Talk:Sye Raa Narasimha Reddy/Archive 1

Archive 1

No Vijay Sethupathi

User:Yashu327, according to this link Vijay setupati is not going to be part of this film. Hence removed it. --Ravichandra (talk) 07:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2019

114.79.130.166 (talk) 06:47, 1 October 2019 (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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:01, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2019

202.71.13.18 (talk) 04:30, 4 October 2019 (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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — IVORK _Discuss 05:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Replace word 'Britishers' with British

The word 'Britisher' often used by Indians in fact, does not exist. The correct word is British. The article mentions 'Britishers' in a few places. Please replace it with 'British'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.178.222.212 (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

 Already done by Kautilya3 Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 October 2019

Please add (if not inappropriate in view of the protected status of the article): On Friday, October 4, 2019 there were two incidents at theatres in Ontario, Canada in which a man cut the screen and sprayed a noxious substance on the audience. Source: https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/two-incidents-of-substance-sprayed-in-movie-theatres-police-say-1.4625627 Rakoz (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2019 (UTC) Rakoz (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: @Rakoz: Any request for a change should be accompanied by a reference link. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:03, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Please add second source for theatre incidents edit: cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo-suspect-sprayed-noxious-substance-on-theatre-goers-in-kitchener-and-whitby-police-say-1.5310958 Rakoz (talk) 17:33, 7 October 2019 (UTC) Rakoz (talk) 17:33, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I'm not really clear on what long-term encyclopedic value is being served by the inclusion of this information. Are we trying to suggest that this film in particular attracted one specific kook who sprayed people with bear repellent? I'm not sure how that will be of interest ten years from now. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Freedom fighter --> Indian independence activist

@Ivanvector: Hi there, I don't have a great alternative to throw into the ring, but this edit seems odd to me. I understand your WP:LABEL argument, but the film is depicting him as some sort of rebellious warrior, not as an "activist", which seems so euphemistic to me. In the official trailer (on producer's verified channel, so no copyright concern), the guy hatchets and slices British soldiers. That seems far less like a picketer to me. Also, the media calls him that.[1][2][3] Anyhow, I'm not going to fight you on this, but "activist" seems like a super soft label when the point of the film is to depict war and action. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

It looks to me like the movie is a pretty strong fictionalization based on the real person. The character in the film may very well be aptly described as a "freedom fighter" (the heroic Indian fighting against the oppressive British), but the real individual probably shouldn't be, per WP:LABEL. I'm not exactly sure how best to address that situation either. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Mr.Nekkanti Srinivas is not a historian, has no credits to him whatsoever

Just because someone shows calls himself a truth teller , he doesn't become a historian. Mr. Nekkanti Srinivas has no academic achievements nor any professional credits. He doesn't in anyway qualify to be a historian much so a credible one. He showed up to the debate with an old book and a unrelated judgement. He cannot be called a historian just because he called himself one and his opinion cannot be used because his opinion was long discredited even in the debate. Even in the debate he seldom calls himself a historian. Please use credible resources when you are speaking about someone important not hearsay articles. 78contender (talk) 04:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@78contender: And just because someone shows up on a Wikipedia talk page and claims that Srinivas has neither any academic achievements nor any professional credits doesn't make that a true or credible position. If you want to make a strong argument, it might help to bring some sort of references or some kind of cogent analysis of Srivinas that might, say, cast doubt on the research done by him, perhaps? Or do you just want us to delete the criticism from our neutral encyclopedia because you happen to disagree with the conclusion? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:22, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

That is not how wikipedia works. You need to produce sources or citation which says(or proves) that he is a historian. I don't need to produce a citation to prove that he has no citations or any kind of credits. This is illogical and laughable.

So this is what we have come someone who has no idea about the language or can understand the source material is adjudicating about it. It can be proved by single google search. .Everything i said is in the debate and very clear to anyone who knows the language. I hope wikipedia manages to find someone who knows atleast the language of the source to adjudicate about it.

As asked i will give the analysis of Mr.Nekkanti Srinivas, he never called himself a historian even through out the debate nor anywhere else anytime. His contention was that in a book whivh was written around and published by the government of india in 1950 the name of Mr.Sye ra narasimha reddy is not present, so he is not a freedom fighter. This is something everybody knows, that is why the trailer of the film specifically mentions him as "forgotten hero". The judgment he uses is a judgment given by the highcourt of Karnataka in the case involving the celebration of tippu sultan's birthday. The court said people who defended their own kingdom and fought for it cannot be called as freedom fighters. But if this analogy is used the person known as first ever freedom fighter "Rani Lakshmi bai" can also be not called as freedom fighter. So centrally this rationale was not accepted or appreciated. So he is bewildered and confused when this argument comes up. His rationale in the debate (for the people who can understand the language) is completely illogical and unwarranted.The citation and resource for this is the debate itself.(People who know the language please criticize it, it seems so surprising when people who have no idea about the language of the source material are adjudicating it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78contender (talk • contribs) 21:07, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@78contender: I have to apologise, I spoke prematurely without having a full understanding of where the content came from, since I'd forgotten the origins. Looking through the edit history, there was a lot of back-and-forth about this section, with people removing and adding the content silently, without any notes or discussion, like this anonymous editor removing the content without explanation. I protected the article to prevent this disruption and flagged the section to encourage editors to discuss what content should be there. The content was restored here by Naucatcone without discussion, and again here without discussion. The concern I had about the content at the time, was that it was poorly written and draws a conclusion about the subject without even establishing what the "controversy" was. This tends to run afoul of our neutrality guidelines. Naucatcone was also directly requested to open a discussion about this content, but they apparently didn't bother to do so. What is important for this section, is that if there are legitimate criticisms about the historical accuracy of the film, that we present a neutral perspective, rather than asserting one idea as truth. As for whether or not Srinivas's commentary should be included, if he is not identified by the TV host and/or network as a historian, then there is a strong argument to be made that his opinions should be held under scrutiny. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:39, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Not just the tv hosts or the network, he never called himself a historian. He expressed that he was just present as a concerned citizen. This is a very wrong when credibility is being attributed to statements given by someone who have been given a wrong title. I hope people who know the language or can understand the source material will adjudicate about it rather than someone quite uninformed. This will only lead to a lot needless confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78contender (talk • contribs) 12:41, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@78contender: You are welcome to propose alternative language for that section if you have an opinion about it, or to propose what should be removed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:08, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

350crores syeraa

Syeraanarasimhareddy already crossed 350crores share above :183crores already came on 99tv about syeraa collections Vamshij (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

@Vamshij: I'm not exactly sure what you are asking be changed in the article, but we would need reliable sources (see WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources) before we made any changes. Also, gross and share are not the same. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2019

Please change Box Office number to 275 cr. The producer Ram Charan told this to Deccan Chronicle and Namaste Telangana newspapers. Also another newspaper Greatandhra published it online. Here is the proof: https://www.greatandhra.com/movies/news/ram-charans-tall-claims-about-sye-raa-100311 Laglegend (talk) 05:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: @Laglegend: Why would we regurgitate the claims that a producer makes about financial success. I mean just speaking objectively, don't you think it's weird to just swallow whatever figure a person involved with a movie would throw at you? What if you got bitten by my dog, and as the dog's owner, I just declared that my dog never bit anybody. Would that be sufficient proof for you? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:05, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Sye Raa Narasimha Reddy (soundtrack) into Sye Raa Narasimha Reddy

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was merge. Ab207 (talk) 18:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

---

WP:NALBUM Kailash29792 (talk) 11:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support merge. Album does not meet WP:NALBUM. A selective merge would work well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:06, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support Content can be covered here. -- Ab207 (talk) 13:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Kailash29792, since there are no objections, you may close the discussion and complete the merge. Thanks -- Ab207 (talk) 17:40, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

    Ab207, thanks for the suggestion but I don't know how to. Onel5969 do you? Or you know someone who can? Kailash29792 (talk) 17:50, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Kailash29792, I'll perform the merge. I'm no expert but will be a learning experience. Ab207 (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2021 (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.

65th Filmfare awards

according to this page, the movie was nominated/won 65th Filmfare awards. but 65th Filmfare awards were given in 2017 whereas the movie was released in 2019. Hitmankf (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

@Hitmankf Thanks for the notice. All the awards seem to be hoaxes. -- DaxServer (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2021 (UTC)