467:
mentioned above, half of these records I was completely unaware were actually records. I think something that is tightened up in scope (not every single record ever), has more prose to set the context, and the removal or conversion to prose/table of most of the notes section would serve this list well. Hope this helps.
128:
542:
readability because they made it possible to keep the entries much briefer. I never had a problem with having to jump back and forth since my desktop browser reveals the contents of the notes when hovering the cursor—and on mobile clicking the notes does the same thing—but perhaps that is not true of
283:
I had missed the FLC for the article mentioned (I never watched
Deadpool) but agree with them and may even want to nominate these for AFD. "Highest non-opening week Tuesday gross"? This is as trivial as it gets. "Highest December opening day gross": This is pretty granular, not really a record. Sure,
543:
all devices and browsers? It's changed now, anyway. As for tightening up the scope, I have to admit I'm not quite sure what entries you think don't belong. I removed a number of month-specific records which I thought might be overly narrow, but could you perhaps give me some pointers in that regard?
466:
above that I harbor some concerns about the article in general. I don't know that I would AFD it, but I can see this as being almost impossible to keep up to date as other movies set these records. Also, as I mentioned above, the readability of the article is difficult with all the footnotes. As was
331:
I would say a separate article of these statistics is as unencyclopedic as a separate article for its reviews. We can leave details about specific reviews to Rotten
Tomatoes and details about specific box office records to Box Office Mojo, and summarize the highlights in the main article. If we get
239:
I agree that it is somewhat odd (though not as odd as your comparison would make it seem – Malta only gained independence from the United
Kingdom in 1964). However, for box office purposes these three countries are regarded as a single market in much the same way as the United States and Canada are
284:
boxofficemojo compiles these trivial statistics and
Deadline Hollywood reports them but we get it, the movie sold a lot of tickets everywhere. I suppose you could put a bit more in the Box Office section of the main article but I do not believe this is an encyclopedic topic and
185:
665:
525:
I don't think it will be all that difficult to keep up to date. Each record will only need to be updated once, when it is surpassed. The biggest problem in that regard is that there aren't really any serious trackers that keep track of records like
99:
94:
809:
Opening weekend in the US, the UK, Australia, New
Zealand, Japan, and "across Europe", Thursday night in the US, opening day in the US, per-theatre average in the US, PG-13 opening in the US, and "various other December records" in the US from
103:
86:
792:
Thursday previews, Friday, Sunday, Monday, second Monday, Tuesday, second
Tuesday, non-opening Wednesday, non-opening Thursday, cumulative 1-day through 10-day grosses, second weekend, third weekend, and total gross (all US records) from
439:
is improperly tagged and a copyvio problem. The license asserts that the "threshold of originality" is not met by the image, however the style, color scheme, and the actual name of the movie being added throw it over the threshold in my
428:
A significant amount of your sources say they were accessed back in 2015. Can I presume you visited all the websites a little more recently than that? The access date is key because it provides a reference to when the web site was last
704:
Perhaps I misunderstood what you were asking. I took your question to mean roughly "Are these records only covered by box office trackers (BOM, The
Numbers) or by other (news) sources as well?", and my answer was "The latter."
413:
I personally feel the "Notes" section is overkill. If you absolutely think this is necessary, the data could be better visualized in a table so the reader doesn't have to jump back and forth from the article to the notes
144:
90:
631:? Movie fansites will make up all kinds of intersections for the purpose of trivia, e.g. "Highest non-opening week Wednesday gross", why would anyone ever consider that to be of any encyclopedic value?
450:
this film broke all these records. Context should be added that explains how it was the first Star Wars film in so many years, has a new cast but keeps some of the old characters, Abrams as director, etc.
82:
75:
453:
There are no inline citations in the lead. With how long the list is, it is difficult to find the specific citation for the assertions in the lead, which can be fixed by adding inline citations.
867:
714:
699:
681:
640:
600:
582:
552:
483:
389:
358:
340:
326:
292:
273:
253:
227:
209:
176:
65:
801:
UK gross, US gross, UK opening weekend, worldwide opening weekend, widest UK release, highest UK advance bookings, fastest to ÂŁ50 million in the UK, and single day gross in the UK from
218:"United Kingdom, Ireland and Malta" - why on earth are these three countries bundled together? It makes about as much sense as having "US, Canada and Portugal"....... --
566:
I think this looks much better. I may give it a quick copyedit if I have time, but for now I am comfortable with the list. I believe it meets all the criteria. Nice work!
149:
661:
791:
760:
fastest to $ 1 billion, biggest
Christmas Day, biggest second weekend, opening weekend in Australia and New Zealand, and fastest to $ 100 million in IMAX from
507:
I had visited all the sources during this year without updating the access dates, and have gone through them again and updated the access dates to 2018.
40:
743:
400:
issues. You need to use symbols and colors to highlight specific pieces of data. You also need to explain what "Sa" "Wknd" "m" mean. Maybe try the
829:
30:
17:
660:
I agree that trivial entries such as overly narrow intersections have no place on these types of lists (as my track record at for instance
436:
775:
305:
If the problem is that individual entries are trivial or too granular, that can be fixed by removing those entries – the problem with the
767:
345:
The proper analogy here is not individual reviews for the film, but accolades received by it (of which there are—as noted above—numerous
808:
672:
standards. If you think that some of the remaining entries should be removed for the same reason, I would be open to your suggestions.
317:? Is box office performance inherently unencyclopedic? Is a film's box office reception less encyclopedic than its critical reception?
197:
751:
844:
776:
three-day and four-day weekend record, opening day, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, weekend market share (all in the UK and
Ireland) from
783:
744:
Thursday previews in the US, US presales, and openings in
Belgium, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland and the Netherlands from
759:
800:
650:). Those sources aren't always that good at quantifying the records however, which is why most of the list is sourced to
333:
192:
were in any shape to be featured. I think this is something that should be remedied considering that there are numerous
184:
I'm nominating this for featured list after some extensive cleanup since it was noted in the (ultimately unsuccessful)
189:
346:
336:
has more than enough details that cover/duplicate the rest and to have a fork of all these records is purely trivia.
310:
193:
695:
636:
574:
475:
381:
668:
shows), and I have removed a number of such entries already as part of my cleanup effort to get this up to
223:
188:
that there are currently no featured lists for box office records and I can frankly say that none of the
691:
655:
632:
531:
309:
list was that there would barely be anything left after doing so. If the problem is that the topic is
861:
710:
706:
677:
673:
596:
592:
548:
544:
354:
350:
322:
318:
269:
265:
249:
245:
205:
201:
172:
168:
837:
397:
647:
568:
491:
469:
129:
Featured list candidates/List of box office records set by Star Wars: The Force Awakens/archive1
666:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates/List of Black Panther box office achievements/archive1
234:
219:
517:
61:
314:
855:
784:
US and global opening weekend, Thursday previews, single day, and aggregated weekend from
651:
619:
website? I mean, how many of them are really truly notable, e.g. coverage in things like
527:
498:
I added symbols, explained abbreviations, and moved the legend to the bottom of the table.
422:
53:
669:
417:
Your Box Office Mojo references need to be standardized across the whole article. The
410:
template. I also am not a fan of the legend for the table being hidden in a footnote.
375:
258:
I looked through the sources cited in that section and didn't see Malta mentioned, so
535:
520:
has been expanded, inline citations have been added, and a plural "s" has been added.
463:
404:
337:
300:
289:
120:
851:
57:
241:
836:, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see
534:
for markets other than the US/Canada one (i.e. the problem lies in the
611:
how many of these records have reliable source coverage outside the
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
456:"first through third weekend" needs an "s" at the end of "weekend".
313:, you should be able to be more specific than that – does it fail
538:
of the field). As for the footnotes, I personally thought they
349:). Reviews would be analogous to markets, or perhaps weekends.
83:
List of box office records set by Star Wars: The Force Awakens
76:
List of box office records set by Star Wars: The Force Awakens
432:
Personally, I feel the external links section is unnecessary.
186:
Featured list nomination for the corresponding Deadpool list
154:
260:
116:
112:
108:
68:
504:
The Box Office Mojo references have been standardized.
200:I believe this list is now ready to be nominated.
196:for accolades received by films, and going by the
875:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
662:Talk:List of box office records set by Deadpool
646:Quite a few (and even more if you also include
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
881:No further edits should be made to this page.
850:template in place on the talk page until the
41:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
510:The external links section has been removed.
425:, Box Office Mojo, boxofficemojo.com, etc.
372:
133:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates
733:
443:I find the lead lacking significantly:
334:Star_Wars:_The_Force_Awakens#Box_office
136:
126:
752:US and worldwide opening weekend from
421:value in your references changes from
7:
437:File:Star Wars The Force Awakens.jpg
690:Not sure you answered my question.
216:Quick comment on a section heading:
24:
501:I converted the list to a table.
396:*The "Record Grosses" table has
768:IMAX single day presales from
715:23:15, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
700:22:54, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
682:22:45, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
641:19:44, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
1:
868:21:05, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
66:00:25, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
446:There is no explanation of
332:rid of the granular stats,
898:
601:15:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
591:Thank you for your input!
583:15:17, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
553:10:32, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
484:16:05, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
462:I also have to agree with
390:15:20, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
359:06:29, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
341:05:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
327:05:15, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
293:04:12, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
274:00:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
369:Comments by Gonzo_fan2007
254:13:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
228:09:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
210:12:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
198:WP:Featured list criteria
177:12:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
878:Please do not modify it.
845:featured list candidates
36:Please do not modify it.
31:featured list nomination
513:I removed the image.
648:Deadline Hollywood
621:The New York Times
435:I would challenge
580:
560:
559:
387:
347:WP:Featured lists
311:WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC
194:WP:Featured lists
180:
162:
161:
889:
880:
864:
858:
849:
843:
840:, and leave the
817:
738:
692:The Rambling Man
633:The Rambling Man
581:
577:
573:
571:
495:
482:
478:
472:
420:
409:
403:
388:
384:
380:
378:
373:
304:
263:
238:
165:
134:
124:
106:
38:
897:
896:
892:
891:
890:
888:
887:
886:
885:
876:
862:
856:
847:
841:
822:
821:
820:
739:
735:
658:, and the like.
652:Box Office Mojo
617:Box Office Mojo
575:
570:« Gonzo fan2007
569:
567:
528:Box Office Mojo
489:
476:
471:« Gonzo fan2007
470:
468:
423:Box Office Mojo
418:
407:
401:
382:
377:« Gonzo fan2007
376:
298:
259:
242:Box Office Mojo
232:
190:five such lists
97:
81:
79:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
895:
893:
884:
883:
871:
870:
854:goes through.
819:
818:
816:
815:
806:
798:
789:
781:
773:
765:
757:
749:
732:
731:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
659:
606:
605:
604:
603:
586:
585:
558:
557:
556:
555:
523:
522:
521:
514:
511:
508:
505:
502:
499:
460:
459:
458:
457:
454:
451:
441:
433:
430:
426:
415:
393:
392:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
281:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
182:
181:
167:Nominator(s):
160:
159:
158:
157:
155:External links
152:
147:
139:
138:
132:
131:
78:
73:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
894:
882:
879:
873:
872:
869:
865:
859:
853:
846:
839:
835:
831:
827:
824:
823:
814:
813:
807:
805:
804:
799:
797:
796:
790:
788:
787:
782:
780:
779:
774:
772:
771:
766:
764:
763:
758:
756:
755:
750:
748:
747:
742:
741:
737:
734:
730:
716:
712:
708:
703:
702:
701:
697:
693:
689:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
679:
675:
671:
667:
663:
657:
653:
649:
645:
644:
643:
642:
638:
634:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
610:
602:
598:
594:
590:
589:
588:
587:
584:
578:
572:
565:
562:
561:
554:
550:
546:
541:
537:
536:Americentrism
533:
529:
524:
519:
515:
512:
509:
506:
503:
500:
497:
496:
493:
492:Gonzo fan2007
488:
487:
486:
485:
480:
479:
473:
465:
455:
452:
449:
445:
444:
442:
438:
434:
431:
427:
424:
416:
412:
411:
406:
399:
398:accessibility
395:
394:
391:
385:
379:
374:
371:
370:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
343:
342:
339:
335:
330:
329:
328:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
302:
297:
296:
295:
294:
291:
287:
275:
271:
267:
262:
257:
256:
255:
251:
247:
243:
236:
231:
230:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:
213:
212:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
187:
179:
178:
174:
170:
164:
163:
156:
153:
151:
148:
146:
143:
142:
141:
140:
135:
130:
127:
125:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
77:
74:
71:
69:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
48:The list was
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
877:
874:
833:
826:Closing note
825:
811:
802:
794:
785:
778:The Guardian
777:
770:The Guardian
769:
762:The Guardian
761:
754:The Guardian
753:
746:the Guardian
745:
736:
728:
628:
625:The Guardian
624:
620:
616:
615:website and
612:
608:
607:
563:
539:
474:
461:
447:
368:
367:
306:
285:
282:
261:I removed it
235:ChrisTheDude
220:ChrisTheDude
215:
183:
166:
150:Citation bot
80:
49:
47:
35:
28:
656:The Numbers
613:The Numbers
532:The Numbers
857:Giants2008
740:A sample:
707:TompaDompa
674:TompaDompa
593:TompaDompa
545:TompaDompa
351:TompaDompa
319:TompaDompa
266:TompaDompa
246:TompaDompa
202:TompaDompa
169:TompaDompa
54:Giants2008
838:WP:FLC/ar
832:has been
830:candidate
429:verified.
834:archived
828:: This
627:or even
540:improved
464:Reywas92
440:opinion.
419:website=
414:section.
338:Reywas92
307:Deadpool
301:Reywas92
290:Reywas92
145:Analysis
50:archived
609:Comment
564:Support
518:WP:LEAD
137:Toolbox
100:protect
95:history
812:Empire
803:Empire
795:Forbes
629:Empire
576:(talk)
477:(talk)
383:(talk)
315:WP:NOT
286:oppose
104:delete
58:FACBot
729:Notes
670:WP:FL
240:(see
121:views
113:watch
109:links
16:<
863:Talk
711:talk
696:talk
678:talk
664:and
637:talk
597:talk
549:talk
516:The
405:Abbr
355:talk
323:talk
270:talk
250:talk
224:talk
206:talk
173:talk
117:logs
91:talk
87:edit
62:talk
56:via
852:bot
786:CNN
530:or
448:why
244:).
52:by
866:)
848:}}
842:{{
713:)
698:)
680:)
654:,
639:)
623:,
599:)
579:@
551:)
481:@
408:}}
402:{{
386:@
357:)
325:)
288:.
272:)
264:.
252:)
226:)
208:)
175:)
119:|
115:|
111:|
107:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
70:.
64:)
33:.
860:(
709:(
694:(
676:(
635:(
595:(
547:(
494::
490:@
353:(
321:(
303::
299:@
268:(
248:(
237::
233:@
222:(
204:(
171:(
123:)
85:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.