User talk:Shshshsh/Archive 37

Shahid Hello my name is Nav and I wanted to thank you for your constant monitoring and preservation of the madhubala page i wrote a few years ago. I spent a great deal of time and effort expanding and writing the previous page which was largely inacurate and full of gossip, so your constant reverting of irrelevent and incorrect additions etc is GREATLY appreciated since i rarely have the time to do so myself. I also wrote pages on vintage actresses Nimmi and Ameeta though being less prolific than Madhubala, thier pages remain largely intact ;o) Thanks again for your efforts and defence of my entry Warm Regards Nav Navsikand (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Rekha80.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 12:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image is irreplaceable because no free images showing an actor in a film can be found. The rationale clearly explains why the image adheres to

WP:NONFREE and particularly its eighth caluse. Many featured articles use non-free images. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Need your help. Can you add a music section and elaborate on what I added. The says talks of a Holt song which Bachcan sings which is one of India's best known folk songs. Can you verify and improve it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:53, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who in your view is one of the worst actresses in Hollywood. It has to be Denise Richards who is onscreen for being nothing but a pretty face. Her filmography in the last ten years says it all. Easily the worst Bond girl ever.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is she an actress? She's a socialite who has appeared in some films, like Kim Kardashian, another talentless fame whore. Dunno, Meryl Streep and Cate Blanchett are my favourites. Judi Dench and Helen Mirren are also great.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of Selena Gomez?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I think Selena is absolutely gorgeous, just so cute and seems a lovely girl. She's a knock out for sure but I kind of feel like a paedo about it LOL, I dunno, she's 18 but just seems very young that's all, like she was only 3 years old when I started comprehensive school!... She can certainly do better than Justin Bieber though, annoying little git.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of Nicole Scherzinger? I think she's very hot and a nice person but I must admit at times she really looks like an ageing prostitute...♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific about the connection? That account's edits don't seem to be problematic as yet. Daniel Case (talk) 21:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you'll have to open an

Thanks. Its a pretty good feeling. After watching how User:Dr. Blofeld plowed through Mother India so quickly, I may soon be getting the hang of this thing. He uses GoogleBooks quite a bit. If you have any other advice or article writing tips for me, I am listening. I failed to get Shriya Saran to GA because the reviewer was blocking many sources as unreliable, but when they were removed there was not enough content left. I guess its a lot harder to get BLPs than films to GA. BollyJeff || talk 20:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the GA section in the talk page. There were many other sources that were rejected, and removed, but not the ones that you mentioned, except Idlebrain and behindwoods.com. I kept the ones I did only because they were just for awards. BollyJeff || talk 21:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would make a massive difference if you could both add some google book references to articles like Andaz (1971 film). Even 2 or 3 references makes a big difference to unsourced.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC) Excellent. A goal might be to get some book references into all of the films listed in the top Bollywood list. The original list can be accessed from before it was marked as "copyright". I'll definitely give a helping hand.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hey i want to award u a barnstar and i will .i am impressed with preity zinta article.keep it up.You and ranbirk are truely amazing guys.

The Modest Barnstar

		The Modest Barnstar
		You have done amazing work to most of the articles on wikipedia. Thank you and hope you will continue to do all these. Wallvelvet (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: I filed an SPI report about it to confirm the accounts and look for the usual sleepers. You're probably right that it is him. Looks the same to me. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: Reprotecting the page is in order since the old protection expired. I reset it for another six months. That will help with that article, but will not help with his other habit of undoing all of your edits. I filed another SPI report for the new account. If you find any more accounts, do report them to SPI as there always seems to be sleepers that are found. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: The CU came back really fast and picked up three additional accounts: One already used and two that had not. Do feel free to file an SPI report as soon as you see any other socks. Waiting for me to file it will just allow him to get in more edits. The SPI form makes it easy to file a new report. Just make sure you request a checkuser on the report. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to send another Wikipedian a private message that does not show up here? BollyJeff || talk 00:34, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shshshsh. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

Hello friend. To be honest she was one of the few old Hollywood stars I never liked. Too much of a diva, and eight husbands says it all!!! I can't believe though she was younger than Clint Eastwood! I've been playing the following on the piano. see this. B flat minor, B flat diminished, E flat minor, B flat minor G flat major, F 7 etc. Genius.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:06, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LOL Shirley Maclaine was one of the few I didn't like either!! Great actress but a hard nosed bitch. She's one of the few female co-stars that Clint Eastwood didn't try to seduce. Both he and Don Siegel said she was harder than most men!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She is supposed to be quite a difficult person I think. Her article really ought to be much better than it is, but then again most old Hollywood greats have lousy articles on here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its hard to think that Clint Eastwood was older than both liz and James Dean. I mean James Dean and Liz Taylor had accomplished so much by only 24, Eastwood didn't even have his first audition until that age. He only really became super famous in the mid 1960s.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there bud... How are you doing? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:25, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not too bad... a bit busy though. What about you? Have you seen any new movies recently? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I only saw NOKJ and I actually liked it. All I can say is that Ms. Mukerji finally learnt that working with YRF won't get you anywhere. LOL :) BTW this is so pathetic! Does it remind you of anything? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) BTW have you managed to catch a glimpse of Preity's new TV show? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to read my new articles

Thanks buddy. Can you help with addressing Talk:Mother India/GA1?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:33, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mother India passed GA with flying colours... See this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to say... -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I wanted to show you that it is possible to write good articles on such old films.. Its a site called Qwiki. It used wikipedia text and displays it as a sort of media portfolio with it spoken and some nice pictures. Users can submit links on youtube and photos which can be used to illustrate it. E.g Preity Zinta clips on youtube can be recommended.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which film do you want improved to GA next?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can get Dil Se up to a B class status. But GA, I doubt the critical coverage of it is all that substantial in books... I'll look into it over the next few days.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gorgeous. Man would I love to ride that motorbike down the Italian coast with that chick on the back.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:10, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah she's hot alright. Check your email I've posted something about Aishwarya which will definitely interest you.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will resume with Dil Se tomorrow, Can you condense/improve the quality of the plot for me and then I'll resume writing it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:55, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tell you who I think is hotter than Jolie. Krista Allen. I think she is one of the sexiest I've ever seen. See this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr. Shahid. Not your cup of tea? Dil Se is proving to be difficult, not sure I can find enough decent material to get beyond B. It has at least improved though!..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You see this?. Prepared for GA and nominated. Not only completely reverted, my GA nomination reverted and page locked to prevent my version going through and being promoted because Giano is more important that wikipedia's GA and FA content. Seem right to you? Is this a complete miscarriage of justice and a perfect example of the mess wikipedia administration is in with such extreme double standards?♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. This was mainly aimed at Bollywooddreamz because he reverted an edit that was exactly liked one of yours and then ridiculed the guy for it. It leaves me (and I am sure other outside observers) wondering why its okay in one place and not in the other. It seems to me that for consistency sake, the articles should be treated the same. If you really believed that your edit on Priyanka was right, then I would think that you should agree with what the other guy did on Kareena, and not take 'Dreamz side. Likewise, if you think the way it is on Kareena is okay, then put it back that way on Priyanka too. I would really like to see it the same way on both articles. Otherwise I am left wondering how to write up these things on other articles that I might edit. But please don't take offense; things often come off more harsh in writing than in speech. You know that we are friends on here. BollyJeff || talk 01:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now after writing all of this, I see that he has already changed it :-) BollyJeff || talk 01:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please post a question and keep the quiz moving..You have removed my question also, how can i use it later? Prasad (talk) 07:46, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Amondal is not posting a question, can you pl. post my earlier deleted question ?? Prasad (talk) 06:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add some info bout Ranveer's second film in his article? Im kinda doomed at editing because of my accident. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:58, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I have been seeing you building and maintaining Rekha page too selflessly since quite long, I hope my humble contribution helps. Fanofbollywood (talk) 13:01, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup that got ugly with her PR interfering a lot, anyway I have told all my photographers to be on a lookout, hopefully I'll get one soon. Fanofbollywood (talk) 19:04, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shahid, I created this article Kamla_(film), though its childish to ask for feedback, but kind of put in a lot of time that's why would appreciate your feedback. Fanofbollywood (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Fanofbollywood (talk) 06:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are your views on this issue? And how can you provide a source for a signature? BollyJeff || talk 12:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hola amigo. How are you? Having fun? Chao !!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edits on Mukerji's page is pathetic... -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An ANI opened about me for creating stubs like

LOL.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:17, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing well. What about you? (P.S. Do you really think that it is really "him"?) -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Over the past several months, I only managed to catch NOKJ & Patiala House - the latter proves what Kumar can actually do if he stops doing these "mindless" comedies. What about you? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been a fan of Vidya since she made her debut with Parineeta; she reminds me of the yestyear actresses. Anushka Sharma is another actress that I am growing fond of. As for the actors, I like Pratik Babbar and Ranbir Kapoor. Ranveer Singh isn't that bad either... though I have to see what else he does with his new-found success. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I completely disagree with the SRK intro. Tom Cruise, Will Smith, Brad Pitt etc we do not claim them to be "one of the world's biggest movie stars" even though they are. To me a westerner it seems extremely out of place to claim he is one of the world biggest movie stars when the fact is the vast majority have not even heard of him in the UK and Europe. Seriously if I did a survey Who is Shadrukh Khan? to my home town out of 50,000, 49,000 at least would not have heard of him. This is why you must clarify that he he is perhaps the biggest movie star in Asia with massive populations but not as well known in Europe. Sorry mate but he really isn'y well known in UK and Europe even though I believe they made a Madame Tussauds one of him for the British Indians. This is why it looks out of place. Either accept my change or remove the claim please. The current version looks highly Indian-centric and not a genuine reflection of the truth. He is far from being one of the biggest movie stars in Europe, North and South America. The claim is indeed true if you account for Asian populations and diaspora compared to the overall world population but that's because there is a disproportionate number of Asians in the world to other continents. It needs to be clarified. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded slightly which I think addresses my concern.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, but I do hope you can see what I mean.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would be nice to get his article up to GA of course... Thing is a lot of people don't know he is one of the biggest movie stars in the world! I think its OK to say so as long as it implies that it means overall, which I think the current version makes clear... Anyway I think this coming week I'll draft up an improved version in my user space and then we can copy edit it and hopefully promote to GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have written an Edit Filter in an attempt to help with the sock that keeps following you. I can't tell you how it works, but hopefully it will help a little. The filter is currently set in a log only mode in order to check its effectiveness. I know that he is not around every day, but if you spot him over the next couple of days, can you leave me a note so I can check to see if the filter would have caught him? Or you can file another SPI report as I'm watching that page. Thanks! -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that he has disappeared? At least for a little while. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:34, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: You're probably right. =) The filter got disabled for now, but I can always re-enable it should he reappear. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. An obituary, now that's a first. Any articles on the go Shahid? Chao!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:45, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why make this edit to put Jaya on top? Look whose pictures are on the cover; not hers. Nothing in here to indicate who should be first. BollyJeff || talk 21:08, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, AB is on the cover of KANK, so he belongs there. My take is whoever is on the poster/DVD cover are the major actors that should go in the infobox, or at least be at the top of the list. BollyJeff || talk 21:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If not the poster, then I think whoever has the leading roles, or most screen time, should determine the order, not acting seniority, unless the screen time is similar. On Sholay, I think other people chose the order, why? In this case, I understand that Dharmendra was the bigger star at the time, which is why he is first. BollyJeff || talk 23:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey buddy, I am doing fine. Its just that over the past several months I have noticed that a lot of links are dying and I am unable to find a replacement of them or sometimes even an archived version of a source that already died. Just as a precautionary measure, I thought it would be good if we archived sources while they were stil working... something that I thought of while going through the article of Taare Zameen Par. If you take a look at Zinta's article, there are a lot of dead links now and an archived version of these sources can't be found anymore. (P.S. BTW how do you check the size of the article?) -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 17:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you're telling me that if the "original" link dies (even after finding an archived version of it), the archived version won't work on WP anymore? As for the size of the article, I'm talking about finding out its length. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 17:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I now understand what you are saying. Thanks for letting me know about that. I thought that an archived version would continue working even though if the original version was dead. -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 17:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someday we will get SRK up to GA and Kareena to FA right? Ciao!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that, well, its certainly keeping me busy!! Haven't been to he cinema recently, you?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:17, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WHich ones?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check out

Perhaps if I started a dress of Bette Davis's you'd like it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a bit of fun. I'd start a dress of Rekha's if I had the sources. Can you think of any iconic Rekha dress? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"No, sorry, it's not done. Wikipedia uses internal wikilinks, not external links in the text." Oh my bad, didnt know that. Yea, never seen external links in the text anywhere else. Apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantserai (talk • contribs) 17:45, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I thought Udit Narayan was originally from Nepal and not India, but on here (wiki) it is written India. I also read some facts about Udit and there it was stated he was born in Nepal. Now, i am in doubt. —Preceding

Hello there. Is it ok to add the Wiki project movies to my article talk page?--Damirgraffiti ☺Say Yo to Me!☺ 01:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]