User talk:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ/Archive 15

OMG

Its been so long since we chatted. I was on a long vacation for getting married, yes I'm a married buddha now. He he. What's going on with Kareena? Did you see Golmaal 3? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Duhhh, I thought you knew that I was leaving WP. I didnot get the chance to see Golmaal 3 yet as me and the mrs are busy decorating our new home. I may catch it this weekend. Although We Are Family was kinda disappointing for me, I'm waiting for another JWM kinda role from our dear Bebo. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I maybe biased... but I liked WAF since it featured two of my favorite Indian actresses on screen. As for G3, a lot of people have been saying that Bebo's character (Daboo) in the film reminds them of Geet in JWM and I kinda agree :) (P.S. I NEVER knew you were leaving WP. You didn't tell me anything about it!! :P -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 02:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha. I left, got married, and also returned. Buck up dude!! Hey I wanna watch Guzaarish so badly. Can't have enough of Ash's nakhras. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Did you see the episode with Kareen and Saif on Koffee with Karan? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Of course I saw it. That "who knows who better" quiz was hillarious and the way Saif goofed up! How excited are you about Tees Maar Khan? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:03, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I have already read this - thank you very much for this kind gesture, dear friend. What's up with you? Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hi Rahul. Why does the List of highest-grossing Bollywood films not include the list that is adjusted for inflation? Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kareena in Omkara.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kareena in Omkara.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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 (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 01:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Hi BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ, hope you're well. As an editor who has used the services of the Guild of Copy Editors, I thought you might be interested in knowing that the Guild is currently holding elections for its coordinators. To view the discussion and voice your opinion, please visit the election page. Thanks! – SMasters (talk) 15:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Hey buddy - all is good and I'd thank you if you started implementing it on other articles. However, I think it's unnecessary to add descriptions of awards - this info belongs to the articles on the awards. I do understand that you have taken it from another article, but I still disagree with it. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay then - it's a good format. Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:37, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. One thing though - your calculation of Bebo's awards is wrong. Even an award which was won is considered to be a nomination. If she was nominated for two X awards and won only one - then she has one win and two nominations. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Take the Apsara award as an example - you see one win and one nomination - it should be one win out of two nominations - so it's one win and two nominations. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

No - these are direct wins. Shahid • ^Talk2me 23:48, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Well no - you should use the archived version. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:07, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll do it. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:08, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done :) Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Same to you... and ALL THE BEST!!! =) -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year amigo!!! Everything well I hope?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:35, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, best wishes for the new year from me too, and to you Dr Blofeld. Off2riorob (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

LOL. What was your favourite film of 2010?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:41, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Best film of the year? Mmm Green Zone was good. I enjoyed the Expendables but it was a little hyped and not as good as anticipated..♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:57, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

This is

... just so effing brilliant!!! Congrats! — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks bud. I was inspired by this. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Well who isn't inpisred by that? My next submission for the Madonna awards list will be based on that only. And, arre yaar, please please please no talkbacks! They mess with my MiszaBot archiving. :( — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:11, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Gratuitous colours

The problem with gratuitous colours is a) that they're *gratuitous* and b) that in the case of navbars they create a jumble of colours at the bottom of articles where everyone's favourite colours are all thrown together. It's called the Skittlepedia Effect. And read WP:Deviations (2nd ¶), which I gave as my reason; it's part of the manual of style. Regards, Jack Merridew 22:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay I somewhat get what you're trying to say. However, suppose I decide to create other Indian award templates (as done with other "Hollywood" awards; see the bottom of Angelina Jolie's page) how would I distinguish between the templates. Don't you think that having different colours for different award templates helps differentiate the awards? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 15:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Readers distinguish between the templates by their differing titles; the *text*. The colours are mere ornamentation. The titles are *content*. This project is about content and structure, not pretty colours. Jack Merridew 06:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

You do make a valid point Jack. Anyways, I have no problems if you were to change it back. Regards -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 16:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you; I'll tidy-up the others I see in that category, too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:12, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

My take

Hey buddy!! First and foremost, SRK and Kajol totally deserved their awards in my view. Vidya Balan was a good nominee, but she was not as relatable in Ishqiya as Kajol was in MNIK. In 2006 Bebo deserved it more for Omkara then Kajol for Fanaa, and it was an injustice, but this time it's fully deserved. Udaan was in my view one of the best films of the year, and I'm surprised Dabangg won. I think Ronit Roy deserved his award, but I'm frankly not very happy with Bebo's win. She was good, of course, but I think if you win an award it means you have delievered one of your best, and it is not really one of her best performances, even if it's excellent. She won because she was the best in the list, which is fine, but I think Shehnaz Patel was great in Guzaarish, but she was overlooked at Filmfare (what a joke). Have not seen Golmaal 3 so I cannot say if Bebo deserved the nomination, because from what I remember in Golmaal 2 she was kind of ordinary. What's your take? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ranveer Singh

Take a look at the revamped article. And as for the above award show, disagree with every award, except the Best Male Debut. Filmfare was a pile load of shit this year. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I am actually tired of award shows trying to popularize themselves by giving awards to the most popular, and the worthy. Shahrukh was not even worthy of being nominated, and Kajol shouldn't have won. And Dabaang as Best Film? As much as I hated Guzaarish, I loved Hrithik's acting in it, and he should have won. As for actress, Vidya was deserving of it as she was simply brilliant in Ishqiya. That is one actress who can mould herself. Kajol, as much as I love her, I feel she has lost her spunk. And thanks for Ranveer Singh. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

List of highest-grossing Bollywood films

Since you have reverted my actions here and I believe that this constitutes a copyright problem, I have blanked the section with the "copyright problems" template and left a note at the talk page explaining my concern. I have listed the matter for a different administrator to review. Please provide your opinion there for the reviewing administrator to consider before taking action. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Kareena

You said "WP is not a place to glorify how much brands an actor has or how much they make for their endorsements." Can you show me the policy that states this? Also you might want to reconsider the 'Clothing line' section. Especially the first paragraph looks a lot like what I wrote, minus the earnings, though it does say there was a 75% gain. BollyJeff || talk 17:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay... I might have not properly explained what I wanted to say, but a couple of years back Shahid, myself, as well as other editors [who edited Bollywood articles] decided that we would NOT mention how many brands an actor endorses, as it depends on the outcome of their latest films at the box office. As for the fee they charge, it also depends on the same factor, as well as their popularity. There is NO policy on WP stating this, but in order to maintain consistency and neutrality, it would be best to avoid adding such things. I have no problem adding things like she is found to be one of the most popular female celebrity endorser for brands and products in India.

As for the clothing line section, the only reason I mentioned it was because she was the first Indian actress to launch her own clothing line. Think about it, mostly ALL of the actors have endorsed products throughout their career, but how many have actually launched their own clothing line? The brief introduction of Globus is mentioned as it gives a brief introduction to how Kapoor's clothing line started. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 01:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply

Hey friend, you are missed on here. What's up? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:33, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Not many, I missed No One Killed Jessica but I'll watch it in a few days. What about you? Have you seen some of the films released last year and which recent films have you watched? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh yeh of course he feels deprived. I hate fan edits, it's really annoying, but don't worry, I'm there watching this page and I won't let any unjustified edits of sweet revenge happen. I believe in making informative articles based on facts, not opinions. Those who do not will have to accept it one day. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Guys. What's with the double standard? He removed the exact same thing that Shahid removed from Priyanka. How do you justify that? BollyJeff || talk 20:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Prajwal21 gave the exact same reason for Kapoor as Shahid did for the removal from Priyanka's article. The reason is obvious: Just because it was removed from your 'favorite' actor's article doesn't mean that you could go around removing it from other articles. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 02:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I realize it was a bit of an act of revenge, but if you can look past who did the edit, there is a real question here. If Shahid's edit was proper, then why should it not be applied everywhere, for consistency? Why do you think it is proper to use the critical acclaim verbiage or whatever it was, for Kareena and not for Priyanka? It is confusing to other editors, be they fans or not. BollyJeff || talk 00:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

By saying "BTW this is so pathetic! Does it remind you of anything?" Why would it be pathetic for him to make the exact same edit, with the same comment, if the circumstance is the same as well? I don't want to make a big deal, its just that I was genuinely confused over the inconsistency. BollyJeff || talk 12:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

See this. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:19, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Krrish 3

Dude, Krrish 3 has been finalised. Please get your facts right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smarojit (talk • contribs) 04:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Uhhh "dude" there has been ongoing speculation about this film since Krrish released back in 2006. There have been NO "reliable" sources indicating that the film has entered principal photography or is even close to starting. Please refer to WP:NFF regarding future releases! -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello!!!

Hello amigo, I was thinking the same thing! What have you been up to? Interesting on promoting anything to GA?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

You should get a book on either Khan or Bachchan like I did with Clint Eastwood..♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Please do mention this on the talk page then, if you think so. What's up BTW? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeh I do, but anyway, the account was blocked, so it's okay now. How are you? Any new movies seen? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:14, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, just like you I did not have time to watch many movies. I'm yet to watch many famous movies. Are there any new actors you like to watch on screen? I'm becoming increasingly fond of Vidya Balan... Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

webcite archive

Is this something that is needed, even though most of the links are still alive? Is there a WP: page describing this and how to do it? BollyJeff || talk 19:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Well technically, it is not needed. However, nowadays a lot of links are dying or are being lost due to some technical problems and I witnessed this on Kapoor's article. Therefore, if any other working links would happen to die, I would have an archived version of it - this would make it a lot easier than having to go and find other sources. As for archiving sources, you can go here! Regards -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/109.204.72.82

This editor that was adding film verdicts to Hrithik Roshan is now adding them to Akshay Kumar. Is there a policy on this, or is it another one of those unwritten agreements? They already reverted my 'correction' once. BollyJeff || talk 14:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

It is simply not needed. Why include it there when it is already discussed in the "career" section... -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 16:10, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Archives

Hey Rahul, how've you been, brother? I noticed that you started adding archived versions of existing sites. Why? Generally sites do not turn dead everyday. Adding archived versions is a good practice but it should be done every once in a while after checking the sources with an external too which lists the dead links. Otherwise it's not necessary and just loads the page with more space. Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:59, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

On Zinta there are only two dead links, one of which is dead since... today, which is most probably a temporary problem (and even if it's not, it's not a big deal because the url can be removed). The other one is going to be fixed now. You see, it's not that big a deal. I just think so much space for practically no reason is not very necessary. The archives often do contain the right links. If you cannot find them in the archives because they're lost, then most probably even if you "save" it here before, the archived link will not work here either. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "check the size"? Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:25, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, if a certain link is permanently lost and even the archives cannot find it, then the archived link that you add in advance will obviously not be valid either. If a link is saved in the archives then of course the link will work, but then why do it if as of now the original link is perfectly available? The size can be seen in the history page. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:43, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Rahul, the only link I used was BollywoodHungama, that's why I stopped the expansion when no other link was found for the Star Screen Awards. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, there is not that much to update - the IPL is already mentioned, the production company is not yet officially started, and as for television, I'll add it soon. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Enhiran

Enthiran page is being owned by hard-core Rajinikanth fans User:Vensatry, User:Bollyjeff and User:Eelamstylez77. They have a conflict of interest in keeping this article neutral. They claim Enthiran is the highest grosser in India (not Sholay and 3 Idiots).

The neutral version is this. Taran Adarash even gives break up. Please help rotect wikipedia from such vandalising criminals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kollyfan (talk • contribs) 16:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)