User talk:Shshshsh/Archive 20

I had a look at some of the "lists" yesterday. I seem to average about 3rd or 4th on them! Did you know in the month of May my talk page was the 27th most edited page on the website!!! Why do they construct these lists!! I guess I'm equally guilty for bothering to look at them. Your name was quite high on various lists too. Hope you are well!

Hi. re your removal of prod from this article - yes, IMDB is reliable, but it doesn't imply notability - WP:MOVIE states "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

This guideline includes published works such as books, television documentaries, full-length featured newspaper articles from large circulation newspapers, full-length magazine reviews and criticism excluding the following:

• Media reprints of press releases, trailers, and advertising for the film.[1]
• Trivial coverage, such as newspaper listings of screening times and venues, "capsule reviews," plot summaries without critical commentary, or listings in comprehensive film guides such as "Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide," "Time Out Film Guide," or the Internet Movie Database.

Hello!!! I agree my friend. I would love to know more about Bollywood!!! This is why I try to see as many clips as I can on youtube, whether they are only ten minute clips or not and try to cover as many Bollywood articles as I can because I want to learn about them. There are so many films though!!! that there are always films I come across which I've never heard of!!! I would love for you to educate me more, I always greatly appreciated your messages before about certain films and actresses like Hema Malini and sharing your great knowledge of it. I know you always appreciate my work and copy editing and efforts at trying to help the Bollywood articles, but being honest I often feel a little out of sorts because I am not Indian and am not in a socirty where Bollywood dominates. It is kind of a limitation to what I can do in this department. This is why I deeply appreciate you sharing stuff with me and communicating on such articles so I don't make any major errors in judgement in the future. Now Best Regards

I've created more Bollywood articles than anyone, really? Wow I didn't know that what about that Haphr guy I thought he would have created more!!! Well its kind of a hope that Indians who use wikipedia will expand them and soon enough we have half decent articles on each film. WHat we really want is several thousand GAs!!! Given the size of India and the many who speak English you;d expect there to be more active Indian cinema editors other than those who are here to vandalize or treat it as a fan site. Sorry if I seemed to have boomed at you, I just wanted to find a way to discuss and plan the next stages of the developing it as a group as I think eventually it could be developed to FA and we need to begin to evaluate how to achieve this (including a peer review). I think it is already GA level. I haven't read the article again yet fully today, but it seems you have made many wise decisions on cutting down the waffle. But there is a fine line between a fully informative and comprehensive article and one which resembles a Birdseye Potato Waffle and is not as comprehensive as it should be. Now I have finished ranting at you, can you give Mr Bigglesworth a pat on the back and forgive the Bald One for making you feel as if you've committed an error. Sometimes I think too much about planning and how to develop something that my Bald head forgets to be sensitive to everybody. All the best amigo and please keep me posted!!

Wow did you see the mens final? Thats how tennis should be! When I was growing up it was always Sampras and his aces, his matches were always pretty boring and one sided and always based on serve. Its great to see a proper battle!.

Hi how are you? Whats keepin you so busy huh? Yes it was the best match I've ever seen. Read the news on it everybody seems to agree. I'm gradually getting back into editing films and actors again which I had intended to do this year but have spent ages trying to get Africa and much of Asia and Latin America off to a start. I've been looking through some of the films and biographies. The state on so many major films amazes me, I haven't seen any change in all the areas I've looked at since Christmas. You;d think the global size of wikipedia they'd all be up to at least a start class level. Although the number of people who casually use wikipedia is huge, the amount of active editors is unfortunately extremely low. I guess not many people like working on something which doesn't pay,

Thats exactly why I seem to spend some days on here and I'm away for others, or my editing seems spaced out of late. I try to edit as much as I can, but I need some money for living on!! Do you reckon I should get hold of Bollywood DVDs in bulk and sell them on ebay for a profit? This way I'd be getting some money for it and also increasing the number of Bollywood films out there in the UK!!! I've found an American website which sells them in lots of 50. I wonder whether I could sell them....

LOL I didn't mean as a sole income LOL. Just for some extra cash. I don't know I'd have to see usually they are expensive to buy on ebay. If I could get hold of some cheap in bulk from elsewhere and sell them off at a resonably good price I'd make a fair bit on them.

I dunno, sounds a bit awkward in terms of structure and repetition. What about something like: The film, set in contemporary urban Mumbai focuses on the life routine of affluent Indian youth, exploring a major period of transition in the lives of three young friends.[22] Zinta starred as Aamir Khan's love interest, Shalini. According to critics, the film broke new ground by illustrating the reality of Indian youth in the city today. Despite being well received critically however, it was only a moderate box office success overall. It performed well in Indian cities but failed in the rural areas, which critics attributed to the urban-oriented lifestyle depicted in the film.

Contemporary may refer to:

Change it then. LOL I'm wondering why you're still thinking about writing an article which is already FA you perfectionist you!!

Dunno, depends on whether it was successful in cities all across the world or not. Hey I've begun developing 1950s Bollywood by year

"a moderate box office success in India; it performed well in the major cities but failed in the rural areas". SHould be fine. The only thing is isn;t this normal that a film does well in the cities and not so well in rural areas? Isn't it true that Bollywood films win most of their taking in the cities, I remember exmaning the Bollywood films in America which also seemed this way with "failure" in the countryside. Yes I added 1950 for now. I'll add the titles of the others gradually

Yes but it is the same with the Oscars isn't it. ET in 1982 etc. Often the best films aren't the ones that reap all the awards. COuld you point me to a reliable site that list the top gorssers of each year too?

Do I use the gross or nett gross figure?

I don't completely trust those figures anyway and in the english speaking world rupees and the unusual fugure system with two and three digits is hard to follow anyway. I'll just list them as the top ten recorded earners

OK I've begun doing

Don't worry I'll try to get them blue linked and fill in each gap

Thats over 500 Bollywood edits in succession in two days!! Its starting to take shape. If I spent time dedicated to Bollywood rather than worrying about everything on here I'd get things moving quickly!

The reason I nominated it for a GA is because good new articles like

Oh sorry if you felt pressured to improve it quickly!! Its just when I see articles reaching GA within four days of creation I kind of get itchy to promote a several year old article!!! There shouldn't be any problems from what I can see anyway. It is annoying how some articles are revieweed immediately while others you have to wait months

Whats the matter with her? She looks tired and ill.

I had a huge crush on her in the 1990s when I was a teenager, you know the type I like with the blue eyes and chesnut coloured hair. I was shocked to see that image too!

The thing is lots of women who are "stunning" in the media as they appear in films or on the catwalk and high profile events look rather less attractive without the makeup and the gloss. Even Shania looks less stunning in her daily routine without makeup and wearing casual clothes. Some women can still look stunning without the gloss, the true natural beauties, but there are few women who can look equally as good without any make up whatsoever. The thing is it is quite normal for even the most attractive women to have off days when they look washed out or jaded, I;ve seen pictures of even Halle Berry looking pretty average. The problem is because the media is used to seeing them as nothing less than perfect, they have a field day picking up on it. There are countless magazines here in the UK which are dedicated to bringing down female icons and slagging them off without make up or in bad clothes, not nice is it.

Oh yes, in fact I prefer women with light makeup rather than caked in it.

Yeah I've seen the croc scene before. Thats

Yes you showed me that clip before and the after clip. Oh I know Kabir Bedi as

Wow Shahid isn't she hot!!! Thats one hot Venezuelan Miss Universe!

No. Have a look at

Boo hoo they;ve deleted the lovely Venezuelan

Hey Shahid, there is good news buddy!! Yesterday,

Here is the new evidence to suggest that acting is not a taboo. In an interview with her father in Encyclopedia Britannica, remember that notable book I said about before see this. Her father is directly asked whether it is a family taboo and he says it isn't only that acting and domesticity are not compatible.:

Dude I'm still in the middle of editing. I get ideas and then read through afterwards and make changes anyway.

LOL, hehe, no you wouldn't want Baldy to open that trap door and leave the possibility open to being devoured by man eating piranha now would you lol. LOL. I always think if you really want to improve something you have to be bold with your ideas. Some of them will probably need modificiation later but I call it my "brainwave" period which I conceive different ways in how to approach something Once that is done and we have the fuller article and all possibilites for content. it can undergo a final copyediting and a period where we try to make the most concise article possible given the content and hopefully we then have an FA after a copyediting period and final suggestions, although it will not be until December 13 2019 that the League of Copyeditors wake up....

Yes the book source informs me it is Encyclopedia Britannica (India) which makes it all the better and more valuable in my view, sort of an "official" Hindi encyclopedia. I'd sure love to get hold of that book it looks brilliant

Nearly 700 pages too. OK I'm done for tonight. I hope it isn't too bad. I got up to around 2005. It reads quite well so far I think in terms of flow. I'll continue tomorrow afternoon. Byeeeeee!

Shahid you can be very rude at times to messages which are not as huge as you make out, you misinterpret a great deal or make it seem worse than it actually is. Did I say I had a major problem with any of it? I repsonded to his message saying thanks for the praise, but a lot of what I seemed to have added has gone this is all I said, at first glance it looked like it had all been reverted. I didn't evne look to see who had changed it, it might have been both of you it doesn't matter and I really don't care. I agree with most of the revert changes as a lot of it wasn't relevant but I'd hardly call a Britannica quote stupid. When you start branding all these policies, you begin to look like some of those other wiki policemen on here who try to make every edit look pathetic or grossly against wikipedia policy. I had hoped some of "OR" sections would be referenced.

Calm down Shahid. I know there are many who are obsessed with minor issues and there are nasty people on here but this is why I thought the peer review would be a good initial way to address any issues it has. Just for the record I am cool with most of the reverting as some of it wasn't relevant, there are just one or two things I thought were valuable to the article. I never once said that my editing is final and I also much appreciate both your work at improving the article. All I hinted was that there is such a massive amount of work to do not only on the rest of Hindi cinema but the rest of wikipedia that any time spent on something which is removed (evne if completely understandable) isn't as productive as could be possible if I was building up stubs etc elsewhere. I'm not used to having anything removed largely because I work all across wikipedia often on bare minimum articles to try to build them up. I never once said all of your reverts were wrong, or tried to paint you in a bad light. Why would I? What could I possibly gain? I get the impression you are quite aggressive when you start saying things like "Do we need a certain quote. Definately not. It is stupid and makes wikipedia look like a fan site". Just say "Blof. I don't think the quote is necessary" and we'll sort in peacefully. It makes me look slightly foolish too for adding something awful to the article.

Yes I agree. OK just try to be a little calmer, its only me after all. All I did was try to add some new viewpoints or perspectives to the article which were either interesting or helped fill in an understanding of the article somewhat more. If this violated I'm sorry, but I always try to improve something and then read through it afterwards which I had intended doing today and remove anything which seemd OR or POV or anything like that when I have finished. As you are editing something, without having the chance to read through afterwards you miss certain things which are unnecessary or affect the flow of the article. Understand I spend most of my time building up dreary stubs or creating new content so any minor issues (which become huge at FAs) are not so much on my radar anyway. That isn't to say I can't write an FA article because you known very well I can, but there is such a massive amount of work to do on the rubbish on here that perfecting single articles to FA is a frustrating one. I've taken out the Britannica quote now for conciseness but i don't think it is a stupid quote, even if he demostrates a very old fashioned view of women. Rather perhaps it is unnecessary as this is reflected in the text. I will explain to Rahul that I am cool with most of the changes, its just I didn't anticipate much of what I added removed so soon without having the chance to continue where I left off last night and try to put it right myself. Regards

Mentioning the England location and Blenheim palace as one of the sites I think is of note to many readers particularly those in the "west". It makes it that bit more interesting I think, I don't see any harm in mentioning it even if the quote was not relevant. I don't expect anybody to be impressed by the book source but I do think it helps showing that the article is written from a range of sources rather than just purely web material.

Well the reference was there because of the original quote which put it in the context - it does seem a little unneccesary now it is no longer there. Partly in England should be fine. I haven't seen the film all the way through only clips, wasn't London in the film too? But that is the sort of thing I mean when certain editors go too far with picking things. Did it really affect the quality of the article by mentioning Australia? Personally I think it helps put it in its context and would be interesting to me - it wasn't as if you related details on how the film was made and produced. Ah well, but I appreciate that you forsee the same kind of reaction people gave to the Zinta article.