User talk:DeluxeVegan

DeluxeVegan, you are invited to the Teahouse!
hi WekiZone (talk) 14:31, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

December 2018
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:24, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I primarily use a Samsung Note, which automatically loads the mobile version preview. DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Spoiler!
Re this, You said, "There is no policy against adding spoilers to Wikipedia." Please see this: WP:FILMPLOT and WP:DISCL. Per Wikipedia's content disclaimer and guideline on spoilers, all of the film's important events should be outlined without censoring details considered spoilers and without using disclaimers or spoiler warnings in the article. Siddiqsazzad001       14:38, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * @: The quote says "without censoring details", which means the entire plot be mentioned without omitting any suspense, plot twist or similar. That is basically asking us to go ahead and add the plot without caring for spoilers. But in your revert, you said, "Do not add spoilers, which is basically the opposite. Am I missing something? DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Please see carefully, there are many details and suspenses come out from that revision. It should be more shorter. Thank you,  Siddiqsazzad001       15:03, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't get you. Isn't that exactly what the policy is saying- we are supposed to outline all important events without omitting any details and suspenses since Wikipedia is not censored? DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Vidya Balan
Please change vidya balan page profile photo. Then set new photo of vidya balan in Wikipedia Shaniyamoosa (talk) 19:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You should be asking this question at Talk:Vidya Balan. I don't see anything wrong with the current infobox image. DeluxeVegan (talk) 19:59, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Setters film
Do not simply replace references without checking as you did here. The source deleted by you supports the text, The theatrical poster giving release date of the film was released on 8 March 2019., in the "Marketing" section of the article. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:11, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That missed my eye. I will be more careful in the future. DeluxeVegan (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Soundtracks
There is no need to mention the soundtrack details in starting section. You must check other film articles and plzz add sources when u add information. Thanks. Sush150 (talk) 12:18, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * @ See MOS:FILM for any idea on how a film article's lead should look like. Do take a look at other Indian film WP:FAs like Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge, Sholay, etc. There is something related to the soundtrack in these leads. I have not added any unsourced information, so I have no idea what you are talking about. Also, to keep the conversation in one place, its best if you replied here. Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 12:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Plzz refer new released film's article and see the not mention soundtrack information in lead. Also u given examples like Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge and Sholay film's articles are not mention soundtrack information in lead.so, plzz not mention again it's not looking good. Sush150 (talk) 18:20, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * @: Again, please keep the discussion in one place at the talk page of the article of Student of the Year 2. Both articles do mention the soundtrack in the lead, please read again. Wikipedia articles aren't perfect, but the closest we have to perfection are WP:FAs and WP:GAs. "Not looking good" isn't a compelling reason to not include the information: see articles of "recently" released films (albeit not FA or GA as they are too new, but of somewhat more superior quality than the average article) like Sanju, Andhadhun, Thugs of Hindostan, Dhadak, Stree, Zero, Simmba and possibly many more. DeluxeVegan (talk) 20:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I have copied this discussion onto the article talk page. Please respond there. DeluxeVegan (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
You are welcome

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC) 
 * Thanks! Those claws look suspiciously too sharp. Hmm... DeluxeVegan (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Good catch
I had added an errant word to a sentence I'd written myself, at Spider-Man: Far From Home! My thanks! :) —Tenebrae (talk) 13:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem! DeluxeVegan (talk) 13:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

About cast lists
I'm sorry if I sounded aggressive, but the break in cast lists not only appears in every MCU film article, but in every cast list whose information on each actor and character has more than two lines. It's something the community has agreed on. If you would like such a big change, you should at least start a discussion at the Captain Marvel article, which will continue at the Wikiproyect Film. El Millo (talk) 14:44, 1 July 2019 (UTC) break, so I incorrectly assumed that the standard was no longer being used elsewhere. Apologies, DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:01, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * @: Thanks, I wasn't aware of such a consensus. The template was deleted a while ago, and newer MCU articles like Black Widow (and other non MCU-superhero film articles like Shazam, Wonder Woman 1984 etc.) didn't use the

Hhggtg3279
Hi. As you may already know, there's this user who has been causing problems in a bunch of MCU related articles, most recently on Spider-Man: Far From Home regarding Michelle / MJ. Now, he has created MJ (Marvel Cinematic Universe), an article which clearly doesn't meet the notability standard of Wikipedia. Do you know how we could nominate it for deletion? Or should we discuss this first somewhere? El Millo (talk) 00:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * @: We could nominate it for deletion at WP:AFD, but I would say this is applicable for a WP:BOLD redirect to the supporting characters in other media article as it is completely unreferenced. Also, Hhggtg3279 has violated the 3RR rule many times now, so a report is warranted. DeluxeVegan (talk) 07:53, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Mission Mangal
Hey, can you add a "Plot" section in the "Mission Mangal" Wikipedia article? Bramhesh Patil (talk) 06:33, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * @: I haven't seen the film. DeluxeVegan (talk) 06:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the reply. Bramhesh Patil (talk) 06:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Ripapart (talk) 22:39, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft categories
Sorry for messing up with draft categories. I didn't notice the "Draft categories" template. -- Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 11:16, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Lol, there's no need to apologize. DeluxeVegan (talk) 11:19, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

P. V. Sindhu
Regarding your recent edit: She uses her full name along with her abbreviated name professionally (see any televised Olympic games, etc.). "P. V. Sindhu" is definitely not a stage name nor a mononym, so her legal surname should be used according to MOS:SURNAME. Also, according to MOS:INITIALS, there should be a non-breaking space between multiple initials. Please refer to those, and don't make future edits like that. Cheers. —Getsnoopy (talk) 22:50, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The MOS is blurry on whether to use the surname when it's not a part of the common name. I think it's best left to interpretation. DeluxeVegan (talk) 02:39, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

With regards to LGBT rights in India
I have noticed with some curiosity the list of contributions attributed to User:Naagam and they have a pattern of disrupting articles by deleting relevant cited information, under the edit summary of "adding new information", which may easily go unnoticed. They have recently been doing so at LGBT rights in India. I will be very grateful if you could let me know what could be done, because they have gone quite ahead with their series of unchecked disruptive edits. -- Tamra vidhir  (talk) 16:48, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * @: Hi, sorry for the late reply (I wasn't able to access Wikipedia for a time, and I suspect this is the case with others too); if they continue with their "addition of information", a report at WP:ANI is warranted. Alternatively, you could post an informal request to an admin at their talk page and ask them to look into it. Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 06:44, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, I did the same here. -- Tamra vidhir  (talk) 06:50, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Such sneaky censorship is undesirable. I can't say I am surprised. DV is right, If Tito has time to investigate this and take action he, probably should. If you (User:Tamravidhir) dont see a progress then please proceed to ANI. This cannot be allowed to go on like this.-- D Big X ray ᗙ  07:30, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I will do that. It is indeed difficult to keep track of their edits and may very well be disruptive if allowed to continue, given their history. -- Tamra vidhir  (talk) 07:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Regarding article on Parihar
Hi, DV. Could you please check this edit to Parihar and the whole content of the article itself? I am a bit unsure of the same. I had nominated it for deletion before its recent expansion. -- Tamra vidhir  (talk) 09:35, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * @: The references look reliable to me, so the topic might be notable depending on the existence of in-depth coverage. There should be no problem with including the cat Category:Crime in India, given that the criminal background is covered adequately in the article. The subcats Category:Gangs in India or Category:Indian criminals may be more specific. It appears that the subject may be notable only because of the criminal association more than anything else. DeluxeVegan (talk) 10:03, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I had objected against that categorisation with this. Should we have 'gangs in India' as a category? -- Tamra vidhir  (talk) 11:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * @: From what I see of the article, the clan was considered "a lawless community" by a British magistrate, so there should be nothing controversial about including the category. Yes, perhaps the cat Gangs of India that would work. DeluxeVegan (talk) 11:36, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Neutral notice
This is a neutral notice to all registered editors who have contributed to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film over the past year (Sept. 15, 2018-present) that a Request for Comment has been posted here. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:09, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Re: Moving "Box office" subsection to a separate section
Hi DeluxeVegan! Yes, it's a recommendation under that section, second paragraph, quote below. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film#Box_office https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film#Accolades zwaa 18:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Consistency doesn't apply here, if you haven't seen "Box office" as a separate section before, maybe that's because it's unusual with such long box office recounts in the first place, but as a subsection it certainly stands out in detail comparing with other articles that I've read.
 * But I'd much rather be discussing a redesign of Mobile view so that the Table of Contents (TOC) in Desktop view can be automatically displayed as a section on top in Mobile view, because that would more or less make issues like this moot. If you can tell me where and how I can find and join or create such a discussion I'd be much obliged!
 * Still, the reason that I really recommend breaking out the "Box office" subsection to it's own separate section is that it's really long, making it tiresome to on a mobile device, scroll down to the subsections that follow (and imo are quite useful and enjoyable to read compared with box office numbers), in particular because Mobile view doesn't have a TOC making it really hard to get an overview or to find a specific subsection if you don't know in which section to look in the first place. With all sections expanded it's possible to do a search, but then you lose the overview so if you want to keep the overview it's faster to switch to Desktop view (or open a separate tab to it) and use the TOC there to find the subsection, even though Desktop view is cumbersome and impractical to read on a Mobile device.
 * Please refer to section #Box_office, second paragraph:
 * Quote: "This information [box office results] can be included under the Reception section, or if *sufficient* coverage exists, it is *recommended* that this information is placed in a "Box office" or "Theatrical run" section." (There's currently no such section).
 * For the same reason (that long scrolling is tedious) I also recommend applying the explicitly permissable action: "Accolades that a film receives can be covered in * their own * section".
 * Please refer to section #Accolades, first paragraph:
 * I'm pretty sure that a considerable part of read accesses in Wikipedia these days are in Mobile view and consequently, automatically displaying the TOC from Desktop view in the Mobile view is a really important enhancement to consider. Apparently, it's been argued that the collapsible sections in Mobile view take the function of the TOC (which they don't, because subsections aren't collapsible!), the idea being quote: "no waste place for a toc, show the sections instead". But then you'd have to be familiar with in which section you can expect to find for instance box office results, which presents a problem much worse than doing the job so that Mobile view displays a TOC section (equally collapsible). And by the way, whatever for is the TOC "collapsible" in Desktop view (it's hide/unhide there) where it's a fraction as useful as in Mobile view? That makes no sense.
 * Finally: The box office results worldwide are certainly spectacular, but maybe national results outside the country of origin are better listed in separate articles for each country or under a fourth level heading?
 * Hi, such recommendations are not binding, MOS:FILM states in the lead, "There is no defined order of the sections; please see WikiProject Film's Good Articles and Featured Articles for examples of appropriate layouts". Thor: Ragnarok is already a good article, and the Marvel Cinematic Universe is a WP:Good topic, so please do understand that any such subjective style-related changes are bound to be met with resistance. I am not really sure what the issue with the TOC is; as someone who edits on a tab with mobile view most of the time, I can access the Table of Contents (and by extension, the Box office subsection) from the lead with the click of a finger. My tech side is not very strong, so I suggest you raise this point at either Village pump (technical) or MediaWiki. Best, DeluxeVegan (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Chhichhore
Hi can you change the plot section in Chhichhore. In present you are highlighting the whole movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ervikasbhargava (talk • contribs) 12:57, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The entire plot of the film should be present per WP:SPOILER. Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 13:12, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The "in films" pages
Listen, every single time you’ve edited the 2019 and 2020 in film pages, you’ve made things more and more complicated. And every time you’ve edited them, people have changed back to the format it SHOULD be in. No one wants the pages in the format. Don’t you think it would make more sense to have everything one one page instead of having them separated? Zedonathin2020 (talk) 12:12, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * W.r.t. "no one wants the page in the format", please see the WP:RfC at Talk:2019 in film. The proposal received almost unanimous support and is the standing version with WP:Consensus. If you wish to contest this revision, instead of WP:EDITWARRING, you need to gain a new consensus on the talk page demonstrating support for your proposal. Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 12:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Response
That "Proposal" has been the format of the film pages for YEARS until you came along. Your format makes things more and more complicated. No one wants to look up separate pages to find movies, I think it makes more sense to have all the English language movies on one page like we’ve been doing for the longest time. Zedonathin2020 (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The present version has consensus demonstrated through an WP:RFC. Your argument goes against the spirit of WP:WORLDWIDE. Please take this to Talk:2019 in film to keep the entire conversation in one place. DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not happy with you doing that proposal of the change of you did on 2019 in film. You just made it more complicated than you think and it's not helping with WP:WORLDWIDE, regardless of what you think. That was totally uncalled for. If you look at the other year in film pages, it makes more sense to have the English language movies in one page instead of making things way to complicated. I'm not pleased with your actions for making that proposal. BattleshipMan (talk) 00:36, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It counters systemic bias and WP:WORLDWIDE by not listing only English-language films. Why should we ignore all other language-films in favour of English? Your comment does not convince me otherwise. Please stop turning this into a personal issue; consensus was determined on the article talk page. DeluxeVegan (talk) 07:08, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll tell you something. That now format in 2019 in film has taken away the meaning of what the year of films stands for. Year in film articles are meant to reveal films that are released that specific year, not the central hub of list of films in certain countries. The year in films are supposed to list films are meant for the propose of the films released in certain years. When you proposed that format and when that RfC made that decision for their new consensus, it took away that meaning. We should find a way to bring the old format back and have it met with WP:WORLDVIEW so it will maintain that meaning. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * [Year] in film does not necessarily mean that the article should include a list of films released in a year. It primarily refers to a comprehensive outline of important events that concern films and/or film history for the said year (hence the word film, not films, which would limit article scope). The content is always up for debate, as is the case with all articles. DeluxeVegan (talk) 20:31, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Add sooryavanshi movie in highest grosser Indian movies list at franchise column on cop universe series budget 160crore Indian rupees collection ₹294.17 Indian rupees SOURAVSHETTIGAR (talk) 09:01, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Single article for both the state and the union territory
The more work I do on the pages for the state and the future union territory the more I am beginning to think a single article could be appropriate for goth entities as there seems to be a lot of duplication between the two pages. The current article of Ladakh has been reworded to reflect the change in status. I believe the article for Andhra Pradesh was retained in 2014 and the change in boundary was explained in the body of the text. The corresponding article for Telangana was also edited to reflect the change from region of Andhra Pradesh to state. I believe similar single article for both the state and the union territory for Jammu and Kashmir could work here too. I present a possible solution on my sandbox for such an article User:Cordyceps-Zombie/sandbox Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * This change has a lot more bearing than the AP split. AP retained its status, government, chief minister, etc. AP was also not autonomous (having a degree of self-authority); compare it to how international bodies generally view the Jammu and Kashmir state in a different light, if not separate, from the country India. Here, the reorganization isn't simply carving out a portion of a state; it is effectively ending the state's administration, and introducing a new form of governance in the two union territories. Compare India and Dominion of India.
 * We also don't need to duplicate the etymology and geography sections, I think there has been some consensus to keep history and etymology out of the Kashmir pages. Perhaps Fowler&fowler could expand on that, but they are currently on a wiki break. DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake.
I was thinking about two things to add and accidentally somehow got them intertwined into one section. The New York Times article was mean for the reception part. Sorry for any inconvenience. I placed it just now where it belongs. Aceing_Winter_Snows_Harsh_Cold (talk) 04:19, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Spider-Man: Far From Home IP edit war
Greetings! In your revert at Spider-Man: Far From Home, you indicate that the IP user has been banned. Can you point me to a page that lists the ban? If there's an active ban, then there are grounds for immediate administrative action. —C.Fred (talk) 14:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * @: The IP user is, who went back and forth over the character Michelle/MJ and her surname Jones. They were eventually blocked for being disruptive, which was made indefinite after the socking began. This IP was confirmed to be them by checkuser, and the new IP is from the same spot and uses the same ISP. Hope that helps! DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:17, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Genre discussion on Talk:List of American films of 2019
Hey there! I just wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about genre columns for articles for lists of films by country and year. Since you edited the article recently, and since said edit was related to the topic of the discussion, I figured you might be interested. Cheers! – Matthew  - (talk) 00:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

FYI
Hi DV, this character is an impostor account of, and more importantly, is a sock of Bothiman. If you see new accounts spring up that are lickspittles for Tamil actor Vijay, and who are obsessed with inflating all his accomplishments, we're usually talking about Bothiman. By the way, there is a useful feature at: Preferences > Gadgets > Strike out usernames that have been blocked. This will make it easier to see patterns in article edit histories, which makes it easier to spot socks. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:50, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't realize this. Thanks for the heads-up, I have the feature activated now. DeluxeVegan (talk) 18:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If you now look at the edit history of Vijay (actor), you'll see how the tool can be useful in spotting those patterns. And here is the sort of content he's been trying to force into that article for months.  Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Neutral notice
As an editor who commented at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film between Jan. 1, 2019, and today, you may wish to join a discussion at that page, here.--Tenebrae (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:List of American films of 2025


Hello, DeluxeVegan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of American films of 2025".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:44, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:List of American films of 2025


Hello, DeluxeVegan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of American films of 2025".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of American films of 2027
Hello, DeluxeVegan. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of American films of 2027, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:List of American films of 2027


Hello, DeluxeVegan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of American films of 2027".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of American films of 2026
Hello, DeluxeVegan. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of American films of 2026, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:01, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle
This article has been proposed for deletion by same user. Can you please share your views on Articles for deletion/List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle. Abbasulu (talk) 00:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I am a bit late. Looks like the nomination was withdrawn and there is no issue now. Cheers, DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:18, 19 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Please share your views on Similar Article List of Bengali songs recorded by Runa Laila

You've previously voted in the discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Bengali_songs_recorded_by_Shreya_Ghoshal. Similar article List of Bengali songs recorded by Runa Laila is considered for deletion. Would you please share your views here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Bengali_songs_recorded_by_Runa_Laila. Abbasulu (talk) 03:41, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Pls check out the latest source of Bollywood Hungama
Its 233.49 crore gross...ltest figure Harharshit (talk) 15:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You are right, I was restoring an earlier stable revision and assumed the new numbers were financial vandalism, and not the source being updated. Feel free to restore the numbers. DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Ponniyin Selvan: II
Much of the info here is simply copied from PS1. Could you please find what to delete? We need info specific to PS2. Or we could create Production of Ponniyin Selvan: I and II. Kailash29792 (talk)  06:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry @, I took a while to respond. Yeah, a separate production article seems like the right approach since both films were shot simultaneously. You seem to have done most of the heavy lifting already but I'll see what I can add to help (and yet the actual article itself has been moved back to draftspace. Frankly boggling how the sequel to the second highest-grossing Tamil film is two weeks away from release and still not considered notable enough for Wikipedia, but I digress). DeluxeVegan (talk) 13:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Someone who looks down at the most hyped Tamil film of the year as yet another unnotable potboiler is clearly biased, bigoted, or simply ignorant. They don't see PS as India's answer to bigger films like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings. Kailash29792 (talk)  13:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Tiger 3
It has been deleted. And I was in danger of being blocked for voicing my opinion. Thankfully we still have it in the draftspace, but I'm not sure how up-to-date it is. Hereafter I won't take part in such AfDs because my words may have catastrophic consequences. , do you have a solution? Kailash29792 (talk)  10:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * How ridiculous. If that isn't a superclose I'd be damned. DeluxeVegan (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Draft:List of American films of 2026


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:List of American films of 2026, was deleted as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz Read! Talk! 16:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)