Talk:Titash Ekti Nadir Naam

Recent edit
An IP is continuously changing the title to the English title. There is no need to use the English name, when the film is in Bengali and it is the COMMONNAME. Tito ☸ Dutta 16:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Just seen this. The COMMONNAME is A River Called Titas.  F i l m F a n  20:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Although this is an English wiki, the film was produced in Bangladesh, and the name and language in the original film is in Bengali, so the name should be a romanization of the Bengali name.  Konveyor Belt   express your horror  at my edits   20:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Another similar discussion where the film fan was told the same thing: Talk:Mahanagar. Tito ☸ Dutta 20:46, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Titash Ekti Nadir Naam → A River Called Titas – Title used in the English-speaking world. WP:EN. WP:NCF.  F i l m F a n  00:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak support, perhaps with -sh - Not sure about the -s for -sh, since both the novel and the DVD are spelled "A River Called Titash" on the cover artwork Amazon.com novel and DVD, however River Titas itself is generally is spelled with -s in the more reliable sources. And Titas is also the confirmed name of the Bangladeshi gas field and gas company. However I find these "in the rest of the world" arguments pretty lame. Many of these art films (which is what any subtitled film becomes in the English speaking markets) are simply not notable in English-speaking countries, their notability derives from back home - in this case Bangladesh. And they do get discussed in books on Bangladesh cinema as Bengali names etc. However if there's only 1 English translation and amateur translations don't invent titles I suppose WP:NCF does support the RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - change, if there's no preference given to a minority of English names per User:Titodutta's link, then this film is more given the Bengali name in printed books. See also Talk:The Downfall of Osen In ictu oculi (talk) 11:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * All current releases in the US, UK, etc. use Titas.  F i l m F a n  10:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose: Bengali film, Bengali name. "Titas Ekti Nadir Naam" is the commonname. Please see the references in, . See Australian Art Gallery's article. FilmFan has somehow found one source, here is another Amazon.com DVD which is using the Bengali title, we are using Bengali title poster as well. See Films Division website. No need to change. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titodutta (talk • contribs) 10:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Come on, yaar! This is a Bengali film, so the Bengali name will remain. Regards, --Jionpedia ✉  11:23, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * According to what policy?  F i l m F a n  11:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Indian film naming conventions. Have you moved any other article following the same rationale? If so, please list those articles, we need to check those moves as well. Tito ☸ Dutta 11:51, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You do realise you just linked me to a TALK page? Here's a quote from WP:NCF that addresses this issue specifically:
 * "Use the title more commonly recognized by English readers; normally this means the title under which it has been released in cinemas or on video in the English-speaking world. Normally, this will be an English language title that is recognized across the English-speaking world; however, sometimes different English-speaking countries use different titles, in which case use the most common title, and give the native and alternate English title(s) afterward.
 * Note: in the following paragraphs, the phrase 'the English-speaking world' refers to countries in which the majority of the population speaks English as their first language; it thus includes the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, Ireland and New Zealand, as well as several smaller countries. It does not include countries such as India in which English is a common second language, but in which films are rarely produced in English."  F i l m F a n  17:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Discussions generally take place in talk pages. Read the discussion and its consensus. Have you moved any other article following same rationale. If so, please list those articles. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 17:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * No. Read my previous post.  F i l m F a n  17:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there anything to read? Per the Indic film naming convention -- if a n Indian film's original title is used in English sources, use that. BTW, you have still not answered, have you moved any other article following the same rationale, if so, please make a list. Anyway, I don't have any more time here. I have many other tasks. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 18:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Support. I assume that a title English speakers can read is "more commonly recognized by English readers" than one they can't, as NCF, quoted above, puts it. When a title is given in the form "Titas Ekti Nadir Naam (A River Called Titas)", as this one is here, the obvious conclusion is that "Titas Ekti Nadir Naam" is being given as the Bengali title, while "A River Called Titas" is the English language title. 37.9.56.152 (talk) 22:27, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Support. Don't understand the oppose votes when WP:NC-FILM clearly states that India is not included in "the English-speaking world," so the title in the "UK, USA, Canada, Australia, Ireland and New Zealand" wins out here. 82.132.215.176 (talk) 09:32, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'll rather ignore the rules.Jionpedia ✉  10:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I really don't want to accuse these IPs of being socks but it's a little suspicious... Konveyor Belt   express your horror  at my edits   16:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent edits: release in US and UK
Ghatak's all films face financial crisis and were not exported well. Right of a short film Amar Lenin was purchased by Russian Government and that is the only significant overseas release of Ghatak's film (other than Titash's release in Bengaldesh). Titash releasing in the United States and United Kingdom — is an exceptional claim — needs a clear citation. A special screening after 40 years of the film's release is not a "release". Tito ☸ Dutta 12:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Whether or not it was released theatrically, it is available on Blu-ray/DVD/online, all of which are "releases". The title in the US and UK is A River Called Titas.  F i l m F a n  17:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Where it is clearly mentioned? I just showed above the title is Australia is "Titash Ekti Nadir Naam". -- Tito ☸ Dutta 17:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)r
 * We're talking about the US and UK.  F i l m F a n  17:35, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Ya, then show, the film released "only" in the US and UK with that title and no other title, and more importantly the film "released". A DVD after 40 years of the film's release is not a release unless it "clearly" mentioned it. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 17:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You're wasting your time. Here are some links for you. I can provide you with many more, but I don't need to since it's all there.  F i l m F a n  17:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Give me one source which clearly mention, the film "released" in those countries (with any name). Ghatak's film, which always faced critical financial issues, releasing in the United Status is a big news which must be clarified with details, not just with poster image. Tito ☸ Dutta 18:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I did it, and I'm thoroughly bored now.  F i l m F a n  21:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Requested move prematurely closed
No consensus has yet been reached, the RM has not even been relisted once, and Jionpedia, who was heavily involved in the discussion, has closed it. Tried to revert and relist, but undone by Jionpedia.  F i l m F a n  15:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 7 days has been already passed, dude, so it was necessary to close it. --Jionpedia ✉  15:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * See above message, Jionpedia.  F i l m F a n  15:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Where? And please don't make false allegations.--Jionpedia ✉  16:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)