Talk:24 (2016 film)

National Award 2017

Just want to clarify. Did 24 win the award for best special effects?

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --218.208.254.216 (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC) It was upcoming movie that announced to be released on Deepavali

We, here, stick to policies laid down by Wikipedia. Arjann (talk) 17:47, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because this movie is an upcoming movie that had been scheduled for Deepavali 2015.

Edit summary of 21 September 2015

1. Release date is unconfirmed. Hopefully 2016. Page needs to be moved but I need a discussion on page move. That can be done later.
2. Wikilinks fixed
3. Genre of the film is corrected and page lead is summarized with sources
4. Under production - Unnecessary trivia is removed. Precise details with reliable sources is added. No one is interested to know what happened after shelving, about Suriya's Massss or who went ahead with what project. Rumored stuff is removed. All this is not needed here. Little bit casting details are added.
5. Filming and music section is added.
6. Nothing is exactly known about the distribution rights. I mean, a strong reliable source is absent. Removed. It needs to be counter-checked. Tamil distribution rights and purchasing sum aren't reported officially.
7. Rather than controversy, the listed title is far better.

Other than all this, more details with reliable sources may be added. Improvements, suggestions and discussions are always welcomed here or on my talk page. Arjann (talk) 09:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Worst Wikipedia Admins ever

I Updated details of Single song Release Date for movie 24 with Valid Citation . Even I had Valid Sources They Still Deleting my Data.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satya durga reddy (talk • contribs) 12:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Satya durga reddy:

1. New comments go at the bottom of talk pages
2. Please sign your comments by appending four tildes ~~~~ at the end. The software will convert this to a signature with a timestamp, so that people know who wrote the comment and when.
3. Talk pages are not intended for WP:SOAPBOXING, they are intended for discussing specific changes to the article.
4. No personal attacks, please

It appears you're referring to this edit that was subsequently reverted by Widr. The content you submitted contained grammar errors, and we shouldn't be using Facebook as a reference because it is user-generated content. Your later resubmission of this content contained more grammar errors, date formatting errors ("14th march" -- we don't use ordinals like 1st, 2nd, 3rd for dates. This should have been "14 March", and a year should have been included), capitalization errors ("Single Song Named", "march") and you used condensed hashtag formatting (KalamEnKadhali) for the names of the songs instead of writing them out properly like "Kalam En Kadhali", which the source does. So please double check your submissions so that you're not causing extra work for other editors, because you will find your edits quickly reverted, sourced or not. If English isn't your strong suit, you might consider posting edit requests on the talk page.

Hope that answers your concerns. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Micro financial details like satellite rights

In this edit I removed content about the film selling its satellite rights. Why is this of any academic importance? We're not here to track every financial detail. There is no MOS:FILM precedent for this information and it's not something that is generally cared about across WikiProject Film. If trades care about this, fine, let the trades care about it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2016

ridin bal's movie review blog gave it a 4.8/5 and praised the film for being a best science fiction film in tamil and also praised suriya's acting especially his villian role. http://ridinbaltamilmoviereviews.blogspot.ae/

Ridinbal16 (talk) 08:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Blogs are not reliable sources. — JJMC89 (T·C) 10:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Merging of 24 (soundtrack)

• Disagree merge: It's very common to have a separate soundtrack page, and no reason to merge them with the main article, when both articles are long enough. Your claim under the above tagged notice, I would like to state that this revision is primitive and now the revision on 11 May 2016 is in significantly expanded form. The soundtrack article has standalone reference(s). So please, I request you first read the reasons for merging and then propose a merger. The points under "Merging should be avoided if:" (partially barring point 3 are clearly followed by the article 24 (soundtrack).
  Arjann (talk) 06:16, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  Please note: @Cyphoidbomb:, @Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:
• Merge: I strongly prefer to merge the article with 24 (2016 film) because of the following reasons. As per the notability guideline to create an article about an album Wikipedia:Notability (music), there are some conditions which are not satisfied, the reasons are:

1. It is not a top album that is listed in country's musical charts
2. The recording has not been certified gold in any country.
3. The album has neither won nor nominated for any notable awards in
4. It is not a important subject of national broadcast or similar ones

There are sources but having sources alone doesn't make it notable. According to point 5 of the notability guidelines, if it is only a part of a notable film then it should merged with the parent article.

If merging makes the parent article too long, then some unimportant section in this article such as Personnel can be removed, because only music director is enough as the singer(s) and lyricists names have already been mentioned in the track list. KCVelaga _{☚╣✉╠☛} 23:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

1) If you're going to argue that the article isn't notable per WP:NALBUM, then you should be evaluating whether or not it meets any of the criteria, not just the four you've selected. 2) A personnel section is perfectly fine per MOS:ALBUM, so it seems odd to propose cutting the section just so it conforms with your view that the standalone article should not exist. It's sort of like arguing that we remove the references so that we could delete the content as unsourced. 3) I think you are misinterpreting point 5. The guideline suggests that if the only claim of notability is that the work was featured in a notable medium then it is probably better to incorporate it into the main article. (The guideline goes on to link to guidelines for articles on living people, which is confusing.) However, if the soundtrack "has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it" then it would have more than one claim of notability. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:33, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: It is like you have put the same points posted at the page deletion request. Don't you have any other thing else to say? Why don't you properly interpret the reasons for merging. Is it that deliberately you are chasing the users or having some kind of the personal disinterest in the film that makes you do so? Arjann (talk) 04:39, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't have any kind of personal disinterest against the film. It is just about the songs in a film just as all other Indian films, there is nothing exceptional about this film. So why create a separate article to its name? KCVelaga _{☚╣✉╠☛} 09:47, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I'll repeat what I said at the AfD, and hope you will understand this time: Merging the soundtrack with the main article will bloat it, and the soundtrack image would violate WP:NFCC. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:00, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Please, someone respond about the merger and put an end to this. I don't like seeing such tags/issues at the top of a page. Please, resolve. In course of time I (or other interested users) may develop both the pages. Arjann (talk) 16:17, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@Arjann: I find the soundtrack is not notable to have a separate namespace. As I have mentioned before it is just about the track list in a film. There is nothing significant than that. For those who are thinking that it will bloat the parent article, the details such as the personnel section can be removed as they are not required. The names of composers, music directors and singers were already mentioned in the track list. KCVelaga _{☚╣✉╠☛} 11:35, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: How can you say that personnel section is not required. Did you go through what is mentioned in Album article style guide under "personnel". Further, the entire section is well sourced and may be counter-checked. Arjann (talk) 13:53, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:, I also can't help noticing that you're basically just repeating your incomplete argument without addressing the issues I brought up, specifically whether or not the album meets any of the notability criteria, not just the four you've selected, and it would be nice if you were to provide a solid argument for removing the personnel section, considering MOS:ALBUM does provide for the inclusion of such a section. As noted, your suggestion that the section be cut isn't adequately explained and sort of sounds like a "If we remove one of the wheels, we can tow away the car for being unfit to drive" argument, i.e. you're proposing that we make arbitrary changes to the article just so it then has a reason to be merged. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2016

Box Office is 125 crore for 2 weeks Vishwanath krishna (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 11:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Box Office Update

Please update box office collection to Rs. 100 crore (18 Days).

Source-- http://www.ibtimes.co.in/24-worldwide-box-office-collection-suriya-starrer-grosses-rs-100-crore-679859 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.197.224.180 (talk) 08:09, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

The films grossing 100 crores in 18 days Dabishdab (talk) 09:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2016

The movie is now declared as a blockbuster.

References

Somasunder.r.1988 (talk) 04:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Somasunder.r.1988, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a mouthpiece for a film's marketing department. We don't regurgitate subjective "declarations" as facts. Also, asdlk.com is a blog. We are not interested in what blogs say, because anyone with an internet connection can create a blog and proclaim themselves an expert. We only care what reliable published sources have to say about any given subject, with the exception of the "blockbuster", "flop", "all-time super-hit" nonsense. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2016

117.202.42.76 (talk) 10:03, 28 May 2016 (UTC)total box office now is 125 crores

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 13:01, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2016

117.217.141.16 (talk) 08:33, 30 May 2016 (UTC)24 already grossed 142.9 crores (source:asdlk.com)

 Not done Asdlk in not a reliable source - Arjayay (talk) 12:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2016

24 MOVIE CROSSED 103 CRORE IN 18 DAYS .THEN WHY YOU didn't change the BOX OFFICE REPORT............... MIDHUNRAJ 007 (talk) 04:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:12, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Box Office Update

UPDATE BOXOFFICE COLLECTION - http://www.ibtimes.co.in/24-worldwide-box-office-collection-suriya-starrer-grosses-rs-100-crore-679859

 Not done - From the source: "The news of "24" grossing Rs. 100 crore has been announced by the makers of the film." We do not use primary sources, i.e. people directly involved in the subject like the film's producers, director, actors, promotional department, for controversial data like financial values. Producers have a vested interest in inflating or deflating these values depending on their goals. They might inflate the numbers to make the film more attractive to potential viewers, or they might deflate the values to escape taxation if the film isn't doing well. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:59, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2016

24 movie collected over 150 crores (source:http://cinipunch.com/28-days-collection-suriyas-24/)

Deeku d15 (talk) 06:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)24 movie collected over 150 crores (source:http://cinipunch.com/28-days-collection-suriyas-24/)

References

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The source you have provided is not a reliable one. Amccann421 (talk) 07:23, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2016

The movie has collected more than 150 crores INR and has been declared as a blockbuster. Somasunder.r.1988 (talk) 09:45, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

References

Not done: Somasunder.r.1988, see the other comments on this page, please. We don't use blogs as references. 123boxofficecollections.com is unsuitable as a reference. Further, we don't include subjective "blockbuster" labels as they have no academic value. It's like including "the film was declared beautiful". That's an opinion. We don't present opinions as facts. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:29, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Box Office Update

Please update box office collection to Rs. 100 Crore (Catchnews is a reliable source)

Reference-- http://www.catchnews.com/regional-cinema/actor-suriya-24-movie-crosses-the-rs-100-crore-mark-becomes-2nd-film-after-singham-2-to-enter-into-100-crore-club-1464243875.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.197.224.146 (talk) 05:23, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Box Office Adjustment

If there aren't any reliable sources to attest new box office figures, you should edit the article indicating that the latest figure comes from a specified date. For instance, you should write "as of 15th May" in the current figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.226.188.159 (talk) 07:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

• How can I use the file for the Bengali article of 24 (2016 film)? Bang Bang50 (talk) 23:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2016

the box office collection of the movie is incorrect its written that 100crore but its 157crore for proof can check these links total bo- https://twitter.com/RucshanK/status/740536879028817920 2 weeks after release bo- https://twitter.com/neeraj_sunny/status/741331089105379328

62.209.9.3 (talk) 18:05, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. st170e^talk 18:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

To clarify St170e's note, it's unclear who these people are, so it's unclear why we should care what they say about a film's financial details. See WP:UGC. We're not interested in what random people on the Internet have to say, only what reliable published sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:05, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2016

the box office collection is 155 cr

Arjun gosh (talk) 05:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:55, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Corret the fake collection report.wikepedia is not a page for fake reports.

its 156 crore in 28 days.the 100 crore collection was the 10th day report.refer(www.galaxyreporter.com) Athulnandu (talk) 07:14, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

 Not done - See below. Galaxyreporter is a blog. We don't care what blogs say. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:29, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Remove the 100% fake collection report of 100crore or correct it as "100crore(in 10 days)".WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE CURRENT FAKE REPORT?

The current boxoffice report is fake until changing it to "100 crore(10days)".refer(www.galaxyreporter.com),(www.behindwoods.com),(www.ibtimes.com) Athulnandu (talk) 07:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

 Not done - See below. You've provided no references, and at least two of the sites you've mentioned here are blogs. We don't care what blogs say. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:30, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

please Correct the boxoffice collection to 156 crore.

The movie crossed 100crore in 10 days& crossed 150 crore in 28 days .all reports and official confirmation says that 24 grossed more than 156 crores worldwide.(www.galaxyreporter.com),(www.moviereview.in),(www.onlookersmedia.in),(www.gackhollywood.com),(www.iluvcinema.in),(www.courierdaily.com),(www.skylarkpictures.in).cheak the 28 days collection Athulnandu (talk) 09:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Athulnandu, Wikipedia is not a breaking news source, it is an encyclopedia run by volunteers. It is a bit obnoxious for you to post three urgent-sounding requests in the span of a few hours. Wikipedia has no deadline. You didn't even include reliable references. If you are asking for a change, you could be helpful by providing direct links rather than making other editors do the research for you. I can tell you that most of the sites you mentioned in your last post are completely insufficient and I won't even look at most of them. Galaxyreporter.com is a blog. Onlookersmedia.in is a blog. Skylarkpictures.in is a blog. Iluvcinema.in is a blog. We don't care what blogs have to say. Anyone can start a blog and call himself an expert. We only care what reliable published sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about any subject. This almost always means mainstream sources. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2016

the fil grossed 100 crores and that is not included.

106.66.173.118 (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:31, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2016

please upload the Box-office WW of this movie '24' 122.174.215.115 (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
You must also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2016

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. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:29, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Home media

The satellite rights of the film were sold to Jaya TV; it is scheduled for its Indian television premiere on 10 October 2016 coinciding with Ayudha Puja. (Kollytalk and Youtube are reliable sources)

References-- http://www.kollytalk.com/cinenews/jaya-tv-acquires-satellite-rights-kabali-theri-428887.html
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B08Yxr_TPrI— Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.197.224.146 (talk) 05:23, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Why are satellite rights noteworthy? Wikipedia doesn't typically get into a film's detailed financials. There's nothing at MOS:FILM that encourages we detail satellite rights or other rights sales. Oh, and neither Kollytalk nor YouTube are reliable sources. If JayaTV is, (I don't know off-hand) their presence on YouTube could be used, but that doesn't address the matter of why satellite rights would be noteworthy to an encyclopedia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2016

2405:205:8382:281F:F019:77EF:7002:15F8 (talk) 07:50, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 08:46, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2016

Anjaan (2014 film) (talk) 08:33, 27 December 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. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 09:00, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2016

Ayushmaan Bhava 24 (talk) 09:54, 31 December 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. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 10:00, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2017

24total box office coolection is 150crores http://www.imdb.com/list/ls060166618/ 109.161.146.3 (talk) 07:58, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. IMDb is not a reliable source EvergreenFir (talk) 09:08, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2017

Disney English 02:10, 11 January 2017 (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. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:36, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

24 Decoded

Suriya's 2016 film 24. Vikram Kumar next 2018 24 second part of planed in 24 Decoded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Takkarutakkaru (talk • contribs) 11:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 24 (2016 film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170115165223/http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/movie-review/24-movie-review-suriyas-athreyan-is-a-role-to-remember-for-years-2788454/ to http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/movie-review/24-movie-review-suriyas-athreyan-is-a-role-to-remember-for-years-2788454/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:27, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2017

Pls Change total box office collec tion of 24 KenGohan (talk) 06:32, 20 August 2017 (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. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 06:42, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 November 2017

Adarshmp12 (talk) 12:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

108 c

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 13:44, 18 November 2017 (UTC)