Talk:Swatantrya Veer Savarkar (film)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 March 2024

Ghogare.rohan (talk) 10:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

please change The film has been criticised for distorting history and for promoting one-sided agenda to This film is masterpiece and portray the true character brave freedom fighter of india . The veer savarkar is the father of Modern India who shaped its history. <ref>https://www.moneycontrol.com/entertainment/movies/swatantra-veer-savarkar-review-randeep-hooda-the-director-outshines-the-actor-in-strangely-fascinating-yarn-article-12515291.html<ref>All the true events of his intriguing life have been depicted and a Balanced Perspective<ref>https://awbi.in/swatantra-veer-savarkar-movie-review/#google_vignette<ref> Ghogare.rohan (talk) 10:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

This film is masterpiece and portray the true character brave freedom fighter of india . The veer savarkar is the father of Modern India who shaped its history.

I think this is needed to be told instead of directly alleging that the movie distorts the history on the basis of some articles written by a bunch of people.

}} TylerK79 (talk) 05:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Are articles by film reviewers/critics valid as historical sources

@Grabup Main body of the article claims that the movie is historically inaccurate, one sided based on few articles by film critics/reviewers, while making it seem like a verified claim.

So atleast need to add context that the film is criticised by film critics else the sources should be from qualified historians. Coffee Beans 19 (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Coffee Beans 19, The cited sources are reliable secondary sources, you said "While making it seem like a verified claim", Yes The Indian Express and Hindustan Times are reliable sources, because they verify facts that's why they are reliable. Grabup (talk) 14:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, but the authors are not historians I am just proposing to add who the authors are in main body

For other biographic films the pattern seems to be that there is a separate section detailing historical accuracy and is not part of the main body Coffee Beans 19 (talk) 18:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Coffee Beans 19, Authors are not need to be historians, the sources are reliable as per WP:ICTFSOURCES, You can read WP:RS to know about Reliable Sources in more details. Grabup (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Coffee Beans 19, Wikipedia is based on what reliable secondary sources says, If you have reliable sources which says that the movie shows the accurate history then you can cite here. Grabup (talk) 18:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup: i have given enough evidences still you are looking for few more. Looks like you are not aware of Indian independence history and rather it seems you are not bother to go through it, Anyways Ghogare.rohan (talk) 05:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ghogare.rohan, Your cited source Moneycontrol mentions “What works for this film, which can and possibly will be debated for historical inaccuracies” The source does not says that the film shows the accurate history. And your other source is a blog site totally unreliable. Grabup (talk) 05:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup:

You mentioned that the references I rendered were unreliable, but how did you make sure or verify that the references already provided were reliable????? If you are telling me those references number 11 and 12 (pinkvilla and News 18) are reliable, it totally insane.

If you want, you can study books written by many great writers, viz., Dhananjay Keer, S.L. Karandikar, Vikram Sampath, Arvind Godbole, and many more. Without studying anything, people can write whatever they want in Pinkvilla and News 18. So I do not expect anything from a self-proclaimed Wikipedia editor or watchdog, so get fair information.

i already mentioned "ANYWAYS". I am not here to debate/argue with whoever you are because you are totally unaware of history and just relying on few pinkvilla and News 18 information ....hahahahaha

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/randeep-hooda-swatantrya-veer-savarkar-is-anti-propaganda-film/articleshow/108214104.cms

https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/swatantra-veer-savarkar-review-randeep-hooda-is-brilliant-biopic-101711098668591.html

https://marathi.abplive.com/movie-review/entertainment/movie-review-swatantra-veer-savarkar-movie-review-biopic-randeep-hooda-ankita-lokhande-released-on-22nd-march-by-chandrakant-shinde-abp-majha-entertainment-bollywood-latest-update-marathi-news-1266981 Ghogare.rohan (talk) 11:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ghogare.rohan, Pinkvilla and News18 are reliable sources as per WP:ICTFSOURCES, If you want to question the reliability of these sources you can start a discussion at here, or at WP:RSN. Grabup (talk) 11:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I rest my discussion. For Wikipeadia these might be reliable but for Historian these are not certainly not. I do not want to visit wikipeadia for their unreliable and unauthenticated information. Lets conclude this discussion. Ghogare.rohan (talk) 11:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, You have not provided any reliable sources to back your words, Wikipedia does not provide unauthenticated informations as all our information is backed by idependent reliable secondary sources. Grabup (talk) 11:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

That is your perception that wikipedia do not provide unauthenticated information but thats not the reality. Ghogare.rohan (talk) 11:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

anyone can write anything about film reviews based on their political vendetta or narratives and Wikipedia proclaim that as a independent reliable secondary source. Ghogare.rohan (talk) 11:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ghogare.rohan, These reliable sources are not “Anyone” they are reliable news sites, We don’t accept anyone’s article as reliable as you cited a unreliable source. These news sites have fact checking team and they verify facts before publishing that’s why they are considered as reliable sources. Please read WP:RS.

After reviewing your account I found that you are most likely not here to build Wikipedia rather than just to remove this well sourced portion. Grabup (talk) 11:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Grabup : How about these references

which i mentioned above?

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/randeep-hooda-swatantrya-veer-savarkar-is-anti-propaganda-film/articleshow/108214104.cms

https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/swatantra-veer-savarkar-review-randeep-hooda-is-brilliant-biopic-101711098668591.html

https://marathi.abplive.com/movie-review/entertainment/movie-review-swatantra-veer-savarkar-movie-review-biopic-randeep-hooda-ankita-lokhande-released-on-22nd-march-by-chandrakant-shinde-abp-majha-entertainment-bollywood-latest-update-marathi-news-126

Ghogare.rohan (talk) 12:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ghogare.rohan, The first source The Times of India, is the saying of the director and actor, so, it is primary source, should not be added. Because obviously he will talk good about his film.

The second source is Hindustan Times, It already used in the article to back the line which you wanting to remove, the source says, “As a result, Swatantra Veer Savarkar ends up being a one-sided narrative”

And the third source is in Marathi and there is no consensus about the source at WP:ICTFSOURCES. Grabup (talk) 13:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Neutral language in Lead as per WP:NPOV

The lead uses strong language which lacks neutraliality as WP:Neutral and WP:NPOV policies.

"The film has been criticised for distorting history and for promoting one-sided agenda"

Most quoted sources references are Not Reliable per Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

Only Reliable refernce is "Indian Express", therefore the language used must be from Indian express as per WP:RS

Hence, until a consensus is found, more balanced language from the "Indian Express" language will need to be added, as per WP:RS and WP:NPOV.

The film presents a detailed biographical sketch of Savarkar from his childhood, including the key events from his life, often in a near-worshipful tone towards the central character.

The film has also been praised for many aspects, which are not mentioned in lead. Please discuss for consensus. RogerYg (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)