Talk:Naagin (2015 TV series)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Sloppy parentheticals

The article's starting to get laden with sloppy parentheticals. Note this edit by IP 45.124.198.204. People who are unfamiliar with the series are not going to have any idea what most of this content means. Note:

• Madhura Naik as Mayuri (Icchadari Morni)(Peahen) (2016)

What does Icchadari Morni mean? Is that a name? So then what's Mayuri? Another name? Why is there a name next to a name? What does a peahen have to do with anything? Is this some sort of supernatural form that the character takes? All of this stuff should be explained in clear prose. I have no idea why Indian television article contributors are so afraid to write a complete sentence. It's bizarre. Rather than explain in a sentence, it's better to wedge three parentheticals next to one another? Doesn't make any sense. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:02, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Haven't seen the show, but as far as I can understand, Mayuri is the name of her character and "Icchadari Morni" is its description in Hindi which translates to peahen. - Managerarc™ ^talk 01:27, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@Managerarc: I appreciate the reply! I'm still confused. I know you don't know the series, but it's unclear why they're calling her a peahen. There's got to be a way to explain this so it makes sense like:

"Madhury Naik as Mayuri - Mayuri is blah blah blah, the daughter of blah, who occasionally takes the form of icchadari morni, (English: peahen)"

Or something similar. Part of the problem is that we're capitalizing Icchadari Morni, which takes on the shape of a name to a non-Hindi-speaker like myself. I must have like a dozen different articles like this on my watchlist that are completely incomprehensible. Shakti — Astitva Ke Ehsaas Ki is another example. "Durshaktina as Churail/Kinner" Is this an actor playing two roles? Are we talking about a transgender ghost? So frickin' confusing. The contributors are writing these articles with no regard for whether anyone who isn't Indian and familiar with the series can understand them. It's like reading a children's television show article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Well it's a fantasy series, so it might be true that the character changes its shape from time to time. Regarding the other one, I don't know who Durshaktina is. Never heard or read about any actress by this name ad can't find any source for it either. "Churail" or Churel means witch and "Kinner" means transgender I think. They are definitely not character names.

Yes, I do agree with you regarding the state of articles related to Indian television. They are the most difficult to keep track of because something is being changed every few minutes. Plot summaries are written like novels, no one bothers to add sources, lots of original research, poorly written content. It's far worse than the film articles.- Managerarc™ ^talk 12:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Of the dozen or more similar articles on my list, it's almost like there's a systematic effort to have the articles conform with some unseen template. I can't tell you how many times I've removed the "Former cast" section from these articles, (per WP:TVPLOT we care about Main and Recurring, and former cast should intuitively be either in Main or Recurring so we have a better sense of their importance in the series) but random editors keep putting them back in. Argh... And there aren't many editors from WikiProject Television who care about Indian TV articles. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:20, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:TVPLOT and Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative works

In this edit I removed the plot section. It had been flagged for major chopping for four months. Per WP:TVPLOT, plot summaries shouldn't exceed 500 words. The version I chopped was 2877 words in length. Far too long. Additionally, per Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative works, excessively detailed summaries of plots present potential copyright violation concerns, as they can be considered "derivative works". If someone wants to take another stab at it, go right ahead, but you shouldn't exceed 500 words and you should stay focused on the major points in the series, not episode-by-episode details. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:48, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Naagin (season 2)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge Naagin (season 2) to Naagin (2015 TV series). This is an uncontroversial merge proposal. The S2 article was created prematurely with no awareness of WikiProject Television norms. We don't create standalone articles unless there is sufficient content to require it. In this case there isn't even an episode list for S1 or S2, so child articles are unwarranted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

---

There's no clear justification for a standalone article for this series. Most TV series don't have unique articles for each season unless there is sufficient content about the production, cultural impact, list of episodes, etc. to warrant that. The main Naagin (2015 TV series) article has some of that stuff, but the ratings content wasn't maintained, the plot summary is a giant mess, etc. More effort should be made to clean up the main article before splitting into a second season. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:26, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the season article I can't see any justification either. There's not even an episode list. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Different seasons no need to merge. Moreover I am removing the merge template from the page. See 24 (TV series) and 24 (season 2) VarunFEB2003 12:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@VarunFEB2003: By what logic do you think that you have consensus to end the merge discussion? What MOS:TV guidelines govern your position about the suitability of the S2 article? You are comparing the second season of 24, an article that has content about the season's plot, along with a comprehensive list of episodes with summaries, and list of awards, with an article that's little more than an unsourced cast list. By what stretch of the imagination is this article ready to exist as a stand-alone? There's not even an article for season 1 like there is for 24 (season 1). The way this usually goes is:

1. Main article on the series is created, i.e. 24 (TV series) or Naagin (Indian TV series)
2. Episode table is created and fleshed out at the main article. This remains at the main article until a second season begins. Meanwhile, we're collecting production information and any other data we can.
3. Once a second season has begun, the S1 episode table is moved to a unique article along with the production and other real-world information we've collected, i.e. SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1)
4. The season 2 article is created with a list of episodes, we start fleshing out the casting/production information, etc.

Your unilateral change seems to take none of this into consideration. The S2 Naagin article is premature at the very least. It's also problematic that you unilaterally moved the article from Naagin (season 2) to Naagin 2 (Indian TV series). Did you even bother asking anyone at WikiProject Television what our normal article naming conventions are for this sort of thing? Naagin 2 sounds like a film sequel. Why did you move Naagin (2015 TV series) to Naagin (Indian TV series)? This is just poor decision-making all around. You need to restore the merge templates at the very least. @AussieLegend: do you have any input on this? Now it seems we have to figure out what the main and sub articles should be titled... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

You are all free to revert me if you feel I was wrong. P.S This article is about season 1 and that one about season 2 VarunFEB2003 17:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@VarunFEB2003: So the burden is ours to fix your mistakes? I'm still not clear on how you decided that two other opinions on the matter should be disregarded in favor of your own opinion. I don't see an acknowledgment about that in your response. As for your post-script, this article is about the television series in general as it should be. It's only "about season 1" because only one season has aired. All multiple season articles start with a single main article about the first season, then expand as content warrants. Mr. Smart LION made a questionable call when he created Naagin 2 (Indian TV series) (or whatever it was titled at the time) so prematurely. A season 1 article should have been created first, provided that sufficient content existed, but since we don't even have a list of episodes, even a S1 article would be premature. It would just be a cast list. If either of you plan to dabble in television articles, you both need to familiarize yourselves with MOS:TV and mainstream non-Indian television articles. The headaches that are caused in Indian entertainment articles are astounding, and most of it comes from either a lack of awareness of or an apathy toward established television guidelines at Wikipedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

 Done rollbacked VarunFEB2003 17:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@VarunFEB2003: Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

• Support: I don't see any need for two standalone piece on a single topic. If and when more sources emerge to support enough contents that could possibly make navigating through article difficult, we can do a split. Anup [Talk] 14:44, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I think that this article should be titled as "Naagin (Indian TV Series)" including the needed content from Naagin (season 2), while I suggest that the Season 2 page should be changed as "Episode List of Naagin (Indian TV Series)" (it could extend too much if the series turns into TV soap opera). I also agree that the Plot section of the page must be updated, from the story told in Episode of 8 October 2016. Also Ratings section should be summarized due to too much repetations. Thanks! M.Billoo2000 (talk) 22:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we need the extra disambiguation of "Indian" in the title. There's only one TV series titled Naagin as far as our disambiguation page is concerned. Frankly, I think the article would be best titled plainly as Naagin (TV series). We don't tend to add the year unless there's a reason, like to distinguish from other TV shows called Naagin. For example 24 (TV series) has no year, but Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1987 TV series), Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2003 TV series), and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) do, because there are three TV series with this title. Note also the lack of "American" in the article titles. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:16, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above 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.

How character lists work...

This seems to be an issue, so let me explain how character lists should work per WikiProject Television norms. (First, see WP:TVCAST, then see List of Millennium characters, a featured list.)

• Character lists should contain the name of the actor, and the names of roles they play, along with brief descriptions of who the character is.
• We typically break up cast into Main and Recurring cast subsections.
• "Main" is determined by the series' onscreen "starring" credits. If that's not available, then by some official source. "Recurring" is for characters that appear more than once. We shouldn't care about one-off characters. Wikipedia is not IMDb, so we are not required to list every person who appeared more than once, either.
• Guest stars are typically indicated in episode lists.
• "Former cast" is not a valid subsection, because it is not consistent with community consensus, and because it doesn't tell us whether the cast member was part of the Main or Recurring casts. Just because someone leaves a series, does not mean that their role gets buried in a discard pile.
• Per WP:TVCAST, new additions to the cast (whether they are in Main or Recurring) should be added to the bottom of the list. So if Karanvir Bohra joined in S2, he would be added to the bottom of the Main cast list, even if he plays a major role. That's just how WikiProject Television prefers things. We don't reorder cast based on perceived importance. This would constitute original research.
• Having individual cast lists for S1 and S2 is only going to result in duplicate content for no good reason. Cast is presumed to continue as the series progresses, unless we indicate otherwise.

Ex: "Arjun Bijlani as Ritik Singh (Yuvraj) / Sangram Singh - Bijlani left the series after S1."

• We should avoid using slashes per WP:SLASH, because slashes create confusion. Are these people twins? Are they two unique characters? Is one name a nickname for the other? If a character is playing dual roles, that should be explained in prose, with as much detail as needed to communicate to someone who has never seen the series.

Ex: "John Doe in a dual role as Sam and Dave. Dave is a personality imagined by Sam, who suffers from brain trauma. Dave takes the form of a naagin who constantly tempts Sam into doing evil. Sam is constantly trying to avoid listening to Dave, but by the end of S1, Sam's resistance wears down and he starts letting Dave manipulate him to do evil."

• Character tables, like the one found at List of Millennium characters should be used to supplement cast/character information. It should not be used to replace the cast list.
• Once a character list at this article becomes sufficiently full of information (information about the character, casting, real-world info) then it can be branched off into a unique article. But we are far too early for that now.

Here is an example of what Naagin (TV series) should look like at this stage: The Grinder (TV series) Editors should realize that the goal for any article is to make it to Good article or Featured article status. If you continue to delete information and use sloppy parentheticals to indicate facts about a character, or to format the article in a way that is not consistent with MOS:TV you're only bringing the article backwards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2016

Plz add kinshuk mahajan to star list 2405:204:520D:628F:0:0:2AB2:48A0 (talk) 19:37, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —MRD2014 (Merry Christmas!) 22:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

English , Maths

Actor Ritik khatik (talk) 12:57, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ritik khatik: Was there a point to this comment, or were you just testing the talk page for functionality? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2017

161.0.240.168 (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2017 (UTC) Rudra falls in love with Shivangi.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Cast section

The cast section (like various other sections in this problematic article) is a mess. See WP:TVCAST for guidance. Listing the cast by season just creates a wall of repetitive content. Do we need Mouni Roy's name three times in that section? Most television articles are interested in a general list of characters organized by their introduction. List of Millennium characters uses a table to summarize noteworthy cast's appearances across seasons, but -- and more importantly, there is a prose section that provides brief summaries of the characters along with real-world content about casting, etc. It's shocking that the people interested in this series have zero awareness that we're building an encyclopedia here, not a crappy version of the show's website. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:04, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

In these edits, I cleaned up the cast list by converting the unnecessary season subsections into parentheticals. I don't particularly care for the parentheticals, but I don't presently have a better idea for how to present this content. I removed the large cleanup template, as most of the issues have been resolved. I removed the refimprove template because a cast section doesn't really need references, as the primary source (the show itself) is used as a source for cast. The items in need of sourcing were claims of certain actors returning for S3, which will not premiere until November. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Class assessment: 6/17/17 UTC

Hi! I just assigned classes to the WikiProject templates on this page, assigning Start and C classes to the WikiProject India and WikiProject Television templates, respectively. Here is why I did that:

• For the WikiProject India assessment (WP:IN1): The article seems to satisfy all C-class requirements, except that C-class articles "should be free from major grammatical errors", which this article contains. However, the article seems to satisfy all of the Start-class criteria. Therefore, I assumed that the article qualifies for Start-class. Once all major grammatical errors have been fixed, this page should probably be promoted to C-class in the WikiProject India template.
• For the WikiProject Television assessment (WP:TV/A): The article seems to satisfy all B-class requirements, except that B-class articles have to be "reasonably well-written", "[contain] no major grammatical errors", and "[flow] sensibly", and the article fails all of these criteria. However, the article seems to satisfy all of the C-class criteria. Therefore, I assumed that the article qualifies for C-class. Once the prose is fixed appropriately, this page should probably be promoted to B-class in the WikiProject Television template.

If anyone has any questions, please let me know.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 05:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Are Shesha and Ruchika the same person?

@Pranay Star: As the main editor who adds plot details to this article, I thought that you might know the answer to this question. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 01:13, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Noah Kastin. Shesha and Ruchika are the same. But Rocky's family only know her as Ruchika. So, I wrote Ruchika. Always writing Shesha does not make sense. So, always talk with me before you set clarifies in the page. Regarding this, I thank you for asking such doubts and making me write perfectly. Pranay Star (talk) 05:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

The above comment was moved from User talk:Noah Kastin by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) at 06:54, 20 June 2017 (UTC). This was done in an effort to keep the discussion centralized.

Thanks for the reply, Pranay Star! Knowing this, I think it would make sense to change all occurrences of "Ruchika" to "Shesha" so that the reader knows who is being talked about. If it is important that Rocky's family knows her as Ruchika, perhaps it should say something in her first Season 2 appearance along these lines:

Shesha (known to Rocky's family as Ruchika)

Also, I'm not quite sure what you meant by "set clarifies". If you could let me know, I would greatly appreciate that!

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 07:02, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Merge Naga Kanyaka into this article?

Hi! I noticed that Naga Kanyaka, an article about a dubbed version of this article's subject, contains a large overlap with this article (as its subject is the same). Therefore, I would like to merge Naga Kanyaka into this article.

If anyone has any suggestions on whether or not Naga Kanyaka should be merged into this article, please let me know. Otherwise, I will merge Naga Kanyaka into this article.

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 02:18, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

• Merge - It's unclear what community guidelines Helper V1 was following when they created an article on a *DUB* of an existing series. Makes no sense to me. Looks like basic unnecessary content forking, especially since the entirety of Naga Kanyaka could be included as a mere paragraph at Naagin (TV series). Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I have now merged Naga Kanyaka into this article, though I have not yet cleaned up the section that Naga Kanyaka was merged into. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I have now cleaned up after the merge (in this edit). Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Named footnotes: 6/23/17 UTC

Hi, Azharmohammed! Thank you for editing Wikipedia!

I noticed that, in this edit, you added a named footnote. While what you did would work if the footnote was defined (i.e. with content included) at a previous point in the article, the reference was not defined at an earlier point. Therefore, the footnote does not work properly.

If you intended to cite a source, you can add the source after the text <ref name="Cast 6", then replace the text /> with </ref>. This will then define the footnote, making it clear what you are citing.

For more details on named footnotes, see WP:REFNAME.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:37, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Azharmohammed: I just removed the undefined citation (in this edit). Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 03:01, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Confusing edit summary: 6/27/17 UTC

Hi, Pranay Star! Thank you for all of your work on this article!

I was confused by something that you said in the edit summary of your most recent edit (this edit). The thing that confused me was the following line of text:

anyone don't make a clean up

I'm not sure if this is a request for no one to clean up the article. If so, I am requesting permission to edit the article, because it still needs to be copy edited and possibly shortened.

Thanks again for all your great work!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 20:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Pranay Star: If I receive no response, I will assume that it is fine for me to edit the article. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:35, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Noah Kastin. I requested everyone who edit the article to not make much clean up. It results in the incomplete plot of the TV series, so anyone who reads it does not know reasons for why a situation had occured or what happened to him/her to do a particular thing. I think you understand, I am giving you permission to clean up but do not edit it much. Leave these sentences and don't edit "At the end of the season, Rocky stabs Shivangi for an unknown reason yet to be revealed and Ritik look alike comes and tells Rocky that Shivangi should die for a reason."

Because, it is the sentence which depicts the story of the last episode of Naagin season 2.

Once again, thank you.

Pranay Star (talk) 04:30, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

The above comment was moved from User talk:Noah Kastin by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) at 04:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC). This was done in an effort to keep the discussion centralized.

Thanks for the update, Pranay Star! Also thanks for giving me the go-ahead to copy edit the article.

I would like to remove some parts of the article which are somewhat irrelevant to the season as a whole (such as "A is revived, only to be killed shortly by B" or "B is killed by C, only to be shortly resurrected by D"). I would like to do this to make identification of important plot points clearer, as well as making the overall word count shorter (per WP:TVPLOT, the season section should be no more than 500 words; however, it is currently 682 words). Would you mind if I compressed the article as suggested? If no answer is given, I will assume that I can do that.

By the way, how much of the sentence that you asked me not to touch is relevant, besides "Later, Rocky inexplicably stabs Shivangi"?

Thanks again for the update!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 05:04, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok, Noah Kastin. Edit as much as you want but make it look relevant. Thanking u, Pranay Star. Pranay Star (talk) 1:04 am, Today (UTC−4)

The above comment was moved from User talk:Noah Kastin by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) at 05:12, 28 June 2017 (UTC). This was done in an effort to keep the discussion centralized.

@Pranay Star: I have now massively compressed the season, bringing it down to 392 words (coincidentally the same number of words as season 1). This should now be fairly concise, highlighting important plot points and complying with the Manual of Style (which it should continue to do even once the "clarification needed" tag is removed). Please let me know if I deleted any really important plot points (which I probably did). Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 05:35, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry Noah Kastin, you have made it too small after Shivangi's marriage plot. It is irrelevant and I think you must watch naagin series and then understand it and write. Because, you left important sentences i.e. Rocky too became a nag and Shivangi killing all murderers in a way and Rudra's death. I am not telling about episodic plot but to make the plot perfect and suit it. I am now editing it properly and after that, you check it again and ask me if you have any doubts. Pranay Star(talk) 1:54 am, Today (UTC−4)

The above comment was moved from User talk:Noah Kastin by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) at 17:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC). This was done in an effort to keep the discussion centralized.

Thank you for your changes to the page, Pranay Star! In answer to why I removed the sentences that you mentioned:

I did not intentionally remove Rocky turning into a Naag and helping Shivangi kill Ritik's murderers. Thank you for restoring those; they seem to be fairly important.

As to why I removed the sentence about Rudra dying: I removed that because Rudra seemed to be fairly unimportant to the season plot. The three mentions of him currently are 1) he allies with Shivangi; 2) he is used as a framing device by Shesha; and 3) he dies. As far as I am concerned, him allying with Shivangi is not very important if he doesn't contribute much to the overall season plot, and neither is him dying (again, if he doesn't contribute much to the overall season plot); this is why I removed both of those events from the summary. Then, once he was only in the summary once, I figured he did not need to be called be name (hence the change of "Rudra" to "another person").

By the way, the same reasoning for Rudra applies to why I removed all mention of Avantika from the plot summary. By the time I removed Avantika from the plot, all she did was 1) get summoned; 2) kill Rudra; and 3) get killed. By that point, the only part of that that really helped the plot was that she killed Rudra, and that didn't have to be her; all that was necessary was that Rudra was killed (as long as Rudra was an important enough character to warrant inclusion). This logic also applies to countless other characters who I removed (including Tanya and Jadunath, just to name a couple).

Please let me know if this makes sense. If so, I will once again remove mention of Rudra and Tanya. (If I receive no response, I will remove mentions.) Please also let me know if you have any other questions or opinions.

Thanks again for your contributions!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 17:55, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

@Pranay Star: I have now altered the article (in this edit) as I had said that I would. Please let me know if you have any comments on this. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 07:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Confusing edit: 6/29/17 UTC

Hi, Pranay Star! Thank you for your amazing contributions to this article!

In your most recent edit to this page (this edit), two things confused me:

1. You re-added mention of Rudra to the article, seemingly with no explanation. If you can explain why you did this, I would greatly appreciate that!
2. Your edit summary exceeds the maximum character limit, making it difficult to understand what you are trying to communicate, due to the fact that some of your edit summary does not appear. If you can explain what you were trying to say in your edit summary, I would greatly appreciate that, too!

Thank you again for your contributions!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Class assessment: 7/2/17 UTC

Hi! I just reassessed the classes for the WikiProject templates on this page, upgrading the WikiProject India template from Start to B, and leaving the WikiProject Television template at C. Here is why I did those things:

• For the WikiProject India assessment (WP:IN1): The article seems to satisfy all B-class requirements.
• For the WikiProject Television assessment (WP:TV/A): The article seems to satisfy all B-class requirements, except that B-class articles have to be "suitably referenced, with inline citations", as well as "[having] reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged [has to be] cited". The article fails these criteria, as it has some uncited statements. However, the article seems to satisfy all of the C-class criteria. Therefore, I assumed that the article qualifies for C-class. Once all statements are cited appropriately, this page should probably be promoted to B-class in the WikiProject Television template.

If anyone has any questions, please let me know.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 09:04, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: - I don't agree with rating of B. 3 of the important sections - Season 1, Season 2 and the cast have pretty much no references. Hence, it should be given a rating of C.

VasuVR (talk, contribs) 13:33, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@VasuVR: Thank you for your input! Also thank you for letting me know that there are some uncited sections; I have now tagged them appropriately.

About the B rating for WikiProject India: The B rating for WikiProject India does not say that the article needs to be fully cited. What it does say about citations is that "At minimum, [the article] should also have some references to reliable sources". It then goes on to say, "Nonetheless, [the article] has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR)". Since the only problem that I noticed with the article is that it does not have enough references, I assumed that it passed for B-class in its WikiProject India rating.

On the other hand, the WikiProject Television B rating says that the article must adhere to the six B-Class criteria, one of which says that the article must be "suitably referenced, with inline citations". This is why I rated the article C-class for its WikiProject Television rating. However, the WikiProject India Assessment guideline does not say that the article must adhere to the six B-Class criteria to be rated B-class.

If WikiProject India articles must, in fact, adhere to the six B-Class criteria, I will reduce the rating for it on this article to C. Also, if this is required, the guideline page should probably be changed to express this.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 01:39, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Citations needed: 7/9/17 UTC

Hi! I noticed that the article has many uncited facts in it. As may be noticed, I am in the process of trying to cite more facts, but I need some help doing so. I particularly need help in three areas:

1. I am not familiar enough with policy to know quite what needs citations and what doesn't. In particular, I don't know whether the plot section needs citations or not.
2. I can't read in any language other than English, so I can't use information from non-English reliable sources.
3. I am not sure what facts are likely to be unable to be cited and should thus be removed.

If anyone can help me with any of these issues or in any other way help the article become completely cited, that would be tremendously appreciated.

@Cyphoidbomb and Pranay Star: As the main contributors to this article, I thought that I should let you know. Your help in particular should help this article get better.

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 03:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Ok, Noah Kastin. I understood what you are asking about. As you have read the articles of how to write a tv series article, you must be knowing about the citations in that article. You will know the need of citations in that article. If needed citations for plot, then you send a message for me whether to cite or uncite plot. If it needs citation, then I can add from the news articles like Bollywoodlife. And International broadcast and adaptation, I can't get you citations as news doesn't mention about a series dubbed in malayalam or it is rerunning in other channel. I think you have understood. Discuss with me for any other articles too.

I have been busy since yesterday so I have no time to edit Wikipedia articles these days. Pranay Star (talk) 04:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The above comment was moved from User talk:Noah Kastin by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) at Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋). This was done in an effort to keep the discussion centralized.

@Pranay Star: Thanks for the offer to get plot citations!

In answer to whether the plot section needs citations: I just did a bit of research, and discovered what seems to me to say that plot summaries do not need citations, but that citations are helpful. See MOS:PLOT and MOS:FAIR USE for more details.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 04:51, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Pranay Star and Cyphoidbomb: I've just done about as much as I can do pertaining to cleaning up sources already in the article (in the article's current state).

By the way, this source—which is only used in the article to cite the fact that Naagin airs on SCTV, dubbed into Indonesian—might also be useful for citing various parts of the plot summary (if this Google Translate window is anything to go by).

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 05:43, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: Thank you for your efforts. My preference is to only act here in a gnome/admin capacity. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Noted. I will try to respect your preferences. Thanks for stopping by! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 07:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

New sources found: 7/12/17 UTC

Hi! I just found several sources which may or may not be useful for the article. Here they are, with brief notes describing basically what they include:

• [1]: Reception and S1 end month.
• [2]: Criticism.
• [3]: Speculation on reception. Note that this source is already used in the article.
• [4]: Actress’s feelings on the show. Note that the following citation has the same content, only (in my opinion) not written as well: [5]
• [6]: Reception and popularity.
• [7]: Reception and popularity.
• [8]: Popularity, S1 end month, part of S2 lead cast, and replacement by Kavach...Kaali Shaktiyon Se. Note that this source might also be useful in the Kavach article.
• [9]: Production and part of S2 lead cast.
• [10]: Production and reception.
• [11]: Production and speculation on S3 cast.
• [12]: Production and reception.
• [13]: Popularity, start date, and directing-related.
• [14]: So long that I can’t briefly describe it.
• [15]: Reception, part of each S1 and S2 lead cast, S1 end date.
• [16]: Popularity, S1 and S2 lead cast, Pakistan ban details.
• [17]: Pakistan ban details.
• [18]: Possibly useful, but I can’t figure out for what.
• [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24] and [25]: Popularity.

If anyone has any opinions on how useful these sources are or what they could potentially be used for, please let me know (possibly underneath the individual citations for comments on individual sources, or as a general comment down here for comments concerning several sources). I may add more about the individual sources and/or add them to the article as I discern their usefulness or lack thereof.

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 04:57, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Class assessment: 7/11/17 UTC

Hi, IJBall! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia!

I am somewhat perplexed by your recent class assessment of this article, where you demoted it from B and C classes to Start and Start classes (in this edit). What confuses me is that the only explanation given (in the edit summary) was that the article has "numerous issues" and is "under no circumstances B-class". However, I'm not sure what issues you're talking about. If you could let me know, I would greatly appreciate that!

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: B-class is one of the highest assessment levels we have on Wikipedia – it is just short of Good article-class, and a significant subset of B-class articles would likely be approved for Good article-status. This article comes nowhere near qualifying for B-class – the overall article has a {{Refimprove}} tag, and in addition nearly every section of the article has separate 'cleanup' tags as well, and there are numerous {{citation needed}} tags. In short, this is an article with a lot of problems, and would fail to pass all 6 levels of B-class assessment (right now, I'm not sure it would pass any of those 6 assessments). It is nowhere near 'B-class', and with its many issues I think even giving this article even a 'C-class' assessment status is a stretch... 'Start-class' sounds right for a semi-longish article that is insufficiently sourced (but not completely lacking in sourcing). Pinging Cyphoidbomb who has already put a lot of time into this article... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: After reading Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Assessment and Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Assessment more closely, several times, and after checking over the article again, my point of view is much closer to yours. I agree that it should not be rated B-class on the WikiProject India scale and definitely not on the WikiProject Televison scale. I also agree that Start-class probably fits for its WikiProject Television rating, though I think the article might almost be at the point where it could get a C rating for WikiProject Televison. However, for WikiProject India, where the requirements seem to be significantly less strict than for WikiProject Television, I think that the article is much closer to getting a C rating, and might actually be at the point where it should have one. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 00:47, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

In general, different WP's shouldn't rate the same article with different assessment classes. I'd like to hear from Cyphoidbomb on his thoughts on 'Start-class' vs. 'C-class' before proceeding. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Thanks for letting me know about the rule with the same article having multiple classes not being allowed. That clears up a lot of issues.

I'd also like to hear from Cyphoidbomb, and will definitely wait for him before proceeding as well.

Right now, I'm trying to improve the article's quality by finding good, reliable sources that the article doesn't already contain. Please let me know if this causes any problems for the article's quality assessment.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 01:03, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

My personal view is that if can eliminate most to all of the {{citation needed}} tags and replace them with appropriate sourcing, the article would likely graduate to 'C-class' at that point. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Complex edit: 7/15/17 UTC

Hi, Pranay Star! Thank you for adding a useful citation to this article. Also, thank you for removing two sentences, each of which shouldn't be in the article until they can be cited; one due to WP:CRYSTAL (the one concerning season 3), and one due to WP:PEA (the one concerning awards).

I just reverted your edits to the second paragraph of the lede of this article. The changes that I made—along with reasoning for them—are listed below:

1. I put back the uncited start and end dates for season 1, for two reasons: 1) I think that the start and end dates for the season are fairly important; and 2) available sources probably exist, stating what the start and end dates were.
2. I removed the reference citing Sudha Chandran being one of the main characters in season 1 and returned the "citation needed" tag. This was done because the reference did not state that Chandran was a main cast member for season 1, only that she was in season 1.
3. I re-added the uncited sentence about Kavach replacing the first season of Naagin. This was done because I am fairly sure that sources exist supporting this fact.
4. I fixed up minor grammatical, punctuation, and capitalization errors.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thank you again for your useful contributions earlier today!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 16:04, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Xà Nữ Báo Thù: Vietnamese speakers requested

Hi! Currently, there is a sentence in this article concerning a dub of this article's subject into Vietnamese, entitled Xà Nữ Báo Thù. This sentence, unfortunately, is completely uncited. However, I cannot read Vietnamese, and Google Translate produces nonsensical results (e.g. "Bite still how to bear suffering"). If anyone can read Vietnamese and can help me find sources for Xà Nữ Báo Thù (or conclusively find a lack thereof), I would greatly appreciate that! Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 19:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Noah, the Reference desk (or more specifically Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language) might be a good place to start if you're trying to get direct assistance. Or perhaps WikiProject Vietnam? Regards and thanks for your efforts, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:26, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Thanks for the advice! I will look into those options. Thanks again! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 00:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I have now put in a help request at WT:VIETNAM. The help request is located at WT:VIETNAM#Vietnamese citation translation requested. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 01:06, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

CN spans

Hi all (and perhaps Noah, specifically), do we really need the citation requests for the cast/roles that have already aired? Typically we use the primary source (the TV show itself) for uncontroversial content like cast, or plot. I'm not sure the flagging is necessary. I'll take on faith that Kinshuk Mahajan plays a male serpent, for instance. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:21, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Good point; I will remove the majority of the citation requests. However, I would like to see some form of citation for who is a "main character", as this is the source of some debate (i.e. editors moving characters into and out of the main characters section). Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 00:45, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: This is going to be tricky for non-Hindi speakers to verify, especially because I think Indian TV and films may not do credits the way the Western world does credits. The things I'd be most wary of is the random moving of cast up or down, (which you seem to be attuned to) since that tends to look like we're adhering to someone's personal interpretation of who is important and who is not. Although, I think that sometimes ignorant editors will move people from main cast to other sections depending on whether or not that actor/character has been downgraded. This is problematic, because as I'm sure you can understand, if someone is a main cast member, but later takes a back seat in the series, they shouldn't be swept under the rug. Anyhow, a much bigger problem across Indian TV articles. TL;DR: I don't oppose your requests for clarification on main characters. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: For recurring characters, would TV Guide be useful just to prove that they exist (and sometimes their names)? Here's a sample TV Guide entry on Naagin characters (note that this may only cover one season, unclear which): [26] Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 14:54, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I have also discovered some citations (currently used in the article) which state that various characters are main characters. Having found no other reliable sources that state that characters are main characters, I am inclined to believe that the only characters who are main characters are the ones that the sources that I found specify. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 17:45, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Character roles: 7/16/17 UTC

Hi! I'm not quite sure what notation should be used for characters who are sometimes main characters (and so appear in the main characters section), but are sometimes recurring characters. This seems to be the case with Aashka Goradia (recurring in season 1, main in season 2) and Arjun Bijlani (main in season 1, (possibly) recurring in season 2).

I have tried to find an appropriate guideline, but have failed to do so. I have also failed to find a comparable article with a characters section to base this one on. If someone can let me know what notation to use, I would greatly appreciate that!

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 17:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Can you help me figure out what to do about this? Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 00:40, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: Prose is my usual go-to. Depending on how much information we have, something like "Goradia was a recurring character until season 2 when she took over the lead after __'s departure" or whatever the case may be. Obviously we calibrate depending on what sort of content exists. And yeah, I'd probably move her to Main if she's Main, but not move her back if her character takes a lesser role in the future, since it's important for us to know that she was part of the main cast at some point. The Indian marketing sockpuppets seem to hate prose, preferring instead to use Wikipedia to detail whomever is fresh on the screen at this moment, but that's not how we operate. We should absolutely have real-world information in our cast section, per WP:TVCAST. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I just made an edit in an attempt to solve this problem. Please let me know if this achieved the desired goal. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 18:49, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: Good work, my only note is that "relegated" makes it sound like a demotion, as opposed to just how the storyline evolved. In the interest of neutrality, maybe something along the lines of "Bijlani's role was reduced to a recurring role" or something. I can't think of the best phrasing at present. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:29, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Thanks for pointing out the problem with the word "relegated". I can't think of a better word at the moment either, so I've tagged the sentence with Template:POV statement until I can think of a better word. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 02:43, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Content Reversion: 7/20/17 UTC

Hi, Pranay Star! Thank you for all of your great work on Wikipedia!

I have reverted two of your edits to this page (this one and this one), for the following reasons:

• They removed material which probably could be cited, but which I have not found citations for yet.
• They removed helpful explanatory comments.
• They removed existing useful citations.
• They added citations which do not adequately cite the facts that they seem to be citing.

Your edit did also add some useful citations, so I have re-added those in this edit.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 20:49, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Content Reversion: 7/21/17 UTC

Hi, Elexbrand! Thank you for editing Wikipedia!

I have reverted five of your edits to this page (in this edit), for the following reasons:

1. They added content concerning a future release with no sources supporting the content that you added. This is explicitly prohibited by WP:CRYSTAL.
2. They disrupted the general shape of the cast list. In this article, the general cast list format has been: one actor, one entry. If it is announced that the actor will appear in the next season, the parenthetical statement next to their name (such as "(Seasons X—Y)") can have that "Y" number incremented by one to show that the actor will appear in the next season. For example, "Arjun Bijlani (Seasons 1—2)" can be changed to "Arjun Bijlani (Seasons 1—3)", if it has been announced that he will appear in season 3. (Note, however, that this must be cited; see point 1.) However, it should not be written as:

• Arjun Bijlani (Seasons 1—2)
• Arjun Bijlani (Season 3)

If you can find reliable sources showing that Arjun Bijlani and/or Adaa Khan is going to have a main role in season 3 (Mouni Roy's appearance in season 3 is already sourced, so no additional citations are needed to cite that fact), feel free to change "(Seasons 1—2)" next to the actor's name to "(Seasons 1—3)" and add a citation next to the parenthetical statement. Alternatively, you can drop links to reliable sources on the talk page here, and I will add them to the article for you.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 21:25, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Arjun Bijlani

@Kamiya Khurana: re: this and this, can you please explain why you're removing Bijlani's appearances in S2? According to the prose in the cast list, he was at least in the first episode. Is that not accurate? Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)