Talk:Life! Camera Action...

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Life! Camera Action... 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

Film: Indian / American

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.

India: 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 31 January 2013 by reviewer GrooveDog (talk · contribs).

Puffery!

This article seems bogged down by promotional language and puffery:

"Life! Camera Action... received universal acclaim and its message widely praised."
"The film received universal acclaim and wide audience appreciation earning numerous international awards and accolades in various categories from around the world."
"It became the only feature film to date by an Indian filmmaker that is shot by a two member crew with worldwide acclaim." (Edit: I have removed the "with worldwide acclaim.)
"...the film went on to receive numerous accolades around the world"
"The film has received various accolades"
"Thomas Baker of the Accolade Film Awards in California praised..."

This is standard WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK. "Universal" acclaim implies unanimity, which will never be achieved. I'll point out that for all the awards it won, there were numerous that it was nominated for, but didn't win. The numerous mentions to the acclaim and praise is excessive. Did anyone even try to find a negative review? Audience appreciation is generally irrelevant so I'm not sure why we care about that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have cleaned up the puffery and promotional language. Does it look ok now? Please advise. Aterrence (talk) 19:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not clear where the neutral point of view is being presented. Where are the negative reviews to balance out all of the film festival gushing? Citizen Kane, a Western film that routinely makes various "best films of all time" lists, like at AFI's 100 Greatest American Films of All Time or at Rotten Tomatoes, where it has a 100% rating, still has negative criticism presented at Citizen Kane#Contemporary responses to balance out the gush. Ryder212 has made a few reverts [1][2] making baseless proclamations like "We cannot change the facts or challenge sources." Well, we cannot change the facts, but we can question their representation in a project that demands neutrality, and we can absolutely challenge sources, so I'm not even sure what he means. Saying "the film has received critical acclaim" is accurate, but can "the film has also received negative acclaim" also be accurate? NinjaRobotPirate do you care to comment? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think in almost all cases, the phrase "critical acclaim" (and, even worse, "universal acclaim") is puffery and a red flag. There are times when it's appropriate, such as when it's in a quotation, but generally I think it should be avoided. Not every verifiable fact has to end up in a Wikipedia article; contested facts, if indiscriminate or presented in too promotional a manner, can be excluded through consensus. Nobody is saying that the film can not be described as having had a positive reception if reliable sources specifically say so. But to use phrases like "critical acclaim" is too promotional – in my opinion, at least. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with that. I'm not even a fan of summarizing general critical response (the film received generally positive reviews), as I think these things are better left to critical response aggregators like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes to say in their own language. And even then, care should be exercised to avoid blanket statements, particularly when Metacritic and RT don't always see eye-to-eye. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Life! Camera Action.... Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Life! Camera Action.... Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120806091542/http://exclusivenews.co.in/life-camera-action-wins-another-top-three-awards/ to http://exclusivenews.co.in/life-camera-action-wins-another-top-three-awards/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]