This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other concerns about the biography of a living person, please report the issue to the biographies of living persons noticeboard. If you are connected to the subject of this article and need help with issues related to it, please see this page.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other concerns about the biography of a living person, please report the issue to the biographies of living persons noticeboard. If you are connected to the subject of this article and need help with issues related to it, please see this page.

WikiProject Biography / Actors and Filmmakers / Politics and Government

(Rated B-Class)

Biography portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.

B

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (marked as Low-priority).

This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as Low-priority).

WikiProject India / Cinema / Politics / Television

(Rated B-Class, High-importance)

India portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

B

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (marked as High-importance).

This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup.

This article is supported by the Indian television workgroup.

Amitabh Bachchan received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

[edit] Topics from 2007-2008

[edit] Health

Samrat.bose 23:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC) The part which deals with Amitabh Bachchan's health (myasthenia gravis) is filled with factual errors. It says: "Later, he was struck with with an illness called Myasthenia Gravis. This happened either because of the heavy medication that he took during his Coolie accident or because of the blood transfusion that he had received." Myasthenia gravis is a disorder where there is a problem at the junction of the nerve and muscle. Certain types of proteins at such places block the uptake of important chemicals causing the muscle to tire easily. People with myasthenia find it difficult to do things which cause the muscle to tire. For example, they find it difficult to carry on repeatative movements, or the patient may be unable to comb his hair beyond a certain time. Myasthenia is usually not known to be caused by the reasons cited. A drug called penicillamine (not to be confused with the antibiotic penicillin) can cause a similar problem, but it is not something one would have as "heavy medication" as cited. Some other drugs may exacerbate the problem in someone who already has myasthenia, but would not cause it.

[edit] Total cruft

This article is total cruft. I have replaced dozens of non-RS cites with {{fact}}. If it is not addressed pronto, I will be blanking large parts of the article. We cant have an article full of OR with {{fact}} tags sitting on every sentence for eternity. Sarvagnya 04:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

By saying "total craft", you don't really give a genuine reason and you didn't give. You're just quickly removing sites which names seem to be unreliable. I want you to come with every source HERE and say why it's unreliable. According to what? I had a read through WP:RS. No indication is given to your claim that box office india, bollyvista.com (which are used in featured articles, and can do NOTHING with that) etx are unreliable.

I definitely agree that blogs, (even bollyspice.com), youtube etc are not reliable, but boxofficeindia is again the official site of box office figures in India so I'm waiting for explanations why it is not.

As for these tags. I want to see explanations and examples that will provide their necessarity:

{{Original research|date=November 2007}} {{Fansite|date=December 2007}} {{Cleanup|date=November 2007}} {{rewrite}} {{Refimprove|date=November 2007}}

If you restore the page without discussing, I'll turn to an administrator and we will solve it ASAP with him. Thanks, Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:55, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong Birth Time

Amitabh Bachahan's birth time as mentioned in this article is 12 hours behind his real birthtime. -VJha 16:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit Request - add category

{{editprotected}} Please add the following newly created category to the artcle:

 Category:National Film Award Winners

--Anoopkn (talk) 13:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Declined - not an urgent request, can be done when the page is unprotected. Stifle (talk) 16:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit Request - fix spelling

Please correct the spelling of own in the line "offered to sacrifice their won limbs"

Wikivarun (talk) 01:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Done. Stifle (talk) 16:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do we really need a mile-long filmography, people?

Another sad victim of manic filmographitis. Let's just retain key (important) films in a simple partial filmography section, and leave the rest of the documenting to www.imdb.com shall we? AppleJuggler (talk) 05:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with removing the filmography completely. We can create an article, Amitabh Bachchan filmography, and retain key films here. On the other hand, partial filmographies are usually preceived as POV, because saying what's notable and what's not, is POV, and someone can say that the film Mard is notable, and someone can say that... it's not! Here we are in troubles. Shahid • ^Talk2me 07:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Creating a separate page for the filmography is a very good option. AppleJuggler (talk) 00:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding genocide

It seems to me that the section meets WP:V, although its neutrality could be improved with some reference to his response, if he has made one. Wikipedia is not censored is also a guideline that seems to support keeping it in. Are there Wikipedia policies that would support removing it that I'm not familiar with? Remember, while we seek consensus on how Wikipedia policy applies to articles, that's based in policy- editors whose reasoning isn't based in policy aren't given as much weight in a disagreement, since Wikipedia is not a democracy. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

A second look at the source, though, seems to indicate that he's been charged, but not yet proven guilty. Wouldn't it be better to wait until after he is tried? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

First of all, I can't see the notability of the case and how it stands in an encyclopedia article about Bachchan. He has been part of many controversies. Secondly, until it is written well, in a comprehensive and clear way, and supported by reliable source (one of the sources is unreliable), this info is cannot remain here. Also good to note that this user has violated WP:3RR. And I agree it's better to wait until he is tried. Shahid • ^Talk2me 15:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Babu Mann, it seems, is hell bent on including a genocide section in the article. He has cited two sources - IBN and IndiaInfo. Let's see what these say. IBNlive site says, "Bollywood star Amitabh Bachchan, senior Congress leaders and police officials figure in a list of 200 persons against whom Sikh organizations will file a fresh petition in the Supreme Court, seeking action against them for their role in anti-Sikh riots in Delhi in 1984." Have they filed a case? The law of natural justice states that any person accused of any crime has to be treated as not guilty until found so. So, even if these organisations file a case against Mr. Bachchan, until and unless he is proven guilty, he cannot be implicated for the 1984 genocide of sikhs.

The citing of Indiainfo.com news titled "Big B splits Sikh outfits into two" is even more dubious. Please refer to this from Times of India, which is a reliable source, on the same issue and you will come to know the truth.

Now please refer to the fact that the All India Sikh Students Federation actually created these charges which can be seen here. The article starts with "The All India Sikh Students Federation (AISSF) claims to have produced a documentary “November 1984– a state sponsored Sikh massacre” charging Bollywood star Amitabh Bachchan with inciting people to kill Sikhs after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi". And the article ends with, "The documentary, however, does not have any clipping of Bachchan making any such statement of which he is being accused." So, Mr. Mann, where does the case stand? Please refrain from (re-)introducing highly POV materials to Wikipedia. In case, you do not relent, my earlier statement, left in your talk page still stands. Oh, by the way, as you have tried to project, I am not a guy who would say that in 1984 the Sikhs were not butchered by mobs led by Congress stalwarts like Jagdish Tytler & Sajjan Kumar. Why don't you use your energies to drag the real culprits to the dock? Thanks. Shovon (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] about your humanity,down-to-earth nature

sir, i vineet khanna,aged 43 years, resident of delhi is yours big fan and admirer. i am deeply impressed with your acting skill, which is beyond any comparison. apart from above qualities, the way you speak, behave, truly shows your greatness and proves that you are star of the millenium and indeed one and only superstar.

 sir, why sharukh khan needs to  do —vithe films which have been done by you, like don and now remake of deewar.

sir, kindly accept my goodwishes for your future films and good luck for your family.

Thanks & regards -122.161.88.197 (talk) 14:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] About his films

Can we just move his filmography to another page as it is taking alot of space and put his notable films on his page.Xxxsacheinxxx (talk) 16:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Ineed someone to add his hit films in the notable films section. Thank you. Xxxsacheinxxx ([[User

talk:Xxxsacheinxxx|talk]]) 16:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DISSAPPOINT EVERYTIME

GUYS WHY RU ERASING THE INFORMATION Shahrukh Khan 21 october 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Topics from 2009-2010

[edit] Inconsistency

Amitabh Bachchan (Hindi: अमिताभ बच्चन IPA: [əmitaːbʱ bətʃːən], born Amitabh Harivansh Bachchan…

And then, Bachchan was initially named Inquilab, inspired from the phrase Inquilab Zindabad, during the Indian independence struggle, but was re-christened Amitabh which means, "the light that would never go off." Though his surname was Shrivastava, his father had adopted the pen-name Bachchan, under which he published all his works. It is with this last name that Amitabh debuted in films, and, for all public purposes, it has become the surname of all members of his current family. There appears to be an inconsistency here. Civilizededucation (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] No photo

bloddy wikipedians dont even have a pic of mr. bachchan on this page. —Arc diatm (talk • contribs) 09:15, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

A photo was added 9 days later (13-Sep-09) by User:FotoPhest. -Wikid77 (talk) 10:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Retrofit talk-page year headers/subpages

27-Sep-09: I have added subheaders above as "Topics from 2007" (etc.) to emphasize the dates of topics in the talk-page. Older topics might still apply, but using the year headers helps to focus on more current issues as well. Afterward, I renamed unsigned or duplicate comments and moved entries (including "No photo") into date order for 2008 & 2009.
Then I added "Talk-page subpages" beside the TOC. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] sperate page for amithab bachchan Controversies is added

sperate page for amithab bachchan Controversies is added to make the Main page less lengthy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amitabh_bachchan_Controversies

--Hopefloat007 (talk) 10:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The main page is not half as large as many articles, and definitely not split worthy. I've restored the content here. -SpacemanSpiff 02:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The page was changed after discussion, these days people are reading wiki with iphones and netbooks with small screens and its very difficult to scroll and load big pages.

We have already made split page for Main article: List of Amitabh Bachchan's awards, honours and recognitions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Amitabh_Bachchan%27s_awards,_honours_and_recognitions

Same we did for amithab bachchan Controversies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amitabh_bachchan_Controversies --Hopefloat007 (talk) 10:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no consensus for splitting, stop splitting the article as a logged in user and as an IP. You have repeatedly removed warnings from your page from multiple editors. -SpacemanSpiff 13:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] split page poll : Amitabh Bachchan controversies

Guys, I am seeing you all fighting for your lovely star :) Stop it, let discuss who want a split page and who want single very long page. Yes we have split the page before also for amitabh bachchan awards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Amitabh_Bachchan%27s_awards,_honours_and_recognitions

Lets do a Poll, till that time we keep the page split easy to ready for big and small screens devices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.237.140.154 (talk) 13:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

We are calling SpacemanSpiff to discuss but he is more interested in posting messages rather than constructive discussion. --Hopefloat007 (talk) 13:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no discussion and no consensus so you will have to stop this. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Quite amusingly, the above editor/IP keep ignoring any messages and keep repeating "no one is discussion. So I'll be clear once more. The article is not large enough to be split. At 43K, one can argue that it's not large enough. Also, a split of a section can occur when there is too much content in that section to provide a summary view. It's not the case here. Finally creating an article to just list controversies, fails WP:POVFORK and that's all the more important for BLPs. So net effect, splitting this is unnecessary and clearly not per our guidelines. -SpacemanSpiff 13:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Contents