Talk:Chennai Express

Edit request on 1 October 2012

In the casting and filming section,the 2nd last sentence,please change it to "However, in August it was officially announced that Deepika Padukone has been signed to play the lead opposite Khan". Usman8811 (talk) 15:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 October 2012

Sajalhasan007 (talk) 10:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. No actual request made here. NiciVampireHeart 13:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 January 2013

Genre Romantic Comedy Studio Red Chillies Entertainments Starring Shah Rukh Khan, Deepika Padukone Directed by Rohit Shetty Written By Farhan & Sajid Screenplay by Yunus Sajawal Produced by Gauri Khan Afeef27 (talk) 20:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Soundtrack reception

A lot of fanboys of SRK are trying to add music reception with sources like Funrahi, Highonscore etc. So please someone add a reputed source. A new section was created called "Critical reception of Soundtracks".

Regards

---$oH4M ❊  আড্ডা  08:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Unnecessary editing

Shahrukh Khan has decided that the names of his actresses will appear before him in film credits. Chennai Express is the first such movie. I have added reference but someone keeps interfering with the text unnecessarily. I have added reference but some unknown user with IP address dispayed is unnecessarily interfering with the text of this page, what to do! aish.ego (talk) 01:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The content is in the article now. If it is removed again, restore it with an edit summary urging discussion on the talk page. Do not edit war, repeatedly re-adding it. It seems appropriate content to me, but perhaps other editors disagree. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

ok jim, thanx a lot :)aish.ego (talk) 05:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey, the unknown person is again bothering me. It's really making me angry now. What to do? aish.ego (talk) 07:42, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Must be some fan work.All Film actors , Cricketers and politicains Articles in India tend to have this issue. But I have one question. Th actor has said that it will appear in credits of the film. Not in wikipedia / any online stuffs isnt it. So why to make a fight for this silly stuff? Both from the unknown IP editor and also from you :)aish.ego --- Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 11:38, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Controversies Section

The controversies section was once deleted without proper reason. When it was restored , again its edited with a lot of changes been made with a lot of mingled description like 'youtube videos are not RS','Chennai Express actually is releasing in pakistan, that was just a rumor.' etc. But changes between revisions Revision as of 22:22, 21 July 2013 and Revision as of 00:33, 22 July 2013 reveals much more changes irrelevant to the change description.

The Source that has been given is the Official YouTube Channel of SUN NEWS. Sun news ( SUN Group) is an Indian public listed company and the given you tube channel is a official channel of the company.

Again a Fan based work to hide Information for benefit ? Proof : The user User:Ashermadan seems to have made contributions to ShahRukhKhan , who ( through his wife) is the producer of the Film . Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 03:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

YouTube is not an RS and no video can be used as an RS. Please read the rules. You will be reported next time you do this. Please refer to YouTube guidelines for details. Ashermadan (talk) 04:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Apart from that, SUN NEWS is NOT considered a reliable source as per Wikipedia guidelines. Look them up before you make an edit. Ashermadan (talk) 05:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Please read through Wikipedia guidelines First http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links#References There are channels on YouTube for videos uploaded by agencies and organizations that are generally considered reliable sources

There is no need to THREATEN to report. Wiki is open and tracked Medium . Advise to read the wiki rules carefully before bragging about the same .

Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 05:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but SUN NEWS is not an RS. That's pretty much clear by their unprofessional look. Ashermadan (talk) 05:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

If you find a link from a trusted source like the Times of India and whatnot that are written in English and are accessible to everyone, then please update it. If not, then wait until the reviews come out that mention the "controversy of the accent". Please maintain the quality of the article instead of included biased regional snippets that are not even in English and unverifiable by many other people. Ashermadan (talk) 05:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The link you posted from SUN NEWS is in some unrecognizable language and looks to be a format of an opinion. It is not a news article. If you have any issue, please contact an administrator. I have been editing for many years and I can assure you that SUN NEWS and their OPINION PROGRAM is not a RS. Ashermadan (talk) 05:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

SUN NEWS is not an RS -- False statement. Its an Indian Media. TOI is just another Indian media. Making TOI reliable and Sun news unreliable is your personal opinion. Wiki is not for personal opinion

their unprofessional look. --- ???? This is a recorded nasty statement ? What do you mean by professional look and non professional look ?

instead of included biased regional snippets that are not even in English --- Multiple meanings ... What is included is just reporting . you cant be judgemental of report .

that are not even in English --- pls read through Non english sources section of wiki rules http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources

I have been editing for many years -- Whats the link between and my edit and bragging of your Longevity in editing ? Unnecessary arguments in talk page Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 05:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

SUN NEWS is not an RS and your video of the man getting all riled up in an OPINION based program is not news. It is just his opinion. I have reported you for vandalism because this isn't the first time you have let personal feelings come into play. Ashermadan (talk) 05:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The video you posted is more like a video blog or a random Twitter or Facebook or blog based rant. It is not news nor is it RS. Ashermadan (talk) 05:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Please read through the following Wiki link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Edit warring over content is not vandalism.

I am tired of pointing to wiki rules Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 05:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring is not vandalism but including non-RS sources and random opinion videos from youtube is vandalism. I know the accent of the heroine is making you angry but Wikipedia is not the place to express those frustrations. Adding opinion videos from random channels that aren't even published is wrong and does not make them RS. Ashermadan (talk) 05:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment: It is clear that an edit war is going on. Generally speaking, youtube is not a reliable source so great care should be taken before re-introducing it as a source when tis has been disputed. If you can't achieve consensus here, then take the source to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Please be aware of WP:3RR and avoid edit warring. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I know the accent of the heroine is making you angry --- You are living with me to know this  :) ??? Its advisable to argue on contents than getting personal

Adding opinion videos from random channels that aren't even published is wrong and does not make them RS. -- this is the bone of contention ...

Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 05:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

FLAT OUT just said YouTube videos aren't RS. Especially when they are of some random man getting all angry over an accent. This is not news, this is not a "controversy", this is nothing. It is not RS and cannot be included. Ashermadan (talk) 06:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, you CANNOT add disputed content in until a consensus has been reached. Take it to the Noticeboard and only after that, if it is accepted as an RS, will the item be put into the article. Ashermadan (talk) 06:04, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

This has been opened in Noticeboard for second opinion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard

But Flat Out : what to do about the following inappropriate code of conduct used by talk

1) Misquoting Edit war as Vandalism 2) Getting personal on comments with fellow editors 3) Fan based work to hide Information for benefit ? Proof : The user User:Ashermadan seems to have made contributions to ShahRukhKhan , who ( through his wife) is the producer of the Film . 4) Being Judgmental on One news channel as Reliable source and other as Non reliable 5) Commenting on looks of the persons in the concerned video Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 06:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment: First of all, I didn't say the source was unreliable I said to be careful when using youtube as a source. Secondly, don't use this talk page to keep arguments going. The source has rightly gone to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard for discussion so let that take its course. If you want to follow-up do it at my talk page. Flat Out let's discuss it 06:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The Consensus has been achieved for Reliable resource in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#YouTube_Video_of_News_Channel_as_Reliable_resource. Any more Reversal will be reported as Fan Based vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthikeyan.pandian (talk • contribs) 05:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Consensus has been reached on this source with a suggestion that the original news program be cited instead of the youtube replay. It is not good policy to preempt a reversion with a threat of a report. Let's just focus on improving the encyclopedia. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:46, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

original program is stored only in youtube. The link to the youtube channel is provided in the News channel's website. have added the linking page as reference too. Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 11:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 August 2013

Budget is 55 Crore Confirm by BOX office INDIA 5 crore Promotion Charge 202.160.160.254 (talk) 06:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment: You may be right, but where is the source?----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 13:55, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Critical reception

"India" section currently contains 13 reviews. I can't see any rave review, but only one "clean" positive review which comes from Taran Adarsh. If we take average, it would make 2.84 out of 5 stars which could be called "mixed" (or even hardly "mixed to positive"). Besides that, the "Overseas" section is totally "mixed" (or even "poor"). Rachel's review is "rotten": http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/chennai_express_2013/reviews/ (also http://www.metacritic.com/movie/chennai-express/critic-reviews) and Sneha received the film very poorly.

There are even very reliable sources from Times of India which say the critical verdict for the film is "mixed":

• Shahrukh Khan’s Chennai Express getting mixed reviews

Fideliosr (talk) 08:40, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 august 2013

Deepika Padukone's charecter is Meenalochni Azhagusundaram

In Cast section please change Deepika Padukone as Meena lochni
to
Deepika Padukone as Meenalochni Azhagusundaram/Meenamma

I can't cite sources but I have seen the movie also "Meenalochni" is tamil name and "Meena lochni" is not correct.

Are you sure that it is Meenalochni Azhagusundaram and not Meena Lochni mentioned on the credits? ----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 13:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

was it mentioned as Meena Lochni in credits? "Meenalochni" is a proper tamil name also Tamil names usually have father's name as surname In the movie also a drunk Shahrukh call Deepika "Mennalochini Aluuuuuuuuuuuu" since he can't pronounce "Azhagusundaram" Sivakumar1605 (talk) 14:59, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

That is not the question. My question is: is Meenalochni Azhagsundaram mentioned in the end credits?----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 15:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure,I didn't read the credits. Is it mentioned as " Meena Lochini" or "Meenanamma Lochni" in the credits?
why was the name changed to "Meenanamma Lochni' from "Meena Lochni" in wikipedia? Sivakumar1605 (talk) 16:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

SUMITKRISHNAGUPTA

This guy SUMITKRISHNAGUPTA is making a joke of the credibility of Wikipedia. He has removed all the negative reviews with proper sources and added whatever fanboyish garbage he thinks is right. He always does that without ever engaging in a talk page discussion. Fideliosr (talk) 05:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Rating box and use of sources other than BoxOfficeIndia.com

According to a general consensus, reviews must only be kept in the article body and no rating boxes should be added. Also, it's decided to only use BoxOfficeIndia.com for revenue updates. Fideliosr (talk) 06:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

No reviews have been left out in this revision, sir. Feel free to make whatever formatting changes on this version. Fideliosr (talk) 06:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I think Box Office India is currently unavailable. So we can use reliable sources like The Times of India, CNN-IBN and Hindustan Times for now until BOI is back in form. Regards, ----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 07:12, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. That would be fine. Hope Box Office India is up soon. Fideliosr (talk) 07:25, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

First day nett collection of BOI and other reliable Wikipedia sources vary by 4 crore!!its a huge difference

First day nett collection of BOI and other reliable Wikipedia sources vary by 4 crore!!its a huge difference.Reliable trade websites like Bollywood Hungama,KoimoiTimes of India,CNN-IBN,IBNLive,India Today ,Indian Express and trade experts like Taran adarsh gave chennai Express first day nett. gross at Rs 33.12 crore,more than what Box Office India is propagating at Rs 29 crore. Below are URLs: http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/box-office/special-features/id/228
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/box-office/special-features/id/229
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/box-office/special-features/id/230
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/box-office/Chennai-Express-beats-Ek-Tha-Tiger-on-day-one-earns-Rs-33-crore/articleshow/21741131.cms?
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chennai-express-mints-rs.33.12-crore-on-opening-day/1/298931.html
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/shah-rukh-khans-chennai-express-collects-rs-39-cr-creates-history/1153658/
http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/chennai-express-sets-thundering-pace-113081000045_1.html

This is high time that Wikipedia should reconsider its basis of including gross figures for Bollywood films We should discard BOI now,which is now and then unavailable,Bollywood Hungama is much better which gives detailed gross of overseas also ,apart from domestic record in table.--Tarandhoni (talk) 12:52, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

No, absolutely not. Don't you DARE think about that.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 12:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Not again, Tarandhoni. We have had enough of BOI-related discussions. Every film-related article should mention BOI and that's the consensus. Fideliosr (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

These IPs and new registered users could well be sockpuppets. Fideliosr (talk) 16:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

This needs to be stopped now. There's always difference between figures of Box Office India and other trade publications. The reported revenue by Box Office India for every Hindi film is lesser than what others publish. Same is the case with Chennai Express; no exception. Fideliosr (talk) 18:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

the information related to cheenai express collection is incorrect.it collected 33.12 cr on its first day beating ett record but there is difference of 4 crores.if you follow BOI then atleast mention figures of other sites too.the utv production house itself has confirmed 33.12 cr figure.please mention that too </ref>http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Bollywood/Chennai-Express-registers-record-opening-earns-Rs-33-crore/Article1-1106072.aspx</ref> </ref>http://www.indiatvnews.com/entertainment/bollywood/chennai-express-collection-rs-33-12-cr-on-friday-9149.html</ref>

please mention other sites data too Anubhav1792 (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

We're already been through this. Only Box Office India should be used.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 13:52, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

chennai express collected 33.12cr first day at boxoffice 117.197.10.127 (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: No source for it.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 15:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

Please , Taran adarsh (Verified trade analyst) and many reliable sources have claimed and gave collection of Chennai Express's 1st day to be 33.12cr. Its Kind request to udpate it as sson as possible. BOI and Komal Nahta are not to be believed. Thanks ! Iamritz26 (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

ENOUGH! Only Box Office India will be used!----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 15:59, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

1st day is 33.12cr . Source ??? --> https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=566273190102615&set=a.462020980527837.108862.449517261778209&type=1&theater

OFFICIAL CHENNAI EXPRESS PAGE ! Enough of shitty relies ! Go and update it with 33.12cr Iamritz26 (talk) 16:11, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Enough of this crap! As I said before, only Box Office India will be used!----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 16:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

the film has collected 33.12 crore on the first day leaving behind Ek the tiger which had collected 31.25 crore. 182.18.177.142 (talk) 16:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: Seriously, this needs to get stopped.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 16:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

i want to edit the chennai express movie wikepidia please give me the permission Md Juyel Haque (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: Please specify what exactly needs to be changed.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 16:42, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

please change the box office india collections of chennai express to 33.12 and it has beaten ek tha tigers record according to http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/1872682/report-chennai-express-mints-rs33-12-crore-on-opening-day http://www.indianexpress.com/news/shah-rukh-khans-chennai-express-collects-rs-39-cr-creates-history/1153658/ http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Bollywood/Shah-Rukh-Khan-starrer-Chennai-Express-mints-Rs-33-crore-on-opening-day/Article1-1106072.aspx Tukur123 (talk) 17:35, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done: I think this is the only solution to stop this.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 17:39, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:PP. Don't think we can leave it to certain individuals who can break general consensus and do whatever pleases them. Fideliosr (talk) 18:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Tarandhoni, Pleasant1623, and myself agree about the clause. That's the best way to end the legitimate concerns people like Tukur123 have. We added the clause just like in JTHJ. So please stop vandalizing the page Fidliosr. Ashermadan (talk) 18:38, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

No, if the clause should be added, add it to every single Hindi film. Box office figures in other trade publications are always bigger than Box Office India. Stop being a fanboy. Why only Shahrukh Khan films? Fideliosr (talk) 18:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Secondly, it is highly possible that you are either sockpuppeting or meatpuppeting as your history implicates. It is for everyone to see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Ashermadan Fideliosr (talk) 18:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

You add it to every Hindi film. It's not my job. You clearly have so much time on your hands that you keep on reverting edits at 3 AM in the morning in India. I agree it should be added. The precedent has been started on JTHJ and there was excensive discussion then. So please stop vandalizing this page. Ashermadan (talk) 18:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, in order to maintain uniformity, it was decided that only Box Office India must be used on all Hindi films. No exceptions could be made to this general consensus. Fideliosr (talk) 18:53, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

You clearly don't understand English. We aren't removing Box Office India figures. We're adding a separate clause talking about the controversy of the figures and how there's confusion. 4 editors here are for the clause and you're against it. So please stop vandalizing. Ashermadan (talk) 18:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Don't make further personal attacks. You're the one who's making embarrassing typos. Secondly, as I've mentioned, no clause must be used for sake of uniformity. Only, repeat only, Box Office India must be used for revenue details of Hindi films. Every experienced editor who's been working on Hindi film related articles knows that. Fideliosr (talk) 19:03, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Read the discussion of the 'JTHJ' talk page archives. This has already been decided by the majority of editors here. Can you count? 4 outweighs 1. Ashermadan (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

But what about all the films that released before and after JTHJ? Factual Proof (talk) 19:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

You can add clauses to them too. I don't mind. I don't have enough time to do so. I'm sure you two do. It doesn't matter. You two will lose interest in trolling this article in a few days or weeks. I'll make changes then. Ashermadan (talk) 19:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Your argument about JTHJ is based on WP:OSE. Moreover, read WP:PNSD. It's established, and rather famous, consensus to use Box Office India only. Other established editors will agree. Fideliosr (talk) 19:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Contrary to Ashermadan's claims, there is no discussion in JTHJ's talk that allowed such a clause, and nor is there any such clause in the actual article for JTHJ. Factual Proof (talk) 19:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly, that's my point. I don't mean any disrespect for User:Ashermadan but he gets rather emotional when it comes to SRK related articles and starts hurling abuses, using sockpuppetry to push his agenda. His terrible history states so. This behavior must be stopped now. Fideliosr (talk) 19:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Article protected

This article has been protected from editing for three days to try to generate talk page discussion of the disputed content. Please follow the WP:BRD guideline. You may also wish to consider dispute resolution (WP:DR). Mark Arsten (talk) 19:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

Please correct the opening day collection as Boxofficeindia.com is turning out to be a ANTI-SRK site. As it has also reported huge 20 crore less lifetime business of Jab Tak Hai Jaan as compared to other trade analysts. Now, the site has reported huge 4 crore less for Chennai Express in it's opening day itself.All the trade analyst have claimed that CE has broken opening day record but only boxofficeindia.com denying it. Please go through sources as wikipedia is meant for correct and unbiased information.

SUMITKRISHNAGUPTA 19:17, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

ANTI-SRK site, huh? Would you kindly provide sources to establish your claim or is it some sort of conspiracy theory put forward by you? Fideliosr (talk) 19:23, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm similarly intrigued, and amused by this in fact. If you go to the "down the years" part on the BOI website, and click on top actors, you will see a section that summarises each actor's success over recent years. There are many pro-SRK comments for the years his films were doing the best business! Is that enough evidence against Mr Gupta's claims? Factual Proof (talk) 19:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

That's exactly what I had told Tarandhoni only two minutes ago (on 19:43). Isn't that hilarious? Fideliosr (talk) 19:50, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The information provided is wrong cheenai express has earned 33.12 cr ,i know that wiki follows BOI fig but why it is only done with Shahrukh movies same thing happens with jab tak hai jaan .why BOI figures in movies like Son of sardar was used BOI said son of sardar earned 80 crores but acc to wiki page it earned 104 crores why is it so?? this link show son of sardar fails to collect 100 crores and Box office india also states that then also wiki updated the other stats but in case of shahrukh movies they don't we all shahrukh fans feel like cheated kindly chnge the figures of cheenai expresss from 29 cr to 33.12 cr which is confirmed by nation tv news too please it is humble request to atleast give the other data too as wikipedia has given the stats of other sites for movies like son of sardar which BOI said earned 80 cr but wiki shows 104 cr .why is this done to shahrukh movies only Anubhav1792 (talk) 19:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry or Meatpuppetry

There different accounts created on 13:48, 10 August 2013, 17:35, 10 August 2013 and 15:54, 10 August 2013. Too many IPs and newly registered users. This sort of suspicious activity on this article suggests traces of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry. Fideliosr (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

here in the jab tak hai jaan page it clearly says that Son of sardar according to BOI earned 88 cr but in son of sardar wikipedia page the figure is 104 cr .why is so ????? if wikipedia follows BOI then why it is done only in case of Shahrukh only .one can atleast mention other stats if there is a conflict Anubhav1792 (talk) 20:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd also previously corrected Son of Sardaar page if you can go through its history, and I've done it now. WP:OSE but still the issue is over I guess. Fideliosr (talk) 20:34, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 August 2013

Sorry to say this as it has been repeated, but why is CE being referred to have a first day collection lower than ETT when UTV in their official statement say that it collected 33.12cr? If this is according to BOI, is there a concrete proof that the website is more reliable than the OFFICIAL figures? 182.68.185.37 (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2013 (UTC)