Talk:Paan Singh Tomar (film)

Untitled

This page need to be renamed as Paan Singh Tomar (film),because an article with the same name Paan Singh Tomar needs to be created about the person on which this film is based.I'am working on this article and currently this is in my user page's draft.Once it is moved to appropriate namespace I'll create the new article about the person.--Sandy (talk) 14:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this article needs to be moved to Film section whether or not there's an article for the same person (which Sandy says is working on) as it's the article about an film only. Amarendra (talk) 07:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

It is rightful & justified to create the page name dedicated to the person on which movie is actually based. It will be principally incorrect to dedicated the name for a movie based on the person himself. Though the movie only highlighted the name of the person who was in oblivion for years. But the person deserves a page on his name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.55.243.18 (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I understand and respect the fact that it is indeed due to the effort of Mr Tigmanshu Dhulia the film maker that we are aware today about the plight of such a Person who lived in our Society. I feel it would do more honors to the Film Maker if the Site is dedicated in the memory of Pan Singh Tomar and Proposed by Mr Tigmanshu Dhulia the film maker. Apart from this a Second Pan Singh Tomar The Movie Site should be opened separately. Thanks. Adv. Merchant — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.232.74.82 (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Paan Singh Tomar deserves a footnote in history. So that we and future generations may never forget. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.179.173.139 (talk) 19:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Why not do a simple disambiguation about the man and the film, after all wikipedia can't be partial regarding knowledge, isn't it? (SHAARDUL, INDIA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.207.58.193 (talk) 07:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Creting disambugation page might be second thing.Discussion here is about Renaming the page.--Sandy (talk) 08:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the creation of a separate page for the movie so that this page can be used for the article about the sportsman.Shashi (talk) 08:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Paan Singh Tomar - The person and the film should get their respective sites. There should be no confusion or ambiguity about it. As the movie is released, it will only do justice if "The Person" is discussed along side "The Movie". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.1.38 (talk) 03:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgt18 (talk • contribs) 12:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Totally agree to rename this page, this film is created on a real character. Paan Singh Tomar title must be owned to the person, no one gave him the credit what he deserves atleast his name should belong to him. Rohit Yaduwanshi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohkya (talk • contribs) 18:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello All, I agree that this page be renamed as "PAN SINGH TOMAR - THE MOVE/FILM", as this strictly discuss about the facts and scenarios from THE MOVIE/FILM.

While it will also be great to have a new page dedicated to the person on whom this Feature Film is based.

Tarun — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.161.160.10 (talk) 13:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with sandy. A new page is required. because of this movie, we started to talk about Mr. Tomar. In last scene of movie, i read about many unsung heroes, can we do something about them through Wiki. - Gogo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauravgoyal1985 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

hello all , i also agree with the above idea of renaming the article . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.177.205.22 (talk) 10:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Himanshu, I'm in favour of renaming the page. It is very obvious that the above page relates to the movie and hence needs to be renamed.

The movie should be kept in seperate FILMS category so that any one can differentiate from the actual character mentioned somewhere else in another page at Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.185.103.70 (talk) 05:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes i also agree that this page should be renamed as film and there should be another page on the person name paan singh tomar.Ayanosh (talk) 10:26, 9 March 2012 (UTC)ayanosh

It would have made sense only if, there was a page on the bio of Paan Singh Tomar, as of now details about his life are sketchy and correspondingly there is no page on him. Therefore I believe it is okay to leave it the way it is (Lingaraj 10:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjlraj (talk • contribs)

Well,as I said earlier I am working on paan singh tomar's page,its ready and filed for review.So this page should be renamed to Paan Singh Tomar (film)--Sandy (talk) 10:51, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

the word film must be included,because it is,after all a movie and it will avoid any confusion with regard to the actual person by this name regardless of the existence of an article in his name

Pkukreti (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC) The movie is based on the real story of an athlete 'Paan Singh Tomar', so the name of the current article should be changed to 'Paan Singh Tomar (film)'. Because it will open aspects for creating an article ('Paan Singh Tomar') on the personal life of athlete himself.

• Rename. It would be ok to keep the name as it is if Paan Singh Tomar was a fictional character. He is not. So the title should include the word "film" in it. You can redirect "Paan Singh Tomar" to "Paan Singh Tomar (film)" until the article is created and then add a hatlink. --210.89.50.153 (talk) 03:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes Definitely This page need to be renamed as Paan Singh Tomar (film),because an article with the same name Paan Singh Tomar needs to be created about the person on which this film is based. We should give space to PAAN SINGH TOMER... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazypankaj (talk • contribs) 05:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok moving this page to the film. Creating article about the Person. Please contribute more. sheki 06:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheki nitk (talk • contribs)

All right, then. Can we agree that the discussion is closed? 72.137.97.65 (talk) 19:07, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

There is clear agreement here for this page move; therfore, page moved to Paan Singh Tomar (film). Paan Singh Tomar is awaiting speedy deletion to be replaced with Paan Singh Tomar (Athlete). Pol430 talk to me 00:27, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done--Aervanath (talk) 18:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Paan Singh Tomar (film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 04:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I will review this. TompaDompa (talk) 04:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

General comments

• A lot of copyediting is needed for grammar and tone. Mixed verb tense is a recurring issue.
• There is only a single image in the article. See if there are any appropriate ones to add. If there is an available photograph of the historical Paan Singh Tomar, I would suggest at least adding that.

Lead

• The WP:LEAD will need further work at a later stage since the body requires a lot of work (see below) and WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY.
• but was forced to become a rebel against the system – hardly WP:NPOV.
• shoestring budget – should be sourced.
• The film was released domestically on 2 March 2012 – avoid using the word "domestic". The meaning of the word is context-dependent.
• emerged as an average at the box-office – copyediting needed. "An average" is an odd phrasing. How does one emerge as such? Box office should not have a hyphen when used as a noun.
• a domestic net of ₹201.80 million – according to the cited source, that's not the domestic net but the worldwide gross.
• The film won the Best Feature Film and Best Actor – either remove the definite article or add "awards" after this.

Plot

• Verb tense is not consistent throughout. There are even several instances of mixed past and present tense in the same sentence.
• dacoit – replace, gloss, or at minimum link.
• Answering questions about himself, the story goes in a flashback from the year 1950. – copyediting needed for grammar.
• He forms a gang of people some of whom are his relatives and are in conflict with Bhanwar Singh. – anacoluthon.
• As an act of revenge for his brother's death – unless there's something I'm missing, this is the first mention of the brother's death.
• had become police informers and had informed the police – seems rather redundant, no?

Cast

• I would suggest glossing the characters.
• Who does Paras Arora play?

Production

• This section is rather thin.
• Dhulia researched the film's background – the film's background?
• But that would need a lot of money. This caused Dhulia to work on it for 10 years. – conspicuous use of short declarative sentences. Not an appropriate writing style in this context.

Soundtrack

• freewebmusic.co appears to be a spam website; even the Wayback Machine link redirects my browser to some random webpage.
• Since the film [...] classical influences. – unsourced.
• The music of this epic film stands out for its authenticity, originality, and the perfect blend of central Indian folk with western classical influences. – hardly WP:NPOV.

Release

• This section is quite the WP:QUOTEFARM.
• Paan Singh Tomar achieved universal critical acclaim among the critics. – this is a very strong assertion that is not backed up by the cited source.
• grossed ₹65.0 million (US$810,000) nett – "gross" and "nett" are contradictory terms.

Awards and nominations

• This entire section is unsourced.
• There is a lack of consistency with regard to linking recipients.
• What's with the bolded "Winner" above the table?
• I would suggest rethinking the formatting of the table. The WP:Good article for the film Jab Tak Hai Jaan, another Hindi-language 2012 film, provides an example of how this can be done.

Summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   See my comments above.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   See my comments above.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Earwig gives a couple of false positives where the copying was clearly done in the opposite direction. The excessive use of direct quotations in the "Release" section may however be a problem in this regard. Because the article will need to be extensively rewritten before it can be promoted to WP:Good article status, I have not checked for WP:Close paraphrasing at this point.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   As noted above, the "Production" section is rather thin. There may be other significant omissions as well.

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   The "Release" section goes into way too much detail about individual reviewers' opinions.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   See my comments above.

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   The only image is the poster, which would seem to be an acceptable instance of fair use.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This is far from ready and qualifies for a WP:QUICKFAIL.

@Twinkle1990: I'm closing this as unsuccessful. The list of issues above is not exhaustive, but a sample of issues I noted while reading through the article. I don't think this can be brought up to WP:Good article standards within a reasonable time frame. I gather that you are fairly new to this, and I don't want to discourage you from contributing to Wikipedia. To that end, I'll suggest WP:Peer review as a a more appropriate venue to bring this article to at this stage to get feedback and suggestions for improving the article. You may also wish to consult the WP:Guild of Copy Editors. For specific guidance about writing film articles, I would suggest reading MOS:FILM and you could of course always ask for help at WT:FILM. I will add some maintenance templates to the article. TompaDompa (talk) 03:31, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.