Talk:Kanika Kapoor

Mandatory Quarantine

Was she or was she not made aware of the mandatory quarantine when she entered India during the pandemic? There is no clarity on that , all media information is vague and there are no specific details available .. please add some info in that regard. Leningrad (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect information

Incorrect and unverifiable information is constantly added to this page. The information is being added to misrepresent the person. I added an "early life" section to give more background information but another user keeps changing factual information to put in info that is not verifiable, or relevant to the article. I don't believe the information added meets the guidelines for biographies of living people, as they seem to be trying to slander the person. Pclams (talk) 00:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Citation cleanup

This article was listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting. It's taken me a while to fix the error since the article has been edited so frequently. I have removed unsourced information: the husband's name; the year of the marriage [important, since the birth date is disputed]; the word "divorced" [since the source only says "walk out". None of the three Times of India articles confirm that Anjjan asked Kapoor to sing; one mentions them singing together but does not say how this came about. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kanika Kapoor/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cartoon network freak (talk · contribs) 07:01, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm Cartoon network freak and I'm going to review this soon. Best regards, Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:01, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Lead

• for the Hindi language films → remove "the" as it's overfluous
• Through her successful singing career → Throughout her career (per fancruft)
• always aspired to pursue a career in singing → showed interest in music from a young age
• She has three children and got divorce from Raj in 2012 and relocated to Mumbai to become a singer. → Kapoor has three children and got divorced from Raj in 2012, which led to her relocating in Mumbai to become a singer.
• was for a music video, which became a huge commercial success. → it's not clear what you mean by 'it was for a music video' – did it receive a promoting clip, which became a huge commercial success → which experienced commercial success
• Upon its release, "Baby Doll" went viral and topped the charts and Kapoor received wide critical acclaim for her singing style as well as earned several awards, including the Filmfare Award for Best Female Playback Singer. → Upon its release, the track was similarly acclaimed commercially and by music critics, including it earning the Filmfare Award for Best Female Playback Singer for her.
• Kapoor subsequently earned more success by singing one of the Hindi cinema's top charted songs, including "Lovely" and "Kamlee" for the film Happy New Year (2014), "Chittiyaan Kalaiyaan" for the film Roy (2015), "Desi Look" for the film Ek Paheli Leela (2015), "Nachan Farrate" for the film All Is Well (2015), "Jugni Peeke Tight Hai" for the film Kis Kisko Pyaar Karoon (2015), "Jab Chaye Tera Jadoo" for the film Main Aur Charles (2015), "Neendein Khul Jaati Hain" for the film Hate Story 3 (2015) and "Premika" for the film Dilwale (2015), the later of these rank among one of the highest-grossing Bollywood film. → There's too much fancruft in the leading piece of this, and the enumeration of films verbally doesn't make any sense; please re-word.

Infobox

• Write first music genre with a capital letter
• We need sources for the genres, her labels...

Early and personal life

• brought up → raised up
• Kapoor's family → Her family (to avoid word repetitions)
• under musician → with musician
• Kapoor participated → The singer also participated
• in Lucknow. She then moved → in Lucknow, and subsequently moved
• married to → married
• Set comma after "businessman"
• Kapoor separated → The singer got separated
• two instances of the word "moved" repetitively
• her parents home → her parents' home

Career

• released the music video "Jugni Ji" → released an accompanying music video for "Jugni Ji"
• was the remix version of the Pakistani Sufi song → was a remix version of Pakistani Sufi's
• one of the biggest singles of 2012 → fancruft; it wasn't really that successful
• debut.The → leave required space
• and topped the charts with winning Mirchi Music Award → and was commercially successful, with it winning a Mirchi Music Award
• of the Year" award → Remove "award"
• major success → plural form
• there's too often a word repetition caused by the word "song"; try alternating to "recording", "track", "single" etc.
• The same with "she"; try alternating with "Kapoor", "the singer" etc.
• the female artisans → remove "the"
• and develop → and to develop
• became a huge critical and commercial success → making such statements isn't good for GA status as of fancruft
• collaborated third time → collaborated a third time
• collaborating fourth time → same as above
• arranges and take part → arranges and take's part
• one of them which is with → one of them being

Awards

• Aren't there also nominations for the singer?
• Use a table format for the awards (example here)
• single 'Teddy Bear' → single "Teddy Bear"

Outcome

I'm extremely sorry to fail this, but there are just too many problems with this article. First of all, the text doesn't flow through repeated word repetitions, clipped sentences (She XY. She XY. She XY), and poor grammar (not as often). Additionally, there are sources missing for some statements, including the infobox. Overall, the page is of C status (changed from Start class), but it has a long way to go in order to be promoted to GA. I suggest you to take this to Wikipedia:Guild of copyeditors and let one users correct further issues on the article. If you have any questions during the process, you can ask me whatever you want, but as this article stands now, this is a quick fail. Best regards, Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:28, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Date of birth

Hello. Over the years we have had different dates of birth in this article: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] Additionally, various dates of birth can be found on various websites. So before a date of birth is added once again in the article, we would need to find a solid WP:RS. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 01:06, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

@Yeasayer: Hello. Following your latest edit summary ("Am undoing my edit and will up load more with Documentation, including proper Marriage year etc from UK Court records"), can you please take a look at the following Wikipedia policy: WP:BLPPRIMARY. We (i.e. you, me and all Wikipedia editors) are prohibited from using court records. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 04:51, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kanika Kapoor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150316160729/http://www.927bigfm.com/bsea2014/nomination_list.php to http://www.927bigfm.com/bsea2014/nomination_list.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect Information

I have corrected the information of Kanika Kapoor's birthdate. It was written 23rd March but it is wrong. The real birthdate of Kanika Kapoor is 21st August. When i corrected some people keep changing it again and again. I don't know why people do like this. Kanika replied us in comments on instagram that her birthday is on 21st August and not on 23rd March. Whoever wrote that her birthdate is 23rd March does not know the real date and writes wrong. I hope you all people understand that this is the only real birthdate of Kanika Kapoor. You can ask any of the fanclubs of her on instagram. Afsha Shaikh (talk) 14:48, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kanika Kapoor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121126045624/http://www.media247.co.uk/showbiz/brit-asia-tv-music-awards-2012-the-winners to http://www.media247.co.uk/showbiz/brit-asia-tv-music-awards-2012-the-winners

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

tantrums

@Jaswant Singh4: hello. You removed well sourced content here and here; with edit summary: "Statements can read out in the media website. Not needed here." The content added is not written by media website. They are quotations by director of a well reputed hospital, quoted by reliable source, in an article completely dedicated to these tantrums by Kapoor. There are multiple other reliable sources covering it. Only because something is negative, doesn't mean it should be removed from the article. We have to maintain both sides, and achieve neutrality. Kindly do not remove that particular content without proper discussion with other editors on the talkpage of the article. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran:, Thanks for your concern. Firstly, this coronavirus section doesn't even deserve a separate section in article. It should have been covered under personal life. Let's leave this for later. Talking about the "tantrums", let's assume she is lady who always shows tantrums. So, you think that those "tantrums" need to be published because they are occuring during the disease. Its just a dumb reason. Talking about the statements, do we, at Wikipedia need statements to "prove tantrums". Isn't it an encyclopaedia. Its just the people and media speculation that she may have infected others while all the media reports says that all her acquaintances reported negative. So, there is no meaning of needlessly expanding this section by writing who and who attended the parties and all. Hope you understood. Jaswant Singh4 (talk) 04:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jaswant Singh4: thanks for your reply.

1. Because of her, ex chief minister of a state, a few MPs, and MLAs went in self-quarantine. Further, the President of India had cancel his plans. It has been well covered in reliable sources. If MLAs, MPs, and even the President of India is not important enough for you, i dont know what else is. With that logic, we can trim down wikipedia by 50%.
2. Talking about the tantrums, it has nothing to do with disease. We (you, me, and all the wikipedia editors), have nothing to "prove". We simply add the facts from reliable secondary sources. Multiple reliable sources have published article solely covering the tantrums. Thats why it can be added in the article.
   1. Yes, lets assume that she is a lady who always throws tantrums. If you can provide few different reliable sources for that, we can add that information in the article as well
3. The article, or me, is not speculating she infected anybody else. But people went in self quarantine, and I added that in the article. Vasundhara Raje's twit clearly states she went in self quarantine because she met Kapoor. Later, secondary relaible sources report the same with reference to Raje's twit. The article is not speculating anything.
4. None of the media reports are saying "all her acquaintances" tested negative. Last time I checked, the number was ~60 out of ~300. The authorities are still tracking the people she came in contact with. All of them getting tested, and getting the result, is nothing but sheer speculation from your side.

Hope you understood. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: I can agree with you on 1,3 and 4 point but not on the 3rd one. "Multiple reliable sources have published this, so this can be added to Wikipedia". Acc. to your theory, I am adding to this article that "she loves her children very much" and "she was manhandled at one of her concerts". Don't be tense about sources, I have great list of reliable sources to prove these points. By the way, you yourself have accepted that the "tantrums have nothing to do with this disease". Then, why such a "deep analysis of tantrums supported by statements" is present in CORONAVIRUS section. It should be eliminated in the first place itself. Hope you agreed. Jaswant Singh4 (talk) 09:31, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jaswant Singh4: yes, I agree on the inclusion of the stuff you suggested, and I still disagree about removal of tantrums. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)