Talk:Padmaavat

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2017

Addition in #Historians: "Indian historian Harbans Mukhia writes in The Indian Express, "Khalji defeated the Rana of Chittor in 1303 and died in 1316. No one by the name of Padmini or Padmavati existed then — or at any time — in flesh and blood resembling the story. She was born in 1540, 224 years after Khalji’s death, in the pages of a book of poetry by Malik Muhammad Jayasi, resident of Jayas in Awadh, a very long way from Chittor. " Reference - [1]. 2.51.21.156 (talk) 11:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

 Partly done With some copy-editing. King Prithviraj II (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2017

Please add the following text to "Release" section:

On 20 November, the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, Shivraj Singh Chouhan, said "The film which distorts facts and disrespects 'Rashta Mata' Padmavati will not be allowed to screen in any part of Madhya Pradesh." Following this, the Chief Minister of Punjab, Amarinder Singh, announced that he would not allow the film to be released in his state. The Chief Minister of Rajasthan, Vasundhara Raje, stated that the film will not be screened in the state until the changes to the storyline suggested by her in a letter to the Information and Broadcasting Minister Smriti Irani are incorporated. 59.88.206.189 (talk) 15:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

References

dsfds sdf sdf dsf

 Not done Do you have any sources that explictly state that this ban was implemented? The Chief Ministers simply saying so in a public rally doesn't make it official, hence it is not appropriate for an encyclopedia like Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. If you have references that state this ban was implemented, feel free to request again. King Prithviraj II (talk) 16:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Where have I written that the ban is "implemented"? The words I used adhere to whatever the sources say: "announced that he would not allow the film to be released", "stated that the film will not be screened in the state". These announcements by the Chief Ministers (not some random politicians), regardless of whether the ban will be brought into effect or not, are noteworthy by themselves. 59.88.206.189 (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

The article has statements by lesser politicians like Raj K. Purohit and Sitaram Yechury but not of CMs of important states holding office? 59.88.206.189 (talk) 16:24, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

You are asking for this to be included in the Release section. The Chief Ministers' statements do not belong in that section. I wouldn't object terribly if you had requested to include this in the Controversy section. Leaving request open for further comments. King Prithviraj II (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done. While these are merely statements, they weren't made by cranks: these government officials have the power to censor the film or prevent its release. I added it to the "Controversies" section's "Withdrawal" subsection (and consequently renamed it "Withdrawals"). If you could both look at my edit here, I'd appreciate it; any changes are fine because I don't think I'm familiar enough with this cultural controversy to do much more than what I've already done. CityOfSilver 16:14, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Your edit was fine and necessary, I initially rejected the request because including the CM's statement in the Release section can lead to the misinterpretation of the text, ie. lead to the inaccurate picture that the film is already banned, like some newspapers report as their headlines (but isn't the case). It is a part of the film's extensive controversies though, so there is no problem with the inclusion in that section. Thanks, King Prithviraj II (talk) 17:49, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2017

Could someone please add "in India" to this sentence, it's the last sentence of the page's introduction. This is how it will look when "in India" is included. Initially scheduled for release on 1 December 2017 in India, the film has been indefinitely postponed following numerous controversies. The reason for this is because the film is still being released in Australia according to Village Cinemas, one of the main cinemas in Australia, it has not been postponed in Australia and I assume in international theatres as well. Promotional banners on Australian websites say it's being released on the 1/12/17 as well. 120.144.142.144 (talk) 22:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello and Welcome to Wikipedia. If you need to improve this page of sounds then please feel free to edit it becuse you or anyone can edit Wikipedia. Please consider to creating an account so the facility will be easier to edit in editing. Thanks HINDWIKI • CHAT 01:56, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@HindWIKI: Thank you for your message but the page is currently protected so I'm unable to edit it. (120.144.142.144 (talk) 02:01, 22 November 2017 (UTC))

 Done HINDWIKI • CHAT 02:08, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that @HindWIKI: (120.144.142.144 (talk) 02:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC))

Semi-protected edit request on 22 November 2017

In Release section, add "Padmavati is slated for release in the United Arab Emirates on 30 November 2017. VOX Cinemas website shows that UAE release date remains same, IBM Times raises concern about piracy. 2.51.21.156 (talk) 15:48, 22 November 2017 (UTC) 2.51.21.156 (talk) 15:48, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

 Already done by HindWIKI. King Prithviraj II (talk) 14:48, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edits

@HindWIKI: I didn't get this edit of yours, can you elaborate the summary? Thanks, King Prithviraj II (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

that edits I was reverted, seemed only on tests and unsourced. Ratan Singh is perfect per changes on Ratan Sen. And thanks for your good work on Wikipedia. HINDWIKI • CHAT 13:37, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

@HindWIKI: You are welcome! What I was actually asking is that some sourced content that was introduced by me (Banerjee's comments, murder associated with Padmavati, etc.) also got reverted along with the unsourced test info. Was this a mistake? King Prithviraj II (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome to improve Wikipedia. But please give reliable sources with any content it casts, and keep in mind the layout of Wikipedia. Thanks HINDWIKI • CHAT 01:03, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok, the content was well-sourced, so this must be something wrong with the layout. Thanks! King Prithviraj II (talk) 07:06, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2017

Please add the following line to the "Withdrawals" subsection:

The Deputy Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Keshav Prasad Maurya, said in a statement that "unless its controversial portions are removed" the film will not be released in the state. 59.95.71.223 (talk) 17:11, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2017

Add the following to "Withdrawals" subsection:

Vijay Rupani, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, announced that the film would not be allowed to be screened in the state as it "hurts the sentiment of Rajput community." The Chief Minister of Bihar, Nitish Kumar, stated that the film will not be released in the state "without amicable solution among all parties involved." 61.2.6.222 (talk) 14:17, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

References

 Done-- HINDWIKI • CHAT 14:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Padmavati is based/inspired ONLY from Padmavat Poem of Malik Muhammad Jayasi, not from others

Since I had been rectifying this thing in past as well, I want to clarify it to all the users here itself.

Lets take some examples:

1. There have been so many uncountable adaptations of epic legends like Ramayan and Mahabharat on television, films, stage dramas etc. None of them inspired one another to continue making strings of similar adaptations. So we don't write on wikipedia page of one notable adaptation that it got inspired from the previous adaptation. And we clearly don't even specify list of previous released adaptations on the page of newly created adaptation.

2. Devdas is also a novel, there have been many non-popular film adaptations of this novel even before and after Sanjay Leela Bhansali made his popular adaptation. So on SLB Devdas wikipedia page, we clearly don't write that all other previous film/television adaptations inspired Bhansali to make his own adaptation of novel right? Because that's idiotic. Same here, why on this page?

Bhansali has clarified that his Padmavati film is adaptation of fictional Padmavat Poem of Malik Muhammad Jayasi ONLY. So please, stop mentioning all the other kinds of film/television adaptations of Padmavat poem on this page because it's so idiotic to claim that "Bhansali possibly got inspired as there have been films before...". Come up with a source/citation in which Bhansali talks about getting just 'inspired' from previous Padmavati films or television documentary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarpSinghh (talk • contribs) 17:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Whether Ramayana or Mahabharata-based serials/Devdas adaptations inspired each other is not our main concern here; sources present here do verify this very film was inspired by many earlier adaptations of the poem, Bhansali has worked on one of these adaptations himself. See WP:Other stuff exists.

"Bhansali has clarified that his Padmavati film is adaptation of fictional Padmavat Poem of Malik Muhammad Jayasi ONLY" Source including the "only"? Also, Wikipedia prefers secondary sources to primary sources. Most of the above essay (if it can be called that) is simply WP:IDONTLIKEIT. King Prithviraj II (talk) 13:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

BTW, found Bhansali talking about inspirations which rebukes your claim of "ONLY." Also pinging @Maestro2016: Who introduced other inspirations in this edit and will be able to answer your queries better. I initially added the Tamil film as a source of inspiration using this as a source. Thanks, -- King Prithviraj II (talk) 14:38, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 7 December 2017

Rectifying disambiguation from Kapil Sharma to Kapil Sharma (comedian) as requested in the dab correction list. MT Train^Discuss 16:17, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

 Done utcursch | talk 16:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Trim controversy section

The controversy section is too long. Listed names in reaction section is not needed. Wikipedia is not newspaper. In withdrawal and threat sections, there are several long quotes with little value and should be summarized/removed. Too much detail about each and every threat by Karani Sena is given which is unnecessary. Pre-screening reviews are not much important. Please trim the whole section.--Nizil (talk) 05:50, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello @Nizil Shah: the page Padmavati film controversy is already created and redirected to the main page Padmavati (film). I suggest you that we can move Controversy' section' content in the page Padmavati film controversy. -- HindWiki^Connect 08:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Nothing should be moved, only the section of this article needs to be trimmed down. Removing all the names, huge detailing of Karni Sena, undue reviews will trim a lot already. Capitals00 (talk) 08:52, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nizil Shah: Good work with removing this[2] WP:UNDUE. What's next now? I think there should be some more removal of content from Padmaavat#Threats and Padmaavat#Reactions. Capitals00 (talk) 16:53, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

@Capitals00:, thanks. I will be trimming it more but will take some time.--Nizil (talk) 04:20, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Controversy section is trimmed now. Historian opinions and other history related sections needs work. Critical response also need some trimming. Will do later. Regards,--Nizil (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

It's time to remove some content from Padmaavat#Portrayal of Alauddin Khilji. Those paragraph starting with "Shantanu David of" and "Bobby Naqvi" needs to be entirely removed. Capitals00 (talk) 11:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2017

CBFC has officially announced that there have been 0 cuts and only 5 modifications suggested to the movie on 30th December,2017: 1) A clear disclaimer stating that the movie is a work of fiction with no resemblance to history 2) Modifications to the Groomer song sequence as per the character being portrayed 3) Changing the name of the film from Padmavati to Padmavati (which is the poem on which this movie is based) 4) Modifications to inaccurate names of historical places which have been used 5) Disclaimer stating that the movie does not glorify the practice of Sati/Jauhar

Change in the first paragraph of the wikipedia description from 26 cuts to the above written text. Rohan96joshi (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:14, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2018

The film is the source of inspiration from Chittoor Rani Padmini (Tamil Film). The film starred Sivaji Ganesan[2] and Vyjayanthimala in the lead with K. A. Thangavelu, M. N. Nambiar, T. S. Balaiah, T. P. Muthulakshmi and Kumari Kamala forming an ensemble cast. It was produced by R. M. Ramanthan of Uma Pictures. The film's score was composed by G. Ramanathan and it was filmed by R. Sampath. Arunpras29 1 (talk) 04:25, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Ravensfire (talk) 05:03, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2018

A RTI has been recently denied for Padmawati.This was a RTI placed by Dr. Nutan Thakur. The Censor Board clearly denies to give any sort of information and replied that it is completely confidential. 111.93.195.150 (talk) 04:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Film name is changed

According to the news, now the name of the movie has been changed Padmavati to Padmavat, so please change here too.--Raju Suthar (talk) 05:01, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Its Padmaavat with 'aa' Singh Anamay (talk) 07:26, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 10 January 2018

Padmavati (film) → Padmavat (film) – According to the news, now the name of the movie has been changed Padmavati to Padmavat, see here 2405:205:138E:9255:0:0:11C9:A0AC (talk) 13:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:TOOSOON and WP:COMMONNAME. The sources have began referring to the film as Padmavat only after the CBFC's decision on the title was released. The statement from CBFC counts the title change as only suggested. I have also read a news report on TOI of the film probably being released under the title Padmaavat. That being said, this hasn't been officially confirmed in a press release or a new poster hasn't been released. Padmavati is still used by sources, a report published just 2 hours ago from the time of my post. King Prithviraj II (talk) 18:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Support move to Padmaavat with a double a, now that the it has been confirmed. King Prithviraj II (talk) 12:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, please wait for an official confirmation from Viacom18 before moving the page. Thanks. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 19:06, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

The film name is already changed. see below from AajTak 2405:205:138E:9255:0:0:11C9:A0AC (talk) 02:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the title needs to be changed. The tickets are being sold on bookmyshow under the name of Padmavat only. Shubham Rekhate (talk) 04:06, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Bookmyshow is not the deciding authority. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Yesterday around 11:55 pm the name of the movie was officially changed from Padmavati to padmaavat on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:E786:43FE:C578:28F0:A161:C79D (talk) 06:35, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

It's official, the studio spokespersons have confirmed it to IANS. Title has been changed to Padmaavat with a double "a", their verified social media pages mentioned above has also renamed. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 08:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Final confirmation from Producers. See news headlines The Times of India, TimesNowNews, News18, News18. 2405:205:1309:3164:0:0:294E:F0B0 (talk) 11:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@King Prithviraj II and Krimuk2.0: The Padmavat (film) is right title, not Padmaavat. Move it again at the right. 2405:205:1309:3164:0:0:294E:F0B0 (talk) 02:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2018

Please add plot of this movie. After watching the moving, I have brief points which can help. I don't remember name of some characters like Ratan Singh's turncoat Rajguru or the man Alauddin kills in the beginning of the film, so please be careful about that:

• Begins in 13th century Afghanistan with Jalauddin Khilji of Khilji tribe, subservients of delhi Sultanante, plots to seize the throne of delhi. Alauddin brings him an ostrich which he states was requested by Jalaluddin who expresses ignorance.

• The aged Jalaluddin calls his daughter Mehrunisaa and remembers about the ostrich. Alauddin requests Mehrunisaa's hand in return. Jalaluddin hits alauddin but Mehrunisaa approves.

• Alauddin's wedding is organized. Jalaluddin sends a man to call Alauddin who is engaging in adultery with another woman. The man discovers it and informs him to go to his wedding, but is killed by Alauddin who goes to the wedding place. Mehrunisaa is informed of the killing and is horrified.

• Singhala's princess Padmavati wounds Ratan Singh while hunting a deer. Ratan had gone to the island to acquire rare Singhala pearls for his first wife. The two fall in love and marriage takes place between the two.

• Jalauddin who has seized Delhi's throne permits Alauddion to repulse the Mongol invasion. He later undertakes an unsanctioned raid on Devagiri, and Jalaluddin is informed by his wife and Alauddin's nephew of his ambition to seize the throne.

• Jalaluddin knowing of his plot departs to Kara. Alaluddin is also stationed in Kara where he has captured Devagiri's princess, who he molests and decides to make her a part of his harem. Jalaluddin arrives and gifts slave Malik Kafur to Alauddin who has Jalaluddin and his guards assassinated.

• Padmavati journeys to Chittor with Ratan Singh, but is lusted after by Ratan's Rajguru. The Rajguru is caught attempting to watch Ratan and Padmavati when they kiss. he is kicked out of the kingdom. The first queen is also jealous of Padmavati.

• After seizing the throne, Alauddin tries to rape Mehrunissa but hears Mewar's Raguru playing a melodious tune on his flute. He orders Kafur to bring Rajguru to him. The rajguru informs him that he can become the second Alexander and must acquire Padmavati whose beauty is narrated to Sultan by Rajguru.

• Alauddin sends an invitation to Ratan and his family to come to Delhi but is refused. Being informed of it, the Sultan orders an attack on Chittor. One of his detachment of soldiers is however killed after falling into a trap. The rajguru advises him agaimnst attacking had-on.

• While Alauddin threatens other Hindu kings to not to help Ratan, the siege proves unsuccessful. The Khilji tents are burnt in a volley of fire arrows but the drunk Alauddin refuses to leave. The Khilji soldiers want to leave, but Alauddin accuses them of not caring about their dream of Khilji tribe's supremacy and thus succeeds in mollifying them.

• Khilji feigns peace and is allowed to enter Chittor where he meets Ratan. He asks to see Padmini. The Rajputs knowing his intentions, threaten him and tell him that he is only alive because he is a guest. He is allowed to momentarily see Padmavati momrntarily after hse insists on it so Chittor is saved from Khilji.

• Alauddin is however upset that he a only briefly allowed to see her. He tricks Ratan by invites him to meet outside the fort before he departs back to Delhi. Alauddin treacherously has him captured and returns to Delhi along with Ratan.

• He demands that Padmavati come to Delhi. The chief queen laments for Ratan and wants Padmavati to go to Delhi. Padmavati agrees. But stes some conditions including beheading the turncoat Rajguru. Alauddin agrees and sends his head to Chittor.

• Meanwhile Alaluddin's nephew attempts an assassination. Alauddin is wounded and his nephew on the next day thinking he is unconscious speaks about the plot on his bedside, but is choked to death by Alauddin.

• While on the Sultanante's frontiers, the Rajputs plan to ambush the Khliji soldiers in the morning which is the time for Namaz. Padmavti frees Ratan with help of Mehrunissa. The Khilji soldiers who are praying are alerted and attack, but are ambushed by the Rajputs disguised as women.

• The Rajput attack is repulsed, with the ambushing Rajputs and Senapati vijayddan killed. Padmaavti is hailed for saving Ratan in Chittor and is compared to a goddess. Alauddin imprisons Mehrunissa and marches to Chittor.

• The two rulers engage in a single duel, Alauddin is nearly defeated by Ratan who is dishonorably killed by Khilji's forces by being shot with arrows, but berates Alauddin for fighting dishonorably before dying. The Khilji army succeeds in defeating the Rajputs and capturing Chittor, but are unable to capture the Rajput women who commit jauhar with Padmavati.

You can choose appropriately what to add. I realize some of it you might find not significant to add but I narrated what I thought might be important in brief points. Add what is significant to the overall plot. 103.40.196.1 (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: This request does not comply with the requirements of MOS:FICT, which asks for concise and accurate summaries of plots. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:29, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit Request

This film has recieved more positive reviews than negative. Amend "mixed reviews" to "positive reviews" but still implement some criticism for the film. A.Ahmed (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2018

There are a few changes in the plot. Saisripavi (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 20:23, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2018

Two edits need to be made.

The plot is inaccurate at one place and should be corrected. Concerning Alauddin and Devagiri princess, there is no rape scene in the film. Alauddin only touches her and lifts her in his arms, immediately then his uncle, Sultan Jalaluddin arrives. There is no rape. The sentence of rape should be removed, Devagiri princess of not much significance to the plot. Instead simply simply change "Alauddin undertakes an unsanctioned raid on Devagiri" to "Alauddin undertakes an unsanctioned raid on Devagiri whose princess he captures."

Also the chief queen of Ratan Singh is mentioned as "first wife" in 3rd para and "chief queen" in 4th para, while her name is given in the Cast section as Nagmati. I suggest changing "The first wife of Ratan" in third para to "Nagmati, Ratan's first wife,". In the fourth para "Upon being insisted by the chief queen" should be changed to "Upon being insisted by Nagmati" for shortening it a little and making it more clear. Mr. NoDungEater (talk) 08:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:00, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2018

Padmaavat (2018) Reviews Aspkom (talk) 01:08, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Lead

@Krimuk2.0: Wait what when did I blanked Padmavati page?? Anmolbhat (talk) 11:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

You removed content that summarised the film’s controversy in the lead. Please be careful with your edits. Thank you. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 11:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0: I am sorry but you are being a little biased there and engaging in WP:OR. You have linked the word right wing with Saffron terror. Opposition from Rashtriya Janta Dal, Muslims protests, INC of Rajasthan, etc. are way more than just what you are frequently adding [3] despite the continuous removal of your WP:OR.[4] Anmolbhat (talk) 12:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Look at what the refs say. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 12:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0: [5][6], none of your sources support your statement, "but your wording minimizes the size of controversies". Per WP:BRD it is recommended discussing your edits[7] before you reinsert them. But you are clearly not doing that instead you are misrepresenting sources. Thank You!! Anmolbhat (talk) 12:52, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

They do! So please stop removing well-sourced info. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:08, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

You gave a link that is not even working, and I just checked the working one, it is nowhere reducing the controversy like you are doing. We are writing a WP:LEAD by covering all aspects, while NYtimes is only reporting an incident. Both things are too different. Anmolbhat (talk) 13:18, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I had myself changed back the lead for these same reasons. There is clear opposition and charges of distorting history from other communities, political parties and historians that are neither right wing, nor Rajput. One can read the rest of the sections of the article to decide, but we can't give half-baked conclusion unless we are going to mention everybody, but that would be WP:UNDUE. Capitals00 (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

The lead’s purpose is to summarise the majority opinion. Of course there are other groups who opposed it, but what’s been the most prominent? The NYTimes article mentions Hindu extremists in the article title for goodness sake. You think that’s half-baked? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:30, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Here are HuffPost and the BBC talking about the same groups. Is that a half-baked conclusion too? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:33, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

No, WP:LEAD lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents. What about [8][9][10][11]? They are a part of "majority opinion" as well and have been mentioned on the article. Anmolbhat (talk) 13:38, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2018

Please notify the Telugu and Tamil versions of the soundtrack, available on the official T-Series Telugu and T-Series Tamil YouTube channels. 27.7.226.8 (talk) 13:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ToThAc (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2018

The following needs to be added to the reactions as Sanjay Leela Bhansali (the director) of the film has finally broke the silence on the row.

And during this whole controversy the director of the film, Sanjay Leela Bhansali kept mum through out till today (31st January 2018) when he expressed his feelings upon his most controversial films "Padmaavat". Doctorsanchit (talk) 13:00, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The proposed text is written as if to sensationalize the matter, and is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Undue weight

@BreadBuddy: You have tagged the article with the "undue weight" template. Could you please elaborate on what controversies can be removed from the article? I have tried to clean up most of it, but the large sections still remains. Perhaps split from the main article? King Prithviraj II (talk) 15:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@King Prithviraj II: I am referring to undue weight given in these controversy sections for social analysts and left-based thinkers. I am not saying I am pro-right or pro-left, I am saying that what need is equal representation of opinions on this sort of issue. Also, there is undue weight in the lead; as per WP:LEAD we should have a general opinion of what issue with the movie is, instead of having one particular critic's opinion on the issue pasted on the top. Splitting from the main article may be considered a POV fork so I would recommend trying to desaturate any portions of the controversy sections that are redundant. Also im sorry about the wall of text lol! BreadBuddy (talk) 16:15, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

When you have right-wingers creating undue controversy and mayhem over false allegations of "love story', "love scene", "dream scene" etc againsrt the film, what else did you expect? You lied about the film without even having seen it, now you expect others to add your "comments"/lies? 103.40.196.124 (talk) 08:26, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

And I wonder what "left-based" this person is claiming. The websites here are common news websites mentioning reactons of people from many fields and political affiliations. I guess he's one of those right-wingers still accustomed to blaming "mainstream media' of being "leftists" despite a lot of the "mainstream media" having already become pro-Modi and pro-BJP. 103.40.196.172 (talk) 11:26, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I've removed the tag. Due weight is not about giving left and right wing perspectives equal representation; it is about reflecting what sources say. I am no expert in this area and this is not intended as a comment on the neutrality or lack thereof in the article, but the reasoning of the editor who added it was flawed and not sufficient to justify the tag. The tag should only be re-added if alongside it is a rationale on the talk page containing specific descriptions of which topics are overrepresented or underrepresented (or omitted), with evidence and arguments based on the number of sources on those topics that exist. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 02:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Controversy section is trimmed now. Regards,--Nizil (talk) 07:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2018

In the last paragraph of the plot, please lengthen the climax and expressly dictate the jauhar scene because it holds very much importance. 27.57.189.104 (talk) 14:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Also please make note of WP:PLOT. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Feature film soundtrack

Hi! I have some confusions on management of Template:Singles in the page. Please check, Thanks! M. Billoo 15:31, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Terrible phrasing needs cleanup

Can someone please rephrase this to be more easily understood? I do not think it is an Indian English vs. other dialects issue, but rather sloppy writing, wrong prepositions, and jumbled clauses. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:35, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Playing Khilji so it made Singh compare his role to the Joker and Alex DeLarge as it lead to a huge criticism that got him trolled as making it up that he has gone and seen a psychiatrist as it made the Joker fans angry as due to the Joker role Heath Ledger had to go through medication as that lead him to death. As fans got furious that he has replaced himself with Tyler Durden portrayed by Brad Pitt from the movie Fight Club, leading to anger from the fans as it got himself more hatred and criticism.

@MatthewVanitas: It looks like this guy, Minority Report 20 is responsible for the addition of the gibberish. A number of his edits have been problematic for one reason or another. I'll revert the prose to the earlier version. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:57, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

MatthewVanitas and Cyphoidbomb typical bollywood pricks who only knows is to watch shit movies and you guys should do some porn shit and admit it that role is bullshit from that prick ramveer singh and u are the gibberish retared people who aren't educated properly as u just want him to look good but no he is a shit actor and always will be — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minority Report 20 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

@Minority Report 20: I don't understand what you're saying, but you should watch the personal attacks against other editors. I'm sorry if it is uncomfortable to hear, but the content you submitted is incoherent. If you want to try to explain what you were getting at, then maybe someone can help with the syntax, but otherwise, it should't be in the article. Also, the content should be sourced so that we know the opinions are coming from reliable sources, not just from the minds of a Wikipedia editor. We don't publish our own opinions at Wikipedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Cyhoidbomb first respect others as those information looks like to make them look good I am publishing the truth and you are being rude to me calling gibberish you saying that as it's hard to accept the truth so please understand and be polite to others and respect me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minority Report 20 (talk • contribs) 09:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia page, and your edit copied above is frankly terrible. Sentences that run on and on and on, poor phrasing, and just bad writing. It's nigh-impossible to even determine the intent of your edit. Given your personal attacks here, demanding "respect" is the last thing you should be doing. Ravensfire (talk) 14:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2018

BUGET 300 CR COLLECTION 480CR }} 2405:205:140F:7C65:A59D:A81B:9713:FA5A (talk) 08:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done Unsourced. And next time DON'T YELL. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)