Talk:R. Madhavan

	R. Madhavan has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 4, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed September 23, 2007 Good article nominee Listed June 15, 2012 Good article reassessment Kept
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Mid-importance). India: Bihar / Tamil Nadu / Television Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Bihar (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Indian television workgroup (assessed as Low-importance). This article was last assessed in October 2006. This article was nominated to be an Indian Collaboration of the month but failed to qualify. Animal rights Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Veganism and Vegetarianism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

He also worked in Ghar jamai serial which were telecast on zee network. and the the serial detail is Here’s another national integration serial with a twist in the tail. It’s about Malayatoor Subramanium Namudripad (R. Mahadevan) a Keralite who is in love with Chandani (Mandira Bedi).

When the girl’s father, Bishamber Mehra (Satish Shah), a proud Punjabi with caste blinkers over his eyes, comes to know of the affair he decides to scare the young man by telling him that he would have to stay as a Ghar Jamai if he marries Chandani.

But his plans go for a six when Namudripad readily agrees. And then start the cat-and-mouse between the two. In the predictable end they both discover the qualities of each other and live happily ever after.

Despite the presence of Satish Shah, back on the small screen after a seven-month gap, the humour wears thin. And the weak script reduces Ghar Jamai into drab serial — a case of old wine in a new bottle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.91.80.163 (talk) 17:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator told me today that Madhavan was an ideal article. Well done to all that has contributted

According to the folks who oversea the broader film projects (all of them, worldwide), it's OK to have templates for directors, but not for actors. The problem is that you can end up with multiple templates at the bottom of some films and squabbles about whose template comes first, etc. As long as there's a link to the actor's main page, anyone interested can find the filmography. Could the Madhavan fans busy adding templates please help in removing them? Zora 00:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the speedy delete tags from this article . It clearly is more than advertising and does assert the importance of the subject. GameKeeper 07:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't anyone here beside me feel this article has not been written in a neutral point of view? It's just too long and well, its very fan-ishly written. Comments? -- Visual planet 12:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had a quick read through, I knew nothing of this person before reading the article. The only thing I thought was dubious was the 'wrongfully jailed father' part. This needs a source and it has to be more than a quote from an interested party. An overturned court case for instance. There are films mentions in which R. Madhavan's role was criticized , giving the impression of a balanced article. Unless someone with knowledge of R. Madhavan can list verifiable negative things not mentioned in the article, then I think it looks OK. I did not remove the NPOV tag , but I do think its removal is justified, but not for the reasons given by the remover. GameKeeper 20:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly not a top priority article for the WikiProject Biography. See here for the criteria Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment#Priority scale. In my opinion Mid or Low would be more appropriate. GameKeeper 16:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An incomplete FAC nom was added to the bottom of

I've been learning how to use the auto peer reviewing tool . I tried it on this article, the results may be of interest and can be seen here Talk:R. Madhavan/autoPR GameKeeper 23:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is great, and I think it's worthy of featured status, with a few minor corrections. I already fixed a few minor grammatical things (e.g. placement of references after the ending punctuation of sentence, instead of before; and a few language issues). What the editors need to fix before GA status is to add citations to the 'film career' section, as well as the 'game host' section (change the name of this section to 'game show host' or 'deal ya no deal'). Reference citations that link to URLs should also have dates of retrieval for the URL in the citation.

It might also be good to make a statement that 'deal ya no deal' is the Indian version of the american show, Deal or No Deal, to tie this into the commonly advertised show that most people would be familiar with (if there's a british version of the show, maybe say something about that, too).

Other than that, this article looks great! Quite an interesting read. Dr. Cash 20:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The on hold for this article seems to have expired, but the sections that citations were requested for seem, well, lacking in citation. However, since Derek says this article is perhaps worthy of featured status, I dunno what to do about this article, I don't suppose anyone is planning to carpet bomb the sections in question with citation any time soon? Homestarmy 14:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest the hold be extended pending more detailed examination, or the article be removed from GA consideration altogether. A quick examination shows there are numerous spelling and grammar issues, as well as some NPOV problems, things that should not exist at all for a GA nominee. I'll do what I can to correct when I have some time, but the original editors should review for these before continuing with the nomination.

—  Jim Dunning  talk  :  05:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took another look at the article and there are too many copyedit issues that should be addressed before the GA nomination goes further. This is a compliment to the content — it looks good where NPOV doesn't intrude. I flagged the article so someone will take some time with the grammar, spelling and run-on sentences.

—  Jim Dunning  talk  :  05:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took another look at the article, and the concerns were still not addressed. It's been at least a week (a little over). Combined with the concerns given by other editors, I am removing this article from the

Good article candidates list. Dr. Cash 05:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

If the copy is correct, then citations are needed to replace the erroneous ones ASAP. —  Jim Dunning  talk  :  12:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've done it. Universal Hero 21:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been quick-failed for various reasons including those noted in the nomination. Biographies for living people should include an image. Additionally, almost half of the article lacks citation. Random wikification of stand-alone years and the wikification of month/year combos needs to be removed. The prose could be improved in places, for example, the first paragraph of the lead could be better worded. Lastly, an article should be thoroughly copyedited to ensure there are no typos or misspellings before an article is nominated for GA.

Once the article is improved to meet the standards listed at

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:37, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.151.217 (talk) 20:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is usual that we put their name in their mother tongue in the bracket for every personality in the first short brief. People removing it. I don't understand why. am i missing something here? —Preceding

All i have to say is that some of the facts are totally wrong and I find it amusing that a reputed site like this would pick up stories from cheap publications and represent them as facts and ref over here. Half the details of my personal life are wrong as are the opinions on my professional ones. My "parrot" for gods sake is with me even today and PETA never came close to confiscating anything from me. Its facts and silly sensationalism like this which irk me. I strongly protest against some of the opinion published here and assure you that I can provide equal if not more articles on the above to prove the contrary. Do get in touch with me for any clarifications that you may have and kindly update the site with substantiated facts from reputed sources. Regards R. Madhavan (Actormaddy (talk) 20:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)) Actormaddy (talk) 20:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.72.107.99 (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems hopefully fixed. 86.1.70.198 (talk) 14:51, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He also worked in a serial Ghar jamai which were telecast on Zee Network.

It’s about Malayatoor Subramanium Namudripad (R. Mahadevan) a Keralite who is in love with Chandani (Mandira Bedi).

When the girl’s father, Bishamber Mehra (Satish Shah), a proud Punjabi with caste blinkers over his eyes, comes to know of the affair he decides to scare the young man by telling him that he would have to stay as a Ghar Jamai if he marries Chandani.

But his plans go for a six when Namudripad readily agrees. And then start the cat-and-mouse between the two. In the predictable end they both discover the qualities of each other and live happily ever after.

Despite the presence of Satish Shah, back on the small screen after a seven-month gap, the humour wears thin. And the weak script reduces Ghar Jamai into drab serial — a case of old wine in a new bottle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.91.80.163 (talk) 17:50, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editors!
There has been a discussion on India Portal related to mentioning of caste of subjects. The point is that mentioning caste of people, who have nothing to do with their caste, is found to be unnecessary by few editors. Hence the caste of the subject person needs to be deleted from the biography. I am not deleting the caste as of now but am only posting this here so that the regular editors of this article are well aware of it beforehand and no edit-wars take place. For details of discussion held on the portal please refer

Not here, please. There is a community discussion taking place at

WT:INB and I would advise people to read the entire discussion before forming an opinion because the above summary is incorrect. Nothing more need be said here. - Sitush (talk) 02:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

File:Madhavanprof.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Madhavanprof.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Madhavanprof.JPG) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- talk) 14:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply ]