The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot ( talk) 13:10, 17 March 2015 (UTC) [1]. reply
This article is about the highest grossing Tamil film (at present) and is also the first Rajinikanth film to be nominated for FAC. This article received an extensive peer review, especially by Skr15081997, Bede735 and SchroCat and an "informal review" by Prhartcom. The article was copyedited by Onel5969. We are nominating this article for featured article because in our opinion, it satisfies all FA criteria after the copyedit and the peer review. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I peer reviewed the article, and find nothing to object to at FAC. I am not well enough informed about the subject to feel confident about offering support, but I do not oppose the promotion of the article and I have no outstanding queries. Tim riley talk 16:08, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Crisco 1492: Thanks for the tip, Crisco. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support: Looks good! Many congratulations to all involved. --
KRIMUK90
✉ 05:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
reply
@ Krimuk90: Thanks, Krimuk. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support Very good work! -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 11:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Crisco 1492: The reason there are spaces is because I did not want the links to be redirects. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Crisco 1492: They are mentioned in casting. Will add references. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Skipping ahead...
@ Crisco 1492: All of your comments have been resolved. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC) reply
The prose is plodding, uninformative, and repetitive, and many MOS and citation issues need to be addressed.
On citations, please review all authors-- the format varies on author name-- sometimes incomplete, sometimes last name first, sometimes first name first (sample S. Shankar ... what is that?) Could you please explain the use of one-word names? How do we know who those authors are and what makes them reliable (sample Sangeeta-- I am unable to find "about" pages describing the author credentials on one-word author names.) What is the format on Inian; Bhavanishankar, Jyothsna? On authors like H. Ramakrishnan, Deepa, is H part of the last name, or the middle initial? If double last names are used in India (as in Hispanic naming conventions), I've nonetheless not encountered such inconsistency in earlier Indian film articles I've reviewed.
On See also, I can't see any reason that the List of highest-grossing films, and science fiction films, can't be covered and linked in the text.
The "Cast" section is a list, and adds nothing that couldn't be better covered in the "Casting" section.
WP:MOSNUM, consider switching 166–177 to 166–77.
WP:NBSP and WP:PUNC issues abound.
Why the hyphen in "top-205 films"? Why the hyphen in "the company's fourth-quarter in 2010"?
That is only a starter list on MOS items that might be easily addressed; the repetitive, uninformative, and plodding prose is a bigger concern, but I am out of time this morning to list my concerns. I suggest that an independent copyedit from an editor not previously involved might help vary the prose and spark up the numerous sections that say ... nothing. Back later ... although maybe I will luck out, and some of the editors who gave premature or implicit support to this nomination will have addressed some of the copyedit needs before my revisit. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure I quite agree that the article is uninformative Sandy, but it might benefit from another copyedit or two and perking up a bit to make it seem less "rambling" as you say. My original primary concern was the length, and although it has since been shortened the prose might be difficult to digest and seem bland and plodding in places as you indicate. I did see FA potential in this in terms of comprehension at an earlier stage though. Perhaps Eric Corbett could take a look at it. Sometimes some of the minor MoS glitches are not so easy to spot. I'll give it a full read tomorrow and see what I can do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Yes, I agree received on the "generally positive reviews" repetition thing, it's a problem I find in most of the Indian articles! Ssven in the awards section I always think a summary of the most important awards is a good idea, otherwise as Sandy says it's not much use. Perhaps a sourced table of the notable award wins, or if it can be done in prose without seeming repetitive go for that. Also the music section, what happened? It should provide a decent summary, including some reviews. As it stands it doesn't tell the reader much. I've not looked at this since the PR, sorry about that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I've given it a full copyedit. It would still benefit from a few pairs of eyes looking at it but it reads a bit better now I think. If you compare it to how it was a few weeks back at 166kb, it is far more digestible and readable, especially the box office info. I'll be willing to support once the prose is polished off a little more, you mention how the soundtrack was received and a few reviews, and you expand the awards section to let us know the awards it actually won. One thing I find highly dubious is the idea that Beyonce would have plagiarised that from a Tamil film, with due respect.. There'd be plenty of more plausible sources of inspiration I'm sure. It would really benefit from some more images too I think to help perk it up. Are there no images of the cast and crew, even if not on set which could be added, or premiere photos/advertising boards etc?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC) reply
This definitely needs some work from some good copyeditors. I went over it, but here are some things that I don't want to change unilaterally:
I have more comments, which I will add later when I get some more time. If you'd like to withdraw the nomination and open up a peer review, I can add some more in-depth comments and suggestions.- RHM22 ( talk) 15:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ RHM22: Can you list some of the places where it is so? — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ RHM22: Reworded to bad robot. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ RHM22: Removed as you suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 10:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
"The title of the song "Kadhal Anukkal" literally means "love atoms", where the scientist asks his girlfriend the amount of love atoms she has for him.[101] Asimov and the scientists Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein are mentioned in the song "Boom Boom Robo Da" in the line "Issac Asimovim velaiyo robo, Issac [sic] Newtonin leelaiyo robo, Albert Einstein moolaiyo robo".[102] In the song "Irumbile Oru Irudhaiyam", the line "Google-Kal Kanadha Thedalgal Ennodu" references the search engine Google, while the line "En Neela Pallale Unnodu Siripen" translates to "I will smile at you with my blue tooth", alluding to the wireless technology bluetooth."
@ RHM22: Resolved your comments. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 01:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I'm finished with my (rather extensive) copyedit. I believe I've corrected the bulk of the outstanding problems (except those I've noted above). If there are any other considerations, they would best be directed toward the nominator(s). All that said, I believe there may be reference issues, which I am not qualified to handle, so that will have to be left to someone else to SP/SR. This article has the material for success, but it still requires some polishing to be considered the 'best of the best,' in my opinion. SandyGeorgia: My above concerns haven't been addressed, but they will presumably be resolved when the nominator(s) return. If you have any questions for me, please don't hesitate to ping me or address me on my talk page.- RHM22 ( talk) 18:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Nominator has requested withdrawal. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 13:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC) reply
The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot ( talk) 13:10, 17 March 2015 (UTC) [1]. reply
This article is about the highest grossing Tamil film (at present) and is also the first Rajinikanth film to be nominated for FAC. This article received an extensive peer review, especially by Skr15081997, Bede735 and SchroCat and an "informal review" by Prhartcom. The article was copyedited by Onel5969. We are nominating this article for featured article because in our opinion, it satisfies all FA criteria after the copyedit and the peer review. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I peer reviewed the article, and find nothing to object to at FAC. I am not well enough informed about the subject to feel confident about offering support, but I do not oppose the promotion of the article and I have no outstanding queries. Tim riley talk 16:08, 7 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Crisco 1492: Thanks for the tip, Crisco. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support: Looks good! Many congratulations to all involved. --
KRIMUK90
✉ 05:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
reply
@ Krimuk90: Thanks, Krimuk. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support Very good work! -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 11:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Crisco 1492: The reason there are spaces is because I did not want the links to be redirects. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Crisco 1492: They are mentioned in casting. Will add references. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Skipping ahead...
@ Crisco 1492: All of your comments have been resolved. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC) reply
The prose is plodding, uninformative, and repetitive, and many MOS and citation issues need to be addressed.
On citations, please review all authors-- the format varies on author name-- sometimes incomplete, sometimes last name first, sometimes first name first (sample S. Shankar ... what is that?) Could you please explain the use of one-word names? How do we know who those authors are and what makes them reliable (sample Sangeeta-- I am unable to find "about" pages describing the author credentials on one-word author names.) What is the format on Inian; Bhavanishankar, Jyothsna? On authors like H. Ramakrishnan, Deepa, is H part of the last name, or the middle initial? If double last names are used in India (as in Hispanic naming conventions), I've nonetheless not encountered such inconsistency in earlier Indian film articles I've reviewed.
On See also, I can't see any reason that the List of highest-grossing films, and science fiction films, can't be covered and linked in the text.
The "Cast" section is a list, and adds nothing that couldn't be better covered in the "Casting" section.
WP:MOSNUM, consider switching 166–177 to 166–77.
WP:NBSP and WP:PUNC issues abound.
Why the hyphen in "top-205 films"? Why the hyphen in "the company's fourth-quarter in 2010"?
That is only a starter list on MOS items that might be easily addressed; the repetitive, uninformative, and plodding prose is a bigger concern, but I am out of time this morning to list my concerns. I suggest that an independent copyedit from an editor not previously involved might help vary the prose and spark up the numerous sections that say ... nothing. Back later ... although maybe I will luck out, and some of the editors who gave premature or implicit support to this nomination will have addressed some of the copyedit needs before my revisit. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure I quite agree that the article is uninformative Sandy, but it might benefit from another copyedit or two and perking up a bit to make it seem less "rambling" as you say. My original primary concern was the length, and although it has since been shortened the prose might be difficult to digest and seem bland and plodding in places as you indicate. I did see FA potential in this in terms of comprehension at an earlier stage though. Perhaps Eric Corbett could take a look at it. Sometimes some of the minor MoS glitches are not so easy to spot. I'll give it a full read tomorrow and see what I can do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Yes, I agree received on the "generally positive reviews" repetition thing, it's a problem I find in most of the Indian articles! Ssven in the awards section I always think a summary of the most important awards is a good idea, otherwise as Sandy says it's not much use. Perhaps a sourced table of the notable award wins, or if it can be done in prose without seeming repetitive go for that. Also the music section, what happened? It should provide a decent summary, including some reviews. As it stands it doesn't tell the reader much. I've not looked at this since the PR, sorry about that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I've given it a full copyedit. It would still benefit from a few pairs of eyes looking at it but it reads a bit better now I think. If you compare it to how it was a few weeks back at 166kb, it is far more digestible and readable, especially the box office info. I'll be willing to support once the prose is polished off a little more, you mention how the soundtrack was received and a few reviews, and you expand the awards section to let us know the awards it actually won. One thing I find highly dubious is the idea that Beyonce would have plagiarised that from a Tamil film, with due respect.. There'd be plenty of more plausible sources of inspiration I'm sure. It would really benefit from some more images too I think to help perk it up. Are there no images of the cast and crew, even if not on set which could be added, or premiere photos/advertising boards etc?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC) reply
This definitely needs some work from some good copyeditors. I went over it, but here are some things that I don't want to change unilaterally:
I have more comments, which I will add later when I get some more time. If you'd like to withdraw the nomination and open up a peer review, I can add some more in-depth comments and suggestions.- RHM22 ( talk) 15:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ RHM22: Can you list some of the places where it is so? — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ RHM22: Reworded to bad robot. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
@ RHM22: Removed as you suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 10:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
"The title of the song "Kadhal Anukkal" literally means "love atoms", where the scientist asks his girlfriend the amount of love atoms she has for him.[101] Asimov and the scientists Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein are mentioned in the song "Boom Boom Robo Da" in the line "Issac Asimovim velaiyo robo, Issac [sic] Newtonin leelaiyo robo, Albert Einstein moolaiyo robo".[102] In the song "Irumbile Oru Irudhaiyam", the line "Google-Kal Kanadha Thedalgal Ennodu" references the search engine Google, while the line "En Neela Pallale Unnodu Siripen" translates to "I will smile at you with my blue tooth", alluding to the wireless technology bluetooth."
@ RHM22: Resolved your comments. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 01:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC) reply
I'm finished with my (rather extensive) copyedit. I believe I've corrected the bulk of the outstanding problems (except those I've noted above). If there are any other considerations, they would best be directed toward the nominator(s). All that said, I believe there may be reference issues, which I am not qualified to handle, so that will have to be left to someone else to SP/SR. This article has the material for success, but it still requires some polishing to be considered the 'best of the best,' in my opinion. SandyGeorgia: My above concerns haven't been addressed, but they will presumably be resolved when the nominator(s) return. If you have any questions for me, please don't hesitate to ping me or address me on my talk page.- RHM22 ( talk) 18:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Nominator has requested withdrawal. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 13:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC) reply