From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Varalaru (film))
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Varalaru was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
March 5, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed


Why does the synopsis appear to be written by a fan? The synopsis should contain the story in brief if I'm not wrong. There are several references to Ajit's performance which, I feel, don't belong here. The entire thing sounds like a user review and not really like an encyclopedic entry.

Even if I can digest all the comments about the various aspects of the movie, the last paragraph 'Having had to..' definitely does NOT belong here. --Madhu 06:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

GA nomination failed — improvement suggestions[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail: [[File:|16px|alt=|link=]]

I enjoyed the article and generally found it informative. With some revisions it can be reconsidered for GA status. My key concerns are with readability, the lead, Manual of Style issues, and lack of references:

  • Readability and grammar: Admittedly I am unfamiliar with English as it is written and spoken in India, but there are a number of parts of the article that are difficult to understand. I also stumble over some of the preposition use here and there, which I realize is regionally idiomatic, so that may just be me. Even so, it seems the article could benefit from a rewrite of many of its paragraphs to make it more accessible. Tense fluctuates and should be made consistent. For example:
"Ajith played three roles in the movie: a father and his two sons. His female lead as the father is actress Kanika. Ramesh Khanna and Suman Shetty are featured in supporting roles. The film's score and soundtrack are composed by A. R. Rahman."
could be changed to —
"Ajith plays three roles in the movie: the father and his two sons. The female lead, Shivshankar's wife, as the father is played by actress Kanika. Ramesh Khanna and Suman Shetty are featured in supporting roles. The film's score and soundtrack are composed by A. R. Rahman. (you might add here something about Rahman's notoriety)."
    • There are places where actors' names are used interchangeably with the characters': when referring to the story/plot, the characters' names should be used.
    • There are problems with subject-verb agreement, pronoun usage, punctuation, run-on sentences and a number of typos. Fixing these issues should be relatively easy, but should be done by someone familiar with the plot (since some of the problems leave the reader who hasn't seen the film confused about some of the characters and story events).
  • Lead: The lead is a good start, but lacks an indication of what makes the film notable or interesting. It should briefly describe the film's story and summarize the article. Perhaps referencing some of the info from the Production, Themes and Influences sections would help as well.
  • Lists: The character list should be pared down, removing much of the detail and description. The same for the crew and soundtrack lists. For example, in reference to screenwriter K. S. Ravikumar, "The screen play was pretty smooth throughout the entire piece of the story" can be safely removed. Also, there are comments such as "The story was one of the key elements that Varalaru was a hit (sic), it was well done and well executed" that are either original research or need verifiable sources. Aesthetically, it might be a good idea to use a bulleted list rather than a table for the cast, crew and soundtrack lists.
  • Verifiable References: The Production, Themes, Development, Publicity and Influences sections are generally good (informative and interesting) but need to have citations added for almost everything. Otherwise, concerns about original research and failure to give credit to the appropriate reviewers and critics arise. The Trivia section content should be merged with other suitable sections and the section removed.
  • Citations: Finally, the entries for the References section should be expanded so they are more informative. Perhaps using the citation templates would help with this.
  • Manual of Style issues:
    • Inconsistent wikilinking and redirects. For example, Ajith Kumar and Ajith
    • Use &ndash's where appropriate (see ndash).
    • Most of the time photographs and graphics should be inserted like this: [[Image:Example.jpg|thumb|caption]] . If the author does not specify the number of pixels, then the reader's default value is used for thumnails. Users with 21" screens likely prefer larger thumbs than users with 14" screens. By specifying, all users see the same size.

Good luck with a future nomination and feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments.

 Jim Dunning  talk  :  01:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 02:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


There were several things that needed clearing up. At a few places, I couldn't tell for sure what was meant, but I did my best. Contact me on my help page if you need more help. I think the article is great, I don't agree that the plot summary is too long - it's way shorter than most of what I've been editing on television/film pages. Levalley (talk) 19:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Apparently sourced claim from older version, if it checks out it should be returned to article[edit]

The film was remade in Telugu by Pawan Kalyan.[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:28, 10 May 2010 (UTC)