Satyamev Jayate (talk show) was nominated as a Media and drama good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 8, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Here are some more URL's for the article to be expanded.
-- Msrag ( talk) 09:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I think most of them have been included in some or other form. JPMEENA ( talk) 12:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
This section is I think extremely important as this show brings out some startling facts. Everything can't be summarized. The listing in section list of episodes hardly makes any difference as it shows a routine chart of show. Who doesn't know that female foeticide is big problem in India?? But how this show brings that issue (and other issues later on) that is important to mention. When a movie of 3 hrs can have big plot and story sections what stops a show having 3-4 lines summary points. Here we can't talk about and compare it with game show, of-course, as writing plot summary will be a joke for them. I am not comparing what we have in other articles but it's quite good enough to mention at-least few summary point than rather writing a summary line for this particular show. JPMEENA ( talk) 16:10, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Jpmeena, the section can be anything except "Progress of the show". "Progress of the show" is definitely not encyclopedic and sounds more of the likes of Blogs or Forums. Encyclopedic material cannot and should not be portrayed as any present tense or future tense. We should just indicate as it is. Progress of the show indicates the article from today's (present) point of view. Later after the show it is over, it'll definitely needs to be changed. So you cannot keep changing an encyclopedic material format as per your convenience and only the content can and should change. Please indicate any reputed, reliable article on Wikipedia if you have come across this section. Moreover, if you fail to read the sources provided, have a look at this which clearly indicates "Aamir along with the music director of ‘Delhi Belly’ Ram Sampath has created roughly 16 songs for the 16 episodes that are expected to roll in the inaugural season of the show". Hence I advise you to please refrain from reverting it back just because you named the section that way and think its correct. And lastly even you could've discussed it over here before reverting it twice.-- Msrag ( talk) 07:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Should we change logo image of the show to this? Its the updated logo from satyamevjayate.in having 'Satyamev Jayate' handwritten by Aamir. rahul ( talk2me) 08:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Some problems remain in this article :-
In lieu of this, I may engage in copy-editing of this article. If editors can work together, we could get this to a GA, you know :). ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 18:44, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Dwaipayan is correct; I am talking only about the lead. The format for the main body is actually very good, and I would rather have this than go for a table format. However, in case you are aiming to make this a list of sorts, then tables would be advisable (though i doubt we want a list here :). ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 04:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Article says that there is a self-imposed and self-enforced ban on dubbing in Kannada by Karnataka Government. Unfortunately this is untrue and such kind of ban is un-constitutional. This ban was self-imposed and self-enforced by Kannada Film Industry in sixties and further it was extended by television artists and technicians on Doordarshan & Satellite Channels as and when they came into existence. This ban is not Government sanctioned. I request somebody to correct this mis-information.
Subramanya ( talk) 12:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
True, That has been corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharathiya ( talk • contribs) 04:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Before the article becomes very large, we need to change all the dates to DMY format, and follow that, as India uses DMY format.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 02:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Let me present a few proposals for citation template use.
Let's mention the agency that is providing the news under "agency" parameter (in "cite news" template) whenever that info is available. (This has been done a few times already, so I propose it).
Let's not mention the place mention under any parameter such as "place" or "location". This parameter is supposed to tell the location of the publisher. From personal experience, this is a hassle (we did use that parameter in the article Kolkata).
Again, there is no rule really, but the article needs to be internally consistent, that is follow the same pattern throughout.
If all the major editors involved agree, we can follow these guidelines. (Personally speaking, I am against using "agency" parameter, as despite out best effort we tend to miss it often. However, this has been used already a few times in this particular article). Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 01:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, you are reading it right. After the sort of name-calling and bad-faith accusations that are ripping the air apart at the Shahrukh Khan talk page, I decided that its time to put some of the editors in their proper places, seeing as it is that there seems to be a great penchant among the said editors to talk a lot about neutrality but do very little in reality.
One look at the Critical Reception section is enough to understand that the section has been written with the sole aim of promoting the show and advertising the praise the show has got, which is a very clear violation of Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Wondering how I am able to say such stuff? Could some of the esteemed name-calling editors (who work on this article as well) tell me why the following reviews have failed to find any mention in this article? :-
Now unless you will shoot down all these as unreliable or biased (which makes you no better than a certain editor at the Khan talk page), I think it is time you cleaned up your self-centered pompousness over neutrality and start doing some actual work regarding it. NOTE - This message is not for everybody, but the required editors will understand that this message is being sent to them. ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 15:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
I just asked what you meant by "Bible". Am I so jumpy that whatever I state is taken as anger? i must take some anger management classes :P ;). I do agree that nobody stopped me from adding them, but my stand was for an entirely different reason. I hope you guys didn't misunderstand either. Anyways, in the end, the job is done here and in all likelihood will be done in the other article too. So no fuss :). ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 14:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: TBrandley ( talk · contribs) 16:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Issues:
I found this issues rather quick, and I not even done yet. I'm afraid I going to have to fail this article. Please take this article to peer review, and then nominate it again. Thanks for you understanding. TBran dl ey 17:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Surely, not a contender for a quick-fail. I believe you are in a hurry, as you have taken custody of many articles in the GA Nomination page. If you are unwilling to do it or take time to provide inputs, let some other editor review it. The reasons you have provided are minor copy edits and could be easily rectified. Please, elucidate the reasons for doing a quick fail? Regards, theTigerKing 17:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Just as a passer-by; the show will finish it's first season in 3-4 weeks. Wouldn't it be better to GA review it then? §§ AnimeshKulkarni ( talk) 14:58, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Made some of the minor changes suggested in the GA review. Hope it's ok Coolcool2012 (talk to me) 10:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Are any issues going to be fixed anytime soon? I'm going to have to fail if not soon. TBran dl ey 05:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments
More issues to come later. Regards. TBran dl ey 23:38, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Satyamev Jayate (talk show) was nominated as a Media and drama good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 8, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Here are some more URL's for the article to be expanded.
-- Msrag ( talk) 09:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I think most of them have been included in some or other form. JPMEENA ( talk) 12:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
This section is I think extremely important as this show brings out some startling facts. Everything can't be summarized. The listing in section list of episodes hardly makes any difference as it shows a routine chart of show. Who doesn't know that female foeticide is big problem in India?? But how this show brings that issue (and other issues later on) that is important to mention. When a movie of 3 hrs can have big plot and story sections what stops a show having 3-4 lines summary points. Here we can't talk about and compare it with game show, of-course, as writing plot summary will be a joke for them. I am not comparing what we have in other articles but it's quite good enough to mention at-least few summary point than rather writing a summary line for this particular show. JPMEENA ( talk) 16:10, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Jpmeena, the section can be anything except "Progress of the show". "Progress of the show" is definitely not encyclopedic and sounds more of the likes of Blogs or Forums. Encyclopedic material cannot and should not be portrayed as any present tense or future tense. We should just indicate as it is. Progress of the show indicates the article from today's (present) point of view. Later after the show it is over, it'll definitely needs to be changed. So you cannot keep changing an encyclopedic material format as per your convenience and only the content can and should change. Please indicate any reputed, reliable article on Wikipedia if you have come across this section. Moreover, if you fail to read the sources provided, have a look at this which clearly indicates "Aamir along with the music director of ‘Delhi Belly’ Ram Sampath has created roughly 16 songs for the 16 episodes that are expected to roll in the inaugural season of the show". Hence I advise you to please refrain from reverting it back just because you named the section that way and think its correct. And lastly even you could've discussed it over here before reverting it twice.-- Msrag ( talk) 07:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Should we change logo image of the show to this? Its the updated logo from satyamevjayate.in having 'Satyamev Jayate' handwritten by Aamir. rahul ( talk2me) 08:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Some problems remain in this article :-
In lieu of this, I may engage in copy-editing of this article. If editors can work together, we could get this to a GA, you know :). ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 18:44, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Dwaipayan is correct; I am talking only about the lead. The format for the main body is actually very good, and I would rather have this than go for a table format. However, in case you are aiming to make this a list of sorts, then tables would be advisable (though i doubt we want a list here :). ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 04:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Article says that there is a self-imposed and self-enforced ban on dubbing in Kannada by Karnataka Government. Unfortunately this is untrue and such kind of ban is un-constitutional. This ban was self-imposed and self-enforced by Kannada Film Industry in sixties and further it was extended by television artists and technicians on Doordarshan & Satellite Channels as and when they came into existence. This ban is not Government sanctioned. I request somebody to correct this mis-information.
Subramanya ( talk) 12:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
True, That has been corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharathiya ( talk • contribs) 04:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Before the article becomes very large, we need to change all the dates to DMY format, and follow that, as India uses DMY format.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 02:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Let me present a few proposals for citation template use.
Let's mention the agency that is providing the news under "agency" parameter (in "cite news" template) whenever that info is available. (This has been done a few times already, so I propose it).
Let's not mention the place mention under any parameter such as "place" or "location". This parameter is supposed to tell the location of the publisher. From personal experience, this is a hassle (we did use that parameter in the article Kolkata).
Again, there is no rule really, but the article needs to be internally consistent, that is follow the same pattern throughout.
If all the major editors involved agree, we can follow these guidelines. (Personally speaking, I am against using "agency" parameter, as despite out best effort we tend to miss it often. However, this has been used already a few times in this particular article). Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 01:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, you are reading it right. After the sort of name-calling and bad-faith accusations that are ripping the air apart at the Shahrukh Khan talk page, I decided that its time to put some of the editors in their proper places, seeing as it is that there seems to be a great penchant among the said editors to talk a lot about neutrality but do very little in reality.
One look at the Critical Reception section is enough to understand that the section has been written with the sole aim of promoting the show and advertising the praise the show has got, which is a very clear violation of Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Wondering how I am able to say such stuff? Could some of the esteemed name-calling editors (who work on this article as well) tell me why the following reviews have failed to find any mention in this article? :-
Now unless you will shoot down all these as unreliable or biased (which makes you no better than a certain editor at the Khan talk page), I think it is time you cleaned up your self-centered pompousness over neutrality and start doing some actual work regarding it. NOTE - This message is not for everybody, but the required editors will understand that this message is being sent to them. ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 15:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
I just asked what you meant by "Bible". Am I so jumpy that whatever I state is taken as anger? i must take some anger management classes :P ;). I do agree that nobody stopped me from adding them, but my stand was for an entirely different reason. I hope you guys didn't misunderstand either. Anyways, in the end, the job is done here and in all likelihood will be done in the other article too. So no fuss :). ~*~ Ankit Bhatt~*~ 14:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: TBrandley ( talk · contribs) 16:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Issues:
I found this issues rather quick, and I not even done yet. I'm afraid I going to have to fail this article. Please take this article to peer review, and then nominate it again. Thanks for you understanding. TBran dl ey 17:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Surely, not a contender for a quick-fail. I believe you are in a hurry, as you have taken custody of many articles in the GA Nomination page. If you are unwilling to do it or take time to provide inputs, let some other editor review it. The reasons you have provided are minor copy edits and could be easily rectified. Please, elucidate the reasons for doing a quick fail? Regards, theTigerKing 17:25, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Just as a passer-by; the show will finish it's first season in 3-4 weeks. Wouldn't it be better to GA review it then? §§ AnimeshKulkarni ( talk) 14:58, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Made some of the minor changes suggested in the GA review. Hope it's ok Coolcool2012 (talk to me) 10:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Are any issues going to be fixed anytime soon? I'm going to have to fail if not soon. TBran dl ey 05:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments
More issues to come later. Regards. TBran dl ey 23:38, 26 August 2012 (UTC)