Wikipedia:Peer review/Andha Naal/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Andha Naal[edit]

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I intend to take it to FA. Andha Naal is a landmark film in Tamil cinema for being the first without songs and dance, which are otherwise formulaic in Tamil films. Thanks, Kailash29792 (talk) 12:48, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Pavanjandhyala[edit]

For the time being. Remaining at the FAC, if possible.

  • "It is the first film noir in Tamil cinema, and the first Tamil film to be made without songs, dance, or stunt scenes." -- scenes or sequences?
I would go with "sequences". Kailash29792 (talk) 06:37, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was critically acclaimed and was awarded the Best Film Award by the Madras Filmfans' Association and a Certificate of Merit for Second Best Feature Film in Tamil at the 2nd National Film Awards in 1955." -- Agreed. But, is it really necessary to mention an award in the lead which does not have an article of its own here?
I agree that unnotable awards shouldn't belong in the lead section, but I didn't add it. Guess the NFA is enough in the lead. Kailash29792 (talk)
  • "In 2013, Andha Naal was included in CNN-News18's list of the 100 Greatest Indian Films of All Time"." -- Where is the opening double quotation?
I'll add it, along with the source since it is a quoted material. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:37, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who played the role of Purushothaman Naidu? If possible, please find out.
I could ask him, but I do not want this to become a poisoned fruit. I hope Mohan V. Raman knows. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:37, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POISON holds good for two of Dhananjayan's books. He cannot be considered non-reliable in all other cases. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:49, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The lead role of the radio engineer Rajan was initially offered to S. V. Sahasranamam, who was removed...." -- Can we have a better word in the place of removed?
"Dismissed" is fine? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:37, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:49, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...which became one of the earliest films in which portrays that type of character." -- Something is missing.
  • "According to film historian Randor Guy, it was one of the earliest antihero roles in Tamil cinema." -- Is he referring to Rajan?
Yes. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:37, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "When Balachander refused, Meiyappan demanded that the canned footage be burnt, but Balachander again refused, and instead allowed Ganesan's scenes to be reshot." -- Too long. Consider breaking it into two sentences.
  • "The film's final cut was less than 12,500 feet (3,800 m)— - shorter than most contemporaneous Tamil films." After an emdash, why is an endash being used?
  • Please follow WP:FILMRATING.

-- Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:30, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Redtigerxyz[edit]

According to The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 (Chapter V Section 25), Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year. But since I do not know who the author is, except that the picture was published in the August 1951 issue of Gundoosi, I guess the picture is best removed. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the plot, generally name of actor/actress is introduced in brackets as in Pather Panchali.
There exists a cast section to list who played who. And if the actors are linked in the plot, they do not get to be linked in the "production" section due to WP:OVERLINK. That is why I prefer to not mention the actors in the plot section. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am OK if this is not implemented; if it is done similarly in other FAs.--Redtigerxyz Talk 13:02, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Rajan was about leave Madras in anticipation of the bombings." is unclear
 Done I wrote, "Rajan was about to leave Madras in anticipation of the bombings". Kailash29792 (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are flashbacks used in the movie? The plot suggests that, though it is not said explicitly..

--Redtigerxyz Talk 14:45, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, flashbacks are used in the movie. I do not describe them as flashbacks, so that the plot can stay in-universe. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, we need to state somewhere that for example, if Pillai is narrating the incident, it not just a long narrative but a flashback sequence. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See if it has been solved now. I have written in a way that if it is in past tense, it means it is a flashback. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

  • "The main theme of Andha Naal is patriotism." After reading the plot, I am perplexed by this statement. Is this is a mainstream view? It is referenced to Ganeshan's autobiography; seems to be his opinion, rather than a scholar's assessment or the director's viewpoint.
Do I write "according to Ganesan"? Kailash29792 (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Check with the source. What does it say? It needs to be attributed; if it not a mainstream view.--Redtigerxyz Talk 16:38, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I've added Ganesan's name. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The film was later re-released after the announcement of the 2nd National Film Awards and became a box-office success" is confusing as we do not know what was announced. Only after reading "At the 2nd National Film Awards, the film won a Certificate of Merit for the Second Best Feature Film in Tamil", the former makes sense. Please resolve.
This source reads, "It was only after it won the 1955 National Award for Second Best Feature Film in Tamil, that the film was re-released and received more warmly by audiences". Since the source has three publishers – including the Directorate of Film Festivals – to indicate its reliability, can it be used? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am not doubting the fact; but just the comprehensibility of the sentence. The ref is clear when it says "after it won the 1955 National Award for Second Best Feature Film in Tamil"; but the article is unclear: how the announcement of the 2nd National Film Awards can lead to re-release and success? what was the announcement? Did it win something? are questions that remain unanswered until finally the article reveals that "At the 2nd National Film Awards, the film won a Certificate of Merit for the Second Best Feature Film in Tamil".--Redtigerxyz Talk 19:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Page 72 of Voice of the Veena: S. Balachander reads, Only when it was screened as a morning show, and after it won the National Award, did it attract a large number of young viewers. Still, it was not what may be called a 'box office hit'. So I guess I'll write that after its NFA win it was re-released and fared better. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:19, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Andha Naal won critical praise in spite of its poor performance at the box-office" is the same thing as "to critical acclaim,[48] but did not succeed commercially" Remove one of them.
I removed the second one. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is Kalaimanram ?
I'm not sure if it is a newspaper or magazine. Is there any generic term for print news sources? Kailash29792 (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see Vensatry has described it as a monthly mag. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I added the full quotes so that any other ambitious editor will further improve on them. Vensatry, do you know what to cut/paraphrase? Kailash29792 (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not addressed. Redtigerxyz Talk 13:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Now it has been. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Too many quotes for my comfort.--Redtigerxyz Talk 15:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

* "The few films he produced, directed, acted, sang and composed music for, stand the test of time and are worth celebrating." [is understood] only when you read that Balachander is essentially remembered as a Veena maestro. This needs to be explicitly stated somewhere. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:09, 7 August 2016 (UTC)---Redtigerxyz Talk 17:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, yes. The source says, "His foray into Tamil filmdom was short-lived, as he chose to give it up to pursue his passion for classical music and the veena, which has become one with his name. Yet, he blazed a trail that left an indelible impact on a generation of film-goers, who remember his classics such as Andha Naal, Nadu Iravil and Bommai for their unconventional storyline and making. The few films he produced, directed, acted, sang and composed music for, stand the test of time and are worth celebrating." May I write the following? Although Balachander's career in Tamil cinema was short-lived as he quit it in favour of following a career in classical music, his daughter-in-law Dharma Raman wrote for The Hindu, "<already quoted>". Kailash29792 (talk) 10:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure how neutral the praise of a close relative should be treated. I would use the ref only to state the fact his film career was short-lived. Redtigerxyz Talk 17:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, the source seems better fitted at Balachander's BLP. I've removed it from here. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:43, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Andha Naal was released alongside another film featuring Ganesan, Kalyanam Panniyum Brahmachari, making him the first Indian actor to star in two films releasing on the same day"
    • Why is a FB post by an actor be considered a RS?
    • The ref does not say that "first Indian actor" part. It explicitly only says that Ganesan released films on the same day 17 times; 1954 was the first time he did it.--Redtigerxyz Talk 19:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Mohan V. Raman is associated with The Hindu and is more of a film historian than an actor; nonetheless, I'll rewrite as per the source. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:19, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Since I no longer want to continue with this PR, I suggest it be closed. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:34, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
...actually, no. Since there was lack of activity and reviewers, I wanted this closed so that I could move forward with FAC (where reviewers will swarm). But after Vensatry convinced me that more editors could review this, I changed my mind. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Krish![edit]

Vensatry has more knowledge of the NFA system than me and will be able to explain why. To my knowledge, the aforementioned category (at that point) looked like a parent category with the three certificates of merit being subsidiaries. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:44, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are there any images or screenshots of the film? You can easily use in the plot section or the legacy or reception section.
There are, but not all PD-India images (older than 60 years) can be used since most are still copyrighted by the US. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead says it was a failure but if I am not wrong the article says it was a success after a re-release. It can be easily included in the lead to avoid confusion.
 Done wrote "original release". Kailash29792 (talk) 06:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure it was. If it was not, I'd mention that, provided there are sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Otherwise it's a great article (Note: I might add few more points later).Krish | Talk 05:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Numerounovedant[edit]

I'll put up my comments by the evening. NumerounovedantTalk 06:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "screenplay and dialogue" - dialogues is it?
Nope. Read the definition on Wiktionary. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks. NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "commercial failure in its original release" - at the time of its
Is "during" better? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
in that case it will be "original run". NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

  • "Japanese bomb the Indian city of Madras" - "Japanese forces" would read better

Neat work up until here.

Production

  • "and told him the story" - this is rather informal, why not simply say he approached him with the script?
How about "narrated the script to him"? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Would work fine. NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "When the production was halfway through, Meiyappan was not satisfied" - you might want to rephrase here.
  • "who would later become one of Tamil cinema's established director" - I am not sure if this is of any relevance.
How about, "who later became an established director in Tamil cinema"? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's good as well. NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The background score was performed "- performed? wouldn't "recorded" work better?
 Done Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Themes and influence

  • The opening points of the third paragraph are strong claims without any direct quotes. You may want to look into them. Maybe put some direct quotes, or rephrase to make them sound more factual.
There are three sources used in this para. What more do you want? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, what I meant was it's really wordy. You may simplify the text to make it sound less turgid. NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Times of India compared" - The comparison has to be attributed to the writer not the publisher.
If only I knew who the writer was. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shouldn't "conscientious officer" be in quotes as well?
The source reads "conscientious and serious". I believe "conscientious" is formal and normal enough not to be quoted. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Release and reception

  • "making it the first of seventeen instances where he starred in two films releasing on the same day." - Not sure how this is relevant.
I agree, I'll remove it. While I'm certain that the film's performance was affected by another film also starring him, the source doesn't say so.
  • "because the audience were not impressed by a film without songs." - the explanation really doesn't belong here. If you decide to keep this you may want to split the sentences.
  • Disagree. The subsequent sentences make it clear that the film failed big time because the audience was apparently not happy over the lack of songs/dances sequences. That's a vital point, IMO. —Vensatry (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What I simply meant was it would read better as two sentences, it's obviously an important detail. NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • considered "revolutionary" - by who?
The Times of India doesn't say who, but the beginning of "Legacy" reads, "Andha Naal has been described by French film historian Yves Thoraval as a revolution in Tamil cinema for the absence of songs and dances", supported by a source which reads, "...accomplished a 'revolution' in Tamil cinema by shooting a film, which established his reputation as director, without any songs, Andha Naal". Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's still going to need a reference here. NumerounovedantTalk 15:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "role as an antihero won critical acclaim; many critics said that Pandari Bai's role as the patriotic wife overshadowed Ganesan's performance." - You may need to split the sentences too, and use "however" to connect the clashing claims.
  • Are we sure that the director was delighted "with critics praising the performances of Ganesan, Pandari Bai and the other actors."?
the source reads, "he was not worried. He was delighted that he pulled it off, what with Sivaji’s understated performance that stole the show and support in just right measures from the co-actors, including a charming Pandaribai." Any alternative rephrasing possible? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "new attempt" - attempting something new?
Yeah, the lack of songs. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "such a publicity been made" - odd choice of words, "had the movie been promoted as a thriller"?
The text reads, "it criticised AVM for not publicising the film as a thriller; the magazine asserted that had such a publicity been made, the fans would not have been horrified by the fact that there were no songs in the film". I do not want to repeat words. But I've rephrased it. Please see.
  • "The magazine gave the verdict," - Again, the magazine didn't, the reviewer did.
 Done since the reviewer was anonymous, I didn't mention their name. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In that case one should rather use "A reviewer/critic/writer...", and the newspaper and magazine should not be directly attributed as the reviewer. NumerounovedantTalk 15:06, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tamil magazine Gundoosi stated that" - Same.
  • This is an awfully long sentence, too wordy and colloquial. There is really no way the reader would understand any bit of it. Split, reword, rephrase.
  • "It asked" - No "it" didn't.
  • The same issue continues into the next review.

Great work on the article, especially on the plot and lead. I am a little concerned with the one-dimensional writing in the other sections, and you may want to bring in some variety in the way you begin sentences as lot of them start in s similar fashion. Will go through the last section soon. NumerounovedantTalk 10:50, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Kailash29792: I would like to make some minor changes, if you don't mind. Some points are hard to explain, so it will be easier to compare the two versions. You can always revert any changes and work around my edits. NumerounovedantTalk 15:27, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please go ahead. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Kailash29792: I might make some minor changes, but it might be a while. For now it looks good. Good luck! NumerounovedantTalk 16:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind, as long as the text does not deviate from the source. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me now. NumerounovedantTalk 15:04, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments Vedant. With that, I think it's time I wrap up this PR and move on to the next level. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:39, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Andha_Naal/archive1&oldid=1136085653"