Talk:Sivaji: The Boss/Archive 1

Complete Rewrite

I don't have the time so i can't do it, but if someone does happen to have an insane amount of time on their hands and HAS seen the movie, please rewrite this article. It looks like a Rajini fansite.Chaosprophet 05:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Provide Proof and don't Vandalise!

Please provide proof because a lot of misunderstanding and "edit wars" seem to be going on because of the lack of proof. I have notice MANY edits to change information that was provided with proof to incorrect information. I have corrected this but in the future can users please not do this. I feel you are accidentally vandalising.

AVTN 19:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Oh my goodness. Where is the loads of information that was here? Oh dear!! Please bring it back whoever it is who did it!

How much did ayngaran pay?

Does anyone know? AVTN 20:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

About the vandalism

Hi,

I don't know about others vandalising but I definetly am NOT vandalising this article. Infact I tried my very best in keeping this article clean for about a long time now by adding many information and cleaning the article such as fixing broken links. Incase you don't know me I was the person you thought was intentionally removing your information. The reason why I removed your information then was because it was no different from what I had written on it (the info titled Illegal Audio Release).

Sorry if it was wrong in anyway but I couldn't discuss this with you because I didn't have a Wikipedia account at that time. I recently created one to see if I could be able to edit the article once again since it is protected. But I see that I am still unable to do so even though I created an account. If it was you who protected it please remove the protection if you can so I can add information I find. This time I will add information and try not to remove unless it must be.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rdx-77 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

It has already been unprotected. So you can edit it now. Sorry for the misunderstanding. But I wasn't talking about you. There were a huge number of IP edits which were deleting and "changing" the page in undesirable ways.
AVTN 12:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know why the Sivaji: The Boss page is STILL protected? Even after the removal of the protection template.~~ AVTN ^[|Talk] 08:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Some errors regarding Shakar's b'day

This is to the person who is maintaining this article.

In this article "Sivaji - The Boss", it is mentioned that this movie is scheduled to be released on May 8th coinciding with the director's (i.e Shankar) birthday. But, in wikipedia page for Shankar, his birthday is mentioned as 17 August. Please verify the correct date. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drsk77 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Release date/Article content

There is a line which says that Shankar wanted the release date of Sivaji to clash with Dasavtharam. There are no citations and the allegation is a personal opinion, not an established fact.

I don't think Shankar shifted the release date to clash with Dasavatharam. Shankar shifted the release date due to recording of audio for the film. There was an article on www.indiaglitz.com about this a few days ago.

Trivia

Also, the Triva section of this article should not have been removed. It was very helpful for readers to pickout point form info. The article is currently much too wordy and I suggest it should be cut down.

Wikipedia does not encourage Trivias per new rules, information must be merged with the text. G Ganesh 17:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Flags on the Release dates

Can someone please stop adding a large list of flags for the release dates and distribution lists. There are more countries where Sivaji will be screened, such as Canada and Sri Lanka, and it would not look nice to add a whole bunch of flags all with the same release dates. It would be much simpler to inform it in a more general and condensed way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 22:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

They are not major countries in the world where the distrubuters will earn a lot. Also some companies have bought distrubution rights for within thier country from either AVM Productions or Ayngaran International (for example Pyramid in Malaysia). Please discuss before removing information. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 17:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Ratings

Tamil films are officially rated only in United Kingdom and India. The BBFC (as you can see on all Ayngaran Video covers) are the only official worldwide film raters. You can also check their site at [1]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 22:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Films are also rated in other countries worldwide. Until 2005 none of the Tamil films were certified in the UK. Now they have to be certified if they are to be released in Cineworld Cinemas, also the films rake in such an income that since Chandramuhki Ayngaran can no longer not get them certified. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 17:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

What a sprawling, messy article

This is the longest, most heavily annotated article about a movie I have ever seen that doesn't ever mention what the movie is about. Ford MF 23:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

There is a big expectation among the Tamil community as it is being directed by the Shanker with Tamil cinema superstar "Rajini". Well it is good to have well cited detail article but me too was surprised that Important movie story is missing in the article. May be because the movie not yet released. I appreciate atleast few line about the storey so that it helps the readers about the movie. I I am native Tamil from the neighboring country Sri Lanka. If somebody can add the story details would help the Tamil Wikipedia article (ta:சிவாஜி(திரைப்படம்) as well.--Umapathy (உமாபதி) 17:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Shankar is such a perfectionist that he will not release the story, it would damage the film. Shankar has only released a handful of stills and all of them from songs. Earlier on a still had been taken by a cameraman and released on the internet, for that reason Shankar scrapped that scene and remade it. I highly doubt the story will come out until after the release date. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 17:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Article Length

I agree with the comment about the article length. It is way too wordy and long and it must be shortened. Many of the information in the article is unnecessary and irrelevant.

Country Flags

And who ever is adding all those flags to the release date and distributors list and adding countries other than India and UK for ratings PLEASE STOP. This is ruining the clean appearance of the article. It would be helpful if the owner of the article simply blocked the person who is doing all this (no offence). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 04:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

It is not illegal to add information that is useful to the article. Also the article is not too long, it has been viewed by many editors and even praised many times for its content. This is what a Rajinikanth film article should be, his films are not merely a film like Spider-Man 3 which you go to watch; his films are something you live through, you enjoy, you love, watching his film makes you ecstatic. When he appears on the screen everything whistles with joy. Many millions of people are looking forward to his film and reading eargerly about it. Heck nearly every magasine has a picture of Rajinikanth on the front and maybe a bit about the film. He was the most powerful person in Tamil Nadu in 1995, he is going to be the most powerful person in Tamil Nadu after Sivaji: The Boss! He is the thalaivar, the one and only Superstar. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 17:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do know that Rajini is the one and only superstar and his films are simply the greatest. I my self am a Rajini fan (looking forward to watching Sivaji) and interested in keeping all Rajini related articles clean and standardized. But there is no point in overacting about it and adding info that isn't relevant and unnecessary (such as the long list of flags and list of countries for film rating). This is all very nice but it should be at an appropriate level. Flags would be necessary if the film was released on different days in different locations. Sorry if there was any misunderstanding but I just wanted to input my opinion on the drastic changes that have been made on this article in the past couple months. I have been monitoring and adding various details on this article since early last year. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 00:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

Very well I hope it is to your liking now? I have simply put flags for the different country distributers and made Aygaran Worldwide. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 08:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it looks a lot nicer now. Thank you very much. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 16:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

Tamil Nadu Tax Exemption

In order to get tax exemption from the Tamil Nadu Government as far as I understood movie name need to be in Tamil. Will this move get exemption by having tailoring name in English?. Can somebody investigate this? or will they pay tax to the Tamil Nadu Government?--Umapathy (உமாபதி) 17:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The title considered at this stage of production was Super Star but Rajinikanth claimed that he did not want to boast or show off his status in the cine field. The film ended up being named Sivaji.

— Universal Hero, Sivaji: The Boss article.

I would think that it was registered as "Sivaji" which is what counts for the tax office. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 14:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sivaji Release Date Information

I spoke to Ayngaran International recently and they say that AVM (namely Shankar) has postponed the release of Sivaji: The Boss to 2007-05-26. Ayngaran will receive the movie on the 2007-05-24 when they will promptly send it to the UK certification board and it will be released worldwide on the 2007-05-26. Ayngaran International think the film may be postponed further. According to Ayngaran International the delay to the films release is due to A. R. Rahman. Please do not change the release date back to 2007-05-17 as it will not be released then. Thank you. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 11:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The 1 billion rupee budget

Whats this some kind of a joke?..There is no way this film would be a 100crore project.I think 60crores would be just and reasonable.If you think the marketing,prints etc would add to the cost then.. well hell No! no tamil film producer would be willing to produce a movie at a 100 crore budget.Sivaji's actual budget might be within 50-60crores(including the 20 crore fee of rajini).I have no intention of belittling the movie(i would only be too happy if a tamil film is made at 100 crore)but false exaggeration about the movies budget like this would make most poeople expect too high of the film and that might let them down when they watch the film.So PLEASE CHANGE the budget to 600 million rupees.

The budget has been properly given references. This was estimated by a news site, the last Sivaji: The Boss budget was 40 crores back in 2006 end, and an extra 25 crores which Rajinkanth is taking. I doubt no money was spent in making Sivaji in the last 5 months. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_{V A} 09:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The confusion is over!

Well folks its out,the release date of Sivaji is may 31.Its official.AVM has disclosed it to galatta.com.Check it out!And dont change the release date again.

Super flop

Padam oothikichuna, naan kadan vaangiyavdhu London muzhukka poster adichu Rajini thatha maanathai vaanguven! Anwar 15:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

This is an English wikipedia. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_{V A} 16:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Please no personal animosity

Failed GA

This article nomination was quick-failed because the movie has not been released, and thus is unstable. Please renominate in sufficient time after its release and once the article information has stabalized.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 14:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Clean up.

Citation templates

The citation templates have been fixed. I put all the cinema news articles as news citations, and all the site and blog citations as web citations. As I was doing it, I came along many citations just linking to base site/blog urls, not linking to the actual content but to the site which holds the content. I have listed some of the problems below, this includes google caches which are frowned upon in wikipedia citing, see WP:CITE!

Problems found

• • Work Complete - Youtube, Flickr sections unsortable so it has been kept. Universal Hero 14:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

To Do....

There are no active tasks for this page

• As it is a premature film, it can't be nominated. Nominate it again about 3 months after its release (about August)(you might want it to go to GA now, but be patient.
• In my opinion, for a film that hasn't been released, the article is too long. 72000kb, considering you have to add a plot section, a release and response + dvd sections, it'll be too long.
  • Try trimming down the section "Soundtrack" into about three paragraphs. It already has a main article which all that information should be there. (1 para on production, 1 para on unoffical to official versions and 1 para on release and response)
• You have extra spacing between the two paragraphs in the LEAD, this should be just one line.
  • For an article this size, the lead should be longer, see WP:LEAD
• You have a casting section, but you might want to add a cast list (similar to Casino Royale (2006 film) or Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith). You then might want to trim the Casting section to only main actors/actresses

*Remove the wikinews box in the Publicity and Release section, (either remove it or put it down with external links

Removed the Wikinews box. I believe the content in the Wikinews article is no longer relevant to the Release of Sivaji! Vishnuchakra 13:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

• In the references section there is a link at the top, remove it or put it in external links.
• In the opening infobox, you don't need the release of the soundtrack in the released part.
• It is cited but you may have cited incorrectly. (I havent checked it)

**For news articles use {{cite news}}

• • • • • • Done by User:AVTN to perfection.

**For web pages with info use {{cite web}}

• • • • • • Done by User:AVTN to perfection.
    • I'm not going to check that but it seems all the references are all the same.

****Reference One is a prime example, to use {{cite news}} over {{cite web}}

• In my opinion you should have the article copy edited, (this is a check for spelling, updating prose etc.). Some of the prose on the article is not good (eg. After the release of the surprise hit, Kadhalan in 1994, directed by Shankar he answered when interviewed by Sun TV,[4] that his official aim was to direct South India's two major actors, Kamal Haasan and Rajinikanth. (doesn't really make sense)).
  • Use {{Copyedit}}.
    • See WP:COPYEDIT for more details

*The category's need to be sorted aphebettically (numbers then letters)(ignore automated categorys eg. Upcoming films) Universal Hero 13:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't do it, but I saw that it's already done - so struck out the point. aJCfreak yAkBaK 12:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

• Strike it out when you've completed it! Universal Hero 13:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

GA

Well, once it comes out, I think we should try it out at a GA review again. Any thoughts? Dreamy 00:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Singapore Release

It's releasing here in Singapore, on the 14th of June, 2 days time .. CONFIRMED!

First para

Ummm... Regarding the following lines in the opening para:

Rajini for the first time is acting under a bigger brand than himself (Shankar). Shankar is the only director that has much better openings than rajini films.

They seem to be completely an opinion. Statements with such high claims usually require properly verifiable sources. Otherwise, such statements have to be removed, esp if we're going to try nominating the article for GA/FA. --aJCfreak yAkBaK 12:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Fight over references

Instead of edit warring, please discuss the problem in a civil manner here on the talk page. Regarding this, I think Gnanapiti was correct in removing that reference. There's no mention in that reference that Rajinikanth has surpassed Jackie Chan as the highest-paid Asian actor. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed lot of fake references like blogs, youtube video, flickr homepage etc. Still there are lot of nonsense cruft to remove. I want to question the credibility of sites like behindwoods where whole site looks like a blog, kollywoodtalk which is nothing but a blog and tamilstar which looks like a personal webpage. Tons and tons have been written based on them directly violating WP:RS. On top of that, for lot of claims made in the article, if you go to the pointed reference, there will be nothing on the claim, as Nishkid pointed out above. Things need to be fixed. Gnanapiti 23:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

From what I see, Kollywoodtalk violates WP:RS, since it looks like a blog, and the user posting the information is not an authority on the subject. TamilStar doesn't look like an RS, and neither does Behindwoods. They look like basic Tamil film fansites that happen to incorporate quite a bit of detail. That doesn't mean they are to be considered reliable sources. We need actual references that meet WP:RS, and to start, we can look at more reputable film news websites. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Guyz, I think I've corrected it to a Universal Edition balancing on our three views. Still we need to add a:

• • • • A plot section - (Wait a week) to reduct spoiler complains
      • A reception section

Universal Hero 10:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC) I readded the plot section. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and if we have a general plot summary, then we should incorporate it into the article. We shouldn't withhold information for a whole week because some people haven't seen the movie yet. Nishkid64 (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'm thinking of going through each and every reference. I dunno much about reliability, but some of the references point to links where the claims within the page are not present, as noted earlier. Gonna try and increase the credibility of the article. aJCfreak yAk 09:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

To add to the references clean-up: the cited reference for the budget of the movie being 100 crores is [2] from a site called NowRunning.com. The site has a disclaimer which mentions that "nowrunning.com publishes articles and columns from other news agencies and guest writers. The views expressed in these articles are carried as written, in order to preserve the original voice. However, it needs mentioning that guest columns and other external articles are opinion pieces, and reflect only the feelings of the individual concerned -- the fact that they are published on nowrunning.com does not amount to an endorsement by the editorial staff of the opinions expressed in these columns." Also, the article merely states that "Film circles estimate that AVM would have invested more than Rs 100 crore". This is purely an estimate, IMO. But I dunno what to do about it, so if someone could correct this, if necessary, then great! aJCfreak yAk 10:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

That definitely needs to be removed and replaced, per WP:RS. Nishkid64 (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It's done. User:Tintin1107 provided an appropriate reference for the cost of production and I've written it into the article. Check it out. aJCfreak yAk 18:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Umm...where? I don't see any edits by Tintin1107 in the last two days. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

He provided the reference on my talk page and I included it. Check the article's current reference to the Outlook news item. Cheerio! aJCfreak yAk 09:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

So many articles link to Sivaji: The Boss!

Special:Whatlinkshere/Sivaji:_The_Boss

Could someone check it out. I know most of the actors listed there aren't in the Tamil version of the film, but I heard other versions were different so could someone check it out?

AVTN 21:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I dunno about the people involved with the movie, but I noticed that there is a page titled Sivaji: The Boss Release Controversy (and another titled Sivaji: the Boss Release Controversy). Was wondering if we could move all rumours/extension of release date/etc. to an article like that? It would help reduce the size of this article. And we could include a section in this article to link to the Controversies/Rumours article. I guess we could do this if we reach a consensus. What say ye to that, people? aJCfreak yAk 09:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Lead paragraph

Hi. I'm trying the work on the lead paragraph based on WP:LEAD and Lage Raho Munna Bhai, which is a FA. I've done a little bit of work and I've uploaded it to a subpage of my sandbox. Anyone who's checking this discussion, please feel free to check it out and we can continue discussing the changes here. If there is a consensus with regard to the changes in it, we can then append it to the actual article. :) aJCfreak yAk 11:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Sivaji:_The_Boss#Soundtrack

Can work be started to make this smaller. I have copied the current version over to the sub-article over here: Sivaji: The Boss (soundtrack). User:Dekimasu had recently did a redirect. I spoke to the user. But I have been very disappointed on work on the main article's audio section. I will begin work on the article after the 25th June (after my exams). AVTN 14:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

This article is total crap

This article is total unabashed fancruft sourced almost entirely from non-RS fansites, blogs, youtube, google video etc.,. I tried cleaning up the non RS references and replacing them with {{fact}} tags, but that's next to impossible. The article has 135 so-called citations of which more than 120 are from non-RS sources. There simply is no point replacing all those citations with fact tags. I dont think anything short of a rewrite from first principles can help this article. It is total fancruft and also had nearly a dozen or more 'fair use' pics all of which are of suspect licensing. Basically everything is wrong with this article and I even propose to blank the entire article except the lead and ask that it be rewritten. Sarvagnya 01:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, though I don't quite agree that the entire article is crap, I do believe that the article needs major cleanup. To start with, could you please take a look at the lead that I've written in my sandbox? (Read previous post). Would like some consensus on it before including it into the article - since I tend to shy away from edit wars and it looks like this article could become an intense concentration of such wars. :) Anyways, was wondering whether ALL the tags placed at the top of the article really belong there. Maybe the article reads like a fansite/poorly sourced one, but that does not mean that we need to be "anti-article", do we? I feel that some of the tags are repetitive. Please consider removing some of them. Again, would've done it myself - but I don't wanna offend anyone. Cheerio! aJCfreak yAk 09:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The lead is crappy too. For starters the details of the plot has no business squatting in the lead. And then there are blatant lies. The outlook citation given says 80 crores.. but in the lead it conveniently transforms into 96 crores. The article is peppered with blatant POV, lies, unreliable sources, unencyclopedic material, blatant copyvio(check the 'reviews' section for copyvio from here), unabashed fancruft, weasel, peacock, undue... This ought to be the worst article I've ever seen on wikipedia. If this article doesnt qualify for being blanked at sight per Jimbo here and here, I dont know which one will. My patience with this article is running short and next to nothing has been done to improve this article in the past few days. If it is not improved real soon, I will rewrite the lead and blank the rest of the article. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

This is what sify wrote - As a film, it acts as the vital bridge between the old Rajni films and new commercial packaging that makes Shankar tick with the generation next audience. On the downside, there is nothing new story-wise. Shankar has rehashed his pet theme of a one-man crusader who cleans the society of the scum of the earth, which was seen in his earlier socio-commercial fantasies like Gentleman and Muthalvan. There is a sense of déjà vu- as you have seen similar plots too often from his stable. The script is too thin on logic. There are far too many banal dialogues and familiar homilies and messages, associated with a Shankar film, are thrust in and at times the pace is too sluggish, especially in the first half. And this is how it gets reported in this article - "While Sify.com, Indiaglitz.com, rediff[33], The Times of India [34], apunkachoice[35] and many other gave a thumbsup,..."!! Now which part of the sify review above looks like a 'thumbsup'? Sarvagnya 20:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I just added to the list of reviews. I was very disappointed on how the editor thought there were "mixed" reviews. Most of the bad reviews are from Rajinikanths political enemies, such as Sun TV. While ALL other TV channels were advertising the movie and also creating shows (like speaking to the fans,etc...) Sun TV did not even mention the EXISTENCE of Sivaji. Sorry if I caused any problems.~~ AVTN ^Talk 20:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

What does sify have to do with sun? And anybody who damns the movie is his political opponent? Yeah right. The article still remains in horrible shape and I will now start removing any unsourced or poorly sourced fancruft from the article. Sarvagnya 18:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

What sites a considered Reliable sources?

IBNLive.com is reliable since it is part of the CNN news network. Is Indiaglitz, behindwoods, etc... reliable? Please state which are reliable so users know which are good sources and which are bad. I will also add it to the ToDo list to help people out. ~~ AVTN ^Talk 10:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I think Galatta.com's take on Sivaji could be considered RS too. Please hear me out: Galatta.com apparently has an official tie-up with AVM Productions for promotion/etc. of the film. So for first-party sources, we could use Galatta.com. That's my opinion. Apart from that, I suggest going through Lage Raho Munna Bhai as it is the only Indian film article which is a featured article. That might help us improve the quality of this one. aJCfreak yAk 10:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Summarazing Sountrack section.

I am doing a rough summary as I have exams tommorow. I hope you people can stop calling him AMAZING and stop using adjectives such as PRAISED! This is not a fanclub. If you really wanna praise him then go join one of his fanclubs (I am in one already). I praise him there but not here. We want this to be informative. Most people who read it already know how amazing he is. ~~ AVTN ^Talk 10:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, glad that you feel this way. Let's hope we can improve the article. What do you think of the re-write of the lead paragraph? aJCfreak yAk 10:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you edit stuff straight into the article. UH or me will rarely do something unless we see something wrong. Although we normally do tend to revert a lot of edits since they are sometimes worthless. Also, according to an interview with IBN Devdas is the most costliest indian film. So Sivaji is second most costliest. I don't remember the link but you might do well finding out. ~~ AVTN ^Talk 10:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the track list. Should the infobox still be kept? ~~ AVTN ^Talk 11:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sivaji song articles prod'ed for deletion!

Reason: Does not add any significant information not found in Sivaji (soundtrack).

• Balleilakka
• Style
• Vaaji Vaaji
• Athiradee
• Sahana
• The Boss
• Sahara

They will all be most likely deleted in 5 days from now. So if you feel they should not be deleted PLEASE add information to them. Use WP:SONGS as a guideline.

~~ AVTN ^Talk 12:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

AVTN, I dont know for what reason you had reverted yourself after prodding them for deletion. I have reverted you to put them back up for deletion. Sarvagnya 04:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Work on Sivaji songs! Need looking at!

Could you tell me if this is satisfactory information? Style (2007 song), if it is then I will add the same amount to all the articles. Also according to WP:SONGS I should not use headers. I have added the pretense for the song since I think it is encyclopedic. ~~ AVTN ^Talk 20:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Also done Balleilakka ~~ AVTN ^Talk 20:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Request before any edits

Hi., i am requesting all editors of the article to give a couple of days to clean up this article. i know that this article has undergone major edit wars but i felt that the article has a lot of data collected. I am sure that there are a lot of people who want their opinions heard, but i am asking for you to hold off triggering an edit war for a couple of days. Once i remove the "IN USE" tag, you are free to criticize/critic. --Kalyan 17:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The template that you have placed is supposed to be there only for a short while and not for days. And even the template {{underconstruction}} is designed only to avoid edit conflicts. Both these templates are not be used as an excuse or work around for keeping junk in the article. Remove all non-RS references, fake references, fan sites, blogs, etc from the article and cleanup claims made based on those references. As of now, this article is pure junk. Gnanapiti 20:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it too much of me to ask for "Good faith"? Please understand it takes time to clean-up a page as long as what has been put up there. --Kalyan 05:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Title

Why is the title Sivaji (film) instead the title should be Sivaji: The Boss?. It needs a page move ASAP --SkyWalker 07:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think the movie can be moved to Sivaji: The Boss. --Kalyan 09:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

It was Sivaji: The Boss before User:Sarvagnya moved it without discussion.

"Sivaji" is the name of the movie. "The Boss" is the tagline. Articles are created using the film names, not the taglines included. KKKG is Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham, not "Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham - its all about loving your parents" ! Sarvagnya 23:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with your moving to sivaji. The boss is not just the tagline it is the title of the film. You just dont call it has sivaji. It is called sivaji: the boss. --SkyWalker 06:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

And Also even the official site call it has Sivaji: The Boss and it does not say anything like the boss is a tagline. It is just say Sivaji: The Boss. I hope you will correct your own mistake and move this page too Sivaji: The Boss. I can do it myself but i dont what to start a moving war. So i prefer you to do it first. --SkyWalker 06:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Its common for movie sites to mention taglines in the same breath as the movie name.. but that doesnt make a tagline a part of the movie's name. Anyway, IMDB says that "Sivaji" is the name and "boss" is the tagline. Sarvagnya 06:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The link i showed you is a official link not some movie sites. If you are going to show IMDB link it is like wiki based info. IMDB is not reliable to show info. Any one can edit it. --SkyWalker 07:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The article have been renamed again to Sivaji: The Boss. --SkyWalker 15:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

For heavens' sakes.. even this article says that 'TB' is the tagline! You've even given a citation! Sarvagnya 18:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok.. here's The Hindu saying it. Sarvagnya 18:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok after seeing the Hindu it may be evidential but I do not believe that all newspapers are reliable resources. Even if it is a tagline it may be mentioned in the article.--59.184.125.134 10:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

A nice review.

Very unusual. [3] AVTN 20:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Budget and translation.

40 crores has been translated as 4 million USD. 40 crores INR is 10 million USD in reality, not 4 million. Can anyone correct this?

Links for box-office

Please excuse the barrage of links, but they are all mostly relevant and from RS. I wanted to expand on the box-office section and collected data from various sources (most prominently from an online fan club, but I picked links that were from reputed sources). Unfortunately, I'm busy with a couple of other articles, so I'm leaving it to the other editors to convert this random collection of data into meaningful prose.

India Opening

• All-india advance booking
  • nearly Rs 2.5 crore in just advance bookings nationwide
• CNN-IBN chennai opening
  • Sivaji is set for release in 18 halls across chennai June 15
  • Most theatres were forced to post additional security, fearing fights. There was a mad frenzy for tickets ever since the theatres started advance booking for the movie and most theatres had exhausted their tickets on Sunday itself.
• CNN-IBN All India opening
  • 100% opening across India
• IBN opening
  • Sivaji has been released over an estimated 850-900 screens worldwide, the largest for an Indian film
  • In every country where the film has been released, tickets have already been sold out for the first two weeks, and even more in the case of Malaysia.
  • Record crowds in National Capital region, including Noida and Gurgaon.
• CNN-IBN All India opening
  • 1,000 cinema halls
  • sold out for the next three weeks at theatres in Chennai.
  • Reportedly shot for Rs 80 crore
  • The Telugu rights of Sivaji were sold for Rs 14 crore
  • Even in northern India, the response to the film was "remarkable"
• Fin. Express Mumbai opening
  • Cineplex, Inox and Fun republic
  • 95-100% occupancy on weekends and 65% on weekdays
• TOI Bangalore
  • fetched more money than any other non-Kannada film screened in Bangalore in the last two years
  • 11 lakhs per day on Tax
• Pune opening
  • Every theatre from Inox, E-Square, City Pride to Gold Adlabs and Fame (Pimpri Chinchwad) has deemed it fit to have preview shows
  • While the multiplex will screen no less than 12 shows over the weekend, five of these will be on their main screen, which has a seating capacity of 600—an honour reserved only for the most mammoth of them all
• ScreenIndia, Indianexpress group All-India opening
  • considerable interest even among Maharashtrians, Gujaratis, Bengalis, Biharis and the North Indians.
  • Mumbai opened with an unprecedented 17 prints
  • Hindi dubbed versions too might be out by the end of the month
  • Centres like Indore, Ahmedabad, Chandigarh, Kanpur, Lucknow and Kolkata to be opened in 2nd week
  • Never before has a regional film scored this big outside home territory
  • Chennai: Tickets were sold out in minutes for three weeks, Rs 1.70 crore on advance booking alone
  • 500 cinemas in Tamil nadu
  • Andhra Pradesh: 350 theatres with 270 prints, a record for a dubbed film.
  • Kerala, shows started as early as 5 a.m. This is the first time that a non-Malayalam film has been released in 86 theatres across the state.
• The Telegraph Kolkata opening
  • opened at all four city multiplexes
  • Sivaji is the biggest release in Calcutta this Friday
• AP opening
  • 2.75 Crores in 4 days in just the Nizam area
  • In Nizam 90 in about 90 theatres. 42 theatres alone are in Hyderabad
• Pune opening
  • A total of 20 shows are running in Pune each day
  • the first time we are screening four shows everyday of a non-Marathi regional movie
• Baroda opening
  • The Boss conquers Barodians, even those who don't know Tamil, as the actor's latest film Sivaji opens to a full house

Worldwide Opening

• Singapore opening, from Reuters' reporter
  • 15 screenings in Singapore
  • Sivaji’ is expected to break the record for being the most screened Indian-language movie in theatres across the world
• Hindu on Gulf opening
  • Dubai laborers watching it for free
  • Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Sharjah are fully booked for the next two weeks. In Bahrain, it is the only movie being shown at two theatres and tickets are being sold in black
• Chicago opening
• Business standard Woldwide opening
  • Sivaji collected Rs 1.7 crore on the first day of its release
  • Debuted at 9th position in UK
• Economic times Chennai+Worldwide opening
  • 1.35 crore in the first four days, which will be a record for any city across the country
  • Chennai’s distribution rights were sold for Rs 6.5 crore
  • (Page-2) UK average per-screen collection of £14,050. This is the highest per screen average for any movie in the UK so far in 2007
• Qatar unprecedented response
  • General Manager of the Qatar Film Distr. Company : To my knowledge, no other film in Qatar has ever generated the kind of response that Sivaji has
• Sri Lanka opening
  • 41 shows a day in seven theatres across the island, with all shows running to full houses
  • The Cine City multiplex in downtown Maradana has 20 shows a day

2nd week

• Delhi 2nd week
  • was released in only two multiplexes in Delhi and one in Gurgaon last week, is now being screened in more than 12 halls across the capital.
  • Cuttingwe have increased the number of screens and number of shows in the northern region across language barrier north Indians too are coming in large numbers to catch the action
  • "we have increased the number of screens and number of shows in the northern region"
• AP opening box-office rank
  • Sivaji opened at number one spot in box-office, even ahead of Telugu films.
  • It is expected that the film will stay in the number-one slot at least until the end of this month.
• Kolkata opening report
  • was the most-watched film at the plexes this weekend
  • Over the weekend, Sivaji recorded an average occupancy of 70 per cent at the plexes, a first for a regional film and that, too, one with no subtitles.
• TN 10-day collection (Tamil link)
  • 30 crores in 10 days
• Yahoo All-India response
  • For the first time perhaps in the history of regional cinema Sivaji - The Boss starring superstar Rajinikanth has managed to go beyond the Tamil-speaking audience and make its presence felt pan-India and beyond.

After 3 weeks

• Collections after 3 weeks
  • Andhra: 18c, Malaysia: 7.8c, UK 2.78c and USA Rs 4.5c
  • All India: 95c

General

• Book on Rajini
• Rajini's old movies being re-released in North India

Lotlil 06:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the data. I used them to create the section on Box-office performance. Please note that i have only used "reliable" sources and avoided any controversial sources. --Kalyan 08:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Lengthy

This article is way too long. It is 73 kilobytes. In comparison, The Matrix is 35kb, The Lord of the Rings is 35kb, Lage Raho Munna Bhai (a featured article) is 58kb and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End is 36kb. I just listed a few major feature films of the recent past to give us a scale of reference. Anyways, the article takes an immense amount of time to load on a super-fast connection (My connection's upwards of 1Mbps). We need to reduce it. By reduce, I do not mean simply remove. I mean we can cut out information which is irrelevant to the nature of the article. aJCfreak yAk 10:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, i volunteered for a copyedit and reduction of the article size but there is no stoppage of edits from other folks and hence i have kept out till things settle down and then i plan to work on the article. --Kalyan 10:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on it....by setting up new pages for the mass info and keeping the key info to the main page! Universal Hero 11:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Way too lengthy...and what is the purpose of the sub-sections:

   * 4.1 Special screenings
   * 4.2 India
   * 4.3 International
   * 4.4 Reviews
   * 4.5 Controversies

Do we really need these? freewit (talk) 07:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Fake "in use" tag

Please do not add "in use" tag and keep it for over a week. The above boc office sources are blogs and violates WP:RS. Anwar 11:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you were referring to the links I've added in the talk page above. But, the sources are Hindu, CNN-IBN, Times of India, Indian Express and the likes. Not blogs. Lotlil 12:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I was referring apunkachoice.com, thatstamil.com, telugucinema.com, nowrunning.com. These websites do not quote official sources. Where do they get this trade info from? Distributor's testimonials are obviously biassed. Incase you are unaware, Yahoo is a news syndicate, not a news source. Also, consider reading Wikipedia policy on self-published online and offline sources. Anwar 15:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

While I don't agree these websites are "blogs" by any stretch, they still make up only 4 out of the 25+ links I've quoted. I know Yahoo is a syndicate, but if you look at the link you will know they attribute it to the original source, which is CNN-IBN. I gave the yahoo link becuase that was my primary source. If you want to ignore those four sources (nowrunning.com etc.) until we can establish reliability, I'm fine with that. Also, remember biased sources and reliable sources are two different things. Lotlil 15:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

'STRONG PROTESTING YOUR ACTION: Hi Anwar., please check here - the tag at the time you reverted back to some revision didn't have the {{inuse}} tag but {{underconstruction}} tag. If you had read the talk page, you would have noticed that i asked for edit wars to stop before i resume my copyedit of this article - something i am sad to say, has not been heeded by a lot of folks. So i strongly advise you to check your facts before you make changes/remarks. --Kalyan 13:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC) (I have posted the same message in the talk page as well!)

Flop show

Sify.com says distributors would incur losses due to exorbitant pricing.[4] Anwar 16:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The Sify slideshow states 1 Sivaji- Classification- Hit.: Reason- Made at an exorbitant cost, and sold to distributors at record prices some of them may recover their cost, while others may just not cover their amount. Took extraordinary record opening, with large number of prints, which makes it a hit. How does it make it a flop show?--Kalyan 17:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

In Jaya TV, Abirami Theatres Ramanathan had mentioned that Sivaji had to remain houseful for 50 says in all the theatres (15 at that time) for recovering the cost of Rs.65 million (for Chennai). Anwar 16:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

That is speculative reporting; not based on much facts and figures. It has not even been a month since the movie released. Please give it time. For example, Superman Returns crossed the $200 million revenue mark only four months after its release. It is one of the slowest to do so. Give it time. Btw, if you have verifiable, reliable content to include - please go ahead. Happy Wikifying the article, folks! aJCfreak yAk 16:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thala's Kreedam is replacing Sivaji next month in both the gigantic multiplexes - Sathyam and Devi! Ticket rates in Tamil Nadu have been dramatically reduced (by 85%) since 2006. This was the killer blow. In Andhra market too, Sivaji has slowed down.[5] Kreedam audio sales has overtaken Sivaji last week. Anwar 10:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

That is because the Sivaji audio has been running for 3 months non-stop at the top-a record itself. Universal Hero 10:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Sivaji is now removed from all screens in Trivandrum and Ernakulam in Kerala (after just 5 weeks). Several distributors in Tamil Nadu face huge losses and unlikely to recover even Minimum Guarantee. Attendance averages 35% on weekends - Nellai, Madurai, Vellore, Kaaraikudi, Dindigul, Thiruvannamalai Anwar 11:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Kreedam dismantles Sivaji from top slot opening at 110 shows daily in Chennai. Anwar 2:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Did something change at nowrunning.com in the last few weeks ? Sometime back you mentioned, that the website is not RS. Lotlil 13:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I am dissapointed!

You all are adults (most of you atleast). Please do this in a decent and civilized fashion. Please don't mass remove and mass add without making any progress on the article. This is probably the last thing I do on Wikipedia. This article and the actions of its editors were a contributing factor to my early retirement. Although I do not blame them anymore, as my retirement is now decided.

Hopefully, you all will work together to make a wonderful article for the Rajini-sir. This article is the first thing that is linked from google. Pretty much everyone online who is tamil has seen this article.

Please work together and make this article what it should be, INFORMATIVE!

And I say good-bye. I will take my leave from this place, you all can contact me via e-mail if you need any help.

AVTN 21:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

THIS IS THE TEMPLATE OF THE ARTICLE

• This edition has been approved by several experienced editors.
• Now it's time to source properly.
• And add a Critical reception section to the Reception section.
• And maybe a Themes section.

Universal Hero 11:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Glad to see you guys are making steady progress on the article. We could also add couple more sub-sections :(1) High-profile screenings (2) Controversies. I know there were special screenings for politicians and celebrities - apart from Karunanidhi and JJ, there was CBN in AP, Rajkumar family and Ambareesh in Ktaka, Amitabh and also the president of Maldives. We could add the controversies such as leaking of the songs, "accidental" death of a technician in the farewell party, allegation of plagiarism on Shankar and the recent lawsuit by a Congress worker.Lotlil 15:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Who approved this edition? What about blogs like behindwoods, Tamilstar etc? Gnanapiti 19:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The most recent massive additions from UH to the article seem to be a step backwards. I like going back to the last version by Kalyan and have you guys add one clean section at a time, like you were doing so far. Lotlil 20:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Link spam

When there are two sources for box office claims, err on the side of caution and take the most conservative figure only.Anwar 12:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

What was the need to revert the whole darn article if your concern was with the box office section alone ? And, exactly what's your problem in that section - you say "only two sources" are given but in the talk-page edit summary you say "linkspam". Which is it? Lotlil 13:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio image

Stop uploadng again and again copyvio images like Image:Sivaji_Poster.jpg. It was speedied twice before on the same grounds as Image:Sivajirajinishriya.jpg, Image:Sivaji-poster.png, Image:Sivaji-05.jpg, Image:SiovajiW1.jpg, Image:Sivaji_release_PVR-Bangalore.JPG and Image:Siivajicoverin.gif. Wikipedia takes copyright violations seriously. Repeated violations would result in a block if brought to the attention of other administrators.Anwar 13:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Anwar. FYI., the speedy delete notice that you slapped on the Image:Sivaji_Poster.jpg has been DECLINED by an administrator because FAIR USE RATIONALE IS ASSERTED. Consider the matter closed.
To everyone else, please note that you can add screenshots of movies as long as it has FAIR-USE RATIONALE in-line with usage across other movies. --Kalyan 13:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hagiography

Please stop adding speculative claims of box office figures repeatedly. I think it would be better to wait till the year-end to get real picture of the fate of the film after biggies like Kreedam, Bheema, Dasavadharam and Billa are out. This is what happened when Pokiri released. Vijay fans were too quick to claim it as a blockbuster.Anwar 11:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Anwar, Can you please let us know why you should not be barred from making any more edits to this article. You have repeatedly violated all "good-faith" norms; acted with almost childish behavior. Moreso, your personal opinion (found here) suggests your utter contempt for the movie and thus can be taken as evidence for putting your personal opinion over and above the behavior required in this forum. All BO claims are from mainstream news organizations and all the sources pass the WP:RS criteria. In comparison, do you want to talk about your edits of the following Ajit's movies - Aalwar (I would love to hear your defense on how the plot section meets copyedit requirements) and Kireedam. If the article "Sivaji" was bad, how can you defend the following statement from Aalwar Ajith should take care on his story selection, he should not accept characters blindly. Ajith is considerably a handsome hero ever produced by Tamil industry, he should take care of his good looks in his movies. It is a watchable movie - Inspite of my repeated copyedits to the article, you have always reverted back to this. Please explain your actions. --Kalyan 11:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

One more point. Where did ever claim that the move was a Box-office BLOCKBUSTER or even an equivalent word. I have only added information as presented in various media articles. Why are you trying to dispute figures from sources like Times of India, The Hindu, Rediff and the likes. How can they be "speculative claims"? --Kalyan 12:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

spoiler tag

Hi., i am removing the {{spoiler}} tag because it violates the Wikipedia policy that states Spoiler warnings are usually redundant when used to cover an entire "Plot" or "Synopsis" heading, or fictional "History" headings of any sort in articles whose subject is fictional, since spoilers are to be expected in a plot summary. --Kalyan 12:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Cast/casting

What exactly is meant to be the difference between the two sections - Cast and Casting? And why does the "Casting" section talk about rumors and rumor mills? When it comes to showbiz in India or anywhere in the world every tabloid and evening paper has a 'rumor' to circulate. Stick to the facts and remove rumor and speculation. Sarvagnya 16:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Canadian Rating

Hi, here in Canada the rating for Sivaji is 14A.[6]

GA assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

1:

• Only first letter of headings should be capitalized (e.g. “Cast & Crew” should be “Cast & crew).
• Inconsistent use of American and “Queen’s” English, e.g. “realise” is “Queen’s”, but “picturized” is not. Also, article alternates between “theater” and “theatre”. Language needs to be consistent.
• Numerous number agreement errors, e.g. “The film’s score and soundtrack was…”, “The names of support cast … was released”, “no other major details … was mentioned”, “he calculates that there is … 20,00,000 [sic] crores”, “several false information … were released”, etc.
• Inconsistent naming of foundation as “Sivaji Foundation” or “Sivaji Foundations” – sometimes italicized, sometimes not.
• Incorrect and inconsistent date formats, e.g. “2nd April, 2007”, “17th May 2007, “on April 2, …”, etc. See WP:DATE.
• Numerous miscellaneous grammar errors, e.g. colon used as full stop, missing or extra periods, missing capitalization, commas not used to offset parenthetical phrases, independent clauses or co-ordinate adjectives, etc.
• Peacock words, e.g. “tremendous box-office reception”, “excellent fully bald head”, “famous Indian movies”, “made a perfect debut”, etc.
• Phrasing not appropriate for an encyclopedia article, e.g. “delayed at least a couple of times”, “we see that this…”, “has done throughout the film”, “Despite the fact…”, “surprisingly, the also…”, “was apparently supposed…”, “which supposedly will feature”, “the film reportedly”, etc.
• Awkward word choice, e.g. "Tamizhselvi is taunted”, “labelled [sic] this song was set to come in the climax”, “the film did not have satisfy the unexpected high expectations”, “the situation changed from 2nd week with theaters playing special shows for even 11th weekend”, etc.
• Lead does not summarize all sections of the article and contains redundant information.
• Proper nouns sporadically italicized - inconsistent and only published works should be italicized.

2:

• The information in the "Cast" section needs citations; additional citations needed elsewhere (e.g. beginning of “unofficial versions” section).
• NOR violations include, among others, “Arivu … played a key role”, “He … becomes a pivotal factor”, “the role … suffered through the rumor mill”, “A.R. Rahman always does all of his important work in London”, “Surprisingly, they also…”, “as per usual Rajinikanth films…”, etc.

3:

• Soundtrack and DVD section (essentially just soundtrack section, as DVD has two sentences) is longer than any other section. This section should be broken into a new article and summarized in the film article.
• Too much information in the box-office section. Information about exact number of screens in different regions/cities is superfluous.
• "Cast" section contains plot-related information about the characters. This information should be integrated into the plot summary or moved to a “character” section.
• Name list in “Casting, location and music” is unnecessary detail (too long).
• Several plot summary issues, e.g. article states “[they] cart away Sivaji’s dead body”; he is, however, not dead. Also, summary abruptly concludes with “Finally the movie ends with Adhiseshan getting killed in a stampede”; does the film not address the fate of the organization and Sivaji’s relationship with Tamizhselvi?

4:

• Article addresses controversies related to the film’s content, but does not address whether there was negative response to the film as “art” (i.e. negative reviews).
• Article mentions “protests from pro-kannada groups” but does not elaborate.
• Article has a laudatory tone exacerbated by NPOV violations, e.g. “tremendous box office reception”, “the film finally opened”, “made a perfect debut”, “open to unsurprisingly full capacity”, “the Sivaji success story”, “the response in Cape Town was disappointing”, etc.

6:

• The photo “Rajni in the song Athiradee” appears to be a screenshot from the film. The licensing tag, however, states that the uploader is the author and has released the image to the public domain. I’m not satisfied that user:Hedgehog Kanna owns rights to this image.

General:

• The article reads awkwardly and gives the impression of being patched together by many editors. All of the information is now there, it just needs someone to go through the article and make all elements cohesive. Essentially, it needs a very good polishing. Please let me know if you need elaboration or assistance. Ɛƚƈơƅƅơƚɑ _talk 17:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Official and Unofficial versions of Soundtrack heading removed

There is a separate wiki page for the soundtrack of Sivaji. We can put the official and unofficial versions over there as it is more relevant. Putting it in the film section increases the content and size and since there is an alternative page, I removed them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saiwiki08 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Assessment

I will be assessing this article when time permits. Stay tuned. Ncmvocalist (talk) 01:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Assessment/Review being conducted by Ncmvocalist

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is 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.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• Fair use rationale of Sahana sivaji.jpg needs to be detailed like the Sivaji film poster image and the Fans sivaji.jpg image.
• The Sahana image, and Sivaji-03.jpg need to have full stops at the end of its captions as per MOS.

This article needs to be more focussed - especially the first couple of paragraphs in the lead section. I am finding it difficult to express the issues that are present in the lead section with this regard, however, I can point out that if one reads the first two paragraphs of Bomarillu and one reads the first two paragraphs of this article, there is clearly a difference in the level of focus. Obviously tighter expression will help (and helps address the issue of clear prose), but in this case, it also involves the reorganising of some content. I agree with the choice of using American spelling for this article.

In addition to tightening expression to make the prose clear, grammer needs to be corrected at times. For example, an organization has an aim...it is not to have an aim. ("This organization is to have an aim of building hospitals and educational institutions to serve the poor without any charge.") The sentencing here can also be improved from: "Her family is initially scared by the overbearing nature of Sivaji's family. They eventually accede to Sivaji's request and ask for his horoscope; however, the jaadagam (horoscope) of the two do not match and the astrologer predicts impending doom if the two are united." to "Her family is initially scared by the overbearing nature of Sivaji's family, however, they eventually consider Sivaji's proposal and ask for his jaadagam (horoscope). [accede to Sivaji's request? what request? be clear.]. The astrologer predicts impeding doom leading up to Sivaji's death if the two are united and so Tamizhselvi refuses the proposal. However, Sivaji manages to calm her fears and convinces her to marry him.

Please also ensure that the tense is consistent throughout the article. Again, you may want to check MoS in case there is any relevant material with respect to this.

I am also a little unconvinced that references could only be found in Rediff and The Hindu for certain parts of the article, although, I am pleased that the Economic Times and the Film Classification Board to name a few, were some other references used.

For now, I am putting this article on hold. Please note: although every effort has been made to list as many major issues as possible, other issues more may crop up later once these have been rectified. Best wishes,

Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:24, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Notes in response to the GA review

Firstly, many thanks for taking out time in reviewing the article. I appreciate your efforts.

1. The Prose has been tightened and the lead section has been re-written.
2. So is the case with the plot which was improved for sentence structuring. Similar tense was attempted in the section.
3. About the references, here is a small check I did on the sources

• The Hindu - 15
• Rediff - 10
• CNN-IBN - 4
• Hindustan Times - 4
• Economic Times - 3
• TimesNow - 3
• Business Standard, Outlook India, BBC, NDTV, Times of India, Apunkachoice, Bizhat, Indiaglitz, Kumudam, Screen India, Indian Express, Zee News, Telegraph India, ABC, OneIndia, moneycontrol, BoxOfficeMojo, Times South Africa, Idlebrain, Businessofcinema, behindwoods, yahoo, tamilstar - Each as a single cite, totaling 23.

I feel that even though 25/70 references come from Rediff and The Hindu, them being reliable sources, due credit have to be given for the content they carry. I feel, the reason why a wealth of information was available in The Hindu is because it is more popular in the South. With Rediff.com, what happened was that it got exclusive rights to interview the cast and crew. That explains a chunk of references from the both. Once again, I request them to be considered as reliable sources.

I hope that I could all that was addressed. If there seems to be anything left out, please do let me know. With best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:

I'm still a little concerned by some parts of the prose - it is perhaps pedantic, but then again.... In the cast section, it reads " His parents are played by Manivannan and Vadivvukarasi respectively " - it can be more clear. Either the word respectively should be omitted, or, the father and mother can be clearly identified. Eg; His father and mother are played by Manivannan and Vadivvukarasi respectively. Another example of a 'bad' sentence: "The credits appear with audience being suggested that Sivaji succeeds with the foundation and achieves what he dreamed of." The use of commas for Suman's bulletpoint could also be improved - why only 1 comma in the whole of the 1st sentence?

Despite the poor expression in these sort of sentences, the article seems quite focussed. Ending the article with a controversies section is rather unusual - why were DVD details omitted? why wasn't the controversies section included in 'release and reception' as a subsection? Ncmvocalist (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Re:

• Your concerns regarding the prose has been checked and corrected. I agree with you: it definitely looked shabby. I must have overlooked these issues. I reworded a few sentences in plot and cast to appear better.

• I relocated the Controversies section as a sub-section of the Release and reception section. Also, I felt having the Special screenings subsection right at the top of the section would be appropriate.

• DVD details have not been included for the very simple reason that it doesn't seem to have released commercially as a DVD. My search yielded nothing close to a DVD purchase in any online store.

I hope all your concerns have been addressed. If any, please do not hesitate to put them forth. With best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 14:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Re: Re:

Some parts of the casting and development section can be improved prose-wise, I think. It is something that we can work on without any major issues. The final sentence in the casting section needs to be referenced. The DVD details is something we may need to add in the future too. Despite these, I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors, notably User:Mspraveen who worked hard to bring it to this status. Congratulations!! Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Stunt Coreographer ...

... is Peter Hein, not Heinz, nor Hain as it says. For some reason my computer deletes half of the text every time I try to edit this. (Anyone know why? Is wikipedia mac-hostile?) Good if anyone could correct this.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.215.51.74 (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 

Dubious budget figure

This article gives the budget for the film as $17 million (80 crore rupees then at exchange rate of $1 = 47 rupees) based on speculative press reports without verification from the producer. Also, the biggest hit in Tamil until then was Chandramukhi which grossed $15 million in 2005. So, I believe this budget figure is nonsensical considering that it was widely reported in the vernacular media that this film grossed $20 million at the box office worldwide. I however agree that this film was the biggest hit in Rajinikanth's career as well as the biggest hit ever in Tamil film industry.

In Tamil film industry tradition, a film is considered as a blockbuster if its total gross is atleast 2 times the price paid by distributors to producer. This film is considered a blockbuster. So its budget is far less than the speculated fancy numbers reported in media.Anwar (talk) 09:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

For the moment, I suppose we listen to sources and let it be as its is believed in popular belief. Universal Hero (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Is that an excuse? I am not saying the film is a flop. I am saying the scope was limited than you think. Anwar (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Total gross

What is actually the total gross of the film? Based on S. Shankar's wikipedia article, it says $98 million, meanwhile according to the article, it says $33 million. World Cinema Writer (talk • contributions) 11:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

At the moment the Gross Revenue section says the movie made $100 billion, isn't that $100,000,000,000? If so, that means it made INR 4500,000,000,000 by simple conversion using $1 = INR 45. This amount is ludicrous. Does someone seriously believe this movie made more than Avatar did, which was $2.7 or so billion? The article cited as reference says it grossed $25 million. Where did the $100 billion figure come from?

-- Kushal Sharma (talk) 19:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

It came from here, earlier today. Vandalism fixed. AtticusX (talk) 05:04, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Guys! IMPOSSIBLE!

Hello.

Listen, I know that Sivaji was a massive hit. But nobody will believe that it grossed US$ 98 million. Its just not possible! The biggest Indian film hit, as of 2010, is 3 Idiots, which grossed US$ 84 million.

I suggest that you please find proper referencable sites before putting up such unbelievable figures - especially on the template.

Ankitbhatt (talk) 16:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

According to reports, 'Sivaji' has become the first-ever Tamil film to find a place in the UK Top 10 at No. 9. Filmed at a budget of Rs 85-90 crores, the revenue figures projected for 'Sivaji' from Tamil Nadu alone is 60-70 Crores. It's estimated to have grossed over 25 crores over the last one week in the state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.92.71.198 (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Discussion pertaining to non-free image(s) used in article

A cleanup page has been created for WP:FILMS' spotlight articles. One element that is being checked in ensuring the quality of the articles is the non-free images. Currently, one or more non-free images being used in this article are under discussion to determine if they should be removed from the article for not complying with non-free and fair use requirements. Please comment at the corresponding section within the image cleanup listing. Before contributing the discussion, please first read WP:FILMNFI concerning non-free images. Ideally the discussions pertaining to the spotlight articles will be concluded by the end of June, so please comment soon to ensure there is clear consensus. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

`

l \\ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.252.120.83 (talk) 08:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Alternate Version

User:Universal Hero/Sivaji Universal Hero 17:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Sivaji: The Boss/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Ratings: The article has good content but poor sources from YouTube etc. More credible sources are needed. For wikiproject india, it is low importance, nothing to do with core India. The article should be ripe for a peer review after the movie has been released and been so for 2-3 months to gauge the success. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 15:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Sivaji (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.upperstall.com/films/2007/sivaji-boss
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.zeenews.com/Entertainment/Movies-Theatre/2007-06-15/377080news.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1953351.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://timesnow.tv/articleshow/2132948.cms
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thetimes.co.za/PrintEdition/News/Article.aspx?id=653801

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sivaji (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://behindwoods.com/tamil-movies-slide-shows/movie-1/top-ten-movies/tamil-cinema-topten-movies.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)