Jump to content

Talk:Baahubali: The Beginning: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by 166.170.44.216 - "Telugu only: new section"
Line 295: Line 295:
--[[User:Conradjagan|Conradjagan]] ([[User talk:Conradjagan|talk]]) 07:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
--[[User:Conradjagan|Conradjagan]] ([[User talk:Conradjagan|talk]]) 07:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:Seriously don't post this drivel if you cannot back it up with source about tax deduction. {{u|Cyphoidbomb}} already explained to you two sections up that this is [[WP:OR]] especially for India where box office grosses are vastly critiqued due to inflation. —[[User:IndianBio|<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF"><b>Indian:</b><font color="#FF033E">'''BIO'''</font></font>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0"><b>ChitChat</b></font>]] ]</sup> 07:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:Seriously don't post this drivel if you cannot back it up with source about tax deduction. {{u|Cyphoidbomb}} already explained to you two sections up that this is [[WP:OR]] especially for India where box office grosses are vastly critiqued due to inflation. —[[User:IndianBio|<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF"><b>Indian:</b><font color="#FF033E">'''BIO'''</font></font>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0"><b>ChitChat</b></font>]] ]</sup> 07:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:: Someone should bring this up at the Indian film cinema task force. My view is that the Indian film articles would be better served if they followed the main WP:FILMS guidelines and got themselves into GA and FA status than just letting editors write whatever tax nonsense they want (that no one really cares about); it's hindering the articles overall. We don't get into tax or rebates or whatever happens with American, European or other films based on their shooting locations. -- [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 08:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
<s>:: Someone should bring this up at the Indian film cinema task force. My view is that the Indian film articles would be better served if they followed the main WP:FILMS guidelines and got themselves into GA and FA status than just letting editors write whatever tax nonsense they want (that no one really cares about); it's hindering the articles overall. We don't get into tax or rebates or whatever happens with American, European or other films based on their shooting locations. -- [[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682]] ([[User talk:Ricky81682|talk]]) 08:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
::: You are correct Ricky. This is utter garbage and that's why the Indian film articles lack importance sometimes. —[[User:IndianBio|<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF"><b>Indian:</b><font color="#FF033E">'''BIO'''</font></font>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0"><b>ChitChat</b></font>]] ]</sup> 08:27, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
::: You are correct Ricky. This is utter garbage and that's why the Indian film articles lack importance sometimes. —[[User:IndianBio|<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF"><b>Indian:</b><font color="#FF033E">'''BIO'''</font></font>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0"><b>ChitChat</b></font>]] ]</sup> 08:27, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


::::It is a problem that the WikiProject Film community doesn't seem too interested in Bollywood films, because we would likely wind up with better articles that aren't as full of fluff. Bollywood films should absolutely be expected to adhere to [[MOS:FILM]] and normal community standards. The table we're discussing in this section is completely unnecessary and only creates another place for data to be corrupted. Contrary to what many editors think, we're not here to present every single piece of information about a subject (like tax information). We're here to present an overview of the subject and to focus on the most important aspects. And if I see another "blockbuster status", so help me god...! [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb|talk]]) 17:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
::::It is a problem that the WikiProject Film community doesn't seem too interested in Bollywood films, because we would likely wind up with better articles that aren't as full of fluff. Bollywood films should absolutely be expected to adhere to [[MOS:FILM]] and normal community standards. The table we're discussing in this section is completely unnecessary and only creates another place for data to be corrupted. Contrary to what many editors think, we're not here to present every single piece of information about a subject (like tax information). We're here to present an overview of the subject and to focus on the most important aspects. And if I see another "blockbuster status", so help me god...! [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb|talk]]) 17:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
:::::And not only that, this fancrufty table is a problem in many other Indian film articles, with bloated box office collection and [[WP:OR]] like Conradjagan's personal thesis of tax deduction and blah blah. I'm so tempted to do a [[wP:BOLD]] edit and remove them. Its beyond nonsense now. —[[User:IndianBio|<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF"><b>Indian:</b><font color="#FF033E">'''BIO'''</font></font>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0"><b>ChitChat</b></font>]] ]</sup> 06:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
:::::And not only that, this fancrufty table is a problem in many other Indian film articles, with bloated box office collection and [[WP:OR]] like Conradjagan's personal thesis of tax deduction and blah blah. I'm so tempted to do a [[wP:BOLD]] edit and remove them. Its beyond nonsense now. —[[User:IndianBio|<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF"><b>Indian:</b><font color="#FF033E">'''BIO'''</font></font>]] <sup>[ [[User talk:IndianBio|<font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0"><b>ChitChat</b></font>]] ]</sup> 06:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)</s>
:::: struck racial slurs. Please be respecting all peoples.


== Box Office Update 520 Crores ==
== Box Office Update 520 Crores ==

Revision as of 03:41, 13 August 2015

Primarily Telugu Version

The movie is not being two times. The movie is primarily shot in telugu and Additionally the dialogues are being made in Tamil also. Please discuss here if you disagree with my above statement. Marchoctober (talk) 19:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, as the lead states it is a bilingual, with a source. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. The film is a trilingual made simultaneously in Telugu, Tamil and Hindi. Rana said the same in a recent interview. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Its a Telugu movie, telugu Director and telugu heros.More importanly telugu producers. How can other languages especially tamils can claim it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.5.126.153 (talk) 23:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Simple. Watch the Tamil version and understand. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the trusted Guardian Site, where it states it is a Telugu film dubbed into Tamil (Actually it is also made in Tamil to evade Tax from Tamil Nadu). People please give due credit to Telugu and stop being cheap and taking the credit for the work that has nothing to do with Tamil http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jul/12/baahubali-the-beginning-review-fantastic-bang-for-your-buck-in-most-expensive-indian-movie-ever-made — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeeps369 (talkcontribs) 00:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As i said before, watch the Tamil version and then you can understand. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To the person who is asking to watch the Tamil version, who dubbed the voice of telugu hero prabhas in the tamil dubbed version. You will be surprised to know it was Surya who DUBBED the voice for prabhas. Does this not make it a dubbed film. Never thought Tamils will stoop to this level of taking credit for someone else film. A film is decided on which industry produced it. It is Telugu film industry which produced and presented the film.I can quote several references from leading news agencies. Forbes,Guardian,BBC, CNN to name a few here. Admins have to interfere in this matter as wrong information is being spread in wikipedia. Forbes Guardian BBC CNN

To the first point the same person mentioned there was an interview of Rana with Rajdeep Sardesai. Its a video conversation where he explicitly mentions that it is a TELUGU film and all Telugus should be proud of it. Here is the Video .

Request Tamil admins and reviewers to please refrain from this page edits. Aloosamosa (talk) 05:03, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please go to the Youtube Channel "Baahubali Movie" Which is the official channel page for this movie. If you see the videos, only the telugu trailers & promos are presented under this channel. Eventhough they have other language trailers/ promos on their page, they are presented by their respective distribution companies unlike the Telugu version. isn't it evident that this done by telugu film insustry. Let us just identify the movie only by which film industry that produced it.

One more suggestion, let us add a section called Film Industry and credit it to Telugu film industry Pradeeps369 (talk) 03:38, 22 July 2015 (UTC) pradeep[reply]

Seems like a lot of assumption is required to arrive at this conclusion, Pradeeps. We need sources that say stuff explicitly, not sources that inspire us to draw conclusions. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok atleast can you add a column called " Industry - Telugu Film Industry" . This is evident right as Arka Media Works is based in Hyderabad, Telangana
Pradeeps369 (talk) 03:52, 22 July 2015 (UTC) pradeep[reply]
I don't understand what you're asking to add. A column? Where? And why? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just below the Language section, can we please add a Section called "Industry" and put the reference as "Telugu Film Industry". Bcoz this film is produced in Telugu film industry although it was shot both Telugu and Tamil Pradeeps369 (talk) 04:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC) pradeep[reply]
I assume you're talking about adding content to the infobox, the large vertical box on the right of the screen, as you have tried to do here, here and here. Template:Infobox film has set parameters. We don't add new parameters to the infobox because the WikiProject Film community has already decided what information is important across various articles. We don't credit films to industries, we credit films to studios. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:55, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pleas go trough the this article
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/saritharai/2015/07/20/look-whos-reaping-the-bonanza-from-baahubali-indias-most-expensive-film-ever/>
4th paragraph 4th line, it clearly states that the movie was produced by Telugu Cinema
Please give your comments after reading this.. you believe forbes right?
Pradeeps369 (talk) 05:00, 22 July 2015 (UTC)Pradeep[reply]
And here is one more article which reinforces my argument
<http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/baahubali-the-beginning-how-the-battle-epic-is-helping-tollywood-challenge-bollywoods-dominance-over-the-indian-film-industry-10402812.html>
Title and the 2nd paragarph (Clearly states its a Telugu film)
All of the above articles are from trusted sites
Pradeeps369 (talk) 05:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC) pradeep[reply]
What exactly is the information that you want to change? Are you trying to eliminate other languages from the Infobox? That doesn't seem intuitive if the film is simultaneously being produced in other languages. If you're just trying to get a mention of Tollywood in the article you might have more luck proposing an addition to a specific place in the article. I don't see a reasonable place to jam this content into the Infobox. Also, please indent your replies as I have done. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My only point is either it is "simultaneously shot" or "dubbed" doesn't make a difference.it is released in multiple languages at the same time. But it is Primarly a Telugu Language film and let it just be that. Whats wrong in that, No other indian movie is mentioned that way, why just for this movie? is my question Pradeeps369 (talk) 05:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC) pradeep[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb The film is a product of Telugu film industry. Actors, directors, producers, technicians, VFX studios are all based our of Hyderabad. Sad to see there is no mention of Telugu film industry in this page. Any additions to include Telugu film industry is being reverted immediately. See the revenues the film earned in each language. The numbers speak for themselves what language the film belongs to. 60% of total revenues came from telugu states. See Taran Adarsh tweets in his twitter handle. . Please change the First line in the main section as Indian Telugu Epic film . That would give due credit to the telugu people who worked for this film for almost 3 years.

Some more references here: ForbesGuardianBBCCNNQUARTZGREATANDHRAHOLLYWOOD REPORTERAloosamosa (talk) 07:29, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Budget of Baahubali

All the reliable sources stated that the budget for both the parts collectively is 2.5 billion. I think it shall be mentioned only in Production of Baahubali and neither in the beginning nor in the conclusion as it would amount to factual errors despite being reliable. Please comment. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:09, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's better your way. It also keeps the infobox clean. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:44, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Kailash. I assume this as a support. However, i think we have to seek much more opinions on such sensitive issues. @Ssven2, TheRedPenOfDoom, Krimuk90, Vensatry, and Dr. Blofeld: I require your feedback before i can go forward with. Hope you all shall respond within a reasonable time. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:59, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That means, can i assume it a support? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It means I support the inclusion of the budget in the lead and body of all three articles and am agnostic about whether budget figures are included in the infobox. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with me. I agree with TRPOD and I too support. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 13:07, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now both of you users, please clean up the article. User:Arichuvadi is editing it in the most inappropriate ways, that involves reverting other users' edits. But since you both use Twinkle, you can get it right. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:11, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We can. Now that the user is at WP:AN3, let the events unfold. Till then, the article can be cleansed to an extent only. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:14, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I Support putting information on all three pages There is enough evidence and supporting sources to include the information of the budget in the lead and infobox. Marchoctober (talk) 16:32, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am wondering how does one verify the budget claims? Does the movie production company submit tax sheets to prove it? It looks like the budget claims are just word of mouth. The director might have said approximately a number and all articles are quoting it. There is no point in citing so many articles, they are basically useless. It is also same with those box office claims, they always cite a very high number, but never produce actual tax returns to prove it. Unfortunately, wiki has become a place where fans can come and claim whatever the figure and cite some source. I think wiki should ban writing the box office and budget claims, unless the movie production team provides tax returns. Rajkancherla (talk) 05:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move 22 July 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]



Baahubali: The BeginningBāhubali: The Beginning – The film's title is spelled in posters as well as in the title card as Bāhubali and not Baahubali. Malayala Sahityam (talk) 06:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Bahubali The Beginning Budget

Bahubali the beginning part budget is ₹ 120 Cr. but in Wiki it is given ₹ 250 Cr. Rajamouli already told the budget of ₹ 250 Cr. is for both the parts. not first part. Please try to change the budget figures.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.254.92.197 (talkcontribs)

see above Talk:Baahubali:_The_Beginning#Budget_of_Baahubali -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:30, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gross and Net Collection

  • Bahubali Total worldwide collection NET OR GROSS?
  • IN hindi dubbed version its net 70 crore .When its calcuted in gross its go to almost 100(because tax not less)

Baahubali is a Telugu movie

To the person who is saying it is bilingual, who dubbed the voice of telugu hero prabhas in the tamil dubbed version. You will be surprised to know it was Tamil actor Surya who DUBBED the voice for prabhas. Does this not make it a dubbed film. Never thought Tamils will stoop to this level of taking credit for someone else film. A film is decided on which industry produced it. It is Telugu film industry which produced and presented the film.I can quote several references from leading news agencies. Forbes,Guardian,BBC, CNN to name a few here. Admins have to interfere in this matter as wrong information is being spread in wikipedia.

Here is the trusted Guardian Site, where it states it is a Telugu film dubbed into Tamil (Actually it is also made in Tamil to evade Tax from Tamil Nadu). People please give due credit to Telugu and stop being cheap and taking the credit for the work that has nothing to do with Tamil http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jul/12/baahubali-the-beginning-review-fantastic-bang-for-your-buck-in-most-expensive-indian-movie-ever-made

Also they are including Telugu version collections in Tamil version which didn't even gross 50 crores from entire India and rest of the world in Tamil version and mentioning it is bilingual. I never thought Tamil will stoop to this level of taking credit for someone else film.

First time i'm seeing a movie which even didn't gross one-third Rs 50 crore(15%) of total collections in its original Tamil version is included in the list of Rs 401 crores gross that too by cheating and fooling people by including Rs 350 crores gross of Telugu version in Tamil version. -Padukati Raju

Your personal analysis to the contrary, we follow 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 05:14, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After hearing multiple incarnations of this same general complaint, I still don't understand what Padukati Raju's (or the other editors') point is. Give credit to whom? A language? An ethnicity? We don't give film credits to languages or ethnicities. If it makes sense to say that the film was produced in "Tollywood" or whatever the correct nomenclature is, then maybe that should be mentioned, but this weird attempt at trying to change the facts is super-odd. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:40, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some people take inordinate personal pride in whether or not their group within India is better than others. Note how in all of the posturing about numbers there isn't a single link to a source. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Abecedare :Struck speaking in bad taste ethnic slur Marchoctober (talk) 06:44, 7 August 2015 (UTC) @User:NeilN[reply]

Don't strike other user's comments. This is not an ethnic slur, this is an observation about behavior at this article and in the discussion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:32, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's an ongoing RFC at Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_Indian_films#RfC:_How_should_we_classify_Baahubali about how should we classify this film (namely Tamil and/or Telugu). I ask for people to comment there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Actually it has to be a Telugu film but it is Bilingual(Tamil and Telugu). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLxFLeiFURY At time 1:25 director told that team has to do corrections/edits for Tamil, Hindi and Malayalam(So, Telugu completed first). At 14:24 anchor asked that why he is making movie in Tamil also. Rajamouli replied that he did Eega movie in Tamil also along with Telugu and it became success in Tamil also, so he made it in Tamil also and taxation is also another reason for doing in Tamil also(otherwise he may do in Telugu only and dubs in Tamil). He also told that he wants to do in as many languages as possible, but is infeasible. So, I am sure that primary and for-sure is Telugu only. He had option to do it in Hindi/Tamil. He chosen Tamil for Taxation, Previous market etc., It is good if it is kept under Telugu movie. But from the property of Baahubali that it is a "bilingual" Tamil may also be added.

Pavan, this may interest you. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kailash29792: I'm already done with it. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Plz Update The Collections

Bahubali 20 Days - 450 Crores

Source

http://m.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-box-office-collection-rajamouli-film-grosses-rs-450-crore-20-days-640947 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talkcontribs) 18:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tollywood

In this edit I added content about the involvement of "Tollywood" to address the "Telugu film industry should get credit!" complaints. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:34, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collection Update *Kindly Update*

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

462 Crores In 21 Days


And below link source says Hindi Dubbed Version crossed 90 Crores.. Kindly Update that also  :) Thank u

http://m.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-2-bahubali-pre-production-full-swing-ss-rajamouli-rope-bollywood-actors-sequel-641011

08:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)08:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)08:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)08:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)08:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)Santhoshlee1 (talk) 08:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talkcontribs) 08:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2015

Please change the line "After Shiva beheads Bhallala Deva" into "After Shiva beheads Bhadra (Bhallala Deva's son)" according to the FILM Vamsikkrishna32 (talk) 12:37, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:48, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed Collection Update *Plz Update **

Hello... Here Is the Link for 3 Weeks(21 Days) Detailed Collection Update of Bahubali.. I don't have proper knowledge about editing Wikipedia Pages properly.. So here posting the link of the source and the detailed numbers here.. Someone Plz Update the Collections Referring to this source

http://www.andhraboxoffice.com/info.aspx?id=802&cid=6&fid=834

Hindi Version Nett Gross : 96 Crores

Full Details are In The Link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talkcontribs) 16:51, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not have any obligation to serve as a minute-by-minute cash register ticker. We do have an obligation to use only reliably published sources with a reputation for fact checking and editorial oversight. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:09, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this. I will also point out to the enthusiastic editors that all of these gross values are the product of estimates. That is, it is very unlikely that any of these news outlets are physically counting the money. That means there is likely no one source that is "correct" over the other sources. Just because you may have found a source that presents the gross as more than another source's gross doesn't mean the larger number is more accurate than the lesser number. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:51, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Sir, This is the only Authentic BOXOFFICE website of Telugu Film Industry.. You can verify the whole site.. 462 Gross Information Posted On Ibtimes website takes their information from this website itself.. Am not saying this is accurate.. All am saying is.. Wikipedia article of Bahubali didn't update the Domestic Nett.. Distributer Share....Entrainment Tax Section.. And Hindi Gross Section.... 462 is up to date but the above sections are not up to date.. They are up to (10 Days) but movie already completed 21 Days.. So am asking you to update the above sections.. Not Gross.. You don't need to change the Gross if u don't want to.. But update the Domestic Sections.. Which are not making sense.. As The Gross we put is of 21 Days.. And the Domestic values are of 10 Days..Taran Adarsh Bollywood Analyst on which BOXOFFICE of Bollywood depends.. He also posted the same thing that Hindi Version crossed 95.6 Crores .. So not so much different from the source I posted which says 96 Crores.. And ib times said 462 Gross.. And this source said 468. 4 Crores After completion of 21 Days.. So it makes sense and not much of a Difference.. U know better sir.. Am just saying :) .. Do what u think is Proper.. Thank u :)

Santhoshlee1 (talk) 07:01, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian cinema task force discussed this back in November 2014 and Andara Box Office as a potential unreliable source. There's little evidence it should be considered reliable. There are articles in various newspapers, in places like Forbes and in many other places about the Telugu film industry. Would you be better served by asking for real legitimate sources rather than every website you find that just posts box office details without questioning them? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:37, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Sure sir, Am gonna check Forbes from. Now... And does this works? They have given the total Gross Worldwide and the Tamil Version Gross

http://m.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-bahubali-21-days-box-office-collection-ss-rajamouli-strikes-gold-tamil-nadu-3-weeks-641261 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talkcontribs) 10:58, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BOX Office Update

http://m.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-23-day-box-office-collection-rajamoulis-film-crosses-rs-485-crore-mark-4th-saturday-641351

Sir Update,

Domestic Nett - 370

Distributive share - 268

Worldwide Gross - 485 :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talkcontribs) 09:59, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update Box Office Plz

http://m.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-bahubali-hindi-version-crosses-rs-100-crore-mark-box-office-24-days-641396

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2015/08/02/indias-baahubali-blasts-past-500-crore-78-million-worldwide/

Worldwide Gross - 500 Crores Hindi Version - 100 Crores

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talkcontribs) 18:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] 

nett gross?

Re this "The Hindi version grossed over 40 crore (US$4.8 million) nett in the Mumbai circuit.", "Baahubali became the first non-Hindi film to nett. gross over 100 crore (US$12 million)" Conradjagan, (or anyone else) how does a film gross X nett? What is a nett gross? From what I remember from that time I read the dust jacket of an accounting book, gross = total take, net = what you have left after you subtract your expenses. Can someone explain this peculiar phrasing, and can we clarify it so that it's understood by the rest of the English-speaking world? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:29, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cyphoidbomb , here is the Formula for the film collections and how it shows a way to boxoffice of the film.

In India, We have Entertainment tax charged by states on films. It varies from state to state. Some states like Rajasthan dont have Entertainment tax, while Tamil nadu doesnt take Entertainment tax on any film having Tamil name.

Gross in India= Nett. Gross+ Entertainment tax
What we see in the film collection reports is Nett. Gross after deducting the Entertainment tax .
But the most important for a film is Distributor share of the film.

Distributor share= Nett. Gross - Theatre rentals
Distributor share varies with each week and region in India. it will be more in first week,then lesser in second week etc.--Conradjagan (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly certain the rest of the world doesn't understand this atypical system. We have a Manual of Style for film and we should adhere to it. Budget is of interest, gross is of interest. Let's keep in mind that Bollywood financial figures are notoriously unreliable and subject to corruption from all ends. Making bold statements about how much was spent in taxes, how much the distributors got, how much was spent for publicity, etc. should be taken with a grain of salt and not presented as irrefutable fact. Even with Western films where there is better tracking of budget and gross values, it's still difficult to tell whether a film has made a profit or not, since marketing figures and back end deals are not widely publicized. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:INRconvert

Is there a reason why we are converting all the Indian rupee values to $US? (ex: [1]) This is not the US encyclopedia, this is a global encyclopedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:18, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only to provide an exchange rate, perhaps! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As Indian movies are having international release. --Aero Slicer 04:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The MOS:CURRENCY depends on whether this is a country-specific article or not. I think we should remove it and keep it only rupees as it's largely and still is ultimately an Indian film. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The dancer in grey dress of manohari song name is incorrect.

Dear Wiki,

The dancer name in grey dress name is mentioned wrongly.

Pls check and confirm back.

MBS... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharath Sathya (talkcontribs) 14:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is her real name Mr. "I know everything"? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear kailash,

Thanks for your nickname.

But i dont know the dancer name it. Pls find the real name of the third dancer.

I am sure it is not gabriel.

MBS... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharath Sathya (talkcontribs) 05:56, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Exact meaning of Baahubali

Literal meaning is mentioned as Exceedingly powerful. Another source claimed as "One with strong arms". --Aero Slicer 04:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you list the sources? —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
These three sources ibtimes, hollywood reporter, the guardian. All mention "The one with strong arms". --Aero Slicer 04:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense also, I think in Indian Sanskrit or Hindi language, Baahu means "hands", and Bali means "strong one", so the meaning. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the antagonist is known as "Mahabali" which means "exceedingly powerful".--Aero Slicer 04:56, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of table in the Box office section

Conradjagan has been continuously adding a huge table in the box office section of the article, like this, stating that "The table in Baahubali is according the pattern on other Indian films. Every column has been provided with third-party reliable source". That does not in any way serve the purpose of MOS:TABLE, which clearly states that tables "can be useful for a variety of content presentations on Wikipedia, but should be used only when appropriate; sometimes the information in a table may be better presented as prose paragraphs or as an embedded list". We are already representing the box office score in prose, why will we need another table to reprsent the same content? And if we represent it, there must be a better way to do it than a WP:ACCESS failing table with forced width parameters. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IndianBio, Tables are used in article of Indian films for quick view, so that viewers can have a quick look and better understanding at overall buisness without going into each line to find gross of each day,each week . thats a tedious process. Also the table in Indian films reflect the film collection details clearly.

In India, We have Entertainment tax charged by states on films. It varies from state to state. Some states like Rajasthan dont have Entertainment tax, while Tamil nadu doesnt take Entertainment tax on any film having Tamil name.

Gross in India= Nett. Gross+ Entertainment tax
What we see in the film collection reports is Nett. Gross after deducting the Entertainment tax . But the most important for a film is Distributor share of the film.

Distributor share= Nett. Gross - Theatre rentals
Distributor share varies with each week and region in India. it will be more in first week,then lesser in second week etc --Conradjagan (talk) 07:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously don't post this drivel if you cannot back it up with source about tax deduction. Cyphoidbomb already explained to you two sections up that this is WP:OR especially for India where box office grosses are vastly critiqued due to inflation. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 07:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

:: Someone should bring this up at the Indian film cinema task force. My view is that the Indian film articles would be better served if they followed the main WP:FILMS guidelines and got themselves into GA and FA status than just letting editors write whatever tax nonsense they want (that no one really cares about); it's hindering the articles overall. We don't get into tax or rebates or whatever happens with American, European or other films based on their shooting locations. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC) [reply]

You are correct Ricky. This is utter garbage and that's why the Indian film articles lack importance sometimes. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 08:27, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is a problem that the WikiProject Film community doesn't seem too interested in Bollywood films, because we would likely wind up with better articles that aren't as full of fluff. Bollywood films should absolutely be expected to adhere to MOS:FILM and normal community standards. The table we're discussing in this section is completely unnecessary and only creates another place for data to be corrupted. Contrary to what many editors think, we're not here to present every single piece of information about a subject (like tax information). We're here to present an overview of the subject and to focus on the most important aspects. And if I see another "blockbuster status", so help me god...! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And not only that, this fancrufty table is a problem in many other Indian film articles, with bloated box office collection and WP:OR like Conradjagan's personal thesis of tax deduction and blah blah. I'm so tempted to do a wP:BOLD edit and remove them. Its beyond nonsense now. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
struck racial slurs. Please be respecting all peoples.

Box Office Update 520 Crores

http://m.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-5th-week-box-office-collection-will-srimanthudu-halt-rocking-run-rajamoulis-film-641865

Santhoshlee1 (talk) 18:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2015

Baahubali The Beginning grossed over ₹540 crores or ₹5.4 billion

Source : http://www.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-bahubali-30th-day-box-office-collection-rajamouli-film-crosses-rs-540-crore-642241 Pkarthik0123 (talk) 21:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Kailash29792 (talk) 02:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2015

Baahubali grossed over 5.5 billion rupees and is the third highest grossing Indian film.

source: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/baahubali-bahubali-5th-weekend-box-office-collection-prabhas-film-turns-3rd-all-time-highest-642326 Pkarthik0123 (talk) 10:31, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Telugu only

Baahubali is Telugu only. See [[List of most expensive Indian films. See List of most expensive Indian films — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.170.44.216 (talk) 03:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]