Talk:Dhoom 3

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

India: Cinema Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

Film: Indian

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

Disability

Dhoom 3 is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

Autism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Kaun Banega Crorepati#KBC 7|Kaun Banega Crorepati]] The anchor (#KBC 7) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

This article has been incubated[edit]

Please do not start an article here.

As a result of an AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dhoom 3 (2nd nomination), this article has been incubated and can now be found at:

Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Dhoom 3

Any editing should be done on that version, until it meets the requirements of WP:NFF and is ready to be returned to the mainspace.

JohnCD (talk) 22:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did considerable editing to make it valid according to wiki standards.Though I coudln't move it to original name.Admin please review the page and based on your review move it to namespace.--abhishek (talk) 08:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It will not meet WP:NFF until filming commences. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:19, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia measured Dhoom 3 budget in billion, i guess indian currency is never measured in billions/rather it's crores — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.241.178.130 (talk) 10:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 13 August 2013[edit]

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

Please change * Riya Sen^[1] to * [Riya Ray]^[2] because Riya Ray is the actress in the new Dhoom 3 movie,now they finalist kajol. See IMDB Listing here for reference:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1833673/ Qwyrxian (talk) 06:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed Riya Sen, but we cannot use IMDB as a source for cast lists on movies that have not yet been released. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

Edit request on 31 August 2013[edit]

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

DVK Krishnan 121.244.199.154 (talk) 08:17, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Please give details on what changes you want to make Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 08:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 31 August 2013[edit]

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

please edit the plot, aamir khan is alive though it is not shown how he escapes death. Both sahir and samar are alive which is shown before post credit scene. you can ask anyone who has watched the movie Snowpengu99 (talk) 08:56, 26 December 2013 (UTC) Krish2007 (talk) 08:21, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Please give details on what changes you want to make Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 08:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Soundtrack[edit]

Dhoom 3 Title Song is out now Dhoom Machale Dhoom- Aditi Singh Sharma ref.- http://boxofficecollection.in/2013/11/14/dhoom-3-title-song-dhoom-machale-dhoom-is-releasing-today.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shashankrayal (talk • contribs) 07:41, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Running Time[edit]

Running time appears to be 172 minutes

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/dhoom-3-film

^[1]

References

^ http://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/dhoom-3-film

Semi-protected edit request on 18 December 2013[edit]

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

101.0.33.19 (talk) 05:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC) Not done Specify what to be added. Don't add blank edit requests or this right could be revoked. Soham 05:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Remake[edit]

It is plain silly to label it as remake based on a bunch of tweets and obviously against Wikipedia policy.

Your source says:

But one complaint that many have against the film is that the main concept has been copied from Hollywood movie Now You See Me

Don't add it back. It is not an official remake just speculation. Fideliosr (talk) 09:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss it here. You can't make it a "remake" just because of some user tweets. Fideliosr (talk) 09:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Claims by any non-notable person cannot be accepted in Wikipedia, even if the claims appears in reliable sources. So until any notable person like Taran Adarsh or Subhash Ghai or Anupama Chopra states that Dhoom 3 is a remake, we (Wikipedia) cannot add the same info. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 10:01, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. Soham (talk) 11:18, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not copied from Now You See Me. It's copied from a Christopher Nolan movie (strangely just like Aamir Khan's movie Ghajini). I don't know if you could use this in any section other than reception, but this review is one of many that points out that a lot of the film's elements are copied from other Christopher Nolan movies. Ω phois 15:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice find, but we cannot create an entire section title Plagiarism without other sources. I mean if this piece is included in the article it has to be a different dedicated section. Soham (talk) 16:19, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It and similar reviews could be included in the reception area, as a paragraph by reviewers noting the "similarities" between the films. Ω phois 21:32, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For that we need similar reviews, could you find some more? Soham (talk) 05:19, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comparisons are made to Nolan's Batman films and to Nolan's The Prestige.

Variety

International Business Times

Ω phois 05:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the last one, which is a trailer review the other ones are fine I guess. It can be included in a single line. Thanks. Soham (talk) 05:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2013[edit]

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

Aamir Khan plays a dual role with the names Sahir Khan & Samar Khan Viku20072000 (talk) 12:24, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Where is the source for it? Soham (talk) 12:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above claim is correct, aamir khan plays a dual role with the names sahir and samar ( Source: ask anyone who have seen this movie) Shrey 121 (talk) 08:08, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2013[edit]

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

Need to update critical reception Hafizcool (talk) 12:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done, That's a work in progress. Which source do you want to add? Soham (talk) 12:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The critical reception section is a mess[edit]

Critical reception is extremely negative. And the end of the movie doesn't make any sense. Very poor plot and Direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:36CA:8EA0:3495:F1AA:56CF:1CA6 (talk) 17:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks to some fanboys — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.130.187 (talk) 00:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please elaborate on this? Actually we've got a cite for "positive" reviews only, not anything for "mixed". Even then, we are keeping it "positive to mixed". It should instead be "positive" acording to the citation. Fideliosr (talk) 06:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank God the page is PROTed. Otherwise we would see a massacre right now. Soham (talk) 08:10, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So true :) Fideliosr (talk) 13:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2013[edit]

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

Please change the "Plot" section to the following, to avoid plot spoilers: "Circus performer Sahir (Aamir Khan) leads a double life, pulling off a series of elaborate bank heists in order to avenge his father's (Jackie Shroff) death. Jai Dixit (Abhishek Bachchan) and Ali Akbar (Uday Chopra) are called to Chicago to help catch the thief.

Not done Wikipedia is not a place for spoilers. Plot sections are full. Soham (talk) 07:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

diana not in movie[edit]

Diana penty is not in dhoom 3 and yet she is present in cast section of the movie. Please remove her or else people will get wrong information. Shrey 121 (talk) 08:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I checked my sources, she is not in the film. Soham (talk) 08:32, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office Section Need Accurate and Updates Values from Valuable Sources[edit]

I don´t have access to a lot of sites because I am in Cuba but i was reading in a news paper according to which the film has made a business of 36 Crore on the first day broking all the previous records. Can someone please update theses values from a valuable source?Dr. Shahid Alam(Talk to Me) 06:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all I think you mean to say "reliable" sources, in that case Boxofficeindia.com is the only WP:RS used for BO Collection of Indian films and it has been so for years owing to WP:CONSENSUS. Thanks, this would solve your queries. Soham (talk) 06:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2013[edit]

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

Please include details about bikes used and the description about bike stunts in the film 117.207.165.140 (talk) 16:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. --ElHef (Meep?) 16:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2014[edit]

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

IN BOX OFFICE- DOMESTIC PLEASE CORRECT THE SPELLING ERRORS

"According to several trade publications, Dhoom 3 opened to an overwhelming response at the domestic box office. Box Office India stated that[137] the film had an extraordinary opening, recording 75% occupancy in multiplexes and 90-100% occupancy in single screens.[138] The opening day collection stood at INR30.9 crore (US$4.7 million) from the Hindi version, while the dubbed Telugu and Tamil versions together earned INR2.8 crore (US$430,000).[139][140] The total opening day collection of the film broke the records of highest non-holiday opening and highest single day previously held by Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani and Krrish 3 respectively.[141][142] On the second day of its release, it went on to collect INR29.50 crore (US$4.5 million), setting new records in several circuits.[143] Dhoom 3 (Hindi) nett. grossed INR35 crore (US$5.4 million) on its third day to take Hindi version total to INR95.76 crore (US$15 million) nett approx in the first weekend and further INR7 crore (US$1.1 million) nett approx in Tamil and Telugu which took the all language figure to INR102 crore (US$16 million), making it the fastest film to reach INR100 crore (US$15 million) in India.[144][145] The film netted INR20 crore (US$3.1 million) on its first Monday, INR21 crore (US$3.2 million) on the first Tuesday, INR24 crore (US$3.7 million) on first Wednesday and INR14 crore (US$2.1 million) on first Thursday, taking the first week total to nearly INR174 crore (US$27 million) for its Hindi version.[146][147][148][149][150][151][152] The film set new first week records in all circuits and became the highest grossing film in the East Punjab circuit at the end of its first week.[153] Dhoom 3 nett. grossed INR10 crore (US$1.5 million) from its Tamil and Telugu versions to take its all language total to INR183.46 crore (US$28 million) in first week.[154][155] Dhoom 3 collected INR10 crore (US$1.5 million) on second Friday, INR11.50 crore (US$1.8 million) on second Saturday, INR17 crore (US$2.6 million) on second Sunday ,INR6 crore (US$920,000) on second Monday, INR7 crore (US$1.1 million) on second Tuesday ,INR10.50 crore (US$1.6 million) on second Wednesady and INR4 crore (US$610,000) on second Thursay to take its Hindi-version total to INR239 crore (US$37 million) in two weeks.[156][157][158][159][160][161][162] Dhoom 3 set a new record for second week collections,beating four-year long record of INR56.24 crore (US$8.6 million) of 3 Idiots.[163]" 14.98.14.157 (talk) 07:59, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done and Thank you for lending your time to help us improve Wikipedia. If you are interested in editing more often than once in a while, we welcome you to log in and participate in our WikiCommunity.. Soham 08:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Critical response[edit]

Mutiple sources clearly state that the film got positive reviews. Moreover, Rotten Tomatoes reports it got 88% fresh response. Here's some more:

The film has received "largely positive reviews" for its fun quotient - Koimoi
Dhoom 3: Aamir Khan getting positive response - Times of India

Removing cited text like this is plain ridiculous and violation of Wikipedia policies. Thanks. Fideliosr (talk) 14:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, you've hit the nail right on the head. Removing this would result a violation of WP:NPOV, among WP:5P because it immediately adds a negative bias to the article. Negative or Positive Wikipedia should remain neutral and unbiased. Soham 16:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are also negative reviews cited in this very article. It violates NPOV to begin the section by immediately saying the film received very positive reviews, glossing over the many negative ones until the very end. I looked through the negative reviews cited in the article. To be honest, this article seems heavily biased in favor of the film. The negative reviews largely omit why the critics disliked the film. Instead, the article just gives the negative review's score, while adding in the few things about the movie that the critic liked. For example, the India Today article pretty much bashes the movie, criticizing everything. The one thing that is quoted from the article? That it was a "a visual treat". Ω phois 09:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellently pointed out, we don't want this article to be POV-pushed. To maintain its neutrality lets re-write the critical reception section. Soham 09:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ophois. It all depends upon what reliable sources have to say. Right now, both Indian and foreign press are saying that the film received positive to mixed critical response (see the above two sources which explicitly mention that and the Rotten Tomatoes score). But you were right in saying that some parts were somehow predetermined but I've fixed them now. Also, some editors changed the verdict to "largely positive to mixed" and overseas response to "garnered immense praise", but I repeatedly changed those phrases backto "positive to mixed" and "garnered praise". Thanks. Fideliosr (talk) 12:37, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Times of India article you're referring to doesn't even mention reviews. That was written before anyone had even seen the film, and basically says that Aamir is getting good feedback because his character looks cool in the previews. The other source vaguely says that the film is getting positive to mixed reviews, but doesn't mention what he is basing that on. You cannot use a vague source to negate the negative reviews that we know exist. We have very negative reviews cited in the article, so that must be taken into account. Ω phois 18:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found two sources that say the film was panned by critics, and have added it to the article. I changed the first sentence to "The film received mixed reviews from critics upon release, ranging from positive to negative." That way it can show the large range of reception. When I get the chance I will add some to the review section, as well. Right now it seems a majority of the text of the negative summaries in the article are still trying to find the small positive aspects. Ω phois 18:52, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First off, you must know how WP:RS works. Both masala.com and firstpost.com are not reliable sources and don't even have a Wikipedia entry about them. Secondly, we have more than one reliable sources saying that the film got "positive" reviews and one saying "mixed". Thirdly, if you calculate an average from all these sources, it would be fairly positive. You will also have to accept that most of those publications which gave negative reviews also gave it largely favorable ones. For instance you singled out the India Today. Check Movie Review: Dhoom 3 is fantastic, a complete Aamir Khan film. The section also contains Raja Sen's review. Check Sukanya Verma reviews Dhoom 3: Mazaa Le!. Fideliosr (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The movie has received "mostly positive response" from the critics as well as audiences - Zee News

The film has received "largely positive reviews" for its fun quotient - Koimoi

Dhoom 3 has received "fairly positive reviews" - The Asian Age

Notice all three of them are clear WP:RS but don't want to create a WP:CITEKILL.Fideliosr (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know how reliable sources work. I have written various featured articles, including Taare Zameen Par. Having a wikipedia entry for a website in no way validates or invalidates a reliable source. Masala.com is large profile site with an editorial staff, with one of the editors writing the article I cited. I have no doubt it would pass inspection in the FAC process. And again, you cannot use a source to invalidate other sources we are using. We have many negative reviews of the film, so you cannot just say the film received "positive to mixed" when it is clear that the reviews ranged from positive to negative. You can use those sources to say that a specific news article claimed it received "positive to mixed reviews", but you cannot blankety apply it as fact as you are trying to do. Ω phois 21:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say all reliable sources must have a Wikipedia entry, but most of the times, it could be a clear indication. Masala.com is a website that doesn't even have an "About" page (WP:QUESTIONABLE nonetheless) and which primarily focuses on Telugu cinema a.k.a Tollywood. The thing is we have far too many "clean" and reputable sources supporting positive to mixed verdict. Review aggregators like Rotten Tomatoes further back it up. Fideliosr (talk) 21:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Masala has an editorial staff, which is the main thing listed in the wp link you provided. What makes koimoi reliable? After a glance, I would highly expect many editors to question it in FAC. And again you are missing the point that you cannot use a source to make a blanket statement as fact when it is clearly contradicted elsewhere in the article. Ω phois 21:28, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A look at any high quality article on wp would show that sites like Rotten Tomatoes are not cited in the summary of a section. They are specifically listed as a reviewer, explaining how te overall review was determined. Summaries of sections aren't even supposed to use cites, but rather summarize what is detailed throughout the section. Ω phois 21:32, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Even Box Office India doesn't mention their "editorial" staff anywhere on the website. As far as Koimoi is concerned, it was co-founded by Komal Nahta and is frequently cited by major publications such as TOI and HT. The "fact" is not at all contradicted; even films like A Streetcar named Desire have a few negative reviews but that doesn't mean that we could ignore the general verdict which is favorable and supported by a number of reputable sources. Dhoom_3#International is not a summary of a section, but a sub-section itself. Fideliosr (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've restructured it a little, which I hope is a fair compromise. Tomorrow I will look through the positive reviews. The few I looked at so far are actually mixed reviews from which whoever added it only quoted the good and omitted any criticisms. Ω phois

Not that it is needed anymore under the way I restructured the section, but here is a reliable source noting the critics panned the film. Ω phois 02:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like an okay compromise - thanks - but I must remind you that a blog post from a reputable newspaper is still a blog post and hence weakly reliable. Fideliosr (talk) 12:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The author is listed on the WSJ site as being a reporter for the WSJ, which validates the credentials of his article. Ω phois 23:08, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And here is another article saying the same thing. Ω phois 23:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Production section[edit]

Here is a good interview that would be great for the development section. Ω phois 02:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Caper film[edit]

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

Please change the header from action thriller film to caper film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.208.208.137 (talk) 16:46, 7 January 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the film would be considered a caper/heist film. It's more about Aamir Khan's character and his motives for revenge. We don't even get to see the actual heists themselves, only him running away each time. Ω phois 00:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Technical 13 (talk) 20:30, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overseas gross[edit]

Box Office Mojo, a reliable international source for box office revenue, states that the overseas gross of Dhoom 3 is US$ 75.7 million. [1] 117.192.178.125 (talk) 13:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office Mojo is a USA-based website. So the gross of Dhoom 3 in USA will come as Domestic gross, and gross of other countries,including India(where Dhoom 3 is made) will come as overseas gross.--Nehapant19 (talk) 17:30, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The list of Awards is going to be long soon[edit]

List of accolades received by Dhoom 3 is merged with this article. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The list of Awards is going to be long soon as its only January . When months willl come and by June 2014, many awards will be announced and Dhoom 3 will be nominated. So its better to create a separate page for Dhoom 3 awards and nominations --Nehapant19 (talk) 15:10, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should be merged to the main article. Also film has not won any major film awards mainly nominations and i dont see the point for a table either. Daan0001 (talk) 15:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree that it ought to be merged. If it gets to the point where we need to split it again we can. In the mean time though, the list of accolades is not really a good article all on its own. Zell Faze (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the awards are also won by dhoom 3 ,though postive or negative like golden Kela awards.The seaparate page of accolades of dhoom 3 should stay --Wikipenofdoom (talk) 21:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be merged into the main article too. It isn't that long anyway. Maybe you could format it like Skyfall's award section, where you have the awards in drop-box AB01 ^{I'M A POTATO} 04:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wikipedia:Citation overkill[edit]

Wikipedia:Citation overkill - 'nuff said. BollyJeff | talk 01:45, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Dhoom 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6330&nCat=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6333&nCat=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://indiatoday.intoday.in/gallery/aamir-khan-sachin-tendulkar-dhoom-3-special-screening/1/10774.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 15 external links on Dhoom 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=312&catName=TGlmZXRpbWU=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=210&catName=MjAwNA==
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.emirates247.com/bollywood/take-one/dhoom-3-dhoom-drowns-aamir-starrer-talaash-2011-12-29-1.434974
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.emirates247.com/bollywood/buzz/bollywood-buzz-aamir-katrina-s-dhoom-3-prep-2011-10-17-1.423842
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-10-31/news-interviews/43559393_1_dhoom-3-director-vijay-krishna-acharya-aamir-khan
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/dhoom-3-teaser-crosses-6-million-views-within-six-days/1/309351.html
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/anthem-dedicated-to-dhoom-series-released/1/333268.html
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/dhoom-3-title-song-dhoom-macha-le-launched-featuring-aamir-khan-katrina-kaif-abhishek-bachchan-uday-chopra/1/324796.html
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/dhoom-3-movie-review-aamir-khan-katrina-kaif-abhishek-bachchan-uday-chopra/1/332052.html
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/report-dhoom-3-vrooms-to-global-success-crosses-rs-500-crore-1946394
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6337&nCat=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/overdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6336&nCat=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6352&nCat=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/overdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6336&nCat=
Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6247&nCat=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Dhoom 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dhoom 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140104021906/http://www.boxofficeindia.com:80/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6355&nCat= to http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=6355&nCat=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:49, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dhoom 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/Movies/movie_detail/dhoom_3
Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/Collections/movie_collections/budget
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141220054148/http://www.koimoi.com/bollywood-popular/ghanta-awards-2014-complete-nominations-list/ to http://www.koimoi.com/bollywood-popular/ghanta-awards-2014-complete-nominations-list/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140125010006/http://www.aegindia.org:80/2014/01/can-salmans-jai-ho-be-a-winner-at-the-box-office/2141653.html to http://www.aegindia.org/2014/01/can-salmans-jai-ho-be-a-winner-at-the-box-office/2141653.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 24 external links on Dhoom 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Dhoom 3 (TBA)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dhoom 3 (TBA). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:53, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.bollywoodlife.com/news-gossip/riya-sen-happy-birthday/

[2] ttp://www.imdb.com/name/nm3304672/?ref_=tt_cl_t9

[3] ttp://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/dhoom-3-film

[1]

[2]

[1]