Jump to content

Talk:Sanjay Dutt/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

November 2007

Why are there no pictures of him? Rm999 07:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

It's probably difficult to find pictures which are definitely clear of copyright restrictions. Dieresis (talk) 10:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

This is a little odd

so I am moving it to the discussion page.

My fans can contact me on toll free satelite number +92-3222-539606

Carptrash (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Category:Indian prisoners and detainees & Category:Prisoners and detainees of India

Now that he's free are these categories still appropriate? —SpaceFlight89 08:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Alas, poor man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.3.249 (talk) 04:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Is Sanjay dutt muslim (his mother is muslim)?

Is Sanjay dutt muslim (his mother is muslim)?

Humanbyrace (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC) mera dua hai k ssnjay dutt bolim ho jay i lover sannjay dutt pls cont me 

sanjay babu khanbaba9555@yahoo.com  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.165.166.10 (talk) 11:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

His Father was Sikh and Mother was Muslim. Generally these days you would consider him both Hindu and Muslim but he is from an older generation and so maybe this needs some clarification, whether he is Muslim/Sikh or both. Further India is a patrilineal society. He is listed as Indian Hindu which is incorrect and should be changed to Indian Sikh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.49.251.113 (talk) 16:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC) Sorry about leaving unsigned 75.49.251.113 (talk) 16:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

He’s a practicing Hindu. His father was a Punjabi Hindu and his mother was originally Muslim but converted to Hinduism upon marriage. ItsSugmaDique (talk) 18:39, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@ItsSugmaDique: Per what published reliable sources? —C.Fred (talk) 22:21, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

https://www.dnaindia.com/bollywood/report-did-you-know-sanjay-dutt-s-grandfather-had-to-change-religion-to-marry-nargis-dutt-s-mom-jaddan-bai-2631007/amp

https://m.photos.timesofindia.com/celebs/celeb-themes/love-sees-no-religion/Sanjay-Dutt-Manyata/amp_articleshow/20661242.cms

Well, I mean it’s just common knowledge among fans so there’s nothing really solid, but you can check the links above. 

ItsSugmaDique (talk) 02:07, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

To Do list

This article needs expansion in the following areas:

  • Lead
  • Film Career - Performance of his films over last few years, his performance in the films, acclaims (if any)
  • Article to be have more of his Film career than his Political stint.--Msrag (talk) 04:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

File:SANJAY DUTT.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:SANJAY DUTT.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:SANJAY DUTT.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:32, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Attempts to make this into an attack page?

The edit-warring over what I feel are grossly undue materials into the first paragraph, and additions of unsourced defamatory material, suggests that there's a great deal of push here to make this into an attack page. I think we should go over the entire page checking that what we already have here isn't undue or otherwise biased. --Ronz (talk) 16:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

In general, the sources don't seem to be as bad as I expected, though definitely sensationalist, which has spilled over into the article. --Ronz (talk) 17:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Tensions are hot in the air these days, edit-warring is finna be a commonality in the near future, brother. ItsSugmaDique (talk) 02:10, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Sources for recent additions on film career?

[1] provides no new sources. Are we supposed to assume that the info is in current sources? --Ronz (talk) 17:51, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sanjay Dutt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:10, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Sanjay Dutt. 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:

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) 02:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Conviction

He has been convicted ,sentenced and served his sentence for 5 years with no further appeal pending and this is sourced clearly with WP:RS and is very crucial to this biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.65.13.70 (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

What is your point ? The article covers this issue. - FlightTime (open channel) 13:40, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
The point appears to be that certain editor(s) want to give it higher prominence [2] [3], which to me seems undue, if not an outright WP:BLP violation. --Ronz (talk) 15:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Looks that way. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:04, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
He was convicted as part of the Mumbai bomb blasts case and this needs to be mentioned in the lead and it sourced with BBC News.There is no BLP violation for convicted crimes when it is sourced in reliable sources.182.65.81.214 (talk) 15:07, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
and this needs to be mentioned in the lead Sorry, but asserting what you personally want is not the way to obtain consensus. Edit-warring over such material could get you blocked though. --Ronz (talk) 15:15, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
there is no personal assertion the subject was convicted under the Arms Act, 1959 the lead needs to be clear and his trial was part of Mumbai bomb blast trial h was accused A-117 .He was charged under both TADA and Arms Act and convicted in only one.

Dutt was convicted in 2006 of buying weapons from bombers who attacked Mumbai as per BBC. BBC NEWS Sanjay Dutt was arrested under TADA and the Arms Act for his role in 1993 Mumbai serial blasts. as per Hindustan Times.

It doesn't seem like you understand the problems. Please stop edit-warring and attempt to understand. --Ronz (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add the corrections

His mother died in 1981, shortly before his debut film's premiere; her death has been cited as the cause of his drug addictions.[4]

Nargisji died of cancer and not because of Sanjay's drug addictions. Plus there is no connection of cancer and Sanjay being drug addict back then. 

Shriyadixit (talk) 21:45, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

"Dutt was wrongly arrested"?

Regarding the edit-warring, where's the source? We need to know who's point of view this is, if it is proper to present it in Wikipedia's voice, and if it deserves mention in the lede. --Ronz (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

if he wasn't wrongly arrested then why did he get acquitted? he did get wrongly arrested in TADASheldonlove12 (talk) 07:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
To avoid BLP and WP:SYN problems, we need references, not speculation from editors. --Ronz (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

it is well sourced actually110.145.188.158 (talk) 06:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

New Images and more content needs to be added

this person has been working for more than 37 years, and internet has so many sources and images of him, this wikipedia page needs to get updated and have more information? just like most of his contemporaries, otherwise it is is just biased editingSheldonlove12 (talk) 02:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for starting a discussion.
An image of him in sunglasses is not an improvement. Please review Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images.
WP:BLP requires high-quality sources and more. Please review BLP carefully and note that the burden of creating consensus rests on those seeking to add disputed material. --Ronz (talk) 03:36, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I agree more pics and info is needed, like other celebs, like for instance look at anil Kapoor's page110.145.188.158 (talk) 06:33, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
thanks for agreeing with me! And as for proper sources and pics? wikipedia takes most of its bollywood photos from bollywoodhungama, and reviews and its quotes are mentioned in various articles, rediff is a well-established site, i don't see the problem?Sheldonlove12 (talk) 07:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I do not see why information regarding his work cannot be added on the page, he has done over 180 films, and some info on the movies should be added, why special treatment for his page? every celeb has stuff written about their work, cut their pages in half if that's not what is supposed to be on their page? his movie gumraah is very much relevant, the box office is relevant too, I don't see why well-sourced and relevant info should not be added?110.145.188.158 (talk) 06:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing up specific content for discussion: Gumrah is still mentioned, and the filmibeat reference is extremely poor and promotional. --Ronz (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

promotional in what sense? khal nayak was a big hit and it is a fact, i am sorry if you do not even have information on the person you are edit warring forSheldonlove12 (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2018 (UTC) ohh and mind you that claim has been backed up with a legit box office india website, how is that promotional? does he own that website? or any other websites used?Sheldonlove12 (talk) 17:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

It's a poor and promotional source. If you disagree, the onus is on you to demonstrate otherwise.
The ref is a basic publicity piece for the same biopic that keeps getting added to the lede.
Again, these edits look like promotion for films rather encyclopedia information about the person. --Ronz (talk) 21:17, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
box office india is not a promotional piece, it is a database for the box office of indian films? do you realise that or not? the fact a biopic is made on him shows this guy is actually a big deal, he doesn't need promotional pieces to publicises his long career, in that case even I can remove all the "demoting" pieces on this page, and call it rubbish110.145.188.158 (talk) 22:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Ignoring what I've written, the poor source that I identified, the promotional content that I've identified, and the policies that apply will just get you blocked. --Ronz (talk) 01:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

You are ignoring what I am writing, box office is a fact, and box office india links are not "promotional" so quit being biased.110.145.188.158 (talk) 01:36, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

If you want to try to only add references that no one has yet disputed, then only restore those. --Ronz (talk) 01:45, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

first of all big thanks anon who is helping me, second of all, i will remove the "promotional sources" the argument is thin, but whatever, one needs to work together rather than edit warringSheldonlove12 (talk) 02:21, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Let's see how it goes. --Ronz (talk) 02:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for understandingSheldonlove12 (talk) 02:36, 9 August 2018 (UTC) why has the reference to his biopic been removed?110.145.188.158 (talk) 04:08, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Birth place

Sheldonlove12, upon looking more carefully I see that the material is indeed referenced in the main body of the text, so my revert was incorrect; thanks for fixing that.

Is there a reference for the subject's birth place and date, though? I can't find one either in the infobox or elsewhere in the article. Wham2001 (talk) 11:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

this is one reference https://www.indiatoday.in/sanjay-duttSheldonlove12 (talk) 14:45, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Mumbai, the Bai. ItsSugmaDique (talk) 02:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Conviction info in lede

Clearly sourced with BBC News ,CNN and Hindustan Times .Clearly mentions why he was jailed very crucial to this article.

Dutt was arrested under the TADA in April 1993 and was convicted for Violation of Arms Act for possession of illegal weapons procured from other accused in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case ,he was released on 25 February 2016 after serving his sentence.[1][2][3]2402:3A80:453:DDEC:2DF7:EA15:96EA:B2C5 (talk) 16:28, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Lead is wrong he was convicted under the Arms Act, 1959 this needs to mentioned and further clarify why he was arrested precisely. April 19, 1993 – Sanjay Dutt was arrested under TADA and the Arms Act for his role in 1993 Mumbai serial blasts.Arms act does need to be mentioned.2402:3A80:453:DDEC:2DF7:EA15:96EA:B2C5 (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)


See Talk:Sanjay_Dutt#Conviction and the other, related discussions here on the talk page, as well as the edit-summaries given when the content was removed.

You're going to be blocked for ignoring the problems with the content you've been edit-warring over. Please stop edit-warring and make some attempt to show you want to understand the concerns, which are issues of the material being undue and inappropriate in the lede. --Ronz (talk) 17:05, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

I am not edit warring sorry if it appeared like that but the discussion above was only adding it to the Infobox above not about the lead statement.Please see the references it is 100 % sourced .Further it is only you now .2402:3A80:453:DDEC:2DF7:EA15:96EA:B2C5 (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm waiting for you to be blocked, to be locked out from editing the article, or to attempt at working in good faith with others. Looks like you don't want to try the latter, so don't expect further comments from me. --Ronz (talk) 17:35, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Needs to be mentioned for what he was convicted in the lead.Now 2 editors oppose this and 2 support it.But it clearly sourced in reliable sources.2402:3A80:444:14B0:4446:7610:3C8:2AFE (talk) 02:25, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
2402:3A80:444:14B0:4446:7610:3C8:2AFE, the issue is not whether his imprisonment under the arms act is sourced (it is, and it is mentioned in the body of the article), but whether it's appropriate to go into so much detail in the lead section of the article. A relevant policy section is WP:PROPORTION, part of WP:NPOV; you should read it if you haven't done so already. My view, and I believe that of those reverting you, is that he was convicted of illegal possession of weapons adequately describes the reasons for which he was imprisoned, and that going into more detail about the exact Act that he was convicted under would lend the topic undue weight. If you want more text to be added to the lead you're going to have to persuade others that that's not the case. Wham2001 (talk) 07:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  1. ^ "Sanjay Dutt: Bollywood actor sent back to jail for 1993 Mumbai blasts". BBC News. 21 March 2013. Retrieved 27 October 2018.
  2. ^ "From arrest to release: A complete, 23-year-long Sanjay Dutt timeline". Hindustan Times. 25 February 2016. Retrieved 27 October 2018.
  3. ^ "Bollywood star Sanjay Dutt ordered to prison for gun possession". CNN. 22 March 2013. Retrieved 27 October 2018.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sanjay_Dutt/Archive_1&oldid=873656084"