. I made 3000 bucks last month on Wikipedia... :P Scieberking (talk) 21:33, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

:/ :P AnkitBhatt^WDF 13:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Scrapbook

Thanks for the lavish compliments :D. The next GA ... dunno yet, but surely another film one (perhaps The Dirty Picture ;) ). Ra.One was something like once in a year, it doesn't come so easily every time. Hoping to see you again in some other article. Cheers! AnkitBhatt^WDF 12:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I think I'm gonna doom Ra.One to an FA :P :D. Waiting for consensus though. AnkitBhatt^WDF 12:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

Hello. Please visit this section of the Ra.One talk page, and provide a consensus so as to decide the future of my proposition. I will be glad if you also mention some comments regarding how to approach this (undoubtedly) longer and more detailed review. Thank you. AnkitBhatt^WDF AnkitBhatt^WDF 16:50, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Help!

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Scieberking's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Scieberking (talk) 23:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've just made a few necessary tweaks. Now, I'll have to get my designers to get the watermark removed :-S Alright, Meryam Chriqui! As soon as you take over, she'll settle down in life and hopefully get married to your enemy; Salman. That too goes against you... :P

And what did you do on Photoshop CS2? Airbrush his face? Nice facebook girl, huh :P Scieberking (talk) 15:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

what? Airbrush who's face? If you're talking about the pic I uploaded, I just resized it and changed the coloring. Seriously! --Meryam90 (talk) 15:50, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I thought you did a quick job on the wrinkles :P I've got the watermarks removed. You can have a look here. It has been reviewed by an admin, too. Means it's now permanent. Scieberking (talk) 15:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey your SRK is in Morocco.. go catch him, lol. Scieberking (talk) 21:35, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal (Ra One song)

Thanks for your excellent contribs to Criminal (Ra One song).Keep up your good work.I'll too start adding more information.I hope it becomes a good article with your help.That's me! ^{Have doubt?} Track me! 16:19, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! Anytime, its sad tho that it didn't get as much Media coverage as Chammak Challo, we would of been able to expend the article even more :D Cheers! ;) --Meryam90 (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

Hello there. This notice is being sent to inform you that there is currently a consensus discussion going on here. It will be greatly appreciated if you could participate in this debate, as you have worked on this article before and are familiar with its working and history. Thank you. AnkitBhatt^WDF 09:13, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, wassup? And how's SRK looking in Morocco :D? AnkitBhatt^WDF 09:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dildaara-Stand by me (Ra.One song)

Your help will be greatly appreciated in the above article.Hope you can fill the article with much more references and information.Thanks,That's me! ^{Have doubt?} Track me! 10:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you inform KarthikNdr abt this?That's me! ^{Have doubt?} Track me! 10:40, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ra.One Issue

Hello. Please comment here and put up your opinion regarding this issue. Your help will be much appreciated. Thank You. AnkitBhatt^WDF 15:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wanna help over?

Hey! After seeing all this rubbish regarding Ra.One gross, I hit upon a brilliant plan. I intend to publish a new WikiComedy which will help all stressed and overworked Wikipedia editors unwind after a long day. The title of it is The Seeta Mayya Saga. But I can't do this alone. I'll need some help. What say you??? :D. AnkitBhatt^WDF 12:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Don 2: The King Is Back, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Hyderabad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ra.One

Hi Meryam90, nice to know that you are still working on the article. Btw Ankit wanted to say to u HI!. I do agree we have to wait to complete awards section. Thanks and regards. -- Karthik Nadar 16:28, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

Erm.. yeah, you need to mention that in the edit summary. Please be clear on what constitutes vandalism and what is not. Most people don't have time to go through the diff, and check out what is wrong with the material. People operate by seeing their watchlists. Though a bad edit may be obvious to you, it generally isn't obvious for others. Lynch 7 17:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion

Please comment here if needed. Thanks. X.One ^SOS 14:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DDLJ

Thanks for adding the picture. Are reviewing the article now? BollyJeff || talk 21:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as per your request I've started going through the article and will post my concerns soon. ASHU^IND 05:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have made all the suggested changes except for one that I thought was not right because no other GA/FA articles had it. Anything else needed to continue the review? BollyJeff || talk 21:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All done, congrats on writing such a brilliant article. and I encourage you to try and review some articles yourself. Oh and don't mind GA reviews going rather slowly...they generally do take time. Cheers Meryam90 (talk) 22:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I am a little intimidated about doing reviews. I did one that I knew was an obvious fail. BollyJeff || talk 00:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah same thing was for me too, but I checked lots of GA reviews and did lots of reading :P Now I am not scared anymore, and to let you know DDLJ was my first GA review. That's why I was slow and steady on it, cause I didn't want to miss anything. Btw, if you have anytime, please check Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi or My Name is Khan for any improvement, cause I believe those deserve a GA status next. Cheers. --Meryam90 (talk) 00:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you very much Mery for the kind gesture - this is really heartwarming. :) Shahid • ^Talk2me 00:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charts on Chammak Challo

I am afraid those charts are gonna have to go. There is the lack of sources, and there is this: Wikipedia:BADCHARTS#Deprecated_charts See that iTunes is listed there. BollyJeff || talk 21:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Guerillero | My Talk 17:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel for Don 2

farhan akhtar said it on tv i watched it myself im not vandlising sorry if you thought i was but im not i don't exactly know what channel it was but when i find out i will tell :) Bollywood Fan 1

No no, i didn't delete it cause i Thought u were vandalizing, I deleted it cause it needed a source, and because right now Akhtar is focusing in his acting career, so It may be a looong while till he makes the sequel, we shall wait till then, no?--Meryam90 (talk) 21:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Yes, we all need to keep our cool. In the end, its only words on a web site, and they can always be changed later when the trouble makers get tired and move on to something else. I don't understand the urgency that some people have to add stuff here way too soon. Ya know its an encyclopedia (which publish well researched and established facts), not a crystal ball. BollyJeff || talk 15:11, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the source for filming started today? Can you start an article without knowing the name? BollyJeff || talk 15:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks official enough. If "on the floors" means principal photography has begun, then it passes WP:NFF. If you want to start a stub with so little information, go ahead. BollyJeff || talk 15:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Technically it is too early for Dhoom 3, but it's already there and with 22 sources. To start your article, type the name desired into the search bar (make sure it is spelled right) and hit enter. If there is no current article with that name, a red link will on the page after "You may create the page". Click that link and paste in you new article. BollyJeff || talk 16:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job! BollyJeff || talk 18:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have not read it all, but upon a quick glance, it looks pretty close in quality to Ra.One. I personally don't care for seeing every earning, in every state/language, on every day, unless its a new record, but whatever. Same thing was on Ra.One and Enthiran. You could ask for a Wikipedia:Peer review. BollyJeff || talk 19:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Abhinav619's talk page.
Message added 17:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Abhinav619 (talk) 22:39,12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Abhinav619's talk page.
Message added 22:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Abhinav619 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say

DDLJ - particularly the train scene, which has become quite iconic. Shahid • ^Talk2me 11:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Hello

Ya . Who isn't ? :) Hello <>Bilaalu (talk) 01:17, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Next collaboration

Hey. How's life?

I think I've found our next collaboration. Great job with the SRK-Yash film. Now I have one more I'm working on : Chennai Express (film). Hope to see you there too. I'll be working on the Yash Chopra project as well.

Regards, AnkitBhatt^WDF 11:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HOLY SHIT!! OMG!! Thank God man, U're here! I've been having such a hard and Anti-Srk-ish time fom hell in here :D aaaand u need to check SRK's wiki page also, I've been expending it lately. --Meryam90 (talk) 19:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify as to what you mean by "anti-srk-ish time". I checked it out, and its going good though some tweaks are required. Will chip in whenever possible. Btw, another barnstar? That too just for my return? Thanks a lot! AnkitBhatt^WDF 04:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Roma Character

hi i have just made a article on don 2 in the plot called Roma and i wanted to put a picture on it if its not too much trouble could you please put a picture of roma on it where it says "Priyanka Chopra depict Roma respectively" thanx and thanx if you could do it :D xxx Bollywood Fan 1

There is much more to worry about in that Roma article than the picture...it needs A LOT of grammar correction, copyediting, sources and actual true facts. I hope U manage to fix that soon...or else the page is gonna get deleted. --Meryam90 (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

if its not too much trouble could u help me with it im sorry if im troublin u but please only if its not too much trouble too u :) Bollywood Fan 1

Don2 Poster

Sorry to say that it was quite unfair on your part that you removed every unreliable source material from the article except your own poster(bollyspice) as per your convenience , just coz you liked that poster . I had to again change it back , but it would have been so easier on me if you yourself would have done it :( <>Bilaalu (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the History of the article before making such accusations, I didn't change the poster...further more, a poster can be taken from even a simple Google search, images do not require reliable sources if are under Fair use. Most importantly, there is NO MUST used poster according to wiki rules, any official poster can be used. The one you have uploaded is of poor quality, therefor it must be changed back, same as for the Ra.One page.

Edit: I see you have changed it to a better resolution, in that case, guess you can keep it.--Meryam90 (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please editor check again what i said, I never blamed you for having taken out the poster. I know it was some other user. What i was saying that when you were removing all unreliable material on the aricle, you could have also removed that red poster of women empowerment coz that too was from Bollyspice, which you have yourself mentioned in one of your edit-summaries that it is an un-reliable source. Anyways, peace out. You are a good & sincere editor, which can't be said about that troll Ashermadan (talk) :D <>Bilaalu (talk) 12:42, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have already mentioned that: a poster can be taken from even a simple Google search, images do not require reliable sources if are under Fair use. Any link available on the net is good for use reliable sources are only for INFORMATIONS not IMAGES. I hope that is clear enough for you now.--Meryam90 (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was already clear, you did not need to explain that again. <>Bilaalu (talk) 12:49, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:WTF

Jai was the speculated title of the Yash Chopra film, though he clearly stated that the film remained untitled. The article is a pathetic blob of written matter and must ideally be deleted as soon as possible. It fails everything, from accuracy, verifiability and grammar. AnkitBhatt^WDF 04:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I made my latest updates on the Ra.One article, by revamping its accolades section. Give it a peek and see whether it is alright. AnkitBhatt^WDF 10:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Hi Meryam90!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you!SarahStierch (talk) 03:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I love the idea :) and I was shocked to know that 91% of editors here on Wiki are males.--Meryam90 (talk) 10:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify as to why you removed the entire reviews part that I added, with proper references to good sources Variety, Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. I loved Don 2, but reviews are reviews and all of them have to be posted. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 09:41, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There were no references...I just checked again...There were NO references.--Meryam90 (talk) 22:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meryam, they were there. I clearly put Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes and Variety references. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 17:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Don_2&diff=472273759&oldid=472273138

tell me if you see a reference there and lemme know...maybe u should of checked ypurself first before trying to argue here with me...--Meryam90 (talk) 17:49, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I talked about REVIEWS Meryam. The reviews I added of Variety and two others are not there right now. Besides, the Los Angeles Times did not give a positive review, they gave it a mixed one. Check Metacritic. In case you did not remove the reviews, then forget everything said. Btw, I was about to add the ref for the 49% part, and frankly I'm suprised you didn't do so. I will add that bit and put it up. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews? Then it wasn't me...I only deleted review fom India from Indecine and BollySpice... and the edit I showed you is the other thing I removed because it had no source. So, pretty much wasn't me who deleted your reviews buddy...and you can't edit the article, it's protected now :P--Meryam90 (talk) 16:41, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, no problem then. What do you mean "I can't edit the article"? Can't auto-confirmed users edit the articles automatically? ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 07:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And why has the protection been added? Has there been troublesome editing going on? Or is it that some SRK haters are taking issue with the BO figures quoted, and found it in their best interests to block editing off for everyone? ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 07:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea, I just woke up yestrday and discovered that some admin made it fully protected on claims that there is dispute over the worldwide gross and the poster...I think we fixed the poster issue already, guess we will need to find some solution to the damned Info Box. Why the hell must SRK release his movies in dubbed versions? ARG...--Meryam90 (talk) 12:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source information needed for File:Ishaan.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Ishaan.jpg. However, the file description needs source information before it's okay to use on Wikipedia.

Please click here and do the following:

Add a detailed description of who the original author is and where you got it. Please be specific, and include a link to the source if you can.
Be sure to save the page.

If you follow these steps, your image can help enhance Wikipedia. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the media copyright questions page.

Thank you for your contribution! --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing todisambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read theFAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Apsara Award for Best Director(check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Rockstar, Imtiaz Ali and Dum Maaro Dum

Apsara Award for Best Film(check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rockstar

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:OSO

I think you can dig up a bit and find some website which will have the nominations list. I'll try to help, though I'm pretty busy right now on some film forums regarding Agneepath. Btw, have you seen Agneepath? ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 14:48, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Becoming An Admin

Hey, how does one become an admin? I know you don't like me that much but no one is updating theDon 2 page and that X.One guy is just some lame Salman fanboy who keeps on thwarting my attempts. (Asher Madan) — Precedingunsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs) 15:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see this?

The section is like the Preity Zinta, kareena Kapoor and Rani Mukerji's sections. It speaks about his achievement outside of his films, his reputation in Media and his ranking in power lists and stuff :D

Scieberking is getting himself worked up. Its a common thing among the haters; point out their hatred and they get all huffy. Prove their hatred, they blast up on others. How typical. Btw, Meryam you seriously need some copyedit training. The last sentence you wrote makes next to no sense. :P ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 18:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL I KNOW...It probably has something to do with me multitasking, I should stop doing that. do check the section, I'm uploading it slowly, btw, How do U feel about this:

Khan has an abundance of style in terms of his trademark mannerisms, gestures and way of delivering dialogues and his acting style is often compared to that of actor Dilip Kumar. Through his appearance in numerous romantic films- often produced by Yash Raj Films or by Karan Johar's Dharma Productions, Khan has developed a “romantic lover boy” image and is referred to as the “king of romance” by Media outlets. Khan is often accused of repeating himself either through the type of characters that he plays, referred to as the “Rajs and Rahuls” or him not being able to shed the superstar persona on screen and often playing himself. In 2011, Rediff.com listed him in top 10 "Readers Choice: The Greatest Actors of all time". In June 2009 he was declared the male Star of The Decade at the tenth International Indian Film Academy Awards, held in Macau.--Meryam90 (talk) 18:19, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I made several changes to the section. You can give it a look. Regarding this, I'll suggest:-

"Khan's mannerisms, gestures, dialogue delivery and acting style is often compared to that of actor Dilip Kumar. Due to his appearance in numerous romantic films, Khan has developed a "romantic lover boy" image and is referred to as the "King of Romance" by media outlets. Khan has been often accused of repeating himself through the type of characters that he plays, referred to as the "Rajs and Rahuls", or him not being able to shed the superstar persona on screen and often playing himself. In 2011, Rediff.com listed him in "Readers Choice: The Greatest Actors of all time". In June 2009 he was declared the Star of The Decade (Male) at the 2009 IIFA Awards."

See. Keep it trimmed and simple; cut out all the fancy media-created stuff. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 18:36, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I wanna keep trademark mannerisms in there and the way you phrased it isn't the way it is suppse to be, the main focus isn't the comparison to Dilip Kuamr:P So maybe:

Khan has an abundance of style in terms of his trademark mannerisms, gestures and way of delivering dialogues and his acting style is often compared to that of actor Dilip Kumar. Through his appearance in numerous romantic films- often produced by Yash Raj Films or by Karan Johar's Dharma Productions, Khan has developed a "romantic lover boy" image and is referred to as the "King of Romance" by media outlets. Khan has been often accused of repeating himself through the type of characters that he plays, referred to as the "Rajs and Rahuls", or him not being able to shed the superstar persona on screen and often playing himself. In 2011, Rediff.com listed him in "Readers Choice: The Greatest Actors of all time". In June 2009 he was declared the Star of The Decade (Male) at the 2009 IIFA Awards. amma go with That :D

Even if you keep trademark, i strongly think that that Karan Johar-YRF thing isn't necessary. Wikipedia requires direct details; besides, SRK has done romantic films outside these banners as well. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 18:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm U're right actually, he did :P so taking out YRS and Karan :D

Nice expansion. I've made few more changes to it. Now the section looks pretty good. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 05:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, :D I added more and OMG, I am still not done :O --Meryam90 (talk) 20:11, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Freaking Out

Ok, show it to me. Rumana has my email address so you can email it to her or just show it to me here, just past it on my talk page. -- Asher Madan 11:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added byAshermadan (talk •contribs)

Also, I unblocked you from Twitter. You can send me the link there. You haven't responded about the SRK piece you needed me to check. Asher Madan 16:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

No that's fine, I went ahead and uploaded it, it's on SRK's page now the "IN THE MEDIA "section. tell me what do U think, and please, none of ur famous English tweaks...seriously...--Meryam90 (talk) 22:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Housefull 2

I don't know whether you like Akshay Kumar or not, but take a look at this Housefull 2trailer. If you don't puke, you're not human :D. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 15:30, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bodyguard Worldwide Gross

Scieberking is vandalizing the Bodyguard 2011 page. He is changing it to 253 crores when we still use BOI for HINDI ONLY films. Help me stop him. He has gone crazy with the mad-for-Salman disease. Asher Madan 00:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you see his reason for putting ₹253 crores? "since there's no restriction to use BOI only" LMAO! ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 04:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meryam, you're missing the fun. Come on quick. Its seriously hilarious, and you should check out Scieberking's die-hard attempts to pull down Ra.One and push up Bodyguard. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 08:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scieberking has gone crazy and is trying to pull down Ra.One! The Lallu fan inside him awoke finally. We need you to join in. This is hilarious! Asher Madan 08:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

And what is even more disgusting is that he is getting some support, especially about his rant that BOI is not reliable. And X.One is going a step further, by mailing stuff rather than talk face to face. Cowards; when they can't use logic or consistency, they resort to below-the-belt methods and cheap arm-twists to get their way. And then they irritatingly preach about "divas". Irony exists in every corner of Wikipedia. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 10:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I have a rather limited knowledge of images and their copyrights in Wikipedia, but as far as I can see we can't use those images, as they are owned by Red Chillies VFX and hence non-free. Unless RCV states that the images are usable in public domain, or we can get permission from them to use the photos, the images can't be used. I think User talk:Moonriddengirl could help you out more in this matter, so its best you cross-check with her too. Hope this helps. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 04:04, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SRK

Not expected, not wanted ;). Do you have any plans of taking SRK's article to GA? Looks good at the moment, and you being one of the main contributors, may nominate it. If you don't feel like, never mind. X.One ^SOS 16:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're actually lolling and replying ;)? Hmmm.... X.One ^SOS 10:43, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem....interesting elocution. X.One ^SOS 10:51, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE

BW films don't release in Morocco :o ? That I didn't know. Wow you must be some Internet BW fan eh? :D ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 11:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Private theater? PRIVATE THEATER? :o How rich are you? Am I talking to a multi-million dollar oil baron's heiress, perhaps? ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 14:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL no I am NOT THAT rich...Well, I am not rich, my parent are I suppose...I just live off them :P --Meryam90 (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a LAME thing to say :/ . Whatever, you are RICH enough to have a private theater. I'm sure you're being modest about yourself; tell me, how many Rolls Royces do you have? Any 16th century palaces? Casinos in Las Vegas? C'mon, you must have something :D. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL no seriously man, private theaters are really not THAT expensive...no Rolls Royces. I only have this, this and this, no palaces, no Casinos..Sorry for disappointing you :P... --Meryam90 (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh yeah, you have only a BMW 7-series and only two other awesome-looking cars (though 1 looks like a truck IMO). Yeah you must have only a few billion dollars in your bank account as well LOL :D. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 18:05, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help expanding

Hello, Meryam90. I recently created the article Naadan Parindey, which requires expansion. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Dipankan ^{In the woods?} 07:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Don 2

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Don 2 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. ASHU^IND 04:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Don 2 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Don 2 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. ASHU^IND 18:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great if you think so. Yes, accuracy is of utmost importance in Wikipedia and you should understand that by now, so no point in trying to tell me that the dubbed versions don't matter because they do. Why the hell did you not open up an RfC? You knew that such problems would occur. Besides, do you know how much of trouble I had to go through because of this gross issue? It is not a matter of just 10 cr or 15 cr; even 1 cr is important. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ACCURATE. You cannot side-step that fact even if you wish the article to go to GA (and I do as well, even if you don't think so). I hate it when people bring up old controversies like this gross stuff, especially the ones where there has been such appalling dirty tricks used; this issue is very tricky and very touchy, and it must be handled properly. No way can anybody say "All right that's it" etc. and put a full stop unless everybody agrees. And that is exactly what this GA review was trying to do.

And yes, people have called me absurd, a liar, "evil", a diva, a troll and many other stuff but I have chosen to ignore such stuff; do not think that you are the only one who has had to be at the receiving end of insults. I am not going to apologize as I know I have done no wrong, no matter what the world thinks of me. If this must mark the end of our Wikipedia work, so be it. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 06:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, thank you SO MUCH for calling me "childish and absurd". Do you have any more insults to use on me? ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 06:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I see you do. Fine then. Do not bother responding to this; delete this immediately. Next time, don't bother calling me for anything at all. All right? Happy at last that you have me out of the way? I will not bother disturbing you with my "nonsense". ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 06:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

This is to inform you that there is currently a peer review going on for the article Ra.One here. Your participation is most welcome. Regards, ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 14:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

controversy in Shahrukh wiki

Ra.One

Could you take a look here, go down to the bottom and see the problems regarding the critical reception section? I'd be much obliged. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 09:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring on Don 2

Plot and casting info are not appropriate in the cast section, nor are those images. Move it to the relevant section if not present, and if it is, remove it. Don't overdo stuff just for the sake of it, if at all it is being done. Secret of success (talk) 06:23, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The appropriat section IS cast. plus it is a method used in most Hollywood films. U don't seem to mind Ra.One's cast section tho...--Meryam90 (talk) 10:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other articles are irrelevant here, be it a Hollywood or Bollywood film. We do not judge an article by comparison. First, the step results in bad consequences by flooding of images in the section. Most of the info regarding the storyline are already under consideration in the plot. It is just resorting to repetition for the individual characters, I don't see any form of argumentation for that. If there exists quite a lot of information about the production of the cast, a section titled "casting" can be fabricated or the info moved to "development". It is high time you realized that the layout of the article is getting affected by it, by all those images and apparent jargon. Secret of success (talk) 12:30, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that is your opinion, I browsed through alot of articles and read meant policies and it is all in order + U see it flooding the article...no one else does. That would be all. and at the very least, U can learn to respect ppl's work by not calling it redundant and deleting it, U have an opinion abt something, take it to the talk page...-Meryam90 (talk) 13:00, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please get a clear stand of my comments before hastily jumping to conclusions. First, I said that other articles cannot be compared with this one, at least not when a controversial issue arises. That is by no means constructive here. You are weakening your argument by doing that, intentionally or otherwise. Second, removing a person's addition does not, by any means, signify that one is disrespecting it. I would suggest assuming good faith before getting such ideas. Secret of success (talk) 13:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mind if I am intervening but the only problem I can see in the cast section is the non-matching sizes of the two photo columns. Meryam, I suggest you experiment a bit in your infobox and make sure that the two rows end up having the same height, otherwise it does give the sense of unnecessary overcrowding. This may mean that you will have to reduce the width of the SRK-PC column but in the end the section looks better.

Regarding the content of the cast section, such a rigorous application of WP:OSE will get us nowhere. In fact, what Meryam did in the cast section is actually what is done by pretty much several film articles. Though I must mention that adding details of the Cast section in the lead is unadvised, it falls under repetition. There can be changes here and there (and they are undoubtedly required) but as of now, yes the cast section does look good. The photo thing I used in Ra.One was because it would be difficult to put the 4 images in a single column (it would come out of the section itself) but if Meryam can add proper pre-casting and role-preparation info into the Cast section, then she can go ahead and put all the photos into one vertical multiple image template.

Hope this helps. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 13:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a need for the cast images? If a reader wants to look at SRK or Chopra, all (s)he has to do is a click the links in the infobox, lead or any other section which lead to their respective articles containing all relevant information. Why is that piece repeated in Don 2, and what is its relevance that would mean its omission being detrimental to their understanding? What is the rationale for this argument? Secret of success (talk) 11:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again you have totally failed in reading half of my statement. I pointed out that any repetitions must be removed (and I have done a bit) but I am currently a bit busy with some other articles and cannot devote attention to Don 2. The article is not perfect and not only in the Cast, there may be repetitions in other parts of the article as well. Clarify your rationale of argument as to why a Cast photo is not necessary. By you logic, there can be several photos that need not be there at all, for example the Ra.One default face look because one can just read the lines in the text. I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing wrong in keeping Cast images as it does not go against MOS:FILM and there is no rule to keep it out. And before you pull up WP:OSE again, let me tell you that it is futile; editors will look to to other articles to seek improvement methods and will cite them, and most better-looking articles (several of them GAs and FAs) do have Cast photos. Your given example of Taare Zameen Par has a Darsheel Safary cast photo. Even I can click on the link and see his picture; why is it there then? That sort of logic is faulty. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 13:06, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On Ra.One, go through WP:NFCC#8 which says "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."—If it does not satisfy this, I'm afraid it will have to be deleted—I did doubt the importance of the two images in the "Suits" section, and now that you mention it, I feel it is time to have a formal discussion about this. It is not just wrongly licensed (it consists of retouched posters, not film screenshots), but also goes against NFCC. Secret of success (talk) 15:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Don 2, yes, those are unnecessary. I have already clarified in the above rationale, as the main images of SRK and Chopra are just reproduced here. Further, the section looks odd and disfigured (some points are big, some consist of one-liners), thus affecting the layout of the article. Do you really think that a reader will be so inclined to see how the four look in real life, that they cannot click once and go to their articles? Use them sparingly, do not overdo articles. Just because there "is no rule to keep it out", a license to say "there is absolutely nothing wrong in keeping Cast images" cannot spring up without a reason, and I have seen no arguments to retain the images, other than WP:OSE, which I am striving away for now—I am not objecting it, but they should be used only if they do nothing else but improve an article. Secret of success (talk) 15:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to point out, the Ra.One suits section has only one image, it looks like two because the actual image was like that. There was a hindrance with the proper license to be used because if I had to put the photo as a poster, the requirement is that the image "must be used as the prime indicator of the article, and at the top of the article" which was not the purpose of the image at all. Oh, so the main superhero suits that is worn by the two main characters (one of them being the title character) and such suits being a first in Indian films (neither Enthiran nor Krrish had superhero suits of anything remotely like it) are "unimportant"? You doubt the importance of half the things I add in the article, so no real surprise there, but yes they are important. They add considerably to the understanding of the reader, especially in case of Ra.One (character) as the only other image of him in the article is that of his "faceless face" and that does not have the suit in any form. Feel free to have any formal discussion you wish to have.

Regarding the "disfiguring" I suggest you take the matter up with Meryam as I have not contributed significantly to Don 2 to be able to knowledgeably comment on it. I have also pointed out, using exactly your pointed-out article when I had asked you about tips for improving Ra.One to FA status, about Taare Zameen Par. You cannot conveniently sidestep that issue, so answer that query as well. Yes, if it does not violate any rule and if it does not harm the article in any way, then there is no problem with keeping the image. Explain how it harms the section. I have asked Meryam to re-size the image columns; seeing your sleepless zeal to remove those photos, I shall undertake the re-sizing process myself. Yes, the images in both Ra.One and Don 2 are improving the article, and there is also the point to consider that most of the Wikipedia readers rarely/never view sub-pages or inside links; they browse through the main page information as few are aware of the actual scope of the project. In light of that, yes, placing the images in the section are quite proper and hardly unnecessary. Obviously your next step will be to ask for "links" and "confirmation" that proves that normal readers don't go deeper into the article, and quite unfortunately I do not have the patience to even think of responding to such requests. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is usually recommended to a film article that having more than one poster is purely extraneous. G.One's suit is represented in the infobox poster, upto some extent. That issue does need discussion, as the idea of an article having three posters is well, preposterous. If an explanation is available for that, other than the fact that no other Indian film has had that till now, I stand corrected. But otherwise, no. In Don 2, I believe my explanations in my previous comments are adequate. Do look at that. Secret of success (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am finding it really hard to continue applying WP:AGF as this issue is becoming increasingly silly. G.One's suit is barely represented in the infobox; all you can see is his collar. That is not adequate by any stretch of imagination. Let me make myself much clearer: the photo is not another poster. It is an official press release, and two such press release photos were combined into one by the source. As per Wikipedia's non-free content policy, as little of the photo as possible should be taken. Which is why I cropped out the title part and kept the area to a bare minimum. So the photo is not another poster for the film; just having the name of the film in the photo, without the production house details or other such details, does not constitute a poster in case you are unaware of this basic fact.

That you still have side-stepped the issue about Taare Zameen Par evidently shows that you are just arguing for your personal dislike of the photo so this discussion most probably ends here. Your only gripe is that there are supposedly "too many photos" in the article, which is a blasphemous excuse not to mention extremely funny. I suggest you follow WP:NPOV before continuing this futile and pointless fault-finding where there is no real fault. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

king of bollywood and child of bollywood

(queen of bollywood and king of bollywood is term cannot be associated to personality. It's degrading for personality status. ~~hopefloat~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopefloat007 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? how did u conclude THAT? --Meryam90 (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same question can be asked from you ? It is derogatory, will you be liked to call king of Arab. Please SRK is above all this pop fanfare status. Wiki is factual not pop article of fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopefloat007 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not derogatory...he LIKES being called that...if U knew enough of the guy, U would actually know he is fond of teh name as well as being called King Khan. --Meryam90 (talk) 15:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I study with his son in reliance school, he never say I am the king of "bollywood". There is difference between king khan and king of bollywood. I hope you are understanding the difference. Later is pretentious contemptuous presumptuous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopefloat007 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, what is all this about? ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

:P don't even ask...check SRK's page...U'll get the full idea *facepalms self*--Meryam90 (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, something about King of Bollywood I see. Hmm. As a neutral opinion itt would be better to just leave "King Khan"; the title of "King of Bollywood" is hard to place and that title has shifted continuously from SRK toAkshay Kumar to Aamir Khan and currently to Salman Khan. Just my two cents opinion. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:30, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it doesn't actually shift, Media keep playing with the term as well as King Khan but eventually call the other actors some other names (Khiladi, Ace Khan, Tiger or Dabangg Khan and all that)...but it is used to describe him in national and international Media even now. I mean, most article, just dating like from yesterday are using King Khan and King of Bollywood when speaking of him. The problem is that the guy isn't removing it, he's only removing a redirect note that stated that the term redirects to the article as well as a movie with the same name :P --Meryam90 (talk) 16:35, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

True. Well anyways, doesn't mater really. If the issue is small it can certainly be rectified :) ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 16:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually a pretty funny issue...I liked how he uses Arabic terms for Hello and welcome in the Edit Summary...that was cute :P --Meryam90 (talk) 16:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chak De India...

I wonder if you would be willing to take a look at Chak De India. I brought it to GA in 2009 but have been away from it for awhile. I looked at it again recently and found that it was in need of some repair, which I've been attempting to do. I believe the potential is there for an FA but it would need quite a bit of development and a group of editors interested in expanding it. I have a lot going on in real life so I come and go but am generally trying to spread the word that this might be an article to focus on. -Classicfilms (talk) 15:43, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Classicfilms's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Again...

Hello, Meryam90. You have new messages at Classicfilms's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Smile!

A smile for you

You’ve just received a random act of kindness! 66.87.7.149 (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ra.One nominated for Featured Article

This notice is to inform you that I have nominated the article Ra.One for a featured article promotion. The nomination can be viewed here. Any comments are welcome at the article's or my talk page. Thank you. ~*~Ankit Bhatt~*~ 13:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. When you recently edited Karan Johar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Star TV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:36, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

^ http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=3534&nCat=

[1] ttp://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=3534&nCat=

[1]