User talk:Shshshsh/Archive 6

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations again on getting Zinta to GA! :)

Could you please have a look on Roshan's talk page, a discussion there about the new baby on the way (if at all) might help prevent an edit war.

And if possible, drop by on SRK's talk page too, theres a discussion there involving religion that would do better with more eyes on it.

Thanks,xC | ☎ 16:18, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shahid, I did see JWM. I saw it on Oct 28. I totally agree with you! There's only one word that can describe the film, "Fantabulous". LOL. I wasn't expecting much from the movie but it turned out to be an excellent movie with wonderful performances by both Shahid and Kareena at their best. No wonder, critics have been raving about the film and it's all set to be a HIT!! It's a pity that just when their chemistry is showing so much on screen, they've decided to part ways. BTW, which one are you going to see first,

The article's looking as great as ever but I question the use of a See Also section - it's got nothing directly to do withe article. It links to 2 shabby pages. Just a thot' Happy editing :) Universal Hero 14:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. It hasn't Universal Hero 19:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't got much time, tests around the corner et all. It's especially hard, South Indian actors tend to have poor websites and small information to extract from. Universal Hero 22:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wasting no time on this. I am using the significant turn out at the A-class review as a form of peer review and have therefore already nominated it for an FA. Due to the very long FA process proposing it now is a very good idea and if anybody has any minor quabbles (perhaps shortening it a little and minor copy edits) along the way then this can be sorted and crossed out. The article actually looks like an FA now is all virtually all the way there except in status. The FA has begun at

Yep it will be a beast of an article but an example of the thousands of important articles that are missing that Jimbo talks about. Shockingly we don't even have a real article on Wildlife of Brazil!! I would like to see the

Congrats Shahid on Zinta's article recently being promoted to an A-class status. All the best in taking it to a FA status. According to me it's already a FA. I plan to read and support the article in taking it to a FA status tomorrow. Hope you don't mind!! I am currently busy with university and just came on Wikipedia for a while to revert some vandalisms. BTW I saw in Zinta's history that you said that she didn't act in

Dil Se was only dubbed in Tamil, so that can't be counted as a Tamil movie. Anyways I wish you all the best once again on Zinta's article. Hope your wish comes true!! Best Regards --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 01:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I forgot to ask you something. I saw that images from KHNH and KK are on Preity's pages. Does that mean we're allowed to use them. I remember Yamla removed them from Kapoor's page but I just wanted to go through it with you. Regards --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 02:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! That's why I changed it to Telugu. Shahid, do you think it would be better to put an image of Kareena from Omkara, Dev or Jab We Met. I don't know which one. Because the first two brought her critical acclaim, nominations for Best Actress and two Best Actress (Critics} awards. On the other hand JWM brought her critical acclaim along with commercial success and I am pretty sure that she will get a nomination for Best Actress. --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 02:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for everything and letting me know that you can only use three images. Even though Madhuri Dixit is making her comeback with Aaja Nachle, I don't know why but I strongly feel that Kareena is going to win it too. LOL. If Dixit gives a good performance like Kajol did in Fanna, then it might be like last year with Dixit taking the Filmfare Best Actress Award. BTW, out of these four, which one should I put: Refugee, K3G, Chameli, Omkara. It's hard to decide. --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 02:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, I forgot about Sonam Kapoor. She looks very very promising, more promising than

Star Screen Awards is my favorite award ceremony in India. It's never biased. It always gives it to the person that deserves it. For e.g. Kareena for Omkara over Kajol for Fanaa. Filmfare is biased. So Dixit might win it for her comeback. Let's wait until we see Dixit's and Sonam's performances then I can decide. But so far I think that she is going to win it. I didn't see Laaga yet.. people say it sucks!! LOL! I thought that it would be a turning point for Mukerji than all the movies she has been doing lately. --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 03:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

LOL! I was planning to watch Laaga this weekend but judging by what you're saying I probably might not. I rather watch

Bhool Bhulaiya. I didn't get a chance to watch Tabu in "The Namesake" but I do plan to. I really hope and pray to God that she wins the Oscar. If she does, it would be a really big accomplishment for her as well as the Indian film industry. I think she has accomplished much more, in terms of her performance than Aishwarya Rai has. Rai is only getting offers from Hollywood due to her beauty. No doubts on that. I think that Tabu might get a nomination but due to a more popular Hollywood actress that is also nominated, might win over her. I feel that Academy Awards are sort of biased. Great films like Mother India and even Laagan never won it. I know "The Namesake" is a Hollywood film, but I feel that many people think of the film has a Bollywood movie. Well let's hope and pray. What do you think? Will she win? P.S. I can't wait to watch Saawariya. Looks like a very good love story. --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 03:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

No Problem Shahid! I am always ready to help you with whatever you need help with. I truly truly feel that you and Blofeld have improved Zinta's article by leaps and bounds. You've my deepest wishes and regards. All the best with Zinta's article. --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 20:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am well happy with how this has developed. Even if it never reached FA it is a primary example of an article for all other Indian actor and general actor articles to aspire to. Are you going to find any negative quotes though? All it needs now is one or two and referencing checked I think

Thanks for everything. No problem, as I am really busy these days with university. After my exams are done, I plan to nominate it for a GA. On top of that, I really want to improve the pages of Karisma Kapoor, Kajol and Rani Mukerji. There's not really anyone that is currently working on those articles. I plan to work on them as soon as Kapoor reaches a GA. I would appreciate it if you decided to help me with those three actresses as well. Regards --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 20:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Coolie was the film -released the year I was born!! I think I'll add a poster to it and try to find a screenshot of the frozen image used in the film of the actual rupture

Here's an example of the citation issues that need to be addressed: "Actresses Filmographies". Retrieved July 14, 2007. No publisher is identified, and when you click on the link and then click on "Home" to try to find authorship of this website, you get a dead link. You could fix this by rmeoving the link perhaps and stating the publisher and original source

I think it may be a good idea like what I have done with the James Bond group to work on an actor or film in a two week or monthly period and aim at getting it up to GA standard. I succeeded in getting about 7 GA's in just a few weeks. Several of us could collaborate on a specific article every two weeks with the aim of getting a start or B class article to GA status which can be done quite easily. I believe the INdian cinema group could set an example for othhers to follow by attempting to win a GA every two weeks for an article on an actor or film. I think we should work on the greats first. Amitabh Bachchan and Rekha. -Hey I fixed some of the images and added a superb shot of them from 1981 - could you imagine the eyes on the kid if they were together!!! What do you think? Whilst we can still all aim at improving stub class Indian cinema articles I think it was also ptovide more focus for the group to work on a given article and collaborate. 22:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I've had something like that happen. Anyway, I check the person before setting any warnings and such so no worries about any mistakes by me. All's clear as can be. MacroDaemon 02:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shahid, yeah, well, these days I'm kinda frustrated. Whenever I venture out to slay the ugly beast that's vandalism, Blofeld, Dreamz, you, Universal Hero or one of the others are so incredibly fast! :) Anywayz, I only just noticed what kind of debate is going on on Preity's article considering her nomination for "featured". I think some of the other editors have a slight tendency towards unpoliteness. If you talk about improvements, kindly point them out, not just mention that somewhere, anywhere, there might be some. I was out to improve some of the stuff on Preity's page, however currently, SandyGeorgia seems to work on it. When she's gone and something's left to do, I'll make my presence felt, so don't you worry. Wish that User:Zora was here, though. I really appreciate your hard work. Ever thought of becoming admin? Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 01:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes Featured article candidates tend to attract unpolite users who think it is a playground for attacks and to try to prevent it- it is a nasty business admin and FA stuff -this Plum is why I avoid adminship and the "government regime" on wikipedia. I would rather work at the book so to speak rather than pussyfooting around other users who I haven't got the time of day for.

Hello, Shahid,

I thought about applying for an admin, but I think I'll first try to get ~5000 to 6000 mainspace edits (they are kinda picky about that) and I still have much to learn. Most recent example: What do you do when you think an User's mainpage is unacceptable? That kind of stuff. Yet, I think you could do it, too, maybe,. I'm extremely impressed with your argumentation over at Preity Zinta's discussion for "featured" (I'm currently catching up with everything) - *and*, compared to me, you have the major advantage of being an native speaker. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 01:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shahid,

thanks, but - I just have a very good dictionary: [1] ;) I see you're Jewish. I didn't know there is a Jewish community in India - and maybe, I don't get it, but if English isn't your native tongue, it's Hindi? Life in Germany is good - today, I met a group of Indians in the train and they were speaking Telugu (I think). I wasn't able to understand a single word, but the language itself has such a nice, well, ring to it and it's really nice just to listen to it. Anyway, since I'm living in Southern Germany, the weather is quite nice, compared to the cold, wet Northern regions. If you have left India in 2006, where are you currently living? Do you like it there? And how's the weather? ;) Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 02:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shahid,

wow, you're living in Australia! Lots of spiders, or so I've heard. My cousin is currently there with her family. I really understand that you miss your homeland - Australia must be very different. I get homesick quite easily, too. And having lived in Mumbai and Kolkatta - I heard and read so much about these two cities; must've been really hard. I'm trying to learn Hindi, but I still cannot read it, however: "Teera Bharat Mahaan". :) I hope my grammar and everything are correct.

I'm wondering: considering you living in Australia, do you like Salaam | Namaste or do you hate it? ;) And did you see Shahrukh Khan when he was filming for "Chak De! India"?

In Germany, as you can imagine, Israel and Jewish culture and religion are a very big issue considering what happend about sixty years ago. Whenever a German head of state or a minister visits Israel or a Jewish community, the newspapers and the media are full of it and everyone hopes that the German representative will do a good job.

Anyway, I have to go to bed now. It's almost four o'clock (in the night!) and I have to get up early, tomorrow. I wish you a great day and best wishes and regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 02:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shahid, first of all: lots of Indian Southern actors have really "interesting" filmography. Ajith Kumar's filmography is the next I'll do. About the manual of style: You're right. It says:

• from oldest to newest. Chiranjeevi's is the other way.
• Title (year), role - notes Check. Yep, should do.

Besides that, it looks okay to me. What do you think? Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 02:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blood82Addition to 6columnist quote

You have been blocked for 24 hours for a violation of the 3RR.

I'm so offended... I definitely think to leave Wikipedia. But I would also like to replace references. Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree FA's are a nasty business and at times you indeed question whether it is worth it -this is why I try to avoid councils whether it is adminship or debates. Remember that anybody visiting the article in general is likely to be impressed by a detailed well written article on an INdian actress and think it is an excellent component of the encylcopedia. You should remain proud of how it has developed and remember that we are winning 20-3. You seem to forget this. All the "major problems" identified are trivial whether it is an extra comma, or reference or word here and there and can be corrected very easily even in seconds. I guarantee the article now doesn't need a major copy edit but perhaps one or two minor changes which the fussy ones can adjust if they want to. I mean somebody cited the link to Zinta's college as a flaw - why coulnd't they just have added (Delhi) -two seconds it would have taken but some appear to delibrately antagonize people and mention this as a reason to "strongly" oppose. Now quite frankly I've had enough of Zinta and the FA for the time being -for today anyway-I've asked anybody who opposes to help fix what they see is a problem and I'll check it again tomorrow. Also if you are citing websites with seemingly funny names like Santabanta (yes that was uncivil to say it was a joke) I'd recommend stating the writer and Times of India. Good luck with the referencing and try to remember that 20 people support this which is often greater than many FA nominations particularly at an early stage

What? I'm blocked Blofeld. Shahid • ^Talk2me 11:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I see "You have been blocked for 24 hours for a violation of the 3RR". User:Spartaz Humbug. i could ask for you to be unblocked but you'll probably have to wait. I can't see that you did anything that justified blocking you - you should have received a warning first. It is very difficult to keep calm when people are strongly opposing and seeming to gang up on issues which are clearly not a major problem. I'll ask

Yes he will ruin all of our pages if we don't take care of it. They were to coming against me. Each of them made 2 edits so I couldn't help but revert. It's unfair. boxofficeindia is used in

Lage Raho Munnabhai, an FA. So how can it be unreliable when it is actually used in a page which was featured in "Today's featured article". Bollivista.com is also used there. They other user who opposed intendt to remove Planet Bollywood, when it is actually one of the most active review articles for Indian films on the net, apart from indiaFM.com. They just decide that it is unreliable just for their own will just becayuse they think so. Apunkachoice is also reliable. I easily can remove this SantaBanta and bollyspice.com but there are limits to everything. It's not fair. Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I came here following to see about a request to unblock you on my Talk by Sir B. I'm very disappointed by what I find. Your attitude seems to be that you were justifed in edit warring because two other editors disagreed with you. That's not very encouraging and I also see no evidence of contrition or assurances that you will not going out and do it again. I'm not going to unblock. A warning on the 3RR is not required for an experienced editor and your performance at FAC this morning was far from edifying and had I seen that before I blocked you I may well have added some extra for that. If you want to be unblocked try the {{unblock|your reason here}} template but I'm not going to do it after this.

Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

We had a big deal of a problem on the

Lage Raho Munnabhai. So I strongly feel he is biased. He judges every reference's status per its name, if it sounds to be good or not. After having this tiff with him, he wikistalked

me to the Preity Zinta article, which is, as you know, an FAC. He added his drastic comment (and both of us know why the comment is so drastic (strongest possible oppose)) with the reason to it being clear and far not only non-Rs. In fact most of the references are reliable, but some racists and POV pushers think they are not because the word Bollywood is there, and therefore, makes it an unreliable site.

I don't regret doing anything I've done. I protected my, and other users', hard work and even discussed it on the article and asked the same questions regarding the

WP:RS issues as I asked you on the article talk page, but I received no normal and direct response. I think these things must be factual. I don't want to be unblocked. Thanks, Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Whoa, what happened here? Am I reading correctly that Shahid was blocked because of restoring comments that were deleted from the FAC? Or is there something else? I haven't checked the FAC yet. Shahid, I was just coming here to reply to an earlier query on my talk page, when I saw this mess. What I came here to say was that I realized that one of my earlier responses to you was not clear; yes, as you edit to correct my inline comments on the article, please feel free to remove my inline comments. I only leave them there as a note of things that should be clarified, and it's OK to remove them as you address them. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to point out a few things here again, some of which were already raised by Shahid earlier -

• User:Sarvagnya threw out weeks (months?) of work by several editors to reference article
  Shahrukh Khan
  . Without any prior justification or at the very minimum, some sort of dialogue on the talk page, such drastic cuts seem to be a very aggressive.
• Same user also removed a table of awards from the same article, saying it was redundant. An identical table (in terms of content, colour, and formatting) can found on the featured article
  Jolie
  . So the question is, is said user making zir own rules?
• Same user also attacked Amitabh Bachchan's page soon after. If you intend to launch a campaign against poor sources, start with one article, finish work with that and using that as a precedent you can make some progress elsewhere. But just going after any article you can find to throw out its sources... is that correct?
• Lets say that the user is doing the right thing by trying to throw out these refs and replacing them with {{fact}} tags. Apparently the user hasn't seen the same sites being used as refs in the featured article
  Lage Raho Munnabhai
  . Perhaps it might be better for said user to read up a bit before starting edit wars?

Now from whatever little bit I understand, Shahid tried to protect the articles that he, alongwith several other editors, have worked on for so many days. To me, it seems understandable that he reacted the way he did to the articles being chopped up. Taking the above four points into consideration, and seeing that User:Sarvagnya did not even try to talk to User:Shshshsh on his talk page or have a decent dialogue on any article talk page, I think its wrong whats happening to Shshshsh here.

xC | ☎ 17:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks xC, I really appreciate you for your help. It's more important than any other problem for me. I'm actually not upset. I was defending pages I've worked on. Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're always welcome. I've tried to address some more concerns of editors. Two more lists came up on FAC. I'd like to continue with this right now, but I'm exhausted and gotta catch some sleep now. Hang in there and don't let them get to you,xC | ☎ 22:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words and the help on Zinta's article. I used my sister's computer and changed some things under her IP address.

• I restored some things which were removed, and are very important to the article. Blofeld and myself have worked very hard on it, especially on the early life section.
• In the lead, I strongly disagree with Gnenapati's words. He says POV POV, but there are actually references for everything.
• The lead is here to summarize the whole article. Not everything which is written there must be referenced because it is acrually very well referenced in the artcle itself and in the body text.
• We can change demonstrate ---> show or whatever but not more that that. It was actually accepted by all the users except for the above mentioned user.
• Apart from that, the fact that she is a humanitarian is featured in the section "Humanitarian work". That's why it appears in the lead, to mention that.
• For the claim in the lead that was removed by another user saying that it needs a more reliable source, I've added an article from TOI.
• I have removed MANY unreliable sources and provided reliable ones. *I've addressed some of the comments of the FAC, but didn't add the so awaited  Done.
• Well I have much more to do so I will make it once my account is unblocked.

• I will create the page for Taran Adarsh.
• I'm really grateful to you for dedicating time to it. Thank you, best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 04:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you used your sister's PC to edit Wikipedia as an anon ip while your block was extant. This is an unacceptable violation and your block has been reset to 72 hours from this point. I am willing to reduce the length and/or commute the block but before I do this I need you to confirm that you will behave yourself from this point forward.

Please forgive me. I have never violated Wikipedia, I have never vandalized. I didn't know that this is not permitted. If I had known this, I wouldn't have written that here. I was honest enough to say that, and it is the proof that I wasn't aware of this. I wanted to improve the article. Please unblock me or commute the block. I have much to do here on Wikipedia. And I promise to behave well, I didn't know about that, and regarding this violation I haven't received any warning. It is not fair. Please help. Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I have unblocked.

Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Shshshsh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Please forgive me. I have never violated Wikipedia, I have never vandalized. Many users here commented that my initial block was unfair and even turned to the administrator who blocked me and asked him to unblock me. I couldn't edit, that's why I used my sister's computer. I didn't know that this is not permitted. If I had known this, I wouldn't have written that here and admitted it at all. I was honest and innocent enough to mention that on my talk page, and it is the proof that I wasn't aware of this being not permitted. I wanted to improve the article. I have never vandalized pages, and used another PC for the first time just to improve. I have never, really never edited with my IP address even to edit pages. This is my first mistake, so how can you be so unfair? Please unblock me. I have much to do here on Wikipedia. My watchlist indicates a load of vandalism which needs to be reverted. And I promise to behave well, and never violate the WP:3RR rule, and no other rules of course. I didn't know about that, and regarding this violation I haven't received any warning. It is not fair. Thet's just so insulting to be convicted after so much of work here, for only one mistake which was pulled by another one which is a misunderstanding. Best regards

Decline reason:

From the tone of your request, I assumed you had been indefinitely blocked. You have not; your block has merely been extended 72 hours. You have learned, if you didn't previously know, that you are not permitted to edit when you are blocked, and Wikipedia will still be here for you when your block expires. Relax. Use the time to cool off a little. Read a book, watch a movie, spend time with your family, and you will be welcome to make positive contributions when your block expires. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Blofeld, Xcentaur, Hero, Rahul or whoever sees that. If you see that, please inform some active administrator of this. Please do something. I was improving the article and look what I get in demand. That's a shame, how can Wikipedia be so unfair towards me? It's so insulting. Please inform someone. Regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhhhh - a perfect example of a sticky situation made ten times worse. Shahid it was only a 24 hour block and you only had a few hours to go. Ahh -you know that if you are under a block you are watched like a hawk for any possible avoidance of it. Now its been expanded to 72 hours. I can't fight your cause in this but I feel the siutation has been blown out of proportion unnecessarily. A nasty situation. Just take the time to browse wikipedia and take a breather.

Please Blofeld inform User:Yamla or someone else maybe User:Utcursch please. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If nobody helps me, I'll just leave this project forever. I won't tolerate such an attitude towards me. I haven't done nothing which is terrible or unforgivable. It is just unfair. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid the situation has become blown way out of proportion I agree but you have to understand that there are always strict rules over blocking and if you appear to have violated any temporary ban they will crack down on you hard as they feel their efforts at control are being thwarted. I don' think its right that you have been blocked for 72 hours like a vandal partiularly as you have done much good and were attempting to improve it but surely you could have waited another 6-8 hours to be unblocked? If apparently it was you who used your sisters' computer I certainly wouldn't have spoken to anyone!!! Man. Look I've asked Yamla and Riana for their views but I don't know if anybody can do anything. But you must admit you do appear come up with threats when facing difficulty which is understandable such as "leaving wikipedia for good if you aren't unblocked" but often they are not received very well. —Preceding

I'm not threating anybody. Wikipedia won't be closed if I leave. That's just a personal view of mine. I'm dissapointed. I was one of those who've created articles, warned anons, reverted vandalism, and now I'm blocked because of a little misunderstanding. I don't find it logical or respectful, this kind of attitude that administrators give to Wikipedia's users who have always been helping and even were blocked for it, is ugly to me. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid everybody is grateful for the work you have put into wikipedia and even blocking vandlaism yourself- even if most people don't show it. The admin who blocked you also are not disputing your excellent contributions to Indian cinema on wikipedia. What wikipedia has a strong policy on is when people appear to be threatening others or using a heated tone which they see as disruptive, which in this case I believe has been misinterpreted -I felt your intial reaction was within accpetability and that they didn't see both sides -. Now I don't see anything wrong with what happened initially but I strongly recommend you try to contain yourself in a difficult situation it doesn't help adminstrators change. If they see you are calm and that it has blown over they will be more likely to accept you back in as soon as possible.

Hello. I really have to request you to stop edit warring with those sources. Sources for Bollywood articles are really easy to find and you dont have to use non-rs sources like you do now. And yes, all those sources you use are non-RS until and unless you can prove them to be otherwise. The only way to prove that a source is RS is to show that the ones behind the source are acknowledged(not self-styled) experts in the field. If you can establish that, there wouldnt be any problem with your sources. But the onus is on you to do that. Thanks. Sarvagnya 19:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, you and blofeld need to recognize that I am not doing this out of spite. I had edited Shahrukh Khan in the past, so it showed up on my watchlist coupled of days back. I went there and saw that all the non-RS sources I had removed some weeks back had been brought back. Then I checked a couple of other bollywood articles and saw that the same sources were being used all over the place. I went to

WT:INB to leave a message to the community about this. There I saw that Zinta was in FAC. From there I came to Zinta and was shocked that an article with so many non-RS sources could be in FAC. Between all this you had started edit warring with me and got blocked soon after. Blofeld thought I was stalking you when I landed on Zinta... infact, I was led to Zinta by Blofeld's own post on WT:INB. Sarvagnya 20:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

You guys have repeated for the n^th time now that boxofficeindia is "official". What do you mean by "Official"? Who made it "official"? Who runs it? Is it run by the official body that governs Bollywood or is it run by amateurs? And when did i say rediff was non-RS. I personally dont like Rediff all the time, but I am not going to make a case that it is non-RS. prietyzinta.com, bollyspice, boxofficeindia etc., are nothing more than fansites and hence non-RS. Sarvagnya 20:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the website sources can be replaced immediately by ones which are seen as more reliable this should be OK -I also don't want to source articles from fansites either. Howver what I don't want to see is anybody's hard work removed or an edit war without a rationalized discussion. At present I admit I am concerned by the dead link on the home page of the box office site. Surely there must be other online sources which adequately confirm accuracy in articles? What about Times of India etc? If somebody could find out about the box office india or at least find out who the publisher I feel conflict can be avoided easily

• FWIW I had a shufti at the site. I can't find any about on the website and that is the first place I look for evidence of what kind of fact checking and reliability a site has. The main page makes no mention of it being offical anything. It does say that information comes from trade publications and distributor declarations but there are no links anywhere to the source material. I spent a lot of time at WT:RS in the past and I'd be very concerned to use this source without more information about the background of people behind this. This is as anyonmous as it could possbily be and that worries me if we can't find duplicate sources that reproduce the information. Surely this can't be the only place to find this material?
  Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Hey Shahid, sorry for the late reply. I was really busy these past couple of days. I got your message before but didn't have enough time to respond to it. How come all of a sudden the user is choosing sites that are unreliable. He told me that box office india was unreliable but as I can see now, you've provided the ref. for it being realiable. Good Job!! So now, according to that person, which sites are reliable and un-reliable. According to what I've been reading, sites like indiafm and rediff seem to be reliable. Are there any more? What about the unreliable ones?? Once again consider my apologies for not helping you with this matter before. Regards --Bollywood Dreamz ^Talk 17:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Shahid, although I, too, lost patience a few times :-) It's not a "failure"; it's feedback to help make the article better for the next time. I hope the issues are addressed soon and we'll see Preity back on FAC; I've enjoyed getting to know "the only man in Bollywood", who must be quite a woman. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow I'm quite surprised the nomination ended so suddenly it sometimes last well over a month. I think it was because of the trouble I think. We had a vast majority of 25 supports including from several admin but those few users kind of got a fire burning didn't they and rather than actually help it they would rather make things even worse. The article is an FA in many people's eyes and is a role model for articles on Indian actors- it just amazes me how much people will try to stop something being promoted. Very disappointing from them . The question is, is all the pussy footing about to correct trivialities for these people really worth the stress? Ah well we tried.

Hi Shahid, I know you won't lose your heart over the non-promotion of article. You are a valuable editor and you have certainly proved it. If you are OK, I'll work on the article and remove/reword all blatant POV like sentences and words. We'll work on adding the credible sources later. Fine? Gnanapiti 20:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]