Talk:Kabali

Budget.

The budget sourced from the NDTV site seems speculated. There is no other source which quotes the same budget. The film was initially announced as a moderately budgeted gangster film. Immediately after the film's teaser went viral, there were different budget figures quoted by different web portals. I suggest we wait for a better source. Totally, the Budget of this movie, remains mystery and the producer become so mad and greed to earn money fast and huge.

Dubs

In this edit I moved the content about film dubs down to the release section. Seems very out-of-place in the lead, as dubbing is a pretty mundane practice and not a very important detail crucial to our understanding of the subject. Frankly, I see nothing at MOS:FILM about the inclusion of dubs, but if they are to be included, it seems that putting them in a more logical section, like in Release, would be the smarter way to go. I'd venture to guess that most films are dubbed into some language or another. I don't know that that's particularly noteworthy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Repetitious content

I keep removing what appears to me to be glaringly repetitious content, specifically the statement "It's also the most watched teaser trailer within 24 hours for an Indian and Asian film", which appears directly after the statement "Its teaser trailer went viral in Asia and became the most watched teaser trailer in Asia after its release in April, gaining 5 million views in less than 24 hours." This content was added probably a third time here by 120.144.52.147 with the justification "It's in the source for goodness sake!" Yes, it may be in the source, but it's also in the sentence before it. All the same points are being hit: "teaser trailer" "most watched" "24 hours" What am I missing here? That it is the most viewed Indian film teaser? Obviously it's the most viewed Indian film teaser, because it's an Indian film and we're talking about a viewing record being broken. Obviously it's an Asian film, because India is in Asia. It's completely useless information, and frankly, the more specific you get, "It's teaser trailer went viral in Asia and became the most watched Indian teaser trailer in Asia", the less impressive it becomes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I added the information back in because there has been no other teaser trailer for an Indian movie or Asian film that has been released during the time of YouTube and social media to receive this much attention. I am not repeating information because it is the most watch "teaser trailer" in Asia, not out of Asian films only but of films from around the world that have been released in Asia, that is what you're not getting. You said, "That it is the most viewed Indian film teaser? Obviously it's the most viewed Indian film teaser, because it's an Indian film" that doesn't make sense because this is not the only Indian film that has been released, is it? India produces more films than any other country in the world and that's only for Bollywood, so that's why I can see that it's a good reason for keeping it in. Do you understand what I'm saying? (120.144.52.147 (talk) 06:37, 18 June 2016 (UTC))

It's repetitive. "The most watched teaser in Asia" means that out of all other countries' films, this Indian film's teaser was watched the most. That is impressive. Pointing out that it is Indian is unnecessary, because we know it's Indian. Pointing out that it's an Asian trailer that did well in Asia is unnecessary, because we know it's Asian. It's like saying "Irishman John Doe is the richest person in Europe. He's also the richest person in Ireland and the richest European in Europe." We know he's the richest European, because we know that he's Irish. Obviously he's the richest Irishman if we know he's Irish and the richest man in Europe. We've already covered the lesser accomplishments by covering the major accomplishment. He's also the richest person named Doe in Europe or in Ireland, the richest Irishman in Ireland... but so what? The Irishman is the richest person in Europe. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:59, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

The thing is @Cyphoidbomb:, you obviously didn't read the source because I noticed you removed it a few days ago. You still don't get it, it's not the most watched Indian/Asian teaser trailer in Asia but in the world that's why it's a separate sentence, it's not repetition and that's why I've included it. Here is a different source as I noticed you said the previous one was not reliable. [[1]] (120.144.52.147 (talk) 07:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC))

(edit conflict) Which source says "most watched Indian teaser trailer 'in the world'"? The prose you wrote didn't make that claim, so there's a clear reason for me not understanding what you were talking about. I've never heard of The News Minute, so I'm reluctant to agree that it meets WP:RS, but assuming it did, it doesn't even qualify the record by indicating the scope of the record. "In the world" is glaringly missing, and it just describes the trailer as "the most watched Indian trailer" two weeks before this source qualifies the scope as "in Asia". The India Today link has the same omission. So does Times of India. Anyhow, if you want to say "By May 2016 the teaser trailer had reportedly received 17.1 million views, making it the highest viewed Indian film teaser at the time.[2]" I'd be fine with that. But then we wouldn't need "In Asia", or "In India" because we would have covered that with the general record. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:29, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I understand that it was ambiguous, after re-reading what was originally published I agree with you and can see that the information about its impact in Asia is quite impressive and I feel it's lost in a way in the new edit. I've added part of it in but I think if you want to as well we could revert it back to the original version and omit the part about the teaser being the most viewed Indian teaser trailer because its impact in Asia seems to be a bit more impressive as opposed to the former. What do you think @Cyphoidbomb:? (120.144.52.147 (talk) 07:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC))

"Went viral" sound like marketing puffery, which I don't find useful or appropriate. I also find it dubious to assert the teaser was the most viewed in Asia with 5 million views. Most viewed in 24 hours seems more likely, but I have to take care of something and do not presently have time to research this. I'll have to revisit this later, but will leave the current wording alone. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

That's alright, yes we can leave it as that for now. (120.144.52.147 (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC))

Range of opinion on budget

In this edit, I presented the budget as a range. At some point, here the budget was reduced from 160c to 110c by Amarnath Da Vinci with the vague and insufficient explanation "Added reference for budget". This explanation is insufficient because it doesn't explain a valid rationale for reducing the budget, which is provided by a reliable published source. This 110 crore value was then changed here and here, with the summaries "rev vandalism" and "rev gossip source". The 110c value is obviously not vandalism, as it too is sourced. The "gossip" claim is not adequately established, and all these figures are estimations anyway that are derived from questionable means. It seems the most academically responsible thing to do is either to present the budget content as a range of the various opinions from reliable sources or to omit the budget until the data begins to stabilize. I don't particularly care either way, but the back-and-forth needs to stop. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:43, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

True. As you said, all these figures are sourced from questionable means. It is better to leave the budget column blank. The range does not look convincing.TamilThiraiUlagam (talk) 18:55, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2016

As part of Kabali movie promotion Amazon India is selling Kabali print t-shirts.

Premnathjeedi (talk) 08:49, 13 July 2016 (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. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2016

Please change Kabali is expected to be released in Tamil worldwide, along with dubbed versions in Hindi, Telugu, and Malayalam.[30] The film will be simultaneously released in Singapore and Indonesia.[31] Malik Streams Productions and Distribution, a Malaysian media company, will simultaneously release the film in Malay for exclusive screening in Malaysia alongside the original Tamil version.[32]The film will also be dubbed in Thai and Chinese, where talks are under way to simultaneously release the film in Hong Kong and China.[33][34] Kabali will also premiere at the Le Grand Rex in Paris, France.[35]

to

Malik Streams Productions and Distribution, a Malaysian media company, will simultaneously release the film in Malay for exclusive screening in Malaysia alongside the original Tamil version.[32] Step on Moon Productions which acquired the distributing rights overseas for the Telugu and Tamil versions in Germany is going to screen a Premiere show in Berlin on the 21st of July. The film will also be dubbed in Thai and Chinese, where talks are under way to simultaneously release the film in Hong Kong and China.[33][34] Kabali will also premiere at the Le Grand Rex in Paris, France.[35] Pmac1988 (talk) 07:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — VarunFEB2003 I am Online 11:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Piracy and online prints

There has been speculative and unconfirmed news in the media re: pirated online copies uploaded online. I would request not to publish such information not in the main article until it has been confirmed or statement from the police or a concerned agency.Rms77 (talk) 13:46, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you, Rms77, but Wikipedia accepts information from online news agencies. The Indian Express tells me "Rajinikanth’s Kabali has been leaked online three days before release, according to reports...", while IBT tells me "Rajinikanth's much-awaited movie "Kabali," which is set for a grand release on July 22, has reportedly been leaked online..." and with only the TOI sounding speculative. It is not possible to ascertain a possible leak other than depending on these news URLs. You also raise that we rely on statements from police or concerned agencies. Is that really possible? How do we do that? Please share you comments. Best, Mr. Nair Talk 07:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

News about piracy on lead section

I believe this news snippet satisfies WP:FILMLEAD and is controversial enough to be included in the lead. But, Charles Turing thinks I am giving undue weight to this news, mostly because the video links were removed from the web. The links' availability should not be our concern. The fact that it was covered by most national dailies makes it fair. Views? Cyphoidbomb? Also, all editors, please raise your concerns here before reverting any edits. Best, Mr. Nair Talk 11:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Concern was not about the links. The subject was not a controversy, leading dailies reporting an incident does not make it a controversy. Did the producer suffered any loss, or anyone downloaded it, or there had a war-of-words on the subject ?. It is not like Premam or Leela, where 1000s of copies (including censored copies) were downloaded within an hour, and the long-term disputes surrounding it. Not to mention that all the cited sources in the section Online piracy issue use words such as "reportedly been" and "according to reports", indicating that they don't even no whether it is real or hoax. And what makes you think the leaked camera-print (showing Rajinikanth's entry scene) someone captured from a preview show is notable ?. --Charles Turing (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

We don't and can't know if the producer suffered any loss. That would take a data scientist to scrounge through the numbers as to who all downloaded the copies from the darknet. We don't know if anyone downloaded it, but a piracy incident almost always implies that. If we begin comparing, then I agree this one is not as notorious as what happened with those films you mention. But, when leading dailies report it, then it IS notable, is it not? 'Reportedly been' and 'according to reports' is enough. It shows that the news has been made from authoritative source, say a cyber crime agency in this case. A news agency cannot say that they looked up the files online and downloaded it. That is why they say 'reportedly'. I don't know, mate, this now looks like a pointless exercise to me. Let a third party intervene. Also, I agree with you about the short sequence part. Not notable enough to be on the lead section. Best, Mr. Nair Talk 13:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

You still not said how come this become a controversy, as it was the point you asserted to take it to lead. As you said if no reports are available about the producers loss or any other arguments in this case. Then there is definitely no controversy. Don't attribute anything (say cyber crime agency) yourself which is not mentioned in the news. Vague terms such as "reportedly" and "according to reports" will not be used in a confirmed news, don't develop your own theories. If they have a source they will credit it (see example) or atleast state it as "said a close source". According to latest reports, the makers has rubbished all piracy news as "rumours", producer is making an official statement ([3], [4], [5]). And "rumours" has no place in Wikipedia. The trivia about the leak of introduction scene is not only non-notable for the lead, but for the article itself as a whole. I agree with you, intervention of a third party is necessary here. Don't give undue weight for things which it is not. Everything reported in news are not taken into Wikipedia. --Charles Turing (talk) 17:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Dear Charles, let's just not blow this out of proportion. If no one replies in this thread by July 24 UTC, please go ahead and remove the statement from the lead. Thanks, Mr. Nair Talk 06:26, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2016

Mohanlal has bagged the Kerala distribution rights of Kabali. The movie will be distributed in Kerala by Mohanlal's MaxLab and Antony Perumbavoor's Aashirvad Cinemas.

2601:646:C480:2132:84AE:E2E5:A5C2:D12 (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

References

"Bagged" would not be appropriate tone for an encyclopedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:01, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: — VarunFEB2003 I am Online 13:34, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

plot

The main theme of this movie is how a gangster (KABALI) finds and protects his family from his enemies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyaluvbala (talk • contribs) 18:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

So? Mr. Nair Talk 18:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2016

An unsatisfying difference between the wishes of fans and director : The movie had gigantic promotions and expectations from not only fans but also across film industry around the world . It is normal revenge drama with Malaysian-Tamil setting , all actors in the movie have done justifications to their roles other than villain "Tony Lee" , director should have thought about mass villain or better performer to clash against "superstar Rajini". Rajini with suits looks classy and stylish , fantastic performance from Radika Apte ,Dhansika and Dinesh while Riythvika playing an surprising role. Overall onetime watch family entertainer and thalaiva's mass however director Pa. Ranjith has given a sense of letdown.

Rajiv Prasanna(rajivprsn) (talk) 19:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

• Not done: This is not a forum for discussing the movie. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 19:43, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Kabali Music : Non-Avalibility of SPBalasubramaniam

The non-avalibility of the singer as mentioned on Kabali movie page is not true. Please remove that part from wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanjish (talk • contribs)

Appears to have already been done. I don't see any mention of this person in the article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

box office

kabali collected 40 cr on the first day Dabishdab (talk) 03:47, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

 Not done - Please provide references. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

As on 27th July, 2018 the production team disclosed that box office collection of Kabali was approximately 320 crores after 7 days of release. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.243.209.140 (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

60.243.209.140, 1) 2018 is 2 years away. 2) The production team can say whatever they want, we only care what can be independently verified by secondary sources. See WP:PRIMARY Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:33, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Budget of Kabali

The budget of Kabali is 170 crore ($25.5 million).

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dongroves/2016/07/23/record-debuts-for-tamil-superstar-rajinikanths-kabali-as-producer-discusses-piracy-and-a-sequel/#1dba2e4739a9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadelison (talk • contribs) 07:04, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2016

"Please change below given content The Indian financial company Muthoot FinCorp who is also an official partner of the film produced silver coins embossed with the image of actor as cast in the film.

to the below given content

The Indian financial company Muthoot Fincorp  who is an exclusive on-ground merchandising partner of the film, launched Lucky Superstar silver coins  embossed with the image of Superstar Rajnikanth. This coin would be available in 3,800 outlets of Muthoot Fincorp.

Because Muthoot Fincorp has asked to make the changes.

Arrnavb (talk) 09:05, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

References

 Not done The proposed change looks overly promotional and includes peacock terms as well as advertising for the company. --bonadea contributions talk 09:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Standardize spelling of full name

I noticed different spellings of the full name of Kabali, so I picked the one from this news article. Editors should feel free to update as a consensus is gained with the release of more sources in time. → scribbleink ^ᗧHᗣT 02:54, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Behindwoods.com

Is Behindwoods a verifiable/authoritative source? What do you guys think? Best, Mr. Nair Talk 07:04, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

WP:ICTF says that it is not, though the discussion that was linked did not have many voices arriving at a definitive conclusion. There are more discussions here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:39, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks like it is mildly reliable. Mr. Nair Talk 07:28, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Financial table

In this edit Drmsonepur restored a financial table to the article with the explanation "124.25 + 87.5 = 211.75 , No distributor share, no tax figures, only GROSS figures at the box office". I suppose this was in response to my removal of the table which I explained thusly: "These financial tables appear every time there's a new major Indian film, yet there is no consensus for inclusion and they tend to attract financial cruft like distributor's share, nett, nett gross, blah blah. Please seek consensus at WP:ICTF". Somehow Drmsonepur missed the part about seeking consensus for inclusion, as well as some of my other points. If the content is clearly presented in prose, there's no need for a table. Further, as I thought I clearly explained, these tables attract financial cruft, that is, they encourage people to populate them with excessive data, and if there's one thing I see far too much of at Indian film articles, it's excessive financial data. Case in point: Why are we including the Tamilnadu gross? When has any American film been broken up by California gross vs. entire US gross? And why are we breaking down the international gross into 1) what I presume is the entire international gross, and 2) the US-Canada gross? Completely arbitrary. And lastly, we should be following the model set forth by MOS:FILM (which, interestingly, I almost never hear mentioned by editors of Indian film articles). There's no encouragement at MOS:FILM to create financial tables. So I don't know what Drmsonepur is using as his model for this content, but it's not our established community guidelines. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2016

In malaysian version, a screen note that Kabali surrenders to police and titles are shown.

203.199.204.198 (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2016

Mention the country while mentioning Puducherry, India

Kprasad 8979 (talk) 20:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Done Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2016

in the plot.. change "falsely charge" to "falsely charged"

Kprasad 8979 (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: The phrase "falsely charge" doesn't appear in the plot section, so it's unclear what you want changed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:07, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2016

a change in gross. the film grossed more than 300 crores in 5 days .so pls edit it

62.209.9.112 (talk) 13:44, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Please provide reliable sources for the same. —Vensatry _(talk) 16:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2016

During the Kabali Movie success meet, S. Thanu the producer of the film delivered the message that the Kabali movie has collected Rs. 389 Crore by the end of the seventh day from the movie release date. so Please change the box office to Rs.389 Crore

Shivgowder (talk) 20:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

 Not done - 1) Shivgowder you didn't provide a reliable source. 2) Even if you had, the information contradicts other independent sources. 3) We don't use primary sources, that is, people who are directly involved in a thing, as a source of controversial information like financial data. People closely connected with a film would have every reason to inflate or deflate their financial information, either to make their films look more appealing, or to make them look less appealing to investors or the entertainment tax collector. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)