Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force

Reliability of sources listed at WP:ICTFSOURCES
I've observed that many users often refer to WP:ICTFSOURCES when assessing the reliability of sources used in articles related to Indian films/actors. I believe it's time to completely update the current list located at WP:ICTFSOURCES. Many of the sources listed there are involved in press releases, paid branding, and brand posts. The last discussion on this matter took place eight years ago, and within this timeframe, the credibility of many sources has likely changed. Therefore, I'm initiating a new discussion to update the list. I'm pinging @JavaHurricane as they discussed this matter in the NPP discord channel a few months ago. I'm also pinging users who participated in the previous discussion for their input. @Bollyjeff, @Cyphoidbomb. – DreamRimmer (talk) 08:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. Most of the sources are biased and paid. A certain concrete guideline must be set and preferably an RfC must be done to single out the actual tracker websites. Also, I should add that in down South, such tracker websites do not exist. Sites such as Pinkvilla only track the movies only if the movie makes headlines. Hence, that should also be kept in mind. The discrepancies between the actual collections and the publicized collections by the producers have caused multiple edit wars in many pages, especially in Malayalam movie pages. So, if we can get a consensus on that, it would be great. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey all, I am starting this RfC for the abovementioned reason – to analyse the authenticity and reliability of current ICTFSOURCES, and to reassess and update the sources enlisted. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)


 * @The Herald, I plan to share my detailed thoughts when I have a bit more free time. In the meantime, would you mind listing the sources we typically use and sharing your opinion on each? This would be really helpful for streamlining the process and finding even better sources. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Good plans here to update the list. I think also it should be merged into WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/ICTF FAQ. The table format is more in line with Reliable sources/Perennial sources, allowing for rationales and links to past discussions on each source. Something I've been meaning to tackle for a while. --Geniac (talk) 15:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * , shall we revisit this RfC this weekend? Summer box office need a good guideline and pointers. What I was thinking is, let's just pick apart the ones under reliable section and scrutinize every single one and try to reach a consensus. A level 3 heading for each, which will help future editors to link faster and search faster. Savvy? The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I have started an essay for better source analysis, which when completed, can incorporate this RfC results and can be transcluded into the page, or can even be made as an opinion/guideline essay. I am thinking of a table like WP:RS/P in alphabetical order for faster and easier navigation. Anyone can drop by and help out with suggestions or edits. Thanks and happy editing. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The Herald, this is EXCELLENT. I think once complete, it will be easier to update in the same manner WP:RS/P is based on any future WP:RSN thread. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ I have created a shortcut WP:ICTFSA (Yes, a pun on essay and Source Analysis as well). More sources can be added onto it from ICTFFAQ or after consensus from here or RSN. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Good work Herald. – DreamRimmer (talk) 04:43, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Could someone add a section for Indiantelevision.com as well. Please refer this. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 12:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. Now please add your views and comments too :) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:15, 5 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: Please do not edit the verdict line when there is no clear consensus in RS/P, or on RS/N or any talk pages. Only the clear consensus discussions are deemed automatically reliable.

123Telugu

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:1, 2, 3
 * Comments: I see this being added to pages on the same day the articles come out. Gives me the impression of possible COI. Regardless, there seems to be discussion that it is not reliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)


 * About us shows that the site is owned by Telugu film producer Sri Shyam Prasad Reddy. This itself makes it unreliable I think. RangersRus (talk) 15:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

, is there a time period for commenting you are hoping for? Wondering if some of these such as those discussed already at RSN should be added to the list. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have a specific time period in my mind. But the ones who's reliability or unreliability is established, we can close the subsection and add it to the list. Ideally, an uninvolved editor should close, so maybe we can ping some admin or someone who's active here for that. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. Thanks. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have posted on WP:RSN to get verdict on these sources moviecrow.com, 123telugu.com, Indiaglitz.com, cinejosh.com, behindwoods.com, thesouthfirst.com, latestly.com. Still what you think of these sources?  RangersRus (talk) 14:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Except for Cinejosh I see the others as usable. But maybe I'm wrong about Cinejosh. Kailash29792 (talk)  14:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I too have doubt about cinejosh.com but also for moviecrow.com (does not have any information on this site about the company. Maybe a blog or personal site). 123telugu.com has been considered unreliable for boxoffice numbers and as a whole site unreliable but had no final stance to completely put it on the unreliable list. Indiaglitz also has nothing on the company information and the contact us link takes you to homepage. This too seems a personal site or a blog. Others too I have doubts. RangersRus (talk) 15:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * 123Telugu can be used for general film-related updates and independent interviews. This site have many articles that are related to smaller Telugu films doesn't have in the mainline media. Jayanthkumar123 (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Question is reliability. The site is owned by Telugu film producer Sri Shyam Prasad Reddy and this puts the reliability of this source in question adding onto what is said here by an administrator Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force/Archive_8. RangersRus (talk) 17:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

Bollywood Hungama by Hungama Digital Media Entertainment

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

BOL Network
1
 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:Specifically BOLNEWS which is used 400+ times as a reference on Wikipedia. Cannot find editorial standards so unsure if reliable or not. Although the network is out of Pakistan, it has many references for Indian and other non-Pakistani cinema.--CNMall41 (talk) 03:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I added a recent RSN discussion which indicates it's generally unreliable. It was also added to WP:NPPSG as unreliable based the discussion.  S0091 (talk) 18:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

Box Office India (Boxofficeindia.com)

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: 1, 2, 3
 * Comments:

Now, this is still true because we still have no other proper tracker website for Indian movies, especially Bollywood. Biased or not, the BO figures are almost close to the reported verified amount. So I'll put this one as a reliable source. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

Box Office India (Boxofficeindia.co.in)

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Business Standard

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Paid articles are published by Business Standard here. Articles which's URL contain "content/specials/" are sponsored. Grabup (talk) 18:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * All articles in the Content/specials/ doesn't contain disclaimers, some contains, same like India Today. Here are some examples:
 * https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/pioneering-thoughts-with-dipen-bhuva-a-fusion-of-healthcare-cybersecurity-and-ai-124040900630_1.html
 * https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/hutech-solutions-announces-sanjeev-kulkarni-as-new-chief-product-officer-cpo-124040900662_1.html
 * Grabup (talk) 18:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

Business Today

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

CNN-IBN's IBN Live

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Daily News and Analysis

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Deccan Chronicle

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:One thing to watch for (and maybe we just need a disclaimer if the overall source is found to be reliable) is anything marked as written by "DC Correspondent." These are contributor posts and often have a disclaimer that they have not been vetted by editorial staff. --CNMall41 (talk) 09:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

Deccan Herald

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Dina Thanthi

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Dinakaran by Sun Group

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

EastMojo

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: 1
 * Comments:I brought this up at RSN a while back but only had one comment. It is being used a few hundred times as a reference but do not see it as being reliable. Bringing it here since it seems to have a lot of film references and we are addressing many of them now. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

Filmfare

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: It is used over 2000 times as a reference on Wikipedia. Here is their about page. I do not see editorial oversight and sounds more like TMZ in my opinion. Just at first glance I think it could be used maybe to verify basic information such as film roles but nothing for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:32, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

Film Companion

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Film Information

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:run by Komal Nahta; see here, for example
 * Verdict:

Firstpost

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: 1
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Forbes India

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: 1 ("Branded Content" discussion), 2
 * Comments: Used 800+ times in Wikipedia. Note that it is NOT overseen by Forbes editorial staff. It is (what I believe) branded as Forbes (likely from licensing agreement). It is actually owned by Network 18. It is used as a reference in many film and actor pages.--CNMall41 (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

Hindustan Times
In my experience with press release work, Hindustan Times stands out as a prominent website for publishing paid brand posts. It's crucial to note that any article lacking a specific author shouldn't be relied upon. Furthermore, it's advisable to avoid using articles with a disclaimer or those tagged as brand posts. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:


 * Help us to remove these 42 Sponsored Hindustan Times articles cited on Wikipedia. Grabup (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have been cleaning some of these up. I am also finding there are quite a few paid posts from other sites on those Wikipedia pages and sent three to AfD already. I would actually lean towards saying only using HT with staff written articles for verification of basic facts (release dates, etc.) and NOT for notability. And NEVER using anything that is paid, branded, no-byline, or otherwise falling under NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

India Today by Living Media

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: India Today has published paid articles within its "Impact Feature" section, with 50 articles currently cited. It's important to note that sponsored content should not be used as a citation. I encourage anyone to help remove them; I'm actively working on it as well. Grabup (talk) 09:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * They haven't included disclaimers in all of their Impact Feature articles, but there are some instances where disclaimers have been added to articles. "Disclaimer: The contents herein are for informational purposes only. If you have any queries, you should directly reach out to the advertiser. India Today Group does not guarantee, vouch for, endorse any of its contents and hereby disclaims all warranties, express or implied, relating to the same."
 * Examples:
 * 1. https://www.indiatoday.in/impact-feature/story/piramal-finance-offers-home-loans-with-seamless-process-and-competitive-terms-2510232-2024-03-04
 * 2. https://www.indiatoday.in/impact-feature/story/could-2024-be-the-year-gold-has-been-waiting-for-a-long-time-2503014-2024-02-16
 * 3. https://www.indiatoday.in/impact-feature/story/breaking-barriers-celebrating-women-achievers-across-industries-2490394-2024-01-18
 * Grabup (talk) 10:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This is clearly the case; also note that the people in the byline at the bottom of the page will typically come back with marketing positions in the company. I've updated my entry here and will be happy to help remove these. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kuru, thanks for User:Kuru/fakesources; it's really helpful. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow, this is gold. Thanks Kuru :) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 11:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

Indiatimes by The Times Group

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Indiantelevision.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: There are currently 1000+ uses of Indiantelevision.com, the same owner as TellyChakkar.com. And this raises concerns on its reliability. --C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

Magna Publications

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Mid Day

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Mint (newspaper) by HT Media

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Mumbai Mirror by The Times Group

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

NDTV

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

News18 India

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: 1
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Outlook

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: There are currently [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22www.outlookindia.com%2Fbusiness-spotlight%22&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1 17 uses] of Outlook India "business spotlight." I believe the publication would be reliable OUTSIDE of that but these are paid-for articles. I would support reliability but maybe a note in the box that says those marked as "business spotlight" or sponsored should not be used as a reference (in the process of removing the 17 I linked to above once I get the time). --CNMall41 (talk) 06:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The paid-for shall not be considered as reliable at all. Reliable outside the paid-for articles. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

Pinkvilla.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:1, 2, 3
 * Comments: Website editorial guidelines for reference.--CNMall41 (talk) 07:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * With an editorial team and a published editorial policy, as well as an affiliate disclosure, Pinkvilla.com can be deemed reliable due to their reportings to be very close to the actual BO figures and other film related news. But, I'll still stay clear of the gossip section. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How'd one determine an actual BO figure? — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 14:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * What I do is go through the established RS. Most of the time, all of them stick to a particular figure (lets say X). Sometimes, they have discrepancies, and I use the figures as a range ( ₹ X - Y crores). Pinkvilla almost always give the same figures as other RS and it is always less than the promotional figures tweeted by filmmakers and other primary sources. Hence, I use them as RS. (As they say, if it looks like a RS and posts like a RS, it is most probably is a RS, lol.) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

Rediff.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Reviewit.pk

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:1
 * Comments:I brought this up at RSN a few months back. Looks like auto generated content from Twitter and also possibly paid. I would suggest adding this as an unreliable source.
 * Verdict:

Screen (magazine)

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Sify

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: [ 1], 2
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

The Economic Times

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

The Express Tribune

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

The Financial Express

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: Similar to the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Film%2FIndian_cinema_task_force&diff=1215807296&oldid=1215806840 note on Outlook India] above, First Post has sponsored content marked as "brand wagon" (often included in the URL as well). I have no comment on the reliability of the overall publication but will say the branded posts should not be used in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

The Hindu Business Line

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: Subsidiary of The Hindu (WP:THEHINDU)
 * Verdict: Reliable source

The Hindu

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: Reliable per WP:THEHINDU
 * Verdict: Reliable source

The Indian Express

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: Reliable per WP:INDIANEXP
 * Verdict: Reliable source

The News Minute

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

The Statesman

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

The Telegraph

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

The Tribune

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: Similar to Outlook, The Tribune has paid articles "Impact Feature". Grabup (talk) 09:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Verdict:

The Wire

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments: Reliable per WP:RS/P
 * Verdict: Reliable source

Zee News
Zee News is owned by Zee Media Corporation. They also have other publications such as Daily News and Analysis. Not sure if we should address any of these individual or JUST Zee News for the purpose of the RfC. Just throwing it out there. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: 1, 2
 * Comments:
 * DNA is already added in the RfC above. I'd say while we are at it, let's review all the sources. India.com is deemed unreliable per this discussion. So, that's out. I don't know other publications under them. If there are any that are used frequently, by all means add them to the miscellaneous category below. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict


 * In addition to the aforementioned sources, the following references are also brought up multiple times and are used in various pages.

Koimoi

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

OTTPlay.com
According to their website (About us page), they apparently use 4 sources; Hindustan Times, Film Companion, Live Mint and Desi Martini, of which HT and Mint are reliable per RSP and RSN. Desi Martini is a partner site for HT. Film Companion, I'm not so sure cuz the page doesn't mention anywhere about their sources or their origin or history, hence sounds dubious. But other than that, OTTPlay.com should belong in the reliable side of the spectrum. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * I am coming across this one quite a bit when sourcing filmographies. I think the main issue I have is that it is a commercial website and they benefit from aggregating news. A lot of the articles are bylined "Team OTTplay" so not sure if these are coming from the reliable sources or if they are original content from that site. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

The Times of India

 * Included in RS/P?: WP:TOI
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Per RS/P The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It has a bias in favor of the Indian government and is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage. That puts TOI in either unreliable or no consensus region. It is generally unreliable for box office figures since I have seen them using Sacnilk.com and promotional figures a lot. They may be reliable for news articles, but IMO it all should be taken with a pinch of salt. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Help us to remove these sponsored articles published by Times of India, (1), (2). Grabup (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I found another subsection with containing Lifesyle/Spotlight on The Times of India, this subsection is cited 185 times without drafts and 193 times with drafts. I found a article on the same subsection which contain a disclaimer “ The article has been produced on behalf of Globsyn Business” but other articles majorly does not contain any disclaimer.
 * *| 193 cited list


 * Article containing disclaimer Grabup (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Verdict:

The New Indian Express

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

IndiaGlitz

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

cinejosh.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

behindwoods.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

thesouthfirst.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

latestly.com

 * Included in RS/P?:
 * Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
 * Comments:
 * Verdict:

Coke Studios
Relevant discussion here related to Coke Studio (Indian TV program) and its seasons. I realize this is a film task force but I see the television task force is inactive. CNMall41 (talk) 21:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Expert opinion needed: Is Aranmanai 4 bilingual?
This is a follow-up query regarding an edit war where I objected to Aranmanai 4 being labeled as bilingual. Now that the films are available on streaming platforms, you can verify it here Aranmanai 4, Baak. I am also attaching screenshots of the CBFC certificates Cert1 Cert2, which show that the films are individual entities rather than dubs of one another. Additionally, there are significant differences in the censor cuts for both fight and song sequences, with less than 30 minutes of footage differing between the versions. Therefore, I request an expert opinion on whether the film should be considered multilingual or not. Tagging previous participants for their input, Anoop Bhatia (talk) 07:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * See List_of_multilingual_Indian_films. There are three types of films: straight films, dubbed films, and partially reshot (which can get straight certificate). DareshMohan (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Is Silverscreen India notable?
It will affect Articles for deletion/Eashvar Karthic. DareshMohan (talk) 00:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Regardless of the site's notability, the article has to be deleted or redirected to the subject's sole credit. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  06:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Does one film guarantee notability?
Chidananda S Naik has an article although almost all other Cinéfondation short film makers don't have one.

Vidyadhar Kagita only directed one film albeit a different crowdfunded film. Where do we draw the line?

Question: Are interviews considered reliable primary sources or unreliable? DareshMohan (talk) 07:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Are they covered by any of the sources in ICTFSOURCES? Vestrian24Bio ( TALK  ) 07:15, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Chidananda S Naik isn't notable either; just beacuse someome recently created it. It is likely to be deleted sometime soon. Vestrian24Bio ( TALK  ) 07:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * They are covered by reliable sources but all of them are interviews. DareshMohan (talk) 07:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * does it passes Notability (people); personal opinion: I don't think it does. Vestrian24Bio ( TALK  ) 07:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It definitely does not pass WP:ANYBIO point 2 & 3; point 1 says, received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times.
 * Cinéfondation isn't a well-known and significant award to be considered.
 * Other than the award, there's nothing much about him anywhere on the web. Vestrian24Bio ( TALK  ) 07:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

As I was pinged, just sharing my view on Vidyadhar Kagita. For me, yes, WP:DIRECTOR may apply as his so far only notable work has received substantial coverage mentioning him as the main creator. So I do consider he may be notable enough for a WP page. Does one film guarantee that? No. The guideline is perfectly clear that it does not but it may be sufficient to have the director/writer (etc, depending on the coverage, the role, and basically or ultimately on consensus of Wikipedians if notability is challenged). In the case of the other discussed example, however, as I mentioned on my TP, I am not convinced it's enough, given the type of coverage (or lack thereof) and the award the said short (and its director, for that matter) has received. Best,- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  10:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Vidyadhar Kagita is also notable for at least one of his short films which has some independent coverage (not sure about reliability hence added a different source to article). DareshMohan (talk) 17:52, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Is Moneycontrol notable?
4 out of 5 times when I reloaded this site an ad came when I pressed read more in the center of the screen. It will affect the notability of Chidananda S Naik. DareshMohan (talk) 07:10, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Dhruva Natchathiram: Chapter One – Yuddha Kaandam
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dhruva Natchathiram: Chapter One – Yuddha Kaandam that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Edits! Talk! 06:56, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

CBFC mystery
When dubbed films with no visible reshots (even with close analysis) have straight CBFC certificates due to actors dubbing for themselves. What is the protocol? Examples: Telugu version of NOTA (film) and Tamil version of Marakkar: Lion of the Arabian Sea. i.e. Vijay Devarakonda dubs for himself in Telugu, Arjun Sarja dubs for himself in Tamil, etc. DareshMohan (talk) 00:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

thew14.com
I do not find this reliable source. It was a site used by one of the film critic Mayank Shekhar. I do not find this critic notable either. Opinions? RangersRus (talk) 00:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Site is Unreliable per WP:BLOGS. I don't think subject-matter expert applies to these blog sites. Sid95Q (talk) 06:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Site is unreliable, but posts over there by the critic can do per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  12:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

CBFC ratings export
Hi. Does anyone know of any such [reliable] database? — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 16:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Pinkvilla & BOI unreliable for South Indian movies
These two portals, under report BO numbers of South Indian Movies and they can’t track single screens BO numbers in South India. Single screen BO data is not something one can find online for BOI. Lately both portals are even under reported BO numbers even undermining Comscore OVS numbers & Global BO numbers, only for South Indian films. There is an evident bias & misinformation regarding South Indian movies. This discussion has already happened in several talk pages of South Indian movies. These two portals should be tagged "not reliable for South Indian movie's Box office" Swarleystinson88 (talk) 07:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Refer to the discussions happened above and in the talk page archives regarding this issue. Please gather consensus and provide links for the discussions where the unreliable nature of Boxofficeindia.com and Pinkvilla.com are clearly established. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree that Pinkvilla & BOI are reliable for their independent tracking. They are definitely reliable for Bollywood movies but are they that reliable when it comes to South Indian movies is still a question, they don’t seem to include the weekend state ticket price hikes, 3D ticket charges etc. South India has most Single screens unlike North India where they have more Multiplexes which are comparatively easier to track, with more consistent ticket prices. As of now, most tracking portals who are cited reliable on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force are Bollywood based portals like Pinkvilla, Bollywood Hungama, BOI etc.
 * Pinkvilla & BOI numbers for Jailer (2023 Tamil film) were 605-607 crore, while most trackers and media portals confirmed it to be around 650 crore. BOI numbers for Leo (2023 Indian film) is 595 crore, while most trackers and media  portals confirmed it to be around 620 crore. Same case with Salaar: Part 1 – Ceasefire, with people constantly fighting over the reliability of these figures by BOI & Pinkvilla. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Salaar:_Part_1_%E2%80%93_Ceasefire&diff=prev&oldid=1195505303
 * The difference in the B.O numbers provided by these two Bollywood based portals is huge. Yes, even if they don’t include Non theatrical rights, the numbers are still under reported for South Indian movies. We doen’t have to follow producers figures but how reliable are these Bollywood based third party sources is a question especially in today film landscape. This has become a way for Bollywood biased editors to keep changing the B.O numbers of South Indian movies citing these two platforms. There is under reporting in case of Kalki 2898 AD as well.Comscore which is cited by many International media portals put B.O numbers KALKI worldwide collections at $109 million (https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Rankings?tab=7&item=1)
 * I am not asking to disown these two platforms but I hope people give it a thought especially who understands the difference in theatrical distribution of Bollywood and South, politics of South cinema & Bollywood etc. At least an addition in comments to take it with a pinch of salt in case of South Indian movies will be insightful. Sacnilk at least provides more detailed breakdown of B.O figures state wise, language wise, region wise etc. Swarleystinson88 (talk) 13:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Swarleystinson88, Sacnilk.com is a WP:BLOG and is nowhere close to a reliable source. Furthermore, Sacnilk.com is known to report directly based of maker's tweets (WP:PRIMARY) and use promotional figures. Hence anything associated with them are treated as WP:FRUIT. Another point is when there are multiple sources reporting multiple figures, we go with a range. See WP:ICTFMOS for the guidelines. Yes, I agree South Indian BO figures aren't crystal clear like North Indian BO figures, but since there are no independent trackers present down south, we go with the figures reported by established reliable cites. Additionally, if you still want to establish the unreliable nature of those websites, you can start an RfC here or start a discussion at WP:RSN. lThanks.<span id="The_Herald:1720538761481:Wikipedia_talkFTTCLNWikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force" class="FTTCmt"> — The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with this comment, especially the point about using ranges when otherwise reliable sources of differ on the numbers.  Ravensfire  (talk) 16:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I also agree with Swarleystinsons88's comments. While there is concern about Sacnilk's reporting being influenced by primary figures, Pinkvilla operates similarly. We cannot dismiss the possibility that their independent sources are closely the producers, given their strong connections with production houses and involved in gossip/PR activities. Some of thier journalists often display bias towards certain actors and belittle others on social platforms, engaging in petty fan wars, which raises questions about their professionalism. Although bias might not seem like a valid argument, it cannot be entirely ruled out.
 * Nonetheless, Pinkvilla remains one of the leading trackers of Bollywood. However, I don't believe they should be considered reliable for tracking other language movies, particularly South Indian films. South films operate under different policies, such as special ticket price hikes approved by the government and extra charges for 3D glasses, which go to the theaters rather than the producers. In the North, 3D film ticket prices are directly higher, meaning the revenue comes from the film itself.
 * Additionally, the preference for single screens in many South states complicates data tracking, as these are not part of a national chain like PVR or INOX, making it difficult for Bollywood reporting agencies to gather accurate ground-level data in the South. This is evident from the significant discrepancies in reporting on South films, highlighting that they are not currently able to track the market accurately, despite their proficiency in the North.
 * While there is no standard reporting site for the South, we do have media houses like Idlebrain.com, which have a good history and a rich archive of media, film interviews, and more. They were among the first media networks in the South. A discussion on reliable South media portals could help in understanding the bigger picture and ensuring more accurate reporting.
 * Furthermore, with Comscore, a leading international tracker, entering the Indian film market, we could consider standardizing them as the base source instead of relying on Pinkvilla and other sites with potential paid influence. The challenge is that Comscore figures are not cited in published articles but are freely tweeted on socials, and instead use Sacnilk or Box Office India as references. This reliance creates a monopoly and raises further questions about the reliability and potential bias of these sources.
 * Moreover, while Bollywood Hungama states that their box office figures are compiled from various sources and their own research, acknowledging that the figures can be approximate and that they do not claim authenticity, no such disclaimer is found on Pinkvilla. This absence of transparency further questions Pinkvilla’s reliability as a source.
 * Additionally, Pinkvilla’s tracking and figures are largely derived from Comscore, especially for international figures. Their overall analysis aligns well for Bollywood films. However, the same Comscore portal is not being considered reliable for South films, leading to a difference in opinion. What is the reason for this clash of opinions ? This inconsistency suggests an underlying bias against South Indian films and highlights the need for more reliable and unbiased sources for tracking their box office performance. There's a lot of food for thought here. Thanks! Wiki Reader 997 (talk) 17:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Editnotice
Template:Wikiproject Indian Cinema task force editnotice I have created this template which can be put in as an edit notice for various talk pages that are receiving multiple stray/useless edit requests for changing the box office figures. The current high traffic pages include:<ul><li>Kalki 2898 AD</li><li>List of highest-grossing Indian films</li><li>List of Indian films of 2024</li><li>List of Telugu films of 2024</li><li>List of highest-grossing Malayalam films</li></ul>I have opened this thread so that the community can review it and decide further which all pages might benefit from these. Thanks.<span id="The_Herald:1720617664355:Wikipedia_talkFTTCLNWikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force" class="FTTCmt"> — The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. I don't see any issues with using this edit notice. – <b style="color:black; font-family: Tahoma">DreamRimmer</b> (talk) 15:43, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Baharon Phool Barsao


The article Baharon Phool Barsao has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "I'm finding basically no sources for this online. Lots of stuff that at first seems to be about this movie is about a different similarly titled movie or song, and some sites clearly mix them up."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gnisacc (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Good idea . Let it be deleted. I just wish can inform this page about future PRODs like you are doing, not like how he did for Puthiya Vaarpugal (which I had to retrieve using WP:REFUND) or Enakkoru Magan Pirappan (which I saved from PROD). -- <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b>  (talk)  09:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm working through Category:Articles lacking sources from December 2023, there are a few other Indian films in the category that I am trying to find appropriate sources for and verify the notability of. If you are interested in taking a look and saving any of them and finding some reliable sources that would be great! - Gnisacc (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Announcements through Twitter by Film Production company, reliability?
Page Indian 2 has Twitter sources from film production company "Lyca Productions" account, making announcements on release, marketing, distribution, 4DX release, music. Is this a keep or unreliable? RangersRus (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * RangersRus, That's clear cut WP:PRIMARY. Producers and makers and actors are primary sources. We don't even take DOB of actors that they celebrate on social media. No WP:INDY verification means not reliable.<span id="The_Herald:1721056433886:Wikipedia_talkFTTCLNWikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force" class="FTTCmt"> — The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Expedite verdict on moviecrow.com, 123telugu.com, Indiaglitz.com, cinejosh.com, behindwoods.com, thesouthfirst.com, latestly.com
Moviecrow.com, 123telugu.com and Indiaglitz.com are widely used on almost all Indian film sites. Now with more sites like behindwoods.com, thesouthfirst.com, latestly.com coming on board, reliability of all these sites need a definite Verdict to keep or remove and why. Can we all please expedite the verdict with everyone's input and update the WP:ICTFSOURCES list? I can help with list update but I need verdicts on reliability question of all these sources. Please give your verdict on these sources:
 * movie crow.com No information on the company.
 * 123telugu.com. About us shows that the site is owned by Telugu film producer Sri Shyam Prasad Reddy. Makes it unreliable.
 * Indiaglitz.com No information on the company. Contact us link takes straight to homepage.
 * cinejosh.com No information on the company. Maybe blog?
 * behindwoods.com
 * thesouthfirst.com
 * latestly.com. RangersRus (talk) 17:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)


 * ping for intake on these sources who previously gave thought on 123telugu.com. RangersRus (talk) 17:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * My opinions:
 * moviecrow: About Us page only talks about how much money can be made by advertising on their site. No staff listed. No bylines on news articles. Not reliable.
 * 123telugu: My opinion from previous discussion is unchanged.
 * indiaglitz: Links at bottom of the page are broken. No staff listed. No bylines on news articles. Not reliable.
 * cinejosh: Looks like a blog. All articles are written by one person.
 * behindwoods: About Us page only says they have "a 500 member team". The site made me turn off my adblocker, and I see why. It's overloaded with ads, and their Contact Us page is sure to tell you how big their viewership and subscriber numbers are. No staff listed. No bylines on news articles. Not reliable.
 * thesouthfirst: About Us page lists some staff albeit without qualifications listed, and the Careers page has a reporter job requiring at least 3 years of experience. The only one on this list that looks okay so far.
 * lastestly: About Us page states they have 15 to 50 employees. However, bylines on articles lead to generic "profiles" of author, such as Meera with no last name, photo, information, or qualifications. Or worse, "Team Latestly". Not reliable.
 * --Geniac (talk) 21:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)