Talk:Nagma

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

This page still needs a lot of work, but what it needs most right now is a photo or two of Nagma, and of a movie poster or scene featuring her, which it meets Wikipedia's rules on copyright. Ratufa 21:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC). It is mentioned that Nagma's mother Shama (Seema) Kazi divorced her husband Arvind Morarji (Nagma's biological father) in August, 1973, and married Chander Sadanah in March, 1975; Nagma was born on 25th December, 1974. There is no coherence to these statements and this needs some amendment.--68.193.2.168 (talk) 18:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC). --68.193.2.168 (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

conversion..[edit]

is this noteworthy? and is there are any reliable news source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsjustajoy (talk • contribs) 19:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In south India christian missionaries just like commercial ads do get famous actors/actress acted in ther conversion footages.

This is a baseless allegation, Nagma has herself denied this charge in so many newspapers. She is spiritual but not religious. I hope some christian fanatic has added this para simply by adding some drama/ad which is not real.


Indian Christian???[edit]

How is Nagma an Indian Chrisitian when she was born of a hindu father and a muslim mother???

Why is she then listed in category of the Indian Chrisitians???India07 (talk) 21:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

is it true Nagma did fraud as she converted to christian? is it either acting or true? 

  Few references:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4KINtB4VBM (2008)
  http://www.christianmessenger.in/i-take-each-day-as-it-comes-nagma/ (2010)
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcvpX8C6N7s (2012)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.214.147 (talk) 17:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A recent interview (2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGjSLcpWUTo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.202.24.2 (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Truth Be told: Irrespective of controversies truth be told as she is now a actively christian undeniably, as a wiki user, one would need a chance to know her religion. Unavailability of such info in wiki and the same can be verified on a simple Google search then the credibility and reliability on wiki is southwards so, to reflect truth, her faith to be added is perfectly justified. So, please don't strip off religion from her page to make wiki marking lack of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chitrada (talk • contribs) 05:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Nagma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Nagma/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

== This bio needs a photo ==


This article could use a good photo or two - possibly a promo photo from a 1990s film and something more recent, but of course something that is doesn't raise copyright problems. Also, a more detailed movie list would help. Otherwise, it's not what's normally considered a 'stub' article anymore. Ratufa 00:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 00:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 00:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Nagma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Best practice treatment of dead references[edit]

Please remember for IAbot and archives can often be used to recover dead references; and that if the citation cites a printed work it does not have to have an URL. Marking such a link as url-status=dead is perfectly fine; Template:dead-link is also not bad. Adding HTML markup "sup" to simulate an undated citation needed/reason= is an extremely poor choice and disrupts attempts at link recovery. I am spitting feathers at having just had to go round the houses after recovering such links. thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

note[edit]

am seeking page protection.Intalk (talk) 08:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent version and protection as of 10 October 2020[edit]

I've notified Drmies, in their talk page about this today. The current version is not the best one. Instead it is the result of disruptive edits, vandalism, white washing and promotion that happened yesterday.

  • They have removed properly sourced content supported by WP:RS sources like The Telegraph, Outlook, NDTV, etc and replaced it with an obscure non-RS source "NENOW" [1].
  • They have disruptively changed the birth date of the subject from 1974 to 70 which doesn't match with the inline source that was provided by me.
  • The lead section is puffery ridden now with phrases such as "..such as blockbuster movie Yalgar; ..She began her acting career in Bollywood and acted in a few of the biggest Bollywood movies and in other language... Hat note has been removed too.
  • The Personal life section is totally unsourced/OR which writes "Nagma remains unmarried till date. In an interview with The Times of India, she said she would get married when she finds the right man.", but the source [2] doesn't mention anything about her personal life.
  • I have checked and corrected the "Early life" and "Political career" sections. Now many sentences and sections are unsourced/original researches thanks to removal of RS sources like this by Intalk here
The sourced version was this:

After divorcing Morarji in August 1974, Nagma's mother married Chander Sadanah, a film producer in March 1975 with whom she had three children: including two daughters, actresses Roshini and Jyothika.[1] Through father and his first wife Sapna, Nagma has two elder half-brothers, Dhanraj and Yuvraj.[1]

Now we have this unsourced para and complete removal of a sentence:

After divorcing Morarji in August 1974, Nagma's mother married Chander Sadanah, a film producer in March 1975 with whom she had three children: including two daughters, actresses Radhika and Jyothika.

  • The only section contentious was the Controversy section, with substantial use of allegedly, which can be discussed and dealt with/removed separately. Anything else can also be ironed out the same way. I believe we should restore it to the last stable version, this one, and then start from there. Pinging @Cyphoidbomb:. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:48, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fylindfotberserk, I am going to stay out of this as much as I can, but I will tell you that the names of the elder half-brothers really shouldn't be in here, since they are not notable and their names have no encyclopedic value. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:09, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but the quoted para is still unsourced, even if we do not mention about the half-brothers and her father's liaison. Intalk has also removed sources from the last two paras in the Early life section despite keeping the text more or less the same. I mean, who does that. Just compare the respective sections (Early life, Politics) in the Current version and the Stable version before the edit war. Not to mention the fake/OR birth date as well as totally unsourced/WP:OR/gossipy Nagma#Personal_life section added by Intalk. I've never complained like this before but considering Intalk's lazy and rather disruptive (removal of sources) edits as the 'best version' is shocking. Urging @Cyphoidbomb and RegentsPark: to take a look at the situation. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Restored valid sources without readding any contentious content, removed unsourced, puffery and original researches as per policies, and unreliably sourced content and sources. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:20, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:MashriqiUser[edit]

I definitely am trying and literally will by god I swear i am not be a fool of myself because this is a fully protected page. But my question is that why does Nagma have an automated fully protected page? Please answer me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MashriqiUser (talk • contribs) 03:24, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "Nagma's family secret". www.telegraphindia.com. 21 April 2006. Retrieved 16 August 2020.

Disambiguation needed[edit]

In the 2nd para of "Early Life" there is an ambiguous link to "from National College, Mumbai University." I believe "National College" should wikilink to: R. D. National College.— Rod talk 17:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:31, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nagma&oldid=1207832495"