Talk:Ulagam

Cast list

In relation to my recent removals of content, I figured I would explain it here. The first problem with these additions are as follows: WP:FILMCAST states that "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, so it is encouraged to name the most relevant actors and roles with the most appropriate rule of thumb for the given film: billing, speaking roles, named roles, cast lists in reliable sources, blue links (in some cases)". Instead, the cast list is a complete, indiscriminate listing of every actor involved, including dancers in the movie, despite such roles being minor in comparison to that of the main characters. lastly, the "lost film" section is inappropriate per WP:V. Eik Corell (talk) 04:49, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I am only a writer, not an admin. Therefore, I do not know the rules that govern the Wiki articles. I first came to Wikipedia as a common man to get information on something as Wiki proclaims itself as an encyclopedia. Before this I only knew Encyclopedia Britannica. When I found that some of the articles that I was looking for information about very old Tamil films did not contain them, I started writing articles myself. Unlike Hollywood, or even Bollywood, there is no record about Tamil films except some books by individuals on different aspects of the Tamil Cinema. I thought Wiki could fulfil that short-coming and included as much information taking time to collect information. I wrote more than 150 articles which are now a treasure as far as very old Tamil films are concerned. But some admins came in between, some who are from different countries and culture, and started removing sections that took me time and energy to collect and write. Therefore, I stopped writing the articles. I find that you have removed the external link section in the article Parijatham (1950 film) even after I have removed the additional links and leaving only the link to the full length film. I left it because it is a source for the character names of the actors.

Anyway, I feel that the admins are there to discourage writers. I have found that some admins have removed information from my articles since I left writing. I feel sad when I see my hard work is mutilated. I write this because you specify some "rules" and wrote an explanation for your actions. I still think an encyclopedia is a place where as much information as possible should be given. But Wiki is not such a place. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to write my views.--UKSharma3 (User | talk | Contribs) 02:04, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I'm not an administrator. I just spotted that a lot of these articles were using information copied directly from other sites. This is a copyright violation, and if such information is not either removed or completely rewritten, Wikipedia could be in legal trouble; It could be subject to lawsuits and at worst, lose its safe harbor status. Copying content and pasting it onto Wikipedia, or linking to presumably copyrighted content uploaded in its entirety to youtube or other platforms is what opens the door to these things. About the cast list: Unless roles are notable, for example main characters and/or important side-characters with big enough roles in the movie, they should not be mentioned. Sections on songs in articles like these are also questionable - On the one hand, music obviously plays a bigger role in Tamil and Indian movies of this kind. On the other, normally, unless a soundtrack has received coverage by reliable sources, it is not notable enough to be mentioned and including it lands us right back at WP:INDISCRIMINATE; Listing information simply for the sake of listing information. I have asked for input from other editors here, so hopefully we can get some more opinions on this. Eik Corell (talk) 08:41, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree that some articles on Tamil films contain text copied and pasted directly from other sources. Though I know that the authors of source articles do not care of this copy-pasting, I, as a writer myself, do not approve this. I never copy paste not only in Wiki but also in other places such as Facebook. If I have to quote something verbatim, I always cite the source. Just for information - I have decided not to intervene in any edits hereafter. I am working with another person to bring out a book containing the info I was giving in the articles. Already one volume has been published and we are working on the next. So, Good-bye to Wiki. I appreciate your interest in implementing the policies and your concern --UKSharma3 (User | talk | Contribs) 02:01, 24 August 2019 (UTC)that Wiki should not be drawn into legal battles.---UKSharma3 (User | talk | Contribs) 02:01, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Uksharma3, I totally agree that it feels like the admins are trying to discourage writers. ———Superbrickbro.

Also not an admin...does anyone have a policy-based reason for disagreeing with Eik's edits? Those who contribute information here are not necessarily expected to know the policies, but are expected to conform to them when they are pointed out, say in the course of a content dispute, which is what this fundamentally is. "I'm here to write, not to follow the rules" isn't really a workable practice. Persons looking for perhaps more comprehensive coverage of films should likely go to a more dedicated site such as IMDb. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your observations above and here. I do not wish not to conform to policies. The word Encyclopedia misled me. I have no time to go through the voluminous policy pages in Wikipedia added from time to time. As to my knowledge, Encyclopedia is a place where one gets as much information as possible on a given subject. As I said earlier, unlike Hollywood or even Bollywood, Tamil cinema has no proper record anywhere except bits and pieces here and there. I thought I will build Wiki to somewhat fulfil this short-coming of Tamil cinema history. But sometime back I found Wiki is not the place where this can be done. So, I stopped writing articles. Now I go through the Watch-list and ignore most of the editing done by others on my article. I intervened only when the whole list of songs was removed along with the removal of You Tube links on an article.

As I said earlier, I came to Wikipedia first as someone looking for information believing it is an encyclopedia. I started writing articles when I found that most of the information I was looking for, were not available in the articles. Now I understand why. So going back as a layman, I will not come to Wiki to find any information.--UKSharma3 (User | talk | Contribs) 02:01, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what to say at this point beyond sorry you feel that way? Wikipedia is attempting to be an encyclopedia (perhaps for some values of 'encyclopedia'), but as discussed at WP:IINFO, it's really never been a place to cover a subject in the most exhaustive detail possible; rather WP tries to limit its coverage to significant/notable information, which is determined based on different criteria depending on the kind of information involved. As Eik noted, for instance, in the case of the casts of films we limit our coverage to the principal actors of the film in question. Best wishes. DonIago (talk) 02:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks and Best wishes!--UKSharma3 (User | talk | Contribs) 02:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)