Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Promotion of Rashmika Mandanna article to GA-Class

Hi, I was just wondering how I could improve Rashmika Mandanna's article in order to get it promoted to GA-Class, any tips would be massively appreciated. Thank you! Iknowthingsaboutstuff1 (talk) 21:18, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

You have to make sure it meets all the criteria listed at WP:GACR. Once you are confident that it does, then you can have someone copy-edit the prose as well. WP:GUILD is an option. Keivan.f^Talk 07:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, that’s perfect, thank you! Iknowthingsaboutstuff1 (talk) 03:44, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Filmibeat?

@Aadirulez8:@Kailash29792: Why is Filmibeat considered unreliable? This source is not gossip by any means. DareshMohan (talk) 19:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

DareshMohan, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 397#Oneindia as a reliable source can throw some light on that. Thanks. — The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

User POV

This user seem to have a POV (Telugu) which seem apparent in their edits. Have a look. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 21:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Drama Icon Awards

Has anyone heard of these awards? I see it being added by an IP but looking for references online I see very few reliable secondary sources. Wondering if this is a legit award that should be added to Wikipedia pages or removed. I was going to remove but thought best to check here first in case there are non-English references I am missing. CNMall41 (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

As per MOS:FILMCRITICLIST, "Awards included in lists should have a Wikipedia article to demonstrate notability." So till the time they don't have a Wikipedia page they are not notable and should be removed. Sid95Q (talk) 03:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, agree with Sid95Q. This is just another awards, like the copycats of DSPA we have. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I removed it. Looks like it was 5 pages total and kept the main page on my watchlist. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Can Pinkvilla be considered a reliable source ?

Can Pinkvilla be used a reliable source ? It is an Indian entertainment and lifestyle website. Goodfacts666 (talk) 03:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Consensus at ICTF and reliable sources noticeboard puts it as one of the best sources for movie related news and box office collections, sans gossip though. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Could you please link that consensus-discussion? The most recent discussion I found was from last summer:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive 8#Pinkvilla is unreliable for box office figures

that does not seem to have consensus for its box-office being reliable at all in some cases, let alone "one of the best sources" as a general sense. DMacks (talk) 03:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey. Along with that discussion that reached nowhere, I found Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive 8#RfC on reliability of pinkvilla where it was discussed. It has been included in ICTFSOURCES for quite a while and since then, it was considered as an RS for film related material, sans gossip. Which is why I made the aforementioned statement. Now, for an indepth scrutiny, I had initiated a complete rewamping of all ICTFSOURCES a couple of months ago, a proper RfC, which is still open above. It's high time to re discuss all the sources listed in ICTFSOURCES. But for now, Pinkvilla is considered reliable per ICTFSOURCES, since some consensus was achieved in the past (can't put my finger on when and where, but I am guessing some 8 years ago) and it was not refuted till date.

Personally, I don't trust Pinkvilla for news, but with BO figures, I do. Especially since Boxofficeindia.com and Bollywoodhungama doesn't cover a vast majority of movies, especially the ones made down south. So, it's like a compromise. Other sources are totally useless, like Sacnilk, which is downright unreliable. Hence, Pinkvilla. But yes, I agree to the fact that we need to re visit the reliability and credibility of every single ones on ICTFSOURCES. Thanks and happy editing. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi The_Herald,

Please find the Talkpage discussion link as requested.

-> Pinkvilla was nothing but a network of photographers, and became popular after some photographs of Bollywood actress Sonam Kapoor clicked by them went viral, and they went into expanding from photographers into a website. SO, again my arguement is there are plenty of such websites which can post-anything just to get bytes/views. Hence can't be considered reliable.Goodfacts666 (talk) 04:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Good source for casting news, film developments, and box-office (and currently much better than the agenda-fuelled BOI). Gossip sections should be ignored though. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The origins of the website in 2009 might be dubious, but over the years, the unreliable nature of the news was never properly established, though it was questioned multiple times due to the gossip sections. But so far, they have been consistent with box office figure reportings and other film related news, and hence they are considered to be a RS. Once again, we need to rewamp all the sources listed, which I'll kick off sometime this week or next. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you The_Herald and Krimuk2.0 for clearing up the reliability matter on Pinkvilla. While we are have discussion on sources for films, is Koimoi reliable or unreliable? I see conflict in these two lists WP:ICTFSOURCES and WP:ICTFFAQ. One time I pointed an editor to WP:ICTFSOURCES since koimoi was not here on reliable list but then the editor pointed me to WP:ICTFFAQ because koimoi was listed there. Can we just have one list that we can point editors in question? RangersRus (talk) 13:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, such a list is undergoing creation right now, in my sandbox. Also, an RfC is going on above too. A merge of those two are critical. Also, Koimoi is generally considered on thw unreliable side of the spectrum. I don't use it ever. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't use Koimoi anymore -- their clickbait-y articles have gone from bad to worse. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Side topic, but what is your opinion on the notability of Koimoi. I dropped by and do not see anything there of use and search doesn't locate anything to support notability. You sound more familiar with the website so wondering if you are aware of any sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I did a short research and found nothing GNG or SIGCOV for the article either. Looks like an AfD incoming. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Aadujeevitham (film)#Requested move 29 March 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Aadujeevitham (film)#Requested move 29 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Is Box Office India reliable for South Indian movies?

As mentioned in the Box office India website, it is only reliable for box office collections of Hindi films.[1].

I have seen it being used as box-office collection report for many south language films (telugu, tamil films). So, I think it should not be used for south films and only be used for Hindi films. Can I get some opinions on this. Uzumaki787 (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey. In my experience, BOI.com (not BOI.co.in which is not a RS) is almost accurate with box office figures. But lately, they have been accused of using promotional figures for even Bollywood movies. Since we don't have any such tracker websites down South, I'd say try to get an estimated range of BO collections, say ?100-150 crores for example, from reliable sources, if they are showing two reports. Once a well established RS such as the ones listed in WP:RS/P, you may pick that figure. BOI rarely reports outside Bollywood, so I'll take their reports outside Hindi cinema with a pinch of salt only. Just to know, which movie are you referring to? Thanks and happy editing. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Herald, I am referring to a movie Salaar: Part 1 – Ceasefire.

Recently I saw Disney+Hotstar tweet who bought the OTT rights for Salaar reporting it as 700 crore [2] which I think is official from the makers/producers of the movie.

To support this some "Generally reliable" sources also have News18 India and Hindustan times refering the same number.

News18: [3] and [4]

Hindustan Times: [5]

So all these refer to the number referred by movie producers but BOI is reporting a reduced number which I think is unreliable (as it reports only Hindi films majority of the time) and needs to be removed. What do you think? Uzumaki787 (talk) 04:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I'd go with HT and News18 numbers. There's a possibility that BOI might be reporting only Hindi version's collection. If not, you can go with the range. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

BOI has reported the worldwide gross but it completely contradicts with the numbers given by makers themselves which they have reported it in their official handles. So, HT and News18 are the reliable ones in this case.

Can you please make this change in the Salaar page as its protected and update the list of grossing pages as well. Uzumaki787 (talk) 05:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Some guy called Wayfarer is continuously reverting the edits what you have changed, I think his account looks suspicious as he gamed his account to 500 edits referring [6] to make such disruptive editing. Can you please look into this. Uzumaki787 (talk) 06:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

True. BOI doesn’t report accurate South Indian movie B.O data. This is mostly because south India has most numbers of Single screens which cannot be tracked like multiplexes. A lot of under reporting happens with Bollywood trackers due to unavailability of Single screen B.O data online. Its better to cite BOI only for Hindi films. Sacnik is accused of the same underreporting issue as well. Nevaunderestimate (talk) 12:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I won't call it disruptive editing, but they might be entering the edit warring territory with the next revert. I'd advice to continue discussion here with anymore reverts. Also, the reliability of sources is undergoing in the top most section of this page. Feel free to pitch in. Wayfarer Pacifist is also adviced to do so. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Another thing to note is the amount of null edits amassed by the user to reach 500 edits is pretty visible, but nevertheless, current edits to the Salaar article is not disruptive editing, unless they start to editwar. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Herald, salaar page is also linked to many pages, suggesting to make changes in the listed below, thanks in advance

Here are the list of pages linked to Salaar

1. List of highest-grossing Indian films: [7]

2. List of Indian films of 2023: [8]

3. List of highest-grossing South Indian films: [9]

4. List of highest-grossing Telugu films: [10]

5. List of Telugu films of 2023: [11] Uzumaki787 (talk) 07:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done RWILD✉ 14:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

User:183.83.162.156

Hello user:183.83.162.156 is making a large number of edits on Indian film articles, particularly the plots of the movies. On first glance, the quality of the edits are not good. I think it would be good to get some additional review of the edits. Thanks in advance! Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

It's very obviously B.Bhargava Teja socking. Let the plots remain, they just need extreme copyediting. Too bad the GOCE does not let users submit more than two articles at a time. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@Kailash29792, thank you for taking a look. Based on your evaluation, I have reported the user to SPI, here. Please feel free to add commentary if you think support for your claim is needed. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 14:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Relevant RSN discussion for those interested

Relates to the user of references and application of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Discussion here. CNMall41 (talk) 20:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Gold Awards

We have a page for Gold Awards which appears notable. However, there are many subpages for the individual awards such as Gold Award for Best Actor in a Lead Role, Gold Award for Best Actress in a Lead Role, Gold Award for Best Television Show (Fiction) and others. Looking at the individual awards, the references are about winners but nothing in-depth that talks about the individual awards. These were mainly created by blocked accounts (either socks of promotional) and appears likely created simply to promote the show. Prior to doing a mass nomination of the individual awards, wanted to get feedback from others on notability. As I said, I think the main page would be notable but the individual awards would not. CNMall41 (talk) 18:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I think they serve a purpose to list the historical results in each of the main award categories. As splits from a notable article they prevent that article being too long and don't have to be individually notable apart from the main awards page. If the main page wasn't notable that would be a different matter, Atlantic306 (talk) 18:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense. I guess what I am saying is that I don't think a split is warranted as there is not enough sourced content that would keep the page longer than necessary. It lasted 12 years and now defunct. I will take a look and cleanup up or tag any of the subpages. Thanks for the input. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Indianfilmhistory.com

Recently I removed Indianfilmhistory.com as source from a page ([12]) as it looked unreliable. Just wanted to consult with the community once as I think we never discussed this site before. Sid95Q (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Sid95Q:The website doesn't mention anything about their sources or editorial team or editorial policies. Looks like a WP:BLOG and/or gossip site. Better to steer away from such obscure ones as they do not have any reliability. I'd personally won't be using them. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Filminformation.com

The website resembles a blog without attributed authors. User @PSDA1 added sources and box office details to the article "Swatantrya Veer Savarkar (film)" which I removed due to lack of credibility. Without editorial details and relying solely on Komal Nahta's name, I don’t think it is a reliable source for Indian box office collections. It's akin to Koimoi, Tellychakkar, Filmibeat, Sacnilk, and Bollymoviereviewz. What are your thoughts on this source? Grabup (talk) 09:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it's a blog and comes under WP:BLOG and WP:GOSSIP. It is not a reliable source with low to none credibility. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Bollywood Hungama images

Hi, It seems that the permission for Bollywood Hungama images is not valid. So we may have to delete all images (more than 17,000 currently on Commons) unless Bollywood Hungama confirms that the permission is valid. Apparently they didn't answer to emails. See discussion on c:Template talk:BollywoodHungama. Any idea? Yann (talk) 11:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

This is gonna be a huge setback if they don't answer back. But nonetheless, I'd say let wait out the discussions happening in the template talk, as well as the Village Pump to see how it all unfolds. Here in ICTF, the discussion on this topic is not going to attract a major crowd. So let the broader community consensus come up and then we can discuss it here accordingly. Maybe if they are not willing to reply and a non free media rationale is applied, we have to limit the website usage in our articles. Whatever be the case, over 17k instances is too large to ignore. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh wow, that was an interesting read on commons. I hope that BH replies and that this works out. I think all of the top tier actors and actresses will be okay, so many of the rest will lose their images. Following that discussion with interest. Ravensfire (talk) 04:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I know this is a bit of a long-shot, but if any editors here happen to know someone who might know someone at BH that could help get some resolution on this, it would be very helpful. The challenge really is that everyone is clear on what the compatible licenses allow - and trying to put additional restrictions on them would not be acceptable. For example, a requirement that the BH watermark remain on the image is probably not going to fly. Ravensfire (talk) 04:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Cinema express can it be considered reliable?

https://cinemaexpress.com/ which seems to be subsidiary of Indian Express, it provides articles about films. can it be used as source for references.

Thanks, Aadirulez8 (talk) 10:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Cinema Express is known for South Indian film related news and reporting and a part of The Indian Express, there is no consensus about the reliability of it. I think Cinema Express should be considered as a generally reliable source. Grabup (talk) 11:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Since IE is used as an RS, it's subsidiary is also considered as one due to the same editorial team. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 11:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

so should we add Cinema Express in reliable section of WP:ICTFSOURCES? Aadirulez8 (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Ghilli

Are we suppose to club grosses of initial and re-releases together like this? I mean considering the inflation. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't know seriously. Inflation is a different matter, but clubbing re-release earnings with original earnings... in an industry where reliable BO info is rare, is just confusing. I'd say keep the original gross separate from re-release gross. --Kailash29792 (talk) 03:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Name change of the article Cinema of West Bengal

It is good to change the current name (Cinema of West Bengal) to "Bengali cinema, India" or "Bengali cinema (India)", where the latter two names are similar to the names of other language-film industries of India (example being Telugu cinema, Hindi cinema, Tamil cinema, etc.). Anyways, the current article differentiates it with the Cinema of Bangladesh and also mention about it in the top section. Jayanthkumar123 (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree one should be Bengali cinema. But then see Tamil cinema vs Sri Lankan Tamil cinema and Malaysian Tamil cinema. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)