Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Enthiran/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13:10, 17 March 2015 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Enthiran

Nominator(s): Kailash29792; Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the highest grossing Tamil film (at present) and is also the first Rajinikanth film to be nominated for FAC. This article received an extensive peer review, especially by Skr15081997, Bede735 and SchroCat and an "informal review" by Prhartcom. The article was copyedited by Onel5969. We are nominating this article for featured article because in our opinion, it satisfies all FA criteria after the copyedit and the peer review. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Tim riley

I peer reviewed the article, and find nothing to object to at FAC. I am not well enough informed about the subject to feel confident about offering support, but I do not oppose the promotion of the article and I have no outstanding queries. Tim riley talk 16:08, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley: Thank you, Tim. You can as well torrent download the film with subtitles or buy it in a shop which sells Tamil films if you want to. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 04:35, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably not a good idea to suggest people do something illegal. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: Thanks for the tip, Crisco. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley:, are you watchlisting this? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:12, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not, having said all I have to say on the matter. (There is not, btw, the smallest chance of my following the above suggestion: watching foreign films is not my thing.) Tim riley talk 19:15, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review
    • File:Endhiran poster July 2010.jpg - Size is fine, fair use rationale is okay. Source is dead though.
Fixed. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Aishwarya Rai Robot1.jpg - I can't see anywhere in the source that the image was taken by a Bollywood Hungama staff member. Also, the version used in the article is not the version on BH's site.
I have nominated it for deletion as BH seems to have used a different site's image, albeit a cropped version of the image. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Support: Looks good! Many congratulations to all involved. -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 05:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: Thanks, Krimuk. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 05:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very good work! --FrankBoy (Buzz) 11:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Frank. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Prose comments from Crisco 1492

    • a 2010 Indian Tamil science fiction - per WP:SEAOFBLUE there shouldn't be so many references in such short order
    • S. Shankar - Why mention his initial twice in the same sentence?
    • All these single initials followed by names would preferably have non-breaking spaces, so that the initial and name aren't separated by line breaks.

@Crisco 1492: The reason there are spaces is because I did not want the links to be redirects. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

      • Non-breaking spaces count as spaces for the purposes of links. There's also a template you can use that does the same thing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • several awards - got a reference for how many?
      • Nope. Tweaked the sentence. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • android humanoid robot - Sea of blue again
      • Fixed link. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Please review the FAC instructions and refrain from adding templates to nomination pages-- I have removed the "done" templates. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • terminator - the allusion to the film is not formal English. A less colorful term is to be preferred
    • Way too many sentences starting with "Chitti" in the plot.
    • Why are some cast members referenced in the cast section and others not?

@Crisco 1492: They are mentioned in casting. Will add references. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Skipping ahead...

    • Why release the soundtrack in Malaysia if this is a Tamil/Indian film? I mean, I know a lot of Malaysia's Indians are Tamil, but I'd expect something closer to home.
    • After the second day of release, the album reached number one on the Top 10 World Albums chart on iTunes in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, making it the first Tamil album to do so - Be explicit that you're referring to the Enthiran album in this sentence, and not the Robo or Robot albums.
    • The soundtrack session feels like it jumps around a lot.
    • Despite Shankar's claim that Enthiran was a purely original idea, - might be worth noting this before you discuss Terminator and Star Wars.
    • What's with the YouTube links? You'll need to verify that none of those are copyright violations. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any reason why they went from Enthiram to Enthiran?
  • In an interview with The Hindu, Shankar said that the script was his own idea and that he "worked hard on every shot so that it doesn't bear even an iota of resemblance to anything you've ever watched before." - This paragraph has been focusing on the filming rights, not the script writing. Thus, this comes across as a non-sequitur.
  • the night before each day of filming - feels somewhat odd to me
  • Denzongpa's voice was dubbed by dubbing artist Kadhir. - More of the repetition Sandy was concerned about (dub - dubbed)
  • Television personality Raaghav played the role of Sana's neighbourhood bully. - Is this really worth mentioning? Don't recall the character being included in the plot summary.
  • Standardize your approach to false titles
  • the interpreter between Bohra and the international terrorist organisation - I believe "Interpreter" is not the correct term here
  • A lot of your sections are quite short. Consider merging them.
  • Filming began on 15 February 2008 at AVM Studios in Chennai, when portfolio photographer Venket Ram did a photo shoot with Rajinikanth. - Is a portfolio photo shoot really considered "filming"? See principal photography
  • The scene also featured Rai, Santhanam and Karunas. - Relevance?
  • Hein - who is he?
  • Aluminium Composite Panel - what's with the caps?
  • reported to have cost ₹50 million - which, the panels or the glass buildings? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: All of your comments have been resolved. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review by SandyGeorgia

  • Oppose, based on review of this version.

    The prose is plodding, uninformative, and repetitive, and many MOS and citation issues need to be addressed.

    On citations, please review all authors-- the format varies on author name-- sometimes incomplete, sometimes last name first, sometimes first name first (sample S. Shankar ... what is that?) Could you please explain the use of one-word names? How do we know who those authors are and what makes them reliable (sample Sangeeta-- I am unable to find "about" pages describing the author credentials on one-word author names.) What is the format on Inian; Bhavanishankar, Jyothsna? On authors like H. Ramakrishnan, Deepa, is H part of the last name, or the middle initial? If double last names are used in India (as in Hispanic naming conventions), I've nonetheless not encountered such inconsistency in earlier Indian film articles I've reviewed.

    On See also, I can't see any reason that the List of highest-grossing films, and science fiction films, can't be covered and linked in the text.

    The "Cast" section is a list, and adds nothing that couldn't be better covered in the "Casting" section.

    WP:MOSNUM, consider switching 166–177 to 166–77.

    WP:NBSP and WP:PUNC issues abound.

    Why the hyphen in "top-205 films"? Why the hyphen in "the company's fourth-quarter in 2010"?

    That is only a starter list on MOS items that might be easily addressed; the repetitive, uninformative, and plodding prose is a bigger concern, but I am out of time this morning to list my concerns. I suggest that an independent copyedit from an editor not previously involved might help vary the prose and spark up the numerous sections that say ... nothing. Back later ... although maybe I will luck out, and some of the editors who gave premature or implicit support to this nomination will have addressed some of the copyedit needs before my revisit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SandyGeorgia, I am having a hard time understanding. Will writing "166-77" minutes convince readers that the film is not 77 minutes long? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved your post to chronological order: please do not chop posts from other editors. See WP:MOSNUM. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's common in India, especially Tamil cinema for directors and crew to be known by their initials. S. Shankar I believe is correct professionally. Imdb and reliable sources like this use S Shankar, so I think we should too. It might look odd to a lot of readers familiar with the industry with his full name.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with Dr B. regarding this point; when the common name is the individual's family name and initial(s), that's what we should use. If we force American/European standards on such subjects, we end up with delightful situations as writing "Suharto Suharto" (something that actually happens with passports at the US embassy here) because there must be a family name and a given name. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:05, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neither answer above addresses the issue of citation consistency in author names (I am familiar with alternate naming conventions in Hispanic doble apellido). This article does not use a standard author naming convention. And there are still single author names on Rediff. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I quite agree that the article is uninformative Sandy, but it might benefit from another copyedit or two and perking up a bit to make it seem less "rambling" as you say. My original primary concern was the length, and although it has since been shortened the prose might be difficult to digest and seem bland and plodding in places as you indicate. I did see FA potential in this in terms of comprehension at an earlier stage though. Perhaps Eric Corbett could take a look at it. Sometimes some of the minor MoS glitches are not so easy to spot. I'll give it a full read tomorrow and see what I can do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I saw mention in the peer review that it needed a copyedit, with the nominator indicating that would be done after the peer review ... but then I also saw mention that the article was too long and needed to be pruned. It might be, then, that the pruning left the article saying nothing, but the copyedit, if done, was inadequate. The prose is flat, and frequently repetitive. I am loathe to take what little time I have online to go through and give examples, which would be easier done after a copyedit is performed. But as a few samples for now,
  • Repetitive:
    • "Enthiran received generally positive reviews from critics in India ... " and
    • "Enthiran received generally positive response from critics abroad."
    • In the Plagiarism section, everyone "demanding". Please try to vary the prose!
  • Prose that says nothing:
    • Awards and nominations is pretty much a list, giving us little in the way of commentary.
    • Home media ... same ... it doesn't say anything.
  • Basic prose issues:
    • praised Enthiran for being very "original". Very original is original.
    • The "Distribution" section is just a jumble of symbols, notes, and footnotes ... is there no way to make it flow more professionally?
    • Four separate allegations of plagiarism were made against the film
That's a short list of much more that I saw when I read through this morning. Samples only: I do not engage FAC or FAR as in the current trend where reviewer gives a list, the nominator fixes them, reveiewer gives another list ... that is not the purpose of FAC. I will re-evaluate once someone independent does a complete copyedit and addresses all MOS issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree received on the "generally positive reviews" repetition thing, it's a problem I find in most of the Indian articles! Ssven in the awards section I always think a summary of the most important awards is a good idea, otherwise as Sandy says it's not much use. Perhaps a sourced table of the notable award wins, or if it can be done in prose without seeming repetitive go for that. Also the music section, what happened? It should provide a decent summary, including some reviews. As it stands it doesn't tell the reader much. I've not looked at this since the PR, sorry about that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • What is meant by "was shelved due to scheduling conflicts for former" -the former, meaning Haasan or what?
Corrected. It's Haasan. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 08:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mankatha (DVD). 1st clip from 45:12 to 45:27; 2nd clip from 2:17:26 to 2:17:50. to Dookudu (DVD): clip from 1:43:02 to 1:43:15. You need to add the distributors of the DVDs and the years, those are not formal citations.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld: I have added the distributors' names as a footnote with sources and changed the citations. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've given it a full copyedit. It would still benefit from a few pairs of eyes looking at it but it reads a bit better now I think. If you compare it to how it was a few weeks back at 166kb, it is far more digestible and readable, especially the box office info. I'll be willing to support once the prose is polished off a little more, you mention how the soundtrack was received and a few reviews, and you expand the awards section to let us know the awards it actually won. One thing I find highly dubious is the idea that Beyonce would have plagiarised that from a Tamil film, with due respect.. There'd be plenty of more plausible sources of inspiration I'm sure. It would really benefit from some more images too I think to help perk it up. Are there no images of the cast and crew, even if not on set which could be added, or premiere photos/advertising boards etc?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look; an independent copyedit is still needed. I looked at one sample section in the middle of the article, and found still meaningless trivia (or at least, no apparent reason for why certain items are mentioned) and garbled prose. Saying that a film received "generally positive reviews" without citation is original research. We still have prose redundancy: "Four separate allegations of plagiarism were made against the film. "After its usage in the film's production stages, the mannequin was returned to the Stan Winston Studio in February 2011. Munich-based film technical company, Panther, were responsible for the crane shots." Samples only: why does the reader care that a mannequin was returned wherever whatever whenever? What is the link between that sentence and the next? The MOS trivials have not been addressed (PUNC, NBSP, MOSNUM, hyphens, sentences starting with numbers, etc.) Sold-out. Hyphens joining two authors of books (Stephen Hawking-Leonard Mlodinow book A Briefer History of Time). I suggest withdrawal of this nomination for re-working off FAC; alternately, pls ping me is a previously uninvolved editor (fresh eyes!) goes through and reworks the article prose, content and MOS issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia: I'm currently going over this article, and I will fix any grammar and MOS-compliancy issues I come across. I'll continue my copyedit and read-through when I get some time later today. I'd suggest it be withdrawn for now, but perhaps the two week waiting period could be lifted, assuming the article is brought up to snuff before that time?-RHM22 (talk) 15:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, RHM22-- I will unwatch for now then. Please ping me if/when a copyedit has been completed and my feedback is needed. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:10, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by RHM22

This definitely needs some work from some good copyeditors. I went over it, but here are some things that I don't want to change unilaterally:

  • Some statements seem out of place where they are. For example: "In an interview with The Hindu, Shankar stated that the script and the story featuring a robot as the titular character was his own idea." This seems to be placed somewhat haphazardly in the "Origin" section. I would personally just remove that, since I'm not sure what relevance it has to anything in this section. Alternatively, it might be appropriate to place it in the section dealing with plagiarism. Another statement that seems somewhat randomly placed is this one: "Keeping the actor Rajinikanth in mind, Shankar rewrote the original script to suit his acting style." Could this go in the casting section?
I have done as you have suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • ""Ranguski", the name of a mosquito encountered by Chitti, was also the childhood pet name of Sujatha Rangarajan." What? This is going to confuse people, since it isn't mention in the plot. Besides that, it seems quite trivial and not important enough for a mention in the article.
I have done as you have suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have more comments, which I will add later when I get some more time. If you'd like to withdraw the nomination and open up a peer review, I can add some more in-depth comments and suggestions.-RHM22 (talk) 15:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cast and crew "The film's soundtrack album and background score was composed by A. R. Rahman..." Are the soundtrack album and background score one item? If not, it should use "were."
I have done as you have suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article seems to alternate back and forth between using the serial comma and not using it.

@RHM22: Can you list some of the places where it is so? — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few examples:
"...female lead included Deepika Padukone, Priyanka Chopra, Shriya Saran and Rai..."
"...Amitabh Bachchan, J. D. Chakravarthy, Narain, Arjun Sarja, Sathyaraj and British actor Ben Kingsley were..."
And the serial comma:
"...three different sets were used: one of copper, one of gold, and one in silver."
"...They visited Austria, Germany, Peru, Brazil, and Argentina..."
I believe there are others, but that's what I see at a glance. It needs to be standardized throughout the article.-RHM22 (talk) 00:43, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done for the above examples as you suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ssven2: Please be sure to check through to make sure there aren't others, in case I missed any. Standardization is one very important facet which is often overlooked.-RHM22 (talk) 00:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cast and crew "while Legacy Effects, a visual effects studio based in the United States, formed after Stan Winston's death in 2008, were in charge of the prosthetic make-up and animatronics in the film." I would suggest removing the part stricken in my above quote.
I have done as you have suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:30, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This could probably be eliminated as trivia: "Shankar stated that Rajinikanth waited patiently for two to three hours each day to put on the make-up."
Done. As asked. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • What does "negative robot" mean, and who said it? It should be attributed in-text if it's a direct quote from someone, or else reworded.

@RHM22: Reworded to bad robot. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok; I'm still going over the article, and I'm sure I will have more points. I'm correcting things that are easily fixable, but some things will need attention from the author(s).-RHM22 (talk) 00:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • As stated above by SandyGeorgia, this should be removed as trivial: "After its usage in the film's production stages, the mannequin was returned to the Stan Winston Studio in February 2011."-RHM22 (talk) 09:46, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@RHM22: Removed as you suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 10:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd probably remove this as well, for the same reason: "Vaseegaran also calls one of the robots R2, referring to R2-D2." Either that, or work it into the sentence a bit better so it doesn't just plop out like a little factoid blob, if that makes sense. Something like "..., which is referenced in the film when Vaseegaran refers to one robot as "R2."" might be appropriate.-RHM22 (talk) 09:52, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tweaked the sentence as you suggested. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 10:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you; I will be back later today to address this and other points.-RHM22 (talk) 10:08, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ssven2 Thanks for looking at the R2-D2 bit, but what I actually meant was to join the two sentences, rather than delete the first one. As it is, the sentence is out of place and a bit of a non-sequitur. Let me work with it and see if I can improve it a bit.-RHM22 (talk) 15:14, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not really familiar with Bollywood-type movies, but this (and some of the surrounding material) is slightly confusing to me: "Filming of the song took place in April 2009 for 22 days." Does this refer to a certain musical number performed in the movie, or to a standalone music video created for songs performed in the movie? I will copyedit that section once I understand its meaning.-RHM22 (talk) 15:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Duh, obviously a song sequence that is part of the narrative. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is not quite so obvious to me, as someone with no experience in Hindu films.-RHM22 (talk) 16:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "exasperates you when you listen for the first time. But as you listen again, you realize that though Rahman gives this album a crisp metallic touch in keeping with the theme of the story, he still remains faithful to his Carnatic roots in a touching way." This quote needs a direct citation immediately afterward, not after the next sentence.-RHM22 (talk) 16:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This strikes me as unnecessary: "The title of the song "Kadhal Anukkal" literally means "love atoms", where the scientist asks his girlfriend the amount of love atoms she has for him." If it isn't important it, I'd trim it off.-RHM22 (talk) 16:15, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a matter of fact, I would probably cut this whole paragraph:

"The title of the song "Kadhal Anukkal" literally means "love atoms", where the scientist asks his girlfriend the amount of love atoms she has for him.[101] Asimov and the scientists Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein are mentioned in the song "Boom Boom Robo Da" in the line "Issac Asimovim velaiyo robo, Issac [sic] Newtonin leelaiyo robo, Albert Einstein moolaiyo robo".[102] In the song "Irumbile Oru Irudhaiyam", the line "Google-Kal Kanadha Thedalgal Ennodu" references the search engine Google, while the line "En Neela Pallale Unnodu Siripen" translates to "I will smile at you with my blue tooth", alluding to the wireless technology bluetooth."

I can't see anything in it besides trivia and cultural references, which seem quite out of place here.-RHM22 (talk) 16:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...but was postponed to 1 October 2010 due to the court verdict regarding the Babri Masjid demolition case." Why did this delay the film?-RHM22 (talk) 16:26, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Department earned ₹225,000 from their promotional activities." I would remove this, as it seems trivial to me.-RHM22 (talk) 16:43, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 153 is inadmissible, as the web page cited states the source as "Wiki" (presumably either Wikipedia or some other Wiki-type website). Also, the "fact" it supports is likely to be controversial (all claims were proven false).-RHM22 (talk) 16:54, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Aniruddha Guha of Daily News and Analysis believed it had the "best special effects ever seen in a Tamil film", and that it was "one of the most entertaining Tamil films – across all languages – ever made"." needs a direct citation.-RHM22 (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • ""Indian cinema's pinnacle of evolution"." needs a direct citation.-RHM22 (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lisa Tsering from The Hollywood Reporter began her review by saying that "Rajinikanth is such a badass that Chuck Norris is afraid of him"." This also needs a direct citation.-RHM22 (talk) 17:53, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@RHM22: Resolved your comments. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 01:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm finished with my (rather extensive) copyedit. I believe I've corrected the bulk of the outstanding problems (except those I've noted above). If there are any other considerations, they would best be directed toward the nominator(s). All that said, I believe there may be reference issues, which I am not qualified to handle, so that will have to be left to someone else to SP/SR. This article has the material for success, but it still requires some polishing to be considered the 'best of the best,' in my opinion. SandyGeorgia: My above concerns haven't been addressed, but they will presumably be resolved when the nominator(s) return. If you have any questions for me, please don't hesitate to ping me or address me on my talk page.-RHM22 (talk) 18:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RHM22, would it look good if the "Music" section contained info only about the composition, writing, etc. of the songs, and not about their filming? Kailash29792 (talk) 12:18, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have an issue with that being there, but you could move it to the 'Principal photography' section if you'd prefer. I don't really have a preference either way.-RHM22 (talk) 14:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I actually moved it from the principal photography during my copyedit in the first place as I felt it rambled a bit and paid too much attention to the lyrics to be included in production!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:02, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment

Nominator has requested withdrawal. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Enthiran/archive1&oldid=1138459774"