Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:37, 2 March 2022 editTayi Arajakate (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers17,082 editsm COI-proxy user in Puli film article← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:08, 5 January 2025 edit undoRavensfire (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers88,919 edits Annoyed by an IP: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Tab header}} {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Tab header}}
{{shortcut|WT:ICTF}} {{shortcut|WT:ICTF|WT:INCINE}}
{{WikiProject banner shell |1=
{{WikiProject Film|Indian-task-force=yes}}
{{WikiProject India|cinema=yes}}
}}
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Sidebar}} {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Film/Sidebar}}
{{WikiProject Film|class=Project|small=yes|Indian-task-force=yes}}
{{WP India|class=Project|cinema=yes|small=yes}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive index|mask=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}} {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive index|mask=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{atnhead}} |archiveheader = {{atnhead}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K |maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 7 |counter = 10
|minthreadsleft = 10 |minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(20d) |algo = old(10d)
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Shortcut|WT:INCINE}}
{{archives|index=./Archive index|search=yes|age=20|bot=MiszaBot II}} {{archives|index=./Archive index|search=yes|age=20|bot=MiszaBot II}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used|link=Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2012-09-17/WikiProject report|writer= ]| ||day =17|month=September|year=2012}} {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects|link=Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2012-09-17/WikiProject report|writer= ]| ||day =17|month=September|year=2012}}

== Reliability of sources listed at ] ==
<!-- START PIN -->{{Pin message|}}<!-- ] 03:44, 27 March 2034 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2027043859}}<!-- END PIN -->
I've observed that many users often refer to ] 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 ] 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 @] 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. @], @]. – ] (''']''') 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. {{pb}}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. ] (]) 13:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
<!-- ] 08:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1708243272}}
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. ] (]) 07:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

:@], 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. – ] (''']''') 14:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Good plans here to update the list. I think also it should be merged into ]. The table format is more in line with ], allowing for rationales and links to past discussions on each source. Something I've been meaning to tackle for a while. --] (]) 15:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|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? ] (]) 03:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
*I have started ] 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 ] in alphabetical order for faster and easier navigation. Anyone can drop by and help out with suggestions or edits. Thanks and happy editing. ] (]) 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 ] is based on any future ] thread. --] (]) 22:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
:::{{Done}} I have created a shortcut ] (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. ] (]) 04:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
::::Good work Herald. – ] (''']''') 04:43, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
:::::Could someone add a section for Indiantelevision.com as well. Please refer . Thanks ] <sup>(] ] ])</sup> 12:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::Done. Now please add your views and comments too :) ] (]) 12:15, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
*'''''Note: Please do not edit the verdict line when there is no clear consensus in ], or on ] 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?:, ,
;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. --] (]) 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. ] (]) 15:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

{{ping|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. --] (]) 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. ] (]) 05:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
::::Makes sense. Thanks. --] (]) 07:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
::::I have posted on ] 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? {{ping|CNMall41}} {{ping|The Herald}} ] (]) 14:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::Except for Cinejosh I see the others as usable. But maybe I'm wrong about Cinejosh. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 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 ] 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. ] (]) 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. ] (]) 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 ]. ] (]) 17:08, 16 July 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 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.--] (]) 03:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
:I added a recent RSN discussion which indicates it's generally unreliable. It was also added to ] as unreliable based the discussion. ] (]) 18:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
;Verdict:

=== Box Office India (Boxofficeindia.com) ===
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: ], ], ]
;Comments:
{{Block quote|text=Per BOI's 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 ] by proxy). <small></small><br /><br /> In mid-2019 we discovered that BOI's budget figures included print and advertising costs. (See ]) 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.|by=] table}}

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. ] (]) 07:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

:@] I completely agree with the above. There was also a 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. ] (]) 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 . Articles which's URL contain "content/specials/" are sponsored. ] (]) 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:
:# https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/pioneering-thoughts-with-dipen-bhuva-a-fusion-of-healthcare-cybersecurity-and-ai-124040900630_1.html
:# https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/hutech-solutions-announces-sanjeev-kulkarni-as-new-chief-product-officer-cpo-124040900662_1.html
:] (]) 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. --] (]) 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?:
;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. --] (]) 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 as a reference on Misplaced Pages. 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. --] (]) 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 ]; see ]
;Verdict:

=== Firstpost ===
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
;Comments:
;Verdict:
=== Forbes India ===
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: ,
;Comments: Used 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 ]. It is used as a reference in many film and actor pages.--] (]) 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. – ] (''']''') 11:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

:Help us to remove 42 Sponsored Hindustan Times articles cited on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 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. --] (]) 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 "" section, with . 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. ] (]) 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
::] (]) 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 and will be happy to help remove these. ''] ]'' 11:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
::::@], thanks for ]; it's really helpful. – ] (''']''') 11:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::Wow, this is gold. Thanks Kuru :) ] (]) 11:52, 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 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 ]

=== 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?:
;Comments:
;Verdict:
=== Outlook ===
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
;Comments: There are currently 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). --] (]) 06:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
::Agreed. The paid-for shall not be considered as reliable at all. '''Reliable''' outside the paid-for articles. ] (]) 07:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
;Verdict:

=== Pinkvilla.com ===
;Included in RS/P?:{{n}}
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:], ], ]
;Comments: Website for reference.--] (]) 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. ] (]) 07:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
:::How'd one determine an actual BO figure? — ] (]·]·]·]) 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 ({{estimation}} {{INR}} 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. <small>(As they say, ] , lol.)</small> ] (]) 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. ] (]) 14:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)<small>— ] (]&#32;• ]) has made ] outside this topic. </small>
;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?:
;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 ===
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: , ]
;Comments:
;Verdict:

=== 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 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. --] (]) 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 (])
;Verdict: {{Y}} '''Reliable source'''

=== The Hindu ===
;Included in RS/P?: {{y}}
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: {{y}}
;Comments: Reliable per ]
;Verdict: {{Y}} '''Reliable source'''

=== The Indian Express ===
;Included in RS/P?:{{y}}
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:{{y}}
;Comments: Reliable per ]
;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 "". ] (]) 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 ]
;Verdict:{{y}} '''Reliable source'''

=== Zee News ===
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: ], ]
;Comments:
Zee News is owned by ]. They also have other publications such as ]. 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. --] (]) 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 ] 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. ] (]) 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 (), 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)
::{{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:

=== The Times of India ===
;Included in RS/P?: ]
;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. ] (]) 05:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

:Help us to remove these sponsored articles published by Times of India, (), (). ] (]) 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.
:: *

:: ] (]) 15:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
;Verdict:

=== ] ===
;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 ===
== ] promo/tracking ==
;Included in RS/P?:
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
;Comments:
;Verdict:


=== latestly.com ===
Seeing a lot of tracking URLs for ] being added in the review sections of films/TV shows as refs; e.g.: . These are likely being added by the website's operators themselves, while that is not wrong per se tracking Misplaced Pages users through ] strings such as "utm_source=Misplaced Pages&utm_medium=ReviewSeeding&utm_campaign=HouseOfSecretsReview" appears promotional, spammy and unethical to me. Not sure what should be done here: {{u|Kailash29792}}, {{u|Ab207}}, {{u|Cyphoidbomb}}? ] (]) 01:40, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
;Included in RS/P?:
:I say let them be. The site is not spam, it was founded by a ], and other leading critics also write for it. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 02:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?:
::While params of any kind are primarily unintentional or an overlook by editors who are just copy-pasting the urls into citations, the "utm_source=Misplaced Pages" is intentional and is thus external link spamming. The website can track incoming Misplaced Pages traffic by referral headers in the HTTP requests. @] Is your bot capable of trimming these tracking params? — DaxServer <small>(] to ])</small> 07:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
;Comments:
:::{{ping|DaxServer}} deferring to @] who might have a better tool BenderBot if interested. I'm not setup/approved for referral removals at scale. -- ]] 20:03, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
;Verdict:
::The potential COI of Film Companion was discussed earlier but the task force was okay with it as FC is generally a reliable source. That said, I don't think there would be any objection if those trackers are removed from the urls. -- ] (]) 14:43, 16 October 2021 (UTC)


=== TrendingTopicc.com ===
== Sources for Indian Cinema and TV Series ==


;Included in RS/P?: No.
Hi, can tv series, or film series cast list have a cast which does not have any references or citation? There are a ton of wiki pages that have cast without citation, and they do not have any mantainence tag, but in some articles, many cast have been removed because they were unsourced. So, please clarify my doubt regarding this. Which is correct???] (]) 13:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|Itcouldbepossible}} As far as I can tell, there's no need for any citation for credited cast because the film itself acts a source for such information. Uncredited roles and character interpretations, on the other hand, must have citations (see ]). -- ] (]) 17:51, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
::{{ping|Ab207}} What about Tv Series, or daily soaps???] (]) 02:36, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
:::{{u|Itcouldbepossible}}, please go through ]. Citing noteworthy and credited cast members is not generally required. All other information must be sourced. -- ] (]) 17:56, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
::::{{u|Ab207}} Consider the following article ], ], ], ], or any other TV stub. It has many unsourced cast lists. So will it be removed or kept? It is till not clear to me. ] is saying that every {{tq|All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name supported by a reliable source.}}, but you are saying that they are generally not required. ] (]) 04:56, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
:::::{{u|Itcouldbepossible}}, it says all names should be referred as credited. That means if a particular actor is credited by name in the show, then the show itself acts as a source for the information. If you are deviating from that, then it should be supported by reliable source. In case of any disupte, please discuss with the concerned editor and reach a workable solution. Hope this helps. -- ] (]) 16:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)


;Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?: No.
== ] has an ]==


;Comments:
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>''']''' has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the ''']'''.<!-- Template:Rfc notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 02:46, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
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">—&nbsp;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)
== Dubbed films ==


: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)
In ], I have the dubbed films section but {{u|Rajesh Praveen}} has my edit without any explanation. I'm of the opinion that the list is intended for original Kannada language films only, and not the dubbed ones. Would appreciate the community's input on this. Thanks -- ] (]) 13:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)


;Verdict:
:My personal view is that the article is for films that were originally created in the particular language, not about dubs. I'm not seeing a Dub section in other languages. ''']''' (]) 16:41, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
::Previous versions of such pages used to carry dubbed versions, award ceremonies, and notable deaths (]) but they were removed at some point. If we have consensus to include only original films, we can get rid of other sections. -- ] (]) 17:32, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
:A user started adding Web/streaming television series citing this reason .I think we need a consensus about which content should be added which not.] (]) 18:32, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
::It's fairly obvious that a list of films should include films only. ] may be created separately for the list of television series. Notable deaths and award ceremonies must added in ]. -- ] (]) 20:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
:::Also users have started adding OTT platforms in ], So we need a uniform consensus for all the languages lists as most of the times users argue that there us no discussion or consensus about this. ] (]) 06:52, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
::::Dedicated column for an OTT platform seems unnecessary, although a direct-to-video release may be indicated in the notes columnif needed. -- ] (]) 15:34, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
*In , I have added the rough consensus of above discussion to ]. Please review it and suggest any modifications if needed. Thanks. <small>Customary ping to the participating editors, {{ping|Ravensfire|Sid95Q}}</small> -- ] (]) 12:53, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


== TimSip ==
==Discussion at ]==
]&nbsp;You are invited to join the discussion at ]. ] (]) 15:12, 24 December 2021 (UTC)<!-- ] -->


Can Timsip (https://timsip.com/) be considered as a reliable source for daily box office collections? (Specially for non-Hindi films which are not reported by either Pinkvilla or Bollywood Hungama) ] (]) 03:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
== Film production company articles ==
With the close of the ] as delete, I'm going to try converting articles (except the big ones like Sony, Zee, maybe Red Chillies?) under {{cl|Film production companies of India by city|this category}} into ] (which they already are de facto) as most of the 200 articles there do not pass ]. I plan to nominate the absolutely non-notable ones for ] or ]; watch these - ], ] - if you wish to contest any such noms. Please feel free to convert any. Also feel free to revert me, in which case I'll take them to AfD. ] (]) 12:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
:{{u|Hemantha}}, I think if a non-notable production company belongs to a notable actor/producer, it can simply be merged/redirected there per ]. -- ] (]) 09:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
::Sure. But from a brief look - say ], ], ] are very hard to salvage? Redirect to most successful film seems iffy, but might work in some cases. ] (]) 12:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
:::In some cases, a redirect to the owner or main name, if there is one, may be appropriate. ] as am example. There's a feel of ] happening around some of these companies (] as an example with a current AFD and I strongly suspect there are some suspicious editing, not the editor creating the article). If there's not some solid sourcing that focuses on the company itself (and there are some that do have good sourcing and coverage), AFD makes sense. Some of these are just mini walled gardens that need some trimming. ''']''' (]) 17:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
::::Yes, there's a lot of UPE in the recent ones which is how I came across this category (as an aside, one absolute positive listifying has over outright PROD/AfD-ing is that it'd preserve evidence for us non-admins). Anyway I dipped into the waters with ] and ] before trying to see if there's any precedent to this kind of listifying NCORP fails. And there appears to be for NCORP, but some for others like ]. ] (]) 14:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


:Clearly a personal site or blog. It has no ownership and editorial insight. This site disclaimer says "Box office performance can be affected by many factors beyond our control, and Timsip is not responsible for any errors or discrepancies in the data reported." This is unreliable source. Most of the non-Hindi films are reported by Pinkvilla on the boxoffice gross. ] (]) 22:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
== Looking for comments at List Of SonyLIV Original Programming ==
::Okay. Thanks. ] (]) 01:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)


== Question regarding ]’s article ==
Hey all, I'm looking for comments at ] to head off an edit-war. Thoughtful comments would be helpful to avoid this going to a drama board. Thanks. ''']''' (]) 03:35, 6 February 2022 (UTC)


Since Mandanna appears in films across multiple languages successively, as she is a ] actress, is it necessary to specify which language each film is in, particularly in the lead where she’s had multiple "breakthroughs" but they’re all across different industries + in the main body is it necessary to specify which film is in what language. It’s become very messy and disorienting as there’s no guidance on it. Thanks. ] (]) 01:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
== Reliability of '']'' ==


:Indian actress in lead is enough and does not need to specify all languages but the filmography is good enough to show the films and languages she worked in (imo). ] (]) 01:49, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Was there any assessment of Pinkvilla's reliablity at ICTF before it was added to the project page? It was discussed at ] once where {{u|Tayi Arajakate}} argued in favour. I believe Pinkvilla is a decent source with journalists who actually know their stuff with regard to films.


== Bollywood Hungama News Network ==
Case in point, take the film '']'' where the makers were tight-lipped about the film's originality. ''Pinkvilla'' rightly called out that it was a remake of ''Jigarthanda'' back in . They even revealed the gender-reversal of Siddharth's role in the original which is now played by Kriti Sanon, and it turned out to be correct. OTOH, "reliable" sources like (Dec 2020), (Mar 2021) were still calling it Veeram's remake while (Feb 2021) said its an " original screenplay" which could have been taken from the of that time.


Is articles written by unreliable per ]? ] (]) 02:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Pinkvilla's BO figures are also well informed as they provide , and mention trade in terms of gross, net and share while sources like simply quote ] tweets. I'm bringing this up because Pinkvilla is being removed even for non-controversial info like release dates. -- ] (]) 14:48, 18 February 2022 (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)
:I say it should be usable, at least for exclusive interviews. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 15:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
::What you mean by 'byline'?
::Usage for exclusive interviews goes without saying, as it falls under ] territory. But calling it unreliable seems too rigid and inflexible. I'd say Pinkvilla's material falling outside of ] should be usable for coverage on films. -- ] (]) 15:48, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
::Articles written by author 'Bollywood Hungama News Network' still exists in
*If there are no objections, I intend to move ''Pinkvilla'' to generally reliable section for the purposes of film-related sourcing. -- ] (]) 21:01, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
::* ]: , , etc.
::None from my side, as in objections. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">] ] </span> 02:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
::* ]: , , etc.
:Sorry a bit late to this. I should say though that I didn't exactly argue in favour, there is a lot of gossip and clickbait on the site that needs to be sifted through but then again that's perhaps par for the course when it comes to any news media reporting on the Indian film industry. Otherwise, I'm inclined to agree with you that it's not outright unreliable, as a news outlet that specialises in the film industry, it tends to have better research and is in many cases more accurate than general news outlets. It should be usable for non-controversial information as long as it is being used strictly for the film industry, doesn't fall under ] or advertorials and one takes ] (particularly promotion) into consideration. Exclusive interviews and the like goes without saying as a ]. <span style="background-color:#B2BEB5;padding:2px 12px 2px 12px;font-size:10px">] <sub>]</sub></span> 05:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
::* And many more.
::{{u|Tayi Arajakate}}, thanks for the comment. I agree about celebrity NOTGOSSIP which we can clarify with a note that the reliability is strictly related to film content. I'm keen on upgrading this because the primary focus of ICTF is films while BLPs of actors is secondary. -- ] (]) 07:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
::So shouldn't all these resources be removed? ] (]) 05:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Yeah I've no issues with upgrading it, with a note that is. To be honest, I think most of them need some note or the other. I also didn't mean it shouldn't be used for BLPs of actors at all, just with some considerations in mind. <span style="background-color:#B2BEB5;padding:2px 12px 2px 12px;font-size:10px">] <sub>]</sub></span> 09:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
:::]. I no longer wish to entertain your bludgeoning and edit warring. Read the linked guidelines above. --] (]) 07:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Got it. ICTF should ideally list all the mainstream sources and make a note known of issues with them. But it presently gives as simplistic classification of general news outlets as reliable and film websites are unreliable. This is in contrast with say, American films, where entertainment sites like '']'', '']'', '']'' etc are considered quality sources and general news outlets are rarely used. This no way means that Indian films sites are of that standard but gap between the film sites and general news outlets is not as wide as it portrayed in the source guide. -- ] (]) 12:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
:::::] has nice tables with rationales for deeming sites as unreliable, with links to previous discussions. I don't know how updated it is, though. --] (]) 04:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)


== Discussion on the reliability of Pinkvilla ==
=== India.com by ] ===
Tangential but related since this an instance of "reliable source" which has no idea what they are saying: says '']'' "crossed Rs 96 crore at Box Office worldwide." They might have deduced this from:<br />a. "According to media reports, the movie saw a pre-release business in theatres of about Rs. 64.50 crore in Tamil Nadu and an overall of Rs 76 crore in India and 20 crores from the rest of the world." -This is dubious because pre-release business has nothing to do with the theatrical gross.<br />b. A tweet by a random fan account which says "TN - 36.17CR ROI - 76 CR WW - 20.6 CR Overall - 96.77 CR" - Ludicrous numbers. Rest of India 76 crore? Even hard-core Ajith fans might find it difficult to believe.


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)
This is not the first time India.com has published has such fake numbers. , they somehow managed to get the 5 day-wise collection of '']'' which totals to 31.5 crore. They simultaneously know that the film has grossed 51 crore in 5 days. In Telugu cinema's parlance, 31.5 crore here refers to "the distributor share" which is Gross-(theatre rentals + taxes). Not knowing this difference, the geniuses at India.com simply add the gross and share, and write: "The total is minted is around Rs 81.5 crore worldwide." (Ignoring the poor grammar, the added figure should be 82.5 but its probably too much to expect from them)


== Annoyed by an IP ==
''Watch this space for more updates on Valimai’s Box Office Collection.'' For sure, ICTF should not. -- ] (]) 20:31, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
*'''Update''': Upgraded Pinkvilla as a reliable source for film content in . Also took the liberty of adding India.com as unreliable per the above evidence. Thank you {{u|Kailash29792}} and {{u|Tayi Arajakate}} for your valuable inputs. -- ] (]) 08:01, 26 February 2022 (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.
== COI-proxy user in ''Puli'' film article ==


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}}
It is to bring to your attention that a COI-proxy IP is using unreliable sources to increase the gross of the film ] . Last year we (Cyphoidbomb and me) dealt with these proxies aimed at Vijay's films that weren't successful at the box office. Pinging {{ping|Ab207|Ravensfire|Sid95Q|Kailash29792|Arjayay|Tayi Arajakate}}. - ] (]) 14:15, 28 February 2022 (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.
:Just looking at the page titles where it's already being used () "ABC-all-you-need-to-know-about-this-XZY-movie/", this feels like a very spammy site. If it's getting pushed in an apparent COI/spam manner, the ] is the best option. This looks like a blog that scrapes content from various other sources. I would not want to use it as a source and would support it being blacklisted. EDIT: Also warned the IP for personal attacks in that edit summary as well as noting the source is not acceptable. ''']''' (]) 14:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
::Agree, no indication that the site publishes credible information. Would support blacklisting as a way to prevent abuse. -- ] (]) 14:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
:::Agree that bollywoodsociety.com appears to be a coffee-table mag, rather than a reliable source. AFAIK the criteria for full blacklisting are quite onerous. I cannot, however, find any criteria for inclusion, or methodology for adding names to, "The following should ''not'' be considered reliable sources." section of ]. Given this discussion, which seems to be reaching a consensus, could it not be added to that list? - ] (]) 14:52, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
::::Not aware of any particular criteria or procedure for addition into ICTF source guide but I think questionable sources are either first proposed here or boldly added directly. As there is rough consensus regarding about bollywoodsociety, I've cited this discussion to mark it as unreliable in . -- ] (]) 11:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
:::::Bollywoodsociety looks yet another scraper site to me so I've no objection it being included in the list of unreliable sources. From what I understand, the source guide was originally created based on a discussion on this talk page so any changes based on the discussions here seems fine. I've also listed it at ]. <span style="background-color:#B2BEB5;padding:2px 12px 2px 12px;font-size:10px">] <sub>]</sub></span> 11:34, 2 March 2022 (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.
== Manobala Vijayabalan ==


I feel like it is a waste of my time editing here, since they undid my edits as they felt suit hence this message.
Manobala Vijayabalan () is a "film industry tracker" on twitter who is frequently cited by Janani K of '']'' and other sources. However, {{u|PublicEnemy54321}} has ] BO figures published by him are questionable because they almost always vary compared to other reliable sources. Comparison table for recently released films:


Why can't this user be encouraged to
{| class="wikitable"
#Respond on their talk page. ()
|+
# Make an account (They edit very frequently under different IP addresses, so why not?)
!Film
# Prove they are not a bot (since they only add names to filmographies, possibly from other websites)
!Figure
!ManobalaV's estimate
!Other reliable estimates
|-
| rowspan="2" |'']''
|WW - 4 days
|
| ( via '']'')<br /> ('']'')
|-
|Tamil Nadu - 4 days
|
|74.39 crore ( net @18% GST by '']'')<br /> ('']'')
|-
|'']''
|WW - 3 days
|
| ('']'')<br /> ('']'')<br /> (Ormax Media via '']'')<br /> ('']'')
|}


Despite the notice at ], the user seems to go about their business. ] (]) 11:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
In November 2021, '']'' wrote about the claims of ManobalaV on '']'' BO figures. They noted that almost all the media reports which reported that the film has grossed over 200 crore trace back to him. However, IE wasn't able to verify these figures independently from other sources.


:{{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)
With no editorial oversight and reputation of fact checking, ManobalaV falls under what Misplaced Pages calls ]. Even though they are sometimes published in reliable sources, ManobalaV's figures are controversial, and many times found to be inaccurate. Therefore, propose to add ManobalaV and any source that ] in the list of unreliable sources if there are no objections. Inputs are welcome. Regards -- ] (]) 09:40, 1 March 2022 (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. ''']''' (]) 17:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:It would also helpful to know what the community thinks of reliable sources which quote mysterious trade pundits/unreliable sources for box office figures without doing their own research. Here, quotes someone called "Trinath" who says ''Valimai'' grossed 150 crore in the opening weekend (4 days) which is way off than other reliable estimates. -- ] (]) 06:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:08, 5 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
Shortcuts
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconFilm: Indian
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.
WikiProject iconIndia: Cinema
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup.
WikiProject Film
General information ()
Main project page + talk
Discussion archives
Style guidelines talk
Multimedia talk
Naming conventions talk
Copy-editing essentials talk
Notability guidelines talk
Announcements and open tasks talk
Article alerts
Cleanup listing
New articles talk
Nominations for deletion talk
Popular pages
Requests talk
Spotlight talk
Film portal talk
Fiction noticeboard talk
Project organization
Coordinators talk
Participants talk
Project banner talk
Project category talk
Departments
Assessment talk
B-Class
Instructions
Categorization talk
Core talk
Outreach talk
Resources talk
Review talk
Spotlight talk
Spotlight cleanup listing
Topic workshop talk
Task forces
General topics
Film awards talk
Film festivals talk
Film finance talk
Filmmaking talk
Silent films talk
Genre
Animated films talk
Christian films talk
Comic book films talk
Documentary films talk
Marvel Cinematic Universe talk
Skydance Media talk
War films talk
Avant-garde and experimental films talk
National and regional
American cinema talk
Argentine cinema talk
Australian cinema talk
Baltic cinema talk
Belgian cinema talk
British cinema talk
Canadian cinema talk
Chinese cinema talk
French cinema talk
German cinema talk
Indian cinema talk
Israeli cinema talk
Italian cinema talk
Japanese cinema talk
Korean cinema talk
Mexican cinema talk
New Zealand cinema talk
Nordic cinema talk
Pakistani cinema talk
Persian cinema talk
Southeast Asian cinema talk
Soviet and post-Soviet cinema talk
Spanish cinema talk
Uruguayan cinema talk
Venezuelan cinema talk
Templates
banner
DVD citation
DVD liner notes citation
infobox
invite
plot cleanup
stub
userbox

Archiving icon
Archives
Index
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10


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)
  • 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)
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?

1

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)

Included in RS/P?
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
1, 2, 3
Comments

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

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.

— WP:ICTFFAQ table

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:
  1. https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/pioneering-thoughts-with-dipen-bhuva-a-fusion-of-healthcare-cybersecurity-and-ai-124040900630_1.html
  2. https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/hutech-solutions-announces-sanjeev-kulkarni-as-new-chief-product-officer-cpo-124040900662_1.html
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)
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?
Red XN
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 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
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

Included in RS/P?
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
1, 2
Comments
Verdict

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?
Green tickY
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
Green tickY
Comments
Subsidiary of The Hindu (WP:THEHINDU)
Verdict
Green tickY Reliable source

The Hindu

Included in RS/P?
Green tickY
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
Green tickY
Comments
Reliable per WP:THEHINDU
Verdict
Green tickY Reliable source

The Indian Express

Included in RS/P?
Green tickY
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
Green tickY
Comments
Reliable per WP:INDIANEXP
Verdict
Green tickY 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?
Green tickY
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
Green tickY
Comments
Reliable per WP:RS/P
Verdict
Green tickY Reliable source

Zee News

Included in RS/P?
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
1, 2
Comments

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?
Red XN
Discussed in RS/N or any talk pages?
Red XN
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)
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
Article containing disclaimer Grabup (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
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 (talkcontribs) 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

TimSip

Can Timsip (https://timsip.com/) be considered as a reliable source for daily box office collections? (Specially for non-Hindi films which are not reported by either Pinkvilla or Bollywood Hungama) BhikhariInformer (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Clearly a personal site or blog. It has no ownership and editorial insight. This site disclaimer says "Box office performance can be affected by many factors beyond our control, and Timsip is not responsible for any errors or discrepancies in the data reported." This is unreliable source. Most of the non-Hindi films are reported by Pinkvilla on the boxoffice gross. RangersRus (talk) 22:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks. BhikhariInformer (talk) 01:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Question regarding Rashmika Mandanna’s article

Since Mandanna appears in films across multiple languages successively, as she is a pan-indian actress, is it necessary to specify which language each film is in, particularly in the lead where she’s had multiple "breakthroughs" but they’re all across different industries + in the main body is it necessary to specify which film is in what language. It’s become very messy and disorienting as there’s no guidance on it. Thanks. 19Arham (talk) 01:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Indian actress in lead is enough and does not need to specify all languages but the filmography is good enough to show the films and languages she worked in (imo). RangersRus (talk) 01:49, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

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
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

  1. Respond on their talk page. ()
  2. Make an account (They edit very frequently under different IP addresses, so why not?)
  3. 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)
Categories: