![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Please do not edit this section
Most interesting was the failure of Akshay Kumar's "Samrat Prithviraj," a film that should have been on the watch list of every Hindu nationalist moviegoer. It eulogized a Hindu king, who is frequently described as the last Hindu emperor, to the extent of being accused of distorting history. Kumar, the lead actor, said during publicity that the king was not given adequate space in textbooks while foreign invaders (read Muslims) had whole chapters dedicated to them – a notion that perfectly matched the Hindu nationalist campaign on rewriting India's history textbooks. Kumar himself has earned the reputation of being a poster boy of Hindu nationalism.
(subscription required)To the chagrin of BJP ideologues, only a few people in the industry subscribe to its ideas, such as actors Akshay Kumar, Ajay Devgan, Anupam Kher and the lyricist Prasoon Joshi. A couple of films with a pro-nationalist tilt have been made recently, giving the party what Santosh Desai, a prominent commentator, called "some more thematic influence" over content.
The nauseating scene is featured in the movie "Sooryavanshi," which is ruling the box office here in India. The film stokes the dangerous "love jihad" conspiracy, which paints Muslim men as colluding to seduce or kidnap Hindu women or girls and convert them to Islam. But other Islamophobic tropes are the center of the film, which has as its male lead one of the biggest stars in India, Akshay Kumar — a big fan of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and an actor famous for his jingoistic, hyper-nationalist films. "Sooryavanshi" is one of the most successful films in India after the covid-19 lockdowns were eased. Its success contributes to the climate of hate and discrimination that India's estimated 200 million Muslims must face everyday.Every third frame of the film is a bloodcurdling Islamophobic image. While an upper-class Hindu character played by Kumar gives lessons in patriotism, the Muslim antagonist responds with hate. He is ungrateful, with a long beard and skull cap. Each time the protagonist sermonizes the Indian Muslim to fall in line, the audience in the theater where I saw the film whistled and applauded.The film does not even pretend to mask its agenda — which is the right-wing Hindu nationalist agenda of Modi's government. It justifies the abrogation of the special status accorded to Kashmir, where thousands of youth were detained and an Internet blackout was imposed in 2019. Like the government, the film argues that the abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution has wiped out terrorism from the valley.
Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
I will add another section and summarize it in the lead in the near future when I'm able to make time for it.
Fowler&fowler
«Talk»
20:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Not done –
Not done –
mentioned only because of poisoning. –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done
mentioned four failed marriages in the context of alcoholism; nothing about his family
–
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done
scandalized by his involvement in a paternity suit and marriages to much younger women.
–
Done –
Done
celebrity marriage
–
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Done,
his wife killed him
–
Done –
Not done –
Not clear (
"She was briefly married as a young woman but thereafter lived independently."
) –
Not done –
Tom Holland
Not done (
but he is young
) –
Not done –
Not done –
Nicholas Hoult
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Done –
Done –
Katrina Kaif
Done –
Done –
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Angel Locsin
Not done –
Shaylee Mansfield
Not done (
but she is very young
) –
Not done –
Done (
but highly public
) –
Done –
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Done –
Judy Ann Santos
Done –
Peter Sellers
Done –
Shefali Shah
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Rod Steiger
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done (86 articles)
Please do not add anything to this section; you may start another section for discussion if you'd like.
Following recent edits by Fowler - I would like to specify what Krimuk2.0 has already mentioned above - Citizenship is part of his personal life, and not a major issue in and of itself. The claim that citizenship overshadows his personal life, which has been a subject of frequent media interest throughout his career, is baseless. There's also agreement above that it's already been given too much importance in the lead and perhaps should be cut down per WP:DUE. At this point, everything that is not his film career as an actor, should be put together in one paragraph, just like it's normally done in other actor BLPs, including FAs. Fowler, your attempts to single it out here and make it a single paragraph is obvious - please discuss it and reach consensus instead of edit warring. Shahid • Talk2me 14:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Mr Akshay Kumar didn't vote. He didn't vote because he chose not to. He chose to give up his Indian citizenship for a Canadian passport. A few years ago, in a video that has since gone viral, he explained that Toronto was his home, and that he'd stay there once he retires from films. After he was confronted with why he didn't cast his vote, Kumar tweeted that his vote was a private matter and not anyone else's business. It is important to note that Mr Kumar, a Canadian citizen, has earlier advised Indian women to use sanitary pads and has also made a movie telling Indians to use toilets. Had Mr Kumar possibly just danced and beat up bad guys at the end of two-hour melodramas (as some of his colleagues limit the agenda to), social media may not have sounded as affected as they did over his citizenship. Had he not interviewed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on national television during the elections on national and notional issues, a doting audience may not have questioned his politics. Lastly, if Mr Kumar hadn't publicly endorsed Mr Modi's advice to exercise the right to franchise, his fans may not have asked him why he didn't cast his vote.Family matters are best kept within the family. It is the parent who takes it upon himself to spoil or shape the child. Likewise, some matters of the nation are best addressed by the nationals themselves. In India, cinema and cricket run deep and have as much impact. So when it was ascertained that Mr Kumar had forsaken his nationality for the seductive wilderness of Canada, it hurt. In light of that, his right to participate and, further, to preach was debated, questioned and criticised. Your national loyalty became everyone's business, Mr Kumar.
His admission that he holds a Canadian passport comes soon after he conducted a "non-political" interview of prime minister Narendra Modi while general elections were underway. In the interview, questions like whether Modi likes mangoes and how he eats them drew a lot of mirth and derision from social media users. Kumar is also known for projecting himself as a uber nationalist. One of his recent films, Toilet – Ek Prem Katha, was seen as a vehicle to promote a much-touted scheme of the BJP government. His earlier films are seen as vehicles of a muscular government ready to take on enemies of the state through assassinations and kidnappings. His films like Kesari, Rustom, Gold and Airlift, among others, focus on themes relating to nationalism. Meanwhile the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party has stoked nationalism while using the national security plank for its electoral campaign. Kumar's citizenship issue has become a big deal because BJP supporters frequently subject people from India's religious minorities to "loyalty tests."
An inconvenient fact challenged Akshay Kumar's nationalist credentials: under pressure, he admitted he traded his Indian citizenship for a Canadian passport. In fact, he owns a mansion in Oakville, Ont., once said 'Toronto is my home,' and in 2011 campaigned for Canada's own prime minister at the time, Stephen Harper. 'What's most embarrassing is he's involved in urging (Indian) people to go to the polls, and he doesn't have voting rights,' said Narendra Subramanian, a McGill University political scientist. As well as adding a dose of Canada to the world's largest exercise in democracy, the curious controversy underscores the potent identity politics unbottled under Modi's regime. Modi was elected partly on promises to curb India's pervasive corruption and modernize its economy. But Modi's BJP has been blamed for also stoking sectarian fervor among India's Hindu majority, with results that include the lynching of several Muslims for slaughtering cows. As a Hindi-speaking hunk of sorts, he fits well with the BJP's messaging, which includes both Hindu nationalism and a muscular Indian patriotism, says Chinnaiah Jangam, a Carleton University history professor. "Akshay Kumar represents that sort of high-caste, Hindu male power," said Jangam. Said Subramanian: "He is very pro-BJP, very much sold on that line and pushes for a kind of militaristic Indian nationalism connected to Hindu identity." As part of its election campaign, the party produced a biopic that extolled Modi's virtues and launched a TV channel devoted to the party. Both were nixed by India's election commission as campaign ads in disguise. Jangam said that likely led to what was billed as a "non-political" conversation between Modi and Kumar. The prime minister rarely does interviews with actual journalists and has not had a press conference since being elected. Then questions started being raised about Kumar's citizenship, especially after he declined to say if he had voted himself. Some pointed to a 2017 interview in which he explained "I am an honorary (Canadian) citizen. I've been given an honorary thing. It's a thing that people should be proud about." Then an enterprising journalist pointed out that Ottawa has only ever named six honorary Canadians, luminaries like Raul Wallenberg, Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama. It's unclear on what basis or when Kumar became a Canadian. An immigrant must have permanent-resident status and have lived here for three of the previous five years to be eligible. A 2005 Toronto Star story says he became a permanent resident in 2001, while Postmedia News reported in 2011 he was not a citizen. If, as he says, he's been away from Canada for several years, that suggests he obtained the passport while Harper was prime minister. In fact, many Bollywood and other Indian elites obtain passports from developed countries, a status symbol that lets them travel more widely, said Jangam. "It's a class privilege," he said. "And most importantly, if things go wrong in India he has a foot in Canada."
An Indian government advertisement on road safety is being criticised for allegedly promoting dowry. The ad, which features Bollywood star Akshay Kumar, was tweeted by federal transport minister Nitin Gadkari. It shows Kumar scolding a father for sending away his newly-wed daughter in a car that has just two airbags. While some social media users praised the ad for highlighting safety, others felt it promoted dowry by hinting that the car was given by the father. Paying and accepting dowry is a centuries-old tradition in South Asia where the bride's parents gift cash, cars, clothes and jewellery to the groom's family.The practice is a punishable offence in India, but it continues to thrive - leaving women vulnerable to domestic violence and even death. Last year, a study found that dowry was paid in 95% of the marriages in the country even though it's been illegal since 1961.
I watched “Samrat Prithviraj” on the morning of its release—“first day first show,” as it’s called in Bollywood—with Nandini Ramnath, the film critic for Scroll. Ramnath was excellent, acerbic company for a movie with plenty to be acerbic about. In the lead role was Akshay Kumar, an aging action star with a face as lean as a greyhound’s. Kumar’s Prithviraj is a self-righteous bore, forever harping on about Hindu tradition and the need for Hindus to stick together. (The film’s obviousness won it tax exemptions in several states ruled by the B.J.P.) His sandstone palace is bathed in a golden light—the perfect venue for his wedding to an ingénue of a princess. But Prithviraj can spare little time, and just a couple of song-and-dance sequences, for love. Most of the film is taken up either by his councils with advisers about battles or by the battles themselves. In the climax, Prithviraj dies—but not before he rewrites history by killing Ghori. (Lions in a coliseum are involved.) The film’s epilogue calls Prithviraj the “last Hindu ruler in north India” (a falsehood) and laments that, after his death, India recovered its honor only when it gained independence from the British, in 1947—thus conflating homegrown Muslim rulers with European colonists in a sweep of rhetoric. When the lights came up, there were barely a dozen people left in the theatre, down from the twenty or so at the beginning. In the weeks that followed, “Samrat Prithviraj” proved to be a box-office dud. It’s the sort of fact that some filmmakers cited to me in hopeful tones, as if to say that the Hindu-nationalist playbook doesn’t guarantee a hit—that the whims of the audience will ultimately thwart any ideological conquest of Bollywood. But this idea ignores the sheer volume of oxygen taken up by films like “Samrat Prithviraj,” and their accretive psychic weight. And it overlooks the movies that aren’t being made, the stories that aren’t being told, the things that aren’t being said. “The worrying aspect,” Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub told me, “is that, out of fear, you draw back and you draw back and you draw back, until you step on the very people you ought to be defending.”
Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Kumar has made news in recent years not just for his films but for his growing proximity with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, even earning the moniker of "poster boy for Hindu nationalism". No surprises then that the film got a big leg up from the government. Three BJP ruled states made it tax free - to bring ticket prices down and make it more appealing to audiences. And Home Minister Amit Shah, after watching it with Kumar at a special screening, described it as an important part "in the journey of India's cultural revival which will take the country back to its glory days".
On the other hand, I am not arguing with you, only using this page to collect sources between which I am also responding to your interruptions. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Behind this wave of nationalism in Hindi cinema, however, there seems to be a system of unspoken collusion. The image-conscious government watches closely not just the content of films but also the opinions publicly expressed by celebrities. Some are approached directly to amplify the government's voice. Those who cooperate are rewarded in many ways: tax cuts, government assignments, national awards and so on. Those who do not are punished through the misuse of institutions. Akshay Kumar emerged early on as a willing colluder, and has been able to skilfully find common ground between his own beliefs and the government's agenda.The Hindu-nationalist establishment finds Kumar useful due to a constellation of factors: the perception of him as an outsider to the film industry; people's image of him as a Hindu alternative to the three big Muslim superstars—Aamir Khan, Shahrukh Khan and Salman Khan
When it comes to big stars openly extending support to the BJP or Prime Minister Narendra Modi from Tamil Nadu, it has always been 'Superstar' Rajinikanth. But the actor with a massive fan following in the state and outside has stopped short of formally aligning with the BJP and just said he would take the path of 'spiritual politics'. But if not Rajinikanth, then who is best positioned to be a BJP cheerleader in Tamil Nadu? If you have been observing actor R. Madhavan of late, you know the answer. He is not there yet, but is slowly fashioning himself into a possible Akshay Kumar of the south. From endorsing Modi without context, flaunting his Brahminical thread on the chest to Islamophobic jokes – Madhavan is fast walking into a political hall of fame inhabited by stars such as Kangana Ranaut and Akshay Kumar. These are early days. Rajinikanth's 'spirituality' politics can only take it so far. The party would need more cheerleaders and Madhavan is that educated, patriotic family man who works for middle-class voters. The process of becoming an Akshay Kumar will be complete in quick time.
The main topic of this section, pertaining to the length, proportion and importance of Kumar's citizenship, and the question of whether its coverage in the lead abides by WP:DUE, still stand. Those who will join the discussion should know. Shahid • Talk2me 22:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
I'll repeat that the main topic of this section (please do not reply to the previous message below this current message, so others see it), pertaining to the length, proportion and importance of Kumar's citizenship, and the question of whether its coverage in the lead abides by WP:DUE, still stand. Those who will join the discussion should know. Shahid • Talk2me 23:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
(Farmer's protest) Aware of the reality of media in India, they also began a newspaper of their own, Trolley Times, circulated at the protest sites. They also opened social media accounts and began to broadcast live the events from the stages they had erected on the highway. They attracted support internationally. For one, their cause—the hardy peasant standing up to corporate greed—was popular and their protest both massive and striking. Celebrities jumped in and discovered how vicious the social media space in India is. Tweets from the singer Rihanna, climate activist Greta Thunberg and porn star Mia Khalifa became front page news and also, more ridiculously, earned them finger-wagging lectures from Jaishankar's foreign ministry' and pious and identical pushback responses from Indian celebrities like Sachin Tendulkar and Akshay Kumar in coordinated fashion.Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Just catching up with this topic after I was pinged/contacted by F&f and Shshshsh respectively. Can I get some help with a reading list about the citizenship controversy (not sources that discuss the subject's right-wing connection unless they do so in context of the citizenship saga; that is a linked but larger topic, and I want to start with a manageable nibble)? Here are the sources I have seen mentioned already. I would appreciate additions to the list from anyone... while retaining the right to remove sources that IMO are non-RS, unrelated, tangential, or generally not helpful to my understanding the subject :-). To avoid wasting effort and pixels, there is no need for quotes; I'd prefer to read the material in context although I may request quotes later if I am unable to access a source myself. Thanks for the help!
PS: May I also request that editors avoid the back and forth arguments for now? Lets wait till the sources have been gathered, a concrete proposal has been made and then we can discuss its merits. Abecedare ( talk) 23:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
|
Off-topic thread
|
---|
|
The sobering reminder of the entire region's often inflamed ethnic and religious violence stood in jarring contrast to Harper's next stop: a feel-good photo-opportunity in the penthouse of a pricey modern hotel with Akshay Kumar, an A-list Bollywood star and an Indo-Canadian, who brought out a huge throng of Indian media to an event promoting Canadian tourism. Harper also announced that Kumar, a black belt in karate, will be a torchbearer for the 2010 Winter Olympics.(what led to the citizenship)
Synopsis: AkshayKumar, who is a Canadian national, does not require a visa to travel to the UK for tourism and business purposes for up to 90 days. Bollywood star Akshay Kumar was made to wait at Heathrow Airport as UK immigration officials checked the details of his Canadian passport. The 48-year-old flew into London from Mumbai for the shoot of his film 'Rustom' but had to wait an additional hour- and-a-half as the authorities checked the entry requirements to the UK for Canadian nationals yesterday.
An inconvenient fact challenged Akshay Kumar's nationalist credentials: under pressure, he admitted he traded his Indian citizenship for a Canadian passport. In fact, he owns a mansion in Oakville, Ont., once said 'Toronto is my home,' and in 2011 campaigned for Canada's own prime minister at the time, Stephen Harper. 'What's most embarrassing is he's involved in urging (Indian) people to go to the polls, and he doesn't have voting rights,' said Narendra Subramanian, a McGill University political scientist."
In the thick of the 2011 federal election, Stephen Harper appeared in the Indo-Canadian heartland of Ontario with a ringer. At a campaign stop in Brampton, Bollywood mega-star Akshay Kumar praised the then prime minister, danced on stage with his wife, Laureen Harper, and thrilled the audience. And at some point, the Harper government invoked a little-known law to grant the actor Canadian citizenship, circumventing the usual, stringent residency requirements for would-be Canadians, says a former Conservative cabinet minister. MP Tony Clement, who as industry minister met with Kumar in Mumbai, says the citizenship grant was just a thank you for the actor's help in promoting Canadian tourism and trade to a huge emerging economy – not a reward for partisan support. 'Basically, he had offered to put that star power to use to advance Canada-India relations, our trade relations, our commercial relations, in the movie sector, in the tourism sector,' said Clement.
They are among the "Lost Canadians," a group of Canadians who have been denied or stripped of citizenship by federal government due to legal technicalities. While the majority of these cases have been resolved through the 2009 Bill C-37, An Act to Amend the Citizenship Act, some people are waiting years to receive the same citizenship papers that others -- such as Bollywood actor Akshay Kumar -- was granted within weeks.
The past few days have seen a lot of interest over Akshay Kumar's ambiguous citizenship status given that he was nowhere to be found when Mumbai went to vote. While Kumar, patriot-in-chief of Bollywood, had said his Canadian citizenship was purely 'honorary,' a report by Pinkvilla found that to be untrue, forcing Kumar to release a statement. Admitting that he indeed is a Canadian citizen, Kumar put out the following statement and people doubled down on the criticism given that he had only recently interviewed Prime Minister Narendra Modi. ... Actor Siddharth, a vocal critic of the BJP government and majoritarian politics, wasted no time in drafting a not-so-sly tweet aimed at Kumar.
the Prime Minister has turned the spotlight on Canadian citizen Akshay being hosted on INS Sumitra under Modi's own watch. In February 2016, Akshay and his young son were on the navy patrol vessel alongside Modi and other dignitaries, attending the International Fleet Review (IFR) at Visakhapatnam — India's largest military exercise in 15 years. INS Sumitra is also the presidential yacht of India. This was more than three years after a September 2, 2012, report in the online newspaper Vancouver Observer had referred to Akshay's Canadian citizenship, saying it had been granted to him "within weeks" while many others waited for years.
Akshay Kumar who, in India, is popularly known as "khiladi" implying not only the title of his most popular film (Khiladi in 1992) but also his hypermasculine body as an expert in martial arts. In a report on his recent films, Ramnath (2018) argues that Akshay Kumar "has made a remarkable journey from body building to nation building" where his hypermasculine muscular "body has always worked harder than the rest of him". Whereas in earlier films, his "chameleon"? natured cinematic characters dared to transgress national borders, his recent spate of films on nation-building and a popular interview with PM Modi underline that his star image as an international khiladi is gradually being replaced by a "sanitised" image of a national khiladi. In addition, bearing in mind Akshay Kumar's renouncement of his Indian passport in 2011, subsequent application for Canadian citizenship and, recently, re-application for an Indian passport have been a matter of public scrutiny in the Indian media (India Today Web Desk 2019), his impersonation of the migrant character Ranjit, who eventually returns to India, allows for the play of a variety of nationalisms.
Abecedare: The politics and the citizenships are not unlinked as he was granted the citizenship for political reasons by a conservative government in Canada, the reasons linked to his right-wing politics. Anyway, I will for now add the sources that specifically mention citizenship. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Ok. So now I have read all the sources listed in the Sources sub-section. Some thoughts:
In order to be concrete, here is my proposal for the last para of the lede (again with the caveta that that para will be subsequently expanded to provide better context):
In 2019, after being criticised for not voting in the Indian general elections, Kumar disclosed that he had become a Canadian citizen early in that decade. Commentators contrasted Kumar's relinquishing of his Indian citizenship with the on-screen and public persona he projected of an Indian patriot and nationalist. Some also questioned whether the fast-tracking of his Canadian citizenship application by the Conservative government was influenced by his campaigning for Stephen Harper in 2011.
The main-body can add some more details such as, Kumar's explanation of why he applied for Canadian citizenship, his 2019 claim that he had applied for Indian passport etc. And probably the last sentence in my proposal can be moved to the main-body itself, where Clement's explanation for the fast-tracking can be added.
@
Shshshsh,
Fowler&fowler,
Krimuk2.0, and
TrangaBellam: Thoughts? For now, I am mainly looking to see if we can agree of the
weight to be accorded to the different aspects of Kumar's Canadian citizenship. The exact language for the lede and main-body can then be refined.
Abecedare (
talk)
00:22, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Kumar has become a naturalised Canadian citizen. After the 2011 Canadian federal election, the Conservative Party government granted Canadian citizenship to Kumar by allowing him to bypass the protracted residency requirement for Canadian immigrants. A former Canadian tourism minister stated the citizenship was awarded in return for Kumar's offer of using his celebrity status to promote Canada's trade relations in India.is the most accurate, and the citations [1], [2], and [3] currently in the lead are enough. [3] is the Parliamentary Affairs Bureau of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). It trumps a piece in Caravan Magazine, given that people will object that it is leftist, or even mainstream Indian newspapers, given that they are often under pressure to publish certain versions of stories. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Keshavjha4434 ( talk) 14:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Akshay Kumar Is An Indian Actor
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
15:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove redirect to "Selfiee (upcoming film)". Markovchained ( talk) 00:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I am aware of the section above and I've quickly scanned through it— but I am not sure what to make of the lengthy diatribes. I still have to note the absurdity just of the "short description" and perhaps the first sentence of this article—as Fowler notes elsewhere—"[we] mention the place(s) associated with a person's notability, not the one mentioned in their passport." Akshay is notable as an Indian Hindi-language film actor, someone who was born is India, spent the majority of his life and career in India. His passport does seem to be a hot topic among those who disagree with his politics and perhaps want to dispute his right to comment on Indian politics as a non-citizen of India. To call him a "Canadian actor of Indian origin" based on that is simply laughable. Can we get an RfC on this if consensus through discussion is not possible? regards, TryKid dubious – discuss 16:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
The redirect
Bade Miyan Chote Miyan 2 (film) has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 3 § Bade Miyan Chote Miyan 2 (film) until a consensus is reached.
Tousif ❯❯❯
Talk
11:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Is the word "naturalised" that important to stress upon the article's lead paragraph? Why can't it simply be India-born Canadian actor? I think this way it looks more neat. Rejoy2003( talk) 18:25, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Akshay kumar has relinquished the canadian citizenship and is back as a citizen of India announced by him on the 15th of August 2023 VibhuVerma ( talk) 07:21, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change birth place from Amritsar,Punjab, India to Delhi, India Sahilgng ( talk) 12:10, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Fowler&fowler: what do I make of this explanation of yours? I don't see any material supporting your claim at MOS:LEAD (maybe it's somewhere in the linked pages), and it is kinda nonsensical. I remind you of your edit at Siddharth Varadarajan again, who has been an American citizen for much of, or all of his career, and is one to this day as far as I know. We don't say he's an American editor of Indian "news sites", do we? Akshay having a Canadian or Jamaican or whatever citizenship is irrelevant when whatever career excellence and audience he has had has been in India. It's only relevance seems to be related to his publicly aired political views or associations, already documented at excessive length in the last paragraph. Can you please stop trying to stuff it in the first sentence? TryKid dubious – discuss 14:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
as Fowler notes elsewhere—"[we] mention the place(s) associated with a person's notability, not the one mentioned in their passport."Is there even an iota of doubt that the country associated with Akshay's notability is India? Why the insistence on including the country (previously) mentioned in his country in the first sentence then? Fowler, please take your own advice and stop trying to force yourself on the page. TryKid dubious – discuss 15:11, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
where he's noted as both Austrian and American in the lead, and it's specifically called out because of the dual citizenship- Hi @ Ravensfire - that's not exactly the case. From my understanding, Schwarzenegger falls more inline with likes of Peter Lorre like what user @ TryKid said. In regards to politicians in America of foreign birth, the likes of Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright are not described as being "German American" or "Czech American" respectively. In contrast, Schwarzenegger was born in Austria and first gained notability as an Austrian, representing the country in bodybuilding/weightlifting. He then moved to America and gained notability as an actor there, before becoming a dual citizen in 1983 and later a governor of California. In his case, he achieved notability in both Austria and America, lived in both countries, and is a dual citizen. That doesn't seem comparable to Kumar's situation. He held sole Canadian citizenship for a time because of Indian laws, and that is why he was listed as solely "Canadian". But that isn't the case anymore, and even as a Canadian citizen who became an Indian citizen again, his life and career are pretty much all in India, with Canada being more of a footnote. Honestly, we could just omit nationality from the lede all together like the consensus on Tina Turner, who had many recurring discussions because she was an American citizen, born and raised in the U.S until the last 10 years of her 83 year life. But that's beyond the point.
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Please do not edit this section
Most interesting was the failure of Akshay Kumar's "Samrat Prithviraj," a film that should have been on the watch list of every Hindu nationalist moviegoer. It eulogized a Hindu king, who is frequently described as the last Hindu emperor, to the extent of being accused of distorting history. Kumar, the lead actor, said during publicity that the king was not given adequate space in textbooks while foreign invaders (read Muslims) had whole chapters dedicated to them – a notion that perfectly matched the Hindu nationalist campaign on rewriting India's history textbooks. Kumar himself has earned the reputation of being a poster boy of Hindu nationalism.
(subscription required)To the chagrin of BJP ideologues, only a few people in the industry subscribe to its ideas, such as actors Akshay Kumar, Ajay Devgan, Anupam Kher and the lyricist Prasoon Joshi. A couple of films with a pro-nationalist tilt have been made recently, giving the party what Santosh Desai, a prominent commentator, called "some more thematic influence" over content.
The nauseating scene is featured in the movie "Sooryavanshi," which is ruling the box office here in India. The film stokes the dangerous "love jihad" conspiracy, which paints Muslim men as colluding to seduce or kidnap Hindu women or girls and convert them to Islam. But other Islamophobic tropes are the center of the film, which has as its male lead one of the biggest stars in India, Akshay Kumar — a big fan of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and an actor famous for his jingoistic, hyper-nationalist films. "Sooryavanshi" is one of the most successful films in India after the covid-19 lockdowns were eased. Its success contributes to the climate of hate and discrimination that India's estimated 200 million Muslims must face everyday.Every third frame of the film is a bloodcurdling Islamophobic image. While an upper-class Hindu character played by Kumar gives lessons in patriotism, the Muslim antagonist responds with hate. He is ungrateful, with a long beard and skull cap. Each time the protagonist sermonizes the Indian Muslim to fall in line, the audience in the theater where I saw the film whistled and applauded.The film does not even pretend to mask its agenda — which is the right-wing Hindu nationalist agenda of Modi's government. It justifies the abrogation of the special status accorded to Kashmir, where thousands of youth were detained and an Internet blackout was imposed in 2019. Like the government, the film argues that the abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution has wiped out terrorism from the valley.
Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
I will add another section and summarize it in the lead in the near future when I'm able to make time for it.
Fowler&fowler
«Talk»
20:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Not done –
Not done –
mentioned only because of poisoning. –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done
mentioned four failed marriages in the context of alcoholism; nothing about his family
–
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done
scandalized by his involvement in a paternity suit and marriages to much younger women.
–
Done –
Done
celebrity marriage
–
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Done,
his wife killed him
–
Done –
Not done –
Not clear (
"She was briefly married as a young woman but thereafter lived independently."
) –
Not done –
Tom Holland
Not done (
but he is young
) –
Not done –
Not done –
Nicholas Hoult
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Done –
Done –
Katrina Kaif
Done –
Done –
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Angel Locsin
Not done –
Shaylee Mansfield
Not done (
but she is very young
) –
Not done –
Done (
but highly public
) –
Done –
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Done –
Judy Ann Santos
Done –
Peter Sellers
Done –
Shefali Shah
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Rod Steiger
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Not done –
Not done –
Done –
Done –
Not done –
Done –
Not done (86 articles)
Please do not add anything to this section; you may start another section for discussion if you'd like.
Following recent edits by Fowler - I would like to specify what Krimuk2.0 has already mentioned above - Citizenship is part of his personal life, and not a major issue in and of itself. The claim that citizenship overshadows his personal life, which has been a subject of frequent media interest throughout his career, is baseless. There's also agreement above that it's already been given too much importance in the lead and perhaps should be cut down per WP:DUE. At this point, everything that is not his film career as an actor, should be put together in one paragraph, just like it's normally done in other actor BLPs, including FAs. Fowler, your attempts to single it out here and make it a single paragraph is obvious - please discuss it and reach consensus instead of edit warring. Shahid • Talk2me 14:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Mr Akshay Kumar didn't vote. He didn't vote because he chose not to. He chose to give up his Indian citizenship for a Canadian passport. A few years ago, in a video that has since gone viral, he explained that Toronto was his home, and that he'd stay there once he retires from films. After he was confronted with why he didn't cast his vote, Kumar tweeted that his vote was a private matter and not anyone else's business. It is important to note that Mr Kumar, a Canadian citizen, has earlier advised Indian women to use sanitary pads and has also made a movie telling Indians to use toilets. Had Mr Kumar possibly just danced and beat up bad guys at the end of two-hour melodramas (as some of his colleagues limit the agenda to), social media may not have sounded as affected as they did over his citizenship. Had he not interviewed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on national television during the elections on national and notional issues, a doting audience may not have questioned his politics. Lastly, if Mr Kumar hadn't publicly endorsed Mr Modi's advice to exercise the right to franchise, his fans may not have asked him why he didn't cast his vote.Family matters are best kept within the family. It is the parent who takes it upon himself to spoil or shape the child. Likewise, some matters of the nation are best addressed by the nationals themselves. In India, cinema and cricket run deep and have as much impact. So when it was ascertained that Mr Kumar had forsaken his nationality for the seductive wilderness of Canada, it hurt. In light of that, his right to participate and, further, to preach was debated, questioned and criticised. Your national loyalty became everyone's business, Mr Kumar.
His admission that he holds a Canadian passport comes soon after he conducted a "non-political" interview of prime minister Narendra Modi while general elections were underway. In the interview, questions like whether Modi likes mangoes and how he eats them drew a lot of mirth and derision from social media users. Kumar is also known for projecting himself as a uber nationalist. One of his recent films, Toilet – Ek Prem Katha, was seen as a vehicle to promote a much-touted scheme of the BJP government. His earlier films are seen as vehicles of a muscular government ready to take on enemies of the state through assassinations and kidnappings. His films like Kesari, Rustom, Gold and Airlift, among others, focus on themes relating to nationalism. Meanwhile the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party has stoked nationalism while using the national security plank for its electoral campaign. Kumar's citizenship issue has become a big deal because BJP supporters frequently subject people from India's religious minorities to "loyalty tests."
An inconvenient fact challenged Akshay Kumar's nationalist credentials: under pressure, he admitted he traded his Indian citizenship for a Canadian passport. In fact, he owns a mansion in Oakville, Ont., once said 'Toronto is my home,' and in 2011 campaigned for Canada's own prime minister at the time, Stephen Harper. 'What's most embarrassing is he's involved in urging (Indian) people to go to the polls, and he doesn't have voting rights,' said Narendra Subramanian, a McGill University political scientist. As well as adding a dose of Canada to the world's largest exercise in democracy, the curious controversy underscores the potent identity politics unbottled under Modi's regime. Modi was elected partly on promises to curb India's pervasive corruption and modernize its economy. But Modi's BJP has been blamed for also stoking sectarian fervor among India's Hindu majority, with results that include the lynching of several Muslims for slaughtering cows. As a Hindi-speaking hunk of sorts, he fits well with the BJP's messaging, which includes both Hindu nationalism and a muscular Indian patriotism, says Chinnaiah Jangam, a Carleton University history professor. "Akshay Kumar represents that sort of high-caste, Hindu male power," said Jangam. Said Subramanian: "He is very pro-BJP, very much sold on that line and pushes for a kind of militaristic Indian nationalism connected to Hindu identity." As part of its election campaign, the party produced a biopic that extolled Modi's virtues and launched a TV channel devoted to the party. Both were nixed by India's election commission as campaign ads in disguise. Jangam said that likely led to what was billed as a "non-political" conversation between Modi and Kumar. The prime minister rarely does interviews with actual journalists and has not had a press conference since being elected. Then questions started being raised about Kumar's citizenship, especially after he declined to say if he had voted himself. Some pointed to a 2017 interview in which he explained "I am an honorary (Canadian) citizen. I've been given an honorary thing. It's a thing that people should be proud about." Then an enterprising journalist pointed out that Ottawa has only ever named six honorary Canadians, luminaries like Raul Wallenberg, Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama. It's unclear on what basis or when Kumar became a Canadian. An immigrant must have permanent-resident status and have lived here for three of the previous five years to be eligible. A 2005 Toronto Star story says he became a permanent resident in 2001, while Postmedia News reported in 2011 he was not a citizen. If, as he says, he's been away from Canada for several years, that suggests he obtained the passport while Harper was prime minister. In fact, many Bollywood and other Indian elites obtain passports from developed countries, a status symbol that lets them travel more widely, said Jangam. "It's a class privilege," he said. "And most importantly, if things go wrong in India he has a foot in Canada."
An Indian government advertisement on road safety is being criticised for allegedly promoting dowry. The ad, which features Bollywood star Akshay Kumar, was tweeted by federal transport minister Nitin Gadkari. It shows Kumar scolding a father for sending away his newly-wed daughter in a car that has just two airbags. While some social media users praised the ad for highlighting safety, others felt it promoted dowry by hinting that the car was given by the father. Paying and accepting dowry is a centuries-old tradition in South Asia where the bride's parents gift cash, cars, clothes and jewellery to the groom's family.The practice is a punishable offence in India, but it continues to thrive - leaving women vulnerable to domestic violence and even death. Last year, a study found that dowry was paid in 95% of the marriages in the country even though it's been illegal since 1961.
I watched “Samrat Prithviraj” on the morning of its release—“first day first show,” as it’s called in Bollywood—with Nandini Ramnath, the film critic for Scroll. Ramnath was excellent, acerbic company for a movie with plenty to be acerbic about. In the lead role was Akshay Kumar, an aging action star with a face as lean as a greyhound’s. Kumar’s Prithviraj is a self-righteous bore, forever harping on about Hindu tradition and the need for Hindus to stick together. (The film’s obviousness won it tax exemptions in several states ruled by the B.J.P.) His sandstone palace is bathed in a golden light—the perfect venue for his wedding to an ingénue of a princess. But Prithviraj can spare little time, and just a couple of song-and-dance sequences, for love. Most of the film is taken up either by his councils with advisers about battles or by the battles themselves. In the climax, Prithviraj dies—but not before he rewrites history by killing Ghori. (Lions in a coliseum are involved.) The film’s epilogue calls Prithviraj the “last Hindu ruler in north India” (a falsehood) and laments that, after his death, India recovered its honor only when it gained independence from the British, in 1947—thus conflating homegrown Muslim rulers with European colonists in a sweep of rhetoric. When the lights came up, there were barely a dozen people left in the theatre, down from the twenty or so at the beginning. In the weeks that followed, “Samrat Prithviraj” proved to be a box-office dud. It’s the sort of fact that some filmmakers cited to me in hopeful tones, as if to say that the Hindu-nationalist playbook doesn’t guarantee a hit—that the whims of the audience will ultimately thwart any ideological conquest of Bollywood. But this idea ignores the sheer volume of oxygen taken up by films like “Samrat Prithviraj,” and their accretive psychic weight. And it overlooks the movies that aren’t being made, the stories that aren’t being told, the things that aren’t being said. “The worrying aspect,” Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub told me, “is that, out of fear, you draw back and you draw back and you draw back, until you step on the very people you ought to be defending.”
Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Kumar has made news in recent years not just for his films but for his growing proximity with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, even earning the moniker of "poster boy for Hindu nationalism". No surprises then that the film got a big leg up from the government. Three BJP ruled states made it tax free - to bring ticket prices down and make it more appealing to audiences. And Home Minister Amit Shah, after watching it with Kumar at a special screening, described it as an important part "in the journey of India's cultural revival which will take the country back to its glory days".
On the other hand, I am not arguing with you, only using this page to collect sources between which I am also responding to your interruptions. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Behind this wave of nationalism in Hindi cinema, however, there seems to be a system of unspoken collusion. The image-conscious government watches closely not just the content of films but also the opinions publicly expressed by celebrities. Some are approached directly to amplify the government's voice. Those who cooperate are rewarded in many ways: tax cuts, government assignments, national awards and so on. Those who do not are punished through the misuse of institutions. Akshay Kumar emerged early on as a willing colluder, and has been able to skilfully find common ground between his own beliefs and the government's agenda.The Hindu-nationalist establishment finds Kumar useful due to a constellation of factors: the perception of him as an outsider to the film industry; people's image of him as a Hindu alternative to the three big Muslim superstars—Aamir Khan, Shahrukh Khan and Salman Khan
When it comes to big stars openly extending support to the BJP or Prime Minister Narendra Modi from Tamil Nadu, it has always been 'Superstar' Rajinikanth. But the actor with a massive fan following in the state and outside has stopped short of formally aligning with the BJP and just said he would take the path of 'spiritual politics'. But if not Rajinikanth, then who is best positioned to be a BJP cheerleader in Tamil Nadu? If you have been observing actor R. Madhavan of late, you know the answer. He is not there yet, but is slowly fashioning himself into a possible Akshay Kumar of the south. From endorsing Modi without context, flaunting his Brahminical thread on the chest to Islamophobic jokes – Madhavan is fast walking into a political hall of fame inhabited by stars such as Kangana Ranaut and Akshay Kumar. These are early days. Rajinikanth's 'spirituality' politics can only take it so far. The party would need more cheerleaders and Madhavan is that educated, patriotic family man who works for middle-class voters. The process of becoming an Akshay Kumar will be complete in quick time.
The main topic of this section, pertaining to the length, proportion and importance of Kumar's citizenship, and the question of whether its coverage in the lead abides by WP:DUE, still stand. Those who will join the discussion should know. Shahid • Talk2me 22:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
I'll repeat that the main topic of this section (please do not reply to the previous message below this current message, so others see it), pertaining to the length, proportion and importance of Kumar's citizenship, and the question of whether its coverage in the lead abides by WP:DUE, still stand. Those who will join the discussion should know. Shahid • Talk2me 23:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
(Farmer's protest) Aware of the reality of media in India, they also began a newspaper of their own, Trolley Times, circulated at the protest sites. They also opened social media accounts and began to broadcast live the events from the stages they had erected on the highway. They attracted support internationally. For one, their cause—the hardy peasant standing up to corporate greed—was popular and their protest both massive and striking. Celebrities jumped in and discovered how vicious the social media space in India is. Tweets from the singer Rihanna, climate activist Greta Thunberg and porn star Mia Khalifa became front page news and also, more ridiculously, earned them finger-wagging lectures from Jaishankar's foreign ministry' and pious and identical pushback responses from Indian celebrities like Sachin Tendulkar and Akshay Kumar in coordinated fashion.Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Just catching up with this topic after I was pinged/contacted by F&f and Shshshsh respectively. Can I get some help with a reading list about the citizenship controversy (not sources that discuss the subject's right-wing connection unless they do so in context of the citizenship saga; that is a linked but larger topic, and I want to start with a manageable nibble)? Here are the sources I have seen mentioned already. I would appreciate additions to the list from anyone... while retaining the right to remove sources that IMO are non-RS, unrelated, tangential, or generally not helpful to my understanding the subject :-). To avoid wasting effort and pixels, there is no need for quotes; I'd prefer to read the material in context although I may request quotes later if I am unable to access a source myself. Thanks for the help!
PS: May I also request that editors avoid the back and forth arguments for now? Lets wait till the sources have been gathered, a concrete proposal has been made and then we can discuss its merits. Abecedare ( talk) 23:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
|
Off-topic thread
|
---|
|
The sobering reminder of the entire region's often inflamed ethnic and religious violence stood in jarring contrast to Harper's next stop: a feel-good photo-opportunity in the penthouse of a pricey modern hotel with Akshay Kumar, an A-list Bollywood star and an Indo-Canadian, who brought out a huge throng of Indian media to an event promoting Canadian tourism. Harper also announced that Kumar, a black belt in karate, will be a torchbearer for the 2010 Winter Olympics.(what led to the citizenship)
Synopsis: AkshayKumar, who is a Canadian national, does not require a visa to travel to the UK for tourism and business purposes for up to 90 days. Bollywood star Akshay Kumar was made to wait at Heathrow Airport as UK immigration officials checked the details of his Canadian passport. The 48-year-old flew into London from Mumbai for the shoot of his film 'Rustom' but had to wait an additional hour- and-a-half as the authorities checked the entry requirements to the UK for Canadian nationals yesterday.
An inconvenient fact challenged Akshay Kumar's nationalist credentials: under pressure, he admitted he traded his Indian citizenship for a Canadian passport. In fact, he owns a mansion in Oakville, Ont., once said 'Toronto is my home,' and in 2011 campaigned for Canada's own prime minister at the time, Stephen Harper. 'What's most embarrassing is he's involved in urging (Indian) people to go to the polls, and he doesn't have voting rights,' said Narendra Subramanian, a McGill University political scientist."
In the thick of the 2011 federal election, Stephen Harper appeared in the Indo-Canadian heartland of Ontario with a ringer. At a campaign stop in Brampton, Bollywood mega-star Akshay Kumar praised the then prime minister, danced on stage with his wife, Laureen Harper, and thrilled the audience. And at some point, the Harper government invoked a little-known law to grant the actor Canadian citizenship, circumventing the usual, stringent residency requirements for would-be Canadians, says a former Conservative cabinet minister. MP Tony Clement, who as industry minister met with Kumar in Mumbai, says the citizenship grant was just a thank you for the actor's help in promoting Canadian tourism and trade to a huge emerging economy – not a reward for partisan support. 'Basically, he had offered to put that star power to use to advance Canada-India relations, our trade relations, our commercial relations, in the movie sector, in the tourism sector,' said Clement.
They are among the "Lost Canadians," a group of Canadians who have been denied or stripped of citizenship by federal government due to legal technicalities. While the majority of these cases have been resolved through the 2009 Bill C-37, An Act to Amend the Citizenship Act, some people are waiting years to receive the same citizenship papers that others -- such as Bollywood actor Akshay Kumar -- was granted within weeks.
The past few days have seen a lot of interest over Akshay Kumar's ambiguous citizenship status given that he was nowhere to be found when Mumbai went to vote. While Kumar, patriot-in-chief of Bollywood, had said his Canadian citizenship was purely 'honorary,' a report by Pinkvilla found that to be untrue, forcing Kumar to release a statement. Admitting that he indeed is a Canadian citizen, Kumar put out the following statement and people doubled down on the criticism given that he had only recently interviewed Prime Minister Narendra Modi. ... Actor Siddharth, a vocal critic of the BJP government and majoritarian politics, wasted no time in drafting a not-so-sly tweet aimed at Kumar.
the Prime Minister has turned the spotlight on Canadian citizen Akshay being hosted on INS Sumitra under Modi's own watch. In February 2016, Akshay and his young son were on the navy patrol vessel alongside Modi and other dignitaries, attending the International Fleet Review (IFR) at Visakhapatnam — India's largest military exercise in 15 years. INS Sumitra is also the presidential yacht of India. This was more than three years after a September 2, 2012, report in the online newspaper Vancouver Observer had referred to Akshay's Canadian citizenship, saying it had been granted to him "within weeks" while many others waited for years.
Akshay Kumar who, in India, is popularly known as "khiladi" implying not only the title of his most popular film (Khiladi in 1992) but also his hypermasculine body as an expert in martial arts. In a report on his recent films, Ramnath (2018) argues that Akshay Kumar "has made a remarkable journey from body building to nation building" where his hypermasculine muscular "body has always worked harder than the rest of him". Whereas in earlier films, his "chameleon"? natured cinematic characters dared to transgress national borders, his recent spate of films on nation-building and a popular interview with PM Modi underline that his star image as an international khiladi is gradually being replaced by a "sanitised" image of a national khiladi. In addition, bearing in mind Akshay Kumar's renouncement of his Indian passport in 2011, subsequent application for Canadian citizenship and, recently, re-application for an Indian passport have been a matter of public scrutiny in the Indian media (India Today Web Desk 2019), his impersonation of the migrant character Ranjit, who eventually returns to India, allows for the play of a variety of nationalisms.
Abecedare: The politics and the citizenships are not unlinked as he was granted the citizenship for political reasons by a conservative government in Canada, the reasons linked to his right-wing politics. Anyway, I will for now add the sources that specifically mention citizenship. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Ok. So now I have read all the sources listed in the Sources sub-section. Some thoughts:
In order to be concrete, here is my proposal for the last para of the lede (again with the caveta that that para will be subsequently expanded to provide better context):
In 2019, after being criticised for not voting in the Indian general elections, Kumar disclosed that he had become a Canadian citizen early in that decade. Commentators contrasted Kumar's relinquishing of his Indian citizenship with the on-screen and public persona he projected of an Indian patriot and nationalist. Some also questioned whether the fast-tracking of his Canadian citizenship application by the Conservative government was influenced by his campaigning for Stephen Harper in 2011.
The main-body can add some more details such as, Kumar's explanation of why he applied for Canadian citizenship, his 2019 claim that he had applied for Indian passport etc. And probably the last sentence in my proposal can be moved to the main-body itself, where Clement's explanation for the fast-tracking can be added.
@
Shshshsh,
Fowler&fowler,
Krimuk2.0, and
TrangaBellam: Thoughts? For now, I am mainly looking to see if we can agree of the
weight to be accorded to the different aspects of Kumar's Canadian citizenship. The exact language for the lede and main-body can then be refined.
Abecedare (
talk)
00:22, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Kumar has become a naturalised Canadian citizen. After the 2011 Canadian federal election, the Conservative Party government granted Canadian citizenship to Kumar by allowing him to bypass the protracted residency requirement for Canadian immigrants. A former Canadian tourism minister stated the citizenship was awarded in return for Kumar's offer of using his celebrity status to promote Canada's trade relations in India.is the most accurate, and the citations [1], [2], and [3] currently in the lead are enough. [3] is the Parliamentary Affairs Bureau of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). It trumps a piece in Caravan Magazine, given that people will object that it is leftist, or even mainstream Indian newspapers, given that they are often under pressure to publish certain versions of stories. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Keshavjha4434 ( talk) 14:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Akshay Kumar Is An Indian Actor
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
15:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove redirect to "Selfiee (upcoming film)". Markovchained ( talk) 00:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I am aware of the section above and I've quickly scanned through it— but I am not sure what to make of the lengthy diatribes. I still have to note the absurdity just of the "short description" and perhaps the first sentence of this article—as Fowler notes elsewhere—"[we] mention the place(s) associated with a person's notability, not the one mentioned in their passport." Akshay is notable as an Indian Hindi-language film actor, someone who was born is India, spent the majority of his life and career in India. His passport does seem to be a hot topic among those who disagree with his politics and perhaps want to dispute his right to comment on Indian politics as a non-citizen of India. To call him a "Canadian actor of Indian origin" based on that is simply laughable. Can we get an RfC on this if consensus through discussion is not possible? regards, TryKid dubious – discuss 16:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
The redirect
Bade Miyan Chote Miyan 2 (film) has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 3 § Bade Miyan Chote Miyan 2 (film) until a consensus is reached.
Tousif ❯❯❯
Talk
11:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Is the word "naturalised" that important to stress upon the article's lead paragraph? Why can't it simply be India-born Canadian actor? I think this way it looks more neat. Rejoy2003( talk) 18:25, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Akshay kumar has relinquished the canadian citizenship and is back as a citizen of India announced by him on the 15th of August 2023 VibhuVerma ( talk) 07:21, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Akshay Kumar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change birth place from Amritsar,Punjab, India to Delhi, India Sahilgng ( talk) 12:10, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Fowler&fowler: what do I make of this explanation of yours? I don't see any material supporting your claim at MOS:LEAD (maybe it's somewhere in the linked pages), and it is kinda nonsensical. I remind you of your edit at Siddharth Varadarajan again, who has been an American citizen for much of, or all of his career, and is one to this day as far as I know. We don't say he's an American editor of Indian "news sites", do we? Akshay having a Canadian or Jamaican or whatever citizenship is irrelevant when whatever career excellence and audience he has had has been in India. It's only relevance seems to be related to his publicly aired political views or associations, already documented at excessive length in the last paragraph. Can you please stop trying to stuff it in the first sentence? TryKid dubious – discuss 14:58, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
as Fowler notes elsewhere—"[we] mention the place(s) associated with a person's notability, not the one mentioned in their passport."Is there even an iota of doubt that the country associated with Akshay's notability is India? Why the insistence on including the country (previously) mentioned in his country in the first sentence then? Fowler, please take your own advice and stop trying to force yourself on the page. TryKid dubious – discuss 15:11, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
where he's noted as both Austrian and American in the lead, and it's specifically called out because of the dual citizenship- Hi @ Ravensfire - that's not exactly the case. From my understanding, Schwarzenegger falls more inline with likes of Peter Lorre like what user @ TryKid said. In regards to politicians in America of foreign birth, the likes of Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright are not described as being "German American" or "Czech American" respectively. In contrast, Schwarzenegger was born in Austria and first gained notability as an Austrian, representing the country in bodybuilding/weightlifting. He then moved to America and gained notability as an actor there, before becoming a dual citizen in 1983 and later a governor of California. In his case, he achieved notability in both Austria and America, lived in both countries, and is a dual citizen. That doesn't seem comparable to Kumar's situation. He held sole Canadian citizenship for a time because of Indian laws, and that is why he was listed as solely "Canadian". But that isn't the case anymore, and even as a Canadian citizen who became an Indian citizen again, his life and career are pretty much all in India, with Canada being more of a footnote. Honestly, we could just omit nationality from the lede all together like the consensus on Tina Turner, who had many recurring discussions because she was an American citizen, born and raised in the U.S until the last 10 years of her 83 year life. But that's beyond the point.