Revision as of 13:45, 30 November 2024 editRangersRus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers8,176 edits →Deletion of 2000s Malayalam films without Sify or Rediff reviews: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:34, 14 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,306,673 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive 10) (bot | ||
(84 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{shortcut|WT:ICTF|WT:INCINE}} | {{shortcut|WT:ICTF|WT:INCINE}} | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell |1= | {{WikiProject banner shell |1= | ||
{{WikiProject Film |
{{WikiProject Film|Indian-task-force=yes}} | ||
{{WikiProject India |
{{WikiProject India|cinema=yes}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Sidebar}} | {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Sidebar}} | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|archiveheader = {{atnhead}} | |archiveheader = {{atnhead}} | ||
|maxarchivesize = 200K | |maxarchivesize = 200K | ||
|counter = |
|counter = 10 | ||
|minthreadsleft = 5 | |minthreadsleft = 5 | ||
|algo = old(10d) | |algo = old(10d) | ||
Line 200: | Line 200: | ||
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: | ;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: | ||
;Comments: There are currently of Indiantelevision.com, the same owner as TellyChakkar.com. And this raises concerns on its reliability. --] <sup>(] ] ])</sup> 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC) | ;Comments: There are currently of Indiantelevision.com, the same owner as TellyChakkar.com. And this raises concerns on its reliability. --] <sup>(] ] ])</sup> 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
;Verdict: Unreliable per discussion at ] | |||
⚫ | ;Verdict: | ||
=== Magna Publications === | === Magna Publications === | ||
Line 356: | Line 356: | ||
According to their website (), 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. ] (]) 06:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC) | According to their website (), 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. ] (]) 06:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC) | ||
: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. --] (]) 00:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC) | :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. --] (]) 00:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
⚫ | ::{{u|DareshMohan}} and {{u|RangersRus}}, your opinion please? DareshMohan removes articles credited to individuals who have worked for other sources before. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 02:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
:::I'd say reviews are notable but OTT release information isn't since it is compiled from many sources. {{ping|Kailash29792}} Sorry, if you are mad at me for removing the reviews. Once this reaches a consensus, you can re-add them. {{ping|Manick22}} Thoughts? ] (]) 05:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ::::{{u|DareshMohan}}, I'm not mad at you for removing the reviews. Just confused because I thought it was previously agreed upon as RS due to HT Media owning it. But I agree that OTT release information can be obtained from better sources. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 07:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
;Verdict: | ;Verdict: | ||
Line 407: | Line 410: | ||
;Verdict: | ;Verdict: | ||
== |
=== TrendingTopicc.com === | ||
;Included in RS/P?: No. | |||
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: No. | |||
;Comments: | |||
Trendingtopicc.com is not a reliable source for citing budget or box office collection figures. The website lacks transparency regarding its ownership, editorial processes, or methodology for calculating box office data. Without a clear framework or evidence of how its numbers are obtained and verified, the site cannot be trusted as a credible source of financial information. Additionally, Trendingtopicc.com does not provide details about its contributors or their qualifications, further raising doubts about the authenticity and accuracy of the information it publishes. Unlike industry-recognized trackers, such as Box Office India, or reputed publications, this site has no established credibility in the field of film journalism. Using its data may lead to the dissemination of unverified or exaggerated claims, which is inconsistent with Misplaced Pages's standards for reliable sources. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:22, December 18, 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
:I think this site is unreliable for anything. It appears to just be a slideshow of tweets. I'm confused, though; are you the creator of this site? --] (]) 22:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | :Lol, would the creator trash talk about his own website? <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 01:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
⚫ | ;Verdict: | ||
== Bollywood Hungama News Network == | |||
Is articles written by unreliable per ]? ] (]) 02:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
In the section ''Reliability of sources listed at ]'', @] made an important point considering the reliability of Indiantelevision.com, which is that it is the parent company of TellyChakkar. TellyChakkar has been considered unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES, so should Indiantelevison.com be also considered unreliable or not? Prior to this, has there been any consensus on the usage of the website as a reliable source? Awaiting consensus from {{ping|RangersRus}},{{ping|Benison}}, {{ping|Geniac}}, {{ping|CNMall41}}, and {{ping|Kailash29792}}. ] (]) 03:13, 12 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Your question is misleading as it is not about the source, but the individual article in the source. So yes, the publication is reliable. But, individual articles that are not bylined are simply churnalism and/or paid media and fall under NEWSORGINDIA.--] (]) 04:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::What you mean by 'byline'? | |||
::Articles written by author 'Bollywood Hungama News Network' still exists in | |||
::* ]: , , etc. | |||
::* ]: , , etc. | |||
::* And many more. | |||
⚫ | ::So shouldn't all these resources be removed? ] (]) 05:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
:::]. I no longer wish to entertain your bludgeoning and edit warring. Read the linked guidelines above. --] (]) 07:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Discussion on the reliability of Pinkvilla == | |||
:Not reliable. Their About page makes it clear they are primarily interested in promoting their paying clients. "Apart from conceiving and executing promotional campaigns targeted at the Media, Marketing & Television Trade online, it also offers similar services offline, thus providing clients with a 360 degree media service and marketing solution." ] (]) 02:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
:not reliable and my evaluation is same as Geniac's and agree with the analysis. ] (]) 15:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
::And this is a problem because most ] movie articles use this source. I’d suggest that we hold off on it until others chime in into this discussion. ] (]) 13:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
There is a discussion on the reliability of Pinkvilla on RSN, see ] if your interested. -- <small>LCU</small> ''']''' <small>''«]» °]°''</small> 14:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Request for Comments at ] == | |||
== Annoyed by an IP == | |||
There is discussion going on regarding the use of "]" in Indian articles at ]. ] (]) 02:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{ping|Ravensfire}} This one IP dubbed the "IP from France" has been undoing some of my edits and doing some questionable edits, all without an account or communicating with other users. | |||
== Youlin Magazine == | |||
It has been irritating for them to remove my edits such as at '']'', reused names from credits (use Google account). An old source even mentions the Srilankan actors . Rajendra Prasad appears in two songs in the film and the credits and this can be confirmed by {{ping|Srivin}} | |||
This website has come up in a few deletion discussions in the past and I thought it was already discussed but cannot find anything here. Checking on the reliability of Youlin Magazine. Their has no mention of editorial guidelines. Their page says they accept guest posts and that contributors are reviewed by the editorial board but no information about what the "editorial board" is. Gmail address is the main point of contact. WOndering about it being used to verify non controversial information and/or use for notability purposes. ] (]) 01:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
The editor goes on to add wrong information about films ] is not in including three Kannada films , which I had removed here . He is not in these films {{ping|Kataariveera}} and the lack of his name in reviews of these films confirm this. | |||
:This magazine is currently cited in , but I would still be cautious about using it as a reliable source. The lack of clear editorial guidelines and transparency about the review process make it difficult to assess its credibility. – ] <small>(])</small> 05:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Not reliable. Bylines lead simply to lists of articles written; no info on the supposed various authors. No physical address listed anywhere. ] (]) 04:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Not reliable. I saw this source during one of the AFC review but did not check for its reliability. It does not show anything about the "the editorial board". It also accepts one time submission from guests. Now after evaluation, I find the source with no credibility. ] (]) 10:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
* This discussion has also been opened at ].-]. 22:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
In summary, this editor has the same issue that chiloka.com has. ''Two people can have the same exact name and be different.'' India has 1.4 billion people and having the same name is rather possible. This editor tries to merge every instance of an actor's name to their filmography even though chances are, it is a different person by this same name who acted in the film. | |||
== ] == | |||
I feel like it is a waste of my time editing here, since they undid my edits as they felt suit hence this message. | |||
Is '']'' reliable? It was first dismissed at the Teahouse reportedly as not reliable as per ]. But when I dug and found out who wrote for Viggy.com (since the website says Roopa and '''me'''), it turned out me was journalist ] (who didn't have an article but won a sub category at the National Film Awards, ''Viggy.com'' now redirects there). See ]. | |||
Why can't this user be encouraged to | |||
As a test to see if ''Viggy.com'' is reliable, I half-heartedly created ], but it was rejected twice. Does that mean a film without reviews is inherently not notable? ] (]) 04:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
#Respond on their talk page. () | |||
# Make an account (They edit very frequently under different IP addresses, so why not?) | |||
# Prove they are not a bot (since they only add names to filmographies, possibly from other websites) | |||
Despite the notice at ], the user seems to go about their business. ] (]) 11:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | : |
||
:Unreliable. The site allows to post materials submitted by users and says "" No editorial insight. ] (]) 14:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
::On the right hand side below the guy with sunglasses, that refers to the discussion forum, which I'm not talking about. I'm talking about reviews and press releases from the site. If doubtful, at least anything that explictly mentions Roopa Hegde or ] as authors should be considered reliable. ] (]) 18:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I do not see where in disclaimer that that the material submitted by users points to discussion forum. We had two or three other sources that were personal sites or blogs of critics and said to be unreliable such as Bobbytalkscinema.com, milliblog and this site falls in same criteria of unreliability. ] (]) 21:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Ok, so blogs of critics are unreliable like , got it. Why don't we claim ''Viggy'' as 90% unreliable while any articles where the author is specified like the ''Na Kanda Rajkumar'' section by ] and interviews by Roopa Hegde are reliable. The main issue is that they forgot to specify the author on other articles which lead to the confusion if they or users wrote it. ] (]) 18:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Information about pre/post productions and interviews cam be considered right? Additionally, consensus can be obtained regarding cinema reviews and generally how the movie fared without geting into box office figures. Cant this be followed? ] (]) 15:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | :: |
||
:{{ping|DareshMohan}} is absolutely correct here...The Rajendra Prasad mentioned in 3 Kannada movies is different from veteran Telugu actor Rajendra Prasad. Its just a case of a small time actor of one language having same name as that of a popular actor of another language. So if his correct edits are unnecessarily being reverted, suitable suggestion/action required to deal such cases ] (]) 15:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Deletion of 2000s Malayalam films without Sify or Rediff reviews == | |||
:I think you've done about all you can, this is when it's time to keep going to ANI, especially noting that you've been there before, a range block was done but this is still continuing and ask for further blocks. ''']''' (]) 17:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Budget reports from makers == | |||
So Malayalam films of the 2000s are sourced with a Rediff or Sify review additionally with an Indiaglitz or Nowrunning review. Do you think it would be a good idea to add all the Sify reviews from the archives . I am asking here because I don't want to mass delete a bunch of articles that are only sourced by Indiaglitz. Examples: ]. Do you prefer PROD or AfD in this matter? See ]. This is not canvassing as I'm not asking you to vote there. I am not adding Rediff reviews since they are already added to articles. ] (]) 06:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
Is the budget report claim from the maker of the film reliable? We know that makers very much tend to inflate boxoffice figures and that is why any source with reports from the makers are unreliable but how about budget? Makers likely can deflate the budget to prove the film recovered cost or was successful at the boxoffice? ] (]) 12:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | : |
||
:If a film page has unreliable sources, you are good to remove them and if no reliable sources can be found with 2 or more reviews, you can AFD it. ] (]) 13:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | :: |
Latest revision as of 15:34, 14 January 2025
Main page | Discussion | Participants | Alerts | Announcements | Main article | To-do list | Assessment | Notable articles |
Hindi cinema recognised content | Malayalam cinema recognised content | Tamil cinema recognised content | Telugu cinema recognised content |
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archives | ||||||||||
Index
|
||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
WikiProject Film was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 17 September 2012. |
Reliability of sources listed at WP:ICTFSOURCES
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
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 Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/ICTF FAQ. The table format is more in line with Misplaced Pages: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)
- @DreamRimmer:, 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)
- Done 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)
- Could someone add a section for Indiantelevision.com as well. Please refer this. Thanks C1K98V 12:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Good work Herald. – DreamRimmer (talk) 04:43, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Done 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)
- 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)
- 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)
@The Herald:, 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? @CNMall41: @The Herald: 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#Reliability_of_123Telugu.com_-_123telugu. RangersRus (talk) 17:08, 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)
- 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)
- 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 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)
- Verdict
Bollywood Hungama by Hungama Digital Media Entertainment
- Included in RS/P?
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Comments
- Verdict
BOL Network
- Included in RS/P?
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Comments
- Specifically BOLNEWS which is used 400+ times as a reference on Misplaced Pages. 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)
Per BOI's About us page, "The figures on the website are not taken from producers or distributors of the respective films but independent estimates from our sources and then cross checked through cinema collections." If true, this suggests that they're not acting as mouthpieces for the production companies (i.e. acting as a primary source by proxy). Archive
— WP:ICTFFAQ table
In mid-2019 we discovered that BOI's budget figures included print and advertising costs. (See this discussion) Worldwide, when people reference a film's budget, they mean the production budget, i.e. the cost of making the film, not the cost of marketing it. So we should try to find a better source for budget than Box Office India. If we have no choice but to use BOI, then we should include notes that clarify that the budget figure is not consistent with other figures. Ex: "(Note: this figure includes print and advertising costs.)" or similar.
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)
- @The Herald I completely agree with the above. There was also a discussion in which the credibility of BoxOfficeIndia.com was questioned for South films. However, since the user was identified as a sockpuppet, it can only be seen as an attempt to discredit BoxOfficeIndia.com rather than the other way around. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 05:46, 1 November 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:
- 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages. 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
- Included in RS/P?
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Comments
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)
- Help us to remove these 42 Sponsored Hindustan Times articles cited on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages 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)
- @Kuru, thanks for User:Kuru/fakesources; it's really helpful. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:42, 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)
- 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
- Unreliable per discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive 9#Indiantelevision.com
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 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?
- N
- 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 (est. ₹ 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)
- I don't think pinkvilla is a reliable source. They underreport south india movies collections a lot. I think for better reporting. Need to rethink about pinkvilla as reliable source for south indian movies. NithishSagi (talk) 14:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)— NithishSagi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- 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 (est. ₹ 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)
- How'd one determine an actual BO figure? — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 14:42, 28 April 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)
- 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
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 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?
- Y
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Y
- Comments
- Subsidiary of The Hindu (WP:THEHINDU)
- Verdict
- Y Reliable source
The Hindu
- Included in RS/P?
- Y
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Y
- Comments
- Reliable per WP:THEHINDU
- Verdict
- Y Reliable source
The Indian Express
- Included in RS/P?
- Y
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Y
- Comments
- Reliable per WP:INDIANEXP
- Verdict
- Y 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?
- Y
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- Y
- Comments
- Reliable per WP:RS/P
- Verdict
- Y 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)
- 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
- Included in RS/P?
- N
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- N
- Comments
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)
- 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)
- DareshMohan and RangersRus, your opinion please? DareshMohan removes articles credited to individuals who have worked for other sources before. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd say reviews are notable but OTT release information isn't since it is compiled from many sources. @Kailash29792: Sorry, if you are mad at me for removing the reviews. Once this reaches a consensus, you can re-add them. @Manick22: Thoughts? DareshMohan (talk) 05:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- DareshMohan, I'm not mad at you for removing the reviews. Just confused because I thought it was previously agreed upon as RS due to HT Media owning it. But I agree that OTT release information can be obtained from better sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd say reviews are notable but OTT release information isn't since it is compiled from many sources. @Kailash29792: Sorry, if you are mad at me for removing the reviews. Once this reaches a consensus, you can re-add them. @Manick22: Thoughts? DareshMohan (talk) 05:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- DareshMohan and RangersRus, your opinion please? DareshMohan removes articles credited to individuals who have worked for other sources before. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:04, 20 December 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
- 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
TrendingTopicc.com
- Included in RS/P?
- No.
- Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
- No.
- Comments
Trendingtopicc.com is not a reliable source for citing budget or box office collection figures. The website lacks transparency regarding its ownership, editorial processes, or methodology for calculating box office data. Without a clear framework or evidence of how its numbers are obtained and verified, the site cannot be trusted as a credible source of financial information. Additionally, Trendingtopicc.com does not provide details about its contributors or their qualifications, further raising doubts about the authenticity and accuracy of the information it publishes. Unlike industry-recognized trackers, such as Box Office India, or reputed publications, this site has no established credibility in the field of film journalism. Using its data may lead to the dissemination of unverified or exaggerated claims, which is inconsistent with Misplaced Pages's standards for reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolly ka Badshah (talk • contribs) 08:22, December 18, 2024 (UTC)
- I think this site is unreliable for anything. It appears to just be a slideshow of tweets. I'm confused, though; are you the creator of this site? --Geniac (talk) 22:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Lol, would the creator trash talk about his own website? Kailash29792 (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Verdict
Bollywood Hungama News Network
Is articles written by Bollywood Hungama News Network unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA? Thesanas (talk) 02:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Your question is misleading as it is not about the source, but the individual article in the source. So yes, the publication is reliable. But, individual articles that are not bylined are simply churnalism and/or paid media and fall under NEWSORGINDIA.--CNMall41 (talk) 04:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- What you mean by 'byline'?
- Articles written by author 'Bollywood Hungama News Network' still exists in
- Deepika Padukone: , , etc.
- Priyanka Chopra: , , etc.
- And many more.
- So shouldn't all these resources be removed? Thesanas (talk) 05:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:CIR. I no longer wish to entertain your bludgeoning and edit warring. Read the linked guidelines above. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Discussion on the reliability of Pinkvilla
There is a discussion on the reliability of Pinkvilla on RSN, see WP:RSN#Pinkvilla if your interested. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 14:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Annoyed by an IP
@Ravensfire: This one IP dubbed the "IP from France" has been undoing some of my edits and doing some questionable edits, all without an account or communicating with other users.
It has been irritating for them to remove my edits such as at Nadigai, reused names from credits (use Google account). An old source even mentions the Srilankan actors . Rajendra Prasad appears in two songs in the film and the credits and this can be confirmed by @Srivin:
The editor goes on to add wrong information about films Rajendra Prasad (actor) is not in including three Kannada films , which I had removed here . He is not in these films @Kataariveera: and the lack of his name in reviews of these films confirm this.
In summary, this editor has the same issue that chiloka.com has. Two people can have the same exact name and be different. India has 1.4 billion people and having the same name is rather possible. This editor tries to merge every instance of an actor's name to their filmography even though chances are, it is a different person by this same name who acted in the film.
I feel like it is a waste of my time editing here, since they undid my edits as they felt suit hence this message.
Why can't this user be encouraged to
- Respond on their talk page. ()
- Make an account (They edit very frequently under different IP addresses, so why not?)
- Prove they are not a bot (since they only add names to filmographies, possibly from other websites)
Despite the notice at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1148#IP_from_France, the user seems to go about their business. DareshMohan (talk) 11:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- @DareshMohan: is absolutely correct here...The Rajendra Prasad mentioned in 3 Kannada movies is different from veteran Telugu actor Rajendra Prasad. Its just a case of a small time actor of one language having same name as that of a popular actor of another language. So if his correct edits are unnecessarily being reverted, suitable suggestion/action required to deal such cases Kataariveera (talk) 15:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think you've done about all you can, this is when it's time to keep going to ANI, especially noting that you've been there before, a range block was done but this is still continuing and ask for further blocks. Ravensfire (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Budget reports from makers
Is the budget report claim from the maker of the film reliable? We know that makers very much tend to inflate boxoffice figures and that is why any source with reports from the makers are unreliable but how about budget? Makers likely can deflate the budget to prove the film recovered cost or was successful at the boxoffice? RangersRus (talk) 12:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories:- Project-Class film pages
- Project-Class Indian cinema pages
- Indian cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- Project-Class India pages
- NA-importance India pages
- Project-Class India articles of NA-importance
- NA-importance Indian cinema pages
- WikiProject Indian cinema articles
- WikiProject India articles
- WikiProject Film talk pages