Talk:Sivaji (film)/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Complete Rewrite

I don't have the time so i can't do it, but if someone does happen to have an insane amount of time on their hands and HAS seen the movie, please rewrite this article. It looks like a Rajini fansite.Chaosprophet 05:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Provide Proof and don't Vandalise!

Please provide proof because a lot of misunderstanding and "edit wars" seem to be going on because of the lack of proof. I have notice MANY edits to change information that was provided with proof to incorrect information. I have corrected this but in the future can users please not do this. I feel you are accidentally vandalising.

AVTN 19:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Oh my goodness. Where is the loads of information that was here? Oh dear!! Please bring it back whoever it is who did it!

How much did ayngaran pay?

Does anyone know? AVTN 20:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

About the vandalism

Hi,

I don't know about others vandalising but I definetly am NOT vandalising this article. Infact I tried my very best in keeping this article clean for about a long time now by adding many information and cleaning the article such as fixing broken links. Incase you don't know me I was the person you thought was intentionally removing your information. The reason why I removed your information then was because it was no different from what I had written on it (the info titled Illegal Audio Release).

Sorry if it was wrong in anyway but I couldn't discuss this with you because I didn't have a Wikipedia account at that time. I recently created one to see if I could be able to edit the article once again since it is protected. But I see that I am still unable to do so even though I created an account. If it was you who protected it please remove the protection if you can so I can add information I find. This time I will add information and try not to remove unless it must be.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rdx-77 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

It has already been unprotected. So you can edit it now. Sorry for the misunderstanding. But I wasn't talking about you. There were a huge number of IP edits which were deleting and "changing" the page in undesirable ways.
AVTN 12:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know why the Sivaji: The Boss page is STILL protected? Even after the removal of the protection template.~~ AVTN [|Talk] 08:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Some errors regarding Shakar's b'day

This is to the person who is maintaining this article.

In this article "Sivaji - The Boss", it is mentioned that this movie is scheduled to be released on May 8th coinciding with the director's (i.e Shankar) birthday. But, in wikipedia page for Shankar, his birthday is mentioned as 17 August. Please verify the correct date. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drsk77 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Release date/Article content

There is a line which says that Shankar wanted the release date of Sivaji to clash with Dasavtharam. There are no citations and the allegation is a personal opinion, not an established fact.

I don't think Shankar shifted the release date to clash with Dasavatharam. Shankar shifted the release date due to recording of audio for the film. There was an article on www.indiaglitz.com about this a few days ago.

Trivia

Also, the Triva section of this article should not have been removed. It was very helpful for readers to pickout point form info. The article is currently much too wordy and I suggest it should be cut down.

Wikipedia does not encourage Trivias per new rules, information must be merged with the text. G Ganesh 17:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Flags on the Release dates

Can someone please stop adding a large list of flags for the release dates and distribution lists. There are more countries where Sivaji will be screened, such as Canada and Sri Lanka, and it would not look nice to add a whole bunch of flags all with the same release dates. It would be much simpler to inform it in a more general and condensed way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 22:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

They are not major countries in the world where the distrubuters will earn a lot. Also some companies have bought distrubution rights for within thier country from either AVM Productions or Ayngaran International (for example Pyramid in Malaysia). Please discuss before removing information. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 17:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Ratings

Tamil films are officially rated only in United Kingdom and India. The BBFC (as you can see on all Ayngaran Video covers) are the only official worldwide film raters. You can also check their site at [1]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 22:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Films are also rated in other countries worldwide. Until 2005 none of the Tamil films were certified in the UK. Now they have to be certified if they are to be released in Cineworld Cinemas, also the films rake in such an income that since Chandramuhki Ayngaran can no longer not get them certified. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 17:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

What a sprawling, messy article

This is the longest, most heavily annotated article about a movie I have ever seen that doesn't ever mention what the movie is about. Ford MF 23:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

There is a big expectation among the Tamil community as it is being directed by the Shanker with Tamil cinema superstar "Rajini". Well it is good to have well cited detail article but me too was surprised that Important movie story is missing in the article. May be because the movie not yet released. I appreciate atleast few line about the storey so that it helps the readers about the movie. I I am native Tamil from the neighboring country Sri Lanka. If somebody can add the story details would help the Tamil Wikipedia article (ta:சிவாஜி(திரைப்படம்) as well.--Umapathy (உமாபதி) 17:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Shankar is such a perfectionist that he will not release the story, it would damage the film. Shankar has only released a handful of stills and all of them from songs. Earlier on a still had been taken by a cameraman and released on the internet, for that reason Shankar scrapped that scene and remade it. I highly doubt the story will come out until after the release date. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 17:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Article Length

I agree with the comment about the article length. It is way too wordy and long and it must be shortened. Many of the information in the article is unnecessary and irrelevant.

Country Flags

And who ever is adding all those flags to the release date and distributors list and adding countries other than India and UK for ratings PLEASE STOP. This is ruining the clean appearance of the article. It would be helpful if the owner of the article simply blocked the person who is doing all this (no offence). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 04:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

It is not illegal to add information that is useful to the article. Also the article is not too long, it has been viewed by many editors and even praised many times for its content. This is what a Rajinikanth film article should be, his films are not merely a film like Spider-Man 3 which you go to watch; his films are something you live through, you enjoy, you love, watching his film makes you ecstatic. When he appears on the screen everything whistles with joy. Many millions of people are looking forward to his film and reading eargerly about it. Heck nearly every magasine has a picture of Rajinikanth on the front and maybe a bit about the film. He was the most powerful person in Tamil Nadu in 1995, he is going to be the most powerful person in Tamil Nadu after Sivaji: The Boss! He is the thalaivar, the one and only Superstar. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 17:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I do know that Rajini is the one and only superstar and his films are simply the greatest. I my self am a Rajini fan (looking forward to watching Sivaji) and interested in keeping all Rajini related articles clean and standardized. But there is no point in overacting about it and adding info that isn't relevant and unnecessary (such as the long list of flags and list of countries for film rating). This is all very nice but it should be at an appropriate level. Flags would be necessary if the film was released on different days in different locations. Sorry if there was any misunderstanding but I just wanted to input my opinion on the drastic changes that have been made on this article in the past couple months. I have been monitoring and adding various details on this article since early last year. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 00:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC).


Very well I hope it is to your liking now? I have simply put flags for the different country distributers and made Aygaran Worldwide. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 08:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it looks a lot nicer now. Thank you very much. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.103.179 (talk) 16:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

Tamil Nadu Tax Exemption

In order to get tax exemption from the Tamil Nadu Government as far as I understood movie name need to be in Tamil. Will this move get exemption by having tailoring name in English?. Can somebody investigate this? or will they pay tax to the Tamil Nadu Government?--Umapathy (உமாபதி) 17:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The title considered at this stage of production was Super Star but Rajinikanth claimed that he did not want to boast or show off his status in the cine field. The film ended up being named Sivaji.

—Universal Hero, Sivaji: The Boss article.

I would think that it was registered as "Sivaji" which is what counts for the tax office. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 14:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sivaji Release Date Information

I spoke to Ayngaran International recently and they say that AVM (namely Shankar) has postponed the release of Sivaji: The Boss to 2007-05-26. Ayngaran will receive the movie on the 2007-05-24 when they will promptly send it to the UK certification board and it will be released worldwide on the 2007-05-26. Ayngaran International think the film may be postponed further. According to Ayngaran International the delay to the films release is due to A. R. Rahman. Please do not change the release date back to 2007-05-17 as it will not be released then. Thank you. ~~ AVTN T CVPS 11:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The 1 billion rupee budget

Whats this some kind of a joke?..There is no way this film would be a 100crore project.I think 60crores would be just and reasonable.If you think the marketing,prints etc would add to the cost then.. well hell No! no tamil film producer would be willing to produce a movie at a 100 crore budget.Sivaji's actual budget might be within 50-60crores(including the 20 crore fee of rajini).I have no intention of belittling the movie(i would only be too happy if a tamil film is made at 100 crore)but false exaggeration about the movies budget like this would make most poeople expect too high of the film and that might let them down when they watch the film.So PLEASE CHANGE the budget to 600 million rupees.

The budget has been properly given references. This was estimated by a news site, the last Sivaji: The Boss budget was 40 crores back in 2006 end, and an extra 25 crores which Rajinkanth is taking. I doubt no money was spent in making Sivaji in the last 5 months. ~~ AVTN T CV A 09:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The confusion is over!

Well folks its out,the release date of Sivaji is may 31.Its official.AVM has disclosed it to galatta.com.Check it out!And dont change the release date again.

Super flop

Padam oothikichuna, naan kadan vaangiyavdhu London muzhukka poster adichu Rajini thatha maanathai vaanguven! Anwar 15:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

This is an English wikipedia. ~~ AVTN T CV A 16:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Please no personal animosity

Failed GA

This article nomination was quick-failed because the movie has not been released, and thus is unstable. Please renominate in sufficient time after its release and once the article information has stabalized.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 14:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Clean up.

Citation templates

The citation templates have been fixed. I put all the cinema news articles as news citations, and all the site and blog citations as web citations. As I was doing it, I came along many citations just linking to base site/blog urls, not linking to the actual content but to the site which holds the content. I have listed some of the problems below, this includes google caches which are frowned upon in wikipedia citing, see WP:CITE!

Problems found

To Do....
Here are some tasks you can do:


    • As it is a premature film, it can't be nominated. Nominate it again about 3 months after its release (about August)(you might want it to go to GA now, but be patient.
    • In my opinion, for a film that hasn't been released, the article is too long. 72000kb, considering you have to add a plot section, a release and response + dvd sections, it'll be too long.
      • Try trimming down the section "Soundtrack" into about three paragraphs. It already has a main article which all that information should be there. (1 para on production, 1 para on unoffical to official versions and 1 para on release and response)
    • You have extra spacing between the two paragraphs in the LEAD, this should be just one line.
      • For an article this size, the lead should be longer, see WP:LEAD
    • You have a casting section, but you might want to add a cast list (similar to Casino Royale (2006 film) or Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith). You then might want to trim the Casting section to only main actors/actresses

    *Remove the wikinews box in the Publicity and Release section, (either remove it or put it down with external links

    Removed the Wikinews box. I believe the content in the Wikinews article is no longer relevant to the Release of Sivaji! Vishnuchakra 13:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
    • In the references section there is a link at the top, remove it or put it in external links.
    • In the opening infobox, you don't need the release of the soundtrack in the released part.
    • It is cited but you may have cited incorrectly. (I havent checked it)

    **For news articles use {{cite news}}

    **For web pages with info use {{cite web}}

        • I'm not going to check that but it seems all the references are all the same.

    ****Reference One is a prime example, to use {{cite news}} over {{cite web}}

    • In my opinion you should have the article copy edited, (this is a check for spelling, updating prose etc.). Some of the prose on the article is not good (eg. After the release of the surprise hit, Kadhalan in 1994, directed by Shankar he answered when interviewed by Sun TV,[4] that his official aim was to direct South India's two major actors, Kamal Haasan and Rajinikanth. (doesn't really make sense)).

    *The category's need to be sorted aphebettically (numbers then letters)(ignore automated categorys eg. Upcoming films) Universal Hero 13:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

    I didn't do it, but I saw that it's already done - so struck out the point. aJCfreak yAkBaK 12:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


    • Strike it out when you've completed it! Universal Hero 13:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

    GA

    Well, once it comes out, I think we should try it out at a GA review again. Any thoughts? Dreamy 00:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

    Singapore Release

    It's releasing here in Singapore, on the 14th of June, 2 days time .. CONFIRMED!

    First para

    Ummm... Regarding the following lines in the opening para:

    Rajini for the first time is acting under a bigger brand than himself (Shankar). Shankar is the only director that has much better openings than rajini films.

    They seem to be completely an opinion. Statements with such high claims usually require properly verifiable sources. Otherwise, such statements have to be removed, esp if we're going to try nominating the article for GA/FA. --aJCfreak yAkBaK 12:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

    Fight over references

    Instead of edit warring, please discuss the problem in a civil manner here on the talk page. Regarding this, I think Gnanapiti was correct in removing that reference. There's no mention in that reference that Rajinikanth has surpassed Jackie Chan as the highest-paid Asian actor. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

    I've removed lot of fake references like blogs, youtube video, flickr homepage etc. Still there are lot of nonsense cruft to remove. I want to question the credibility of sites like behindwoods where whole site looks like a blog, kollywoodtalk which is nothing but a blog and tamilstar which looks like a personal webpage. Tons and tons have been written based on them directly violating WP:RS. On top of that, for lot of claims made in the article, if you go to the pointed reference, there will be nothing on the claim, as Nishkid pointed out above. Things need to be fixed. Gnanapiti 23:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
    From what I see, Kollywoodtalk violates WP:RS, since it looks like a blog, and the user posting the information is not an authority on the subject. TamilStar doesn't look like an RS, and neither does Behindwoods. They look like basic Tamil film fansites that happen to incorporate quite a bit of detail. That doesn't mean they are to be considered reliable sources. We need actual references that meet WP:RS, and to start, we can look at more reputable film news websites. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
    Guyz, I think I've corrected it to a Universal Edition balancing on our three views. Still we need to add a:
          • A plot section - (Wait a week) to reduct spoiler complains
          • A reception section

    Universal Hero 10:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC) I readded the plot section. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and if we have a general plot summary, then we should incorporate it into the article. We shouldn't withhold information for a whole week because some people haven't seen the movie yet. Nishkid64 (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

    Hi. I'm thinking of going through each and every reference. I dunno much about reliability, but some of the references point to links where the claims within the page are not present, as noted earlier. Gonna try and increase the credibility of the article. aJCfreak yAk 09:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
    To add to the references clean-up: the cited reference for the budget of the movie being 100 crores is [2] from a site called NowRunning.com. The site has a disclaimer which mentions that "nowrunning.com publishes articles and columns from other news agencies and guest writers. The views expressed in these articles are carried as written, in order to preserve the original voice. However, it needs mentioning that guest columns and other external articles are opinion pieces, and reflect only the feelings of the individual concerned -- the fact that they are published on nowrunning.com does not amount to an endorsement by the editorial staff of the opinions expressed in these columns." Also, the article merely states that "Film circles estimate that AVM would have invested more than Rs 100 crore". This is purely an estimate, IMO. But I dunno what to do about it, so if someone could correct this, if necessary, then great! aJCfreak yAk 10:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
    That definitely needs to be removed and replaced, per WP:RS. Nishkid64 (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
    It's done. User:Tintin1107 provided an appropriate reference for the cost of production and I've written it into the article. Check it out. aJCfreak yAk 18:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
    Umm...where? I don't see any edits by Tintin1107 in the last two days. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
    He provided the reference on my talk page and I included it. Check the article's current reference to the Outlook news item. Cheerio! aJCfreak yAk 09:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

    So many articles link to Sivaji: The Boss!

    Special:Whatlinkshere/Sivaji:_The_Boss

    Could someone check it out. I know most of the actors listed there aren't in the Tamil version of the film, but I heard other versions were different so could someone check it out?

    AVTN 21:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

    I dunno about the people involved with the movie, but I noticed that there is a page titled Sivaji: The Boss Release Controversy (and another titled Sivaji: the Boss Release Controversy). Was wondering if we could move all rumours/extension of release date/etc. to an article like that? It would help reduce the size of this article. And we could include a section in this article to link to the Controversies/Rumours article. I guess we could do this if we reach a consensus. What say ye to that, people? aJCfreak yAk 09:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

    Lead paragraph

    Hi. I'm trying the work on the lead paragraph based on WP:LEAD and Lage Raho Munna Bhai, which is a FA. I've done a little bit of work and I've uploaded it to a subpage of my sandbox. Anyone who's checking this discussion, please feel free to check it out and we can continue discussing the changes here. If there is a consensus with regard to the changes in it, we can then append it to the actual article. :) aJCfreak yAk 11:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

    Sivaji:_The_Boss#Soundtrack

    Can work be started to make this smaller. I have copied the current version over to the sub-article over here: Sivaji: The Boss (soundtrack). User:Dekimasu had recently did a redirect. I spoke to the user. But I have been very disappointed on work on the main article's audio section. I will begin work on the article after the 25th June (after my exams). AVTN 14:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

    This article is total crap

    This article is total unabashed fancruft sourced almost entirely from non-RS fansites, blogs, youtube, google video etc.,. I tried cleaning up the non RS references and replacing them with {{fact}} tags, but that's next to impossible. The article has 135 so-called citations of which more than 120 are from non-RS sources. There simply is no point replacing all those citations with fact tags. I dont think anything short of a rewrite from first principles can help this article. It is total fancruft and also had nearly a dozen or more 'fair use' pics all of which are of suspect licensing. Basically everything is wrong with this article and I even propose to blank the entire article except the lead and ask that it be rewritten. Sarvagnya 01:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

    Okay, though I don't quite agree that the entire article is crap, I do believe that the article needs major cleanup. To start with, could you please take a look at the lead that I've written in my sandbox? (Read previous post). Would like some consensus on it before including it into the article - since I tend to shy away from edit wars and it looks like this article could become an intense concentration of such wars. :) Anyways, was wondering whether ALL the tags placed at the top of the article really belong there. Maybe the article reads like a fansite/poorly sourced one, but that does not mean that we need to be "anti-article", do we? I feel that some of the tags are repetitive. Please consider removing some of them. Again, would've done it myself - but I don't wanna offend anyone. Cheerio! aJCfreak yAk 09:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
    The lead is crappy too. For starters the details of the plot has no business squatting in the lead. And then there are blatant lies. The outlook citation given says 80 crores.. but in the lead it conveniently transforms into 96 crores. The article is peppered with blatant POV, lies, unreliable sources, unencyclopedic material, blatant copyvio(check the 'reviews' section for copyvio from here), unabashed fancruft, weasel, peacock, undue... This ought to be the worst article I've ever seen on wikipedia. If this article doesnt qualify for being blanked at sight per Jimbo here and here, I dont know which one will. My patience with this article is running short and next to nothing has been done to improve this article in the past few days. If it is not improved real soon, I will rewrite the lead and blank the rest of the article. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

    This is what sify wrote - As a film, it acts as the vital bridge between the old Rajni films and new commercial packaging that makes Shankar tick with the generation next audience. On the downside, there is nothing new story-wise. Shankar has rehashed his pet theme of a one-man crusader who cleans the society of the scum of the earth, which was seen in his earlier socio-commercial fantasies like Gentleman and Muthalvan. There is a sense of déjà vu- as you have seen similar plots too often from his stable. The script is too thin on logic. There are far too many banal dialogues and familiar homilies and messages, associated with a Shankar film, are thrust in and at times the pace is too sluggish, especially in the first half. And this is how it gets reported in this article - "While Sify.com, Indiaglitz.com, rediff[33], The Times of India [34], apunkachoice[35] and many other gave a thumbsup,..."!! Now which part of the sify review above looks like a 'thumbsup'? Sarvagnya 20:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

    I just added to the list of reviews. I was very disappointed on how the editor thought there were "mixed" reviews. Most of the bad reviews are from Rajinikanths political enemies, such as Sun TV. While ALL other TV channels were advertising the movie and also creating shows (like speaking to the fans,etc...) Sun TV did not even mention the EXISTENCE of Sivaji. Sorry if I caused any problems.~~ AVTN Talk 20:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
    What does sify have to do with sun? And anybody who damns the movie is his political opponent? Yeah right. The article still remains in horrible shape and I will now start removing any unsourced or poorly sourced fancruft from the article. Sarvagnya 18:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

    What sites a considered Reliable sources?

    IBNLive.com is reliable since it is part of the CNN news network. Is Indiaglitz, behindwoods, etc... reliable? Please state which are reliable so users know which are good sources and which are bad. I will also add it to the ToDo list to help people out. ~~ AVTN Talk 10:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

    I think Galatta.com's take on Sivaji could be considered RS too. Please hear me out: Galatta.com apparently has an official tie-up with AVM Productions for promotion/etc. of the film. So for first-party sources, we could use Galatta.com. That's my opinion. Apart from that, I suggest going through Lage Raho Munna Bhai as it is the only Indian film article which is a featured article. That might help us improve the quality of this one. aJCfreak yAk 10:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

    Summarazing Sountrack section.

    I am doing a rough summary as I have exams tommorow. I hope you people can stop calling him AMAZING and stop using adjectives such as PRAISED! This is not a fanclub. If you really wanna praise him then go join one of his fanclubs (I am in one already). I praise him there but not here. We want this to be informative. Most people who read it already know how amazing he is. ~~ AVTN Talk 10:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

    Hey, glad that you feel this way. Let's hope we can improve the article. What do you think of the re-write of the lead paragraph? aJCfreak yAk 10:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
    I suggest you edit stuff straight into the article. UH or me will rarely do something unless we see something wrong. Although we normally do tend to revert a lot of edits since they are sometimes worthless. Also, according to an interview with IBN Devdas is the most costliest indian film. So Sivaji is second most costliest. I don't remember the link but you might do well finding out. ~~ AVTN Talk 10:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
    I have removed the track list. Should the infobox still be kept? ~~ AVTN Talk 11:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

    Sivaji song articles prod'ed for deletion!

    Reason: Does not add any significant information not found in Sivaji (soundtrack).

    They will all be most likely deleted in 5 days from now. So if you feel they should not be deleted PLEASE add information to them. Use WP:SONGS as a guideline.

    ~~ AVTN Talk 12:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

    AVTN, I dont know for what reason you had reverted yourself after prodding them for deletion. I have reverted you to put them back up for deletion. Sarvagnya 04:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

    Work on Sivaji songs! Need looking at!

    Could you tell me if this is satisfactory information? Style (2007 song), if it is then I will add the same amount to all the articles. Also according to WP:SONGS I should not use headers. I have added the pretense for the song since I think it is encyclopedic. ~~ AVTN Talk 20:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

    Also done Balleilakka ~~ AVTN Talk 20:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

    Alternate Version

    User:Universal Hero/Sivaji Universal Hero 17:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)