User talk:Gunturvishal

Hello
Hello, how are you? I have seen your edits to the page Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu. I wanted to clarify that websites such as filmgola or gulte would not make good sources due to their inconsistencies in reporting. The websites are not reliable enough to list them or to use their reviews. I would suggest looking for alternative sources such as Times of India, Rediff, TeluguOne or something similar. And please make sure that you are not affiliated to any of the film websites, because using wiki for promotion or advertising is a violation (refer WP:NOTADVERTISING. Let me know if you have anything else to add on this issue. And lastly do not accuse editors of vandalism, i suggest you refer Vandalism to better understand the term Vandalism in Wiki. Thanks, krZna (talk) 16:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Reply
Hello Gunturvishal. It's good to hear that you are not related to any website. Firstly everyone is welcome to contribute to Wiki, no one owns any article in here. It's sad that you feel that way but the truth in this case is far from it. Even though everyone is welcome to contribute, it is very much necessary to monitor pages to avoid vandalism. We have seen on numerous occasions where people related to a particular website use Wiki to promote their content and advertise. To ensure that the content written in Wiki is of a particular standard, it's preferred to use reliable sources to add content. About removing your edit, when it comes to film reviews, reviews from well known websites/critics would ensure that no bias is given to the film and to maintain neutrality. The user who you accused of vandalism gave a reason while removing the content. He said that the websites/critics (Filmgola and APGlitz) listed in the reception section are not reliable enough to use their reviews. That in my opinion is a more than a valid reason. The guy who added the content back to the reception section was me. I have added reviews from sites such as The Times of India, Rediff, The Hindu, Oneindia.in, Idlebrain.com, 123Telugu.com etc. to the section. I believe these are clearly more reliable websites than Filmgola or Gulte.

I don't understand why you think i am showing favoritism here. The case here is simple, you made a mistake when you accused an editor of vandalism. Even if you think the user removed your edit with not explaining it properly, that doesn't make it a vandal edit. I understand you are a new editor, hence i contacted you on your talk page and gave you a source to get better acquainted with what vandalism means in Wiki. Even if i don't necessarily have to, i reached out to help you. You made a single edit and when that's reverted you start to talk about people owning articles and hampering your freedom? I would suggest you to assume good faith before doing something. The editor who reverted your edit has nothing against you. You should always assume that and contribute. There is nothing personal when an edit is made or when it is reverted. I think i made myself clear on this issue.

Finally, while contacting a user on his talk page, leave your message at the end of the page (you left me a message at the top) and always remember to sign that message. You can sign it by typing four tildes (~) ; after the message and Wiki will automatically replace them with your username and the date. I hope you would continue to edit and contribute to Wiki in the future. Thanks, krZna (talk) 06:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013
Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage newer editors. Please read NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Because Filmgola and apiglitz are not reliable sources. Raghusri 10:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)