Shahid is busy inreal life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome to my talk page! Please leave a message and I will reply to you as fast as possible!:)

Archives

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30 31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40 41

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the articleLekin... you nominated forGA-status according to thecriteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofTayi Arajakate --Tayi Arajakate (talk)05:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The articleLekin... you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Lekin... for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as abold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you cannominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofTayi Arajakate --Tayi Arajakate (talk)14:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofLekin... at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) atyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Rhododendrites^talk \\14:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rhododendrites, I've replied to you there.Shahid •^Talk2me17:31, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission ofHamari Beti at theDid You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) atyour nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!Umimmak (talk)21:07, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

—Kusma (talk)00:02, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to present your pointshere?Krish |Talk To Me15:59, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk)00:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shahid, hope you're doing well. could you do me a favor and take a quick look atthis when you get the time? (PS: I think you're one of the best copy-editors around and I'll love to have your inputs on it.)

have a good day :DMeryam90 (talk)09:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk)00:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]Cwmhiraeth (talk)12:02, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]— Maile (talk)00:02, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your work onPreity Zinta, now afeatured topic. As you have been told multiple times before, I'm sure, your work on it inspired a number of editors to do the same with other Indian actors.FrB.TG (talk)14:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fun fact: each of the featured promotions were roughly seven years apart (biography in 2008, filmography in 2015 and awards in 2022).FrB.TG (talk)14:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG Thanks so much! Indeed, seven years apart (the bio was first promoted to FA in 2008 actually, so you're very correct about the seven-year gap between each promotion). Right now working onShefali Shah's article. I'm sure you've seen some films with her. Thanks again for the barnstar.Shahid •^Talk2me14:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Much deserved. I have seen Shah in some films but so far only in supporting parts. Filmmakers didn’t tap into her full potential in those films but I’m happy to see she’s now finding a long overdue success as a leading lady. Do let me know if you take it to GAN or FAC. I’ll be more than happy to review it.FrB.TG (talk)15:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the articleRudaali you nominated forGA-status according to thecriteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofFrB.TG --FrB.TG (talk)13:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The articleRudaali you nominated as agood article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting thegood article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. SeeTalk:Rudaali for issues which need to be addressed.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofFrB.TG --FrB.TG (talk)10:40, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The articleRudaali you nominated as agood article has passed; seeTalk:Rudaali for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as abold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you cannominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.Message delivered byLegobot, on behalf ofFrB.TG --FrB.TG (talk)13:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Madhuri Dixit's page 1. In the introduction section, 6th line - it is written as "Dixit's early career was shaped up mostly by romantic and family dramas before she expanded her repertoire"... This line appears to be vague and irrelevant. Infact in the beginning of her career itself, she appeared in the films like Parinda, Dharavi, Prahaar, Prem Pratigya etc. Which are neither Family Drama nor Romantic Films. Also writing such lines on a legendary actress page does not make any sense. 2. Noted by critics for her beauty, dancing skills, and strong characters - Instead of Strong Characters, it can conveniently written as Acting Skills which was there earlier as well.AIL601 (talk)12:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AIL601: I disagree with you. Even in Parinda, she had a small role which was strictly that of a love interest. Prem Pratigya is an out-and-out romance. There might have been exceptions like Prahaar and Dharavi, but they were few and far between. The films thatshaped her early career are Tezaab, Tridev, Dil, Saajan, Beta, Khalnayak, HAHK, Raja, and the likes. Strong characters is what I think suits better. I believe she is recognised as a huge, charismatic star, less as strictly an actor.Shahid •^Talk2me13:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Shahid, Every actor in the world grows at a pace & then evolves and especially in Indian Film Industry, people play supporting roles, two minute appearances etc in the forgettable films in the beginning of their careers and yet immediately labelled as actors. How many actors in the mainstream / commercial Hindi film industry has had a diversified filmography in their early phase itself to be called as Great Actors? By writing the phrase as "Early career being shaped mostly by some genre before expanding repertoire" in the introductory section of the wikipedia page of a legendary actor and labelling them like this devaluate them. This particular phrase is irrelevant and unnecessary. I strongly oppose this and request to remove it.

ThanksAIL601 (talk)15:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bud, could you keep an eye out on this article that I had earlier taken to GA? A revert-loving fan doesn't really seem to understand how to keep the article's quality intact. Would really appreciate it. :)Krimuk2.0 (talk)06:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: Sure thing, my friend. :)Shahid •^Talk2me08:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk)00:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man. I have recently expanded yet another actor biography,Oscar Isaac, and intend to take it to FAC in the near future. According to the article‘s history, I have authored around 80 percent of it so it only makes sense that someone else takes a look at it before I nominate it for FA. With that in mind, I was wondering if you could give it a go? That is if you have the time or inclination. I‘m not fully done expanding it yet, but I don‘t expect to make major additions anymore so you can start as soon as now. Thank you either way.FrB.TG (talk)15:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Hi there, my dear friend. Thank you for this message. I wish I had a little more time to take part in this impressive project. I've been quite busy off late and the few minutes I give WP these days are spent on random corrections off my watchlist. If I get some free time, I'll be more than happy to give it a go.Shahid •^Talk2me13:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thank you for replying.FrB.TG (talk)15:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. Isaac has passed its FAC.FrB.TG (talk)04:41, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Ohhh, I thought it'd have more time and I could support it too. I wish I had more time, I did nothing really. Brilliant work as always, way to go.Shahid •^Talk2me08:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1. Stop complaining about how I'm "bludgeoning" while yourself feeling the need to respond to every single one of my comments with one of your own.
2. Please stop attempting to impose your proof by assertion by telling me to stop commenting about said arguments.
3. Please don't come back on my talk page again.

Thank youRandomCanadian (talk /contribs)17:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RandomCanadian: In my first messages I did let you know I believe you mean well, but it started getting out of proportions and instead of letting the AfDs run their course, it seemed like you really couldn't accept others' disparate views and as time went by, just became increasingly involved and invested in one goals: to have these pages deleted because you know what's right. The ensuing intolerance to others' legitimate opinions made the process quite unpleasant. That's not how it should work. I have nothing against you, I really don't hold any grudge, and I still like to believe you mean well. But please, spare me these empty, senseless warnings. You know well they have no place here. You should better apologise for this hostile behaviour.Shahid •^Talk2me18:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandermcnabb (talk)13:32, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources on the articles are database sites. I would take it to AfD, but there is literally a 100 articles that are poorly sourced (starring Dharmendra/Mithun Chakraborty). Are these films well known, is that why they shouldn't be deleted? If so, where are the sources?

I understand that you want to save the articles, which is good. But just give me an input on whether these low-budget films were box office successes or not.DareshMohan (talk)00:14, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: Thank you for this message. The question is not whether these films were box office successes. I'm not sure notability should be directly associated with commercial success. The question is whether information on their box-office performance is provided to begin with, and I saw that many of them do have figures onBox Office India. Are they hits? Quite the contrary, actually, as one would expect with films which are essentially B-grade films. But sources exist. There are too many of those PRODs, and I'm too busy to have time for editing and digging in the archives these days, otherwise, as you might know from my history of improving articles at AfDs, I'd save as many as I can. Since I can't, and I'm not sure speedy deletion is the right course of action, I suggested that you consider AfD, hoping that someone would kindly do the job and save at least some of them.Shahid •^Talk2me00:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok makes sense. I am not going to AFD them (the ones withbig actors) because theymay have sources/doing AFD for 100 articles would take forever. Why not just redirect them to the main actor or toMithun's Dream Factory (twenty-six films directed byT. L. V. Prasad starring Mithun)DareshMohan (talk)00:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: I think it could be a good option at least for some if not most of these pages.Shahid •^Talk2me09:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you 100% sure that the film released? Surprised that it wasn't onRaveena Tandon filmography.DareshMohan (talk)03:59, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: Not sure at all! Looking for sources, might change my own vote.Shahid •^Talk2me09:08, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work in sourcing Indian films.DareshMohan (talk)04:16, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: Thank you for this kind gesture. I appreciate that. :)Shahid •^Talk2me09:09, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SeeMegha (1996 film) andYash (film) and add sources please.DareshMohan (talk)06:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Shshshsh! You were able to find lots of refs atthis Indian-film related AfD. I've came across this article,Bandhan (1956 film), during NPP, and want to AfD it as myWP:BEFORE search found few refs, the current ones are inadequate forWP:NFILM orWP:GNG. If you have time, could you see if you could find any refs? Many thanks for your help, if you are not interested in this, apologies and have a nice day:)VickKiang (talk)22:18, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@VickKiang: Will look for some as soon as I have more time.Shahid •^Talk2me09:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find any reviews from thearchives?DareshMohan (talk)07:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: There aren't any, sadly.Shahid •^Talk2me10:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Way to go!SNUGGUMS (talk /edits)00:14, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild: Thank you for your quick and effective management of the FAC process (not just of this article, but in general).SNUGGUMS: Thanks a ton for your helpful review, as always, and for this kind message.Shahid •^Talk2me09:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was quick. Many congrats!FrB.TG (talk)10:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Thanks a lot, dear driend.Shahid •^Talk2me11:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, OG! :)Krimuk2.0 (talk)10:49, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well done Shahid, amazing expansion given what the article was before!! I didn't see the nomination, I'd have given it a massive grilling Sarvagnya/Fowler style haha. Just kidding! Good to see you pop up Krimuk it's been a while! ♦Dr. Blofeld10:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Thank you Blof.Shahid •^Talk2me11:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, I totally missed this FAC. Congrats! --Dwaipayan (talk)19:19, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dwaipayanc: Thanks so much, good to see you after so long.Shahid •^Talk2me22:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shshshsh,

I wanted to let you know that I just taggedSomeday (2020 film) for deletion, because it's a redirect that seems implausible or is a simple typo.

If you don't want Someday (2020 film) to be deleted, you cancontest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note onmy talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Lithopsian (talk)12:29, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Some changes" (you're welcome) would be ... capitalizing the wordshort? Removing the (unrendered) space near the end of that line, orthat crooked 2 those in the infobox? "As written" templates? Oh, I know: we both really hate how some asterisks (bullets) have spaces after them and some don't.

Please don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.Doodoodave (talk)16:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doodoodave: Are "As written" templates for a Hindi film title really called for? Removal of a wikilink for awards isn't very good either. Restoring your contribution though.Shahid •^Talk2me16:16, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doodoodave: Also, I had to fix all your image captions. The name should be there, that's how it's done, and sizes are not necessary.Shahid •^Talk2me16:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also removal of commas after "in year".Shahid •^Talk2me16:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commas exist for a reason. --Doodoodave (talk)17:50, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doodoodave: Could you please communicate without these cynical links? I find it slightly disrespectful. Thank you.Shahid •^Talk2me18:07, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. But that's just an opinion.--Doodoodave (talk)18:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see that the policy you cite here re captions justifies what you did - captions must identify the subject. As for commas, irrelevant here.Shahid •^Talk2me18:16, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1. Theseare main articles.

• Preity Zinta filmography
• List of awards and nominations received by Preity Zinta

2. Dis sayin' ...

• wp:Manual of Style#Typographic conformity

Doodoodave (talk)19:21, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doodoodave: Yes, but they aren't main articles in relation to the career section, but rather lists providing additional information. It would be a main article if it was something likeMeryl Streep in the 2000s, which is citedhere. As for the quotes, I just thought em dashes were more suitable in the specific cases where they're now used.Shahid •^Talk2me19:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you create an article on this film?DareshMohan (talk)04:25, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: Hi there, too busy, sorry.Shahid •^Talk2me09:27, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The basis of introduction and biography write ups of various people on wikipedia are different from each other despite being of same professions and with similar achievements.AIL601 (talk)01:42, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AIL601: Didn't understand much what you're trying to say. The fact that other pages have problems doesn't mean this one should. If you support the addition of "influential" to the lead of Dixit, then I'm afraid you do not fully understand Wikipedia's goal and rules. Wikipedia isn't a film magazine, it doesn't use puffery but describes facts. We should describe facts. When I have more time, I'll add more of her achievements and stature. But not like that, "influential" is a terrible word for an encyclopedia. For the record, I love Madhuri Dixit.Shahid •^Talk2me09:27, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Shah Rukh Khan website needs to be on Shah Rukh Khan’s page. It’s a website about him.KrishJ2001 (talk)06:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can't believe this still isn't a GA! ♦Dr. Blofeld17:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Soon hopefully.Shahid •^Talk2me11:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably because she's such a big personality, a giantess of Indian cinema, people are often intimidated promoting core articles like her. Hope you're well! ♦Dr. Blofeld21:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Could be, it requires a lot of work to do justice to her, and time as well.Shahid •^Talk2me22:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please be aware ofWP:ASPERSION.This recent comment was inappropriate for this AFD. There is not enough evidence presented, by you or anyone else at that discussion, to be accusing anyone of any sort of bias. Im not even saying you're necessarily wrong, just that you certainly need to a better job articulating and proving it. That aside, for your information, the creator of that article has recently had a lot of their article nominated for deletion because they were the subject of an ANI report a week ago, due to their excessive creation of unsourced/poorly sourced articles and violations ofWP:CANVASS.That's likely the reason for the nominations. Anyways, please be more mindful of this in the future. Thanks.Sergecross73msg me00:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: Hi there. Kindly assume good faith, if that's what you're supposedly asking from me (when the message is titled "Month Year", it is clearly written in a certain context, and I don't appreciate it even when it's coming from admins). I did not addressanyone in particular, and I'm always very particular about that, but mentioned a problem that definitely exists, from my years of experience on WP and contribution to numerous articles on the project, and there are dozens of respected editors and admins like yourself who I can ping right here and who can attest to that on the WP:INDIA project as well (a recent AfD was closed where the admin clearly said they were well "cognizant of the issue of systemic bias" in their closing note). I am not going to be intimidated in any way into not expressing a general point of view, and you, with all due respect, should be very careful to not misinterpret what I've said. I've been repeatedly saying that I never blame deletionists - this is a larger problem which must be addressed. As for who created these articles - I frankly have huge respect for this person's hard work in creating all these pages. I just think of the amount of time and effort they've put on just selflessly contributing to WP. We have to support such people, to guide them and help them through the process. They do make mistakes when they're new to the project and not versed enough in its policies. We were all there at some point. Thank you for understanding.Shahid •^Talk2me00:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of that changes how neither you nor anyone in that discussion provided any sort of proof or evidence that bias was playing a role inthat particular AFD discussion. I'm not acting in bad faith or trying to intimidate you. You appear to have missed the part where I said you're probably right in a general sense conceptually. I'm telling you that you need to back up the claims you make inindividual discussions. Serious accusations require serious evidence. You fundamentally and objectively failed to do so in that AFD, no matter how you slice it. Thanks.Sergecross73msg me01:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: We appear to be in disagreement here. I specifically spoke againstWP:SYSTEMICBIAS (due to "the editingcommunity's narrow social and cultural demographic") - it's by the system, not individual bias and not one directed at someone in particular. No one is to be blamed in person, that's the idea. It could be applied even when Indians are those deleting them. I see several lists by foreign singers which are poorly sourced and no one seems to have considered deleting them. This is a cultural thing, I can assure you that, and I totally understand it, but it needs to be addressed on a large scale.

There have been so many AfDs of Indian films whereWP:BEFORE was claimed while a simple Google search by editors would often show plenty of sources. I was actually happy with that at times because it would give me a new challenge. I've had some highly satisfying WP:HEYs and some of my DYKs started at AfD actually. AfDs can be very fruitful, but after a while, it becomes frustrating and not for the right reasons and not because of someone in particular. I agree by the way that my vote was probably not very detailed (I agree with your point about WP:ITSNOTABLE, I should have been more elaborate - I see it only now because you didn't ping me).

In this case, of course, there's this one user whose efforts have not complied with policy, I agree. But I strongly believe these pages can be saved. I believe in inclusivity on WP.Shahid •^Talk2me01:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's look at this another way then. Your direct quote was"There's no way you can delete this list and want other ones kept." Why would you say this, unprovoked, to nobody in particular?Sergecross73msg me02:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: Clearly it was aGeneric you and I think it's quite obvious from how I wrote it - why would I ever address a nominator directly with a "you" without naming them? It doesn't make sense. When I want to address the nominator, I do it explicitly. Actually the "you" was referring to the Wikipedia project in general (it's Wikipedia who eventually deletes, not the nominator), that's why I proceeded with my point aboutsystemic bias. You see, it's just a matter of perspective and good faith. I accept that you are not acting in bad faith, especially now that we're having this discussion (although I do highly recommend that when you write to more veteran editors, who do know the ways of the Wikiworld, you use a more friendly heading instead of that generic "Month Year" one which I know many immediately associate with a hostile warning), but I think that combined with my vote, which was indeed WP:ITSNOTABLE for once, my message could have looked a little antagonistic. I generally do expect huge amounts of good faith by admins.Shahid •^Talk2me02:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it's not about "bad faith", it's that I fundamentally don't understand why you said that direct quote. Why would you say that, unprovoked, to no one in particular, when no one had done that, or even suggested otherwise? The comment doesn't make any sense contextually. It would be like if I had jumped into that discussion and saying "Hey, just a reminder, I don't want anypersonal attacks from anyone." There's obviously wide agreement personal attacks are not okay, but why would I say such a thing to a group of editors who had not said any personal attacks? Same applies to the statement that you did actually say. I don't understand.Sergecross73msg me02:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: There's a list nominated for deletion, along with many others. I think I've explained it quite well above; this is not said to anyone in particular - this is a general observation about systemic bias, and the context is, indeed, systemic bias: "There's no way you (mind you,generic you, can be easily substituted with "Wikipedia") can delete this list and want other ones kept". I find this AfD as another example of a greater problem on Wikipedia, which is systemic bias, and I'm commenting on it. Wikipedia must encourage total equality for all lists of this sort from all countries, that was my point. There's no way you (yes, not you, Sergecross73, but a generic you) can keep other lists by foreign singers and have this one deleted. As I said, the nominator is not the one who deletes it in the first place, so it couldn't have been said to them. It makes perfect sense to me contextually. And your example isn't very fitting here to what I said or meant. I hope it's more clear now. If not, then it's clearly a matter of disagreement or misunderstanding, or both.Shahid •^Talk2me02:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be frank, your explanations simply doesn't make sense in the context of what you actually said. But as long as you understand not to cast aspersions, I've said what I needed to say.Sergecross73msg me03:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: The fact is, no aspersions have been cast on my part, my message addressed a larger problem in a general context and it was a perfectly legitimate expression of disappointment fromthe project. I've been enough time in here to know the importance of good faith. Anyway, thank you for this message.Shahid •^Talk2me09:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid, what do you consider to be the ten best Indian films of all time? ♦Dr. Blofeld20:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Oh that's tough, but I'd say all of them would be old classics: Raj Kapoor's classics (Awaara,Shree 420,Jagte Raho), then films likeMughal-E-Azam,Bandini,Anupama,Seeta Aur Geeta,Trishul,Masoom,Ijaazat, and if I have to name one post-2000 film, then it'd beDil Chahta Hai, although there must be other which I like more. In recent years, I lovedKahaani,Neerja,Andhadhun andQueen. By the way, these are strictly Hindi films, if you're talking about Indian films, thenSatyajit Ray films would definitely be there.Shahid •^Talk2me11:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks amigo. I've seen a few of those but will rewatch sometime and see the others. I enjoy Raj's films too. Yes, all Indian films I mean! ♦Dr. Blofeld12:14, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MarnetteD Some recommendations there for you! :-) ♦Dr. Blofeld12:18, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mentionAwaara andMughal-E-Azam! They're gems too. Also if you wish to look for more recommendations my films list is still around:User:Ssven2/Films that I have seen (Pre 1990s) andUser:Ssven2/Films that I have seen (1990s and beyond).  —Ssven2^{Looking at you, kid}11:05, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled astoday's featured article for 22 May 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found atWikipedia:Today's featured article/May 22, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article atWikipedia talk:Today's featured article/May 2023. I suggest that you watchlistWikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work.Gog the Mild (talk)12:52, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thak you today for the article, introduced: "Shefali Shah is an Indian actress who started on Indian television and for much of her career, acted sporadically in films, often playing character roles. Although consistently respected for her talent with awards and praise from critics, it was not until recent years that she gained wide recognition, starting with the internationally acclaimed series Delhi Crime on Netflix. Since then, her career has only been growing, courtesy digital streaming platforms, with substantial leading roles." - on her birthday! --Gerda Arendt (talk)07:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Found somereviews, add if needed to lesser sourced articles.DareshMohan (talk)08:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to review Alia Bhatt's article for GA? I had nominated it long back, but there's been no takers so far.Krimuk2.0 (talk)09:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: Hi there, my friend. Very, very busy at the moment. As soon as I get more free time, then no problem (if no one takes it before).Shahid •^Talk2me11:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, any news on your RfC for Template:Infobox film?Shahid •^Talk2me12:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. And no,nothing new.Krimuk2.0 (talk)15:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: Terrible article, as expected from Krimuk2.0. ;) Congrats though! :)))Shahid •^Talk2me20:51, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehe. Thank you so much! :))Krimuk2.0 (talk)05:59, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shshshsh. You added the references "Trivedi 1994" and "Da Cunha 1995" to Dimple Kapadia, but neither work is defined in the article. Could you add the required cites to the Bibliography section, or let me know works these refer to? -- LCUActivelyDisinterested∆transmissions∆ °co-ords°15:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ActivelyDisinterested: Done, thank you. Forgot to insert them.Shahid •^Talk2me16:10, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Shshshsh,I have added the link[1] for her being the Critics choice for best actress in 1992 for Drishti. If you notice the category mentioned in the 1992 awards is called "Outstanding Performance In A Non-Commercial Film." The same was mentioned in 1991, when Anupam Kher won it for Daddy, Hence, Dimple Kapadia was the first actress to win this award, not for Rudaali but for Drishti.--GaiusAugustine

GaiusAugustine: Hi there! :) I know, I've seen it before. But there's a problem - this piece information seems like a mistake of theirs as it appears nowhere else. I will email Filmfare and ask them, because I've seen the video archives and it's not there, neither is it in any other source. Let's see.Shahid •^Talk2me07:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GaiusAugustine: Fixed it now.Shahid •^Talk2me14:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For the persistent good work onShefali Shah that has turned it into an FA.Ashwin147 (talk)08:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashwin147: Thanks so much! I appreciate it.Shahid •^Talk2me10:16, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to take this to GA status. Would appreciate your feedback and comments. Thanks.  —Ssven2^{Looking at you, kid}10:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now at RSN - please do !vote.TrangaBellam (talk)21:23, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why did you re-edit my addition in spite of that link proof ?SANKURDAS (talk)05:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: WP is not a fansite. There should be a limit to the number of possible titles we include in the intro.Shahid •^Talk2me09:36, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Same to you .SANKURDAS (talk)09:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: Didn't get what you mean.Shahid •^Talk2me09:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you should understand that just citing stuff isn't enough - you need to gain consensus on the talk page. Let's discuss it there. I do not object to being convinced otherwise.Shahid •^Talk2me09:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is your problem with Sridevi ?SANKURDAS (talk)09:57, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you know it quite well that she is called the Last Empress of Bollywood as well as Indian cinema. More of all before changing my addition you should make yourself sure about my editing whether it's wrong or not , The link which is attached in that funeral page states vividly that IT HAD ATTRACTED HIGHEST NUMBER OF MOURNERS. Please be decent and sure while making any comments.SANKURDAS (talk)10:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: She was indeed a huge star - but all these journalistic titles have no place in an encyclopedia. What's more, it's supported by weak sources.Shahid •^Talk2me15:13, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it is regardingthis revision, especially the change of the header to - "Shift to low-budget cinema (1990–1999)". I'm confused whether it is a better alternative to the previous one ("Comeback to Bengali cinema (1990–1999)"). IMO, the section has a wider scope than what both of these headers are supposed to convey. Thanks. -Fylindfotberserk (talk)10:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Hi there, I can hardly see any mention of Bengali films in that section. What title would you rather give it?Shahid •^Talk2me15:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The section mentions a few Bengali films, and he received a National Film Award for one (Tahader Katha). The section also mentions the very notableAgneepath. The reason I didn't revert the change is because the section isn't heavily focused on Bengali films, but this phrase 'low-budget cinema' doesn't look nice. Kinda downplaying his achievements in that period. I believe a better title is necessary. -Fylindfotberserk (talk)16:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then " First female superstar" is what kind of title ? Isn't that journalistic ?Wikipedia is not your own notebook or personal diary. Just remember ,People like you had defamed this Wikipedia with some baseless information. As for example...You replied me according to "Last Empress " but at the same time I specified that HIGHEST NUMBER OF MOURNERS' matter , you didn't come to that point.

More of all who are you to say that those sources are not reliable ? Then What WIKIPEDIA is ?

There are lot of statements where we can see [source needed ] , here i already attached 4 links .

More of all @‪Fylindfotberserk‬ approved my addition ,you can check out talk page there .

By the way Best will always be best , nothing matters what movie lovers like you state to defend your own favourites.

Now XYZ can't move forward that's why you will pull ABC backward 🥱 with futility.SANKURDAS (talk)15:36, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: "First female superstar" is cited by strong and reliable sources. Your puffery is not. As for "People like you had defamed this Wikipedia" - I don't know where you're taking this nonsense from, but this is clearly in violation ofWP:NPA. Please refrain from making any other such comments.Shahid •^Talk2me09:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense ! 😆Then what should be termed to that person who repeatedly avoiding that highest mourners' fact ? First of all you should read all the passage where i commented then reply...I already stated that only you had this problem with that TITLE, already a Wikipedian approved this .SANKURDAS (talk)09:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: No one approved it, and please stop creating new sections here. Click the "Reply" button instead.Shahid •^Talk2me09:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get any reply button at the bottom of your comments.

Before replying justify your thoughts. Don't comment unnecessarily . If i said that one Wikipedian approved it then it's true . Already i stated his name . @‪‪Fylindfotberserk is that Wikipedian who approved it .‬SANKURDAS (talk)10:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: Please provide a link of a discussion where @‪‪Fylindfotberserk agrees with this addition.Shahid •^Talk2me09:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SANKURDAS?markasread=284645098&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-Fylindfotberserk-20230628203000-SANKURDAS-20230628202200

Think again before commenting.SANKURDAS (talk)09:50, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: I know that Fylindfotberserk approved your edit on Sridevi! I can see it myself in the page history. I'm asking where in the discussion you have consensus to add the Empress stuff. There's none.Shahid •^Talk2me10:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you to ask for a consensus ?Do you need a consensus to write that the Earth moves round the Sun ?At first you said no one approved it . Now your tone is absolutely opposite.

I don't care about any consensus.....Let's see what you can do.SANKURDAS (talk)10:23, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SANKURDAS: Please avoidWP:EDIT WARRING and readWP:CON to see what consensus means.Shahid •^Talk2me10:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is once again usable. You may ramp up work on whatever articles were lagging before due to the blacklist.Kailash29792(talk)09:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i have already left a msg in his talk page of Varoon but he didn't reply. He continues reverting even when the sources are against him. He refuse to discuss and continues to push his own narrative.Arorapriyansh333 (talk)10:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started the debate on the talk page.

You don't need to come threaten me on my page when we can all discuss the issue on the talk page of the relevant articleVaroon2542 (talk)18:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Varoon2542: You have been reverted. That a Prime Minister praised her isn't notable in the lead. It's just a random trivia. If anything, throughout her active history, it could have been more of an honour to the politician and not her, if you look at her influence, to even know her. Her first hit is not notable - she has sung literally thousands of hits, and we do not use the lead to chronicle her entire career. I suggest that you work out a better version on the talk page and achieveconsensus to include what you think should be there.Shahid •^Talk2me09:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations |August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You cansign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t ·c)buidhe05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiAnchor10 (talk)20:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)05:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind of you Gerda to think of Shahid! ;-) Adarsh was kept Shahid, but based on your "I couldn't agree more" though we shouldn't really have the article as he just doesn't have the detailed coverage. ;-) ♦Dr. Blofeld09:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shshshsh, I saw you had reverted my adding of the category 'Himachal Pradesh University alumni' to Preity Zinta. She indeed is an HPU alumni, since she studied from St. Bede's College, Shimla, which comes under HPU. I have thereby reverted your edit. Best wishes.Apandeyhp89 (talk)09:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Apandeyhp89: Alright, fair enough. Thank you.Shahid •^Talk2me09:54, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Shahid. I see you have made an addition of this fact in the main article; thank you. But somebody called Dr. Blofeld has again reverted my adding of the category 'Himachal Pradesh University alumni'. What to do?Apandeyhp89 (talk)10:08, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created a new category atCategory:St. Bede's College, Shimla alumni, which is now a sub category of the Himachal one. ♦Dr. Blofeld10:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Dr. Blofeld.Apandeyhp89 (talk)10:43, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I honestly don't get what "no need to remove the sources" was supposed to mean in the comment toyour undo ofmy edit. Iremoved nothing, onlyadded the reference to an interview posted under anofficial BBC YT account which (a) covers the genesis of the tape in some detail, and (b) clarifies that it's an audio tape (and even why) - unlike the Munshi book that (a) barely mentions it and (b) leaves the erroneous impression that it's a video tape. Removing the word 'tape' is of course fine, I just thought 'Exercise audio' looked ambiguous/weird without it added.82.131.19.108 (talk)10:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry, my bad. I thought you had removed the source from the book. As it stands now, I'm not sure the interview form YT is needed, but feel free to re-insert it.Shahid •^Talk2me11:00, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying the situation. Now it makes sense and, np, stuff happens. I put it back because I think it has some added value compared to the book ref.82.131.19.108 (talk)05:16, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider opening an account, it will be very helpful for you. :)Shahid •^Talk2me15:10, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I much appreciated your suggestion, but I have some higher priority side projects and knowing myself it'd be tempted to spend too much time here if I made an account, so have refrained for now. :) I've already spent way too much time recently catching up on everything Rekha after seeing her steal the show in the 2-hour Indian Idol special from 2021 dedicated to her. I don't usually watch these types of shows but this was absolute fire, that dance number of hers alone (at 66!) was something else! I have no idea why she's not doing any movies... Sorry if I've been annoying you with too many suggestions about her pages!82.131.63.86 (talk)17:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, no annoyance at all. I haven't seen the Idol special but you've made me curious to catch it. Your suggestions are most welcome and constructive. And I can't agree with you more about Rekha's absence from the movies, especially considering the good material available to women her age - as we see with Dimple Kapadia's recent parts. I would still recommend that you open an account, it doesn't mean you have to be too active, but it will give you certain privileges and have a track record of your contribution.Shahid •^Talk2me23:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Part 1,part 2 on the official YT channel (both have over 20 minutes of cuts despite being listed as Full Episodes by SET). The full show is currently on Dailymotion in four parts, but not on an official account, so not linking it here (look for 3rd and 4th April 2021). Most of the best clips are also separately on YT on the official account. Some of the singers are excellent too, but she's the one breathing the fire into the whole thing and making it maybe even better than a movie! It's been like 2 months since I saw this and I still can't stop myself from rewatching a clip or two pretty much daily, lol.82.131.63.86 (talk)03:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for sharing! I'll catch it asap.Shahid •^Talk2me13:24, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shahid, that's sad about Preity. Is she not getting parts due to ageism in the industry in favour of actresses in their 20s and 30s or has she turned her back on film and concentrating on her work as an entrepreneur? That businessman she was with seemed to change her. Do you still watch new films in Bollywood or has the industry gone downhill like Hollywood? I can count the number of new films I've seen since 2020 on one hand! ♦Dr. Blofeld14:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Hi Blof, no no, I think she made a conscious decision to quit films. She never really wanted to dedicate her life to acting. She is just not that kind of person. Films were probably just a phase in her career, and I can understand that. She was never the cinema-breathing movie buff type. In one of her interviews she actually said she hardly watched films as a child. Mind you, she is an educated woman - BA and a master's program or whatever it is that she took in criminal psychology. Her film career was a good steppingstone for what she does now. I obviously feel sorry that she doesn't act anymore. She's a charming actress and it would be nice if she made a film at least once in a few years like Kajol used to. She could easily lead one of those web shows and do a great job of it. But she lives in LA, she has a family and it's probably not her thing. Even Dimple Kapadia has said many times there's a huge effort in making film for her. It's not an easy job.

I think Hindi films have gotten significantly better, and if you include the stuff on the streaming platforms, it's just pure bliss. The material there is much better. You should giveDelhi Crime a try.Shahid •^Talk2me00:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The opposite from Hollywood then which has gone down the toilet! That's good that you're still enjoying the new films! I always liked Preity, and enjoyed the 2000s films of hers I've seen. Doesn't look likeBipasha Basu is doing anything now either!! Probably busy raising her child! ♦Dr. Blofeld07:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, many of them, not just her. Most of these girls grew up in traditional families where a woman's duty couldn't be clearer even if she's a working woman. So even the raciest girls end up settling down, maturing and probably getting closer to their roots to realise what matters to them most (at least in the early stages of their family life). Preity for one is not really like that, she's a feminist of sorts, she's just changed her career path, but she is quite busy.Shahid •^Talk2me09:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the best Bollywood film you've seen in the last five years? ♦Dr. Blofeld11:58, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can't name one - but I thinkAndhadhun was really, really good.Shahid •^Talk2me12:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joining in on a conversation uninvited after a month. I agree thatAndhadhun was a fantastic film and am really glad to see Tabu doing so well. Other recent films that I loved wereDrishyam (also with Tabu in it) andRaazi, both top-notch thrillers.FrB.TG (talk)20:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG, long time! I've seen all three of those films and enjoyed all of them. Tabu is a paragon. I'm happy to see the growing quality of Indian films.Shahid •^Talk2me10:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wholeheartedly agree with the bit about Tabu, and I'm very happy that she hasn't fallen yet another victim to Bollywood's sexism and ageism against actresses who aren't in their 20s or early 30s anymore. I've been meaning to bring her article to FA status for quite a while now but haven't gotten to it yet. I plan/hope to start working on it by December as I will have more time then.FrB.TG (talk)13:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree with you. What a great idea to work on her page - I actually expanded her lead and collected sources from here and there to do the same. I wish I had more time to join you in the process.Shahid •^Talk2me13:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please add table format toDharmendra filmography. PlzDareshMohan (talk)06:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please kindly read my discussion underUser_talk:Javierfv1212#Replacing_Devanagari_with_Brahmi andUser_talk:Symphing12#Aṣṭādhyāyī and maybe let's begin anew a talk about consesus on using Indic Scripts, because I think those contained inWikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_48#Native_languages_in_lead (re:lead)] andWikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics/Archive_64#Multiple_Indicscript_in_infoboxes_are_out_of_control (re:infobox) are dated.noychoH (talk)21:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bollywood film clans has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with thecategorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on thecategories for discussion page. Thank you.Mason (talk)20:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shshshsh. Since the time Miss India started, there is a rule that no contestant below 18 years of age can participate. So how did Miss Juhi Chawla won the Miss India contest at age 16? Can you explain? Why would they just allow her and no one else to participate at the age of 16 and break their rule just for one year in 1984? Even right now in 2023 only girls above the age of 18 can participate in the competition. Just check out the qualifications required to participate in Miss India.— Precedingunsigned comment added byA1B3C5 (talk •contribs)14:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A1B3C5: I don't know that there's such a rule, but it'sWP:OR which we don't follow, multiple sources show that she was born in 1967. We should follow them and not reject them based on some randomHindustan Times article. We need stronger sources.Shahid •^Talk2me14:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, do you really think that these pageants were really that strict about their rules? I don't believe they really followed any rules to begin with. Priyanka Chopra for one was 17 when she won on 15 January 2000.Naina Balsaver was even younger when she won in 1976.Shahid •^Talk2me14:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The pageSaathi (1991 film) is contested for deletion, so please help save this page. ThanksKungfuPanda2008 (talk)12:04, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not have a review section. I have managed to find one review by NDTV:https://web.archive.org/web/20040427061536/http://www.ndtv.com/ent/reviews.asp?lang=hindi&id=105&moviename=Ab+Tak+Chappan

Really helpful if you can find more reviews of this film. Thanks!75.135.173.245 (talk)21:38, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Despite all the problematic wins at this year's Filmfare, the one that made me happy was Shefali win for her tremendous perf inThree of Us. It's been a joy to (finally) witness her get such well-written parts and be rewarded for them.Krimuk2.0 (talk)11:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: So true. Other than that though, the awards are as predictable and pointless as they've been for decades. The lead acting awards are just funny. The same names, for the same popular films. They're just awarding personalities, not performances, and it reeks of commercial pressure. Also, to give Rani the award for this poor film, is an insult to her talent, because she is a fantastic actress and it may mislead people to think it is indeed one of her best. I so wish she would pick better roles on OTT platforms, including series or films like what Kareena recently did inJaane Jaan or Vidya did in many of her films. She deserves so much more.Shahid •^Talk2me12:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I hope she does. Things have never been better for 40+ actresses in India than they are now. I hope it only keeps getting better with time.Krimuk2.0 (talk)15:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, any recommendations for films from last year that you particularly liked?Shahid •^Talk2me12:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Hindi cinema, my favourites of last year apart fromThree of Us were12th Fail,Gulmohar andKho Gaye Hum Kahan. But I think the best work in India is happening in the long-form format, with shows likeKaala Paani andFarzi, and particularly down South, withKaathal: The Core,Sapta Saagaradaache Ello – Side A, andHi Nanna. What were your favs?Krimuk2.0 (talk)15:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: Thank you, a very nice list of films.Three of Us is stupendous. I can't think of a more skilled actor for such films. I wish I had time to see as many films though, quite busy professionally.Jaane Jaan, which I mention above, is quite watchable.Gulmohar is indeed very good, so isGhoomer.Goldfish is excellent. I really want to watchJoram. Have you seen Rocky Aur Rani?Shahid •^Talk2me21:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't fond ofJaane Jaan -- I think theDrishyam films and the recentMerry Christmas were far superior. As forRocky Aur Rani, I really enjoyed it as a commercial film, but I don't see it as an awards player, except for perhaps Ranveer's hilarious perf as a male Poo.Krimuk2.0 (talk)06:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that the quality of Indian films is getting better while Hollywood has gone down the toilet! ♦Dr. Blofeld08:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: All True. Agree aboutJaane Jaan and I consideredRocky Aur Rani a sort of rehash of K3G. Ranveer is always highly energetic and enjoyable. I takeMerry Christmas as another recommendation. @Dr. Blofeld: Good seeing you.Shahid •^Talk2me10:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed very good to see you Blofeld. What movies have you enjoyed recently?Krimuk2.0 (talk)11:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Krimuk! I'm just rewatching all the classics! ♦Dr. Blofeld11:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Always the best. I watchedBrian De Palma'sBlow Out for the first time yesterday. Those films had an incomparable vibe.Krimuk2.0 (talk)12:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great film! The most recent I've rewatched isNow, Voyager,Fistful of Dollars,Rear Window andBanana Peel. I've seen so many now that I have a rough idea of what all the real classics are at least from 1888 up until 2000. But still discovering good films from the past! I suppose a big part of it is that it's the nearest to going back in a time machine and capturing things back then. I'm particularly fond of the 60s and early 70s era in particular. ♦Dr. Blofeld12:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have either of you seenLe Bonheur (1965)? Beautiful film, one of my favourites! ♦Dr. Blofeld12:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reccos. Will watch. :)Krimuk2.0 (talk)19:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Lady Eve also recommended, excellent screwball comedy, great chemistry between Stanwyck and Fonda. ♦Dr. Blofeld08:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations |March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You cansign up here orask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t ·c)buidhe02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Chirag Kahan Roshni Kahan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)20:21, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you sir, but since you've been recently policingFilmfare Award for Best Actress, could you maybe give me some feedback on the talk page there about my latest changes? I'm not confident that no reaction since 2 days ago means it's all OK, maybe no one with interest has seen them yet. Anyway I went ahead with more tuning today.Gamapamani (talk)12:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the heading Career Fluctuations (1999-2001), it says:Conflict broke out between Khan and the other partners of Dreamz Unlimited over the failure to cast Juhi Chawla in their 2003 production of Aziz Mirza's Chalte Chalte, and they parted ways, despite the film's success. Where in the source associated with this sentence explains the conflict? Because I've heard that Aishwarya Rai Bachchan was selected initially but was dropped and Rani Mukerji replaced her. In fact, this Rediffsource itself says "Aishwarya Rai was originally signed on as Priya. Rani replaced her after Salman Khan interrupted the film's mahurat shot and created a scene, accusing Shah Rukh of getting too friendly with his girlfriend." Where in the source does it mention about the conflict between SRK and Juhi?We are the Great (talk)02:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of Chalte Chalte, if you're free to reply or anything, after answering my question, can you please find more sources for the film, especially the Mid-Day source? Thanks to your effort, I was able to find its review ofHum Tum, also starring Mukerji.We are the Great (talk)01:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Raataurdin.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)17:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add references to this?DareshMohan (talk)03:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RangersRus (talk)15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]AmericanY (talk)15:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. If you're free or anything, please take the time to add reviews for Rani's moviesSaathiya,Chalte Chalte, andBunty Aur Babli. Thanks to your efforts, I was able to findMid-Day's reviews forHum Tum.We are the Great (talk)02:21, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fake name Shadab Ali Farooqui keeps getting added toHoliday (2014).DareshMohan (talk)19:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related toIndia,Pakistan, andAfghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you thatIndia,Pakistan, andAfghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This messagedoesnot imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please seeWikipedia:Contentious topics. -Ratnahastin (talk)12:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ratnahastin: oh please, you're wrtiting to someone who's been on WP for two decades. My record is related to India cinema which this film is subscribed to. Also, I hope you do realize that in no way are you a neutral party on this.Shahid •^Talk2me12:49, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Mission Kashmir (movie soundtrack album - cover art).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)02:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Jallaad.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)17:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:KyaKehnaCD.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described insection F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk)17:29, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk)06:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been deleted. Any scope for restoration please?DareshMohan, pinging you as well.Kailash29792(talk)22:57, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shshshsh, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created,Subhash K. Jha, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subhash K. Jha (2nd nomination).

Deletiondiscussions usually run for seven days and arenot votes.Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions isnotability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with{{Re|EarthDude}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

EarthDude (wannatalk?)12:40, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Shshshsh. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 19 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee❚❙❚❙❙✉14:14, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19 years eh! It seems I got to know you pretty soon after you first arrived!RIPDharmendra BTW. Such a legend of Indian cinema! ♦Dr. Blofeld05:43, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]