Talk:Mallika Sherawat

message: Has this page been edited down? The last time I came to this page, there was much more text in it...now it seems to have lost more than half of its previous content.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.116.153.69 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 31 March 2005
Hi
How r u 
My name Adam
I'm Indian
Me from Gujarat
I  meet u 
I'm in Mumbai Saymons (talk) 14:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Edited down?

message: The quotes are not sourced, not verifiable, and hence should be removed. Most of the trivia were either covered in the text, unverifiable, or advertising. (We don't need to advertise a diamond company.) The article is a bit choppy, and needs more research and connecting prose. Also needs categories, IMDB listing, etc. But it's late and I'm tired and I hope someone else will tie up the loose ends. Zora 09:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major pruning 

message: I realize that some may be offended by Ms. Sherawat's provocative dress, but that hardly qualifies her as a porn star.  A porn performer, by definition, would be someone who performs explicit sexual acts on camera.  Ms. Sherawat hasn't even appeared nude.
--Konczewski 14:59, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why list as a porn star? 

message: The article had gotten extremely jumbled and I gave it a hard shake. I have the impression that material that used to be there has disappeared. Disputed birth date? References? I also removed some linkspam. 
Too many revisions by too many different people and an article turns into incoherent mush. Zora 05:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: "Today, she is considered the sex symbol of India" - this statement is at best subjective and should be left out of an encyclopedic entry, given that people can have differing opinions on this point.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.192.73 (talk) 00:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sex symbol?

message: What happened to the picture of her posing for the magazine? The current picture is... not what people would see out of sherawat.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.2.124 (talk) 23:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I included following lines in the article: "Both Khwahish and Murder involved a lot of skin show and exposure.For example, both Khahish and Murder involved love making scenes with rampant show of her cleavage and Murder involved a brief bareback scene of Mallika." What is wrong about this?Why did editors remove my edit?
61.17.195.76 (talk) 07:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why did editors remove my edit? 

message: How come no mention of it?
--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 06:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it wasn't her in the clip and anyone with functioning eyes could see that? 208.125.28.188 (talk) 15:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The famous MMS scandal of 2005 

message: The part of you have added doesnt look informative. It is highly opinionative. There is no need of so much of story in a wikipedia article.  It would be good if you can edit the part to be precise and upto the point. 
I hope you got my point. It would be disastrous on part of us if we allow negative/positive points about a individual person ( by just providing some news source) in wikipedia
Thanks for your understanding SaatwikG (talk) 06:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Which part does not look informative and which part looks opinionative?? On one hand you are saying it in not informative and in the next sentence you are saying that so much information is not required! Check out the biographies of other persons. It is not simply like typing a Biodata. The information that I have put up is necessary to understand her whole personality and her need to cook up a background. We need not be worried about positive or negative points as long as we are factual. And what I have put up is factual. We are not doing moral policing here. I hope you get the point. Thanks for discussion.--Indian Chronicles  (talk) 04:11, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: we are not to Judge whether relatives are correct or not....simply report facts. Lets us not judge whether Indian express is final Judge..there is no end to it. WP BIO's should give both positive and negative news without bias. And public figures cannot avoid criticism. And no one claims that Sherawat Surname does not exists. Only it is uncommon. Pls read properly.--Indian Chronicles  (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Pls discuss which part you have found objectionable and against wikipedia policies?
As I said, you are of the view that her version is entirely wrong and indian express version is true. This is like a cooking up story. There will be lot of gossip floating around newspapers on movie actors. Should we include all that and try to project it as a true story? Is there any need for all these statements w.r.to her early life? You are trying to portray her character in a wrong way. I checked lot of Indian celebrities wikipages. There is no need for explaining everything in wikipage unless it is highly useful to the article. 
(1) I have given a link where sherawat is entirely valid surname. Is there any link which says her mother maiden name is sehrawat?
(2) How do you know that whether her marriage is a forced one or based on her desire. These are entirely personal things which we are not sure about. 
(3) I believe below sentences are pure gossip which adds no value to the article and putting them on wiki is highly objectionable.
When her father, Mukesh Kumar Lamba, questioned her she is said to have replied that "Papa, filmon mein yeh sab kehna padta hai achchi publicity ke liye.
Glamour photographers recall that Reema Gill, as she was known then, would avoid any mention of her husband, even deny being married. Her publicity statements also got her father in trouble as he had to spent a lot of time pacifying angry relatives when Mallika has said in interviews, "I come from a place where women are kept in the backyard along with cattle"; that her parents "fled from Rohtak" because relatives disapproved of her career choice; and again, "In my family, no woman has even held a job
" SaatwikG (talk) 17:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

text: This has been reported in paper and Mallika has not raised any objection to the same. You are not able to demonstrate yet that it is against WP policies. Pls read again.....no one is saying that Sherawat is invalid surname. Try to understand difference between invalid and uncommon. I would like more opinion on this edit. Somehow your arguments sounds hollow and without basis. what is fact for one person may be gossip for another. It is necessary to portray true story. Check pages of celebrities, it gives infos on their scandals and affairs. This may be denied and considered by them. But it is to be reported.--Indian Chronicles  (talk) 18:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Mallika Sherawat - Early life

message: I completely agree with the version of Bollyjeff which is well written and structured, and I understand the reason behind the removals made by SaatwikG. 's version is sourced but it lacks neutrality and is evidently added to show Sherawat in a bad light.
I think the article should be restored back to Bollyjeff's version. If three editors, including (obviously) Bollyjeff, SaatwikG, and myself, agree to make it that way then there's a clear consensus which must be respected.
If edit warring is continued from now on, this will be reported and taken care of by an administrator as soon as possible. Thanks, Shahid • Talk2me 16:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on this, I have reverted to an older version. Thanks for your opinion. BollyJeff || talk 16:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree on this consensus at all. It is quite clear that few of her fans are hell bent on sanitising this page. Shahid has been involved in content dispute before hence his view do not matter. However I will leave it to more saner editors to make NPOV edits.--Indian Chronicles  (talk) 16:24, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks BollyJeff and Shahid for bringing some neutrality into the article. The early life part from Indian express was never there before in this article.  If anyone among 3 of us were a fan, we would never agree to the second paragraph in Early life.  So please stop accusing people and try to get "balanced view".  That would be good for your future wikipedia edits. SaatwikG (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indian Chronicles, there's one thing which does not matter here and it is your opinion about other editors and the fact that you do not agree with a consensus, which does not have to be agreed with, but respected. Three editors disagree with you and you will have to accept that. Also, please try to be more civil as not once have you already got personal with other editors. This page will be reverted and if you keep edit warring, you will be reported at ANI, definitely consider it a warning. Shahid • Talk2me 17:46, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Shahid thanks for your sermon. I am aware of the WP rules. Read what I have written. I have said I will leave it to saner editors to salvage this page. And yet you come jumping to warn me not to edit this page. I will respect consensus till more editors comment on it, but I need not accept this consensus. I have been civil and patient. I can see the truth being subverted, but I will follow the WP rules. Your threats of reporting me are meaningless as I have been within Wikipedia rules. I can also be as pompous and warn you but I will not.--Indian Chronicles  (talk) 18:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a difference between a threat and a warning. I never warned you not to edit the page, but not to keep edit warring. You have not at all been within WP rules as you kept edit reverting without starting a discussion at time. Shahid • Talk2me 18:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: My take

message: There is a doubt among some of the authors that it may possible that she kept "sherawat" name for better sounding and friends do think that way. But recent article from Times of India says it is indeed her mother's gotra or maiden name http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Mallikas-great-grandfather-more-popular-than-her-at-her-native-village-in-Haryana/articleshow/7361685.cms  So i m planning  to remove 
this part of article " Friends have said, though, that she opted for the surname Sherawat for its distinctive sound and not, as Mallika later said, because of her strained relationship with her father and his relatives." Please discuss if you have any concern.SaatwikG (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is obvious that its her mother's maiden name; that's already been stated and sourced. That doesn't make the other sourced parts any less relevant, though. I don't see why you should want to remove it. BollyJeff || talk 14:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

text: The part in parens about the alternative spelling is not even mentioned in the WP article now, so I don't see the need to remove the part about the reason for using the name. Do what you must, but I would really hate to see you start up another edit war with that other guy. BollyJeff || talk 16:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: On Sherawat Name

message: Birth Year: April 1974
Shafeekbsb (talk) 22:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jnorton7558 (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Shafeekbsb, 25 June 2011 

message: Malika Sherawat was born on October 24th 1981 in Rohtak, Haryana.
http://www.ganeshaspeaks.com/blog_Mallika_Sherawat_celebrated_her_26th_birthday_538.jsp
Boing83 (talk) 02:14, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 11 February 2012 

message: In The Myth she plays Samantha, a person who helps Jackie escape from India. The princess is played by Korean actress Kim Hee-sun.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.103.254 (talk) 18:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: - fixed 19:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role in The Myth is incorrect 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:26, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Mallika at ShaadiSepehle audiorelease.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: This thing can be added to the main page; since this is not an ordinary thing:
 
She has been called as “a pure soul” by Shri Shankaracharya Raghaveshwara Bharathi swamiji. Sherawat also said to have broke ground for the pontiff’s Hanuman temple project at a cave which is said to be God Hanuman's birth place (according to shankaracharya) at Gokarna.       -  Bharathiya 15:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this really controversial? Is it a very important event in her life, or just some publicity thing? Also, there should usually be no separate section for criticism and controversies per WP:BLPSTYLE. BollyJeff | talk 15:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy

message: I've restored the portrait image per WP:PERTINENCE. None of the images currently in the article are very good, but at least in this she's looking near the camera. Cropping it to a portrait would be an improvement, but what we need is a real portrait rather than a paparazzi pic. --Ronz (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs better image

message: Please change the part where it is said that the word mallika means 'queen'. Mallika is a sanskrit work which means jasmine. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mallika
61.12.17.222 (talk) 09:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: While you're right that the word Mallika means 'jasmine' in Sanskrit, it also means 'empress' in various languages. In the interview that is used to source the discussion of her stage name, the actress herself says she picked the stage name 'Mallika' because it means 'empress'. That being the case, I don't think we should change the article to go against the reason the person herself has given for her stage name.Jeppiz (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 21 February 2013 

message: In the second line (or the third sentence) of the article, "She than appeared in successful romantic comedy Pyaar Ke Side Effects (2006) which won her much critical acclaim", the than should be changed to then.
Please make the spelling/grammatical change. Thank you.
91.75.70.162 (talk) 17:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 29 May 2013 

message: Edit war existed about her age, different website indicating her age differently, in that aspect, the perfect source, is her official accounts, Mallika, Officials indicate her as 37 year old—bor[n] ₡ 1976, (HERE).
Smauritius (' . ') 17:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real age 

message: I cannot edit the article (unregistered). But the article says she married the winner of a game show on 8 November 2013 without offering any reference (The reference offered is an internal Wikipedia link). A registered user needs to fix that. 122.176.9.79 (talk) 15:37, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've also removed the other marriage mentioned as there was no mention of it in the source. Peter James (talk) 18:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did not marry Bachelorette winner 

message: I cant search something from wikipedia Sonasivaliyeva (talk) 14:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested correction 

message: Please change "Sarabhai vs Sarabhai 1 episode, 2005" to  "Sarabhai vs Sarabhai Season 2, Episode 28" Reference attached
Meetme2meat (talk) 05:34, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - Managerarc™ talk 00:38, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2016 

message: Change both 'Dirty Politics' link value to 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_Politics_(film)' Sanjar1998.msa (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: - FlightTime (open channel) 02:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2022 

message: Could you please change "Sherawat has established herself as a sex symbol" by "Sherawat is an international artist". Rebeeniel (talk) 10:24, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested correction