This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

India: Cinema List‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles List This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance). Business List‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles List This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Film: Indian List‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles List This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force. Lists List‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles List This article has been rated as List-class on the project's quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

How should classify the film Baahubali? This is both for the main table and for whether it should be included in any of the subtables.

Tamil and Telugu

• Support both Tamil and Telugu as explained below. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 11:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• support per the multiple reliable sources Forbes to the Guardian to the Times of India to IBN to NDTV to The National which identify the film as bilingual Tamil / Telugu. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support for obvious reasons. The film was shot in both languages, there is no reason to deviate from reliable sources as a way to accommodate the fragile egos of a select group of readers. Elspamo4 (talk) 17:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Has been endlessly explained in above discussions. Cannolis (talk) 18:57, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This is a fairly unique situation, in that two versions of the film were made at the same time. I think the film should be treated as both a Telugu and a Tamil film. I don't really get what the fuss is all about except maybe some hometown/language/culture pride? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:51, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: A wide range of sources make it clear that the film was simultaneously produced in both languages. --Carnildo (talk) 02:39, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, since this is not only what independent sources tell us, it's what the producer has stated (it was produced bilingually because a monolingual approach could not have recouped the production costs). See the #Discussion section for sources.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  02:38, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tamil only

Telugu only

• Support Telugu Only. Marchoctober (talk) 08:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why? WP:JUSTAVOTE will be ignored by the closer.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  02:39, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Baahubali is undoubtedly a Telugu movie which is simultaneously dubbed into Hindi,Tamil,English and French. How could it be in the list of highest grossing tamil movies? This is a blunder mistake on wikipedia, it must be verifed as soon as possibleJohnnyBlaze007 (talk) 16:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Its a telugu movie dubbed into another 4 languages. Ricky is behaving as a true Madrasi.175.101.16.161 (talk) 16:24, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Struck ethnic slur. Elspamo4 (talk) 17:49, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchoctober: @JohnnyBlaze007: @175.101.16.161: are there any sources or policies that support your position?

• Support Please go to the Wikipedia Page "Telugu Cinema". It doesn't mean films shot in Telugu, It actually means films produced by Tollywood. Similarly go to the page "Tamil Cinema" What it means is films shot in Kollywood. so if your intention is just to servce the technicality, your absolutely misleading people here. Baahubali is product of Telugu Cinema and I strongly support it to be mentioned only in the Field of Telugu. In the page of baahubali, it was anyway mentioned as Telugu & Tamil. But in the grossings we need to be careful not to mislead readersPradeeps369 (talk) 14:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Many films from Tamil like Enthiran, Indian, Singham, Shivaji ... were shot simultaneously in both Tamil and Telugu but, being considered as Tamil films. Though Bahubali - The Beginning has Tamil version its a Telugu film only. Will anyone consider those films as Telugu films? Enthiran bagged 2 national awards and many other awards, but it didn't get nominated to atleast one section of Telugu cinema awards like Nandi, film fare-Telugu and other. It is obviously telling that which way should one follow. PK ^talk 10:34, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Tamil films like Enthiran/Robo, I, Indian, Singham, Shivaji ... were shot simultaneously in both Tamil and Telugu but, being considered as Tamil films. In all Telugu versions of the above films, no where you will find letters in Tamil but you will find them in Telugu only. Some portions of these movies are re-shoot to suit Telugu audience. Similarly, Bahubali - The Beginning is a Telugu film only and some portions are re-shoot to suit Tamil audience. If we add the gross earnings from all the versions including dubbed languages, how can we give a particular film a Tamil only or Telugu only film. Either we need to include a single language from where it has originated like Bahubali from Telugu language or include all the languages in which the movie was released including dubbed languages The Guardian. If Bahubali is included in the list of highest grossing Tamil movies list, then why wasn't Eega movie included in Tamil list as it was also produced in Tamil along with Telugu version simultaneously? Because it is not in the top of the list? Everyone wants to take credit if we are successful. And why was Eega movie got National Award for Best Feature Film in Telugu even though it is produced simultaneously in Tamil also? So, it is better to include Bahubali only in the Telugu list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 11:39, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Certainly it is a telugu movie and not telugu and tamil. The movie is shot primarily by telugu and for global audience. Due to the market similarities, and for revenue making purposes some shots were shot twice while rest is dubbed. This is a common practice and even tamil films are shot twice for lip sync purposes or add specific scenes with telugu or the target market actros to make it more marketable. For example, I or Robo have added mixed tracks and that doesnt mean they are telugu films. srikrishnak (talk) 07:20, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It is primarily a Telugu movie and shot with few scenes in tamil that doesn't mean it is a tamil movie. Here bilingualism is not the issue. while mentioning in the grossing list you should consider production and from which language the film originated not bilingualism. I have 4 instances to classify it as a Telugu movie and remove from the tamil list. The production is from a Telugu production house and not even single from tamil is involved in it. The story, script, direction, music, cinematography etc... almost entire crew is from Telugu film industry including cast. If we look at the release almost 75% released in Telugu version and (Hindi dubbed version(from Telugu)) and the rest is from others. In the collections almost 80% is from Telugu and Hindi dubbed version. Also only some scenes were shot in tamil for tamil audience and the rest is dubbed in Tamil.

But to classify it as a tamil film they have only one instance ie. stating it as a bilingual film which is actually not as Tamil version has some dubbed scenes. For all those who are mentioning baahubali as a bilingual i'm asking is the story, script and direction is from both telugu and tamil directors? not at all It's only from Telugu director and writer alone. Is the production house is from tamil? If you check the gross collections then look how much tamil version has collected nearly 15%. Then why are you including the movie in tamil list by adding other version collections 80% into it although it is not primarily a tamil movie. simply don't state bilingual as a reason. In the gross box office list, will you look at the language or the production and collections? In Hollywood if an English movie is also shot in French it is regarded as an hollywood movie not french movie. In the collections it will be listed in english list not in the french list similarly is the case of baahubali it should be included only in telugu list not in tamil. So remove it from tamil list.

Padukati raju (talk) 06:54, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Providing sources which say the film is from Telugu film industry and Telugu language: 1)www.bbc.com 2)theguardian.com 3)reuters.com 4) cnn.com 5) huffingtonpost 6)hindustantimes.com 7)timesofindia.indiatimes.com 8)ndtv.com 9)odishasuntimes.com 10)thehindu.com Marchoctober (talk) 18:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This News Article by TheGuardian.com which clearly mentions that the film is a Telugu movie and was made additionally in Tamil and dubbed into Hindi and Malayalam, but clearly states that it is a Telugu Movie. Marchoctober (talk) 19:16, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

• Baahubali: The Beginning was shot in both the Tamil and Telugu languages and then dubbed in various other languages. There is no disputing that amongst the sources. Rather than trying to figure out how much of a film constitutes a Tamil/Telugu (or Hindi or Punjabi)-"industry" film (based on actors/directors/producers/location shot), since it was shot in both Tamil and Telugu originally (and then dubbed elsewhere) it should be listed as both Tamil and Telugu language film. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 11:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment It was removed from Tamil again with this misleading edit. I'm not in the mood to fight it anymore. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Telugu Only. Marchoctober (talk) 08:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you elaborate? As noted above, this is not a vote so policy discussions would be preferable and I know that there's pages of the same arguments going in circles but it would be really helpful if you could put it in a short summary here as many people may not respond to every repeated discussion. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the sections

• Baahubali is a Bilingual
• Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films#Film_language_versus_industry
• Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films#Tamil_Films_misrepresenting_information

The above users all are biased users which is why I have started those sectionsMarchoctober (talk) 08:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, everyone is biased but you and everyone who agrees with you. They are so biased that you require multiple discussions and pages and tangents to not a point other than "it's insulting for it to be called a Tamil film." -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know what to say. But, as per the trade is concerned, the Tamil version is lacking behind when compared to the remaining two major releases (Telugu and Hindi). If you want me to classify which language Baahubali belongs to, i would opt for a Telugu-Tamil bilingual. Because, the film's director S. S. Rajamouli told IANS — Given the budget of the film, it’s impossible to recover the cost involved if we release in one language. Right from the start, the plan was to make it as a Tamil-Telugu bilingual. Hence, we cast actors who are popular in both the industries. Here is the reference for the same.

When the director himself admits that Baahubali is a bilingual, i think that should be valued more than anything else. And, for all those who are concerned that Telugu cinema isn't getting its due recognition, i want to cite the case of Eega. That film, also a bilingual directed by Rajamouli, received acclaim mostly for its Telugu version. National Film Awards, Filmfare Awards South and all notable awards were received by the Telugu version only. In the case of Baahubali, Telugu cinema is being praised by the International media and fortunately, the same can be placed in the article and summarised in the lead provided the content is written neutrally.

So, i suggest this option — Specify Baahubali as an Indian bilingual simultaneously shot in Telugu and Tamil. Next, specify in the poroduction section that Rajamouli planned it as a bilingual only to recover the cost involved which he found impossible if released in only one language. For all who are concerned for Telugu cinema recognition, please write the content from International magazines in a neutral way in the "Legacy" section. As per WP:LEAD the same would be summarised in the lead section where we can see a statement similar to "Due to the success of Baahubali, Telugu film industry was noted and praised by International magazines such as Forbes and The Guardian". Any one who does or does not support this may explain their arguments below. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:46, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly don't have objective criteria here. What do you mean that by "the Tamil version is lacking"? We aren't removing it from the Tamil language just because you personally don't think it was the best version, that's a nonsensical way to categorize things. And it's not about whether the Tamil industry "deserves" or doesn't recognition, it's about a single film and what's the best way to classify the films on this page (I'm starting to learn towards a delete all the subtables and just list films approach). And if you care about more about praising Telugu cinema than anything else, you're here for the wrong reasons. That's not the point of this page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:03, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate Pavanjandhyala presenting reliable sources to qualify their statements, and they are certainly right in re-asserting that the film is bilingual, but I too share your sentiment regarding the mindset that a certain industry 'deserves praise'. This page is not for 'praising' a certain 'industry'. This isn't the scope of the page. This page has absolutely nothing to do with a film's industry. I am also in agreement that all subsections should be removed. Perhaps a new RFC should be started in the near future with regards to your proposal. Elspamo4 (talk) 09:13, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If that is the case, then here is my explanation. Baahubali is a bilingual simultaneously shot in Telugu & Tamil and dubbed into Hindi in order to recover the making costs which is confirmed by its director in an interaction to IANS. There is no need to project it as only a Telugu film for the acclaim Telugu version has received because that shall not change just because the film is a bilingual. So i suggest that the film (includes both the parts) be mentioned as a bilingual one in the lead and mention in the Production section that this film was made as a bilingual to recover the making costs. What say? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this bizarro argument about only the Telugu version being acclaimed coming from? Are there sources that say that the Tamil version is horrid or something? It's literally the same film. No, that's not a solution as it entirely ignores the other language it was made in. Further, arguing about the reason a film was made in various language (again without providing sources) as a justification for how it should be categorized is again original research as if certain reasons (budget, financing, marketing) are good while others are not. The film was made in two languages. We should not be coming back here when the next film make in two languages (or three) [made, not dubbed that seems clear] to debate about what reasons it was made in those various languages, whether one language makes it "more" acclaimed than another or "more" amazing or whatever that accomplishes nothing here in terms of consistency and is just people here picking and choosing based on their personal interests. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:39, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See. I provided the source in my first message here. If you missed it, here is the reference i quoted and it was not an original research as you say. With this, i can prove that Baahubali is a bilingual film. Coming to the acclaim problem, many websites such as Forbes and all mentioned the Telugu version of Baahubali in particular. This and the box office success of the film "as a whole" (i mean together in all languages) made a few quote that Baahubali is only a Telugu film. By stating the reason why this film was made as a bilingual, i want to make it clear that this is not just a Telugu film but a bilingual. Nothing else from my side. I'm done with it. What all can do after reading the content in that source carefully and this last message of mine here, please do the needy. I just wanted to make sure that the filmmaker's intention is clearly mentioned in the related articles (Baahubali: The Beginning, Production of Baahubali and Baahubali: The Conclusion) to avoid unnecessary confusions regarding the issue whether this is a bilingual or not. Thank you for letting me participate in this productive discussion and i think, its time i say good bye to this. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:48, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. How does "bilingual" = Telugu only? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

snide: It runs through the "industry" which squeezes all the Tamil out. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given that it's conclusively proven to have been a bilingual production from the start, I guess this will be a textbook example of why a closer should look at rationales and ignore the head-count of "votes". LOL.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  10:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If Bahubali is included in the list of highest grossing Tamil movies list, then why wasn't Eega movie included in Tamil list as it was also produced in Tamil along with Telugu version simultaneously? Because it is not in the top of the list? And why was Eega movie got National Award for Best Feature Film in Telugu only even though it was produced simultaneously in Tamil and the content of both the movies are same? It is because Indian film awards are given only for the language in which the movie is originally made. Since Eega was not an original Tamil movie, it didn't get any award in Tamil language category. Same is the case with Bahubali. It's a original Telugu movie and when it receives any awards, it will receive the awards only in the category of Telugu language and not for Tamil language. So, it is better to include Bahubali only in the Telugu list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 15:20, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Section break

Let me put a small break here. The point is Wikipedia categorizes Indian films by language not by so-called industry. Evidence can be seen by Category:Indian films by language. Now, they could be misinterpreted as the same except we have English-language Indian films. The basis for inclusion there is the (primary) language in which the film was shot. There is no English-language Indian film "industry" place/populace whatever that would let us classify other films as in or out of this category other than by simple language. For the same reason, we should be classifying Baahubali as both Tamil and Telugu because it was shot in those language rather than using some personal opinions from editors as to whether a film has "sufficient" amounts of a particular film industry to be classified under that industry. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's completely biased editing on part of the administrator Ricky81682|Ricky81682], who is biased to make Bahubali to give Tamil color. Bahubali was maintained as Telugu movie until the gross collections of Bahubali didn't cross the gross collections of highest grossing Tamil movie "Enthiran". When Bahubali grossed more than Enthiran, they made it as both Telugu and Tamil movie. Why no explanations were given for "Eega/Naan Ee" movie, for which I have given lot of explanation above? When "Eega/Naan Ee" was produced simultaneously in Telugu and Tamil but considered Telugu only movie then how come Bahubali will be considered both Telugu and Tamil movie? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 10:52, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't attack other editors. Has Eega been brought up before? If you can provide a source about Eega, put it in a separate section and we'll list it on both. I don't recall it being listed on the Tamil film list when it was merged here. At to the National Film Award, that is determined by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (India), correct? Does it classify films or are films categorized there and nominated based on the producers submitted it there? I'm just trying to flesh out your rationale for using that as a basis for categorizing films. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 17:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to attack personally. For awards, the producer has to submit an entry for the movie. Is it possible for Bahubali to be submitted as an entry for Tamil version. It is not possible. Because "Dubbed/revised/copied version of a film" is out rightly rejected by the awards Jury [1] as Tamil version of Bahubali is copied version Telugu Bahubali and Tamil version is not in it's original form. Same has happened with "Eaga/Naan Ee". Producers know that if they submit the Tamil version, it will be out rightly rejected. Eega was eligible for National awards only in Telugu version and not in Tamil version. Same is the case with Bahubali. It is eligible for National awards only in Telugu version. If National awards jury is considering it as a Telugu only movie then how Wikipedia will consider it as both Telugu and Tamil movie. Please remove Bahubali from Tamil list. Otherwise, it will misguide people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 04:02, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're speculating here. Where is this "Tamil version would have been rejected" coming from? You don't have proof of any of this. Is this the same as the "the Tamil version was lacking" argument I've heard before? Ok, the point is it was the producers' choice to list it under Telugu and not Tamil (I doubt they could submit it in two categories) and it was not like some government agency's choice which would give us some more objective criteria to work off. That's my point. As to Eega again, no one has brought it up before (I don't recall it listed when I merged the separate Tamil article over here) and I mentioned it in the #Eega section below. I'm assuming you'll support including that in the Tamil section to be consistent. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to the form on page 17, only one language is permitted and this is submitted by the producers. I agree that any dubbed dialogue is also inadmissible as you said. I don't see any discussion about bilingual films. It's an interesting point none the less. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please change sources for Magadheera and Race Gurram to properly executed "2nd Saturday Box Office Collection: Baahubali Beats Endhiran's Lifetime Record in 9 Days". International Business Times. 19 July 2015. --Sudzuki Erina (talk) 09:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That article admits that those are estimates and is just repeating its numbers from this site which I'm really questioning. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. But that article (incorrect framed) is used now in Highest grossing Telugu films for Magadheera and Race Gurram. --Sudzuki Erina (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DEADLINE lol. We'll fix these things eventually. - Ricky81682 (talk) 19:31, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there support for this change? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, this falls back under an example where a potential source is citing a known unreliable source (andhraboxoffice.com). There's a discussion at WP:RSN about this actual issue as some people think that if possibly (or known) reliable source rely on something, that should be sufficient to consider that source reliable. I disagree however. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:16, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Removed from article now. I wish the Indian cinema page or someone had an interest in discussing these sources rather than me just talking to myself repeatedly it seems. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:25, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please update baahubali collections to 462 crores. ^[1]Aloosamosa (talk) 12:43, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's 500 now. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-bahubali-3rd-week-box-office-collection-prabhas-film-grosses-462-crore-21-days-641133

Please update Baahubali's gross to 462 crores- Thx a lot! Nyankitty5023 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyankitty5023 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please update the gross of Drishyam as 60 cr. [2] Josephjames.me (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please add the gross of Twenty:20 as 32 cr. [3] Josephjames.me (talk) 12:42, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support the update of Drishyam to 60 cr - the source is a valid major newspaper speaking in its own voice. Do not support the Twenty:20 as it is just the director speaking in terms that he himself qualifies "if one believes the trades". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:23, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey TheRedPenOfDoom! I've made a table from whatever data was available. Please make me know of the corrections. There a few more films for which I have not been able to find a reliable source. I shall try to add them as soon as possible. Thanks! Josephjames.me (talk) 13:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

for starters, you have cited [4] for two of the films in your list, but as far as I can see that source does not provide box office figures for ANY film. Did you copy and paste from the stand alone article? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:07, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is given in a photo in the article. [5] Josephjames.me (talk) 14:17, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Source: Industry"? That's a little odd but the Economic Times is a reliable source I guess. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• All done. If there are concerns about a particular source, we can discuss. The only issue is that the article now has 11 sources for this language. Any objections to cutting it to an even ten? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. Josephjames.me (talk) 12:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Forgot to thank you... Thanks! And please revise the 'Premam' figure as 60 cr. Thanks again:) Josephjames.me (talk) 13:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja

There's two separate numbers listed for Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja: [6] alleging 20 crore and [7] alleging 49 crore in an off-hand comment. Rather than the note, we should look into it with more detail. It seems like the Times piece may not be reliable for this citation since that result would make it the third-highest film, something that nothing else seems to agree with. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'The Times piece may not be reliable for this citation since that result would make it the third-highest film, something that nothing else seems to agree with.' That's exactly why I put the gross as 20 cr. because that would also support this article [8] which states that Drishyam beat Twenty:20 to become the highest grossing Malayalam film. But if the gross is true, the film would be a 'flop' (27 cr. budget, 20 cr. gross) rather than a 'blockbuster' [9]. It surely needs a discussion, but as a big grosser, I thought it must feature in the list. Josephjames.me (talk) 12:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need sources

Can any one provide gross for films such as Narasimham, Rajamanikyam etc.? Thanks! Josephjames.me (talk) 12:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update the collection of Bajrangi Bhaijaan. It has crossed 500 cr Worldwide.^{[1] [2]}

Collection update of Bajrangi Bhaijaan

Update the collection of Bajrangi Bhaijaan. It has crossed 540 cr Worldwide. Here is the evidence... http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2015/08/04/despite-weekend-slowdown-indias-bajrangi-bhaijaan-treks-to-540-crore-84-2m-worldwide ^[1] kindly update collections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bibsomania (talk • contribs)

Baahubali grossed Rs. 500 Crores - Forbes Magazine http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2015/08/02/indias-baahubali-blasts-past-500-crore-78-million-worldwide/ Harshasg (talk) 05:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is generally the case that there is no ==Ext links== header if there are no links even if there are templates. 203.109.161.2 (talk) 06:01, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You're right. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Change the grossing of "Baahubali:The Beginning" to 500 crores.^[1] Gourabgggg (talk) 07:47, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reliable source. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't see your link for some reason. Done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collection update of Bajrangi Bhaijaan 2

Update the collection of Bajrangi Bhaijaan. It has crossed 540 cr Worldwide. Here is the evidence... http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2015/08/04/despite-weekend-slowdown-indias-bajrangi-bhaijaan-treks-to-540-crore-84-2m-worldwide kindly update collections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambeinghari (talk • contribs)

It's been done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collection update of Baahubali

Update the collection of Baahubali. It has crossed 500 cr Worldwide. Here is the evidence... http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2015/08/02/indias-baahubali-blasts-past-500-crore-78-million-worldwide kindly update collections.

thanks..

Done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no an error at the foor of the page. 203.109.161.2 (talk) 09:50, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The movie Bhajrangi Bhaijaan, as of now not grossed Rs.540 crores. No main stream Indian media reported so. Till tuesday, as per most Indian news portals the movie grossed only Rs.294 crore and is nearing Rs.300 crore mark.^{[1] [2][3]} Ved548 (talk) 12:29, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Sources you give are for domestic box office gross. Table in article reflects global box office gross and is supported by Forbes source. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 12:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed above, the film Eega was produced in both Tamil and Teleugu was is classified as bilingual here. Any objections to including it on the Tamil chart? I'd suggest we drop Thuppakki so teh chart is limited to a top ten but that's a separate concern. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:32, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

==Highest grossing Kannada films==

Rakesh bg (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rakesh bg: Where did you get this text from? Was that an old separate article that got merged here? It'll just make it more accurate if I put that in the edit summary for copyright reasons. I don't think that Indiaglitz (for Mungaru Male and for one of the sources for Maanikya) would qualify as a reliable sources but it shouldn't just be me here so let's wait on at least one more person to comment here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:22, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Hindu here confirms 50 crore for Mungaru Male and that it is the highest Kannada box office collection. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:24, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ricky81682: Looking at the "What Links Here" for Mungaru Male, I don't think this table was copy-pasted from anywhere on the English wikipedia. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As i am from kerala and a regular movie analyst the 2009 movie Pazhassi Raja made 49 crores as shown in Times Of India. it was then a record and all media where buzzing about the film collections. 100% sure that the movie grossed 49 crores not 20.. Kindly update the collections

regards................ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambeinghari (talk • contribs) 07:29, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ambeinghari: I cannot find any sources from Times of India that confirm this. The most recent one I can find (Nov. 2014) says 27 cores. Can you please link to your source? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:13, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked that the gross be updated to 27 crore though. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bajrangi Bhaijaan's Collections needs to be updated asap. It shows 575 Crore INR in its own wiki page. Yashmrsawant (talk) 10:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The article says 540 in the infobox and in Bajrangi_Bhaijaan#Box office. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:19, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

==Highest grossing Marathi films==

The Marathi cinema industry produces films in the Marathi language and is based in the state of Maharashtra, India. India's first full-length film, Raja Harishchandra, was released in 1913 in Marathi.^[1]

Ani 007d (talk) 12:13, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ani 007d: Are you asking that this information is added to the article? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, was the table taken from anywhere, or did you create it yourself? If you copied it form somewhere, we need to know so we can fulfill our copyright obligations. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In this section, please change the gross for Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja from ₹20 crore to ₹27 crore per this more recent source. Also, please move Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja from 7th to 5th in the table. Thank you EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 15:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According To The Source Tamil Film Veeram Has Grossed ₹130 crore According To The Source ^[1] So Please Consider Changing in the List of highest-grossing Tamil films under List of highest-grossing Indian films GIftson.J (talk) 16:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Verified - Quote from source: According to Forbes India, "Veeram" is estimated to have earned about ₹130 crore. Seems good enough to me. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 16:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).