Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

The Great Father final discussion

All the people interested in changing The Great Father's discussion, please read this. Some of you include - @Anupmenon0007:, @Abbas.j63:, @Abi rockzz:, @Imthiyaz07:, @Muhammed.suhail:, @5ana1234: among other newbies who have formed accounts to update The Great Father's figures. Here are some information for you :

• @Cyphoidbomb: is the admin who generally patrols pages about Indian Movies.
• We only accept reliable sources as references for movies. For Indian movies the agreed sources include those listed in WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources. We may accept sources not listed there, though that is not usually done. So that rules out sites like kboupdates, mollywoodtimes, filmfaktory etc.
• We do not accept primary sources as references. So that rules out facebook pages of actors/producers/directors etc. However we may also not accept the figures if we are presented a news report from reliable sources where the source for the information is explicitly mentioned to have come from such people (actors/producers/directors) etc.

Now let us look at the references we have for the 50 crore figure, which we all know is not correct (the details are mentioned in Talk:The Great Father). However what you or I know is immaterial as we only look at sources and usually add the figures presented, if they meet the criteria :

• http://www.manoramanews.com/news/entertainment/2017/04/23/mammootty-move-to-50-crore-club.html - Malayala Manorama is a reliable source. However in the 2nd line of the reference it is clearly mentioned that the information was released by the Producers failing our criteria for primary sources. Some people had a doubt that why was Munthirivallikal Thalirkkumbol allowed to use a reference from Manorama. Hopefully this answers that.
• The other reference is form The News Minute - http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/mammootty-s-great-father-biggest-hit-2017-so-far-60966. The News Minute is not considered a reliable sources and is not included in the list above. We generally don't accept references from newspapers with a workforce of 12 people. And even if we are tempted to do so, the article itself mentions that the content is sourced from Digital Native. Searching for Digital Native does not provide any proper hits. So when we don't trust The News Minute itself, how can we trust Digital Native (which is the original source) which nobody has heard of. Anyway I won't be reverting The News Minute edits and will leave that for Cyphoidbomb to decide, as this information is available in English.

And since you are all here, let me also take this opportunity to provide some suggestions. Mammootty's movies have very bad Wikipedia pages because fans like you are not interested in adding good information but are only interested in adding bloated figures. See how well the pages of Mohanlal's new movies are written and how informative they are- Munthirivallikal Thalirkkumbol, Pulimurugan, Oppam. Even his flop movies like 1971: Beyond Borders, Kanal (2015 film), Loham and Peruchazhi have long informative articles. And now take a look at The Great Father, Thoppil Joppan, Puthan Panam , White (2016 film) and Utopiayile Rajavu all of which are small uninformative articles which do not even have a plot (story) section.

If the time you spend in fighting for improving The Great Father's box office figures can be used for writing the plot for the movie, you would have done something worthwhile at that. Even if you add the 50 crore figure now, almost every reader knows that the numbers are fake and it will not have any impact. But if you improve articles of Mammootty's movies, it will have an impact on every reader. Cheers. And thanks for reading the long post. Do not form any more new sections and if you have to say anything comment below. Jupitus Smart 18:05, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: The the collection of Munthirivallikal Thalirkkumbol and Pulimurugan collection report is confirmed by Mohanlal and those movies producers respectively. In the case of Mammootty movies these specifications are made. I have provided various sources for the collection report. If you needed i will provide. Muhammed.suhail (talk) 15:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail: I respect your statement, but we don't source figures based on our convictions. The collection of Munthirivallikal Thalirkkumbol may have been sourced from Mohanlal/producers. But the source provided for the same does not make any mention of that, and therefore we cannot arbitrarily overrule it. And if I understand correctly, you have said that you are willing to provide more references that meet the criteria for The Great Father. Please do so and if they indeed meet the criteria, there would be no problem in updating The Great Father's figures. Jupitus Smart 15:50, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: I understand what you said. But now i am providing the source which the report doesn'n shows that the collection is according to producers or any film members. It is a reliable source as early in this section this source jas been given. The Source is SOUTH LIVE.

http://ml.southlive.in/movie/film-debate/baahubali-2-kerala-boxoffice Muhammed.suhail (talk) 20:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Here is the another source https://pycker.com/movies/my-dad-david/news Muhammed.suhail (talk) 20:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Here is the another source. http://mollywoodtimes.com/2017/04/22/the-great-father-touches-the-50-crore-mark/ Muhammed.suhail (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail:Its ironical when you say you have understood what I have written and act in a diametrically opposite way. I had clearly said in the 2nd line that we only accept reliable sources and not blog sites. To make it easier for you I had even listed the sites we generally accept - WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources. I had even specifically overruled mollywoodtimes. Yet you continue to provide references from blog sites like pycker, southlive and mollywoodtimes. Let me put it to you more simply - if you are providing a Malayalam reference, provide a reference from a reputed newspaper like Manorama, Mathrubhumi etc or if the reference is in English, provide a reference from one of the sites listed in WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources. Jupitus Smart 03:08, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: sir then the source used for the movie Charlie (2015 Malayalam film) is IBT. In there report they say the collection is according to the twitter page KERALABOXOFFICE. Is that is a reliable source?? Muhammed.suhail (talk) 12:59, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail:Besides that the figures were inflated by some Dulquer Salman fan as well. I have removed that from the list. And I have added Pazhassi Raja to the list based on a request by @Sagar.kottappuram777:, which I feel is correct. And Sagar.kottappuram777 would be better off reading the entire paragraph before asking any more questions. As for producers and taxes, all producers can also have vested interests in inflating the numbers - bring in more people into the theatres, prop up the careers of actors, money laundering etc. And I don't think the producers are going to be be hounded by tax officials for what a facebook post says, which can easily be refuted by the producer. And for the last part, my job is only to objectively judge the suitability of a reference, and not to prove producers right or wrong. Jupitus Smart 13:33, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: ok sir I understand the wikipedia rules and what did you say.If i found a reliable source that you said I will inform it. Muhammed.suhail (talk) 16:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail: If you find a reliable source, that you think meets all the criteria, then you don't have to inform me. You can add that yourself. Jupitus Smart 16:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Sir again the movie Charlie (2015 Malayalam film) has been come in the list with the same source that I shows it is not reliable. Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja (film) is also removed from the list. As per your concern the Times Of India os a reliable source and that report doesn't shows anything like it is confirmed by the producer. If you can add Charlie (2015 Malayalam film) then The Great Father also can be add. Please for what reason Pazhassi Raja is removed from the list. Muhammed.suhail (talk) 19:36, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I will replace Charlie after checking tomorrow. As for Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja (film), there was a lack of consensus over the figures in Talk:Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja (film), which was the reason why the numbers were never updated earlier. There were valid concerns that the figures were inflated, and I did not bother to check them when Sagar.kottappuram777 presented the reference. The administrator notified me of the oversight and I promptly reverted back to quid pro quo. Read the talk page discussion on the movie's page and you will understand more.Jupitus Smart 19:46, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: I would say that IBT's inclusion of a random tweet by this entity probably shouldn't be considered. There's no link in their Twitter profile to any web presence, so that we could establish why they are apparently experts in Indian film financials, but the Twitter account is also unverified, which would make it difficult to trust their claims even if they were a known authority, which has not been established. Just looks like another person posting random data, and this is exactly the problem that we've been talking about: Just because a typically-reliable source like IBT or Manorama posts some detail doesn't mean we need to swallow it as indisputable. If the actual source of the data is questionable, then the data is questionable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:03, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Charlie was a hit, although I cannot find another source which mentions the 42 crore figure. I will remove it for the time being, and wait for the fans to bring in proper references.Jupitus Smart 03:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Then sir Can you add another source for MunthiriVallikkal Thalirkkubol. Only Manorama News Arguing this all other source says that it is according to producer. So Manoram News made an error on it. Can you go for a detail study. I think that you find an error on the collection of Munthiri Vallikal Thalirkkumbol is not valid. Because according your sources the producer or actor post in facebook is not valid. THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS report says that it is according to Mohanlal FB post. The link is http://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/malayalam/2017/mar/01/munthirivallikalin-50-crore-clubmohanlal-thanks-all-1575955.html

According to TIMES OF INDIA report it says that the collection report is according to Director. Then how is it valid??? 

http://m.timesofindia.com/entertainment/malayalam/movies/news/munthirivallikal-thalirkumbol-enters-50-crore-club/articleshow/57392148.cms If you can add Munthiri Vallikal Thalirkkumbol again on the list then you can add Kerala Varma Pazzhashiraja on that list. Here is the Pazzhashiraja Collection report according to Times Of India http://m.timesofindia.com/others/news-interviews/Hariharan-MT-Vasudevan-prepare-for-Randamoozham/articleshow/9807050.cms Muhammed.suhail (talk) 16:08, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I have already told you this; we don't add sources arbitrarily, based on the whims of any particular editor. If you want to change the gross of Pazhassi Raja, discuss it on the talk page with the editors who had made valid points as to why the figures may be inflated. If you can establish a consensus, then we can consider updating the figures, though that seems unlikely as Pazhassi Raja does not appear in other reliable sources as having grossed 50 crore, including in TOI itself in a later article, meaning the one off link could have been an error/paid editing. As for Munthirivalikal -

• The Times of India link does not say that the announcement was made by Jibu Jacob, instead saying that he thanked everyone on reaching the milestone.
• The New India Express does say that Mohanlal announced the milestone. However many other sources have also independently verified the gross and have republished the 50 crore claim, without having to rely on Mohanlal's statements (Manorama, Indian Express, India Today and Catch News, among others). A Times of India article even says that the movie is nearing the 75 crore, based on its own assessments of the box office - TOI article. To put it simply just because Mohanlal announced the gross on his page, does not nullify the plethora of other sources which probably derived the figures from their independent sources. The same goes with The Great Father. If other reliable sources back the producer's claims, then The Great Father can also be considered for updation. However most sources still put the 50 crore figure entirely on Mammootty's claim while some others dismiss the figures for the movie as possible propaganda as mentioned earlier - Sify and IBT. The lack of consensus among reliable sources as opposed to the convergence of consensus for Munthirivalikal is the reason why The Great Father has not been updated.

Anyway I would not mind if Munthirivalikal's figures are changed after consensus is established towards that. Jupitus Smart 18:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: In tge movie Pulimurugan you give the source Catch News is that is a reliable source???? Muhammed.suhail (talk) 08:29, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Asking me the same question at multiple places won't change the answer. What I consider as reliable/unreliable is immaterial. The existing consensus is that Catch News is a reliable source, and I fully respect that. Jupitus Smart 08:32, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Here is the better aource For The Gteat Father

http://www.inuth.com/entertainment/malayalam-movies/the-great-father-mammootty-starrer-continues-to-create-records-before-its-theatrical-release/ At last of the report it says that it is copyright to The Indian Express. Again you are saying that it is not reliable you are just posting it according to tge fan base as you are a malayali Muhammed.suhail (talk) 08:47, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I just checked, inuth belongs to the Indian Express Group. So that would not have any issues, as Indian Express is considered a reliable source. So this can be accepted as source, though it does not mention anything relevant to the ongoing discussion. And if you think I am biased, you are better of asking somebody else to change the figures. Cheers. Jupitus Smart 11:24, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Sorry The link i given is fault by me. Here is the real link

http://www.inuth.com/entertainment/malayalam-movies/kerala-box-office-mammootty-the-great-father-emerges-as-the-actors-first-rs-50-cr-blockbuster/ Muhammed.suhail (talk) 13:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Since I am an involved editor, I should rather not decide on this. You are better of asking the administrator, who is more experienced in weighing the consensus arrived at by different sources. Jupitus Smart 13:58, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

You deleted charlie from boxoffice report. ibtimes reported it has collected 42 crores. http://www.ibtimes.co.in/charlie-worldwide-box-office-collection-martin-prakkat-movie-becomes-dulquer-salmaans-highest-669474 https://www.topmovierankings.com/news/charlie-box-office-collection-reports-and-records http://onlookersmedia.in/collection-report/charlie-collection-report-total-business/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boxoffice tracker (talk • contribs) 19:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Boxoffice tracker: Please read the entire discussion before responding. Jupitus explained the problem with Charlie. Also neither "topmovierankings" nor "onlookersmedia" are reliable sources. Also, there are 10 films on our list of highest-grossing Malayalam films, so there's no place to put Charlie. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:32, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Kbo updates is considered as now official collection report provider of kerala box office. WHich is startup situated at kaloor kochi, formed to fullfil this purpose. So I found according to their report greatfather collected over 60cr and didn't found it is updated in wiki. so here my suggestion .. http://www.kboupdates.com/2017/04/the-great-father-raked-60-crore-from-world-wide-boxoffice/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D004:A103:980A:4CC8:E64E:B916 (talk) 13:04, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

"Kbo updates is considered as now official collection report provider of kerala box office." Considered by whom? There's no "official" anything in Indian finances, as all data is based on estimates. And "startup"s do not satisfy the community's need for sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

That was just a suggestion.It doesn't matter whether it is updated in wiki or not.because no one considered wiki as a reliable source for boxoffice collections due to it's editable nature.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D48A:7586:AC99:F9F1:AA9:E11D (talk) 11:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Great. Please tell everyone you know that Wikipedia isn't the place for the constant box office fussing. I'd rather the bulk of India go to their preferred faceless blogs and questionable sources for "proof" and bicker amongst themselves off-site than come here and shout about which poor reference is the best source of the latest dubious rupee tally. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2017

Please change the collections of Dangal to RS 1756 crores as the box office tracker Ramesh Bala tweeted it. Because every time the collections are changed when any website writes about it saying that Ramesh Bala said so. But this time he tweeted it 7 hours ago, but still there is no changes in the wikipedia page. Ferdouse Shihab (talk) 12:49, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done for now: Wikipedia is not a breaking news source, and we're not required to fanatically mirror the latest box office guesses tweeted by the professional guessers. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2017

Tony28tarun (talk) 16:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 03:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 June 2017

Gyan0401 (talk) 16:51, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

http://www.boxofficeindia.com/report-details.php?articleid=2971Gyan0401 (talk) 16:51, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:16, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 June 2017

Please Change Kabali Box office to Rs650 Crore. Rajat491 (talk) 05:19, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Not done: @Rajat491: This is an old, old issue. If you read the article currently, it explains in great detail why the high number you are submitting is ridiculous. It's obvious that Financial Express and Indian Express was including the much celebrated, record-breaking music/satellite rights pre-release figure of ₹200 crore into their total, which is a supremely idiotic and irresponsible thing for them to do when the rest of the universe talks about a film's gross in terms of box office gross, i.e. money made solely at the box office through ticket sales. There are two focal points when measuring a film's gross: How much it grossed domestically, and how much it grossed internationally. One of the references currently in this article is this Dec 2016 piece from Financial Express, which says, "[Kabali earned] Rs 215 crore within India ... and Rs 262 crore from abroad, for a total of Rs 677 crore.". Well, 215 domestic + 262 international = 477 crore. That's your total. Where did the 677 come from? Obviously from the ₹200 crore pre-release income. So, the figures that are currently at List of highest-grossing Indian films, which present a range from 477 to 499 crore (Forbes' estimate) are as close to accurate as you can get. 650-677 is ridiculous. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 June 2017

Kabali numbers are blatantly incorrect. I would appreciate if the number is changed back to 350 crores per the history of this page. Someone is trying to bump it up for wrong reasons. I would appreciate this change be rolled back ASAP agopal128 (talk) 09:42, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: @Agopal128: See the comment directly above this one. The current gross range of 477-499 is properly sourced and is more reflective of the actual gross than either the 350 value or the ridiculous super-high 600+ values. There are adequate notes in the article, which I assume you did not see, that explains the entire issue. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:00, 3 June 2017 (UTC) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:00, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 June 2017

in higest grossing movies bahubali 1&2 are originally telugu and not tamil please make it telugu. 183.82.176.77 (talk) 05:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Your request is not terribly specific, but I assume you don't understand what the language column in the article is for, or perhaps the various language sub-sections are for. If a movie was *FILMED* in multiple languages, as Baahubali 1 and 2 was, (it was filmed in Telugu and Tamil, not dubbed) then it qualifies as a highest-grossing film originally produced in multiple languages. No, that's not satisfying for people who are looking to hoist their particular ethnic identity aloft, but from a technical standpoint noting that the the film is a Tamil-language release, is not inaccurate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Telugu gross collections error?

The collections for Tollywood is out of order and needs to be fixed. Order should go like this: 1. Bahubali 2 2. Bahubali 1 3. Khaidi 150 4. Srimanthudu 5. Magadheera (+dubbing) 6. Janata Garage 7. Sarainodu 8. Attharintiki Daredi 9. Gabbar Singh 10. Eega

SourinSP (talk) 14:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@SourinSP:  Not done This source says Srimanthudu grossed 200 crore worldwide, which would be more than the 164 crore worldwide asserted by this source to Khaidi 150. So it's unclear why we'd flip the positions of those. If you want to see anything changed, you're going to have to bring references and strong arguments for why the current order is not accurate. Simply providing a list and asking us to blindly adhere to it isn't going to work. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Even if Srimanthudu is in fact higher that Khaidi 150, Gabbar Singh shouldn't even be on this list. Looking at this: sourcehttps://www.google.com/amp/m.timesofindia.com/entertainment/telugu/movies/news/Gabbar-Singh-50-days-collections-list/amp_articleshow/14525905.cms

It made less than Srimanthudu let alone Sarainodu. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SourinSP ::(talk • contribs) 19:11, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@SourinSP: That reference is describing distributor share figures, not gross. This source puts the gross at 150 crore. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:24, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

This contradicts some of your claims, though:

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/janatha-garage-box-office-collection-will-jr-ntrs-film-beat-sarrainodu-srimanthudu-693653 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SourinSP (talk • contribs) 01:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I haven't made any claims. I've only double-checked the sources that are already in the article. Don't know what to tell you. This is an inherent problem with Indian film financials--there are no absolute figures. Everything's a guess. Everything's subject to exaggeration. I'm sure that for every figure in the article, there's another figure that's several crore higher or several crore lower. Do we disregard an otherwise reliable source simply because another otherwise reliable source has a figure that's closer to what we personally wish it to be? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Multiple sources exist for Srimathudu's 200 crore gross figures - [1] (Catch News - not a reliable source, though accepted as one here), [2] (NDTV), [3] (Times of India) and the Business Standard reference mentioned above. Just because IBT does not think so, I don't think the figures should be brought down. And anyway, our list does not match with the list of Top Telugu movies provided by IBT, making it futile to match figures.Jupitus Smart 05:27, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Khaidi n.o 150 collected more than Srimanthudu as per Andhraboxoffice.com http://andhraboxoffice.com/info.aspx?id=1834&cid=6&fid=971 http://andhraboxoffice.com/info.aspx?id=2031&cid=6&fid=4556 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjeev4puli (talk • contribs) 04:07, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Sources

The admins says that they need a reliable sources.The Source used for the malayalam movie Pulimurugan is catch news.How is it reliable.It is not like any news channels or indian express.How is it possible to use it.Please clarify for what reason it is used.Who is the editor in that.What is his qualfication.Muhammed.suhail (talk) 02:10, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail: A good place to ask this sort of question is at the Indian Cinema Task Force talk page, particularly if you wish to contest its use. That said, from what I understand, Catch News is owned by Rajasthan Patrika and was founded by Shoma Chaudhury, who was fired after the site had been established. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 June 2017

Please include telugu movie Katamarayudu, 150cr+. Rajupowerstar (talk) 16:10, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:43, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Wrong Collection Updated for Baahubali 2

All source and news channel are saying baahubali cant cross 1700Cr and someone just updated it as 1700 Indian Express(1684) :- http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/box-office-collection/dangal-vs-baahubali-2-box-office-collection-here-is-why-ss-rajamouli-film-might-not-make-rs-2000-cr-4707556/ Koimoi(Komal Nahta's) (1676Cr as two day old):- http://www.koimoi.com/box-office/baahubali-2-all-versions-worldwide-collections-1700-cr-mark-seems-difficult/ India.com :- http://www.india.com/buzz/dangal-beats-bahubali-2-on-box-office-to-become-highest-grossing-non-english-indian-movie-of-all-time-2241882/

Ramesh Bala tweet (1684 Cr) : https://twitter.com/rameshlaus/status/875555585466318848

1. Baahubali2 's 7 Weeks - Total WW BO:
2. India:

Nett : ₹ 1,066 Cr Gross : ₹ 1,373.5 Cr Overseas: Gross : ₹ 310.5 Cr Total: ₹ 1,684 Crs Sanjan Kumar Patel 15:10, 16 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjanind (talk • contribs)

I personally feel that Rob Cain is a bit biased towards Baahubali and shouldnt be used as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.51.23.184 (talk) 17:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

1) How does this comment relate to the one you are responding to? Doesn't Rob Cain work for Forbes? I don't see any Forbes links in this thread. 2) You've provided an unsubstantiated opinion that Cain is biased. Why do we care? What's the context? What is your evidence of bias? Where's your evidence that the contrary viewpoint should be considered instead? Wikipedia's not a democracy, so simply voting to disregard his articles isn't going to result in anything. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 June 2017

Dangal movie's Box office collections are wrong displayed. World has no evidence to verify the same. it is not more than 700-800cr. Loveshk.10 (talk) 09:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@Loveshk.10: Except that reliable sources disagree with you, and they are experts, whereas you are not. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 June 2017

Update Sachin: A Billion Dreams collections in the Maraṭhi films section per ref https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/sachin-a-billion-dreams-box-office-collection-day-7-sachin-tendulkar-biopic-4684405/lite/ To 38.80 crore. 31.215.193.119 (talk) 19:54, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Already done Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 June 2017

Per this ref here, Dangal has collected ₹ 1823 crore and Baahubali 2: The Conclusion has collected 1652 crore. kindly update this information. 86.97.128.171 (talk) 12:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Already done Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 June 2017

please change Dangal collection ₹1,823 crore (US$280 million)[8] to ₹1,870 crore (US$281 million). Here is the source of this- https://www.forbes.com/sites/dongroves/2017/06/04/dangal-out-muscles-xxx-return-of-xander-cage-and-kong-skull-island-in-china/#65e1913f3820 Ferdouse Shihab (talk) 12:18, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Already done Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 June 2017

Dangal has surpassed 2000Cr worldwide. Please change this in the appropriate columns. This achievement is listed in the Forbes article mentioned below: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/06/26/indias-dangal-takes-down-%E2%82%B92000-crore-305m-a-major-milestone-in-world-cinema/#74404a8f202a Dangal also becomes the first Indian film to garner 2000Cr worldwide. Please add this description in the Introduction. 223.229.201.174 (talk) 11:24, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Already done Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Franchise

We must focus on some development in the franchise screen it shows a lot of movies still running and appears as Baahubali beginning is still running . How to clear those green colored cells.. And we must include dollar alongside according to me.. ^∞😃 Nabeelgm 😃^∞(Talk)

• Nabeelgm (talk • contribs)

Nabeel Gm 08:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC) Nabeel Gm 08:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Why Include dollar ? It has nothing to do with this subject and it is also a small bias on our part. If dollar be included, there should be Pakiatanj Rupee, Yuan, Euro, Riyal etc as they are also unitsof money calculation. King Prithviraj II (talk) 13:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Because in other places we have included dollar alongside rupees Nabeel Gm 17:06, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 June 2017

add THUPPAKKI tamil list RajaRajaCholan (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Not done: The data originates from a primary source, meaning that there is an inherent conflict of interest with blindly reporting a distributor's data. When secondary sources confirm the data independently, that's ideal. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:56, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Pk's gross?

In its Wikipedia page it says that it have grossed 832crs and here it says it has grossed 794 crs plz fix it JV Tuber (talk) 02:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@JV Tuber: It's been fixed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:32, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Source for film by year section?

What is the source for highest grossing film by year section, it all seems self-made up figures. Also the list only includes data of Bollywood not other industries, what is the source for Highest grossing films by inflation adjustment? SoniaKovind (talk) 06:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Maestro2016, since you appear to be making a lot of edits in this area, the above question is mostly directed at you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 12:51, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

As we've discussed on my talk page, the adjusted domestic gross figures for several films from the '60s and '70s are based on this source: Top 50 Film of Last 50 Years, Box Office India, 3 November 2011. Maestro2016 (talk) 13:01, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb On his talk page, Maestro2016 and I discussed about the list and its source and it was clear that the list is a hypothetical list which uses gold standard for ticket prices. The publisher of the source himself calls it only an academic exercise and not an actual list of adjusted gross, so it can not be the basis of the list on the page. The list on the page should be removed. SoniaKovind (talk) 13:17, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

As I wrote on my talk page: Then you've clearly misunderstand what the author is saying. The author is arguing that the gold standard is a more reliable measure of a currency's worth than the government's official inflation rate, which he argues is "ridden with weaknesses" and "subject to subsequent revisions." Maestro2016 (talk) 13:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

No, he is only suggesting, as in "what if" meaning what if we take the gold price as basis. Gold prices are not stable, in 2010 gold prices shot up by 30% but have remained stagnant since 2012, does that mean a film's revenue will automatically shoot up by 30% in fiscal year 2009-2010? And will not change at all in last 5 years?

Even if its an "argument" according to your interpretation, its his argument against other's argument, that does not make it true. Even gold standard pricing is "ridden with weaknesses" and "subject to subsequent revisions." SoniaKovind (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@SoniaKovind: This all seems very complicated for my little brain. Why can't we just use one of our internal Inflation templates, like {{Inflation}} or {{INRConvert}}? Also, are we getting too serious about a subject (Indian film financials) that is mostly just based on guesses anyway? Guesswork + corrupt system ≠ reliable data. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: LOL, I agree, their is no standard box office measurement system in India, especially for inflation adjusted gross. I was asking Maestro2016 to not add this list based on a dubious source and was hoping he would remove it after discussion. SoniaKovind (talk) 13:59, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Also as you have shown that boxofficeindia.co.in is not a reliable source, this list should certainly be removed. SoniaKovind (talk) 14:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Maestro2016, I'm not aware of Boxofficeindia.co.in being widely considered a reliable source here. I'm aware that there are two BoxOfficeIndias, .com and .co.in. I also know that .com is used about 17x more frequently at the English Wikipedia than .co.in is, and when I do a search of a site like The Hindu for "boxofficeindia.co.in", I see more hits for the .com site. My point being: I don't get the sense that .co.in is widely considered reliable here. Also I've seen some instances, like their treatment of MSG-2's figures that seemed like they were merely parroting what the producers told them. There's been some inconclusive discussion about it here and here. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:40, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

So you're saying boxofficeindia.co.in has no connection to boxofficeindia.com? From what I gather, looking through those discussions, the .co.in version is a professional trade magazine separate from the .com website, with some users arguing the former is more reliable and some users arguing the latter is more reliable. Either way, this is getting pretty confusing. We might need some input from other users, to get some kind of consensus here. Maestro2016 (talk) 14:43, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Inflation adjusted movie figures are always a slippery slope. I see that this is a worked upon list and I appreciate the tenacity. However this in no way an encyclopedic list as it relies on a lot of assumptions.

• The assumption that boxofficeindia.co.in is the same as boxofficeindia.com. I tried checking, and nothing came up to suggest the same. WP:ICTFFAQ () says that there exists a boxofficeindia.co.in which is different from boxofficeindia.com, the latter being the site we consider as reliable.
• The use of gold standard is probably without precedent. As discussed above gold's prices cannot be considered as the harbinger of inflation, as inflation is much more complicated than that.
• The overseas gross figures are not proper as well. Gunga Jamuna, Disco Dancer, Bobby uses figures from the Soviet Union while Sholay and Mother India does not have figures in the overseas gross figures. Assuming that Gunga Jamuna, Disco Dancer and Bobby did indeed gross so much in Soviet Union, there exists the possibility that it could have grossed similarly high figures in a lot of other nations, which is not being accounted for currently. Also the fact that Sholay's figures does not exist in the RBTH reference used is providing a misleading idea about the list, as Sholay is usually considered as the highest grossing movie ever.

I therefore will be removing the list till a consensus is established about all the above problems. Providing a misleading list when the page is attracting high traffic is not in the interest of the encyclopedia. Best. Jupitus Smart 08:02, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: Also revert 'Highest-grossing films by year' list before recent edits, it uses same misleading source and numbers. SoniaKovind (talk) 12:43, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

If we shouldn't use boxofficeindia.co.in, then what do you think about Cyphoidbomb's alternative suggestion of using the {{Inflation}} or {{INRConvert}} templates? Regarding the Soviet Union, the list of top 50 Indian films in the USSR compiled by Sergey Kudryavtsev (film critic) doesn't include popular domestic grossers like Sholay, Mughal-e-Azam, or Mother India (for whatever reasons, maybe because they may not have been released there), hence the absence of overseas gross for these films. Maestro2016 (talk) 10:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: Also, why is there a different format in Highest-grossing films by year section, with writer's name instead of studio/producer's name? All other sections on the page use studio/producer's name not writer's on the list, as a film's revenue are subject of studio/production house, not writers. SoniaKovind (talk) 10:47, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: Using the collections in USSR as the Worldwide collection is not acceptable. Ganga Jumna may have grossed X crores in Soviet Union. Sholay may not have grossed anything in USSR but may have grossed a much higher value than X in say USA. So listing Ganga Jumna above Sholay will give off the idea that it was the bigger hit, when it may have not been so. As for INRConvert - I am not sure about that. You are better of asking Cyphoidbomb about the feasibility of using it. However when the base value is contested, I don't see why changing it to inflation adjusted figures would help. Regards. Jupitus Smart 11:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@SoniaKovind: asked me to revert the yearly highest grossers edit - on my talk page. I don't intend to do that unless a better consensus emerges about that. I would also request her to discuss the same here where everybody can chip in. Jupitus Smart 12:39, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I requested to revert 'Highest-grossing films by year' list before recent edits, as it uses the same misleading source and numbers, just like the other list that was removed. SoniaKovind (talk) 12:47, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

You probably have not understood @SoniaKovind:. I will not be reverting that until a better consensus about reverting emerges. The reason for reverting the inflation adjusted figures were mentioned by me above. That does not hold for highest grossing movies by year. So I cannot randomly revert. You are much better off talking to Maestro2016 and convincing him about your points. Jupitus Smart 12:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Jupitus Smart: I pinged him earlier, he hasn't replied on the page. The reason for reverting the 'Highest-grossing films by year' section is also the same as he has used the same figures and source for this section as in 'inflation adjusted figures' section, which you reverted, how are the same numbers misleading in one section but not in other? Please look into it. The figures and source. SoniaKovind (talk) 13:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

As Cyphoidbomb suggested above, the data from the boxofficeindia.co.in source could be replaced with data from the {{Inflation}} or {{INRConvert}} templates. Maestro2016 (talk) 13:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

The Western box office market (North America, Western Europe) for Indian films didn't come into existence until the 1990s, when Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge opened up the NRI market. Prior to that, the overseas market was mainly limited to Asia and Eastern Europe, of which we only have data available for the USSR. Maestro2016 (talk) 13:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@SoniaKovind: We have an administrator involved in this discussion, so if he does not reply to you for long, I believe the admin would do the needful. As for the quick revert in one section and the lets discuss this out in another section - The highest grossing movies per year is accepted to be broken as mentioned in the cleanup tag above. So if he can prove that a movie with a higher gross existed in a particular year (which he has probably done, though not in the most convincing manner), he is free to replace the old movie. However when it is a whole list which is wrong as in the inflation adjusted figures list - that is not acceptable - as it becomes entirely WP:OR. I understand this is not the most convincing answer, but that is what I believe. So I myself will not be reverting it, though somebody else is free to do so. Jupitus Smart 13:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: Why no reply on this one? Why is there a different format in Highest-grossing films by year section, with writer's name instead of studio/producer's name? All other sections on the page use studio/producer's name not writer's on the list, as a film's revenue are subject of studio/production house, not writers. SoniaKovind (talk) 13:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Does it matter whether or not the director/writer/producer/studio/actors are listed? Maestro2016 (talk) 13:26, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Of course, why did you come up with you own format? Please follow the established format, which includes director and producer. SoniaKovind (talk) 13:34, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I've made several changes to the yearly section: removed all references to boxofficeindia.co.in, replaced gold figures with data from {{Inflation}} templates, and replaced writer format with studio format. Maestro2016 (talk) 07:06, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Dangal

Please update earnings of dangal as Forbes has released source it has grossed 2000cr *^🦂😎 Nabeelgm 😎^🦂(Talk)•°Nabeel Gm 17:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC) Nabeel Gm 17:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Nabeelgm: Posting an edit request without providing a specific reference is a waste of your time and of other editors' time. In this case, the request was already made in the comment above yours, with a reference, so your request is superfluous as well. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:58, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

07/04/2017: Please update Dangal collections as 1864cr. kiranprasad2001 http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/dangals-box-office-collection-at-rs-1848-crore-not-rs-2000-crore-clarifies-films-spokesperson-3773841.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiranprasad2001 (talk • contribs) 10:42, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 July 2017

Remove as green highlights on Dangal as it is not showing in international cinemas anymore, including China Helperedits (talk) 09:19, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Change Srimanthudu collections

It is impossible for the Telugu movie Srimanthudu to gross 200 crores. It has actually grossed 144.45 crores. Look at the following links for verification.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/srimanthudu-total-worldwide-box-office-collection-mahesh-babu-starrers-lifetime-earnings-rs-650528

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/khaidi-no-150-26-day-worldwide-box-office-collection-chirus-movie-beats-srimanthudu-record-715022 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadelison (talk • contribs) 08:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

2008 Highest Grosser

How is Ghajini the highest grosser of 2008? It has grossed ₹ 194.58 crores.

http://www.boxofficeindia.com/movie.php?movieid=309

The Tamil movie Dasavathaaram should be the highest grossing movie os 2008. It has grossed ₹ 200 crores.

http://movies.ndtv.com/regional/baahubali-to-thuppakki-tamil-cinemas-100-cr-films-1204181

https://web.archive.org/web/20160802165023/http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib%3ALowLevelEntityToPrint_ETNEW&Type=text%2Fhtml&Locale=english-skin-custom&Path=ETM%2F2009%2F04%2F04&ID=Ar01400 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadelison (talk • contribs) 07:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Ghajini crossed 200 crore worldwide, according to the following source: Nikhat Kazmi. "The Cast And Crew of Ghajini Celebrate The Film's 200 Crores Collections Worldwide". Bollywood Hungama. Retrieved 12 January 2009. Maestro2016 (talk) 15:36, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, if both the movies grossed 200 crores, shouldn't they both be cited? Wadelison (talk) 20:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Wadelison

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 July 2017

Baahubali 2 has collected 2000 crores already. The page was not updated. Check the Baahubali 2 wikipedia page where you can see the proof with official links from magazines and newspapers. Please update it. It should be ranked no.1 with Dangal in the list of Highest grossing Indian films Freewebstennis (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 July 2017

42.109.130.234 (talk) 16:36, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

| 3.The Great Father | style="background:#b6fcb6;"| 2017 | style="background:#b6fcb6;"| Haneef Adeni | style="background:#b6fcb6;"| August Cinema | style="background:#b6fcb6;"| ₹50 crore (US$6.3 million) | style="background:#b6fcb6;"|

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:53, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

References

Dangal's Box office collection

A spokesperson from the team of Dangal has said Dangal has made a worldwide gross of 1864 crores and the news that it has crossed 2000 crores is absolutely fake. Sptavva7 (talk) 10:22, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable source that says this is the case. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 20:03, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/dangals-box-office-collection-at-rs-1848-crore-not-rs-2000-crore-clarifies-films-spokesperson-3773841.html Sptavva7 (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Dangal collections 1523 crores

http://www.news18.com/news/movies/dangal-all-set-to-beat-baahubali-2-at-the-box-office-earns-1523-cr-worldwide-1409483.html Saisiddharth4u (talk) 16:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/dangals-box-office-collection-at-rs-1848-crore-not-rs-2000-crore-clarifies-films-spokesperson-3773841.html Sptavva7 (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Dangal collections are fake.

The spokesperson of the Dangal team has clarified that Dangal hasn't touched 2000 crore rupees gross. In fact, it has only made 1864 crore rupees gross. Sptavva7 (talk) 18:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/dangals-box-office-collection-at-rs-1848-crore-not-rs-2000-crore-clarifies-films-spokesperson-3773841.html Sptavva7 (talk) 18:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Dangal

Hi,

The 1864 crore figure for Dangal is absolutely unreliable as a section of the media has only quoted an unnamed spokesperson whose affiliation cannot be verified as the source.

The truth, as revealed by Forbes columnist Rob Cain on twitter, is that reports of such business are based on nett figures for China, which have no place in global box office figures.

I would appreciate it if this issue could be resolved so as to avoid spreading misinformation.

Thanks. Factual Proof (talk) 01:05, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I have now reverted Dangal back to 2000 crore. Maestro2016 (talk) 02:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ssven2: Since you have reverted back to the 1864 number, could you maybe address the issues raised by Factual Proof here? Maestro2016 (talk) 18:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: Oops, my bad. I didn't notice this. I have reverted it back to 2000. In doing so, I had to revert your recent edits (Sorry about that).  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 06:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

That's okay. I've now restored those intermediate edits. Maestro2016 (talk) 07:05, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/dangals-box-office-collection-at-rs-1848-crore-not-rs-2000-crore-clarifies-films-spokesperson-3773841.html Sptavva7 (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Update Bahubali 2 Box office / fake dangal collection

Bahubali 2 figure is not updated. Cooltunir (talk) 07:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Cooltunir (talk) 07:20, 23 July 2017 (UTC)== Dangal controversy ==

dangals figure may not be accurate, reports that aamir khan buying tickets for his own movie.

Baahubali 2 collections

Kindly check this source. Film Grossed 1908 crores. Pls update the boxoffice collections. Ambeinghari (talk) 17:10, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Highest Grosser of 2008

In 2008, both Dasavathaaram and Ghajini had grossed ₹ 200 crore as per their respective sources. So either both should be mentioned or one of them can be mentioned as per alphabetical order/date of release(In both cases, Dasavatharam would have to be mentioned, but it is not). Why is only Ghajini mentioned? -Rajan51(talk) 16:30, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Ideally the industry would publish their own list of highest-grossing films of 2008 so that we wouldn't be in this mess, but for lack of any sources saying "yeah, they both made 200 crore, but this one made 200.0001 crore, so it's the highest", we should probably include both in that spot. I'd go with alphabetical order, since that's what's been done with some of the other films grouped together, like in the Malayalam section. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:35, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 August 2017

Bhubali:The conclusion Grosss is 1912 crores please update Ajay1998A (talk) 06:32, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 06:45, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Kung Fu Yoga

Should it be added? It was an Indian co-production after all.69.108.67.62 (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

That would be a can of worms considering there are many Hollywood movies that are Indian co-productions - War Horse (film), Lincoln (film) and Grace of Monaco (film) being examples. Besides there is the question of where to add them under - We would need a new section for Chinese, besides ones for English and prospective sections for French/Spanish/German when Indian producers begin expanding further. Jupitus Smart 09:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 August 2017

Dangal official made 1864 crore not 2000 crore. http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/aamir-khan-dangal-has-not-earned-rs-2000-crore-worldwide-4733757/ Nischal90 (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Baahubali

How did Baahubali's gross jump from 1700 crore to 1900 crore? The only source mentioning 1900 crore seems to be Box Office Mojo. While it's a reliable site for overseas box office numbers (such as US, UK and China), its Indian numbers look dubious. Here it does not show any weekly gross figures for India, but only shows $45,500,000 for the opening weekend, and then doesn't give anything after that. And then when you look at its weekly Indian charts, it's clearly wrong, listing Guardians of the Galaxy as the #1 film in India the following week after, when Baahubali was dominating. I've also noticed that Box Office Mojo is not mentioned as a reliable source at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/ICTF FAQ. The reliable Indian sources listed there have it around the 1700 crore region, nowhere close to BOM's claim of $297 million (1900 crore). Maestro2016 (talk) 19:38, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

For example, this recent report from CNN-News18 and this report from India Today, both listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/ICTF FAQ, show that Baahubali 2 has currently grossed over 1700 crore worldwide as of August 2017. Maestro2016 (talk) 19:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Franchise

Hello world, There are several movies missing on the franchise look like in Tamil VIP movie etc and in Telugu several movies like gabbar Singh franchise are missing .. So plz fix it..*^🦂😎 Nabeelgm 😎^🦂(Talk)•°(contribs) Nabeel Gm 03:27, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Dangal's gross

Multiple news reports from reliable sources state that the film Dangal grossed 1864 crore despite the Forbes website declaring that Dangal made a gross of 2000 crore (The Forbes ref is clearly mentioned in some sources like this). The spokesperson was not referring to the nett gross (which Factual Proof mentioned above), which is considerably lower as foreign films released in China only get close to 10% or 20% (Pardon my memory) of the actual gross, which means the film can only gain a nett of 200 crore in China, which, added with the Indian gross (let's take this as the nett even if its not) gives nearly 1000 crore, nowhere near the 1864 mark. I know primary sources are not to be used, but usually primary sources exaggerate the real gross, which is not the case here. Another thing about Forbes reports - pardon me if I am wrong, but when Indian Express states Baahubali's gross was 1684 crore on Jun 16 here and Forbes puts the gross at 1725 crore here on Jun 21, the film's gross was moving very slowly according to analysts, so within 5 days such a huge difference in numbers is nearly impossible. Also the Forbes website clearly states,"Opinions expressed by Forbes contributors are their own", which means any person could just open up an account and write an article there. @Cyphoidbomb: For his useful opinion. 31.215.112.147 (talk) 20:03, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Thought I don't know that "any person could just open up an account and write an article" at Forbes, I think it's probably reasonable to go with the lower number, on the basis that we know for a fact is that the film grossed at least that amount. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Could you proper update us Dangal Gross Figure...! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.165.143.84 (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

And the "proper" figure would be.... ? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:37, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 August 2017

Remove The Great Father from Malayalam section. It is sourced with the site "kboupdates.com", which is a poor source. The site is unreliable even for citing less challengeable contents. 103.15.253.81 (talk) 05:08, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Note: Tagged with the template {{Unreliable source?}}. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 08:23, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Done The content was submitted by Akhil7Cena in these edits. To my knowledge there has been no community discussion about kboupdates.com suitability as a reference, so the status quo should be maintained until the community agrees that it's suitable. To me it looks like every other crappy blog that gets slipped into Indian film articles. The gibberish English at the bottom of the page "We are impartial,we do only follows the reality, the near evidences..." suggests that there's no strong editorial standard being maintained there. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:39, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion

  i : Extend the top list from 15 to 20 ([Here]), as We have so many languages,so at least Top 20 should be there . And also top 20 sound & look good ;)
  ii : Make another block inside Highest-grossing films by language , with forign language . There should be a list for highest grossing foreign language film in India.

Want your views regarding these two points. Sanjan Kumar Patel 06:31, 28 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjanind (talk • contribs)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 September 2017

Ninnu Kori (2017) Telugu: 461 million INR(US$ 7.2 mil) 14.139.38.9 (talk) 11:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 11:22, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Even if this were true, the Telugu list ends at 1250 million. So this would not find a place anyway. Jupitus Smart 13:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 September 2017

Edit required under TAMIL MOVIES

VIVEGAM new movie which crossed 157 cr and currently running. So it takes the position of 8th and Theri needs to be step down to 9th position. source: http://www.financialexpress.com/entertainment/after-defeating-baahubali-in-chennai-thala-ajith-kumar-film-vivegam-set-to-break-record-of-i-movie-of-shankar-vikram/850567/ 122.174.57.152 (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done for now: Got any sources other than Express Group (Financial Express / Indian Express)? After their incompetent reporting on the Kabali figures, I'm strongly reticent to blindly republish their latest Tamil film hype. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Included other sources: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/vivegam-box-office-collection-ajith-kumar-kajal-aggarwal/1/1044692.html http://www.businesstoday.in/lifestyle/off-track/vivegam-box-office-collection-ajiths-movie-seems-unstoppable-crosses-rs-160-cr-mark-worldwide/story/259986.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.174.57.152 (talk) 19:30, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 September 2017

DanteInfeno (talk) 21:54, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 21:56, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 September 2017

8 Ksb1983 (talk) 21:30, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 22:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Domestic gross

@Cyphoidbomb, DRAGON BOOSTER, Maestro2016, and Jupitus Smart: Right, pinged all important contributors to this article. Now, what I am raising is, this article contains information about wordwide gross, gross by language, and gross by year, but it doesn't contain domestic gross. I propose adding a section titled domestic gross to this article, good places to get info include Box Office India, Bollywood Hungama, etc. Requesting your information on the same, 2.51.16.149 (talk) 13:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

We already have List of highest-grossing Indian films in overseas markets. And most movies overlap in both the articles, so anybody can find out the domestic gross by subtracting, if they are so interested. I am however not averse to the idea altogether. If there is a consensus towards it, I would prefer if you create it as a new article, instead of cluttering this article, similar to the overseas article. Jupitus Smart 13:28, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

If you want to cover domestic gross, my suggestion would be to create a new article along the lines of List of highest-grossing films in China, which covers the gross of films released in China (including both Chinese and foreign films). The closest equivalent for Indian films is List of highest domestic net collection of Hindi films, which only covers Hindi films released in India. Maestro2016 (talk) 15:48, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

This sounded like a good idea to me, so I went ahead and created the article at List of highest grossing films in India. @Jupitus Smart and Maestro2016: Are the sourcing and formatting of the article proper according to Wikipedia standards ? Thanks, King Prithviraj II (talk) 15:09, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Your view ? King Prithviraj II (talk) 15:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 September 2017

Theri's collection source tells us that the movie had grossed a total of Rs.156 Cr. in the first week of its release. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dongroves/2016/04/24/tollywood-box-office-update-sarrainodu-scores-in-the-u-s-and-india/#5d79d6027c3a The movie then went on to run for another 50 days and hence its collections is obviously more than the said amount http://onlookersmedia.in/collection-report/theri-gross-collection-to-reach-200-crore-mark-soon/ The above link cleaerl states that the movie had collected atleast Rs.175 Cr. I request the movie collections to be changed from Rs.156 Cr. to Rs.175 Cr.

14.139.160.224 (talk) 09:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC) 14.139.160.224 (talk) 09:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Though you are correct that if a film ran for 50 days, it presumably grossed more than what it made in its first week, Onlookersmedia.in is a blog. Blogs are insufficient as reliable sources. See WP:UGC. We care what reliable published sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about anything. If you can find a stronger mainstream news source that takes a stab at estimating Theri's gross, feel free to resubmit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Dangal collected 2000 crore, check the link below by Forbes and anyone who has access to update the collections kindly update. Thanks.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/10/03/if-secret-superstar-hits-big-aamir-khan-will-own-the-title-worlds-biggest-movie-star/#3b6ee934a8d3 Saisiddharth4u (talk) 18:06, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 October 2017

MERSAL 1500CR Mukhilk (talk) 13:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 14:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mukhilk: Please don't post idiotic edit requests. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:24, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 October 2017

Fidaa- 2.0 Million dollar spyder- 1.5 million dollar jai lava kusa- 1.5 million dollar 183.82.230.9 (talk) 10:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:23, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Trying to wrap my head around the data...

So I'm randomly looking at the reference list for the 1973 film Bobby. Here's what I see:

Bobby: ₹30.24 crore (US$35.65 million) in 1975 (₹1155 crore (US$172 million) in 2016)

• India: ₹11 crore^[173] (US$14.21 million)^{[n 59]} in 1973 (US$77 million or ₹517 crore^[125] in 2016)
  
• Soviet Union: 15.65 million SUR^{[n 60]} (US$21.44 million,^{[n 61]} ₹19.24 crore)^{[n 62]} in 1975 (US$95 million (₹638 crore)^[125] in 2016)

How we arrive at 30.24 crore is visually confusing to say the least, with all those currency conversions and notes and such. @Maestro2016: You seem to have placed a lot of stock in what some random LiveJournal user has said. How does this source qualify as WP:RS? And how do we know that this BOI reference, which cites a gross of ₹11 crore doesn't represent the estimated worldwide gross? Where does it say that this is the domestic take? I mean it's already problematic that we're dealing with box office estimates from 1973. We can't even get consistent box figures with all our technology in 2017.

It seems that we're making assumptions about 2 important facts: 1) That the LiveJournal post is authoritative, and 2) That the Box Office India guesstimates are domestic only.

Additionally, I'm curious why Urdu appears so often in the Highest-grossing films by year table. Seems to have sprung up here. Many of these are presumably Hindi films produced by Bollywood. What's the Urdu connection? Dubs? We don't include dubs in these tables.

Really we're in WP:SYNTH territory, because we're cobbling together a bunch of data from a myriad of sources to arrive at something none of the sources say. Taking a LiveJournal post, taking the alleged ticket sales figure, multiplying that by the average ticket price, converting that figure into Indian rupees, adjusting for inflation... HUUUUGE margin for error here, and it's kind of shocking that no mainstream Indian source can be found to say explicitly "Bobby was the highest grossing Indian film of 1973 with a worldwide gross of ₹NN crore." The lack of data to this effect makes everything else so suspect. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:58, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll try to address each of these points:

1. The LiveJournal blog is written by Sergey Kudryavtsev, a Russian film critic and Soviet cinema historian. He is a reliable source for Soviet box office numbers.

2. Box Office India makes a distinction between domestic, overseas and worldwide numbers. Also, BOI does not cover overseas or worldwide numbers for any films released before the 1990s, but only has domestic numbers for films before that. And even after the 1990s, BOI's overseas data is limited to NRI markets (it doesn't include China, for example).

3. Prior to the partition of India in 1947, there was no clear political distinction between Hindi and Urdu, but it was just Hindi-Urdu back then. Also, some of those films from the 1940s are from what is today Pakistan, so it would be incorrect to list them as just Hindi. As for films after 1947, only several films are listed as Hindi-Urdu, the ones that state Urdu on their articles.

4. Wikipedia's currency and inflation templates were used to calculate those numbers. Generally, this falls under WP:CALC, which appears to be acceptable.

5. I'm not aware of any mainstream Indian sources that cover the Soviet Union, but they usually focus on just the domestic box office and overseas NRI markets. For the Soviet market, we'd need to look for Russian sources, rather than Indian sources.

Maestro2016 (talk) 14:39, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: Thank you for the clear explanations! I've gotten an interesting lesson on Hindi-Urdu. Good to know. Thanks. I'll have to ruminate about some of the other points. I still do feel that the notes are really dense and hard to understand though, but I'm not particularly motivated to do anything about it or to propose a solution at present. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:19, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect gross

Pulimurugan gross collection is wrongly quoted its 152 crores as supposed to 125 crores which is given in the page. http://www.catchnews.com/regional-cinema/2016-box-office-kings-mohanlal-is-the-only-malayalam-actor-among-top-5-aamir-khan-tops-the-list-followed-by-akshay-kumar-and-salman-khan-1483966620.html?seq=2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anoopkatvm (talk • contribs) 08:40, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

@Anoopkatvm: Maybe you should read the source again. "Pulimurugan is still running to packed houses in more than 80 centers across the Kerala has so far collected Rs. 152 crore worldwide." Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 October 2017

Change the worldwide gross of Kabali from "₹477 crore (US$74 million) – ₹499 crore (US$78 million)" to "499 crore ($79 million)", the link is "https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/10/24/for-vijays-mersal-%E2%82%B9200-crore31m-worldwide-gross-is-now-a-lock/2/". 183.78.95.38 (talk) 07:38, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: There is obviously a range of opinion on the gross. Why would we assume that the higher figure is the correct one? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:46, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Vijay Starrer Mersal has collected 170cr worldwide and Gonna Breach 200cr club Soon ..Has to be added in Highest Grossing Tamil Films

Riyazsrk123 (talk) 07:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC) Please Add Mersal in Highest Grossing Tamil Films List and Reliable sources such as Forbes,india today article link has been provided below..

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 October 2017

Please change vivegam in tamil films from eighth position to ninth position and put mersal in eighth position Mersal (film). Ramsundarramsundar (talk) 14:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The references given are not WP:RS for Indian cinema (see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force for more) and the box office figures for the other films would need RS updating to determine if positional changes are necessary. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 00:00, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Add Mersal to the Highest Grossing Tamil Films and remove Vivegam from the list.

As shown here from a trustworthy source, Mersal has crossed 180 Crores in the Boxoffice and should make the list.

In this article posted recently breaking down the boxoffice of Vivegam, it has only grossed 112 Crores and should be removed from the list.

Kesh505 (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Atlee

change ((Atlee)) to ((Atlee (director)|Atlee))

Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 October 2017

Change the Worldwide gross of tamil film "Mersal" from '170 Crores to 200 Crores' , the link is " http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-12-days-box-office-collection-crowning-vijay-film-joins-rs-200-crore-club-2nd-weekend-747432 " 183.78.95.52 (talk) 05:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Done ToThAc (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Update Mersal's collection

A request to update Mersal's collection and change it from Rs.170 Cr to Rs.210 Cr.

1. http://www.businesstoday.in/trending/box-office/mersal-box-office-collection-vijay-rs-210-crore-worldwide/story/262920.html

2. http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-12-days-box-office-collection-crowning-vijay-film-joins-rs-200-crore-club-2nd-weekend-7474

Although the business times quotes the official twitter handle of the film (which might not be a valid source), the ibtimes has confirmed that the film has atleast grossed Rs.200 Cr. Arunkxip (talk) 11:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Please update Mersal box office collection from 170 crore into 210 crore.

http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/tamil/mersal-box-office-third-week-on-but-vijay-starrer-refuses-to-slow-down-4916990/

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-14-day-box-office-collection-ilayathalapathy-vijays-film-rs-210-crore-beat-vikram-record-747732 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:6F2B:3182:AC88:A346:20FF:6949 (talk) 14:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Please underline Mersal movie Green, because Mersal is still running. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:6F2B:3182:AC88:A346:20FF:6949 (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Done ToThAc (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 November 2017

'Change the Worldwide gross' of Tamil film 'Mersal' from "200 Crores to 210 Crores" , the link is ' http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-14-day-box-office-collection-ilayathalapathy-vijays-film-rs-210-crore-beat-vikram-record-747732 ' .. 183.78.95.2 (talk) 02:14, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. I have no idea why I didn't highlight the row green in the first place, as there is enough sources to indicate that the film's general notability is only increasing, so I did that too. ToThAc (talk) 15:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

MERSAL

PLEASE UNDERLINE MERSAL MOVIE IN GREEN, because the movie is still running!!!!!!!

My 2nd request!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E5:D3CB:F001:51E8:ECC2:6941:CDB8 (talk) 09:33, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done ToThAc (talk) 15:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 November 2017

Change the position of Tamil film 'Mersal' from 'no. 8 to no. 7' because it's Worldwide gross is higher than the film 'Dasavatharam' .. 183.78.95.233 (talk) 12:40, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Done Thank you  — Ammarpad (talk) 22:01, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Mersal

Please update Mersal collection into 227 crore.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-box-office-collection-vijays-film-mints-rs-227-14-crore-worldwide-748516 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E5:D3CB:F001:541C:8796:AFDC:60F6 (talk) 12:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 November 2017

Please 'change the Worldwide gross' of Tamil film 'Mersal' from '210 Crore to 220 Crore' , the link is ' http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-box-office-collection-vijays-film-mints-rs-227-14-crore-worldwide-748516 ' .. 183.78.95.73 (talk) 12:12, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: All Indian box office figures, including IBTimes, are estimates, so there is no reliability to presenting the difference between 210 Crore and 220 Crore as significant or that the new figure is more authoritative. See Indian cinema task force for more information. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 00:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 November 2017

Hi. I have been a editor of this wikipedia page before. Now I cant. Please let me edit. Thanks! R-360 (Creations) (talk) 02:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

 Not done - the article is now under extended-confirmed protection. This permission is given to editors with 500 edits and 90 days tenure. I should note that, although unlikely, you could apply for these rights. Once you meet these requirements, you will be able to edit it again. If you have a specific request, please open a new one. Thanks. ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 02:45, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 November 2017

'Change the Worldwide gross' of Tamil film 'Mersal' from '220 Crores to 230 Crores' , the links are, '' and ' .. 183.78.95.138 (talk) 05:17, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Not done: There is no need to keep updating the estimated and unreliable gross receipts every week while the film is still in current release. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:26, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Mersal

Hi guys, Please update mersal box office collection to 230 crore.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-troubles-vijays-film-far-over-now-director-served-notice-story-theft-749056

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/mersal-box-office-collection-vijays-film-completes-25-days-business-gets-boost-adirindi-749016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:6F2B:31E9:4D6D:C573:3B4E:B145 (talk) 11:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. Maestro2016 (talk) 07:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Why Hindi movie collections are getting increased and Telugu Tamil movie collections are decreased

We can see Hindi movie gross collections are getting increased with some sources and Telugu and Tamil movie collections are getting decreased with some other sources even if some sources showing higher collections. Everyone in India knows that Baahubali - The Beginning is the fourth highest grossing movie in India but it got relegated. Similarly, collections of Baahubali - The Conclusion are also got reduced. It is strategic demeaning of regional cinema. Please restore the original list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.49.82.85 (talk) 02:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

It was lowered because later reports from the same source (IB Times) lowered the film's final worldwide estimate. However, I've found a more recent IB Times report that increased its estimate slightly, which would put it back into the top 5. Maestro2016 (talk) 13:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Mersal

please update mersal box office collection into 235 crore worldwide.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/forget-mersal-its-time-celebrate-5-years-vijays-thuppakki-749294 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E5:D3CB:F001:8D5:5E92:C489:1262 (talk) 11:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. Maestro2016 (talk) 14:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 November 2017

Please 'change the Worldwide gross' of Tamil film 'Kabali' from '45 Million US Dollar to 77 Million US Dollar' , the link is ' https://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2017/05/11/armies-of-ajith-fans-mobilize-to-blast-vivegam-teaser-to-record-views/#3e18049816eb ' .. 183.78.95.171 (talk) 05:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: As mentioned in the edit summary, the most recent figure from International Business Times (IBT) puts Kabali's final worldwide gross at ₹286 crore in October 2017. IBT is the more reliable source according to ICTF FAQ, and IBT gives the most recent figure. And as mentioned on Kabali (film), higher estimates are inflated according to IBT. Maestro2016 (talk) 06:59, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: There is no "more reliable" here, with the exception being that I'm not a fan of Express Group (Financial Express / Indian Express), because they did a really piss-poor job of reporting the financial data, including "pre-release income" in the box office figures. They were complicit in the confusion and questionable data. 286 crore seems low if we consider Forbes put the figure higher than what Express Group was reporting. That said, if IBT is reporting a far lower worldwide gross, then the data should be presented in the form of a range as it was in this version of the article, i.e. from 286 crore to 499 crore. I'm unclear on why the range disappeared. If there is a wide discrepancy of opinion we should usually err on the side of ranges, rather than using either higher or lower absolutes. And in the table, it should be ranked based on the low number, since we know that it grossed at least 286 crore. There used to be a citation note that explained why the data was being presented in the form of a range. I'm not sure why it disappeared, but it presents necessary context and should be restored. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I've now restored the range and notes for Kabali. Maestro2016 (talk) 17:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Maestro2016: Thank you, sir. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: already answered ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 16:40, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Mersal

Hi Guys,

can you please update Mersal box office collection from 235 crore to 240 crore^^

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/adirindi-first-week-box-office-collection-mersal-telugu-version-breaks-even-distributors-8-days-749760 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:6F2B:3109:525:9FFF:7B9F:12CA (talk) 20:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. Maestro2016 (talk) 06:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Change mersal movie ranking

Move mersal movie to 5th ranking in highest tamil movie grossing and move 25th rank in globel grossing Kaarthik roy kevin (talk) 11:10, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

MERSAL

Hi guys,
can you please update Mersal box office collection from 240 crore to 250 crore and add in global gross figures ^^

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/ilayathalapathy-vijays-mersal-creates-history-breaches-rs-250-crore-mark-750449

Done. Maestro2016 (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 November 2017

Please 'change the Worldwide gross' of Tamil film 'Mersal' from '240 Crore to 250 Crore' , the link is ' http://www.ibtimes.co.in/ilayathalapathy-vijays-mersal-creates-history-breaches-rs-250-crore-mark-750449 ' .. 183.78.95.8 (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Mersal just reached 210crores only, not more than this. Update it. Jahir cer (talk) 05:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Rajinikanth movies are high grossed movies, have proof officially.

Hj Jahir cer (talk) 04:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Kabali & Enthiran movie. Please update. Kabali beat the Baahubali-the beginning record. Check the true box office collection and revise or update. Jahir cer (talk) 05:03, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 Not done It's unclear what changes you are requesting, Jahir cer, and you need to bring references when you ask editors to make changes. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:40, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Rajinikanth movies

Kabali movie collected more than 950crores approximately. The collection of first 13 days are 650crores, confirmed news by some magazines. Likewise Enthiran movie also collected 400crores approximately. Please revise this page in tamil cinema or kollywood. Jahir cer (talk) 04:11, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 Not done - @Jahir cer: Your unsourced claim that Kabali grossed over ₹950 crore is absurd. The idiots at Financial Express, posted high claims of up to 677 crore, but when you read the source, it becomes very clear that they've included included pre-release income, which is never factored into box office figures. Box office = money made at the box office, through ticket sales. So even from the perspective of the poor journalists at Express Group, the film grossed 477 crore (215 domestic, 262 international). Since you've brought no references to this discussion about the 950 crore claim, there isn't anything else I can say on the matter. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:50, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 November 2017

Please add Vitamin She in the list of highest grossing films after Karsandas Pay & Use. It has collected 3.5 crores till now. 74.82.35.73 (talk) 10:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Not done for now: Which one of these is supposed to be a reliable source for the financial data? Surely not the Facebook link. Surely not the Weeklycollection.in blog. I don't see any financial claims at Bollywood Bhaskar. I don't see anything that resembles numbers on the front page of Gujarati Midday. ?? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:43, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Starring

Its important to add a column representing the leading star/s of every movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaazan (talk • contribs) 15:47, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Vaazan: Why is that important? And how do we decide who the leading stars are of each movie? What list would we look at for that information? Would we just pick and choose at random? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:31, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: For that reason, why don't we follow the table as listed here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films . When additional information like multiple production houses can be columned, why not have leading actors columned for every movie. It also helps to catalogue the attribution of the financial success of a movie to them, as it is so with most Indian movies. If this doesn't seem logical, then having the columns reduced without director or production house names is also equally logical, like the link I have posted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaazan (talk • contribs) 14:17, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Vaazan: Again, why do we want this information in these tables? And again, how do you determine who the "leading stars" of every movie are? You're proposing a cruft magnet, i.e. yet another block of information that's going to invite indiscriminate additions. Proof: Since editors have already added directors and production houses to the existing tables, that's given you license to suggest yet another column be added. Nobody's going to agree on who the stars are. This is a recurring issue in Indian film articles. Anyway, the simpler the data in this article, the better.

Also, please sign your posts with four tildes like: ~~~~. This will automatically append a signature and time stamp, like this → Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Ramaleela Malayalam Movie Entered 55 Crore Club!

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/ramaleela-earns-rs-55-crore-55-days-arun-gopy-says-he-owes-success-specially-dileep-748819

https://www.filmibeat.com/malayalam/news/2017/ramaleela-box-office-collections-the-dileep-starrer-joins-the-55-crore-club-269390.html

http://www.manoramaonline.com/movies/movie-news/2017/11/08/its-official-dileep-ramaleela-enters-50-crore-club.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramaleela_(film)

^ Above are the links proving it. Ramaleela Malayalam Movie Entered 55 Crore Club.Italic text — Preceding unsigned comment added by PuliMurugan (talk • contribs) 02:52, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

@PuliMurugan: The source of the content is the film's director. We don't use primary sources for controversial content, since a director would have every reason to inflate financial figures, and (big surprise) there is a lot of lying in the world of Indian cinema financials. We use sources that provide independent verification. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:58, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

But then how will any movies box office collection be known? Most of the movies like Bahubali are known to everyone by the producer or someone else on how much the movie makes at boxoffice. Malayalam Manorama is a trustable news website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PuliMurugan (talk • contribs) 18:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Sir Here is the link which gives clear reference that Ramleela has entered 50cr club.This article is given by Times of India which is the most reliable source.The collection they said is not given by the producer or the director . https://m.timesofindia.com/entertainment/malayalam/movies/news/dileeps-ramaleela-enters-50-crores-club/articleshow/61564289.cms . Please take necessary actionsMuhammed.suhail (talk) 10:05, 19 November 2017 (UTC) Admin can yku please add Ramleela in the list the source is provided above which is by TOI Muhammed.suhail (talk) 08:45, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you @Muhammed Suhail... and that link was 1 or 2 weeks ago when the movie collected 50 Crores, Now the movie crossed 55 Crores. http://www.manoramaonline.com/movies/movie-news/2017/11/08/its-official-dileep-ramaleela-enters-50-crore-club.html Manorama Online or Malayalam Manorama is a trustable news channel and website. The movie crossed 55 Crores. Plz Update... Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PuliMurugan (talk • contribs) 22:11, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Wait, wait, I'm really confused here. Do both of you live in a mindset where you're unaware of the well-known corruption in Indian film finances? Is that a shocking mystery to you? Because it's certainly not a mystery to me, and I am an outsider who has zero passion for any Indian film. But if you're both aware that Indian film finances are untrustworthy, there's no excuse for asserting that this data, as confirmed by the producers, is the true information. Even Muhammed.suhail's post of this reference says, "Now we hear that the film has also entered the 50 crores club. 'Ramaleela' is Dileep's second movie after 'Two Countries,' reportedly, to enter the 50 crores club." This is a cautious tip-toeing around information that was leaked to them. This isn't an independent confirmation. Do you believe the producers of Kabali who tried to generate hype that the film made ₹600 crore? Are you comfortable swallowing that data? If not, then please stop trying to republish rumours and producer claims as incontrovertible fact. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb Then you tell us how much ramaleela movie collected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PuliMurugan (talk • contribs) 19:46, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

It made as much money as independent reliable sources have been able to confirm independently. If that number is not available yet, then we publish nothing. Wikipedia has no deadline. We're not under any obligation to act as shills for the producers by regurgitating their financial claims. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:50, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

As you are providing only reliable sources in case of Ezra the source you are provided is not available then how did you add that movie in the List of Malayalam Movies expecting a reliable answer from you sirMuhammed.suhail (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail: There is something known as dead url, when a url stops working and dies. This is what happened to the Ezra source. Since most of the users around here must have examined the source and confirmed it's reliability for its inclusion in the article, there is no urgency to remove it. It seems to be a Yahoo News source, from the url. About the gross of Ramaleela, an OR Observation: The actor Dileep was arrested prior to the release of the film, so there is probably a lot of inflation of the figures by the producers as a publicity stunt. This was the latest source I could find which did not use director/producer figures. Also, if the film really has crossed 50 crore, there is bound to be a lot of hype in media, with multiple news reports, not blog reports and reliable sources reporting "reports suggest it crossed 55 crore." King Prithviraj II (talk) 16:34, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok I understand what you mean i will provide you the source which proves Ezra , The Great Father , MunthiriVallikal Thalirkkumbol reaches 50cr.You can add this source which is stating that these movies collected 50cr . http://m.manoramaonline.com/movies/movie-news/2017/11/08/its-official-dileep-ramaleela-enters-50-crore-club.html . In the second paragraph it mention about 50cr movies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammed.suhail (talk • contribs) 07:14, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

In this edit I updated the Ezra reference with an archived copy of the Yahoo article. (It actually came from Catch News, filtered through Yahoo.) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb This is a trustable website. Manorama Online. Please update Ramaleela Final Gross. 55 Crores. http://www.manoramaonline.com/movies/movie-news/2017/11/08/its-official-dileep-ramaleela-enters-50-crore-club.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by PuliMurugan (talk • contribs) 02:12, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

@PuliMurugan: 1) Please sign your talk page posts by typing four tildes like this: ~~~~ This will append your name and a time stamp. This is a requirement. If you post any more unsigned comments, I will just ignore you. 2) I've already explained what the problem is with using content that originates from producers/directors/actors or other primary sources. Either you don't understand for some reason, or you are deliberately ignoring the explanation. Maybe this article can help paint a better picture of the issue. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

• @Cyphoidbomb: I speak Malayalam to an extent, translating the first sentence of the source (ദിലീപ് ചിത്രം രാമലീലയുടെ ബോക്സ്ഓഫീസ് കലക്ഷൻ അണിയറപ്രവർത്തകർ പുറത്തുവിട്ടു) A rough translation would be "Dileep's film Ramaleela's Box Office collection was revealed by the filmakers." This sentence itself shows the figures are primary. King Prithviraj II (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

@King Prithviraj II: Thank you for the translation! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome, also, check out the headline of this source, the 50 crore claim is met with skepticism. King Prithviraj II (talk) 15:33, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

please check again

Financial Express & Indian Express confirmed the Kabali movie grossed 650crores in first 13days from the movie release. Jahir cer (talk) 11:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Please stop raising this nonsensical issue over and over. Your previous comments have been responded to. Now you're just wasting people's time. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Premam Malayalam Movie Final Collection

As per the reports of TOI Premam has collected 63cr worldwide. Please update this information https://m.timesofindia.com/entertainment/malayalam/movies/highest-grossing-malayalam-films-of-all-time/photostory/49755072.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammed.suhail (talk • contribs) 23:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

The Great Father Malayalam Movie WorldWide Collection

As per wikipedia the more sources added the more can be believed by the user. For The Great Father only one source is provided. I added new topic mainly because of giving another source validating that the movie has collected 50cr http://m.manoramaonline.com/movies/movie-news/2017/11/08/its-official-dileep-ramaleela-enters-50-crore-club.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammed.suhail (talk • contribs) 00:09, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

@Muhammed.suhail: This reference has been mentioned at least four other times on this page, and you previously mentioned it on 20 November. Read the comments above if you want to understand why the source is problematic. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I am not talking about Ramleela i am talking about The Great Father In second para it shortly says about the movies that collected 50cr The Great Father is there in the list and it doesnt says that according to produver or actor Muhammed.suhail (talk) 09:45, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Thupakki Year

Dear Editors, Please do edit the thupakki release year from 2012 to 2016. Proof - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuppakki Thank you very much. Nithish Singh (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nithish Singh:  Done I assume you mean that you wanted us to change the release year from 2016 to 2012, right? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

vivegam ???

please remove vivegam from tamil films it is a box office flop and actual collection is 112 crore as of november article http://www.catchnews.com/regional-cinema/vivegam-thala-ajith-starrer-emerges-big-flop-final-collections-lesser-than-opening-weekend-collections-of-thalapathy-vijay-s-mersal-88892.html Thank you --49.206.113.14 (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Vivegam's 160 crore gross was attributed to India Today. Do you normally shun this source in favor of Catch.com, or only when it pertains to Vivegam's gross? Because it could be argued that there is a disparity of opinion, and so both sources should be presented in the form of a range. What do you say to that? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:50, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

3 Idiots gross

The box office gross of 3 Idiots is flawed. As per the given source, it grossed $30.5 overseas. This has been converted at the exchange rate of 2013 rather than that of 2009- which was the year when the film released. If this is converted at the exchange rate of December 2009(the month of release of the film), the overseas gross would be about ₹140-145 crore. I request this to be corrected. Besides, how does the release of a remake of the film in another language make it a franchise? ~Rajan51 (talk) 12:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

The $30.5 million figure is the final overseas gross given in early 2017, so it would be better to use a conversion rate nearer to the date of the source. The last territory it released in was Japan in 2013, which is closest to the date of the source. As for the franchise question, while not a series, licensed remakes fit the definition of a franchise, which is a broader concept than a series. Maestro2016 (talk) 05:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

The fact that the overseas gross was given in 2017 does not change the year of release in all countries. If the film released in 2013 in Japan, then the collections of Japan alone can be converted at the 2013 rate. This would apply to delayed releases in other countries/territories too. Regarding the 3 idiots franchise, the heading of the table clearly states Highest-grossing franchises and film series which would mean that for an inclusion, it would have to be a film series and a film franchise. ~Rajan51 (talk) 11:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

It depends on what exchange rates IB Times were using to convert from local currency to US dollars. For all we know, they could've been using 2017 exchange rates. A 2013 exchange rate makes sense as 2013 is the last time it had an overseas release, and also happens to fall right in the middle between 2009 and 2017. As for the franchise/series, the heading "franchises and film series" means that the list includes both franchises and series, not necessarily that each entry must be both a franchise and series. Maestro2016 (talk) 15:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Malayalam movie Ramaleela

Malayalam movie Ramaleela has entered 59cr pls update that.. Ajayk97 (talk) 10:49, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Please provide a source for that. ToThAc (talk) 16:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Ramaleela collect more than 56 crore Nabhan nbn (talk) 15:16, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nabhan nbn: Still lacks a sufficient reference. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:42, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Ramaleela 50+crore Nabhan nbn (talk) 02:54, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Ramaleela Malayalam Movie Box Office Collection Report - Indian movie planet indianmovieplanet.com › ramaleela-mala... Ramaleela 50 crore Nabhan nbn (talk) 02:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 December 2017

Please add the film Ramaleela in the list of highest grossing Malayalam films. The film is the second highest grossing Malayalam movie and has grossed approximately 80 crores in the box office. Source for the films collection :https://www.filmibeat.com/malayalam/news/2017/ramaleela-box-office-the-dileep-starrer-is-now-next-only-mohanlal-s-pulimurugan-270556.html. 103.94.138.84 (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Filmibeat is not considered a reliable source for financial information. See WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2017

Add Ramaleela to the list of highest grossing Malayalam films as the film is the second highest grossing Malayalam film and has grossed 80 crores in the box office as per the information given out by the film's director through his Facebook page. Another source for the collections of Ramaleela : http://www.catchnews.com/regional-cinema/dileep-s-ramaleela-unseats-mohanlal-blockbuster-drishyam-to-become-the-all-time-second-highest-malayalam-grosser-93444.html 103.94.138.84 (talk) 04:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: We don't use primary sources for controversial data like a film's finances. A director/producer/actor would have every reason to inflate these numbers. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Tiger Zinda Hai

Add information on Tiger Zinda Hai it grossed 256 crores as of now JV Tuber (talk) 07:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

--- @ JV Tuber you can also add.. anybody can edit wikipedia given sources are reliable

No, this article can only be updated by extended-confirmed users due to protection against vandalism.DarpSinghh (talk) 09:57, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2017

Please change the places/rankings of the list for 'India's top 25 highest-grossing films, which include films from all the Indian languages'. It is very messy and most of it are in wrong places/rankings according to the grossing, some of the films are also not similar with the list of 'highest-grossing films by languages' like based on grossing. Please change it to make it look professional and descent, i believe someone vandalize it. Thank you .. 183.78.95.173 (talk) 15:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. I don't see the problem that you're reporting. As of this version of the article, the gross values in the Top 25 list at the top of the article seem to be in descending order. Did you maybe click on the sorting tab in another column, and that threw off the formatting? Maybe I'm missing something. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 December 2017

Kollywood Tamil Movie Thuppakki collection is 120 crores Source : http://www.ibtimes.co.in/photos/all-time-highest-grossing-tamil-films-2881-slide-21713#JrEkSJAutV1IH7kS.97 Senthil Babu PM (talk) 21:51, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

TZH

Please check with tzh how can it be ahead of 300 cr + movies with less bo ^🦂😎 Nabeelgm 😎^🦂(Talk)•°(contribs) Nabeel Gm 09:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC) Nabeel Gm 09:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

 Fixed here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 09:46, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Highest grossing franchise and film series

Please remove remakes from the film series. These are not from the same production house. JumboRock (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Exactly! When did 3 Idiots became a franchise??? The story didn't go on... It's just that other adaptations in different languages are made... — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarpSinghh (talk • contribs) 05:54, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

As I explained above: "As for the franchise question, while not a series, licensed remakes fit the definition of a franchise, which is a broader concept than a series." They don't need to be from the same production house either. A number of international film franchises have films produced by different companies. Maestro2016 (talk) 09:31, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 53 external links on List of highest-grossing Indian films. 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://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=145&catName=MTk0MA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=146&catName=MTk1MQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=147&catName=MTk0Mg==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=148&catName=MTk0Mw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=149&catName=MTk0NA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=150&catName=MTk0NQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=151&catName=MTk0Ng==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=152&catName=MTk0Nw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Journey-of-Indian-rupee-since-independence/articleshow/21844179.cms
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=154&catName=MTk0OQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=155&catName=MTk1MA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=156&catName=MTk1MQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=158&catName=MTk1Mg==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=159&catName=MTk1Mw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=160&catName=MTk1NA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=161&catName=MTk1NQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=162&catName=MTk1Ng==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=163&catName=MTk1Nw%3D%3D
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=164&catName=MTk1OA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=165&catName=MTk1OQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=166&catName=MTk2MA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=167&catName=MTk2MQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=168&catName=MTk2Mg==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=169&catName=MTk2Mw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=170&catName=MTk2NA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=171&catName=MTk2NQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=172&catName=MTk2Ng==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=173&catName=MTk2Nw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=174&catName=MTk2OA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=175&catName=MTk2OQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=176&catName=MTk3MA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=177&catName=MTk3MQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=178&catName=MTk3Mg==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=179&catName=MTk3Mw%3D%3D%2F1973.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=180&catName=MTk3NA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=182&catName=MTk3Ng==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=183&catName=MTk3Nw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=184&catName=MTk3OA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=185&catName=MTk3OQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=186&catName=MTk4MA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=187&catName=MTk4MQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=188&catName=MTk4Mg==
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170725023456/https://www.rbth.com/amp/495697 to https://www.rbth.com/amp/495697
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=189&catName=MTk4Mw==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=190&catName=MTk4NA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=191&catName=MTk4NQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=192&catName=MTk4NQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=193&catName=MTk4OA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=194&catName=MTk4OA==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=195&catName=MTk4OQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=201&catName=MTk5NQ==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=202&catName=MTk5Ng==
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=212&catName=MjAwNg==

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) 17:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

mk

please cheak that kabali was 450 cr+ [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films&diff=817587364&oldid=817582226 here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.186.144.114 (talk) 12:36, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

The content in the article currently presents a gross of ₹286–499 crore. This range is explained by the note that follows the information. You can read it here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:51, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Although just noticed that the Forbes link is attributed to Rob Cain, a contributor, not a staff writer. @Maestro2016: Wasn't there a discussion somewhere about whether or not Rob Cain's opinions were sufficient for inclusion as a reliable source? Was that matter ever resolved? Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

It doesn't seem like any consensus has been reached yet on Rob Cain. Maestro2016 (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

TigerZindaHai Gross

Please update it to 419.80 crores as of now so rank it up Source:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Zinda_Hai JV Tuber (talk) 10:51, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

It's been updated recently. Maestro2016 (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2018 (UTC)