User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 8

Thanks for your revert
Hi, Cyphoidbomb,

Maybe you don't see a talk page message with a title like this one every day, but I do appreciate a revert with a rationale. I am wondering, in the article Baahubali: The Beginning, whether the term "bilingual" is exactly fitting in its current context in the article lede. Having reviewed the sources, I see a description of a production process in which a Telugu-language story was expanded into a Telugu-language script, and then a Tamil-language screenwriter was hired to produce a Tamil-language script which was apparently use to film many scenes directly in Tamil during production, simultaneously with filming scenes in Telugu. But the movie as a viewer watches it (I have watched it) is in one language or another,[note] so the movie as such isn't "bilingual" from the viewers point of view. ([note] Yeah, the movie includes the made-up language of the invading group, which in fact was made-up by the Tamil-speaking screenwriter and used in all released versions of the movie, but since that language is just made up, that probably isn't what is intended by "bilingual" in the movie description.) Digging into the sources cited in the article, I saw a statement from one of the lead actors that the close-up scenes were often specially shot to facilitate dubbing with better lip-synching for the Hindi version, so couldn't the article just as legitimately say "triligual" in that same place? And of course just about all the sources agree in saying that on release day the movie was released in versions in Telugu, Tamil, Malaylam, and Hindi (all languages in which I have watched movies from India in the town where I live), so couldn't the movie also be described as "quadrilingual"? Of course one way to fix this problem is to have no adjective in that part of the lede (as you saw was my intention) but to expand the body of the article with full citation of what the sources say about the development of the movie in different languages. But, yeah, this gets to be very contentious in articles about Indian cinema, which you have evidently worked on more than I have. (Aside: thanks for raising the question about "nett gross" on another editor's talk page, as that phrase was puzzling to me too.) Anyway, I just offer for your consideration the thought that I wouldn't want to slight any language that was anticipated as a release language by the film producers as they released the film. But maybe there is a better way to surface all of those details in the lede than has yet been tried by the several editors working diligently on the article. Thanks for the detailed rationale for your edit; see you on the wiki. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 00:12, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for your note. I don't know very much at all about the Indian film industry, except for the stuff I've picked up while editing here. This seems to be a unique situation unlike most other films in the world, where, as you correctly ascertained, this film was produced in two languages at once, instead of simply being dubbed after the fact. I don't think this would be much of an issue to most people—if a film were made simultaneously in English and Spanish, I doubt that anyone would resist both languages appearing in the infobox. It seems to me that the problematic variable, is the issue of Indian cultural/ethnic/language pride fueling decisions, per discussions on the talk page. User Pradeeps369 tried numerous times to "credit" the Telugu film industry, making his personal objection known on the talk page: "People please give due credit to Telugu and stop being cheap and taking the credit for the work that has nothing to do with Tamil ... I never thought Tamil will stoop to this level of taking credit for someone else film." This sentiment was echoed by Aloosamosa, "Please change the First line in the main section as Indian Telugu Epic film . That would give due credit to the telugu people who worked for this film for almost 3 years." This user also argued, "The numbers speak for themselves what language the film belongs to. 60% of total revenues came from telugu states." Well, maybe the Tamil people didn't go see the movie because they too are caught up in this ethnic pride ridiculousness? Anyhow, these are clearly POV arguments and we have to be very cautious to avoid POV content. I also don't see what value is provided by arguing about what the film "primarily" is. The film Avatar was produced in standard film format along with a variety of 3D formats. Does that mean that the film was "primarily" a standard film? A 3D film? Who knows, and who cares? What we do know definitively, regardless of emotion, is that there were different formats. Two nations were involved in the production of that film. Are we going to split hairs over which one was "primarily" the harder working nation? Foreign gross totals for the film were almost 3x more than the domestic take—are we going to claim that the film was "primarily" intended for an overseas audience? No, we go with what the references say. The pro-Telugu editors seem to be cherrypicking references that lack any mention of Tamil, as proof that Telugu is the official language. This is logically fallacious, because they are using a lack of information to draw a conclusion about what the film must not be. Just because sources A, B and C don't say something, doesn't mean that source D is incorrect when they do say something. If an article didn't mention that Avatar was produced in a standard format, would that mean that the 3D format was the "primary" format? Of course not. Regards,  Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Your thoughtful comments provide a good framework for future edits to the article. Thanks. I'll digest your comments, look for new sources and reread the previously cited sources, and maybe see the film again in another of the languages of distribution before updating the article. I'm glad to see that careful editors are looking after a very high-page-view article. See you on the wiki. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:41, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

The Destructive Destroyer Vandal
What makes you think you are WP:INVOLVED? Is the master blocked? Are you reasonably sure the IP is a sock per WP:DUCK? --Neil N  talk to me 20:00, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi The user has never actually spoken, as far as I know, so I don't think I've ever been in a dispute with them or anything like that. I did spearhead a few trips to ANI back when I was a regular editor. As a newly-appointed admin, I'm taking the cautious approach, which is why I asked Euryalus, who was the last admin to block this user. Just don't want to inadvertently wind up in a COI situation. Your guidance is appreciated as well, so gimme the poop! Oh, and yes, I'm reasonably sure. This IP (which geolocates to Gaithersburg, Maryland) and the other IPs (which also geolocated to Gaithersburg, Maryland) were involved at Winx Club articles. As detailed in this most recent ANI report they also had problems comprehending MOS:DATERANGE and figuring out how to format headings properly. See this from the new IP. Also as documented in the ANI report, they have a tendency to delete talk page comments without replying, which you can directly observe in their talk page history. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:16, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Let me outline a situation which may help you out. There was an IP I was heavily involved with back in January on Talk:Islamic_calendar. The same IP tried to disrupt my RFA so it's obvious there was no love lost between us. A few weeks ago, it came to my attention the IP was the sock of a banned user: User_talk:NeilN/Archive_25. I declined to make that determination and let another admin handle it (even though it was obvious) because I had no idea who Vote X was when I was involved with the IP. However, now I would have no hesitation blocking their socks (and have - they pop up frequently) because that's what any other admin would do. So if you're blocking a sock, be prepared to defend it if asked by showing evidence if asked, and not on the basis of WP:INVOLVED. --Neil N  talk to me 20:20, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Very reasonable. Thanks for the real-life example! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:47, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Roronoa Ace
Hey, since you recently became an admin and you suspect Roronoa Ace of sockpuppetry, is it possible for admins to run a checkuser on accounts? If not, this should be taken to SPI. Electric Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 21:44, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, no CheckUsers have different abilities, because seeing users' IPs and such requires an elevated type of trust. (They have to divulge their identities to ArbCom) I did open an SPI case on Monkey Luffy with Rorona as a sock. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:47, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

FYI
Articles for deletion/Gurcharan Singh Bhikhi (Sidki); since you brought this up at WT:INB. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  12:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

RfA
Hey, I totally missed it--congratulations. A close call, and some wise words in the closing statement, but congratulations. By now you will have discovered that it's a lot less fun than it seemed before, though that powertrip can be a great high. (For instance, you can now revdel this from your talk page: feels good!) Listen, if you ever need to know anything, if you're ever in doubt, if there's ever a task that needs to be done but you just can't be bothered to do it or to learn how to do it, don't hesitate, and call on or  immediately. They'll be glad to help. All the best, Drmies (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Haha! An enjoyable read, thank you. Interestingly, I thought of you when I was being told I was too snarky to be an admin! Too snarky? What?! The only blessing from this newfound toolset, is that I spend less time at AIV writing stupid reports.
 * Yet another incarnation of the XYZ dipshit. [Diffy diffy diffy diff demonstrating that it's vandalism to whomever might be patrolling...] - Cyphoidbomb
 * This board is for obvious vandals. Take it to ANI. - Admin123XYZ
 * WHAT THE ACTUAL SHIT?! That guy *is* an obvious vandal! (Fills out RfA...) - Cyphoidbomb
 * Thanks for the congrats, and I hope I can expect you to please keep me on the straight and narrow. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm all over that. I wrote the straight and narrow, though EC copyedited it for me. I agree, BTW, with the AIV thing, to some extent. I don't frequent it very much, but I click on the suspected vandal's contributions every time I see an AIV report go by, and I guess that saves the board some trouble. In most cases, the reporter is correct--I may have found a few of yours along the way. Listen, if you really want to serve, pop by on UAA every now and then. It's a depressing place and it's somewhat timeconsuming to figure out what all is going on, since there's often extraneous matters--subpages, article creation, etc.--but poor old Daniel Case is having to spend way too much time there by hisself. Again, congrats, and take care of yourself. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Formula for Nett. Gross of films in India

 * Cyphoidbomb, here is the Formula for the film collections and how it shows a way to boxoffice of the film.

In India, We have Entertainment tax charged by states on films. It varies from state to state. Some states like Rajasthan dont have Entertainment tax, while Tamil nadu doesnt take Entertainment tax on any film having Tamil name.

Gross in India= Nett. Gross+ Entertainment tax What we see in the film collection reports is Nett. Gross after deducting the Entertainment tax. But the most important for a film is Distributor share of the film.

Distributor share= Nett. Gross - Theatre rentals Distributor share varies with each week and region in India. it will be more in first week,then lesser in second week etc.--Conradjagan (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Question about Looney Tunes article
Why was it reverted back to the previous one? The Merrie Melodies article still mentions the one-off 1988 revival, so why can't the Looney Tunes article mention the 1987 to present revival? Also, the last pre-revival Looney Tunes short ended in 1969, not 1970. 24.180.56.157 (talk) 14:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you check the article's Edit History? Click "View history" at the top right of the page. I think I explain the reversion fairly well. "Seek consensus on talk page. These complicated changes to infobox are probably best explained in prose." The infobox isn't the place to cram extraneous information about a revival series etc. If you want to change the dates, that's fine, but they should be supported with references, and you should explain your changes in your edit summary. Numerical vandalism (where pernicious editors come by and change random numerical values) is prevalent and only references can help other editors see that there is a valid rationale for numerical changes. Regards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

list of highest grossing films talk page
In highest grossing list talk page i have mentioned support but no one is responding. Support for Telugu was more than that of support for telugu and tamil then why are u not removing baahubali from the tamil list Padukati raju (talk) 05:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Infobox television season
Damn, you discovered my secret! I didn't come up with the colours listed on my user page. They were originally added to List of Arthur episodes with this edit. speaking of my user page, I'm trying not to let the discussion stagnate, as so many TV discussions seem to. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 20:04, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait, which conversation? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:36, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This one. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 07:29, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Balochistan#Recent_changes". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! (talk) 12:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Rainynites query
Please delete my profile. This website is too confusing and discouraging for me to be an editor. I will be moving on.

Rainynites (talk) 02:50, 6 August 2015 (UTC)Rainynites

The Incredible Hulk
Your edit summary that I made an "unexplained change" is demonstrably false. I corrected incorrect information in the article (the movie takes place five years after Banner's first transformation, not five months, it says so in the movie, as well as in sources), and changed "158 days" to "five months" because it was too specific. Thank you. Spaghetti07205 (talk) 01:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, I even explained in my edit summary that I was fixing incorrect information. So it was not "unexplained". Spaghetti07205 (talk) 01:22, 19 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Just so you know, Spaghetti07205 is a WP:Sock, one who also voted in your WP:RfA. Flyer22 (talk) 16:47, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I noticed the ANI report about him, glad to know he was desocked. My reply to his comment at my RfA caused a few Oppose votes, unfortunately--maybe I can try to get those back! :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:26, 5 August 2015 (UTC)


 * If I were you, I might ask if anything can be done about a vote that turned out to be a WP:Sock vote. But I guess since the votes are on record the way they are, nothing can be done about the WP:Sock vote. I hadn't known about your WP:RfA; sorry for missing it. Flyer22 (talk) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not much of an issue at this point, since I did pass. No grudges against you for missing my RfA. It was a delightful shit-fest, though! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:51, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

"Loud House" age info
On your recent revert from my edit on The Loud House, I used an Instagram comment for verification because it was said by the show's creator. Not to be mad or anything, but I believe that if the creator of the work said that information, it has to be canon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartoonkid95 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I can understand why you would think that. However, it's also possible that it was an off-the-cuff remark with no relevance to any existing or future episode. If a fictional character has not been depicted on screen as a PhD, of what value is that fact? A two-dimensional character is only as deep as they are depicted. Since we're talking about a quick instagram comment, not a proper published interview, there's also on context being provided that helps us better understand what he means. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:32, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Mall
 Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 03:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Reply
How foolish are you? The goddamn series has never even been in the 2015-2016 upfront of Cartoon Network and you're still sucking up to the usual "there needs to be a source to confirm this". Seriously guy, hop off my back and save the empty threats of blocking me. Also, how come you didn't revert the same thing at the List of The Tom and Jerry Show (2014 TV series) episodes? Oh wait, let me guess... JoesphBarbaro (talk) 21:38, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've explained this in detail. Either provide a source that says definitively that the series has ended, or drop the stick. Any further edits to this effect will be considered disruptive. Your battlefield mentality isn't conducive to community editing. If editing here makes you angry, you are free to find more enjoyable hobbies. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Source my ass. As soon as it's 10 years later, and still no word that the series is returning, are you gonna say that we still need a bootlegged source?! JoesphBarbaro (talk) 21:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There would be no need for a statement like that. If the series ended 10 years ago, the infobox would indicate the run, and the last episode would have the last airdate. Extra words =/= better. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Kate Winslet
Hello, I see your warning at Internet 7000, he or she has added the same thing again at Winslet's article, which I have removed again. Just wanted to update you on the matter. regards--Jockzain (talk) 08:56, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * - Thanks for the info. I have blocked them for 72 hours. I'm concerned about their competence. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem, I checked the previous edits made by the same editor and found most of them unconstructive. Maybe after this block, he or she will work more positively.--Jockzain (talk) 17:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Refactoring response
Sorry about the refactoring there. --Rtkat3 (talk) 22:32, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Pig Goat Banana Cricket-response
If you are talking about the names of the characters, there links have been added since we don't know what species some of the animal characters are since I don't know what type of pigs, goats, or crikets that the three characters are. --Rtkat3 (talk) 21:45, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Your reply makes no sense to me. How is your edit consistent with WP:OVERLINK? just warned you a few days ago about the same issue: adding ridiculous wikilinks for common concepts like "bear", and this is something I've had to remind you numerous times about since 2012 or earlier. You have consistently demonstrated no comprehension of the guideline, and I'm seriously beginning to question your competence, particularly in light of years of editing from you where you don't seem capable to distinguish between trivia and useful content. At this point I'm seriously considering bringing you to ANI. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:52, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * So in this edit you modified your comment above, but it's still meaningless. How does a wikilink to "pig" tell you what type of pig it is? Stop wasting other editors' time with these absurd wikilinks. The species of pig, or the varietal of banana is not crucial information and we don't need to turn every article into a wall of blue links simply because you fail to comprehend WP:OVERLINK. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Tickety Toc
I need to request that Tickety Toc is protected immediately because multiple IP addresses posted photos of two people doing something inappropriate which has been reverted. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 04:19, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You can make a request over at WP:RPP. Cheers! Amaury (talk) 04:21, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * - It seems to have been a flare-up with one disruptive IP here. I've blocked it for 12 hours. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:23, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't mean to be a stalker. 2602:306:3357:BA0:562:C07A:19FB:4239 (talk) 04:26, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That wasn't directed at you. Amaury was letting the reporting IP know that he stalks my talk page. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:40, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Question
Did you just recently become an admin or have you been an admin this whole time and I just wasn't aware of it? If the former, congratulations! Amaury (talk) 04:17, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, just got the mop a couple of weeks ago. :) Thanks for the congrats. It's more work... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:30, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

A question
As it seems you are online, could you possibly help out with my question on another talk page? The admin I asked asked another admin, however he hasn't come online. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 21:21, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm sorry, but your questions at User talk:Keith D are beyond my area of expertise; I don't know anything about edit filters yet. Sorry mang. Don't know who to ask, either. :( Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:27, 9 August 2015

(UTC)
 * Could you possibly ask User:NawlinWiki? Thanks. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 21:32, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If you're wondering why I asked you rather than ask myself, the filters may think the same message is spam so it'd be much appreciated. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 21:36, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, if you don't understand what I meant above: "If you're wondering why I asked you to ask User:NawlinWiki rather than ask User:NawlinWiki myself, the filters may think copy and pasting the same message I sent you is spam...". If you're busy, I completely understand and I'll just ask the user. It's just I'm cautious because adding BBC reports for football matches was categorized as repeated addition of external links. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've pointed him in the direction of your query at Keith's talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:20, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

82.25.11.240
Sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.25.11.240 (talk) 22:53, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Regarding TheRedPenOfDoom
If we reach a consensus in favor of the inclusion of future programming sections, I would like an indefinite block or topic ban for TRPoD on grounds of WP:CIVIL and WP:DISRUPTIVE. Electric Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 17:57, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , I think that's something that should be addressed at ANI if you wish to pursue that, but frankly I don't think that's a wise thing to do and it could WP:BOOMERANG on you. An editor who expresses a staunch opinion about something shouldn't necessarily be hit with a topic ban simply because consensus doesn't go his way. That would be like me hitting you with a topic ban simply because we disagree about whether rerun content was noteworthy. An indefinite block wouldn't be reasonable either since I don't have reason to believe that he deliberately causes harm to the project, and it would be difficult to convince other admins that he does. I don't know that he violated WP:CIVIL either. He's not warm and fuzzy, but nobody says you have to be a sweetie-pie, only civil. Red has 123,000+ edits and I believe that his contributions are generally good ones. He's helped bring order to the chaotic, corrupt, promotion-heavy world of Indian cinema, so I kinda need him around for that. Yes, it is irritating when another user gets a bee in their bonnet about something and won't let go. All we can do is try to treat other users the way we'd like to be treated. My unsolicited advice to you is that you play it cool and try not to take it personally. You're a good editor and you should be focusing on the fact that other editors at the project like myself appreciate your hard work. Hope that helps somewhat. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Reverting
The languages you have warned such as "phenomenal success","blockbuster" have also been used in many other wikipidia pages. We are using languages only reffering other wiki pages,and that pages are still existing,and the many reverted content were with credible news sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Refined devil (talk • contribs)
 * There are lots of other articles that have spelling errors. That doesn't mean we want people to write sloppy prose. "Phenomenal success", "blockbuster", etc. has no business in a properly written article. If that language exists in other articles, it's a problem. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:31, 10 August 2015 (UTC)


 * If you see that the content added has any problem with source, then it would be better to clear the particular content.
 * Here in the case of satelite rate, the source added was in regional language, but the regional language sources have been used in many famous wiki articles. But the other entire content with clear sources in english lalnguage have been removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Refined devil (talk • contribs) 19:49, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Although I do understand your frustration, and I'm sorry for that, you can't submit problematic content then expect other users to sift through it and remove everything that isn't problematic. It is up to you to submit well thought through content to begin with. You might consider using an article's talk page first before submitting content to see if anyone has any suggestions for how it should be included. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:05, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

What kind of sources are considered reputable sources for broadcast networks' schedule?
This pertains to broadcast networks and how they announce the broadcast dates of a series? Can we use tweets by verified twitter accounts or Facebook pages as a valid references? If a tweet were to say "Series  to premier on at ", would that be considered a reputable source? Similar case applies to posts by the Facebook page admins as well. Would the actual schedule on the official website itself be considered as reputable sources? I apologize if they come across as stupid questions, but as a newbie editor just starting out, I thought it was better to ask. Manoflogan (talk) 20:16, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think you should bring this question up at WikiProject Television so that you get more voices. Preferred sources might include reputable television schedule websites like TVGuide. Or newspapers that print TV listings. Twitter and Facebook are not preferred sources. The community prefers reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Primary sources like a Twitter account or a Facebook account can occasionally be used for uncontroversial content, but we can't base large portions of an article on a primary source. One thing we don't want is this scenario: Let's say you own the TV network and you're trying to get an article set up at Wikipedia. We don't want you using Facebook or Twitter as a way of "proving" disputed content. The content needs to come from reliable sources that have a reputation for fact checking. Again, you should raise this question at the TV WikiProject so you're not hearing this information from the same two people over and over again. :) See also WP:TVFAQ although I know it's not going to help you much with the Zindagi TV thing. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Will do that. Thanks for your advice Manoflogan (talk) 20:34, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Your request for adminship
Hi Cyphoidbomb, I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Congratulations on the positive result; however, while your request was a pass, there was significant opposition based on your article work, temperament and the copyvio incident - the last in that list being an honest mistake in an otherwise good anti-copyvio record. With regards to temperament, that issue arose over some of your comments within your RfA but the context and your track record of being a friendly/collaborative editor were both noted, too; still, I do recommend exercising greater care with your interactions now that you are an administrator. Nothing would make the opposition happier than proving them wrong.

Now that my "lecture" is out of the way, as always, the administrators' reading list is worth reading and the new admin school is most certainly available if you feel that you might require some practice with the tools in a safe environment prior to applying them elsewhere on the project. Congratulations also on your entry into WP:RFX100. Good luck with your adminship! Acalamari 05:46, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * , I gratefully accept your lecture and the sage admonitions. As open-minded as my supporters have been, especially those who had legitimate concerns and who flipped in consideration of the facts and of my earnestness, I will be equally open-minded to their valid criticism. Thanks to you personally for reading through all that RfC misery. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:57, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Firstly, good luck with your mop! For the record, I found the copyvio concerns mildly concerning (you really should have seen that&mdash;it was blatantly obvious), but not enough to warrant the overly-dramatic landslide opposition that followed. Nor was AussieLegend's conduct a factor at all, since he isn't you. My opposition, GregJackP's, and a couple others' was more based around the lack of any recognized content creation and the prominent featuring of WP:CIVIL on your userpage. Having watched many good content editors getting relentlessly hounded and harassed by "civility policemen" who have never written recognized content, I am just guarded when I see very likely potential for another. So, while you are free to ignore anything I say, I'd just like to ask you to think twice before blocking someone per them being rude. :-) "Will it benefit the project?" is the question that should be asked before making any block. I know my opinions are in the vast minority, but I am staunchly opposed to the hivemind banning culture that features so prominently in admins today. If you pay attention to my comment here, I'm positive you'll make an excellent admin&mdash;I'd love to be proven wrong, and I know the others would too! :-) Anyway, enough of that. My talkpage is always open if you have questions or concerns about anything, or if you need checkuser to help deal with a troll. Congratulations on passing RFA! Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:59, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Very thoughtful of you to reach out, . I'm bummed that I couldn't earn your support. I do consider civility to be an important deal, as nobody wants to have their own happiness polluted by an editor who has an axe to grind with everybody, but I will consider your points and weigh whether a civility block is worth it depending on the situation. I only envision myself blocking people who I think are being abusive, or who have a history of not being able to participate well in a community, but we'll see how idealistic I am after I've been doing this for a while. As for the copyvio thing, I own the mistake. My focus was on the data—the airdates, the titles, the ordering, then the superficial crap like coloration, links to previous and next articles, making sure the data was transcluding properly, that the tables weren't broken, and so on. I easily had 7-10 tabs open. Even just matching airdates was a mental exercise—the dates in the article are ascending, but the dates in the references are descending. Jumping back and forth, scrolling up to find one episodes, scrolling down to find it in the ref...whew! That, coupled with my life-long problem of being easily distracted—hey, what's that over there?—meant that as a matter of focusing on my goal, I had to gloss over the blocks of prose. So, it may be difficult for you with your particular brain configuration to understand how I could have missed it, but with my brain configuration, it's not so difficult to believe. I will learn from the experience though and I'll be more careful. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations on the successful result, now you are an admin do good for our community. -- Eurovision Nim (talk to me)(see my edits) 09:10, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I will do my best. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * , Congrats.--  John Gormley J G  ( ✉ )  16:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Appreciate your support! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It was a nail-biter, but you hung in there! A big congratulations!! --Drmargi (talk) 20:02, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Congrats! Well deserved. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats! :) -- Amaryllis Gardener  talk 13:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats, Cyphoidbomb! L235 (t / c / ping in reply ) 15:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats and thanks for your good work. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats on the new position! :) AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 22:41, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Ha, that's great,, thanks for the sage advice. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:02, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll miss you at RFPP! :-) KrakatoaKatie 22:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, congratulations! Wait until you get yourself WP:INVOLVED into a mess and learn that the real test of an administrator is when to not use the tools. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You're right about that, I keep seeing plenty of opportunities to not use the tools. My strategy is to pay close attention to figure out what's going on, then jump in like I'm playing double dutch. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cyphoidbomb, Congratulations! I was not aware of your adminship otherwise I would have !Voted for you. Best wishes. Audit Guy (talk) 02:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Congrats on adminship, Cyph! You'll be a fine addition.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Wow, I didn't even know you were up for an adminship! If I had known I certainly would have supported your candidacy. I'm sure you will be a great administrator :) Betty Logan (talk) 20:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, (You didn't know because candidates are not allowed to canvass.) :) I appreciate the well-wishes and expect you to help me keep my feet on the ground. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Just a Quick Thank You
Hi, just wanted to say thank you for furthering my (meagre) efforts to have a centralised discussion about future programming sections. You were correct in assuming I was talking about the Zee Zindagi page, and the discussion seemed like it picked up steam after that. Sunny Sundae Smile (talk) 01:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to help, . I have to be honest, though, I find it a little odd that you came out of a 15 month hiatus and (beyond some user page tinkering) went quickly into reverting edits made by across a number of articles that you'd never edited before. And also suddenly, you have an interest in Zee Zindagi? Where did all this come from? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:28, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I happened to visit List_of_programs_broadcast_by_HBO and saw the section missing. I went to other similar articles and saw the sections were being wiped out unilaterally with no attempt to build consensus beforehand. It reminded me of a similar situation on the MMA articles (3 years ago), where one dissenting opinion was cause for wiping half of the project. The bureaucracy over common sense approach last time soured me to the process for a while. I went about finding consensus on the MMA project in all the wrong ways, and was unnecessarily aggressive. I suppose I started in similarly poor fashion this time too (although one might argue I merely followed the precedent being set for me by an overzealous experienced editor). I'm trying to be more sensible this time. The MMA issue was eventually resolved, and I'm confident this one will be too. It's all been a lot more encouraging my previous spell editing here. Also my interest in how the page for Zee Zindagi should be laid out isn't as sudden as you might think. I've been watching Zee TV for more than twenty years. Zindagi has some really good Pakistani TV series. I'm also a fan of Geo TV and ARY Digital, if you wanted to know! Anyway, I appreciate the help and hope my explanation suggest that my edits are in good faith, even if my activity patterns seem odd! Best, Sunny Sundae Smile (talk) 10:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

If you have time for a question - Consensus v. participation
On the one hand, a change cannot be made to an article unless there is a consensus of opinion among editors of the article. On the other hand, if "the opposing party" Oh, say Zmaghndstakun for example, "have not explained why/what part of the material (which the supporting party added)" beyond "WP:NPOV and WP:COATRACK", then ... what? that overrides the need for consensus? Their objection is WP:Edit warring? Do you know off hand? Should I ask village pump? --BoogaLouie (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and also thanks for all the work you've done on this Balouchistan problem. --BoogaLouie (talk) 14:11, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think going forward we should treat this as a normal edit-warring situation. The users clearly were at these articles to stonewall any change. They both came in with cocky wikilawyering attitudes. The fact that they wouldn't even accept a compromise is indicative of a POV, and the notion that they never even adequately explained their objections was another tip-off for me. Since topics relating to Pakistan, India and Afghanistan are hot button topics, it's probably best to ask an admin to consider applying discretionary sanctions on editors like this in the future.


 * I filed an SPI on Zmaghndstakun and Rashidzaman. They were both found to be operating other accounts, and Zmaghndstakun was found with very high likelihood to be a sock of LanguageXpert. The CheckUser believed that the two (Zmaghnd and Rashid) were working closely with one another, as there was technical evidence to connect them. Zmaghnd was also editing extensively while logged out, so that's something to look for as well. I am most impressed with Zmaghndstakun's commitment to hypocrisy. The typical accusations and proclamations of good faith and innocence, along with deflections to other editors: "Now you guys will get banned Rashidzaman786 also because he is also opposing your efforts. A poor coward approach of deceptive cheatness." Anyhow, I'm sure he'll be back, so keep your eyes peeled. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "coward approach of deceptive cheatness". I guess all is permitted in smiting the foreign devils and furthering the glory of the Motherland.
 * I will probably be back with more questions about SPI, etc. if I encounter stonewall edits.--BoogaLouie (talk) 18:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hahaha! I enjoyed that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

An admin task for you!
Hey Cyphoid. I have a task for you if you'd be so gracious to help. Please move Draft:Star Wars Anthology: Rogue One to the main space at Star Wars Anthology: Rogue One, as filming has begun allowing a mainspace article per WP:NFF. Once that has completed, please look over the contents of Star Wars Anthology – Rogue One, which I think was a cut-and-paste move of the draft, and if you think it was, can you merge any edits of that to the moved-draft article (the one with the ':'). Thanks! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. Looks like another admin got to it first. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry I wasn't around to help, . Cyphoidbomb (talk)
 * Not a problem. Another user approached another admin, so it's all good. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
BackyardigansKaibigan (talk) 21:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Don't change ended series to current series
T.U.F.F. Puppy is ended, not current, according to List of programs broadcast by Nickelodeon. That means you should NOT change it to a current series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.23.15 (talk • contribs)
 * See your talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry
I know I was putting down unreliable facts in the SpongeBob Season 9 page, but I'm kinda new to editing Wikipedia, and I don't really know how to use the referencing codes very well. But as you can see here: https://twitter.com/VincentWaller72/status/631458565669019648 it was confirmed that the writers for "The Executive Treatment" and "Squid Plus One" were what you saw in the tweet. So, do you think you could re-add the writer's names that I put and add the references as well? Or at least tell me the code I have to put in on there? Thanks for understanding and I'm sorry for my mistakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lego Spongy (talk • contribs) 22:07, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your explanation. Please see Referencing for Beginners. At the most bare minimum, you should add a URL between two tags like
 * . Even better is if you name the reference so that you can use it again:
 * Even better than that is if you use the built in citation tool, which makes it easy to flesh out references like:
 * Hope that helps. Watch the video! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hope that helps. Watch the video! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hope that helps. Watch the video! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Akon's name references
Hi, thanks for fixing his name on the wikipedia page.

Akon also confirmed his 12 names in an interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3skzeuRWNiQ

Perhaps you could also reference the video in the article, so people don't come along and delete it in the future? (I don't have the ability to edit the page)

Thanks again for your time.

Cheers 81.151.4.136 (talk) 14:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I see you're wielding a mop
I don't like to abuse WP:AIV with issues that are not clear cases of vandalism, but I'm disappointed in the lack of attention paid to my post at WP:ANI (the link to the specific section "The barrelling editor from IP 72.229.40.94" isn't working for some reason). Can I ask you to take a look? I came short of asking for a block, demurring to an administrator's consideration, but maybe I should be bold here and suggest that the IP address be blocked from contributing for a while, to get things back on track again. Willondon (talk) 13:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * - Looking into it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:01, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * - I've blocked the IP for a week. While researching, I found another blocked IP from NY who had a lot of intersections with the one you reported. Details here. If you see a flare up, please let me know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi sir
Hi sir, The sock puppet which you last arrested by the names of maria0333, rashidzaman & others. whose propagandist and wrong map is going to be deleted in a few days. So, he has started his nasty works again by Hashimachakzai, AlluArjunTollywood (disguising himself as indian) and  other users names again  and through IP (39.47.86.140 &) editing, thus changes the reality of articles. While after your nomination of his fake map for deletion, he uploaded this one thumbnail|New designed copy of the nominated fake & wrong map which is also that map but changed in design. So, a strict watch on this vandal must be performed. Thanx --Adilswati 04:37, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you, I know all of this. I was the one who recommended that file be deleted. However, I don't endorse any specific version of the map. What would be helpful is two things: 1) If you notice sockpuppetry from this user, you need to open a new case at WP:SPI under the sockmaster User:LanguageXpert and you need to provide evidence that the user is making edits similar to other sockpuppets. 2) You, and people who are of similar mind to you, must absolutely not engage in sockpuppetry and edit-warring yourselves! I cannot stress this enough! When I happened upon Balochistan, Pakistan and saw that one editor who was trying to get a balanced perspective added to the article, I thought that the argument had merit. However, since this editor had turned out to be a sockpuppet, it polluted the entirety of his message and that meant that a person arguing in earnest had an uphill battle because of the lack of integrity! Integrity is super-important at Wikipedia. If you are a sock of another blocked user, stop editing now. You're not helping. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:51, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello everyone. I take no position on the map issue at this time, but it is now clear that this account was create for POV pushing and general disruption.  It is problematic that this account is adding the same improperly sourced paragraph, verbatim, to a series of different articles.  For example:       This is further complicated as the person is now reinserting voluminous amounts of unsourced material to the same or similar articles.  Please feel free to reach me on my talk page or via email if there are any additional concerns I should be aware of.  Regards, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yamaguchi%E5%85%88%E7%94%9F&action=edit&amp;section=new Yamaguchi先生] 18:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Probable SPA vandal
Hey, Cyphoidbomb. Can you keep an eye on this one: User:185.94.31.96. He has been making "unconstructive" edits to a series of American college football articles, altering coach Bret Bielema's name to "Bert" and "Fat Bert" everywhere he can find it. I have already left him a gentle warning on his talk page. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:30, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure thang. Cyphoidbomb Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You da bomb. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:46, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail
Regards, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yamaguchi%E5%85%88%E7%94%9F&action=edit&amp;section=new Yamaguchi先生] 20:50, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

hello?
Hello? I've got a problem. The Pingu episode list articles have been unjustly deleted for no reason; some think they're OR. I really would appreciate those articles being recreated and protected from OR edits. Visokor (talk) 19:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi It's unclear what articles you are referring to. Do you mean articles like Pingu (series 1), Pingu (series 2) and so on? To say that they were unjustly deleted for no reason is not accurate. Consensus for deletion was determined in this AfD discussion. I do see a lot of OR and fancruft. You should ask the closing admin  if he'll consider "userfying" them for you so that you can get them into shape. If the series is notable (and it may or may not be), it would seem reasonable to see some form of episode list with brief summaries. There is one currently at List of Pingu episodes. If the article is userfied, you might be able to salvage some of the episode summaries--I would advise keeping them between 100-200 words per WP:TVPLOT and formatting them like a regular list of episodes article. Also you would need to properly attribute the content. I'd have to look into how that would be done. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

And another thing, there's another article I think needs a lot of attention: The Magician of Samarkand. That article's all skin and bones, if you know what I mean. Visokor (talk) 10:53, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Question regarding Rescue Heroes (TV series) article
You said in your edit summary that "jungle" in "Venezuelan jungle" should not be capitalized. According to Google, the word "jungle" in Venezuelan Jungle IS capitalized (see https://www.google.ca/#q=Venezuelan+Jungle). My question is, if Venezuelan Jungle is the name of a jungle, shouldn't the word jungle be capitalized? Claudia Kishi (talk) 17:25, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Not sure what the link demonstrates, exactly. Most of what I see on the first page are article titles, which would normally be capped. For instance Venezuelan Jungle is capped in the title of  this New York Times article, but that doesn't mean that "Venezuelan Jungle" is the proper name of one specific place. I would venture to guess that Venezuela has lowercase jungles everywhere, what with being a lush tropical nation full of rainforests. In contrast, Venezuela's Amazon Jungle would probably be capitalized because it likely describes a specific jungle region, for instance in this map. If there's an official place called "Venezuelan Jungle", then I'd love to see that, otherwise, it seems we're talking generically about the jungles of Venezuela. Hope that makes sense, regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, you're right. I thought it meant the title of the place - it was just talking about the jungle in Venezuelan. Claudia Kishi (talk) 18:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Osgoode Hall
It's in no way promotional. The stats are from the only two law ranking publications in Canada. Please check my citations and elaborate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Overleveraged1 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Regards, Sofffie7 (talk) 18:52, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey! Sorry to bother you, but do you have an opinion about the websites I listed? Have a good evening, Sofffie7 (talk) 21:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Muppet vandal
While the Muppet vandal is annoying, you may want to tone down the "numbskull" stuff—you are an admin, after all. :) Trivialist (talk) 23:11, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's a calculated risk I take. Your point is noted, however. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:16, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Dispute in Islamic views on slavery
See what you think of this. A bit similar to the Baluchistan kerfuffle. Do you think I should go ahead with a formal RfC on the dispute? --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:52, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If it's just between you and another editor, I'd go with WP:3O. Otherwise, sure, why not. This sort of thing is waaay beyond my interest or comfort levels. Even the Balochistan thing was a stretch. I was only there because people were stonewalling the introduction of any sort of unsavory content, which set my bullshit detector ablaze. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * thanks --BoogaLouie (talk) 22:11, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Vjmlhds
Thank you for taking notice and saving me the trouble of taking the matter to ANI. Levdr1 lp /  talk  02:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * An unsavory situation to endure. Sorry you had to go through that. I reported the user to emergency@wikimedia.org before indeffing them, which is what I'd recommend if the behavior continues in another form, which I hope it does not. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:13, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks again.   Levdr1 lp  /  talk  03:15, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Category help
Hello there I need some help, I moved the category Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities in the United States, I was just trying to make the category more inclusive and it won't let me move it back. --ACase0000 (talk) 12:43, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've moved Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities and towns in the United States back to Category:Wikipedia categories named after cities in the United States. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, for any trouble. :) --ACase0000 (talk) 16:26, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No problemo. :D Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Fox Kids (Australia)
Do you agree with 's sentiments that the subject of the article is not notable? I tried to tell him not to change the page to a mere redirect without first seeking consensus, only for him to say that consensus does not override WP:GNG. Just wanted to ask this. Electric Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 02:48, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, let me ask you! Did you find any significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject that suggests that the Australian Fox Kids channel is notable enough to have a stand-alone article? Let's remember that notability is not always inherited. We still need sources that discuss the relevance and impact of these entities, and we still need more than passing mentions.


 * There is a strong feeling among some editors, for example Ahecht and possibly Geraldo Perez, that many of these articles for child articles of TV networks (Cartoon Network (EMEA), Nickelodeon (Africa), Disney Channel (Spain)) are often fluff. I think we could easily incorporate them into umbrella articles like "Disney Channel International" (I'm not being very creative here) and spare ourselves the headache of hundreds of extra channel articles. Most of these child articles do nothing but serve as a place to host programming lists, which are almost never sourced. (Note Disney Channel (Spain) for instance). So, if there were an intuitive place to merge the content from the Australian Fox Kids channel, that might be a way to go. Another is a redirect. Hope that helps, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:55, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay then... maybe I should take it to Proposed mergers? Electric  Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 15:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, why not! :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/HenryWalken
You said you would appreciate advice ... I would not have requested a CU on this SPI. Saying you're "curious" doesn't really justify a CU, and in my view you had no real reason to suspect other accounts. The behavior was obvious. I would have just tagged the two accounts on your own without even opening an SPI. As you can see, I ran the CU anyway, but that's just because I like you. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 00:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm a big fan of good advice and also of people who like me! I appreciate your input. The user in my estimation was taunting that he'd previously been blocked and my curiosity about other accounts wasn't personal, it was in the interest of pre-empting more vandalism in case there were other easily undiscovered accounts that I couldn't have discovered simply on behavioral evidence. If you think that's not justification enough for a CU, please gimme the hard-hitting facts, and I still would appreciate future friendly criticism as you've delivered. :D Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you give me diffs as to the taunting?--Bbb23 (talk) 03:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Taunting" is my slight hyperbole. Okay, sir please I promised for Wikipedia's policies, So some admins blocked users such as HenryWalken, I'm really sorry for vandalism.. My concern was, they're drawing attention to the fact that they've used more than one account, so I wondered if there's more than two out there. Dat's all. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Not enough in and of itself for a CU in my view. It's more an admission of socking but not implying there are other accounts. Sometimes you see accounts that literally brag that there are more accounts out there.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:48, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, I think I see your point. I shall be more judicious. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Kylebulger
Hello! I was wondering if you could please block Kylebulger. I have recently spent much time and effort into improving the Moose and Zee page, yet this user has repeatedly edited the page to include his own name as the creator of the show, claim that the series is being "revived," add nonexistent segments hosted by himself to the "Recurring segments" section, and so forth. Not a single edit he has made includes a source. I reviewed all of Kylebulger's edits, and each one has been vandalism (normally including some misspelled words). Thank you for your time! --Squiddaddy (talk) 14:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've issued a warning on his talk page. When this happens, feel free to issue warning templates yourself. The templates can be found at Template messages/User talk namespace. Please avoid templating editors who make lots of contributions, and leave notes on their talk page instead. Typically we start with lower-grade warnings L1/L2 and work our way up to L3 and L4. So for example if someone submitted an unsourced edit, I might format it like this:
 * NAMEOFARTICLE ~
 * Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network Arabic
Funny how you always ask me for sources but when an idiot wrote that Regular show airs on CN Arabic, you never reverted his edits , anyways , i don't give a damn about this article anymore , have fun keeping your little article up to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.118.44.217 (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I have no idea who you are. You've made one edit at Wikipedia according to your edit history, so your complaint is lost without context. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Tom and Jerry filmography
Take a good look at what all those random IP addresses have been doing to that article. Neither you nor User:Visokor did jack about it. Instead you blocked me for 2 whole weeks and there are a ton of TV show/movie articles that need a good cleanup, to which I believe that neither of you are aware of. I wish you was never an admin. Save all the threats of banning me forever and ever, guy. JosephBarbaro over and out. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 22:19, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Almost the entirety of the problems you are having here have to do with irrational anger that clouds your judgment. If you looked at the revision history of Tom and Jerry filmography, you'll note that my username doesn't appear anywhere in the history. That article isn't on my watchlist. It's not on my radar. You are angrily complaining about my lack of involvement at an article that I was not even aware of. How is that rational? Meanwhile, what was on my radar was your anger-motivated edit-warring at an article that *is* on my watchlist. This problem necessitated my intervention. Had you listened to previous advice and taken a calmer, slower approach to editing, you would have avoided this entire problem and you would have been the champion suppressing disruption at Tom and Jerry filmography, instead, you've been stewing and now you're converting personal responsibility into external blame. I don't expect you to be satisfied by this response, but I believe that if you were to ruminate on it, you'd understand the point I'm making. I believe that you can be a very strong editor, but the anger has to go. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I notice that you've modified your complaint to acknowledge that I and Visokor were not aware of the disruption. My points still remain. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah right...blocking me for 2 weeks or so for little to no reason. After I reverted you on that aforementioned T&J article, I made another edit to which you didn't revert at all. That's what primarily pissed me off about you and the block you gave me, and also, talking behind my back while I was blocked from editing and also, from editing my own talk page. Thanks for ruining my chances of trying to fix a ton of articles in the past 2 weeks. Now I can't even fix them because of that annoying editing conflict. Now I have to edit them manually which can take such a long time to do so. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 23:00, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hate to break it to you,, but I warned you that you were one revert away from a block here and here because you ignored the very clear instructions I gave you in July and kept editing according to your own POV. You again asserted your POV and your block was directly related to that. That was *your* choice. I issued a 2 week block because you had previously been blocked for 1 week for the same thing. As for your absurd "talking behind my back" complaint, that was a direct result of more bad choices in the form of these petulant comments. You're not a victim here, chief. Either control your anger and impulsiveness, or find another hobby. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Pot calling the kettle black? After I reverted you, I changed it and you didn't revert that at all. That means that I was still technically correct. So you literally had no right to block me for long periods of time. Don't tell me what I can or can't do with my life, you swine. I can be ten times better than you and that other admin guy that blocked me. I'll prove myself that I can do way better than you can ever do. You don't even know how to do your job as an admin. A lousy one at that. But whatever, that's you. You don't know me like that, nor what I go through outside of the computer. I'll get back to regularly editing tomorrow. By the way, you deserve all the disrespect I've been giving you for the aforementioned reasons that I've said previously. Maybe it's you who needs to "find another hobby", if you even have another hobby that is...Good night, older head. Hope I never get to communicate with/contact you ever again in my life. I also hope you have a miserable life too. Swines these days. JosephBarbaro over and out. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 23:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the template ref link
I did not know that the template ref had been deprecated. Thanks for correcting my mistake. This is in relation to context https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zindagi_TV&type=revision&diff=677258223&oldid=677257847 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manoflogan (talk • contribs) 04:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I felt you deserved a clear explanation since you seemed frustrated by a previous change. :) Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:26, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Angelina Ballerina: The Next Steps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emma Tate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * - Thanks robot. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Rajini Chandy
Hi I put the edit on the Premam page for the voice of George's (Nivin Pauly) mother. It's quite hard to find a proper reference because Indian movies credit their people in a different way. However in the actual movie they thank Rajini Chandy for giving her voice. She is credited in the actual movie. AlexJosephT (talk) 19:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. The primary source can be used as a reference, so if she was credited, that's sufficient. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for post that should be shown as fine example of how to talk with newbies :) Krzysiu (talk) 02:49, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

2601:ca:8400:9380:902b:e39c:fde7:e7d5
Piper and Olivia are dating. Source of information here: https://instagram.com/p/6dZVPAsoKY/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:ca:8400:9380:902b:e39c:fde7:e7d5 (talk • contribs)
 * Wikipedia is not a gossip column. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 11:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

small class="autosigned">— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.230.11 (talk) 01:17, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

The MoS on animate pronouns: Say or Nay?
I'm told that not all of my pings went through, so this is to inform you that your name has been cited on a list of Wikieditors who hold the opinion that the MoS should not explicitly state that animate pronouns are standard for fictional characters. If this is not correct, please feel free to remove or alter the entry. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:21, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Ukgameshow.com poll
Hi Cyphoidbomb, how are you? Sorry to bother you, but I saw your revert of Wonderwizard's mention on The Exit List page about the ranking 8f the programme on the Ukgameshow.com website. I do think tht this source and fact is not a notable inclusion by Wikipedia standards. It is a fan based opinion poll and is not a recognisd website. Unfortunately in looking at his recent edits these past few days, I noticed that he is including a mention of the very same poll on every gameshow Wikipedia page mentioned. I was just wondering if you agree and if you can possibly do something about it. Thanks in advance.66.130.12.185 (talk)samusek2 —Preceding undated comment added 15:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Courage the Cowardly Dog
I just came back to ask one thing. Is it alright if I could add to that article by writing that reruns had aired regularly on CN from 2004 through 2011? Or no (because of the usual source thing...)? I've seen CTCD aired reruns regularly at early Saturday morning at 4 AM or 4:30 AM during the City era of CN. Then around 2007-2011, reruns have aired regularly at 10 pm (Monday-Thursday) or 1-2pm (Saturday & Sunday). Yes, the Cartoon Cartoon Show and Cartoon Planet aired reruns of the CTCD too. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 12:26, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , I don't find reruns to be particularly noteworthy, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask. I would only care about mentioning something about reruns if there was something significant to be said about them. For instance, I Love Lucy was one of the first (if not the first) TV series to air reruns, and reruns have been airing consistently for 64 years. That's noteworthy to me and would deserve mention. Otherwise, what academics really seem to care about are first-run dates. Nobody writes books full of rerun dates, only original air dates. There is also an issue with how difficult it is to support rerun content. How do we prove, for instance, that no reruns ran after 2011? You might consider asking at WikiProject Television if my answer isn't satisfying. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , I agree with you that it is pointless to mention reruns (regular, occasional or both) of every show/movie. Nobody really cares anyway since they can always buy a fully completed series/movie online or in real life, or re-watch them for free on sites like YouTube and watchcartoononline. All we care about is the original release of each episode of a TV show and that's all that matters. As Wikipedia is not a schedule guide, every TV network always changes their schedule on their channel of what time a show comes on at any time they want. For this reason, I might consider in reverting "reruns" of every TV show (well, the ones that I know anyway...). JoesphBarbaro (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * "It's 5:00 somewhere!" I believe is the refrain... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet?
Hi Cyphoidbomb. You recently blocked User:Peter Phillip Charles Leoni, but I'm wondering if User:Stacy Gunn should also be blocked as a sockpuppet? I'm not sure if there is enough evidence for a block per WP:DUCK. --Drm310 (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ooooh, good eye!! Hmm... I'll have to mull this one over. Hard to get an SPI going if the guy hasn't edited... I might opt to stall him out to see what happens. Grateful for the tip! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:03, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh wait, I just noticed that he has edited. I'll dive in. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism on my user/talk pages
Would you be so kind as to take a peek at my user and talk pages? I'd rather have things dealt with quietly, and avoid running around AIV, or AN/I, SPI, or whichever of the boards is required. I will defer to your judgement. It may be inappropriate to ask directly, and if it is, please just let me know, and I will do the correct thing. Thanks!  Scr ★ pIron IV 14:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks like David Biddulph got most of the problem handled. I took care of some of the straggler summaries. Going to AIV would have been a reasonable thing to do. I probably wouldn't have wasted my time at ANI, since (from my own experience) only about 40% of my requests were ever addressed before I became an admin. (Which reminds me, I should probably start hanging out at that swamp...) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's this guy. He tends to be persistent (I've semi-protected your talk page) and is well-known so mentioning his name in any future AIV reports should get you quick results. --Neil N  talk to me 16:01, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What a fine use of the limited number of years we're here on this marble... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know, and for the talk page protection. I must have done something right, to have gotten his attention... )trying to make lemonade out of lemons)  :-)  Scr ★ pIron IV 17:10, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Archive Content on Verizon Wireless Talk
Hello,

I know you said you added a bot to auto-archive stuff on the VZW talk page, but it missed a few sections.


 * Controversy section disputed
 * Pricing and Availability--GSM
 * V CAST
 * Bodega Bay For Verizon Rob 6-12-15 (less than 6 months old but it's someone asking a question about VZW service/pricing and not meant for Wikipedia)

Can you manually archive these?

There are 2 other sections I didn't list because they are still less than 6 months old.

Thanks, Myriad Pro (talk) 13:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Bella and the Bulldogs
Since only admins can edit it right now, any chance you could revert this? Looks like it sneaked in there. First episode is not a two-parter and the other problematic edits were reintroduced. Amaury (talk) 20:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Though I would like to, I think it's better that we wait, as annoying as the edit might be to you. Sorry. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No need to be sorry. :) Obviously, it's up to you, but that edit is what was originally challenged. From what I recall, any time there's an issue like this, the article should be reverted to before it happened. In this case, this edit is the last edit before the the issue began.


 * You know more about this than I do, though. That's from what I recall. Amaury (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Would you consider returning the article to the the status quo state it was in before the edit war began? Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ,, I'm still learning. Lemme check the admin school. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ,, I've restored an earlier version of the article, before the war began. So as not to side with anybody, I've gone back to Yobot's edit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:50, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, and although I've set a reminder for myself, if I forget, remind me to extend the semi-protection back to Jan 16 2016 per NeilN's original block. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That works fine, thanks. I or someone else can always re-add the season two episodes when the protection expires. That didn't really have anything to do with the issue, it was more that the other user kept asserting that Newbie QB was a two-part episode without even attempting to discuss it and made other edits that went against guidelines—specifically the MOS—such as using bold instead of italics for things like "Note."


 * I'm good at remembering and will be sure to remind you tomorrow. :) Amaury (talk) 20:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Speaking of which, just thought I'd let you know that the PP tag was removed and when hovering over the lock, it says the expiration is January 16, 2016 (for the semi-protection) instead of tomorrow per the article's history. Both I think are from the revert you did to the bot's version, though the article is still fully protected, it just doesn't show it. Amaury (talk) 21:00, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Here's your reminder! I've also re-added the S2 episodes. Hopefully it's not a problem as that wasn't the issue as mentioned. :) Amaury (talk) 21:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Dexter's Laboratory pilots
I can't even find a single piece of evidence that confirms that "Old Man Dexter" and "Dumb Like Dee Dee/Dimwit Dexter" have also aired as pilots prior to the regular series, which is why I reverted them. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 17:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, but one question
Thank you for telling me about the policy regarding IMDb; I have seen it used as a reference on other pages and will make sure to fix those articles. I do have one question, though: why did you remove the part about Uniqua being the only character to appear in every episode? It is true; I can provide a different reference if that is why you removed it. Thanks again, --Squiddaddy (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What does it matter that one character is in every episode? Was there an episode of Seinfeld that Jerry wasn't in? What's the point, and more specifically, what academic purpose is served by pointing this out? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It matters because it is the most widely-accepted piece of evidence proving that Uniqua is the main character of the show. I had no idea you felt so strongly about keeping it off the page, though; I won't add it again, especially because I now see how much problems you've encountered with the Backyardigans article (some user insulting you on their user page and adding too much unsourced content). Thank you for your time, Squiddaddy (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That's the thing, though. She's a main character. Unless otherwise noted as absent in list of episode articles, where it will say how many times they were absent in that series/season and list them as absent on the respective episodes, main characters are always assumed to be present. See here for an example. Amaury (talk) 15:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * @Both - It's because she's the only character to appear in every episode that made me think it was significant; Pablo, Tyrone, Tasha and Austin are all absent for at least one episode. I guess it's not 100% essential to the page, but I'm sure it's notable enough to be included somewhere. Squiddaddy (talk) 17:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I wanted to apologize
Hi, I saw your message and I only just wanted to apologize me about the info I added yesterday. I did have any intention to violate Wikipedia rules about adding new data. Do you know how could I added it again in the right way? Sorry by to do it wrong... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chockys (talk • contribs) 20:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

He's back
It's been a few weeks, but we're in for some more fun times. Jerod Lycett (talk) 02:48, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Re: Jmichelson27 on Henry Danger
Per your advice, after they again introduced their problematic edits on Friday night, making the article even less compliant again, I left the article alone for the time being and messaged them about it here. In the morning, had reverted them. Now, once again, just a little less than a couple hours ago, they re-introduced their problematic edits, so I reverted them, as they have once again failed to at least bring it up on the talk page. Amaury (talk) 03:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)