Talk:Ra.One/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edit request on 30 November 2011

Ra.one gross according to Boxoffice.India is 200 But Kamal Jain of Eros said 230 crores. Isn't he a more reliable source. I don't know what Wikipedia has against Ra.one. It keeps on posting wrong figures! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka6r18eNhaQ Please edit. I hope atleast you are gonna be fair. Raonebest (talk) 08:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: As of the consensus reached earlier, BoxOfficeIndia.com will be the only source to be used for Box office issues. A source from the website stated that the film has collected 200 crores worldwide. -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 09:10, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
No. Official revenues aren't preferred on Wikipedia, but third-party and independent sources like BOI are. Second, there is wide consensus to use BOI. Third, Jain has a history of inflating and wrongfully describing both gross and budget figures. Scieberking (talk) 09:14, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
It doesn't matter even if Eros is saying Ra.One grossed more than 3 Idiots. Only BOI could be used. Scieberking (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I've been quiet abt this, but now quit honestly I need to say this, the BOI link talks abt the HINDI version only if you add the Tam/tel versions gross, it may as well reach the 240 crores. I understand the consensus...I've been part of it after all...but well can't just ignore the other versions of the film all together and wait if BOI would grace us with the final gross someday?! As if those versions can not be considered as part of the film's gross?! BOI wont ever talk abt them because then you will have to put them in comparison with films that did not release with those versions. Doesn't change the fact that their revenues do exist.--Meryam90 (talk) 20:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Umm guys and gals, Box Office India will not add the tamil, telugu, german, korean, etc. versions of the film to the gross number because then it will not be a fair comparison in their mind. They think that if other films like Bodyguard, Dabangg, 3 Idiots, only released in Hindi then only the Hindi version needs to be compared. Meryam90 is right and you just can't ignore all the versions of the film (Tamil, Telugu, German, Korean-not sure the last one released yet but it will in the next 2 weeks for sure). 240 crores is a reliable number. Kamal Jain, the CFO said that during a shareholders briefing as well. If you consider the data from other sites that talk about how much the tamil and telugu version have made, komal nahta said that in 2 weeks both the versions had made around 12 crores (we're at 6 weeks now). Knowing the tax rate in the regions, the gross comes out to roughly 24 crores (double that). The tamil/telugu version was also released internationally in some parts of the US (and other parts worldwide) including Chicago, Virginia and Texas because I saw tickets available for both the Hindi and Tamil and Telugu versions. The german version was also pulled in a lot of cash. So, just let the 240 crores number be because Box Office India will not report the revenue from the other versions. They stopped reporting at 9 days and havent issued another update. Meryam90 is definitely correct so Scieberking just chill. Plus, you guys have used Economic Times Interviews in 100000 places in your article and why cant you use an itnerview from the most reliable source as of now--THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE FREAKIN" COMPANY THAT RELEASED THE FREAKIN" MOVIE! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs) 11:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
While I do not think there is any need of profanity, I also support Meryam in saying that 240 crores is the rightful gross of Ra.One because gross refers to "the total amount of money a film has earned at the box office, sans tax cuts and any other duties charged on ticket prices." hence, the Tamil and Telugu and all the other language versions should rightfully come under this.
Besides, if that's the logic, then we should also remove the 3D grosses because Bodyguard didn't release in 3D. But that isn't correct. Hence, I request Scieberg to review his opinion regarding the gross figures. And yes, I suggest Ashermadan to become a little less over-emotional; your message would have reached better had you kept it straight to the point. You, see, I'm learning some Wiki manners and hope to spread them everywhere too :D. Thanks. AnkitBhattWDF 13:29, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

First, official figures aren't preferred on Wikipedia like I've said a thousand times. The facebook poster and this Jain interview are promotional in nature. Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources. BOI is an independent, third party source which is being used for box office data on most Wikipedia entries of Bollywood films.

Second, BOI does deal with Tamil and Telugu revenues, as it's been doing with The Dirty Picture. The total gross figure will be out soon.

Third, Jain has a long, evident history of inflating figures. He did just with the budget, and now he's doing the same with worldwide gross. Ra.One earning some 40 or 50 crore from dubbed Tamil and Telugu versions is just illogical. Ankit, "claims of 250 cr was absolute rubbish"; these are your own words, right?

Moreover, enough is enough. This is the fourth time. If I see any sort of profanity used again by Ashermadan, I assure him a block! He's been warned at least thrice by three users, including an admin. Scieberking (talk) 20:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok seriously now you're just doing this for the sake of it, it's embarrassing...and you're afraid to be called Anti-SRK or pro-Salman, I may as well go ahead and call you that, because when ou sit there and stop me from removing the highest grossing film in the overseas market (when in fact IT IS NOT) from Bodyguard or an "All time blockbuster" from Ready because BOI is the ONLY source to be used, you're majorally going against yourself here...Secondly, 200 crores from Hindi as we know...40 from the other version (domestic or overseas) is logical, I used 3idiots, bodyguard, Ready and Singham and calculated the Tax income they take out from gross, it reaches 25%-30%..So accodrding to Nahta and Taran who kept track on the Tam/Tel version way after Boi stopped doing so, the final gross of those have hit 9 crores by now (domestically)

alone.

Don't tell me BOI is the only source used if you don't follow that rule yourself...I rev your edit, we will keep it at that, and then as you say of BOI does release the gross WITH the south version, we will change it then...plus 1 editor's word can't go against the agreement of 3...democratically speaking as well!! --Meryam90 (talk) 20:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, Bodyguard has grossed 253 crore according to CNN-IBN, but still 292 crore by BOI is being used. So are almost all Bollywood movies. 3 Idiots has done 375 crore according to the same article. Honestly that wouldn't surprise me if Jain says Ra.One has grossed more than 3 Idiots, because I know his data keeps fluctuating. If you keep inflating box office figures and use the promotional and official data, then that wouldn't be just right. Scieberking (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the "all-time blockbuster" verdict of Ready, it wasn't just announced by the producers or the head of production company, but by Taran Adarsh, a leading film critic, whose reliability has been extensively discussed. Scieberking (talk) 21:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Why does the page about Box Office Figures keep on changing? Sometimes it's 200 Crores (or 220, I'm not sure) and sometimes it's 240 Crores. Kamal Jain said that it was 240 Crores from all its versions and Box Office India is just reporting the Hindi version. Go with the number that was given in an interview until Box Office India releases the numbers. As Ashermadan said, Box Office India only reported for the first 9 days saying that it had netted 6 crores and ceased to provide us data after that. Their numbers for the release were also off. Eros stated that the film was released in 3100 screens in India and 904 abroad but Box Office India only reported figures from 1837 cinemas. What about the 1263 cinemas in India? The regional versions of the film did not release in 1263 cinemas. Why did Box Office India not report those numbers? I do not agree with Box Office India with this release because it is the largest ever for an Indian film and because they have not accounted for the figures from 1263 cinemas even in the first week of release. Clearly Box Office India is out of its depth and cannot be considered an accurate source anymore. The same happened with the release of Bodyguard which was said to be the biggest release in the month of August/September. To sum it up, I agree with Meryam that the number should stay at 240,00,00,000 INR because Box Office India has not reported the data from 1263 cinemas. My question to you Scieberking is that why has Box Office India not reported the data from 1263 cinemas in India and not made their findings clear about the abroad numbers? This is my argument and why I believe it should stay at 240 crores. Now it is 4 people against 1 so it should stay at 240,00,00,000 INR. ZAli Zubeidaaslam (talk) 21:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zubeidaaslam (talk • contribs)

The thing is, a 100% correct report about the exact number of screens doesn't exist. The numbering of screens kept changing if you can kindly read talk page archives. Let's not question the reliability of BOI again, and if you do that, I fear there won't be a single source left for box office collections of Bollywood movies. Thanks. Scieberking (talk) 21:13, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
The CNN-IBN article was ORIGINAL search from them. this is coming from withen the production company PLUS, all ppl involved with the film said that the budget was 150, Khan, Sinha till the last leg of promotion and you're well aware of that...Well, you're the only one here saying that Jain is unreliable AND every Media outlet in all of India still calls Ready a Bolckbuster even Kamal Nahta calls it that...and I am sure you would agree that Kamal is FAR more reliable that Taran, I even asked Ormax The compan that OWNS BOI...and they called it ONLY a blockbuster...
HUH, and HERE is a 4TH opinion against your judgment M.Scieber, Anything more then?!! --Meryam90 (talk) 21:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
She has a point? What happened to the data reported by 1260 cinemas? why are you so adamant about not keeping it at 240? now 3 people are against you and you still keep on changing it back? and, 'freakin' is not an insult. go use a dictionary. Asher Madan 21:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if 16 more editors come up and urge to do something biased and against Wikipedia policies. Scieberking (talk) 21:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

How is it biased? We feel the BOI is not reliable in this case and zubelia has provided some great evidence. what happened to those 1200 cinema numbers? And EROS didn't release any official number. People were speculating it was 5000 etc but when they released it it was 4004 EXACT EXACT. EROS never said it was 5000 screens, 5000 screens will happen till the end of 2012 but for now its 4004 exactly and BOI has failed to deliver the required information. I feel theyre out of their league here because hindi films are releasing on larger and larger scales. 2440 for now seems reasonable and when BOI (if) they ever provide the numbers, we'll see. I feel the same problem will be thrown upon us when don22 comes out. Asher Madan 21:29, 10 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs)
Because we don't go with official announcements for box office numbers. Independent, third-party sources must be used. See my above reply to Zubeidaaslam, and learn how to sign your posts. Scieberking (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I did read it and youre EROS stated 4004 screens ONLY ONCE. They said that by the end of 2012 raone would be on 5000 screens roughly. SO youre wrong. Asher Madan 21:35, 10 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs)

Your post is almost unreadable and doesn't make any sense at all, but from what I understand of it, I only said that the number of screens keeps fluctuating. And it's totally irrelevant to talk about the methods employed by BOI, or how they carry out their research. Scieberking (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I feel it is relevant to talk about their methods because data from a good 1263 screens is missing! Why do you chose to ignore that? When Eros International said it released on 4004 screens on October 26-31 and other people were speculating, why can't we accept the Eros 4004 screen number? Maybe for smaller releases BOI can manage but they've definitely not stepped up their game for Ra.One, Bodyguard or even 3 Idiots. Other sources like Komal Nahta and Taran Adarsh reported 91-93 crores nett during the weekend but BOI reported 85.5. That's a good 10 crores nett off? How did that happen? Did anyone question that? Do you have some hidden agenda? Why are you fighting over this? If you want to call an admin and we'll make the same argument. Maybe BOI is good for some films but it's definitely not reliable for Ra.One, Bodyguard and other huge releases. --Asher Madan

How can you ever prove this? This is your POV and original research. Come up with a reliable source if you want to further implicate that BOI is biased and showing incorrect data. Anyways, with a so-called consensus like this, which is highly illogical, totally against policies and guidelines, and brings in fanboyism, I don't think it should be a GA anymore. This is probably my final comment. And I don't want anyone to make further accusation and personal attacks. Thank you very much. Scieberking (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Look Scieberking, if BOI releases a statement with all data from the Hindi, Tamil, Telugu (and German?) versions, I promise you I will be the 1st one to update this page with it. I check BOI ever single day but they have not released anything. Their "Worldwide Grossers" charts also keep on stating "Ra.One Hindi" over and over again. 240 Crores is the best estimate we have right now and I think that's all we're trying to say here. 240 Crores is much closer to the real figure than the "only Hindi" version is. We've provided the link and stated in the article that BOI says differently by giving them the nett figures in the Box Office section. It shouldn't be a big deal. Hopefully this is only temporary and BOI will release something (though I have my doubts because they stopped counting the tamil and telugu versions at 9 days) and if it's not then I guess more explaining needs to be added to the article. Have a good day. Sorry to raise your blood pressure over this. It shouldn't be a big deal as it is only temporary. --Asher Madan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs) 22:05, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I;m going to create a new section regarding this. its becoming too big to handle here. AnkitBhattWDF 14:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 December 2011

Box office section India Please edit 1st day collections and all collections of 5-day weekend are wrong </ref> http://www.koimoi.com/box-office/shah-rukh-khan-breaks-salman-khan-s-weekend-box-office-record/

Even the source which you've quoted as #149 it says 1st day nett collecton is 18.5 crores </ref> http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-10-28/news/30332680_1_bollywood-film-raone-theatres

Secondly, you've nowhere mentioned Ra.one's 170 crore opening worldwide weekend gross I think it should be. </ref> http://ibnlive.in.com/news/raone-breaks-bo-record-with-rs-170-cr-collection/197886-8-66.html According to Eros, 5 day nett collections in India is 96 and overseas gross is 37.25 crores (more than 100 crores nett) </ref> http://www.koimoi.com/box-office/shah-rukh-khan-s-ra-one-7-day-total-103-crore/ </ref> http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-10-31/news/30341937_1_raone-music-rights-overseas-market So Ra.one's 5 day net collection is 100 crores! PLEASE EDIT! That source is from the official site. Check for yourself </ref> http://raonemovie.com/ Stop being biased!!!!!

Also, I see you've quoted economictimes many times in this article. But when it comes to total gross you fail to acknowledge Acc. to economic times total gross is 240 crores! 123.252.212.89 (talk) 05:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

It is 240 crores right now. Besides, the opening weekend numbers will be put up soon subject to editor consensus. AnkitBhattWDF 13:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 December 2011

Please admin. and editors

I think the case of ra1 figures should be treated as enthiran only .Period .

Enthiran gross has been provided by boxofficeindia.com for all languages .

http://www.boxofficeindia.com/boxnewsdetail.php?page=shownews&articleid=2171&nCat=box_office_news.

It has not yet been updated on the Enthiran main box , but well , that's a separate issue .

So , my request to you is to please change the worldwide gross of Ra.one from 240crores (which is totally un-reliable considering it comes from EROS and Mr. Jain ..hehe ) to 200crores (i know its the hindi version alone , but its the last update from boxofficeindia.com ) immediately .

Moreover, we cannot have random sources (like economictimes and blah..blah..) for box-office for different movies because then comparisions between movies cannot be ever made adequately . Taran Adarsh and Komal Nahata are probably the worst trade-analysts and un-arguably the most corrupt people on the planet to even consider .

BOI should be the only source . Period .

Kindly wait for the worldwide figures to be updated on BOI which include all versions . I am sure they will update as they updated Enthiran figure of gross 255.50 crores .....and i beg you to revert ra1 figures from 240cr to 200(hindi) immediately .Please donot degrade wiki standards by publishing box-office figures and even verdicts of movies from sources other than boxofficeindia.com .

How can anyone justify that so-and-so movie crossed so-and-so movie based on wiki figures unless all wiki figures are from the same source ? So , all figures and even verdicts should be taken from ony one source . It's plain simple to understand , i hope .

I also feel 3i gonna do 75 crores in china on 900 prints easily seeing the craze on pirated version among the chinese and after seeing its humoungous response in hong-kong (30cr on 100 prints) and korea (15cr on 50 prints). So , 450 cr worldwide gross 3i would be quite easy . And one last request . Please enter enthiran i.e. robot gross of 255.50 worldwide in the main -box in the right top corner of that movie's page .


Seeta mayya (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

A procedural not done as is being discussed below. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 20:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 December 2011

The box office is 256 crore.

125.24.115.200 (talk) 04:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

A procedural not done as is being discussed below. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 20:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 December 2011

Please include ra one collected a record 170 crores in opening weekend in the introduction part Do I need to quote the sources again?

and btw 255.50 crores is Enthiran's expected gross read the article properly! 123.252.213.104 (talk) 05:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

A procedural not done as is being discussed below. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 20:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Ra.One Gross figures

Please note that any new discussions regarding this matter will be taken up here. Thank You.

I am going to clearly list out some viewpoints here. Please go through them in their entirety, and then respond.

  • Ra.One is basically a Hindi film. However, due to a very wide release and high budget, the film was dubbed in Tamil, Telugu, German and Korean so as to earn more money.
  • Ra.One is a 3D-conversion film.
  • The distributors of Ra.One are Eros Entertainment, headed by Kamal Jain, CFO.
  • Ra.One has more or less completed its run in Indian theaters, though it still has quite a considerable release left overseas.
  • The dubbed versions of Ra.One were released overseas as well.

Now, the major concerns are:-

  • Box Office India has stated the gross at ₹200 crores, but that is for the Hindi version only. It is a third-party reliable source (though its copyrighting has faced much issue).
  • Kamal Jain has stated the gross at ₹240 crores, which includes all language versions all over the world. It is a first-person source whose reliability is being questioned, but there is no way we can say it is unreliable.

Now, I will put up some suggestions.

Firstly, please note that Ra.One released overseas in all language versions. besides, the film also released in these languages in India itself. The major drawback with BOI numbers is the fact that, forget overseas, they haven't updated the Tamil/Telugu versions for India itself. hence, there is a strong possibility of the gross increasing at least by ₹8-9 crores. In addition, these versions would have raked in more money overseas as gross, meaning that entire gross version can touch upto ₹30 crores just from these version. And I haven't included the German/Korean versions.

Secondly, there is much talk about BOI being a "third party source", hence most reliable. Please note that BOI itself has stated that the gross is for Hindi version only - what happens to the other versions? I am in no way doubting the reliability of BOI, but they haven't yet updated information in a wholesome manner.

Third, the tone being used is become very adamant and often descending into unnecessary abusiveness. I suggest everybody to keep calm and think things over properly. I also request flexibility in this matter; any sort of internal dispute will destroy this article's chances at the FA review.

Fourth, while Wikipedia prefers third-party sources, nobody can say that the first-party sources are unreliable in cases like this. Please note, they are the distributors and I'm sure you would have heard of the Battlefield Earth controversy regarding inflation of figures. Any smart businessman will keep himself out of trouble. certain editors are using the statement that "Eros can say that Ra.One grossed more that 3 Idiots, but that isn't true". You are perfectly correct, but please note that Eros has not made any such claim.

As of now, I will not put up any sections for the final verdict. There will simply be "Comments". Only after a thorough discussion can we decide what to do. Cheers. AnkitBhattWDF 15:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments

To Seeta Mayya Please do not copy-paste the same comments from previous discussions. If you are unable to type, I suggest you get a keyboard. Moving on, why is Enthiran being compared to Ra.One? Note, Enthiran is Tamil while Ra.One is Hindi. Second, you have clearly failed to go through my comments. I specifically told editors to go through my comments first before talking here. You are needlessly blabbing here. I suggest you read through this discussion once again very very carefully, and then come back and say something new. AnkitBhattWDF 15:35, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

And another thing, what a lame and pathetic link you have given! The heading clearly states "Expected Lifetime Gross of Enthiran". Do you even know how to read and write English properly? We cannot use "expected" figures in Wikipedia. AnkitBhattWDF 15:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Use the BoxOfficeMojo for box office concerns. Since its listed there it'll be a heavy reliable source. ASHUIND 15:33, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
That would have been the best thing to do, but unfortunately BOM is over a month outdated in Ra.One figures; hence it can't be used. AnkitBhattWDF 15:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
BOM updates on monthly interval and recent update is of 1 DEC. You'll have to follow it since almost 99% of film related articles follow BOM for budget and box office related concerns. Every day film will make some money and you can't keep updating it on weekly basis. Since film is over with its run and in final stages to be out of theaters a monthly change will be sufficient. Rest will just get added after home media release. ASHUIND 04:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
No Ashu, only the US gross has been reported. What about the "foreign" section? It hasn't been updated for over a month. Simply put, unless BOM updates the overseas figures, its impossible to use them as the gross figures in this article. AnkitBhattWDF 09:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I think I've already made my comments above. First party data is preferable, and could get unreliable, if distributors like Jain keep inflating and flactuating the figures related to the budget as well as gross. For the film that has netted (all BOI, and not official, data) 114.74 crore in India, $8.6 million overseas, and another 8 crore from dubbed versions, 240 crore (at best it could be 220 crore max) seems to be quite inflated and promotional in nature. It is highly apparent and poorly hidden. No independent source or trade analyst would claim that Ra.One is the second highest-grossing film after 3 Idiots. With that said, I'm done with this. I wouldn't make any further comments to such futile discussions. Thanks. Scieberking (talk) 15:57, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Therein lies the problem. As far as I can see, Ra.One has earned $10 million overseas from Hindi version itself. And you are grossly under-reporting the Tamil/Telugu versions; gross cannot be 8 crores as even BOI's last update stated the net at 6 crores, translating to at least 10 crores in India itself. Note, this is old data. Plus, we have to take into account the overseas part too. I'm sorry you find this discussion futile; you have often found such discussions futile, I believe. Cheers. AnkitBhattWDF 16:39, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I have no idea what reliable sources for just Indian box office figures are. I can see the attraction of having consistent figures, but do not see that that excludes other sources. I do note that Box Office Mojo is a reliable source for box office figures and has a page on Ra.One here. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:54, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

To Seeta Mayya

I agree, the tone of the discussions here are not directed in a constructive way. I suggest everyone maintain etiqutte, no arguing on redundant stuff and just get to the point. However, please do consider Enthiran's case though. I find it to be very similar to this one. The deal with Enthiran was that editors relied on some original sources and a few third party sources, such as news sites which quoted estimated box office numbers from producers. All of these were deemed unreliable and we ended up removing the figures from the infobox altogether, in favour of using figures generated only by BOI. We decided not to use that either because it only had the box office figures of the Hindi version and not a number that combines all versions. I'm not suggesting that we should remove the numbers in the infobox for Ra.One as well—my idea on this issue is that I really don't mind using third party sources other than BOI or any others that quote box office figures from producers because in the end, that's pretty much what BOI does too (doesn't it?). If the BOI figure is used, make sure all other Bollywood film articles give the "Hindi version-only" figures to keep things consistent (and keep the list of highest-grossing Bollywood films accurate). EelamStyleZ talk 18:57, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

To Seeta Mayya

Your claims have absolutely no proof and you are consistently giving completely unreliable information. First thing first: Note that BOI has said Expected Lifetime Business of Enthiran. Let me make it clearer : - EXPECTED. It is unconfirmed. Alright? Now do you get why we are not using BOI for all language versions. Second, stop speculation at once. Nobody can "see" exactly how much a film will earn anywhere. Third, this is not a matter of fans vs. others. Please get that outdated philosophy out of your head. My only aim is to make this article an FA after the awards section, and I do not like when editors needlessly disrupt very important consensus. Fourth, I or any other editor is not biased. The plain fact that you should get is that Bodyguard did not release in Tamil and Telugu, hence WE CANNOT USE THEM. Please do not make me repeat this again and again. Fifth, excuse me but 75 crores? While I cannot predict any sort of exact figure like you can, I am most certain a 75 crore gross is out of hand for any Bollywood film. Hindi films do not have that sort of widespread craze as in, say UAE. Please put up reasonable predictions. Besides, Ra.One is releasing in China with 1,000 prints. But I won't say it'll gross 100 crores there.
You have still not seen the analysis I posted. If you continue to make such sort of contributions to this consensus, then I shall completely ignore you. Let me make it simple and plain: I am willing to become a friendly discussive editor, but only if the facts are gone through thoroughly. Till then, even if you wail of gender bias and rude behavior, I shall take no steps to change myself. I consider this the last time I see this BOI link again, otherwise I will really blow up if I see the word Expected again. AnkitBhattWDF 08:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


  • Changed lines by "----", that are cleaner. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 21:02, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
That's your contribution to this consensus :( :P ? AnkitBhattWDF 09:01, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
No, just a maintenance tag. Since it's in someone's comments, I find that people should leave a small message. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 11:23, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
  • The more I think about it, it seems to me that this problem will likely resolve itself in a few months - once the reports are all in. After all, in Wikipedia:There is no deadline. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
    Yes, but it would be good to get this consensus for the future. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 11:23, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
  • *Le sign* I talked so much about this issue I have nothing to add over here. the way I see it, it's either put the 200 crores from BOI, and wait, may they ever state the full all versions gross of Ra.One or put the 240 crores from the CFO of Eros and then wait if BOI they ever state the full all versions gross of Ra.One. :D
The one comment that made more sense to me from all of you is the one of Ruhrfisch: The more I think about it, it seems to me that this problem will likely resolve itself in a few months - once the reports are all in. After all, in Wikipedia:There is no deadline.
Now, my issue mainly isn't being an SRK fan or not, I just hate the fact that every 2 seconds a gross is reported, 200 then 240 and then again 200 and on and on and on. We all know BOI is just a website, they're the most reliable here because they're backed by a company who's main aim is collection such info and being payed for it. Claiming that he is not a good source is just ridiculous. Why? cause the reason stated is the fact that he falsified the budget...they all did, Khan, Sinha, they all said that it was 150. LOL BOI itself said that it was 175 crores. Remember that one? so that reason is most invalid...--Meryam90 (talk) 13:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Exactly. Scieberking has very conveniently forgotten the fact that BOI reported landing costs at 175 crores. What happened to that huh? But there won't be a response because he has "made his point in several places". In addition, our darling Mis Goody-Goody Oh-so-delicate Feminist has also "he he"d this issue. Isn't that so Little Miss Sunshine? AnkitBhattWDF 15:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I participated in this nonsense for Enthiran, and do not want to do it again. Too much hate. We got the figures removed from the infobox from that one because it was too contentious; the same may have to happen here if you people don't cool it. Take a look at the first paragraph of the Enthiran box office section too see how we added in the various claims into the text, but kept them out of the infobox. I would think you could add the claims for other language versions in text format here, until/if it ever gets put out by BOI. BollyJeff || talk 14:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I promise you that such a thing will not happen here. I assume that all editors are intelligent enough to distinguish between logic and foolhardiness; actually, by the time this discussion is over, a new figure for Ra.One gross may come out LOL. AnkitBhattWDF 15:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


To Meryam90 and Ankit bhatt

Hehe !! Ankit Bhatt , really ? why can't you just cool down ? LOL , do you think ra1 is even 1% as good as 3idiots in terms of quality ..hehe..whether you release ra1 in 5000 prints in china , it can't earn more than 10crore or so . Please remember that . The trending of 3idiots has been historic in the modern era and lets not compare it with trash like ra1 . Moreover , FYI ,3idiots has been a superb take on education system in a hilarious manner . And if you could only tell me which are the nations that suffer from educational stress among children , yes they are CHINA , JAPAN AND KOREA . now , look , 3i had been a huge blockbuster in the pirated version in dvd's n cd's in korea n hong-kong ....and when it released in these 2 countries on mere 100 prints each .JUST LOOK AT WHAT 3I DID ...30 CRORES IN KOREA AND 15 CRORES IN HONG-KONG ...in china too , the craze in dvd pirated market has been over over humounguous ...and with 900 prints and especially being dubbed in chinese as san gun win , 3i can easily do a 75 crore or even more . remember dude , 3idiots released on a paltry 1400 prints in india ..and you dont seem to have the slightest idea about it's trending and appreciation ..its not a bad movie like ra1 - the superhero !!hehe !! Hehe !! Meryam90 ,Now , just answer one question of mine ..just one ...how do you want to compare 229 cr bodyguard gross by boi , 366 gross 3i by boi and 240 hahaha gross ra1 by kamal jain ...im a huge huge srk-ian ..but i can't be like you ..sorry , but i think you guys just want to show srk is the best in any situation , not matter what .. coz frankly Ankit , you especially , keep on giving reference to your previous comments etc . , where i cannot find even a single talk-worthy and un-biased point and then continuously ridicule me ..is that how wiki editors respond to a guest , that too a girl ?? NOT DONE !!! :(

And btw , please don't tell me that both of you even handle shah rukh khan 's wiki article coz it would be a shame that srk fans have written such a pathetic n small article on a living legend ...and if you 2 do handle that page also , please have a look at my edit -request on that page even coz i felt i needed to give you guys some important rather necessary info about srk for the betterment of that article ..Huh !!oh god !! wiki editors !! huhhh !!!

Seeta mayya (talk) 15:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

To Seeta Mayya Ok seriously, Please stop with the use of the "genre card" as an excuse here, what is this, the 19th century? I thought ppl were over the whole "How to talk to a lady kind of c***". I am a girl too and I can tell you no one here is disrespecting anyone, U're making no sense, you keep using the FAN and comparison mentality here, which are by far very outdated. plus you're really not contributing in any useful way to this discussion. That said, stop using that demanding tone and going against your own words...that just takes away your reliability as a person and an editor. I have nothing further to add here. Oh and regarding the SRK page, dear, why don't you show us your magic and edit it yourself? what's stopping you if you know better than all of us?! :D --Meryam90 (talk) 14:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Mrs. Seeta Maya, as I said, I'm going to ignore the viewpoints of a mentally reatrded and outdated person. Perhaps I could help you? I'll be freeing up some much-needed consensus space and be doing everyone a favour. Please do not feel bad and hurt that "this happened to a gril" ROTFL! Seriously, I completely support Meryam; she's a she, yet she doesn't wail like a helpless baby whenever she is given a counter-argument. Grow up girl. AnkitBhattWDF 15:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Mrs. Seeta Mayya you need to be more respectful. We are all in agreement that 240 should stand because it represents worldwide gross and is closer to the actual figure Ra.One might earn. All other pages like those for The Dirty Picture etc. show WORLDWIDE GROSS FOR ALL VERSIONS. And please don't call Kamal Jain unreliable. If Kamal is unreliable so is BOI then because they said the budget of Ra.One was 175 but it was actually 135-150. And, as far as the Enthrian article is concerned, it is EXPECTED. Also, if you want to keep the 200 crores, then go to all the films that have also released in Tamil/Telugu (like the Dirty Picture most recently) and change them to Hindi only. By your logic, Enthrian should only show 29 crores that it made from the HIndi version alone, not the 255 crores you claim. Seriously stop fighting. It's only a film and we'll update the article if BOI decides to release figures. Asher Madan 15:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs)


To Meryam90 , Ankit Bhatt & Ashermadan

Ha ! I knew you would get so touchy and irritated Mrs.Meryam90; and it clearly shows your bias for srk . It's pathetic you can't get it how people reading wiki articles must be ridiculing the editors now . Even lots of my friends have told me that even wiki has now become a fake site and an srk-pro site . Bias can be clearly seen as you guys din't take even an iota of time for uploading Mr. kamal jain 's comments , whereas you guys would have fought a death-defying battle if someone did something like this to 3i or bodyguard figures . Now , alright im sorry for using that gender-card ..hehe ..i really am . But , its really sad to see that wiki editors can conveniently chose to ignore and ridicule and laugh at a real unbiased view from a person like me . Huh !!! uhmm !!! Sad is the state of affairs !! and Ankit , i don't seriously see any point in talking to a so-called guy (well, are you even a guy ? hehe) ...and now you have even crossed limits calling me a mental case . Seriously , why do such peeps even exist in this world ?? Help me !! Help me !! O lord !! :( and Asher , i can understand you yaar . We don't need to fight , you know why . I was just saying why not wait for boi altogether till they publish all-version gross . I seriously dont wanna fight with you . plzzzzzzzzz .

and lastly , who deleted all my comments . who ? who ? who ? UNFAIR !!! :((

Seeta mayya (talk) 15:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Seeta, Who's fighting? We're just telling that we have to use a worldwide gross figure in order to be consistent. Someone brought this to our attention and we had to honor their request because it made sense and they provided a compelling argument to use 240 crores instead of the Hindi 200 only. I'm also saying that when you say Jain is unreliable you forget that BOI made plenty of mistakes like the 175 crores budget debacle. Kamal Jain is the first hand source which has direct access to the data and said it during a small stocks and shares interview because the interviewer asked. Until BOI issues an official update with all the versions (tamil, telugu, hindi, german, korean, etc. etc. etc.) we will stick with this number because according to the calculations made by a few people here, 240 crores does represent an accurate figure for the first release of the film worldwide. -- Ashermadan (talk) 16:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

To Asher

I accept your point of view , if you say so ; but tell these 2 meryam90 and ankit to behave properly . Please also have a look at my edit request on SRK wiki page . Seeta mayya (talk) 16:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Miss Seeta Mayya, I'm giving you pretty much an ultimatum. You are an incompetent nincompoop who doesn't deserve the attention of a street dog. Simply speaking, your claim that you are "a huge srk fan" is so outright laughable that I suggest you to shut your trap rather than embarrass yourself so much. Second, if you love 3 Idiots so much and hate Ra.One so much, I suggest that you get lost from my sight and sound. We are not here to predict the Box Office of any film; only you are so remarkably stupid to even attempt such a thing. Miss Oh-So-Crap, i also suggest that you learn proper Wikipedia rules: this is not a personal forum. There is a STOP warning at the top of this talk page which you clearly failed to see. In case you do see it, you will understand why your foolish comments were deleted. As ususal, the comments will be deleted again and again, and it will keep happening no matter how many times you put it back. Good day Miss Loser. AnkitBhattWDF 16:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I promise the moment BOI releases figures I will be the first one to update this page with them. So far, BOI is MIA just as they are MIA with Enthrian. I hope they release it soon because BOI never released FINAL figures for Enthrian. As I said, I will wait and update it myself when theyre released. Ill take a look at your SRK request right now. -- Ashermadan (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

But Asher , just check my top-most link for enthiran worldwide gross 255.50 crores by boi .Did you see it in my first edit -request on this page?? So , i am 100% sure boi will update ra1 figures too , they must be some where around 225-230 i feel . Seeta mayya (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes I did and it says EXPECTED. We can't go by expected data here. BOI has not provided final CONFIRMED figures and that's why there's so much speculation. We can't use that article. I was used before for Enthrian and people protested because it said expected! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs) 16:36, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


Civility

{{uninvolved|Conduct|The users are attacking each others.}} Please keep calm for this, as this behavour is bad for discussion. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 20:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry Ebe, but Seeta Mayya is disrupting consensus procedure. I'm afraid I'm being forced to do my duty here. AnkitBhattWDF 05:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
While I see your point, being uncivil will get this worse. Handle it with grace. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 10:22, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I have the best solution: I'm going for a block. And I hope its indefinite. I'm sick of Wikipedia, period. With all the abuse going on by the others, I find it depressing that time and again I am forced to bow my head down and suffer the punishment. If I ever knoew that this was what I would get after over 2 years of experience, I would never have joined. Good day. AnkitBhattWDF 13:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Im sorry everyone :( But i really din't expect so much hatred , my comments being regularly deleted even if i upload them back ...just felt i could help to improve pages about shah , but im stunned at the kind of behavior shown :((((( THNX ...sorry :(Seeta mayya (talk) 14:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Seeta, you will get proper responses if you articulate your comments better; or so I feel. I have removed your comments because it was not related to the topic, and it was uncivil. Please keep your comments cool, and let it be succinct, preferably; you'll probably get better responses. Lynch7 02:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
But how can you let all these derogatory comments against me be still here and delete mine ? Moreover , this conversation looks rather pointless without my comments . You should take notice that these comments have been far more abusive and off-topic than mine . So , i request you Lynch , to either put my comments back or delete the whole of this comments section that refers to my name again n again ....and that too with abusive comments against me Seeta mayya (talk) 03:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
If you feel others' comments were derogatory, cite policies and take them to task. I have not read others' comments, but your comments will not be reinstated because they violate WP:CIVIL and possibly WP:NPA. Lynch7 13:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

On a related note, a general appeal to everyone to keep calm, and not resort to being uncivil. Let's not have any name calling or any other uncivil behavior. Lets talk and behave like grown ups. There are provisions for dispute resolution without being uncivil; if need calls for them, lets use them. Just shouting will only sour the atmosphere. Lynch7 13:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey MikeLynch, I guess the dispute is over tough not aware whether be solved or not. Ankibhatt has again quit-ted Wiki. -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 14:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Haha, I had forgotten what it was about :-) I made a comment; it's up there somewhere. BollyJeff || talk 14:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Well its too bad for Ankit then, let's just mind our business and not not feed the divas. Lynch7 14:25, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
He should have received strong warnings for stuff like this anyway. Lynch7 16:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Seeta mayya. I think her comments should be put back in or everyone else's comments should be taken down. Wikipedia:Civility pretty much only mentions deleting comments before anyone else sees them (where the user who posted them deletes them). Otherwise, just strike through, or put it in a collapsible table:

Otherwise, when someone calls for someone impartial or uninvolved or whatever, it's seriously a royal pain to go back and actually reconstruct what was said and who said what to whom and when it was all done. I'm of the opinion that we should just delete most of the comments, archive the rest, and try to start over with some real civility on all parts as though everyone was a new person. Banaticus (talk) 15:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

bolly business verdict

Is there any room/need for this in the article? It says that Ra.One Hindi verdict is average, because it did not recover costs in India box office alone: bollybusiness.wordpress BollyJeff || talk 17:31, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Immediate problem - it's a blog, so unlikely to be a RS. Ravensfire (talk) 18:14, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Alright, forget it then. BollyJeff || talk 18:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
I wish it was a reliable source, some of the analysis seemed pretty good. Much better than from many "reliable" sources, to be honest. Ravensfire (talk) 18:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Yeah that's why I picked up on it. This site often quotes reliable magazine articles and such, but it's not clear where they got these numbers. BollyJeff || talk 19:46, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Ra. ONE box office report

Ra. ONE has grossed 253 crore in 1 month. You can check in this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?u=y_-Utx89o0U so please change — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.24.114.53 (talk) 14:07, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

These were just estimates. It's actually at 240 crores because entertainment tax is 25% rather than 30%. The 240 remains. Don't worry, it still beaten BG and all these other films to become the 2nd highest grosser. -- Asher Madan

Edits

Please stop adding ridiculous things into the critics section. Give me an example of any other article on the entirety of wikipedia that even says a critic was criticized for 'overrating' a film. Even the deccan chronicle was criticized, many tamil reviews were criticized. seriously, keep the quality of this article intact. your plot summary is poorly written and even people like Meryam90 agree with me. They supported the changes and is a heavy contributor to the article. Why do you keep on doing this? you reversed the edits I made that even she thought made the summary better. now you're acting rather oddly and adding something as ridiculous as "he was criticized for overrating"? seriously. do you even have any idea what a good article is and what isn't? -- Asher Madan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs) 15:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 December 2011

In the box office section it says it has been declared hit by Box office India. It is out dated!!! Please change to blockbuster!! 123.252.214.44 (talk) 04:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: Source says the film is just a Hit. -- Karthik Nadar 05:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 December 2011

Asher...you say it has beaten bodyguard...so why does the BG wiki page says it is the highest grossing film of 2011..please edit!! Wiki is contradicting itself!! 123.252.214.44 (talk) 04:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Man, I don't care about wikipedia anymore. i can't be bothered to change every single thing. If you want to talk to Karthik or Secret of Success. There's too much confrontation on Wikipedia and you can't change anything. Good luck. -- Asher Madan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashermadan (talk • contribs) 00:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

 Not done Please consider explaining how specifically you are intending to make an edit request before making any further ones. Thanks. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 23:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Komal Nahta and Taran Adarsh

http://www.koimoi.com/box-office/shah-rukh-khan-breaks-salman-khan-s-weekend-box-office-record/ The box office section says Ra.One's total 5 day nett collections were 85.50 from all version!! But Komal Nahta and Taran Adarsh have different stats! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raonebest (talk • contribs) 11:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Television Broadcast Rights

Pity on Wikipedia Editors. I really don't understand whats going on here. I really didn't know that all the editors involved here in making this article a 'Good Article' can go up to this extent of even writing down 'Rumored' figures. The article says the television broadcast rights has been sold for Rs 40 crores by Star TV. But the reference provided clearly indicates that it is just "rumored to be...". Moreover from when did we started considering Koimoi.com a reliable source for such figures. I think almost all prominent editors here know Koimoi is more or less a biased site providing irrelevant numbers and figures. On reading the above discussions, I found that user Meryam90 is nothing but a mere SRK fan. She has no other job in the world other than editing articles of SRK and his films. All editors just keep telling others that Wiki is not a fan-site and its an encyclopedia. But whatever shes doing here isn't fan-ism? I have no personal grudges against her but I just want to highlight the way Wiki is working now has changed and in fact degraded. Can someone now please do justice to the article and provide a reliable source for the Television Broadcast rights. I still wonder how many such links are provided as a reliable source by such biased editors.--SM —Preceding undated comment added 09:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC).

Thank you for been kind enough to update our mistakes. Give me few days to root out all problems. -- Karthik Nadar 11:48, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
I have updated it now and provided a more relaible source (Hindustantmes) than Koimoi and Oneindia. Hope that source stays as a reliable one unless the editors you named above makes a change. You can cool down now. --Msrag (talk) 08:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
wow! lemme give u a huge, a whole post dedicated to me? well U could go back to the history of this article, U'd probably find out that it wasn't me who made that particular edit :D nevertheless...Yes, I am a SRK fan. Yes, I only edit his films. No, I am not biased, only his haters think I am :D What U don't know is that, it is the sole reason why I am here, otherwise, I probably don't care abt the rest of Wiki...That is my sin...Oh, the horror :D --Meryam90 (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Civility

Per my statement (now at Talk:Ra.One/Archive_2#Civility) I'm archiving most of the talk page so that discussions can now continue on an ongoing civil basis. If uncivil comments are posted, please either 1) leave them alone, 2) strike through them if you must, 3) put them in a collapsible table:

It is generally better to just leave them alone because it makes it easier for people who later enter the discussion to see exactly who posted what and when it was posted, and what is in response to something else and to the responses seem justified or not, especially since someone already thought an admin was biased and this person was asking for the opinion of completely new uninvolved people. Just be civil. If people continue to be uncivil after warnings, their comments will stand as mute testimony to justify a block of some length. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page or put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk page and someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 23:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Nice! I've also removed the automatic archiving. Simply put, it's not needed anymore. I also removed a duplicate archive box template which should clean up the headers slightly. Ravensfire (talk) 00:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Maintenance

I just ran http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Ra.One on this and discovered more than a dozen dead links. Not acceptable on a GA! Who is gonna fix this? Perhaps the ones claiming this as a GA for themselves? Many, but not all of the bad links are from Bollywood Hungama. That site restructured and renamed all their links, and deleted some. The site needs to be searched for the links, or maybe they need to be replaced with new citations, if those old ones cannot be found. BollyJeff || talk 13:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Somehow I am not liking the use of this expression: Who is gonna fix this? Perhaps the ones claiming this as a GA for themselves?. :Nevertheless, the links are available online and will be fixed within the hour. There are only 11 dead links anyway and the ones tagged as suspicious or a soft 404 are actually working just fine.
and now U see that U can easily fix Bollywood Hungama's links as well, that's something to add to your informations :D [which U already did, from the change u made to the DDLJ article lol].--Meryam90 (talk) 17:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
I didn't even realize you could just replace www with oldbh for some of them! Thanks for fixing it so quickly, and sorry for my tone above. BollyJeff || talk 18:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
I didn't know either to be honest, I just figured it out (I guess I was really too lazy to look up 11 links all over again :P) So I should thank u cause now we seem to have found a solution for the Bollywood Hungama dead links dilemma! :D

Clarify as to what you mean by "Perhaps the ones claiming this as a GA for themselves". You may think very low of SRK or his films or his fans, but I expect not to hear this sort of comment that deliberately attacks the major contributors of an article. Is that clear? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I love SRK and many of his films. I already apologized above for the way I phrased the request. I just meant that if the article starts looking bad, it may reflect badly on the major contributors, and we don't want that to happen. Assume good faith please. BollyJeff || talk 15:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Alright, alright...All Iz Well guys :D btw, can I be cheap here and request some copy editing for Red Chillies Entertainment? :P --Meryam90 (talk) 15:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Red Chillies Entertainment? Oh yes, I remember; it was rather poorly written and low on content, the last time I saw it. I'll check it out now. Btw, what articles have you been working on lately? ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:18, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it was, but I tried top improve it now but I am lil bit afraid it my be sounding advertise-ish :P I've been working on Don 2 (but now it's protected :( ) and SRK's page which is double its size by now :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meryam90 (talk • contribs) 3:23 pm, 27 January 2012

Neutrality

Good article guys, it seems like it's greatest movie(in territory of Hollywood, Bollywood etc.) of all time! Editors are only viewing and editing from there own perspective no one is concerned about neutral user. The monopoly of thoughts and edits clearly depicts the biased information. Jpmeena (talk) 05:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Could you elaborate please? I do not understand exactly how each user is "monopolizing" the article. We go by fixed and reliable sources and assimilate information in one place; Wikipedia is that basically. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 13:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Chammak Challo OGG.ogg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Chammak Challo OGG.ogg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Chammak Challo OGG.ogg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:59, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Featured article

After much thought and final additions, I have decided to push for the FAR as its better late than never, and FA-related progress on this article had slowed considerably. If any major contributor has any sort of errors to rectify in the article, please put them here as I can't open a third peer review now. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Khan promoting Ra.One film in association with MacDonalds.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Khan promoting Ra.One film in association with MacDonalds.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Khan promoting Ra.One film in association with MacDonalds.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Non-free images

I have found that the article uses 7 non-free images, out of which some are not properly licensed. It needs to be limited to 2 or maximum 3. The poster, a VFX image and possibly a costume image, but certainly not more than that. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. Its presence has to significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission has to be considered detrimental to that understanding. You may be able to learn more from WP:NFCC. With regards, Secret of success 15:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ra.One/Archive_2&oldid=1137110083"