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.

Kalaipuli Dhanu confirm 187 crore box office collection of Vijay starrer Thuppaki, directed by AR. Murugados. Please update from 180 crore to 187 crore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CTpy2sjerM

2003:77:6F05:51D1:5455:128C:8E33:86F4 (talk) 19:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: Sorry, we don't use primary sources for controversial information like financial details. Directors, producers, actors, promoters all have a vested interest in inflating or deflating these numbers, depending on what their financial goals are. (Inflating numbers might make the film more attractive to people who want to be part of the spectacle, deflating numbers might make the production company less liable for entertainment taxes, etc.) We're only interested in what reliable secondary sources (no blogs, no IMDb) have to say about the data. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The film named Killing Veerappan which released on january 1st 2016(kannada version) and 7th january 2016(telugu dubbed version) collected approx 34 crores in both languages.

Please add killing veerappan in the list of kannada films

|- | Killing Veerappan | 2016 | Ram Gopal Varma | Zed3 productions | ₹38 crore (US$4.6 million) |^[1] Plaster kill bill (talk) 16:02, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. It appears you are autoconfirmed already. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Plaster kill bill, though you may be capable of editing the page, you're going to need to provide a better reference before changing the content. We don't use blogs as references, because anyone can create a blog and call himself an expert. Please stick to reliable mainstream publications with established reputations for fact-checking. Anything short of that will be reverted. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Good Evening Please add starer surya's 24 tamil moive in the list of Tamil films

|- | 24 | 2016 | Vikram Kumar | 2D Entertainment

Kindly Request for add tamil movie starre surya 24 moive the movie collected world wide 150 crores this is the proof website: http://www.onlookersmedia.in/collection-report/suriya-24-collection-report-28-days http://gabbarboxofficecollection.com/2016/suriya-24-box-office-collection-3rd-day-sunday-1st-weekend-total-collection.html Samsuddeen (talk) 14:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Samsuddeen, we don't use blogs or other user-generated sources as references. See WP:UGC and prior explanations on this talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Add this 24 movie 150crores

Kasim999 (talk) 13:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Theri has grossed around 175 Crores Worldwide in the first 50 days of its run. Is this a reliable source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kesh505 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Last year, there was a big hue and cry in wikipedia discussion when Baahublai was listed as a Tamil movie (to be specific Kollywood industry) although the production house is based in Hyderabad and the director-hero are popular only with Telugu audience (the main actresses are known in both Telugu and Tamil movie industries, however). The film was made in Tamil too and hence Baahubali was given a shared status of Tamil and Telugu by moderators. But as many pointed out this idea of just making a movie in a language does not necessarily mean the movie belongs to that specific movie industry. One must take into account various other factors like - production house location, director, actor etc. The moderators who are usually ignorant of the nuances of differences about Indian movie industries, stick to some notions that may be sensible elsewhere, but not in India where a director-actor association with a specific movie industry is pretty strong. During the last year's discussion, one of the commentators who insisted on Baahubali being only a Telugu film (or to be specific Tollywood industry), predicted that Baahubali would not be nominated for any award in Tamil. Lo and behold, his/her prediction came true: Baahubali has not been represented at all in Tamil Filmfare nomination for 2016. Of course the argument would be given that perhaps Baahubali was not worth for any award in Tamil movie industry - but I think a better argument is they didn't even consider it to be a Tamil film to begin with. So if Filmfare, which is officially the "Oscars" for India, along with most of the Indian audience who have good knowledge of Indian movie industry rightfully treat Baahubali as only Telugu film, why do moderators here think differently? I am surprised that someone can be a moderator on wikipedia without much understanding of the field upon which they are moderating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.147.191.11 (talk) 13:37, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus has already been reached on this issue, and the decision was arrived at by regular editors, not by "moderators". You can thank the dishonest editors who resorted to antics like sockpuppetry for polluting the conversation with their petulant behavior. Nowhere else but in Indian cinema articles do we find this drive to attribute a film to an ethnic industry rather than uncontroversially indicating the languages the film was recorded in. Tollywood is clearly indicated in the main article. This list article is focused on the highest grossing films of India organized by language, not by ethnic film industry. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Agreed. It was a many month long lengthy discussion with every possible conceivable angle discussed and nothing new here has been presented. Everyone else has moved on as frankly no one should care. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Theri Box office Collection:

http://idailytimes.com/vijays-theri-collects-rs-250cr-worldwide-box-office-update.html

2003:80:C514:4501:619D:2679:2B9:47ED (talk) 07:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done st170e^talk 13:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that List of highest-grossing Indian films in overseas markets be merged into List of highest-grossing Indian films. We don't need a separate page just for overseas figures. - Managerarc™ ^talk 20:45, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managerarc I don't think we need to keep a unique tally of grosses domestically vs. grosses internationally. Maybe discussing whether the overseas article should be deleted is in order. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merging is appropriate. A totally unnecessary list. See the List of highest-grossing films (FL), gross when adjusted for inflation, films by year, franchise films are all listed in that single page. Likewise, the List of highest-grossing Indian films in overseas markets is not an independent topic, and List of highest-grossing Indian films shows worldwide gross, not the domestic. --Charles Turing (talk) 11:34, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit I reverted Honor bee's resubmission of a 75 crore total for Mungaru Male. Filmibeat is not considered a reliable source by WP:ICTF. Mybangalore.com looks like a blog to me, and thus would be unsuitable per WP:UGC. The final reference, dnaindia.com, attributes the information to the film's lead actor, which would mean that we're using a primary source for controversial information. A primary source would absolutely have a reason to fudge the financial numbers of a film, for instance he might inflate it to make it more of an attractive spectacle for potential viewers, or he might deflate it to reduce the film's entertainment tax liability, or an actor might inflate it to make himself more marketable as an actor. There are all sorts of reasons why it is a bad idea to use a primary source for controversial data. Oh, and the information was also previously submitted by a disruptive troll who is not welcome to edit at Wikipedia, which should raise some questions about motive and appropriateness of the submission. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moot point. Not surprisingly, Honor bee was a sock of Nagendra NJ, a user who is not welcome to edit at Wikipedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:53, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

115.112.71.222 (talk) 14:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC) Vedalam Movie of Ajith 56 Director Siva Mass Opening in TamilNadu 15.5 Crores in First Day.[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Also any change would require you to provide reliable sources. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]