Talk:Riya Sen/Archive 1

message: does this page really requie a clean up??--Anshuk 03:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Really?

message: I took out the bits re her supposed boyfriends. None of that is referenced, and I'm not sure that all of it is true, or even notable. I also toned down the reference to "having sex" -- need to check on this one -- and removed ALL the references to companies for which she did ads. This is just another opportunity for advertisers to use WP for profit, it's not notable, and ad trivia, IMHO, should be shot on sight :) Zora 12:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're being over-eager in removing material about her boyfriends. True, they were unreferenced - but you should have added a  tag instead of removing it. Regarding notability, these people are public figures, and hence their love lives are a matter of public record. If you include an actor's spouse, then why not people they have dated, especially when it is relevant to other parts of the article (Ashmit Patel). As for the ads, I disagree on the removal of the fact about Lakme. Certain product campaigns are extremely sought after, and being featured in such campaigns is an achievement for the said star, and needs to be included.Gamesmaster G-9 23:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

text: On both relationships and ad campaigns, I think we should go with our common sense on what counts as notable and what doesn't. Gamesmaster G-9 05:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gossip column material 

message: Mentioning that Riya Sen was involved in scandals is not tantamount to slander, especially since the article even contains a section titled Scandals. Further, if a scandal has been extensively reported and goes to public image of a celebrity, then mentioning it (with appropriate references) conforms with WP:BLP. In this case, the dramatically different images of the two sisters is notable, in my opinion, and this goes to that. Gamesmaster G-9 16:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed that to controversy and kept the cell phone stuff and the movie kisses. I removed the model box, since that information is neither referenced nor stable, I removed the fangush, and I removed the personal opinion comments re her image versus her sister's. Who she is dating is pointless trivia. She could change boyfriends every week and it's not up to us to comment on it. This is an encyclopedia, not a fansite or a gossip column. Zora 10:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slander 

message: The measurements are fine and verifiable. Check into Indian film magazines. And, please, note that none of the other model infoboxes cite their source either. - Aditya Kabir 20:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On second thought, may be you have a right to remove the measurement thingy. After reading the measurement debate on Indian Cinema Project Page, I am not sure either. I'm not removingit myself, though. It hurts to delete stuff that you put there in the first place. :D. - Aditya Kabir 20:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  For [[User:Zora|Zora]] 

message: Dear, I have not been able to make peace with your comments above. Please, consider the discussion below. And, before that I'd like to note that the vile gossip you mention may be only a matter of proper phrasing, not removal. Instead of removing the material you probably could put a Copyedit tag to the article.
:As I have already mentioned to Zora - take a look at the following featured articles - Lindsay lohan, Julia Stiles, Jake Gyllenhaal, Angelina Jolie, Katie Holmes. In EACH of the cases, there is a mention of all the people they have dated, as well as other information that you would call "vile". Let me now say that it is not acceptable for that to be removed. You want to reword it, thats fine, but the information on her personal life STAYS. Gamesmaster G-9 17:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Aditya. We should use our common sense to determine the notability of a campaign. For example - the fact that Hrishita Bhatt first appeared as the Liril girl - or that Leena Chitnis started the trend of actresses modelling for Lux. These facts are relevant information, and no blanket ban is acceptable. Gamesmaster G-9 17:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Too much has been said abouot this. Zora's arguments against the infobox reveal her personal bias, which I find offensive. The infobox stays. Gamesmaster G-9 17:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've weighed in about this there. Hornplease 10:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  For [[User:Zora|Zora]] 

message: I am sure advertising should not be allowed on WP, and I really appreciate your heroic efforts to stamp out all advertising in here. But, I am really not sure if a models portfolio highlights imply advertising. Let's see... Claudia Schiffer's article has Chanel and Guess? cited, including a image from an advertisement of the latter; Cindy Crawford's has Pepsi and Pepsi Stuff; the article on Kate Moss has a whole galaxy of brand names - Gucci, Dolce & Gabbana, Louis Vuitton, Versace, Burberry, Chanel, Missoni, Dior, Longchamp, David Yurman, Yves Saint-Laurent, Burberry, Rimmel, Bvlgari, Agent Provocateur, Virgin Mobile, Belstaff, Louis Vuitton, Roberto Cavalli, Stella McCartney, Nikon, Ugg boots, Balenciaga and Calvin Klein Jeans - featured, as well as image of an advertisement of the last one and a section titled Campaigns. This list could drag on, citing exmples could go on, but, I think these examples are enough to make the point. Can you lead me to any policy decision of WP that warrants an all-out Jihad against brand names, at least any support apart from your comments that brand names and/or a models portfolio highlights should be judged as advertisement?
:I agree with Aditya. We should use our common sense to determine the notability of a campaign. For example - the fact that Hrishita Bhatt first appeared as the Liril girl - or that Leena Chitnis started the trend of actresses modelling for Lux. These facts are relevant information, and no blanket ban is acceptable. Gamesmaster G-9 17:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On [[Advertising]] 

message: On the model infobox I am even less sure. The template do exist and is widely used in WP, without much attempt to remove it from most of the pages (well, most, as far my research went, which is far from comprehensive). Many of the go beyond simple measurements and cite dress sizes, weight and more. If it is as unacceptable and ephimeral as you say, shouldn't there be a concerted effort, or at least a policy discussion, to remove the infobox altogether? Well, may be there already is one going around, I being so uninformed. If there is one, can you, please, lead me to it? Thanks. - Aditya Kabir 16:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Too much has been said abouot this. Zora's arguments against the infobox reveal her personal bias, which I find offensive. The infobox stays. Gamesmaster G-9 17:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've weighed in about this there. Hornplease 10:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On [[:CAT:INFOBOX|Infobox]] 

message: Since the subject is a Bengali-Tripuri by ancestry, and often in news for that very reason, it is only fair that the Bengali (as well as Kokborok) script for her name is provided. She works in the Hindi film industry, and is known as such, therefore the Hindi script for her name should be provided in fairness as well. It would also be fair if some one could provide Telegu, Malayali or Tamil scripts for her name. Much of her success came from those industries. I personally can provide only two (Bengali and Hindi) and have done, too. - Aditya Kabir 12:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is exactly the kind of overkill that we are trying to avoid. Even in the discussion, most people wanted only the native script to be used, otherwise the first part of the article becomes cluttered and unreadable. Gamesmaster G-9 07:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Scripts 

message: Hahaha. Let's keep the Tamil, Telegu and Malayali part out to keep the overkill part out, though it should be noted that Bengali actress Reema Sen has Tamil script to spell her name since she is noted for her Kollywood career. And, definitely let's forget the Kokborok part, especially since the script has no representation on WP. But, still should I note that the article on Rani Mukerji has two scripts to spell her name - Bengali and Hindi - while that on Sushmita Sen has three - Bengali, Hindi and Urdu.
If I may pitch my two cents in I'd say, it's perfectly relevant to add Bengali and Hindi scripts to spell Riya Sen's name, since she is noted both as a person of Bengali ancestry and her Bollywood career. Still, I am not putting the Hindi script back yet, rather I'd wait for an answer, I guess, to be proven wrong.
But, the most interesting features of this discussion are two of your comments - "please don't add new scripts. this matter is under discussion" and "This is exactly the kind of overkill that we are trying to avoid". If there is a discussion on this or a concerted effort to avoid this kind of overkill I'd really like to take a look. Knowledge will only make me better contrbutor. Can you, please, lead me to any of that? I am have learned a lot from you, no harm learning more. Thanks. - Aditya Kabir 16:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, Aditya - here's a link - Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Use of vernacular scripts in India bio articles - 2. Its very long, so you might want to skim through. Interestingly, both Zora and I are on the same side of that argument. And the problem is that there are many Wikipedians who just love to play the game of regional one-upmanship here, so I think its a good idea to limit this as far as possible. Gamesmaster G-9 16:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Aditya and GG9,  (the only active tripuri user on en-wiki) has informed me that Tripuri's use Bangla script to write their names. Borok script died out a long time ago, Reema Sen is not Tripuri, (that would be Raima Sen). Riya Sen is a fixture in Hindi cinema, so might as well keep bangla and hindi.Bakaman 04:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that Tripuris use Bangla script is a happy coincidence - it shouldn't be used as a justification for a wider policy. And if Hindi, then why not Tamil? As for Reema Sen, I believe what Aditya was saying is that though she is Bengali, her principal work has been in Tamil cinema. Gamesmaster G-9 06:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont know who Reema Sen is, I merely stated she isnt Tripuri. Nobody seems to have issue with Bangla and Hindi on this page thoughBakaman 05:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  For [[User:Gamesmasterg9|Gamesmaster G-9]]: Overkill, really? 

message: Saying that she "had a relationship" with someone suggests that she was sleeping with him. The gossip about her boyfriends is salacious, and non-notable. If you just said something like "Bollywood gossip columns have linked her to X, Y, and Z," with cites, that might be just tolerable. Ditto the PERSONAL OPINION about Riya being a scandalous person, just like her mother. If you guys keep restoring this sort of stuff, I'll take it to the BLP noticeboard. Ever since the Seigenthaler affair, the powers that be have been very touchy about scurrilous gossip re living people. Zora 09:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your choice of words reveals your overwhelming bias. Did it ever occur to you that maybe a relationship could be based on something other than sex? It's not in this case, as the ref notes, but still. Take it to the noticeboard if you feel it necessary, because you're not going to get away with blanking content you find offensive in any other manner.  – Someguy0830 (T | C) 09:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Zora, please give it up now. I am tired of explaining this again and again. And even if two adults are indeed having sex, then HOW IS IT BAD? And most of the material you keep trying to delete is referenced. Please go ahead and take this to whatever board you choose. Seeing how desperately you are trying (and failing) to drum up support for your cause that models are "meat", I don't think you'll get very far. Gamesmaster G-9 18:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 
Not all of us think that way, Zora. Your opinion is irrelevant, as are the empty threats. I'm certain GG9 has cited them properly and in his mind "Relationship" does not have such imaginative connotations.Bakaman 06:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malicious gossip