Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:33, 25 May 2020

Dimple Kapadia

Dimple Kapadia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/Dimple Kapadia/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Dimple Kapadia/archive2

Nominator(s): Shahid • Talk2me 22:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

This article is about a well-known Indian film actress who was particularly popular during the 1980s and early 1990s and was later acknowledged for her experimental work with arthouse cinema. She was launched by Raj Kapoor, but the film buffs among you will probably see her in Christopher Nolan's next. I visited this page several years ago when it was a stub. I started working on it, hoping to just slightly improve it, but got increasingly engaged in the process. Today there are several FAs on Indian actors but hardly any on those whose work goes back to the 1980-90s, since so little coverage of those years is available online for India, particularly for cinema. Nonetheless, all the digging paid off and it was promoted to GA soon after. A few days ago I came back to update and polish it and today, having gone over everything, I believe it meets the FA criteria. I will appreciate and be more than happy to address your comments. Cheers, Shahid • 22:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose from Fowler&fowler

• I'm not really commenting, only curious. I don't know much about Bollywood movies, but years ago had met an Indian gentleman whose last name was Kapadia, and who was Zoroastrian. That curiosity brought me here, thinking naively maybe she is a relative, but I discovered something entirely different, I think. The article says, her mother's name was Betty. Why is no maiden name (née) mentioned? Well, I was curious, so I clicked on the citation. That took me eventually to a youtube channel which showed (around the 6-minute mark) the Salat al-Janazah, or some other Muslim prayer, being read when her coffin returned to the house before the funeral. It obviously means that the mother was Muslim. Why is all this not mentioned? No sources? Or is it that under Mr Modi, Bollywood has to hide everything, even the religion he does not fancy? I'm curious. Was her dad Muslim too? I would recommend that you dig up the maiden name of the mother. That is generally done in most biography articles. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, it's an interesting question. I obviously did look for Betty Kapadia's maiden name but couldn't find it. But now I've found this text from a book on Raj Kapoor:

"Chunnibhai Kapadia was — and is — a maverick. A rebel in the stronghold of Gujarati conservatism, Chunibhai had from his early days been a non-conformist in everything. He was an attractive catch in the wealthy Gujarati community's marriage-market because he belonged to the wealthy Kapadia industrial family. Chunibhai, however, took his non-conformism seriously enough to by-pass all the huge dowrys and wealth that went hand-in-hand with making an arranged match with a girl from another wealthy Gujarati family. Instead, he opted for a love-marriage. Falling for a pretty young Muslim girl whom he nicknamed Betty, Chunibhai married her. The marriage created a furore, shaking as it did the very foundations of this community's traditionalism. And it was Chunibhai's eldest daughter Dimple, now about fourteen years old, who Mrs. Raj Kapoor's close friend Munni Dhawan had mentioned as a good choice for the title role of Bobby."

Indeed, her mother was Muslim, but there isn't evidence her father was, and this quote actually implicates he wasn't. Shahid • 01:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, well, keep digging. Maybe you'll find a maiden name for her mother and restore her some biographical heft. Even if you can't, you should certainly restore her mother's religion to her. You could even recount the story of the parents' marriage. All the best. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:53, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I'll work on it, currently looking for sources from the horse's mouth. Shahid • 01:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

I noticed that you (still) don't have a maiden name for the mother. (The absence of sources is a little perplexing, unless the marriage was considered so "scandalous" at the time that everything was done to suppress the identity of the mother.) Anyway, I just did another search. It turned up an interview with Ms Dimple Kapadia ca. October 2013 in a Magazine, Masala! which is apparently published in the United Arab Emirates. It seems like a legitimate interview. Speaking of coming from the horse's mouth, or in this instance the next of kin's, Ms Kapadia is heard saying there about her mother:

"My father had gone to see my mum's older sister for an arranged marriage but he fell in love with the younger one instead. My mum was only 16 then. And the next year, she gave birth to me. I was very attached to my mother but I was scared of dad."

So that seems to insinuate that the father was Muslim as well! For, we do know that the mother was Muslim, and arranged marriages in India never involve two religions, they mostly do not even involve two different castes within the same religion. Anyway, in the absence of any other source directly stating the father's religion, that would likely be WP:SYNTHESIS. But why are you not adding the mother's religion? There is a good source for it. The mother, moreover, is deceased; so no BLP issues are at stake. Why the reluctance? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

No reluctance as such. I just think that mentioning her mother's religion while not mentioning the father's would make it look quite weird. Secondly, now that you're saying her father was probably Muslim as well, mentioning Betty's religion could implicate he wasn't of the same religion. Then, I think we should avoid synthesis and while I did see this interview you quoted, it seems as though the two quotes, the one from the book and the other from the interview, bring contradicting conclusions. I would recommend moving this discussion to the talk page of the article, because it seems unrelated in this nomination. Shahid • 01:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

You mean mentioning the father's last name, but not the mother's before marriage does not look weird? You have two reliable sources which seem to contradict each other. Per WP FA Criteria, it is your duty to report both and point out the contraction. That is being Comprehensive. This discussion very much belongs to this page. If you want, I can formally oppose the nomination for suppressing information that is available in two reliable sources. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:07, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Please chill and do not use threats to force me into editing - I do not appreciate that kind of attitude. You proclaim the article is not valid because it's missing one word? I wish I knew why her parents' religion is so important to you, to me it means nothing. I have so far not seen a single source (and you can imagine I did look for many) where Dimple Kapadia (mind you, she is the subject here) identifies by a particular religion and so it probably is not very important to her. And no, we actually do mention both the father's last name and the mother's last name, which is Kapadia. Her mother was referred to as "Betty Kapadia" in every single reliable source I've seen, so her maiden name is not available and there's nothing I can do about it, and there's nothing weird about it. Now, her parents' love story is not part of Dimple Kapadia's biography, in my opinion. Even her own story with her husband would be just trivia in my book. Now to the sources, both give us absolutely no information about her father's religion, and yes, writing "Chunnibhai Kapadia and his Muslim wife Betty" sounds really weird to me because it would mean he wasn't Muslim, and while I do think he was, we can't be sure. Do you really think this version would be good? Comprehensive means "major facts or details and places the subject in context" are not neglected. This is not a major fact, definitely not about the subject, which is Dimple Kapadia. If it was major, we would find better sources from the horse's mouth. As a matter of fact, out of all the FAs on actors (Indian and non-Indian) which I checked now, most of them do not mention any religion while I'm pretty sure one could find sources. So if you have some good version which could be worked out, then propose it here instead of wikilawyering. Shahid • 13:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Most "sources," by which I mean those on the backs of which poorly-written articles on Indian movie stars have traditionally appeared at FAC, don't say anything other than repeating in a regimented fashion the banalities about two sisters whose names are advertised as "Dimple," and "Simple." I note in this instance, but also in plentiful others, citations to The Times of India or its sister publications; see an assessment of TOI at RSN. Some sources, however, do blurt out the name of the third sister, "Reem," a Muslim female name from Arabic, riʼm, rīm, A milk-white doe, and the brother's, the Muslim male name, Suhail (i.e. سہيل, i.e. Canopus, the second-brightest star in the sky whose variable visibility was employed by Arab astronomers in the early second millennium CE, to posit that the earth was round). Speaking of first names, since when did "Betty" become a name for an Indian woman of that vintage who was not Anglo-Indian (or Indian Christian), the nickname for "Elizabeth," the same as in Crocker, Ford, Boop, or Grable? Why have you not given credence to very reliable sources, which have reported the mother's first name to be "Bitti," a more likely Indian name, a diminutive for a daughter? See for example, The Calcutta Telegraph, here. The same spelling appears in a biography of Dimple Kapadia's first husband published by Penguin/Random House. See here and note the picture as well of the parents. Do you see the tell-tale bindi, worn traditionally by married Hindu women? For if you do, please tell me where and I'll bring out the microscope.

In other words, there is very reasonable doubt that the mother's nickname is Betty; it is more likely that it is "Bitti." There is every likelihood, that the mother was Muslim and some likelihood that the father was as well. As for why religion needs to be mentioned in a biography, it (religion) had been a defining feature of an upbringing until very recently, especially in traditional societies such as India's, even among people who are being reported to have flouted tradition. There is no reason that the first sentence in the background and personal life section—which has a scant mention of "background," and which is already laced with an asymmetrical mention of the mother's birth and death years, but not the father's—cannot have her religion instead. What is wrong with saying, "Dimple Kapadia was born on 8 June 1957 in Mumbai to a Muslim mother Bitti— and her husband a Gujarati businessman Chunnibhai Kapadia?" It was after all Bitti to whom the primary credit of the birth and early upbringing of her daughter belongs. Please see ancillary discussion at WT:FAC alluding to the various forms of gender imbalance. There are other issues here: the lack of probing into her inordinately early marriage, probably running afoul of the Indian Age of Consent, at least in the spirit of the law, and of the general manipulation of vulnerable girls in Bollywood. I'm sure there are sources, such as Virdi, Jyotika (2003) Cinematic ImagiNation: Indian Popular Films and Social History, Rutgers University Press, but it is not my job to find them. This is as far as I go with comments here. I will not be returning nor registering support or oppose. This is mainly for the benefit of others who might be doing so but do not know much about Indian culture. Make what you will. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay, for some reason, I do have a feeling that if Dimple Kapadia wanted to be identified by a religion, she would have mentioned her religion at least once in her long career. Interestingly, she does wear a bindi from time to time, and that's why the confusion. Even in a long monologue by Kapadia about her childhood and early life, which you cited to Masala (but the text actually comes from another source, which is already on the article - DNA India), she makes no mention of religion, which makes me believe that religion is, at least in her case, not necessarily "a defining feature of an upbringing" as you have nicely put. Mind you she married a Hindu and so did her daughters, so you can imagine what role religion really played in their family. Her husband, by the way, was secular.

As for The Telegraph, yes I'm aware of that source, but thought it's just a single source among many. The book that you mentioned actually called her Bitti because of this very Telegraph source (it's cited in there), so it's really just one source (anyway, I'll use it for now). Newspapers and books from as early as the 1970s and the 1980s call her Betty, including a journalist who visited their house and wrote a piece for The Illustrated Weekly of India. Misplaced Pages is all about verifiability, not truth, and I don't think people are allowed to practice their WP:OR on here, as tempting as it is for knowledge-seeking people, including me.

Somehow I find it difficult to mention her mother's religion basing it off one single book which is a biography of Raj Kapoor. I'll try to look into some of the documentaries, maybe I'll find something more concrete. In any case, if nothing is found, I should consider adding "and his Muslim wife Betty". Shahid • 08:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

No, not Dimple Kapadia, it was the mother Bitti or Betty, and secondarily her father, I was talking about (to which your first two paragraphs constitute replies). The "defining feature," etc. applied to them. It is clear that Dimple Kapadia herself is neither particularly religious nor shy about reminiscing about her failed early marriage to a Hindu actor. You could use both names Betty or Bitti. Even if the second source which uses "Bitti" cites the first, it is written by a reliable author who found the spelling convincing. Anyway, good luck. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, already applied Bitti. Thank you, Shahid • 11:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay finally found something. Her father was from a Khoja family which accepted Hinduism. Look at this article by Open magazine about her daughter Twinkle:

...nurtured in an eccentric lapsed Ismaili Khoja family and shared with a beloved guitar-playing, ink sketch-loving uncle. Her maternal grandfather, Chunibhai, was infamously disowned by his father, Laljibhai—who had embraced Hinduism, but continued to regard the Agha Khan as his religious mentor—when he allowed his daughter, Dimple, to act in Bobby

I've added the following sentence: "Chunibhai belonged to a wealthy family of lapsed Ismaili Khojas who accepted Hinduism but continued following Aga Khan as their mentor, and Bitti was Muslim." Shahid • 13:16, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Good work! The Khojas are Nizari Ismailis, therefore Shia Muslims. What we have are "histories," attempted by three generations, whose accounts are equally reliable, and equally unreliable per WP standards: a) The friend of a friend of Chunnibhai who states that CB came from a conservative Gujarati family but fell in love with a Muslim girl. b) Dimple Kapadia states her dad, CB, went to "see" her aunt for a prospective arranged marriage, but fell in love with her mother. And she was born the following year. c) Dimple's daughter Twinkle, tells us what Bollywood ignoramuses such as I had guessed in a few minutes, that the family is indeed Muslim. The business about "lapsed Muslims" who had "embraced Hinduism" but continued to follow the Aga Khan, is adaptive lying, not based in any reality that I am aware of nor I'm sure is the Aga Khan. (Lapsed Muslims who have embraced Hinduism don't name their children Reem and Suhail.) In Misplaced Pages we cannot state whatever a source states, only what is reasonable in it. What is reasonable is: "Chunnibhai was of Khoja Muslim heritage; Bitti was Muslim." Short and sweet. So, I would get rid of everything else in what you have added. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:15, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

PS There is plenty evidence that she was married in March 1973 (see here for example), which means she was 15 when married, well short of India's Age of Consent (which is 18 now, but was 16 in 1973). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm still looking for sources though. Well, I'd suggest keeping the Hinduism part because it seems like there was some sort of balance which could say a lot about their lifestyle, and it wouldn't necessarily contradict the names given. Naming your kids is not a sign of religious practice, but often just a way of preserving your history and heritage. I found exactly the same information, by the way, in an article by Sumit Mitra dated as early as 1985, so it doesn't appear far stretched. I really want to stick exactly to what the source says, because Kapadia has really never mentioned her religion and I wouldn't want this page to include anything other than was has already been published so far out of respect for her family.

Personally, I would assume they didn't really convert, but accepted Hinduism without completely abandoning their ethnic/cultural/religious identity. That's not very common, I guess, but then they were indeed quite an eccentric family, and that explains to me why at the end of the day they were actually quite a secular family, not having any reservations about their daughter marrying so early and to a Hindu man in a Hindu ceremony. Removing it or making conclusions based on common knowledge would be too much of OR (my own conclusion now is that a and b are now not that contradictory: their mother was a Gujarati Muslim just like her dad, though not necessarily Khoja, and indeed, he was to marry her aunt and ended up marrying Bitti, which was scandalous - the versions kind of complete each other). Shahid • 17:52, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

First, it is not clear from the syntax of that sentence who it was that embraced Hinduism; it seems like Lalji but it could have been his son Chunni, but either way, Hinduism traditionally in the period 1930s to 1950s—when they would have likely effected this reorientation of religious outlook—didn't really allow conversions, so entrenched was caste a feature of it. For the same reason, there is little chance they could have given their children names that harkened back to the religon they had just disavowed. What you are suggesting are the easy vanities of a much later era. There were also the questions of the disparate succession rules in Hinduism and Islam. On the other hand, if he was just a fan of Hinduism, we could say that if there was clear mention of that fact, not ambiguous mention as in "embrace." The most I think we can say with the current evidence is that "Chunnibhai was of Ismaili Khoja heritage, but living unconventionally; Bitti was Muslim." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

According to this entry in the Cambridge Dictionary, embrace means "to accept something enthusiastically", and one of the examples given is "This was in the days before she embraced religion". Similarly, this entry in The Free Dictionary, gives a definition of embrace which is "to take up (a new idea, faith, etc); adopt: to embrace Judaism".

Exactly because of what you just wrote, I wrote that it was the family and not a particular person. It might have been the father, but as you can assume, if it was the father, then it was everyone in the family. While everything you're saying is interesting and I'm definitely taking your words at face value personally, I can't think how we can interpret written text from two reliable sources so freely. This is exactly what WP:VNT is all about. Actually, I don't really think there's much of a problem here - no one is saying they converted, the only conclusion that could be drawn here is that they sort of kept exploring, since everything is presented fairly - both the so-called embracement and the fact that they kept following Aga Khan and even gave their kids Muslim names. Shahid • 19:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

What you had written was unsustainable in the light of the sources; I reverted it. Per BRD please gain consensus here before you revert back to your version. Alternatively, we can say, "Chunnibhai was of Ismaili Khoja heritage, but by his adulthood was professing a more pluralistic religious outlook; Bitti was Muslim." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:48, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

No please do not revert until consensus is reached. Shahid • 19:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

"Chunnibhai was of Ismaili Khoja heritage, but by his adulthood was professing a more pluralistic religious outlook; Bitti was from a Muslim family." That is what the sources are saying, in toto. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:52, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, but this is not at all what the sources are saying. The source is saying "...nurtured in an eccentric lapsed Ismaili Khoja family and shared with a beloved guitar-playing, ink sketch-loving uncle. Her maternal grandfather, Chunibhai, was infamously disowned by his father, Laljibhai—who had embraced Hinduism, but continued to regard the Agha Khan as his religious mentor—when he allowed his daughter, Dimple, to act in Bobby."

How exactly is it unsustainable, if that's what the source explicitly says, and why are you so against the mention of Hinduism? I really don't get it. Shahid • 19:55, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

It was added off-handedly by a granddaughter in a magazine, Open, which has not been commended latterly for its journalistic uprightness. All sources are not equal on Misplaced Pages. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

By this idea, the source should not be used at all. Why use it partially for the claims that one agrees with. Shahid • 21:01, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

My oppose is not based on a few sentences in section 1. But those sentences exemplify the issues found in other implausible and unrepresentative ones. The better sources are not used. Section 2.1, for example, has a rich scholarly literature, including the following (with initial page numbers):

• Nandy, Ashis (1998), The Secret Politics of Our Desires: Innocence, Culpability and Indian Popular Cinema, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 117–, ISBN 978-1-85649-516-5
• Dwyer, Rachel; Patel, Divia (2002), Cinema India: The Visual Culture of Hindi Film, Rutgers University Press, pp. 64–, ISBN 978-0-8135-3175-5
• Joshi, Priya (3 March 2015), Bollywood's India: A Public Fantasy, Columbia University Press, pp. 99–, ISBN 978-0-231-53907-4
• Varia, Kush (31 January 2013), Bollywood: Gods, Glamour, and Gossip, Columbia University Press, pp. 22–, ISBN 978-0-231-50260-3
• Dickey, Sara; Dudrah, Rajinder (24 October 2018), South Asian Cinemas: Widening the Lens, Taylor & Francis, pp. 8–, ISBN 978-1-317-97729-2
• Banerjee, Srivastava (13 September 2013), One Hundred Indian Feature Films: An Annotated Filmography, Routledge, pp. 54–, ISBN 978-1-135-84105-8
• Abbas, K A (1 December 2013), Bobby, HarperCollins Publishers India, pp. 1971–, ISBN 978-93-5029-554-0
• "Karma of 'Bobby' Lovers Stirs India's Filmgoers" By Bernard Weinraub, Special To the New York Times, Dec. 12, 1973
• Jain, Pankaj (2009). "From Kil-Arni to Anthony: The Portrayal of Christians in Indian Films". Visual Anthropology. 23 (1): 13–19. doi:10.1080/08949460903368887. ISSN 0894-9468.
• Lutgendorf, Philip. 2005. "Sex in the Snow: The Himalayas as as Erotic Topos in Popular Hindi Cinema." HIMALAYA 25(1).

Instead this source is used repeatedly. It has sentences like:

• "Dimple does a Nicole Kidman in Hum Kaun Hai, inspired by Hollywood's The Others."
• "Of course, Dimple's fans may not mind that too much, thanks to the ravishing actress."
• "The eternal headturner: She is the best looking grandmom in films today."
• "Auburn-haired Dimple Kapadia looked as resplendent as a Botticelli angel in her youth but hers is the kind of beauty that gets only better with age."
• "One can question Dimple's choice of films but there are no two opinions about her being a headturner and one of the more sensitive actresses that the industry can lay claim to in the 1970s and the 1980s."
• "Dimple was pronounced the 'it' girl in her debut film, Bobby, itself. Master showman Raj Kapoor signed her on when she was barely 14 and did the mahurat of his first directorial film without himself in the cast on Dasshera day in 1971."
• "Her expressive eyes effectively conveyed teen angst. And when she emerged nymph-like from the pool in a red bikini, Dimple, despite her puppy fat, had teenagers enthralled. Her knotted polka-dotted blouse and earphone hairstyle were wildly emulated."

The last of these is quoted in the section. A reviewer cannot say anything more actionable than: Comprehensivess fails in section 2.1. The best sources are not included. Very poor ones are. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, so now that you've already opposed the nomination based on one word, you're presenting a list from Google Books without even going into what they include? Do you realise this article is on an Indian actress and not the film Bobby? Is there anything you think could be added to the section? One of your sources is titled "Sex in the Snow: The Himalayas as as Erotic Topos in Popular Hindi Cinema" - what is it in there that you think could be added into this article? What do you mean by the best sources? The article uses sources from Encyclopedia Britannica, and other books, where necessary, but if anything, your problem is not comprehensiveness. It's just a clear attempt to try to justify your automatic opposition to this article.

Needless to say, your last line is a lie; this quote does not appear on the article. Shahid • 17:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Parents' religion

(Invited other reviewers to weigh in but removed it for now) Let's try to work it out here before inviting other reviewers. So here's what we have:

Open magazine (2019) in a piece about Dimple Kapadia's daughter says:

...nurtured in an eccentric lapsed Ismaili Khoja family ... Her maternal grandfather, Chunibhai, was infamously disowned by his father, Laljibhai—who had embraced Hinduism, but continued to regard the Agha Khan as his religious mentor—when he allowed his daughter, Dimple, to act in Bobby

India Today (1985)

The wealthy Khoja family, which embraced Hinduism only with Chunibhai's father, Laljibhai, and which accepts the Agha Khan as its religious mentor even now, disowned Dimple's father the day he agreed to Raj Kapoor's proposal to let her sign for Bobby.

My version is "Chunibhai belonged to a wealthy family of lapsed Ismaili Khojas who accepted Hinduism but continued following Aga Khan as their mentor"

Yours is "Chunnibhai was of Ismaili Khoja heritage, but by his adulthood was professing a more pluralistic religious outlook"

What do you guys think is best? Maybe you have another suggestion? Looking forward to your opinion. Shahid • 20:10, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you realize the irony of your suggestion? I came here out of curiosity, knowing nothing about this actress, knowing only that Kapadia was the name of a Zoroastrian person of my former acquaintance. Based on my curiosity, my knowledge of India, and some rummaging, I conjectured that the mother, and perhaps both parents were of Muslim heritage, something that neither you, nor a single one of the dozens and dozens of sources you had hitherto marshaled in this article had uttered a peep about, nor for that matter had any of the other reviewers whose opinion you are now quick to elicit. My conjecture has turned out to be more or less true. You are now attempting to dispute how stable or serious was the father's, the parents', or the family's, belief in Islam, chalking it mostly to an innocuous ecumenicalism. Well do what you want. I have lost interest in pursuing this beyond what I understand to be the likely truth. I am tired besides. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

First, I'm grateful to you for bringing it on, while I do think that mentioning religion is not necessarily important for actors' biographies. The irony is that I did exactly what you said. You wanted religion to be included, and I spent hours digging in the archives. Now that finally sources have been found, I'm not sure who's attempting what here. I'm following the sources, and you are suggesting your own interpretation of the text, which is far stretched and not supported by the sources. Why not just write what the source says? You have been proposing different explanations as to why it's not very likely that what the sources are saying is true. That's not how Misplaced Pages works. Misplaced Pages is about verifiability, not truth, and I'm following the sources, I do not "do what I want". If I find something else in some book or documentary, I'll be the first to write exactly what they say. Thank you for the help, Shahid • 20:59, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

There is only one source. 1985. (The musings of the granddaughter recorded in 2019, repeating the words of 1985, including "embracing," don't constitute anything reliable) 1985 starts out peremptorily, "The wealthy Khoja family, which embraced Hinduism only with Chunibhai's father, Laljibhai, ..." Where in the story was there previous mention of Hinduism to warrant the use of the definite article (The)? What evidence is cited for this statement? Nothing. However, a little later, we do have Dimple Kapadia's own words:

"When I was a child, my parents took me to Agha Khan, and he named me Ameena. Beautiful name, it means the dignified one".

So you do have a birth name, by her own acknowledgment, which you can add to the article, and which is far more beautiful that "Dimple." If you are worried about respect, please give her her name back. It is "Ameena."

However, the Hinduism mumbo-jumbo is just that. No citation, no previous mention, no story, no anecdote, is offered. There is such a thing as plausible truth in Misplaced Pages. For something to be plausible it has to have a context, a causal and chronological sequence. None is given for the family's continuing to regard the reigning Aga Khan, the Hazar Imam, as their spiritual head, but also "embracing" Hinduism. She was born in June 1957, so it was likely Aga Khan III, and not the current Hazar Imam, who named her. The Aga Khans were themselves quite cosmopolitan, regularly appearing at the races at Derby and Ascot, but they were clear about Ismailis being Muslims. Aga Khan III founded the All-India Muslim League. It would be a bizarre distortion of Indian and Pakistani history were Misplaced Pages to state he was going around christening Hindu babies, giving them Muslim names. By the way, I'm not even remotely one of those Hindu nationalists who on Twitter like to out Muslims, casting them to be traitors. But a biography needs its reliable truth, not a fantastic or accusatory one. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:20, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay I'm removing the invitation for other opinions for now.

Well Ameena is indeed a beautiful name. Her birth name from what sources say is Dimple though - she was a child when they visited the Aga Khan who gave her a second name, which sadly didn't stick. You're right should be mentioned. She herself said on DNA India:

When my sister Simple and I’d travel together, officials at the airports would ask, “Are your names for real?” I suppose Dad had a crazy sense of humour. Actually, I was given another name by the present Aga Khan’s father. It was Ameena but no one ever called me that."

In another source, she is quoted as saying, "I was born with a cleft in the chin but Dad didn't know the difference between a cleft and a dimple. So I was named Dimple." So Dimple is basically her birth name given by her dad (which as implied appears on her passport).

Again, I do not say they converted to Hinduism, nor does the article. It says they embraced/accepted it while still maintaining their heritage. That's exactly what the source says. No one christened Hindu babies because they're not officially Hindu. They kept their tradition and followed Aga Khan, and it's written there. How can there be any problem with that? But do you realise how much all of what you're writing is your free analysis based on your belief and knowledge and not facts as presented by sources? Shahid • 22:49, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

The causal sequence is: a) The present Aga Khan's father, Aga Khan III died on the 11 July 1957. b) Dimple Kapadia was born on 8 June 1957 c) Sometime before Aga Khan III died, he named her Ameena (which along with Amina, Aamina, is a variant of the popular Muslim female name, Arabic آمنة which means honest, or trustworthy, and is the name of the Prophet Muhammad's mother.) d) She was, therefore, less than 1 month and 3 days old when she was so named, i.e. she was an infant.

Ameena was, therefore, her name, her original name, for the Aga Khans are not known to give second names, pious Muslim names, of the Prophet's mother's no less, to infants of their Jamat whose parents have chosen frivolous names such as "Dimple" as the primary ones. Passports however are made much later in life. She might have had her name officially changed to Dimple later, but it is unlikely to have been her birth name; two siblings after all did have straightforward Muslim names: Reem and Suhail Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Look, much as I have enjoyed this back and forth—and it has been enjoyable for me as I had never imagined so much new material surfacing—I do have to go. I will leave you with my final proposal for the first few sentences of the background section.

Dimple Kapadia was born on 8 June 1957 in Mumbai to a Gujarati businessman Chunibhai Kapadia and his wife Bitti, or "Betty." Chunnibhai was of Ismaili Khoja heritage, but was thought to hold somewhat unconventional religious beliefs; Bitti belonged to a Muslim family. When barely a month old, Dimple was given the name "Ameena" (Arabic آمنة, literally, "honest," or "trustworthy," also the name of the mother of Prophet Muhammad) by Sir Sultan Mahomed Shah Aga Khan III, the spiritual head of Nizari Isma'ilism. Dimple is the eldest of four children, her siblings—all of whom are deceased—being the actress Simple Kapadia, a sister, Reem, and a brother, Suhail."

I can give you sources for the Arabic etc. later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

PS (Added later): a) 1) آمنة (p. 101) A آمنة āmina, The name of Muhammad's mother. F.J. Steingass, A Comprehensive Persian-English Dictionary, page 101. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

PPS See also the Wiktionary entry. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

She did not say she was named after Muhammad's mother, but gave the translation of the name. Shahid • 11:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

:) Again, we cannot accept everything she says, including her translation; she is only the source of the name being given to her by the Aga Khan. The meaning of the name exists independently. It is our encyclopedic duty to provide it, correctly. Hers is incorrect. See the Wiktionary entry. I'm sure I can find other sources. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay, Ameena does mean 'the dignified one' as well, that I know for a fact! I have no problem adding the translations which appear on Wiktionary, which are all true (all these translations are close in meaning anyway), it's there now anyway. But I don't think other uses of the name are noteworthy unless she said she was named specifically after someone. Shahid • 12:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Aminah is the Prophet's mother. It is a very important aspect of Dimple Kapadia's name. It doesn't really matter what spin she puts on the name. It was given by the Aga Khan, who traces lineal descent from the Prophet. It is an important requisite for explaining the naming. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, I disagree with you. As for your claim that "It doesn't really matter what spin she puts on the name." - well, according to me it's the only thing that matters. No WP:OR. The very basic link of Amina on Misplaced Pages goes to the Zazzau warrior queen, so you can never know. Why not just link the name and that's it? I think giving the translation is enough, and the readers are intelligent enough to make the link between Aga and Muhammad's mother and draw conclusions if they need to, just like you did. Shahid • 14:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help Fowler, it has indeed been very useful. I'll be looking for other sources, but at this point Hinduism stays because that's what is said in the sources, unless other sources are found. What matters is what the sources say, not what we think they meant or was less likely (WP:VNT). The readers can make their own conclusions based on the information presented, which must be presented fairly in accordance with sources. Secondly, she said several times that she was named Dimple by her father. She was given "another name", in her own words, Ameena, so her birth name is Dimple, and speculations about when she got her passport are, again, inappropriate. But anyway, your version is very good IMO, except that scripts are deprecated on Indian articles anyway, and I shortened it a bit. If you disagree with the versions we'll open it up to other editors so that they weigh in on the issue, but this rather small issue has been going on for too long. Shahid • 08:16, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:INDICSCRIPTS is about Indic scripts in the lead or the infobox; this is Arabic in Section 1. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 10:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

If they are not used for her full name in the lead, why would nay script be used at all? Shahid • 10:49, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

For the same reason they are used in the FA India, in Section 1 (Etymology). The etymology of someone's name is of encyclopedic interest. I'm not saying that the Arabic script has to be in the lead or the infobox; but the name Ameena does need to be in the infobox as an alternate name. I don't know if the template has that argument; it probably does. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

They are not mentioned on film-related articles though. This is an actor's article. Moreover, she never said it's her second name - it's a name given by Aga Khan which hasn't stuck. Not a single reference mentions it as her second name or her full name as Dimple Ameena. Shahid • 11:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

My proposed version says simply she was given a name Ameena as an infant (for the Aga Khan III died when she was 1 month and 3 days old) by Aga Khan III. Short and sweet. It makes no claim to being the only name, "another" name, or "second" name. But she does say he gave her a name. Adding "infant" is not original research. Elementary math is allowed. You cannot use the word "child," which can mean a period between infancy and adulthood, even if she used it. We know she had to be an infant. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Of course! :) I'm using exactly what you wrote (when she was barely a month old). Shahid • 11:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

You are? Can you please communicate those edits to me (here)? OK, I've taken a look. It is better, but Hinduism is problematic. You can footnote it, if you'd like. But it is too incongruous, too implausible, in the light of everything we know about Khoja Shia Islam. We can't add whatever a source says; however, there are many sources that attest to his unconventional, rebellious, ways. You could change it to "Chunnibhai was of Ismaili Khoja heritage, and a rebellious spirit;(footnote about the family "embracing" Hinduism) Bitti belonged to a Muslim family." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

A footnote could be a solution. But look, I have no bias here. I couldn't care less about her religion. But it appears that neither can Kapadia herself; almost 50 years in the movie business and never a mention of her or her parents' religion. Maybe this complicated self-exploration of her father's family is the reason for it? She married a Hindu, as a matter of fact. I can't understand this anti-Hindu sentiment. Please try to explain to me how you are willing to exclude text that is mentioned by a reliable source. How can we ignore the fact that a reliable source says they "embraced Hinduism" and that they are lapsed Muslims based on your own belief or interpretation? It is the most unfair incident I can imagine and is totally contradictory to the spirit of Misplaced Pages. What you're doing here is exactly what Misplaced Pages is against. Shahid • 12:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Another possibility is:

"Chunnibhai was rebellious by temperament; he was from an Ismaili Khoja family, which according to one source had come to "embrace Hinduism," in the previous generation, without entirely relinquishing Ismaili loyalties. Bitti belonged to a Muslim family."

That is about all we can say reliably. (Khoja, btw, is a caste designation used for a former Hindu caste which converted to Shia Islam during the 13th or 14th centuries. Some of these converted Shia did adopt other faiths such as Sunni Islam, and even Hinduism, to escape persecution, but that happened much earlier. But unless we have sources that specifically attest to a late 19th-century or early 20th-century reconversion, we cannot state it in a manner that implies it, in our voice, that is. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Better, but rebellious by temperament sounds a little unencyclopedic to me and too much information about her father when really this article is about Kapadia the daughter. How about - "Chunibhai was from a wealthy Ismaili Khoja family, which was reported to have 'embraced Hinduism', without entirely relinquishing Ismaili loyalties (and here footnote: quote about them continuing to regard the Agha Khan as a religious mentor)". Shahid • 13:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The source starts out with, "But there was something oddly rebellious about Chunibhai himself, ..." Rebellion is an important aspect of his personality. It was mentioned in the very first source about Bitti being Muslim. It underpins his behavior. All I can accept is: "Chunnibhai was considered rebellious; he was from an Ismaili Khoja family, which according to one source had come to "embrace Hinduism," in the previous generation, without entirely relinquishing Ismaili loyalties. Bitti belonged to a Muslim family." "according to one source" is necessary, for we have only one. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Our versions are practically the same. I just removed him being a rebel since this article is not about him; his rebellious nature is attributed here to him allowing Dimple to act in movies and in the book to marrying Bitti. See the India Today article. The rest - "Chunibhai was from a wealthy Ismaili Khoja family, which was reported (can add by India Today) to have 'embraced Hinduism', without entirely relinquishing Ismaili loyalties (and here footnote: quote about them continuing to regard the Agha Khan as a religious mentor)" - is similar to yours, just instead of writing previous generation, I'm writing, "the family he came from" - which is, indeed the previous generation. Shahid • 14:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay - I personally strongly believe Bitti was Gujarati and Ismaili as well just like her husband. Sadly, nothing exists on it. My suggestion is,

"Chunibhai was from a wealthy Ismaili Khoja family, which was reported (by India Today) to have 'embraced Hinduism', without relinquishing Ismaili loyalties; he and Bitti followed Aga Khan as their religious mentor."

I think that would be true considering Dimple's self-reported story. Shahid • 16:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

This is not a small issue. It is the matter of someone's heritage in a section which is titled "Background." There is no possibility for any a Narazi Ismaili to "accept" or "embrace" Hinduism within the fold of that Shia Islam faith. See here, the official website of the faith:

The Shia Imami Ismaili Muslims, generally known as the Ismailis, belong to the Shia branch of Islam. ... Throughout their 1,400 year history, the Ismailis have been led by a living, hereditary Imam. They trace the line of Imamat in hereditary succession from Ali, the cousin and son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him). ... They firmly believed that the legacy of Prophet Muhammad could only be entrusted to a member of his own family, in whom the Prophet had invested his authority through designation before his death. That person was Ali, Prophet Muhammad’s cousin, the husband of his daughter and only surviving child, Fatima. The institution of Imamat was to continue thereafter on a hereditary basis, succession being based on designation by the Imam of the Time. ... In time, the Shia were sub-divided. The Ismailis gave their allegiance to Imam Jafar as-Sadiq’s eldest son Ismail, from whom they derive their name. The Ismailis continue to believe in the line of Imamat in hereditary succession continuing from Ismail to His Highness the Aga Khan, who is their present, 49th Imam in direct lineal descent from Prophet Muhammad.

I have changed my comments to an oppose. I see the issue of the parents' religion to be symptomatic of the overall weakness of this submission, of the inability to source, to cite, to paraphrase, to separate what is plausible from what is not. This submission, and the nominator's recalcitrance in the face of numerous sources, is the reason that knowledgeable editors do not like to waste their time on FAC. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

This is almost funny - an oppose put to impose the removal of one word, without even reading this article. Anyway, you have already posted threats of opposing this article based on this one sentence appearing or not. And now that it's on, you demand that it be written your way and according to your belief, and not according to sources. I'm not intimidated by this oppose. I do not let religious agenda become part of my work.

The quote you've added, how is that even related to Dimple Kapadia?

Hi there, user:Aoba47, user:Encyclopædius, user:indopug - please weigh in on this issue and let's work out a version.

User:Fowler&fowler does not want the word Hinduism to be mentioned despite the fact that it is mentioned in the sources. Shahid • 10:08, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

• Halim, Moeena (19 December 2016), Twinkle 'Funnybones' Khanna: The author who puts a bit of herself in her characters, India Today Quote: "Inspired by her maternal grandmother, who would drag her to the Ismaili jamatkhana (community centre), Noni and her sister Binni were originally supporting characters in the novel she began writing as a teenager." That is Bitti Kapadia who is doing the dragging. The Ismaili Jamatkhanas are uniquely Ismaili houses of worship; see Why Ismaili Jamatkhanas are only open to Ismaili for prayers which says, "One of the ways in which Ismailis have expressed their identity wherever they have lived is through their places of prayer, known today as the Jamatkhana." See also Misplaced Pages's own page, Ismaili Jamatkhana. I hope this belies any notion of the family's lapsed Ismailism. I mean the evidence is that Dimple's mother was taking Dimple's granddaughter to the house of worship of a religion that professes belief in Muhammad, whom they view as: "the final Prophet and Messenger of God to all humanity" Please take out the gratuitous mention of Hinduism. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, this is exactly what I just found - I tried Twinkle Khanna Ismaili, among others.

But why should Hinduism be removed from the mention of Chunibhai's family? These sources do not contradict at all the previous ones; the previous sources maintain the same claim, that they are Aga Khanis.

I would suggest, "Chunibhai was from a wealthy Khoja family, which was reported (by India Today) to have 'embraced Hinduism', without relinquishing Ismaili loyalties; he and Bitti, also an Ismaili, followed Aga Khan as their religious mentor."

This version takes all sources into consideration, which we, as neutral editors, should be doing. Shahid • 16:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I have gone back to my final proposal (please scroll above). It is what the sources say reliably. You are welcome to nickel and dim off-handed remarks in whatever fashion you would like. Ismailism, which is an integral part of Shia Islam, of necessity and non-negotiably monotheistic, does not allow its adherents, even the wayward ones, to "embrace" Hinduism, a polytheistic religion. I am done. My oppose stands. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you even realise how much your "final proposal" (which is rather - "either my version or oppose") is inappropriate on FAC. Please don't think that I would comply with violating Misplaced Pages policies just to have this oppose removed. FAC voting is supposed to be based on constructive criticism and not disagreement with a single word based on personal opinions.

Well, for your information, Twinkle Khanna is half Hindu, so how can you speak of Ismailism being the "necessity and non-negotiably monotheistic, does not allow its adherents, even the wayward ones, to 'embrace' Hinduism"? You see, your theories are practically just yours, and your knowledge is clearly defied by reality as it is reported in reliable sources. See what she says on Rediff.com (November 2016):

My grandmother is an Aga Khani so she would take Rinke and me to the jamatkhana. I had a multicultural exposure, that's why I don't believe in a particular religion. I have respect for most because I grew up surrounded by so many.

I think that's a serious case of Misplaced Pages:I just don't like it on your part. You have several sources which do not contradict each other in any way, but the word Hinduism is the one that you just can't deal with. I wish I knew why. Here's my modified version (based on the sources and not what is "likely" or "possible" and adhering to Misplaced Pages policy:

Chunibhai was from a wealthy Ismaili Khoja family, whose members had—according to India Today—"embraced Hinduism" without relinquishing Ismaili loyalties; Bitti was an Ismaili, too, and the couple followed Aga Khan as a religious mentor. When barely a month old, Dimple was given the name Ameena (literally, "honest" or "trustworthy" in Arabic) by Aga Khan III, although she was never referred to by it.

What do you say? Shahid • 17:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Verifiability or truth?

Dear @FAC coordinators: and anyone involved: Hi there, everyone. This article has been nominated for a month. User:fowler&fowler stepped in and suggested that her religion is added although no sources seemed available. He even posted a threat that based on the absence of religion in her background, he shall oppose. I finally did find sources for her father's religion. And here they are:

Open magazine (2019) in a piece about Dimple Kapadia's daughter says (link):

...nurtured in an eccentric lapsed Ismaili Khoja family ... Her maternal grandfather, Chunibhai, was infamously disowned by his father, Laljibhai—who had embraced Hinduism, but continued to regard the Agha Khan as his religious mentor—when he allowed his daughter, Dimple, to act in Bobby

India Today (1985) (link):

The wealthy Khoja family, which embraced Hinduism only with Chunibhai's father, Laljibhai, and which accepts the Agha Khan as its religious mentor even now, disowned Dimple's father the day he agreed to Raj Kapoor's proposal to let her sign for Bobby.

Based on these sources, I've added the following sentence on the article:

Chunibhai belonged to a wealthy family of lapsed Ismaili Khojas who accepted Hinduism but continued following Aga Khan as their mentor; Bitti was Muslim

User:Fowler&fowler demanded that Hinduism be removed and suggested a rather weird version, IMO, which clearly violates WP:VNT, WP:POV, and WP:OR. He said that it's not likely that this would be true. I did not agree and I identified right away that something is really strange in his insistence to remove that word and to include her Muslim background without any additions that appear in the two sources. I don't mind removing the mention of religions altogether. But this oppose is solely based on this one sentence. User:fowler&fowler admittedly did not even read the article and now opposes it because I follow sources and not his personal will. Shahid • 10:34, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Her parents religion is just not important. It should obvious to the delegates in reading the above comments and being aware of Fowler' s history at FAC.† Encyclopædius 12:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Shahid - Don’t sweat it. When the FA coordinators come to consider this candidate, they will give the above Oppose the weight it deserves. KJP1 (talk) 13:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much, User:Encyclopædius and User:KJP1. I find fowler's remarks really offensive - to not read the article and still oppose it based on one word and some weird anti-Hindu sentiment (not referring to the user's intentions, I don't want to speculate, but specifically to the bottom line of his comments). I can't understand how I'm expected to accept his insistence to accept only part of what the source says because he finds it "unlikely" or less "possible" in view of his common knowledge. This is against everything that Misplaced Pages is about. Shahid • 13:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for the late response. I am honestly uncertain about how to feel on this situation. Maybe it's because I know next to nothing about India and its culture to really understand this discussion on religion or it's because the above discussion is rather long and dense with information. For those reasons, I do not feel comfortable offering an opinion on it, but I still wanted to post at least this response since I was pinged. I agree with the above commentators that the FA coordinators will take everything into account to reach some sort of conclusion. They are far more qualified than I am to weigh in on this discussion. Apologies again for not being much help here. Aoba47 (talk) 16:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Trust me, this long discussion is forced upon me because I'm not willing to give up Misplaced Pages policy in the face of ferocious attempts which I think everyone knows what stands behind them. I wrote an article about an actress, what I'm interested in here is her art and work. Instead, I'm stuck discussing one sentence in the background section, which is treated with such fervent worry by the other user that he is willing to oppose a nomination on nothing but his interpretation not being accepted. This is amusing even to me. Shahid • 16:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Have you considered ignoring what Fowler&fowler has to say and putting it down to simply someone who knows nothing about featured articles trying to convince everyone that they know everything about featured articles? Cassianto 07:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassianto, I have, but I also have to make sure the co-ords are aware of how preposterous this oppose is. Shahid • 08:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The disruptive behaviour displayed by this third-rate reviewer is nothing new and has been going on for a while. I'm sure at least two of the coords can see this. I will take a look at this article tonight. Cassianto 11:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassianto Please don't ping me with ungrammatical sentences. "Putting it down" needs a possesive: "to someone's trying to convince ...." Also, Shshshsh Please be aware that I too can wildly ping people. FAC regulars know nothing about India. I can ping people who do: such as Abecedare, RegentsPark, Vanamonde93, Sitush, Kautilya3, Dwaipayan, Joshua Jonathan, Spaceman Spiff, Doug Weller, ... , which I am not, only pointing out a whole other level of relevant expertise. Contrast this submission with Pather Panchali or Satyajit Ray. Please also read my comments on the sources used in Section 2.1 (above). That's just one section. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

First, I pinged only the coordinators, and before that, only those who are already reviewers on this very page, so get your facts right. Dwaipayan is a editor whom I consider a wikifriend if you like, and he would never have adopted the kind of behavior you have been adopting on this page. As for Pather Panchali, I happen to have been its GA reviewer, so I don't need to contrast. I still am amused by your inexplicable insistence to do everything you can to remove one single word simply based on your POV and nothing else. But I realise now that this behavior is not news to anyone, so you might want to consider altering your ways, including accepting Misplaced Pages's spirit and its policies, including WP:POV, WP:OR, WP:VNT, and WP:AGF. Shahid • 17:21, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Comments by indopug

Initial comments

• Kapadia is barely visible in the infobox. Please add a closer, well-lit portrait crop of her face so that the reader can see what she looks like.
  • Done. Shahid • 18:14, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
• Since Commons has many free pictures of her, you should sprinkle a few throughout the article. See if you can justify a few non-free stills of her iconic roles.
  • Most of the images on commons are of poor quality. The only one that can be used has been added now in 2010s section. As for non-free stills, I wish I could use some. I did add some in the past for her famous roles, using fair-use rationale, but all of them were sadly eventually removed and deleted, so I'm avoiding the use of non-free images. Shahid • 17:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
• "Bombay, Bombay State, India (present-day Mumbai, Maharashtra)" in the infobox is needlessly complicated. Just "Bombay, India" will suffice IMO, at most "Bombay (Mumbai), India".
  • Done. Shahid • 17:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
• No Indian has a clue how much ₹2.13 billion is LOL.—indopug (talk) 16:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Done, it's "₹2.13 billion (US$25 million)" now.

• I meant you should express Rupee figures in lakhs and crores (the $ figure you added will suffice for non-Indians). "Billions of rupees" is incoherent for Indians.—indopug (talk) 15:45, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Shahid • 17:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Indopug, just wondering if you have some additional comments for improvement, now that those raised above have been addressed. Shahid • 22:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. I'm happy with the changes you've made. I think this article is very good already; I will try to do a section-by-section copyedit and detailed review over the coming week.—indopug (talk) 15:45, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text
  • Done. Shahid • 13:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
• File:Pranab_Mukherjee_presenting_the_Padma_Bhushan_Award_to_Smt._Dimple_Kapadia_on_behalf_of_her_husband_late_Shri_Rajesh_Khanna,_at_an_Investiture_Ceremony-II,_at_Rashtrapati_Bhavan,_in_New_Delhi_on_April_20,_2013_(cropped).jpg: what leads you to believe this was published under the given license? On a quick look I don't see it at the source site, and the licensing terms seem to be tailored to data rather than media. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Well, I'm not the who uploaded it or added it on the article, but on its commons page, it's specifically indicated that it "was reviewed on 2018-08-22 by the administrator or reviewer GazothBot, who confirmed that it was available on that source on that date." Anyway, I did remove it for now, Shahid • 13:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Encyclopædius

I very rarely review articles these days, too much to do, but I've watched this one progress over a long time and am happy to review it. Kidding aside, it looks in good shape overall and to be fair it's balanced out as you say. I'll give it a full read later in the week. She is still on my watchlist LOL!† Encyclopædius 16:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Looking forward to your comments :) Shahid • 16:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there Blofeld, don't mean to bother you, but since you've shown interest in reviewing the article, this is a reminder in case it still stands and you have some free time. Shahid • 14:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Lead

• "Kapadia continued working infrequently in the subsequent decades" - Kapadia has worked less frequently since the mid 1990s?
  • Done. Shahid • 19:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Background

• b. = born, no need for shorthand.
  • Done. Shahid • 19:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• though Kapadia has once - remove "has"
  • Done. Shahid • 19:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Career

• Second paragraph in my opinion is excessive, even if I understand it's her debut film. Try to shorten it. There shouldn't really be two different paragraphs covering the same topic. Where it says "Several of her lines in the film became popular, particularly, "Mujhse dosti karoge?" ("Will you be my friend?") I would say something like "Several of her lines in the film became popular, particularly, "Mujhse dosti karoge?" ("Will you be my friend?", and her "knotted polka-dotted blouse and earphone hairstyle" worn in the film made her into a fashion icon". You take several sentences discussing something which really shouldn't be more than a sentence or two.
  • Done, shortened. I actually don't know enough about the subject and the fashion; I just saw excessive amount of coverage given to her being a sort of fashion icon and felt it would be of note including it. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• " leading and most popular" - WP:Peacock advises against the word "leading".
  • Done. Actually both popular and leading seem to be deprecated when not used in the right context, but I've removed the popular, although if you insist could keep it and leave out the leading. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• " A review by Asiaweek labelled her "a delight"" - I don't see any encyclopedic value in including this.
  • It's a film review with critique about her performance. It was important to me to find a review which was specifically published upon the film's release, and I would suggest keeping it. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• " She later said making the film was "one big picnic", though she expressed her lack of comfort performing the "routine song-and-dance" nature of the part." -as the reader I really don't care about what she feels. "In 1984 she had a role opposite Sunny Deol in Manzil Manzil, a drama directed by Nasir Hussain, before starring in Mukul Anand's Aitbaar (1985), a Hitchcockian thriller in which her role as Neha, a wealthy young woman whose greedy husband (played by Raj Babbar) plots to murder her, received positive reviews. Again I don't care about her feeling nervous.
  • Rewrote some. As for the experience on sets, totally true. As for not being comfortable performing dance songs and being nervous while performing a role (particular the latter), I'd argue it's quite relevant to give the readers a glimpse here and there into an actor's mind and how the process of creating a character was achieved. I specifically added it because she was exceptionally unconfident about her talent after her return. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Feroz Khan's Janbaaz (1986) told " - "told" or "tells", we don't use past tense when referring to films.
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• " steamy love scene" - if it was just a kiss, hardly "steamy", and the shower scene in the Specialist, just "love scene" will do
  • Done. Haha you know it's Bollywood! Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "She has confessed to accepting these roles for financial gain rather than artistic merit during this period, noting, " - the lead implies she was a big success after returning in 1984 but if she was in a bunch of crappy movies for money not fully honest. Perhaps add "After several flops", she went on to establish herself as one of the leading actresses of Hindi cinema in the 1980s in the lead.
  • Hmmm.. they're not necessarily flops, just bad films. See, in India of the 1970-80s actors were just working non-stop and I'm sure all of them including Bachchan don't remember some of their works. The films she mentioned were often so inconsequential that their profit was hardly reported, and some of those where coverage does exists actually did very well. I actually mentioned some of them in the last paragraph. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "In 1988, she played the main protagonist Kiran Dutt in Zakhmi Aurat, that of a female police officer who gets gang-raped and, after the judicial system fails to convict the criminals, abandons the legal course and joins forces with other rape victims to get revenge by castrating the rapists." - needs rewording, try "In 1988, Kapadia portrayed a female police officer who is subject to gang rape in Zakhmi Aurat, and unites with other rape victims to castrate the rapists in revenge when the judicial system fails to convict them."
  • Done, rewrote it in light of your version. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• The reviews are excessive for this film, really needs chopping for flow and clarity, you keep going back and forth between positive and negative, lacks structure.
  • Right, because critics were really divided, and the film was very controversial, I mentioned them all. Anyway, I removed some quotes and shortened some. But there's no negative and positive as such - the film was negatively received and Kapadia was received well, and the only bad quote about her I saved for the end. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "playing a joyous young woman who takes martial arts training " - "who trains in the martial arts" would read better
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• 8 or eight?
  • Done. Eight it is. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Kapadia's part was that of career-woman Sandhya, and for her portrayal she was named the Best Actress (Hindi) of the year by the Bengal Film Journalists' Association." = Kapadia's portrayal of career-woman Sandhya earned her the Best Actress (Hindi) of the year award by the Bengal Film Journalists' Association.
• Done, partially. "earned award.. by critics association" doesn't work, so I just shortened it. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Referring to it once as "the most fantastic" part of her career, she recalled the working relationship with Gulzar as "a wonderful experience". To make her character more truthful, Gulzar did not let Kapadia blink even once during filming, trying to capture an "endless, fixed gaze" which would give her "a feeling of being surreal". " -given that you tell us nothing about the role really, it makes no sense to elaborate on it with all that.
  • Okay will do then. Actually this thing was suggested by another editor; and I find it an interesting fact. I wish articles would mention more the technical parts of actors' performances. It is mentioned though that she plays a restless sprite, and if it's her favorite role, I'd say it's noteworthy. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Based on Rabindranath Tagore's short story Hungry Stones, Lekin.." - That should be mentioned when you first start discussing Lekin
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "The critical response to Ajooba was mostly lukewarm" - you don't always need to mention what the critics thought, if it's luke warm I wouldn't bother, reads better without that short sentence.
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• " She played the protagonist in Haque (1991), a political drama directed by Harish Bhosle and scripted by Mahesh Bhatt. Her role was that of Varsha B. Singh, a pregnant Orthodox woman married to an influential politician. Ram Awatar Agnihotri said of her performance: "Dimple Kapadia, playing Varsha, very bravely, tries to make her role look convincing, and she succeeds to a great extent. It is a tribute to her as an actress."" = "In 1991 she played Varsha B. Singh, a pregnant Orthodox woman married to an influential politician in Harish Bhosle's political drama Haque, a role which critic??? Ram Awatar Agnihotri considered to be very convincing."
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Bhatt called her performance "stunning" and reported that when shooting ended, she was "on the point of a breakdown" as she was "exhausted battling with the nitty-gritty" of her character - a missing quotation mark and unnecessary to write in quotes. I would simply say that "The intensity of the filming and enacting the character left her close to a breakdown after shooting ended".
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "no role worth her"" - I don't understand what you mean here.
  • The critic said she had not role worth her talent. I completed the sentence, tried to avoid it. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "She appeared in Laawaris (1999) because she liked the subject and considered her role "substantial"," - I don't see the point in saying she liked the subject and it was substantial if you tell us nothing about the part
  • Done. Removed. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "and Bella Jaisinghani of The Indian Express, calling the film "inconsequential", concluded her review wondering "what made Dimple Kapadia do this to herself"" = and Bella Jaisinghani of The Indian Express calling the film "inconsequential", leaving her to contemplate why she subjected herself to such film"
  • Hmm I think your version takes away from the context given by the quote, because it's a rather cynical remark by the critic. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Ziya Us Salam from The Hindu called her "a charmer all the way. Exhilarating is the air she breathes, bewitching is the glance she casts and enticingly vulnerable is her condition."" - I would simply say "Ziy Us Salam of The Hindu found the film charming, describing her vulnerability in the film as "enticing".
  • He referred to Kapadia not the film. I can't possibly think of a way to write in my own words a review that has a rather poetic tone. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• I've noticed a number of instances in the article where you started a paragraph with "she" and then say Kapadia. Example: "In 2006, she co-starred with Saif Ali Khan and Naseeruddin Shah in the psychological drama Being Cyrus, an English-language arthouse feature directed by Homi Adajania. Kapadia enacted ". It should really be in In 2006, Kapadia. And then "she". Scan the article and where possible follow that.
  • Done, scanned across the board too. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• 7 or seven?
  • Done. Seven it is. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• " emerging as the popular film " - most popular?
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• If it was a huge film and commercial success I would expect to see more than a two word quote even if she wasn't praised.
  • Done. I agree, another one added. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "wrote of Kapadia that she" - there's a few of these which don't read well, I'd remove and reword
  • Done all cases. Changed to "wrote that Kapadia..." Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "and Rajeev Masand found Kapadia to be "droll"." - I'd chop out this for readability, the "but" and then the "and" is jarring
• "Karamvir Kamal of The Asian Chronicle, however," - avoid "however"
  • Done. Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Image and artistry

• Too many quotes, please convert more of them into your own prose. I find it very difficult to read.
  • Okay I've copyedited the entire section. Many quotations are removed, but there are some which are not really doable. Shahid • 23:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
• "Kapadia's screen image has been characterized in light of her perceived beauty and sex appeal. " - awkward, do you mean "Kapadia's screen image has been synonymous with her perceived beauty and sex appeal?"
  • Not really. Maybe "discussed"? Shahid • 22:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Overall there's way too many quotes which affects the readability of the article. A lot of the quotes have no encyclopedic benefit and often leave me shrugging "who cares?". Give it a vigorous going through, remove anything which seems superfluous and try to be more comprehensive in how you get the information across. Give me a bell when you've finished and I'll take another look, thanks.† Encyclopædius 21:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Encyclopædius, so much, for your valid comments. Okay, I went over the article and rewrote some quotes into sentences. Considering it is an actor biography, quotes are unavoidable, because as you know the standard is to include critical commentary and reviews, and for the most part the original wording is better than one's rewording of it which might be sometimes a subjective interpretation. Thanks again, looking forward to your views. Shahid • 00:15, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes of course, but it's finding a balance so the article flows. A lot of the quotes aren't really helpful in my opinion.† Encyclopædius 05:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes I get the point, Encyclopædius - I've taken care of it, you may want to have a look. Shahid • 12:24, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

More quotes removed and some converted to regular prose. I think it's pretty balanced now, Encyclopædius. What do you think? Shahid • 14:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

"The film was described as an "extraordinarily adroit entertainer" by Subhash K. Jha, who preferred it over the "sleazy sensationalism" of Zakhmi Aurat and noted the "unusual restraint" with which the "metamorphosis of the frisky Bijli into the ferocious fighter is achieved", further crediting Kapadia's physical and cerebral travails. In the same year, she made a short appearance in Mahesh Bhatt's action thriller Kabzaa, a critical failure. " I would delete all that and if it's a short appearance in a critical failure wouldn't mention it.† Encyclopædius 17:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Done, Encyclopædius. Shahid • 23:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• Check the Antareen paragraph, Best Bengali and Filmfare awards are unsourced.
• Check return to cinema 1996 and Anichakra, are they supported in the next citation?
• Check 2006 "with similar thoughts expressed by several critics" - is several critics supported in the citation?
• Image and artistry is greatly improved now, well done!† Encyclopædius 07:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
  • All done, added citations where asked, one problem was fixed by you :) and thank you for approving of the changes in the section. Shahid • 16:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• Support - leaning towards support. I say "leaning" as I think it could still use a few editors giving it a grilling but I'm happy with the improvements made.† Encyclopædius 16:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Aoba47

• I believe several of the citations in the lead should be removed. Her birthdate and awards should be included and cited in the body of the article so citations for them in the lead are not necessary. You can keep the citations for her reputation as a leading lady and her film choices after becoming a sex symbol as it is best to have those kinds of statements supported by references.
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
    • There is still a citation in the first paragraph for a sentence on an award. If the citation is intended to support the sentence on her comeback in Saagar, then it should be on that sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
      • Ah, right, fixed it, Aoba47. Shahid • 01:18, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• The phrase "launched by" sounds weird to me in this context: (She was launched by Raj Kapoor at age 16,). I have never heard of someone being "launched". Maybe something like "discovered by" would be better.
  • Done, I think, and rewrote to add some context. "She was discovered at age 16 by Raj Kapoor, who cast her in the title role of his teen romance Bobby (1973), to critical and commercial success." Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For this part, (In that same year she married Indian actor), there should be a comma between "year" and "she".
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I do not know what you mean by "that period" in this sentence: (One of her films of that period was the drama Saagar (1985).). The previous sentence is about her return to acting in 1984, but that is not a clearly defined period. Also, why is Saagar highlighted in the lead and not any of the other films she did that year? What makes this film so notable to her career?
  • Well it was her comeback vehicle and the first film she worked on, but it was delayed by a year so other films were released first. It also won her a second Best Actress award. Anyway, changed it now to - "Her comeback film Saagar was released a year later, and gained her wide public recognition". Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For the lead image, I would specify in the caption where the image was taken.
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Please use Kapadia's full name when you first mention here in the body of the article, i.e. here: (Kapadia is the eldest of the four children of Gujarati entrepreneur).
  • Done, rewrote and added the reference from the lead. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I am guessing we do not know Betty's maiden name?
  • Sadly not - I kept digging endlessly in the archives, and no such mention is made. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Thank you for letting me know. It is probably not available. Aoba47 (talk) 20:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I think it should be "finding" for this part: (Having been a candle enthusiast and found candle-making therapeutic,).
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Bobby should be linked here, (before the release of her first film, Bobby, in 1973), and unlinked here (in his 1973 teen romance Bobby), as it should be linked when it is first mentioned in the article.
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I am not sure if polka-dotted needs to be linked.
  • Done. Removed link. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Was it common for women in the 1970s to get married when they are only 16? I am more so asking for my own general knowledge as opposed to suggesting anything for the article.
  • Generally not, but it depends on where they come from. In the rural areas of India obviously more likely, but in the big cities - definitely not as early. Most actresses were not at all married so early. Hers is a very weird and special case, because she grew up in a big city to affluent parents, so it was very unlikely. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I would avoid using the word "hit", as done in this part (in the box-office hit Arjun, an action film), as it is a little too informal.
  • Done, removed. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For this part, (At that time, she also worked in numerous Hindi films made by producers from the South), I would say South India in the prose as "the South" means a very different thing to me as an American. It would be better to clarify it in the prose to avoid confusion.
  • Done. Changed to South India. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For the Kaash paragraph, I would clarify from the start that Pooja is her character's name in the film. I was confused at first when Pooja was mentioned in the prose as I was not aware that it was the character's name until reading through that part more carefully.
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• The Times of India is linked multiple times in the body of the article when it should only be on the first mention.
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I am not sure about the wikilink in this part, (becoming the second-highest grossing Hindi film of the year), as it is not immediately clear to me what the link would go to. I do not think the link is necessary.
  • Done. Removed. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For this part, (a past rape victim who now tries to persuade an alcoholic and unemployed village man to be a champion of justice for those around him), it should just be "a rape victim". The word "past" does not make sense in this context.
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Filmfare Award for Best Actress is linked twice in the body of the article. Watch out for these multiple links. Akshay Kuma, Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actress, and The Hindu are also linked multiple times.
  • Done, all instances taken care of. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I do not understand this part, (the mother of the title character of an elephant), specifically "the title character of an elephant".
  • Done, I think: "she voiced the character of Devi, the mother of the elephant Jumbo". Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I do no think the link is necessary here: (emerging as the most popular film of the year in India).
  • Done, removed. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I do not think "enacted" makes sense in this context: (She enacted a strict store owner and Kapoor Khan's mother).
  • Done. -> "played". Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For the 2011 and 2018 images, I would specify where they were taken in the captions.
  • Done for both. Just found that the 2011 one is actually from 2008. :) Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• In the "Image and artistry" section, do not link the film titles again as they were linked in a previous section. The same comment applies to names linked in this section that are already linked in previous sections.
  • Done. Removed all duplicate links, which were practically all of them (I thought this section should include links again). Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Remember that items should only be linked when they are first mentioned in the article. Doing it multiple times is an example of over-linking and should be avoided. Aoba47 (talk) 18:05, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• For this part, (on another accasion), I believe it should be "occasion".
  • Done. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Is the List of Indian film actresses really necessary at the end?
  • No it isn't. :) Removed. Shahid • 09:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I hope these comments are helpful. These are things I have noticed from my first read-through. Since this is a rather long article, I would like to read it through a few more times to make sure I can be as thorough as possible with my review. My primary concern is with the duplicate links in the article. Hope you are having a good week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 03:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Aoba47, for your detailed review and valuable comments. Shahid • 09:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

• I support this based on the prose. I will leave the discussion about Kapadia's parents to Fowler&fowler. If you have the time, I would greatly appreciate any help for my peer review on a film article. Hope you are having a great week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 04:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

This review will be submitted as part of my WikiCup work.

• No need to worry about Fowler's comments, just work with the rest of the reviewers, the co-ordinators here know how to deal with Fowler.
• Two refs in the lead looks odd, best remove them to the main body where those details are covered and expanded upon.
  • If you meant the two back-to-back sources, then I've removed one, which is anyway repeated in the body text. Kept just the other which supports a rather exceptional claim. Can remove the other ones in the first paragraph of the lead if you like. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• Lead says returned to film after she separated from Khanna, in 1984, but infobox says they separated in 1982, so the causality is a little wonky, maybe "She separated from Khanna in 1982 and returned to filming two years later" or something?
  • Right it's confusing - wrote "Kapadia returned to films in 1984, two years following her separation from Khanna". Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• " St. Joseph's Convent High School" has no full stop after St
  • Done. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• "She retired from acting for twelve years" retired 1973, restarted 1984, isn't that eleven years?
  • Done. Sorry, eleven it is. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• "to her." while not mandatory, these could be in numerical order while you're doing other edits.
  • Done. Totally agree. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• "content... Once" see MOS:ELLIPSIS, I think a non-breaking space is required after "content" here.
  • Done. Right. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• "She was reported " when was this reported relationship supposed to have happened?
  • Done. Clarified, in accordance with source. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• I don't think you need to link art exhibition.
  • Done, I agree. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• Loads of duplicate links, use the tool to find them, e.g. Rajesh Khanna, India Today, Filmfare, Sunny Deol, The Tribune, Asiaweek etc.
  • Done. All taken care of. Duplicates are allowed in references, though. Shahid • 10:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• J.P. Dutta -> J. P. Dutta.
  • Done. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• Luck By Chance -> Luck by Chance.
  • Done. Shahid • 10:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• Col scopes should be added to the table.
  • Done. Shahid • 10:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• In sortable tables, it's permissible to link every linkable item every time as once re-sorted it's not certain which item appears first.
  • Would you recommend doing it though? Shahid • 10:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
    • I would. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
      • Done. Shahid • 10:21, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
• ISBN formats should be consistent in the references.
  • Done. Shahid • 10:21, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

That's a quick pass, I'll take a more detailed look later. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your helpful and constructive comments. Shahid • 10:31, 25 May 2020 (UTC)