Talk:Brahmāstra: Part One – Shiva/Archive 1

Archive 1

Orphaned references in Brahmāstra (film)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Brahmāstra (film)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "release date":

• From Sooryavanshi: "Rohit Shetty confirms 'Sooryavanshi' to release on Diwali after meet with Maharashtra CM Uddhav Thackeray". The Times of India. 25 September 2021. Retrieved 25 September 2021.
• From Dimple Kapadia: "Angrezi Medium to release a week earlier on March 13". India Today. 17 February 2020. Archived from the original on 18 February 2020. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
• From Shershaah: "Sidharth Malhotra and Kiara Advani starrer Shershaah to release on August 12 on Amazon Prime Video". Bollywood Hungama. 15 July 2021. Retrieved 15 July 2021.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Comment on Bonadea's editing

As per @Bonadea:'s recent editing as the user says it's a press release I argue with the user and can say it's not a press release. Just because it's from ANI doesn't means it's a press release check this [1] no mention of disclaimer or paid article also in other big portals the article wouldn't be published if it was press release. ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 10:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

It is a press release, that is not a claim or personal belief. no mention of disclaimer or paid article It says it's from ANI. Did you believe that the words "disclaimer" or "paid" always appear on press releases? That is not the case. A publication that's being upfront about where they get their material will mention the source – like Gulf News did here. also in other big portals the article wouldn't be published if it was press release That makes no sense. Big news outlets publish press releases all the time. That is the purpose of a press release. This source (which I removed from the article) is identical with some very minimal rephrasing (see churnalism), and that proves without any doubt that it is a PR. --bonadea contributions talk 10:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

thanks for clarifying it. ... २ तकरपेप्सी _talk 10:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Need to add Starring cast of this film

As Wikipedia is based on reliable sources many reliable sources mention Ayan Nayak as starring role. I want many experienced Wikipedian to say weather Nayak need to be there in starring role or not as many reliable sources clearly mentions that Nayak is in star role २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 16:10, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

As per Template:Infobox film, starring roles are based on billing block or on-screen credits where secondary sources have little role to play. Starring list in the official motion poster does have Nayak in it and its too early to conclude whether thier role in the film is important enough to be in the starring list. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

This source[2] mention The film features an all-star cast that includes Amitabh Bachchan, Mouni Roy, Ayan Nayak and Nagarjuna.२ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 19:26, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

"All-star cast" does not mean each of those cast is "starring" in the film. Tom Hanks might be a "star", but that does not mean he is "starring" in a film in which he plays a small part. Does that make sense? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 19:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी: I've reverted this edit where you've cited an IANS source dated 14 Dec. It's a WP:CIRCULAR reference mirroring this wikipedia article of that date. Nayak was silently added by an IP on 13 Dec which remained until Sush150 removed them the following day.

Secondly, I don't see any particular reason why we should deviate from the cast list given by the studio channel where there's no mention of Nayak.

Pinging top editors of this page who are active this week for a wider attention @Bovineboy2008, Sush150, Rickyurs, and Ravensfire:. -- Ab207 (talk) 21:02, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ab207 You are right we should not add any further reason to add Nayak based on any previous sources, I think it's better to wait and see weather the channel or news particularly covers him in a little detail as him working in a starring role in this film. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Concur with Ab207 - use the billing from the film poster / credit from the film. Ravensfire (talk) 00:51, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ravensfire, Ab207, and Pyrrho the Skeptic: You may be also interested to see how २ तकर पेप्सी is trying to legitimize false things here and other Wikiprojects. See the evidences at Talk:Ayan Nayak#Speedy deletion rationale. Thanks. 2402:3A80:1A46:6454:71A2:8CBB:2547:FCD7 (talk) 12:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Is Ranbir Kapoor producing this film?

Please provide a reliable source before linking him as a producer of this film. Greatly influenced (talk) 15:35, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Greatly influenced: Kapoor is credited as producer in the trailer billing block. Added link in the hidden note. -- Ab207 (talk) 19:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

We should move this to Brahmāstra Part One: Shiva.

I believe we should move this to Brahmāstra Part One: Shiva as this is the correct name.Barnacles14 (talk) 23:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

I also believe we should move the page to "Brahmāstra Part One: Shiva", since that is the actual name of the film. Krishna Dahal (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Let’s wait until the sequel release. Also many people know the film as Brahmastra, it is the common name of the film. Mehedi Abedin 21:49, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Prime Focus // DNEG mention

@Csmartstarr, I understand and appreciate the fact that you added content stating about Prime Focus providing the film's VFX and it's citation that was added along, however, it's totally unneeded to add it in the distributor credits in the infobox—considering that only the distributor of the country of origin is mentioned i.e. Star Studios, while a note about Disney serving as the global distributor is cited right next to it. Which brings it to the matter that adding Disney's name below Star Studios and citing it with the Brahmästra link from DNEG's website is totally unrelated to the distributor section, as well as unnecessary in that part.

Coming to the mention of Prime Focus, I think it's more suitable to add it in the production section of the article considering that Malhotra and the company's names are linked and stated in the summary of the article, at the top of it, as well as are included in the producer and production company credits as they do serve as so on the project.

Please let me know if there's any issue or misunderstanding regarding my input.

—Sam (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I put it in the production section but you deleted that too!

It is very rare for Prime Focus/DNEG to actively produce and invest in a movie as they have 100s of massive project in film and TV to work on. This is the reason I have mentioned it.

Also Star Studios is only a subsidiary and brand name now. In all technical aspects the producers, owners, and distributors of the movie are Disney. When it is distributed across the world including India it will be registered under "Walt Disney Company". Csmartstarr (talk) 20:00, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I see, no problem. Sam (talk) 22:13, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2022

change "and co-produced by Ranbir Kapoor and Marijke Desouza independently." to "and co-produced by Marijke Desouza independently." Bhaveshmadkar (talk) 09:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done, You should cite reliable sources for this change. Also why you want to remove Ranbir Kapoor from the producers?. The official trailer of the film mentioned his name as a producer. Grabup (talk) 09:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

The order of the cast

Ok so there is definitely conflicting stuff on this. As we know we have based the cast ordering on the trailer glimpse video that came out a few days ago. However further looking at the videos we see that there is conflicting stuff present. Look at the video from Sony Music India's page [3] compared to the video from Dharma Productions' page [4]. We can clearly see that the orders in both of the videos are vastly different. For me I think we should stick to the Sony Music India's video on the cast order. Pinging editors that are frequently present on this page @Ab207, Sam0006, Fylindfotberserk SP013 (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

@SP013: Mr Bachchan won't agree. It's certain that he would get the top credit in the film too because Dharma re-uploaded the teaser on his demand. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

While I do agree to actually sort the order as per Sony Music India's video (since the said company, and Dharma Productions followed that cast order on the teaser, making it the first time it was basically uploaded on the Internet — meaning it's the principal order), I think that it's better to follow the order in Dharma's re-uploaded version of the teaser (which yes, was certainly to get Bachchan's name billed as the top credit) as it has been seen as a public change/update, and Dharma is the film's principal production company while the former serves as the music label for the film (not like it holds any less importance on the project and matters associated). Although, I would still be more aligned towards the previous cast order (and would like to stick to that if other and more editors are fine with it), as it's much more reasonable and sensible. Sam 16:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

sorry, pinging just incase. (SP013) Sam 16:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes now they are uploading stuff with keeping his name at top , but does it really make sense for even wikipedia to hold his name at the top . Film is completely marketed on the name of Ranbir Kapoor and Alia Bhatt . Bachchan's character is not more important than Ranbir Kapoor's role in any way Rhea786656 (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Besides, I'm not sure how many would agree on it since I'm assuming, and it seems like a lot are editing the cast order on the basis of the re-uploaded video, I guess. — Sam 16:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC) [ talk ]

“Bachchan Sir ko respect deni thi". I don't think they'll change it now. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Brahmāstra: Part One — Shiva

@Ab207 You recently increased the budget of the film by Rs.200 crores. The article you provided is only the 1 article present on this Internet. I've researched for 2 hours but not found any other OFFICIAL declaration from any other reliable websites/sources. Karan Johar officially told in an INTERVIEW it's 300+ (not told 500) 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 Please revert the edit and make it 300+ crores as early as possible

Also 🙏🏻 Please don't block me STAfizs (talk) 12:16, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@STAfizs: Why would you be blocked? You did the right thing by starting a discussion at the talk page.

Coming to the budget, as per this source: Uday Shankar, Chairman of Star and Disney India When asked about the film being mounted on a budget of Rs. 300 crores, he refused to give away a number but said, "Just to tell you, it is way more than that."

For content, we mainly follow WP:Secondary sources, although official (WP:Primary) sources are also helpful in some cases. The only official source here is Uday Shankar; Karan Johar did not make any statement on budget, afaik.

Therefore, I did not increase the budget of the film by Rs.200 crore, I only added an upper estimate of 500 crore, which is perfectly inline with Shankar's statement. -- Ab207 (talk) 12:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

But uday also didn't say it is near 500 crores, way more than 300 can mean, 330 ,340 , 350 also. 500 crores is very high limit , Ranbir Kapoor has not even Charged any money since he is one of the producer . 300-350 would be the right choice Rhea786656 (talk) 20:10, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

We already have another source saying 500 crore budget. Uday Shankar's statement only favours that figure. No idea from where you got that 350 cr, avoid WP:Original research. -- Ab207 (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Khiladi King, please go through the above discussion. We have conclusive evidence to believe that the budget is way over 300 cr. Therefore, the majority sources argument doesn't cut it here. In fact, we should look for an updated budget figure rather than deflating it back. Thanks -- Ab207 (talk) 18:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Only one source mentioned the budget to be 500 crore INR but majority reported the budget to be 300 crore. Khiladi King (talk) 04:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Khiladi King You're not entirely wrong but the studio executive clearly disputed the 300 crore figure, so we must look for better sources. Also, 500 crore is the latest figure possibly including cost escalations due to delays not factored in old sources, so it carries more weight. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Khiladi King The latest official budget as per Bollywood Hungama is 410 crore. Perhaps it's better to go with this one in infobox. -- Ab207 (talk) 13:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Sam0006, what do you think? -- Ab207 (talk) 15:38, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ab207 Well, various sources state different estimations, the most common one and even in press releases I assume, is the 300+ crores one. But at the same time, it has been said that its 'way over' said amount. It's best to keep it at 300+ or the '300–500 crores' estimation, unless a number is confirmed by various publications.

– Sam | he/him (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Sam0006 The 300 crore figure is refuted by studio executive himself, telling it's "way more than that." So we must look for newer and better figures. Since 410 crore is the latest one and it is quoted by sources within the production, it might be close to the actual figure. -- Ab207 (talk) 16:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Hello, Khiladi King. I've removed 300 crore estimate as well (since 500 crore was also removed), it's clearly an outdated figure refuted by studio. 410 crore is the latest update followed by majority of new sources. WP:AGE MATTERS applies here. Regards -- Ab207 (talk) 07:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Astra

I would like to request to add a section "Astra (weapons)". Explaining the weapons and it's origin. 27.56.252.79 (talk) 13:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

For example, Nandiastra, whoever hold it receives power of 1000 nandi's etc. Also Ranbir Kapoor doesn't posses any astra he is himself a astra of fire element. Kindly edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.56.252.79 (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Most expensive film

claim that this is one of the most expensive film in Indian history till date is false, as RRR is 500 crores and this is just 400 crore. Discuss here first Ningalonnichpovuka (talk) 04:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, firstly, saying stuff that I'm engaging in PR or promotional purposes towards the film is false. Secondly, I'm not trying to claim this as the most expensive Indian film, instead its one of the most expensive Indian films. I wasn't the first one to add that actually though, and the film's budged it also considerably notable. – Sam | he/him (talk) 04:28, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

RRR is 500 crores, and there are many films in most expensive league and not worth of adding that 'it is ONE of the MOST EXPENSIVE file TILL DATE in INDIA' in Wikipedia , as amount is already mentioned (400 crores) and not even close to RRR which is 500 crores. Information should be a information and not for film promotion and boosting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ningalonnichpovuka (talk • contribs) 05:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Please stop removing this. How can be a film's budget become promotion? This film's budget according to sources reveals to be 400 crores putting it him expensive film along with many others (RRR). That is where in English Grammer, we use "ONE OF THE MOST" indicating it is not the most expensive film of India but it is among expensive FILMS in India. Vikenviksingh (talk) 07:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I also want to add that you can't label everyone's edits in this part as PR. Sam | he/him (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 10 September 2023

"Post the release, multiplex-chains INOX Leisure and PVR Cinemas have combinedly faced a loss of over ₹940 crore in the market capitalization.[177]" This isn't because of brahmastra But rather multiple flops Like Shamshera and lal singh chadda. Whether brahmastra is a loss or not is not yet decided and pvr s investment in the movie is still hideen. This looks more like a internet fluke than an actual Statment. Please remove it Lord kai07 (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022 (2)

Change "The film received mixed reviews from critics." to "The film received mixed to negative reviews from critics and fans alike." SOup178 (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The film polarised the critics, so "mixed reviews" is appropriate. No bias. Neurofreak (talk) 17:54, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022 (3)

Shah Rukh Khan - Vanarastra 37.186.34.64 (talk) 17:51, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 9 September 2022

ADD BOX OFFICE COLLECTIONS AND HOW LOVE STORY AND ROMANCE KILLED THIS MOVIE. THERE ARE LESSER CHANCE FOR PART 2 DEPENDING ON FINANCIALL FATE OF THIS FILM. 2604:3D09:1380:6A0:48A9:8881:F44D:E41A (talk) 20:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:37, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 9 September 2022 (2)

Change The movie received mixed to positive reviews from critics to The movie received mixed to negative reviews from critics.

This is because the movie was praised for its vfx and cgi but failed to deliver a good story or plot and was lagging in many areas. Many of the Indian magazines have it a low rating due to the peppy screenplay and direction. SOup178 (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. This is a duplicate of your prior request, please discuss there. Ravensfire (talk) 00:44, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Box Office

Brahmastra Box Office Estimate Day 1 Rs. 37.50 crores

Source: https://www.bollywoodhungama.com/news/box-office-special-features/brahmastra-box-office-estimate-day-1-ranbir-kapoor-alia-bhatt-starrer-collects-rs-37-50-crores-record-non-holiday-opener/

Please Update this 103.136.200.165 (talk) 05:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 10 September 2022 (3)

Change from

• Shah Rukh Khan as Mohan Bhargav, a scientist and a member of the Brahmānsh who wields the Vanar Āstra (cameo appearance)

To

• Shah Rukh Khan as Mohan Bhargav, a scientist and a member of the Brahmānsh who wields the Vanar Āstra (special appearance) Saaki2804 (talk) 03:50, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: "Cameo appearance" is a better fit. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 07:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

References

fake news

Post the release, multiplex-chains INOX Leisure and PVR Cinemas have combinedly faced a loss of over ₹940 crore in the market capitalization THIS NEWS IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE , EVEN CEO OF PVR HAS CALLED OUT IT ON TWITTER , ATLEAST CHECK THE SOURCE FROM WHERE YOU ARE TAKIN INFORMATION BEFORE WRITING ANYTHING , NOTICING SO MANY NEGATIVE AND FAKE INFORMATION ON PAGE 146.196.39.116 (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 10 September 2022 (7)

Please add categories Category:2020s Hindi-language films, Category:Films scored by Simon Franglen and Category:Films directed by Ayan Mukerji to the article. Mehedi Abedin 14:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 14:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Reception

Please add review of a renowned film critic, it'll help audience and readers. Review: Taran Adarsh gave 2 out 5 stars, tweeted that this film have VFX but it do not have content. Also added that its second half is bad, it "nosedives" in it. He is disappointed with this film. Source - [5] Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 19:51, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The reviews from reliable wiki sources Indian Express, Zee News amd Taran Adarsh have been negative. The overall review can be summarised as "mixed to negative". However one user has repeatedly indulged in edit war and made it "positive" adding inconsequential references. This page has been vandalised by some users with disruptive intent. It os requested that some admin takes notice of this. Ankitsalsa14 (talk) 06:45, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

reviews

why aree you highlighting reviews from pages like the week which are not even popular 122.50.195.240 (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Reviews are mostly negative Adamstraw99 (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

There is negative review from The Hindu, pls add that. I also request to remove any tabloid outlets such as filmfare which is also a magazine article and has no bearing in stating it's review among the reputed critics and also the reviews in whole become mixed when reputed critics rated and reviewed mostly from mixed to little positive to more negative. Seabirdie (talk • contribs) 02:53, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The reviews from reliable wiki sources Indian Express, Zee News amd Taran Adarsh have been negative. The overall review can be summarised as "mixed to negative". However one user has repeatedly indulged in edit war and made it "positive" adding inconsequential references. This page has been vandalised by some users with disruptive intent. It os requested that some admin takes notice of this. Ankitsalsa14 (talk) 06:43, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Zee News is positive. The overall critical reception is somewhere between mixed and positive and sources that reflect this are cited in the article. The personal opinions of Adarsh and the Indian Express cannot be used to determine critical consensus. Rotten Tomatoes also shows a 63% approval rating based on 16 reviews, pretty much in line for mixed to positive. That the film has been hit by propaganda from right-wing outlets (refuted, obviously) is not a ground for Wikipedia to be indulging them. DeluxeVegan (talk) 07:57, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 10 September 2022 (5)

  " | gross          =    " to "| gross          = ₹75 crore " please add this MPGuy2824. Thank You  103.136.200.165 (talk) 11:29, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

References

 Not done: This is now an outdated number — DaxServer (t · m · c) 08:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 11 September 2022

The two day collection of brahmastra is 79 crores. Please add that in the Box Office section. Vasusen25 (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DanCherek (talk) 02:07, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 10 September 2022 (6)

Ljgv (talk) 14:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The Indian Express Brahmastra box office collection day 1: Ranbir Kapoor-Alia Bhatt film grosses Rs 75 crore, eyes Rs 100 crore weekend 10 hours ago

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DanCherek (talk) 02:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 10 September 2022 (4)

Change The movie receives mixed to positive reviews from critics to The movie received mixed reviews to negative reviews from critics.

Reason being so, the movie was praised for its vfx and cgi but almost everyone who watched the movie including critics and fans, criticized the movie itself and the etchy and lagging screenplay. The movie collected a mere 36 crores despite being a huge magnum opus. SOup178 (talk) 07:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Hate won't save your biased argument Boycott gang isn't allowed here. Most people liked the story as well Lord kai07 (talk) 13:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Cite sources for any statement you make: can you cite a review that speaks well about the story? 103.160.128.40 (talk) 13:24, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DanCherek (talk) 02:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Reviews

One user has repeatedly edited the reviews as "positive". However many reviews like Taran Adarsh and Zeenews have passed negative reviews. We have to go beyond personal bias and come to a consensus for benefit of this informative platform Wikipedia. Going through all the data in open domain, it can be certainly agreed that the reviews are "mixed". Request the changes be made and plagiarism not be allowed. Ankitsalsa14 (talk) 04:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree. Plus the response in India section states that Times of India and DNA India gave it positive reviews and cited two articles, one from each, in that statement. But the articles are not reviews at all, one is on projected revenue of the movie on box office day 1 and the TOI one discusses the leak of the movie. This statement is misleading and the citations do not in any way match up to those claims. 103.160.128.40 (talk) 13:22, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Answered= no Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 15:41, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

first day box office collection?

what is first day box office collection? 2405:201:1007:F228:4187:D079:D6C8:BA10 (talk) 07:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

In country collection should only show first. Gujaratikanudo (talk) 18:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE ABOUT BUDGET AND BOX OFFICE

TILL 11 AUGUST, FILM HAS COLLECTED 225 CRORES , PRODUCERS HAVE POSTED THI

AND YOU CANNOT PUT BUDGET AS 410 CRORE WITHOUT ANY RELIABLE SOURCE , MEDIA ARTICLES HAVE PUT MANY FAKE NEWS ABOUT BRAHMASTRA SO YOU CANNOT TRUST IT 146.196.39.229 (talk) 07:16, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2022

The box office figures are compiled from various sources. The figures can be approximate and Bollywood Hungama does not make any claims about the authenticity of the data. However they are adequately indicative of the box-office performance of the film(s). Box office figures are not official and under scrutiny.

references: https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/brahmastra-box-office-why-there-are-different-figures-for-the-film-everywhere-101663031644806.html https://www.outlookindia.com/art-entertainment/-brahmastra-box-office-figures-are-70-percent-fake-claims-kangana-ranaut-news-222576 https://www.msn.com/en-in/entertainment/other/people-wonder-if-brahmastra-box-office-numbers-are-fake-claim-theaters-are-running-empty/ar-AA11Ie0l https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/bollywood/brahmastra-box-office-success-reports-box-office-fake-or-not-pvr-inox-ceo-book-my-show-numbers-earnings https://www.seelatest.com/bollywood/are-brahmastra-box-office-collection-fake-here-s-the-truth https://www.telegraphindia.com/entertainment/brahmastras-box-office-is-roaring-despite-controversies-made-rs-17-2-crore-on-day-4/cid/1886342 https://www.pixstory.com/story/brahmastra-box-office-collections-fake/142094 https://newsable.asianetnews.com/gallery/entertainment/brahmastra-box-office-collection-real-or-fake-here-s-what-kangana-ranaut-has-to-say-rba-ri14c5 https://www.koimoi.com/bollywood-news/brahmastras-box-office-numbers-are-60-70-fake-figures-kangana-ranaut-reacts-to-its-not-just-ego-its-coke-ego-claims-says-thats-a-new-low/ https://www.bollywoodlife.com/news-gossip/brahmastra-box-office-collection-fake-visuals-of-empty-theatres-and-availability-of-tickets-on-booking-app-of-alia-bhatt-and-ranbir-kapoor-starrer-spark-debate-entertainment-news-latest-bollywood-upd-2183165/ BollywoodHungamaa (talk) 22:57, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done It isn't clear what the change you are suggesting is. That the box office is fake or to include Ranaut's statement? DeluxeVegan (talk) 04:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

References

The article should be neutral, particularly reception section

Lots of fan editors are removing critical reviews by Film analyst, reviewers because they are not propagating their views. Wikipedia should be neautral see WP : NEUTRAL, if someone is not gave review as you wish then it doesn't mean it have no value WP: POV. Taran Adarsh gave his review, he have millions of followers and many years experience in film analysis field. India's one of the biggest news outlet India Todaypublished his review means he have value. Admin should have look in to it. Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 15:50, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia also doesn't need to cite every review in existence, much less a one-word review made on Twitter. DeluxeVegan (talk) 19:39, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan:, most of the fan or paid editors of this film are avoiding critical reviews. But the review of Taran Adarsh is in public domain and he is not just anathor reviewer he have millions of tweeter followers. It's totally unfair, users here not allowing a single line of his review which is reported by leading newspapers of India, such as Times of India, Hindustan Times. The review was published of physical issues of these 🗞️.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

There are 8 positive reviews, 8 mixed reviews and 8 negative reviews in the relevant section. For a film that has received mixed reviews, that's about as neutral as it should get, Taran Adarsh or not. Wikipedia has included full-length reviews by Adarsh in numerous other articles, but a review constituting a single sentence from Twitter is not the kind of content an encyclopedia should entertain as critical reception, especially when there are other viable options available. The man is no Roger Ebert for his words to qualify as a standalone source. DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:37, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan: That man is standalone source or not, let decide readers, you don't need to work behalf of them. India's top newspapers wrote article on his 3 line reviews. The account have blue tick. Source I provided is 2ndry reliable source. I don't get your logic where your balancing quantity of reviews. Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 15:00, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

The logic was to refute your first sentence at the start of this discussion. Maybe editors are removing new reviews not because of their biases but to keep the sprawling section of 24 reviews from ballooning into more. I see no reason to give special preference to a self-published tweet from Taran Adarsh over a review in any other published reliable source. In any case, you need to gain WP:CONSENSUS for this addition. DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Agree with DeluxeVegan. The reception already has plenty of reviews covering various points. There's no value addition by accommodating Taran Adarsh's Twitter review. -- Ab207 (talk) 04:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2022 (2)

In the cast section, it is written that Shahrukh Khan reprises his role as Mohan Bhargava from Swadesh movie and a citation is also provided। However, as per that reference, the name just a reference to Khan's role in Swadesh film.

Kindly change from Khan reprised his role from 2004 film Swades. to The character's name is a reference to Khan's previous role in 2004 film Swadesh.

Thank you, 2405:201:402D:909F:3860:F165:F248:7C65 (talk) 13:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for pointing it out. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2022

Firstly the movie collection 265 Crores that you have listed is not something the film has yet collected, then why are you putting all fake collection numbers and fooling the public? Try to get your information from the reliable source and then update the correct information. 68.71.73.134 (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The current box office figure is reliably sourced. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Disney+ Hotstar release

The marketing section clearly says that the above mentioned platform is Brah'ra streaming partener. I wrote same thing in release section that it'll be release on Disney+ Hotstar, someone reverted it? I want to declare that it'll be released in D+HS in release' section.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 06:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Box office

This movie has crossed 300 crore 2409:4050:2DCA:680B:0:0:7449:E407 (talk) 04:49, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Its 287 crores right now. See Bollywood Hungama. --Yoonadue (talk) 03:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Box Office Collection

37.50 Crore On Day 1 AK965 (talk) 02:08, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

References

Brahmastra Worldwide box office collection till date (September 18) is 332 crores. SahilSpidy123 (talk) 04:27, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected box office collection edit request on 18 September 2022

SahilSpidy123 (talk) 04:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC) I think Brahmastra Box Office Collection Is 332 Crores Till Today And The Wikipedia Is Showing Only 287 crores collection which is a mistake so I request you to edit this and do the collection till 332 crores

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ab207 (talk) 05:12, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Box Office Collection till 18 September

Brahmāstra has collected over 332 crore not 300 crore, so please make it correct, thank you. 103.216.80.197 (talk) 05:52, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

• Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Blazin777 (talk) 07:30, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2022

To change from second highest grossing to the highest grossing indian movie 43.230.47.94 (talk) 09:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ab207 (talk) 16:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022

I suggest adding IGN India's review of the film as well:

Rayan Sayyed of IGN India also criticised the romance between the film's leads and wrote that "the mythology and its computer-generated portrayals are the only reasons to watch this film." Unexpired2513 (talk) 14:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Plus, that opinion has been reflected already by Anna M. M. Vetticad of Firstpost(romance) and almost everybody else(mythology and cgi) Aaron Liu (talk) 11:44, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

formats

movie is not released in 4DX 3D format , so remove that 146.196.39.46 (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Budget

You do realise you are adding any amount in the budget right now ? So now if any media will say budget is 1000 cr without any reliable sources or confirmation , you will put upper limit of 100 crores ?Media reports thousands of fake news , atleast read whether its news is reliable or not .all these 600 crores budget speculations have happened after kangana's statement , komal nahata clearly said in the budget of 400 cr , around 325 cr is for only part 1 , remaining is for whole trilogy , so the budget you should write is 325 crores-400 crores 146.196.39.46 (talk) 21:35, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Corrected. Akshaypatill (talk) 01:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

You did 400 cr - 600 cr 146.196.39.46 (talk) 05:52, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Dubious budget assertions

• As per Komal Nahta, astronomical budget of Brahmastra should be looked at as an investment for its three-part universe." and "Rs 400 cr, a part of the budget is for the future film and that the makers aren’t foolish to invest a heavy amount with the hope to recover its entire sum from just part one."

Now this is a statement of opinion and a pure speculation on his part. Doesn't explain why and how the budget is exported to future film when the they haven't even begun filming. Even if that is true, the cost incurred on this part comes under this part's budget only, regardless of how they use for future parts.

• Hindustan Times is simply subtracting the speculated VFX budget of this film based on director's assertions. This again is shoddy because whatever VFX cost they incurred is part and parcel of the budget of this film.
• Other sources like Andhra Box Office and Kangana Ranaut's social media posts claim the film’s budget is ₹650 crore" Both of them are unreliable, besides ABO simply said that the has gross 650 crore to recover it's budget, not the budget itself is 650 crore. This again shows that the author who wrote the HT article clearly doesn't have the required comprehension skills, making his analysis unreliable.

Bollywood Hungama is the best source among these. It clearly states the budget incurred of Brahmastra is 410 crores excluding marketing. That's basically all we need. Regards -- Ab207 (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

What is the actual budget?

Some reports say it's 400, some say it's 410. And does it included promotional budget, which they spent in Advertising? Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 05:11, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

It's 410 cr as per Bollywood Hungama excluding Print and Publicity expenses. Promotional budget is generally not included in infobox. Only production budget. -- Ab207 (talk) 05:31, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

@Ab207: I was quoting hindusta Times writer in that article not Kangana. The author said the actually budget is not known. If your following bollywood, you known that producers don't disclose actually budget. Various outlets reported different budget. I think we should write it. 410 is not final, budget could be more than this.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 08:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

If you are able to find a new source which claims that budget is so and so, then it can be accommodated. Until then, we have to follow what we have. Wikipedia is not obligated to wait for any official confirmation. -- Ab207 (talk) 08:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

You should WP:Ping while replying/ mentioning a user.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 09:16, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

This part 1's estimated production budget should be around 250-280cr alone.As,till calculations overall cast payments was made under 117cr ( excluding share on profit). And, some industry sources has recently revealed the prime focus i.e. the company responsible for animation has already completed the 20% work of pre production in Part 2 of the trilogy. The prime focus is hired for the whole franchise as per initial deal !!! Intially, the budget was planned around 600cr. For 3 parts. But, it might exceed the planned figures. Must, wait for any official release or authentication. Skalvanov (talk) 14:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Pritam as Music Composer for Songs and Score

Pritam is the Music Composer who has composed the songs as well as the background score. The mention of Simon Franglen is erroneous, would suggest we remove that. 123.252.206.147 (talk) 09:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Sharing proof on the IMDb page, where Simon is not mentioned

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6277462/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm 123.252.206.147 (talk) 10:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source. Sungodtemple (talk) 12:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2022

Remove Simon Franglen from Music by department 49.248.194.206 (talk) 12:20, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: I added a source that verifies the statement. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

This article is incorrect 123.252.206.147 (talk) 10:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

You'll need to provide sources to support your position. —C.Fred (talk) 16:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2022

2604:3D09:E47F:F3F0:D8AD:609F:28BD:D013 (talk) 07:19, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

1. Music Given By PRITAM. 2.Music by Simon Franglen, IS WRONG ON WIKIPEDIA.

3.to support the claim, imdb Music by Pritam Chakraborty Tanuj Tiku ... (original score). (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6277462/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Blazin777 (talk) 11:08, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Incomplete info regarding boycotters - careful presentation of an incomplete narrative for the benefit of the movie

The page has info about Hindu nationalists but not anti-nepotism "gang". Several others, such as me, also boycotted the movie, not due to any religious notion but against concentration of power and influence (political or financial) in an arguably nepotistic industry. Here is a German citation regarding this "other reason" for boycotting. The reason it is important is that the boycott section should not be purely used as a propaganda against a particular religion. It also undermines and typecasts the other boycotters as someone they are not -> accusing and labelling us of being something else without any proof. It should reflect the whole truth.

In other words, the movie's fans or even paid workers very conveniently give the boycott an abhorrent angle, making themselves safe from any criticism. Whereas, in reality, if the angle is included, it should be included with respect to everyone's freedom of speech equally- by including all sections who are boycotting it

Danke, merci. 2A01:E0A:911:1070:3DBC:6EA1:8E12:E69F (talk) 12:28, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Here's what Deutsche Welle actually says in their only sentence evoking nepotism: It [Bollywood] is also one of the most potent popular culture interests in South Asia, so naturally it's a desirable platform to use for propaganda. For a while now, there has been a concerted effort to break this system down by evoking middle class discourses like nepotism and nationalism. Nothing calling the industry nepotistic, and nothing on Brahmastra in particular. So as it stands, your statement is only conjecture. DeluxeVegan (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan Hello. I am not sure what am I doing wrong in the structure of my English sentences that you misunderstood my request. Let me try again. I am saying """1. there is one more reason, apart from religion, why. people are boycotting this industry. 2. Religion is not the only and sole reason behind the boycott 3. I did not claim that the article says Bollywood "is" nepotistic (--> although that would be the implication and the whole basis of the article) 4. I simply said """anti-nepotism people "also" boycotted this movie""". Hope one of these four sentences are clear at least.

The request is "not" to add a sentence like "Bollywood is a nepotistic industry" -- and the citation was not for this purpose. Instead, I propose to add with the citation a sentence like this: There were also boycott calls as efforts from people to break the system down in an allegedly nepotistic industry. Or something like this. This will clarify that 100% of the boycotters are not "Hindu nationalists"- as is being attempted to portray--> which you yourself proved as you quoted the sentence above: .....nepotism and nationalism". Therefore, """"both nepotism and nationalism"""" are the reasons behind the boycott. I repeat 100% of the boycotters are not Hindu nationalists. At least """""some of them""" are supposedly against nepotism. Hope now it is clear I am running out of ways to explain the point. 88.164.68.65 (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

To the IP: you are reading beyond what is in the source. The DW article does not address Hindu nationalism at all, so we can't say whether some of the boycotters are Hindu nationalists and some aren't. I have to agree with DeluxeVegan that your statement is, at best, synthesis. —C.Fred (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I think this is bullying to be honest. Because I am 100% sure you understand what "and" means, and that the phrase "nationalism and nepotism" in no way implies that the latter is a subset of the former (even if a dictionary did not help). Yet you choose to declare that nationalism is not mentioned in the article and insinuate that anti-nepotism boycotters might be simply a subset of Hindu nationalists? That is not a logic, unless it happened out of missing to notice the word "and", it is bullying. 99% of wiki will have to be changed if words on the two sides of "and" become inclusive. Coming back to this but Firstly, ok You say- The DW article does not address Hindu nationalism at all, so we can't say whether some of the boycotters are Hindu nationalists and some aren't.. So answer this- "The citations already being used in the article do not use the word "Nepotism" either. So, by that logic how can you be sure that it's not the other way round? That these nationalists mentioned in the citations currently active in the article are not a part of anti-nepotism boycotters? Right? Ok next:

2. Sentence copy pasted from the article (because I can not copy paste the entire article)- "For a while now, there has been a concerted effort to break this system down by evoking middle class discourses like nepotism and nationalism." : So the DW article says NEPOTISM """""AAAAANNNNNDDDDD"""" NATIONALISM are the reasons behind the boycott efforts. ( jeeeeeez ) How can I read "beyond" the word "and" as you claim? And how can you claim this article does not mention nationalism at all?

If it is still somehow not getting accross, then here and finally which mentions: These comments were in reply to the nepotism debate. Her comment upset the netizens, with many saying that they will boycott her upcoming film Voila, no "and" in this sentence.

What is the request? That anti-nepotists (also) boycotted this movie. What are the article saying? That nepotism was (also) a reason to boycott the movie. These two tiny sentences are enough. I don't know why it has to go beyond this. 2A01:E0A:911:1070:59A7:E6EC:9375:1B9B (talk) 17:03, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with C.Fred that the IP is reading beyond what is in the source. The DW source is talking about recent phenomenas in the industry and not specifically for Bramhastra. ".....they will boycott her upcoming film." does not imply that they actually did it. We don't know whether they did it or not. Also I doubt terms like 'Anti-nepotists' exists in the realible mainstream media. The other sources are not relible. Akshaypatill (talk) 10:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Ya except that there IS the mention of the movie Brahmastra in the article? and ignoring everything I wrote because you deleted this section 5 times and I reported you and you got warned that you can't do it anymore here? 2A01:E0A:911:1070:A11D:62C6:1F1C:A872 (talk) 14:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Can anyone send me a link to the silent wiki rule - "ghost people as soon as they corner you with logic and iron clad citations"?

These comments were in reply to the nepotism debate. Her comment upset the netizens, with many saying that they will boycott her upcoming film as well as literally almost everything I wrote above 2A01:E0A:911:1070:646D:EE9F:2359:7458 (talk) 09:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

(outdent)

• So based on the sources the IP has presented, are they suggesting a change like this?

Before its release, there were calls for boycotting the film by right-wing Hindu nationalists who were opposed to all films from Bollywood, alleging that anti-Hindu sentiments and nepotism were prevalent in the industry.

—C.Fred (talk) 11:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

That would be WP:SYNTH as we don't have any source that directly suggests that it happened with Bramhastra. The calls for boycott from Hindu nationalists, were religious in nature largely because the lead actor Ranbir Kapoor had told once in an interview that he likes eating beef. It offended the nationalists because Cows are deemed holy in Hinduism. Also, The DW article [6] hasn't given it as fact, it is attributed to a woman from Delhi. Suhasini Krishnan, a 28-year-old New Delhi-based media professional, told DW. ....... there has been a concerted effort to break this system down by evoking middle class discourses like nepotism and nationalism, she noted.. Akshaypatill (talk) 17:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello C.Fred, thanks a lot for the follow up. If I consider just one citation for now, this one: These comments were in reply to the nepotism debate. Her comment upset the netizens, with many saying that they will boycott her upcoming film (wherein upcoming film= Brahmāstra: Part One - Shiva), I would propose not to mix up nationalism and nepotism, they are separately reported, never mentioned as one being a subset of the other. In other words, none of the citations claim that "Hindu nationalists" are the ones concerned about nepotism. Therefore, I would propose either a separate sentence: There were calls by many to boycott the film in response as part of the nepotism debate 2A01:E0A:911:1070:A468:D768:E4E7:7544 (talk) 18:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Again you are mixing things up. As per the source, the netizens were upset over her statement, because she said that ‘If you don’t like me, don’t watch me’ and that's why some said that they will boycott her upcoming film. Indian Express, a highly relible source, calls it a reply to haters and doesn't mention anything about the boycutt. [7]. If we going to add this, we can't do it in isolation. We need to provide the context too, which, I think, will be amounted for WP:UNDUE. I don't see any coverage this aspect in any major relible source. For the other sources, as I said earlier, these are not relible sources. Akshaypatill (talk) 19:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I am just going to say for the record, that for whichever reasons on wiki this guy AkshayPatill is totally bent on portraying a certain image of the movie, I am not going to react to him or his vague statements. Unless of course he does something that warrants another warning from Wiki admins. Anyway with his vague statements he is just attempting to dilute the attention away from my crystal clear statements. Looking forward to your answer C.Fred or other sincere editors. Gracias merci danke :) 2A01:E0A:911:1070:A468:D768:E4E7:7544 (talk) 19:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making personal attacks like calling one insincere. We all are volunteering here. As P.S. to my post above - Indian Express has called it as "a reply to haters", so we aren't sure whether it is a part of nepotism debate or a hate campaign (which isn't uncommon now-a-days) against her. Akshaypatill (talk) 20:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Looking forward to your answer C.Fred or other sincere editors. Gracias merci danke :) There is no Indian express article I have cited. My latest response here is the paragraph starting with "Hello C.Fred, thanks a lot for the follow up. If I consider just one citation......" ✅ ✌️:) 2A01:E0A:911:1070:A468:D768:E4E7:7544 (talk) 22:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

So, for the record, as always, once again, wikipedia refrains from updating its content to maintain a certain type of content it wants to portray. ✔️ I don;t think it is smart though because while wiki is a non profit org, it is cheap movies like Brahmastra that end up minimizing their losses because of such practices. Welp. Au revoir 2A01:E0A:911:1070:C559:1E2B:8B0B:95F3 (talk) 18:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

References

BH out of date

Bollywood Hungama hasn't updated their India figures for three days now. But more than that, the numbers for many of the relatively major box office markets haven't been updated since a long time either: UAE figures were never updated post the opening weekend of 9th September (and the same is true for Spain, Portugal, Norway and Italy, but these are smaller markets). Singapore stopped updating in the second week, and the other major markets like USA, UK and Malaysia are updated weekly, not on a daily basis. It may be time to start looking at other sources now. DeluxeVegan (talk) 12:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes , You are Right. Wikipedia Should Chose Another Reliable Sources.

Here Is The Renowned Worldwide Source According To Which The Brahmastra Grossed Rs427 Cr Till 2nd October 2022.

https://boxofficeworldwide.com/box-office/exclusive-ranbir-alia-starrer-brahmastra-jumps-over-4th-weekend-crosses-huge-263-cr-domestic-nett-427-cr-worldwide-gross/ JassMultani (talk) 15:25, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Definitely not that, we require sources to be reliable. But most sources seem to agree the film is atleast over ₹400 crore now [8][9][10]. DeluxeVegan (talk) 20:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2022

change music- simon fraglen to pritam chakraborty. Simon is associated with Brahmastra. Link to justify the claim(https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6277462/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm) 2604:3D09:E47F:F3F0:F432:C2F2:6F69:DC89 (talk) 07:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Blazin777 (talk) 08:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Ready for another failed attempt to have "correct info" on wiki

The sentence - "It also had the highest domestic weekend for an original Hindi film, and the second-highest for a film with screenings in Hindi after K.G.F: Chapter 2." in the article is misleading, as the link cited for it mentions "second highest weekend, that too post-pandemic", not in general since ever in the entire industry. 2A01:E0A:911:1070:6C52:4B0D:A8F:A652 (talk) 00:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 September 2022

Bollywood Hungama is Not Updating It's Figures. Kindly Find the Below Reliable Source & Update The Figures. According To Below Source The Brahmastra Grossed Rs427 Cr Till 2nd October 2022. https://boxofficeworldwide.com/box-office/exclusive-ranbir-alia-starrer-brahmastra-jumps-over-4th-weekend-crosses-huge-263-cr-domestic-nett-427-cr-worldwide-gross/ JassMultani (talk) 14:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: bollymoviereviewz is not reliable source per WP:ICTFSOURCES. Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Blazin777 (talk) 02:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

As a side note, Brahmastra is the first movie that is reporting gross figures instead of net. 2A01:E0A:911:1070:4C49:125A:6C96:89BE (talk) 10:31, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Here Is The Source : https://boxofficeworldwide.com/box-office/exclusive-ranbir-alia-starrer-brahmastra-crosses-27-cr-nett-in-3rd-week-258-cr-nett-all-india-231-cr-nett-hindi-with-413-cr-worldwide-gross-a-super-hit/

The Above Source is Reliable Which Can prove That Brahmastra Worldwide Box Office Collection Till 29th November 2022 Is Rs413 Cr. JassMultani (talk) 13:45, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Bollywood Hungama is Not Updating It's Figures. Kindly Find the Below Reliable Source & Update The Figures.

https://boxofficeworldwide.com/box-office/exclusive-ranbir-alia-starrer-brahmastra-jumps-over-4th-weekend-crosses-huge-263-cr-domestic-nett-427-cr-worldwide-gross/ JassMultani (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: This source is not reliable either. Closing. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 15:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Budget

User:Krimuk2.0 Why do you keep adding back the budget when the lead actor has himself clarified that the claim budget is for the whole trilogy [11]?

He's directly involved in the production so he would obviously know it better than second-hand sources. Why do you want to create a dispute over this? Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 14:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)