User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 24

Categorization inconsistencies
We have some categorization insonsitencies. Depending on the insdustry-size we have Category:2010s Hindi-language films, Category:1990s Hindi-language films (similarly Category:2010s Bengali-language films, Category:2010s Bengali-language films, and similarly for Telugu, Tamil. I worked on Punjabi Category:2010s Punjabi-language films, however there is Category:2010s in Punjabi cinema. This is the first step of the inconsistency in categorization. I think we should have consistency in Indian language films whereevr applicable. --Titodutta (talk) 10:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, if you kindly suggest your view on it, I feel that'll help to improve the portal. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 12:43, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Very sorry for my late reply. Categories are not exactly my forte, but I agree that there should be consistency where possible. Is there a central place where this discussion is being held? Or are you asking for my opinion? I do wonder if "2010s in Punjabi cinema" is intended to mean Indian Punjabi film industry, rather than just "films produced in the Punjabi langauge". How many of these inconsistent categories have you noticed? I don't see anything for Category:2010s in Hindi cinema or Category:2010s in Telugu cinema or Category:2010s in Tamil cinema, so maybe it's a fluke? Category:2010s in Punjabi cinema was created by this guy, so I don't think you're going to get any push-back if you were to move stuff around and propose deletion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:23, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Geetha Govindam
Hi Cyphoidbomb,

Just saw your messages on my User_talk:Praveentech page. Thanks for the messages.


 * 1) This is the first time I saw the User-generated content section. I am sorry about using blogs as references (particularly my blog), when it is written by me and I am editing and contributing an article. Will not reference my blog hereafter, other than something that really is supposed to be referenced. I restored the version because it wasn't by a registered user and someone has removed it by mistake. There wasn't an edit summary in that revision (Undid revision 861542019 by 27.59.133.247). I genuinely didn't see your message on the other revision, where you have mentioned this: "Try again. Two blogs + IBT. The IBT vaguely describes first day "good response" and "positive talk" but doesn't endeavor to articulate *who* is saying that, or if the response had longevity. Hard to summarise all critical response on the first day, no?". If I had seen this, I wouldn't have reverted back. Sorry for that.
 * 2) Just had a look at WP:PUFFERY. Now I agree with you, and apologies for that.
 * 3) I know that Wikipedia hates reference from YouTube, when the spectators say about how great they feel. Not sure how to reference this. If you can guide me on this, might use for others. :) And yeah, again agree with you on the point.

First off, I would like to clarify that I am not being paid to do any kind of promotion or anything. I really loved that movie and the reaction was genuine. One thing I had to tell you about this is, I am in the UK currently and I went ahead travelling more than 300 miles to watch that movie (just imagine how much I am in love with it :)). So, don't take that review as cheap as someone has paid to do it. One more thing is, I haven't added "this revision". Not sure what made you think it was me, but seriously, it wasn't me. I checked out the conflicts of interest article and will make sure if there aren't anything that is unethical in my contributions. In my view, I haven't done any so as yet, but if it may sound that way, I am sorry, will try to make sure it doesn't reflect in that bad way.

The following reverts the edits caused by others to remove my blog links. They aren't definitely paid promotions. Can work with you to resolve this. Up to you to consider undoing your changes. It would be nice to have someone mentioned what I wrote. Obviously, it's a genuine content, right? :)
 * 1) "Timeline of Facebook"
 * 2) "Rubber duck debugging" Praveentech (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Can you please also clarify a few things for me?
 * 1) Who exactly are you? Just curious. :)
 * 2) How is my account standing? Am I doing bad? I am sorry if I have made a mistake, and it was definitely not intentional.

Please let me know. Thanks a lot for your messages again.

Praveentech (talk) 00:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for you response. If you aren't a paid editor, and you are now aware that we have stringent requirements for sourcing, and that you shouldn't be promoting your own blog--and it seems like you're fully aware of all of these, then we'll consider it a non-issue and move forward constructively with no impact to your account standing. If you're curious about the sorts of sites that can and cannot be used (generally speaking, and in the context of Indian entertainment, please see WP:ICTF. We have a significant problem with promotional content being added to articles, especially in the world of Indian cinema. There are editing rings who have no compunctions about using Wikipedia as a marketing tool, and the community is not cool with that, and we're rather weary of it. I'm giving you this information so you have some context for my irritation. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, to address a few other things: This edit is from an IP that geolocates roughly to Cornwall, England. It also added your blog. I'll leave it at that. You aren't required to confirm your location to anybody, but there was sufficient information available to me to suspect you or someone close to you. As for who I am, I'm an administrator at the English Wikipedia. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That's a great deal of information. Went through it and understood the whole thing. Thanks for that. Will make sure I take care of the restrictions first, before contributing to Wikipedia. Hey, and two more questions:
 * This might sound weird, but since you know me to an extent (if you had seen my profile or website or blog), I am a full stack developer. May I apply for becoming an Administrator in Wikipedia, to clean up stuff too? I have a good eye for detail in finding out stuffs. :)
 * Would you like to revert your changes on Timeline of Facebook and Rubber duck debugging or is it still considered wrong? Hey, I didn't add those links at first, but they are pretty relevant. :) Information is about trustable sources, I agree, but at the same time even if it is something new, about legitimate sources too, right? :)
 * This could be really weird. How do I make my blog to be one of the trusted sources - this question would be for my life. The reason being I write about my experiences and would like to have it as a reference to a lot of projects, not only in Wikipedia. This might help me too.


 * Again, thanks for your patience and responses! You are awesome! :) Praveentech (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism of Mahabharat pages
Hi, Thank you for blocking a disruptive user KarnaArjun3 today for vandalism of Draupadi wiki page. Off late, I have been noticing frequent vandalism in the pages of Abhimanyu, Draupadi, Karna, Arjun, etc which are related to the Hindu epic Mahabharata. I checked the edit logs and discovered this vandalism is being done by a groups of IDs named KarnaArjun1, KarnaArjun3, KARNAARJUN, KingPorus, VIKRAMVEDA,, KARNASANGINI, evilArjun, etc who are constantly deleting large chunks of extremely well-researched sourced information along with their references, and instead entering biased misinformation with wrong grammar. Being a researcher on Mahabharata myself, it was easier for me to verify the authenticity. You may check the edit logs of the pages mentioned above.

Admins have intervened multiple times and blocked these notorious users but they seem to be creating multiple accounts and repeating this.This kind of vandalism has begun in the past couple of months. It is difficult to say whether these IDs belong to one user or group of users who are operating together to vandalize the pages.

Nonetheless, currently these IDs are blocked. As a result, their disruptive changes have been reverted and the pages mentioned above look good with correct information. However, given the pattern, it would not be surprising if they come back to vandalize again.

I have dropped a similar note to another admin Oshwah. I would humbly request to admins to do the needful to prevent any kind of vandalism in the future.

Thanks ninadebroy Ninadebroy (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, yes, I noticed them at Draupadi and it was clear to me that they were sockpuppets of each other. One of the older accounts I found was the account, but I think this problematic user might have started as . Hard to say. Anyway, if it persists, then article protection might be warranted. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your prompt action on Draupadi. I checked the wikiedits of and being familiar with the subject of Mahabharata myself, I can see that many(if not all) of his edits are factually correct.Though they definitely needed improvement. However the edits of KingPorus are absolute distortion from the canonical text with completely wrong references. From the pattern of edits made, the blocked duplicate IDs of KingPorus seemed to have added misinformation to glorify the controversial mythical anti-hero Karna, as is evident from the recent vandalism of Draupadi page. Not sure if it would sound real, but in Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma in India, Epic Mahabharata is quite a big deal, and people worship its characters as Gods/demigods. Karna, particularly is a sensitive topic in public psyche thanks to recent fictional adaptations/renditions that depict him in sympathetic manner, though in the canonical texts, he is not so flattering. This kind of false-editing of Wiki pages seem to be a case of hero-worshipping. KingPorus and its other IDs do not seem to be same as.

Ninadebroy (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, great! That analysis actually helps me a great deal, so thank you for that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: There was another vandalism of Draupadi, Karna, Arjun, etc pages today. The changes were reverted back by an admin, and the disruptive user ArjunTheArcher blocked. But I am curious, how are they vandalizing when the pages are appearing "edit-locked" to me! Could you please look into the matter? Thanks. Ninadebroy (talk) 12:24, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

There was another vandalism of Draupadi, Karna, Arjun, etc pages today. The changes were reverted back by an admin, and the disruptive user ArjunTheArcher blocked. But I am curious, how are they vandalizing when the pages are appearing "edit-locked" to me! Could you please look into the matter? Sorry, repeating as I was unable to tag previously. Thanks. Ninadebroy (talk) 12:29, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

famous mtv music is one of sponsors and telecast for iara awards
see the news section https://iara-awards.org/news/ can i revert back in that article--Solomonyuu (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Sponsorship is meaningless. Sponsorship does not confer notability. If an award is notable, there should already be an article on it, i.e. one that has endured community scrutiny. If there is no article, it is not presumed notable. Please stop trying to puff up Vijay. Wikipedia is not a fan site. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2018 (UTC)


 * iam not puffing up whatever the source says iam adding. ok done i will always take your word.--Solomonyuu (talk) 15:25, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you kidding? Have you included one negative review about Vijay? Have you included any conflicting opinion about him? I look at these five edits and see "Honours! Non-notable award!" "You are fantastic”, “Vijay, you rock", "International accolades!" "Let me repeat the non-notable IARA award!" Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

the source stated so Solomonyuu (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

his films are highest grossers in uk and there are many sources statin so how to mention in that article without puffery??--Solomonyuu (talk) 15:33, 1 October 2018 (UTC) 15:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I became Vijay fan after his speech he is a very good person i will never add any thing negative about him iam very sorry cypherbomb --Solomonyuu (talk) 19:22, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of most-liked Facebook pages
Hi, do you have a say in this Articles for deletion/List of most-liked Facebook pages.2405:204:D203:89F5:AC5A:130F:C79:C017 (talk) 08:37, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Undid revision
Excuse me you removed my content from Swag se Swagat tiger Zinda hai but let me tell you that it is the most viewed Bollywood video checkout kworb.net for more info Itsvidj (talk) 15:31, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) References belong in articles. See Referencing for Beginners to learn how to add references. 2) I'm not checking out "kworb.net" for information, because at Wikipedia we only care what reliable mainstream sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about anything. Just because you find a random blog or website doesn't mean that it is an authority. Anyone can start a website and publish whatever they want. See WP:ICTF for a general list of sites that are, and are not, suitable for inclusion in the context of Indian entertainment. 3) Song titles are to be wrapped in quotation marks, and you don't need to say "currently" when you include an "as of" date.. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:53, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Geetha Govindam again!
I am pretty sure you are having a good eye on the article. Should we semi-protect it to make it not editable by unregistered users? Have you seen the n number of times, the budget and contents are vandalised? Do you have a say on this? :) Praveentech (talk) 20:03, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Dishayen
Dishayen appeared in so I tried to fix it but something seemed off. It has been edited by for quite some time and the focus of the article seems to have been completely changed. Looking through the edit history I see that has reverted Padmakalki's edits more than once and Padmakalki even blanked the page at one point.  has also reverted a signifcant copyvio that Padmakalki added. The only citation that was added to the article doesn't seem relevant. There is a page at imdb but that doesn't say anything useful. For now I've reverted Padmakalki's edits as I'm not really sure what to else to do about this one. Do you have any thoughts? -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 19:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hm, weird one. I saw him convert the page to a disambiguation page about distance or something around when Marnette reverted him. Also noticed this recent edit where he rolls back the page to like 2014 or something. Here he consciously changes the air dates to 2013-2016, then changes the start date to 2016 even though this article has existed for far longer. Here he adds a ton of bullets about episode or something on YouTube. My rough guess is that he's co-opted this article to write about a web series, or a college or something? I'll have to look a little deeper, but my guess is that this is going to be CIR issue and I may have to block the guy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism by a range of IPs
Hi, the following IPs are vandalizing various pages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.48

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.55

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.61

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.59

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.49

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.47

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.52

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/103.252.25.45

I am undoing their suspicious edits. Currently they are using 103.252.25.61. Is there any way to blanket-block them or something? Thanks Vivek Ray (talk) 13:15, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've dealt with this guy before. He submits gibberish film titles, adds phony/false directors to stuff, etc. I've asked for a range block here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

user Cyphoidbomb
Received your message.i wanted to start article,but had no idea. Iam trying to create article in better way.But usually i clear talk pages (own) for privacythankyou!!!--Padmakalki (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * While you are quite welcome to remove content from your talk page, it does not aid in privacy as everything is still in the page history and can be seen by anyone. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 17:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

A Query
Hi! I just wanted to ask why is "New Talent Awards 2008" which Harshad Chopda and Aditi Gupta won (The award show was hosted in Sahara One channel and organised by Indian Television.com which was an ALL GEC AWARD SHOW that was held till 2012. The show for which Harshad and Aditi won the award was telecasted on Star Plus and the Award was hosted by another Channel Sahara One. Which is why I had given the reference of a You tube video where both are seen recieving awards and also Tellychakkar.com website Link. Kindly rectify the issue Please! & I understand when you told Star Parivaar Awards are not accepted in the Awards and Nominations Category in Wikipedia. If that is the case then Zee Rishtey Awards, Colors Golden Petal Awards are also SINGLE GEC FAMILY AWARDS.Kindly take that into notice too.Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anjalimarar95 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit confused about what you're asking me. There isn't a clear question in the first paragraph and I also don't know what "GEC award show" means. One thing you should be aware of, is that we are not here to document every award that a person has won. If Harshad Chopda wants to list every award he's won, he can use his own website to do that. We only care about well-established, notable awards. Tellychakkar is not even considered a reliable source, so it's unclear why we'd care about an award they dole out. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Commissioned
I found this article for a non notable movie house named Goodwill Entertainments which could possibly be a paid editing deal. 137.97.7.101 (talk) 16:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Here is a link for ya C so you don't have to go searching . Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 16:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Reply
--Padmakalki (talk) 17:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The article dishayen which you work for it,is Flop tv show .and had poor performance
 * You understood the message.still you need explanationO.K FINE I Explain.
 * You create and spend time for this article
 * But you ignore the things which exist are productive
 * you are working on old 2001 stuff
 * 20years passed.
 * you dont know that language,but seriously if you watch the story.you should really PLEDGE your brain.The content of the story is not good
 * Work for that article that show/particular concept which is quite sensible...
 * If you are unaware of DDrajasthan &DD national there is no point to edit.... then how could arrive references which is 20yrs before???.
 * hope seems so you are interested in same past stuff.anyways doesnt matter--

Reply2
only the actor who is the part of series gets this much anger when his serial/movie gets criticised.user cyphoid bomb Are you the editor or someone in hidden identity???? you are an editor not actor of that show.then why this much anger??? truth never changes.O.k take random people in any hindi city,ask about  popular soaps there has an answer.But for this serial audience will blink.--Padmakalki (talk) 08:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC) ...............................................etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Padmakalki (talk • contribs) 08:33, October 15, 2018 (UTC)
 * For any help ,i can ask u
 * But for instructions there is google search and wikipedia tutorial
 * perhaps you stop yelling at me and find create Cyphoid Bomb searchengine
 * or else donate to wikipedia
 * https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LandingPage&country=IN&uselang=en&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_source=donate&utm_campaign=C13_en.wikipedia.org
 * save my time and your time too.
 * you write essay in my talk page...its quite interesting.
 * see hereafterwards i will not reply to your question.
 * OK you edit these articles develop give references now i provide links
 * These are Tv soaps.....Research and edit
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kkusum (Kkusum)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehndi_(TV_series)  {Mehndi (TV series)}
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumkum_%E2%80%93_Ek_Pyara_Sa_Bandhan (Kumkum – Ek Pyara Sa Bandhan)

(Reply 3)completed the homework????????
have you edited kkusum,mehndi,kumkum,bhabhi,maharani.etcetc.... all tv serials,i think your name has not listed in the contribution page why????? ok you are in dishayen page....continue..--Padmakalki (talk) 15:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I edit what I want, not what inexperienced editors tell me to edit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * who is inexperienced???????
 * me or you
 * it shows based on your answer its youyou are strange bcoz u pledged your intellect.
 * ok you need more time to complete the homework--Padmakalki (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Reply4
if you keep on editing like this you will incur opportunity cost and work @Tv series soon & cry for 1000hours .LOL enjoy the drama. --Padmakalki (talk) 15:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * v.good
 * keep itup
 * rehersal the same story in your family home
 * your home will become like humpty dumpty
 * but please dont fill up your story @ other page. v.pity
 * You have done some (good) that u never worked in that show or else you would have met the same fate
 * you would have go to shooting spot, memorise that script,recite it and plus you should have cried continously for 365hours
 * I don't understand this incoherent mess you've left on my talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The language is in english you can understand--Padmakalki (talk) 15:33, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Lol. Nope! I genuinely cannot. Anyway, you are welcome to discuss serious matters on my talk page, but if you're just going to drop a bunch of baseless paranoid claims, I have no use for your input. Since you appear to be totally confused about my involvement at Dishayen, I've only edited that page nine times, and my first edit was four days ago, after asked me to look at it. So your paranoid accusation that I work for the show is ridiculous, but amusing to me. You should also be aware that Wikipedia has a "no personal attacks" policy. If you continue to make baseless accusations, you're very likely to wind up blocked, which might be embarrassing for you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:43, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Query
Methinks your friend with whom you have been "conversing" above should be placed on administrative leave based on WP:NOTHERE or WP:COI, or some combination thereof. It's your call, though I realize you shouldn't do the job yourself. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 04:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Well... I don't see the COI issues, but their English comprehension skills worry me. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Gack, I meant WP:CIR, not WP:COI. Getting a bit careless with my WP:ALPHABETSOUP. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 11:57, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Dishayen article
I got your reply ,if you can please rectify that partSameer kills Neha's and Nikita's cousin over a dispute, and Rajive gets framed.that line is incorrect.The story is soniya,neha cousin gets killed when she tries to kill neha in rage.neha tries to defend herself But accidently sonia gets stabbed herself by mistake.she dies through injuries.Rajeev meets soniya before her death so he and neha are framed.But in court rajeev as wellas neha are questioned. Atlast through nikitha request sameer reluctantly helps neha & rajeev in soniya murder case,.This part has to be correctedthere is no proof/link,but this is the actual story part --Manavatha (talk) 22:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the content, because the details you've provided just open up more questions for me, and I'm not clear on how these events affect the larger series arc. I think it's better to omit this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Me Too movement (India)
There was only one main article, Me too movement until October 11, 2018. Metoo tag began surfacing in India only a couple of weeks ago and suddenly a large article has been created. Indians always has a thing for controversies and they just want a space to stuff all the daily news coverage in their own POV. Also most of the issues written in that article is not happened under the "metoo campaign". In Malayalam, as far as I know only one actress has reported misconduct (that too not under metoo, but media relates it for hits), yet there's a separate section dedicated to the industry (I have trimmed it substantially). The overall NPOV is highly challengeable and one sided. India has the least metoo reports and there's a section for India in main article like any other country, don't know what's so special about India. This article is unnecessary and should be deleted. 2405:204:D20D:E712:C1A5:F07C:A5A9:6CA6 (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I can't delete it just because someone doesn't like it. I am not clear about whether or not this is an article about Me Too in India, or an article about sexual harassment in Indian cinema. It just seems that unless the complainants are vocalising their stories with #metoo hashtags or unless they're saying that they stood up because they were inspired by the Me Too movement, we'd just have an umbrella article to collect all sexual harassment claims made over the years. I don't know. Anyway, your options as I see them are:
 * Propose deletion through Articles for Deletion. You will need to present a compelling case for why this should be deleted.
 * Propose a merge of this article with Me too movement, if you think that's where it belongs. Merges are a little tricky, you'll have to read the instructions, because you have to template both the target and the origin pages, and open a discussion on the destination page. Again, you'll need to write up a clear argument for why the two should be brought together, and since there's a lot of content on the Mee too India page, you'd have to help figure out what to move over and what to dump.
 * Don't delete or merge, but instead, help shape it away from whatever POV or other issues you're seeing.
 * Whatever you choose, you might also consider inviting members of WikiProject India and WikiProject Feminism to the discussions. Hope that helps, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:50, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I would like to address this to both of you. I have already posted a more detailed response on the original poster's talk page, but I will paraphrase here.  First, I admit there have been some users who just use the article to post the latest 'happening' of harassment allegations.  But for the most part, many of the incidents listed are consequential and have had social impacts, and are not just allegations.  For example, Anirban Blah was asked to resign from one of the top management firms in the country; Sajid Khan was outed as director of his film, MJ Akbar was asked to leave politics and is now taking his accusers to court, etc.  These are all very socially relevant things and that happened fairly quickly.  And I think it's quite biased of you to say that Indians always have a thing for controversy, as if we are incapable of being objective.  There is little on that page that is actually one-sided, because most of it came from major news sources - so they are meant to be objective.  And also, you're saying that it's just Indians writing their own 'daily news coverage': this movement has been deemed significant enough to be written about by BOTH the US' Financial Times AND CNN:


 * https://www.ft.com/content/4b3c4e7a-d2cf-11e8-a9f2-7574db66bcd5


 * https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/10/asia/india-metoo-intl/index.html


 * Another thing, a major gripe you had was that it just came about a couple of weeks ago and so it shouldn't have its own article on that accord. Keep in mind that according to WP:PERSISTENCE: "That an event occurred recently does not in itself make it non-notable." Yes it only happened a month ago, BUT it has been in the news CONSISTENTLY during that time, and has reached news of not only all across India but into the US as well (WP:GEOSCOPE) (WP:DEPTH).  So it covers a lot of bases as far as having its own article. I don't think you are justified in saying it doesn't.
 * Rush922 (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

User cyphoid bomb
It would be appreciated that you edit articles alone,or you can blame for any mistake commited..But unecessarily dont ENTER in my own talk page.... you block the people or users if something goes wrong Is it right to edit my talk page and call MR.aussie legend for serious discussion. I just want to say the page you edit ,seriously think aboutit bcoz hindi language people will not appreciate these stuff and its flop tv stuff,not even consider any single minute for that show.Ithought that i remake DDrajasthan dishayen which atleast be useful for13 -23 year old people.BUT i dont think so this will not work out.and please im not bothered you are working 20years ago before stuff 2001.coming to present DONT EDIT MY talk page.--Padmakalki (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2018 (UTC) I will show the fact tommorrow only 1/10 know about this show..very sorry you create articles for small things.BUT you pple will never pffer opportunity to the kinds who are really admiring.if you have time watch my youtube links given before4 days that u reverted...im have not created web series,its about the show that you need not know But remember atleast if you have some interest dishayen (DD)rajasthan is amazing..But dishayen dd 2001 is alone your aim of research.continue research ur flop stuff --Padmakalki (talk) 09:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but this is funny. Talk pages are open to anyone to complain in or talk to you. If you do not understand this, you should start by reading the Wikipedia policies before commenting.   Oshawott 12  ==== Talk to me!  05:34, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

LOL
The "conversation" a few sections above is comedic gold. I've rarely been this entertained on Wikipedia. :D Krimuk2.0 (talk) 08:36, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ...that's true! :D Csgir (talk) 08:54, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism by IP
2401:4900:1802:BDB6:EDBC:7DA2:FD66:8C86 has repeatedly been adding age related pronouns to cast sections for upcoming Indian films. Most don’t make sense, just because the actor is old doesn’t mean the characters are old. Summaries like “Some editors are very obsessed with making old actors look young” don’t make any sense. Reported it here now. 2.51.21.238 (talk) 10:24, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Seems like the IP is now using 27.60.179.100. 2.51.21.238 (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the IPs and protected a couple of those articles, including Zero and Thugs of Hindustan. So weird. No idea what this person's obsession is with aging and youth, but those adjectives sound like they are material to the characters' experiences in their story, which hasn't been established. Is Shah Rukh Khan playing an "aging" dwarf in Zero? Is the age of the character a material plot point, or is this person just trolling Shah Rukh Khan by calling him old? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Please can you tell SummerPhDv2.0 to leave me alone
Hi, I'm trying to do my best editing here on wikipedia, and all I get is SummerPhDv2.0 reverting all of my edits. I have learnt my lesson that I must provide a reliable source when editing but I'm just getting sick and tired of SummerPhDv2.0 reverting all of my edits. Please can you tell SummerPhDv2.0 to leave me alone because I'm already starting to get stressed of SummerPhDv2.0. Kind regards. 82.19.95.171 15:03, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you evading an existing block? If so, that would be a violation of our sockpuppetry policy. If you are evading a block, any edit you make can be reverted without regard for its utility. So my advice to you is to get your block squared away. It looks like Summer has mentioned this to you on your talk page numerous times. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes I know but I'm already beginning to get very tired and stressed about it, I'm only trying to do my best editing as possible but SummerPhDv2.0 really does make me very angry, I am sorry it has come to this but I cant take anymore of SummerPhDv2.0's reverting. 82.19.95.171 15:12, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe some time off will help you get your stress under control. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:13, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Sara Ali Khan
Hi admin, this page is created and as far as i know, the actress has not even debuted yet in any Production. In your this edit you redirected but it has been created once again. Just wanted to asked you she meets notability now? Regards KironKhanna (talk) 11:02, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Attitude?
You recently undid an edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zero_(2018_film)&diff=867085273&oldid=867082474

Fair call I suppose, but I only got the idea from a similar comment on the 2.0 (film) page; I figured if it was okay to be there then why not add a similar thing to the Zero page as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.0_(film)#Marketing "Its 2D teaser video has been viewed over 32 million times in 24 hours.[91] The film topic was trended and top searched queries on Google Trends for a week.[92]"

But what got me was your comment for the Zero edit-undo you just did:

"(Spare us the PR record nonsense. Everything's a record if you set the goalpost the correct distance away. This time we're counting views across multiple social media platforms? Poorly sourced anyway.)"

What's with the attitude? If you're going to critique, do it - but just telling someone to 'spare us' the 'nonsense' is borderline condescending. Not everyone is as familiar with whatever Wikipedia standards are considered community-acceptable. Being needlessly dismissive gets us nowhere; I've been around a while, but supposing I was just a fresh contributor adding what I considered an innocent part, only to see some senior editor like yourself just calling it nonsense? It's pretty demotivating and needless. It would work fine if this was some official job environment, but it's not - so try not to be so highhanded about it, please. Rush922 (talk) 17:05, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Unsolicited edit thrust-ed on my page
You have sent me a message for the edit done below https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=96_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=867678771

There seems to be some issues with the Wikipedia versioning and I strongly recommend you to check the technical stuff before you pounce on users. All I changed in my edit was to correct the name of the lead actor (Vijay) which was consistently vandalized to some (possibly non-existing) common man (Bijosh). I remember there was an edit before mine that had actually mentioned about these "highly positive reviews" that you have ranted. It has been deleted ,and surprise surprise I cannot take the responsibility for that even if you wished I could.

Please check before you can advise and in your future please get some training on communication ethics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shininaga (talk • contribs) 09:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I will explain on your talk page what you accidentally did. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:59, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Use of ratings system in Indian films
Hi,

Recently you made | this edit on the Thugs of Hindostan page regarding the film ratings system.

You said that it was a system mostly used for albums, not films, and that most non-Indian film articles don't even use it, but that Indian contributors seem obsessed with it. But, I think that in knowing how film reviewing itself is done in India, you could make the case that it is an effective tool to use. It's true that in the west, reviewers don't often use a rating tool to judge a film, and they do so qualitatively- like for Variety or the Chicago Tribune, who tend to be pretty verbose. But Indian reviewers in general - even top ones like Rajeev Masand of CNN-News18, Anupama Chopra or Raja Sen of the Hindustan Times - almost all use a rating system because that is what the Indian audience tends to utilize more. That's not to say that they don't respect the qualitative and written aspects of the rating, but that the star system has been adopted by reviewers as a way to synthesize their review in a quantitative way. So it's not just an 'obsession' of Indian Wikipedia contributors, but it's reflective of the way the film-reviewing system itself is in the country.

You say that the MOS:FILM doesn't have a preference for this; but keep in mind that most of the guidelines were probably written from a Western-centric view at how the entertainment industry works, as this is English Wikipedia. For example, in WP:FILMRATING, they recommend not to use ratings unless they can be elaborated upon so as to reduce systemic bias, and that different regions might rate films differently as per the MPAA. But that's largely true of mostly Western films, which almost all have to deal with International releases- so an English language film released in the USA might be rated differently in China because the MPAA system may not apply in China. But the Hindi film system is largely limited to India or the Indian diaspora - they do release them abroad, but their target demographic remains the same. So you can argue that for most Hindi/Indian film viewers, the rating system is more universally appreciated by them and there isn't a need to reduce bias- how many American readers would read the Ra.One article? Probably quite few compared to them (and people in multiple countries) reading Avengers: Infinity War. So for the audience that mostly reads the article (Hindi-speaking Indians), it would make sense to use a standard that is accepted and understood by the entertainment system in that country. Just because it's English Wikipedia doesn't mean it's only read by the English demographic, and common sense would say that when applicable, cultural standards can also apply if they are widely accepted in a region.

That being said, in a practical sense, when you see a rating, you get an accurate and immediate idea of how worthy the film is in the reviewers' mind. This is helpful because you don't always want to sift through their articles to get the jist of what they think. A rating summarizes the attitude of the reviewer succinctly, and gives a 'broad-stroke' approach to a review; it's the reason why Siskel and Ebert of the Chicago Tribune used their 'thumbs up/down' system - they knew that even at the end of a long worded review, the audience is aided by some quantitative measure to sum up a film. You might say that there is a danger of judging the film immediately just by the star ratings, but that is why we naturally have the written, qualitative aspects of the review as being predominant in the article, so neither method dominates the other.

So that's an argument I'd like to make for the inclusion of the star system rating for Hindi films, in that listed 'album' format. Let me know your thoughts please.

Rush922 (talk) 10:36, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi there, thanks for your note, I appreciate that your arguments are well thought out. Re: the film ratings table, over the years there have been discussions about this at various articles' talk pages. Here are some bullet points for ease of reading:
 * There is no community consensus for the use of an album rating template in the context of film critical response and to me it seems silly to misuse a template for this purpose.
 * Other arguments have been that these templates are nothing more than decoration, and that they can unduly skew readers' perception of critical response, because they rely on ratings being cherrypicked by editors who could have a conscious or unconscious bias.
 * The organisation of those ratings is additionally problematic. For instance, people almost always put the high ratings at the top of the list, which could make it seem as though a film received more positive ratings, or which could make it seem like the positive ratings are "more true". But if you jumble up the ratings list, does that help a reader's brain process the information?
 * Editors (especially ones who are using Wikipedia to advertise a film) do this with the prose all the time as well, which is intellectually offensive. That is, they will top load all the positive reviews in the critical response section, and bury the negative reviews at the bottom of the list. Casual readers, like most people, are very busy and won't commit to reading an entire wall of critical response. So they'll typically only focus on the stuff at the top. I think that if you were to go to WikiProject Film and ask why they don't use ratings in articles, they'd probably explain this very thing and point out that when you focus on individual aspects of a film, like cinematography, direction, acting, story, sound, you can present a more accurate picture of what was good and bad about the film without having to rely on subjective decorations like star ratings.
 * What about sites that use 1/10 star ratings? Or 1/4 star ratings? Or sites that use film reels instead of stars? How does this jumble of apples/oranges help us understand the overall response better? Isn't that just confusing? What about sources that don't use ratings at all?
 * Did any of this help? As for the ratings thing, I get your point about the films being targeted for a specific audience, but there are a lot of Western films that are not intended to be global. Our readership, however, is global, and we try to make our information as widely understood as possible. A person in Brazil who is studying Indian cinema may have no idea what a UA certificate is, and if there's no clear reason to mention it, we shouldn't. We're not selling tickets. If there is some academic context, then it's usually fine: "The censor board objected to the depiction of alcohol consumption, and refused to give the film a UA, or unrestricted, rating, however producers cut the scene and dropped the Adult Only (A) rating." Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:58, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , yes those arguments make more sense, thanks. I had not realized it was discussed at various points previously. To be fair, I still think there can be ways to use the star system effectively, but perhaps that's for another day and for the Film portal itself to discuss if I or someone decides to raise the point there.  But I appreciate your explanation. Rush922 (talk) 17:26, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You are also (obviously) welcome to open questions at WikiProject Film if you want to double-check the drivel I assert. There are a lot of people who have differing opinions, but not a lot of people there have experience in Indian cinema, so WP:ICTF may sometimes be a good source as well, although the strong editors who work in Indian cinema tend to be an insular group. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , Oh okay, yea getting people who are familiar with the cinema would be better- I can try them too then. Appreciated.Rush922 (talk) 12:42, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Thugs of Hindostan - news outlets now nearly unanimous in 'negative reviews'
Hi, It appears that the same outlets that Blacku22 posted in the Thugs of Hindostan Critical Reception section as calling the reception 'mixed,' have now all released new articles calling the reception 'negative' or 'panned.' These are 2nd-day articles, and they are nearly universal in agreement I believe. I have posited these articles on the ToH talk page - please see the bottom of the original RfC we made to see my discussion with Blacku22: [| here]. This may mean that we don't have to go through with an RfC after all. Thanks.

[Edit: After presenting the evidence to Blacku22, he still disagrees, saying that there still may be some outlets that disagree. I think this is getting ridiculous at this point, because there will always be some who either disagree or are biased, etc. I have since gone and compiled a list of most of the major news outlets I could find on a Google Document - no less than 18 have expressly stated 'negative' (not mixed) reviews - See the link below. Only 1 has since stated 'Mixed.' I think Blacku22 is being far too technical and not allowing reason and common sense here; if 18 news outlets are in agreement, must we be at the mercy or one or two who don't? Keep in mind that these are NOT just random outlets, but most of the major ones who show up at the first or second pages of a Google Search. If we can't accept the evidence, we would be letting our obtuseness (and frankly a ridiculous adherence to technicalities) not accept a truth that is staring us in the face. I think it's obvious we can now say "Most" critical outlets have agreed that the film got "mostly negative reviews."]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jy_pRRGfoVtv8jNWN1CY6KnZFeJDeePtj6V9_aeI26Y/edit?usp=sharing

[Edit 2 :  Looks like he's finally conceded after seeing the Google Doc, and would be okay to stating 'generally negative reviews.' :) I have gone and closed the second RfC also, as we have reached a consensus.  Thank you for all your help in this matter.]

Rush922 (talk) 17:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Need Help
Hello Cyphidbomb, My Name is Thilakshan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thilakshan) i need your help please, I don't know how to contact you. please give me one chance, i need explain you about my blocked wikipedia. can i give you my E-mail adresse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.0.236.168 (talk) 14:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Why do we need secrecy? Why don't you log into your first account (not Thilakshan) and explain whatever you need to explain. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Since updating a JavaScript you're using...
Hi there Cyphoidbomb. I am working on updating my user scripts and, since you're still using watchUserContribs.js, I'd like to verify with you that you're not experiencing any problems with it. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you are so I can make it behave :)  00:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks again for creating this for me. I haven't experienced any problems. Although I do have a question: The clear watchlist cache--that doesn't delete my watchlist, right? I've been afraid to click that. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * NP & YW. No, the "Clear watchlist cache" button tells the browser to forget your watchlist so the next time you load a contributions page (and have this script enabled) the memory of your watchlist will be rebuilt. It's only likely to be useful if you're using multiple tabs and making changes to your watchlist in all of them, and they get out of sync. Note: After clearing the watchlist cache, your entire watchlist will have to be retrieved again in order to build the fresh cache.  01:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * To clarify: Clicking the "Clear watchlist cache" button will not affect your watchlist at all, only your browser's temporary (per session) memory (to save time and network usage) of it.  11:36, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

LOL
You've got to love the crazy mind. I play an augmented reality game called Ingress and get accused of all sorts of things by players on the opposing team who really should be charged with stealing oxygen, and their logic defies me. It's obviously no different here. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You should go comment on his AfD instead of laughing here ;)   Oshawott 12  ==== Talk to me!  08:41, 18 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I missed most of the fun over the last few hours--was I accused of anything other than being Rakesh Malhotra? That's the last one I remember. I can't see the suppressed content. I'm going to check out Ingress today. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:42, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I just saw the post on your user page and looked through the rest. I was pretty late to it all. If you check out Ingress, remember, resistance is futile. You need to be enlightened in this world. :) -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 16:57, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey :)
saavn.com is the official Music Partner of all the Albums i have edited i removed a lot of sources relating to unofficial mp3 download sites and added saavn because they have the rights for the music :)

Thanks for letting me know though :) will stop adding links Moorlord15 (talk) 01:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Vijay actor article
Hi, i came across your message about how you reverted my edit on Vijay actor. Frankly, I only wrote what I learned from about the film he acted. If you think the edit deserves to be removed, feel free to do so. It was just done in good faith. And i don't want to discuss what "good faith" edits mean. But I however I must admit one thing, I have read hundreds of artciles on wikipedia of actors, actresses and celebrities. But Vijay actor article just seems to be written by Vijay fans, meaning, i don't think the article and it's style of writing meets wikipedia neutrality standards. i base my judgement on comparing the so mentioned article to other articles of actors/actreses who have worldwide fame. I inserted a template above his article to show my objection. And secondly, about use of hyperbolics, I don't find any wikipedia policy outlining rules against use of such words. Furthermore, wikipedia is encyclopedia, designed for common people to read and easily understand, not a scientific paper or philoshpical theisis. Dajo767 (talk) 07:30, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Responding on your talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:14, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Reliable source
Can you consider Indianmoviestats.com as reliable source? Because it is more like Box office India for south Indian movies. User1257 (talk) 08:46, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi there, it is a blog run by unknown parties and we do not use blogs as references. We only care what established sources with reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say about anything. That typically means major mainstream sources like established news entities. So, no, I would not consider it a sufficient source. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:34, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

The IP is back
Hi, CB - well, Joy Badlani is targeted again. It's hard to tell what does or doesn't belong in some of these Bengali and Bollywood films because some of the sources are simply not reliable, so there really is no good way to verify if what's in them is even close to accurate. Anyway, see this edit for id purposes as it represents the last one of about 4 made by that same IP. They're back and just made this edit within a few days after the pp was removed. Some of these films need permanent pp or they're going to drive us nuts. 🤪 Atsme ✍🏻📧 16:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's an interesting edit. The Rudranil Ghosh vandal seemed to like using bulleted lists with ellipses instead of "as". This newest IP edit added a table (without including the other films...) They kind of remind me of another incompetent IP editor who kept adding messed up tables in filmographies. They would do bizarre stuff like wikilink every word in a film's title. I first saw them at Anupama Parameswaran. The only thing though was that it wasn't a Bengali IP. Anyway, I'm going to revert this edit and see how it plays out. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:01, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Heartbreak on a Full Moon
Can you semi-protect the page to persistent genre warring? Soft pop (talk) 15:29, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ for 2 weeks. IP blocked for a month, although I'm not sure what good that will do. Based on the geolocation of the IP (Italy) as well as that article history, it looks like a flare-up of, someone who's been doing this nonsense for years. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Twenty:20 (film) protection
Twice in the past you've added year long semi-protections to this article due to constant warring over the order of two of the actors in the movie. The latest protection expired last month. The warring over placing Mammootty first has resumed as before;, ,. I'm not a fan of permanent semi-protections, so I'm asking for another year, but this is a case where permanent might apply. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * And to think that this film is 10 years old! Totally psycho nonsense. I semi-ed again for a year. Maybe next year I'll do a full-semi. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:57, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

A message
Stop editing the budget regarding Thugs Of Hindostan without providing any reliable source. Or else you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia forever. Samyamoy (talk) 07:34, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Troll comment
Please refrain from making constructive edits to Wikipedia, as you apparently did to Gold (2018 film). Your recent edits appear to constitute Self-righteousness and have been reverted. Thank you. 162.208.44.53 (talk) 15:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

I know what I'm doing
I also added two other reliable sources. Did you watch it or you were blind on purpose? Samyamoy (talk) 17:51, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Firstly, since you've dropped an unjustified warning on my talk page, I'd appreciate it if you'd please address your as-yet-unfounded complaint that I changed the budget without providing a reference. Secondly, I'm not sure what your counter-argument is for the sourcing issue. Do you think it's OK to add a garbage reference so long as you have other legitimate references? Or do you think that maybe we should keep garbage references out of our articles, just as a matter of general integrity? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Since you got a problem with the Dailyhunt source I'm ready to remove it. But the other two sources are legit. And you also don't threaten me in future. Samyamoy (talk) 18:04, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Care to indicate where I threatened you? Or is this another impotent, erroneous warning like the one you posted above about the unsourced budget? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:08, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

I always edit Wikipedia providing sources. But you have no right to threaten me over blocking from Wiki edits. Anyway I removed the source you raise objection to. Now peace. Samyamoy (talk) 18:20, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Either be specific about what threat you're talking about, and what unsourced budget change I made, or stop wasting my time. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:29, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Need Help
hello, please reply my massage?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive_24--85.0.236.168 (talk) 18:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Why did you leave a note in my archives? Those are closed discussions and nobody reads their archives. Here is what you said:


 * Hello, My first account Arnav19 was blocked and my first Wikipedia account was not Arnav19, it was Thilakshan (I mean this is Tamil Wikipedia Account).https://ta.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%A9%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D:Thilakshan
 * Thilakshan: 23rd March 2013 (Tamil Wikipedia) 4th May 2015 (English Wikipedia)
 * Arnav19: 11 November 2013

I don't know i can use one Wikipedia Account with 2 different languages. After few months i was open new account with Arnav19 name in English Wikipedia. It was my big mistake. After that I met many problems Example: editing, reference, copyright...... and also my editing was very poor. One day my Arnav19 Wikipedia was BLOCKED. But i am not give up. From 4th may 2015 i started editing with a name of Thilakshan. This time my editing was better, no copyright issue and my article was more improve. One day this account was also blocked. I have a more interest in in English Wikipedia. Please please help me. I need writing with my original name Thilakshan. I know, this is my fault, now i know about the rules of Wikipedia. Please forgive me and solve my problems. Thank You.--85.0.236.168 (talk) 18:47, 26 November 2018 (UTC) I don't have time to deal with this now. I'll address it in a few hours. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The oldest account you have at the English Wikipedia is the Arnav19 account. You will need to open an unblock request from that account, not Thilakshan. However, I have very little faith in your ability to edit here. You have made a colossal mess of dozens HUNDREDS of articles and you never attempted to fix any of these issues after they were brought to your attention numerous times. Mistakes that you made in one article were carried to dozens and dozens HUNDREDS of other articles you created, and then people started using your articles as templates for their articles, thus perpetuating the same mistakes you routinely made. You have no awareness of the scope of the mess you created. I also do not believe that you have the English skills required to work constructively at Wikipedia. This is most recently made evident by your edits here after I instructed you above that archived discussions are closed. I do not believe that you are competent to edit at the English Wikipedia at present. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Edited above to strikeout "dozens" and instead use "HUNDREDS", because that's actually the scale of what you've done. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:27, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Junglee Pictures
Hey, I hope you're well. The draft page for Junglee Pictures was declined due to its promotional tone and puffery. I've recently given it a copy-edit to remove such language, and would appreciate it if you could move it to mainspace. Cheers! Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 17:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Larger film posters in articles?
This isn't a big deal I suppose, but is it just me or do the Infobox film posters seem larger than normal recently? I've noticed this in not just one or two film pages, but many of them. Did someone change the resolution size at the Infobox template page or something? Just curious. Thanks. Rush922(talk) 08:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I haven't noticed anything. Maybe something changed in your thumbnail preferences? Mine is set at 220px, but I'm pretty sure I changed that a couple of years ago. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

sarkar
top 3 tamil films in admissions after mersal and baahubali 2in france use it kindly--Hjkl12345 (talk) 16:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We're not here to promote films, dude. Everything is a world record if you set the goal the right distance away. "Highest-grossing film to star a man with a mustache!" Wikipedia isn't a platform for advertising. Understand? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

super thumbs up--Hjkl12345 (talk) 16:25, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

forbes 2018
Vijay(actor) article no.26 indian actor 2018 salary http://www.forbesindia.com/lists/2018-celebrity-100/1735/3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.196.5.222 (talk) 18:13, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Blocking a vandal
I need help to block 88.161.50.247, this user is constantly tampering with movie genres and none of his edits are constructive. I checked the block log to find out you had blocked him earlier too. Please block him, I am having trouble in it since I don't have an idea of how to. (77Survivor (talk) 07:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC))
 * Thanks for the tip. I've blocked them for six months. (You have to be an administrator to block someone.) Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Rush922(talk) 12:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
You are Most Welcome sir

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:32, 13 December 2018 (UTC) 

Hi
Telebrations is an award show to appreciate ITV talent. It is held by ABP News which is one of India's leading news channels. It has been held for around 10 years. More importantly, fans vote for it. Secondly, AVTA is an Asian Television award show in which the fans nominate and vote so I honestly think there is no point of being non notable? These aren't random award mills or weebly awards. MiaSays (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi there, do articles about either of these awards exist at Wikipedia? If so, they can be used. If not, we would first need to establish that the award is notable before adding them to articles. I get your points, but this is how we help other editors (and readers) confirm that we're not adding random award mills to articles. There might be other considerations as well. For example, Star Parivaar has been around for 15 years, but would be insufficient for inclusion, because it's a self-aggrandising in-house award that only honors people on its own network. This is the intellectual equivalent of winning a "World's Most Handsome" award from one's own mother. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:21, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I understand your point, but WP is a reliable source of information, thus awards that are achieved by actors should be mentioned regardless of the fact that they have pages on WP or not. The exception being weebly awards or random award mills which are obviously not valid. I think it's not possible for ALL valid award shows to have pages and be maintained. The awards that have decent coverage and have public voting (except weebly ones) should be added. Just saying. MiaSays
 * I'm not sure what you mean when you say "WP is a reliable source of information" or how that supports your counter-argument. That said, it is a longstanding community attitude that when we include lists of things that we claim are notable, those items should have their own articles. If you have a list of notable people from a certain city, each of those people should have their own article already, because notability needs to be established first. Otherwise, anybody could add their name to the list, regardless of whether they were notable or not. Similarly, look at a list like List of Filipino former child actors. Virtually everybody in that list has an article that establishes notability. Or List of accolades received by Star Trek Into Darkness or List of accolades received by Velaiilla Pattadhari. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Then how do we establish 'NOTABILTY' please explain. And no, this is not some paid promotion. When an award show takes place all the pages of actors are updated according to wins and nominations, it's obvious there will be edits on the pages of actors who have won. It is incorrect to judge someone without a reason. Anyway, please tell me how do I establish notability of an award show? There is no rule as such on WP. I see awards without pages on WP everywhere in actors awards sections. Shouldn't there be an equal rule? MiaSays (talk) 07:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Since we are talking about TV awards, why don't you go to WikiProject Television and open a discussion there and ask them under what circumstances awards should be added to a biographical article or a TV article. Maybe ask if it is OK to add awards if there is no existing article at Wikipedia about that award? That way, someone other than me can give you insight on community norms. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:32, 16 December 2018 (UTC)


 * But isn't an award considered notable if it has a page on WP and has notable coverage from reliable sources? MiaSays (talk) 07:34, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If an award is notable, an article may have already been written about it. If that article stands the test of time and is adequately sourced such that our general notability guideline is satisfied, (which means that multiple sources are writing in detail about the award itself, including history and the people behind it and so on, not just parroting "so-and-so won ___ award") and if our community is satisfied that it is a legitimate independent award (unlike Star Parivaar), then maybe the award could be included. But an award with little academic coverage that's only been around for a few years is not likely to be notable per our guidelines. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:40, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Also, since you have a problem with adding 'non notable' awards, then it would be nice if it is followed on all pages. If some pages include 'non notable' awards then it would be incorrect because the rest are not 'allowed' to add them. MiaSays (talk) 07:53, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand your frustration. It is a common complaint that "if X is wrong on page Y, then you should change X on every page at Wikipedia", however, I'm sure you can understand how difficult that would be to correct X problem on however many pages that problem exists on. Not all articles get the same amount of scrutiny, so we are often left having to deal with these issues on the more popular pages. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:11, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Another user has added the awards now, it is pretty obvious people are going to update wiki pages. I corrected their edits. I guess you will remove them again. MiaSays (talk) 10:28, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've started a discussion here, in case you're interested in participating. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Merry

 * Thank you ! Merry Christmas to you and your closest. Warm regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:08, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Zee Biz is not a reliable source for worldwide box office collections of 2.0.
Zee Biz is not a reliable source for worldwide box office collections of 2.0. A trade website data is needed. times of india quote figures of Box Office India. that can be used. https://www.zeebiz.com/india/photo-gallery-20-box-office-collection-worldwide-total-till-now-bollywood-hindi-kollywood-chennai-earnings-rs-800-crore-rajinikanth-76254

the worldwide figures of 2.0 is no where touching even Rs 700 crore. its in Rs 665-670 crore range.

https://www.boxofficeindia.com/report-details.php?articleid=4533 https://www.boxofficeindia.com/report-details.php?articleid=4535

--Insaafbarua (talk) 17:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't know why you dropped this obnoxious copy/pasted wall of information on my talk page, but you don't get to manufacture an arbitrary rule of needing "trade website data". We consider information published in mainstream sources, not just "trade websites". Feel free to open a discussion on the article's talk page if you feel otherwise. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:55, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Protecting the "Zero (film)" page?
Hi Cyphoidbomb,

I noticed that the Zero page is unprotected - ordinarily that should be fine but since we're getting close to its release date I've noticed that vandalism seems to be picking up - me and some others had to undo some random edits this morning. Maybe you or someone can watch that page as it nears release this Friday? Just a thought. Rush922(talk) 22:32, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've semi-protected the article for 3 weeks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:17, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Good move, thanks. Rush922(talk) 19:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
You are welcome sir.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC) 

Hello
I think you need to stop judging people for literally EVERYTHING. Not everything is paid and promotional. You say these words at the drop of a hat. Stating the truth is also promotional? If they are popular and I stated that how is that promotional? I really don't understand. Y'all have a problem with people adding achievements and awards, not finding them notable enough. Edits are reverted if the sources are not 'reliable' enough. Everyone gets the reliability part, it makes sense but how is it a problem if one or two 'non reliable' sources stay. It's not like sources that are vile are being added. Even the 'non reliable' ones are offering some insight. Why can't some of you administrators chill? We are really not here to disrupt or promote. We are not getting paid. So please stop judging. Thank you. MiaSays (talk) 09:29, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It would help if you'd link to a specific instance of what you're complaining about, because I have over 15,000 pages on my watchlist and I don't just follow you around all day. And just so you know, people *are* being paid to write promotional articles. So your complaint is coming from a place of absolute ignorance. You personally may not be getting paid, but that doesn't mean that there aren't cadres of people all around you who spring out of nowhere to drop promotion into articles all day long. There are users who who drool over article subjects and who are obsessed with labeling films as "blockbusters" "super hits" "failures" "flops" and "disasters", there are users who are intent upon vandalising financial data, editors who seem to think it's appropriate to opine about various subjects, and users who violate our sockpuppetry policy to commit this disruption over and over again. So chilling hasn't really accomplished much to maintain article quality. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * And I understand that just like I said but not everyone comes up with those intentions so by 'chilling' I meant, don't judge EVERYONE cause of a few people. You clearly misunderstood the point of the message. Anyway. MiaSays

Christmas 2018
Merry Christmas! Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 17:01, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, Cyphoidbomb!
Have a good one, dude! Foxnpichu (talk) 18:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Merry Christmas, . Stay warm! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Not Repeat this types of Edits (2.0 gross).
Hello, I have read your message to me that you told "2.0" doesn't claim 985 cross that is right but the reliable source title was like this only that "2.0" had given an challenge of thousand crore it means "2.0" has entered in thousand crore club, so so sorry I will not make this edit again without reading the full reliable source that I will provide thank you for telling me. Sapian sam (talk) 06:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks to me that you fabricated the 985 crore figure. I don't know how else to interpret that edit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I am really sorry that I have given wrong information in the page, I am really very guilty on my mistake and You are right that I have fabricated that 985 crore figure. So sorry I promise I will never edit like this. Please forgive me. Sapian sam (talk) 07:30, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Discussion on Naagin
@ Cyphoidbomb : To explain the edits in article Naagin series, fistly Suryavanshi is a title signifying the clan of the character and not in his/her official name but often used after the surname "Singh". Also only the words of Indian/Hindi origin are qouted especially those which indicate a post e.g. "Takshak-Raj" indicates the post of the king of Takshak clan and used as a referral like one uses 'King' in King Philips say, and so Takshak-Raaj is not a nickname and to be used before the name Rocky, also since it's a post in Indian language it is quoted. Also the quoting of posts King and Prince aren't for sarcasm but to indicate the posts are not official but widely regarded by the subjects of that very King/Prince. Also Italics have only be used for Naagin which is an Indian word and not English like squirrel that it can be freely written (also haven't used quotation here not to confuse between a bestowed post like Naag-Rani and an identity like Naagin). Am I able to make it cleare to you? Was that sensible? Please reply since if I was able to make you understand I would like for you to undo your recent edits on the article. Thanking You, PentaETAD (talk) 17:53, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm going to paste your comments at the Naagin talk page and reply there, since that is the most appropriate place for this discussion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm beginning to wonder
If something more needs to be done to protect Joy_Badlani - not sure what's going on, but it appears it may be a not-so-notable wanting more notability via WP??? It is rather annoying to keep watching that page to protect against the promo material. What do you think about this? I'm still learning. Atsme ✍🏻📧 22:16, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Protection wouldn't have affected that guy. I left him a notice not to submit unsourced content. I tried searching for her name with that film title and couldn't find anything, so it's possible that he's just adding hoax content. I'll keep an eye on him. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

user disruptively adding categories
Hi can you check this user who is adding Sony Pictures India category unrelated pages like HBO and Fox Sports. Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 16:11, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I don't know enough about this area to be able to warn appropriately. If there are instances of them adding bad categories, why don't you warn them, and if they continue adding the same problematic content, let me know and I'll intervene. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:52, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * here and here and you can see the user is adding unrelated categories to Sony pages. Sid95Q (talk) 02:04, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * As I said, I don't know enough about international partnerships and licensing and subsidiary ownership to be able to do anything here. If you have personal knowledge in this area, you should reach out to the user directly, preferably with sources, like "Hi there, I see you've added ___ to ___ category. I don't understand why you added these categories, since Sony does not own _______ as proven by &lt;this source&gt;. Could you please explain those edits?" I'm just not able to block users unless it's clear they're engaging in questionable behavior, and I don't have enough information here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:20, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I left a message on the user's talk page but problem here is these users never reply and no matter how times you revert their edit or send them messages they never stop. This user is doing this third time after his/her previous edits by reverted either by me or by other users. Sid95Q (talk) 06:46, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * After discovering that he lied about the producer here, and along with some of the counter-intuitive edits, like slapping Sony labels on HBO templates, I've decided to indef him. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:17, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year
 Happy New Year! Cyphoidbomb,

Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Donner60 (talk) 04:43, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
 * Thank you, and best to you in the new year! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2018 (UTC)