User talk:Ssven2/2016 Archives

A year ago ...
critical reception
	... you were recipient; no. 1234 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

Mani Ratnam[edit]

Watch Aayutha Ezhuthu/Yuva (Hindi). I cant believe you missed on this film.

From, Viswanath

Woody Allen[edit]

A Happy New Year to you! Check out Love and Death (1975) and Zelig (1983) asap, they're amazing! You'll piss your pants watching Love and Death, it's his funniest film I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Same to you! I sure will watch'em, Doc. Watch Bombay and the other Mani Ratnam films I've listed asap as well.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mani Ratnam?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Get off my back Evelyn! ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Yeah, Misty was gripping too. Takes a leaf from Psycho, but has a flavour of its own. :-) — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:42, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you do don't watch Zardoz, one of the worst films I've ever seen! Connery should be embarrassed at agreeing to make it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:32, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I won't. Got it. Watched The China Syndrome two days ago. Incredible film! Do watch Martin's Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid. A great homage to film noir.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've seen it, or at least part of it, I recognise Martin's picture from the film. Twas a long time ago. I'll watch it again soon.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Like Loeba I have a thing for Jane Fonda, particularly in the 1970s at her peak. A great actress. I'd say at the peak of her powers in the late 70s. They Shoot Horses Don't They and Julia both excellent but there's not much point in suggesting any more to you as you always watch what you want anyway, I highly recommend The Getaway as McQueen's best film and you go watch Bullitt! ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:54, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Not like that, Doc. I'm saving the best for later. I decided to watch your earlier suggestions (crime films and Lemmon's films, still a few left and Rose Tattoo and Smiles of a Summer Night. I'll watch them all soon enough.)

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the same, I watch what I feel like! I have to be in the mood to watch Indian films for instance as they're a whole different kettle of fish.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I'll watch The Getaway this evening, honest injum. The thing is I use μTorrent download for getting the films (unlike how your good self gets films through Amazon) and it takes a pretty long time to get downloaded here with my Wi-Fi not being so good after the recent floods and all.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:18, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What connection do you use? I use ACT. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Beetel. It used to be quite fast but as I said, after the recent floods, its only moderate speed. Me mum's thinking of fixing it up soon by this week. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:25, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hope eventually that all films will be available by subscription on a single site. I think it's the way things are going. The film companies should agree to release all their catalogues to Amazon online for a given fee and Amazon charge monthly or annually for a fee. I think that would legalize it more and give film fans what they want. Amazon Instant Video is increasingly good for Golden Hollywood, but not so much for "foreign" films. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you never torrent or use streaming sites? Wow, they make up such a high percentage of my viewings lol. I go to the cinema a lot as well though so don't feel too guilty. --Loeba (talk) 15:48, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But online videos rarely give the same quality as offline ones. This is mostly due to connection and buffering issues. I always get my movies downloaded in 1080p (and 720p less often). Kailash29792 (talk) 16:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine owning your own cinema and library full of every film ever made on DVD, all in year and alphabetical order. :-) I bet Tarantino's house comes close! That's definitely true about the quality. I think some films really have to be enjoyed on a big screen to truly appreciate. When you think of some of the truly amazing cinematography films like Days of Heaven or Heaven's Gate and some of the classic Hollywood epics, I'd sure love to see them in the cinema.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:06, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen Days of Heaven on the big screen! Sublime. --Loeba (talk) 20:03, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky sod! I don't care too much for the acting/screenplay in it but the cinematography is absolutely sublime, one of the greatest of all time. If the acting and subject matter matched the cinematography it would easily make my top 10 list. Heaven's Gate was magnificent too, cannot believe the fuss they made about it, felt like a mixture of a Peckinpah and David Lean at times. I'd love to watch both in the cinema! I'd also love to see Metropolis and Marketa Lazarova on a big screen, if you've not seen Marketa Loeba strongly recommend it, it's in my top 10, just an amazing film. This guy's review here is spot on. I guess 2001 Space and Barry Lyndon would be terrific on a big screen too. Watching Lyndon Ssven is like visiting an 18th century art gallery or museum, it's like seeing those classic paintings in video or stepping into those Baroque era paintings, fantastic technical achievement from Kubrick. When you watch it you have to focus more on how the film looks than the subject I think to truly appreciate it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:22, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Epics[edit]

Wasn't going to suggest any more but if you liked the Ten Commandments and Ben Hur you'll definitely like The Robe. In fact it was that film which started off getting me back into watching films again a few years back!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:40, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Gift (1934) is tremendously funny and well worth a watch, it's better than the Bank Dick IMO. The porch and bathroom scenes in particular are just hilarious. You can watch it here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Thank you so much for the link, Doc. I'm going off to Pondicherry tomorrow and will be there for four days. I'll be back on Saturday afternoon.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:56, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy the break, I'll try to resume with Grant sometime!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:03, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Thank you! Watching the video link for It's a Gift right now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:23, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Finished watching it. Hilarious! No wonder Steiger adores him. See ya in 4 days. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 17:35, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure you don't eat any kumquats in Pondicherry, otherwise you might be gone 4 weeks rather than 4 days ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Hey doc. Guess what. The hotel (Surguru) has free Wi-Fi (and it has pretty decent speed too!) Nevertheless, I'm still on wikibreak. Don't worry about kumquats. Don't even know what they are.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:47, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kumquats form the topic of the grocery store scene in It's a Gift, thought you'd seen it? The guy persistently asking for his kumquats and W.C. being distracted!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:24, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I did "Ten pounds of kumquats". LOL. I just don't really know what he meant by that. Is it a tidbit?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a fruit LOL, read Kumquat.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:39, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would have been more amusing to the American public at the time because I believe the name was made fun of in the press at one point and it seen as an obscure fruit. Him asking the guy to spell it would have brought out an uproar in the theatre as I think it reflected what everybody was thinking, "how to do spell the bloody thing" LOL. I think the funniest part of the film was the squeaky washing line and the rat poison LMAO.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult to watch a movie from the early or mid 70s and there not to be some form of sexual content or reference LOL. Such a smutty period haha. Even the more straight laced older actors looked sleazy back then! Even Maggie Smith looked up for it ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:58, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Baby LeRoy was incredible. The scene where Fields tries to go to sleep only to face one disturbance after another (porch scene) is the funniest one along with the bathroom and shop scenes! LMAO! Mcgonagall's a really great actress. Loved her in Best Exotic even though her character was prejudiced against Indians.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll watch You're Telling Me with Fields and Kathleen Howard from the same year. I'm not expecting it to be anywhere near as good though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:11, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh duh, I realised I've already seen it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try The Dentist.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mayabazar[edit]

Mayabazar turns a FA! Thanks for being a valuable contributor and co-nominator. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	Many many congratulations on the transformtion of Mayabazar from GA to FA. -- Frankie _talk 08:31, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Thanks for the barnstar, Frank, but the credit really goes to Pavanjandhyala.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still a great overall achievement!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Thanks, Doc. Have you seen Only Yesterday (1991 film) before? Again another brilliant Ghibli and Takahata product. Halfway through it now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, not seen that one. Enjoy!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barton Fink and Raise the Red Lantern also excellent from 1991. Fink I've rated one of the best films of the 90s. And it's set in the era that we both love :-) If you want a truly badass action film from that year though try Out for Justice, Seagal's best film IMO. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MM[edit]

I'll be travelling tomorrow. Can you please solve the remaining comments (those by Susie) in Mullum Malarum? I left her a message, but she didn't reply. Kailash29792 (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FAC[edit]

I have an ongoing FAC, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sonam Kapoor/archive2. Letting you know if you are interested in reviewing. -- Frankie _talk 20:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PR request[edit]

Would like your help here. Thanks.Krish | Talk 17:09, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any reply bud?Krish | Talk 15:25, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: Yes, there is a reply :-). I'm actually reviewing Angela Lansbury for GA and not pretty active now. I'll inform you when I'm leaving comments at the PR.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:36, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kumari 21F[edit]

Are you interested to review this article for GA status? Please let me know. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:04, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: I'm taking up Angela Lansbury as GA review as she has really grown on me (like Rod Steiger) with Bedknobs and Broomsticks and Manchurian Candidate. I'll have to pass this one. :-( — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:52, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Ssven2. Why a sad emoticon for that, eh? All the best to you and Midnightblueowl for Lansbury's GAN. Tell her that i am waiting to see it as a GA because, it has been a long time since i awarded something good to someone stranger to me.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review[edit]

Hey there, I have opened a peer review for actress Kalki Koechlin after making some significant improvements to the page. I saw that you have reviewed a number of articles and this is unfamiliar territory for me, so if you could help it would be really appreciated. If you have some suggestions come up with them here. Thank You! Numerounovedant (talk) 14:15 , 22 January 2015 (UTC)

TMS cameo[edit]

This article states that he made an appearance in Server Sundaram in the song "Avalukenna". The singer in the video also seems to carry some of TMS' trademarks such as his hair combed upward, the pattai and the bindi on his forehead. But do you really think it is him? I am unsure. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FLC[edit]

I have nominated this for the flc. I hope to get some constructive comments from you, for further improvements of the list. I would appreciate it. Thanks!Krish | Talk 13:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any reply would be appreciated.Krish | Talk 18:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: I'm not really that active here for the moment so I'll have to pass this one.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:59, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rod Steiger on screen and stage[edit]

I had to add your name in the FLC in the first place. However, when you nominate a list, it only inserts the name of the creator. It's something I always forget to do. Anyways, let's hope it becomes a featured list. -- Frankie _talk 18:11, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks![edit]

Many thanks for undertaking a GAN of Angela Lansbury! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NVNV[edit]

Hi Srinivas, I know you are busy watching hollywood classics, but please watch Nuvvostanante Nenoddantana, the original of Unakkum Enakkum. Watch it for Siddharth's emotional and energetic performance. Its on youtube. Please please watch this. I am not a fan of Trisha or Sid, but I want to know your reactions or ratings for this film.

Sincerely, Kiran — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.15.223.80 (talk) 04:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Lloyd[edit]

Don't know if you've seen any of his films yet but he's one of my favourites. Welcome Danger, Safety Last, Dr. Jack and Girl Shy all gems. He's the most watchable silent movie star I think (though John Barrymore comes close), I prefer him as an actor than both Keaton and Chaplin admittedly, though some of Chaplin's films were absolute masterpieces and were better made.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:02, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Titilating conversation as usual Ssven, cheers ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Hey there. Sure, I'll definitely catch up with Lloyd's movies. Please don't get me wrong, Doc. I'm not much active at the moment (just reducing my time on the computer in case I spoil my eyes). ;-)

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:29, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is that. More important though is to take an exercise break every hour or two for circulation!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For all the help you gave me with Marilyn Monroe and for being an amazing editor! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amar Akbar Anthony (2015 film) for GA[edit]

Can you review the article Amar Akbar Anthony (2015 film) for Good Article. (JO Bieson (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone will review it in its current state, considering how undeveloped it is. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:04, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jurassic World for GA[edit]

Jurassic World for GA ?. JO Bieson (talk) 10:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sukumar (director)[edit]

Thanks for the help, Ssven2. It made my job very easy. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Good Dinosaur[edit]

Although I haven't yet seen it, I know it has a good score on Rotten Tomatoes, and I intend to see it. In spite of that, I don't see why it could fail commercially; so far its' worldwide collections are less than that of Toy Story and A Bug's Life. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The time of its release wasn't proper I guess. It was released around the same time as Mockingjay 2 and a few weeks before The Force Awakens. I guess people wanted to see Jennifer Lawrence and the Force in action more LOL. Watching Bridge of Spies now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Peanuts Movie against Spectre and Alvin and the Chipmunks 4 against The Force Awakens didn't look like good choices either. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:29, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List[edit]

Sorry to bother you. See, when you copy your suggestions list from Tibetan Prayer's page to Krimuk90's, it is absolutely okay. But two things are alarming—"Mouna Ragam (1986) — Breakthrough film for Mani Ratnam which you reviewed for GA", "Other highly recommended Mani Ratnam films. Krimuk loved the first two". I saw these two. There may be others too. Please rectify.

PS: I am very impressed with your choices and recommendations. I've watched nearly 50% of these till now, but i don't think so that i can complete the rest sooner. I also have to watch Dr. Blofeld's recommended films. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An award for you![edit]

	The reviewer of the streak award
	Today, i have 24 GAs and one GA-turned-FA, and my GAN success streak stands at 25-0! Thanks for reviewing six of these 25, Ssven2! Yours friendly, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Boudu Saved From Drowning[edit]

Highly recommended for 1932, you only have one film at the moment. It's in my top 50. You'll also like Scarface (1932 film). Rest of the list is coming on very nicely!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed How Green. Wasn't Maureen O'Hara stunning at that age!! So authentic that film, you'd never guess it was made on a set in California, it really feels like the Welsh valleys and I say that living just 30 or 40 miles from them! Obviously Ford would have made in Wales if it wasn't for WWII. That's definitely one of my favourites from that period.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thoroughly disliked Chariots of Fire. I'll have to watch it again at some point to see if I'm being too harsh. I thought it pompous, bunch of toffs running about in their vests. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Chariots was pompous, granted, but the performances (especially from Charleson and Holm) were excellent, worthy of the former's training at Olivier's theatrical division for young actors. The "Court Run" scene was one of my favourites along with the criticisms Cross's character faces against the Masters of Trinity College at Cambridge University (the latter was really pompous). But Best Picture Win? Don't think so.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It did have some good scenes, but clearly not an Oscar winner. Das Boot is Oscar worthy but it was foreign language.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Either On Golden Pond or Raiders of the Lost Ark or Reds should have made it, I feel.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oscars[edit]

Hey! How are you? It's been so long talking to you. Did you watch the 88th Academy Awards? I still couldn't believe George Miller lost to Alejandro G. Innaritu. It was unfair. Even J.J. Abrams (the presenter) didn't wanted to announce his name(Innaritu's), looking upon his facial expressions. What do you think?Krish | Talk 16:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

George Miller won enough awards for the film didn't he? The Revenant was a far superior film to Mad Max..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Blofeld Well, yes, The Revenant is one spectacular art film. There were several genuine jaw-dropping moments: the opening sequence, the bear vs Glass, horse and Glass's fall from the edge of the mountain, the infamous Glass eating a bison's liver, the whole Glass in river sequence, and off course the climax sequence. Actually, I feel Miller should have won Best Director (if not his film). Keeping in mind that Innaritu won the previous year (total 3 actually), they should have let Miller win. Anyways, Miller was very sportive and he clapped for Innaritu. Maybe The Wasteland would win him that award.Krish | Talk 13:44, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: Hey there. Haven't seen the oscars but happy that DiCaprio got his due. Mad Max IMO was a technically excellent film (mindlessly entertaining) but Nicholas Hoult was rather irritating. Theron and Hardy were brilliant in it though. I enjoyed it on the whole but maybe because it got so many awards in the technical front (almost a sweep, really!), Innaritu was preferred over Miller. One would have guessed the way things were going after the Golden Globe and BAFTA awards. Glad Vikander won as well. Great talent, especially in Ex Machina.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Innaritu won 3 Oscars last year including the Best Director, so this year's award should have been given to Miller, who was most deserving than anyone. Ten years down the line, it will be discussed as widely as the Crash Vs Brokeback Mountain moment. Well, now can't be done anything. Well the good part was Vikander's win, Ex Machina's VFX Award and Mad Max: Fury Road's six awards. I'm currebtly in love with Alicia Vikander and her sexy voice. There is something about her voice. Her performance in The Danish Girl was nothing short of spectacular. It's a shame that she was nominated for Best Supporting Actress and not for Best Actress. This was the sole reason that the Outstanding performance by Kate Winslet in Steve Jobs didn't won. She was in true sense a Supporting actress in the film. I didn't recognise Winslet in the film, she was so much in the character.Krish | Talk 07:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, yes, she was every bit the main actress in The Danish Girl and should have won the main Best Actress one!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: I'm sure Vikander will soon get the Best Actress award given her talent.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Next year or maybe in 2018. She will win another before JLaw wins her second Oscar. I'm that much sure about her. She is very talented. I remember her last year interview during Ex Machina release, where she was acknowledged as "You don't know her yet, but you'll be hearing about her the whole year". This became true and we will hear and talk about her forever.Krish | Talk 08:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Padma Vibhushan award recipients FLC[edit]

Hey. Hope you are doing well. I have renominated the list as last nomination was archived without conclusion. If you get time, could you provide comments at the nomination here? - Vivvt (Talk) 04:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Tamil cinema[edit]

What do you think of it? I've done my best to make it stable, I guess you too can do something. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wishes[edit]

	Happy Maha Shivaratri!
	Wishing you, your family, and your dear ones a very happy Maha Shivaratri! Keep yourself very happy and joyful, away from sorrows and worries in this moment, something which Nataraja teaches! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:40, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Om Namah Shivaya! Thanks, and same to you as well. Give my regards and best wishes to your family too.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 23:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving talk page[edit]

Why do you archive your talk page like every few hours? It's a strange practice and seems a bit frosty towards other editors! like people give you a barnstar or good tidings and you nuke it within a few hours. Can't understand why you do it! Do you really think the page looks better blank?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do the same; I have an auto-archiver. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How many days do you wait before archiving Kailash?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:37, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld and Kailash29792: I used to have an auto-archiver too, but I figured to group the messages by year myself rather than use an auto-archiver to archive them like Archive 1, Archive 2 and so on. I really don't mean anything wrong or bad with archiving the messages in a few hours. From this message onwards, I'll wait for a 2-3 weeks before archiving.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know you don't LOL! A week to 10 days I think is OK, but I think if you do it every few hours/days it sort of looks like you hate other editors and don't want people to talk to you haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Haha, if that's the case, then 10 days it is. BTW, how's Kandan Karunai so far. Watch out for the climax song "Arupadaiveedu Konda Thirumuruga" though. Beautiful composition by KVM and equally great rendering by Sirkazhi Govindarajan.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:04, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoying it, definitely great film material, relaxing now to give the last 40 minutes my full attention. I've left some funny quotes from it on my talk page! LOL, the pillars at 1 hr 44 minutes look like fruit pastel lollies ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:06, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Yeah! They do, don't they? Actually the pillars are decorated with garlands (It's the garlands that make them look like fruit pastel lollies). If you really wanna see a film on Lord Shiva in Tamil, Thiruvarutchelvar is a really great egg. The opening sequence with Padmini is nothing short of grand and superb. The songs "Mannavan Vandhaanadi", "Sitthamellaam Enakku Sivamayame", "Irukkum Idatthai Vittu" and "Naadhar Mudi Melirukkum" will definitely get you hooked. Kandan Karunai is an equally great film to watch as a Shivaratri treat.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:12, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'll run Thiruvarutchelvar next. 1967 is one of the obviously great years in film I wanted to watch over a 100 films from so these all count ;-) Get watching The Tenant and The Notorious Landlady!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thiruvarutchelvar is running now :--).. 1967 you know might just be one of the best years for film. Tons of great films from that year. Well, you can probbaly see that already from what you've seen from that year but there's lots more! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:14, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It just started raining heavily and he's moaning about being tested. I don't blame him haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Ah, the story of Tiru Kurippu Thonda Nayanar. Well, the cloth was torn into pieces. After all, God uses us all, tests us all and does his work in mysterious ways. Thennadudaya Sivane Potri (Praise be to Shiva).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:17, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Well, God never tests us. It is our "faith" in him that has been tested, always! Try to give it a thought leisurely. I'm sure you understand what i mean. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: I know what you mean. I actually meant He tests our faith in him and finds out whether it's genuine or we're just showing off when I said "After all, God uses us all, tests us all and does his work in mysterious ways." — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:49, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Actually what i meant is that, what was supposed to be a check by a father-like figure whether his creations "love" him, "trust" him, and have "faith" in him is very rudely referred to as "Divine games", "play of fate" etc. We call the God as the judge, but we fail to understand that we are actually judgemental in the first place. Why don't we reciprocate his love? Why we find pleasure in cursing him for the sorrows, though it is our actions that cause them? Having said that, i am one of those idiots who belong to this group and also try to "love" the divine. Perhaps, i too require a force similar to the one which pushes an electron from one orbital to another.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Amen to that, brother. Like I said, "He does his work in mysterious ways."

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. That indirectly helped our filmmakers to exhibit the restricted "cinematic liberties" in devotional films, Haha! I will surely try to watch Kandhan Karunai and Thiruvarutchelvar once my exams are done (in early April). Meanwhile, i suggest you too to have a look at this. That was a shocking departure by Rama Rao from his subtle portrayals of God, esp. Vishnu! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:05, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Snake!!! You ought to create a List of Indian films featuring snakes haha! Probably thousands of them!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:27, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia in Indian parliament[edit]

@Dr. Blofeld, Kailash29792, Krimuk90, Ssven2, and Vensatry: Extremely sorry to disturb all of you. But this is something noteworthy. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:17, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:49.14.132.247 is the culprit.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:21, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Doctor. I mean, how idiotic that was? Already the negative perception of Wikipedia is at large, and incidents like this will lower its respect further. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it shows you that these professional people are acutely aware of wikipedia articles, even the crappy bios like that one.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:25, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well said. I seldom see professional people speaking something constructive about Wikipedia. One thing worth recalling is that Maalavika Manoj, an Indian independent musician permitting the use of one of her images posted in her official Fb account. She even sent a hi-res image to OTRS along with the permission. But, most of the times, we see people badmouthing. Wish they were aware of editing tests and vandalism. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a secret but, I uploaded that image of Maalavika with her consent. And I often hate those people who blame the encyclopedia for errors and not those who added the same. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:35, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know that Kailash. That was why i "clearly" mentioned that she "permitted", which means someone has requested to do so. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: For a moment I thought the press had something to do with all of us (the ones which you'd mentioned). The same thing happened with Rajinikanth's article when he was hospitalised in 2011. Seems like they don't have any business in the Parliament. :) —Vensatry _(Talk) 08:13, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: You! That's why i say you have a different sense of humour. Anyways, Rajinikanth and Amitabh Bachchan are celebrities with a pan Indian recognition. Their death hoax is understandable. But a MP, whose name itself is new for us (i think so) with a really badly written BLP, has this situation. Added to this, she says "Wikipedia killed me" in the zero hour. I really think that the Parliament has nothing to do other than the JNU row. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PR Queen went unrecognised[edit]

Have you seen this? I am ROFL. It seems like the PR Queen of Bollywood finally got a reality check.Krish | Talk 15:43, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: Yeah, "leggy brunette" does sound quite funny indeed.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:52, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What was more laughable was the way Indian media (or say her hired PR) turned this into a drama. Some reports even said "She is doing big budget XXX and Daily Mail didnt recognise her" and Balh Blah. I mean Bollywood stars are not even recognised down south, so forget about the UK. But, the the Queen she is (of PR offcourse), it was a slap across her face. I mean the way Indian media has made a daily routine of writing everything about her Hollywood film debut, from her look to body building and her selfies. But the truth is not a single Foreign media publication cares about those things. Still her PR is doing everything to get her into the headlines. It is being reported like the film has released and she is about to go to the moon. Some media or say her PR are even printing "Conqured Hollywood, ruling Hollywood, making waves in Hollywood" I mean her film is not even released. Just signing a film doesnt make you a Hollywood Star, even established Hollywood stars suffers a blow in their career. But because this is Bollywood, everything is exagerated. God! Something like this Dining with @DjokerNole, filming with #VinDiesel, @DeepikaPadukone's on a roll is even more laughable. I mean how disgusting this sounds. She is on a roll, by having a dinner and filming with a star? If ever Filmfare introduced an Award for Best Actress in the field of PR, she will win every single time.Krish | Talk 12:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) "PR Queen" really? They all do it. Do you not think that the Indian media did the same coverage prior to Quantico for Priyanka Chopra? They should really focus on the success in India of Indian actors and not put so much stock on the will they or won't they make it in Hollywood which reeks of inferiority. Cowlibob (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes DP is the ultimate PR Queen. I also agree all do it but she does it 10x than others. Chopra's case is a bit different. Indian media is copying everything what the International publications are writing about her. Chopra has been covered by all most all the popular International publications, even before her TV series premiered. After her show, the reporting doubled. But, International media have zero idea about Padukone because her film hasn't been released yet. She will gain more limelight after the film. However, despite no media coverage in West, Deepika is 24*7 in limelight in India thanks to her PR team and a DUMB BOYFRIEND. It is suspicious. By the way, everybody knows that Padukone has an over-enthusiastic PR (even Sonam siad that on Koffe with Karan). Posting selfies and making news out of it is a cheap trick that only Padukone can pull-off. Padukone posted a pic with Vin Diesel, even when she was not confirmed for the film just to get attention "Look, me too doing a film". On the other hand, Chopra had signed her ABC deal in 2013 and she didn't say a word about it for next one year. She was in talks for her Hollywood film even before her TV series was premiered, but the news broke months after and that too by Western media outlets. Now say who is what. Chopra is someone, who doesn't need cheap publicity. But Padukone has a thirst for publicity that wont be fulfilled until she is officially named the PR Queen.Krish | Talk 10:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to say this guys, but Cowlibob, you are talking to the wrong person about Priyanka Chopra. I am not an admirer of either Chopra or Padukone, but i surely realise that these two are talented and have substantial media coverage. Bollywood is all about exposure to the unknown as well, this fact holds true to most of them, including ahem 'Brand' SRK and Salman 'Bhai'. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) This may sound off topic but, apart from being the daughter of a renowned badminton player and being a skilled badminton player herself, don't you think Deepika is almostfamous for being famous? A lot of other Bollywood actresses seem to be following suit. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:27, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely right. Despite giving an outstanding performance in Tamasha (Not seen Piku, nor will, because of Parineeti) she is getting attention for selfies, love affair and a Hollywood film? It's a shame. She is very talented and should maintain dignity. But, she is so desperate for attention and popularity that she is using cheap tactics even when she is not in the country. These things can only work in Bollywood, if she didn't stop her habbit. She will be blasted by everyone in America, if she planted fake news that "she is working with X,Y and Z", like she does with every film (in India) about to go on floors. You will find her name attached to every film which has been announced, even if she was not considered for that part in Director's nightmare. She should take cue from Neil Nitin Mukesh, who announced himself as a part of GOT and HBO blasted him.Krish | Talk 13:07, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Krish!, if you don't mind asking, what Parineeti has got to do with you not watching Piku? How are these two connected? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This may sound weird but I promised myself if Parineeti left the film I won't see it even if Piyanka starred in it. Actually, Parineeti was the first choice of the film. The director approached AB, Irfan and her at same time. I had kind of feeling that the film might be a great one. But then she left that film for her so-called favorite Saif Ali Khan starrer, which never took off. She had admitted she can even play a wallflower in a Saif starrer and then she left Piku. An extremely passionate actor like her can leave a meaty role just to work with her favorite star, without thinking anything? Anyways, even if Parineeti were in Piku, she would have been snubbed at all awards over DP's dull performance in Bajirao Mastani (the popular one). That happened in 2013, when a brilliant Nimrat Kaur and Sonakshi Sinha were robbed, just because their film was not as popular or successful as Ram-Leela. It's Bollywood afterall.Krish | Talk 13:35, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You'll miss out on a lot of great films if you only watch them if the 1st choice actor you want played the role. I'm sure Parineeti would've played well in the role and she desperately needs a good one to restart her career. Self-promotion is part and parcel of success of Hindi cinema, best not to get so aggravated about it and also to not give so much personal value to award ceremonies. Cowlibob (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now, I don't give a damn about awards, especially Indian. It affected me in January when the dumb nominations the Filmafre came up with. Since I work on Accolade list too. But soon I realized what Kangana says is true. "Come and get it". Haha. If not we have big stars who can receive those awards. And if not we will create new categories and if we are Filmfare, we will nominated SRK, Kajol and Sonam, even when their performances are panned. And, will award them when their performance is average. Now, I don't care. I have kind of grown up.Krish | Talk 14:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well said, Cowlibob. To an extent, Parineeti's decision to walk out is commendable as playing a short tempered woman (who shouts more than talking) would be repetitive, considering her previous works. Piku is a brilliant film though it takes time to take off. I watched it only for Bachchan and Irrfan. I loved their performances very much and Padukone too did a good job. Watching it or not is your wish, but "promising" yourself that you would not watch a film if your favourite actor/actress walks out is not just weird, but is stupid as well. Sorry if it hurts. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't hurt. I know It's foolish but whatever.Krish | Talk 14:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oopiri[edit]

Watched its theatrical trailer here today. I prefer to call it an adaptation of The Intouchables rather than a remake. Nagarjuna is good as a paraplegic. If possible, try to watch The Intouchables. It is worth a look. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:19, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you![edit]

Happy birthday, Ssven2! May the almight bless you with peace, knowledge and prosperity. Enjoy the day and enrich the experience.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Thanks, Pavan. I do try to keep off cakes, ice-creams, chocolates etc otherwise the calories would shoot up. Never ate an ice-cream in my life, you know. Sometimes I wonder how could people have a fondness for something like that? My mom got a headache eating that 10 years ago (She's fine now, don't worry). Nevertheless, Dhanyavagalu, Thammudu!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:33, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find a better substitute when wishing someone on his/her birthday through WikiLove. But, your "Dhanyavagalu" confused me, as it is "Dhanyavadalu" in Telugu and "Dhanyavadagalu" in Kannada. Yenakku Tamil Pessa Theriyadu, Ungalukku Telugu Pessa Theriyadu. Hathavidhi!. Anyways, i really appreciate your efforts in trying to spell it, and i am not so surprised to see that someone gets a headache when they eat ice creams. It happened with most of my family members.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Never ate an ice-cream in your life? You must be from outer space. Kidding, Belated Happy Birthday. -- Frankie _talk 17:27, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday (belated just noticed)! Ssven is wise to avoid ice cream, I have a fondness for it but always makes me feel tired like most things loaded with sugar. I'm more sensitive to sugar these days to try to avoid it as much as possible!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:39, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Thanks for the albeit late wishes, Doc. Yeah, I really don't like ice-creams at all. Tried a lick on a vanilla once and it was quite cold and I got a case of common cold that very night. Chocolates and cakes are more or less "once in a blue moon" but I generally tend to avoid them too. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:47, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped eating Chocolate, same reason, always makes me tired. Replaced it with sultanas!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:53, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Ah, raisins. Much more healthier too! — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:57, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chocolate gives you an energy rush/mood lift for about 10 minutes and then leaves you wanting to lie down! Sultanas/raisins give you energy for hours!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:06, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: More carbohydrate content, I suppose. Try coffee for energy!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:09, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mohanlal filmography[edit]

Hi Ssven2, I have nominated this list for FLC. Can you spare some time to help with that. --Inside the Valley (talk) 12:48, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Wages of Fear[edit]

You've not seen this one have you? It's intense. A special kind of film about a truck driver! Watch it and I'll start watching Andha Naal!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Deal accepted! Haven't seen it yet.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The last half hour is probably the most intense of any film I've ever seen, really edge of your seat stuff! Well read the plot and you'll learn what it's about. Watching Andha Naal now, I thought I'd seen it but obviously not.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:52, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Won't read it as I fear it will spoil the excitement of it all. I'll definitely watch it by this week.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:53, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well let me know when you're watching it and I'll try to see Andha Naal at the same time!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:56, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for you![edit]

Belated Happy Birthday! Sorry for being late but I'm on a holiday right now, so you can understand. You are one of the most amazing people I know here. Always so kind.....Keep it up. Krish | Talk 16:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice[edit]

I don't know how much a fan of blockbusters you are, but will you be seeing it this week? Despite the reviews its been receiving (shouldn't be surprising if you how well Zack Snyder's movies have been received), I'd go at least for the long wait and its many 'firsts', such as the first live-action to feature both its title characters, and Wonder Woman. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:00, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Not interested in it. It'll be a success anyway. This review from the Chicago Tribune made me laugh : "A near-total drag, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice plays like a loose, unofficial quarter-billion-dollar remake of The Odd Couple, in which Oscar and Felix are literally trying to kill each other." — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:07, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose the Doc will see it either; over here he states he does not fancy blockbuster movies. Maybe the film will still underperform due to the reviews and that could place the future of the DC Extended Universe in danger, like how The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was supposed to be the start of a Sony Cinematic Universe but failed, and now Spidey is with Marvel (but still under Sony's control). But if Nolan had directed Man of Steel and Dawn of Justice, they could have been saved, given his success with The Dark Knight Trilogy and his streak of fresh-rated movies on RT. I should have known the franchise was doomed when WB chose Snyder, who is almost another Michael Bay. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:24, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Hopefully, Ayer will bring it back on track if this film doesn't do that well. His films are better received (Training Day, End of Watch and Fury were well-received). Maybe WB can whip up Joss Whedon himself.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:28, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My mates and I booked tickets for tomorrow, before the reviews were out. Going to regret the decision it seems. I don't mind watching some of the recent superhero/fantasy films (some like Deadpool, Ant Man and Captain America: Winter Soldier can be quite fun), though there seems to be a bit too many of these out there and not many are trying to do things differently. Honestly, I prefer the more complex Marvel shows on Netflix (Daredevil and Jessica Jones) over their theatrical releases any day. In general, the quality of big-budget blockbusters seem to be deteriorating by the day. I don't see the fun in watching effects-heavy films unless they have an original story to tell that justifies the VFX (like Gravity, Life of Pi). It's the animated films, like the recent Inside Out or Zootopia, that are creatively satisfying and rightfully earn big bucks as well. Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Speaking of animation, I seriously hope that "pencil and paper" would come back. Recent ones like The Wind Rises, When Marnie Was There (nominated in the recently concluded oscars, beautiful film that.), even The Peanuts Movie showed glimpses of traditional animation.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:49, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be very good indeed. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Well, I miss the 90s, don't you, bro? :) When Cartoon Network had just entered everyone's TV. The era of the Disney Renaissance. Really miss this kind of animation. Really wish for it to be back.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:58, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely agree. Those were the days. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 10:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This scene reminded me that modern day animators are not usually able to recreate the magic of paper animation, even with the highest technology and salary. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: It's also partially to blame on the amount of passion people put into it. Most of them just want only hard cash (box-office) and not much of credit (praise from critics and audience). Both would do just the trick (Films of Hitchcock, Wilder, Nolan, Bala, KB etc:). Just goes to show that "all that glitters (CGI, VFX) is not gold". Look at The Hobbit trilogy. Overload of CGI and screenplays which make one feel that there's still something missing, made the film receive less favourable reviews than the classic LOTR trilogy. MCU is doing both critical praise and box-office figure very well so far (if they could make it more gritty and realistic by reducing the CGI, which would also reduce the budget).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:39, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought Ex Machina winning the Best VFX Oscar should have made people realise that they can make the best sci-fi worthy CGI/VFX without insanely heavy budgets. And every single MCU film has been rated fresh on RT. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:44, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: For MCU, all of them except The Incredible Hulk and Thor 2 (both of which didn't get the "Certified Fresh" rating but still received favourable reviews). Very true about Ex Machina there. It's just $15 million for US, and yet, it is a really great egg in contemporary times.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:48, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Kailash. Let's hope for more "original" science fiction films. Btw, have either of you seen the British TV series Black Mirror? It's fantastic! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 10:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kalki Koechlin[edit]

Hey there, I had an ongoing FA nomination on Kalki Koechlin's article. If you find time would you mind sharing your views? Thank you! NumerounovedantTalk 18:54, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anbe Sivam[edit]

Good work on the article so far. DYK (5x)? GA? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:49, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: GA, of course.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:56, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Out-of-the-blue this is. I don't know what prompted you to do this, but i appreciate your effort. BTW, if you have time, why not complete Apoorva Raagangal as well? Two potential GANs of such great films, if succeed, can give me a chance to give away another RAEB! :p Anyways, it was just a suggestion that is free to be ignored. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, is this really justifiable for use in the "Themes" section, or for the matter, in the article itself? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Yes, the writer covers a lot about the film in the article. So, I've included it in the "Themes" section.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:15, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Let the reviewer (?) decide.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think visitor articles in Behindwoods cannot be used until they have been written by notable and reliable people. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:30, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of this? I thought it would fit in "Legacy", but the subject is not good. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I had earlier seen an article in The Hindu called "Kamal wills, Kamal does" regarding the same topic and I left it out as you appropriately put it, the subject both articles (mine from The Hindu and yours from TOI) are not good. Hence, better not to include it. How could he know such events would take place? It purely a matter of coincidence and is beefed up by the media for publicity and TRP purposes.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you get the pages from Best? I mailed you them earlier today. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:03, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the film released on 11 Jan. S. R. Ashok Kumar stated (in future tense) it "will be released" on that date. Rediff states in future tense it is 14 Jan, as do IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes (in past tense). Kailash29792 (talk) 12:37, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely enough, this interview dated 14 Jan, which is already used in the article, states that the film will be released on 15 Jan. Dhananjayan's books support this date, as does this fansite. So I think that settles the release date dilemma. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ssven2: GOCE requests are handled by its members in roughly the order in which they are submitted. It may well be that I end up editing the article as the current backlog is cleared, but I do not accept individual c/e requests. Regards Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Twofingered Typist: Noted. Thanks, Twofingered Typist.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copy/paste split without proper attribution.[edit]

Hi Ssven2, when you split an article like you did at List of awards and nominations received by Bajirao Mastani, you need to be sure that you provide proper attribution. The easiest way to do this is at the time of the split by adding in your edit summary a note to the effect of "content copied from Bajirao Mastani, please see that article for attribution". If you forget, however, attribution can be provided by filling out the {{copied}} template and putting it at the top of the talk page. It would be appreciated if you'd please take care of this. Please see WP:CWW if you have any questions. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aalavandhan[edit]

Out of all the Tamil films you recommended, this is the one I have got to so far (and I could find so far) as it had Manisha Koirala (though it was only a cameo), who I thought was amazing in Dil Se and Company. The human genome is a fascinating concept, and Hassan's screenplay is innovative and engaging. Kudos to its special effects! ツ FrB.TG (talk) 16:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Those special effects inspired the Kill Bill films of Tarantino. I knew you would enjoy it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 23:29, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kill Bill films are also quite well made. Quite over-the-top and stylized but hey these are Tarantino films. I had checked your "egg store" ;) earlier and I couldn't find them. Haven't you seen 'em or aren't they worth rating for you? ツ FrB.TG (talk) 05:26, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mine is a "Films Seen" list unlike Doc's "Great films" where he includes films which are, in his opinion, worthy to be entered into the list. I haven't seen the Kill Bill ones yet. Seen so much and still so much so see! That's real cinema for you.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:41, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aalavandhan could be one of my future GANs. But an obstacle to that is the lack of reviews. And its strange how I liked both Kill Bill movies, despite watching them on Indian TV (which is almost always heavily censored). Kailash29792 (talk) 05:44, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From what I see, it seems like you are the type of person that is not much of a fan of big-budget, blockbuster action/superhero/sci-fi films. You rather seem to care more for a film with a good plot and story, making sense. ツ FrB.TG (talk) 05:46, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do admire the "big-budget, blockbuster action/superhero/sci-fi films" (otherwise, I would have rated Ponyo instead of The Dark Knight as the best film of 2008. :-)). But, it's always good to see a film with content in it, and its particularly interesting (most of the time IMO) if a film has both content and blockbuster material. I will see the Kill Bill films soon. They are, after all, being telecasted on HBO often.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:50, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"if a film has both content and blockbuster material" -- I can only think of Christopher Nolan right now. If you are a Tarantino fan, watch Jackie Brown. I agree with Dr. Blofeld that it is his best work. ツ FrB.TG (talk) 05:56, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or even Ridley Scott for that matter. :-) — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am a fan of both blockbuster and art films; I only dislike the extreme forms of them, such as Michael Bay's films and Oscar baits. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:58, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Ssven, two DYK noms: [1][2]. ツ FrB.TG (talk) 07:13, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for all the help on the Piku and Tanu Weds Manu Returns award lists. Cheers! Krimuk\|90 (talk) 10:06, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Glad to be of service, my dear fellow. I'm already a co-nominator Piku's accolades with your permission. So, can I also be TWMR's co-nominator?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course you are. You really don't need my permission when you have been such a great help. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 12:39, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Thank you. Watching Airlift now. Great egg so far!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:58, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:16, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by Bajirao Mastani has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

Hello, Ssven2. List of accolades received by Bajirao Mastani, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 00:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Padayappa[edit]

Use this if you find it useful. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Birdman[edit]

When you mentioned that The Hunger Games films were a waste of talent for Donald Sutherland, it reminded me of a scene in Birdman in which blockbuster franchises are implicitly derided; where Riggan asks for Woody Harrelson to appear in his play, but learns that he is "doing the next Hunger Games." I know we both have seen it, and while the film was not perfect (but still great in my view), I would applaud the message behind it, that it criticises the domination of blockbusters in Hollywood. Don't you think Tamil cinema too needs such a film? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:03, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Badly! Not just Tamil cinema, but Indian cinema, in general, needs such a film badly. Uttama Villain captured some of what you mention, I think. The protagonist, knowing he's going to die and tired of doing the same formulaic films repeatedly, makes a period comedy-drama film with the director who helped bring him into the limelight in the first place. When you mention "criticises the domination of blockbusters in Hollywood", The Player comes to mind. Such an attack on Hollywood blockbusters, particularly the climax (I won't spoil it for you by revealing the details, see the film if you haven't).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the film to my "must watch" list. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:42, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Keechaka Vadham[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Keechaka Vadham you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 08:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keechaka Vadham[edit]

Planning to take this to FAC anytime soon? —Vensatry _(Talk) 08:24, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: Just GA for now. Should have been promoted long ago IMHO. It has more prose size than Si Ronda, an FA. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:27, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, what a pity. :) Can't believe it's been five years since the article was created! —Vensatry _(Talk) 08:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: What a pity indeed (at 0:50). Soon, it will be FA. Hopefully.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:40, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Before we take it to FAC, here is a list of sources we can use to expand the article further:

Various sources also say the film was released either in 1916 or 1917. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oopiri[edit]

Took a day off and watched the film in cinemas. Well made remake/adaptation (whatever they may refer to) of The Intouchables. Try watching Thozha and The Intouchables someday if time permits. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:18, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Keechaka Vadham[edit]

The article Keechaka Vadham you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Keechaka Vadham for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 06:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For bringing Keechaka Vadham, the first South Indian silent film, to GA status. Despite the limited sources, I think it can achieve FA somehow. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:09, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Depends if it's fully comprehensive or not... Hey, I thought the deal was that you watch High Plains Drifter for me seeing that film?♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:29, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: OTW to watching it today!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:55, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lilac water? It's the music which will really creep you out, it really is the definition of "eerie". That's an important asset to the film I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Lilac water? Is that a perfume?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:15, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think aftershave in the film yeah, it's near the beginning of the film the barber says something like "lilac water? 10 cents a bottle, the ladies love it". I think he says lilac, but pronounces it li-lack rather than li-luck.. I might be wrong though! Clint's definitely at his most rough in this film, he looks like he's been on the plains for six months without a bath LOL.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:18, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Here it is. It is indeed a perfume.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keechaka Vadham[edit]

	A sword for you!
	For bringing Keechaka Vadham (1918) to GA status, i give you this sword. Because, weapons kill. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Pavan, in the words of Q, "Us wikipedian editors have a Licence to develop the articles on this website, not a licence to kill". But thanks for the sword. Kind of makes it look like the one this lavli maniac used in his recent film ('twas longer though).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sword is a symbol of bravery, and excellence in a craft. They are intended to protect, but are capable of killing too. I gave you this as a satire on Keechaka's death and an acknowledgement of your excellence. I think you didn't understand that, and quoting Q and Bajirao is a proof for that. Shall meet you again along with a few great, noble, and capable souls at the graveyard. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: My dear friend Pavan, I did understand. Excuse me for my rather "poor" attempt at humour.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:17, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do. But remember, it slips only once.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE Copy-edit of Anbe Sivam[edit]

Hello, Ssven2. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Anbe Sivam at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! – Corinne (talk) 03:16, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Anbe Sivam[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anbe Sivam you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oopiri[edit]

Glad you liked Oopiri (Thozha there, with a different editing and different runtime). Do try The Intouchables as well. François Cluzet is wonderful as the paraplegic. BTW, any sequence that remained with you now? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Vivek's comedy scenes evoke some laughs but he could have been given more screen space. Karthi is the heart and soul of the film. He makes the role feel really believable and Nagarjuna (I became a fan after seeing Ratchagan my first film of his, now this film made me admire him all the more). The sequences in Paris were really nice. A bit of F&F there too.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The adaptation has some changes which makes the caretaker more affable. Both Nagarjuna and Karthi were amazing. My favourites: the whole thread of the abstract art, and the moment where Nagarjuna says "I'm unable to breath. Please get me out of here". But, i must admit, i was badly missing the romantic flirt here, who albeit was a soul. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:08, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Ah yes, Prakash Raj was superb in it as well. Karthi creates a painting without even knowing or deciphering what its meaning is (its nonsense really). But the way Prakash Raj deciphers the painting is funny!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Just see his reaction when Karthi says, "i've begun another painting with hope that you would buy it". LOL! Anyways, if you get some time and a good subtitled print, try watching The Intouchables and Soggade Chinni Nayana. BTW, a heart congratulations for Anbe Sivam's new found status. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Anbe Sivam[edit]

The article Anbe Sivam you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anbe Sivam for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 17:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations![edit]

	The Double GA barnstar
	Ek maar, dho tukda (Keechaka Vadham and Anbe Sivam turn GA in the same month)! Kailash29792 (talk) 04:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Thanks again. You really do like using Vaiyapuri's phrase from Gemini, don't you? Why is that, pray tell?

BTW, I plan to take both beyond sometime this June given their capability to be so. It would be great if you could help me find more references for both articles like you have done for Mouna Ragam (not Behindwoods. It was necessary in Enthiran's case, but not here, unless its an interview).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:12, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you a bunch of references for Keechaka Vadham, did you even see? As for Anbe Sivam, I think you can attempt FA if it has at least 75 references. I've already started collecting references. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:34, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: No I don't think I did, bro (for Keechaka Vadham). It would be better if you stored references in a sandbox like User:Kailash29792/Keechaka Vadham references for instance. That would be quite ideal.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:37, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for List of accolades received by Piku[edit]

On 11 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article List of accolades received by Piku, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Juhi Chaturvedi won two National Film Awards for writing the screenplay and dialogues of Piku? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/List of accolades received by Piku. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MGR films[edit]

Enjoying Rickshawkaran so far, has a groovy look to it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: MGR, performance-wise, is at his inimitable best. If you like him in Rickshawkaran, do watch him in Malaikkallan, Alibabavum 40 Thirudargalum, Periya Idathu Penn, Enga Veetu Pillai, Aayirathil Oruvan and Anbe Vaa. Should be a welcome change for you after seeing mostly Sivaji Ganesan films.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:23, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He looks a bit like Ganesan (from a distance/side) I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:24, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I think you must be confused with the pencil-like moustache that both of them sport. He was also one of the state's best Chief Ministers. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Similar head shape/hair I thought too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:38, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: But taller and fairer. More of the Errol Flynn and Doug Fairbanks (both Sr. and Jr.) type pf actor.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know what you mean.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thiruvilaiyadal[edit]

Despite Blofeld suggesting the creation of the article Influence of Thiruvilaiyadal during the film's GAR, I now strongly believe it looks like a fork. Yes, I think the legacy section can be longer than it currently is. What do you think? Should it be merged? Kailash29792 (talk) 12:58, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I feel its best left as a separate article as it would look bloated in the main one. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is also a potential FAC if Thamizhan1994 returns. He said he'd be back in late 2015 or early this year, but it's already the middle of April. You still in touch with him? Thought you'd ask him when he's returning. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:08, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I contacted him a couple of days ago. He was still busy in his project work and that it would take him a couple of months or so to finish it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:11, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Siva[edit]

Venkateswara Mahatyam may not be a GA, the chances are very very less. A DYK is possible. BTW, your edits on Siva has made me rethink, and i've taken a decision. Whether you like it or not, irrespective of your interest, you are the co-nominator of Siva's GAN. Even if you have any problems with that, i am least bothered. Is that okay, my dear friend? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:36, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And, as a first step towards that, you have to watch Siva before its c/e starts. It's not similar to the Doctor's film barter. You have to understand its content and the techniques employed, and that helps me as well when the copy-editor has no clear idea about the film's content. For example, Corinne in the case of Malliswari. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But there cannot be more than one GA nominator. Perhaps, if it is a potential FAC, it can have at least 3 nominators. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:47, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hell with the rules. Why can't more than one editor work on an article and make it a GA? If he isn't listed as a co-nominator, it's okay. I will credit him at the GAR page at the end of the review. I know that you are a busy man, but i wish to collaborate with you too for a GA. If you refuse, it's fine. We anyways have a FAC ahead for Missamma in the second half of 2016. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: BREAK THE RULES!. YEH WIKIPEDIA APNI TOH PAATHSHALA HAI ;-) LOL. I'll help you on resolving the comments at the GAR if you like when you are off wikipedia.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Well, coming to the songs, i prefer this to those by Rahman. I find it actually more bad-ass. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:47, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Yeah, its quite good. I haven't heard of it. I thought that with your mention of "Hell with the rules", these two songs suited the sentence.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They do suit the situation. Well, i hope you complete watching Siva soon in your leisure time. BTW, something special here for Sreenu's fans in Thozha (actually Oopiri). Hope you like it (though i commend the makers for removing it). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:53, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Pier, Aberystwyth[edit]

Can you add the archive url link for ref 2? Seems to be dead. Seen 10 Rillington yet? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:08, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Archived the link. I plan to see it today. Started my work on Burton using Melvyn Bragg's book now. The book's pretty good.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:10, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:26, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When you've done a reasonable expansion of Burton and cleaned up the sourcing let me now and I'll add it to the board. Let me know if you liked 10 Rillington Place. I suppose it's hard to enjoy the film because it's so creepy and realistic, but a masterpiece of serial killer films.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:04, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

25em?[edit]

Hi Ssven, any particular reason for the 25em here? My browser is turning that into 4 columns and it looks rather claustrophobic. What's wrong with 30em? That's the default at Template:Reflist and with my monitor size it produces 3 easier-to-read columns. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: It comes out in 3 columns on my Macbook Pro in a nicer way than the 2 columns. I've changed it to "Reflist|3" now. Have a look now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SYNTH and "Mixed to positive"[edit]

Hi Ssven2, re: your edits here, two things: the first is that language like "mixed to positive" and "mixed to negative" are generally shunned by WikiProject Film as being meaningless. There have been numerous discussions about this. Additionally, summaries of critical response should come from specific voices, i.e. professional critics at reputable trades, not from Wikipedia editors. There is too great a temptation for editors to cherrypick reviews, then draw a conclusion based on those cherrypicked reviews. I would argue that this constitutes synthesis. I hesitate to suggest that that's what you were doing here when you wrote "1, 1,5 and 2 aren't really positive" but it sounds to me like you were summarizing the reviews that someone else selected. How do we know the editor wasn't biased against the film when he picked those reviews? If I wanted to promote my favorite film, should I just go to Wikipedia, add a few good reviews, and then someone will come by and summarize the film as well received? Regardless, as noted, the summaries should come from specific voices. Frankly, we're under no obligation to summarize reviews at all, so there is always the option of omitting the summary. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Becket 1964 Burton and O'Toole.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Becket 1964 Burton and O'Toole.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Becket 1964 Burton still.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Becket 1964 Burton still.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Becket 1964 Burton.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Becket 1964 Burton.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Burton and Bloom.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Burton and Bloom.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Burton Henry V 1951 still.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Burton Henry V 1951 still.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Burton The Robe 1953.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Burton The Robe 1953.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:My Cousin Rachel Burton and de Havilland 1952.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:My Cousin Rachel Burton and de Havilland 1952.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Othello - Burton & Neville 2.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Othello - Burton & Neville 2.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Othello - Burton & Neville.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Othello - Burton & Neville.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Rajini debut.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rajini debut.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1964 Broadway.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1964 Broadway.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Richard Burton in Hamlet 1953.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Richard Burton in Hamlet 1953.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Richard Burton Prince of Players 1955.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Richard Burton Prince of Players 1955.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The Rains of Ranchipur Richard Burton 1955.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Rains of Ranchipur Richard Burton 1955.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keechaka Vadham references[edit]

You may store these sources in User:Ssven2/Keechaka Vadham references:

Various sources also say the film was released either in 1916 or 1917. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:04, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They (not the above sources) say that Keechaka Vadham, despite being a silent film, had Tamil cast members; hence it considered the first Tamil film. Do you still think it qualifies as a part of Tamil cinema, if its studio was based in Tamil Nadu? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:09, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The film had Tamil cast members, was produced, scripted, directed, filmed and edited by a Tamil director, and as you rightly pointed out, the studio was based in Tamil Nadu.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:07, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hence, I have included it in Portal:Tamil cinema. And I sometimes wonder, how can a Hindi film produced by a South Indian firm (AVM) be called a Bollywood film? Because the term originally referred to only Hindi films (as they were then mainly made by Mumbai studios), and now it means any film produced by a Mumbai-based firm, even if there is little to no Hindi. Kalidas (1931) is definitely a Tamil film, but how can it be called a part of Kollywood, if it was produced at Mumbai? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: In such cases, if the cast is primarily made of Tamil people or people who speak Tamil or were a part of previous Tamil films, then it is considered a Tami film, irrespective of where it was made. On a lighter note, judging by what you meant, Octopussy would be a bollywood film since it was shot primarily in Jaipur and featured Kabir Bedi and Ashok Amritraj. :-) Kalidas's cast was primarily composed of Tamil people despite having been filmed in Mumbai and produced by the same man who directed Alam Ara. It does say it was filmed using the same sets that were used for Alam Ara. This could have been done for keeping the film under a reasonable budget too.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:13, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I think you mean Vijay Amritraj. And I did not mean that a film's nationality is defined by where it is shot; rather by where its studio is based. Slumdog Millionaire and Life of Pi do not qualify as Indian films despite being shot in India; by contrast, Gandhi qualifies as one because it was a multinational production (the UK-based Goldcrest Films and the National Film Development Corporation of India). Kailash29792 (talk) 15:32, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Naked Gun[edit]

Check out this. Can't believe you and some of your page stalkers have still not seen these films!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Hilarious and nice too! BTW, I've watched The Elephant Man. Really moving film! The scene where Merrick has tea with his doctor's family is really tear-jerking! also the scenes where he confronts the mob. Thank you so much for recommending it. Now, your part of the deal, go and listen to some Sankarabharanam.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed it, I'l watch Sankara later today. Just wrapping up 1983 but I'll be moving onto 1985 soon, so Pale Rider and the one you said next I guess. What was it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Sri Raghavendrar, one of Rajinikanth's best dramatic roles.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:43, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't noticed you'd seen The Elephant Man, I've been busy! You'll have to let me know at the bottom of my talk page when you've seen one so I'll get to it sooner!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Will do so next time, starting from after watching Pale Rider. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. After that pick one from 1997, Jackie Brown then if you've not seen it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: You're on, O Evil One. Jackie Brown vs. Annamayya after that.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Starting to miss my classic Hollywood Golden era films haha. Having a good 80s run when I can but I can never go too long without longing for the 30s-60s haha. It's more than just the film in those periods, it sort of takes you back to an era in a time machine. That said some of the looks of the actors in the late 70s and early 80s look more dated than even the ones in the 40s haha. Sammo Hung's hairstyle in the early 80s LMAO.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Spot on there. That's one of the main reasons I love the films from the mid 30s to the mid-to-late 60s. It brought out the best in Hollywood and such gems were made that we don't see the likes of in today's era. Watched The Robe yesterday. I can't believe it has only 33% on RT. It deserves at least double (65-70) IMHO. A really underrated masterpiece.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, though the acting from some of the others (not Burton) in it at times is a little wooden the film overall definitely deserves a mention right up there with the best Hollywood epics. The Robe actually was the film that got me back into watching films again a few years back. I had to recommend it to people after seeing it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Look Back in Anger? That's one of Burton's best. Not just because of him too, the lovely Claire Bloom, Steiger's missus and Chaplin's co-star in Limelight!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I've been meaning to watch it. Tell you what. We'll make a deal on that one. Look Back In Anger vs. Kalyana Parisu after Jackie Brown vs. Annamayya. How 'bout that, eh?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deal, though I suspect you've got the better end of the deal!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Well, Kalyana Parisu is a tragedy. But you'll find it quite to your liking. Huh, "liking a tragedy". Sounds ironic, doesn't it, Doc?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it's good! Burton's acting in Look Back in Anger though is superlative! It's one of those kitchen sink realist dramas or so they called them, popular in the UK in the late 50s and early 60s. You liked that one with Richard Harris as a rugby player. Another good egg of that genre is Saturday Night and Sunday Morning with Albert Finney. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:52, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: This Sporting Life. Yes. I thought of it as more like a kitchen sink version of Taming of the Shrew, but with a sort of role reversal. Harris tries hard to impress his tenant/love but in vain. In the end, he simply gives up and focuses on his Rugby career. Kalyana Parisu is good indeed. You'll have a smile or two when K. A. Thangavelu comes around with his "Mannar & Company" bit.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by Piku[edit]

Hey, I have co-nominated the list at the FLC. Cheers! :) Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:15, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Great!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:06, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work expanding Richard Burton buddy. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:20, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90 and Dr. Blofeld: He deserves it. After seeing Liz's article expanded and Burton's looking quite empty without much sourcing and citation, I decided to take it up. He is also one of mine and doc's favourite actors and he really should have stuck more towards stage than screen IMHO. But then, we wouldn't have got such fine performances like in The Robe, Becket and Virginia Woolf.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:40, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He was outstanding in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? One of my favourite films and one of the best portraits of a marriage on screen. I remember seeing it when I was 18 and thinking, 'this is why I'll never get married'. Haha! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:47, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Me too! Haha! On a light note, no offense mind you, that's probably why Abdul Kalam was a lifelong bachelor too.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I guess one ends up being more constructive when unattached. Remember: "stable relationships are for horses".

--Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:54, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Not only more constructive but the person enjoys more freedom (to do what he wants, likes). The part where Burton pulls up a gun on Liz only to open an umbrella was really funny! I was thinking "He should have done with her then and there!" Marrying Liz, one can say, was both the best thing he did and the worst mistake he ever made.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, exceptionally talented people, like Liz, are often very troubled. Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Unstable, you mean.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes, unstable, yeah. It's a professional hazard. Haha! Krimuk|90 (talk) 05:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Even a personal one considering her many husbands and affairs (both while married and single). Thanks for resolving the comments by Pavanjandhyala BTW. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FAC[edit]

Hey Ssven2! I just re-nominated Kalki Koechlin's article for FAC, since you have been a part of the previous discussions I would appreciate your comments. Thank you! NumerounovedantTalk 12:49, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Puthiya Paravai[edit]

Do you find this source worth using in Puthiya Paravai? It looks reliable because it is owned by The Indian Express Group. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:54, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: It is a RS but it looks to be more of a detailed synopsis than a review. So, don't really need to add it I think. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:01, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's mouse time![edit]

Many thanks for your input at the recent PR for Walt Disney. The article is now at FAC should you wish to comment further. Thanks again – SchroCat (talk) 07:30, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jackie Brown[edit]

Your turn ;-) Love your comment "I will not review any GAN/FLC/FAC/PR for the moment", I know exactly how you feel ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:07, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Will watch it in a day or two. I do make exceptions like in Walt Disney and Mani Ratnam, two of my biggest inspirations.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:10, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thillana Mohanambal[edit]

Hey, is it possible for you to split the Mayyam sources in Thillana Mohanambal? I mean the Mayyam refs may stay, but the title/publisher info of the Mayyam refs should be what is the title/publisher info of the newspaper/magazine articles appearing in Mayyam. I do intend on taking it to FA, or GA-reassessment at least. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:40, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by Bajirao Mastani has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

Hello, Ssven2. List of accolades received by Bajirao Mastani, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 17:02, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia de Havilland[edit]

Hello, Ssven2. Thanks again for your helpful changes to the Olivia de Havilland article. I am preparing it for WP:FAC nomination and would appreciate any additional feedback if you have the time. You can add your comments to the peer review page. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 21:37, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Veerapandiya Kattabomman[edit]

It is definitely a potential FAC; you will be the main nominator while I will be co-nominator. But do you have the words ready to use if Behindwoods is objected to? I spared that Rekhs source because she has notability outside that website as a successful subtitlist. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The News Minute[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The News Minute requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 02:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coolest[edit]

Tell me, if you had to make a list of the "top ten coolest guys ever" who would be in it? Mine would include Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Elvis Presley, John F. Kennedy, Steve Mcqueen, Clint Eastwood, Bruce Lee, Jimi Hendrix, Slash, and Keith Richards.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:17, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Me, in my case, here it is (in alphabetical order). — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:23, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Lee
Cary Grant (cool, charming, glamorous, great sense of humour etc. you name it, he's got it.)
Clint Eastwood
Elvis Presley (truly "the king")
John F. Kennedy
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
Rajinikanth
Ray Charles/Michael Jackson
Sachin Tendulkar
Steve McQueen

Obviously Gandhi, Jesus and a few others could qualify too. Ray Charles and Cary Grant agreed, but I think Jacko was too Wacko to be that cool. A big part of being cool is feeling totally comfortable in your own skin and not giving a shit haha. I think it was clear that Jacko was very uncomfortable in himself with all the surgery. I think for me it has to be Jimi Hendrix at the top, but Sinatra and Presley come close.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: To me, MJ is truly an inspiration (particularly as an environmentalist, myself being a Chemical engineering graduate; I cry when I hear "Heal the World". My favourites are "Earth Song", "Theiller", "Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough", "Bad", "Billie Jean", "Beat It", "The Way You Make Me Feel", "Black or White" (particularly for his attack on racism) and "Jam".) It his wackiness that makes him so cool and awesome. Presley is "THE KING", nothing more to say. It was after I watched Lilo & Stitch, I got introduced to EP! Maybe its also because I haven't seen much of Hendrix or even Sinatra I haven't included them there. I see Hendrix is a leftie like me! BTW, caught up with Look Back In Anger. Kind of has a pre-Virginia Woolf feel to it with the husband-wife arguing, maybe Burton incorporated that in Virginia Woolf, eh? Notwithstanding, it was really enjoyable.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:38, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm left handed too, all the most creative people are haha. I play guitar right handed though. You see now like Steiger why I think so highly of them! Lee J. Cobb and Edward G. Robinson too, amazing actors which might not always be mentioned. Interesting both were of Romanian descent. That Sinatra paid for Cobb's entire rehabilitation and all that says it all, Sinatra thought he was the greatest actor ever! He was right I think, Cobb is certainly in the elite of the elite in Hollywood film acting!

.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:28, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I knew we would have something in common (the left-hand bit). Sinatra maybe one of the greatest musicians ever, but he is a decent actor. He was pretty good playing second-fiddle to Kelly in Anchors Aweigh, but that was ultimately a Kelly show (with a bit of Tom-and-Jerry added).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Suddenly? Good actor yup.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:04, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Strongly recommend watching Zee and Co. asap, might just be Taylor's best performance!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:15, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Films...continuing[edit]

Good article, sometime we must create an article on Burton and Taylor!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:19, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Yup, most definitely. I've completed until the 1960-1969 part (including that as well). It has practically worn me out but I learnt so many things about the man: How he wanted more money to make a living despite having enough (one of the main reasons why he bumped into Cleopatra and Liz). How his near and dear ones (Emlyn Williams, Sybil (especially her! Oh, why did he abandon her for Liz? That's what I kept thinking. Sybil was perfect in every way as a lifelong companion and wife. If he hadn't done Cleopatra, he would have been a great actor, possibly the greatest). But he is one of the greatest nonetheless. Is it just me or does he remind you of Steiger?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:11, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, both Steiger and Burton were special actors, and the article is looking great! Have you a 1972 film to recommend vs Zee and Co.?♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Vasantha Maligai is a great egg. Again, you'll love Sivaji Ganesan in it. Right after I watch Hush... Hush and I am Cuba, and after you watch Puthiya Paravai and Karnan.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to watch one of those on the weekend, I'm catching up with some of the Lassie ones today. I've a few of them a long time ago, too long ago to really remember.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:01, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I absolutely loved Lassie Come Home. It was so lovely and almost tear-jerking. Pal, McDowall and Liz were wonderful in it. Loved the countryside. Maybe, someday, I'll stay at such a peaceful place ... going with a little bit of digital as well, haha!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a especially a great treat seeing the English countryside in colour in the 1940s!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers! See for yourself![edit]

Can you believe this? Does it look accurate or worth adding in any way? Vensatry, what is your opinion? Kailash29792 (talk) 09:30, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thalapathy is fine, but 16 Vayathiniley? I would not even call that a 'supporting' role. Wish Mullum Malarum was sent to the NFA. He (along with Sridevi) was very natural in Johnny. Looks like a bogus claim. —Vensatry _(talk) 12:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Behindwoods for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Behindwoods is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Behindwoods until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Coderzombie (talk) 15:48, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately a lot of people have a negative attitude to any business/website related article on here!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:22, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792 and Dr. Blofeld: The source wasn't reliable enough until of late. The last two years, Behindwoods have really developed and are helping conduct the recently opened Blue Ocean Film and Television Academy (BOFTA) their online courses. It also has its own awards ceremony, YouTube channel, Facebook and Twitter pages. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:28, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I still wonder how Behindwoods got to be used in Enthiran, despite its disputable reliability. Or I think Wikipedia is full of luddites; people who are opposed to technological development. In this case most people see traditional newspapers as being the more reliable and online sources as amateur and unreliable. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:39, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Spot on there, bro. As for Enthiran, maybe its just "magic". Everything fell into place then. No one nominated it for deletion for the last year and a 3/4 since I re-created the article properly in September 2014. Up until now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:48, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aval Appadithan[edit]

You may use this source wherever it may be needed, and try to minimise Dhananjayan if necessary. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The source is good. I'll use it wherever possible.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your combined efforts with Krimuk90 in making the List of accolades received by Piku a featured list. Hearty congratulations! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Thanks, Pavan.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:48, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. All the best for Anbe Sivam, Richard Burton and other constructive attempts. Eega and Siva are draining me completely, do check the "Making of Siva's GAN" (little boring but real), if Kailash has forwarded it to your mail inbox. Cheers! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:51, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala and Kailash29792: It was very deep and an interesting read! Thank you and to Kailash too.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kannadasan's final song[edit]

I think this source states that "Kanne Kalaimaane" was long thought to be the final song written by Kannadasan, but that was actually "Devan Thantha Veenai" from Unnai Naan Sandhithen. Can you look into it? Kailash29792 (talk) 08:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Moondram Pirai was the final film he worked on before his death. Maybe he must have written the song before and it was used with permission from his family members in Unnai Naan Sandhithen, which doesn't have a Wiki article. I think the article's author is basing his news on the release date of the film. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Richard Burton photos[edit]

The Getty ones need to be avoided because many of them aren't PD. It's true that some of their holdings have less than truthful information regarding rights, but you need to be able to prove that the photo in question is PD if you're trying to challenge something Getty has--same holds true with Corbis. Take a look at this photo of Amelia Earhart for an example of how to challenge something from these companies. It's very clear that the photo originated with NBC-see the back.

I need to take a look at Burton photos and do some "matching" with the movie publications at Lantern. I think we can find something there. We can also get hold of a screenshot of him from The Longest Day trailer; if you remember, we checked it for Rod Steiger and there's no copyright notice on the trailer. File:Richard Burton 1955.jpg This one is in trouble because there's no proof that it's in the PD. Going through the Commons photos that aren't screenshots, here's the ones to avoid:

File:Becket_1964_still_2.jpg No PD proof
File:Becket 1964 still.jpeg No PD proof
File:Liz and Dick 1983.jpg No PD proof
File:Olivia de Havilland and Richard Burton in My Cousin Rachel 1952.jpg No PD proof
File:Richard Burton - The Robe.jpg No PD proof
File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1953.jpg No PD proof
File:Richard Burton Henry V 1951.jpg No PD proof--this was taken in the UK so it most likely is under UK copyright.

Will need to go over screenshots from trailers later. We hope (talk) 13:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another bad one File:Taylor-Burton-Sandpiper.jpg This was from the time when the movie was shown on CBS. CBS doesn't own the rights to the movie, so there's no proof it's really PD. You can add this link to File:Ava gardner night iguana.jpg. This is a link to the trailer from The Night of the Iguana. I viewed the trailer and there are no copyright notices on it; you can take more screenshots from it if you like. ;-) We hope (talk) 13:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: It would be really great if you could find some free images especially from his plays (Henry V, Hamlet 1953, Coriolanus 1953-54 Othello 1956, Hamlet 1964 being some of his more famous ones). I really don't know to deal with images and check for PD proof.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:58, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can look through some older Playbills; their covers are photos and many of the older copies were either never copyrighted or not renewed. We can go at it that way for Broadway. ;) We hope (talk) 15:06, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Yeah, I suppose so. Boy, there's more to this guy than just Liz you know. I plan to focus more on his career and write about Liz as less complicated and gossipy as possible. He needs to be seen for the actor he really was and not just as another one's of Liz's "concubines".

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard Burton Yvonne Furneaux Wuthering Heights 1958.jpg Here he is doing Wuthering Heights on US television in 1958. And File:Lucille Ball Elizabeth Taylor Richard Burton Heres Lucy 1974.JPG here they both are in both a rare television and comedy appearance on Lucille Ball's television show. We hope (talk) 15:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Claire Bloom Richard Burton Alexander the Great.jpg Brand-new! :) We hope (talk) 17:34, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burton Taylor Cleopatra.jpg and another one! :) We hope (talk) 18:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: How about this image? and this and this? — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:38, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but none are PD. :-//

this image The CC license says no derivatives are allowed with it and it can't be used commercially if someone wishes. CC licenses for here need to allow an image to be used commercially and allow derivatives.

this one has a copyright marking at the bottom right of the page it's displayed on -"C" in circle, Norman Parkinson Archive.

the postcard has issues when you look at the back The photo was taken in London by Popperfoto. This is the company of photographer Paul Popper, who took a lot of celebrity photos in Europe. He always marked his photos with a copyright notice-the ones I've seen. The company who made the postcard got or bought permission to use the photo on their cards.

I wish this was better news, but don't give up looking! :-) We hope (talk) 13:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: I have added a new PD template to File:Richard Burton Henry V 1951.jpg and created the Hamlet image here on Wikipedia. I nominated the image File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1953.jpg for deletion. Can I use the images from his biographies as they are all from the OpenLibrary Web Archive.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain how the Royal Shakespeare Theatre qualifies as an entity of the British Government? The auction says the photo was clipped from a book and that's all-no details re: who published that book, where or when. There's a lot at the Internet Archive that is said to be in the public domain but turns out not to be on further investigation. For example, some of the film trailers there have had the copyright notices removed; when you view the trailer on other sites, you'll see it has a copyright notice. In order to use things from there, you have to be able to research the items you want to use to check and not rely on what someone else has listed it as. We hope (talk) 15:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a chance to try matching some things. It may take a bit because part of what I'll be doing is to search old newspapers and magazines for publications of photos. We hope (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Thanks. Do let me know when you get some images.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When I have something, I'll post the file links right here. This is a link to the trailer we used for The Longest Day photo of Rod Steiger. Free of copyright notices and Burton was in it also. :-) We hope (talk) 15:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Nice. File:The Longest Day Richard Burton 1962.jpg is another one I uploaded in addition to File:Richard Burton Longest Day.png. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change the template on the one with Burton smoking in the chair to read that it's a screenshot from the trailer of The Longest Day and give the link to the trailer at TCM as you did on the second one and that should be great! :-) We hope (talk) 15:40, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Do have a look now how it is. I've changed it. :-) — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:48, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! :-D We hope (talk) 16:08, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Burton[edit]

The Burton article is looking amazing BTW, great job! I suspect it'll have to be trimmed down by the end to satisfy those who don't like long articles but I'd argue one for Burton needs to be a considerable length. I'd say promoting Burton takes priority over Grant first now as you've got it so far! If you want my help on Burton next month I'll try to help you! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Thanks for the compliment, considering that it is my first time doing a biography article as a solo editor. I would like some help on handling his personal life and his acting style/legacy sections. You can collect references pertaining to them for me and store them here.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want it to be a solo effort go for it. I'll get on with Grant. But see how far you can go anyway.To promote something like that purely by yourself would be a great achievement!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: TrueHeartSusie3's work on Monroe inspired me to go for Burton. Also, seeing Liz expanded and Burton so empty, I wanted to do the job. You can help me out with the personal life sections as I probably might not get the hang of it well enough. BTW, I too am working on Grant with you, Doc.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not my work on Steiger and Sinatra then ;-)?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Both our works on those two articles. As of now, I'm planning to get Burton to GA (Just like how we worked on Sinatra and Steiger. Only this time, the roles are reversed. I'm nominating Burton for GA. The guy's really grown on me though. You were right. He is one of the greatest actors who ever lived). For FA, we can co-nominate Burton and Grant. You can nominate Grant for GA.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Another thing. The reason why Burton's article might look long is because he is multi-tasking (Radio, Stage, Screen and Telly) and has done some noteworthy roles in each of these mediums. I've amalgamated all into one heading — Career.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think Burton is undoubtedly in the top five of most talented actors, but due to his alcohol problems and the fact that he didn't really care about his career his film career was much less in stature than it might have been. So as a result he's not often considered as one of the best. See Look Back in Anger when you can. BTW Bede has developed Olivia de Havilland ready for her centenary.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Looks fabulous. She really deserves a TFA for no. 100. Kirk's centenary too is approaching by this year's end. So, you will help me out by expanding the personal life section? The alcohol and the turbulent "Liz and Dick" relationship can be covered there in detail. If too detailed, we can create a separate article "Personal life of Richard Burton" or even "Liz and Dick" itself.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's tricky for them. I would need books on it so not sure I could really do much. Liz and Dick dhould definitely have their own article. It's one I may consider after Cary Grant, and then a summary could be written for the Burton persona life. A 100kb detailed article on the couple would be awesome I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: You can get the following books for free from Open Library. Registration is free too. No payment needed — 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:09, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your questions[edit]

Hello, Ssven2. You have new messages at We hope's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Night of the Iguana Screenshot[edit]

Some bad news re: File:Ava gardner night iguana.jpg I just watched the trailer at TCM. The trailer runs 3.20 and it has what you might call a false ending--looks like it's done but there's still time on the clock. The copyright notice comes in at about 3.13-3.16 into it; it's hard to spot unless you have the trailer on full screen but it's there. :-// We hope (talk) 16:22, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My Cousin Rachel trailer[edit]

This is the original 1952 trailer with no copyright marks. I originally viewed this at themoviedb but was not allowed to save the link as it's on the WP blacklist. We hope (talk) 16:42, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Burton[edit]

I'll get to your questions in a minute, but I think you can change one of your non free images to PD.

File:Richard Burton in The Robe 1953.png

This is in the film's trailer and it has no copyright marks. Robe trailer You'll need to look fast because it come in at about 4 seconds after the trailer starts. I grabbed a screencap of the frame. ;) Will help you with this if you want. We hope (talk) 14:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now your questions. File:Richard Burton - The Robe.jpg-ABC Television doesn't own the rights to the film-they only contracted to show the film on television. The owner of the film is 20th Century Fox. I know this looks a lot like the Wuthering Heights image re: coming from a television station but DuPont Show of the Month was a television program aired on CBS Television. I've been trying to find an old newspaper that printed the photo (before 1964) but no luck at this so far.

The first one for The Comedians was published in The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio newspaper). This is after 1963, so the Plain Dealer's copyright is still in force. Unfortunately their abbreviation for the newspaper is sometimes "PD", so that's what it meanson the photo's back. :/// The second one is from the showing of the film on television. As above, CBS was showing the film and doesn't have rights to it. I think I will have more photos for you sometime today. ;) We hope (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard Burton Maggie McNamara Prince of Players.jpg

File:Taylor and Burton Cleopatra.jpg

@We hope: Regarding The Robe, the previous screenshot wasn't too clear. That's why I replaced it with a non-free image. If you managed to get a clearer version of it, let me know. Do try to find some more photos of his other films (even the plays, especially one of Hamlet if you can. It would be really grateful).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:52, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is that since the frame was part of the trailer, it can be changed to free. We hope (talk) 00:56, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Oh, I get it. I'll get right on it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:58, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just take your better screenshot and upload it over the Commons one. You might want to make a note on the file at Commons that this scene is about at 4 seconds into the film trailer. Then you can ask for a deletion of the non-free one here. A lot of photos I find start out as newspaper and magazine photos of not so great (some terrible :-)) quality. I then find better copies of them and use them. :-) We hope (talk) 01:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Done. How to nominate the non-free one for deletion? — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:06, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just copy this {{Db-g7}} to the file page and make a note there that thee is an identical free file at Commons File:The Robe 1953 Trailer Screenshot 1.png We hope (talk) 01:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing new for Burton right now--am trying to finish with Joseph Parry at present ;) We hope (talk) 14:09, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: All the best with that.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anbe Sivam[edit]

Anbe... Sivam! Vismaya Kaarakam! Pramadakaram! Haha!!! All the best for the PR and FAC. ;-D Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:37, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will this link fit anywhere in Anbe Sivam? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:11, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Don't think so, bro. It looks a tad specific. The thematic elements in the film are explored in a quite generic manner.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because the plot section reads, "performances protesting against MNC-driven industrialisation, that resulted in the marginalisation of the labour force". This made me believe that improved technology resulted in mass unemployment. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The film (the "Naatukkoru Seithi" song sequence, in particular) don't really mention about robots causing unemployment. I think FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) is a more better link. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:37, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You could use this article in "Themes" I think. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:53, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More for Burton[edit]

Am still trying to get a photo of him as Hamlet; have some possibilities but need to work more on the "how" of it. Burton did Hamlet in the US in 1964, so that makes it a little harder to do. You can't say the item wasn't renewed because that holds for items before 1964. :-/// I read an interview with him where he said he'd known Elizabeth Taylor from about the time he started working in plays & films in the US. He then said something to the effect that he and she would always be together-something to the effect of a destiny thing. We hope (talk) 16:02, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: I managed to get a screenshot of the filmed version of the play. Maybe you can get a better image and slap it in its place.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:54, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The News Minute[edit]

If you find these useful: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Behindwoods?[edit]

Hi Ssven, what happened to all the Behindwoods content? Did the community decide somewhere that the source stinks? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand, but I think the WP administration is full of luddites who claim to maintain neutrality, yet they prefer newspapers over websites. I do not know why Behindwoods is being called an unreliable source; there have been no reports questioning its' credibility. And the site also conducts many exclusives which cannot be found elsewhere. Kailash29792 (talk) 18:21, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia email re Newspapers.com signup[edit]

Hello, Ssven2. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 12:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MSVTimes[edit]

It may seem like an unofficial fansite, especially since I don't think MSV would have been great at using computers and he's currently dead. But it could still be official if he approved of it, and this source mentions it as being official. Henceforth, do you think it qualifies as RS? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:18, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: It most likely does indeed. An article can be created on it/re-directed to MSV as well.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:32, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Server Sundaram and Enthiran[edit]

I actually thought this source could be useful by replacing any Danny source. I also believe Enthiran may have to undergo a FAR. What do you think? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:59, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The Firstpost source just blankly lays out that SS was adapted from KB's play of the same name with the same lead actor from the play. As for Enthiran, not just yet. We'll try to find sources that can replace BW, and post them in here stating for which BW ref no. it can be replaced with. Keep the interviews though as we can justify that they are exclusives. Pavan, could you lend us a hand by finding suitable sources for Enthiran to replace the BW ones? Do let us know here.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ssven2, let me know the ref no.s to be replaced. I will try to help (if you haven't done it yet on your own). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: You can try to find out a reference showing when Enthiran's shooting wrapped up as I somehow feel that the reference with director Shankar's blog might be questioned. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:34, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it is the director's official blog, it isn't a problem. Many other websites have cited it as an update on Shankar's blog. What do you think of this? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have the pages for SS from AVM Saravanan's book which could easily replace Danny. I'm not telling you to edit, but if there are mistakes by me, you have the source for proofreading. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:36, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anbe Vaa[edit]

Do you find this source worth using in Anbe Vaa? Especially the line "The portion of AVM studios in Vadapalani, belonging to Gurunath's father AVM Balasubramanian, which was built to accommodate the lavish and opulent sets of MGR's 1966 runaway hit Anbe Vaa was razed a few months back with Gurunath putting out the land for realtor friend Vikram Aggarwal with a plan of developing close to 600 apartments in its place." Kailash29792 (talk) 12:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The info isn't specified clearly here. So, best if we leave it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I first thought that some sets for the film were built at Vadapalani, and were not demolished until last year. But then I realised it's the portion of AVM Studios he is talking about, which seems insignificant. Besides, have you spoken to Thamizhan1994 of late? Has he hinted a possible return? Kailash29792 (talk) 15:19, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Yes, he did. He would return during the fag end of this year (Somewhere around November-December). — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:33, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cary Grant[edit]

Resuming with this today if I can. Cary Grant's parents. Nothing like his father, looks more like his mother, especially around the eyes! I'm not sure we could use those images though as though they're early 20th century might not be PD in the UK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: We can add the images (if any of the childhood ones happen to be in PD) later. Expansion and improvement of the article is the big thing now. BTW, how's my mew lead/infobox image? Got it from flickr. It was C.C.2.0 licensed.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:49, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a good one, though of course would look better without that big, ugly infobox, but first things first ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's the 2013 book I'm using not, 1996. 1997 was an error but it's not 1996 either!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Oops, my bad, doc. Changed it to 2013 now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:58, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Refs[edit]

First off, I found a serial version of the book Elizabeth and Richard in some 1976 newspapers. Clipped the links and will post them here. In articles they need to be noted that they're from Newspapers.com:

If you're not signed up for Wikipedia:Newspapers.com, please think about it as I think you'll find it a big help re: Hollywood notables and the like. Am still trying to finish Joseph Parry. ;) We hope (talk) 13:11, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Thanks for the references and all the best for Parry, We hope. I have requested access now.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Films seen yet?" and Cary Grant[edit]

Emailed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:19, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talking of 1964, seen those films yet?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure you see Topper asap, it's a classic! It might have been his first truly great film. Classic comedy!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:18, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

His performance in People Will Talk is excellent, very underrated. You know that might have been one of the most natural roles I've seen him play as the doctor, it's definitive Grant, a must see!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But then it's by a master director, check out some of his gems!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add a cluster ref for " Sylvia Scarlett (1935), The Awful Truth (1937), The Philadelphia Story (1940), Howard Hawks's Bringing Up Baby (1938), and His Girl Friday (1940). Along with the later Arsenic and Old Lace (1944) and I Was a Male War Bride (1949), these films are frequently cited as among the all-time great comedy films. " in the lede. Ideally we need to find mention of every film on a best list.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:06, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Newspapers.com access[edit]

You should have full access now. Note that our Wikipedia Library accounts don't include "Publisher Extra" content. All the best, HazelAB (talk) 11:50, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, HazelAB.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:23, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gerda Arendt! And in correct order (1 2 3 4) too!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AVM 60 Cinema[edit]

AVM Saravanan has written about Anbe Vaa extensively in the book. If any of the pages has contents already in Danny's book, you could use them in place of Danny's sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, use ping template while messaging to me, esp. at project and talk pages. noping isn't notifying me. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:33, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FLC requests[edit]

Thanks for all requests that you're making on behalf of us for the Rajini FLC; I don't pay heed to that particular editor who indulges in QPQ supports. I'd rather be happy if my nom fails. Hope you understand, cheers! —Vensatry _(talk) 08:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed[edit]

-♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replied, punk.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Currently 13,700 words and 78kb readable prose. 12,000 words range and 70kb range is probably more ideal but let's get it past GA first.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:46, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You said it, Doctor!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Burton is already 12,000 words and 70KB haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:55, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Burton's different. His life is much more complicated than Grant's as the latter hardly had a flop in his career post The Awful Truth. It can be trimmed later on as he is a famed stage actor too. His personal life also needs a separate article. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Film career of Cary Grant, can you copy over the book sources?♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When fully developed it could be split into smaller sections and you could probably find more aspects to discuss in new sections like "Dress", "Comic delivery" etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:45, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It really does take away a lot of the fun on working on these sort of articles when you have to deal with numerous people. If it was purely article work and a friendly atmosphere here I'd be more eager to move onto the next one but it really is an enthusiasm killer. Audrey Hepburn would probably turn out to be even worse. Perhaps I should just stick to watching their films, as there's little to be enjoyed about working here and having to deal with so much negativety!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:34, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: You can work on taking their films to GA instead. Don't get bogged down, you, who has stuck around for a decade! This is just Jujube matter for you!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On the wiki grant page can you create a section for Audrey and list the books/amazon.co.uk book links/author/prices in a section between Cary Grant and Natalie Wood?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:35, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Done. Do check if I've correctly listed the book prices. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's great Ssven, much appreciated! Will order those by the end of the week, must put the Cary Grant books to good use on the film article before I send them back first though! Will finish my Eega review tomorrow BTW!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:46, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nani's Gentleman[edit]

Saw the film last night, it was a really good thriller (read subtle). However, i found it somewhat similar to SRK's Baazigar upto the pre-climax i.e. the last reveal. Here is its theatrical trailer with subs. What do you think of it? Do they look similar? Or, do you find it similar to some good Tamil film? (recommend one with subs on YT, i am planning to watch something good today after completing Sansho the Bailiff). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:48, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Interesting. Looks like something Atharvaa would do. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:52, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That last scene in the trailer where the blood drips from Nani's forehead, he was just awesome. I never saw him portray such an intense grey-shaded role, almost an anti-hero. Niveda was good as well, though the Papanasam hangover was visible (she cries really long). The climax, however, was really strange. It began like Baazigar and ended up as a tale of a good dopplegangler. If proper info is available, Gentleman shall be one of my future GANs. BTW, any good Tamil film with subs on YT to suggest (not ones by Bala please, i amen't too mature to bear him). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: How about this one? — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:07, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watched it long ago. Brilliant film. Great cinematography and nice performances. But, i felt that the director should have been less indulging at places, he tries to push too hard. Will revisit it again tonight/tomorrow (at least). :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: How about Thegidi? — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:16, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one. Shall watch it and Indru Netru Naalai at once (though i prefer the former first, as i am waiting to watch it since long). BTW, the latter did remind me of Suriya's 24 where his Athreya was a menace. His act here was easily the best in the film apart from the interval and pre-climax. What a villainy! His seating in the chair resembles Stephen Hawking a bit? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Looks like it was lifted from Reddymane's portrayal of Hawking. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:25, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right. The similarity is somehwat evident here and here. 24 is fairly good, intelligent (and as unrealistic) as Vikram's Manam. If possible, watch it for Athreya and Sethuraman. Neither Mani's romance nor his heroism (esp. in the church before Athreya) aren't that effective. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you all the help you offered with your edits ad comments on Kalki Koechlin's article. NumerounovedantTalk 14:54, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Numerounovedant. Glad to see your effort finally paying off. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:59, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey![edit]

Hi! Woah, its been a really long time since we exchanged any words. I recently came to know that you too are an avid GOT follower. Have you seen today's episode? It was epic in every sense. Krish | Talk 18:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: Not "avid" but the screenplay, story and characters are intense and quite good. Will catch up with it today and let you know about it. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 00:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wanna know who the actual parents of Jon Snow are? There is a huge hint in "Battle of the Bastards". If you remember what Ned Stark said to Jon, the last time they met: "The next time we see eachother...we'll talk about your mother. I promise." We might know in next episode. Krish | Talk 04:49, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: Just saw "Battle of the Bastards". Brilliantly done. F***ing Ramsay gets fed to his own dogs! What a way for Sansa to take revenge for raping her! Awesome!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:13, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was so happy that the biggest Moron after Joffery is dead. You noticed one thing (related to my upper post), Jon says something about taking Rickon to the Crypt, near his Father. So?Krish | Talk 05:20, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: Interesting arc there. We'll see what happens next episode, hopefully. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The show never mentioned but in the books Jon has never been to the Crypts of Winterfell as he had strange dreams about it. His actual words were "And then I find myself in front of the door to the crypts. It’s black inside, and I can see the steps spiraling down.Somehow I know I have to go down there, but I don’t want to. I’m afraid of what might be waiting for me. The old Kings of Winter are down there, sitting on their thrones with stone wolves at their feet and iron swords across their laps, but it’s not them I’m afraid of. I scream that I’m not a Stark, that this isn’t my place, but it’s no good, I have to go anyway, so I start down, feeling the walls as I descend, with no torch to light the way. It gets darker and darker, until I want to scream." Plus, I have noticed all the hints as all characters have accepted the fact that Ned Stark won't cheat on Catelyn. In last season, when Littlefinger and Sansa visited Lyanna in the crypts, Peter Baelish gave a very strange look on the mention of Rhaegar raping Lyanna, which made me scratch my head. At that time I was not even aware of any theories regarding the series.Krish | Talk 05:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Quint[edit]

What do you think of it? I think it is a very reliable source as it is owned by Raghav Bahl. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Looks reliable to me. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a discussion here. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Olivia de Havilland and Errol Flynn in The Charge of the Light Brigade 1936.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Olivia de Havilland and Errol Flynn in The Charge of the Light Brigade 1936.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Olivia de Havilland and Hattie McDaniel in In This Our Life 1942.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Olivia de Havilland and Hattie McDaniel in In This Our Life 1942.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Olivia de Havilland and Joseph Cotten in Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte 1964.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Olivia de Havilland and Joseph Cotten in Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte 1964.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Olivia de Havilland and Rita Hayworth in The Strawberry Blonde 1941.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Olivia de Havilland and Rita Hayworth in The Strawberry Blonde 1941.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:49, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Roja[edit]

It is one of my forthcoming GAs. But collecting sources is going to be a headache for me; how about you collect sources and store them here while I add content from them? Kailash29792 (talk) 09:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I'll see what I can do.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:15, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Films[edit]

Exams all over? Wow you've been watching a lot of late, lot's of classics! I've been seeing very little of late as in the summer I don't feel like watching many films! I decided to redirect the Cary Grant film career article as you'll have noticed. It would always be dificult to really produce a good article on that without being too detailed. Best to just work on the films I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:47, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Yep. This Monday. Went very well, thanks for asking. I'm planning more! Tokyo Story was beautiful! Ozu is a master! Such indifference from their own children! No wonder Baghban took a leaf, no a branch, out of it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:24, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Sansho the Bailiff yet? You'll like that I think!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Till the morrow, mate.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:58, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is a great film, Ssven2. Not as magical as Ugetsu, but you'll love it. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I've always had a fascination for Japanese films, Pavan-san.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 17:01, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What does Pavan-san actually mean? eh? :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eyes Without a Face also springs to mind, that's a very interesting egg!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Sounds really interesting, doctor. Shall watch it soon. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: "San" is a honorific suffix. Have a look here.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 02:50, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Truly strange that even young ones are referred to with such suffixes. I remember a similar instance in Late Spring where Noriko's aunt calls her Nori-chan or something. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:46, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clip from My Man Godfrey.ogg

Clip from My Man Godfrey (1936), which earned Lombard and Powell Academy Award nominations

Glad you both enjoyed Bailiff. Ssven, a highly recommended comedy My Man Godfrey. You'll adore Carole's neurotic performance!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedia of Indian Cinema[edit]

I think I finally got it. Do share with other aspiring editors. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Enthiran Filmfare nominees[edit]

The NDTV source in Enthiran does mention the film's Filmfare nominations, but only shows pictures of the nominees. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I tried to find a better source for the nominations but to no avail. Pavanjandhyala, can you find one? It would be really great. Thanks.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:43, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As with the Oscars, the Filmfare nominees are announced and then the winner is announced by the presenter right? And there should be videographic proof of the same right? Kailash29792 (talk) 16:48, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Yeah, but, so far, I haven't been able to get an official video of the ceremony. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:53, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ssven! I'm back to Hyderabad today but am not really happy to say so. I can't help you with this; let me know if i can do anything else for you. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:16, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For your work[edit]

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Cary Grant (estimated annual readership: 500,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! We hope (talk) 11:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@We hope: Thank you, We hope. It wouldn't have been possible without the good Doctor's effort and toil.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:23, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, Collect was the one who put in the most effort, effort in trying to stop it being promoted anyway haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:19, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Do not let it bog you down, mon ami. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It does bog me down though, especially when it seems there's barely an honest admin left in the house these days. Increasing number of admins I previously respected can't even stand up for me and offer a fair solution to something..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:33, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Well, I'll stand up for you no matter what.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:03, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a hilarious egg to watch try Love and Death!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Will do so soon enough. Have you seen The Man Who Laughs (1928) yet? Really great acting from Conrad.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:52, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not seen it nope!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

King in the North, Queen of the Seven Kingdoms, and Daenerys's journey[edit]

I hope you know what I'm talking about. I wanted to talk to you about the finale since its premiere but couldn't. Ping me when you see this.Krish | Talk 09:25, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Krish!: I haven't caught up on the finale but I heard it was really good. I'll tell you my opinion after I've seen it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watch it ASAP. It's not good but an Outstanding piece of television, much better than some of the billion dollar grossing films. I think it's the best episode of the year, series and probably one of the best episodes and finale ever. You will know what I'm really talking about.Krish | Talk 11:26, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anbe Vaa FAC[edit]

As insane as it may sound, I wish to take it to FA before MGR turns 100 early next year. Does it look possible IYHO (in your honest opinion), given the limited time duration? I'm also confused about what to add from this source. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The sangam source is quite confusing, best not to use it in the article. It would be best to conduct a PR before FAC and not take it directly to FAC (you wouldn't want it to have the same fate as MM).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:51, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not finished with MM, but I'm not resuming it immediately. As for AV, you could call Thamizhan1994 and ask him whether he has any problem with me being the main nominator (while he will be listed as co-nominator) because he must be active here to be the main nominator, but he's not. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July to January. Not too small, Kailash. You can throw a stone. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've stopped expanding for now, and have listed it at the GOCE. Ssven could do a source review of the content added by me. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:03, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Open up a PR after the GOCE is completed. I'll do a source review right there itself.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keechaka Vadham[edit]

Don't you think its time to move on...? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he's ready yet. I don't mind him listing me as co-nominator, but the article may benefit from a slight expansion; not necessarily based on the number of sources, but the content. And while many sources state the film was released in 1916 (though Randor Guy and S. Muthiah state otherwise), there has been no news of celebrations of the film's centennial. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kailash, i would like to remind you about my experiences with Siva and Eega. Wikipedia is never finished, and if required, that so-called slight expansion can be made post FAC-start if anyone complains about lack of comprehensiveness. Having said that, it is my opinion. BTW, how are things with you? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guhan Films[edit]

The intro credits of Server Sundaram mention "Guhan Films" as the film's production studio, but the Wiki article credits AVM. Then what did AVM actually do?! I found no evidence that they distributed it. I also found a seemingly non-professional site that reads, "GUHAN FILMS(A.V.M)". What do you think? Kailash29792 (talk) 08:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) It could be a reference to M. S. Guhan. —Vensatry _(talk) 08:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: A.V.M distributed the film as Guhan obviously refers to M. S. Guhan, as Vensatry points out. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is immediately obvious that AVM distributed, but how do we settle this issue into the article now? I still can't find any RS proving they did, or that Guhan Films is a subsidiary of them. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kailash29792, Hope this helps. —Vensatry _(talk) 08:42, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although the source still doesn't say that AVM distributed or that Guhan Films is their subsidiary, there is a statement reading, "We have officially bought the title Server Sundaram from AVM Productions for our film". This confirms that AVM was involved in production. But does anyone know that Columbia Pictures is owned by Sony and anything they produce is immediately credited to Sony? I think we are in a similar situation. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Kolaiyum Sival patthini"[edit]

Although I have seen Andha Naal, I don't remember where exactly in the film this proverb is uttered. Do you? Because we could use the film itself as a source to replace the one remaining Danny source in the article. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Its "Kolaiyum Seival Paththini" and I remember Javar Seetharaman, who plays the detective, saying it. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done By adding that, I have completely extirpated Danny's book from the article. I also believe it is FA-worthy now. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rajinikanth filmography[edit]

Could you invite more editors to the FLC of this article? No-one (apart from Pavan) has made any comments. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hoping the best for it, Kailash. Because of Rajinikanth and yes, it is my 25th FLC review. :) PS: On public demand (read family), i agreed for some recreation today and am just done watching Kabali. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Missamma[edit]

Sorry to trouble you, but i came to know that few of the Tamil version's cast members have different names for the same character. For example, Rama Rao and Ganesan play the same role, but are named M. T. Rao and Balu. If you find such differences, if any, please do add them to the cast section. That would be very helpful. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:06, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Sure thing.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both you guys, good news: I have ordered S. E. Pillai's book Madras Studios via Amazon, and it should arrive within some days. It has detailed info on Miss(i)amma and, unlike Danny's books, is not a mirror publication. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:01, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Great. A special thanks to you and "Nadigar Thilagam" Sivaji Ganesan (correct?). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:47, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why exactly special thanks to Sivaji? And yes, his title is Nadigar Thilagam. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: You will know "that day". Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:55, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only Ganesan? Remaining had the same names? If true, that was somewhat strange. Because, M. T. Rao was a metaphor of mockery towards the unemployed and i wonder what made them name Ganesan as Balu. Anyways, thanks for the help buddy! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I checked Pillai's book (through Google Books' limited preview) and it gives his name as Balu. I think the surname "Rao" would have made the Tamil-speaking character look like a native of Andhra Pradesh, so they renamed him. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:58, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Within the limitations, i've sourced the cast list. Only two additional changes as per Pillai's book: Balu, Lohidasan. The remaining, if any, can be overlooked i assume. Like, the detective's stoic assistant for an example. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Balu sounds more like a Tamil name than Rao as the latter, as Kailash put it, might make the character less identifiable with Tamil audiences (identifying with Tamil audiences was the reason ANR gaaru was replaced with Thangavelu). Even Ramalingaiah was replaced with someone else I believe.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No sources are mentioning it properly. Anyways, let's wait. We have a month. Meanwhile, the king shall return to reclaim something tomorrow. Get ready! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who this king is and what he is due to reclaim tomorrow, but do you find this and this worth adding? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:27, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I've added the Dinamalar source. The Hindu source doesn't quite give any special info about Thangavelu other than the fact that the scenes where he practises singing are enjoyable. Maybe "Legacy" sectionil athai pattri oru bitta podalaam. Your call.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I am the king. I am reclaiming my lost opportunity to make Eega a FA. Anything else you want to know? :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. But I should have told you this earlier which may surprise you: "I", when referring to yourself, must be capitalised, unlike "me" and "you". Kailash29792 (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Andha Naal[edit]

All the pages so far from Pillai's book. Can you see if anything new can be added? Kailash29792 (talk) 12:26, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Peer review/Andha Naal/archive1[edit]

Feel free to post comments or attract reviewers. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sangavitamilmani[edit]

Sangavitamilmani is savagely uploading duplicate film posters and never quits at anything; he doesn't even communicate. Can you please do something about this, as I don't have all day to scrutinise him. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:11, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Action films[edit]

Two early 90s action films I know you'll love and are urgent ones to see, Out for Justice and Showdown in Little Tokyo. Ignore Rotten Tomatoes on Out for Justice, here's a clip! Both are really action film classics and the Rotten Tomatoes reviews probably says more about the taste of the critics than how good the films are, they're both good fun. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed it! It's not exactly a "masterpiece", but captures all the elements of late 80s/early 90s badass action haha so enjoyable. The pool scene and the dog at the end were my favourite scenes.It's much better than 19% or whatever the Rotten Tomatoes critics give it. More like 60 something %. Watching Naan now. Do see the Kathleen Turner-Michael Douglas one I recommended, it's cruel haha, but a feuding couple classic ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: The pool scene is my favourite too. Just being the boss of everyone (badass!). In In & Out, they go so far as to mention that Seagal was nominated for a Best Actor Oscar! Can you beat that, eh?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:49, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Will see the Kathleen-Michael-Danny one soon enough. How's Naan Kadavul so far?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spiritual egg!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: "Jai Bholenath". Aham Brahmasmi (I am Brahman). Its considered as Arya's (the Aghori) best work. The villain (the bald black african-like skinny guy) is now one of the most sought-after comedians in the industry.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watch Quicksand (1950 film), that's an underrated egg. Best performance from Rooney I've seen.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Will do next up. While watching Out for Justice, I was reminded of one of O'Toole's dialogues from Ratatouille — "But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so." It was true in the case of Out for Justice. Glad you enjoyed both MGR films. Why not a higher rating for Thirumal Perumai BTW? Just curious.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unitalicized doesn't mean that it's a poor film!. It still usually means very good. I don't know, some films strike a chord with me more than others.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Fair enough. Thirumal Perumai was a good film, but one of Nagarajan's weaker ones compared to Thiruvilaiyadal and Kandhan Karunai. Probably because the songs aren't as famous as the other two ones are, but they are still good ones from KVM. Quicksand next.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quicksand is a classic noir! Very underrated, IMO up there with the best!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Really felt sorry for Rooney's character, Daniel Brady. Getting mixed up in trouble after trouble. Well, just shows that crime doesn't pay (most of the time. ;-)). — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rediff excerpt[edit]

Hi Ssven2, I really don't think this Rediff excerpt was the best example of neutral editing. The reviewer Pavithra Srinivasan gave Naan Kadavul a 3/5 star rating, but the part that was excerpted seemed to suggest the film was well-received by Rediff, when Srinivasan did levy criticism about the film lacking "punch" and noted a lack of attention being paid to the protagonist's frame of mind. When we get too focused on plucking quotes from reviews, we sometimes lose sight of what we're supposed to be doing, which is painting a neutral portrait of how the film was received, which means that we sometimes have to take a step back and evaluate things like direction and writing and deliver the reader the positive and negative of both. Ex:

The film was praised for its writing. Reviewer A found the story to be rich in character development and fast-paced, but that was not a sentiment shared by Reviewer B who found it languid and full of cliche dialogue. "The script stank", wrote Reviewer C who also noted a lack of believability in the characters, but described the cinematography as stunning. "I felt like I was in a dream half the time."

This sort of shape tends to be a better way to deliver critical response information, but I know that it requires a lot of time, which we don't always have the luxury of. Regardless, if you could please keep this in mind going forward it would be appreciated. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article Review[edit]

Hello Ssven2, I hope everything is fine. I was wondering if you have the time.. could you take up(look at/review) the "Game of Thrones" article(Talk:Game of Thrones), That has been nominated for a "Good Article". I am trying to later hopefully get this to a "Featured Article".. and I need some one to review and tell me what to fix/do to make that happen. AffeL (talk) 14:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AffeL: Hello there. I am quite busy in real life, so I'm afraid I'll have to pass this one. Good luck with your endeavour though.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Invitations[edit]

Might be worth plouging through the WP Films and Wp:Actors members lists with invitations to the Golden Hollywood contest. I did ask User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao to do it with AWB but he's busy I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ek, sorry - forgot to respond. I can try and do something for this tonight or this weekend; it's not difficult, actually, and I don't need to use AWB to do it. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 12:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao , it's Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Golden Hollywood Contest . Wp:Films, Wp:Actors and Wp:California/Los Angeles members should probably be alerted.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Replied, punk.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:33, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mouna Ragam[edit]

I believe this and this can be put to great use in Mouna Ragam, which recently turned 30. Can you see what can be added? Kailash29792 (talk) 09:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ssven2: Both are just reviews praising the film. Nothing new really. Maybe can be added in the "Critical reception" section if need be. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:18, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge[edit]

Asking you so as not to leave you out ;-)

Hi there. I've started a new initiative, the Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. It's a long term goal to bring about 10,000 article improvements to the UK and Ireland. Through two contests involving just six or seven weeks of editing so far we've produced over 1500 improvements. Long term if we have more people chipping it and adding articles they've edited independently as well from all areas of the UK then reaching that target is all possible. I think it would be an amazing achievement to see 10,000 article improvements by editors chipping in. If you support this and think you might want to contribute towards this long term please sign up in the Contributors section. No obligations, just post work on anything you feel like whenever you want, though try to avoid basic stubs if possible as we're trying to reduce the overall stub count and improve general comprehension and quality. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:49, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I'll continue the work on Richard Burton whenever I can.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Caught up with Teacher's Pet and The Rose Tattoo (finally!). The former is a darling (Gable looks a tad frail while Day, glistening as ever! Gig Young is a wildcard, especially in the last half-an-hour. Why didn't he get more chances?) while the latter is an extraordinary work from Tennessee Williams. Magnani deserves the awards she got for this egg! Lancaster's great too!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant films aren't they! I took for granted you'd seen them! Yeah Gig is hilarious. Always looks plastered in every film though. He likely really was!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: "I gave the waiter 5 bucks to spike your drink." "Now I understand. I only gave 2 bucks to spike yours!" Priceless. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you delink my user name in the invites? Otherwise it'll jam again in my messages! Yes, try the Wp:Film members again, but the current support for active editing is low so I won't be running it until I have some people to do writing work!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:39, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chilling egg], well worth a watch, they should make into a feature film!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Damn! They should have.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:34, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Equus is an extraordinary psychological egg BTW. Another Burton great performance.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:25, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Been meaning to watch it. Will do so soon.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The plot and the horse connection is horrible though, but it's very well made and acted by Burton.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although this may sound unrelated, I want Andha Naal to receive more comments on the PR page before the PR is closed and I proceed to FAC. Since Redtiger hasn't responded yet, I want any of you to see if his remaining comments have been solved. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alibabavum 40 Thirudargalum (1956 film)[edit]

I now intend to take this to GA if the number of references is increased, also if the reception and "popular culture" sections are further expanded. Could you help find additional reviews? I also think this may come in handy. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:07, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Danny's book is ok for GA level. It should suffice for now, if you are thinking of substituting Danny's book with other references (It would be great if you could). I'll see if I can add anything from the Daily Thanthi Source.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:15, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I'll take the article to FA anytime soon, so it seems Danny's book gets to stay (besides, how could Vensatry conclude that Best is a mirror book, despite not having read it?) I mean, there are certain chapters that partially lift from us like Parasakthi and Meera, but is a little plagiarism is enough to taint the whole book, like a drop of poison? The Thanthi source also seems to mention that Alibaba isn't the first colour Tamil film. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:28, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You cant blame Vensatry for that. When Mullum Malarum was a FAC, he pointed the WP:MIRROR issue because the standard you aimed for was the best or optimum, neither good nor great. Those books can be used for GAs, destubbing articles, posters, taking opinions on genres etc. Coming to your poison quote, please remember that small causes can have large effects. Master Evil wishes to see a successful GA attempt of yours. Yours truly, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:45, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Daily Thanthi is actually referring to Aan (1952), a Hindi epic film which was dubbed into Tamil under the same title. "Aan" means "Pride" (Same as the word "Garv") (the Thanthi source also mentions it ("'ஆன்' என்றால் 'கவுரவம்' என்று அர்த்தம்.")). So, Alibabavum is the first one for Tamil cinema (first Tamil film in colour). The Thanthi source seems to provide wrong information. Try to see if any other source supports the Daily Thanthi one. Remember, we can't fill up what every Tom, Dick and Harry says about a film JLT.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it absurd how Alibaba is referred to by most sources as a fantasy film, despite lacking supernatural elements? I first thought the cave opening itself in response to a command was irrational, but then I realised there were imprisoned men opening it when they heard the command. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:35, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So yes, the article now has over 50 sources and looks very much GA-worthy. What do you think? I think the lead must be reworked, the "music" and the "legacy" section expanded. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:24, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Ippodhikki indha level podhumnu thonudhu, nanba. Can handle other the music and legacy sections post-GA.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:30, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, I have no plans to expand this article for a potential FAC. Could you find no additional music reviews or milestones that the film achieved? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:38, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Castafiore[edit]

Hi, I edited the synopsis of the Castafiore Emerald, removing a number of inaccuracies and making it more concise - it needs a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Summary_too_long tag as it stands. You reverted my changes, why please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NPalgan2 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NPalgan2: I added "fictional" as Marlinshire and Gopal are indeed fictional towns and provinces for those readers who are unfamiliar with Tintin related topics. The plot summary was already taken into account during the copyedits and GA review. Some of your edits on the summary were pretty good and I incorporated them later after I reverted your edits to the article. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:54, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moulinsart is indeed fictional but Herge placed it in Belgium. Repeating that the English translators placed Marlinspike is in England just conflicts with the statement elsewhere in the article that the adventure takes place entirely in Belgium. I have added 'fictional' next to the first mentions of Marlinspike and Maharajah of Gopal in the synopsis, but Herge never says Gopal is a 'province' - it could be an independent state like bhutan always was, one of the princely states of the Raj, etc. Also, there was a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Summary_too_long issue. Is the current version ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NPalgan2 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NPalgan2: Looks alright. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Montgomery Clift and Olivia de Havilland in The Heiress 1949.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Montgomery Clift and Olivia de Havilland in The Heiress 1949.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Wave films in Tamil cinema[edit]

Really long list. Are you planning to bring it to main space in the future? BTW, why Anegan cannot be included when the likes of Thani Oruvan and Kaththi are present? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:10, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "Roja Kadale" song is in an exotic location, and the story seems a tad superfluous too. Thani Oruvan is more rooted in reality (compared to Anegan). Kaththi too is removed (slightly more masala than other Murugadoss films).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:13, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow I feel that even though Kaththi had a strong message behind it in addition to artistic value, it was largely distracted by fight sequences and formulaic commercial elements. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thuppakki has lesser amount of fight sequences and formulaic commercial elements than Kaththi, hence it is included. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the responses. Strangely, Baradwaj Rangan noted that Kaththi is one of the socially-relevant mass films in his article about non-Tamil film releases with subs. It is an interesting analysis; you can read it here if interested. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:cite AV media[edit]

I just realised that, in this template, the parameter "time" is best used as a substitute for self-made parameters like "Scene/clip from x:xx to x:xx". However, only the start time can be used here as far as I know. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: If the end time is not appearing, it's best to stick to the "Scene/clip from x:xx to x:xx" parameter. 05:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Enthiran - BO[edit]

You seem to have concerns that the display of the box office figures of Enthiran in the Info-box on the film's page could cause problem. You stated that it could be targeted by IP editors and vandalisers. I would like to know how this particular piece of information on this particular page concerns you when there are numerous pages on films with their box office figures in their info-box. - Rajan51 (talk) 12:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajan51: Because there have been previous instances of vandalism, particularly on the infobox, if you check the article's history, which is also why it is currently semi-protected until 5 August 2017. Also because me and Kailash29792 took it to FA status (pretty much from scratch).

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:40, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conjuring 2[edit]

You should consider watching The Conjuring 2 if you haven't. A good take on the controversial Enfield Poltergeist case. Worth watch for Patrick Wilson's imitation of Elvis Presley at least! :D Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Running Man (1963 film)[edit]

Recommend this. It's not Harvey's best film but a thrilling egg, particularly last 15 minutes. You'll enjoy it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Will watch it after you watch Imsai Arasan 23rd Pulikecei. Deal or No Deal?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:46, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, LOL, I don't owe you one for suggesting you watch a great film! Doesn't sound like a good deal to me! Suggest an old thriller or something!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:49, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Alright then, if you wanna catch an "old thriller", Adhey Kangal (1967), Sigappu Rojakkal (1978) or Tik Tik Tik (1981) should do the trick.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll watch Sigappu Rojakkal then!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Do watch that egg. I haven't but from what I've read and heard about it, it seems a pretty good egg.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see Imsai sometime, but it would be a mismatch for Running Man!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Understood. A thriller for a thriller. Imsai will kind of remind you of Mel Brooks' parodies (it also kind of serves as a homage to the ace directors' films). Maybe you can pair that one with any noteworthy comedy. Have you heard? Krimuk is about to leave Wikipedia, probably forever.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:12, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to keep track of what you've seen now haha! One which springs to mind is Mr. Hulot's Holiday, a real classic!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Looks good! That vs. Pulikesi then.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blofeld, here is a subtitled version of Moodu Pani. This is because you suggested an "old thriller". Kailash29792 (talk) 10:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Kailash. I'll see that at some point!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Moodu Pani is like an Indianised version of Psycho (especially the climax). Excellent egg. Can watch it for Balu Mahendra's direction, Pothen and Shoba's performances, and, of course, Isaignani's evergreen music. Do listen to "En iniya pon nilaave". K. J. Yesudas and Raja at their very best.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, why is it every actor in the late 70s era especially looked seedy? Even Kamal Haasan looks like he walked straight off the set of the Indian version of Boogie Nights! Even Maggie Smith looked a goer in the 70s ;-). 1978 really has to be the peak of cinematic seediness! I mean the 1960s decor in late 60s and early 70s looked gaudy and films often had that kinky look about them, but something about the actors themselves looked sleazier in late 70s era!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Maybe the Saturday Night Fever got to them. ;-) — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly LOL. Just something about the sideburns, moustache, disco shades and spotted shirts which look rather unsavoury! I've reached a point in Sigappu where there is a very brief Dollars trilogy tribute at 1 hr 23!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In thinking about it the pre-Code era in the early 30s also had that sleazy vibe about it. Watch any film from the early 30s with Mae West and you'll see what I mean!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:46, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Atmospheric egg, much better on second viewing.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The worst has happened[edit]

So Krimuk has left once again. And Jessica Chastain (currently a FAC) was nominated by him. I do not want to see all the hard-work he put into it falling to waste, so if you like (or Blofeld) you could finish the FAC. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That was one of the reasons why I havent commented at the FAC yet as I could see he was struggling.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He promised to stay till the end of the FAC, regardless of its fate. Too early. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:18, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ssven2 for the kind messages on my talk page. I'm not sure why people are calling this a "dishonourable" exit. I strongly disagree with that analysis. The only thing I've done is delete my user page and rename my account so that I can't be easily traced back. I did that after careful deliberation to distance myself from the toxicity of this place; it's a very personal choice, and in no way hampers anybody's work here. Krimuk|90 (talk) 11:33, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand his frustration. But none of us of course want to see our friend completely disappear though and red linked "renamed user" on the talk pages of so many beautiful articles. And losing so many of our beloved editors in such a small space of time.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just going out for a drink down the pub with my mate "Renamed user henga2423", has a certain ring to it I think!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:31, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Guess it does, Doc.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, his choice I guess. Did you see the Running Man afterwards?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: First thing tmrw, mate. :-) — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:17, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you enjoyed it. Yes, I didn't say it was one of the greatest films ever, but worth watching for the location, acting and thrilling last 20 minutes! I knew you'd like it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Yeah, Doc. Remick and Harvey gave it their best, particularly when she hides his identity in the climax. When are you gonna see Pulikesi?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First thing tomorrow!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Yes, please. Thank you. You'll need it in hot and humid weather. Glad you enjoyed Pulikesi. Vadivelu is the king, period! I'm dying to know what your favourite scenes were. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed most of it but I LOLed in particular at the "he's got a pineapple on his head" scene and the arrows!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: "Ka Ka Ka Po", Doc. This one, isn't it?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Rather funny 18th century Indian egg!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You've got to watch Hulot's holiday now! If you can't find one with subtitles it doesn't matter much because there's not a lot of dialogue, it's more an observational comedy. Here it is but don't think it has subtitles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: Watching it now. This scene should have made you LOL, I'll bet ("Mollamari", "Mudichchavikki", "Punnaakku", "Andangakka")

"Inimel oru pulavan aavadhu aranamanaiyil kaalai vaiththaal avanukku "Milagai podi" dandanai" (If another poet even steps in this palace, he shall get "Red Pimento" punishment) LOL. And the Man of The Match Award scene (Big certificate that). Akkamala and Gapsi (aka Pepsi), making fun of bottled drinks. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Madras Studios[edit]

Ssven and Pavan I have now uploaded the entire index of the book on my photobucket account. This way, you can see what the book covers without having to ask me. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Visaranai[edit]

Visaranai has made it up to the Oscar's Foreign submissions. Another achievement for Tamil cinema. Are you happy with the jury's choice of selecting this film? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) IMO, it's a great choice. I'm yet to see Sairat and Parched, but looking at the reviews I feel they are great ones as well. —Vensatry _(talk) 11:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking more about the former, having watched it. I am happy, but not quite. Because, when i went through the list for Oscar submissions, many were plainly non-optimistic. I mean, Visarani is not the first of its kind, it is the only dominant kind. As if we are trying to show the Oscar committee that we make only these kind of films which show that India is a land of perennial torture to the common man. Sairat is no less, with a much more disturbing ending. No room for optimism these films offer. Is it just we, or every nation sends only extremely disturbing films? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I think Pichaikkaran deserves it.PhysicsScientist (talk) 03:27, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Ha, your comment reminds me of this Nargis Dutt interview. :) "Realistic films" need not have optimistic endings. —Vensatry _(talk) 08:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know that mainly "extremely disturbing films" are sent by India to the Oscars, believing the Academy only likes such stuff. But I don't think such films are submitted by every nation; I'm certain the Academy has a diverse taste of interests. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (which looked pretty mainstream) not only won the award for Best Foreign-Language film, but was also nominated for Best Picture. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that realistic films need not have optimistic endings. But, is stomach-churning tragedy the only option? [Spoiler] In Sairat, when a toddler walks with blood soaked toes after the death of his parents (the lead pair), it was very disturbing as the film's last sequence. You can watch it here to know how traumatising it was. If this was tragic, Visaranai is horrifying to the very core. When i watched it for the first time, arguably everyone in a multiplex started shouting with disgust and terror. The second viewing, well, made me feel very cold. It is a brilliant film, but the trend of sending only these type of films must change. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like your're concerned about the crudeness in "content". I'm guessing that you're aware of Kaadhal, which is actually a precursor to Sairat. This article might interest you - it tells how non-optimistic endings are nothing but a collective reflection of our society. —Vensatry _(talk) 14:51, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I watched Kaadhal long ago, but i do remember its content. I have also read the Outlook article and do respect the author's views. In the submissions, we did have films like Taare Zameen Par. But, i am amused because it was just one among many depressing films. Anyways, after learning that Nayakan too was in the race, i actually want to see an Indian crime film which ends with "crime does pay" ending like Pudhupettai. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:53, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pudhupettai is a very unconventional film, but a great one (and grossly underrated). It's optimistic from the protagonist's POV, but not in the actual sense. —Vensatry _(talk) 07:54, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than going Nallavan aa? Kettavan aa?, Pudhupettai was completely wild with no actual moral prejudice. Anyways, i do wish that Visaranai gets nominated and may even win. Though i really am not at peace with its content, i surely agree that it is a brilliant film in terms of technical aspects (esp. the chilling sound design). But, that does need a good deal of marketing from Dhanush and Vetrimaaran, the producers. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:01, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to watch a 'good' film (read realistic) which deals with the brutality of a particular system, you shouldn't expect optimistic endings. Because, that would dilute the theme. —Vensatry _(talk) 08:10, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'good' film (read realistic) -- this itself is enough to understand the gravitas of the situation. Thanks for patiently participating in the discussion.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Jigarthanda (soundtrack)[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Jigarthanda (soundtrack)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. - Vivvt (Talk) 07:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mail[edit]

Emailed.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 10:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tibetan Prayer: Replied.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:13, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What decides the nationality of a film[edit]

It would be naive to say that the nationality of the majority of the cast decides the nationality of the film itself. It is the production studio that decides the film's nationality, but I think people here don't see it the same way. E.g.: Slumdog Millionaire has a largely Indian cast, but was produced by a UK studio, hence it does not qualify as an Indian film. As for any Tamil film produced by the UK-based Ayngaran International, what do you think? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:42, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Not necessarily. One might even say that Kalidas is not a Tamil film just because it was made in Bombay in the same place where Alam Ara was made. Ayngaran has not produced if I'm right, but rather distributed films. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:26, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

True, their main work is distributing Tamil films. But they've occasionally produced films like Kaththi (distributed by Eros International), Karuppu Roja, Nandalala and Peranmai. Now I must assume that, since it is run by Tamil people and deals with Tamil films but is only physically based in UK, and has hardly anything to do with British films, the films produced by it qualify as Indian films. As for Kalidas, regardless of where it was shot, who produced it and how many languages were spoken onscreen, it was essentially a Tamil language film. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:49, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Bang on. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:59, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Padayappa Swing Scene.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Padayappa Swing Scene.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eega[edit]

Eega has become a FA today! A moment of triumph. Very happy to share this with you. :-D Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Padayappa Swing Scene.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Padayappa Swing Scene.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thillu Mullu[edit]

I know you once aspired to take it to GA status. I don't know if you still do, but you could try reducing the plot, rather than reverting the changes made by the IP. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I still wish to make it a GA. I'll start work on it from mid-November.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good, that isn't far away. And I have tagged for the article to be moved to simply Thillu Mullu, bordering on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. So a GAN could happen once the move is done. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:07, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Achcha.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Diwali[edit]

Happy Diwali!!!

Sky full of fireworks,
Mouth full of sweets,
Home full of lamps,
And festival full of sweet memories...

Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali.
Tito Dutta (talk) 19:53, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

@Titodutta: Thank you and same to you!

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:06, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have a great Diwali! Niagara (1953) highly recommended.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dhanush VIP audio poster.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dhanush VIP audio poster.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:29, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shankars I Audio Launch Still.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Shankars I Audio Launch Still.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chandramukhi album cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chandramukhi album cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:43, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Becket 1964 Burton Gielgud.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Becket 1964 Burton Gielgud.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rajinikanth introduction scene.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rajinikanth introduction scene.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pasamalar LP Record Cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pasamalar LP Record Cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:48, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kandhan Karunai LP Record Cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kandhan Karunai LP Record Cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:48, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Padagotti LP Record Cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Padagotti LP Record Cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:48, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Padithal Mattum Podhuma Audio Cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Padithal Mattum Podhuma Audio Cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saraswati Sabatham Audio Cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Saraswati Sabatham Audio Cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mother India 1957, soundtrack album cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mother India 1957, soundtrack album cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1964.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1964.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aalayamani LP Record Cover.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Aalayamani LP Record Cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hitchcock[edit]

This is something. Is the current generation really feminist? If you know what i mean... Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:34, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Publicity seeking is what I call it. He might have actually tried everything to make her "the next Grace Kelly". She mistook his steps as sexual advances. He wanted her to fully immerse herself in her roles and he was willing to get it by any means necessary. In his own words, "Its only a movie". A 100% agreement on this comment underneath the article by a user, Alias.

"Ok, so \"sexual harassment and stalking were terms that didn\'t exist at the time\". So Ms Hedren missed her chance to become rich then, is now taking her sweet little revenge by using the celebrated Hitchcock name to gain some publicity to sell her dull book of memoirs."

I never really liked Hedren. If he was a sexual predator, why didn't he go after Kelly himself? Or dear Ingrid Bergman, Doris Day, Madeline Carroll, Eva-Marie Saint, Kim Novak, Julie Andrews, Karen Black etc? It just doesn't make sense when all the other people (Most of them) who worked under him denied it. BTW, the bird attack was one of the film's major USPs. Its one of the reasons that made the film a classic.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that it is a publicity stunt. But sometimes, these are done under the garb of feminism and woman empowerment which actually sucks. Agreed that i am quoting the line of a chauvinistic womanizer, but to an extent, what Thyagu (Rajinikanth) said in Aval Appadithan (beautiful film) is right in the current scenario: "Women and politicians belong to the same category. They will go to any extent to achieve their goal. But they aren't sure about their goal." The article was sounding as if Hedren was an Indian victim of Mortimer Wheeler in the pre-independence era. ;-) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting... She had me at sexual harassment and stalking were terms that didn't exist. :) Coming to AA, it had many such sharp lines. Take this one for instance: Men and women can never be equal on bed - misogyny at its best. —Vensatry _(talk) 16:06, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That line was from the same scene. There were many such striking scenes in Aval Appadithan. One of the best comes where Sripriya asks Saritha about woman liberation and the way this concludes with a poignant voiceover about how she dies and takes birth, again to die. Despite being such a chauvinistic character, Thyagu was very charming. I also liked that the characters remain the same in the end as well when there was a chance to get preachy; none reforms/dies/retrospects etc. esp, Rajinikanth. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the beauty of the film. —Vensatry _(talk) 16:41, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The 1000 Challenge for Indian cinema[edit]

Today is Kamal Haasan's birthday. Any special contribution from you or other talkpage stalkers shall be appreciated; if it joins the list, it would be a cute tribute. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your work on Panchathantiram as part of a special request on behalf of the The 1000 Challenge for Indian cinema project. Expecting more from you of such nature. Cheers! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:49, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kabali[edit]

Wanted to ask you something taking your interest on global and Tamil cinema into account. Do you agree that Rajinikanth's much hyped Kabali (arguably his best in the recent past as an actor) has similarities with Kamal's Nayakan? I believe that Kabali is a brainchild killed by shoddy filmmaking. Wish to comment? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: In terms of recent past, to me his best is Chandramukhi as it hardly had any of his gimmicks. Kabali was okay and as you pointed out, it is "a brainchild killed by shoddy filmmaking". Every gangster film in Tamil cinema will indubitably have similarities with Nayakan, which itself had a lot of similarities with The Godfather (1972). As for the similarities, here they are:

Rajinikanth = Kamal Haasan
Dinesh = Nizhalgal Ravi
Dhansika = Karthika (somewhat)
John Vijay = Janagaraj/Delhi Ganesh
Radhika Apte = Saranya (somewhat again)
Hari Krishnan/Kalaiyarasan = Tinnu Anand
Charles Vinoth = Pradeep Shakthi
Winston Chao and Kishore = R. N. Sudarshan and R. N. Jayagopal

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chandramukhi is my favourite too; it presented an otherwise sober and soft side of Rajinikanth whom i wish to see more of at the moment, except when tornado, pigeons and flying rods arrive (pre-climax fight). He was much effective as the evil guy when compared to the rogue Chitti in Enthiran. For me, Kabali would have been a good film if it had been only the story of an aged crime boss (much happy if ex) is losing grip on his mind and is finding his family. But the dalit subtexts and Malaysia's serious problems made it a very ill-made one. I guess it is commercially successful in your state, isn't it? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:23, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: I watched Kabali in Malaysia, where it was censored a lot. It did provide some respite for Rajinikanth. Personally, the lack of a strong antagonist is what hampered the film. I expected a lot from Kishore, who was wasted in the film. If you look at Rajinikanth's blockbusters, especially those of the 90s, he had strong antagonists to challenge him. That was one of the main reasons his films clicked. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be rich enough, ;) let's not go into that. I've watched it in Hyderabad (in Tamil with subs and Telugu later) post the recent personal traumatic incident; my cousin was pestering me to get out of the house for a while to cool our heels. IMHO, Kabali's aim was to show how the system played with a marginalised community and hence the antagonists were just card boards (Chao was better than Kishore IMO). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, do you think Kabali deserves to be a GAN? I feel that there is a tremendous scope for the same. Post GA, a DYK on Rajinikanth's upcoming birthday can be an interesting task. Having said that, i want to have some feedback. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Why not use a DYK from my GA on Rajinikanth as well (Chandramukhi)? Kabali has pretty good potential. You can start now if you wish.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:48, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is this 7-day condition for DYKs and i don't know whether Chandramukhi fits the bill. We have two options: Kabali and Apoorva Raagangal. Out-of-blue ones like Thalapathi and Muthu are also possible. What say? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Virginia Woolf Burton Taylor 1966.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Virginia Woolf Burton Taylor 1966.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Becket 1964 Burton Gielgud.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Becket 1964 Burton Gielgud.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Chandramukhi album cover.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chandramukhi album cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Dhanush VIP audio poster.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dhanush VIP audio poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Pasamalar LP Record Cover.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pasamalar LP Record Cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:03, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1964.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Richard Burton Hamlet 1964.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Virginia Woolf Burton Taylor 1966.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Virginia Woolf Burton Taylor 1966.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dice and phone[edit]

Someone else has now made me think about a second opinion on why i should or should not own a cellphone. ;) Thanks for the recommendation. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great actors/directors[edit]

Ssven2, I know it is not appropriate to randomly go on to your talk page without a reason. The truth is I have been following your films list for quite some time, and have watched a few films. However, what startles me is that I can't believe you don't consider Mammootty, Mohanlal, ANR, NTR, Dev Anand, Prakash Raj, Leonardo Dicaprio and Thilakan on your great actors list. Plus, Sooraj Barjatya and Ramesh Sippy are missing from great directors list. However, it is purely subjective.

Kuranjchopra (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2016 (UTC)KuranjKuranjchopra (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Its maybe because I haven't watched much of their films (excluding the last two before Thilakan, whom I haven't seen in much as well). DiCaprio haven't seen him in much apart from Titanic, WoWS, The Revenant etc. Prakash Raj hmm, almost makes it but in that case I'll have to make a thousand great actors and actresses list haha "There are countless actors and actresses whose work I admire" (I haven't seen Kanchivaram yet BTW). Haven't seen all of Sooraj Barjatya and Ramesh Sippy. I will be into Dev Anand soon enough, thanks for mentioning that. Right now into some RK films. I have mentioned in it that the list is prone to change.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:03, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aval Appadithan[edit]

While it may never become a FA due to how much of Danny is being used in the article, this could be useful to make it better than a GA. --Kailash29792 (talk) 04:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I'll have a look later today. It can be useful for the themes section in particular.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:36, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Ssven2. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trans_title[edit]

A lot of references in Rajinikanth filmography (a FLC) are in Tamil without translations. Since they are quite long and hard to translate, I thought you could help. Do also attract reviewers if possible, since the article previously failed FLC due to lack of reviewers. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:28, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Rules of the Game[edit]

Thank you so much. I take it you are a fan of the film as well. On a side note, I also plan to work on Jacques Rivette bibliography. I have found several FL articles of bibliographies, but they are all of authors and include a bibliography of their personal work. Would you say that these FL articles would still be a good reference point for improving the Rivette article? Admittedly Rivette's article includes both newspaper articles written by him and book/materials about him, while almost all of the other film director bibliographies are entirely books about them. I guess I am uncertain because most of the filmmaker bibliographies seem to (unofficially) be at stub level.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deoliveirafan, congratulations on your latest GA. But I saw some issues that the usually lenient Ssven2 must not have noticed: what was the genre of the film? Why is there an unattributed quote in the lead section? As per WP:LEADCITE, "material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and direct quotations, should be supported by an inline citation." Kailash29792 (talk) 03:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can add the source to the quote. It does say "comedy of manners" in the lead.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 04:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792:, I haven't gone back to check, but I think I remember the lead once reading "...is a 1939 French comedy of manners...", which sounds jumbled and was probably changed by a copy editor at some point.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 04:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't notice the link; I expected it to be next to the nationality of the film, something like "The Rules of the Game is a 1939 French comedy film". But the current placement is fine. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Zindagi[edit]

Too much villainy from SRK in Anjaam. Disturbing is it? I suggest you to try watching Dear Zindagi; not as taught as English Vinglish but is surely a good film. SRK and Alia might move you to tears too, esp. in the scene where the girl finally breaks down before her therapist revealing her darker past and the inevitable goodbye. They will haunt you though you hate the film. Having said that, therapy in real life was never this pleasant though. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Disturbing yes. SRK, however, should be applauded for taking such risky roles. Thanks to Aditya Chopra too for making him what he is today otherwise he would have been typecast in such roles. Nene was rather badass though going all out Hassan chop like that in the second half. As for Dear Zindagi, I'm content to wait for the DVD/Blu-ray disc as I'll watch it there and I'm in no hurry. That said, I'll continue my work on Paava Mannippu. It has some potential. We'll see how it goes.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SRK, well, took a calculated risk with Anjaam IMHO. People appreciated his villainous acts in Baazigar and Darr (though they were pretty anti-heroic only) and moreover, Dixit was on a ball with films like Beta and Khalnayak. Especially for "Dhak Dhak Karne" and "Choli Ke Peeche" (she was at her sensuous best in these songs an i am not kidding for sure). So, a combo of them would guarantee good name irrespective of BO. Cut cheste, SRK's act was termed "overdone" (obviously, i mean, it was too hardcore).

I wish you the best for Paava Mannippu; i remember watching it in parts long ago. But i don't remember the story except that Sivaji's face was scarred. Or, did Sivaji played a role with a scarred face in some other film? I don't know. After watching Rod Steiger, i stopped feeling that this man overacts. Vice versa. ;-) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: The scar is Deiva Magan if I'm not mistaken. In Paava Mannippu, Ganesan's faced is disfigured due to an acid attack on him by M. R. Radha's henchmen. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 17:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not Deiva Magan. Paava Manippu for sure. Could not sleep that night! Anyways, best wishes bro.

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 17:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations![edit]

There are whispers across the project that you have recently graduated from university and are going to be an engineer of some sort? That's awesome! Congratulations to you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:36, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: A chemical engineer. Thanks for the wishes, Cyphoidbomb.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 16:38, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	I'd perhaps remove the 'random' from the title but this is for going around to request people to review friend's nom, for being a good friend. I really like that about you. – FrB.TG (talk) 22:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Thank you very much, Frank.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paava Mannippu[edit]

Pages 68, 129, 130 and 131 in The Eye of the Serpent by Theodore Baskaran have information on this film. I really do think we should come up with a nickname for him, akin to "Danny" for you-know-who. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:18, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: How about Bassky? Like our motta Bosskey? LOL. JK. Let's settle for "Theo" maybe?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:34, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I first thought I'd say "Teddy" or "Ted". Anyway, all the names qualify. Did you read the pages from the above-linked book by him? Kailash29792 (talk) 12:25, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Yes, I have and I'm planning to use them now in the "Themes" section. BTW, I'm putting up an "in use" template now as I'm improving it. You can edit the article once I've removed it.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:28, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After I re-arranged the categories and added Rotten Tomatoes as an EL, I saw this message by you. So please don't let my edit ruin your efforts. And do please save the text in a notepad file or doc. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: No worries. Once you see the in-use template, you'll know that I am editing it at present. Gonna start in a while. Taking a small break from editing the article now. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to use info from the pride of actors himself! Here are the pages from his autobiography. Besides, are you planning to include a "legacy" section? It is also necessary to mention this as part of Bhimsingh's "Pa" series, even if the films share no continuity, just like Gautham Menon's cop trilogy and Deepa Mehta's Elements trilogy. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The "Pa" bit will be hard to avoid, and yes, it is necessary. BTW, what are the page nos for Paava Mannippu there?

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pages 141, 142, 143 and 241. You could also expand the lead to three paragraphs, if not let the two paragraphs be a bit bigger. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now I've got quite a few pages from Sivaji Ganesan: Profile of an Icon by Teddy. See what you can use. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Masoom[edit]

Sorry to bother you. Masoom (1983) with English subtitles for free viewing: 1 Cheers! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:00, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many things[edit]

Hi Ssven2. I really thank you and Kailash29792's efforts in handling the FLC of Tamannaah filmography and the list itself in my absence. I was in Ahobilam, where even proper mobile network is a myth. I also observed that you are working on Jodhaa Akbar, and that's nice. Well, GA or FA? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: FA. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"When I see Chiru's early filmography, much of his roles are performance-oriented. Why doesn't he do such films anymore I wonder?" — Your question did linger in my mind. And, i found something: I like to portray such characters which give you some challenge as an actor. I am really fed up of doing the other kind of cliched roles. What saddens me is, nobody is encouraging me, nobody else is coming forward to make such movies. Sounds similar to Rajinikanth's image trap, doesn't it? Strangely, in the remake of Kaththi, he looks struck again in the same trap. What do you think? Though too small to judge, this does give some idea about the big thing. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey![edit]

I have nominated the article, please do put your comments [3]. This is my first solo FAC.Krish | Talk 21:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paava Mannippu[edit]

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Paava Mannippu has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Twofingered Typist: Sure thing. Thank you, Twofingered Typist.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 15:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Paava Mannippu[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Paava Mannippu you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 15:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Paava Mannippu[edit]

The article Paava Mannippu you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Paava Mannippu for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Paava Mannippu[edit]

The article Paava Mannippu you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Paava Mannippu for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 22:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All the best for 2017![edit]

Hello Ssven2,
Enjoy the Winter Solstice and the Christmas and holiday season.
Thank you for all your good work during 2016 in maintaining, improving and expanding Wikipedia.
All the best for 2017! Cheers, — Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard | 16:31, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gareth Griffith-Jones: Diolch yn fawr iawn. Same to you, dear Buzzard. Dw i heb dy weld ti ers talwn! Shwd wyt ti?

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 12:25, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Telugu cinema[edit]

Please feel free to improve it like Portal:Tamil cinema and Portal:Bollywood (preferably as simplistic as the former). Kailash29792 (talk) 16:39, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays[edit]

Merry Christmas, Ssven2!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! Long time, no "talk". As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

@Onel5969: Thank you very much, Onel. Same to you. Its been a while! How are things with you?

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:58, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

	Merry Christmas Ssven2!!
	Hi Ssven2, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia! –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 12:21, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010: Thank you very much, Gracias and Merci Beaucoup, Davey. Same to you, too!

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 12:25, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much - best of the season to you, too. Happy new year, and happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 12:46, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Same to you, dear fellow.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 12:48, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and Happy Holidays![edit]

Hello Ssven2: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Miniapolis 17:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

@Miniapolis: Same to you, dear fellow Wikipedian.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas 2016[edit]

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Tito Dutta (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Tito Dutta (talk) 19:00, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Titodutta: Same to you, dear fellow Wikipedian.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Merry[edit]

Season's Greetings, Ssven2!
At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD|Talk 03:12, 23 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

@MarnetteD: Same to you, dear fellow Wikipedian.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas[edit]

John123521 (Talk-Contib.) RA is wishing you a Merry Christmas!

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--John123521 (Talk-Contib.) RA 06:39, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@John123521: Same to you, dear fellow Wikipedian.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Original Barnstar
	For Paava Mannippu GA. Wishing to see more of this kind from you. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:10, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Thank you again, Pavan. Happy holidays.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All The Best![edit]

Ssven,
Have a wonderful and prosperous New Year! Wishing you success in achieving all your goals. (couldn't resist adding my favorites! :)) Kaayay (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaayay: Same to you, dear fellow.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 16:31, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vadivelu filmography[edit]

If all his films are sourced, I believe it has a chance at touching the peak. You up for it? Besides, what do you think of Thala's filmography? Kailash29792 (talk) 10:59, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: It is a long shot, but Vaigai Puyal's filmography can definitely be improved. He deserves it, awwwww. Thala's filmography looks good. A trim and copyedit here and there, and of course archiving the references, and its good to go. Co-nominate Vensatry as well if you are ready (he's done most of it though). Get a protection request for it (You know what I mean!).

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:04, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: BTW, can you try to get a copyright-free image of Vadivelu? It would be good for the filmography and the article itself, of course. Most of his other contemporaries have an image. — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since I have touch with people from The Hindu, it may be easy to obtain their permission to use images published by them. Or maybe the Puyal has to storm even Mumbai for his photographs to be published by Bollywood Hungama. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:18, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Nice. Do let me know once you get your hands on a photo.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry, merry![edit]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

@Bzuk: Same to you, dear fellow.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 15:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another[edit]

Merry
Rexxmas

--RexxS (talk) 15:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RexxS: Same to you, dear fellow.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 15:38, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kaththi Sandai First Look Poster.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kaththi Sandai First Look Poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RIP[edit]

@Dr. Blofeld, Kailash29792, Vensatry, and Pavanjandhyala: Ellaarum avuna pothu pothunu vizhuraangaiya (Everyone's falling like ninepins). RIP, Kathy Selden and Princess Leia. You two will be really missed. — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 17:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The worst case of seeing many people die in quick succession may be something like this. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RIP Reynolds and Fisher. On a lighter vein, comparing the deaths with ninepins sounds like sarcasm romancing sadism. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:44, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indolink[edit]

At one point I feared it would fail WP:RS, despite seemingly being the only 90s news/reviews source for Tamil films. What do you think of it? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:53, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: I have removed them all now and replaced them. A request, mate — can you name me as a co-nominator for the FLC too?

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 10:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Oh, BTW, the lead needs more references to support the paragraphs. — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 10:15, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely, since your contributions were significant and not minor (although you could find any unsourced statements in the lead and source 'em). Do you think we should add info on the few commercials he has done? I found a 90s seruppu ad on a verified YouTube channel, but don't know it's exact year. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: We just stick to his films for this list. Best for now.

— Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 10:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]