Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:14, 9 September 2006 editBhadani (talk | contribs)204,742 edits Please stop using original names for actors!!: please try to understand← Previous edit Revision as of 01:41, 10 September 2006 edit undoZora (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers17,728 edits Categorizing actors by religionNext edit →
Line 234: Line 234:
This project seems to be in a mess as I see that WP requires people's articles to be named after their popular names where as we seem to take a different tack. Why do we want to be divisive? Why should Vijay be at Joseph Vijay? Would you move Julia Roberts to Julie Fiona Roberts? Charlie Chaplin to Charles Spencer Chaplin Jr.? and Dilip Kumar to Yusuf Khan? I believe this issue was unresolved the last time we were discussing it, but some one has changed many actor pages to original names. This is unfortunate; Under what name would some one search the WP? Many wouldn't even know original names. When ] is clear that popular names are what are reqd., I guess we need to stick to it or get it changed at ], not have our own flights of fancy. Remember, we are a part of en wikipedia and our project should look at things that are not already covered rather than going about reinventing rules that may satisfy a few egos but are of no productive use. I guess this is my angriest post on WP but I believe it is warranted because we are unnecessarily getting mired into unproductive work. --] 14:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC) This project seems to be in a mess as I see that WP requires people's articles to be named after their popular names where as we seem to take a different tack. Why do we want to be divisive? Why should Vijay be at Joseph Vijay? Would you move Julia Roberts to Julie Fiona Roberts? Charlie Chaplin to Charles Spencer Chaplin Jr.? and Dilip Kumar to Yusuf Khan? I believe this issue was unresolved the last time we were discussing it, but some one has changed many actor pages to original names. This is unfortunate; Under what name would some one search the WP? Many wouldn't even know original names. When ] is clear that popular names are what are reqd., I guess we need to stick to it or get it changed at ], not have our own flights of fancy. Remember, we are a part of en wikipedia and our project should look at things that are not already covered rather than going about reinventing rules that may satisfy a few egos but are of no productive use. I guess this is my angriest post on WP but I believe it is warranted because we are unnecessarily getting mired into unproductive work. --] 14:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
:I am sure that all interested editors would understand the "nitty-gritty" of ]'s comments. We should conform to the convention of the English Misplaced Pages, and should not set our own personal rules of editing. --] 16:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC) :I am sure that all interested editors would understand the "nitty-gritty" of ]'s comments. We should conform to the convention of the English Misplaced Pages, and should not set our own personal rules of editing. --] 16:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

== Categorizing actors by religion ==

Bakasuprman is toiling away adding categories to Bollywood actor articles. Actors are being categorized as Hindu or Muslim. I think this is just plain wrong and pernicious. Religious devotion is not the defining characteristic of most actors. This is the sort of communal thinking that leads to bombing and massacre. In fact, I'm so angry and upset that I want to communicate with other project editors before I do anything. I'd like to get the categories erased and Bakasuprman told to stop. I'm not quite sure what the right procedure would be, but I'm sure there must be some administrative action that can be taken. ] 01:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:41, 10 September 2006

Shortcut
  • ]
Click here to add a new section.

/archive1


Help with Himesh

Hi; I'm relatively new to Misplaced Pages (only since early 2006 have I beeen a serious editor). One of my first projects was to create an article for Himesh Reshammiya. Since it was done completely from scratch, it did take a long time. However, it has been to subjected to various abuses (like putting in photos with websites shamelessly marked on them, and turning the thing from an encyclopedia article into various opinion pieces). I don't want all of my work to go down the drain, so I am please asking for some help in moderation.

NonexistentFool 02:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Rani Mukerji (for the second time again!)

OK, it seems as is User:Shez 15 is not happy with the version which i think everyone else was ok with. He asked me to improve the article and i greatly reduced it. He seemed happy with me then and he even gave me a barnster! As soon as anyone removes anything they see as fancruft, he gets angry. Right now User:Zora is editing the article mostly and getting rid of any fancruft but soon this might end up like another edit war. How do we get through to him? Anyone PLEASE discuss Pa7 00:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If we knew how to change people, we could sell it and make a fortune. I hate to go into another Arbcom case, but I don't know of any other way to get him to stop trying to turn the Rani article into a shrine to his idol. I hate Arbcom cases. Isn't there another way? Zora 23:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I just went through several of Preity Zinta's movies and noticed that there have been problems, too, most recently in Kya Kehna and Dil Hai Tumhaara. Honestly, I don't understand - I thought everybody seemed to be happy the way things were, and now this. As for ArbCom cases - I now basically what they are, but I don't know the protocol. However, if it will help to stop this madness, I'm in. --Plumcouch 00:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I guess he's got a personal vendetta against Zinta, she is probably Mukerji's closest competitor. We have all got better things to do, i mean i saw Plumcouch's target list which was really cool. I want to really reduce the indian film stubs and get rid of any reds and Zora seems very busy these days. Anything just to get this sorted. Pa7 01:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I was recently dragged through an Arbcom case. I testified as a witness and then had to endure MONTHS of abuse. It's not just the subject of the Arbcom who suffers -- it's everyone involved. I don't wish that on you guys. Zora 00:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmm ... I'll try and talk to him again, but frankly, I don't think it'll work as it didn't work the last times I tried. As for Zinta being Mukerji's closest competition: if that's really the reason behind everything, I hope the same thing won't happen to Kajol, since she did that Fanaa flick and seems to be back in the arena. --Plumcouch 00:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
You have a point about Fanaa and Kajol's comeback. I do hope that if you talk to him then maybe he'll back down. I'll try and talk to him as well but like you said i don't think it will work. Pa7 01:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

You can file WP:RFC not on Shez15 personally, but on the Rani Mukerji article to see what other people think of the bias. Arbcom I don't think is appropriate for this type of article - I have only seen arbcom for Articles such as 9/11 attacks, religion disputes, ethnic disputes, etc. I can't see the point of having an arbcom over a dispute about a moviestar. If you get an article RfC with strong consensus, there will be more people watching the Rani page and reverting Shez if a strong consensus is reached.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Lame... You don't need to talk behind my back! I only need your help improving the page. I just state facts, if you think it's fancruft, fine delete it. I personally disagree with you though. Anyway, I'm not following your Indian writing format or whatever you write on Indian actresses. I think there is less information and it's quite simple and boring. I'm trying to make Rani Mukerji's page more like Lindsay Lohan's. I think she is too good for your summary format. I am trying to put as many possible references on the page. But Zora reverts them. By the way, I noticed you guys copied my version of things on other actors' pages. For example, I had initially put a box of filmography for Rani and now, it's on every other page. I also put a television appearances section which is now on Preity Zinta's page too. Pa_7 obsessively likes Zinta too. It's not just me. This makes me to think if you guys are not so perfect afterall. Very biased of pa_7 to do such things. That's why I was frustrated. However, let's just work on Rani's page and make it better. I have a lot of information. Do you think Rani's page will appear like the current version forever. Cmon guys, wikipedia is about updating and adding as much as possible. Either you're gonna help me this last time or you want another edit war?-- User:shez_15|shez_15]] 19:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hold on a second, Shez i liked your idea of putting tv appearances that is why i put it on Zinta's page. I like Zinta, though i do prefer Madhuri Dixit performance wise. Anyways that is not the point. Firstly don't accuse of me of being biased. I may prefer Zinta to Mukerji but i have not filled her page with fancruft. Also secondly one minute you seem to be asking for help yet your calling me biased. I don't want to get banned or anything like that because i love editing on wikipedia, and also i love indian cinema. I have never had any problems with any other editors. I mean User:Zora and User:Plumcouch have had no problems with me, i generally trust there judgements. I like to work with people and if they do not agree with me then i will try and co-operate. I do not want to argue with you anymore. Pa7 00:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Shez, making the page bigger and bigger is not necessarily an improvement. I could make an article about myself and post my daily schedule; that would be information, and it would make the page bigger all the time, but it's WORTHLESS information. The Rani article should not be a junkheap for every scrap of fact or speculation about Rani.
We can add her new movies. If she gets married and has a child, we can add that. If she gets drunk and drives a Land Cruiser over twenty people sleeping on sidewalks, we can add that. But the material you keep trying to add is either pointless or personal opinion.
If you want to add something interesting that ISN'T there, tell us where she lives. Get a photo of her house. Does she live by herself? With her family? Is she close to her family? Is she notable for what she eats? For not drinking alcohol? Does she work out daily? Does she have a dance teacher? An acting coach? A guru? All you've given us is press-releases about public appearances, and film-magazine rumors about who she's dating, or not dating, with whom she has quarrelled, etc, none of which are appropriate for an encylopedia (we don't want to keep track of dates and tiffs). So if we don't know anything about her beyond what is public, how does she protect herself from scrutiny? Is she known for keeping the press at arm's length? Zora 23:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Religion cats

There are cases in which people have been adding relgion cats to actors/actresses, eg Farida Jalal. What do people think about doing this kinds of stuff, as it generally does not affect their public lives. I see in many topics, that these cats are removed, unless the person engages in public religious acitivity.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

There are millions on people in the various religions, and thousands of biographical articles in WP -- if we start tagging everyone by religion, we're going to end up with ridiculous lists. Myself, I'd go with adding cats to people who are KNOWN for their religion.
However, I dunno if we can make this work. Some people like to tag people who belong to the same religion or country or whatever as the tagger, as if it makes him/her bigger or better to be in the same group as someone famous. So we may not be able to stop it, even if we agree that it's pernicious (particularly in a cinema context, where religion isn't usually the point). Zora 08:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I know, the Buddhist cats seem to only be filled with celebrities, rather than anything much to do with Buddhism. Personally, I don't think it should be done unless it is important to their public behaviour. Else, a mention of their religious upbringing (a sentence not in the lead), but no more IMHO.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 08:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
The religion cats are useless IMO. It adds no additional value to the article, and there could be a conflict if a person does not categorise himself as a true believer, but his name suggests that he belongs to a particular religion. It's too blurry to add. =Nichalp «Talk»= 03:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
The cats should go for anyone who is not notable for their religion. Only people who a Misplaced Pages article because of their religion should have such a cat. As for Indian actors, unless the religion they follow is significant for some reason (eg. controversy etc.) it probably just needs a mention with no further details. Gizza 12:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Old cat - flagging

In case ppl. did not know, there is a cat named Category:Actor-politicians. It contains 51 articles, with a good mix from round the world but I believe there wd probly be several more articles on Indian actors that wd fit in that cat. Pppl may want to add this cat to relevant articles after reading the description on the cat page. --Gurubrahma 10:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

You guys might enjoy this

Sepia Mutiny had a piece on a photographer who has been photographing the Indian film industry -- shots of films being made, posters being painted, projection rooms, ticket booths, touring cinemas, etc. Fascinating! Zora 22:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Notability

An edit by someone with interesting initials. Does he look notable enough ? Tintin (talk) 09:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

He has now written an article about himself. Tintin (talk) 10:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

INCOTW - Cinema of India

Cinema of India is this week's Indian Colloboration of the Week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. - Ganeshk (talk) 18:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Lot of articles for improvement

I have added the Indian cinema template to many articles. Most of them are in quite pitiful shape and need attention from the wikiproject team. Would request people to improve them.

Here's a list (will keep updating):

Anamika, Mela (film), Chashme Buddoor, Chori Chori, C.I.D., Jaaneman, Devdas (1935 film), Parichay, Shaukeen, Devdas (1955 film), Devdas (2002 film), Devdas, Pyaasa, Saawariya, Ram Teri Ganga Maili,

Nikhat Khan, Faisal Khan, Johnny Walker (actor), Shankar Jaikishan, Bappi Lahiri, Yogeeta Bali, Geeta Bali, Nimmi, Premnath, Bhagwan Dada, Om Prakash, Aan, Achut Kanya, Shirish Kunder, A.K. Hangal, V. Shantaram, Jeetendra, Helen (Bollywood actress), Vijay Anand, Mehmood, Majrooh Sultanpuri, O. P. Nayyar, Kumar Gaurav, Rajendra Kumar, Shivani Kapoor, Ranbir Kapoor, Simple Kapadia, Bobby Deol, Twinkle Khanna, Rinke Khanna, Dimple Kapadia, Mandakini, Randhir Kapoor, Sohrab Modi, Prithviraj Kapoor, Tanuja, Shobhna Samarth, Mother India, Boman Irani, Johnny Lever

Also, do we need to further divide the project into sub projects. The entries on the category page number almost 1000. Lost 05:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I've rewritten the article on Mandakini. Also written/rewritten Rakhi Sawant, Mamta Kulkarni, Tulip Joshi, Deepika Padukone, Amrita Rao, Riya Sen and Carol Gracias. I'd appreciate help with pictures (especially for Mamta Kulkarni and Rakhi Sawant) and references (especially for Mandakini - some of the info I've used is iffy). Gamesmaster G-9 20:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox movie certificates

anyone want to add india?--D-Boy 19:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Added. -- Ned Scott 07:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

New cat

Just created the cat Category:Indian film choreographers. People may want to populate this cat. Also, Raghavendra Lawrence doesn't seem to have an article. btw, just as we list the project templates on the project page, it may be a good idea to list all the relevant cats and subcats as well on the project page or a sub-page. Any takers?? --Gurubrahma 11:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Alka Yagnik

I kind of cleaned up the article and have expanded it. Can anyone please have a look? Pa7 19:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


Cinema of India page

I have been editing the Cinema of India page since the last month (albeit sporadically). I started (coincidentally) when it was the Indian Collaboration of The Week. If you'd like, please see my edits.

My problem is that I have been having trouble with the regional cinema section, especially the Telugu cinema portion. Can someone please help at least with that part. I posted this message here because there seem to be few people watching that page regularly, and I want to do this fast. Please also see the talk page for that article for my other question. I apologize if this violates any wiki ettiquette, or anything. --Sshankar 06:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Though I cant help you on the Telugu piece, but rest assured. No wiki etiquette being violated here. Infact this is the right forum to raise this -- Lost 08:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Whew thanks! :) But i feel this topic is really neglected; it really needs work. I tried over the last month, but i'm getting a little overwhelmed now :( --Sshankar 16:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting pissed off now; Why are there so few people working on this? I think it is a very important article? ::fume:: --Sshankar 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Spoiling Plots

Could we refrain from this? Could we instead just have a short synopsis?

There can be spoilers. Just they should have the {{spoiler}} tag around them. There should be a short synopsis given that doesn't contain any spoilers. Sorry if something was spoiled for you :O gren グレン 20:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Satyajit Ray peer review

Satyajit Ray is currently in Peer Review. Please have a look and comment as necessary. Thanks.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

User comment in main article namespace

The following text was removed from the article WikiProject Indian cinema:

"Hi

We have a database of the popular musical countdown program Binaca geetmala that we are trying to put on wikipedia ( interested people can visit it by going to Binaca Geetmala on the search page) - is it possible to find a home for it on the project Indian cinema page? --Ghoshi 21:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)"

--Khatru2 19:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


Naming conventions

Hi folks,

Can you please try to keep in mind WP:NCP with regard to bio articles on actors and actresses? In particular, please use proper names as titles of the articles, with a redirect from screen names if desired. "Using exclusively a last name, for which the first name is known, as title of a page on a single person is discouraged, even if that name would be unambiguous, and even if that name consists of more than one word." Thanks. Stifle (talk) 10:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Strongly disagree with this, Stifle. Th is is like moving Cary Grant to Archibald Alexander Leach or Bill Clinton to William Jefferson Blythe III. Tintin (talk) 06:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm only abiding by the Misplaced Pages policy at WP:NC. If you think the policy is wrong, then feel free to campaign to get it changed or, indeed, propose an amendment to Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Indian actors). Stifle (talk) 09:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Please see here. If people published under one or more pen names and/or their own name, the best known of these names is chosen. -- Lost 09:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
What Lost said above. Using popular/stage name is the convention here.
What do you say about the examples of Cary Grant or Marilyn Monroe. Tintin (talk) 10:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I think you are wrong Stifle. What about Massiel, Ruslana, Dana International, Marie N for a European perspective - all are stage names used by winners of the Eurovision Song Contest, not their real names. Also, football players like Kaka - that's a nick.Blnguyen | rant-line 00:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Turns out that there is a completely different actor by the name Venkat Prabhu. See http://www.chennaionline.com/Moviereviews/tammov295.asp or http://www.indiaglitz.com/channels/tamil/article/23864.html

Can someone move the Venkat Prabhu back to Dhanush (actor, please. Tintin (talk) 11:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


Why is urdu on aritcles such as Yuva?--D-Boy 23:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Baazigar

I took a long wikibreak, because I was losing my balance and getting too angry. I think it's safe to come back and edit Indian cinema articles :) I rewrote the plot summary for Baazigar, after watching the movie. What a morally confused and bloody movie! Zora 00:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, well it was a kind of trendsetter in India. Shahrukh Khan, an established hero became a villain for the first time and followed it up with further negative roles:) -- Lost 18:33, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Baazigar is Supposed to be "inspired" by A Kiss before dying. I have not seen the English film so cannot comment on the accuracy of the claim the plot seems similiar. Haphar 11:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

List of Hindi films

I think we do not need the above mentioned article because half of the Hindi films don't even have articles on them. We have the category Hindi-language films and that has all the films that have articles on them. Even if we do expand the list, the majority will be filled with reds! I talked to the user who created it but I need some opinions. Thanx. Pa7 19:17, 5 August 2006

No, we don't need a list of Hindi films. It would be many thousands of films long and to what end? What's the point of having a name if there's no information? Let's just keep on, film by film, and in another ten or fifteen years we may have something like the list the new editor envisions -- but a useful list. Zora 18:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hindi films and plagiarism needs a complete rewrite

This article has been proposed for deletion by Zoe. Frankly, I agree with the deletion, as the list has become unmaintainable. It reached the cruft event horizon when there's so many unjustified entries that no-one bothers reverting more a long time ago. The idea was that the justification for each entry would be contained in the articles, but that just hasn't happened. Many of the articles on the list are stubs, some don't even mention the alleged plagiarism and those that do rarely verify it. Until an anon removed it today, one entry was "Krrish - Paycheck and Spiderman or Superman or The Matrix or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon" - whuh? Why not Citizen Kane and Das Kabinett des Doktor Caligari while we're at it?

Whether it ends up deleted or not, I suggest replacing the whole thing (well, the list anyway) with something that looks more like Films considered the worst ever. That list has inline citations for every entry, so the justification for their presence is watertight in every case. I've started a list at User:Samuel Blanning/Hindi films and plagiarism which contains the two films I know of that can be verified by reliable sources, plus a suitable commented out notice at the top of the list. Please help expand it, and once it reaches a decent length we can move it into articlespace. --Sam Blanning 17:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I started the original article, just to have a place to shovel the constant assertions of plagiarism, and I'll be the first to admit that it hasn't worked. Separating the listing and the justification means that it's hard to verify that both exist, and people constantly omit the justification. I like your version and urge an immediate replacement. Zora 19:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it should contain at least four or five films before being moved into articlespace. Unfortunately the two films I started the list with are the only two where I'm fully aware where and how they were plagiarised. I've heard Hum Tum was based off When Harry Met Sally as well, but haven't seen WHMS so can't really write an informed synopsis. Plus it would be nice if the list went further back than 2004. So I'd really like others to add to it even though it's in userspace at the moment. --Sam Blanning 23:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Satyajit Ray FAC

Satyajit Ray is up as a FAC--ppm 18:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

What to do about Nirojansakthivel?

This new editor dislikes the term Bollywood, apparently, AND he seems to think that we need a LIST of all Bollywood films ever made. He is renaming articles without any discussion. He has renamed List of popular Bollywood films to List of popular Hindi films unilaterally, without any discussion. He keeps starting lists and linking to them; when they're deleted, he recreates the lists and the links. He doesn't discuss; he just proceeds to do what he wants to do, regardless of pleas on his talk page.

What can we do? I'm trying to cut down my time on WP and I don't have the energy to clean up after him over and over again. Zora 02:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Just talk to him, the change from Bollywood -> Hindi isn't really bad. I don't particularly like the term 'Bollywood' myself. But make sure he discusses before changing things. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
The term Bollywood is a LOT more common than "Hindi movies" -- and the Bollywood industry turns out movies in several languages, by dubbing in several soundtracks. They do Hindi/Urdu, Marathi, and English. And Niro just doesn't discuss, or stop. Zora 09:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I moved back the articles that Niro had moved. I actually did the research; "Bollywood films" gets twice as many google hits as "Hindi films." Bollywood is the term most used outside India. Foreigners often use it inaccurately, to describe all of Indian cinema, but that doesn't mean that we should insist on "Hindi films" just to put them on the same level as Tamil films or Telugu films. It's enough, I think, that the opening paras of the Bollywood article make it clear that this is only part of the Indian film industry.

It's almost 3 AM here and I'm fading fast. I'm not sure that I've caught all the double redirects and such, but I'll try to work on it tomorrow. Zora 12:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Rajesh Khanna

This is really bad and someone who knows more about him needs to take a look at Rajesh Khanna. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

First FA of this project

Hi! Satyajit Ray became the first article of this project to become a Featured Article when it was identified as an FA on 10th August, 2006. Congrats to everyone. This project should churn out more FAs. REgards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Congrats! --Bhadani 08:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I would like to say that I have left the project as currently I am in the process of redefining my relationship with English Misplaced Pages, which may take days, weeks, and even months. However, I shall continue to edit pages relating to Indian cinema. Regards. --Bhadani 08:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Largest output dispute

There was a recent discussion on Talk:India questioning India's rank as the biggest producer of films in the world. The Cinema of India article was recently edited to accommodate the changes. However, many articles (including Bollywood) continue to mention Indian cinema as the largest producer of movies. In good faith, I do not question the authenticity of the article in the Economist that the user has provided. However, there seem to be news reports quite contradictory to this claim. I would like to hear the thoughts of other wikipedians in this matter. Thanks!-- thunderboltz15:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion regarding restructuring - please discuss

I noticed on the Community Portal that a new wikiproject council had been developed to help provide guidance and suggestions for the running of wikiprojects. Particularly among the first fruits of this labor is a guide which suggests that for certain WikiProjects, it may be more effective and beneficial to restructure as a task force within the central project (in this case, WikiProject Films). I think this may be germane to both the Iranian and Indian cinema projects, because the general goals between the projects are no different - merely their geographic scopes are differently limited. I'd like to also note that this was written by Kirill Lokshin, who is the Lead Coordinator of WikiProject Military history (one of Misplaced Pages's most successful WikiProjects). WikiProject Military history also is one of the most notable projects which features task forces, many of which focus on a particular time period or country within the large topic of military history.

The benefits of being a task force would include higher exposure as an explicit subunit of the central WikiProject Films page, as well as a high degree of autonomy to continue to use specific talk page banner tags, stub templates, and open tasks, and for the members of the task force to define the task force's priorities and structure. Furthermore, a highly productive task force would also likely be well-noted among the WikiProject Films community and thus be able to command considerable respect and weight in the setting of overall film project discussions and guidelines.

I'd like to also note that I'm not a member of the Films project, although I do follow its discussions; my main interest is in filmmaking, which is where I generally work (WikiProject Filmmaking) on Misplaced Pages. However, I would like to see all the film-related projects succeed, and it seems (from the success of Military history's work) that combining the two projects' editorial teams while maintaining each project's identity would only benefit both parties, and thus make everyone look good.

There is nothing more I'd like to see than a good discussion. Thank you, Girolamo Savonarola 21:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

PS - I've also brought this up in Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Films and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Iranian cinema, largely so that no one feels that the discussion is isolated to one project's "turf", given the issues.

Ahana Deol up for deletion...

...here. You may want to comment there. --Gurubrahma 14:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Hrishikesh Mukherjee

Article needs improvement and in light of his death yesterday would get a lot of people looking it up. Haphar 11:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Putting heroine first?

The Saathiya article puts Rani ahead of Vivek Oberoi in cast listings. I thought that this was just Shez15 doing his usual Rani-deification stuff, but I googled and found that IMDB put Rani first, Rediff put Vivek first, the Amazon DVD-for-sale put Rani first, various other reviews put Vivek first ... Various sites seemed to split down the middle on whom to credit first. As I remember the movie, both actors got equal screen time. On the one hand, as a woman, I want to say, "Sure, put the woman first!" On the other hand, I don't want WP used to deify Rani. What do you guys think? Follow IMDB, as a general rule? Zora 00:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop using original names for actors!!

This project seems to be in a mess as I see that WP requires people's articles to be named after their popular names where as we seem to take a different tack. Why do we want to be divisive? Why should Vijay be at Joseph Vijay? Would you move Julia Roberts to Julie Fiona Roberts? Charlie Chaplin to Charles Spencer Chaplin Jr.? and Dilip Kumar to Yusuf Khan? I believe this issue was unresolved the last time we were discussing it, but some one has changed many actor pages to original names. This is unfortunate; Under what name would some one search the WP? Many wouldn't even know original names. When WP:Mos is clear that popular names are what are reqd., I guess we need to stick to it or get it changed at WP:MoS, not have our own flights of fancy. Remember, we are a part of en wikipedia and our project should look at things that are not already covered rather than going about reinventing rules that may satisfy a few egos but are of no productive use. I guess this is my angriest post on WP but I believe it is warranted because we are unnecessarily getting mired into unproductive work. --Gurubrahma 14:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I am sure that all interested editors would understand the "nitty-gritty" of Gurubrahma's comments. We should conform to the convention of the English Misplaced Pages, and should not set our own personal rules of editing. --Bhadani 16:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Categorizing actors by religion

Bakasuprman is toiling away adding categories to Bollywood actor articles. Actors are being categorized as Hindu or Muslim. I think this is just plain wrong and pernicious. Religious devotion is not the defining characteristic of most actors. This is the sort of communal thinking that leads to bombing and massacre. In fact, I'm so angry and upset that I want to communicate with other project editors before I do anything. I'd like to get the categories erased and Bakasuprman told to stop. I'm not quite sure what the right procedure would be, but I'm sure there must be some administrative action that can be taken. Zora 01:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)