::Hi, I'll also post this on  page.  Firstly, Catgut, I welcome your comments and hope you always feel free to offer them.   I think that this list is always going to be subjective, and only open discussion is going to provide the best result.   I think Wildhartlivie makes a very valid point in addressing the limitations and "key audience" of this project, which is the English speaking world.   Going back to the definition/criteria for inclusion  Core topics about actors and filmmakers. "Generally, these are people who are extremely notable to the common person. This category should stay limited to approximately 100 members".  I think 100 is just an arbitrary number, and I think we should agree that it should be viewed as a guide rather than a rule.   The most important point is "extremely notable to the common person" and in this project the "common" person is someone who predominently speaks English, and it would follow that the interests and backgrounds of the great majority of these people would be related to the culture of English-speaking countries in whatever field they happen to be looking, whether it's music, literature or cinema.   I would expect that the average Chinese cinema-goer would be unfamiliar with almost every name on the current list, but if you were to go to Chinese Wikipedia you would rightly see that their articles are skewed with a Chinese perspective.   I don't think that adding names that are best known within their own non-English language industries would balance this list.   I think it would actually "unbalance" it by adding a number of names that are unfamiliar to the people who most often use these pages, and whose culture is supposed to be reflected in the ratings given.   Someone such as Sharukh Khan, to choose one name at random, is undeniably a significant figure but from the point of view of English language Wikipedia, and the English language experience of most of its readers, would have much less relevance.  I agree that this requires further discussion, and certainly individual names should be discussed, but I think to provide a completely balanced world-view would be beyond the scope of this project.  I would also like to echo another of Wildhartlivie's comments  one of the main results of tagging these articles should be that they are spotlighted by the community at large, as articles that merit elevation to good or featured standard.  It's saying "these articles need to be fixed first" rather than "these individuals made more startling contributions to world cinema than anyone else", although notability and influence are crucial to identifying the subjects.