Talk:100 Crore Club

The page has been stolen from Me
I created the article long time ago and was changed by a lot of unauthorized users which brought the page to deletion. It was deleted and at the same day it was created by User:TheRedPenOfDoom. The new creator is the same person who is a part of supporting of deletion of this page. So my question is! If he was so intereseted wo why not editing the page and puttinh his own? Very bad decision and will go as far as i can for justice!!! Dr. Shahid Alam ( Talk to Me ) 18:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * TRPOD's version was mentioned and had some support at the AfD--he is not acting unilaterally to enforce his own concept of the page. On the other hand, the previous content here was discussed and decided as unacceptable. You do not own anything here, and that same discussion where you voiced your opinion--I'm not seeing any other support for your concept of the page. DMacks (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I was seeing all this scene and would like to comment that User:TheRedPenOfDoom was mad for stealing the page. Everyone know that 100 Crore Club is counted in Bollywood and has a great importance. If Wikipedia policy permit it then it must b changed. Uses can edit page but not deleting others work and create their pages with the same name. The page was a creation of User:Dr. Shahid Alam and i think that really stolen and administrator must take an action against it. 201.220.215.14 (talk) 00:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It is forbidden for you to speculate or comment on other editors' possible motives. The AfD was a public discussion, and in any debate, not everyone gets their way, and nobody "owns" anything to be stolen--that's how it works when we collaborate. You are welcome to file a request for review of the deletion or a request for administrative discussion, but I assure you the latter will fail, and the former will likely as well. DMacks (talk) 04:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

off topic
The section "Fudging of Boxoffice collections by producers and exhibitors" does not seem to have anything to do with the subject of the article - except for the content already explained in the other portion of the article. If there is no rationale given shorty, I will be removing it as a WP:COATRACK. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  14:40, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Support I also suggest that it must be removed. Dr. Shahid Alam ( Talk to Me ) 22:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Termination of this article
This article should be terminated as now almost all films do 100 crore business and the article has too many promotional content and is also outdated one. we are having another articles showing gross collection of indian films. so this article should be terminated.. regards Ambeinghari (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I agree that the article should be terminated. The Bollywood 100 Crore Club, as ridiculous and arbitrary as it is, does have wide use. What I would absolutely insist we avoid, is any list of examples, as this for sure would constitute a magnet for cruft and would result in an endless list that would not serve this encyclopedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Title
Shouldn't it be Bollywood 100 crore club as per WP:TITLEFORMAT and WP:NCCAPS. "Crore" and "Club" are not proper names. -   Managerarc   ™ talk  16:37, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Unnecessary reverting
User : ebyabe plzz dont do unnecessary reverting bcoz the data I entered is absolutely correct nd I guess u dont know much about bollywood so u shudnt interfere in dis page Sohail0801 (talk) 09:25, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

User:ebyabe please dont do unnecessary reverting nd plz talk to me Sohail0801 (talk) 09:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not the only one who is having issues with your edits. You are removing sourced material. Please refrain from doing so. Thank you. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Welfare State  ‖ 09:52, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 18 July 2017

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

The result of the move request was: both moved Kostas20142 (talk) 11:56, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

– Those are the more common names. Also, various non-Bollywood Indian films (such as the Baahubali series) have entered these clubs. Kailash29792  (talk)  11:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.  Winged Blades Godric  12:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Bollywood 100 Crore Club → 100 Crore Club
 * Bollywood 1000 Crore Club → 1000 Crore Club


 * Comment Better to change name to Indian Cinema 1000 Crore Club —IM3847 (talk) 13:55, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Support the moves suggested by Kailash29792. It makes no sense the way it is at the moment, when Baahubali 2 is the second most extensively discussed movie on the page.  I feel an 'Indian Cinema' prefix is redundant, and doesn't reflect common usage.  Plenty of papers refer to the '1000 Crore Club', I've never seen one refer to the 'Indian Cinema 1000 Crore Club'. Landscape repton (talk) 14:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Support – I'm generally a fan of "preemptive disambiguation", but I find it unnecessary here. Even as a total ignoramus on the topic, and only knowing that "Crore" is an Indian English term, I can guess from the title that the article is about some kind of popularity contest in India. No such user (talk) 14:29, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Bollywood 100 Crore Club. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=3826&nCat=
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=126&catName=MTk5MC0xOTk5
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=166&catName=MTk2MA%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=167&catName=MTk2MQ%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=188&catName=MTk4Mg%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=179&catName=MTk3Mw%3D%3D%2F1973.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=156&catName=MTk1MQ%3D%3D
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161130082655/http://www.koimoi.com/box-office/bollywoods-top-worldwide-grossers/ to http://www.koimoi.com/box-office/bollywoods-top-worldwide-grossers/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=166&catName=MTk2MA%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=200&catName=MTk5NA%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=154&catName=MTk0OQ%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=158&catName=MTk1Mg%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=161&catName=MTk1NQ%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=163&catName=MTk1Nw%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://boxofficeindia.com/showProd.php?itemCat=181&catName=MTk3NQ%3D%3D
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boxofficeindia.com/Collections/over_total/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:51, 23 July 2017 (UTC)