![movies like biwi no 1 movies like biwi no 1](https://static.toiimg.com/photo/msid-61222316/61222316.jpg)
In violation of MOS:FILM, you shifted the note of it being a remake to the top, to emphasise it and make the film look bad. (Personally, I believe this guy is a gung ho North Indian type who is blind to anything that is done in other parts of the world, but that's neither here nor there.) 64.154.26.251 ( talk) 11:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC) Me? I tried to help you (despite your continuous personal attacks on me)!!! You added an IMDb source (which is unreliable), and instead of reverting you all the time, I added a reliable source myself. For an entry that has no reference to begin with, he sure is making a big deal about allowing an IMDB reference.
MOVIES LIKE BIWI NO 1 MOVIE
The reference that was posted in regards to the the movie being a remake is the FIRST reference cited on this page. At first he wouldn't even allow IMDB as a valid source. This Shahid guy seems to make every effort possible to block information like this.
![movies like biwi no 1 movies like biwi no 1](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/9b/a4/a3/9ba4a3b02bc8eb53e8360de9af7c1969.jpg)
The movie's raison d'etre was that it was a remake of an existing film. I believe the version I'm reverting to best defines the subject of the article. My question is - in the absence of any other sources, can IMDB be used as a reference? If not, I think it makes sense to tag the whole article (and for that matter a billion other articles on movies/actors etc) with "Citation needed". Thanks for confirming that IMDB is not a reliable source. Imdb whatever the case is not a reliable source. If the intro was expanded it would make even more sense and might be written in a way both of you approve of. Why not try to expand the intro and article. It really isn't so important to get involved in an edit war. Clearly though he is mistaken, the article is fine as it is and his edits are not done in a way that obides by MOS:FILM. I don't see his edits as a deliberate act of vandalism, I think he genuinely thinks the article reads better his way. After that, I even added a reliable source myself ( Diff), but nothing helps, he keeps reverting me, attacking me in the edit summary, and just vandalising the article - his last two edits are in violation of MOS:FILM and can be easily considered sneaky vandalism per WP:VANDAL because he deviously tries to make the film look bad. I once warned him, and then tried to talk to him and explain delicately how it works on here ( Diff). In addition to that, he used rude edit summaries and attacked me personally (don't know why, but he uses this particular page to do that). Blofeld ( talk) 11:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC) This guy who has multiple IP addresses kept adding some info without sourcing it properly (He used IMDb, which is not a WP:RS in this case). What is wrong with the current version Mr. BetacommandBot 17:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Introduction reverting Ĭan be please discuss the problem here. This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class.