Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Deepika Padukone filmography/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 01:10, 29 June 2015 [1].

Deepika Padukone filmography

[edit]

Deepika Padukone filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After successfully taking Padukone's biography to featured status, I am nominating a fully-sourced and well-written listing of her film and music video appearances. As usual, look forward to lots of constructive comments. Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from FrankBoy CHITCHAT 10:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from FrB.TG
Added.
  • Her only music video appearance (that too before acting) needs to be mentioned.
Added.
Corrected.
I think it's okay, because her main purpose in the film was as the love interest.
It sounds so sexist as we never say that a hero played the love interest of an actress. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A majority of Bollywood films are sexist, sadly. I would have described her by her profession or such, like I did with Piku, but in Bachna Ae Haseeno her role was meant as the love interest and little else. If the purpose of a male actor is simply as the love interest of the actress, then I would put it as such. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Padukone's first film release of 2009, the kung fu" - We are aware that we're talking about films until now.
She might have had a music video release as well, couldn't she?
  • The sentence mentioned above is really long. Consider splitting it.
Split.
  • Ref. 7 has a publishing date.
Added.
  • When you say that the film Cocktail marked a turning point in her career, you do not need to further say that "critics praised her performance".
It could have been a turnaround simply because it earned a ton of money. This wasn't the case.
  • "Among these were two of the highest-grossing Bollywood films — the romantic comedy Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani and the action-comedy Chennai Express — and the tragic romance Goliyon Ki Raasleela Ram-Leela, for which she won the Filmfare Award for Best Actress." - Whoa, so long!
Is this even a valid concern: "Whoa so long!"? Tell me one FLC criteria that says sentences cannot be long! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about the criteria. It will be a little bit tiring to read such a long sentence, therefore I think it needs to be divided into parts. It can be rephrased with s/th like "Among these were ... Ram-Leela. For the last of these, she won a Filmfare..."
Split.
Done.
  • I don't see a need to add three images of her, all taken during the same time.
Not a valid concern.
All of her looks spotted in the list are all same. I don't think there is a need to crowd the list with overuse of images.
Removed the 2013 image, kept the 2010 image. It definitely does not crowd the list.
  • Why two sources for Billu? Ref. 26 should suffice.
Removed.
  • Source 35 says that the song's name is "Dum Maro Dum Mit Jaye Gham", not "Mit Jaye Gham".
Changed.
  • Ref 41. does not cite the name of the director of YJHD.
Added.
  • The spelling of her character (in Chennai Express) in the source is "Meenalochani" while you spell it as "Meenalochini"
Changed.
  • Her character in the film has also a nickname.
So?
What do you mean by "So"? It needs to be added.
  • Are you sure that the language of Finding Fanny was entirely English?
Yes, the source says that as well. The Hindi version was a separate dubbed one.
Changed.
I didn't mean that you change her name to "Piku". You can use this source and add her full name back. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Changed. Thanks for the ref. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

None of your comments warrant an oppose. It's highly unethical to oppose a nomination without providing a reason to. None of your comments are major concerns. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My bad! Wanted to write "Comments". Mistaken. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your comments were definitely helpful, but I was very disappointed that you previously opposed the list without a valid rationale. Over the years, I have seen how common bad-faith opposes and comments are among a large number of Indian editors on Wikipedia, but it still saddens me when it happens. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:25, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakes happen! -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I would like to add it, if a certain editor wouldn't start yelling, "ohh you "hypocrat"... only deepika padukone is praised. priyanaka is bestestest!!!" --Krimuk|90 (talk) 12:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well in that case I have to say that your edits are quite dependable on the user you're talking about. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 22:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:31, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It is not comprehensive because Padukone's other music video appearance is not listed here. Plus, My Choice is not a film but, an online video.—Prashant 13:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can SchroCat, Crisco 1492, Dr. Blofeld or any administrator deal with this bad-faith oppose? This editor did the very same thing on Padukone's biography FLC here. He was then warned to not do this again, but here we go! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 13:55, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, SchroCat I think Prashant should be banned from commenting on Krimuk's noms, you've probably seen their dispute on my talk page in recent weeks. When it becomes personal and one childishly opposes a nom then it's disruptive to the process.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not just from my noms; he needs to understand that he can't do this to any editor just because he doesn't like a particular actress. He can't time and again be let off with a minor warning. This is a recurring distraction. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 13:59, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh god! This list is truly incomplete and its not bad-faith. She had appeared in another musc video Phir Mile Sur Mera Tumhara. That's why I opposed. I was going to remove that oppose once it was done.—Prashant 14:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, Priyanka Chopra was in it as well. I don't see it mentioned in "your" list. If that isn't bad-faith, what is? --Krimuk|90 (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because I just saw the video as someone posted on Twitter. I did not meant to take you down. I'm sorry. I thought you will solve this in a cool manner.—Prashant 14:07, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aww. How convenient. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 14:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was just trying to see how would you react to this. I was going to change that oppose to comment anyway. But, you took it in another way. I am not that bad Krimuk. I know how much you work hard on wikipedia.—Prashant 14:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added the video. Also, the My Choice video is mentioned as a short film in the source provided, so that's that. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 14:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You've both opposed and given a strong support on the same day. That's even worse. "I was just trying to see how would you react to this." . So you're using the FL process to get at editors. There you go, if that's not justification for a full ban from all featured articles/list candidates I don't know what is. You've been told many times to not act like this at FAC/FLC. You're not mature enough to control yourself here. Crisco 1492 might wish to comment here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:57, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If a list is not comprehensive then, I have full right to oppose. It is much what Vensatry did at Dixit flc. He opposed it simply because the tv appearances were missing. The same case was her as this article was not comprehensive. The above summary says "I am nominating a fully-sourced and well-written listing of her film and music video appearances." So, its obvious it was not a true claim. After tyhis my concerns were resolved (thanks to me as I named the video too because of your outburst). I have/had no problem with any list as long as it is what the editor says.—Prashant 16:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You have a right to oppose and strike it out and later support, but "Yes, I was just trying to see how would you react to this" is a blatant admission of abuse of the process.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:14, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please, check before accusing me of something which I dont intend to. That was a reply to Krimuk's comment. I said about the information about that video. My above comment "Because I just saw the video as someone posted on Twitter. I did not meant to take you down. I'm sorry. I thought you will solve this in a cool manner." and his reply "Aww. How convenient".—Prashant 16:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Prashant, you are being an idiot here. My mild oppose at the Madhuri nomination was mainly because of the prose quality (in lede). Nowhere have I commented about the lack of comprehensiveness. In fact, I was trying to indirectly help the nominator as someone was opposing the candidate solely based on the absence of a TV show and a relatively-unknown regional film (citing the 3a criterion). I must say that your comments really don't make any sense and are hardly helpful in any of the nominations here. Initially, you came up with a nonsensical oppose and after a bit of quarrel with Krimuk and Blofeld you switched to a strong support. Making statements like "Yes, I was just trying to see how would you react to this" clearly shows you are using this process to have a go against editors, as Blofeld says. Further, "I am not that bad Krimuk" is nothing but a self-admittance of how much a bad-faith editor you are. It's high time you realize that you need to grow up because this is the nth time that your conduct has been questioned. I won't be too surprised if you get a topic ban in the near future. —Vensatry (ping) 18:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; the table seems relatively short, compared to other filmography lists; why can't this be merged to Deepika Padukone? Seattle (talk) 21:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about the minimal count for these type of lists, but 25+ seems pretty much acceptable. —Vensatry (ping) 21:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the size of the parent article is quite large. This does warrant a separate page for her filmography, which will only increase with time. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 04:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • With my delegate's hat on: I don't see a 3b violation here, both because the main article on the actress is already really big, and because there is no fixed minimum for lists. A 25-film filmography is no less valid than a 50+ film filmography, at least according to the criteria. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Doctor. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 15:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 18:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Overall good work. Some suggestions.
  • For her performance, she won the Filmfare Award for Best Debut and also received....
  • For Love Aaj Kal specify it was a commercial success or some term akin to it to make it clear.
I think overusing the word "success" may not be such a good idea, that's why I provided the gross instead of repeating the term several times in the lead.
  • Padukone had five film releases in 2010.
  • Repeated use of the year xxxx to begin sentences, rephrase it. I don't know much about this actress but am presuming that Cocktail was her first acclaimed role which led to a string of box office hits the following year so something along those lines would suffice.
  • As she won a filmfare actress award for her role in Ram-Leela specify what role she played in the film.
  • Finding Fanny and portrayed... I'm never sure with these but I think a Oxford comma is needed there.
  • This one is personal preference. For the image next to the table, maybe pick one associated with Ram Leela or one of her more well known film roles. Cowlibob (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cowlibob (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cowlibob Thanks for the comments. :) I've left the image beside the table as is, so that there is some time gap between the two pictures in the list. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 14:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from —Vensatry (ping)
Comments from —Vensatry (ping) – Looks good
  • Not sure "box office hit" is encyclopaedic
  • "Among these were two of the highest-grossing Bollywood films" – all-time or just 2013?
  • You could add a line about Kochadaiyaan, not because it was her first non-Bollywood film in long time. The motion capture technology was something new in India and the film was definitely among her high-profile releases. Also, in the table it's worth mentioning what kind of film it was.
  • Date of ref #11 is 11 July and not May. Likewise, for ref #13 it's 13 July 2012 (updated date of course)
  • Refs. #16, #23 and #39 need author

—Vensatry (ping) 16:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vensatry All done. Thanks for the comments. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 14:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Deepika_Padukone_filmography/archive1&oldid=1138479453"