Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Assessment/Rang De Basanti

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

Passed as A-Class. PC78 (talk) 21:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rang De Basanti[edit]

Considered a highly influential film in the Indian society, this article underwent a successful GA nomination in May 2008. Thereafter I've made a lot of edits to increase its comprehensiveness. After implementing the valuable comments and suggestions from its first A-class review in November 2008, I was quite sad to see that the article was not promoted despite no huge issues. I took a wikibreak since November and now I am back to work on this. Additional reviews please.. Mspraveen (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Girolamo Savonarola

It's definitely on its way, but the quality of English is nowhere near "brilliant prose". While I'll try to offer some guidance, what this needs above all else is a thorough copy edit. I'd strongly advise seeking out some of the Guild of Copy Editors members to assist you, if possible - my own copy editing skills only go so far.

Done "cast comprising of" - one of the last two words has to go in order for this to make grammatical sense. Also, since this is an ensemble piece, it may be advisable to pare down the actors in the lead solely to the principal roles, without a mention of the supporting actors. Otherwise it starts to read like a roll call.
Done Budget: why not just list this in rupees? Also, in contemporary exchange rates for the time, what is that in a western currency (e.g. dollars, pounds, euros)?
Done "the film begins with" - sounds like you're going to summarize the whole thing in the lead. How about "the film is about"?
Done "freedom fighters" - Freedom fighter? Were they armed? Or do you mean independence activist?
Done "She requests a group of youngsters" - requests of whom? requests the youngsters or for youngsters? Also, what is a youngster? A toddler? A teenager? High school or college students?
Done "who are indifferent to the state of affairs in India" - probably should not be enclosed in commas, unless you're implying that all youngsters are indifferent.
Done "metamorphosizes" - "radicalizes" or "catalyzes" is probably more appropriate
Done Combined both - On what basis are the last two paragraphs of the lead divided up?
Done Where is the cite in the lead for the DVD sales claim?
Done "about some revolutionaries" - "about some of the revolutionaries" is probably more appropriate in tone
Done Rewrote the sentence - "They are not enthusiastic at the idea of acting in a film about the independence movement, but Sue wins them over." - seems a bit limp
Done "In the meanwhile, Ajay Singh Rathod (Madhavan), who is Sonia's fiancé and also a Flight Lieutenant" - works better as "Meanwhile, Sonia's fiance, Ajay Singh Rathod (Madhavan), a Flight Lieutenant"
Done Angered by the situation - "Discontent with the situation" - Should be "discontented", but this isn't really strong enough to describe their reaction. "Aggrieved" might be more appropriate.
Done "in New Delhi, India." - drop India; this has already been established by the context.
Done "breaks up" - break up
Done "and in the process" - replace "and" with a semicolon
Done "is severely hurt" - how?
Done "These young men decide that they must emulate the early freedom fighters and resort to violence to achieve justice. They kill the defence minister to avenge Rathod's death." - "These young men" does not refer to anything immediately preceding it in the text. The second sentence is too perfunctory - perhaps these two sentences need to be rewritten to be more closely integrated.
Done That's what the film suggests to its viewers - "The minister is speculated to have been killed by terrorists" - umm...political killings not carried out by a state generally are considered terrorism.
Done The media reports the killings inaccurately as a terrorist act. Reworded it, however - "To bring forth the true story" - there's nothing inaccurate about what's been reported. Presumably you mean that they want to reveal the pretext for their actions?
Done "Before they do so, Karan murders his father for his corrupt actions." - probably is easier to combine this with the minister's death. Reads cleaner that way, and stays more within the chronology (at least as I understand it).
Done Reworded it - "while holding no hostages" - superfluous, unless this somehow has relevance to the plot further on.
Done "police and commandos" - what, the police and commandos? Military commandos or a police commando unit?
Done "Aks (2001)" - drop the (2001) - the article link will provide that information.
Done "next venture" - what, a business opportunity? If you mean film, just say film. This sentence also would read better if combined with the following one.
Done "shop, the other" - "shop, while the other"
Done "Shortly thereafter, his survey" - what survey?
Done "While his plans of making a film on freedom fighters were dropped due to this reason, another idea emerged in which a British documentary filmmaker on a visit to India realizes that the native youngsters are far more Western than her." - "Because of this, he dropped his plans of making a film on freedom fighters in favor of another idea in which a British..."
Done "His want to join the Indian Air Force while in school, his recollections of listening to Independence Day speeches and watching patriotic films such as Mother India (1957) lent originality to the story" - drop (1957) and try this: "His desire to join the Indian Air Force while in school, as well as recollections of listening to Independence Day speeches and watching patriotic films such as Mother India lent originality to the story."
Done Reworded the sentence - "his friends and he are present in the characters" - awkward and not properly idiomatic
Done "Inclusive of three years for writing the script, Mehra took seven years to research aspects for the story." - "Mehra took seven years to research and develop the story, including three to write the script."
Done "When doubts were expressed on Mehra's morale after his last film's failure at the box office, he retorted by saying that it did not affect him at all and his new film will not follow that style." - "regarding Mehra's morale" would be better than "on" his morale. What does his morale have to do with his style?
Done "not only his storytelling technique improved, but also past mistakes helped him" - "not only did his storytelling technique improve, but past mistakes also had helped him"
Done "Although unwilling to disclose much, he hinted that the film will be "very bright and contemporary in terms of language and identity"[4] and "it has a very strong message at the end"." - Not certain if this is needed. I'm guessing this was added into the article before release when information was scarce, but it adds little value to the article now, as it currently is much more fully fleshed out.

I'm going to stop here for now - let me know when these issues have been worked out and I'll be happy to continue. Please also seriously consider a thorough copy edit, because the current prose quality is significantly slowing down my review speed (and patience). Just being honest. Good luck and I look forward to seeing how the article develops! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the patient review. I really appreciate it. I've reworded several sentences that appear better to me. Not being a native English speaker, it is, indeed, difficult to commit lesser mistakes. I've tried in the past to seek copyediting from other editors, but was not really successful. I'm not sure if you'll have the patience to last the complete article, but if you do, I'll promptly rework on the article. Thanks again. Mspraveen (talk) 05:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I didn't mean patience like losing my cool, I really meant it more like "I'm getting physically tired and need a break". I'd be happy to continue, but you might need to be patient with me for a bit, as I'm currently on vacation. I'll get right on it as I find time. In the meantime, hopefully some of our other editors will be chipping in with their reviews. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 13:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I'll wait until you're back. Hope you are having a good vacation! Mspraveen (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Nehrams2020

I haven't viewed the above suggestions, so if any of my comments conflict with Girolamo's, then please specify accordingly. The following are mostly grammar fixes, and most shouldn't take too long to fix.

Done "It features an ensemble cast comprising Aamir Khan, Soha Ali Khan, Madhavan, Kunal Kapoor, Siddharth Narayan, Sharman Joshi, Atul Kulkarni, British actress Alice Patten in the lead roles." "...Kulkarni, and British..." Also remove the comma after Kulkarni since the serial comma is not used throughout the rest of the article.
Done "Upon arriving in India, she requests a group of five young men to act in her film." I think "asks a group" flows better.
Done Changed it to their dear friend.. Hope it works well with the flow -- "After they agree and begin filming, a dear friend dies in a fighter aircraft crash." A dear friend of who? The young men or the filmmaker?
I mentioned this in the first review and want to make sure it's touched on again. Since the lead has a conversion from crores to dollars, I think all of the other occurrences in the article should also have conversions as well. That includes the figures in the infobox and release section.
Done "...Sue manages to convince them eventually." Change to "...Sue eventually manages..."
"...Mehra revealed that the film's budget was Rs. 25 crores,..." Add the conversion here as well.
Done Rewrote the sentence. I hope it appears better -- "The combination of David Reid and Adam Bohling, who had previously worked for films such as Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels,..." It says work on films such as, but only one film is listed. Mention more or write "who had previously worked on Lock together."
Done "Having worked as an assistant director previously, Siddharth was all praise for Mehra's filmmaking..." Perhaps "...Siddharth praised Mehra's..."
Done I believe you are referring to they'd -- "The Delhi Tourism department felt that if the city's tourism gets promoted, they'd rather support such activities." Contractions shouldn't be used unless it's in a quote.
Done "Since the film start men in their late twenties,..." Maybe reword to "Since the film's plot focused on men..."
Done "In India, The Hindu reported that with audiences from the metropolitan cities turning out in large numbers, film was notching up record collections in its opening week." Replace film with the title.
Done "A report carried out by The Times of India highlighted piracy..." Italicize the newspaper.
Done"However, results from a simultaneously conducted SMS poll indicated that 62 percent felt that the film was the right choice to the Oscars." "...for the Oscars."
Done"...inefficiency in proving basic amenities, corruption, bureaucracy." "...inefficiency in proving basic amenities, corruption and bureaucracy."

Looks good overall. The article has come a long way since before its first A-class review and I believe it will pass this time. Once the above issues are addressed, I'll take another look. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for yet another review Nehrams2020! I was able to address all the above aspects, but for the numbers conversion. Do you mean that all numbers need conversion? Do I skip the ones that are mentioned in USD? Mspraveen (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that you either go with crores or dollars as your main measurement and then convert for the other (if the article goes with crores then ex.Rs. 25 crores (approximately US$5.5 million) would work just fine. In addition, make sure to add a conversion for the gross of $29 million as well. Fixing all of the occurrences in the article shouldn't be too hard. Good job on addressing the above points so far. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 17:54, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. I have addressed this issue now as per your suggestion. To avoid confusion between the Indian currency term crore, I've converted all such instances into "million". Frankly, the numbers appear more streamlined after these changes. Hope all appears well now. Cheers, Mspraveen (talk) 04:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on addressing these issues. I have made a few minor fixes, as well as addressing some dabs. Looking over the article from the points I've raised which have now been addressed, I believe the article meets the A-class criteria, so I support. Prior to going to FAC (if that's the path you're interested in taking), make sure to update all of the access dates and make sure there are no dead links. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by PC78

OK, sorry about this. I did write a review for this article about two weeks ago, but apparently I forgot to save the damn thing. Thankfully I was bold enough to edit out most of my concerns, but there are a few remaining issues:

The links for refs #4, 15, 21, 28, 32, 33, 37, 46, 56, 60, 68, 90, 96, 103 and 104 are broken.

I tried fixing some of these, but most are not included in the Internet Archive or can't be found on my server. Not sure how to fix these unless other sources can be found. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if I can fix these myself when I'm more in the mood. PC78 (talk) 16:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done what I can. PC78 (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox says that the film is Hindi/English/Punjabi language, but the article is categorised as Hindi and Urdu language.

I changed the categories to reflect that in the infobox. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...it had the highest-selling DVD title sales of its time." – a little vague; what is meant by this?

Changed it to "at the time of its release." Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Chandrasekhar Azad (Aamir Khan), Bhagat Singh (Siddharth Narayan), Shivaram Rajguru (Sharman Joshi), Ashfaqulla Khan (Kunal Kapoor), and Ram Prasad Bismil (Atul Kulkarni)" – this is a little misleading as it suggests that the actors play the freedom fighters, when it is actually their fictional counterparts.

Having not seen the film, I'm assuming that the actors portrayed both the fiction counterparts as well as the freedom fighters. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changed this bit myself. As someone else who hasn't seen it, knowing who played who in the film within the film doesn't seem all that important. PC78 (talk) 16:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link to "freedom fighters" in the last paragraph of the plot summary – a minor issue, but shouldn't this be linked earlier in the plot summary when the characters are first introduced?

Moved the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...and worked on it for about two years, with the aid of a third, uncredited script writer from Malaysia." – I may have missed it, but this does not appear to be mentioned in the cited source.

Read the source and couldn't find anything, so I inserted it into a hidden comment for now. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...Joshi said that the song was not initially thought of. While discussing the scene about a mother's loss of her son with Rahman, he had come up with lyrics that suggest of both of them playing hide-and-seek with the sad reality of the son being hidden forever." – this is a little bit unclear

Reworded. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The film, which was scheduled to release two weeks before its theatrical release..." – does this mean that the release was delayed for two weeks?

I think it is stating that it was postponed to the objections, but that's just me. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was going to reword this bit, but when I checked the sources I couldn't see any explicit mention of a two week delay, so I removed it instead. PC78 (talk) 16:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...the soundtrack was well-appreciated by the audiences in subsequent time." – unclear.

This needs sources to back this up. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have now reworded and removed unsourced statements. PC78 (talk) 16:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...and as a result the film was the highest selling title of its time." – as above, the meaning is a bit vague here.

Changed it to "at the time of its release." Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The film also received rave reviews..." – sounds a little POVish.

Changed it to positive. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's everything. On the whole the article is thorough and well-written; the main problem is with the dead links which are just too many to ignore. I'll have another look when the above concerns have been addressed. Regards. PC78 (talk) 16:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. My only lingering concern is with the dead links in the references, but I've been able to fix some of them and will take it on faith that the rest can be sourced elsewhere. This will certainly need to be dealt with before an FAC, but I think I can let it slide here. Regards. PC78 (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I planned to review this article, but since the nominator is not around for the time being, I may hold off. (I reviewed U2 3D instead.) Will the nominator be back anytime soon? —Erik (talk • contrib) 16:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.