Talk:Om Shanti Om

message: It seems that the OST hasn't been released on iTunes...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.73.218.166 (talk) 17:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: miscellanea

message: The Lyrics for Ajab Si are by Vishal Dadlani and not Javed Akhtar.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsrikanth05 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lyrics 

message: The grammar in the plot and the style isn't very good. help? Cutelittlekoala 05:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar and style 

message: "Wikipedia is not supposed to be a dumping ground for speculation, rumor, invented "facts", or libel — continue to follow Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:No original research"
See WP:TRIV. IMO the facts in the trivia section fit the "speculation, rumor, invented "facts", or libel" defn. Thus removing Trivia.--Redtigerxyz 05:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You say you've removed Trivia due to one (or more) of the following reasons:
"Wikipedia is not supposed to be a dumping ground for speculation, rumor, invented "facts", or libel — continue to follow Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:No original research" See WP:TRIV. IMO the facts in the trivia section fit the "speculation, rumor, invented "facts", or libel" defn. Thus removing Trivia.
But, the fact I've provided (Shah Rukh speaking the number one line voted by AFI) does not fit into any of the following : speculation, rumor, invented "facts", or libel
Then why can it not be part of the film's article?
Sweetprashanth (talk) 15:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: all the 42 special appearances haves added .... which is still lacking ... will do it in a bit  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatpepsi (talk • contribs) 17:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  all cameo appearances added 

message: we need more info for this fantabulous film ! --eatpepsi @ proud member of Wiki India Project ! 23:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  great work guys :) 

message: i wrote the article and give the due citations to the quotes and websites.
eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 21:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  added the controversy section 

message: Kindly, discuss in the talk page first before editing the page. I know that the plot is too much in details, until and unless a better short plot is written kindly do not remove the plot. Unsourced statement or POV statemet are to be removed at once. Except for the plot other section must be correctly cited. Thank you. Amartyabag  TALK2ME 05:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pls stop revision war 

message: I have protected the page till both sides can resolve the dispute on this talk page. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected page 

message: The review section seems to be aimed solely at sending a negative idea about the film. It is without any reference, and looks totally biased (and of course, written/copied in a hurry by the way of formatting). Please replace the existing review with the following if found appropriate:
Om Shanti Om has mostly earned rave reviews, along with some criticism for poorly executed plot. But overall, it proves to be a good entertainer, with "poora paisa wasool". 
Reference: Om Shanti Om's Reviews from Different websites Wikionline 83 (talk) 03:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review Section 

message: Does the Controversy section need so many direct quotes? The summary of the all the quotes is that SRK and Farah Khan apologized, when Manoj Kumar was going to sue them. Removing most of quotes (barring at the most 1 or 2) and putting the matter in inline prose will look better and more encyclopedic IMO.  --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold and add what is relavant and correct. Amartyabag  TALK2ME 06:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Being bold and correct does not giving a long list of quotations. The Controversy should be discussed. No doubt, but in prose.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: === Controversy ===
The Manoj Kumar controversy started when his neice called him up from london (during the interval of the film om shanti om she was watching at a theatre) mentioning the following sequence in the film to him on the phone.
In the movie, Shreyas Talpade's character (pappu) sneaks Manoj Kumar's movie passes to enter a movie premier.
When the real Manoj Kumar (film double) shows up for the premiere, the security guards ask him for identification, for which he produces his driving license with a photograph of him covering his face (a parody to his classic style of acting). Since the Security guards do not recognize him they cast him a fraudand chase him out of the premises with their sticks.
And then in a different scene ShahRukh (Om Prakash Makhija) is shown giving a mock thank-you speech and later saying he's Manoj Kumar to the double of Simi Gerewal and walks by the other security guard saying "Inqalaab Zindabad" (Manoj Kumar's movie dialogue) and Shreyas Talpade also mimicing Manoj Kumar walks by saying "Baharat mata ki jai ho" (also a Manoj Kumar dialogue).
Offended by these sequences of the film "Om Shanti Om",Manoj Kumar contrived to sue the makers of 'Om Shanti Om'.
Manoj Kumar's lawyer Mukesh Vashi said.
"Manoj Kumar has been offended by a certain sequence in the film, and he asked me whether any legal action was possible,"
And, Manoj Kumar said to CNN IBN
"Indian audiences had made Manoj Kumar into an icon ... That icon has been wounded, made fun of..... A moral action is more important than a legal action."
"People who make such movies do not know the meaning of respect and decency. They are criminals."
=== Shahrukh's Apology ===
Shahrukh Khan followed this media hype with an open apology with Farah Khan by his side on the TV news channels for the candid little sequence in the film 'Om Shanti Om'. 
Shahrukh Khan said to CNN IBN :
"I was completely wrong... If he is hurt, I apologise,"
"I called him (Manoj Kumar) and the first thing he said to me was "it is no big deal, son,"
"People do parody...it is a done thing"
"Kumar has every right to say anything to me." 
"I don't want to hurt anyone. I dont think this film should be taken seriously, it's a comedy."This movie was gret I think everyone should watch it.
"Elderly people get jolted. Our fathers and grandfathers do that. I have a lot of respect for Manoj Kumar and I admit we should have been more careful"
"I have been copying actors for the past 15 years. I never took anyone's permission. I think I should have called him to take his permission."
eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 06:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ok i re-wrote the whole controversy section with out the images .. any one can upload suitable images ! 

message: Shahrukh Khan followed this media hype with an open apology with Farah Khan by his side on the TV news channels for the candid little sequence in the film 'Om Shanti Om'. 
Shahrukh Khan said to CNN IBN :
"I was completely wrong... If he is hurt, I apologise,"
"I called him (Manoj Kumar) and the first thing he said to me was "it is no big deal, son,"
"People do parody...it is a done thing"
"Kumar has every right to say anything to me." 
"I don't want to hurt anyone. I dont think this film should be taken seriously, it's a comedy."This movie was gret I think everyone should watch it.
"Elderly people get jolted. Our fathers and grandfathers do that. I have a lot of respect for Manoj Kumar and I admit we should have been more careful"
"I have been copying actors for the past 15 years. I never took anyone's permission. I think I should have called him to take his permission."
eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 06:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shahrukh's Apology 

message: eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 06:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  here are the images ...  

message: gauri khan is only in the end credits song !
she did not make a cameo in the movie !
source : 
eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 06:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please remove the part "auditioning for role of Shanti" from Section "Other Special appearances", Gauri Khan. Just Keep "Gauri Khan: as herself".--Redtigerxyz (talk) 08:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

text: done, without prejudice to reinsertion if proven otherwise. SkierRMH (talk) 05:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gauri Khan is not in he movie auditioning for the role of Shanti ! 

message: Gauri Khan indeed is not in that auditioning scene. somebody reported it 3days back & its still there in the article! Atleast provide the reference, so that we can check-up how such a fault came up--Anoopkn (talk) 19:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please remove the part "auditioning for role of Shanti" from Section "Other Special appearances", Gauri Khan. Just Keep "Gauri Khan: as herself".--Redtigerxyz (talk) 08:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

text: done, without prejudice to reinsertion if proven otherwise. SkierRMH (talk) 05:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why no action?

message: om shanti om makes more than 40 crores in the first week , which is a new record , beating Dhoom 2 which garnered only 35 crores !
source : 
eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 06:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Box office record  

message: "shahrukh and farah have been inspired by rakhi sawant to gain cheap publicity....anyways OSO is one of the worst movies to be seen... i guess shahrukh shud now stop workin as a hero coz he is lookin too old especially after takin steroids for body building....deepika padukone looks good only wid a chewing gum in her mouth.. coz tht helps in keepin her mouth shut...farah khan u better direct sum nonsense TV shows like your brother....songs were the only positive point of the movie especially dard -e-disco .. bollywood grow up... its high time..why such type of hype been created for such stupid movies.... dun xpect junk movies like OSO, to get oscars....Karz was far better then OSO in many ways.. its better if movie was titled "Aag hi aag" or "how to burn a set".Total waste of time and money non sense movie....." should be removed as personal views expressed by anon editor.
Please restore the prev. referenced version which presented a NPOV.
--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reviews is vandalized 

message: Swedish media claim that some controversy due to a scene copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopps a Swedish comedy, anyone knows anything about this?
RGDS
Alexmcfire
----
If a source and exact accusations is provided, it can be included in Controversy. The issue has not reached India or I have not heard it.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 16:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copycat?

message: Pls. correct the Reveiw section, here is a review from trusted sources. Remove the present as many revies are from untrusted sources. Other reviews can be seen here. . Amartyabag  TALK2ME 07:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let us come to a WP:CON first before changing.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More reviews from trusted sources 

message: plot should be removed as this film is still playing o  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.79.198.2 (talk) 02:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot

message: Hi 
I have watch the movie twice,
I don't think Gauri was there in the auditions of santipriya.
She appeared at the end only, she looked good by the way.
Thanks,
Shashank  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.115.119.67 (talk) 13:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cast and crew

message: Controversy section with Manoj Kumar must be added immediately. Amartyabag  TALK2ME 12:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For NPOV, it should be added but not in the form it is now. I propose it be put more in prose form than just n number of quotes like an article in a newspaper.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  i will re write it sir ... i am sorry i did in that way, but please let it be there by the time someone or i do it .. i am a noob so forgive me. it doesnt look good for wiki to not to show the controversy section ...any ways sir. what is NPOV ? --eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 15:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dear Eatpepsi; WP:NPOV is neutral point of view.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other comments

message: I personally do not know any actor known as Harfan Maula, who appeared in the song Deewangi. I do not think there is any leading actor called Harfan Maula. When i google searched and found that Harfan Maula is 1976 film. Harfan Maula should be immediately removed from the list.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be vanalism by anon user.  --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Remove per Redtigerxyz. Amartyabag  TALK2ME 11:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: i was the one who watched the song video twice and made that list , no one named harfan amula is in the song ... and that isnt even a name ... the name means in urdu "jack of all" ... thats not a normal name .... its vandalism ... please remove it --eatpepsi @ Wiki Project ! (talk) 16:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Thank you, Redtigerxyz, Amartyabag, and Eatpepsi, for your investigations and insight.  --Yamla (talk) 17:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Harfan Maula??? 

message: For God's sake, remove that external link Watch The Movie. It actuall is a pirate site and even though the OSO files are not playing in the site, Wikipedia should never have a link to a pirate site, especially to its contents.--Anoopkn (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promoting piracy? 

message: add this link if possible
http://www.allpunjabi.com/bollywood_preview/26/Om_Shanti_Om.html Movie preview and wallpapers  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.193.187 (talk) 22:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: external links

message: I Rquest The Adminstrator That He Opens The Edit Page For Me As I Have Many New Material To BE added To tHis Section And Also I Have to add The Total Gross Sales Also And Also To Correct Many Things In It. THANK YOU Ahmedcena (talk) 18:53, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: - Please post information here to be included for discussion. SkierRMH (talk) 05:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Editprotected request

message: The "Special Appearances in the song Deewangi Deewangi" has been changed from it's original (and accurate) 31 stars to somewhere around 40 now. Can someone please change this back to the correct list. I can assure you that people such as Karan Johar and Hrithik Roshan weren't in the the song.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatla00 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special Appearances Has Been Vandalised 

message: I'm a bit confused with the info in this page, is the album for Om Shanti Om be labelled as 'Studio album' or 'Soundtrack'? As far as I know, 'soundtrack' refers to songs related to a certain movie while 'studio album' refers to songs not related to any movie, e.g. IndiPop music, the last time I visited this page, it was labelled as 'Soundtrack', but now it's labelled as 'Studio album', so can anyone give me a clarification because I'm totally confused right now -_- Ashiwin (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a soundtrack, but recorded as a studio album. The field which says, "Studio album" is intended for album recording description. Meaning, studio album, live show etc. This is a studio album; the genre is soundtrack. Best regards, Shahid • Talk2me 18:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot for the answer dude =) but I have another question, I know this seems unrelated but check out HSM 2's soundtrack page, the description says that it is a 'Soundtrack' with the 'pop' genre, shouldn't this page be the same too? Sorry for asking too much questions -_- but I want to clarify this once and for all x) Ashiwin (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing wrong in asking questions:)... Well, thanks for informing me. I didn't know about it. Now I'm quite confused. I will consult somebody. I'll let you know. Thanks, Shahid • Talk2me 22:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks again dude =) After doing much surfing in Wikipedia, I found these pages as references: Studio album, Film_soundtrack#Songs_inspired_by_the_movie, and Template:Infobox_Album#Type, and I think 'Soundtrack' should be the appropriate description for the album, rather than 'Studio album', do you agree? :) Ashiwin (talk) 17:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I do. Thanks for checking. I think you can be a great editor here:) Shahid • Talk2me 18:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soundtrack or Studio Album? 

message: Why does the article redirect to Om Shanti Om (film)?
There is nothing else by the name of Om Shanti Om, so why can't it be in Om Shanti Om instead?
Why the redirect?
--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's a film, and in case there will be an article created later called Om Shanti Om, it is easier to keep track of. Deavenger (talk) 17:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: To attention all the wikipedian. This is one of the well written article with matching references.please do not add poor contents with no reeferences, they can be removed.feel free and be bold to add good source of materials.happy editingRavishankar  (talk) 15:33, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Om Shanti Om. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071121024626/http://www.boxofficeindia.com:80/chart.htm to http://www.boxofficeindia.com/chart.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081208142341/http://www.aol.in:80/bollywood/story/2007110908139019000001/index.html to http://www.aol.in/bollywood/story/2007110908139019000001/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:48, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As a non-user of Indian English, I can't help wondering what such a specifically Indian word as 'lathicharge' is doing in a Wikipedia article. At first I thought it was a misprint, then looked it up and discovered what a 'lathi' is. I suppose there's no reason not to use such terms in Wikipedia (any more than 'lakh' and 'crore', or that ugly euphemism 'eve-teasing'), but it doesn't make for easy reading, especially if (like many Wikipedia users) your native language isn't English in the first place. As for 'Shahrukh Khan is communal' (just after 'lathicharge'), I can again only assume it's Indian English, since it means nothing whatever to me as a native English-speaker - except a vague hint that the guy may be sexually promiscuous! By the same token, I wouldn't use the word 'bold' in its common Irish meaning ('naughty', 'cheeky') or the Australian word 'bogan' in the middle of a text for an international readership.213.127.210.95 (talk) 15:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and change it to a different quote of summarize it then.  I don't know what those words mean either. BollyJeff | talk 21:17, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian English (?) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Om Shanti Om. 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/20080211114102/http://www.indiafm.com:80/features/2007/11/22/3283/ to http://www.indiafm.com/features/2007/11/22/3283/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080212041716/http://www.indiafm.com:80/features/2007/11/26/3294/ to http://www.indiafm.com/features/2007/11/26/3294/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090413205105/http://www.humsurfer.com/shah-rukh-farah-sued-writer-claims-srk-stole-his-script-for-om-shanti-om to http://www.humsurfer.com/shah-rukh-farah-sued-writer-claims-srk-stole-his-script-for-om-shanti-om
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) 15:36, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Om Shanti Om. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.indiafm.com/features/2007/11/22/3283/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.indiafm.com/features/2007/11/26/3294/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014132441/http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=214&catName=MjAwNw%3D%3D to http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=214&catName=MjAwNw==
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021202725/http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=312&catName=TGlmZXRpbWU%3D to http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=312&catName=TGlmZXRpbWU=
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718043755/http://www.punemirror.in/index.aspx?page=article§id=19&contentid=200811222008112204184051347fa014d§xslt=&pageno=3 to http://www.punemirror.in/index.aspx?page=article§id=19&contentid=200811222008112204184051347fa014d§xslt=&pageno=3
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) 09:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is getting out of hand with people adding to it every day.  Its all unsourced.  Does anyone else but me think its about time to pull the plug on the whole thing?  Bollyjeff | talk 17:09, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cameo and Special Appearances