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.

Like List of highest-grossing Tamil films, I see no reason why Telugu films should have a separate article than the main Indian films one. Again, we do it by country and not by language within countries. The merger discussion from 2013 until 2015 shows why a single listing makes more sense and there is enough discrepancies between this page and List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films#Highest-grossing_Telugu_films to make watching both unwarranted. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I lean toward Merge: Seems like unnecessary child article with somewhat arbitrary figures, ex: highest opening, opening weekend, week... Whatever detail is warranted to include could be maintained here. These pages seem more like ethnic badges of honor, to me. Past discussions across various Indian cinema articles suggest that there is a push to associate certain films with ethnic identity and for each ethnic identity to be in competition with each other. I don't know that there is an analogue for this anywhere else in the film article world. Do we have lists for highest-grossing African-American films or highest-grossing Cuban-American films? My impression after having edited and gnomed at many Indian film articles, is that pages like these seem more like badges of honor for specific ethnic identities in India. Greater feedback from the WikiProject Film community would be appreciated, so I have invited them. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, per above. Like other individual industry pages of highest-grossing films, they are excessively detailed of trivial information. All industries can be outlined under the List of highest-grossing Indian films to keep topics inclusive and to prevent any prevailing vandalism/crystal balling. — EelamStyleZ (talk) 18:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I actually support a Delete, the article isn't even appropriately titled. EelamStyleZ (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: Agree with the nomination. The sources aren't even always reliable. Coderzombie (talk) 09:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

somebody should add the the section of "highest grossing franchise and film series", open Highest grossing films and see the sample. Taniya94 (talk) 14:44, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taniya94, why are US dollars the default currency for this table? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cyphoidbomb, I don't know, I tried to convert it to INR but I failed. Can you help me to do it?? Taniya94 (talk) 09:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One user updated Baahubali gross from 600 to 650 crs. Also provided IBTimes source. I know IBTimes is a reliable source, but in this case it doesn't seems correct. Is it acceptable?? Ambeinghari (talk) 13:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific about your objection, Ambeinghari? In his edit summary, Bhuvannalla explained, "Changed the collections of Baahubali according to the latest standard reference source from 600 to 650 crores as the movie was released in many languages in recent times." Was it recently released elsewhere? Does anyone know how much it grossed? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:42, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cyphoidbomb Yes it was recently released in china on july. But the film was not a success there and almost collected 1 million on its opening weekend, which is close to 7 crore Indian rupees. After that the movie show reduction in screen and collections. Even we add 7- 10 crores it should be around 610 crs max. 650 is really impossible... here are both sources, pls check. ^[1][2]

I don't know whether the second source is reliable, but the things it mentioned are true. So for me its another manipulated collections like Kabali...thanks.. Ambeinghari (talk) 02:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recently Baahubali was released not only in China but also in Germany, Taiwan, many European countries and Latin American countries. So, I think IBTimes is not exaggerating the collections of Baahubali. It might have included the collections from all the countries. Even 650 crores is also not final. The number may increase further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 08:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bhuvannalla can you show proofs showing Baahubali was released not only in China but also in Germany, Taiwan, many European countries and Latin American countries???? Ambeinghari (talk) 16:46, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ambeinghari, I found this, which says the film made US $630,000 in China after its first weekend, which would be about 4.2 crore rupees. I haven't done any more research on the matter. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cyphoidbomb i had done so many surfing on internet, couldn't find any thing related to 650crs gross. No official confirmation from the twitter handlers of movie or actors said about the release in Germany , Latinamerica etc... its a clear mistake. Boxoffice should be reverted. Thanks Ambeinghari (talk) 13:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ambeinghari, here are the resources showing Baahubali releasing in different countries like Germany, France, Taiwan, Peru, etc.

http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/regional/baahubali-released-in-france-the-french-are-in-awe-of-prabhas-performance-2856639/

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/bahubali-germany-box-office-collection-ich-bin-baahubali-fails-make-it-big-opening-weekend-677222#wHYllSiP6wQIPlmq.97

http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/baahubali-the-beginning-makes-a-mark-at-chinese-box-office-2816858.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 14:29, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sources. That itself say the movie got bad collections in Germany and china. And good response in france but no boxoffice reports. 650crs is unbelievable. Ambeinghari (talk) 02:32, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IBM Times is both wrong and right at the same time, since it's wrong in concluding, it's wrong finally. The source says the film grossed around ₹5.20 billion (US$62 million) domestically, it doesn't talk about the overseas then after, it jumps to the worlwide. Actually Baahubali collected around ₹700 million (US$8.4 million) overseas which takes the total worldwide nearly ₹5.90 billion (US$71 million), rounding it off to ₹6 billion (US$72 million) was somewhat less acceptable but now ₹6.50 billion (US$78 million), it's just a violation of Wikipedia terms.

^[1]

A. Haque Sonash (talk) 04:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A. Haque Sonash Baahubali's domestic run is over long back. Whatever is added now is from overseas collections only as the movie got released in many countries as discussed above. The reference you have cited is more than one year old showing the overseas collections as 70 crores. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuvannalla (talk • contribs) 13:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guys just do one thing delete this indian box office page from Wikipedia.This thing want work even a waste movies as per source and news won't be gaining that much amount.Have you guys watched sultan movie really did that movie is good.Think practically even there is story in dhoom3 even lots of films failed ex:-prem ratan dhan paying,kick,theri these are flop films lots of fans are still didn't understand how this films did well in box office.Now the same happening with kabali too.Lots media is just giving false trail.One cannot judge with media.Only way is fb review.Even we cannot go for box office collection just best better good movies. Vshek (talk) 17:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vshek -  Not done - It's unclear what change your proposing, and really it sounds like you're ranting about films, which is not an appropriate use of an article talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So now it's time to update collection of kabali there are lots of viewers depends upon news on this page.We cannot keep on counting for the news on IBT or any other source in spite there is no media is publishing the box office collection of kabali.THANKS Vshek (talk) 06:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vshek - I disagree. We can wait. When we have strong reporting from mainstream sources that paint a more realistic picture of Kabali's box office performance, then we can make the changes. So far we have one source that says it grossed over 600 crore at the box office, we have two sources that say it did not, and then we have a bunch of crappy sources reprinting the questionable data. It's hardly definitive. Also Wikipedia is not a news site, so we're not required to report the news. See also WP:NODEADLINE. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We have South Indian cinema reporter and tweeter "Sridhar Pillai" tweets about Kabali collections in twitter. He is kind of South Indian movie reporter like "Taran Adharsh" of Bollywood Hungama.

So Please refer his tweets about Kabali collections.Gsnewid (talk) 13:23, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. That sounds like work. Someone else can do it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:50, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change Prem Ratan Dhan Payo collections from its collections given in this page to 365 cr.

http://www.boxofficeindia.com/movie.php?movieid=3125 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadelison (talk • contribs) 14:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wadelison - You need to articulate a specific reason for making a change like this. I'd be more inclined to agree if you could explain why it should change from 432 crore to 365 crore. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:17, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Boxofficeindia is a reliable website for giving box office collections of a Bollywood movie. Though Indian cine industry hasn't seen an accurate provider of movie collection like Boxoffice Mojo/Rentrak, the stats on Boxofficeindia tallies with figures given by trade analysts. Also, Boxofficeindia's citations have been used for other movie's collections given on this page. So, it must be used for Prem Ratan Dhan Payo.And as given in the DNA page, the 432cr stat is stated by Courier Daily, I ain't sure about its reliability. -Wadelison — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadelison (talk • contribs)

Wadelison - I tend to agree with you that the DNA reference isn't a strong one if they cite The Courier Daily. The Courier site I saw looks like a faceless blog. I don't know why DNA is reprinting their data, but DNA doesn't appear to be vetting the content. I'll wait a bit for other editors to discuss. The content has been in the article for months. I'm not sure who added it. I do see in earlier versions of the list that there were these references used [1][2]. So it seems likely that it did cross 400 crore. I don't think that Boxofficeindia.com should be used as a definitive source any more than any of the other sites should. BOI, however, has a tendency to stop reporting box office data after a while, and then their pages tend to become inaccessible over time, requiring constant additions of archive links. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It should be 400crs gross. Above two sources mentioned clearly says it grossed above 400crs. And those are considered reliable. It should be 400cores. 432crore seems manipulated. Ambeinghari (talk) 01:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

<! Kabali collection is mentioned wrong here. Please refer to {http://www.wholereultss.com/kabali-movie-first-day-box-office-income-1st-day-collections-of-kabali-rajinikanth/}<!

rkumaran05 (talk) 22:42, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - Antoronson05 - I'm a bit surprised that a person of such discriminating tastes would want us to use a faceless blog as a reference, but alas, we won't. Anyone can create a blog and print whatever nonsense he wants. We only care what reliable mainstream sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about anything. One tip-off that this was an insufficient source might have been the fact that http://www.wholereultss.com misspells "results" in their own URL. Hmmm... That's a thinker. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:11, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/box-office/special-features/id/420

Tariqabhar (talk) 13:23, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[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. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's going on here. Not even the columns are properly listed.. columns on one side boxoffice figures on some other side. And all figures mentioned in dollars. Indian films suits crore more than dollars. So many repair has to be made on this particular section. Ambeinghari (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Please change Worldwide gross for Kabali" "Please change 350 crore (US$52 million)[16] to 524 crore (US$78 million)"

because, Kabali movie collection for 4 weeks is 524 crores as per the source 'http://fabnewz.com/2016/08/22/kabali-2016-total-lifetime-box-office-collection-till-date/'

Chandrahasan Devanboo (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done fabnewz.comis not a [[WP:RS|reliable source}} and the link you have given gives a 404 error - Arjayay (talk) 16:20, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kotigobba 2 has grossed 22cr till now. Please include in the highest grossing Kannada film section.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/kotigobba-2-box-office-collection-sudeep-starrer-strikes-gold-beats-record-yashs-690007#KC903ZaFVbShkqPk.97 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadelison (talk • contribs) 19:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update for Theri Collection:

http://www.galaxyreporter.com/2016/05/theri-total-collections-theri-collections-beats-record-thuppaki-katthi-vijay.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:80:C516:201:1879:3055:125A:3631 (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done galaxyreporter.com is not a reliable source.

For the future, an article, that Enthiran 2.0 is beeing made in Tamil, Telugu and Hindi.

It will be to 100% the highest grossing movie for akshay and superstar, therefore already as precautionary.

Read more at http://www.ibtimes.co.in/enthiran-2-aka-2-0-release-date-rajinikanth-starrer-wont-clash-ss-rajamoulis-bahubali-aka-691345#S78WJx871DagCDw2.99 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:6F5F:D65D:A855:8521:99CD:9F5E (talk) 12:28, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's unclear what specific change you are requesting, or what improvement you are suggesting. Please be more clear. Talk pages are not for general chatter about the subject. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:59, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]