Unbroken Chain (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
:::Also, I just checked "SahiNahi" has included all the mixed reviews as negative called "Nahi" (Wrong/No), which means the film still got 69% positive review and rest mixed to negative. I wanted to clear you.—[[User talk:Prashant!|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:Red">'''Prashant'''</span>]] 07:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC) |
:::Also, I just checked "SahiNahi" has included all the mixed reviews as negative called "Nahi" (Wrong/No), which means the film still got 69% positive review and rest mixed to negative. I wanted to clear you.—[[User talk:Prashant!|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:Red">'''Prashant'''</span>]] 07:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC) |
||
::::[WP:NPOV]] demands all viewpoints significantly covered by [[WP:RS]] so if the reviews were mixed then it's ok to note that and some of their comments as long as it isn't [[WP:UNDUE]]. [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell in a Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 12:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:35, 28 May 2015
Boxing Start‑class | ||||||||||||
|
Film: Indian Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
India: Cinema Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Guild of Copy Editors | ||||
|
Please mention that, this film is inspired from mary kom's life and also from "Million Dollar Baby".
Ram nareshji (talk) Please mention that, this filmis inspired from mary kom's life and also from "Million Dollar Baby" 2004 Movie. source: http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/movies/features/type/view/id/6829
Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2014
Please add ONLER KOM (Mary Kom's husband) part played by DARSHAN KUMAAR Nikita.everymedia (talk) 07:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —cyberpower ChatOnline 09:51, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2014
Holy grammatical errors batman!
Filming
After Priyanka Chopra's father passed away, filming started on June 17, 2013 at Filmistan in Mumbai. Prior to that, filming had been postponed for quite a while due to her father's illness. <ref>{{cite web|last=Awaasthi|first=Kavita|title=Priyanka Chopra begins shooting for Mary Kom biopic today |url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/priyanka-chopra-begins-shooting-for-mary-kom-biopic-today/article1-1077621.aspx|accessdate=16 May 2014}}</ref> Second schedule for the movie began on February 28, 2014 for 45 days. <ref name=schedule/> To make all action scenes as authentic as possible, the film-makers decided to use real-life boxers.<ref> http://m.ibnlive.com/news/priyanka-chopra-fought-with-real-boxers-in-mary-kom/488232-8-66.html </ref> Snbirdi (talk) 10:40, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 11:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Copy Edit
The plot summary seems a bit vague: having been copy-editing this but not having seen the film, a little more detail might be a good idea. LS1979 (talk) 10:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Mixed reviews
As per the review roundup in this source, the film has received mixed reviews, and in no way has been critically acclaimed. The article lists only the positive reviews and has completely neglected the negative reviews that the film received. As such, the "non-neutral" tag is needed here until the corrections are made. -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 04:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- A review aggregator site also states that the film received mixed reviews, here, and definitely not "positive reviews" as the article states. I had put a POV-tag to the article for unduly promoting the film, but it was removed by Prashant! without posting anything in the talk page. He instead chose to put up a snarky edit summary, saying, "I ll be putting the same in your every article just wait, I am collecting evidences and then delist from FA". Cyphoidbomb, Cowlibob, Hell in a Bucket, Dr. Blofeld pinging you guys here as well. We need to put a stop to this WP:OWN issue that this editor has. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- I don't own any article and no one else. First, I want to ask all of you to look here. He has rated the film one and half stating he was awke in frustration while watching the film. No one care who thinks what, we work here by looking at sources. He has a big problem with Chopra, and her films. I dont care and no one else. It is the case of Wikipedia:I just don't like it. We look refrences and not views of users. Right? The above link provided by krimuk contrdicts itself.
- Koel Purie gave the film - 3.5 out of 5
- IANS gave- 5 out of 5
- Firtpost did not gave stars but review was - mixed praising performance of Chopra
- Bollywood life gave - 4 out of 5
- India.com- 3.5 out of 5
- Bollywood Hungama - 4 out of 5
- Is it overall mixed or negative? No in fact its overall very positive..—Prashant 07:09, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- India.com is used by the source provided by you dude, which contradicts itself. Now, you have been caught red-handed. So dont pretend to be innocent.—Prashant 07:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Rediff gave 2 stars
- Mumbai Mirror gave 2 stars
- India Today gave 2 1/2 stars
- Hindustan Times gave 2 1/2 stars
- IB Times gave 2 1/2 stars
- Reuters gave a negative review.
- Filmfare panned the film, praised Chopra
- Indian Express gave 2 1/2 stars
- Deccan Chronicle gave 2 1/2 stars
- NDTV gave 2 1/2 stars; criticised Priyanka Chopra's casting and the film's direction
- Screen Daily calls it "merely dully efficient"
- Mint in a negative review, called it "thoughtless filmmaking"
- These above reviews are mixed and not negative. Are they? Is there a rule to include all the 1000 reviews. So, watching your source of Sahi Nahi, It is clear that the film got 69% of positive reviews. So, what should it be called? It says 33 reviewers gave it a positive and rest 15 mixed. Means overall more than positive. Dont you think?—Prashant 07:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- No, 15 are negative. Which means mixed reviews. That's basic common sense. And you haven't even included even one of those mixed/negative reviews that I have listed. Why? And you are actually trying to say you don't have an ulterior motive in promoting the subject? Just plain ridiculous! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Correct your math. Do you think 33> 15. Its more than double. LOL. The overall rating of that site gives 3.5 out of 5. I have not heard anything silly like this.—Prashant 07:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Can someone explain some common sense to him? Why didn't you include even one of those mixed reviews in the article? You mention only the positive ones and don't even include the 2-2 1/2 star reviews. It's not about maths. If a large number of critics have disliked the film, then you can't say it has received positive reviews; it will obviously be mixed. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:38, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Correct your math. Do you think 33> 15. Its more than double. LOL. The overall rating of that site gives 3.5 out of 5. I have not heard anything silly like this.—Prashant 07:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Wow, Then its surely a case of Wikipedia:I just don't like it. We all see overall rating just like Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic which says above 60 is generelly positive or favourable reviews. The site also says the film is "Sahi" (Right). So I think the discussion is over. Put generally positive.—Prashant 07:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Also, I just checked "SahiNahi" has included all the mixed reviews as negative called "Nahi" (Wrong/No), which means the film still got 69% positive review and rest mixed to negative. I wanted to clear you.—Prashant 07:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- [WP:NPOV]] demands all viewpoints significantly covered by WP:RS so if the reviews were mixed then it's ok to note that and some of their comments as long as it isn't WP:UNDUE. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 12:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)