- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14:39, 22 October 2016 [1].
- Nominator(s): Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:27, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Eega is a 2012 Indian film whose protagonist, a murdered man, reincarnates as a fly and avenges his death. Due to some personal reasons, i withdrew its first FAC. Dr. Blofeld, Baffle gab1978 (GOCE), Mike V. Christie have helped me in making this a better article since then. I look forward for some constructive comments from anyone interested to make this a better article, and eventually a FA.
Yours Truly, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:27, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, have read this and made some straightforward fixes. It reads well enough to me that I can't see any prose glitches remaining. And comes across as comprehensive. Thus I tentatively support it becoming a featured article. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:42, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks Cas Liber. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have read until the end of Filming and post-production; I am not finding much to criticize here as it has had enough commentators (and if I recall correctly, I took part in one of its peers). Here are a few to begin with.
"Eega (English: The Fly) is a 2012 Indian, bilingual, fantasy film" - what's with the commas? Are they necessary.
I can understand the opening one-line paragraph of the plot section, but what's with the ending one?
- It began as a bedtime story, and should end like one.
"Indian screenwriter and director K. V. Vijayendra Prasad" - do we need his nationality?
- A suggestion by SchroCat. It may be helpful for non-Indian readers.
" tailor-made for the roles" - are we talking about clothes here? The "tailor-made" word is not very clear or maybe it's just me.
"Rajamouli's brother, S. S. Kanchi" - does a link within Wikipedia exists about him? – FrB.TG (talk) 20:33, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A few others:
"R. C. Kamalakannan and Pete Draper of Makuta VFX supervised Eega's visual effects,[45][46] while Rahul Venugopal was the film's set supervisor and matte painter" - supervis.. in close proximity.
- Changed the first to "oversaw".
"he compared the battle between the fly and Sudeep, which the underdog wins" - who's the underdog here - the fly?
- I am counting "in an interview" six times. I am also seeing xx of xx quite a lot.
- I agree that there are many. But, i feel it important to do so as someone is publishing a person's opinions on a film here.
- Yeah, but some of them can be rephrased. - FrB.TG (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I've removed a few. Hope it looks better now.
Themes: There are a few examples of "saidism": using words like "wrote" and "called" to avoid the repetition of "said". It's quite hard to overuse "said", but even when "said" isn't the best choice, there are usually better ways out of the problem than substituting this sort of word.
- I don't know whether there is a word like "saidism". :) I do not have particular ideas to do so. If you can provide an example, it shall be very helpful.
- I don't think such word exists either that's why I have given it in quote. What I meant by that is the you used words like "wrote" and "called" to avoid the repetition of "said", as in "he said," "he wrote" "he called", but upon rereading they don't seem to be a lot. - FrB.TG (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
These are suggestions from me you can adapt or dismiss. – FrB.TG (talk) 11:46, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- All constructive comments are welcome, FrB.TG. Please do revisit this candidate and help me solve those issues. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's it - thanks for working on it. - FrB.TG (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @FrB.TG: Thanks for the comments. I hopefully resolved all of them and am hopeful that it meets your expectations. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - sorry for the delay in finishing this review, but I decreased my workload in the featured area sometime during this. Anyway, other reviewers might or might not find issues, but to my inexpert eyes the prose reads well enough to be considered for FA promotion. Good luck and I do hope that more reviewers review it. – FrB.TG (talk) 11:08, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
After having a quick run through, I feel that the article meets 1 (b) and 1 (c) of WP:WIAFA. However, I have some reservations about the prose. Not that I'm an expert, but still:
"K. K. Senthil Kumar was director of photography, M. M. Keeravani composed the soundtrack and score, and Kotagiri Venkateswara Rao edited the film." This needs to be rephrased (and possibly split) as the first two bits constitute a comma splice error. Also why there is sudden tense shift - the previous sentence reads, The film stars Sudeep, Nani, and Samantha Ruth Prabhu? It's not just this article, but I've observed this in a majority of our film articles. Is there a strong reason behind it or I'm missing something here?
- Thanks for pointing out about the tense shift. The technical crew's work is not explicit, though you can sense it throughout; the cinematography is a good example. That was why past tense has been in use. I've hopefully fixed the comma splice error.
- I'd suggest you to keep the cinematography and editing bits together. —Vensatry (talk) 11:18, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Rajamouli revisited the idea after finishing ..." Not keen on 'revisited'. Maybe something on the lines of 'reconsidered'?
"The film received generally positive reviews" This! Aren't we experiencing a problem with critical response summaries of Indian films?
- Removed the line. Hope the new one sounds good.
"It was screened at the Toronto After Dark Film Festival, the 2013 Shanghai International Film Festival, and the 2013 Madrid International Film Festival." Why not mention the year (or edition) of the first one?
- I've mentioned it. Thanks for the heads up. :)
- Why eighth Toronto, but 2013 Shanghai and 2013 Madrid? —Vensatry (talk) 11:18, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- If i did mention it as 2013 Toronto, i felt that it would be a case of close repetition. I've numbered the Shanghai festival and left Madrid festival as it was.
- In that case, simply mention the names of the FFs by means of piped-links. —Vensatry (talk) 13:28, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- "The idea for the film originated in the late 1990s when during a conversation with his son S. S. Rajamouli, Indian screenwriter and director K. V. Vijayendra Prasad joked about a housefly seeking revenge on a human" It's better to split this one into two.
- I'm afraid that the continuity would take a beating. I have no clue where to break it.
- Kinda agree, but the level of detailing seems too much for one sentence. But we can make use of semicolons. —Vensatry (talk) 11:18, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I tried doing that. Hope the result looks better.
So what happened to the English film?
- The source suggests that the English film might have been shelved. But, making a change based on such assumption may be a case of WP:OR. What say?
"After completing Maryada Ramanna (2010), Rajamouli revisited the concept after thinking of directing a film that was distinct from any other" Sounds a bit vague. By 'any other' you mean films of the same genre/concept?
- According to the source, Rajamouli said that he wanted to try something which "had never been tried by anyone".
- Is there an explanation given by the director as to why he decided to film the project in two languages?
- Rajamouli was asked the same question by Rediff. Slide 4 of the interview quotes him as saying, "From the word go it was a bi-lingual. The fly, the protagonist, doesn't speak so there is no dialogue half the time." Kailash29792 (talk) 09:13, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Apt is more of a showbiz cliche. Something like 'suitable' would be apt for the given context.
It's worth clarifying the language in which Bhakta Prahlada was made.
- By 'styled the cast' you mean makeup?
—Vensatry (talk) 09:03, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The source says "styling of the film". Changed it to overall styling. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:27, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
-
- From my past experience (Magadheera), i learnt that Rama Rajamouli basically looks after the costume designing (much like Nalini Sriram for Roja). I hence take the liberty to change it to costume design only.
- Are you sure it refers to costume designing as far as this film is concerned? There are artists who can do art direction, costume designing and make up. —Vensatry (talk) 13:28, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I checked the film's opening credits and could understand only one thing. That is, Rama Rajamouli has been credited for "Styling" and Krishna (?) has been credited for the costumes. I am clueless what to do when things are this vague but important. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Vensatry: Thanks for the comments; they were very helpful. I hopefully have resolved the current ones and am looking forward for further comments if any. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comments after re-visit
- Wikilink matte painter appropriately.
- "When Bhasmasur tries to touch Shiva's head, Vishnu assumes the form of Mohini and makes Bhasmasur touch his own head, killing him" Is it connected to the plot in anyway? If not, it's a case of WP:UNDUE.
- It surely is connected. I'll try to keep it simple here. The sorcerer instigates two birds to kill the fly on the behest of Sudeep. The fly makes one of them hit a switchboard and a short circuit happens. The fly escapes, and due to the security systems, all the doors and windows are closed. In the ensured smoke, the sorcerer is accidentally killed by Sudeep. This is similar to Bhasmasur's fate as per a reviewer. Rather than just ending it as Bhasmasur, i added the sentence for non-Indian readers as a note there would definitely look awkward.
- That Gachibowli is a suburb of Hyderabad should be noted, or simply use Hyderabad.
- Done Opted for the former option; i firmly believe that there are more than one such academies in the city.
- "The Central Board of Film Certification issued the film a U/A certificate,[72][75] resulting in a levy of entertainment tax on Naan Ee at the rate of 30% by the government of Tamil Nadu." Is it really because of the U/A certification?
- I think not, because these days entertainment tax exemption is given by TN government only to "U"-rated films with Tamil titles. The source does not mention the certificate, but says, "Naan Ee in 50 days, has grossed Rs 24,46, 33,483 (24.46 Cr) and has collected a share of Rs 8.5 Crore after deduction of entertainment tax (30%), theatre share and commissions paid to distributors fromtheatricals alone." The previous source mentions that the film was rated U/A due to some smoking scenes. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed the whole thing. But, i retained the 30% tax thing; i find it material enough.
- "Its 2013 nominations include Best Film, Best Supporting Actor (Sudeep), and Best Cinematographer (Senthil Kumar)" Which award are we talking about?
- Good catch. Addressed this.
- "Sudeep received national recognition and
respect ...
- Not sure parodies belong to legacy.
- It is too small to warrant a separate section like "In popular culture". But, it is also not so trivial to drop from the article, as we see the film's influences on others being listed in a Legacy section.
—Vensatry (talk) 14:24, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Vensatry: Thanks for the additional comments. Looking forward for your reply and further comments, if any. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Source check from Jaguar[edit]
Due to my temperamental internet connection at the moment, I only managed to spotcheck all of the sources leading up to 91. So far so good. However, I did spot one discrepancy:
- "Makkhi's television-broadcast rights were sold to STAR Gold for ₹80 million" - neither ref 89 or 90 mentions it being sold for ₹80 million, unless I read it wrong. This was the only issue I could find so far. Very good work overall, I'm leaning to support.
JAGUAR 14:34, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, ref 89 reads "Rs 8 crore". That is ₹80 million. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, that was my bad! JAGUAR 12:25, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support I spent a while checking through all of the sources I could access and couldn't find any issues in them. Everything seems to be in order and is well written, so I think it meets the criteria. Good work! JAGUAR 12:25, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Jaguar, I think you're not done yet. You must be familiar with the fruit of the poisonous tree concept here, which states, "If information from a reliable source (the "fruit") traces back to an unreliable source (the "tree") then that information is unreliable as well." The Times of India cites it's sources most of the time, so you could check that. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I was only making sure that the sources backed up all of the content in the article, as well as ensuring that there was no original research. I'm not aware of any unreliable sources as I'm unfamiliar with the publishers. I'll check The Times of India now anyway. JAGUAR 12:58, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jaguar and Kailash29792: Thanks for pointing out. I have replaced the TOI source with Hindustan Times and am hoping that the problem has been solved. Please go through the sources once again and let me know if there are some issues i must rectify/address. Thank you. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:27, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I couldn't find any issues with the sources themselves, but then again I'm not sure what is reliable or not. They all seem fine to me. JAGUAR 19:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – I was asked for a review on my talk page, and here's what I found:
"and the visual effects were praised by the critics upon release." Don't think the second "the" is necessary here; "praised by critics" just sounds tighter.
- How about "received critical acclaim"?
The abbreviation SIIMA should probably be spelled out.
Plot: There are a few needless links sprinkled in here. Do fireworks, bedtime story, or cannon really need further explanation in other articles?
The last paragraph is stubby at only one sentence. Is there any chance that it can be expanded or merged elsewhere, so that its lack of size doesn't stand out?
- Since it is a bedtime story and began like one, i also want it to end like one. But, considering that many editors now and before have pointed out the same, i feel it makes sense to merge it.
Filming and post-production: "Senthil Kumar had to use special lens with a minimum f-stop of f8.0". Was this meant to have "a" before "special lens"?
Visual effects: "The animators found the sequences between Sudeep and the fly much more difficult to execute because it had to...". "it" should be "they", since "sequences" is a plural and "they" works much better with it. Actually, from the next part it seems like "it" refers to the fly. If so, the article should state that because I was confused at first and can imagine others not picking up on it at first.
-
- I went and edited it further. Hope this is okay. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Music: "Keeravani said because of the film's theme of revenge and the protagonist are universal concepts". This read awkwardly to me; try removing the first "of", which should improve it.
Home media: Can I suggest that TRP be spelled out? I wouldn't have a clue what that is without cheating and hovering my cursor on the link.
Critical response: Very minor, but the comma after "criticized the performances and music" looks like it should be a semi-colon instead.
- Done As suggested. And, going through the review, i realised that it was the opposite. Wonder where it went wrong. :)
Radhika Rajamini, Rediff awarded Eega..." → "Radhika Rajamini of Rediff awarded Eega..."?
Accolades: "year" is missing at the end of "becoming the second Indian female actor to win these awards in both languages in the same."
All caps in refs 42, 106 and 125 should be fixed.
- I managed it for 42 and 125, but i have no clue about 106. Can you please help me?
- As this was my last remaining issue, I took care of this for you. Take a look at the edit, and it should show you what to do in the future. It's as easy as modifying the ref title. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The article seems reasonably well-written overall, but some of the issues I found do detract from the quality a bit. If they can be fixed, I can see myself supporting the article. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:51, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Giants2008: Thanks for commenting. I hopefully have resolved the current ones and am looking forward for further comments if any. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:47, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – I jumped in and fixed a couple of remaining bugs. With that, I now think the article meets FA criteria. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Images are all good but you need to provide alt text for them. – FrB.TG (talk) 10:19, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @FrB.TG: All the images, both free and non-free, are provided with appropriate alt text. Thanks for the notice. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:30, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support from Gerda[edit]
I was invited on my talk. It's no subject I know anything about but I always claim that a certain distance is actually helpful for a review. I am intrigued by certain similarities to Kafka's Die Verwandlung, where a person is turned a vermin.
- Plot: nicely told, but I think the last line, "The young girl is impressed with the story of the fly her father narrates." should be a new paragraph, even if short, as no longer the bedtime story. Perhaps also a past tense ("narrated") because it's over?
- That line used to be a separate paragraph. Many suggested me to merge it, and i did. But, somewhere i felt that it needed to end like one. So, i am making it a paragraph again.
- Origin ...: "screenwriter and director K. V. Vijayendra Prasad's mind" - can that be said simpler?
- Changed to filmmaker.
- I could imagine a few lines about reception in the lead, added to the accolades.
- I'm afraid that it would pose a problem to the lead. And, the opinions were like too similar to make note of something rather than summarising the elements praised.
These are so few and minor points that I support right away. Good reading! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Gerda Arendt: Thanks for the review. That was surely helpful. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
