Talk:Karan Johar/Archive 1

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

Major revision

I removed some nasty vandalism and then, while I was at it, revised the article. I removed a huge chunk of writing about his directorial style that was pure personal opinion. I also removed a lot of the trivia. Long lists of people with whom he has worked don't belong here. Nor do comments about his being willing to give newcomers a chance. Sez who? Zora 07:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Numerology fixation with "K" dropped!

i would like to add about his numerology fixation with "K" and his recent announcement to now leave the whole "K" thing and move on

Source : [1]

!eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Is this the same man?

KaranJohar

probably, who knows? Did you upload it?

I uploaded it, but for some reason, it was kicked by a previous editor. It's a free image, so until we have a better one, we could include it. --Plumcouch Talk2Me 12:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Signature

Do we really need a signature? Is this notable? LOTRrules (talk) 15:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing.

Where does it say that one of Wikipedia's 3 most important policies, Wikipedia:Verifiability, does not apply to an article's introduction? Where is this stated in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons? -- Jeandré, 2008-11-15t21:31z

Please stop this obsession with tagging this article. The lead should not be sourced, unless it contains exceptional claims which are likely to be challenged. The lead summarises the entire article, and if the text in the body is sourced, and the lead summarises it properly - there is no problem. Read WP:LEAD. Secondly, WP:V says, "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a ... source". Now what would you like to see sourced and what would you challenge? That he is a filmmaker? That he is the son of Yash Johar? These are not exceptional claims by any means, it cannot be challenged, because in this very fact lies his notability. In addition to that, it is mentioned in almost all--if not all--the sources.
There is an IMDb link, the biggest movie database on the planet, the list of which constitutes its "hard data". See different FAs - any - there shouldn't be a link in this very section.
The history of this page shows in many revisions your insistence to tag this article with no reason. Next time you do it, I'll request a third opinion. Shahid • Talk2me 23:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I've been trying to get this article up to code because the Wikimedia foundation received a complaint (a challenge) via OTRS in 2007 about this article. I've been trying specifically to get all information sourced to reliable, published, third party sources.
Recent challenges: [2] and [3].
wp:lead states "The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic according to reliable, published sources. [...] always pay scrupulous attention to reliable sources [...] aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material [...] there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads."
The first FA listed under "Culture and society" is Aggie Bonfire which has 2 refs for the first sentence, and another ref for the next 2 sentences.
Feel free to request a 3rd opinion - sourcing as required by wp:v and wp:blp is a fundamental requirement of Wikipedia articles. -- Jeandré, 2008-11-16t17:48z
FA Preity Zinta has 8 refs in the lead. -- Jeandré, 2008-11-17t11:59z
Laughable. You cannot challenge something that is not likely to and cannot be challenged whatsoever. "The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic according to reliable, published sources." - nobody said these sources must come in the very lead itself. More so when they are sourced properly in the article body. Please see today's featured article, Phan Xich Long -- there is not even one single reference in the lead. Would you now go and tag it? Would you? Both you and I know that you wouldn't do it. Just like you won't go and tag filmographies of actor and filmmakers FAs, despite the fact that all of them are unsourced.
In conclusion, what you did in the above message is a clear attempt of wikilawyering and violation of WP:GAME. Tagging articles without prior discussion can be easily considered abuse of their use, and therefore vandalism.
The next time you add a tag on any page without a reason, I'll request admin help. Shahid • Talk2me 20:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
The filmography doesn't have any inline cites and differs from his IMDB entry. Under actor the article has Salaam-e-Ishq and Main Hoon Na, but IMDb doesn't. -- Jeandré, 2008-11-17t11:59z
What's the problem then? Be bold and remove these titles instead of tagging it inappropriately. Shahid • Talk2me 12:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Karan Johar/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
This is a very promising article. The content that is already here is of a very high quality. However, there is a lot of room for improvements. What I found particularly lacking in this article, and what could be improved are:
  1. Lack of references, except for a handful of them. More are needed.
  2. The Career section haphazardly lists all his roles (Director, Actor, Designer, Talk Show Host, Judge etc). The section should be broken into subsections, with each talking about a particular. I do not think breaking on basis of timeline would be a good idea for this article.
  3. A Trivia section sounds fan site-ish. The info in that section should be somehow merged into the content of the article.
  4. More detailed prose should be provided about his work. It should also focus a bit more on the market reception, critical recepion and nox-office reception of his films. A separate section for Critic's Response (or Critical Response) may be added.
  5. If possible, a Personal Life section be created (fully attributed, no rumors).
  6. A source for Khan (the movie, should be provided).
  7. Phrases like big hit should be backed by a ref and if possible a sales figure.
Wish the article all the best. --soumসৌমোyasch 09:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 09:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 15:10, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Karan_Johar/Archive_1&oldid=1136866328"