Talk:India's Daughter

A fact from India's Daughter appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 March 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the film India's Daughter is based on the 2012 Delhi gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old woman?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/India's Daughter.

Wikipedia

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).

Film: Documentary / 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 articles
	This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

BBC

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Spring 2016. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Queen Mary, University of London/Research Methods (Film) (Spring 2016)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Constructive Edit[edit]

@Jaimal.sumbria:, could you add valid source for your claim? Please do not add information on existing reference that differ from your input. Thanks. --Anton^Talk 10:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If a politicain has said somtheing (may b in an article), I want to quote that. how can I do that pls tell me. @AntanO — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimal.sumbria (talk • contribs) 10:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaimal.sumbria: Give me a link here and I can suggest you. Please not that the news is notable. Note: Do not click "Edit" on the main page, but on Constructive Edit. --Anton^Talk 10:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AntanO This is the link :: TOI is no 1 news paper in India and Meenakshi Lekhi is an Indian Member of Parliament in the Lok Sabha from New Delhi constituency http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Rape-is-a-global-issue-then-why-is-only-India-in-the-spotlight-BJPs-Meenakshi-Lekhi/articleshow/46513189.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimal.sumbria (talk • contribs) 11:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Give me sometime (I need some break now) and I will add this concept into the article. Please see Sign on talk pages --Anton^Talk 11:06, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AntanO also international coverage was due to widespread protests against gov. not the other way around, don't poke your the things you don't understand. Its not your "BAAP"s article ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimal.sumbria (talk • contribs) 11:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AntanO and Men and women both were equally agitated, I feel by your edits that u r serving some agenda!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimal.sumbria (talk • contribs) 11:22, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could stick on the topic rather than pointing me? See Avoid personal remarks --Anton^Talk 14:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do want to say that statements made by Avanindra Pandey who fought with the rapists and murderers to save his friend and public personality like meenakshi lekhi do matter, u can edit the content to conform to terms and condition. but if we think it does'nt have a place on this page then we r wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimal.sumbria (talk • contribs) 16:42, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section split[edit]

Controversy section was split into Ban in India and Reception sections. No current proposal to fork either sections into a separate article,. Abecedare (talk) 03:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

I propose the controversy section be split into a separate page. All minor edits, like quotes from non-cabinet ministers and actors etc. be shifted there. After the Indian court has given its final verdict, we will have a bird's-eye view of the matter and decide to put what where. –Kenfyre (talk) 17:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kenfyre: Agree, could you split the section? --Anton^Talk 17:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kenfyre: Agree !! also the quotes are haphazard, need to be streamline... .

@Kenfyre: I disagree, I think that for a documentary, a category of film which is likely to cause controversy, the section should be renamed Reactions and stay in the article. AadaamS (talk) 06:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the section needs to be split into a separate article either. However it can and should be considerably trimmed to reduce redundancy, excessive quotes, and some (relative) trivialities. Also suggest that it be renamed to something like "Ban in India"/ "Indian ban", since "Controversy" is too non-specific a title. Finally, a section on Reviews summarizing the critical appraisal of the documentary as a movie would be useful addition. Abecedare (talk) 07:28, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AadaamS: @Abecedare: I think so too, but the over-enthusiastic users may keep adding quotes. In the coming months, however, there will be the trial in India, which will bring even more edits, and it may end up looking like this. –Kenfyre (talk) 07:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that article is scary-looking!

Someday we may need a split along the lines you suggest, but I think at the moment the content is summarizable. I'll take a stab at some of the needed "editing" sometime over the next day, unless someone beats me to it (which they are most welcome to :-) ). Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 07:50, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll split out a "responses" section with reviews, and a subsection on the ban in India.-- Aronzak (talk) 09:18, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also note, the article should not be a WP:COATRACK to discuss Indian politics, which is a different subject to the film itself -- Aronzak (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Like --Anton^Talk 10:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me, someone remove the split section tag then. –Kenfyre (talk) 12:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly object to splitting this article. One does not just make a split on a whim or with the agreement of a few editors. I can see no reason for a split here. If anyone feels strongly it could be brought before the larger community for a decision. Gandydancer (talk) 18:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wait The article is not so long right now and is still being developed. There are reviews still published about this documentary every day in multiple countries. Wait until there is less news and decide how to sort this information, perhaps in 4-6 weeks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. Even having a section for "controversy" is already bad design, and putting it in another article comes very close to a "POV fork". Wnt (talk) 03:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2015[edit]

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

https://sahilvarshney.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/indias-daughter-indias-rapist/ 117.234.244.230 (talk) 20:25, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wordpress is not a reliable source. -- Aronzak (talk) 21:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on India's Daughter. 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/20150307223859/http://www.media247.co.uk/bizasia/ndtv-24x7-to-air-nirbhaya-doc-on-sunday-2015 to http://www.media247.co.uk/bizasia/ndtv-24x7-to-air-nirbhaya-doc-on-sunday-2015

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 00:41, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

School assignment notice[edit]

Hi, we're a group of Queen Mary Film students, Grace McMeekin, bethxelliott, Aimeeellerton and ACottam1, we will be editing this page as part of an assignment.Grace McMeekin (talk) 15:59, 7 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grace McMeekin (talk • contribs) 16:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my group and I have made a few edits to the page. We have added information to the introduction which was quite short. We added a section on production and an accolades table as the page had neither of these things. We updated the information in the background and history sections. We added to the section on the film's release as this was limited. We also checked all the citations, removing any dead links and adding more reliable sources where possible. Grace McMeekin (talk) 09:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]