This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. India: Television Low‑importance 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.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian television workgroup (assessed as Low-importance). This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. This article was last assessed in April 2012.

This article has no references...words like "hot" girl are not generally encyclopedic terms. Please improve the article.... THANK YOU Nissim 14 (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the article as having way too much plot and way too few references. Wikipedia has some basic rules about article content. One of the most important is that the content of articles is verifiable by readers. This means the information in articles must come from specific reliable sources and the reader must be able to refer back to those sources to see where the information came from. Articles must not contain original research - which means they cannot be the opinions of the editors.

In addition, this article has way too much plot detail. Please refer to WP:PLOT that says that Wikipedia articles must be "Summary-only descriptions of works". See also Wikipedia's manual of style which says that "The length of a plot summary should be carefully balanced with the length of the other sections. Strictly avoid creating pages consisting only of a plot summary". This article clearly has way too much plot summary, none of which is referenced.

Would interested editors please address these issues. The plot section should be reduced to one or two short paragraphs and all unreferenced material could be removed at any time. Please address these issues, or I or another uninvolved editor will likely do so soon. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 08:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://tvserialdrama.blogspot.com/2011/07/is-pyar-ko-main-kya-naam-doon-star-plus.html http://www.facebook.com/payal.arnav/info. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The link for Daljeet Kaur takes you to the wrong page. Please change it to Daljeet Kaur Bhanot or Daljit Kaur to avoid confusion. Thanks, Coolcool2012 (talk) 12:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected Coolcool2012 (talk) 22:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Link for Sana Khan points to South Indian actress Sana Khan, not the person in context. The hyperlink should instead point to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana_Khan_%28Television_Actress%29, which is the wiki page for Sana Khan (Television Actress)

202.78.175.199 (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of people are complaining that the show Is "Pyar Ko Kya Naam Doon" is a complete copy of "Geet Hui Sabse Parayi" which was most liked by all the people. Because of that reason IPKKND is having a bad repitation in India, which is not so good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.48.132.130 (talk) 05:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. I noticed this edit request hadn't been answered. A couple of opinions of random people do not require attention in this article. Thanks, Coolcool₂₀₁₂(talk to me) 21:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please enter the plot so that it may be helpful to person who are watching the serial new

117.254.153.17 (talk) 05:09, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please take some efforts and write the plot in short? We can then review it and then add it on the article. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 06:17, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Requests need to be in the form of "please change/add X to Y," not simply "please change/add X." elektrikSHOOS (talk) 16:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

218.208.33.75 (talk) 07:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC) IPKKND is the best serial[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Thank you for sharing your opinion. Let's let the readers of the article make up their own mind. Good day to you my friend. Coolcool2012 (talk) 07:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

67.189.244.17 (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC) you suck[reply]

No request. Closing. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 14:29, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted get rid of the copyright problem with the article so I made rewrite. Can a administrator or clerk check this out? I didn't copy from any site. This is completely my own work: Talk:Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon?/Temp

Therealdeepi (talk) 19:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can an administrator revdel the offending edits per Wikipedia:Text Copyright Violations 101#Are you an admin? Here's how you can handle it? Then the rewritten text can be inserted. Cheers ~ benzband (talk) 08:18, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I've inserted the new text but for some reason my delete button isn't working. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:10, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Another admin has revdeleted the violating text. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:57, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :-) benzband (talk) 15:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a story which revolves around arnav and khushi.they both believe in different means.Arnav is a high profiled buisness man and Khushi is typicall girl who believes in god .Arnav and Khushi is having sisters for whom they will sacrifies anything . As a sacrifes arnav and khushi get married for six month but when the six month arrive they became love birds . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmajashy (talk • contribs) 11:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article has missed the part where Kushi and Arnav get married again. Anyone who can edit this page, please add the same. 125.16.142.226 (talk) 05:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 20:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the page by removing Ek Baar Phir content as its not related to Iss Pyaar Ko,just because the name is similar it creates a lot of confusion and fights regarding this content and its totally wrong what's mentioned regarding EBP that just because of the original one had popularity and this content is added .It not right,EBP is completely different from IPKKND as its not appreciated by the fans of the original show so instead of creating problems its better to remove the content and EBP does has a different wiki page so its better to remove EBP content .Its really annoying . DellzCreationz (talk) 15:14, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

we have reliable source [1] stating they are connected. that fans are fighting about such nonsense is not really something we care about, and we particularly are not going to falsify content to satisfy one side. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:21, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the names are connected,it doesn't it mean that the story line is connected. "Because of season 1 popularity" it doesn't make sense dear. And its not nonsense its the fans love and devotion for the show.That show made a impact for my career ,it totally changed my mindset and I can't see any violations regarding the show. EBP content is not related to IPK just because of the name .Its not also made by the same production house and plus no similar actors .If it was the same production house then that you can call a sequel .I am not a taking a side ,but just the truth.It all means regarding the Production house .The new show is not related to 4 lions so its totally a different show . DellzCreationz (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are connected: "Avinash Sachdev has been facing a lot of flak for his portrayal of Shlok Agnihotri in Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon — Ek Baar Phir. He speaks to CT about playing a male chauvinist, comparisons with Barun Sobti, facing the ire of the fans of original show" -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are not DellzCreationz (talk) 15:37, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to ask how to add the sound track of this show, Cause there are few songs from this show.

1) Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon?(Title Song),Singers :Javed Ali,Sadhana Sargham, Length : 02.58 2) Tuhi Bata Mere Maula,Singer : Unknown, Length : 02.23 3)Rabbi Ve ,Singer : Raju Singh, Length of the song : 02.44 4) Rabba Ve Kyun Dard (Male), Singer : Unknown, Length : 02.49 5) Rabba Ve Kyun Dard (Female),Singer : Unknown,Length : 02.17 6) Meri Aakhon Mein Tu, Singer : Unknown, Length : 03.40

I don't know how to add the songs So please someone add these. Please add these songs.... I have got the song lengths because I have these songs on my phone and I noted the minutes and secs of each and every songs of IPKKND. DellzCreationz (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Track listing is probably what you're looking for. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, By the way I have updated the tracks DellzCreationz (talk) 10:49, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon?. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021114031/http://www.indiantelevisionacademy.com/site/awards_hhita_details_new.php?year=2012 to http://www.indiantelevisionacademy.com/site/awards_hhita_details_new.php?year=2012
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029185256/http://www.indiantelevisionacademy.com/site/event_details.php?id=71 to http://www.indiantelevisionacademy.com/site/event_details.php?id=71

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:35, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's no clear rationale for a standalone article on this subject. We typically only create standalone articles for individual seasons after the main article has grown in such a way as to necessitate a unique season article. The general path for article creation goes:

1. Main article on TV series (See: SpongeBob SquarePants)
2. List of episodes article is created after a second season begins, and only if we have sufficient content to warrant it. That typically means 2 grids with episode titles, air dates, individual episode plot summaries, writer/director info, etc. (See: List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes)
3. Once the List of episodes article gets so beefy with content about casting, production, critical response, for each season, then we might branch out into individual season articles. (See: SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1))

Several Indian TV articles seem to have ignored all community guidelines and preferences for article creation, fast-tracking the establishment of individual season articles when they are not warranted. This is such a case. The bulk of this article can be incorporated into the main article's cast list, with minor prose for plot and other noteworthy differences. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An ongoing problem in Indian television serials is the creation of individual season articles when they are far too premature to be created. Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon 3 basically only contains a cast list and a synopsis. The rest of the content is essentially a repeat of content found at the parent article, Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon? (2011 TV series).

I'm not sure if this is an issue rooted in editor ignorance, but we only create individual season articles once the main parent article has become so stuffed with content. Typically the path goes:

• Main article
• List of episodes - After we get about 2 seasons worth of episode data (titles, airdates, summaries, ratings data) do we create a unique List of episodes article.
• Individual season article - Only after we've bulked up the list of episodes with so much information (beefy episode list, information about casting, production, ratings, reception, etc.) would we create an individual season article. See SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1) for an example of the level of content that must first be present elsewhere before justifying the creation of a standalone season article.

I don't know if Indian editors consider a the creation of a standalone season article as some kind of badge of honor for the series or what, but that is not why we create these unique articles. Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon 3 should be merged into this article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support merge. If, in the future, there is enough material to justify a "season" article, it should be at Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon (season 3) (or Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon (series 3), in UK English) in any case. But, right now, there is not enough enough material to justify a standalone article, and Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon 3 is misnamed (as per WP:NCTV). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:33, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose merge. If you look closely the show is completely different with different cast and storyline. It is not a proper "season" in American and British terms. Only the name has been retained, the cast and storyline has absolutely no relation to the previous seasons. Merging them will create a messy page. Maybe after show goes off air then. Merging them now will be a disaster with different so called "fan groups" fighting insistently whose season is shown in more prominence in final page. Plus if popular American shows like Game of Thrones can have seasons individual page, why not a soap opera that is popular in India? JayB91 (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't really buy this, but regardless currently the article is at the wrong title even if not merged. But aside from that, it looks like a merge is in order as there is not enough material to justify a standalone "season" article here, and having TV seasons of the same show but with entirely different casts is not unheard of or unprecedented. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @JayB91: Your opposition appears to be based on ignorance of how television articles are created at Wikipedia. We don't arbitrarily create individual season articles simply because a season exists. There is a general path that TV articles take, which I've detailed in a thread elsewhere on the page, circa August 2017. We start with a parent article that provides an overview of the series/franchise, which is what Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon? is supposed to be. Compare to the main Game of Thrones article. Editors who are ignorant to WikiProject Television our Manual of Style and all community norms, and who edit outside the realm of scrutiny create these secondary articles with no comprehension of what they should be doing. Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon 3 is a skeleton article that is little more than a cast list and plot summary. Compare that to Game of Thrones (season 3), which has a list of episodes, airdates, episode synopses, real-world content on production, casting, filming, music, reception and ratings awards, etc. Massive difference! A different storyline doesn't warrant the creation of a standalone article. Seinfeld had a different story every episode, but we wouldn't automatically create unique articles for each episode. Charles in Charge had a different cast in season 1 than in season 2, but we don't have individual articles for each season. Days of Our Lives has produced over 13,000 episodes over 52 years. Cast members have come and gone, storylines have twisted and turned, but there's not one standalone article for any season. This is why all of the Iss Pyaar articles should be merged into this main article until there's sufficient content. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:35, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose merge. It's a completely different TV series. Why should it be merged with another TV series? --Harout (contribs • talk) 20:39, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Harut111: What criteria are you using to decide that it is a completely different TV series? Completely different TV series don't usually share the same name and add numerals to the back. The numerals tend to suggest it's part of the same series, just different seasons. Both are Star Plus series, both are produced by Gul Khan. It's not uncommon for Indian serials to advance storylines or restart storylines, etc., which often results in new casts. Is Bigg Boss 11 a whole new series, or is it the 11th season of the Bigg Boss series? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: It is different TV-series because the first and the second TV series are translated into Armenian language and I and whole Armenia have watched them. Soon, the third one will also be translated into Armenian. This is already a notable fact for them to have separate articles. Harout (talk) 11:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Harut111: I'm sorry, I don't understand your explanation at all. It sounds like you are saying that once a television show with multiple seasons is translated to Armenian, suddenly we consider that multiple individual shows. Surely that can't be what you're saying. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose merge. This show completely doesn't match with Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon?. Like Plot & Cast. This season storyline doesn't related with previous one. So Why to merge this article? Siddiq Sazzad (Chat) 12:48, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose merge. Both the shows are completely different with no connections to each other at all. Owing to the popularity of first serial, the 3rd was a namesake season. Usually American shows are connected to each other and/or are continuations of the previous seasons but these three shows share nothing except of a name. The 3rd "season" was originally meant to be titled something else but later changed to ipkknd to arouse interest in viewers. They have different fanbases and Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon has enough content to stay as a standalone page. Merging them would only confuse and anger people. Only because Barun Sobti was the lead again and they used the music, the pages shouldn't be merged. IPKKND has won awards, is dubbed and adapted a lot, has a lot of controversy history regarding the show going off air. This all would not fit into the merged page and would leave the people visiting the page baffled. Ipk 3 was a show alone for itself and should be left so. If the name alone is enough to merge them, then ek baar phir too has be merged. There's no really argument in support of this. --parikc

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Iss Pyaar Ko Kya Naam Doon? (2011 TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metromasti.com/tv/gossip/Karan-Singh-Grover-Shraddha-Arya-were-approached-for-Arnav-Khushi/17456
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metromasti.com/tv/gossip/Is-Pyar-Ko-Kya-Naam-Doon-Star-Plus-Lavanya-Leaves-Arnavs-home/14454
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160309023414/http://www.hotstar.com/tv/star-parivaar-awards/3943/star-parivaar-awards-2012/1000063336 to http://www.hotstar.com/tv/star-parivaar-awards/3943/star-parivaar-awards-2012/1000063336
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.indiantelevisionacademy.com/site/awards_hhita_details_new.php?year=2012
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.indiantelevisionacademy.com/site/event_details.php?id=71
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://peopleschoiceindia.com/winners2012.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The actual origin of the show is japanese although they never mentioned that.The story was inspired by Itazura na Kiss (Japanese: イタズラなKiss, trans. Playful Kiss) which is a Japanese shōjo manga series written and illustrated by Kaoru Tada. Itazura na Kiss was first serialized and published in 1990 by Shueisha through Margaret magazine. It became successful very quickly and became the manga series that Tada became known for in Japan.The manga became so popular that three live TV series have been made so far in 1996, 2005, and 2010, with a sequel of the 2005 drama in late 2007. In 2013, a remake of the Japanese live TV series, called Mischievous Kiss: Love in Tokyo, was made.and several more adaptation were made in several other countries. They changed the story and the character backgrounds a little in the hindi version.But the similarities can be very clear when compared. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.230.120.79 (talk) 11:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this can be substantiated with quality references rather than personal interpretation, it would make for an interesting piece of information. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]