Jump to content

Talk:Vivek Agnihotri/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Controversies

DBigXray I had done following changes before few days: Controversies -> Reception but it is changed by Winged again. Can you comment on this issue or should I replace word Reception with Controversies on Azam Khan or related articles which you changed?— Harshil want to talk? 15:08, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Winged Blades of Godric Why ? plz refer wp:CSECTION--DBigXrayᗙ 15:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree that "controversies" is not a section we should have; but the problem is with the section, not the title. That content ought to be folded into the other material about his career; otherwise, it has the effect of white-washing some bits of the article and collecting negative material into one area. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I too agree with Vanamonde and DBig. It should be removed and these content should be covered in some other section.-- Harshil want to talk? 15:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Agnihotri is a crappy director, who has gained the spotlight of mainstream media for all the wrong reasons; it's tough to write anything positive of him. And, CSECTION is part of an essay. ∯WBGconverse 15:50, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: And, CSECTION is part of an essay. exactly! That’s what I said to DBig and he said it’s accepted standard for all. Azam Khan received media coverages for his disparaging comments. Thus, it will be appropriate to rename it as controversies because the same criteria applies there too. Your opinion? — Harshil want to talk? 16:00, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I will probably agree with you but this t/p is meant for Vivek Agnihotri. ∯WBGconverse 16:08, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I know but I remember heated conversation with DBig when he reverted all of CSECTION added by me by giving warnings. Read here.-- Harshil want to talk? 16:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I moved the "Urban Naxals" sentence in the controversy section to the relevant section about the book. It was a single sentence, and does not make sense to have its own subsection. For the Twitter and sexual harassment allegations, couldn't we just remove the "Controversy" section header and leave those in "Personal life"? That would seem to be an easy fix for the concerns expressed above. I also posted this comment on the BLPN thread. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
I removed the "Controversies" section header for now. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:59, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
I have moved the sexual harassment allegation to the career section since it's an allegation relating to what happened during the filming of one of his movies. See e.g. Matt Lauer and John Lasseter. It's true that this allegation doesn't seem to have had an effect on his career, unlike those cases but IMO it still fits there better. BTW, I did consider adding it as a fourth level subheading to the filmography section but I'm not sure whether that would be accepted since AFAIK fourth levels or beyond are rarely used in articles. I guess it could be moved to between the filmography and Urban Naxals section, while remaining a third level subheading. I have no objection if anyone wants to do either of these. Nil Einne (talk) 04:59, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Note This discussion is currently moved to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Should_Vivek_Agnihotri_have_a_controversy_section Please participate there. --DBigXrayᗙ 07:42, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

I became aware of the discussion from there, but I am unlikely to be commenting there. I don't see any reason to. My comments solely related to how to deal with content in this article. While there's nothing wrong with people asking for help from BLPN but discussions on a specific article's content should generally stay in article talk pages. (With obvious exceptions like the structured DRN.) The practice of splitting discussions into 2 places can cause unnecessary confusion and also makes it more difficult for people to find the discussion in the future. While I've been fairly guilty of that in the past to, I've decided to take a stand and end it and instead return the focus to article talk pages where it belongs. I'm not saying no one should ever discuss a specific article's content somewhere else, or that I will never do so, but it is also wise to consider if it might be better to the article talk page instead of some other place. Nil Einne (talk) 11:46, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
The purpose of taking this to WP:BLPN was to get the opinion of more uninvolved folks, since WBG was resisting attempts to remove the controversy section. Almost every one with one exception was against this controversy section. Now we have a consensus, so I would say BLPN helped to get a clear consensus in this case. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:07, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
For clarity, I only see Winged Blades of Godric changing "Reception" back to "Controversies" [1]. Having the section header to "Reception" was obviously inappropriate. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:40, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Sure and I clearly said there is nothing wrong with asking for help at BLPN. Considering that I wouldn't be on this page were it not for BLPN, it would be particularly dumb for me to say there was something wrong with asking for help at BLPN. But asking for help at BLPN doesn't require that the discussion is "moved" there. In fact you can ask for help there while directing discussion here, or at least without demanding editors here discuss at BLPN instead. Nil Einne (talk) 14:35, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Updation of Tashkent Files section

I have objection with sentence The Tashkent Files was subject to mostly unfavorable reviews from critics and was widely deemed to be politically motivated... as only source was attached for the claim, not wide range of sources. There are few other reviews like inclusion in IIM, special screening for RSS chief, screening in Rashtrapati Bhavan and few good critical reviews. It seems that someone has added only negative details about him here. I’ll add these details published in RS and make one section on Tashkent Files in a day, if someone has objections then raise it here. — Harshil want to talk? 08:17, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

In case you are unaware, neither the RSS chief nor the Rashtrapati qualifies as a film-critic. Also, the Outlook piece's a regurgitated press-feed and how the screening of a film for a Hindu nationalist paramilitary organisation, with a largely-irrational hate of Nehru and his ilk (the film targets Nehru's government for masking the real circumstances around Shastri's death) is an indicator of the brilliance of the film, to the extent of countering established film-critics, eludes me. I mean ICR will obviously like Is Genesis History? and similar stuff, despite how batshit crazy it seems to sane people. At any case, that line is ditto-copied from the parent article about the film, where it was duly sourced and I have added all the reviews from the relevant section to this article. ∯WBGconverse 11:02, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Winged Blades of Godric, thanks for adding references. Harshil want to talk? 11:34, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Own note

Two points

  • "Shoplifted and shopworn". The Hindu. 2005-09-23. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 2020-02-18. notes:- There is a huge difference between what is inspired and what is plagiarised. And that difference comes out when you replicate exactly the same opening scene, the same lines and dumb down the smart idea to an extent that destroys the entire brilliance of it.
    The Rediff review taunts to the same effect.
  • [Placeholder about NIE] ∯WBGconverse 13:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Note

Second line in the lead it not neutral and too much generic. In upcoming days, I will look at the sources and will challenge/reframe it. Whole article is also ambiguous and not contains many specific details. -- Harshil want to talk? 16:59, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Whitewash

Few users did whitewashing here which I have reverted. Feel free to gain consensus before such changes.-Krishna's flute (talk) 04:07, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Please explain/elaborate. --Jaydayal (talk) 07:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Is he really Activist?

Hi, Its mentioned that he is activist? Can author justify well the character of Vivek as an “activist” ? 103.159.99.42 (talk) 04:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Important info about the person to be added in the article

I propose the addition for the following well-reffed info in the article --Hindustanilanguage (talk) 09:04, 31 March 2022 (UTC):

  • Agnihotri said in an interview: "I have grown up in Bhopal, but I am not a Bhopali. Because Bhopali has a different connotation. You can ask any Bhopali. I will explain it to you in private. If someone says he is Bhopali, it generally means he is homosexual, a person with Nawabi likings." In response to this, a complaint was submitted at Versova police station, Mumbai. [1]
  • Vivek Agnihotri said in an interview to Lallantop that India’s biggest problem is with productivity and efficiency and Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) does not provide a productivity-driven environment to its students. He continued that he has never met a JNU alumnus who talks about productivity and efficiency. The journalist then intervenes and asks him his views on Nirmala Sitharaman. Answering his question, the filmmaker immediately changes his statements and says JNU has given so many intellectuals. The journalist then reveals that he too passed out from JNU.[2]
  • He tweeted that Tata Nano is the safest car for women as there is no way women can be gangraped in the car.[3]
  • Despite terming liberals as silent and selective[4], he strongly defended Aamir Khan's PK movie and said All those gundas attacking cinema halls showing #pk must be arrested immediately and locked up with Asaram.[5]

References

  1. ^ "Complaint Against Vivek Agnihotri For "Bhopali Means Homosexual" Remark". NDTV India. Retrieved 29 March 2022.
  2. ^ "Lallantop trolls The Kashmir Files' Pallavi Joshi, Vivek Agnihotri in slow, tender roast, watch!". APN Live. Retrieved 29 March 2022.
  3. ^ "Vivek Agnihotri deleting old tweets". News 18. Retrieved 29 March 2022.
  4. ^ "In which Vivek Agnihotri asks left liberals: why so silent, why so selective, my learned friends?". First Post. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  5. ^ "Film fraternity comes out in support of 'PK'". Business Standard. Retrieved 29 March 2022.
MODIFIED INPUT
  • In an interview, Agnihotri said that he does not consider himself a Bhopali despite his growing up in Bhopal. He made comments on the term "Bhopali" stating that, "Bhopali has a different connotation. You can ask any Bhopali. I will explain it to you in private. If someone says he is Bhopali, it generally means he is homosexual, a person with Nawabi likings". Following this an FIR was registered against him. [1]
  • In another interview, he criticized the efficiency of the JNU alumni and said that, "he has never met a JNU alumnus who talks about productivity and efficiency.". He subsequently changed his mind when the journalist intervened and said that the varsity has indeed produced intellectuals.[2]
  • He expressed the opinion on the social media that Tata Nano is the safest car for women. [3]
  • He opposed the violent agitation targeting PK movie screening and wanted such individuals to be locked up with criminals like Asaram. [4]

References

  1. ^ "Complaint Against Vivek Agnihotri For "Bhopali Means Homosexual" Remark". NDTV India. Retrieved 4 April 2022.
  2. ^ "Lallantop trolls The Kashmir Files' Pallavi Joshi, Vivek Agnihotri in slow, tender roast, watch!". APN Live. Retrieved 4 April 2022.
  3. ^ "Vivek Agnihotri deleting old tweets". News 18. Retrieved 4 April 2022.
  4. ^ "Film fraternity comes out in support of 'PK'". Business Standard. Retrieved 4 April 2022.
 Done --Hindustanilanguage (talk) 03:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2022

Change 6 line in Filmography section. In March 2022, Agnihotri released The Kashmir Files based on real life incidents of the Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus; the film has become a blockbuster hit.[44][45][46] Shortly after the release of the film, he was provided Y-category security detail across the country by the Ministry of Home Affairs based on inputs from the Intelligence Bureau.[47] Ezio68 (talk) 10:56, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2022 (2)

Request you to unblock this page and give me permission to edit


Request you to unblock this page and give me permission to edit Waft Cinemas 1590 (talk) 08:52, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Cannolis (talk) 09:06, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2022

2409:4040:D8E:CF0B:0:0:7EC9:FA04 (talk) 12:14, 28 October 2022 (UTC)please edite permission me
 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 12:21, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2022

Please Permission Edite Neeraj Dheeraj Singh (talk) 10:05, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 10:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Vivek Agnihotri's father was a freedom fighter, when he died, he was cremated with state honors. Vivek Agnihotri's father's name Prabhu Dayal Agnihotri had great knowledge of Sanskrit. Neeraj Dheeraj Singh (talk) 08:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Vivek Agnihotri's father was a freedom fighter, when he died, he was cremated with state honors. Vivek Agnihotri's father's name Prabhu Dayal Agnihotri had great knowledge of Sanskrit. [2] Neeraj Dheeraj Singh (talk) 08:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
The Kashmir Files, directed by Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri, has been officially selected at the Panorama Film Festival. The Panorama Film Festival will screen 25 feature films and 20 non-feature films. This festival is organized by National Film Development Corporation, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, The Kashmir Files movie has been selected in this festival.[3][4][5] Neeraj Dheeraj Singh (talk) 08:40, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
The film Buddha in a Traffic Jam directed by Vivek Agnihotri was planned to be made a short film later it became a short film. People used to ask him whether he had insurance as his life could be in danger after the issue on which he is making a film. Neeraj Dheeraj Singh (talk) 08:50, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Neeraj Dheeraj Singh, is there any factual error on the page at the moment? Where exactly? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Primary sources

Among other problems, the content I just removed [6] uses primary sources quite inappropriately; this, for instance, is an interview with Agnihotri himself, wherein he claims his father was the last surviving freedom fighter, an exceptional claim that requires considerably better sourcing. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:48, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

I was about to ask, what're your comments on this edit about his claims and intentions on The Kashmir Files? — DaxServer (t · m · c) 20:59, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
It's not necessarily wrong, but I'm not very happy with including his commentary but not what RS say about the film. The film article's lead summarizes it pretty well, I'd say. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:15, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I wanted to include both. The film's article has a ton of refs that I wanna refer to again but was confronted by the lack of time. Perhaps another day — DaxServer (t · m · c) 22:16, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Hopefully the page protection will add some "breathing room" so you don't have to battle socks/other disruption while trying to make improvements. S0091 (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vivek_Agnihotri/Archive_2&oldid=1141263027"