Talk:Madhubala

message: *When Madhubala was an infant, an esteemed Muslim spiritual man predicted that she would earn fame and fortune, but would lead an unhappy life and die at a young age.
*Filmaker Mohan Sinha taught Madhubala to drive a car when she was only 12 years old.
*She was an avid fan of Hollywood and after learning to speak fluent English, frequently watched American movies on her home projector.
*When nervous she suffered from uncontrolled outbursts of giggles and laughter which sometimes antagonised co-stars and directors.
*When Guru Dutt first announced his classic film Pyaasa (1957) it was with Madhubala and Nargis in the feminine lead roles. The parts were eventually played by Mala Sinha and Waheeda Rehman who both became stars with the film.
*With the exception of Geeta Dutt in Mr. & Mrs. '55 (1955), most of Madhubala's memorable songs were dubbed by Lata Mangeshkar or Asha Bhosle. Madhubala proved lucky for both. The songs from Mahal picturised on Madhubala in 1949 were some of Lata's earliest successes; nine years later, Asha's vocals for the actress in four 1958 films established her as a major playback singer, rivaling her own sister, Lata.
*Madhubala's sister Chanchal was also an actress and bore a striking resemblance to her famous sibling. She appeared in Nazneen (1951), Naata (1955), Mahalon Ka Khwab (1960) and Jhumroo (1961) alongside Madhubala. She also played prominent roles in Mehboob Khan's Mother India (1957) and Raj Kapoor's Jis Desh Men Ganga Behti Hai (1960)
:I am relocating this section here to preserve the quality of the article. Please feel free to move relevant facts to appropriate sections. --Mayuresh 15:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: Recently someone filled the article with the distilled essense of decades of irresponsible film gossip. None of it is referenced and I suspect most of it is unverifiable. I don't have time to sort it out now -- someone PLEASE rescue this article! Zora 18:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rescue

message: I just wrote another article and I can't stay up to rewrite this one -- it is STILL a mess. It is full of scurrilous gossip and personal opinions. Zora 11:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still disputed 

message: Is this what an encyclopedic entry supposed to be? This one comes straight from some trashy film magazine oozing with oodles of gossip and biased opinion!
The editors of Wikipedia better take note of this!!!
It was a very bad time for her.
 SMTBMt123 (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is one of the worst articles yet! 

message: I reverted Neutralwriter's rewrite of the first para, in which he declared that she was the best Bollywood actress ever. That is mere personal opinion. Suppose some people like Nargis better? Or Hema Malini? Or Meena Kumari? 
We can't make value judgements. I know it's hard not to do so; other editors keep correcting me on this all the time. But we do have to limit ourselves to stating things that can be referenced ("the film was very popular and grossed Rs. XXXX") or quoted. If a well-known critic says that Madhubala was the best, then we can quote that. Zora 20:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal opinion 

message: In an effort to improve this article, I'm going to move the order of the sections to be roughly chronological.  It makes no sense to talk about her marriage AFTER discussing her death. MlleDiderot 19:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of Sections 

message: Is مدھُبال correct? That says Madhubaal.
I think مدّھوبلا would work better. Irtiqaa 07:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urdu spelling 

message: Dear Zohra and others. I have attempted to clean up the madhubala page. I am an avid fan of hers and but tried to stick to facts and omit opinions or gossip. I have read widely on MAdhubala and have added my reference points at the end. I hope you like the page better I wish I could also add a more flattering image of her. I hope you support the changes.
Regards
Navsikand 20:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New MADHUBALA page 

message: In her filmography, it says she starred in a 1971 movie, even though she died in '69.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.6.4 (talk) 19:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  We Need A New Madhubala Page 

message: Because it was released two years after her death, as I mentioned in the article!Navsikand (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation for 1971 film

message: :Image:Madhubala-color.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 21:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Madhubala-color.jpg

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.[?]
*If this article is about a person, please add  along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.[?]
*As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use th; for example, instead of (if such appeared in the article) using January 30th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
*Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.[?]
*Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
*The script has spotted the following contractions: wasn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
*This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with THE FOOTNOTE. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add .[?]
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Shahid • Talk2me 22:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automated peer review 

message: Let me explain why I changed the image. The newer image is more accurate for a number of reasons. Firstly, Madhubala rarely acted in color films. Second, she was rarely seen in the sex-symbol pose as seen in the outgoing picture. In fact, that image creates a misunderstanding that Madhubala was a sex-symbol (Monroe-like). That is just not true. True, she was attractive, but not in a disgusting sexual manner, but rather with otherworldly romantic charm. Anyone who has seen her classics such as Mughal-e-azam, Kaala Pani, Chalti ka naam gadi will notice that she was not at all like Monroe. Madhubala never wore sexually suggestive clothing like Monroe - perhaps except in the last movies, from which the earlier picture was taken. Just because two popular actresses die early doesn't mean they have isomorphic characters. Even the difference in their individual deaths displays something about their characters. While Madhubala died of an incurable cardiac disease, Marilyn Monroe's death was probably a direct result of her mental instability. 
For those of you concerned about fair-use: it's quite fair to use a movie still in wide circulation through posters and the internet. Besides, I have touched it up in Photoshop, so it is my work, not some plagiarized rubbish. Please don't delete this image without letting me know!Papush123 (talk) 02:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Image Explanation 

message: I propose that Madhubala of Mughal-e-Azam be merged into this article Madhubala as they speak of one and the same person. (Looks like some fan made a separate article.) §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  12:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Priya! We don't create two separate articles about same subject, irrespective of whether they are neutral or not (& certainly irrespective of creator's gender). If you find this article to be biased, you discuss it here on it's talk page. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  20:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello again! Your so called non-biased non-discriminant article was nothing but essay on Mohan Deep's book "Mystery and Mystique". We don't write only one person's views here on Wikipedia. That material is suitable for your blog, not encyclopedia. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  09:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

text:  So what do you exactly want? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  11:49, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I Priya Aravind oppose the merger.  Being a woman myself, I have created this absolutely neutral perspective of Madhubala and is based on strong references.  The other article: Madhubala was created probably by a male fan of the actress and is non-neutral.Priyaaravind (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Priya! We don't create two separate articles about same subject, irrespective of whether they are neutral or not (& certainly irrespective of creator's gender). If you find this article to be biased, you discuss it here on it's talk page. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  20:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Unjust 

message: Not a single sentence that was a part of my original article:  "Madhubala of Mughal-e-Azam " can be seen in this current article: 'Madhubala' after it was merged.  If merging implies total deletion of my article, then I protest and complain to Wikipedia of gender bias and absolute discrimination.  Where are the contents of my article: "Madhubala of Mughal-e-Azam"?  Why did you not include them in the article: 'Madhubala' if you intended to merge these articles? The fact is that the entire content of my article was deleted although I have not violated any Wikipedia rules or regulations and so, I Priya Aravind very strongly protest this merger and wish to complain of gender discrimination and curbing of freedom. Freedom that has been the hallmark of Wikipedia. Priyaaravind (talk) 18:39, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello again! Your so called non-biased non-discriminant article was nothing but essay on Mohan Deep's book "Mystery and Mystique". We don't write only one person's views here on Wikipedia. That material is suitable for your blog, not encyclopedia. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  09:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Discriminative 

message: Merger opposed and complaint regarding the unjust deletion of the article: "Madhubala of Mughal-e-Azam" in the name of merger:
First of all, Mohan Deep did not create the article: "Madhubala of Mughal-e-Azam", I Priya Aravind created it and used the biography of Madhubala written by Mohan Deep as one of the references (there were other references too). So, the article is not the personal view of its creater that is me! For that matter, even this article: 'Madhubala' uses Mohan Deep's article as a reference. So, how come the double standards. The fact is that most parts of the article: 'Madhubala' are taken from blog sites and it is obvious from the list of external sources shown in the end.  You just want to delete my article because I don't write odes and oodles of good things about Madhubala taken from unreliable film magazines.  Practice what you preach first.  If my article is considered unsuitable for encyclopedia, then this article: Madhubala is also unsuitable as it is full of content taken from blog sites.  On one end you consider Mohan Deep's biography unreliable (again it is your discriminatory view) on the other end you want to selectively use it as a reference in the article: Madhubala.Priyaaravind (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  So what do you exactly want? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk)  11:49, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  MERGER OPPOSED 

message: The very fact that my article (Madhubala of Mughal-e-Azam) remained unchanged/unchallenged for more than 2 months in Wikepedia shows that it conformed to Wikipedia guidelines.  Otherwise it would have been deleted on the very first day of its creation.  Since it could not be deleted as per Wikipedia regulations, a cunning way was adopted to delete it in the guise of a merger.  Now, there are two options left.  Let my atricle be distinct/seperate from the main article (Madhubala) but you can choose to re-title it as "Madhubala's biography by Mohan Deep".  Second option is to include the entire content of my article in the main article (Madhubala) saying that there are many biographies on Madhubala and this is one of them (with disclaimer).
Priyaaravind (talk) 18:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reply 

message: My article has been unjustly deleted eventhough I have followed all Wikipedia rules and regulations. Please restore my article. Priyaaravind (talk) 18:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WIKIPEDIA: I deserve justice 

message: The newly added information on Mohan deep's biography is too much messed up with other things in this article it was better before these information was added so please revert it or make a clean up.
Also make this article like an article not like a blog
For example this line :- "Madhubala had several affairs of heart and Mohan Deep, described as 'Indian version of Kitty Kelly', investigated her life by interviewing on audio-cassettes over 200 persons including her leading men Shammi Kapoor, Ashok Kumar, director Kalidas, Shakti Samanta and many others besides locating an old, forgotten interview Madhubala's sister had given to All India Radio (Source: Sahyong Times International' Sahyog Times International(July-Aug 1996)for his book on the actress. Here is one more link: One more link to Sahyog Times International "  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gag21friendz (talk • contribs) 11:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information of Mohan deep's biography is messed up 

message: There's rather too much emphasis on the Mohan Deep biography, which is referenced in an inappropriate manner so that it is impossible to tell what is taken from the biography and what stems from other sources. The "Personal life and controversies" section is currently written as if the opinions presented in Deep's biography are facts, and it contains a lot of unencyclopedically salacious detail (some of it not in English, so it is difficult for most readers to understand it).  Wikipedia is not censored, but it is also not a gossip magazine, and the section in question needs to be edited for tone. Preferrably by somebody who (unlike me) understands the non-English terms used. --bonadea contributions talk 16:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: All are socks and have been reported at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Priyaaravind. Let they be blocked and then cleanup can start. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 17:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone, style, neutrality 

message: All efforts have been taken by me to improve the tone, style and neutrality. Those sentences which have earlier been perceived as POV have been toned down and put under quotes. Similarly, the part taken from the biography and that taken from other sources have been clearly separated wherein the paragraph that criticizes the biography is now a separate paragraph and it ensures a neutral point of view. The issue of emphasis on one biography does not arise because the rest of the biography is mainly based on Khatija Akber's biography and only one paragraph is about Mohandeep's biography. Ashanker1982 contributions talk
:Some edits have been made, but the only result is that it is now clear that the new paragraph consists only of long quotes taken straight from the unofficial biography and cobbled together to form an incohesive paragraph. This is inappropriate for several reasons, and the POV and tone issues have not by any means been "taken care of". There is also a serious case of WP:UNDUE emphasis on the unofficial gossip-style biography (the other biography you mention is quoted in one single sentence). The mainenance tags are still very relevant. --bonadea contributions talk 18:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  All efforts taken to improve tone, style, neutrality 

message: user:The Avengers, Including that Kishore Kumar changed his name to Karim Abdul is a crucial piece of information. He changed it while he was married to Madhubala and it shows his conversion to Muslim, which shows that the marriage was based on religious grounds. This is therefore a critical piece of information that should not be censored. Xtremedood (talk) 17:34, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about Madhubala. You can insert it in article. Not in infobox. Kishore Kumar never publicly declared about his alternate name. He was never known by that name. He never practised Islam. It was done only for marriage. After Madhubala's death he was totally Hindu. His last rites were performed according to Hindu tradition in 1987. Watch this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymzOWbaW6vw  Sourced or un-sourced it can't be inserted directly in infobox.--The Avengers 17:43, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  He was cremated. The Avengers 17:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Your first sentence stated the point. It is for Madhubala and if he changed his name and religion for her sake then it should be mentioned. I think this is a critical piece of information. It doesn't matter to this article if he returned to Hinduism later. Xtremedood (talk) 00:19, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's already part of the article in the personal life section. Your comment about censorship don't apply. You want to highlight it in infobox, which is inappropriate. Mike Tyson  and Michael Jackson also converted to Islam, but as they were known by their old name, it's not mentioned in infobox. In this section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhubala#Personal_life_and_controversies  the third paragraph starts as "Madhubala married Kishore Kumar in 1960 after Kishore Kumar converted to Islam and took up the name Karim Abdul,". I didn't remove that information. You are unnecessarily trying to highlight in infobox.The Avengers 01:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:   Good news for you is that Mamta Kulkarni and Yuvan Shankar Raja have converted to Islam. This news will make you happy. You can edit their page according to your will.The Avengers 08:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What does that have to do with Madhubala? Since the spouse is mentioned in the infobox, it should also be mentioned that he changed his name (even just for her sake). Xtremedood (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Spousal Name Change from Kishore Kumar to Karim Abdul

message: I have added a section of tribute which is being payed to Madhubala as a dramatized biography in upcoming movie "1969". Sonakshi Sinha is playing the role of Madhubala while Kishor Kumar is being played by Ranbir Kapoor. Trailer of the movie has gained 1.5 million viewers on youtube. I think addition of this section is justified and would be a good addition to her charismatic career, biography and influence.  
Son of Khaldun (talk) 05:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Tribute as 1969

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Madhubala. 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://web.archive.org/web/20131226043438/http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-7-216155-Peshawars-contribution-to-subcontinents-cinema-highlighted to http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-7-216155-Peshawars-contribution-to-subcontinents-cinema-highlighted
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) 21:19, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Editors please take note that an anonymous editors are repeatedly changing the birth place of Madhubala to Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunwala, Pakistan from Delhi. The users should first bring any sort of reference to prove their claims or else should stop vandalising the article at the earliest. Vrishchik (talk) 07:02, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Requests for page protection should be made at WP:RFPP. DrKay (talk) 20:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism of article 

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) 15:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This image has been removed above. Regards, Jkg1997 (talk • contribs • CA) 16:53, 23 November 2019 (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) 04:23, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: === :Madhubala ===
* 
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism of sub-section: Controversies on Madhubala's life. As21jan1982 (talk) 03:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated, deliberate and relentless vandalism 

message: * 
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism of sub-section: Controversies on Madhubala's life. As21jan1982 (talk) 03:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Madhubala]] 

message: Will it not be best to delete the section of Kamal Amrohi from this Wikipedia page? No such affair took place. It is simply a rumour and has been refuted by Madhur Bhushan. By mentioning it under the relationships section, it seems as if it is true. At least the tone and the language of that paragraph should be changed, and there should be brief mention of the rumour. This will make it remain objective. Nandini125 (talk) 12:47, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted. The section was  in 2019 without references and  by anon without references shortly thereafter. Did not get any search results in Google as well. Maybe there are books and magazine articles that talk about the "rumours", but we need references. Jay (talk) 15:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Madhubala and Kamal Amrohi 

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) 17:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Mohan Deep's book cannot be considered a reliable or reputed source as it has been criticized by the industry as well as Madhubala's family. It is not an authorized biography and gets many details wrong. This WikiPedia page also relies heavily on other inaccurate books and articles about Madhubala. Overall there is a lot of misinformation on the internet and everyone is using unverifiable websites as sources, especially film and gossip magazines, whose sole purpose is to sensationalist and exaggerate matters. For instance, the name Madhubala was given by Mohan Sinha and not Devika Rani. Vidya Sinha mentioned this in an interview and Madhubala's niece Nafisa confirmed this on Instagram (https://www.rediff.com/movies/report/i-still-regret-saying-no-to-raj-kapoor-for-satyam-shivam-sundaram/20150113.htm). Unfortunately, there is widespread misinformation so every article mentions Devika Rani, and using that as a source they continue to propagate such rumors. Madhubala's mother's name is also not Ayesha Begum, it is actually Meher Jahan Begum. I try to correct these things but because most articles and books have incorrect information someone changes the edit based on those sources. I can share a picture of her grave where her real name is mentioned, but there is no article to cite for it.  Madhubala's nieces Perveez and Nafisa shared some information about her on Instagram and quashed certain rumours, such as Madhubala's mother's real name being Meher Jahan, but there is no way to cite Instagram posts. They haven't given any interview either so the only source for the facts is an Instagram post which creates difficulty. Overall this page contains lots of false statements.  
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.224.168 (talk) 13:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Information - Over reliance on biographies  

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:07, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: there are many other beautiful pics of Madhubala
Why to upload 1-2 then? 2405:201:500C:409C:F1C4:AC8C:123B:A876 (talk) 03:28, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need to change the profile pic