Talk:Bhumi Pednekar

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

Requested move 24 April 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. G4 does not apply as the article is different enough to the one that was deleted. While it exists it should be at the proper title. Of course there is on prejudice against a new AfD, but it does seem she has won a notable award in the interim. Jenks24 (talk) 18:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Bhumi Pednekar (actress) → Bhumi Pednekar – No need for dab in title. Destination is create-protected, otherwise I'd move it myself. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2019

RELEASE DATE OF DUM LAGA KE HAISHA 2014 125.19.32.22 (talk) 13:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 13:15, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bollywood in lead

Hi @Krimuk2.0: I disagree with you here. Going down the tree of disambiguation, we would care about the nation first, then the language, then any sort of ethnic identification, if relevant, which I don't think it is. We should consider that not everybody in the world knows what Hindi is, and far fewer know what Telugu or Tamil or Odia are. Making the content understandable should be our first goal, and we likely wouldn't say "She appears in Odia films" because few non-Indians would know what that is. (And no, wikilinking isn't how we make content understandable.) "Odia-language" would be the correct compound adjective to describe the films that person appears in, and then the primary topic is the language, not the ethnic film industry. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:51, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kareena Kapoor, Preity Zinta, and Shah Rukh Khan has been to link to the industry and not the language. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:13, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
@Krimuk2.0: Well, I don't plan to fight anybody here about it, and I hope you don't think I'm giving you a hard time specifically, but taking examples from the melting pot nation, Brad Pitt works in the Hollywood film industry, yet there is no link for that. No link for Woody Allen working in a culturally Jewish film industry. They are American actors, and if they produced films in a language other than English, the third level of our taxonomy would be language. Did Cheech Marin, whose films are in English, work in the Chicano film industry? Ethnic industry is not typically the focus. Anyhow, that's my opinion. It may be unpopular. Feel free to use it or ignore it. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 12:39, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's because saying one is an "American actor" is sufficient, as America has only one film industry, and that's
Bollywood, Telugu cinema], Tamil cinema, Cinema of West Bengal, and many others, which is why we can't compare American actors with Indian actors. Each of these industry is based on language, and that's obvious from the nomenclature. I still fail to see why it's being seen any different. There are proper wikipedia articles to these industries as opposed to a Jewish film industry or a Chicano film industry. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:25, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
]