User talk:Shrev64

Welcome!
Hello, Shrev64, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Naveen Sajju, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Wgolf (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Naveen Sajju


The article Naveen Sajju has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no reliable references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources
Hi there, re: this, if you plan to edit at Wikipedia, you need to become familiar with our guidelines on reliable sources. In a nutshell, we don't attribute content to sources simply because sources can be found on the internet. Anyone can start a blog or website and print whatever they want. We only care what reliable published sources with established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy have to say. In the edit above, you attribute content to blastingnews.com. There is nothing at that site to indicate who runs it or what expertise they have in the field of Indian cinema finances, or that they in any way meet our reliable sourcing guidelines. So unless you're prepared to deliver information about who the editors are, what their qualifications are, and then argue for why you think they qualify as a proper source with an established reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, then you should not use that source as a reference. This goes for any site you come across on the internet. Your change has been reverted. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

August 2017
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Chris Pratt, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.  Whispe ring  03:49, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Unsourced summary of critical response
Hi there, re: this edit, any summary of critical or commercial response, or of any opinion really, needs to be directly attributed to a reliable source. Imagine if I really liked a movie, I might be more inclined to find positive reviews and then to summarise those cherrypicked reviews as positive, where someone with a differing opinion about the film might do the opposite. The point is that we shouldn't be using our own opinions to form conclusions about films. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah I understand, sorry for that, it's my mistake. Shrev64 (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Kannada films of 2020, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thriller ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/List_of_Kannada_films_of_2020 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/List_of_Kannada_films_of_2020?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 14:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pogaru, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Lucas.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Ek Love Ya for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ek Love Ya, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Ek Love Ya until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Hombale Films for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hombale Films, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Hombale Films until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 18 February 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) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)