User talk:TaufikKapoor07

August 2018
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Ayaan Zubair Rahmani. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. red dogsix (talk) 11:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Shagun Sharma, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. ''Diff: You have not properly established that the subject is notable, so it is quite premature to remove the notability template. Thus far there are two references in the article, and neither of them, Tellychakkar.com or Iwmbuzz.com are considered reliable sources. In order to at least satisfy the General Notability Guideline, you will have to demonstrate that reliable mainstream sources independent of the subject are discussing her in depth, i.e. not just passing mentions. The mere fact that she exists is not sufficient to warrant an encyclopedia article.'' Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Please stop removing maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Shagun Sharma, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. ''Diff: If you remove this maintenance template again, your editing privileges will be interrupted. We're not here to use Wikipedia as a social media platform, so when someone raises a question that the person you've written an article about may not be notable, your remedy is to bolster the article with quality references, and try to ensure that at least our General Notability Guideline has been satisfied. You didn't do that, so the article needs community scrutiny. Do not remove this template again until it is properly established that the subject meets our various notability guidelines. See also WP:NACTOR'' Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kunal Verma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tujh Sang Preet Lagai Sajna ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Kunal_Verma check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Kunal_Verma?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) 09:20, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

"Starring" ≠ interchangeable with "appeared in"
Re: these additions, surely you know that "starring" is a special credit that an actor receives on a show when they are considered by the producers to be the most important actors, right? It does not casually mean "appeared in". Thus, it is highly unlikely there are 34 credited stars of this show. In which case, we have to put on our thinking caps and maybe figure out a better way to indicate the most important people in the series. I converted the starring parameter to presenter and listed the three show presenters, which seems to make more sense to me. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:41, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:50, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Based on edits like this, where you remove at least one template without having any idea of what it is for, and you remove the notability template without properly arguing for why you think the subject meets our notability criteria (hint: you'd want to do that on the article's talk page) I'm concerned that you don't understand basic editing procedure, you don't seem to have much regard for this being a collaborative editing project, and instead you have your own agenda. But I like to be proven wrong, so feel free to explain why you keep removing maintenance templates without justification to do so, and then maybe we can discuss an unblock. Note also that since this is a community editing project, communication is very important. If you don't respond to other editors' concerns, it never works to one's advantage. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:53, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Oops, no, wait, there's more!

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of indefinite for sockpuppetry, evading a previous block as. Since you are "de facto banned" and not presently welcome to edit at Wikipedia any of your edits can be reverted without consideration for whether they were helpful or not. We do not have a high regard for people who thumb their noses at community policy.. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:07, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.