Talk:Loham

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Loham article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 30 days

Loham is currently a Film good article nominee. Nominated by Charles Turing (talk) at 14:51, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Film: Indian

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

India: Kerala / Cinema Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Kerala.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Corinne, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 5 November 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Dubious

@Cyphoidbomb: re: your question about dubious smuggling operation. I thought that since things didn't turn out as originally planned by the co-smugglers, the fact that the gold came up missing either before or during transport, and then the final ending all contributed to suspicions about the operation itself, unlike the more predictable smuggling operation where you have bad guys smuggling illegal contraband then getting caught. The whole plot is based on dubious intentions which is magnified when the gold goes missing. Atsme^📞📧 16:28, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Atsme Hmm. There has to be a better way to explain that. I haven't seen the film, so it's hard for me to pitch an alternative. Maybe something like, "The film centers on a band of smugglers who become suspicious of one another after 100 kilograms (220 lb) of gold mysteriously disappears en route from Dubai to Kerala." ?? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:44, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds rather dubious. 😆 Atsme^📞📧 17:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So what's your counter-proposal? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:12, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let Corinne do a little magic copy-editing, and see what happens. My suggestion is to not mention the other film(s) - it's confusing and well...trivial. Atsme^📞📧 05:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Thanks for the compliment.) Are you referring to the fact that the detective/taxi driver who seems to be investigating the case turns out at the end to be a criminal himself? I think it's all right to delay mentioning that fact until the end of the plot summary, which is the way it is worded now. If you give that away right at the beginning of the article, you remove some of the enjoyment of reading the plot summary. Perhaps you will have seen by now that I changed "dubious smuggling ring" to "elusive smuggling ring" at the beginning of the article. Are you not satisfied with that? If you don't like "elusive", then perhaps just "smuggling ring" would be sufficient. I don't know what you mean by the other films. Corinne (talk) 17:21, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE Copy-edit of November 4 - 5, 2015

In response to a request for a copy-edit of Loham at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, I have just reviewed the article and made a few small edits. The article was fairly well written as it was. I have a question about the following sentence, which appears in the middle of the section Loham#Development:

Ranjith explained it was dropped because the film's story resembled that of another film in the same language released during its pre-production time.

The placement of "its pre-production time" at the end of the sentence creates a bit of ambiguity since two films have been mentioned just before it. I assume "its" refers to Loham and not to the other film. If this is correct, the phrase "during its pre-production time" (which I would change to "pre-production phase") should be moved to earlier in the sentence:

Ranjith explained that Lohan was dropped during its pre-production phase because the film's story resembed that of another film in the same language.

Can you say, instead of "another film in the same language", "another Malayalam film"? Corinne (talk) 02:20, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I re-arranged the sentences in the Loham#Box office section. I decided to take the one sentence about the film's budget out of that section and put it in the production section. I couldn't find any section specifically on production costs, so I put it at the end of the filming section. I think the sentence about the budget would only belong in the box office section if the actual profit was being given: box office receipts minus production costs equals profit. Corinne (talk) 18:04, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence is about the pre-production time of the dropped film, not Loham. --Charles Turing (talk) 19:32, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cast

Can we please follow Wikipedia:MOS-FILMS a little more closely and trim down the Cast section? Atsme^📞📧 17:33, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good suggestion. But all the cast members in the Principal Cast is notable except Pradeep Chandran and Mohan Jose, also Mythili and Joy Mathew are actually cameos misplaced in that section.--Charles Turing (talk) 17:24, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Charles Turing - I didn't mean to suggest the current list needed trimming. I posted that comment after I trimmed several non-notable names in the cast that were added by IPs a week or so ago. Atsme^📞📧 20:24, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Translation, please?

Charles Turing, is there any way you can get a translation for the source you just cited? ചാർളിയോ ലോഹമോ മുന്നിൽ ? If not, we should consider citing a different source. Atsme^📞📧 15:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can use google translate, but there may be some mistakes in translation. --Charles Turing (talk) 14:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Turing, it would be best if you would add the English translation or a different source. We shouldn't expect readers of the English WP to translate articles, including cited sources. Somebody needs to translate it (I was unable to get a translation) or we ~~will have to replace~~ should consider citing a source with English titles. ~~It will not pass a GA review.~~ I wouldn't want it to not pass a GA review because of a simple translation. See WP:NONENG, and WP:NCF Atsme^📞📧 15:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC) ^{struck and reworded 23:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)}[reply]

Removed. I think the article is ready for GA.--Charles Turing (talk) 16:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Turing Me, too - but because of all the IP activity and the fact that it's PP, we should probably wait until the PP runs its course and hope the IP vandals don't become active again. A stable article is a must for it to pass a GA review. Atsme^📞📧 17:31, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2016

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

i want to edit this page with reliable source kindly grant me to edit Mobish369 (talk) 10:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 10:23, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]