Talk:Master (2021 film)/Archive 1

Archive 1

"Master (2019)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Master (2019). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:41, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Master Talk

Master will hit screens on Diwali 2020. Megabeast159 (talk) 10:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2020

Change colloborated to collaborated because it is misspelled, it is in the filming subsection of the production section you may need to use ctrl+f to find it, thanks 74.73.230.173 (talk) 23:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done  Darth Flappy ^«Talk» 23:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

"Master (2020 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Master (2020 film). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 1#Master (2020 film) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:29, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

"Master (2020 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Master (2020 film). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 11#Master (2020 film) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2021

release date = 13 1 2021 Juan Peacock (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: This information is already in the article in at least three places that I can see. If changes need to be made, please be more specific in your request in the form "Change X to Y". ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:57, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2021

Actor Vishal (Ezhil of Bakyalakshmi serial) is said to be acted in the first half of the film. 2409:4072:18A:5E26:C5D4:226A:6990:F782 (talk) 07:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --TheImaCow (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2021

Must edit reviews. positive 79.66.219.74 (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2021 (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. --Paul ❬talk❭ 16:56, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

About the plot

I just added the film plot, Now i am not very sure if adding the plot this soon is acceptable by wiki's guidelines, If it is not, revert my edit If it is acceptable, Please fix it up as i feel its not very great in its current form(I am not very good at writing film plots :D) -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 08:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

This page copied my plot section, Not the other way around

They seem to have copied that content from the plot which i added this afternoon(In IST time)

I know wiki content is not copyrighted and nothing can be done about them copying from wikipedia, but i feel infuriated that my original content was reverted and deleted as copyrighted material :(

They seem to be regularly copying wiki plots and pasting them in their site, Like from here to here

Additionally, I am adding the plot once more, I have contacted and requested the website's devs to add a cite note that the plot was taken from wiki if possible. -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 15:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

KindCowboy69, the website obviously copied from us, including the lead section. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:36, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

10cr

10cr

10 cr collection Sandrakanth (talk) 06:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sandrakanth:Do read this, Additionally, This, And dont forget WP:NOTAFORUM-- KindCowboy69 ☮ 06:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Wow Sandrakanth (talk) 18:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2021

89.31.193.197 (talk) 12:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Gross = 141 Cr

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2021 (2)

Master flop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandrakanth (talk • contribs) 18:26, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from fanboy behaviour here, Always remember to cite your sources, Additionally, Do read WP:NOTAFORUM -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 09:59, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Revert

@Dominicoz: Hi there, I reverted this edit of yours for a few reasons, which I detailed in my edit summary:

1. 1 You previously objected to a long plot synopsis, so it was odd to see that you had added vague content about two characters having "opposite ideologies". I don't know what that is supposed to mean, and it would seem to me that most stories are about different ideologies, whether it's a film about a rebellion attacking a galactic force, or a police officer fighting gangsters, or a serial killer chasing down fun-loving teens at the lake. The phrasing certainly doesn't tell readers anything substantive about the film.
2. "Off-beat" is not a film genre. It also wasn't supported by the reference you added, although that's a moot point. The point of genre is to describe the general shape of the film as most reliable sources would describe it, and shorter is usually better. See MOS:FILM.
3. Indiaglitz is not a reliable source. Please see our reliable sourcing guidelines and WP:ICTFSOURCES
4. Alcoholic is the more common, modern word for a drunkard, that most people across the world would understand. "Drunkard" has more of an 1800s vibe. Please see this Google Ngram.

Thanks, and it's nothing personal. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:24, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Dubbing artists

@Kailash29792: Hey there, and happy new year if I haven't said it already to you. I saw this edit, and more specifically, the original addition of dubbed names a few hours earlier. I hesitated about deleting it, because while we don't typically include the names of people who dub over other actors, that's often in the context of, say, a Hindi film that was dubbed in Telugu (or whatever) and then listing the name of the person who did the Telugu dub. That arrangement seems not noteworthy.

We also often see a film in X language, ex: Malayalam, where a particular actor may speak Malayalam, but was dubbed by another Malayalam actor, and that is almost never explained or qualified in any way. That falls into a nebulous area from my perspective. Was it that the actor didn't know X language well enough, so they had to be dubbed? There is never any context here.

This particular case is interesting, since the actors of this film have potentially dubbed their younger roles. That seems slightly more relevant than the lesser examples above. Picking a Western actor at random, if Benedict Cumberbatch voiced a younger version of Sherlock Holmes, for instance, wouldn't that be worthy of mention in an article about one of his Sherlock Holmes projects?

I don't have an answer for this, and you'll notice I didn't revert your change. I just thought I'd bring it up for discussion, because it seems unusual. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, this requires consensus and I hope others have the time to comment. I removed the dubbing artists from the cast section since it can be mentioned later in the article. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:44, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

About the plot

Could you kindly remove the plot as it is an absolute spoiler for people that have not watched the movie. Especially in countries where it has not been played yet. Have some decency to respect that there are fans out here that would like to watch the movie instead of reading about it on Wiki.Table Jar (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Table Jar: Absolutely not. Wikipedia is not censored, and we do not remove spoilers. Anybody who would read a plot description should reasonably expect there to be details that could spoil their enjoyment of the film. Further, Wikipedia is an academic resource not an entertainment blog, and if we removed key details, we would be depriving film students of the information they could be looking for. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Clearly you dont get the point where I expect you to be decent enough to remove the plot for now and update it after some time. In general, new movies do not have their plots described for a period of time. If you disagree to have some respect, its pretty much pointless to have this discussion with you. I hope you are happy that you are bringing some sort of "education" to people. Kudos mate. Table Jar (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Table Jar: Wikipedia doesn't exist to protect people's enjoyment, it exists to provide information. It's unfortunate that you can't envision a scenario where a film student or someone in the entertainment industry might have to be aware of all the current films and contemporary references, but didn't have the time, resources or money to watch all of them. Your proposal would make them wait until some arbitrary "respect" period had elapsed before they could get that information. That would be unfortunate. Anyway, I don't care whether you agree or not, the community has already decided this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Critical response

@Kailash29792: Hi there, in these edits, some editors attempted to push their POVs about the film's critical response, conveniently ignoring the "mixed" claim in favour of the "positive" claim.

Having reverted these promotional changes, the article now says "mixed", but there is a fair discussion to be had about how to present the critical response summary if this source says that critics were "impressed". However, I have to say, that reference looks like a press release to me. It has a general byline attributed to their entertainment desk.

If it is ultimately considered to be a decent source, my suggestion is that we use phrasing that represents the disparity, ex: "Source A describing the critical response as mixed and Source B described it as positive", which is what we typically do with Rotten Tomatoes / Metacritic summaries. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Do exactly that. Even The Battle of the Five Armies lists multiple sources claiming different types of responses the film received. Kailash29792 (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2021

DONTCHANGETHEARTICLE (talk) 13:03, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Master received postive reviewsnot mixed reviews...

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:29, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, see this, and be prepared to argue for why it should be ignored. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:34, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2021

Vijay as JD/John Durairaj 103.94.137.29 (talk) 03:57, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

It's already in the article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

highest grossing film of 2021

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_in_film master highest grossing film of 2021 second highest is chinese film big red envelope

the film has grossed 250 crore

https://mobile.twitter.com/girishjohar/status/1356250711361613825 Firewaterair (talk) 11:38, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

How is this a reliable source? According to this article, Girish Johar is a marketing guy. That would suggest that his post is part of his marketing. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

pinkvilla blog is used for box office figures

pinkvilla blog is constantly added by ip user User talk:103.148.20.233 for box office figures when we have reliable sources. Kindly see to that Lodaku (talk) 16:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@User talk:103.148.20.233 see WP:RS for reliable sources Lodaku (talk) 16:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinkvilla, Filmibeat, Koimoi, etc. have never been considered by Wikipedia's Indian Cinema Task Force to be reliable sources for financial figures. The community wants sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. Some of those sources can be found at WP:ICTFSOURCES. Even the reliability of well-known Times of India has waned over the years. It is on Wikipedia's list of unreliable sites for most important subjects like politics. We're more lax about their fluffy entertainment reporting, but they do stupid things like publish bios like this, which often contains incorrect information, likely scraped from other websites. I mention this for context. No source should be automatically assumed to be 100% accurate, and gossip sites and blogs in particular should not be given any consideration for anything as questionable as Indian film financial data. Anyone even remotely aware of Indian cinema knows that there is NO accuracy with this information and there is a lot of figure inflating and deflating. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

lead sentence correction

@Kailash29792: In the lead, correct it as "The film was a commercial success collecting 300 crore". the 225 estimate is not pointing to any reference remove it. Lodaku (talk) 05:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Kailash29792 is not the solely responsible for maintaining this article, please do not disturb them for trivial edit requests, Request without pinging anyone :) -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 04:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry sir I wont ping anyone in film talk page. Lodaku (talk) 06:43, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinkvilla's inconsistency in reporting box office figures for Master film

Jan 28 2021, In 15 days run, The film collected 225 crore worldwide https://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainment/box-office/master-final-ww-box-office-verdict-thalapathy-vijays-detailed-lifetime-report-and-why-its-super-hit

Feb 25, 2021, In 50 days run, The film collected same 225 crore worldwide https://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainment/news/mirroring-industry-will-exhibitors-narrow-theatrical-window-bollywood-master-premieres-ott-602655

Kindly remove the Pinkvilla's estimate 225 crore from both lead section and the box office section. Lodaku (talk) 06:34, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe I removed these in these edits. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

250 crore

@Dominicoz and Messinwithbruce: I initially was going to disagree with Dominicoz's edit here, because the source provided doesn't explicitly say that the 250 crore figure is from 14 February as Dominicoz asserts, but on a hunch, I googled that subheading "Lokesh Kanagaraj Visits Theatres On One Month Of Master" and found this IndiaToday article from 15 February, which included the 250 crore figure. So unless the film hasn't made any money in the last 17 days, this would be an outdated figure, considering it's still in theatres. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

The 15 February article was perhaps a mistake. The mistake was corrected in the article published on 3 March. That is also a possibility. Messinwithbruce (talk) 18:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb These two articles are written by different individuals. It could be that the publisher (India Today) corrected their mistake from the first article. Messinwithbruce (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't see how it's relevant that they are written by different people. News agencies don't often publish data that is inconsistent with itself. And you're speculating about an earlier mistake. The fact that this newer article uses a sub-heading that is topically identical to this source from 17 days ago is highly suggestive that they just copied the content that was there and edited it a bit. I'll also note that the 250 crore figure was being tossed around by others as early as 4 February. So the likelihood that it was a mistake by 15 February seems farfetched. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I can also show you figures from Box Office Mojo here

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr179982853/?ref_=bo_ydw_table_2

According to this Master has grossed $28,692,170 in India which is roughly 208 crore Indian rupees. They do not however have the figures from all other markets.

But according to this source

https://www.india.com/entertainment/master-completes-50-stupendous-days-at-box-office-thalapathy-vijay-roars-in-tamil-nadu-figures-inside-4463824/

The film has grossed 46 crore in overseas markets. So adding both 208+46= 254 crore only.

So to me it seems like the actual total is closer to 250 rather than 300. Obviously, Box Office Mojo can't be wrong. Messinwithbruce (talk) 19:27, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Please indent your responses properly per talk page norms. Box Office Mojo has never been established by the Indian Cinema Task Force as an expert in Indian film finances. Their overly-specific $28,061,361 figure is ridiculous when there is no centralised auditing authority for Indian film finances, and all values are estimates made by entertainment trades using proprietary methods. We also don't know how old that information is, even it it were suitable. This Google cache tells us that it hasn't been updated in at least two days. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Now being overly specific is the problem? But vague and inflated is apparently alright. About your other concern, a film released on 13 January has done 99.99% of its business by now. The amount that hasn't been updated is negligible anyways. Messinwithbruce (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Please indent your replies properly per talk page norms. Editors who are persistently non-compliant can wind up blocked, which is why I've twice pointed you to that specific section. That is totally avoidable and would be a silly reason to draw a sanction to your editing history.

Moving along, anybody who knows anything about Indian film finances, even casually, knows that there is no exact Truth with a capital T as it pertains to accuracy. So BOM having a domestic figure down to the tens of dollars, is simply unbelievable. Rarely, if ever, does an Indian trade outlet ever goes beyond 2 significant digits.[1][2] Also, you seem to have a preconceived notion about what the film gross should be, which suggests that you are coming into this discussion with a pre-existing cognitive bias about this data. I don't have such a cognitive bias. I don't believe that 300 crore is Truth with a capital T, and I'm perfectly happy to agree to presenting ranges of data when there are comparably recent data being presented by reliable sources. In fact, I'm one of the first people who pushed for ranges in Indian film grosses at Wikipedia, but we require quality sources. When you submit a 250 crore figure that is clearly a reprint of content that IndiaToday published 17 days ago, that's very odd to me, and I happen to know that over time, the major news outlets lose interest in non-Hindi films, so it's not surprising that this info would be out of date. The film is still in theatres in Chennai. It must have made something in 17 days or why would it still be shown? Also, is there an objective reason why, while you've pointed to this article, you're unwilling to accept the ₹263 crore claim? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: One thing I spotted is a group wandering in various Vijay film articles and adding estimates with lowest and highest value example Bigil. They are doing it as a hobby. They will continue vandalising by adding estimates in the upcoming Vijay film articles. If you don't stop them now. The real fact is they just can't digest that a Vijay film collects 300 crore or above. They want to add estimate mentioning previous days collected amount. Indiatoday itself is contradicting its own statement 30 days and 50 days with both 250 crore. The film also released in Malaysia today March 5th so the Master film is bound to collect above 300 crore. so estimate should be removed. Dominicoz (talk) 10:44, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

• Note: Messinwithbruce was CU-blocked as a sockpuppet of banned user ZestyLemonz. Yet another disruptive sock operator trying to push an agenda despite not being welcome to edit here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2021

176.205.74.199 (talk) 09:42, 2 June 2021 (UTC) pleasr remove 250 cr to 300 cr it does not look good just keep 300 cr

 Not done: That is the estimated range from the sources. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

"Master (upcoming Indian film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Master (upcoming Indian film). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 21#Master (upcoming Indian film) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Splitting proposal

I propose that the section Controversies and Impact to be split into two separate articles called Controversial issues related to Master (2021 film) and Influences of Master (2021 film). The content is large enough, and may exceed its size following modification that can be eligible for a standalone article. 122.178.208.253 (talk) 10:07, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

see WP:SIZESPLIT - SUN EYE 1 16:27, 19 November 2021 (UTC)