Talk:Lagaan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLagaan has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 18, 2008Good article nomineeListed
January 27, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 21, 2009Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

Error in no-ball rule[edit]

I have removed the statement alleging the ball bowled by Guran to effect a stumping was a no-ball. This is not the case as the batsman was outside the batting crease when the ball passed him, hence making the height of the ball a moot point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.249.240.131 (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why was Lakha Dismissed?[edit]

I know nothing about cricket but I saw Lagaan yesterday and then read this article today. But as far as I can tall from reading about cricket rules today 1. getting hit by a beamer is a no-ball 2. knocking over the stumps with your person means you get dismissed UNLESS the bowler hits a no-ball This would mean that Lakha should not have been dismissed doesn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.144.188.98 (talk) 09:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Error in the synopsis[edit]

I'm pretty sure that Lakha, after being discovered to be a traitor, did not "score points" for the team. He took a diving one-handed catch, but, IIRC, he was (illegally) dismissed by a bean-ball which hit him in the head, causing him to fall unconscious onto his stumps (first ball) - meaning he didn't score any runs "points".Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yashpal Sharma as Lakha[edit]

Somehow the Yashpal Sharma links to a real Indian cricketer, born in the 1954. Unless they used lots of makeup and I am mistaken, the Yashpal Sharma who played Lakha is probably somebody else?Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lagāna in the card catalog[edit]

Does anybody know why several libraries have this title listed as "Lagāna?" Is that how the Hindi transcribes? —Wiki Wikardo 05:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC) Oh, also, I removed "Lagaan" along with "Dil Chahta Hai" released later that year had a considerable impact on the Indian audiences who were plain tired of the stale formulaic films of old—who’s to say how the entire Indian moviegoing populace felt at any given time? If someone wants to slumping post box office figures or whatever to illustrate, it’s all gravy.[reply]

For the first, yes that is a fairly common transliteration, the long a sound is given the ā to differentiate it from the schwa. See IAST even though that's specifically for Sanskrit, the convention is used for Indic languages in general. As for removing that statement, there's no reliable source backing it, so removing it was a good idea. - Taxman Talk 17:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote synopsis[edit]

Someone had turned the synopsis into a ball by ball account of the climactic cricket game. The result was not only long and confusing, but utterly boring. I cut the synopsis drastically and didn't say anything about the outcome of the game. The game is a glorious piece of film editing and shouldn't be ruined in advance. I loathe sports and have never seen a real cricket game, but that film had me glued to the screen, breathless with excitement. The synopsis should let people know enough to decide whether or not they want to see the movie, not replace the movie. Zora 03:07, 9 October 2006 I don't understand the problem with spoiling the movie if it's under a spoiler tag. 132.216.19.203 21:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Lagaan.jpg[edit]

Image:Lagaan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bhojpuri?[edit]

I'm not disputing that Bhojpuri is used in Lagaan (this seems to be a well-sourced claim), but could anyone provide any specific examples? --Kuaichik 20:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination on hold[edit]

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of January 17, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Prose is readable and fully in compliance with the Manual of Style. Nice work!
2. Factually accurate?: The use of references and in-line citations is almost perfect, but a few minor things need citing. The last sentence of the first paragraph of Screenings at film festivals asserts what a specific person said, and thus merits an in-line cite. In the first sentence of Reviews, there is an uncited direct quotation. The first part of the BBC quote in Reviews is also uncited, every instance of a direct quote must be cited after the end quotation mark.
3. Broad in coverage?: Broad in coverage and on topic.
4. Neutral point of view?: Gives fair representation to all significant points of view.
5. Article stability? No edit wars.
6. Images?: Gives proper licenses and rationales where necessary.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— VanTucky 04:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to the hold below rather than within the body of the review. Thank you!

Firstly, let me thank you, Van for taking out time in doing the GA review. Coming to the review:
  • The missing citation in the 'Screenings at film festivals' has been added
  • The first sentence of the 'Reviews' section does not end at the quotation. There are two more connected sentences and I've cited the source after these 3 sentences. - See citation # 40
  • Same is the case with the BBC review - See citation # 44
I hope, my understanding if placing the citations after all the sentences is correct. If not, I can add the same cite after the quotation, wherever appropriate.
Thanks again! Best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 05:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What I was saying is that every direct quotation, even multiple ones from the same source like in the beginning of Reviews, needs to have an in-line citation immediately following the quotation marks. So if the passage goes: Derek Elley of Variety said "direct quote".[citation needed] He also said "direct quote".[citation needed] Then where I placed the fact tags is where citations go. I'll place {{fact}} tags in the article for places needing direct citations. I fixed the Variety quotes at the beginning of Reviews as an example of how it needs to be done. Thanks for your hard work so far, VanTucky 21:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very well. This has been addressed in the article. Thanks for elucidating. If there appears anything unattended, please do point it out. With best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 04:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your hard work and patience. It is much appreciated, and the article certainly meets the GA criteria now. Congratulations! Also, please consider reviewing a GA candiate. We are currently enduring a backlog, and even one new reviewer makes a difference. Please don't hesitate to contact me further with any questions, VanTucky 03:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance of Bhojpuri[edit]

What is the relevance of Bhojpuri in the title of the film? Maquahuitl (talk) 17:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was one of the languages in which the dialogues were penned. You may please see this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mspraveen (talk • contribs) 07:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is in response to the merger proposal of Awards and nominations for Lagaan. The very reason why I created a new page altogether is because of the sheer number of nominations the film received. It also won many national and international awards and mentioning the awards and nominations together on the main page would not have been appropriate and it would only increase the size of the main article. Instead, I felt shifting the nominations as a newer article, which, in itself, would warrant as a new article. The prominent awards and nominations only have been mentioned in the main article. Thoughts on merger are welcome. Best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 12:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's why I suggested the merger. I don't see the need for a separate article, for several reasons. First of all, I can't find any other examples of any films in history with a separate article just to list their awards - not even those considered the greatest. Not Citizen Kane, not The Godfather, not Battleship Potemkin, not Singin' in the Rain, not The Seven Samurai and on and on. Second, I not only doubt Lagaan is in the same category artistically (though this is POV on my part), but I don't see simply why the sheer number of awards (let's forget about nominations for the moment) merits a completely separate article. To me this is evidence of the hype around this film, and the highly self-congratulatory nature of the Bollywood film industry. I mean no disrespect here to India or its culture, or its highest works of cinematic art (e.g. those of Satyajit Ray). But, like Hollywood, Bollywood loves awards and loves to tout itself. Nor am I making a statement about whether Lagaan deserved all those awards, just as I make no claims to the merits of, say, Gone With the Wind which was promoted by its local industry as its greatest exemplar. But there's no precedent on Wikipedia for a separate article listing all the awards and nominations of a film, and I don't think anyone can justify that Lagaan has won so many, or is so universally recognized as the greatest, that the film is truly in a class by itself. It may be the most hyped film ever, which is a triumph of marketing more than of quality. As I said, I mean no disrespect, I just think the film needs to be treated the same as others. Bruxism (talk) 17:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go as far as to say that this article is completely unnecessary as its corresponding section in the main film article lists all the same awards anyway. --120.138.100.81 (talk) 19:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The subarticle is a standard film awards list, many of which exist in the WP. It is far too long to integrate into the main article as a list. I have standardized both articles in this respect so that there should be no need to integrate the awards list. GA articles and FA articles also do not allow lists. -Classicfilms (talk) 20:17, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion pertaining to non-free image(s) used in article[edit]

A cleanup page has been created for WP:FILMS' spotlight articles. One element that is being checked in ensuring the quality of the articles is the non-free images. Currently, one or more non-free images being used in this article are under discussion to determine if they should be removed from the article for not complying with non-free and fair use requirements. Please comment at the corresponding section within the image cleanup listing. Before contributing the discussion, please first read WP:FILMNFI concerning non-free images. Ideally the discussions pertaining to the spotlight articles will be concluded by the end of June, so please comment soon to ensure there is clear consensus. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lagaan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lagaan. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 04:43, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lagaan&oldid=1208076156"