User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 28

College Kumar
Some IP has been re-adding content created by me into College Kumar (from which I've been blocked from editing for a week), but I can assure you that someone isn't me. I'm being investigated, but I haven't fallen so low that I'd indulge in sockpuppetry. I'm even being accused of Occam's razor, but I swear from the bottom of my heart I didn't direct anyone to re-add my deleted content. I even told a different admin about this here. Any way to clear my name? -- Kailash29792 (talk)  08:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Isaacsorry
I see where you gave editor User talk:Isaacsorry a warning. Each week someone else complains about his editing. Isaacsorry blanks his talk page to remove the cumulative issues. Please take a look at his talk page edit history. I see you are an administrator. He ignored my questions. Anyway take a look and see if he is a problem editor. Thanks. 03:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eschoryii (talk • contribs) 03:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there, editors are allowed to delete talk page posts instead of archiving them. However, this is widely considered proof that they read the notice, so if they are warned for violating policy or contravening community guidelines, they could be sanctioned. Editors aren't required to respond to queries, although that's not typically considered behavior conducive to this community effort, and if someone is making changes, but refusing to discuss, that can also result in sanctions, as nobody has the right to stonewall changes to articles if they're not willing to discuss the issues and achieve consensus. Anyway, if you have specific issues to raise with the user, I can take a look at them if you can provide diffs, but otherwise, aside from having me scour through their recent edits, I'm not exactly sure what you want me to do in this case. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. You need do nothing further.Eschoryii (talk) 04:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Bhaumik Gondaliya
Sir that Bhaumik Gondaliya troll is back. He's targeting this article. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:07, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Help Needed
Hi,

I just saw that [Draupadi] page has been marked for template discussion. Can you pls help me understand what is the issue?

I am willing to contribute in order to help preserve the page as per policies. Please let me whom to contact, and what needs to be done to resolve issue.

(Panchalidraupadi (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2020 (UTC))
 * The template at top indicates that it was added in January 2020. Looking through the article's edit history, I see that it was added here by, so if you wanted to know what their concerns were, you could ask them directly on their talk page. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Panchalidraupadi (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Movie Posters
Someone had uploaded different versions of movie posters of Krrish, Don and Don 2. Remember, we had actually discussed with other editors about how the actual theatrical posters/posters that describes the theme of the films should be used? I tried to re-upload the previous version but it is not working. I will appreciate your help. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  03:58, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what to do
This editor keeps reverting me. I did some edits on Priyanka Chopra's article. He reverted all of my edits even the non-controversial ones. I tried discussing with him and he reverted me again. He has also not replied to my last posts on the discussions we were having on Chopra's talk page. So how am I supposed to edit wikipedia? He keeps reverting me and is not ready to discuss. WP rules clearly says no one WP:OWNs any article and anyone can edit. That editor did not stop at that. He went on to remove a lot of stuff from Andaaz, an article I started working on today. He removes this which has been there since last six years and accuses me of favoring one actress. How am I suppose to edit and work on anything here? Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  08:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If Krimuk has an objection that you are scrubbing the Priyanka Chopra article of anything negative, you should expect pushback. In the edit above you not only made minor cosmetic changes, but you deleted sourced criticism about the subject being perceived as unprofessional by a director. In a world where another editor thinks that you're removing content that balances other content, you can understand why they would have reverted you, right? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, it is not about that edit (I expected to get pushback for that although I believe it belongs in the film's article). It's about him reverting my commas, little copy edits like "critics felt her role was small" to "critics felt she had little to do in the film" and stuff like that. Her 2012 to 2014 section was named "Wider recognition since its FA but that editor changed it without any reasons in 2018. Also he has been reverting my edits when I add "Chopra is noted for her philanthropic work" how is this a controversial edit? Also when he added 5 negative reviews to the article without any discussion in 2018, was that not deserving of pushback? I don't understand. That editor has added negative reviews to Chopra's acclaimed roles such as Barfi (a tad showy), DDD (not as much messy), Mary Kom (83% on RT; trashy screenplay) and when I provided my views and sources for his claims on the talk page of the article, he went silent. In Padukone's article, he has only used 2 negative reviews and rest of her panned performance are written as "the role was not as per her talent but she still stole the show". So now tell me. What's negative and what's positive? Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  14:48, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * My recommendation then, is to work in smaller batches, perhaps. If you're going to make cosmetic changes, then do that in one pass. If you're going to boldly restructure major areas, then try to avoid uncontroversial changes within that edit. I think you should consider the big picture here: If it starts to look like you have a pro-Chopra perspective and that you are manipulating the article to remove negative content, you could potentially walk yourself into a topic ban. I'm not saying that you are doing that, I'm just urging you to consider the end result. I've left a note on Krimuk's talk page. Obviously it's not ideal for one person to revert and be unwilling to discuss. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:44, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I have never been accused of whitewashing Chopra's article Cyphoidbomb. In fact I have been the biggest contributor to Chopra's article and got several Barnstars for it. If I were a whitewasher do you think the article would have passed FA? My problem is that Krimuk 2.0 majorly restructured the article in 2018 without discussions after I got blocked and NO ONE said anything to him. I don't have problems with his all the edits he made in 2018 but some like he added mixed reviews to her acclaimed performances of DDD, Barfi, Mary Kom (a violation of WP: NPOV). Chopra's 2012-14 section was renamed wider recognition (even the lead says) to "recognition for Barfi and Mary Kom" (so her other successful films does not count?) According to him It's balance to add negative stuff when the performance is positively reviewed. Also see here how he had removed positive notices for DDD and Baywatch under the summary of BALANCE even though her performances in both films were positively received. He goes ahead and add a negative review for JG. I started discussions on the talk page of the article yet he is not ready to listen. I pointed out the fact that If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, it does not belong on Wikipedia, regardless of whether it is true or you can prove it, except perhaps in some ancillary article. Then the editor links WP: BALANCE and says ""tiny minorities" would be 1 negative review for 100 positives". It's according to him BUT Wikipedia does not work according to him. Also don't forget Box Office Bomb for TSIP collections a clear violation of NPOV (you had taught me years ago Cyphoidbomb, remember?)

Also he removed the criticism of Padukone'a and Singh's performance (the Anupama Chopra review used in the article criticised him a little but you won't see now; just praise) in Bajirao Mastani article and removed Chopra's quotes, image, mention from the lead etc. Note that the version he completely changed was a version that was reached after a CONSENSUS on that talk page. Yet that editor changed it without any discussion. How can anyone remove consensus reached version of any article?

I would like to invite here to see if I am really the one wrong here. Now tell me that I am wrong to point out the violations of NPOV and the fact that the editor majorly restructured an article without any discussions and removed a consensus reached version from another article. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  01:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Krish!, read what I said, I think you mean well. It's ok to admit you have not always expressed it well, you're just now coming back from a ling term block for socking. Chill just a little, I was saying why it might be hard for Krimuk to do it and in that first sentence I say he needs to attempt it anyways. Sometimes less is more ala ad naseum Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you are right. I should express it better and need to relax a little. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  14:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Krish! Here is something that I learned, it was a valuable lesson. When things get frustrating here, step away. It can be the hardest thing to do but for your own peace it is worth it. I've had my my share of issues here, times I meant well and expressed it very badly to the detriment of myself and others. That's when I realized it just wasn't worth it. Try writing an article, something local like a historical place or notable area where you live. I've never really experienced drama when I did that. Write it source it and be willing to let others write after you and with you. Carve your own path! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I did just that exactly. I started writing another article, Andaaz, after Krimuk 2.0 did not want to discuss but what do you know he went there too and started reverting my edits. I got demoralised so much today that I felt like leaving wikipedia. I am sufferening from a life threatening disease in real life and I got so demotivated today that I broke down. So I cannot write any article without getting reverted by that editor. Krish  &#124;  Talk To Me  15:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * and Cyphoidbomb, editors are proposing at ANI to partically block me. This is clearly a content dispute/lack of discussion issue. What am I supposed to do? Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  01:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Krish!. Honestly, the best you can do now is drop the WP:STICK. Again speaking from personal experience when this stuff starts happening, no matter how much you think you are right, STOP. I know that is unfair but that's why I suggested writing a BRAND NEW article, go to your own area. You don't own it but if you aren't overlapping and the pursuit continues if it's frivolous or hounding editors will see that. I can't recommend this enough Krish, you need to avoid WP:IDHT at all costs. Again understand I'm just commenting on where things stand now with the community. You've pleaded the case in great detail, the community disagrees. We have to accept that when it happens and find ways to work within that consensus. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Sidharth shukla
There is no content about his modelling career ,where he became 1st asian to have won world's best model and other modelling work. No media image such as most desirable men in india, biz personallity of the year , ormax media etc. About his personal life. His media image. Awards section is not complete and full table of awards should be updated Princepratap1234 (talk) 10:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * So fix it. This is a volunteer run project. If you want to see something, volunteer. Just please read our reliable sourcing guidelines and WP:ICTF might be helpful as well. Avoid blogs and faceless websites. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Please review my edits on Sidharth shukla page. It is well edited with proper sources. Princepratap1234 (talk) 07:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * As explained before we don't include one-time interviews on talk shows in a filmography, only notable performances are included so this addition here is not notable plus Google search results cannot be considered as a reliable source as you added here. Sid95Q (talk) 07:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I added it in special appearances and these things are available in every page of tv actor and actress. So you should remove it from everyone page. Princepratap1234 (talk) 08:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's WP:OTHERSTUFF As explained earlier Wikipedia is a  volunteer run project So we work only on guidelines. Just because something is present of some other page does not make it right. Sid95Q (talk) 08:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I added it in different section as special appearances. Princepratap1234 (talk) 08:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Same thing you said above and I gave a reply to that. Sid95Q (talk) 08:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Bothiman sock (March 2020)
I haven't seen a Bothiman sock in a bit, and it's starting to feel overdue. I think is the current one though and wanted your thoughts before filing a SPI. Recent edits are around films with Vijay in them, usual Bothiman sign. The edits adding what Vijay was paid to Bigil and Master articles feel like something Bothiman would do. The closest I have to a smoking gun is this conversation where a Bothisock was trying get the gross of Bigil changed to 300 crore. CAJ makes this edit - note that the original range in that edit isn't supported and the current range is 285-300. I don't get the block of edits to various US films, I can't remember a Bothisock doing that before, but some of them have had odd editing patterns. This may be something where some more WP:ROPE is needed. This feels right, but I don't think it's enough for a WP:DUCK and I don't like putting SPI folks on fishing expeditions.  Ravensfire  (talk) 00:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Could be! He's known for jacking up his edit count by making trivial changes to his user space, so I wouldn't put it past him to be doing the same to innocuous articles. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Possible issues with User:Luigi1090
Hi Cyphoidbomb. I'm still Luigi1090. I know you have known me for a long time here on Wikipedia but, please (with all my heart), help me in this thread with the homonym paragraph at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Luigi1090 (talk) 12:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Malavika Mohanan
Sir, regarding this edit. The birth year and the place of birth of the subject is sourced in the "Early life" section. Is there any other reason why you removed them from the lead and infobox? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I might have seen it appear in the infobox while looking at a wide range of diffs. For instance this. That said, how do we feel about OrissaPost as a reference? Is it a legit newspaper? Their About Us page is a bit weak. If you think it's sufficient, feel free to put the info back. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Was exactly my concerns when I opened a discussion regarding OrissaPOST in the WP:RSN here. Abecedare explained that it is a sister publication of Dharitri (newspaper), the latter of which is in operation since 1974. These seem to be front page clicks of the daily . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Harshad Chopda
Hi, seems to be a paid editor or coi, adding the same old promotional copy and dodgy awards to the Harshad Chopda article, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 21:43, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip. Looks like a sock. Bbb23 indeffed 'em. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Neha Kakkar
Recently the Neha Kakkar article has been "expanded" (bloated I must say 37K+ bytes!) by a new user here. Skimming through the new version, it seemed to be full of puffery as well as unnecessary additions. The user seem to have "expanded" almost all her songs. I'm sure that large chunks of the content are unsourced. Substantial WP:COPYVIO too. Pinging. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Fanoflionking
Hi Cyphoidbomb, I considered reporting this to WP:ANI but I don't think it's a large-scale enough issue to do so. Since you are an administrator that specializes in behavioral issues among users, I wanted to reach out to you first to get your thoughts on a particular user. Over the years, Fanoflionking has had significant issues listening to other editors and asking for any sort of consensus, and it's getting to the point where it's becoming disruptive. He's continually creating new pages and doing major page moves without any consensus, and when he's called on it, he stops for a month or so and then just does it again. He does not respond to any negative talk page messages commenting on his behavior. Moreover, while the occasional typo is normal for all of us, his content pretty consistently has major typos and spelling errors in it, which brings up a question of WP:COMPETENCE. See here where he creates a new page in July 2019 1, is reverted due to lack of consensus, then does it again yesterday 2 There's also all these contributions where are page creations without any sort of consensus 3 I feel that this demonstrates a serious lack of understanding on this user's part that Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and not just his own personal place to do whatever he wants. His talk page is also a huge mess between all the weird archives, and reference lists, but you can see some of the other warnings for doing this sort of thing that he hasn't responded to. Please let me know your thoughts on how to proceed with this. Katniss  May the odds be ever in your favor ♥  18:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Left notice on their talk page that communication is required to achieve consensus, etc. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Guavabutter
He has been replacing mass instances of the proper translation (and the diminutive trans) with the long-discouraged lang-en. Can something be done about this? -- Kailash29792 (talk)  08:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I was unaware of the discouragement of the lang-en template, as I picked it up from an article I came across. Guavabutter (talk) 09:34, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * For context, English readers know when what they're looking at is English. That's part of why it's discouraged. More helpful is being told whether something is a translation or an official English title. (Depending on context.) I also feel the same way about English since nobody reading English would ever think that suddenly they want to learn more about the English language. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Master sock Patiparmeshwar is active again
Hi, you have recently blocked above mentioned master sock but they are active again here and here again. Can you please look into it?-Kthxbay (talk) 16:00, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The first diff you provided was to an edit that I made. Not sure if that was on purpose or not. Blocked the IP and semi-protected the article. Thanks for the tip. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Grateful and I will keep an eye.-Kthxbay (talk) 17:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Disruptive IP
2.96.69.213 has been adding Indic scripts to articles about Indian films. This is mostly likely the same person as 88.108.182.75 (seeing the exact same editing style and additions of script templates) who disrupted multiple articles in the same way despite being informed and warned multiple times. Please see what to to with this IP, the previous IP kept adding the scripts repeatedly despite repeated warnings. Gotitbro (talk) 05:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Left a warning, but I don't know what good it will do, as they haven't edited from that IP in several hours. If you see a new IP making these changes, try to warn them as soon as possible. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

List of Bollywood films of 2021
184.148.152.143 has been adding unsourced content to List of Bollywood films of 2021, and he keeps adding unsourced content no matter how many times me and Sush150 revert those edits. So next time when this IP user keeps adding unsourced content, can you take a look on what's going on here? We are the Great (talk) 17:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Juhi Chawla
Sir, some IP from Pakistan recently added a huge chunk of content. Seems like they restored it to a previous version as evident from the mos date templates. Also added a Good Article tag!. Is it possible that this person us some previously blocked user? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Just looking at the IP address, I suspect Patiparmeshwar. See report above. Their edits tend to look like they are restoring older versions of articles, that in some cases might be way fluffier than the version just before it. I don't currently know of an older sock to suspect, but they appear to have been editing here for yeras. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:15, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking care of that. I wonder whether is a sock of Patiparmeshwar. This bloat and the puffery used looks suspicious. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Definitely fishy, but I don't see any sandbox editing from Patiparmeshwar, whereas this new user is using their sandbox a great deal. I also don't see any obvious edits at Neha Kakkar or her music list that would scream sockpuppetry. But as to whether or not it is promotional, that's a different issue. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:16, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah. That sandbox thing made them look like a genuince editor. But I believe there's substantial WP:COPYVIO . Shall I add some tags to the article? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If you think there are copyright violations, then yes, you should tag the article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

LTA:SAMI
Thanks for this. This IP is a sock of. He POV pushes Urdu into articles. While most of his edits are restricted to language articles, recently he is being a nuisance in Indian film articles too as you have seen. More info on the LTA is covered here. Thanks again sir. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Man, I'm losing track of all the problem people in the world... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * On top of that, the corona virus epidemic caused an increase in the number of vandals and trolls in Wikipedia. I've 7200+ articles in the watchlist. I can't do anything else now! - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I was just going to inform you about this, thanks . Yes this LTA is pretty disruptive, I had to clean up a lot of non-sensical POVPUSH and cats that he had added in many articles relating to Indian showbiz (movies, television, actors etc.). If you see any from the ranges listed at WP:LTA/SAMI making Pakistani/Urdu POVPUSH edits it is most likely him, best protect the page and block the IP cause he doesn't stop. Gotitbro (talk) 20:34, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:53, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

List of highest grossing actors
You deleted List of highest grossing actors as a blatant hoax. I don't see justification for deletion per WP:G3. The voice acting table by Fanoflionking was problematic. In an edit summary I said "not sure this table is a good idea without a more specific source". I guess Fanoflionking manually identified and added voice roles from a list of all roles, and manually tried to find the top-50. I haven't tried to check the result. The voice acting table was removed by Fanoflionking and I don't miss it. You reverted the latest edits by Fanoflionking, thereby restoring the voice actor table, and then deleted the whole page. But the actor list seemed fine to me. The whole table was sourced to https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-star-records/worldwide/lifetime-acting/top-grossing-stars at The Numbers (website), widely used for box office in Wikipedia. The reference said accessdate=11 March 2020 (added by me). I checked the table on that date and it looked OK. The numbers in the source have changed a little since then as expected, but that's what accessdate is for. Some numbers have decreased slightly which may sound wrong but it's not unusual for box office sites to reduce some numbers when they update. Maybe they discovered earlier errors or got revised data from studios. I request that you restore the article to the last version by Fanoflionking, meaning the version where the voice actor table was removed and the article was very close to my 11 March check. You are free to try another deletion process. The article (without the voice actor list) only had one source but that source was reliable and basically verified everything. Notability requires more but a Google search shows that many reliable sources have discussed and listed the highest-grossing actors. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your feedback, thank you. My thought process was two-fold: 1) Was it an outright copyright violation, since we are using a singular source and their proprietary figures arranged in basically the same way. 2) When I noticed that a spot-check of about 20 figures were not consistent with the source, it led me to think the user was falsifying the data. When I asked them to explain the source of their edits, their response was incoherent. This was also a user that another editor had brought to my attention as being persistently disruptive. (See discussion above.) Anyhow, I have restored the article. I appreciate your correction. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The numbers are currently close to the source for four weeks later. Some differences would normally be larger but most theaters are closed. I will try to keep an eye on it when many theaters reopen. I'm not a copyright expert. It's said that data cannot be copyrighted. I don't know whether compiling this list counts as more than data. We have many box office tables which are based purely on Box Office Mojo. In [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fanoflionking&diff=prev&oldid=949691813] Fanoflionking probably assumed you were only referring to the voice actor table. They were only working on that table at the time and others had criticized the table. Their English is poor. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked them and I'll just steer clear of them. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Response to your way too personal messages
Hi, first of all my hobbies and passions has nothing to do with you. secondly stop sending me messages regarding to Sanam Jung's article. I edited it last time four days ago, and have just recently reverted back the edits with "Reliable Sources". However, you have sent me messages in those four days, I didn't edit the article. kindly stop sending me messages with reason and stop reverting her article for no reason. Thanks.

 Pyar Ke Sadqay1608  Wanna Talk? 12:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You don't fool me. I can smell a sockpuppet like a fart in a car. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Question re admin tools
Amaury has deleted hundreds of edit summaries at many articles using edit summaries like "Per WP:PLOT, summaries should be between 100–200 words. Anything lower is easily suspected as WP:COPYVIO, and even if not, a well-written summary should be longer than that. I am removing anything that's less than 90 words as possible WP:COPYVIO" I've left a warning on his talk page, because removing summaries as copyvios when he obviously hasn't checked to see that they actually are copyvios is inappropriate. It there a tool that can be used to revert just a small number of an editor's edits? I can rollback all, but that's obviously not what I want to do. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I have a tool that can do mass reverts, but I'm not sure what the extent of its reach is. I think it might revert an entire page from their edit history (for me, that'd be 500 edits) but their edit has to be the current version of the article. I can ask around, though. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've got that tool too and yes, it does revert all edits but that would have been excessive. As it happened, I was able to revert the edits without too much trouble. A tool that could revert specific revisions would be nice to have though. Stay safe! -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 15:56, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Brightify
Hi Cyphoidbomb,

I noticed that the LTA page for User:Brightify still listed him as Active, but I haven't seen him around in a while and the SPI investigation casepages for both Brightify and Vodkapoise (which now serves as the active SPI casepage for the sockfarm for some reason, despite the more recent appearance of the latter) have nothing beyond late 2018. Have you seen any evidence of Brightify's continued socking, or can I put in a request to archive the LTA page? I remember you were the one that was on top of the string of BanclarkXX duck accounts back in 2014. Thank you,  Passenger pigeon  ( talk )  06:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey there, I can't say that I've seen any obvious socks in a while. I've since changed my area of focus, though. Feel free to archive as you see fit. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Proposal to reach consensus on Darbar(film) page
I propose this reception to be added on consensus

Huffpost notes "Average audience can hardly tolerate first half while the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress." Hindustan Times notes "Rajinikanth plays his part well but doesn't fit into this odd story while music and other actors being a relief." --Universalrahu (talk) 04:27, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The point of a reception section is not to acquire as many random quotes as you can find, it is to present a coherent summary of critical response in narrative form, that addresses essential elements of a film: direction, cinematography, writing, acting, etc. And all of that information should weigh the good against the bad and present a neutral perspective. All of that may be supported by quotes, but quotes should not be the entirety of the section any more than ratings should. To address your selections above, what exactly are "technical aspects"? That's totally vague. What exactly does it mean that Rajinikanth "doesn't fit into this odd story"? Huh? This is why random quote selections are problematic. If you can't explain what the critics are saying, then the quote selectionsiew are totally pointless. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

The template used in the section suggest to reduce the length of quotes and present in neutral word of summary. I have summarized the whole review and presented. Have you read the whole review is there anything above what the critic have actually noted in it. Coming to the word "technical aspects" it denotes what you have mentioned as direction, cinematography, writing, acting, etc. The review have panned all the elements of the film. So a coherent summary of those elements can better be said in other words? rather than "lack of technical aspects". The meaning for the word "element" and "aspect" refer to the same in context. According to dictionary element means "an essential or characteristic part of something abstract" and aspect means "a particular part or feature of something" so really is it vague? Rajinikanth "doesn't fit into this odd story" means he have made his part well but the story doesn't go with him coherently to the credits of his work. Is there any Wikipedia standards or guidelines to guide in this issue? what if the situation if the whole review is panning the film on all elements? The other reviews on the section seems to be randomly "cherry picked" quoting of same words as published by the critic. So what become problematic in the previous edit? I have not randomly picked but quoted the "Abstract" of the review which itself serves as the synopsis of the review. Seeking for more examples or guidelines on phrasing on Reception.--Universalrahu (talk) 06:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I don't even see "Average audience can hardly tolerate first half while the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress." in the source you cited. So it's clearly not a quote. If that's supposed to be your summary, it's not formatted correctly, and there are problems with English grammar. Further, "the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects" is vague. I don't know what that means. "Technical aspects" could be anything technical. The lights. The sound. The way the sets were built. Lack of clean water on set. What specifically are you trying to say? In the HuffPost review, the "technical aspects" seem to refer to criticism of a "vapid" and generic music score and uninspired cinematography. So why aren't we summarising that? This is the sort of thing you should be striving toward:
 * Rajesh Rajamani of The Huffington Post criticised Rajinikanth's performance as a mimicry of "his own younger self", but praised the actor for his energy and enthusiasm, which Rajamani thought was "completely wasted" in the film. Similarly, Karthik Kumar of Hindustan Times, described the first half of the film as "a celebration of vintage Rajinikanth", and observed several scenes that were strongly reminiscent of Rajinikanth's Petta. Kumar felt that Rajinikanth's energy helped to offset the film's tedium, but noted that the over-focus on Rajinikanth's charisma "[resulted] in a screenplay devoid of anything relatively inventive." Rajamani described Anirudh Ravichander's songs and score as "an uninspiring rehash of some of composer Deva’s work for Rajinikanth movies in the 90s or just the generic Anirudh music that he has come to be known for." However, Kumar felt that the songs boosted the mood of the film, but felt "a heavy Petta hangover in the background score."
 * Do you see the difference? In the above, we are presenting a narrative that summarises what others felt about the film, then supporting those summaries with specific quotes, and in one case, including a longer quote that says a bit more in the critic's own voice. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Firstly replying about this statement "Average audience can hardly tolerate first half while the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress." not contained in the source as alleged by you. The lines "Average audience can hardly tolerate first half" framed by me is clearly noted by the critic with his lines "While an average viewer can work hard and tolerate the first half" and the words "while the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress" is re created with the original words of the critic saying "The movie is even a let-down in technical departments in-spite of some very big names making their presence." So what makes you think these lines are not contained in the source? I have mentioned this is not direct quote and only summary of it. Secondly, about the English grammar I checked those lines with grammar checker no faults were found. Next about the vagueness of the lines as you said "the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects" is cumulative of all elements of the film. Is there any mandate to mention each and every aspect of the film individually? the collective aspect of the technicality not to be mentioned? the review contained similar words corresponding to the claim as mentioned before. In WP:MOSFILM direct quoting is allowed. I inquired about my edit reverted by you which is a direct quote. Rajesh Rajamani of HuffPost wrote "Darbar is extremely problematic in how it normalizes and even romanticizes encounter killings" and Hindustan Times wrote "A Rajinikanth movie is meant to play to the gallery but Darbar doesn’t get the formula right." That was a direct quoting of source. Is that edit violating any Wikipedia standards? I see many films in critical reception directly quoting which is also seen in the discussed Darbar page too. If such edits are allowed then whats problematic about the reverted edit? I really appreciate your valuable time on making some efforts to describe the phrasing of reception in your own words.Regards.--Universalrahu (talk) 09:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I already explained in detail what is problematic about the various items in discussion. Here it is again:
 * If you summarise, DO NOT PRESENT THE CONTENT AS A QUOTATION AS YOU DID ABOVE. This is what you proposed be added to the article: Huffpost notes "Average audience can hardly tolerate first half while the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress." That represents your summary, presented as a quotation. That quotation is not in the source. If you submitted that content the way it was formatted, it would be considered a falsified quotation. I thought I explained this very clearly in my first reply to you.
 * "Average audience can hardly tolerate first half while the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress" is not a grammatically sound sentence regardless of what your grammar checker thinks, and that's before we even get into the ambiguity of what "the movie as a whole lacks technical aspects and fails to impress" means, and before we ask "what was wrong with the first half?"
 * As I already explained above "lacks technical aspects" doesn't communicate anything useful to the reader. If I were selling you a car and I told you that the car "lacked technical aspects", you would have no idea what I meant. Do I mean that the car has no headlights? Has no air conditioner? Has no brakes? Has no electrical system? Has no engine? Or do I mean that it lacks twin turbos and a nitrous rig? It's totally ambiguous and that's not helpful to a reader. This is why we write clear narrative summaries that focus on individual technical aspects instead of vague prose like "Critics felt the movie was bad for various reasons."
 * Is there any mandate to mention each and every aspect of the film individually? You are failing to understand the greater point that the content is completely vague, and arguing over and over for a version that you're being told is problematic, is not a constructive use of my time.
 * Rajesh Rajamani of HuffPost wrote "Darbar is extremely problematic in how it normalizes and even romanticizes encounter killings" Again, shouldn't there be context? Was the film criticised for being too gory? Did anybody else have a problem with this? You can't just pull random quotes without thinking about how they will serve the reader. That said, I have slightly less of a problem with this line, but it would be nice for there to be some context.
 * "A Rajinikanth movie is meant to play to the gallery but Darbar doesn’t get the formula right." Again, a random quote taken without providing any context. Only because I've read the reviews, do I understand what the larger statement is here: Rajinikanth makes a certain type of movies that appeal to a very specific fanbase, and while this is yet another Rajinikanth movie, the film doesn't feel the same as other Rajinikanth films--something is wrong, i.e. he's just going through the motions and mimicking his previous performances. Without some form of context, preferably in summary narrative form, the quote has little meaning. Even the expression "play to the gallery" is not so common that we should expect readers to understand what it means. That's why we summarise and present context.
 * You should probably look at WP:RECEPTION for some further tips on how these sections should be structured. And if somehow you still disagree with me after my itemised explanation above, I suggest you go to WikiProject Film and ask for other opinions about whether or not the content you want to submit is suitable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 11:27, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your reply. Hope new discussion regarding Critical Reception going on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film looking forward for better solution.Regards.--Universalrahu (talk) 16:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

YGM
Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Misunderstood
Hwy! I think you misunderstood me. It was not just about "a tad showy" thing. I had raised 5 to 6 points on the talk page. Maybe you did not read them? They are all written above. And, I was not being confrontational and would never be confrontational especially to you. I respect you a lot. See, on Wikipedia, we cannot see each other so words are hard to measure as we don't see the faces. And if I, in any case, offended you, than I am very very sorry. I was just trying to discuss. This problem is happening because there are hardly any Bollywood film editors left on Wikipedia and those who are here are not interested to give inputs. Anyways, I hope you can understand. I am just trying to discuss a NPOV-violation issue according to rules on Wikipedia. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  05:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * This user has been harssing me since the day I came back. He goes everywhere to harass me. See this. He is again at harassing and intimidating me. His last tactic at Andaaz did not work so this time he has chosen this article. You have to do something this time. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  20:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

explain
good evening Mr, you have refused my modification to the article (List of awards and nominations received by Salman Khan), since the explanation you have mentioned is not clear to me ... the information that I have noted is supported by a source containing a video showing the act so I do not understand why you rejected it ... am I supposed to note it on the page of the actor ?? thanks --Aelita14 23:58, 22 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aelita14 (talk • contribs)
 * Hi there, though I recognise that your contribution was meant in good-faith, list articles like this typically don't have a lot of explanatory material. In particular this contribution is a little odd, since it's in an article about Salman Khan, yet Khan didn't win the award. Maybe you could try it in an article related to Shah Rukh? But if another editor pushed back, you'd have to seek consensus by opening a discussion on the article's talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


 * thank you, it must be said that the english wiki does not work like other wiki languages, so I can put this modification on the actors page (srk who gave the trophy, and salman khan who received it) with the sources necessary without problems ... concerning my good faith it must be said that I am not new to the wiki in general, since I am an editor in Arabic wiki but in English wiki I work sometimes. thanks fo all --Aelita14 04:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aelita14 (talk • contribs)

Can You Add Jimmy Neutron, Crashletes, Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader? and The Dude Perfect Show on The Current Programming Section on The Nicktoons Page?
All Those Shows are Back on The Schedule, Here's My Source: https://www.tvpassport.com/tv-listings/stations/nicktoons-hd-east/11445/2020-04-17 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snesboy12 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not interested. You should make your request on that article's talk page. Also I've never heard of "tvpassport.com", so I have no idea if it is considered a reliable source by WikiProject Television. Note also, by the way, you are misusing the minor edit checkbox. [[WP:MINOR|Minor edits}} are cosmetic changes that couldn't possibly be the subject of a dispute, like typo fixes, grammar fixes, capitalisation fixes, reversion of obvious vandalism, etc., not for edits like this. Thanks, [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] (talk) 18:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I did that, nobody responded, also I'm not used to editing the main wikipedia, sure I've edited on here before, but not often. Snesboy12 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Is this you? Why are you using two accounts? What other accounts do you have? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:29, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Woah, you replied fast, anyways that's my old account, I lost the password to the account and was unable to reset the password. Snesboy12 (talk 15:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Grammar issue in article I edited
Hi, I didn't find any grammatical error in article https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darshan_(actor). Please let me know where you feel that I have not presented in grammatically correct way. Cinemapremi (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)Cinemapremi
 * Your version:
 * Post success of Yajamana, A Big-budgeted Indian mythological movie Kurukshetra got released on 09 August 2019.Kurukshetra was received very well by both critics and audience and it went on to become one of the biggest grosser in Kannada film Industry. In the same year, Darshan had another film Odeya released on 12 Dec 2019. This film too received good reviews from critics. Robert film directed by Tharun Kishore Sudhir is an upcoming movie of Darshan.
 * Better version:
 * Following the success of Yajamana, the big-budget Indian mythological movie Kurukshetra was released on 9 August 2019. Kurukshetra was well received by both critics and the audience, and went on to become one of the highest grossing films in the Kannada film industry. In the same year, on 12 December 2019, Darshan released another film, Odeya, which also received good reviews from critics. In 2019, filming began on another Darshan film, Roberrt, which is directed by Tharun Kishore Sudhir.
 * So, there were significant issues with grammar (definite and indefinite articles, capitalisation, spacing, etc.) and basic Wikipedia formatting like italics and no leading zeros on dates. Not to mention your claim that Odeya was well received by critics was not properly sourced. One 3.5/5 star review doesn't mean that everybody liked it. This is why we use references that say "critical response was positive", or something similar, we don't cherrypick reviews that suit our POVs. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me to understand on the things that requires my attention.Will surely improve on that going forward.Regarding that review part,I have added just one review for reference. There are many critic reviews which are positive and can be added. Please let me know if i can edit the page as per your suggestions. Cinemapremi (talk) 05:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)Cinemapremi
 * More references does not mean more correct. I can find references that make the film look like it had average performance, by choosing reviews like this (3 stars) or this (3 stars). Or, if I hated the film, I could find references like this (2 stars) and this (2.5 stars) and then say the film received a negative response. See how dangerous it can be if we let editors decide what is good or bad? Like I said, we don't cherrypick reviews that are consistent with our own biases, conscious or not, we use sources that say explicitly that the film received a certain response. For example in the edit in question, the 3.5/5 star review of Kurkshetra is not helpful, because it is just a review you happened to select that confirms how you believe the film performed. But the second reference you used, this, is good, because it describes the film's "good critics’ response". Big difference. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Ramayan (1987 TV series) and Mahabharat (1988 TV series)
Hi can you protect these two pages. This History vs Mythology issue is getting out of hand now. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 12:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've semi-protected both for 2 weeks each. In the future, it would be helpful if you A) use edit summaries that explain why you are reverting, specifically noting things like "community doesn't stories about religious figures historical" (or whatever the argument is) and 2) present diffs that show people making problematic edits repeatedly so that an admin won't have to scour through the edit history. The edit summaries will additionally help admins be able to spot the problems as they occur if they look through the edit history. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

IP 183.83.72.166
Without doubt, it is evading block. He is still as disruptive, replacing the good trans template with the absurd English: Translation and adding indic scripts in violation of WP:INDICSCRIPT, as evident at Insaf Ki Pukar (here) and Meri Aawaz Suno (here). Can you please block him and revert similar edits? Anyway he may be operating under multiple IP's? -- Kailash29792 (talk)  08:45, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip. Saw him editing images that B.Bhargava Teja uploaded, so it looks pretty ducky. Blocked 6 months and I mass-reverted a bunch of his edits. Let me know if you seen any others. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , please don't bash me. Though you did the right thing by blocking Bhargav and reverting his IP edits, I'm restoring only his good edits, which are only 1% of his overal IP edits. Kailash29792 (talk)  17:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You're free to do that. Thanks for the note. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Vairamuthu
Hi Cyphoidbomb, Is Vairamuthu a public figure? According to wiki, in United states, a public figure is someone who is "a public official or any other person pervasively involved in public affairs". Cambridge Dictionary defines it as "a famous person who is often written about in newspapers and magazines or is often on television or the radio". Vairamuthu is a well-known figure in Tamil film Industry and he gained fame during his accusations in the #metoo controversy, apart from that, the man rarely appears on TV. I could be wrong here too. Sorry for my ignorance but does WP:BLPCRIME apply for him? - SUN EYE 1  08:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * He may not always be in front of the camera like an actor or a politician, but he certainly seems notable as a two-time Padma award winner. If he is, as you say, a well-known figure in the Tamil film industry, then I'd probably consider him a public figure. If he were a plumber or something and was accused of a crime, then maybe that wouldn't be a great reason to create an article on him. So short story, I think it's fine to include the #meetoo accusations. That said, you are welcome to get another opinion at the BLP noticeboard or at WikiProject India. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the suggestion :) - SUN EYE 1  04:31, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Joy Badlani
This actor seems to be infiltrating Wikipedia with false credits in Indian films. How do we fix this? I think IMDb is the main issue. TamilMirchi (TALK) 18:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If you look through the edit history, you'll see a reversion I made that mentioned the "Rudranil Ghosh vandal". This was an IPv6 editor who was adding lots of extraneous credits to Wikipedia articles,, and it's possible he was also messing with IMDb, although I never bothered to figure out if that's what was happening. I'd say remove the ones you know are fake and/or the ones that are questionable. This is a December 2016 version of the article that may be closer to reality. The article was mostly stable until June 2018 when IPv6 editors made these changes, adding tons of credits. I'm not sure if they are related to the vandal, but it's possible. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

HK editor range
So I was doing some cleanup on an article with the usual overlink and promotional drek from our HK friend, and while doing a wildcard search, I saw a pattern in the IP's used. So I threw them into the blockcalc template and came up with this range and this slightly smaller range. Both of them are pretty consistently only used by our friend. Not sure if you're willing to put a range block on them (the /19 is 8192 IP's, /21 is 2048), but it may be an option here. I know they use other ranges as well, but this is a pretty common one with a large number of edits from them.  Ravensfire  (talk) 03:38, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, so I'm a bit bored ... The other usual range could be handled by two range blocks - 1024 IP's on this range and 2048 on this range.  If you run the WHOIS link on the contributions page, they're on a /20 network  which is 4096 IP addresses.  Interesting.  Ravensfire  (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing this. I'll ruminate about these. What's interesting to me is that A) we've been dealing with this person since at least 2016. B) Looking through those IPs range histories, I see some normal edits to non-Indian subject way way back, then boom, June 2017 this person comes on the scene and every edit after that is theirs. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Nativeforeigner's calculator is the gold standard for calculating CIDR ranges: . If you plug in the addresses you suspect you might find a tighter range to look at. I had a look at 101.78.160.0/20 and 101.78.224.0/19 and at least on those networks there are unrelated anonymous users, so I would be wary of long-term blocks. 218.255.160.0/20 appears to be all the same user as far back as I can check so I'd go with your gut on that range. Anon-only, in any case. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I just blocked 218.255.160.0/20 for a year, so we'll see how that goes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , sweet - thanks! That's been the most active of late, so will certainly slow them down.  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:53, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Rishi Kapoor Article
Rishi Kapoor just passed away. Please need help. Many users are jump this article and edits without reliable sources. Sush150 (talk) 04:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Need Page Protection
Hi,

The page of Draupadi is either being vandalized or edited with unsourced info since last night. Can we protect it?

TV shows on the epics Ramayana and Mahabharata are being retelecast in India during the quarantine lockdown, as a result of which pages related to the characters of these epics might suffer from vandalism for the next few months. Please help to edit lock it to prevent vandalism.

(Panchalidraupadi (talk) 17:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC))
 * ✅ - 1 week. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks.

Panchalidraupadi (talk) 19:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding WP:OWN
Good day !

I've recently read WP:OWN and have just realized that I've had some run-ins with a user who has a WP:OWN issue. I've also looked into the user's dealings with other users and have seen that even with other users, the said user continues exhibit a WP:OWN issue. In the WP:OWN article, it was said that the said issue should be resolved in the article's talkpage and to avoid calling out the user for having a WP:OWN issue. However, I'm curious as to the user's situation - nobody has ever tried to resolve the matter with him in the talk page of the articles he edits, but he still exhibits the pattern of behavior typical for a user with a WP:OWN issue. My question is, can a user who exhibits that kind of wanton behavior be sanctioned even if personal communication and arbitration was not resorted to and relying only on the numerous instances of the user exhibiting such behavior? Hoping for an answer as to this query. Warmest regards. Gardo Versace (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I'm not sure I have enough information to answer this. Many editors lurk at favourite articles and do their best to maintain order and quality and the status quo. If nobody is actively protesting their edits or reversions, then I'm not sure what the problem is. Typically ownership issues come when a new editor comes along to an article where someone else has been active, and there is a conflict over content. If nobody is vocalising their objections to the article "owner's" edits, then I'm not sure sanctions would be appropriate. But again, I'd need more details to assess. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)


 * let's the user employs this kind of language in his communications Special:Diff/941507853, Special:Diff/940557828, Special:MobileDiff/951230973, Special:MobileDiff/951250784, Special:MobileDiff/951086566, Special:MobileDiff/950700904, Special:MobileDiff/950700662


 * Here, on the otherhand is how he deals with other editors amd what editors have said about him: Special:Diff/951101947, Special:Diff/951364211, Special:Diff/953018103, Special:Diff/940557803


 * Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Well now there's a lot to digest! We get editors of every type. Regular people with no challenges. People with challenges. Verbal editors, non-verbal editors, vandals, etc. In this case, we seem to be dealing with someone who has very strong opinions and likes to communicate with needless exclamation marks, lol. Anyway, in some of those sample edits, the editor is right. I think it's stupid to put crosses after a dead person's name. If a show has had episodes that are 15 minutes to 45 minutes, we should indicate that instead of the current 30-45 minute structure. Wikipedia is supposed to track the entire history of a show, not just the newest information. That's why we don't delete cast members when their characters die or the cast member leaves the show.
 * As for the Filipino vs. Tagalog thing, while the national language of the country is Filipino, how exactly are we differentiating that from Tagalog as it pertains to the show? Does the show only use the "standardised" version of the language? This issue confuses me, because I've known many Filipinos in my life and none of them have ever said they speak Filipino. They all say Tagalog. What do the reliable sources say about the show? Sometimes TV listings will indicate what language the series is in and we should go with whatever the producers consider the series to be.
 * Anyway, just to put things in perspective, it's possible that in some cases, the editor in question is frustrated at the general ignorance of casual editors. I know that I get frustrated by all the bad editing in Indian entertainment articles. So I kind of see where they're coming from. Having to fix the same mistakes over and over and educate new people over and over can be a headache. As for the IPv6 editor who wrote that massive wall of text, I'd say that's a bit much.
 * Note also that editors are not required to respond to talk page messages, and they are allowed to delete messages. This may not be satisfying, but sometimes you'll encounter editors who are a bit crabby and don't want to deal with stuff. There's not a whole lot we can do in that case. But if they are stonewalling improvements to an article and failing to discuss in good faith, that's when we'd probably consider whether or not they're taking ownership and just edit-warring to preserve their own vision. I know the pointed edit summaries may not be to your liking, but as long as they're not resorting to name-calling, I would just let it slide off your back. Hope that helps. If you have any follow-up questions, feel free to ask them. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I actually learned a lot today, thank you for being so generous with the explanations. I honestly am still learning the ropes on Wikipedia three years in and I'm glad there are admins like you who are patient enough to teach us. That aside, Filipino is actually the national language of the Philippines and it is based upon law, not just any law but the fundamental law of the land - the 1987 Constitution. Hope that clarifies that one as well. Again, thank you so much Cyphoidbomb! Gardo Versace (talk) 15:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're saying about the national language, but just because the national language of the Philippines is "Filipino" doesn't mean the producers can't consider the series a Tagalog series by using the traditional form of the language. A law that is meant to apply to the country as a whole entity doesn't necessarily govern how people are allowed to express themselves and their culture in artistic works. Now on the other hand, if the series is actually using the newer language, you might have a valid argument in a dispute. I'm just trying to offer some perspective. Hope that makes sense. Regards and happy editing, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC)


 * crystal clear friend. Thanks for the clarifications, been a pleasure talking to you. Warmest regards. Gardo Versace (talk) 19:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Editing of Pankaj Tripathi page
Hey, thanks for correcting the page. I would like to know how should we add a particular movie or web series which is hugely popular in a particular page. Do take time and reply. Thank you. Sunny313356u (talk) 05:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * First of all, Wikipedia isn't interested in the "hugely popular" aspect of whatever project so-and-so actor is involved in. This is a neutral encyclopedia and we're not here to do marketing or fluff up any subject. If you want to indicate that an actor participated in a web series, then find a reliable mainstream source--not a blog, but a real, known news agency, for example, that cares enough about the minor project to note it--and exclude all other extraneous information, like how fans drooled over it or whatever. Anything even remotely appearing like advertising will be doused in petrol, ignited, and its ashes will be scattered to the seas. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright, would take care of that from now on. Thanks for guiding. Sunny313356u (talk) 06:26, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Interview about you
Hello, I'm here to interview you but if you want to accept but I don't mind. By the way, do you have the discord? DrPalette0756 (talk) 04:26, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Just a private conversation DrPalette0756 (talk) 04:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Dear brand-new-user: No idea who you are, what you want, or why I would be the subject of an interview, so no, not interested. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:06, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * But you've piqued my interest, new user. I suggest there be no more of these types of requests.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 05:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Let just say about Spencer Karter the former Wikipedia user and now he's hate Susan Wojcicki as in CEO. Don't you recognise him? DrPalette0756 (talk) 06:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Explain about Shkarter1985 and he's the one he huge hate about you and this Wikipedia also rant as well in youtube. DrPalette0756 (talk) 06:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Nope. Doesn't ring a bell. Find something better to obsess about. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay but I'm not serious and I want to know about Spencer Karter in wikipedia user. DrPalette0756 (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

नूरमोहम्मद सत्या
Hi can you check this account. The translation of the name is Noormohammed satya which is also name of a blocked account. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 23:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Thanks! Good eye. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:01, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Help
Hi, want to know that unsourced awards should be removed or unsourced template should be added. Prince 09:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * First of all, you need to sign your posts properly, including at least one link to either your user page or your talk page. If you have modified your signature to do this, you need to fix this, because proper signatures are a requirement. I'll also point out that your user name is not Prince, it is Princepratap1234. Once you do that, then come back and I'll talk to you about the awards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Salaam-e-Ishq
This is the official title of the film whose article exits as Salaam-e-Ishq: A Tribute to Love. I tried moving this article by it said the article exits, a redirect. I removed the redirect yet it did not move. Can you help? Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  10:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Comment by Mayur
Thereis no source for this you can see the web series at last the cast names are shown in there it is asma siddhique not sonali raut — Preceding unsigned comment added by MAYUR026 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll take your word for it. Reverted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Proper spelling of pyjamas
Care to help me out in this discussion? Getsnoopy (talk) 04:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Please be careful of canvassing, mate. I see the validity of your argument, but I will likely abstain on the basis that it feels like canvassing. No disrespect intended. Also, I get TheEpistle's argument that once the mold has been cast, we should probably keep it, even if the British/Indian English origins are arguably closer to the original Romanisation. Although I'm not quite sure how "py" is closer to "pāy" than "pa" is. Seems like both versions ignore the correct "a" vowel sound, whatever that might be. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow, thanks for that; I didn't know about that policy. I just figured you seem to either be Indian or are passionate about India-related topics given our past discussions, so would want to participate in the discussion. Cheers. Getsnoopy (talk) 04:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey there, it's okay to invite people to a discussion, but you should phrase your invitation neutrally, so people don't feel like they have to side with you. Like: "Hi there, there is a discussion at pajamas about whether or not to use British/Indian English, please feel free to comment if this is a subject that interests you." Or similar. Hope that helps. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Arushi Sharma
Hi someone again got confused between the two Arushis. I was trying to find the discussion you had I think at Teahouse So that I can use it for future use but I was not able to find it. Can you share that conversation here so that it can used in future. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 15:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's the link. I wonder if there is a way to add something Punjabi-related in the lead to help with the disambiguation. Like, "she is a pageant titleholder and an actor who mostly appears in Punjabi-language projects." That could potentially ring the bell in someone's mind when they realise that Love Aaj Kal is a Hindi film. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:58, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * A lot of actors who work in Hindi films are from Punjabi diaspora as Punjabi language and Hindi both are taught in most schools right from the beginning so there is no language issue here which could be a case with the other language actors.I think this the reason for the confusion here as People think that a Punjabi actor can easily appear in a Hindi film. So I don't think adding this to lead will be helpful. Sid95Q (talk) 16:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Good to know. I added it before I got your follow-up note. Let's maybe see how it goes for a bit and if it doesn't help stem the confusion, you can always revert. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham... score
Please add this to the Music section with a source. Bollyjeff &#124;  talk  17:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh? If you're talking about these edits, I didn't add any content, I flipped the order from Songs / Score to Score / Songs, since the intended usage of music is for score composers. Unclear why it would need a source, either, since the film (presumably) credits the score composer. Can you clarify what your note is about, please? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I thought you added the name Babloo Chakravarty without a source, but I see now that it was already there. Sorry,  Bollyjeff  &#124;  talk
 * Got it. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Gabbar Singh
What needs to be clarified on the page --GODUBNATION (talk) 23:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The text that is highlighted. For instance it is unclear who is revolting against the goon, the character in this film, or the character in Sholay. Also, do police officers usually revolt against goons, or do they just arrest/kill them? That needs to be clarified. It is also unclear what "loses his mother" means. Is that a euphemism for "she dies"? It's also unclear why he develops a hatred for his brother and father. In summary, the whole thing needs clarification. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

About Kangana being one of highest paid actress in india
The thing that kangana Ranaut is one of the highest paid actresses in India should be mentioned in top. The same has been mentioned in Deepika's and Alia's page. Kindly krimuk2.0 take a note of this. And please don't be so biased towards this and make the change. Pranesh Gavali (talk) 13:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Who are you talking to? If you're talking to Krimuk, you're on the wrong talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Possible Prince Shobuz sock
I think could be the latest incarnation. What do you think - ? Their focus on Mon Jaane Na was a big flag, but the interaction is striking. Pinging as they've also reported socks on this guy. Given the last couple of SPI's, I'm a bit gunshy right now and looking for some further thoughts.  Ravensfire  (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Vandalizing the "Plot" section of "Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior" Wikipedia page.
Stop repeatedly adding the "Gad ala pan sinh gela" line in the "Tanhaji" Wikipedia page's "Plot" section. Plot is for giving a basic outline of the story. Adding a particular film's dialogue in it will ruin the meaning of "plot". Bramhesh Patil (talk) 09:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no prohibition on including relevant dialogue in a plot summary. Familiarise yourself with WP:FILMPLOT before you accuse someone of vandalism. Also, you have removed this at least twice without providing a suitable explanation in your edit summaries--in fact, the first time you did it, you edit summary said "Fixed typo", which was obviously a lie--so between the two of us, it is your edits that are actually indistinguishable from vandalism. Note also that when your edit is reverted, your recourse is to open a discussion on the article's talk page, not resubmit the change. Got it? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Nisha Chouhan
I request that we report this user to Wikipedia and to semi-protect Sarileru Neekevaru as her edits on Sarileru Neekevaru are unnecessary and she keeps changing the cast of Pushpa without sources even when I have sent her a warning about it saying it is WP:CRYSTAL --GODUBNATION (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm concerned that they might not have the English skills to edit here contructively. I'll keep an eye on them and if they persist, then we'll escalate. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "Constructively", not "contructively". Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * She keeps changing the cast back and renaming roles in Sarileru Neekevaru and I have already gave her a few warnings but she does not read them and still changes the page. --GODUBNATION (talk) 15:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * What specifically is wrong with the changes she's making? Is "Tirupati" more correct than Tirupathi? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes it is and that in some movies she changes the way the cast is ordered and she sometimes also changes the cast's names GODUBNATION (talk) 15:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * How would I verify that Tirupati is the correct spelling of that character's name, over other romanisations? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If you watch the movie, his name tag when he is wearing the uniform is spelled as "Tirupathi" --GODUBNATION (talk) 15:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm confused: So then Nisha Chouhan's edit would be correct, no? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry I meant to put Tirupati --GODUBNATION (talk) 20:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah. Got it. (FYI, you don't have to ping me on my own talk page. I'll get the ping anyway. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we need to remove her privileges since she went back and keeps changing the cast of Sarileru Neekevaru even when we give her warnings. GODUBNATION (talk) 15:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

List of management of The Walt Disney Company & User:Cytkory
Cytkory has made a number of undoing of referenced and references material at List of management of The Walt Disney Company. I given him multiple warnings. He has responded with non-AGF edit summaries (It was fine the way it was!, Good for you, I'm bored, too". Yes, I started a discussion, which has been Cytkory informed of and ignored. If you can step in it would be appreciated. Spshu (talk) 20:39, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

In my defense, it WAS fine the way it was. Spshu then came in and brought it back to 2018 plus the FOX assets. I have also seen what Spshu has done in the past and he has been blocked from editing other page. I suggest you do the same here. Cytkory (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * In a community project, articles are allowed to evolve whether you have a fondness for a version or not. This is why discussion is mandatory. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Cytkory is not discussing the issue. He is just reverting the sourcing back to incorrect structures. Spshu (talk) 00:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

FUCK YOU Spshu & Cyphoidbomb. There's your "discussion." Cytkory (talk) 01:22, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Spshu has provided way more FALSE information without sourcing. For example, they think Bob Iger served as President through 2020. Actually, he dropped that title in 2012 when he was promoted to Chairman. Read the article if you are able to. Cytkory (talk) 01:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * My talk page isn't the place for content discussion, the article's talk page is. And I advise you to try to control yourself, since personal attacks aren't tolerated as they violate one of Wikipedia's core policies. If collaboration and civility aren't your strong suits, you should find another hobby, or preoccupation, or whatever this is to you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:44, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cyphoidbomb. As I have been watching in my blocked status, I think that Spshu is making the site more confusing than it was before. Also, some of the edits they made are historically inaccurate. I clearly can't do anything about it until May 15th, but I wonder if you could review the page and Spshu's work for historically accuracy. That is what I have been trying to do through this whole situation. I promise when I get back to include credible sources for my edits. Cytkory (talk) 20:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Spshu is reverting changes that are being made to this page. The changes I saw were being made for the better. Everything they accused me of doing, they are doing it themselves. They also have a history of doing these type of things in the past if you look at their talk page (talk) and trying to claim ownership of the page rather then willing to collaborate with other users. Cytkory (talk) 21:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Then I recommend you and Spshu discuss the changes, since that appears to have been a problem in the past. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Nisha Chouhan (New Section)
Sir, she keeps changing the cast of movies and she keeps changing the lead roles in Sarileru Neekevaru even after her edits were blocked which makes me believe that she needs further action. GODUBNATION (talk) 16:05, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Removal of Budget from Thappad Page
Hi, you gave the reason for removal of budget from Thappad page that the source does not seem to be reliable. The source for that budget is an article on Amar Ujala, an Indian daily newspaper with 2.6 million daily circulation (source:wikipedia page). Few sources can compare with a 72 year old newspaper that is 4th largest in India.

In light of this, I request you to reconsider your opinion and reinstate the budget to improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandeeepbharat (talk • contribs) 00:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)