Template:Did you know nominations/Drishyam


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 15:03, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Drishyam

 * ... that Drishyam ran for more than 150 days in Kerala, with collections of around ₹401 million?


 * ALT1: ... that Drishyam became the second film to complete 100 days in the UAE after Titanic (1997)?
 * ALT2: ... that Drishyam was the first Malayalam film to collect ₹500 million from its theatrical box office collections, remake rights, satellite and television rights?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Pizza cheese
 * Comment: The article has been neither created nor expanded by me. I'm nominating the article for DYK because the article was passed to a GA status a couple of days before.

Improved to Good Article status by Josephjames.me (talk). Nominated by Kunalforyou (talk) at 06:01, 26 February 2016 (UTC).


 * Comment: If you're not a major contributor, you should not credit yourself as the main author. Most of the recent improvements seem to have been done by, although  was the GA nominator. -Zanhe (talk) 18:51, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The template of DYK automatically detects the username of the nominator of DYK and shows in the nomination page, even when not typing the name of the author in the respective fields. You can even test if yourself in the Sandbox. Жunal For You  (☎️✍) 04:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have adjusted the nomination to reflect the two people mentioned by Zanhe, including the GA nominator (who also addressed the issues raised in the review) and a major pre-nomination editor. It may be that there should be some other names, but someone else will have to figure out they are and name them. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment -, the principal contributor (GA nom), has been indef. blocked for sock-puppetry. &mdash; Vensatry (Talk) 11:42, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've removed the blocked sock from the credit list. -Zanhe (talk) 13:58, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK! I am here... JosephJames 13:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review still needed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg with ALT2 or ALT3. ALT1 is actually rather misleading, because the "150 days" is accurate, but the "401 million" comes from a source describing collections after 100 days; so definitely out of date. This is something the GA review ideally should have caught, but it's not too big of a deal. Other things; the article was improved to GA within the requisite timeframe, it is free of copyright issues (copied into a few Wikipedia mirrors, nothing else), and neutrally written. The hooks are interesting, follow the formatting guidelines, and are cited inline. The QPQ is complete (although I would strongly encourage Kunalforyou to spend more time and produce a slightly more detailed DYK review). This is GTG. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Clarification: the original hook was the one that was misleading (and has been struck), not ALT1; ALT1 and ALT2 are the two hooks that have been approved (there is no ALT3 hook). BlueMoonset (talk) 19:59, 13 April 2016 (UTC)