Talk:Dadasaheb Phalke Award

message: We are told that the award was first given in 1969, and that there have been 44 of them up to 2013, but no explanation as to why the 1969 award is labelled as the 17th, nor the most recent as the 60th.  Where are awards 1 to 16? Kevin McE (talk) 12:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The National Film Awards were instituted in 1953 and Phalke award was in 1969 which was 17th NFA. We will correct the article soon. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:11, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: 2 days later, I've removed the ordinals myself. Kevin McE (talk) 10:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards 1 to 16 ? 

message: The year column in the table makes little sense at present because it suggests that the first award was the 17th. I suggest that another column is added - "National Film Awards - and the information split between that and the current "year" column. Or the column title is changed to "National Film Awards" and the contents reformatted to 17th (1969) etc. - Sitush (talk) 06:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The year and the number has always been an issue with NFAs. Now being accustomed to it, some regular editors/readers would know how to interpret it. The current format of calling it "Year" and the writing "YYYY(nth)" has been followed on National Film Award for Best Actor and National Film Award for Best Actress; both being FLs. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the comparatives. I still think that it jars: we are not necessarily (or, indeed, usually) catering for regular editors and readers. Everyone is new once. That other lists have the same construct might indicate a wider problem. I've only just noticed that this is a FLC - perhaps we should copy/paste these relevant sections from here to the FLC page? Are we allowed to do that? - Sitush (talk) 08:14, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table columns 

message: I'm not entirely convinced that "Film industry" in the table heading will make much sense to non-Indian readers. We may need some explanation of how Indian cinema is grouped linguistically. Also, since the table is not sortable, we seem to be massively in breach of WP:OVERLINK. That said, I guess that some people might like to re-order the table by film industry or recipient name, so perhaps consider making the thing sortable? - Sitush (talk) 06:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sortablity would hardly be of use when some have more than one industry mentioned. It would only sort by first entry. And then as only one column of names was left worth sorting, the whole table was left unsorted. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:28, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I realised that. Thus, we should reduce the overlinking in that column. - Sitush (talk) 07:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film industry 

message: * CN is requested with reason "something wrong here - introduced in 1969 but he was born in 1870, so it is not the centenary of his birth" for the statement "First presented in 1969, the award marked the centenary birth year of Phalke (1870–1944)".
::The award is presented at the NFA ceremony. The NFAs are given for films released from 1st Jan to 31st Dec. So the entries are collected, sorted and whatever, and the awards are declared in the first quarter of next year. In recent few years, the ceremony is being held on 3rd May and the recipients are announced in April or so. So even if the award is actually handed in 1970, it is for the work done in 1969. The award ceremony is popular by its own serial number, but is at times also confused by media between the year presented and the year its actually for. That's how the 1969's award which was presented in 1970 falls under the centenary birth year. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we explain this? For example, "the awards are made retrospectively, at the NFA for the following year." - Sitush (talk) 08:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraph later on talks about the related recipients. And we have to somehow mention the relation of these two Kapoors. We also had to mention that Sr. Kapoor was awarded posthumously. For me, the link of son accepting the award and then being rushed to hospital and eventually dying was interesting. To not give undue importance to it, it was added as footnote instead of the main body. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not suggesting that the information should be removed entirely from the thing. My point is that there is no connection other than name between the two parts of the statement and thus the phrasing - especially the "but" - is wrong. "But" creates a dependency between two clauses - eg: "bread tastes nice straight out of the oven but less so when it is stale" rather than "bread tastes nice straight out of the oven but wheat grows in fields". - Sitush (talk) 08:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarifications needed 

message: The file :File:Kanan Devi.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Kanan Devi.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 08:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed from this page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:35, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Kanan Devi.jpg]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dadasaheb Phalke Award. 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:
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/684ysTg3l?url=http://www.asianamericanfilm.com/archives/000026.html to http://www.asianamericanfilm.com/archives/000026.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: This "featured list" (so called) has not been updated in 2 years! Why isn't maintained properly? 178.51.126.153 (talk) 05:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this list not maintained properly?