![]() | 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Can we add New Indian Express as a reliable source? Hence it is bifercated from The Indian Express which is considered as a reliable source.
Does usage of {{Bollywoodhungama}} template in external links section of a film is a violation of external links policy. A user had removed the template from the articles My Name is Khan and Kick (2014 film).-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 13:54, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to please get some input from this community on the issue of various films adding content like, "This was the first film in 1999 to achieve Blockbuster verdict" and similar statements. Here are some examples where I have seen it occur:
I don't think that merely being sourced is enough of a reason for this content to be included. This strikes me as WP:UNDUE, because presumably it's one entity making these verdicts, (Box Office India?) which means that an "undue weight" is being given to their assessment over the assessments of others. For example, in Western film, we don't state as fact "Showgirls attained the rotten verdict" merely because one site called it rotten. Especially problematic, is that this content is typically stated as though it were a fact, as opposed to being presented as a subjective evaluation attributed to a specific source, presented with the appropriate context, like in a Critical Response section with various other balanced reviews.
Proposal: Remove from Bollywood articles unduly weighted "verdicts" that attempt to state as fact any such subjective determination as to the film's success or failure until the content can be presented in a way that covers various interpretations and presents a neutral point of view.
Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
I've run into the phrases "went on floors" and "go on floors" a few times. The only places I find those phrases in Wikipedia or through Google is in the context of Indian cinema. I do not know what the phrases mean and I suspect that most non-Indian users don't know either. What does it mean? Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 04:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've gone through all the "List of Bollywood films of YYYY" articles and removed from the summary tables at the top any mention of "Verdict" or "Blockbuster/Super-Hit/Hit/etc". I have no idea why people keep adding this promotional tripe as if they were facts, but I strongly believe the addition of this nonsense gives undue weight to the opinion of one entity, since it is probably one entity that arrives at these unencylopedic, subjective verdicts. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Kannada films in need of eyes to add and/or translate sources. If you can help, please look in.
I believe that through WP:OEN and WP:INDAFD notability can be established, but I do not have the language skills. Please assist. Schmidt, Michael Q. 06:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fans of Indian film! A discussion is taking place at the admin noticeboard where you people may have some useful input : Noyster (talk), 21:01, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey guys PK (film) is a pretty high-profile article in need of rational editors, preferably ASAP. I'm currently dealing with a couple of users (one has been indeffed) who are filling up the Critical response section with (in my opinion) excessive accolades from politicians and filmmakers, and it's kinda starting to reek of the usual Bollywood promotional fluff. See this current discussion I don't particularly care if my perspective is right or wrong, only that the article is brought up to normal Wikipedia standards. It would be appreciated if you'd please add the article to your watchlists and participate in the discussions. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 09:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Discussion regarding the reliability of Oneindia.com is going at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Oneindia.com. Please voice your opinions.-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 14:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
We all have seen lengthy discussions happening about whether a particular source is reliable or not. If we have a proper resources section on our Project page then there will be no need of these discussions which consume so much time.-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 10:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 10:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Here are some more:
-- If these are all approved, we should add them somewhere on the project's home page. BollyJeff | talk 00:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
These are all good. I can add some more:
Here are some potentials for the un-reliable category:
I would appreciate feedeback at Wikipedia:Peer review/Shah Rukh Khan/archive1. BollyJeff | talk 19:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I could use some NPOV eyes at Badlapur (film). I'm noticing some odd behavior in the critical response section, for example. I'm trying to present neutral reviews that highlight the good and bad, (the complaint of misogyny has come up a few times) but I have noticed that one recent addition was curiously pushed down with a large block of chatty, essentially irrelevant (and improperly formatted) text. There are other matters that I believe I explain in my recent edit summaries there. Since my biggest interest is that we don't let COI editors promote, I'd like to get more balanced eyes there if you have time. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 05:57, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I've opened a discussion at RSN about whether or not cinechicken.com, a RottenTomatoes copycat review aggregator for Bollywood films, could be considered a reliable source. The link is here and I invite you all to participate! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 00:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
While actresses such as Rani Mukerji and Vidya Balan continue to use their birth name after marriage, others including Kareena Kapoor and Aishwarya Rai use their married names Kareena Kapoor Khan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, respectively. Wikipedia policy tells us to use their common name when naming their articles, but almost all media outlets are now addressing Kapoor and Rai by their married names. Recently, Scalhotrod changed Kapoor's article name back to her birth name. Is that a convention we should follow, or do we continue addressing them by their married names? I believe this calls for a vote to avoid conflicts in the future. -- Krimuk|90 ( talk) 06:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Please comment at: Wikipedia:Peer_review/Dilwale_Dulhania_Le_Jayenge/archive1 BollyJeff | talk 13:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is an Indian actor who shared Best Actor at the 1987 5th Damascus International Film Festival. The actor's name in Arabic is transliterated as ماهو شود هوري (Mhw Shwd Hwry), the film's name is translated as رجل وامرأة (man & woman). I think the surname is probably a variation of Chaudhry, but as I'm unfamiliar with Indian cinema does anyone know which film and actor? If so, please edit the page, tia. Timmyshin ( talk) 00:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, I've opened an ANI report about a disruptive IP editor who tends to curse a lot and leave a lot of really incivil edit summaries. The editor also tends to force POV by deleting sources that he objects to, and he also engages in edit warring. The level of his hostility is somewhat odd, which is why I'm thinking he's been around for a while, maybe as a sock operator. If his behavior sounds familiar, please lemme know here. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Proposal to remove the Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards from all Indian film articles. As it would affect a number of articles, I would like to establish consensus before going forward with it. Cowlibob ( talk) 14:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support as requester. These awards are determined by an internet poll of the viewers of a particular website. The website concerned say that they do lots of checks such as IP, email, cookie verification to make sure it's one person for each vote [ [2]] but it's still an internet poll. The awards currently do not have a separate article on wikipedia and I think it will be unlikely to have one as the awards are to my knowledge only discussed on the website which awards them and not in any secondary sources so aren't notable. Cowlibob ( talk) 14:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Krimuk90, Shshshsh, Bollyjeff, Ssven2, Vensatry, and Dr. Blofeld: Pinging some regular contributors to Indian cinema articles. Cowlibob ( talk) 14:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support I would tend to support on the basis that if there is no article on the award, the award has not yet been determined to be notable. The fact that it is an internet poll also gives me pause. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
What about IBN Live movie awards? They are still in Ranaut's FL. If you are saying that other does not talk abouit BHSCA then, how can someone ask me to remove Hello Hall of Fame Awards, which are covered very much by Indian media.— Prashant 16:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Anyone can create thatarticle. That's not a big deal. Is it?— Prashant 16:12, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support per requester. I have never heard of this Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards. BollyJeff | talk 16:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, I don't have any problem in removing these awards. I didn't add Chopra's nomination from IBN Live for Mary Kom. But, I didn't think about the BH awards. Now, I know it is same as IBN Live.— Prashant 17:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support – Not because I'm hearing it for the first time. While the arguments about the reliability of Bollywood Hungama as a source seems to be a never ending one, I see no point in having these non-notable awards. — Vensatry (ping) 19:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support - per above. Shahid • Talk2me 00:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I support removing it as well, if we unanimously agree to not include internet polls to any awards page. I agree with Cyphoidbomb, the notability of BH or IBN is not the question here, but the fact that online polls, no matter from what source, shouldn't be listed among other notable awards. -- Krimuk|90 ( talk) 01:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Support -- Summoned here by bot. I support the removal of it as well, like many have previously said. The award is not a notable subject yet as it does not have an article on Wikipedia. In addition, it is based off of an internet poll, which is questionable. I am in agreement with all suggestions made above. Cheers, Comatmebro ~Come at me~ 21:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
FYI for anyone who has worked with Roshan014, he was found to be operating a sock account, Aleena Afrah. He's been blocked for a week and the sock account has been indeffed. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I was looking at some of the Bollywood's list of awards and nominations and found so many unnecessary awards list such as of Tabu, Urmila Matondkar, Asin, Anil Kapoor and lots more. These list have few awards listed. I don't think these pages are neccesary. I think they should be merged with their parent article or in the filmography like Kangana Ranaut (awards and role). Lot of western articles are like that, they put all the awards in the biography page itself. @ Bollyjeff, Ssven2, Vensatry, Kailash29792, and Cowlibob: What you all have to say about this?— Prashant 11:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
What about award pages of films. I see films with just a handful of awards (that too most of them being minor ones) are forked-out of the parent articles with the sole intention of being taken to the FLC. @ Dr. Blofeld, Bollyjeff, and Dwaipayanc: any thoughts? — Vensatry (ping) 18:51, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The 1957 Telugu film Mayabazar is the first Telugu film to be attempted for FA class. Please feel free to post your comments at the article's peer review to make things at FA more smoother. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 04:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
This year, a UAE-based Bollywood awards show, titled Arab Indo Bollywood Awards, was organised (see this). I'm starting this decision to decipher whether the ceremony is notable enough to warrant inclusion in award lists? Cowlibob, what do you think? -- Krimuk|90 ( talk) 09:51, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
I have created Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema/Tamil cinema task force. Someone please help expand it. Kailash29792 ( talk) 05:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I started a discussion at RSN at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Koimoi. Also, we could use some help at List of highest-grossing Indian films in particular in fleshing out the highest grossing films in the smaller markets. Given two current hit films, and massive constant fighting on the pages and at WP:AN and WP:ANI, the page keep getting protected (fully with the talk page semi) to stop the nonsense over the daily reports of box office results. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 22:52, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
According to this discussion, boxofficeindia.com should be considered a reliable source. However, an editor has brought this up again at WP:RSN (and I've listed Boxofficeindia.com for AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box Office India (2nd nomination). -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 23:02, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
There's an RFC about how to classify the film Baahubali (Tamil and/or Telugu) at Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films#RfC:_How_should_we_classify_Baahubali. I hope this task force may be able to help. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 07:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
An RM that affects this project is currently taking place. Interested editors may wish to discuss here. Chase ( talk | contributions) 17:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, this is a topic that affects anyone who edits in the realm of Indian cinema.
There is a community discussion underway for how to use the |starring=
parameter of
Template:Infobox film. For a while, the
WikiProject Film community has been referring to the billing block of theatrical posters for this information. (For example in
this poster we would extract Channing Tatum, Mila Kunis, Sean Bean, Eddie Redmayne and Douglas Booth, and add that to |starring=
.) I have pointed out that Indian cinema doesn't typically format their movie posters the way Western films do, for example
Drishyam's poster cares about whomever took the still photos, but doesn't care about listing starring roles. I have also heard that Indian films don't always even list starring roles in the credits. So the big issue is: how do we determine who is "starring" in the film? Starring, after all, is a special credit and does not mean the same thing as "appearing in". If you have any opinions or suggestions, I strongly urge you to participate in this discussion as it will affect Indian film articles. Thanks,
Cyphoidbomb (
talk)
20:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
@ Ryk72, BollyJeff, Ravensfire, NinjaRobotPirate, Tsavage, TheRedPenOfDoom, and CosmicEmperor:
Hey all, sorry for the obnoxious mass ping, but I wanted to touch base with all of you, since most of you commented at the RSN with regard to whether or not Cinechicken should be considered a reliable source. (Cosmic, I'm pinging you b/c I saw your removal at PK) Based on my interpretation of the discussion here it seems that although many of us "want to believe" in a Bollywood critical response aggregator because it just might make our lives easier, Cinechicken just isn't quite there yet, as they are not yet established as reputable, and there are other oddities about their site that make them a little sketchy, for instance, when you search for a film, you're redirected to Facebook and asked to give Cinechicken permission to access your account.
Thanks to all who have commented and who will comment. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Cyphoidbomb and Krimuk90:
I know that we don't always all agree on everything, but am I safe in assuming that generally speaking, we're all in agreement that box office totals for films are estimates? Anyone who's had the pleasure of editing at Indian film articles knows that there's a lot of shady crap going on, with a lot of IPs, new users, paid editors and sockpuppets going out of their way to find higher and higher box office figures, sometimes on an hourly basis. While I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that some of these movie companies are using Wikipedia as part of their marketing strategy. What's also a bit troubling to me is that we're using many of these values (which again are estimates) to propagate articles like
List of highest-grossing Indian films. I'm starting to think that it might make sense to mark gross values like |gross=
with the {{
Estimation}} template to make it clear that the values are not to be taken as gospel. (Ex:
est. ₹22 crore.) In my mind it's also somewhat of a bold statement against people who are trying to market their films via box office values. As TheRedPenOfDoom once articulated more elegantly than I am about to: the gross values represent each site's proprietary art of estimating box values. Koimoi's estimate is no better than Times of India's estimate, they're just different, and we might want to consider making it clear that they represent guesses. Thoughts?
Cyphoidbomb (
talk)
19:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Could use some smart editors at Talk:Baahubali: The Beginning. There is a discrepancy about the box values. (Surprise!) One editor kept removing the high 600 crore figure in favor of a 517 crore value supported by BOI, which seems deliberately pernicious. Another side of the dispute involved editors removing the low 517 crore value because they assert that BOI is not an expert in Tollywood film estimates. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of the source in part because they don't attribute the data to any specific writer, but I don't go around unilaterally deciding what is or isn't a reliable source. Anyhow, my solution was to present the gross values in the form of an estimated range, 517 crore - 600 crore, but even that has been met with resistance. I'm interested in making this problematic article stable. If you guys have some ideas for how to remedy this, please comment at the bottom of Talk:Baahubali: The Beginning. And also note that I don't mind being wrong, so long as I am wrong for the right reasons. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, I've noticed a flare-up of activity with users (for instance this one and this one) submitting WomansEra.com as a reference. I know that Arjayay has been encountering this a ton and reverting. I've opened a discussion at WP:RSN. Please participate if you know anything about this magazine. Thank you! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, today I started working on a references FAQ for this task force, which you can find at User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ. There are similar FAQs at WP:TVFAQ and WP:FILM/R, and I find them to be quite valuable, because they give us a list of suitable and unsuitable sources to point to in times of editing grief. :P One thing I think would be helpful is if we could include any Reliable Source Noticeboard discussions that may support the matter, to help other editors understand the rationale for why a source is considered reliable or not. If any of our regulars are reading this, I encourage you to improve this document, and once it gets into decent shape, we can move it into the ICTF edit space. I'll note that I'm not very good at tables, so if you have a better design than mine, feel free to improve it! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I have started a topic in the article talk page but I doubt many people will see it, so posting here as well. Thanks, Biwom ( talk) 09:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
This is an issue that came up at WP:COIN#Imaginationcolors sockfarm cleanup. Various articles were created for awards given by "IndianTelevision.com". Sockpuppets and SPAs were involved, which is why it came up at WP:COIN. The question is whether "IndianTelevision.com" awards are significant. Is IndianTelevision.com a reliable source? Are those award articles worth keeping, or is this just some web site promoting itself on Wikipedia? Comments? John Nagle ( talk) 21:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andria D'Souza - Indian cinema actor. May have 2 lead roles in her filmography. Does that qualify for WP:NACTOR? Discuss! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Is there a requested pages list for this task force? Something like all winners of the National Film Awards or something? I was wondering because I would have remarked that someone else already started Draft:Waman Bhonsle. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 06:19, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Was anyone here aware that a Telugu cinema task force was created by a relatively inexperienced editor? See Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema/Telugu cinema task force. I'm of the opinion that the page should be deleted, since it was created without discussion and would only serves to de-unify the Indian cinema task force into individual languages. Doesn't seem like a great idea. We need all the unified help we can get. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:34, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm having a bit of difficulty buying this source as a reliable indication of MSG2's gross take thus far. For starters, there were some shady antics regarding the first MSG's box take, and most of the recent sources I've seen about MSG2 attribute the gross to the producers, making it a primary source by proxy. This article is vague about where the information is coming from. "After 8 weeks, ‘MSG-2 The Messenger’ has reportedly collected Rs.415.30 Crores in gross." Reportedly? By whom? I thought the reliable sources did their own estimates. And while the main ICTF page indicates that IndiaGlitz is considered reliable, there's no information about who runs the site or how they get their information. I think this warrants re-discussion. Anyone have any thoughts on any of these points? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
In case of Prem Ratan Dhan Payo , gross figures are being displayed. Should the same case be followed for the Tamasha (film) figures as well where net figures are being reported ? Need to have consistency as only net figures are used to determine how much the film actually made. -- ANKMALI ( talk) 04:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Re: this site, I know what "gross" is in finance, i.e. the total amount pulled in, let's say. I know what "net" is in finance, i.e. what you have brought in after you subtract expenses and such. But what is "nett gross"? I see this source says that gross minus entertainment tax is nett gross. Is all we're doing there subtracting the tax and nothing else?
More importantly, we only care about raw gross, right? WikiProject Film tends to focus solely on the raw gross, which doesn't tell you how much of a profit the film made anyway. Some people erroneously think that if your gross is greater than your budget, that you made a profit. This is not true. Typically 2x the budget is considered profit territory for Western cinema because of certain backdoor deals and marketing expenses and crap like that. My point being: We still only care about the gross values for Western films even if they don't tell the whole story. I assume that we have the same attitude about Indian cinema articles, right? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I find that Koimoi is used extensively. However, I listed it as not a reliable source per this statement (not really a discussion) that it is not reliable. I brought this again here in July 2015 and with an empty RSN discussion so I just wanted to see if there's any view finding it a reliable source. In terms of news stories, it's probably easily replaceable but I think it's used quite a bit for box office figures as well. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 11:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Lets keep it simple guys. BOI is the most reliable source. Only BOI accepted in the Wiki community. Lets keep it uniform across board all BW films. Koimoi and TOI and all others dont s*** abou box-office. WikiBriefed ( talk) 12:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Lets keep it simple guys. BOI is the most reliable source. Only BOI accepted in the Wiki community. Lets keep it uniform across board all BW filmsI'm not sure where you got the impression that you can issue edicts, but it's not your place to do so. At present, we allow the inclusion of any reliable source's box estimates, and while I think the community needs to be a little more discriminating about what references we use for film numbers, I don't think I'd support any proposal to use just one reference. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:03, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT BOX OFFICE INDIA AND ITS AFFILIATES DO NOT CONTROL, REPRESENT OR ENDORSE THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR RELIABILITY OF ANY OF THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE AND OTHER USER AND MEMBER GENERATED PAGES AND THAT ANY OPINIONS, ADVICE, STATEMENTS, SERVICES, OFFERS OR OTHER INFORMATION OR CONTENT PRESENTED OR DISSEMINATED ON THE WEB SITE OR ON ANY OTHER USER OR MEMBER GENERATED PAGES ARE THOSE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AUTHORS WHO ARE SOLELY LIABLE FOR THEIR CONTENT
.
WikiBriefed should start by reading Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Guidelines_on_sources where it's clear that Boxofficeindia isn't necessarily a reliable source. There have been numerous prior discussions regarding BoxofficeIndia.com. The discussions at RSN in 2008 here and in July here. Do we really need a third discussion about it? I suspect it'll be the same issue of "there's nothing we got better" (which is false) versus "we have literally no idea what's going on there" (which is true). -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 08:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
This discussion, which you cited: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_13#Boxofficeindia.com appears to show at its conclusion that this source is reliable. In the material that you just added to the front page, you show it on both the 'reliable' and 'not' lists. I think you should take it off the 'not' list. Also, at User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ there is a list in the works that should be consulted. BollyJeff | talk 13:23, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
If more and more users come here to insert BOI links, by replacing all other reliable links, then administrators can blacklist the site. BOI's traffic is due to Wikipedia. Wikipedia has helped BOI to increase it's popularity. The Avengers 05:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Two domain Ip results showed that the websites'IP is 31.172.248.224 which is located in United Kingdom. First - second. Now everything is more suspicious. As siting in UK without having any staff strength like other UK based reputed media: BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Daily Mail, they pretend to know everything about Indian box-office. The Avengers 05:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello. It would be good if some of you could add Ashwini Bhave in their watchlist, cause since 2 December there is one user (or maybe two) who has been repetitively trying to turn the article into an unsourced hagiography and I will soon lose interest in reverting them. Thanks and regards, Biwom ( talk) 18:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, Pawan Singh is a curious article. The bulk of his filmography is made up of redlinks. Is that because Bhojpuri films aren't heavily written about here? Some other reason? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:46, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Many sites uses Tellychakkar as their reliable source though some opposes it. Whether this site is a reliable source or not? D'SuperHero ( talk) 06:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
There is a edit sparring going on Airlift (film) page about actor Inaamulhaq's existence in the film. Sources used were the following sites of Fansofcinema.com and Edumolive.com. The sources didn't seems to be reliable at all. Does still it may used? Ping for the issue ASAP. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 08:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey all, any possibility we could all band together to establish consensus on the inclusion of "nett gross" and "nett" values in Indian cinema articles? I'm seeing a lot of stuff like this which seems way off the mark for the level of detail appropriate for a film article.
And despite problematic grammar and the odd "grossed NN nett" phrasing that would confuse any non-Indian, it seems to make Indian box information really hard to follow, because we're tracking two, and sometimes three different metrics: gross, nett and nett gross. So I'm proposing one of three options:
Frankly, I'm unclear on why the entertainment tax and distributor share is tracked at all. As noted in an earlier discussion on the matter, in Hollywood film articles nobody cares what the studio's net take was minus actor fees, marketing, catering, electric fees are subtracted. It seems completely arbitrary.
As a secondary point of discussion, how many milestones should we track? I understand people writing about the first, second and third day gross values, and maybe even the total at the end of the first week, but how much more of that do we need? 2 week total? 3 week total? Every bit of data until the film completes 100 days? Seems like we'd be fine with opening weekend and final gross, which is pretty much how BoxOfficeMojo does it. [8] The day-by-day updates seem a bit crufty to me, especially since we're talking about estimates anyway.
Feedback is solicited! Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Cross-posting from WT:INB: In the 2010s, one Abhay Dube launched a company called "The Bombay Talkies Limited". He claims that this is a continuation of the historic Bombay Talkies. He also claims that his grandfather Raj Narayan Dube was one of the founders of the original Bombay Talkies along with Himanshu Rai and Devika Rani. Since then, several press-release like newspaper stories have appeared talking about this "revival of Bombay Talkies" and how Raj Narayan Dube was a "pillar" of Indian cinema.
This article from 2013 mentions that "the idea to revive the production house took shape three years ago" i.e. in 2010. That year, the name "Raj Narayan Dube" was added to the Bombay Talkies article on Wikipedia, by an anon, without any source. In 2015, a new article on Raj Narayan Dube was created. Recently, the article Bombay Talkies was re-written using these sources, by BT0912 ( talk · contribs), who claims to the Digital Head of the new company. Also,
MelAntipam ( talk · contribs) has raised some concerns at Talk:Bombay Talkies, which caught my eye. I tried searching for this name and its variations: Raj Narayan / RN Dubey / Rajnarayan Dubey(y). But I cannot find any mention of this guy in even a single source before 2010, which is surprising if he was indeed, one of the founders of a famous studio like Bombay Talkies. There is only one book ( Spot Girl, 2014) which mentions Raj Narayan Dube and Bombay Talkies - it's not a scholarly work, and is obviously based on information from the Wikipedia article or other articles that sprung after the "revival" press release in 2013.
Can anyone else find a pre-2010 source about this Dube-Bombay Talkies link? Any comments are appreciated at Talk:Bombay_Talkies#Errors_in_the_current_version. utcursch | talk 19:46, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I am importing on Commons all Indian movies which are in the public domain. So I created some articles where I found the film. Help needed to complete them. ;o Regards, Yann ( talk) 15:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, FYI, there has been a flare-up of Marathi-language sockpuppetry. Note: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishika.dhanawade/Archive User tends to create sloppy articles related to Marathi film and television, including actors. Some of the articles created recently can be found here and here. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Does anyone know what " the lolo sock" refers to? Should this user be blocked on sight? Thanks, Biwom ( talk) 20:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Something interesting happened recently surrounding Raees (film)--reliable sources appear to have plagiarized the plot summary of Raees, and parroted what may be inaccurate information about the plot. In a nutshell, the Raees article contained a statement that the film criticized the prohibition of alcohol, drugs and prostitution in Gujarat. This spawned a brief back-and-forth [9] [10] between another user and myself, and I wound up removing the content because the details were not adequately substantiated. Here's my detailed comment copy/pasted from Talk:Raees (film)
In these edits I removed content about the film addressing the prohibition of alcohol, drugs and prostitution as the content wasn't found in the source that followed the statement. Further, the original version on 16 July 2015 didn't say anything specific about what type of prohibition the film criticizes, and further details were added a day later without an improvement of the reference.
Complicating issues, recent news articles dated 16-17 February 2016 [11] [12] [13] [14] appear to have copied the same language in this 3 February 2016 version of the article. (Note the change of "criticizes" to "criticises" and the removal of "cruel and clever":
- "The film is set in 1980s Gujarat. It tells the story of the eponymous bootlegger Raees Khan (Shah Rukh Khan) whose business is highly challenged and eventually thwarted by a police officer (Nawazuddin Siddiqui). The film criticises the prohibition of alcohol, prostitution, and drugs in Gujarat."
This highly suggests that some of the trades are copying from Wikipedia without proper attribution ( plagiarism!) and haven't done any actual research or proper reporting. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 10:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The very specific wording that the trades were using, especially after the tweaks made by Kailash29792 implies very strongly that they copied Wikipedia after 3 February 2016. The specifics of alcohol, drugs and prostitution were added without references 17 July 2015, so there's no faith that "criticizes the prohibition of alcohol, prostitution, and drugs in Gujarat" is an accurate statement. In the same edit, the IP said that the film also criticized movie piracy, which we don't know to be accurate. Just wanted to bring this up in a central location so that we have at our disposal a real-world example of the trades copying from Wikipedia instead of doing proper research. It's obviously problematic, because if they copy from us, and we cite them, we get a feedback loop of sketchy information. Not good. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 10:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Anyone know if Ishq Vich: You Never Know was ever released? I had to remove the only reference from the article because it was another cruddy blog. Can't tell if the film was ever released and/or if the article should be considered for deletion. WP:NFF was not satisfied. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Anyone seen this film? There's a discussion that could use more input from folks familiar with it. The issues are: 1) How should genre be presented (also, anyone got any sources for genre?) 2) How should the plot be presented? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I've seen a new vandalism technique flare-up recently--An example here. The user changes the article subject's birthdate to a value that is not supported by the reference, then rearranges the template parameters perhaps in an effort to disguise the change. Just mentioning as a heads-up. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:19, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
The article List of Manipuri films of 1981 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
Marchjuly (
talk)
04:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Anyone know anything about nowrunning.com? It looks like a standard cookie-cutter blog like I see all day long being added to Indian cinema articles for spam purposes. There are about 1900 uses of this domain across Wikipedia, so it's somewhat popular, though I see nothing on their site ( For instance their Contact Us page) that would clearly indicate they are a reliable source run by journalists, or that the site has an established reputation for fact-checking. Anybody have any thoughts? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 02:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Just FYI: A Chinese film is being released today in China, a lot of Indian actors in it. I typed all their names as they appeared in Chinese press to the article, but please correct typos if there are any. Is Sishir Sharma = Shishir Sharma? Suhasini Mule = Suhasini Mulay? I'm not sure so I don't want to link the wrong people. Not sure how much coverage the film has in India. Timmyshin ( talk) 07:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Anyone have any thoughts about Catch News as a reference? I keep seeing it pop up lately, but I don't think I've ever seen it prior to about 2 months ago. I'll be posting at the Indian Noticeboard for other opinions. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 00:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I notice Oneindia.in on the list of unacceptable sources here -- do we consider Filmibeat an extension of this, and if so, should we add it to the list? It would take a huge load off a lot of our plates if we'd start talking about some of these sources and get them added to the XLinkBot list so that they're automatically removed when added. My query here is inspired by this edit at Kabali (film) from an Austrian IP. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Wasn't there a discussion or guideline about not including the indic script in actors and film titles? I cannot find it, but someone is once again adding them everywhere. BollyJeff | talk 17:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
|film_name=
which says "for non-English films: film's name in its native language". That would intuitively include Indian films, so if the film was released with an Indic title (as opposed to something like PK) that would go in the infobox. Similarly
Template:Infobox person contain |native_name=
for "The person's name in their own language, if different". This would be an appropriate place for Indic script. I don't think the point of the discussion was to suppress all Indic script, rather to remove clutter from the lead sentence.
Cyphoidbomb (
talk)
16:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
In this edit IndianCinemaRasigan makes an interesting point in his edit summary, "Removed dollar conversion. The existing conversion is done w.r.t the dollar value in 2016. The conversion rate in 2016 is not the same as it was in 2009." Over the last few months I've seen an increase in people adding year switches to the INRConvert template in the infobox, for instance changing {{INRConvert|123|c}} to {{INRConvert|123|c|year=1990}}. This creates a data clusterfuck in the infobox, when we wind up with:
depending on your screen size. So, the point is a good one that if a film in 2009 was made for Rs. 50 crore, converting it to 2016 US dollars doesn't really paint a clear picture of the cost. However, I also think it's a misuse of space in the infobox to do the inflation calculations. So what options do we have here? One option is to establish consensus to eliminate the use of {{ INRConvert}} in the infobox entirely. Why are we converting to US dollars anyway, especially if the data is only going to be useful for the current year? I feel like there might be a guideline about this somewhere, i.e. why we use the conversion template, I just can't recall where. And now I'm wondering if there's any scenario where the INRConvert template would be useful without the inflation calculations. Thoughts anyone? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:37, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
"Conversions of less-familiar currencies may be provided in terms of more familiar currencies – such as the US dollar, euro or pound sterling – using an appropriate rate (which is often not the current exchange rate)."
Please see: Talk:Indo-Bangladesh joint production#The state of this article in July 2016
Thank you, all.
Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 09:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Is Bollywood Hungama is good source for box office numbers? It gives day-wise figures in the domestic as well overseas box office, and the earnings are supported by most of India's leading newspapers. Semanti Paul ( talk) 07:05, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey all, boy, Kabali has been causing me a headache over the last week with all the requests that we take the producer's word on box office gross, etc. Anyhow...
Anyone got any thoughts on this? An edit request came in requesting we boost the gross for Kabali to 600+ crore based on this reference. Seems odd to me. Many media outlets were reporting that the film brought in 200 crore before the film even opened (from music rights and such) so I wonder if that 200 is being included in the 650 crore estimate. Also, according to the source PK grossed 625 in 24 days, whereas Kabali allegedly grossed 650 crore in 10 days? Seems like hype to me. If anyone is so compelled, some comments at on the talk page would be appreciated. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:29, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Update: Of course I've had to open a similar discussion at Talk:Kabali (film) for the same reason. In a different post, Financial Express was more transparent about their inclusion of the 200 crore pre-release income in their total. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:46, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
As it is, Kabali redirects to Kabali (film). Should the page be moved to Kabali? Coderzombie ( talk) 10:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, should it be of interest, there are two discussions about whether or not to merge Tollywood Highest grossing movies and List of highest-grossing Tamil movies into List of highest-grossing Indian films.
The discussions can be found at:
Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
If you like old Hollywood films and actors and want to win something daily for editing them, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Golden Hollywood Contest. If it's a success we can run one for Indian cinema too, so I need names and support on this!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
I know I'm pretty much just talking to myself these days here, but an editor is planning to swap out the Koimoi-supported content at List of highest-grossing Indian films soon. I've suggested that he open a discussion on that article's talk page. If this is something you'd object to, you might weigh in if/when he does that. While Koimoi is on the WP:ICTF list of sites not to use, I'm not sure how much discussion was actually held on the matter. I didn't see much at RSN. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 06:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
"Almost all films listed in the highest grossing Bollywood movies are manipulated, as different sources say diff values. Koimoi is been in for so many discussions whether its a reliable source or not. Boxoffice India is lot more accurate among all of these. There are huge difference between the collections which are mentioned in koimoi and boxoffice india. Almost 20-50crs. Need OPINIONS about this problem. As its an important page which states the highest grossing movies, we should do our best to improve and show more of a reliable source. Here is what i got. [15]. Its mentiones all highest grossing movies. Shall we replace koimoi sources which are unreliable with these above mentioned boxoffice india source. Expert Opinions and suggestions pls.......... Ambeinghari ( talk) 05:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
This was the conversation I had on Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films few minutes back and I got an expert reply about this issue. Opinions and yours point of view regarding this issue is needed. pls do check. shall we replace koimoi with boxoffice india source????? with that the list will completely change and it will look this.
* |
Rank | Movie | Year | Studio(s) / Producers | Language | Worldwide gross |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | PK | 2014 | Vinod Chopra Films | Hindi | ₹742.97 crore (US$89 million) [16] |
2 | Bajrangi Bhaijaan | 2015 | Salman Khan Films/ Kabir Khan Films | Hindi | ₹603.99 crore (US$72 million) [17] |
3 | Baahubali: The Beginning | 2015 | Arka Media Works | Telugu and Tamil | ₹600 crore (US$72 million) [18] [19] |
4 | * Sultan | 2016 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹580 crore (US$69 million) [20] |
5 | Dhoom 3 | 2013 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹539.87 crore (US$65 million) [21] |
6 | Chennai Express | 2013 | Red Chillies Entertainment | Hindi | ₹395.92 crore (US$47 million) [22] |
7 | 3 Idiots | 2009 | Vinod Chopra Films | Hindi | ₹390.90 crore (US$47 million) [23] |
8 | Dilwale | 2015 | Red Chillies Entertainment | Hindi | ₹372.23 crore (US$45 million) [24] |
9 | Prem Ratan Dhan Payo | 2015 | Rajshri Productions | Hindi | ₹365.45 crore (US$44 million) [25] |
10 | Bajirao Mastani | 2015 | SLB Films | Hindi | ₹358.20 crore (US$43 million) [26] |
11 | Kick | 2014 | Nadiadwala Grandson Entertainment | Hindi | ₹351.80 crore (US$42 million) [27] |
12 | Happy New Year | 2014 | Red Chillies Entertainment | Hindi | ₹345.26 crore (US$41 million) [28] |
13 | Ek Tha Tiger | 2012 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹308.31 crore (US$37 million) [29] |
14 | Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani | 2013 | Dharma Productions | Hindi | ₹295.61 crore (US$35 million) [30] |
15 | Krrish 3 | 2013 | Filmkraft Productions Pvt. Ltd | Hindi | ₹291.52 crore (US$35 million) [31] |
You all are also invited to discuss about it on Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films. valuable comments pls.... Ambeinghari ( talk) 07:21, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Be aware that Ambeinghari is a sock. All of his edits are based on "fanship". Inside the Valley ( talk) 07:45, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
First of all Inside the Valley am not a sock. who are you to call me a sock? Investigation going on right, and not yet proven. so pls don't call me a sock. I don't know why u r against me?? and secondly this is not the place. here an important discussion is going on. so pls. if you have any opinion about this matter you are welcome. again pls don't call me a sock. thanks .... Ambeinghari ( talk) 08:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the SPAM. I've put this message in some Discussion Pages, but maybe I should have begun with this from the very beggining. Please Check this petition. We have a lot of pictures of a relevant Telugu film shooting, but I'm European and I can't recognise a single one. Here the Commons Category.-- TaronjaSatsuma ( talk) 21:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
News from gackhollywood.com can be used as reliable refrence? — Júnior N 14:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply.— Júnior N 12:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
There's a discussion at WP:RSN#Kabali (film) and List of highest-grossing Indian films related to inconsistent grosses reported by Indian Express vs. IBT. Any feedback would be appreciated. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 07:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Is there any way to recover references from Deccan Chronicle. — Júnior N 13:37, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
In this edit, an editor rejected my statement that IndiaGlitz is not considered a reliable source by the ICTF. Needless to say, I'm a bit confused here. The guidelines on sources at WP:ICTF places IndiaGlitz in the "Do not use" section, but there is a link an RSN discussion that tends to lean toward keep. Can we reestablish whether or not it's acceptable? Kailash29792, you were involved in the original RSN discussion. BladesMulti was indeffed for being a sock of OccultZone (so I'm loath to consider his opinion) and Sriram Vikram hasn't edited in three months. Also, if anyone else has any thoughts about this, that'd be nice. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey everybody, Mudinja Ivana Pudi appears to be a film made in Tamil and Kannada. The Kannada title appears to be Kotigobba 2. The lead reads:
This is odd because the lead typically starts with the name of the article. If this trend is going to continue, it might make sense to discuss how we should approach these articles. For example, should the article be under Mudinja Ivana Pudi, or Kotigobba 2? How do we decide what the primary article title is if the film is made in 2 languages? If a film has two titles in two languages, how do we present that in the lead and in the infobox?
There was a big kerfuffle at Talk:Baahubali about a year and a half ago because the pro- Telugu folks wanted to make it clear that this was a Telugu industry film, when the film was simultaneously produced in Telugu and Tamil. Is the ethnic film "industry" that produced it a factor worth considering? Is there a smarter way to go about this? How do we present the information in the rest of the article? Input would be appreciated. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 02:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Kotigobba 2 (English: One in a crore/10 million) in Kannada, Mudinja Ivana Pudi (English: Catch him if you can) in Tamil, is a 2016 Indian action film directed by K. S. Ravikumar.
An editor has requested that a column be added at Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films that would reflect gross box office values adjusted for inflation. If you have thoughts on this, please feel free to comment. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Rank | Movie | Year | Studio(s)/Producers | Language | Worldwide gross | In 2024 currency |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | PK | 2014 | Vinod Chopra Films/ Rajkumar Hirani Films | Hindi | ₹792 crore (US$95 million) | ₹1265.47 crore |
2 | Baahubali: The Beginning | 2015 | Arka Media Works | ₹650 crore (US$78 million) | ₹980.9 crore | |
3 | Bajrangi Bhaijaan | 2015 | Salman Khan Films/ Kabir Khan Films | Hindi | ₹626 crore (US$75 million) | ₹944.69 crore |
4 | Sultan | 2016 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹584.25 crore (US$70 million) | ₹839.95 crore |
I keep seeing editors change the spelling of Ajay Devgan's name from Devgan to Devgn like here (I'm sure I saw another change yesterday, too.) I know that he's sometimes credited as both, and I know that his production company is Ajay Devgn FFilms -- Does the community have an official take on this? Did he change his name officially? Do we vacillate between Devgan and Devgn depending on how he's credited in the film? Was there a cut-off period where he stopped going by Devgan entirely and everything after NNNN year is Devgn? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Input needed on the issue of how to communicate Kabali's gross.
There was a whole RSN discussion about this, but it really went nowhere.
So while Financial Express and various blogs were trumpeting the record-breaking success of Kabali, very little has been written about it since then in sources that are not Financial Express or their affiliates.
The question for the community is: How do we communicate Kabali's gross to readers?
|gross=
parameter. Some possibilities: The word "Disputed" with a link to a relevant prose section. The lowest undisputed value. A range between the lowest estimate and the highest.This disparity also has the potential of affecting language in other articles. For instance in some articles we will encounter phrasing like: "Baahubali: The Beginning was the third highest-grossing Indian film behind PK and Kabali." That's something to consider as well.
Your feedback would be very much appreciated. If response is poor, I may have to open this up to an RfC. It seems like a fairly significant issue in the world of Indian cinema. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
And coming to the query,
And i strongly think its wise and fair to claim a "Dispute" as "Disputed" and leave the audience to decide on what to take. Thanks. -- Pearll's Sun TALK 21:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hey all, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#Languages ordering in infobox and elsewhere. This pertains to how we should organize the list of languages for multi-lingual films (like Baahubali: The Beginning, 2.0, etc.) Your input will be instrumental in our ability to manage disruptions to articles. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 01:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Why do we have two articles for the same film, Mudinja Ivana Pudi and Kotigobba 2? @ Ab abhi: You created Kotigobba 2 (improperly, by the way, since you performed a copy/paste move but did not properly attribute the source article) and Kailash29792, you seem to have encouraged this. Does this make any sense? Is this the future of Indian film articles, where films produced in multiple languages now require two unique article to satisfy everyone? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 01:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
What's the deal with all the additions of satellite rights content in articles? [39] [40] Is this noteworthy? Why? There's nothing at MOS:FILM that would encourage the inclusion of every aspect of a film's finances. Tons of western films wind up being shown on cable, on network television, etc. but I don't think I've ever seen this information detailed in a western film article. Thoughts? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Aaaaaand, Nairspecht was indeffed for sockpuppetry. His was the only opinion in favor of including satellite rights data. If anyone has any thoughts on the above, your comments are still welcome. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Anybody here love movies? Of course you do LOL! The first challenge for India has arrived, Wikipedia:WikiProject India/The 1000 Challenge (Indian cinema). Interested in winning prizes for fleshing your favourite films and actors and seeing articles coming in like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon? Sign up if interested and let's start to see people expanding those stale old stubs and producing some good work for Indian cinema! 1000 articles is an achievable target, and a chance to showcase your work and be credited.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Can we add New Indian Express as a reliable source? Hence it is bifercated from The Indian Express which is considered as a reliable source.
Does usage of {{Bollywoodhungama}} template in external links section of a film is a violation of external links policy. A user had removed the template from the articles My Name is Khan and Kick (2014 film).-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 13:54, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to please get some input from this community on the issue of various films adding content like, "This was the first film in 1999 to achieve Blockbuster verdict" and similar statements. Here are some examples where I have seen it occur:
I don't think that merely being sourced is enough of a reason for this content to be included. This strikes me as WP:UNDUE, because presumably it's one entity making these verdicts, (Box Office India?) which means that an "undue weight" is being given to their assessment over the assessments of others. For example, in Western film, we don't state as fact "Showgirls attained the rotten verdict" merely because one site called it rotten. Especially problematic, is that this content is typically stated as though it were a fact, as opposed to being presented as a subjective evaluation attributed to a specific source, presented with the appropriate context, like in a Critical Response section with various other balanced reviews.
Proposal: Remove from Bollywood articles unduly weighted "verdicts" that attempt to state as fact any such subjective determination as to the film's success or failure until the content can be presented in a way that covers various interpretations and presents a neutral point of view.
Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
I've run into the phrases "went on floors" and "go on floors" a few times. The only places I find those phrases in Wikipedia or through Google is in the context of Indian cinema. I do not know what the phrases mean and I suspect that most non-Indian users don't know either. What does it mean? Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 04:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've gone through all the "List of Bollywood films of YYYY" articles and removed from the summary tables at the top any mention of "Verdict" or "Blockbuster/Super-Hit/Hit/etc". I have no idea why people keep adding this promotional tripe as if they were facts, but I strongly believe the addition of this nonsense gives undue weight to the opinion of one entity, since it is probably one entity that arrives at these unencylopedic, subjective verdicts. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Kannada films in need of eyes to add and/or translate sources. If you can help, please look in.
I believe that through WP:OEN and WP:INDAFD notability can be established, but I do not have the language skills. Please assist. Schmidt, Michael Q. 06:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fans of Indian film! A discussion is taking place at the admin noticeboard where you people may have some useful input : Noyster (talk), 21:01, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey guys PK (film) is a pretty high-profile article in need of rational editors, preferably ASAP. I'm currently dealing with a couple of users (one has been indeffed) who are filling up the Critical response section with (in my opinion) excessive accolades from politicians and filmmakers, and it's kinda starting to reek of the usual Bollywood promotional fluff. See this current discussion I don't particularly care if my perspective is right or wrong, only that the article is brought up to normal Wikipedia standards. It would be appreciated if you'd please add the article to your watchlists and participate in the discussions. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 09:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Discussion regarding the reliability of Oneindia.com is going at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Oneindia.com. Please voice your opinions.-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 14:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
We all have seen lengthy discussions happening about whether a particular source is reliable or not. If we have a proper resources section on our Project page then there will be no need of these discussions which consume so much time.-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 10:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 10:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Here are some more:
-- If these are all approved, we should add them somewhere on the project's home page. BollyJeff | talk 00:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
These are all good. I can add some more:
Here are some potentials for the un-reliable category:
I would appreciate feedeback at Wikipedia:Peer review/Shah Rukh Khan/archive1. BollyJeff | talk 19:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I could use some NPOV eyes at Badlapur (film). I'm noticing some odd behavior in the critical response section, for example. I'm trying to present neutral reviews that highlight the good and bad, (the complaint of misogyny has come up a few times) but I have noticed that one recent addition was curiously pushed down with a large block of chatty, essentially irrelevant (and improperly formatted) text. There are other matters that I believe I explain in my recent edit summaries there. Since my biggest interest is that we don't let COI editors promote, I'd like to get more balanced eyes there if you have time. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 05:57, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I've opened a discussion at RSN about whether or not cinechicken.com, a RottenTomatoes copycat review aggregator for Bollywood films, could be considered a reliable source. The link is here and I invite you all to participate! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 00:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
While actresses such as Rani Mukerji and Vidya Balan continue to use their birth name after marriage, others including Kareena Kapoor and Aishwarya Rai use their married names Kareena Kapoor Khan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, respectively. Wikipedia policy tells us to use their common name when naming their articles, but almost all media outlets are now addressing Kapoor and Rai by their married names. Recently, Scalhotrod changed Kapoor's article name back to her birth name. Is that a convention we should follow, or do we continue addressing them by their married names? I believe this calls for a vote to avoid conflicts in the future. -- Krimuk|90 ( talk) 06:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Please comment at: Wikipedia:Peer_review/Dilwale_Dulhania_Le_Jayenge/archive1 BollyJeff | talk 13:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is an Indian actor who shared Best Actor at the 1987 5th Damascus International Film Festival. The actor's name in Arabic is transliterated as ماهو شود هوري (Mhw Shwd Hwry), the film's name is translated as رجل وامرأة (man & woman). I think the surname is probably a variation of Chaudhry, but as I'm unfamiliar with Indian cinema does anyone know which film and actor? If so, please edit the page, tia. Timmyshin ( talk) 00:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, I've opened an ANI report about a disruptive IP editor who tends to curse a lot and leave a lot of really incivil edit summaries. The editor also tends to force POV by deleting sources that he objects to, and he also engages in edit warring. The level of his hostility is somewhat odd, which is why I'm thinking he's been around for a while, maybe as a sock operator. If his behavior sounds familiar, please lemme know here. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Proposal to remove the Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards from all Indian film articles. As it would affect a number of articles, I would like to establish consensus before going forward with it. Cowlibob ( talk) 14:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support as requester. These awards are determined by an internet poll of the viewers of a particular website. The website concerned say that they do lots of checks such as IP, email, cookie verification to make sure it's one person for each vote [ [2]] but it's still an internet poll. The awards currently do not have a separate article on wikipedia and I think it will be unlikely to have one as the awards are to my knowledge only discussed on the website which awards them and not in any secondary sources so aren't notable. Cowlibob ( talk) 14:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Krimuk90, Shshshsh, Bollyjeff, Ssven2, Vensatry, and Dr. Blofeld: Pinging some regular contributors to Indian cinema articles. Cowlibob ( talk) 14:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support I would tend to support on the basis that if there is no article on the award, the award has not yet been determined to be notable. The fact that it is an internet poll also gives me pause. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
What about IBN Live movie awards? They are still in Ranaut's FL. If you are saying that other does not talk abouit BHSCA then, how can someone ask me to remove Hello Hall of Fame Awards, which are covered very much by Indian media.— Prashant 16:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Anyone can create thatarticle. That's not a big deal. Is it?— Prashant 16:12, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support per requester. I have never heard of this Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards. BollyJeff | talk 16:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, I don't have any problem in removing these awards. I didn't add Chopra's nomination from IBN Live for Mary Kom. But, I didn't think about the BH awards. Now, I know it is same as IBN Live.— Prashant 17:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support – Not because I'm hearing it for the first time. While the arguments about the reliability of Bollywood Hungama as a source seems to be a never ending one, I see no point in having these non-notable awards. — Vensatry (ping) 19:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Support - per above. Shahid • Talk2me 00:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I support removing it as well, if we unanimously agree to not include internet polls to any awards page. I agree with Cyphoidbomb, the notability of BH or IBN is not the question here, but the fact that online polls, no matter from what source, shouldn't be listed among other notable awards. -- Krimuk|90 ( talk) 01:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Support -- Summoned here by bot. I support the removal of it as well, like many have previously said. The award is not a notable subject yet as it does not have an article on Wikipedia. In addition, it is based off of an internet poll, which is questionable. I am in agreement with all suggestions made above. Cheers, Comatmebro ~Come at me~ 21:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
FYI for anyone who has worked with Roshan014, he was found to be operating a sock account, Aleena Afrah. He's been blocked for a week and the sock account has been indeffed. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I was looking at some of the Bollywood's list of awards and nominations and found so many unnecessary awards list such as of Tabu, Urmila Matondkar, Asin, Anil Kapoor and lots more. These list have few awards listed. I don't think these pages are neccesary. I think they should be merged with their parent article or in the filmography like Kangana Ranaut (awards and role). Lot of western articles are like that, they put all the awards in the biography page itself. @ Bollyjeff, Ssven2, Vensatry, Kailash29792, and Cowlibob: What you all have to say about this?— Prashant 11:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
What about award pages of films. I see films with just a handful of awards (that too most of them being minor ones) are forked-out of the parent articles with the sole intention of being taken to the FLC. @ Dr. Blofeld, Bollyjeff, and Dwaipayanc: any thoughts? — Vensatry (ping) 18:51, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The 1957 Telugu film Mayabazar is the first Telugu film to be attempted for FA class. Please feel free to post your comments at the article's peer review to make things at FA more smoother. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 04:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
This year, a UAE-based Bollywood awards show, titled Arab Indo Bollywood Awards, was organised (see this). I'm starting this decision to decipher whether the ceremony is notable enough to warrant inclusion in award lists? Cowlibob, what do you think? -- Krimuk|90 ( talk) 09:51, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
I have created Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema/Tamil cinema task force. Someone please help expand it. Kailash29792 ( talk) 05:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I started a discussion at RSN at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Koimoi. Also, we could use some help at List of highest-grossing Indian films in particular in fleshing out the highest grossing films in the smaller markets. Given two current hit films, and massive constant fighting on the pages and at WP:AN and WP:ANI, the page keep getting protected (fully with the talk page semi) to stop the nonsense over the daily reports of box office results. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 22:52, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
According to this discussion, boxofficeindia.com should be considered a reliable source. However, an editor has brought this up again at WP:RSN (and I've listed Boxofficeindia.com for AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box Office India (2nd nomination). -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 23:02, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
There's an RFC about how to classify the film Baahubali (Tamil and/or Telugu) at Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films#RfC:_How_should_we_classify_Baahubali. I hope this task force may be able to help. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 07:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
An RM that affects this project is currently taking place. Interested editors may wish to discuss here. Chase ( talk | contributions) 17:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, this is a topic that affects anyone who edits in the realm of Indian cinema.
There is a community discussion underway for how to use the |starring=
parameter of
Template:Infobox film. For a while, the
WikiProject Film community has been referring to the billing block of theatrical posters for this information. (For example in
this poster we would extract Channing Tatum, Mila Kunis, Sean Bean, Eddie Redmayne and Douglas Booth, and add that to |starring=
.) I have pointed out that Indian cinema doesn't typically format their movie posters the way Western films do, for example
Drishyam's poster cares about whomever took the still photos, but doesn't care about listing starring roles. I have also heard that Indian films don't always even list starring roles in the credits. So the big issue is: how do we determine who is "starring" in the film? Starring, after all, is a special credit and does not mean the same thing as "appearing in". If you have any opinions or suggestions, I strongly urge you to participate in this discussion as it will affect Indian film articles. Thanks,
Cyphoidbomb (
talk)
20:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
@ Ryk72, BollyJeff, Ravensfire, NinjaRobotPirate, Tsavage, TheRedPenOfDoom, and CosmicEmperor:
Hey all, sorry for the obnoxious mass ping, but I wanted to touch base with all of you, since most of you commented at the RSN with regard to whether or not Cinechicken should be considered a reliable source. (Cosmic, I'm pinging you b/c I saw your removal at PK) Based on my interpretation of the discussion here it seems that although many of us "want to believe" in a Bollywood critical response aggregator because it just might make our lives easier, Cinechicken just isn't quite there yet, as they are not yet established as reputable, and there are other oddities about their site that make them a little sketchy, for instance, when you search for a film, you're redirected to Facebook and asked to give Cinechicken permission to access your account.
Thanks to all who have commented and who will comment. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Cyphoidbomb and Krimuk90:
I know that we don't always all agree on everything, but am I safe in assuming that generally speaking, we're all in agreement that box office totals for films are estimates? Anyone who's had the pleasure of editing at Indian film articles knows that there's a lot of shady crap going on, with a lot of IPs, new users, paid editors and sockpuppets going out of their way to find higher and higher box office figures, sometimes on an hourly basis. While I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that some of these movie companies are using Wikipedia as part of their marketing strategy. What's also a bit troubling to me is that we're using many of these values (which again are estimates) to propagate articles like
List of highest-grossing Indian films. I'm starting to think that it might make sense to mark gross values like |gross=
with the {{
Estimation}} template to make it clear that the values are not to be taken as gospel. (Ex:
est. ₹22 crore.) In my mind it's also somewhat of a bold statement against people who are trying to market their films via box office values. As TheRedPenOfDoom once articulated more elegantly than I am about to: the gross values represent each site's proprietary art of estimating box values. Koimoi's estimate is no better than Times of India's estimate, they're just different, and we might want to consider making it clear that they represent guesses. Thoughts?
Cyphoidbomb (
talk)
19:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Could use some smart editors at Talk:Baahubali: The Beginning. There is a discrepancy about the box values. (Surprise!) One editor kept removing the high 600 crore figure in favor of a 517 crore value supported by BOI, which seems deliberately pernicious. Another side of the dispute involved editors removing the low 517 crore value because they assert that BOI is not an expert in Tollywood film estimates. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of the source in part because they don't attribute the data to any specific writer, but I don't go around unilaterally deciding what is or isn't a reliable source. Anyhow, my solution was to present the gross values in the form of an estimated range, 517 crore - 600 crore, but even that has been met with resistance. I'm interested in making this problematic article stable. If you guys have some ideas for how to remedy this, please comment at the bottom of Talk:Baahubali: The Beginning. And also note that I don't mind being wrong, so long as I am wrong for the right reasons. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, I've noticed a flare-up of activity with users (for instance this one and this one) submitting WomansEra.com as a reference. I know that Arjayay has been encountering this a ton and reverting. I've opened a discussion at WP:RSN. Please participate if you know anything about this magazine. Thank you! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, today I started working on a references FAQ for this task force, which you can find at User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ. There are similar FAQs at WP:TVFAQ and WP:FILM/R, and I find them to be quite valuable, because they give us a list of suitable and unsuitable sources to point to in times of editing grief. :P One thing I think would be helpful is if we could include any Reliable Source Noticeboard discussions that may support the matter, to help other editors understand the rationale for why a source is considered reliable or not. If any of our regulars are reading this, I encourage you to improve this document, and once it gets into decent shape, we can move it into the ICTF edit space. I'll note that I'm not very good at tables, so if you have a better design than mine, feel free to improve it! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I have started a topic in the article talk page but I doubt many people will see it, so posting here as well. Thanks, Biwom ( talk) 09:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
This is an issue that came up at WP:COIN#Imaginationcolors sockfarm cleanup. Various articles were created for awards given by "IndianTelevision.com". Sockpuppets and SPAs were involved, which is why it came up at WP:COIN. The question is whether "IndianTelevision.com" awards are significant. Is IndianTelevision.com a reliable source? Are those award articles worth keeping, or is this just some web site promoting itself on Wikipedia? Comments? John Nagle ( talk) 21:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andria D'Souza - Indian cinema actor. May have 2 lead roles in her filmography. Does that qualify for WP:NACTOR? Discuss! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 19:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Is there a requested pages list for this task force? Something like all winners of the National Film Awards or something? I was wondering because I would have remarked that someone else already started Draft:Waman Bhonsle. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 06:19, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Was anyone here aware that a Telugu cinema task force was created by a relatively inexperienced editor? See Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema/Telugu cinema task force. I'm of the opinion that the page should be deleted, since it was created without discussion and would only serves to de-unify the Indian cinema task force into individual languages. Doesn't seem like a great idea. We need all the unified help we can get. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:34, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm having a bit of difficulty buying this source as a reliable indication of MSG2's gross take thus far. For starters, there were some shady antics regarding the first MSG's box take, and most of the recent sources I've seen about MSG2 attribute the gross to the producers, making it a primary source by proxy. This article is vague about where the information is coming from. "After 8 weeks, ‘MSG-2 The Messenger’ has reportedly collected Rs.415.30 Crores in gross." Reportedly? By whom? I thought the reliable sources did their own estimates. And while the main ICTF page indicates that IndiaGlitz is considered reliable, there's no information about who runs the site or how they get their information. I think this warrants re-discussion. Anyone have any thoughts on any of these points? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
In case of Prem Ratan Dhan Payo , gross figures are being displayed. Should the same case be followed for the Tamasha (film) figures as well where net figures are being reported ? Need to have consistency as only net figures are used to determine how much the film actually made. -- ANKMALI ( talk) 04:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Re: this site, I know what "gross" is in finance, i.e. the total amount pulled in, let's say. I know what "net" is in finance, i.e. what you have brought in after you subtract expenses and such. But what is "nett gross"? I see this source says that gross minus entertainment tax is nett gross. Is all we're doing there subtracting the tax and nothing else?
More importantly, we only care about raw gross, right? WikiProject Film tends to focus solely on the raw gross, which doesn't tell you how much of a profit the film made anyway. Some people erroneously think that if your gross is greater than your budget, that you made a profit. This is not true. Typically 2x the budget is considered profit territory for Western cinema because of certain backdoor deals and marketing expenses and crap like that. My point being: We still only care about the gross values for Western films even if they don't tell the whole story. I assume that we have the same attitude about Indian cinema articles, right? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I find that Koimoi is used extensively. However, I listed it as not a reliable source per this statement (not really a discussion) that it is not reliable. I brought this again here in July 2015 and with an empty RSN discussion so I just wanted to see if there's any view finding it a reliable source. In terms of news stories, it's probably easily replaceable but I think it's used quite a bit for box office figures as well. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 11:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Lets keep it simple guys. BOI is the most reliable source. Only BOI accepted in the Wiki community. Lets keep it uniform across board all BW films. Koimoi and TOI and all others dont s*** abou box-office. WikiBriefed ( talk) 12:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Lets keep it simple guys. BOI is the most reliable source. Only BOI accepted in the Wiki community. Lets keep it uniform across board all BW filmsI'm not sure where you got the impression that you can issue edicts, but it's not your place to do so. At present, we allow the inclusion of any reliable source's box estimates, and while I think the community needs to be a little more discriminating about what references we use for film numbers, I don't think I'd support any proposal to use just one reference. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:03, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT BOX OFFICE INDIA AND ITS AFFILIATES DO NOT CONTROL, REPRESENT OR ENDORSE THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR RELIABILITY OF ANY OF THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE AND OTHER USER AND MEMBER GENERATED PAGES AND THAT ANY OPINIONS, ADVICE, STATEMENTS, SERVICES, OFFERS OR OTHER INFORMATION OR CONTENT PRESENTED OR DISSEMINATED ON THE WEB SITE OR ON ANY OTHER USER OR MEMBER GENERATED PAGES ARE THOSE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AUTHORS WHO ARE SOLELY LIABLE FOR THEIR CONTENT
.
WikiBriefed should start by reading Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Guidelines_on_sources where it's clear that Boxofficeindia isn't necessarily a reliable source. There have been numerous prior discussions regarding BoxofficeIndia.com. The discussions at RSN in 2008 here and in July here. Do we really need a third discussion about it? I suspect it'll be the same issue of "there's nothing we got better" (which is false) versus "we have literally no idea what's going on there" (which is true). -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 08:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
This discussion, which you cited: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_13#Boxofficeindia.com appears to show at its conclusion that this source is reliable. In the material that you just added to the front page, you show it on both the 'reliable' and 'not' lists. I think you should take it off the 'not' list. Also, at User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ there is a list in the works that should be consulted. BollyJeff | talk 13:23, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
If more and more users come here to insert BOI links, by replacing all other reliable links, then administrators can blacklist the site. BOI's traffic is due to Wikipedia. Wikipedia has helped BOI to increase it's popularity. The Avengers 05:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Two domain Ip results showed that the websites'IP is 31.172.248.224 which is located in United Kingdom. First - second. Now everything is more suspicious. As siting in UK without having any staff strength like other UK based reputed media: BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Daily Mail, they pretend to know everything about Indian box-office. The Avengers 05:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello. It would be good if some of you could add Ashwini Bhave in their watchlist, cause since 2 December there is one user (or maybe two) who has been repetitively trying to turn the article into an unsourced hagiography and I will soon lose interest in reverting them. Thanks and regards, Biwom ( talk) 18:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, Pawan Singh is a curious article. The bulk of his filmography is made up of redlinks. Is that because Bhojpuri films aren't heavily written about here? Some other reason? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:46, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Many sites uses Tellychakkar as their reliable source though some opposes it. Whether this site is a reliable source or not? D'SuperHero ( talk) 06:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
There is a edit sparring going on Airlift (film) page about actor Inaamulhaq's existence in the film. Sources used were the following sites of Fansofcinema.com and Edumolive.com. The sources didn't seems to be reliable at all. Does still it may used? Ping for the issue ASAP. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 08:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey all, any possibility we could all band together to establish consensus on the inclusion of "nett gross" and "nett" values in Indian cinema articles? I'm seeing a lot of stuff like this which seems way off the mark for the level of detail appropriate for a film article.
And despite problematic grammar and the odd "grossed NN nett" phrasing that would confuse any non-Indian, it seems to make Indian box information really hard to follow, because we're tracking two, and sometimes three different metrics: gross, nett and nett gross. So I'm proposing one of three options:
Frankly, I'm unclear on why the entertainment tax and distributor share is tracked at all. As noted in an earlier discussion on the matter, in Hollywood film articles nobody cares what the studio's net take was minus actor fees, marketing, catering, electric fees are subtracted. It seems completely arbitrary.
As a secondary point of discussion, how many milestones should we track? I understand people writing about the first, second and third day gross values, and maybe even the total at the end of the first week, but how much more of that do we need? 2 week total? 3 week total? Every bit of data until the film completes 100 days? Seems like we'd be fine with opening weekend and final gross, which is pretty much how BoxOfficeMojo does it. [8] The day-by-day updates seem a bit crufty to me, especially since we're talking about estimates anyway.
Feedback is solicited! Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Cross-posting from WT:INB: In the 2010s, one Abhay Dube launched a company called "The Bombay Talkies Limited". He claims that this is a continuation of the historic Bombay Talkies. He also claims that his grandfather Raj Narayan Dube was one of the founders of the original Bombay Talkies along with Himanshu Rai and Devika Rani. Since then, several press-release like newspaper stories have appeared talking about this "revival of Bombay Talkies" and how Raj Narayan Dube was a "pillar" of Indian cinema.
This article from 2013 mentions that "the idea to revive the production house took shape three years ago" i.e. in 2010. That year, the name "Raj Narayan Dube" was added to the Bombay Talkies article on Wikipedia, by an anon, without any source. In 2015, a new article on Raj Narayan Dube was created. Recently, the article Bombay Talkies was re-written using these sources, by BT0912 ( talk · contribs), who claims to the Digital Head of the new company. Also,
MelAntipam ( talk · contribs) has raised some concerns at Talk:Bombay Talkies, which caught my eye. I tried searching for this name and its variations: Raj Narayan / RN Dubey / Rajnarayan Dubey(y). But I cannot find any mention of this guy in even a single source before 2010, which is surprising if he was indeed, one of the founders of a famous studio like Bombay Talkies. There is only one book ( Spot Girl, 2014) which mentions Raj Narayan Dube and Bombay Talkies - it's not a scholarly work, and is obviously based on information from the Wikipedia article or other articles that sprung after the "revival" press release in 2013.
Can anyone else find a pre-2010 source about this Dube-Bombay Talkies link? Any comments are appreciated at Talk:Bombay_Talkies#Errors_in_the_current_version. utcursch | talk 19:46, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I am importing on Commons all Indian movies which are in the public domain. So I created some articles where I found the film. Help needed to complete them. ;o Regards, Yann ( talk) 15:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, FYI, there has been a flare-up of Marathi-language sockpuppetry. Note: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishika.dhanawade/Archive User tends to create sloppy articles related to Marathi film and television, including actors. Some of the articles created recently can be found here and here. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Does anyone know what " the lolo sock" refers to? Should this user be blocked on sight? Thanks, Biwom ( talk) 20:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Something interesting happened recently surrounding Raees (film)--reliable sources appear to have plagiarized the plot summary of Raees, and parroted what may be inaccurate information about the plot. In a nutshell, the Raees article contained a statement that the film criticized the prohibition of alcohol, drugs and prostitution in Gujarat. This spawned a brief back-and-forth [9] [10] between another user and myself, and I wound up removing the content because the details were not adequately substantiated. Here's my detailed comment copy/pasted from Talk:Raees (film)
In these edits I removed content about the film addressing the prohibition of alcohol, drugs and prostitution as the content wasn't found in the source that followed the statement. Further, the original version on 16 July 2015 didn't say anything specific about what type of prohibition the film criticizes, and further details were added a day later without an improvement of the reference.
Complicating issues, recent news articles dated 16-17 February 2016 [11] [12] [13] [14] appear to have copied the same language in this 3 February 2016 version of the article. (Note the change of "criticizes" to "criticises" and the removal of "cruel and clever":
- "The film is set in 1980s Gujarat. It tells the story of the eponymous bootlegger Raees Khan (Shah Rukh Khan) whose business is highly challenged and eventually thwarted by a police officer (Nawazuddin Siddiqui). The film criticises the prohibition of alcohol, prostitution, and drugs in Gujarat."
This highly suggests that some of the trades are copying from Wikipedia without proper attribution ( plagiarism!) and haven't done any actual research or proper reporting. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 10:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The very specific wording that the trades were using, especially after the tweaks made by Kailash29792 implies very strongly that they copied Wikipedia after 3 February 2016. The specifics of alcohol, drugs and prostitution were added without references 17 July 2015, so there's no faith that "criticizes the prohibition of alcohol, prostitution, and drugs in Gujarat" is an accurate statement. In the same edit, the IP said that the film also criticized movie piracy, which we don't know to be accurate. Just wanted to bring this up in a central location so that we have at our disposal a real-world example of the trades copying from Wikipedia instead of doing proper research. It's obviously problematic, because if they copy from us, and we cite them, we get a feedback loop of sketchy information. Not good. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 10:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Anyone know if Ishq Vich: You Never Know was ever released? I had to remove the only reference from the article because it was another cruddy blog. Can't tell if the film was ever released and/or if the article should be considered for deletion. WP:NFF was not satisfied. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Anyone seen this film? There's a discussion that could use more input from folks familiar with it. The issues are: 1) How should genre be presented (also, anyone got any sources for genre?) 2) How should the plot be presented? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I've seen a new vandalism technique flare-up recently--An example here. The user changes the article subject's birthdate to a value that is not supported by the reference, then rearranges the template parameters perhaps in an effort to disguise the change. Just mentioning as a heads-up. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:19, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
The article List of Manipuri films of 1981 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
Marchjuly (
talk)
04:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Anyone know anything about nowrunning.com? It looks like a standard cookie-cutter blog like I see all day long being added to Indian cinema articles for spam purposes. There are about 1900 uses of this domain across Wikipedia, so it's somewhat popular, though I see nothing on their site ( For instance their Contact Us page) that would clearly indicate they are a reliable source run by journalists, or that the site has an established reputation for fact-checking. Anybody have any thoughts? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 02:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Just FYI: A Chinese film is being released today in China, a lot of Indian actors in it. I typed all their names as they appeared in Chinese press to the article, but please correct typos if there are any. Is Sishir Sharma = Shishir Sharma? Suhasini Mule = Suhasini Mulay? I'm not sure so I don't want to link the wrong people. Not sure how much coverage the film has in India. Timmyshin ( talk) 07:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Anyone have any thoughts about Catch News as a reference? I keep seeing it pop up lately, but I don't think I've ever seen it prior to about 2 months ago. I'll be posting at the Indian Noticeboard for other opinions. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 00:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I notice Oneindia.in on the list of unacceptable sources here -- do we consider Filmibeat an extension of this, and if so, should we add it to the list? It would take a huge load off a lot of our plates if we'd start talking about some of these sources and get them added to the XLinkBot list so that they're automatically removed when added. My query here is inspired by this edit at Kabali (film) from an Austrian IP. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Wasn't there a discussion or guideline about not including the indic script in actors and film titles? I cannot find it, but someone is once again adding them everywhere. BollyJeff | talk 17:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
|film_name=
which says "for non-English films: film's name in its native language". That would intuitively include Indian films, so if the film was released with an Indic title (as opposed to something like PK) that would go in the infobox. Similarly
Template:Infobox person contain |native_name=
for "The person's name in their own language, if different". This would be an appropriate place for Indic script. I don't think the point of the discussion was to suppress all Indic script, rather to remove clutter from the lead sentence.
Cyphoidbomb (
talk)
16:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
In this edit IndianCinemaRasigan makes an interesting point in his edit summary, "Removed dollar conversion. The existing conversion is done w.r.t the dollar value in 2016. The conversion rate in 2016 is not the same as it was in 2009." Over the last few months I've seen an increase in people adding year switches to the INRConvert template in the infobox, for instance changing {{INRConvert|123|c}} to {{INRConvert|123|c|year=1990}}. This creates a data clusterfuck in the infobox, when we wind up with:
depending on your screen size. So, the point is a good one that if a film in 2009 was made for Rs. 50 crore, converting it to 2016 US dollars doesn't really paint a clear picture of the cost. However, I also think it's a misuse of space in the infobox to do the inflation calculations. So what options do we have here? One option is to establish consensus to eliminate the use of {{ INRConvert}} in the infobox entirely. Why are we converting to US dollars anyway, especially if the data is only going to be useful for the current year? I feel like there might be a guideline about this somewhere, i.e. why we use the conversion template, I just can't recall where. And now I'm wondering if there's any scenario where the INRConvert template would be useful without the inflation calculations. Thoughts anyone? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:37, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
"Conversions of less-familiar currencies may be provided in terms of more familiar currencies – such as the US dollar, euro or pound sterling – using an appropriate rate (which is often not the current exchange rate)."
Please see: Talk:Indo-Bangladesh joint production#The state of this article in July 2016
Thank you, all.
Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 09:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Is Bollywood Hungama is good source for box office numbers? It gives day-wise figures in the domestic as well overseas box office, and the earnings are supported by most of India's leading newspapers. Semanti Paul ( talk) 07:05, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Hey all, boy, Kabali has been causing me a headache over the last week with all the requests that we take the producer's word on box office gross, etc. Anyhow...
Anyone got any thoughts on this? An edit request came in requesting we boost the gross for Kabali to 600+ crore based on this reference. Seems odd to me. Many media outlets were reporting that the film brought in 200 crore before the film even opened (from music rights and such) so I wonder if that 200 is being included in the 650 crore estimate. Also, according to the source PK grossed 625 in 24 days, whereas Kabali allegedly grossed 650 crore in 10 days? Seems like hype to me. If anyone is so compelled, some comments at on the talk page would be appreciated. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:29, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Update: Of course I've had to open a similar discussion at Talk:Kabali (film) for the same reason. In a different post, Financial Express was more transparent about their inclusion of the 200 crore pre-release income in their total. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:46, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
As it is, Kabali redirects to Kabali (film). Should the page be moved to Kabali? Coderzombie ( talk) 10:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, should it be of interest, there are two discussions about whether or not to merge Tollywood Highest grossing movies and List of highest-grossing Tamil movies into List of highest-grossing Indian films.
The discussions can be found at:
Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
If you like old Hollywood films and actors and want to win something daily for editing them, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Golden Hollywood Contest. If it's a success we can run one for Indian cinema too, so I need names and support on this!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
I know I'm pretty much just talking to myself these days here, but an editor is planning to swap out the Koimoi-supported content at List of highest-grossing Indian films soon. I've suggested that he open a discussion on that article's talk page. If this is something you'd object to, you might weigh in if/when he does that. While Koimoi is on the WP:ICTF list of sites not to use, I'm not sure how much discussion was actually held on the matter. I didn't see much at RSN. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 06:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
"Almost all films listed in the highest grossing Bollywood movies are manipulated, as different sources say diff values. Koimoi is been in for so many discussions whether its a reliable source or not. Boxoffice India is lot more accurate among all of these. There are huge difference between the collections which are mentioned in koimoi and boxoffice india. Almost 20-50crs. Need OPINIONS about this problem. As its an important page which states the highest grossing movies, we should do our best to improve and show more of a reliable source. Here is what i got. [15]. Its mentiones all highest grossing movies. Shall we replace koimoi sources which are unreliable with these above mentioned boxoffice india source. Expert Opinions and suggestions pls.......... Ambeinghari ( talk) 05:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
This was the conversation I had on Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films few minutes back and I got an expert reply about this issue. Opinions and yours point of view regarding this issue is needed. pls do check. shall we replace koimoi with boxoffice india source????? with that the list will completely change and it will look this.
* |
Rank | Movie | Year | Studio(s) / Producers | Language | Worldwide gross |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | PK | 2014 | Vinod Chopra Films | Hindi | ₹742.97 crore (US$89 million) [16] |
2 | Bajrangi Bhaijaan | 2015 | Salman Khan Films/ Kabir Khan Films | Hindi | ₹603.99 crore (US$72 million) [17] |
3 | Baahubali: The Beginning | 2015 | Arka Media Works | Telugu and Tamil | ₹600 crore (US$72 million) [18] [19] |
4 | * Sultan | 2016 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹580 crore (US$69 million) [20] |
5 | Dhoom 3 | 2013 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹539.87 crore (US$65 million) [21] |
6 | Chennai Express | 2013 | Red Chillies Entertainment | Hindi | ₹395.92 crore (US$47 million) [22] |
7 | 3 Idiots | 2009 | Vinod Chopra Films | Hindi | ₹390.90 crore (US$47 million) [23] |
8 | Dilwale | 2015 | Red Chillies Entertainment | Hindi | ₹372.23 crore (US$45 million) [24] |
9 | Prem Ratan Dhan Payo | 2015 | Rajshri Productions | Hindi | ₹365.45 crore (US$44 million) [25] |
10 | Bajirao Mastani | 2015 | SLB Films | Hindi | ₹358.20 crore (US$43 million) [26] |
11 | Kick | 2014 | Nadiadwala Grandson Entertainment | Hindi | ₹351.80 crore (US$42 million) [27] |
12 | Happy New Year | 2014 | Red Chillies Entertainment | Hindi | ₹345.26 crore (US$41 million) [28] |
13 | Ek Tha Tiger | 2012 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹308.31 crore (US$37 million) [29] |
14 | Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani | 2013 | Dharma Productions | Hindi | ₹295.61 crore (US$35 million) [30] |
15 | Krrish 3 | 2013 | Filmkraft Productions Pvt. Ltd | Hindi | ₹291.52 crore (US$35 million) [31] |
You all are also invited to discuss about it on Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films. valuable comments pls.... Ambeinghari ( talk) 07:21, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Be aware that Ambeinghari is a sock. All of his edits are based on "fanship". Inside the Valley ( talk) 07:45, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
First of all Inside the Valley am not a sock. who are you to call me a sock? Investigation going on right, and not yet proven. so pls don't call me a sock. I don't know why u r against me?? and secondly this is not the place. here an important discussion is going on. so pls. if you have any opinion about this matter you are welcome. again pls don't call me a sock. thanks .... Ambeinghari ( talk) 08:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the SPAM. I've put this message in some Discussion Pages, but maybe I should have begun with this from the very beggining. Please Check this petition. We have a lot of pictures of a relevant Telugu film shooting, but I'm European and I can't recognise a single one. Here the Commons Category.-- TaronjaSatsuma ( talk) 21:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
News from gackhollywood.com can be used as reliable refrence? — Júnior N 14:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply.— Júnior N 12:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
There's a discussion at WP:RSN#Kabali (film) and List of highest-grossing Indian films related to inconsistent grosses reported by Indian Express vs. IBT. Any feedback would be appreciated. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 07:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Is there any way to recover references from Deccan Chronicle. — Júnior N 13:37, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
In this edit, an editor rejected my statement that IndiaGlitz is not considered a reliable source by the ICTF. Needless to say, I'm a bit confused here. The guidelines on sources at WP:ICTF places IndiaGlitz in the "Do not use" section, but there is a link an RSN discussion that tends to lean toward keep. Can we reestablish whether or not it's acceptable? Kailash29792, you were involved in the original RSN discussion. BladesMulti was indeffed for being a sock of OccultZone (so I'm loath to consider his opinion) and Sriram Vikram hasn't edited in three months. Also, if anyone else has any thoughts about this, that'd be nice. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 17:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey everybody, Mudinja Ivana Pudi appears to be a film made in Tamil and Kannada. The Kannada title appears to be Kotigobba 2. The lead reads:
This is odd because the lead typically starts with the name of the article. If this trend is going to continue, it might make sense to discuss how we should approach these articles. For example, should the article be under Mudinja Ivana Pudi, or Kotigobba 2? How do we decide what the primary article title is if the film is made in 2 languages? If a film has two titles in two languages, how do we present that in the lead and in the infobox?
There was a big kerfuffle at Talk:Baahubali about a year and a half ago because the pro- Telugu folks wanted to make it clear that this was a Telugu industry film, when the film was simultaneously produced in Telugu and Tamil. Is the ethnic film "industry" that produced it a factor worth considering? Is there a smarter way to go about this? How do we present the information in the rest of the article? Input would be appreciated. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 02:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Kotigobba 2 (English: One in a crore/10 million) in Kannada, Mudinja Ivana Pudi (English: Catch him if you can) in Tamil, is a 2016 Indian action film directed by K. S. Ravikumar.
An editor has requested that a column be added at Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films that would reflect gross box office values adjusted for inflation. If you have thoughts on this, please feel free to comment. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 04:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Rank | Movie | Year | Studio(s)/Producers | Language | Worldwide gross | In 2024 currency |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | PK | 2014 | Vinod Chopra Films/ Rajkumar Hirani Films | Hindi | ₹792 crore (US$95 million) | ₹1265.47 crore |
2 | Baahubali: The Beginning | 2015 | Arka Media Works | ₹650 crore (US$78 million) | ₹980.9 crore | |
3 | Bajrangi Bhaijaan | 2015 | Salman Khan Films/ Kabir Khan Films | Hindi | ₹626 crore (US$75 million) | ₹944.69 crore |
4 | Sultan | 2016 | Yash Raj Films | Hindi | ₹584.25 crore (US$70 million) | ₹839.95 crore |
I keep seeing editors change the spelling of Ajay Devgan's name from Devgan to Devgn like here (I'm sure I saw another change yesterday, too.) I know that he's sometimes credited as both, and I know that his production company is Ajay Devgn FFilms -- Does the community have an official take on this? Did he change his name officially? Do we vacillate between Devgan and Devgn depending on how he's credited in the film? Was there a cut-off period where he stopped going by Devgan entirely and everything after NNNN year is Devgn? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Input needed on the issue of how to communicate Kabali's gross.
There was a whole RSN discussion about this, but it really went nowhere.
So while Financial Express and various blogs were trumpeting the record-breaking success of Kabali, very little has been written about it since then in sources that are not Financial Express or their affiliates.
The question for the community is: How do we communicate Kabali's gross to readers?
|gross=
parameter. Some possibilities: The word "Disputed" with a link to a relevant prose section. The lowest undisputed value. A range between the lowest estimate and the highest.This disparity also has the potential of affecting language in other articles. For instance in some articles we will encounter phrasing like: "Baahubali: The Beginning was the third highest-grossing Indian film behind PK and Kabali." That's something to consider as well.
Your feedback would be very much appreciated. If response is poor, I may have to open this up to an RfC. It seems like a fairly significant issue in the world of Indian cinema. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
And coming to the query,
And i strongly think its wise and fair to claim a "Dispute" as "Disputed" and leave the audience to decide on what to take. Thanks. -- Pearll's Sun TALK 21:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hey all, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#Languages ordering in infobox and elsewhere. This pertains to how we should organize the list of languages for multi-lingual films (like Baahubali: The Beginning, 2.0, etc.) Your input will be instrumental in our ability to manage disruptions to articles. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 01:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Why do we have two articles for the same film, Mudinja Ivana Pudi and Kotigobba 2? @ Ab abhi: You created Kotigobba 2 (improperly, by the way, since you performed a copy/paste move but did not properly attribute the source article) and Kailash29792, you seem to have encouraged this. Does this make any sense? Is this the future of Indian film articles, where films produced in multiple languages now require two unique article to satisfy everyone? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 01:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
What's the deal with all the additions of satellite rights content in articles? [39] [40] Is this noteworthy? Why? There's nothing at MOS:FILM that would encourage the inclusion of every aspect of a film's finances. Tons of western films wind up being shown on cable, on network television, etc. but I don't think I've ever seen this information detailed in a western film article. Thoughts? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 18:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Aaaaaand, Nairspecht was indeffed for sockpuppetry. His was the only opinion in favor of including satellite rights data. If anyone has any thoughts on the above, your comments are still welcome. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 20:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Anybody here love movies? Of course you do LOL! The first challenge for India has arrived, Wikipedia:WikiProject India/The 1000 Challenge (Indian cinema). Interested in winning prizes for fleshing your favourite films and actors and seeing articles coming in like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon? Sign up if interested and let's start to see people expanding those stale old stubs and producing some good work for Indian cinema! 1000 articles is an achievable target, and a chance to showcase your work and be credited.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)