User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 30

Repeated Addition Of Unsourced Content
Hello! I hope you're having a good day, whenever you get to reading this. I've bee having some difficulties with User: Aashray Saini on the page List of awards and nominations received by Akshay Kumar. Despite numerous warning messages on the user's talk page, the user continues to add the same unsourced information that has been reverted four times. It seems a little heavy-handed to bring this to WP:AIV, so I was hoping you could help with this in some way. Let me know if I should take this elsewhere. Have a great day! Aguy777 (talk) 07:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I blocked the user indefinitely, until he can convince someone that he is not a vandal. This edit, which conflicts with this source and this edit, which conflicts with this seem like obvious vandalism to me. I also think they were just fabricating award numbers at that Akshay Kumar filmography, so I don't know if I would think it was heavy-handed to take it to AIV. Thanks for protecting the encyclopedia. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:56, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for helping out! I felt that the user's disruptive edits weren't disruptive enough to warrant taking it to WP:AIV, but I suppose it would've been acceptable to do considering the lack of communication from the user and the sheer number of ignored warnings. Regardless, have a great day! Aguy777 (talk) 00:30, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

User:Aluvakani
Sir I have a question. Do you think that this user is a sock of B103N48? SP013 (talk) 15:01, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I only see three areas of intersection. I'd have to see some specific behavioural similarities, like one editor restoring the problematic content that the other one made, before I could draw the conclusion that the were the same person. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:11, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * So far, I'm not convinced they're the same person. Looking at these changes, the prose that Aluvakani added is totally incoherent. B104N48's English is not as bad as that. But, if you see anything else, let me know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk page protection
The page protection you so wisely imposed on Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput expired yesterday, and this edit today makes me think it's already time to protect that page again. NedFausa (talk) 19:48, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ I also semi-protected the Death article, but not its talk page. Let me know if you need anything else. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:02, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

A. R. Rahman Discography
I have seen some IP's add the same unsourced content over and over again even after I revert them. Can we get a indefinite protection for this article. SP013 (talk) 18:00, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I did a 6 month semiprotection. You're probably dealing with sock IPs of . Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

IP with Conflict of Interest
Hello sir, I came across an IP who's sole purpose is to add The Hans India articles randomly. Edit history can be seen here. I'm clueless how to handle this, therefore bringing to your notice. Thanks. -- Ab207 (talk) 09:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * This time its THIndia who username is pretty explicit in their COI with The Hans India. There are also isolated incidents such as these where Hans India refs replaced with others. -- Ab207 (talk) 05:52, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

A user who won't just talk
Hello sir, I am not sure if this bizarre issue is worthy enough of an administrator's attention. But there's a user who just won't talk. Out of 2334 live edits, he has made zero edit summaries. He has zero edits to talk pages. He keeps on removing adding/removing content at his will without explanation. I've notified him about this on his talk page, whacked him with a wet trout to get his attention and even pleaded in native language but it didn't change an iota. Instead he copied my user page in almost in entirety to create his own. I'm sorry if I am wasting your time but wanted to know is there anything I should do or just laugh it off? --Ab207 (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot to respond. I see you've read my comment to that editor. I asked at WP:AN, and there doesn't seem to be any specific guideline about copying people's user page. It's just more annoying than anything. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your attention! I don't really mind by my user page being copied but I was slightly confounded by knowing that's the first thing he did after seeing my message, instead of replying something like "Ok, I'll keep that in mind." Hopefully someday before this world ends, he would respond to talk pages and starts using edit summaries. Thank you again for being so kind, even for a minor issue. -- Ab207 (talk) 18:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Even though they've been editing for over a year, this could be one of those cases where the user is not aware of their own talkpage. They continued to edit without edit summaries after the appeals from both of you. I've blocked them indefinitely — sometimes the only thing that helps — with explanations in the block log and on their page. Cyphoidbomb, I've promised to unblock as soon as they reply. Could you please keep an eye on the page in case they respond after I've gone to bed in this exotic part of the world? Bishonen &#124; tålk 19:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC).
 * Boy, I can't imagine a scenario where someone would be unaware of their own talk page. Also, if the user copied Ab207's talk page, then it would seem he saw the notices, otherwise, how would he know about Ab207? I mean I guess they do have article overlaps, but still, how do you not notice the notification light? Anyway, yes, I'll gladly keep an eye out. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It happens. But also, I have another theory, which I didn't want to tell them directly, to do with possibly poor command of English. That would explain the lack of answers on talk, lack of edit summaries, and the copying of Ab207's userpage (not talkpage). Editing articles — the only thing they do — is the easy part! (Especially, ahem, if it's mostly all copied from the internet.) Bishonen &#124; tålk 19:31, 1 August 2020 (UTC).
 * Ah, now that's a good point. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hopefully, this time we can make our first contact with them. -- Ab207 (talk) 05:59, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

B103N48
Sir I have a strong feeling that there are 2 people using the B103N48 account. If you notice after I have given a statement on his page he had 4 big edits but then he personally attacked me after 10 days of me putting the statement. SP013 (talk) 14:39, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Change Revert in Lucifer Page
Lucifer (film)

The change that I made was reverted stating that the article says its 175 CR. The article says as below.

"According to a report in Manorama, the film has collected Rs 175 crore from theatres and fetched Rs 13 crore from its digital streaming rights. Its satellite rights were sold for Rs 6 crore and it made another Rs 10 crore from TV rights in other languages."

175 was just from theatres and others were added up to the total box office collection, which makes it above 200 CR. The article heading also says the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakeshrnath (talk • contribs) 13:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

2 Reverts under 24 hours on the same article
Krimuk 2.0 reverted me twice in last 24 hours and continues to revert me over small small things since my comeback and then goes ahead, accuses me of Edit Warring but the truth is I did not revert once (check history). Is this kind of a tactic to intimidate? Since I have come back, I have been super scared of adding anything to any article (even backed by strong sources) because of this irrational fear that might get me out of this amazing place. This constant intimidation has made me opposite of the WP rule that says WP: Be Bold. In fact after editing, I am always waiting for that editor's "approval" (no revert) to see if my edits are good or bad. No one seems to have said anything to that editor anything. What should I do? Because no one can edit in fear. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  22:26, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Now can you clearly explained what happened because from what I understand reverted your edits since you removed a NYT article that singled out Chopra and that your explanation was that multiple other articles included Chopra along with other actors about the BLM movement. SP013 (talk) 22:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I did not remove it. I replaced it with an Indian sources that focused on each and every Bollywood actor who was called out. I had used same set of sources (Bazaar and News18) in all the other 3 articles where I had this info which was missing since last 2 months in those articles. My edit of re-adding that consistent source was reverted and I was given a silly reason of "go ask NYT". My point is when the whole Bollywood industry was criticised and in all those sources other names are mentioned, why use a source that specifically calls out Chopra? This is not all. After this info was added in early June, this editor did not add the same info in other articles and I started a discussion on Task Force page to talk to others about it. I also pointed out that since he was so okay with this addition, why he had not added any criticism to Padukone's article since she has been criticised for other matters beside this. There are a lot of criticism in Chopra's article but you won't find a single criticism (media or outside of work) in other articles such as Padukone (until yesterday), Kapoor, Bhatt etc. Some of these articles have negligible negative reviews toward performances even those negative reviews are written in way that makes it seem like it's a positive review. For ex. "despite mediocre script and bad characterization, the actor gives an Oscar winning performance". Only Chopra (among the actresses of her stature) has abundance of negative reviews even for her overall positively reviewed performances which I had pointed this out on her talk page but was shut down. I have observed this WP: BIAS towards Chopra and constantly asked for attention from senior editors/administrators but no luck. Instead I get warnings from this editor saying "you cannot revert me, you have been warned". Is this fair? This has made me scared to edit wikipedia as I said above. Because of this constant fear, I don't edit articles or fix even small things. Krish &#124;  Talk To Me  07:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok so now I understand. The user is showing full on bias towards Chopra being the only one in the BLM that was "controversial" and not other actors. Now can you clearly tell me which sources you have used and based off on that we can start a discussion on ANI about the user threatening you in a certain way. SP013 (talk) 14:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuupet at Ushna Shah
Hi, has re-added the exact promo edit by sockpuppets of Patiparmeshwar and in their edit summary complained of their edit being repeatedly removed despite that being their first edit to the page under this account, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 23:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. Blocked. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Some admin help needed
Hi there, You might consider helping with a small but annoying issue - has been editing different Filmfare Award pages, and particularly strange is their insistence to add Kiron Kher's name to the Best Supporting Actress nominees of 2007 both on 52nd Filmfare Awards and on the film page of Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna. Having checked it, she was not nominated for this film. I started digging in the archives to find the originally published list of nominees on Bollywood Hungama, and cited it on both pages, but the user keeps re-inserting her name, and no messages on user's talk page help deter them from doing so. I've already posted four messages on four different occasions, but the same edits keep coming. If you could think of a way to help out, I'd appreciate it. Thanks, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  11:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I asked them directly on their talk page. If they do it again, let me know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:23, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Issue with Checking Edit History
Hi,

Since yesterday, the edit history link of each Wiki page is coming in a weird format, and cannot be clicked. Just wanted to clarify if it is just me or there is some issue going on with Wiki.

Thanks (Panchalidraupadi (talk) 08:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC))
 * I don't see anything super obvious on my side. If you're having issues, you can always report them at WP:VPT. Obviously let them know what device you're on, whether you're using mobile or desktop, and what browser you're using. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Things are solved now. Thanks for responding. :)

(Panchalidraupadi (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC))

CyphoidBomb Name Got Disappear
According to Twitter user @anything4truth: This CyphoidBomb Name Got Disappear. From Sushantsingh Edited Portion Wikipedia. How Can It Be Possible. This Needs Serious Investigation. To conduct this serious investigation, @anything4truth calls upon:
 * Patna City Superintendent of Police Vinay Om Tiwari, who had flown to Mumbai on Sunday to lead a four-member team of Bihar Police probing the death of Sushant Singh Rajput, but who is now, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, selectively quarantined in a guest house until August 15 by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, Mumbai's governing civic body
 * Nitish Kumar, Chief Minister of Bihar
 * Gupteshwar Pandey, Director General of the Indian Police Service in Bihar

Two of these three officials wear impressive uniforms in conducting their duties, so you know this is serious.

@anything4truth concludes: plz Investigate This Wikipedia User Name CyphoidBomb.

Clearly, you have now entered the pantheon of Wikipedia administrators. But please try to stay humble for the sake of us workaday editors who rely upon your example. NedFausa (talk) 22:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that this is one of the trolls on Twitter and that he is desperate to conclude that Sushant was "murdered" and not what was reported. Plus this Twitter user's English is not even good lol. He probably used Google Translate for this. SP013 (talk) 23:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Boy, I'm so confused about what he's trying to say, I too want to know "what symbol [I] use". I also want to know how my name "got disappear". Got disappear from what? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, I think I might be onto something: This paranoid fellow looks at the mobile version of the article and notices that it was last edited by me, maybe not understanding what "last edited by Cyphoidbomb" means, because his English isn't so good. When he comes back, he notices that my name isn't there anymore, and since he has no idea how Wikipedia works, and instead of educating himself on common Wikipedia stuff like checking the edit history, he doubles-down on paranoia and raises his conspiracy theorist defense level, and somehow I'm a mystery he thinks has to be solved. I'm kind of bummed that it wasn't about you,, since you've edited that article more than I have recently. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, they're after me as well. Earlier today, @Karuna33369289 tweeted: Yesterday the reason of death was updated as under investigation...Today the same NedFausa has updated it back to suicide by hanging...why is this user NedFausa soo desparate to show it suicide!!! I suspect these folks would soo love to see my Name Got Disappear too. NedFausa (talk) 02:18, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I wonder (very little) if this mobile version bug has anything to do with their confusion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * From what I understand here, the mobile version is very buggy. When looking for revisions and etc. the system starts to glitch out and there are just a bunch of red lines and green lines making it even harder for the reader to see what has happened. Now in my opinion, I think we should just fully protect the page if anything like this ever happens. SP013 (talk) 15:07, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It gets on my nerves on how people keep pushing the "under investigation" thing all the time like I know it is important but at the same time we can not deviate from what was already reported in the media. I don't understand why people are so pressed by a wikipedia article. SP013 (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Full protection isn't going to stop random yahoos from misinterpreting Wikipedia's editing systems. Full protection only prevents anyone other than an admin from editing, which I don't think would be very useful to the rest of you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Vyjayanthi Movies Logo.png
Sir is this allowed as the user that has uploaded the  appears to be one of the key people for the production house. Wouldn't this be considered as WP:OR. SP013 (talk) 15:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think the term you mean is WP:COI. And I think it does. Kailash29792 (talk)  15:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If we are talking about COI, I'm not sure what the rules are at Commons. The user doesn't have an account at the English Wikipedia. Do we think it's Priyanka Dutt herself? Anyway, at present, I don't see a huge COI issue here yet, just a potential copyright issue if she is not actually affiliated with the company. But if she is a key person at that company, couldn't the company donate their logo to the Creative Commons? Bollywood Hungama apparently has done that with most of their photos. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Original research typically doesn't pertain to images. It pertains to when someone makes a claim or seeks out information that can't be verified by another editor. So for instance, if a doctor argued "based on my 20 years of experience, a better way to perform a heart transplant is to XYZ", well, we would not be able to verify that, because it's not written down anywhere, it only exists in her mind. Or if someone from that production house said "Trust me, the film is going to be released on the 24th, we just haven't announced that to the press yet". Well, how would we verify that? In this case, we're talking about a black and white image, which is presumably verifiable. I don't know what film it is from, but it appears to be from some film, which means that if I could find one of their films, I could presumably check to see if that is their logo. Does that make sense? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:53, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok so I checked, and I didn't notice it but they changed their logo again in July so presumably she probably uploaded it as a newer version of the logo because the past version I got it straight out of their Twitter page and I went back to check and I saw that they changed their logo. Now the main problem is that the user claims the image to be their own image. Now we do not have evidence that this user is actually Priyanka Dutt at all. Wouldn't this be a copyright violation if we can not confirm who created the image. SP013 (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It could very well be. She'd probably have to go through steps at WP:OTRS to prove it. I'm not sure. Image stuff isn't exactly my strong suit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:41, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've nominated it for deletion. Maybe someone can figure out the status and either change the license wording or have her re-upload it under fair use. I suspect that the uploader doesn't understand the implications of releasing it into the Creative Commons under Public Domain licensing, which could actually dilute their brand. Imagine if Coca-Cola put their logo into the public domain. It would be value-less. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * So I uploaded a new version of the image on Wikipedia with the correct licensing so I think we can delete it on the commons. SP013 (talk) 18:12, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanga Meengal
Is Gautham Menon a producer of the film? If he is, then why is he not listed in the national film awards for that year? TamilMirchi (talk) 23:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I'm not exactly sure if I understand the question. It appears that Gautham Menon is a producer of the film per this, if I'm reading it correctly. But when I look through the 61st catalogue, (which took forever to download) I don't see his name on page 42, I see "JSK Film Corporation", which I assume is the studio. So this might be the difference between awarding a line producer, vs. awarding a production company. That said, I have no idea, because I don't know how this award works, or how previous films have been treated. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Latest Natly 88 socks
See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Natly 88. Been a while since I've really spotted any Natly accounts, but pretty sure I've got two pegged. Odd though, they seem to have stopped using one late July and started up another one. Cleanup is not gonna be fun.  Ravensfire  (talk) 03:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit revert
Hello, do verify before removing content from any article as you did in Karan Singh Grover, the filming of 3 Dev is completed and few songs are available. Check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90KwV7Q50Lc, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cmsXMYU8ag. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 13:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you don't know yet according to the WP:Reliable Sources Youtube is not a reliable source as Most videos on YouTube are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, and should not be used at all.. SP013 (talk) 16:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello I just used YouTube as a mention regarding the removal of content not as a reliable source. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 16:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:Mishbir166
Every edits of User:Mishbir166 are vandalised one with addition of the cast who haven't even acted in the series and also gives vandalised cast description contents. Please see to it. Thanks and regards. Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:19, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've looked through some of their recent edits, and it's not clear to me what is or isn't vandalism. Can you clarify? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Addition of casts in Mahabharat like Pankhuri Awasthy, Rhea Sharma, Shivangi Joshi and others in their edits are vandalised who have never acted in the. Vandalised cast description here, where there are no characters named Kusum, Kabir and Kavita in the series Anupamaa. Also, their other edits seems unconstructive. Noobie anonymous (talk) 06:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Sabaash Naidu
hi, yesterday someone deleted Sabaash Naidu film page (without using talk page). This is unreleased or dropped movie. This page has some information about the film with references. look at that page and decide whether or not to retrieve the information,, hope you retrieve the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.181.235.229 (talk) 11:02, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ User did not use the talk page as to why he removed the content so I reverted it back. SP013 (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * New comments belong on the bottom of the page, not in the middle of the page where you put this one. Also, please sign your talk page posts with four tildes like ~ . The page has been restored by another editor. When content is deleted like this, if you disagree with it, you can revert it and then open a dicussion on the talk page to address the editor who removed it. Should the article still exist? That's something you and others should figure out. That's kind of the problem when we create articles about films that haven't been made yet--they can always wind up shelved, and then what? Do we care about shelved films? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Sye Raa Narasimha Reddy
Can I get a page protection for this film as there are some IP's changing the collections to the share collections saying that this is the "truth" even though I have said total collections is more important than share. SP013 (talk) 16:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Janatha Garage
Sir I have been having a problem at this article with this one specific IP that keeps changing the cast roles. I can't seem to find the reason as to why he is but looking at it, it seems to be vandalism. I would be great if we got a page protection on this. SP013 (talk) 15:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Sarkaru Vaari Paata
Can we get a deletion for this redirect as we have a draft for this article but when we try to move it, it won't work and also there wont be IP vandals adding content constantly. SP013 (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Can you help in creating Wikipedia article?
There is show coming on StarPlus lockdown ki Love story i want to create the show article can you help me in this? Unknownnreasonn (talk) 13:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You should go through the Articles for Creation process. I would probably also recommend committing to spell the name of the show with proper capitalisation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Learn to be...
Please learn to be more decent in your responses to people, have some humanity. No agenda is being pushed here, but the mere fact that “consensus” keeps pointing to the need to add the word “suicide” when it has not been proven as a “clear case of suicide” shows where ethics in this website are. Learn your knowledge on this topic first, then comment. It was a request to simply remove one word from info box and your response adds a lot of sarcasm & rudeness that was not necessary. The fact that this is of “warring” topic just shows that it is important to multiple users, but it is okay, when the truth comes up then your team will just have to update everything anyway. Thanks. Justiceforssr (talk) 21:35, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, speaking about learning "your knowledge on this topic first", the suicide determination is adequately sourced. "Clear case of suicide" is what five medical examiners asserted, not something I made up. If you fail to grasp that, or don't want to grasp that, that's your problem. And yes, if there is a change to the determinations that have been amply sourced, Wikipedia will gladly adjust to reflect that. It's really easy. But if the facts remain the same, will you adjust? That's not as easy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I will adjust, but won’t need to - thanks. It’s not for personal reasons, but actual facts that were coming out regarding the case. News reports and doctors are not end all... Justiceforssr (talk) 06:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

please do not be disrespectful again and ask users if they GRASP the idea or not. Everyone has their own intelligence. Justiceforssr (talk) 06:57, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * At Wikipedia, reliable secondary sources, i.e. news reports that quote forensic medical examiners, are the end all. We're not interested in speculation and fantasy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

New(ish) range for HK friend
You've got 218.255.72.0/22 blocked, but I'm seeing them active on 218.255.71.0/22 recently. I've got the range on my list to check, but worth reviewing for possible block.  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Are we seeing the same level of incompetence? I see an edit to the Himesh article, but what else has there been that would lead us to think it's him? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:09, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Hk based range, same IP, edits to the same articles (HR, Ram Kapoor, others), with the large number of linked names which they like to do,  adding fairly minor instrument to infobox for HR (see  for similar),  valid but usual promotional edit for HR,  typical overlinking edit,  another valid, but promotional edit for HR.  The larger range for the IP is 218.255.64.0/20, which covers both of those smaller ranges.  I've got that larger range on my monitor page, and see low level of activity in the past few months, but seems to have increased a little bit lately, and noticed your partial revert on Ram Kapoor of their edits today.  No issues with continuing to monitor it for now, but there's no question this is the same group.  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I poked through and found a bunch that suggest they're the same person. Blocked 1 year. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thank ya!  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

still online
Hi. You still around? —usernamekiran (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

A user who does not use summaries to indicate what they are changing
has not used a single summary out of his 273 edits when editing an article to my knowledge. I have also seen him use the talk page only once ever after he created his account. The user does not respond to Warnings at all and he vandalizes pages by A). Changing up the cast order without any reason as to why he is B). Adding unnecessary puffery to a certain cast member without any reliable source. SP013 (talk) 16:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , there's a couple of templates you can use to let them know that edit summaries are helpful. Uw-editsummary is a general message that gives them some guidance.  If they are removing information without a summary, there are other messages.  See Help:Edit_summary.  While not required, not using summaries ever is often from not knowing about them so friendly messages help.  If they ignore those, it's can be a sign that they aren't really here to collaberate.  Ravensfire  (talk) 16:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Vettipaiyan
There is a user who knows so much despite editing for only two days.TamilMirchi (talk) 15:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The user TheBirdsShedTears knows much about Wikipedia despite editing for only two days. TamilMirchi (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I think you're confused. That user started editing in January and has over 12,000 edits. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
That was a funny comment. You made my day.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC) 

Sock
User:Atlantic052 is a sock of User:Hectore123. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4055:28B:AAFD:0:0:216A:D8AD (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi. I think this, and this are the same persons. There is a sockmaster who edits articles related SAB TV right? Or was it some other channel? —usernamekiran (talk) 12:14, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems possible. I've opened an SPI case. I can't think of any SAB TV socks off the top of my head. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:09, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Infobox images
Sir, recently a user seems on an agenda to add images of the subject when she was "at her career peak". First added a new image here, which got copyvio-ed. Then they added one here. My point is should we be keeping the recent most image or the one taken during the subject's career peak. The original one seems to be in teh article for a considerable time, suggesting it was the preferred one. Also notice the user's harsh language here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is one of those things that may have to be hashed out through discussion. I don't know of any specific community preference on what type of image to include. I think that most biographies of folks from the modern era tend to use semi-recent images. Brad Pitt (FA), Amitabh Bachchan... I don't know that there's any clear guideline on this. I personally get a little irritated though when people use Wikipedia to glamourise subjects, but that's just my personal irritation and has little weight. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah... that Sridevi image from 2013 seems to serve the case. Pictures of her from 1980s-90s seems too old, which this user seems to be POV pushing. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I looked at a few more FAs Elvis Presley has a sexy Jailhouse Rock era image, not fat Vegas Elvis. Rani Mukerji has a 2018 shot. Shah Rukh Khan, 2018. Charlie Chaplin has a youngish photo of him. Richard Nixon has an in-office-era shot, Paul McCartney has a 2018 shot. So my feeling is that it's fairly inconsistent. But on general principle I have a problem with arguments like This "The legendary artist is deceased. It is respectable and honorable to present the image that brought the artist success." This sounds like we're actively paying tribute to or memorialising the subject, which is absolutely the wrong motivation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems like a fan. Anyway Cabayi has flagged that image for copy-vio. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:55, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Acharya (film)
Can I get a page protection for this film as there are IP's that arbitrarily change the cast and dates of the film. SP013 (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Sidharth Shukla
Hi, who will perform the cleanup for Awards and Nominations section for Sidharth Shukla page? Cristmess619127 (talk) 17:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You can do it if you want. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Plot copyvio
Hello, In this edit, I have removed plot of Palnati Yuddham (1947 film) which is copied word-to-word from this Hindu article. Notifying for further action. Regards --Ab207 (talk) 14:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

V (film)
I have seen multiple IP addresses putting the same unsourced content over and over again so can I get a page protection for this. SP013 (talk) 17:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Protecting Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput
On 30 August 2020, semi-protection will expire. On 23 August, you gave us a heads-up: Since I've chimed in on some of these discussions, I'll probably pass on renewing any expired protection on these SSR articles and talk pages, but I'm sure you all know that you can always go to WP:RFPP should the issues flare up again. And they will. I'm sure you're right about what we can expect once protection expires. But before that happens, I'd appreciate your thoughts about lessons learned.

To recap:
 * On 22 June 2020, you first semi-protected Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput, noting: "Persistent disruptive editing. Multiple anonymous editors dropping by to leave unfounded conspiracy theories and suppositions." Protection expired on 6 July.
 * On 8 July, you again semi-protected Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput due to persistent disruptive editing. Protection expired on 29 July.
 * On 30 July, I showed you a diff that, I suggested, "makes me think it's already time to protect that page again."
 * Twelve minutes later, you again semi-protected Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput due to: "Persistent disruptive editing - Continued promotion of conspiracy theories." (You also indefinitely blocked the user in question, thank you very much.)

There is no question that the semi-protection you imposed was in each instance entirely justified and prevented disruptive editing. However, it also had the effect of making it virtually impossible for unregistered users, or accounts less than 30 days old and with fewer than 500 edits that are less than four days old and have made less than 10 edits, to submit an edit request. I say virtually because the process such users must follow is so complicated that, in my opinion, only veteran editors can navigate it. After clicking the View source tab at Sushant Singh Rajput, one is invited to submit an edit request by clicking the blue button and following instructions. Doing so leads to WP:RFED, which is where the going gets tough and the inexperienced get going. If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, one is told, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests. Those instructions in turn explain how to create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {pagelinks} template and the edit being requested. I have plenty of experience in requesting page protection, but even I find this process cumbersome and intimidating. Perhaps that's the point. In the 27 days since you last semi-protected Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput, there has not been a single edit request. God knows I don't want to go back to the free-for-all disruptive editing that necessitated protection in the first place. But I can't help feeling we're missing some middle ground. Is there no way to lock out vandals and conspiracy theorists without shutting down well-meaning edit requests from presumably sane individuals? NedFausa (talk) 20:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Semi-protection is a pretty low-level protection. Anyone could post to the talk page in four days and 10 edits. I'm actually surprised we haven't seen more SPAs, but that could also be why we're seeing semi-retired editors chiming in. Anyway, I'm not exactly sure what middle-ground you're proposing, but if you want to have the page protections lowered, I won't stand in your way. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying. I misunderstood the constraints of semi-protected pages, and have struck/revised that portion of my comment above. However, this correction leaves me even more puzzled as to why there has not been a single edit request in the past 27 days. In any case, I'll not seek to have protection reduced. In five days, semi-protection will expire, and we can take a fresh temperature reading afterwards. NedFausa (talk) 20:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Regarding article review
Article has fixed already it was published long back Charlie063 (talk) 06:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

If u cant help in fixig it y ur removing tags Charlie063 (talk) 06:01, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * (service) Please read WP:AMOUNT. And plase stop going shopping about that. You asked this at my talkpage, at your talkpage, and at WP:AFCHD (and possibly elsewhere). Would you please stop before an admin finds his way to the block button . Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

sleepers
It apperas our friend has one. Praxidicae (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've asked NinjaRobotPirate about this. It's getting a little irritating. I'm not sure it's the same person, since the other guy didn't seem to communicate, but it really feels like coordinated editing here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Cedar Point peninsula (THANK YOU!!)
Thank you so much for fixing that draft for me. You are the first person who actually was helpful to me. (The several reviewers could have easily fixed that much, instead of them just stating that the references weren’t adequate...which the references seemed entirely adequate to me.) Do you think I should try to submit it, now? Or will they just keep rejecting it (without them even bothering to look at the refs again)? Also....is there a ‘talk’ page for the draft? ...if so, would you please place a link right in the draft so I can access the talk page? Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 23:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there, you're welcome. There are thousands of drafts in the review queue and it generally is on the person writing the article to bring it up to some basic standard of quality. After all, you can't force someone to be interested in the thing you're interested in--we're all volunteers here, after all. I did comment here that without TLC from interested parties (i.e. you) the article, if unimproved, is likely to wind up deleted if it is abandoned. Usually, articles are deleted because the contributor failed to demonstrate that the subjec tis notable. (Someone writes an article about their uncle or best friend, neither of whom have ever had a job...) But if you look at our notability criteria for geographic features, it seems that most geographic features are considered notable, however the more info you can incorporate, (When was it discovered? Does anybody live there? What's the population?) the better the likelihood that it could survive. If the draft is abandoned, then after six months it will likely be deleted. So if you can dig up any more info, I'd be happy to help you with the technical aspects of assembling the article. To answer your other question, the link to that draft's talk page is at Draft talk:Cedar Point peninsula (Ohio). And if you forget my username or something, you can always look in the article's edit history. Hope this helps. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You did a really nice job fixing it. I appreciate it so much. I just now tried to clarify why the peninsula, itself, no longer reaches the Huron Ohio mainland....please let me know if I explained it alright now. (Also, if you want to, you could insert the same citation for ref#1 partway after the “7-mile long” statement..because that same ref#1 explains that part. But I guess that I should add a ref that tells exactly what year that later erosion occurred. I will see if I can find one. Thanks again so very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 00:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * yes that was the best place to re-cite ref#1. (By the way, do you know why reviewer Eagleash stated that my draft was “contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia“. And especially after that same reviewer also previously stated that it merely needed additional refs??) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I can't say for sure. Since they linked to Five pillars, if I were to guess, it might be that there was some element of editorialising in the body of the article. I know you were responding to the draft reviewers, but it was misplaced. Anyway, that's just a guess. Only Eagleash knows what they meant. Is there any way to get population info for the peninsula? I see that there are homes there. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I will see if I can find population data (but I think it is enumerated within the mainland areas...but I will check anyway). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 00:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Any other info, along with references you can find, that will help bulk out the info about this strip of land, would be appreciated. Unrelated to that, if you could please type four tildes at the end of your posts like ~, that will append a signature and time stamp like wot you see at right → Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ok I will try the tilde(s). By the way, VERY nice edit correction to the other contributor’s change...YOU stated it exactly correctly!!!2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I was not notified of this discussion but stumbled upon by chance really. In order to either reject or decline a draft at least one of the pre-loaded reasons have to be selected. In 'reject' that's 'not notable' or 'contrary'. The first did not apply so was left with... Cyphoid, when restoring the AfC comments do you think the IP's lengthy and unhelpful responses thereto should have been restored also? Eagleash (talk) 01:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I thought of pinging you, but ultimately didn't think it was entirely necessary, because IMO, the whys of your response were maybe not as important to this temporary contributor as was just seeing somebody help on the article. So I hope I didn't slight you; no disrespect was intended. I don't have a strong opinion about what to do with the comments Anon left. If you want to restore them for historical accuracy, feel free. In a world of promotional articles being submitted to Draft space, we have a n00b contributor who doesn't understand our rules and social systems, and doesn't know how or where to comment, but just wants, in good-faith, to write a few words about a weird land mass that could very well be notable through the inviting language of WP:GEOLAND. I felt they weren't a threat, and thought to keep it kind of casual. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:33, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * OK; not really a problem though other editors may not realise why reviewers felt the need to respond robustly. A more measured set of responses both at the draft and at reviewers' TPs would have seen the anon helped out rather earlier. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 02:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In my own defense: I denoted directly in my original draft that I needed help with formatting (etc.); therefore, the original reviewers could have simply “passed” on the review/rejection, and perhaps forwarded the draft to potential helpmates.
 * But my main frustration was due to the second reviewer who didn’t even bother to see all the multiple times my first reference contains within it (approx. a dozen).
 * (Anyway, Cyph, if you wish, you could create a “general edits” category on that talk-page, and I can post further edit suggestions directly there. Thanks!)2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 03:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Anon, if you want to start a new discussion there, just click "New section" at the top of the talk page, you can name it whatever you like. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:41, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My browser doesn’t seem to display a “new section” option. Anyway I was just heading to bed...but, oddly(I suppose), I was just now wondering, if, in “real life”, if you are as nice, in-person, as you are, on here. (And I could mention several other of your positive attributes....but maybe another time.lol) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 04:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe tick the "Desktop" option at the bottom of the page? That should give you a wider range of utilities, albeit the browsing experience might be a bit less compact. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Zscaler
If you have a moment, I have a somewhat complex situation with this article, possibly needing the eyes of an admin with significant experience. It has been in existence since 2008, and was initially created by an editor with a direct conflict of interest (apparently Michael Sutton, who was a member of the team that founded the company ). When I started looking at this article, I kept finding copyright violation after copyright violation after copyright violation. I kept removing sections that were copied from elsewhere and kept redoing the earwig detector. What I ended up with was a bare intro and a single line of usable history. The history is a mess. It's extremely difficult to clean without a massive time sink to detect exactly when certain parts of the content that are copyrighted were added and what needs a revdel. So, I took the approach of nuke-it-from-orbit and start over. I've tagged the remains of the article as db-g12, taken from. Honestly, I'm not even positive that website was used to copy the content to here, as there's no date on it. It's possible they copied from here, but I can't tell. It's just a mess. I've created a draft at Draft:Zscaler which I intend on moving to Zscaler once it's deleted. I'm hoping you'll take a look at this and see if it merits deletion as I've suggested, or offer an alternative. Thank you for your time, --Hammersoft (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's a dumb first suggestion: Have you checked to see if there are any Wayback Machine archives that would lead us to believe it is a clear copyvio? If you found that verbiage at about the same time it was added to the article, then we'd have a better sense of that. Apart from that, it wouldn't be that hard to RevDel the bulk of the article to suppress the copyvios, at which point the edit history would be preserved and you could laminate your version on top of the existing one. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Good suggestion! The earliest archive.org entry is from March 22, 2016. The content on the page now appeared on the article sometime after that. The content at the last edit before that date did not have this material other than the first sentence (modified, at that). So it would appear that the content here was copied from there. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The issue has been resolved now. Thanks for your suggestion and attention! --Hammersoft (talk) 01:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, cool. Glad to have helped, although only somewhat. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Your intervention needed
The edits by User:Amiha jhunjhunwala and User:Prema Puriwala are being totally disruptive, deviating from the encyclopedic tone. Despite, my instructions for them in their talk page, there is no reply from the former while the latter claims their edits being proper and unnecessarily bashing my edits. Also, their editing pattern and articles edited by them are mostly similar including their User page description. For instance, both kept on adding Sarita Joshi in Anupamaa repeatedly despite my revertion with a character description while she wasn't even seen the series. When i asked them, they say that reports suggest them casted for the series or they say that Joshi is not shooting owing Covid-19 pandemic. Then, if not seen in the series, how could Joshi have a character description as described in their edits. Like this, I have many more to state on their edits. Need your help and intervention. Please don't ignore this message. With regards Noobie anonymous (talk) 11:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Noobie Anonymous
This editor seems to have some personal problems with my editing format as I have not been editting Anupamaa Wikipedia page since a long time and as I am a new editor I will obviously need time to explore and develop learnings from Wikipedia as I am doing so but Noobie Anonymous has a severe issue as he is continuously reverting my edits though they are correct and according to the Wikipedia rules and regulations like when I write the plot he instantly deletes it and when asked there is no response and often gives lame excuses like my descriptions are too long and many more points I have to say as Noobie Anonymous is totally in a disruptive behaviour while continously sending me mails when I have several times said him not to send and there are many more Issues regarding him I have. So please take a look into this matter ASAP and say him not to continously send mails to me cause it's really bothering me and to repeatedly revert my edits Regards, Your sincerely Amiha jhunjhunwala. Amiha jhunjhunwala (talk) 11:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't have any personal problems with you. It is your editing manner being disruptive and not as per MOS:TV which makes me revert back to stable version or correct it. And for plot, it should be as minimum as possible as per MOS:TV and not the entire episode story. Also your edits doesn't even cite any single reliable references from The Times of India, The Indian Express, etc as per WP:ICTFSOURCES. And without trying understanding the Wikipedia policies properly you simply ignore my statements and argue with me. Why should I simply revert without any reason? I just correct those and notify it If your edits are proper why should i notify. As you were not considering my words i notify this to experienced editors. Seems that you and Prema are the same user with different account. You can even cross check with any experienced editors whether your edits are right or wrong. Noobie anonymous (talk) 13:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Noobie Anonymous, Just look now what are u doing again and again you are constantly messaging after repeatedly I have saud you not to do it but still just look at yourself why are you messaging have I sent you a mail, no... not at all I have send this mail to an experienced editor Cyphoidbomb So please just let the matter be with us only and it is the last time I am saying u not message me my cell is getting damaged cause of your annoying messages and there is no such rules in the Wikipedia to edit limitedly Wikipedia has given the right to all editors to edit as much possible as one can with no limits cause Wikipedia page is for to give brief description about any topic So who are you to revert editors editing and only edit by yourself .This is a strict warning as not to continously sending me mails, messages and attachments. Thankyou, Regards Amiha jhunjhunwala Amiha jhunjhunwala (talk) 14:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've left a probably-too-long note on Amiha's talk page. There are a number of problems that I've spotted, which are significant. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Even now they are not accepting their mistakes and blame me unnecessarily and also replaced my proper title card file to their which is not even a title card of Shaadi Mubarak. Despite my instructions in talk page of Anjali Gupta, they replace the flying officer's bio with a Television actress bio of same name even when i said them to create a separate article for the actress and not replacing in flying officer's article. So, Please do keep an eye on both of the accounts and take necessary actions. Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Eswnav
There is this user who is constantly asking me to move several of his drafts to articles. If I do so, then this user is using me. Please warn this user.TamilMirchi (talk) 17:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry this after never do like that sorry Eswnav (talk) 17:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Problem solved. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:45, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I have one doubt, how can I move draft to main article. Eswnav (talk) 17:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Why are you in a hurry to move a draft? Draft:Rekha Krishnappa is not in good shape and neither is Draft:Thazh Thiravaa. In fact, at the latter article, you failed to demonstrate the most fundamental basic requirement of notability per WP:NFF, which is that the film has to have started principal phototgraphy. And, it appears you stole the Production content from other websites. Has nobody ever told you that copying is wrong, as it constitutes intellectual theft? Copyright violations are serious. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Lockdown Ki Love Story
I feel the article Lockdown Ki Love Story has reached its minimum notability and the deletion request could be cancelled and closed. There has been no comments after my comment after the improvements were made by me. I think this discussion could be closed. Please see to it. With regards Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am inclined to let someone else close the AFD when it is ready to be closed. Closing it 2 days early without consensus steering unambiguously to one side or another isn't ideal. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

You can add a title of Mumbai Police narrative above all suicide, depression and autopsy theory
Death story Susant Singh Rajput to be removed and wait for the investigation to complete. Please don't include wikipedia in support Media houses in support of people who want to hide the truth. Be neutral till investigation is over or just cover death issues below a title of Mumbai Police narrative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.196.133.48 (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This isn't the place to discuss this. Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput is. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Full name editor
When I edited Kaithi (2019 film), there was an editor who would constantly add the full names of actors. The user is reborn as user:111.92.48.122. TamilMirchi (talk) 02:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey there, I appreciate the tip, but traditionally, people who want administrators to take action with annoying editors should bring some evidence that these editors are annoying, and that they are the same person. I know that we're all busy, but admins aren't one-person investigation teams. We need help from editors such as yourself to spend a few moments and gather evidence so we can look at it quickly, make a determination and sanction accordingly. If you are dropping all of that into my lap without any information, then the burden falls on me and that's not quite fair. Thanks for understanding, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sivakasi_%28film%29&type=revision&diff=971651337&oldid=971651148 in which the user adds the film name of the actor.TamilMirchi (talk) 04:02, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

A perennially controversial topic
As List of highest-grossing Indian films is protected, IPs have found their way to List of highest-grossing films in India to add unsoured financials to Indian films. Requesting page protection. --Ab207 (talk) 04:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Soorarai Pottru
Sir I am confused about this edit right here. . I explained to the user that even though his source is reliable the price that it was sold was a generalization of all the Indian films that were sold on OTT. Can I get some help on determining whether I should keep it or remove it (I reverted SuriyaCR7Fan's edits already). SP013 (talk) 14:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This is probably something that you will need to sort out through discussion, and maybe ask other members of WP:ICTF to chime in. However, rights sales are not something we typically track. There were at least two discussions about satellite rights sales here and here, with one of the "!keep" votes coming from a sockpuppet operator. I don't see how rights sales of any kind are within the scope of what we do here. Wikipedia is not the Indian copyright office, so we don't care who possesses the rights for X, Y or Z. Wikipedia is also not an accounting firm for the film, so we don't need to know about every rupee they made. There is no mention of rights sales at Avengers: Endgame, for example. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:51, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Forgot to mention, it also feels like an emphasis on re-run content. In TV articles we typically don't care about a show being rebroadcast. In film articles we never talk about the fact that a film is being shown on airplanes or on cable/satellite systems. I don't see how it would be any different for OTT. Maybe OTT is legitimately part of home release, but tracking the money? Who cares? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi
User:Cyphoidbomb please look in could you please look at Talk:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:41:E6FF:544E:DCC7:3B46:60CE (talk) 14:35, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Madesh Elumalai
This user doing unwanted edit in List of Tamil film actresses article. Please warm this user. Eswnav (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You didn't tell me what the problem is. What am I supposed to warn them about? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Rhea Chakraborty
I see that you looked at this article, which has been having some edit-warring recently. One of the editors has filed a DRN request. My question for either you or User:CaptainEek is whether there is a content issue that can possibly be mediated, or whether I should close the DRN request as a conduct dispute. (I can see that there are conduct issues, but sometimes conduct issues go away when a content issue is resolved.)

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey there, sorry, I glanced at your message without actually reading it, and then responded to the DRN request. Sloppy of me. Sorry. The editor submitted potentially defamatory content at Rhea Chakraborty and doesn't understand why it is problematic. Although I've explained it twice at Talk:Rhea Chakraborty and once at the DRN, their reply at DRN suggests they still don't understand why the content was problematic, arguing that because a reliable source used the same phrasing, we can too. But if you look at the edits, the phrasing says that Chakraborty is a "prime suspect" in Rajput's death, but doesn't quantify that in any way, which, in my estimation, results in serious, potentially defamatory implications. So to me this seems an issue of ignorance rather than your normal content dispute. As for whether this can be mediated or not, I'm not sure, but hey, you might have some great mediation skills! Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Based on what you say at DRN, it is a type of case that I usually decline, because it is a one-against-many dispute. If multiple editors have already tried to tell the filing editor that their edits are problematic, or it multiple editors have tried to tell another editor anything, then it is isn't likely that a mediator will persuade them, or that a mediator will persuade the other editors.  In addition to that concern, I see that this is a BLP issue with serious allegations against the subject of the article that do not appear to be proven.  I will comment to that effect without closing the case.  Thank you.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The filing party has been cautioned. Thank you.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Main cast
As you said the main cast need not be the stars of the series. Considering the Indian tv series which run for years continuously with a changing casts and plots, many characters which would get a good screenspace except the leads varies throughout. Sometimes, as stated by you a cast would seem main with a significant plot and screenspace for them other than the main stars while through progress there would not be much plot for them or reduced screenspace like a recurring one as seen in many series. Then where should they be listed? Is it that they should be moved to recurring due to their reduced screenspace while progression of the story? I am confused as how and on what basis to list the main cast clearly. Could you please explain briefly?

And considering Indian tv series, credits are only given to the stars of the series which makes it difficult to identify the other main casts. What could be the solution then? Could it be determined based on screenspace of a cast?

With regards. Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Main cast members should always be listed in the main cast even if their roles were minimised later on. Per WP:TVCAST, we care about the entire history of a series, and new cast members typically get added to the bottom of the list. So for example (totally made–up names)
 * Main
 * Praanvi Mukhtar as Indu: a free–spirited college student who gets everything she wants from her older husband Zalim. (2015–2020)
 * Ragoba Parikh as Zalim: an unfaithful husband who comes from a wealthy family. He works for a corrupt company that creates promotional Wikipedia articles for pay. (2015–2016)
 * Veer Kashyap as Gopal: the CEO of a tech firm. Gopal is a family man who loves his wife and tries to give guidance to his wayward daughter Indu. Kashyap died in late-2016 and his character was written off the show. (2015–2016)
 * Radha Mahanti as Ruhi: Gopal's wife Ruhi is a successful lawyer. She secretly is envious of her daughter Indu and constantly schemes against her. (2015–2020)
 * Ayush Kamath as Uncle Rishu: Gopal's brother has fallen on hard times and lives with the family. He acts as a mentor and confidante to Indu. (2015–2020)
 * Sooraj Joshi as Zalim: Joshi replaced Parikh in the role after Parikh had a dispute with producers about contract fees, arguing that he should be paid more than his female co-star. (2016–2020)
 * Aasmi Patil as Zohana: In an effort to reinvigorate the show after Kashyap's death, Zohana was introduced in early 2017 as Zalim's boss, a divorcee who attempts to seduce him and break–up his marriage to Indu. At the end of 2017, the character suffers injuries in a car accident and spends the rest of the series in a recurring role, trying to recover from her injuries, and occasionally trying to sabotage Zalim's marriage. (2017–2020)
 * This is a rough structure of what most Main cast sections could look like. I'm trying to show you a few things here:
 * Character descriptions should be more than just family relationships.
 * New cast members are added at the bottom of the list per WP:TVCAST. Note how Sooraj Joshi appears after the 2015 cast is introduced, even if he was replacing a lead actor in a lead role. This is technically how it should be done per WP:TVCAST, although I have also tried a different method of using indented bullets to indicate cast changes, as a way of avoiding the very stupid "Ragoba Parikh/Sooraj Joshi"-style slash formatting ///, which is just sloppy and lazy.
 * Note that Aasmi Patil's placement is explained (preferably with references). She starts off as a main character, but then is shifted to another role.
 * Hope this answers some of your questions. For a real-world example of some of this, there is the American show Roseanne. Lecy Goranson played Becky for a number of years, then was replaced by Sarah Chalke in the same role, then Goranson came back a few times and the two actors played her depending on whether Goranson was available or not. Weird show, and those kinds of things should be properly explained in prose. Regards, and if you have any follow-up questions, feel free to ask them. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your explanation. I totally understand it. But as stated there "main cast members are determined by the series producers (not by popularity, screen time, or episode count) and generally have a set order in the credits", Indian series credits only the stars of the series. So, it would be difficult for determining the main cast other than the leads ourselves, right. What could be done for it then? Noobie anonymous (talk) 12:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm not sure. I've opened a discussion at WT:TV, which you are always welcome to do. Maybe someone there will have some tips. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Actually, i missed mentioning a main thing properly in it which i stated there. Please see to it. With regards. Noobie anonymous (talk) 08:23, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The article you added is very useful, thanks for posting that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, one more thing, just so I'm clear: are any actors credited in an episode of Anupamaa? Even Rupali Ganguly? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

As i stated there, credits are mentioned in any episodes for producers, directors, production house, etc. There is no credits displayed in any episodes for cast members, even for the lead star (here the lead star Ganguly) since few years as evident in the reference. It is that we can say who the lead stars are for sure. Either we can determine the other main cast based on the plot importance given to the characters other than the lead stars. For instance, in Diya Aur Baati Hum, Deepika Singh and Anas Rashid are the only lead stars of the series. As per the entire story line and her role appearance, Neelu Vaghela can be considered as one of the main cast as she is the next main character after the leads with a significant role. Else is there any other solution? Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

In the article I provided, the persons mentioned there are all lead stars only who complain about not crediting even for them. Hope I cleared your doubt. With regards. Noobie anonymous (talk) 18:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Dimple Kapadia
Hi there, Cyphoidbomb! Since you've been helpful recently, I might need your admin advice in case you have time (please ignore the message if you're busy).

I took the Dimple Kapadia article to FAC a few months ago. There has been an ongoing debate about the religion of Kapadia's parents, which started on FAC between Fowler&fowler and myself, and never resolved. I was initially reluctant to mention her parents' religion as no sources provided this information from the horse's mouth, but insistence on the part of the user on the FAC (including a threat that unless religion was mentioned, they would oppose the nomination) encouraged me to look for something. And I did. The sources found (including India Today, 1985 and Open, 2019) clearly say her father comes from a Khoja family who embraced Hinduism while still following some of the tradition. But the facts as they appear in sources were not to the other user's liking. Their main claim was that it doesn't really make sense that an Ismalili Khoja family would embrace Hinduism ("not based in any reality that I am aware", as they put it). I found their stand to be in complete violation of WP:OR and WP:V, and refused to comply with their proposed version. The nomination was opposed by them on this ground, and they even kept commenting all over the place, posting long walls of text and messing up the entire page. The nomination was archived because of stability issues (although the user's disruptive conduct was warned by the closing coordinator), but I am willing to resubmit. Before that, I want this issue settled.

Based strictly on the sources, the current version reads as: "Chunibhai was from a wealthy Ismaili Khoja family, whose members had reportedly 'embraced Hinduism' while still regarding Agha Khan as their religious mentor; Bitti was an Ismaili, too, and similarly followed Aga Khan."

I did recently try WP:DRN as a way to resolve this dispute. It didn't work out. I'm not sure RfC is the right way to go. Now I'm looking for another, more efficient way to achieve some sort of consensus. Can you suggest the best course of action? Maybe you'd be willing to offer your input here. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  20:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't read the whole discussion, but I did read a good deal of it. I see your points and I understand why you're being cautious about drawing conclusions about people's religions. My casual opinion is that when we get into splitting hairs this finely, it might just be best to omit the content until better sources are revealed. I don't see why an article can only reach FA if we know the religions of both parents. Anyway, my opinion, casual or otherwise doesn't hold any more weight than anybody else's, so I'd recommend a RFC. Why not? They're not supposed to be a big weight deal, just another way to get more eyes on a talk page that may not be heavily visited by experienced Wikipedians. I don't know your history with RfCs, but the trick is going to be to finding a neutral way to write up the query and to present neutral options. Maybe Fowler would be willing to assist with that? I believe that both of you want what's best for the article, so maybe collaborating on a way to find that best version might be possible. And then of course dropping neutral invites to appropriate Wikiprojects would be useful as well. Hope that helps. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I really want the article to get through, it's been a challenging project. When I started working on it, it was a poor stub. RfC is probably a good option. Thanks again, Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  20:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , before you attempt another FAC, make sure Fowler's comments are solved. If he is repeating his behaviour from here, he must be reported. I don't want anyone else to suffer at his hands the way I did. Kailash29792 (talk)  17:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't even worry about that, Kailash. I believe in the article, and I believe the FAC co-ords already know who they're dealing with. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Beat you to it
See WP:AN/I —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh.... 03:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

More cast reordering issue
As you have seen, we have another account now attempting to reorder cast listings. Of note; it appears this account is attempting to supplant film posters to their preferred versions. Contrast File:Mallusingh 2012.jpg, added by this editor in replacement of File:Mallusingh.jpg. The latter has been restored. This editor appears to have been doing a lot of this. See Special:ListFiles/Vaishnav_bk for images they have uploaded that are not yet deleted. I'm going to be cleaning this up, and dropping another warning regarding this issue to the editor. I'm not asking for action on your part; I just wanted to let you know this appears to be a new wrinkle in this never ending cast reordering saga. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this editor is on my radar. Note Talk:Lucifer (film). He appears to have fabricated Starring cast based on his own interpretations. I find that in Indian film/TV articles, people have no idea what "stars/starring" means and often assume it means whomever appeared in the work, loosely construed. It doesn't help that there are no consistent credits in most Indian entertainment. But I've probably already harped about this... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, I've found a couple more "Vaishnav" accounts at Mallu Singh, but nothing that feels entirely like sockpuppetry, specifically the hopping accounts specifically to be disruptive. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah you have :) Preach on :) I wish there were some way to definitively untangle the mess of which actor should be listed first in films produced in India. However, as you've noted, there isn't any way to do so. Failing that, I wish there were some way to end the ceaseless reordering. But, that seems impossible as well, especially given this has gone on for at least six years, and possibly much longer on other films. To date, there hasn't seemed to have been any way to effectively communicate how disruptive these reorderings are. Sadly, there are probably a LOT more people willing to reorder the casts to their favorite than there are people willing to police this disruptive behavior (you...me...and nobody else?). I don't know how to make it stop, short of fully protecting any article that suffers repeated reordering attempts, and that is a nuke-it-from-orbit approach I'd rather not take. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * User:Vaishnav bk has continued the disruptive cast reordering despite my warning, yet again, regarding their various efforts at lead/support changes, poster replacements, and cast reorderings . This warning, which encouraged them to talk with us, was made must minutes before their most recent uncited cast reordering changes. I've reverted the change and placed a uw-vandal3 warning on their talk page . Just giving you a heads up. Also, I scanned through the current talk page and recent archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force. I haven't found any discussion regarding this years-long disruption. I had thought to start a discussion, but I'm not certain how to go about phrasing it. Obviously the disruption needs to end, but how do we achieve that? I'm at a loss. Suggestions? --Hammersoft (talk) 17:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Heads up; User:Optimuskid WP:DUCK. This account has also recreated College Days, yet again, after it's been deleted or draftified at least five times now. Note that User:Vaishnav bk was responsible for recreating this four times. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Numerous intersections as well. Blocked. Deleted. Thanks for the tip. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:06, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Need help please
Sir the account " Divya Agarwal " has been redirected to another page and protected. She is a notable actress. I want to create a proper web page for her. Since you are a administrator it's my humble request that you either delete or remove protection from this page. Rjidindiana (talk) 09:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If she is notable, then you won't have any trouble satisfying our General Notability Guideline and demonstrating to the draft reviewers that the subject is notable. Also, please don't make the same request of multiple administrators. This is considered forum-shopping, which is not only an ethically shady practise, but it's also disrespectful of the volunteers' time. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok sir Thank you Rjidindiana (talk) 06:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey Cyphoidbomb!!
hey! I want my Draft: Gold Award for Best Onscreen Jodi move to main space ASAP. Can you help me in this? Unknownnreasonn (talk) 12:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

As you're experienced editor of the Wikipedia so I want you to check my draft. If anything is wrong, please change it. With Regards Unknownnreasonn (talk) 12:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd rather let the community decide what to do with it. I have a fundamental problem with these faceless award entities. If the entities themselves (See goldawards.in) don't care enough about their award to maintain a professional website and present a historical archive, why should Wikipedia care about it? This just feels like a shameless cash grab, especially when the majority of sites that care about this content are superficial gossip sites like Filmibeat and press release sites like BizAsia. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:17, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

So what I do please tell me? Unknownnreasonn (talk) 15:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Per the note at the bottom of the page: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,393 pending submissions waiting for review." If I were you, I'd get rid of the bold formatting. It's not needed. The only thing that needs to be bolded in that draft is "Gold Award for Best Onscreen Jodi". Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay,thanks for your suggestion. Unknownnreasonn (talk) 16:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Are you a reviewer
Hi can you review articles related malayalam movie Rahul Somantalk - contribs 20:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Reviewing articles is not what I prefer doing here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Just asked Rahul Somantalk - contribs 21:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)