Talk:Waheeda Rehman

Editing Done, More Revisions and Sources Needed

The original article had language and citation issues. I have fixed some of these. There was exterraneous information that was irrelevant to the biography and uncited. I have removed some of it. The article is better now, in my opinion, however, it could use more biographical information if anyone has it. Please make sure it is interesting to readers and is verified or referenced. With movie stars there is a lot of tabloid news as we all know (here the Guru Dutt affair). This is often times exaggeration and sometimes pure fiction. Biographies of Guru Dutt or Waheeda Rehman should be cited as reference and this section should be re-written to reflect the sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.201.107 (talk) 15:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Place of birth

As per available records on net, Waheeda Rehman was born in Hyderabad, but a person here claims she was born in Chengalpatu, he/she may please provide referenceSarvagyana guru (talk) 02:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I have read in so many articles that Waheeda Rehman hails from Andhra Pradesh.But the article says otherwise.I also read that she had come from orthodox Muslim family in Hyderabad of Andhra Pradesh and due to her father's job they lived in Vijayawada and Rajahmundry towns in Andhra Pradesh. I read one interesting story about Waheeda Rehman and her sister when they were touring Srilanka. When the locals in Srilanka identified them and tried to flock around them Waheeda and her sister started talking in their native Telugu language so as to escape from the crowd.She not only acted first in Telugu movies "Rojulu Marayi" and "Jayasimha" before she went into Hindi field,but also acted in Telugu movie "Bangaru Kalalu" with A.Nageswara Rao after she went into Hindi field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.76.53 (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

According to The Times of India the birth place of Waheeda Rehman is Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh). But the article in Wikipedia says that her birth place is Chingleput, Madras Presisency. Please click on http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Waheeda-Rehman/articleshow/30895862.cms to find out that Waheeda Rehman hails from Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.79.155 (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

How to put a picture from Waheeda Rehman from hit movie as main picture?

I just wanted to ask how to put a picture from Waheeda Rehmman as a main image? We all know that Waheeda Rehman was one of the most beautifull actresses in Bollywood. I wanted to capture and her fans her glory moments and beauty and put that picture from her from Neel Kamal for example? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.248.217.207 (talk • contribs)

• In the infobox, images under a free license are always preferred to unfree ones. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Waheeda Rehman 75.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Waheeda Rehman 75.jpg, 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 image page (File:Waheeda Rehman 75.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Waheeda Rehman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 18:10, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

This nomination seems a bit premature, as the text of the body is almost entirely unsourced. This includes such opinions as "Waheeda participated in spirited panel and audience discussions on her most memorable films—Pyaasa, Teesri Kasam and Guide—although her most successful film is still considered to be Khamoshi, with costar Rajesh Khanna." I'd suggest that this be rewritten making heavier use of inline citations, per criteria 2b and 2c. (Full GA criteria at WP:GA?).

Thanks for your work on this one! Please feel free to renominate once this issue has been addressed. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Waheeda Rehman. 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://archive.is/20120708000553/http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/366585.cms to http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/366585.cms
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/366813.cms
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bfjaawards.com/legacy/pastwin/196932.htm
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120708060818/http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/366477.cms to http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/366477.cms
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120710105030/http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/366919.cms to http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/366919.cms
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120708001712/http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/367120.cms to http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/367120.cms
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120710182858/http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/368596.cms to http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com/articleshow/articleshow/368596.cms

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:48, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Waheeda Rehman in Chaudhvin Ka Chand.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Waheeda Rehman/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: PrinceofPunjab (talk · contribs) 05:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 12:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

@Magentic Manifestations Thank you for your review of this article and your suggestions. I will try to improve article according to those, although it may take some time because of my exams. PrinceofPunjab^TALK 14:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

@PrinceofPunjab Then the question is then should we hold this GAN open for a substantial time (say a week) or close it now and let you work on it at leisure (as you exams are indeed a more pressing concern and requires your undivided attention!). I think, given that we agree there is a large amount to be done and that it will take an some amount of time to do, we should end this GAN now. You can renominate the article once the changes are made and I will look forward to seeing the rewritten article when it is ready. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@Magentic Manifestations I think it is best that we close this GAN now because It will take some time and I will not be free for next 3 weeks. I nominated it on 4th April because at that time I was free but sadly, it's review took nearly a month. Anyways, Thank you for reviewing it. PrinceofPunjab^TALK 05:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@PrinceofPunjab Appreciate the revert. Looking forward once you are done with the changes. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is largely clear
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	As per MOS:CITELEAD, Lead section shall summarize the same and if it is already referenced, it is redundant and not required.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	There are bare citations E.g."Guru Dutt was my mentor: Waheeda/", "32nd Annual BFJA Awards" Please ensure references are quoted in proper style and the sources are quoted with the required parameters. Maintain uniformity in style as isbn numbers are in different formatting across the article (Refer WP:ISBN)
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	It should be a quick fail specifically for this reason. The last GA review ten years back had indicated similar issues as well, which has not been addressed. There are a lot of content with no sources provided. Please ensure that proper citations are provided for all the sentences. There are multiple instances of no citation being provided or complete citations are missing. E.g. "Beginnings and breakthrough", "Widespread success", "Continued success" paragraphs have barely 1-2 citations which do not cite most of the content.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Same as above
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	No major issues as per Earwig
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Certain images seem to have copyright issues. E.g. "Waheeda in Pyaasa (1957)"
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Article needs a lot of working, particularly in terms of providing citations. Many sections have content with no valid references. From the above items, many reviewers would conclude that the article should be failed. I believe that discussing with the respective GA nominator, who might be knowledgeable and interested in the subject, to consider how the article concerned can be reworked. With sufficient effort, often major changes can be made quite quickly. First, we need to agree on it and I look forward to hearing your response. As per subsequent discussion, closing the review.