Cannabis Ruderalis

WikiProject iconFilm: French C‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the French cinema task force.

Unclear

"Other four films in the category were Ajami, El secreto de sus ojos, The Milk of Sorrow and The White Ribbon.[7]" -- Is this supposed to be "The Other four films in the category were Ajami, El secreto de sus ojos, The Milk of Sorrow and The White Ribbon.[7]"? Kdammers (talk) 11:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary

This plot summary is too long but according to wp:plot it is better to have summary that is too long than a version that is missing information. Remember wikipedia requires a plot section not an overview69.253.185.154 (talk) 20:53, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. While longer descriptions may appear to provide more data to the reader, a more concise summary may in fact be more informative as it highlights the most important elements. By focusing the reader's attention on the larger structures of a plot, without drowning it in trivial detail, a shorter summary can often help the reader to understand a work much better than an overlong one. Excessively detailed plot summaries may also infringe on copyright and fair-use concerns. from WP:PLOTSUM. Geoff B (talk) 20:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Response While I do feel that this plot section is WAY to detailed. Initially, I was confused regarding several plot elements in the film and was looking for a full Plot Summary of the film. I was unable to since wikipedia is practically the only source on the internet that gives complete plot summaries. Confused, I literally watched the movie 3 times and wrote this summary which took over 5 hours to help others who were confused. This does not meet WP:PLOTSUM, however WP:PLOTSUM also emphasizes that there should be a plot summary for every article. The version you reverted to was not a summary it is merely an overview.

What I am proposing is that in we should work to cut out the cruft in this summary without leaving details vital to the story. We can easily bring this version down to the 700 word requirement. However, I do feel that this version, in its current form, is still more proper than simply removing the summary entirely. Please help me write a better version, I was hoping you could reduce the text this week. If not ill do it next week, but I've already spent 5 hours on this and was hoping someone else could take the helm. Valoem talk 16:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A summary is an overview. See the definition. Per WP:PLOTSUM, the shorter version is better. Your confusion over the film is no reason to have an overlong summary. Geoff B (talk) 18:36, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The correct length of a summary is 400 to 700 words. 135 words is inadequate. In this case, I've got it at about 500 words by focusing on the three main characters. It's a good summary and touches on the main plot points. The film is not intricately plotted so I don't see the need to go beyond this level of detail. --Ring Cinema (talk) 22:08, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ring Cinema I do thank you for you hard work in this article, however the current version (a revised version of your sumary) is better due to incorrect information.
Firstly, Ryed was NOT kidnapped that is incorrect. Secondly per WP:Plotsum summary should contain just the key details and spoilers. The vision Malik has is the most important aspect of the movie hence the title A Prophet. Also this version contains key details of the relationship between Luciani and the Lingharris which should also be included. Lastly, it needs to be stated that Malik is illiterate in the beginning. Valoem talk 14:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The version I wrote contains all the key details (including his growing literacy). In this case, I think 500 words is about right. No need to push the limit for a relatively simple story. Of course it's always possible to add more details, but that's what I'm trying to avoid by sticking to the three main characters. Sorry to disappoint, Valoem, but your version is cluttered, bloated, and sometimes inaccurate. If the version I wrote contains an error, please correct that. Let's leave out the extraneous bits and stick to the three main characters. Thanks for your interest. I'm sure you share with me an admiration for the film and a desire that the article be a good one. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Valoem, I don't think you have support for your extended summary. Please be kind enough to honor the sentiment expressed that your plot summary is too long and detailed. And again I thank you. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE DO NOT REVERT WITHOUT DISCUSSION I highly recommend rewatching the film again it seems you have a huge misunderstanding of the film, which is ironic because you stated that the plot is fairly striaght forward when in fact it is not. I watched the film 3 times. Your verions is incorrect. The boss is not Vettori this is a huge mistake on your part on top of other things in your version. The boss is Jacky Marcaggi. Please do not revert since your version has incorrect information and missed details please lets put our egos behind. I know everyone like to promote their version, but if you are to revert please contact Geoff B as he is a neutral third party. We are both experienced editors no need to engage in edit war. Valoem talk 14:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prophetic incident

Q. Is it essential that the plot summary include the prophetic incident? Good topic for discussion. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Valoem, I'd like to invite you to start the discussion. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lingharris

Valoem suggests that the plot summary is incomplete without "key details of the relationship between Luciani and the Lingharris." I don't agree because Malik's story can be told without it, but I'm open to a discussion of the point. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will be reverting to this version of plot summary if there are no objections

Sentenced to six years in a French prison for attacking police officers, Malik El Djebena (Tahar Rahim), nineteen years old, French of Arab descent, is alone and illiterate. On his arrival at prison, he falls under the sway of a brutal Corsican mafia group, led by Cesar Luciani, who enforce their brutal rule. The prison is divided by racial tension between the Corsicans and Muslims. Malik attempts to survive by remaining invisible to all sides.

Luciani along with his right hand man, Vettori, thinks little of Middle Easterns like Malik and force him to murder a witness, Reyeb, in the next cell block due to Malik ethnicity which allows him better access to other Muslims. The murder is undertaken after training from Luciani’s group. Although the victim haunts him for years afterward, the success puts him under Corsican protection, and Luciani allows him to make coffee and play cards with his gang. Things change when the bulk of the Corsicans are transferred or released. Malik, who had secretly been learning Corsican, is now fluent, along with fluency in Arabic and French, making him useful to the Luciani. Good behavior allows Malik furloughs, day long leaves from prison, so Malik can conduct business for Luciani on the outside. Malik becomes more reliable than even the gang’s longtime attorney, Sampierro.

Ryad, a Muslim friend, teaches Malik to read and write and is the only friend Malik can trust. Ryad exposes Malik to his own heritage allowing him to meet two other Muslims, Tarik and Hassan, and increase his power within the prison. Through Ryad, Malik also becomes entwined with the prison drug dealer, Jordi. Jordi's men were able to hide 25 kilos of hashish prior to their arrest and along with Ryad's early release the three are given the chance to run drugs into the prison together.

However, things are complicated when Ryad is robbed by a drug dealer known as Latif, and is dying when his testicular cancer returns from remission. Malik becomes an intimate of the family, dining at home with his wife and playing with his infant son.

Although Luciani tries to rule Malik by intimidation, he loses his sway. When Luciani learns that his subordinate is using his day leaves and prison protection to supply drugs he attacks Malik, despite his loyalty to the Corsican. Along with the constant harassment of Malik by other members of the Corsican gang, Malik decides on revenge.

Prior to Malik's second furlough, he has a vision of deer crossing a road in his dreams. Malik is sent to meet Brahim Lattrache in Marseille, another Muslim, who is involved in the secret deal between Luciani and the Lingherris, an Italian mafia group. Here it is discovered that there is a mole the Corsican mafia and that Lattrache is bitter over the death of his friend Reyeb. Malik is held at gunpoint when his vision comes true and their vehicle collides with a deer, causing Lattrache to believe Malik is a prophet. Malik makes a deal with Lattrache and discovers that he can intimidate Latif, allowing the drugs to be returned to Ryad.

Sampierro informs Luciani that Jacky Marcaggi, the Don of the Corsican mafia, is secretly dealing with the Lingherris as well and is attempting to uncover the mole himself. With no one to turn to Luciani sends Malik to meet Vettori in order to assassinate Marcaggi and eventually the Lingherris. Ryad is an eager accomplice, since he sees no other way to leave something for his family.

The drug runners refuse to be involved, so the two friends have to go ahead on their own. Malik doublecrosses Vettori on the day of the hit and knocks him unconscious. Marcaggi’s drive changes its routine. Malik attacks and kills Marcaggi’s bodyguards, drags the boss back to his car, and finally leaves him in the care of Vettori.

Upon Malik’s next appearance in the prison yard, he takes his place among the Muslim group he has cultivated and stands under their protection. When Luciani tries to approach him for an explanation, he is violently refused.

Ryad is dead when Malik's sentence ends, but his wife and son meet him. She invites him to take her son’s bedroom and he walks with them to the bus stop, followed by a coterie of Arab protectors.

Reverting to this version I believe that when it comes to this film, I am more knowledgable and I mean this in no offense Ring Cinema, I am sure there are many other films that you understand better than me. Your version contained many errors, I also feel that my more detail version also passes WP:PLOTSUM. Please discuss why your version is better.
I also believe there is a conflict of interest here as the self-promotion of each editor's own version. I believe we should revert to my version until otherwise please discuss.Valoem talk 14:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your version has already been rejected by other editors. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also the current version of the plot summary has plot holes. For example:

Although Luciani tries to rule Malik by intimidation, he loses his sway. Even when the chief learns that his subordinate is using his day leave and prison protection to supply drugs, the punishment is temporary. Luciani has no one else he can trust to carry out a hit on his own boss, Jacki Marcaggi. Ryad becomes Malik's eager accomplice, since he sees no other way to leave something for his family.

Why does Luciani order a hit on his own boss? This needs to be explained and only the version above explains it.

A summary is not going to explain all motivations. This perhaps explains why you can't get the summary right. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly

Malik doublecrosses Luciani’s henchman on the day of the hit, but the operation turns into a chase when Vettori’s car changes its routine.

That is incorrect.

No, that is correct. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Vettori’s car you mean Marcaggi. Valoem talk 16:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thirdly you wrote

Undid revision 382480122 by Valoem (talk) if you'd like to change this version, please take it to discussion. Thanks.

Why does your version stand? Since your version has inconsistencies it should be my version that stands you must justify your version. Valoem talk 15:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some serious grammar weirdness in that. Millahnna (talk) 15:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry about that, I am working on it right now before the restore.Valoem talk 15:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Check for sentence fragments and run on sentences; those are the two biggest things that catch my eye and, in my experience, sometimes the hardest to fix easily. Trying to cobble a whole sentence together out of a fragment can be weird if you're not sure what the intent of the writer was. Since what you have isn't too terribly long, I'm holding off judgment on which I prefer until you're done. I figure, worst case scenario, we can kind of merge the current text with your text if we need to. I agree with Ring that some of your details aren't strictly needed but since you say our current text might be confusing I'm willing to take a look see as long as we can keep the length manageable. Millahnna (talk) 15:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Valoem is seriously mistaken. Don't believe his criticism, since it's hopelessly misplaced. In fact, he didn't even read my summary before he jumped in with his self serving accusations. For the record, there are NO inconsistencies. My edit is a complete summary of the film's main points, without the unfortunate bloat and inferior style of Valoem's already rejected edit. We'll stick with mine for now and let Valoem make his case here on the discussion page where he can make a good contribution. Many thanks. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually that's bad faith there. Here is your original version:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Prophet&oldid=382412980
Why are hiding the fact that I contributed heavily to your incorrect version. You stated that Ryed was kidnapped when in fact he was not. You do not make mention of Malik's illiteracy, there is no set up as to why Luciani wants to kill Marcaggi. In fact you did not even mention Marcaggi, you incorrectly stated him as Vettori. Therefore I havent proven myself more knowledgable on this topic. This is clearly a case of ego with you, I am the one actually trying to create a stronger article. Valoem talk 16:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No bad faith on my part. If there's an error in my version, please feel free to correct it. I'm grateful to you for your effort to make the article as good as possible. Please continue in that spirit. It just so happens my idea of how to organize the plot summary happens to work a little better to keep the clutter out and I'd like your support on that, too. Not really such a big deal. I'm just looking for a good way to narrow the plot to its essentials. It seems that a focus on the three main characters and their evolving relationship is the best way. Thanks again. --Ring Cinema (talk) 16:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your version has already been rejected, and for good reason. I've simplified the summary so it fits nicely within the guidelines. That's what we're trying to do. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


If there is something incorrect in my version, please feel free to correct it. I don't think you're correct about all your objections and I have to observe that you didn't read the current edit very well. However, I'm interested in nothing but making the article as good as possible.

Your version has already been rejected. We are not going to be able to explain everyone's motives for everything they do in the film. That's unreasonable and probably explains why your edit was rejected by more than one editor for length, bloat, excess detail.

I am offering a way to organize the material properly for a summary. Let's do our best to make it as good as possible. If you think your expertise on the film itself is of a high order, please share that. But that doesn't mean you'll have the best idea about how to organize the material in the summary, and there I think I have offered a good place to start. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thats what I'm trying to do. Who has rejected my version? That kind of talk is the egocentric behavior that destroys Wikipedia. It seems you are bent on maintain your version due to ego. There is nothing wrong with my version and you have not point out one error. We should included as much detail as long as it is within 700 words.

Also I have updated the grammical errors. Please advise. Valoem talk 15:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As we know, Valoem, your version was taken down for length. I think it's very dishonest of you to attempt to deny that. I think it would be best if you simply accept that my organization of the material works better than yours. However, I would value your contribution to an edit of the current version. If we stick to the three main characters we will have an excellent summary of the film's main action. Thanks again. --Ring Cinema (talk) 15:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No actually its very dishonest of you to accuse me of that. My version is within 700 character there are no problems here. If you are talking about my original version here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Prophet&oldid=379978615

That is a different story. I was editing this article long before you were. That version is too long and I made no attempts to revert it when Geoff stated correctly that it does not meet WP:PLOTSUM. However I since my current version, which is based off your version, is within the limits, its details are appropriate and necessary to the summary. I believe the general consensus favors my current version now. I will restore if there are no objections. Valoem talk 16:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I am doing the revert now since there are no objections. Also please see Manual of Style:

Plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words. The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction's non-linear storyline, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range. (Discuss with other editors to determine if a summary cannot be contained within the proper range.) Complicated plots may occasionally require clarifications from secondary sources, so cite these sources in the section.

According to this my version is stronger because it includes key points vital to the story such motives for Malik's betray (the key point of the movie) which is not explained in the current version. I have updated the grammical please correct any issues. Thanks for the help:) Valoem talk 18:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply