User:Benison/Source analysis for WikiProject Film Indian cinema taskforce

When adding information to Wikipedia articles about Indian cinema, it's crucial to use trustworthy sources. Stick to well-known, reliable sources with a track record of accuracy and clear editorial policies. They must fulfill WP:RS policies and must be listed under the following table.

It's best to avoid links that haven't been discussed by the Indian cinema task force, as many of them are deemed unreliable sources. These links often lead to blogs or obscure websites lacking clear editorial oversight, which can compromise the reliability and accuracy of the information they provide.

Guidelines on sources

• IMDb has a search function for Indian films but it's considered a questionable source by the greater Film WikiProject. See WP:Citing IMDb.
• Per this discussion, all box office gross values such as |gross= should use the {{Estimation}} template.
• This user essay is an excellent summary of the problems with paid/sponsored articles that is far too common on India-related sites.
• Per this discussion, worldwide gross box office collection reported by Bollywood Hungama and Box Office India should be used in infoboxes and list type articles. If unavailable, any of the other generally reliable sources listed below can be used.
• The sources termed as unreliable or blacklisted should not be considered reliable sources. If an otherwise reliable source attributes information to an unreliable source then that information is likewise unreliable, per WP:FRUIT. Any "blog" of "blog"-type websites are also inherently considered as unreliable per WP:BLOGS.
• Even legitimate Indian news organizations (print, television, and web) intermingle regular news with sponsored content and press release–based write-ups, often with inadequate or no disclosure (see WP:NEWSORGINDIA). Examples of such sponsored content include supplements published by The Times of India; the Special section of the Daily Pioneer; the Brand Wire section of ABP Live; the Press Release News or the Digpu News Network sections of Firstpost; the Business Spotlight section of Outlook; the Brand Connect section of Forbes India; the Brand Solutions produced content on The Indian Express, etc. Caution must be exercised while adding such contents and consult the reliable sources noticeboard when in doubt.

Legend

•    Generally reliable in its areas of expertise: Editors show consensus that the source is reliable in most cases on subject matters in its areas of expertise. The source has a reputation for fact-checking, accuracy, and error-correction, often in the form of a strong editorial team. It will normally still be necessary to analyze how much weight to give the source and how to describe its statements.
•    No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply: The source is marginally reliable (i.e. neither generally reliable nor generally unreliable), and may be usable depending on context. Editors may not have been able to agree on whether the source is appropriate, or may have agreed that it is only reliable in certain circumstances. It may be necessary to evaluate each use of the source on a case-by-case basis while accounting for specific factors unique to the source in question. Carefully review the Summary column of the table for details on the status of the source and the factors that should be considered.
•    Generally unreliable: Editors show consensus that the source is questionable in most cases. The source may lack an editorial team, have a poor reputation for fact-checking, fail to correct errors, be self-published, or present user-generated content. Outside exceptional circumstances, the source should normally not be used, and it should never be used for information about a living person. Even in cases where the source may be valid, it is usually better to find a more reliable source instead. If no such source exists, that may suggest that the information is inaccurate. The source may still be used for uncontroversial self-descriptions, and self-published or user-generated content authored by established subject-matter experts is also acceptable.
•    Blacklisted: Due to persistent abuse, usually in the form of external link spamming, the source is registered on the spam blacklist or the Wikimedia global spam blacklist. Edits that attempt to add this source are automatically prevented on a technical level, unless an exception is made for a specific link in the spam whitelist.

Generally used sources

Sources

Source	Status	Comments
Allindiansite.com
Andhra Box Office
Andhra Cafe
Andhrakaburlu.com
Assamtimes.org		Discussed here
auditionform.in
Bestoftheyear.con		Discussed here
Bollymoviereviewz.com
Bollyspice.com
Bollywoodbubble.com
Bollywoodlife.com		Discussed here
Bollywoodsociety.com		Discussed here
Bollywood Hungama by Hungama Digital Media Entertainment
Box Office India		Also Discussed here – Note that film budget figures at BoxOfficeIndia.com include print and advertising costs, so we should note that if we can't find a better source. Ex: {{small|Note: figure contains print and advertising costs}}
Business Standard
Business Today (business magazine) by Living Media
Catch
Cinechicken		Discussed here
Cinigoer.com
CNN-IBN's IBN Live
Dailyhunt.com		Discussed here
Dailymovieupdates.com
Daily News and Analysis by Zee Media Corporation
Deccan Chronicle
Deccan Herald
Dina Thanthi
Dinakaran by Sun Group
Dreamdth.com
Filmfare
Film Companion
Filmybeat.com
Firstpost
Greatandhra.com
Hindustan Times by HT Media
India.com by Zee Media Corporation		Discussed here
Indiaforums.com
India Today by Living Media
Indiatimes by The Times Group
Indiglamour.com
Indo-Asian News Service		Use parameter "agency=", Discussed here
International Business Times by IBT Media		See WP:IBTIMES
Iwmbuzz.com		Discussed here
Jan Bharat Times		Discussed here
KeralaDaily.com
Koimoi
Magna Publications
Mid Day
Mint (newspaper) by HT Media
Mumbai Mirror by The Times Group;
NDTV
News18 India by Network18 Group
Nettv4u.com
Nowrunning.com
Oneindia.in		See WP:OPINDIA
Outlook (Indian magazine) by Outlook Publishing India
Pinkvilla.com		Generally reliable for film-related content; avoid celebrity gossip)
Press Trust of India
Radio Sargam
Rediff.com
Republic TV		See WP:REPUBLICTV
Sacnilk.com		Discussed here
Sahi Nahi		Discussed here
Screen (magazine)
Serialupdates.me
Sify
Spicyonion.com
Streamingdue.com
Televisionpost.com
TellyChakkar		Discussed here
Tellydhamaal.com
Tellytadka.com
Tellyupdates.com
The Economic Times by The Times Group
The Express Tribune by Lakson Group
The Financial Express
The Hindu Business Line by The Hindu Group
The Indian Express by Indian Express Group
The News Minute
The Review Monk		Discussed here
The Statesman
The Telegraph (India) by ABP Group
The Times of India by The Times Group		See WP:TOI. Note that WP:RSN considers Times of India to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. Uncontroversial content such as film reviews are usable. See WP:RSP. Do not use Times of India bio pages for details like birthdate as many of them were found to be inaccurate.
The Tribune
Upperstall.com
Zee News owned by Essel Group & Zee Entertainment Enterprises

Dadasaheb Phalke Award copycats

see discussion at ICTF board

Named after a legendary Indian filmmaker, the Dadasaheb Phalke Award is a sub-award of the Indian government's National Film Awards. It is essentially a lifetime achievement award honouring a person's "outstanding contribution to the growth and development of Indian cinema".^[1] This is a coveted award for filmmakers, and there is only one award issued each year. To capitalise on the Phalke name, some small organisations have adopted their own Dadasaheb Phalke awards, and when media outlets don't ask questions and just reprint press releases, we often see the "Dadasaheb Phalke" award erroneously attributed to actors/directors/composers and others who might not deserve the national prize. Some news organisations fail to make this distinction. Examples:

• In 2016, Mid-Day reported that Sooraj Pancholi won a best debut award at a Dadasaheb Phalke award organised by 90bids.com.
• In 2018, Times of India reported that 34-year-old Ranvir Singh was going to win the Dadasaheb Phalke award, when what he was presented with was the Dadasaheb Phalke Excellence Award, an award issued by some other institution.
• In 2019, TimesNowNews, who in this slideshow included a write-up of how the Phalke award is "India's highest honour in the entertainment sector", apparently did not notice that the event was an award handout for a two-year-old film festival named after Phalke, not for the actual national award.
• In 2019, ABPLive.in ran a headline here that a Bigg Boss 12 contestant was being given the award for "Best Entertainer – Reality Show".
• In 2019, International Business Times reported "Ram Charan's wife Upasana Konidela has been honoured with the Dadasaheb Phalke Award for the Philanthropist of the Year ... India's highest award in cinema presented at the National Film Awards ceremony." Clearly this is not the same award. Times of India this time clarifies Charan's award as the "Dadasaheb Phalke Excellence Award".
• By 2020, ABPLive.in still hadn't figured out what this award is, writing here about the Dadasaheb Phalke International Film Festival Awards, "Presented annually at the 'National Film Awards' ceremony by the Directorate of Film Festivals, the 'Dadasaheb Phalke Award' is our country’s highest civilian award in the field of entertainment."
• In 2021, The Hindu's Businessline reported that Dhanush won "prestigious Dadasaheb Phalke Award (South)" for Best Actor. Gulf News said "South Indian stars Dhanush, Mohanlal win Dadasaheb Phalke Awards". Free Press Journal wrote "Dadasaheb Phalke Award 2020 ... The award honoured the individuals from the Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, and Kannada film industries for their outstanding contribution towards the growth and development of cinema." None of these sources mention explicitly that this is related to the Dadasaheb Phalke International Film Festival (DPIFF), which it apparently is, and Free Press Journal really makes it sound like the winners are taking home that government prize, in part because they're using virtually the same phrasing found at India's Directorate of Film Festivals.

So when adding this award to articles, we must be double, even triple-certain that we are talking about the actual National Film Awards' Dadasaheb Phalke Award. Some clues: A film can't win this award; a person wins the award. Winners are typically older, because to make "outstanding contribution[s] to the growth and development of Indian cinema", you have to work hard for many years, not just be young, handsome, or pretty. You don't win the Dadasaheb Phalke Award for Philanthropy or for Most Popular Actor or Extraordinary Work to Reform the Society via a Movie or "for the song 'God Your Lady' in the film Vishwadi" or Most Iconic Jodi. You win it plainly, with no classifications. There is only one, and they worked hard to get it.

Some similar-sounding awards that are not the real award:

• Dadasaheb Phalke Academy Awards – see this TOI article
• Dadasaheb Phalke International Film Festival Awards – see official website
  • Dadasaheb Phalke Awards South – launching in 2019
  • Dadasaheb Phalke Icon Award – Possibly related to the International Film Festival Awards?[2]
• Dada Saheb Phalke Film Festival Awards – see official website
• Dadasaheb Phalke Excellence Award – see example
• Dadasaheb Phalke Film Foundation Awards – see Facebook page
• Dadasaheb Phalke International Film Festial Awards South] – see example
• Legends Dadasaheb Phalke Award – see example
• Dadasaheb Phalke icon Awards film – see example

See also this Hindustan Times article describing the confusion about these knock-off awards.

See also

• WP:ICTFSOURCES
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force/ICTF FAQ – A page for detailed analysis of sources used in movie articles