Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 18:47, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage

(
)

5x expanded by DBigXray (talk). Self-nominated at 11:27, 12 October 2019 (UTC). co-nom DiplomatTesterMan (talk)

  • @DBigXray: If the AfD closes, this will be very close to ready. The expansion is large enough and new enough, and a QPQ is present. I advise against ALT1 because the topic isn't very well known outside India. The Firstpost source for the hook is OK and backs the hook claims but a bit thin of an article. I have done some copyediting myself. The following is a list of specific article issues that need resolution:
  • There is a [better source needed] (lede paragraph 3) and a [clarification needed] ("Charts", sentence 1) in this article.
  • The sentence beginning "The music producer is" lacks an inline citation, which is needed as it is the last sentence of the paragraph.
Credit to you, this is a very good revamp, but the AfD must close "keep" for this to be worthy of consideration. Raymie (t • c) 03:57, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
ALT0 goes against the WP:DYKHOOK rule of "If the subject is a work of fiction or a fictional character, the hook must involve the real world in some way.". For ALT1; Kapoor was clean shaven in at least the 2010 film Milenge Milenge; pics here. We cant have false facts as hook.
Why don't you suggest a hook on how the song is among the most viewed Youtube video? Oh wait; that's false too.
Then why dont you make a hook on how its been on charts? Oh wait; those aren't credible enough to back with WP:RS and WP:CHARTS.
Why dont you just give opinion like lets say xyz non-notable blogwriter considers the songs to very notable? Wait again; that's not what hooks are for. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:26, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • This song isn't about Shahid Kapoor it is about Kabir Singh. The hook sounds like Kapoor literally turned alcoholic and broke up with his wife. In the article it says "Shahid Kapoor is shown as trying to move on in his life but he was unable to forget the memories of his love Preeti" we should not mention his name rather change it to his stage name Kabir. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 19:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • The concerns above make me very worried indeed. (If it doesn't show, this isn't my topic area.) They call into question the suitability of ALT0 and the accuracy of ALT1 (and its source). @Dharmadhyaksha and CAPTAIN MEDUSA: is there more information that might be useful to me, or any suggestions to be made of the nominator? Raymie (t • c) 22:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • There are multiple issues with this article including The song was reported as topping the music charts in July 2019 and was one of the top ten viewed songs of the world on YouTube. however the source says the song got 20 million views within 24 hours. Kiara Advani plays the role of Preeti or Preety. The second paragraph on Music Video says Kiara Advani who played the role of Preety, Kabir's love interest then later in the sentence it says after getting separated from Preeti. The article title is not in italic however name in the article is italic but infobox is not.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 12:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • The AFD has now closed as keep. @Dharmadhyaksha: can you propose a new hook since ALT0 has BLP issues and ALT1's accuracy has come into doubt? Raymie (t • c) 17:37, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Also pinging the original nominator DBigXray. Raymie (t • c) 21:31, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I suggest you familiarize yourself with the DYK process before !voting "oppose" or "strong oppose" on yet another DYK nomination. Dee03 15:00, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Dee03, may-be the volume of my net contributions (which is about five times that of your's) or my net contributions in DYK-space or a comparison of our number of GAs, will let you know about my familiarity? Or, may-be, you need to know about how fly-by people express their discontent over this domain, when they are not the primary reviewer? That being said, I admire your battleground-attitude. Ta, ∯WBGconverse 15:21, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I have no interest in comparing my contributions with you. I have a life outside Wikipedia, a busy one at that. I suggest you strike off the "battleground attitude" remark unless you explain how I displayed "battleground attitude". Dee03 15:24, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Figures. Dee03 15:26, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
In a bid to get this nomination back in line and because a quality hook seems to be the missing ingredient, I'm proposing an ALT2 and asking for a real, serious DYK review. I would also like to ask DBigXray about something I noticed: the "Reception" quotes from India Today and The Statesman are awfully close to each other (offbeat, sad-romantic). What's going on there? Raymie (t • c) 17:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that while critics praised Arijit Singh's voice in "Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage", the song's lyrics received a mixed reaction? Raymie (t • c) 17:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
IMHO both "offbeat" and "sad romantic" are over used cliche words in Indian media. both are seperate media houses and I would consider it a coincidence. Thanks for the ALT, I had been busy with the AfD, followed by Diwali celebration. DBigXrayᗙ 17:57, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
@DBigXray: Happy Diwali! To incorporate this into one discussion, Xray had DiplomatTesterMan suggest some alternate hooks, which I've reproduced here with light copyediting (numbers changed to accommodate my ALT2):
I'm not a fan of ALT4 as the name is not familiar to people outside of India (myself included). ALT3/3a isn't bad, and neither is ALT5. ALT6 seems subjective in the "did well" and has an odd pairing, but the News18 source reveals an ALT7 I really like and that won't have fictional universe problems: Raymie (t • c) 18:25, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes, in terms of the fictional universe problem, ALT 7 is one of the cleanest. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:29, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • A full review is still needed here as it has been several weeks since the last comments. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:51, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi @DBigXray: I am just starting to read this article, and I am a bit confused. I will admit that I am not familiar with articles about chart-topping songs, so I may just be missing something, or misunderstanding. What confuses me is that the first para in the 'Music video' section says "The music video was released on 19 June 2019 by T-Series on YouTube, receiving 20 million views on the same day. It has been viewed more than 59 million times since the day of its release." The references are Youtube (which now shows 71,105,330 views), and Gaana.com and a Times of India article [3] (neither of which have any info about the number of views that I can see).
Then the last sentence in the 'Charts' section says "on the T-Series YouTube channel, the song had been streamed 96 million times within the first month of the film's release". The source for that sentence does have that number.
I realise that the verb is different - 'view' in the first instance, and 'stream' in the second. But is this really saying that the music video was streamed 96 million times by July 22 this year (the date of that source), but only viewed "more than 59 million times" (or more than 71 million to today's date)? That suggests that somehow Youtube can tell if the people streaming the video are actually watching it!
Please forgive me if I am misunderstanding because I don't understand this technological language, but I would like to be clear about whether the number in ALT7 is supported by the article and sources, since that seems the preferred hook - although perhaps some of the other ALTs are also acceptable - I will also look at them. RebeccaGreen (talk) 16:43, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • While waiting for clarification on ALT7, I have struck the hooks that other editors have noted as inaccurate, awkward or not interesting to a broad audience, leaving 4 hooks to consider. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:50, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: RebeccaGreen, how about we all just let ALT7 be since there are so many different numbers (which all may be correct but the timeline and what they are referring to is a mess). Hope User:Raymie has no issues with this suggestion. DTM (talk) 11:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @DiplomatTesterMan and DBigXray: OK, I have struck ALT7. Looking at the remaining three hooks, ALT2 and ALT3a are in the article and sourced. The source for ALT5 is clear, as the title of that review is "‘Kabir Singh’ music review: Likeable ballads in a booster shot of saccharine rock", but the words "saccharine rock" are not actually used in this article. Please could you add them, if you would like that hook to be considered? RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:02, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
  • I added the words "saccharine rock" into the body of the article. I missed this point when suggesting the hook. Thanks for pointing it out. DTM (talk) 06:31, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Approving ALT2, ALT3a and ALT5. I don't have a preference among these, and will leave it to promoters to choose. (I have made a minor tweak to ALT5, changing " Kabir Singh 's songs" to "the songs in Bollywood film Kabir Singh ", as I found the former awkward in reference to a film, not a person.) The facts in these hooks appear in the article with citations to their sources immediately after them. The article overall was expanded to more than 5x its previous length within seven days of its nomination. It is long enough, neutral, well sourced, and there are no copyvio problems. A QPQ was done. Thanks for helping to finalise this, DTM. RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Added "the" before "Bollywood" in the updated ALT5. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came by to promote this, but the article needs a copy-edit to smooth out the grammar. It is too long for me to edit now, but I did tidy up the lead. I removed sentences that didn't have to do with the song per se. There seems to be a discrepancy in the lead, as the first sentence says this is a song from the film, and the second sentence says a different song was sung in the film. Yoninah (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, Thanks for the kind comment. That was a good catch. I have rectified the article to fix this discrepancy. I haven't yet seen the film, but my understanding is that the song is a part of the film album. In the film they have used a film version of the song with same tune but a small 2 word change in the lyrics. The article is about the song that is the part of the album, as that is what is hitting the charts. The album version of the song, was released along with a trailer of the film as a music video. In Indian film industry the song video forms an important and indispensable part of the song. Which is why there is a video section in the article and the lead included a one line summary of the video. One cannot say that it doesn't have anything to do with the song, as it is a part of this song. Also Pinging the co-nom DTM who has seen the film and can correct me if I made any mistake or overlooked something. Yoninah please do not proceed until we hear from DTM. regards. DBigXrayᗙ 17:43, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
@DBigXray: but you're linking in the first sentence to the film, not the album. Yoninah (talk) 22:29, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, The Kabir_Singh#Soundtrack is currently a section of the film article, and doesn't yet have its own article, so...DBigXrayᗙ 22:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
@DBigXray: I rewrote the lead again, and put the second song in a note, but it's not clear at all. Usually a soundtrack album has songs that were sung in the film. You're saying that this song was called something different and sung by someone else, then appeared on the soundtrack album under a different name and different singer? You might have to add more prose to the Production section to explain all this. Yoninah (talk) 23:11, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, "Usually a soundtrack album has songs that were sung in the film.", indeed, that is usually the case, but often the soundtrack album contains 2-3 (even 4 or more) other versions of a popular song, with minor differences such as female version, soft version, remix version, unplugged version, etc etc. The movie doesn't contain all these versions yet they are a part of the soundtrack album and help to increase the selling of the albums and subsequently helps in promoting the film. There are two versions of this song, and both the lead and the article clarifies this. Can you point me what exactly you would like to see that is missing. DBigXrayᗙ 23:18, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, I have seen the movie and I can confirm that whatever I said above is true. I have made few more necessary changes in the article to reduce the confusion between the 2 versions. IMHO this is now ready. Please do check and let me know if you would like to have anything more. If not you may proceed. thanks for reviewing this. DBigXrayᗙ 08:15, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @DBigXray: Before I look at anything, the grammatical problems are still there. I think you should apply at WP:GOCE before nominating anything here. Yoninah (talk) 11:19, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
OK, I have asked GOCE. DBigXrayᗙ 11:24, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment I would just like to point out that this article is in Indian English. I am not very familiar with that variety, but I did not see anything in this article that I didn't also see in the sources. I think that the grammatical questions are largely a matter of WP:ENGVAR. RebeccaGreen (talk) 00:21, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Indeed, this article is in Indian English that I speak. If the concerns above are due to the variations then they should not be changed. Yoninah can you point a few examples behind your last statement. I would be able to check if that is indeed a concern or just a valid difference in the language versions. DBigXrayᗙ 09:02, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
I see that Yoninah has yet to reply, but there are indeed grammatical issues that I believe cross language variants. For example, the second paragraph under Production has a number of problems: the first sentence starts with "Song" and uses an ampersand for "and". The second sentence is about a different version of the song entirely—was it, too, recorded in the same place and mixed and mastered by the same person?—and needs significant work. The article doesn't mention the length of the original version in the prose (it should), so having the length of the alternate version is a bit odd in this context. The final sentence is makes no sense (and the source isn't any better, with its "no music usage in the initial bit")—while I suspect it means that the instrumental accompaniment doesn't get started until after the singing has begun, this isn't at all clear, and "lacking music" makes no sense since a vocal line is, by definition, music. Under the circumstances, I'd delete the sentence unless a clearer source can be found, or the song is listened to and a clearer description of its opening can be made. The first paragraph under Music video also has issues, with the number of views described as "over 59 million" and "over 70 million"; while both are true, it's confusing to list any but the highest of those, and that final sentence needs work. I recommend taking Yoninah's advice: the backlog at WP:GOCER is not so very long, and I echo her recommendation that you submit this there for a copyedit. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, it has already been submitted for copyedit on 4 December 2019 (here). Other points noted. DTM (talk) 08:28, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
The copyedit requested for this article at WP:GOCE/REQ has been completed. DTM (talk) 05:41, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I believe we are now good to go, per RebeccaGreen, now that the GOCE copyedit is complete. To recapitulate for the benefit of promoters, the following hooks are approved: Raymie (t • c) 20:58, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi, I'm promoting ALT5, but it is incorrect to say that it is a song in the film. In fact, the source is referring to "songs on the soundtrack". Therefore I'm revising this to:
  • ALT6: ... that the songs on the Kabir Singh soundtrack album, including "Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage", have been described as "saccharin rock"? Yoninah (talk) 18:47, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Tujhe_Kitna_Chahne_Lage&oldid=932284016"