This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bhavana (actress) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 12 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Bhavana Menon. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 08:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Bhavana (actor) → Bhavana (actress) – More common disambiguating tag is "actress". Arfaz ( talk) 19:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Bhavana actress.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
| |
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 06:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC) |
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved.
Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved.
Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Bhavna at CCL2 party, Vizag, India, 2011.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
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.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bhavna at CCL2 party, Vizag, India, 2011.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 13:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
The result of the move request was: First is moved to Bhavana (Malayalam actress), Second is not moved — Amakuru ( talk) 07:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
– Current disambiguation phrases not precise. The second actress has also appeared in Tamil/Hindi/Tulu/Telugu films. Timmyshin ( talk) 18:22, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
In this edit I removed the content about the subject's sexual assault. It was in the Career section, which was not well-conceived, as it has nothing to do with her career. If this content is going to be included, someone needs to figure out a more intuitive place for it. However, I do fear that without any other information, (like details about a trial, a conviction, subsequent activism to fight rape or to change laws,) a unique section would unduly draw attention to a negative event without providing sufficient context. I also fail to see where it could be intuitively included elsewhere in the article.
Also, per
WP:BLPCRIME, "A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed a crime, or is accused of having committed one, unless a conviction is secured."
It would be a mistake to implicate a suspect, especially when worded as it was by
Koodfaand
here. Koodfaand, you need to brush up on your understanding of
libel and what sort of phrasing could potentially be considered libelous. It is poor judgment to assert, without any trial conviction, that someone was involved in a rape. The smarter approach here is to omit the details about potential suspects, should someone find a way to resolve the other issues raised above.
Cyphoidbomb (
talk) 08:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
In this edit, I removed the connection made in the article between actor Dileep and the sexual assault. The two references did not have the name of the actress. It is WP:OR because the references do not support the claim. This problem arises because of the Indian law (to protect the victim) bans anything which connects her to a particular crime in public. She can potentially sue wikipedia for this entire section. Drajay1976 ( talk) 06:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Users and IP adresses state that revealing the identity of the person is a violation of Indian law. @
Cyphoidbomb: What should be done here ?
King Prithviraj II (
talk) 04:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Do note that the link that the citation mentioned (
http://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/malayalam/2017/feb/20/leading-malayalam-actor-gets-reportedly-abducted-and-molested-by-former-employee-1571991.html<) has been edited to remove the actress name. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
118.101.246.183 (
talk) 06:26, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Police taking legal action against people who use her name on public domain.but she complained in police bout the attack hapnd against her on the very next day of that incident Akhiljaxxn ( talk) 13:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
The above quote is from clause 1b of the terms of use. Wikipedia ***does not*** give immunity or promise to protect the editors from legal action. -- Drajay1976 ( talk) 02:43, 24 January 2022 (UTC)You are responsible for your own actions: You are legally responsible for your edits and contributions on Wikimedia Projects, so for your own protection you should exercise caution and avoid contributing any content that may result in criminal or civil liability under any applicable laws. For clarity, applicable law includes at least the laws of the United States of America. Although we may not agree with such actions, we warn editors and contributors that authorities may seek to apply other country laws to you, including local laws where you live or where you view or edit content. WMF generally cannot offer any protection, guarantee, immunity or indemnification.
The result of the move request was: Done ( non-admin closure) samee talk 10:29, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Bhavana (Malayalam actress) →
Bhavana (actress) – Dab for Malayalam not necessary since there's no other actress in the same name, plus the current naming is improper anyway since she is also active in
Kannada,
Tamil, and
Telugu language films. If it was meant for her ethnicity, then it should have been Bhavana (
Malayali actress).
Let There Be Sunshine (
talk) 16:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. —
Za
wl 13:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I have just moved Bhavana Ramanna back to Bhavana (Kannada actress), because that recent move was made against the RM of 2016, above on this page. As far as I can see, the Kannada actress is commonly referred to mononymically as well, [1] [2] [3] so this move has created a partial disambiguation situation, which would often be discouraged, even if one is primary over the other. @ Zawl: please could you undo the move and reopen the RM so we can discuss further? I oppose the above move. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 10:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Updating about her new film Govinda Govinda Shreyashv2604 ( talk) 12:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, while patrolling recent changes, I have reverted two edits by an IP editor attempting to remove content from this page [12] [13], and then had second thoughts [14]. Although the editor did not give an edit summary, I am inclined to assume good faith and let the page watchers decide what should be done with this content and whether its removal is a proper application of WP:BLP. JBchrch ( talk) 22:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Libra cursa, Why are you removing sourced content? Your edit summary doesn't make any sense. Note that the Wikipedia policy is to discuss on talk if you get reverted, not to simply repeat your edits. hemantha ( brief) 11:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Actually, the sources cited do not say it is Bhavana. I'd have to agree with Drajay1976 that it might be WP:OR ( [15] and [16]). — DaxServer ( talk · contribs) 11:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The above quote is from clause 1b of the terms of use. Wikipedia does not give immunity or promise to protect the editors from legal action. And, the objective of this law is to protect the victims. Not to protect the accused. I believe we should exercise caution and wait till the legal proceedings are over. -- Drajay1976 ( talk) 02:49, 24 January 2022 (UTC)You are responsible for your own actions: You are legally responsible for your edits and contributions on Wikimedia Projects, so for your own protection you should exercise caution and avoid contributing any content that may result in criminal or civil liability under any applicable laws. For clarity, applicable law includes at least the laws of the United States of America. Although we may not agree with such actions, we warn editors and contributors that authorities may seek to apply other country laws to you, including local laws where you live or where you view or edit content. WMF generally cannot offer any protection, guarantee, immunity or indemnification.
Restored fully-sourced content, as Wikipedia is not censored, nor am I subject to the Indian Penal Code here in the U.S. -- Orange Mike | Talk 22:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
IPC Section 228A? Making legal threat itself can get you blocked ( WP:LEGAL, WP:NPLT), not to mention censoring content with it. 1(b) of Terms of Use does not instructs to remove content that violates any local law, instead, it advices those editors who are bound to abide a local law that they should be cautious as the local authorities may apply their law on the editor if he/she resides under that jurisdiction, even though Wikipedia "may not agree with such actions". Regarding 228A, why should an Australian care about Indian law for editing Wikipedia which is hosted in the U.S.? Indian law applies only in India and Wikipedia only follows the U.S law. Wikipedia is available in 325 languages across the world. If every country's law was followed then Wikipedia would not be the same site you see now. WMF has never obeyed any foreign country's laws and has even defied government warnings, because of that the site was blocked by some countries, the most infamous being the three year ban in Turkey, nevertheless, the content remains unchanged. Even the Indian government had warned Wikipedia to change India's map to conform with the borders set by their Constitution, the map still remains unchanged. Where Indian Constitution itself is disobeyed you think you can censor something with IPC? Unlike social networking sites, WMF is nonprofit and hence need not to worry about losing business. The maximum these countries can do is site block or to take action against editors within their territory (that's what 1(b) says), but still you cannot censor.
WP:LIBEL does not apply here as this is not a " defamation" but a real factual incident, neither do WP:AVOIDVICTIM as it is for "a person noteworthy only for one or two events". The actress is fine publicly identifying herself as the victim in this case, whether she's fine or not, Wikipedia is NOT censored and you cannot remove victim's name or any content, unless it violates any Wikipedia policy or the U.S law. WP:NOTCENSORED clearly states: "Content will be removed if it is judged to violate Wikipedia's policies (especially those on biographies of living persons and using a neutral point of view) or the law of the United States (where Wikipedia is hosted)"; and WP:PUBLICFIGURE states: "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it". So, it is what it is. 2409:4073:2E82:CD7A:C522:5000:D7B8:D4A2 ( talk) 18:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Wikimedia foundation is registered in the state of California, United States and have to comply with applicable laws. Some of the content appearing in this page is in violation of California laws that prohibit publishing a rape victim's name. Kindly do not allow this content on this page Sahir Shah 12:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
incredibly courageous choice to step forward, claims of "common decency" can possibly come across as sea-lioning. Hemantha ( talk) 07:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
awareof full facts of the issue; especially if you don't wish your actions to be seen as vandalism. Hemantha ( talk) 16:27, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved. Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:48, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved.
Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:51, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. no decision made as to which title to move to – robertsky ( talk) 11:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Bhavana (actress) → Bhavana Menon – Name as per media. Every single review of her latest film uses her last name, see [17] [18] and Case of Kondana#Reception. Similar case to [19] Tamannaah Bhatia. Gets rid of unneeded parentheticals.
A general search of Bhavana (actress) confirms this. DareshMohan ( talk) 09:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC)— Relisting. Jerium ( talk) 22:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
It has been proposed in this section that
Bhavana (actress) be
renamed and moved to
Bhavana (actress, born 1986). A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{
subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{
requested move/dated}} directly. |
Bhavana (actress) → Bhavana (actress, born 1986) – WP:PDAB versus Bhavana (Kannada actress) not justified. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Toadette Edit! 11:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal ( talk) 05:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
her fight for social justice, so that's doubly irrelevant. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
isn't even certain in the first place-> the article doesn't mention any of this doubt over the birth year. And I largely agree with Crouch, Swale on all counts - I would certainly not call 10:1 overwhelming. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bhavana (actress) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 12 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Bhavana Menon. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 08:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Bhavana (actor) → Bhavana (actress) – More common disambiguating tag is "actress". Arfaz ( talk) 19:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Bhavana actress.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
| |
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 06:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC) |
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved.
Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved.
Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Bhavna at CCL2 party, Vizag, India, 2011.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
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.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bhavna at CCL2 party, Vizag, India, 2011.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 13:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
The result of the move request was: First is moved to Bhavana (Malayalam actress), Second is not moved — Amakuru ( talk) 07:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
– Current disambiguation phrases not precise. The second actress has also appeared in Tamil/Hindi/Tulu/Telugu films. Timmyshin ( talk) 18:22, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
In this edit I removed the content about the subject's sexual assault. It was in the Career section, which was not well-conceived, as it has nothing to do with her career. If this content is going to be included, someone needs to figure out a more intuitive place for it. However, I do fear that without any other information, (like details about a trial, a conviction, subsequent activism to fight rape or to change laws,) a unique section would unduly draw attention to a negative event without providing sufficient context. I also fail to see where it could be intuitively included elsewhere in the article.
Also, per
WP:BLPCRIME, "A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed a crime, or is accused of having committed one, unless a conviction is secured."
It would be a mistake to implicate a suspect, especially when worded as it was by
Koodfaand
here. Koodfaand, you need to brush up on your understanding of
libel and what sort of phrasing could potentially be considered libelous. It is poor judgment to assert, without any trial conviction, that someone was involved in a rape. The smarter approach here is to omit the details about potential suspects, should someone find a way to resolve the other issues raised above.
Cyphoidbomb (
talk) 08:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
In this edit, I removed the connection made in the article between actor Dileep and the sexual assault. The two references did not have the name of the actress. It is WP:OR because the references do not support the claim. This problem arises because of the Indian law (to protect the victim) bans anything which connects her to a particular crime in public. She can potentially sue wikipedia for this entire section. Drajay1976 ( talk) 06:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Users and IP adresses state that revealing the identity of the person is a violation of Indian law. @
Cyphoidbomb: What should be done here ?
King Prithviraj II (
talk) 04:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Do note that the link that the citation mentioned (
http://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/malayalam/2017/feb/20/leading-malayalam-actor-gets-reportedly-abducted-and-molested-by-former-employee-1571991.html<) has been edited to remove the actress name. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
118.101.246.183 (
talk) 06:26, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Police taking legal action against people who use her name on public domain.but she complained in police bout the attack hapnd against her on the very next day of that incident Akhiljaxxn ( talk) 13:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
The above quote is from clause 1b of the terms of use. Wikipedia ***does not*** give immunity or promise to protect the editors from legal action. -- Drajay1976 ( talk) 02:43, 24 January 2022 (UTC)You are responsible for your own actions: You are legally responsible for your edits and contributions on Wikimedia Projects, so for your own protection you should exercise caution and avoid contributing any content that may result in criminal or civil liability under any applicable laws. For clarity, applicable law includes at least the laws of the United States of America. Although we may not agree with such actions, we warn editors and contributors that authorities may seek to apply other country laws to you, including local laws where you live or where you view or edit content. WMF generally cannot offer any protection, guarantee, immunity or indemnification.
The result of the move request was: Done ( non-admin closure) samee talk 10:29, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Bhavana (Malayalam actress) →
Bhavana (actress) – Dab for Malayalam not necessary since there's no other actress in the same name, plus the current naming is improper anyway since she is also active in
Kannada,
Tamil, and
Telugu language films. If it was meant for her ethnicity, then it should have been Bhavana (
Malayali actress).
Let There Be Sunshine (
talk) 16:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. —
Za
wl 13:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I have just moved Bhavana Ramanna back to Bhavana (Kannada actress), because that recent move was made against the RM of 2016, above on this page. As far as I can see, the Kannada actress is commonly referred to mononymically as well, [1] [2] [3] so this move has created a partial disambiguation situation, which would often be discouraged, even if one is primary over the other. @ Zawl: please could you undo the move and reopen the RM so we can discuss further? I oppose the above move. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 10:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Updating about her new film Govinda Govinda Shreyashv2604 ( talk) 12:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, while patrolling recent changes, I have reverted two edits by an IP editor attempting to remove content from this page [12] [13], and then had second thoughts [14]. Although the editor did not give an edit summary, I am inclined to assume good faith and let the page watchers decide what should be done with this content and whether its removal is a proper application of WP:BLP. JBchrch ( talk) 22:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Libra cursa, Why are you removing sourced content? Your edit summary doesn't make any sense. Note that the Wikipedia policy is to discuss on talk if you get reverted, not to simply repeat your edits. hemantha ( brief) 11:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Actually, the sources cited do not say it is Bhavana. I'd have to agree with Drajay1976 that it might be WP:OR ( [15] and [16]). — DaxServer ( talk · contribs) 11:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The above quote is from clause 1b of the terms of use. Wikipedia does not give immunity or promise to protect the editors from legal action. And, the objective of this law is to protect the victims. Not to protect the accused. I believe we should exercise caution and wait till the legal proceedings are over. -- Drajay1976 ( talk) 02:49, 24 January 2022 (UTC)You are responsible for your own actions: You are legally responsible for your edits and contributions on Wikimedia Projects, so for your own protection you should exercise caution and avoid contributing any content that may result in criminal or civil liability under any applicable laws. For clarity, applicable law includes at least the laws of the United States of America. Although we may not agree with such actions, we warn editors and contributors that authorities may seek to apply other country laws to you, including local laws where you live or where you view or edit content. WMF generally cannot offer any protection, guarantee, immunity or indemnification.
Restored fully-sourced content, as Wikipedia is not censored, nor am I subject to the Indian Penal Code here in the U.S. -- Orange Mike | Talk 22:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
IPC Section 228A? Making legal threat itself can get you blocked ( WP:LEGAL, WP:NPLT), not to mention censoring content with it. 1(b) of Terms of Use does not instructs to remove content that violates any local law, instead, it advices those editors who are bound to abide a local law that they should be cautious as the local authorities may apply their law on the editor if he/she resides under that jurisdiction, even though Wikipedia "may not agree with such actions". Regarding 228A, why should an Australian care about Indian law for editing Wikipedia which is hosted in the U.S.? Indian law applies only in India and Wikipedia only follows the U.S law. Wikipedia is available in 325 languages across the world. If every country's law was followed then Wikipedia would not be the same site you see now. WMF has never obeyed any foreign country's laws and has even defied government warnings, because of that the site was blocked by some countries, the most infamous being the three year ban in Turkey, nevertheless, the content remains unchanged. Even the Indian government had warned Wikipedia to change India's map to conform with the borders set by their Constitution, the map still remains unchanged. Where Indian Constitution itself is disobeyed you think you can censor something with IPC? Unlike social networking sites, WMF is nonprofit and hence need not to worry about losing business. The maximum these countries can do is site block or to take action against editors within their territory (that's what 1(b) says), but still you cannot censor.
WP:LIBEL does not apply here as this is not a " defamation" but a real factual incident, neither do WP:AVOIDVICTIM as it is for "a person noteworthy only for one or two events". The actress is fine publicly identifying herself as the victim in this case, whether she's fine or not, Wikipedia is NOT censored and you cannot remove victim's name or any content, unless it violates any Wikipedia policy or the U.S law. WP:NOTCENSORED clearly states: "Content will be removed if it is judged to violate Wikipedia's policies (especially those on biographies of living persons and using a neutral point of view) or the law of the United States (where Wikipedia is hosted)"; and WP:PUBLICFIGURE states: "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it". So, it is what it is. 2409:4073:2E82:CD7A:C522:5000:D7B8:D4A2 ( talk) 18:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Wikimedia foundation is registered in the state of California, United States and have to comply with applicable laws. Some of the content appearing in this page is in violation of California laws that prohibit publishing a rape victim's name. Kindly do not allow this content on this page Sahir Shah 12:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
incredibly courageous choice to step forward, claims of "common decency" can possibly come across as sea-lioning. Hemantha ( talk) 07:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
awareof full facts of the issue; especially if you don't wish your actions to be seen as vandalism. Hemantha ( talk) 16:27, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved. Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:48, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
That photo was taken by myself. All rights reserved.
Kunchakoboban2022 ( talk) 07:51, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. no decision made as to which title to move to – robertsky ( talk) 11:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Bhavana (actress) → Bhavana Menon – Name as per media. Every single review of her latest film uses her last name, see [17] [18] and Case of Kondana#Reception. Similar case to [19] Tamannaah Bhatia. Gets rid of unneeded parentheticals.
A general search of Bhavana (actress) confirms this. DareshMohan ( talk) 09:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC)— Relisting. Jerium ( talk) 22:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
It has been proposed in this section that
Bhavana (actress) be
renamed and moved to
Bhavana (actress, born 1986). A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{
subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{
requested move/dated}} directly. |
Bhavana (actress) → Bhavana (actress, born 1986) – WP:PDAB versus Bhavana (Kannada actress) not justified. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Toadette Edit! 11:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal ( talk) 05:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
her fight for social justice, so that's doubly irrelevant. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
isn't even certain in the first place-> the article doesn't mention any of this doubt over the birth year. And I largely agree with Crouch, Swale on all counts - I would certainly not call 10:1 overwhelming. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)