User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

BH in User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ

I see that you have listed Bollywood Hungama under reliable sources in your FAQ sheet. You should mention in notes somewhere which sections of BH are considered RS. Or is whole website RS? I assume the news section is considered RS as it is authored by their staff or usually by some notable film critic. example: http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/news/2651027/Ashutosh-Gowariker-files-complaint-against-union-members-for-disrupting-shoot
But are film pages example http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/moviemicro/cast/id/539181 or biography pages like http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/celebritymicro/index/id/325 also considered RS? They are pretty much like IMDb. I remember @SpacemanSpiff: is also of the same opinion; that these sub-pages are similar to IMDb; unless he has changed that thought now. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:44, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I haven't changed my opinion, but a lot of crap reg Indian film is now acceptable at WP:AfD and I really don't have any time to work on film articles so I've just moved away from the space. That said, The Times of India is about as bad as some of these as they also do a lot of forumy posts under their entertainment section. I think we have to take into account that many Indian newspapers have gone to the stage of selling "news space" on regional and subject supplements. e.g. see Saksham - everyone is capable, the The Tribune (Chandigarh) which is a good newspaper, publishes stuff under this "Gyan Zone" section which is just PR stuff. —SpacemanSpiff 12:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

More than just being "reliable" in general one needs to check how independent they are. Behindwoods.com was a promotional partner of Enthiran and yet more than 20 articles of this website have been used as reference in this FA. This COI source has been used to call the film "Indian cinema's pinnacle of evolution". In my last comment here you would see how Radio Mirchi, a subsidiary of the The Times Group, was a media partner of the film in question and it was being used to rank one of the film's song on a chart.
Your FAQs cannot address this COI problem directly as they would change case to case. But maybe you can write a note about it in there. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Dharmadhyaksha, SpacemanSpiff, I'm very flexible on how the ICTF FAQ should be filled out. I started putting it together to help the ICTF, but that place is a ghost town these days. As you both know, sourcing is a miserable mess, and it's an uphill battle trying to prune all the piece-of-shit cookie-cutter content scraping blogs from articles as well as trying to keep the paid editors honest. Any help that either of you could contribute to the FAQ would be immensely helpful. My preference is that some form of discussion take place because I don't want one or a few editors to be the sole arbiters of what is reliable vs. what is unreliable. I will say that I've been tempted on more than one occasion to just start slapping some of these poor references in the spam blacklist, (Like nowrunning.com per Spiff's suggestion) but without strong feedback and some examples, I just can't do that with a good conscience. Spiff, you do it! Spiff, per your point about TOI, I found some real-world examples of a few allegedly reliable sources biting from Wikipedia without attribution. If either of you are curious, the details are here. They basically used Wikipdia's summary of Raees in their own articles, down to Kailash's specific wording. Shameful. Anyhow, I could rant for days about this. We need more help in Indian cinema, that's all I know. I don't even watch these films. I'm just helping out because the industry is corrupt as hell and the corruption is trickling into Wikipedia through the paid sock assholes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Sitush has compiled something like this for other areas of Indic stuff, see User:Sitush/Indic publications of dubious merit for example. I think he had one on mirrors, forks and stuff too, so that may be beneficial to you. I don't have the time for these cinema articles right now Cyphoid, there's far too many fanboys, PR agents etc who would make me waste my time, and I'm already running way behind on my Indo-Anglian literature article creation (something that should be covered in an encyclopaedia, though our editing population prefers to know how much cleavage someone showed in a particular film!) I will add to your list though, there's a few pieces that I think I could address. —SpacemanSpiff 05:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree with @SpacemanSpiff: on how useless it is to invest time on this genre of articles.
Btw, taking a slight detour, do we have any provision maybe a template or such to post on talk pages of articles that would state if the subject article is considered RS or not? Like maybe make a template and post it on Talk:The Times of India giving links of various discussions that have been throughout wiki and concluding on its reliability nature. This would be helpful on newspapers, journals, books, websites and such articles. It may be used on biography articles too; like put a note on Talk:James Tod that he is not considered RS; although its mentioned in the article which could go unnoticed. Its difficult and boring to look for RSN archives and other talk page posts to check if any discussion of this sort has ever been made. Many sources get disqualified in peer reviews or featured review processes. Such template or anything on the top of talk page would be helpful. Should this go to WP:VPI? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I would be against adding anything to talk pages of articles themselves, but a section could be added on WP:PUS for Indian film/TV in particular and that could be used to weed out some of the crap. Take even the case of an FA like Priyanka Chopra, there are some really dicey hagiographic sources used. —SpacemanSpiff 05:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

PC and all related FA/FL/GAs are made by a fanboy and reviewed by usual suspects; the frog in the well syndrome applies for all Indian film articles. And that's one of the major reasons for me to steer away from them.
But why oppose putting anything on talk pages? No one reads PUS. Respective talk pages would be easy place to identify reliability of that particular source. You may include a hidden category within the template so you have a ready list of all RS, non-RS references that have articles on WP. We do have Template:Press on talk pages, which is hagiographic of us! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Tamannaah filmography

Situation is really bad here thanks to a few disruptive edits since morning. Going by the recent edits, i feel that it is bound to get worsen. I have warned the user, but i don't think so that it would stop him/her. Any help from you in this regard shall be appreciated. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Pavanjandhyala - Looks like it has stopped for the last few hours. If it flares up again, lemme know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:26, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Repeated addition of unsourced content

I reported Easy4me (talk · contribs) to AIV for making repeated unsourced edits to film articles: [1]. However, it was declined as stale (one of the more frustrating reasons to have a report declined): [2]. Easy4me has already had several level 4 warnings, including one for this month: [3]. Attempting to reason with him, I warned him for adding unsourced budgets twice in the past day or so: [4], [5]. He continued adding a large number of unsourced budgets (copied from my AIV report): [6], [7], [8] (budget was sourced as $3 million elsewhere in article), [9], [10], [11], [12]. Can you please block him? Or at least give him a super-final-I'm-not-kidding warning? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Have you never seen the many articles with unsourced budgets, even though they can be found on either IMDb, Box Office Mojo, or The Numbers? Easy4me (talk) 05:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I always check both Box Office Mojo and The Numbers before I revert/remove a budget, gross, or release date. As I've said many times, including explicitly on Easy4me's talk page (diff), the IMDB is not a reliable source. I have repeatedly explained everything to him – reliability, the requirement to source edits, where to find them, etc. I have left numerous messages on Easy4me's talk page, in fact. He ignores every single one of them. He was once blocked for three months for disruptive editing, and I don't think he learned anything from it. Going by the number of final warnings on his talk page, I think others are starting to become exasperated, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

He's still doing it: addition of unsourced content and removing reliable sources. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

About my deleted page

Hi dear, I want to ask you that can I write Advantages of listening music on Music page as a section. Zafar24 (talk) 09:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Zafar24, content at Wikipedia needs to be presented from a neutral point of view. What you are proposing is the addition of all the positives of listening to music, without any of the negatives. The net result will be a one-sided editorial, and that doesn't strike me as neutral. Why don't you go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music and reach out there? Ask first if anyone knows if this information already exists at Wikipedia, then propose your idea, that you think we should include some of the advantages of listening to music, and see what other editors have to say about where such information should go, etc. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Ok dear. Zafar24Talk 03:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Cyphoidbomb. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Sock

That was a sock of Yaalgar (talk · contribs · count), that one involved you too! —SpacemanSpiff 04:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

SpacemanSpiff, noticed that after I deleted the report. Poor kid. Has nothing else going on... :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:37, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

24 (soundtrack)

Hi. The soundtrack above is listed for deletion by some user whom I have never come across. I'm surprised, why? On the board of discussion (debate of deletion), I have posted my consent. I don't want the article to be deleted in any case and I don't know how should I stop it. Please help. Arjann (talk) 04:51, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Arjann, I wouldn't worry too much--the content is likely to survive in one form or another. Strong arguments to keep an article typically involve discussing the notability of the subject, the soundtrack. If many reliable sources are writing about the soundtrack in depth, that should be mentioned, and the length of the article makes it unsavory to merge. The nominator, while well meaning, doesn't have a lot of experience and may find out the hard way that they shouldn't just casually nominate articles for deletion of they don't understand our criteria, like WP:GNG. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2016

I asking semi-protection for my talk page from IP users. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:24_(2016_film)#Merging_of_24_.28soundtrack.29

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:24_(2016_film)#Merging_of_24_.28soundtrack.29. Participate in the merge discussion KCVelaga _{☚╣✉╠☛} 00:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Copyvio on East Calder

Hi Cyphoid, been a while - how's things? I've come across a copyvio at East Calder (this edit) - I've reverted but I think these are revdel'd? I'm not too clued up on how copyvio additions are dealt with so I'll be sure to read up on it now, just thought an admin should know -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 19:16, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Samtar - Good catch! I've revdel'd it. Thanks for the tip! Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:24, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

No worries -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 19:32, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

User:KootharaCountry

Can you please check if he was actually a sock of User:AniceMathew? They shared many similarities, including abusive behaviour, an obsession towards Suriya, Shah Rukh Khan and Kolkata Knight Riders-related articles, as well as any film's fiscal information. Though KC is now blocked as a sock of another user, the SPI pages could be merged. Kailash29792 (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Kailash - I agree with you that he's probably a sock of AniceMathew and I mentioned that in the WillShowU SPI, but as you found out when you reported him, CU can't be done because the account data has gone stale. Also, I'm not a CheckUser, so there's nothing I could do personally. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

reverting 69.117.173.96

You and I seem to have noticed 69.117.173.96 around the same time but I noticed that you were more quickly able to revert all the disruptive edits than I was. Do the admin tools give you the ability to do bulk reverts? This is something I've wondered for a while, but never thought to ask. --AussieLegend (✉) 02:34, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey Aussie, how's everything? Yeah, I do use a mass rollback tool. Check out my common.js file. I installed it when I was a regular editor, but I must admit, I had problems with it; at the time it wouldn't actually do a mass rollback--I think I had to manually walk through each revert and it wound up taking more time than just clicking the Twinkle rollback button. Once I became an admin, it seemed to work properly. I don't know if that's correlation or causation, though. Writ Keeper, might you be able to shed any light into this, please? Also, Aus, my favorite tool is the "mark blocked" script which strikes names of blocked users in edit histories. Very valuable for spotting sock operators across a number of articles. If I'm investigating someone at an obscure article, seeing who else has been blocked can often lead me to sockmasters. Hope that helps, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:55, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that explains things. When I saw the IP's edits I was really hoping there was a tool that could be used. I've made a few thousand edits this month and I'm all edited out. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

AussieLegend, take a break, the problems will still be here when you get back. They're always here.... always... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Should work as long as you have rollback; I don't think admin has anything to do with it (though, I guess in theory there could be a ratelimit at work somewhere under the hood). It's also possible that you just caught the script at a bad time; I've been making some improvements over time, and it's way better than it used to be. So give it a shot and let me know how it goes. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:27, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

There ya go, Aussie! Thanks Writ. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:25, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Film links

http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/box-office/overseas, is there a rentrak site that one can use to track official data for each Indian films.117.241.21.253 (talk) 16:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

117.241.21.253, I don't understand what you're asking me, or if you're even asking me something. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Entercom promotional edits

Hello Cyphoidbomb, I hope that you are doing well. At your convenience, I was hoping that you could review the recent changes to the Entercom article. The edits appear to be promotional in nature and there may be a conflict of interest at stake. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:07, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

One more for your watchlist

I have one more for you, if you would not mind adding it to your list: Arjuna Harjai. There is a wealth of puffery and recentisms which I will attempt to address, but additional eyes are always welcome. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done, Yamaguchi先生. Sorry I forgot to reply to your last post, but I think you might've noticed that I removed some crap from that article. Take care! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi

It's me, Hoshi. I should've probably told you this earlier, but I originally made this account to evade my block. You may wanna block it. I have not used it since March, but yeah.

By the way, do you mind if you restore my talkpage access to my main account please, so when the time comes that we discuss my fate in the future we can just settle it there? Sorry for socking to make me look like I was getting support. Anyway, peace.

By the way, I have a Wikia account called ITVdude2000, incase you happen to use that. 88.108.184.10 (talk) 23:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Both done. I appreciate the heads-up about the other account. Let's please continue with the no-socking. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:13, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Soon to discontinue

Hey. Just because you interact with me a lot, and tell me all constructive things, I want to tell you that I won't be visiting/editing Wikipedia after May 2016. I have to learn a lot about new softwares at my workplace whose training begins in June. So, I will miss editing and interacting with you over here :( Seriously feels sad. I have come across so many users and admins but the understanding that you carry will remain special and cherished. All the best to you. I'll miss all this. Don't know when I'll be back after that. :( Arjann (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Arjann, that's too bad, and the community is going to lose a good editor, but I suppose it's best that you focus on real-life stuff, right? Best of luck to you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:09, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Jack ü

I'm sorry I won't to it again I did not know thank you for informing me ITZRITZ (talk) 20:05, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Request: The Lying Game (TV series)

Hello Cyphoidbomb! I have a request – could you please keep an eye on The Lying Game (TV series) as well as to keep an eye out on IPs from 1.32.74.xx and 1.32.75.xx? We had IP's from this range do a bunch of weird stuff lately, including a series of WP:Cut-and-paste moves at The Lying Game (TV series) and related pages (that was so bad that I had to go and ask for Anthony Appleyard for help on this...). This IP user has been doing some other weird things like section blanking at Lethal Weapon. It's possible that a range block might be needed here... Anyway, thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:40, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

IJBall, I've added the article to my watchlist--the real trick will be remembering to check it. :) I've never done a range block, so I'd be the wrong dude for that, but if there are continuous problems, I'd be happy to semi. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll let you know if protection is needed – first I have to see if the IP shows up at the Talk page as I requested them to... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:25, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Kate Beckett

Cyphoid, would you please semi the article on Kate Beckett from Castle for a couple weeks? We've got fan girls coming out of the woodwork trying to add content based on supposition. Thank you! --Drmargi (talk) 02:43, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Drmargi -  Done. Take care, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Bless your pointed head. That should slow them down for a while. --Drmargi (talk) 04:42, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Re: Edit

You can check my Talk page and see that another user has cited more references supporting my edit. Ok, then i'm going to use his references for your satisfaction. RickyRolling (talk) 10:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)RickyRolling

Sarrainodu

Hai. An administrator deleted some content in Sarrainodu stating that it was copyrighted from Southie. But I modified some sentences. Can you please restore it?PhysicsScientist (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

PhysicsScientist, I don't understand your request. 1) Why aren't you asking the admin who removed it? 2) I don't think any admin is going to agree to restore copyrighted material. Changing some sentences doesn't sound to me as a sufficient fix. Content can't be copied or even closely paraphrased. It needs to be fundamentally different, which is why we require people to write in their own words. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

The admin did not reply me. There are no similarities between the source and what I wrote.PhysicsScientist (talk) 00:30, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello C. The relevant thread looks to be this one User talk:PhysicsScientist#May 2016. PhysicsScientist pings do not always work so I'll try pinging Diannaa (hopefully this one will work) in case she would like to add anything to this thread. MarnetteD|Talk 01:02, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

@PhysicsScientist: Sorry for not replying to your post. The content you added to the article was identical to material found on this webpage. It was identical. You can't do that. Everything you add to this wiki has to be written in your own words please. — Diannaa (talk) 01:09, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

@PhysicsScientist:, looks pretty identical to me as well. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I saw the reference now for the first time. I think it was copied from Wikipedia. I rewrote the content on Wikipedia, it was deleted earlier.PhysicsScientist (talk) 15:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Diannaa No mention. I misunderstood you. Sorry.PhysicsScientist (talk) 15:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Can you show an old revision where the content is present? I have searched and cannot find it anywhere in the history. — Diannaa (talk) 15:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I have found it, it was added in late 2015. It used the Southie article as a source. So though you did indeed add copyvio, you added it unknowingly, as the material was originally added by someone else. Sorry but we can't re-add it in its present state. It will have to be completely re-written. — Diannaa (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ

I don't think you've updated this page in a while; have you heard about Scroll.in, The Quint and The News Minute? What do you think about them? They should be added to the page. And I thought SKJBollywood should be reliable because it has the initials of Subhash K. Jha (who knows if he runs the site himself or even gave permission to use his name). Kailash29792 (talk) 15:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Kailash29792 Feel free to add them to the "Not yet decided" section. My opinion is that we should tend to assume sites are not reliable until it can be demonstrated that they are reliable. If the sites aren't doing anything to explain who they are or what their credentials are, that's not our problem. Sadly, I haven't worked on the FAQ in quite some time because the task force is a dead zone and nobody really wants to participate in getting the FAQ up and running. It's sad, really. We could save a ton of time if we got the FAQ up and either blacklisted spammy domains, or added the problematic sites to the XLinkBot list to be removed automatically, the way it reverts additions that contain YouTube links. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and sorry, I didn't answer your questions. I'm not familiar with the references you've listed above. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:14, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Sarahcarterslover

Hello, I asked this user to prove his edit on a page. He just reverted my edit and deleted his talk page when I asked him to give a reference. You just put something back on the page. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 03:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, Kiraroshi1976, yeah, I happened to notice your comment on their talk page and the user's removal of the content without responding. That's been problematic for a while, which is why I left my note on their talk page. They did post a URL in this edit summary and it looks like they added the reference in the following edit. If the user continues the unsourced edits and refuses to discuss stuff, let me know, please. I know how needlessly irritating this sort of behavior can be. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:29, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks. Much appreciated. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 11:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Help?

[13] I can't begin to tell you how inaccurate and false this is. Is there any way to deal with this person? Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 00:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Quotations on Neerja

I think there are not many quotations in Neerja. 7 Khoon Maaf has more quotations than Neerja, and it's a "Good Article". Click this link to check out more Bollywood films. They have more quotations than Neerja, and all those are "Good Articles". I want you to remove the tag placed in the "Critical response" section of Neerja. Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 04:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Mr. Smart LION, did you look at the Good Article review at Talk:7 Khoon Maaf? It complains about the article being a quotefarm, so that clearly was a problem for some editors. Much of the problem at Neerja is that there is no context. Saying "the film is good, the acting is good, the directing is good" over and over doesn't tell us anything. Rather, including context that gives us specific viewpoints, with real-world context, does. "Kapoor was praised for her depiction of Neerja. John Doe of XYZ Times noted the character's realism, calling Kapoor's performance 'amazing'. Dan Shah of ABC Mirror who wrote, 'I never doubted for a moment that Kapoor was Neerja--her performance was gripping and she portrayed an impeccable strength." There's connective tissue there that not only selects useful things to quote, but ties it into a complete package. In my example, we're focusing on acting and finding things to say about it, and supporting those thoughts with quotations. In the current version, it's just a collection of quotations. What does this quote tell us?: "Neerja is clearly among the best films Bollywood has been able to gift viewers with in recent times." Okay, so does that mean the acting was good? The directing? The music? Or is it just a general feeling about the film? "‘Neerja’ deserves loud applause because not only is it an exceptional story of courage but because it is an ode to the undying spirit of humanity." This sounds less like a review of the movie, and more about praise for the real person Neerja. That said, I'll remove the template but 1) please note what the actual goal of a critical response section should be and 2) I'm removing the template primarily because it's not the best maintenance template for the job. I still think the section is problematic. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:58, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and Mr. Smart LION, you might consider using the words "please" and "thank you" in your requests in the future. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:59, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Did you mean that the quote on the article:-

Ananya Bhattacharya of India Today also gave 4 stars out of 5, saying "Neerja is clearly among the best films Bollywood has been able to gift viewers with in recent times."

should be like this?

Ananya Bhattacharya of India Today also gave 4 stars out of 5, and concluded that the film "is clearly among the best films Bollywood has been able to gift viewers with in recent times." Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 04:15, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Mr. Smart LION, what I am saying, is that in these edits, you removed quotation marks from content that directly quoted the source. You cannot do that. Quotations must be presented as quotations. Please see MOS:QUOTE. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:42, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

OK. Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 04:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I've done according to your request. Now tell me what's the problem with the quotations in the "Citical response" section. Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 05:15, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Could you please action an obscure RM?

An editor has started a requested move discussion at Talk:Top Gear (2002 TV series)/Editnotice. That subpage is not going to be on anyone's watchlist as far as I can work out so it's unlikely that it's going to get anyone's attention. He's asking for another obscure page to be made into an editnotice when the normal procedure is to make a request on the article's talk page and wait for an admin or template editor to action the request. I can move the page, but can't delete the subsequent redirect from draft space, and that really needs to be done. I'm not convinced the move request is valid anyway, as it is self-serving. The page he wants moved is really just an advertisement for a draft page he created. (He believes an entire new TV series article should be created for series 23 of Top Gear (2002 TV series)) He has also created Draft:Top Gear (2016 TV series) (redirect), which is just a redirect to article space. That should probably be deleted too. I'm not sure what the process for getting that deleted is. Is a WP:CSD#G6 nom all that is needed, or should it be an MfD nom? Anyway, if you've got some time could you please have a look? --AussieLegend (✉) 16:32, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

AussieLegend, sorry man, my brain is having trouble wrapping itself around this. I see the move request at the edit notice--can I trouble you to please tell me what specifically you want me to move/delete? I've taken care of deleting Draft:Top Gear (2016 TV series) (redirect), so just lemme know whatever else to hatchet. I deleted under G6, uncontroversial housekeeping. Dunno if that's the right one to use, but that's what I dun used! Hope all's well with ya. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:45, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

You've done well so far! The RM at Talk:Top Gear (2002 TV series)/Editnotice should be closed as nobody is going to see it. The related page at Top Gear (2002 TV series)/Editnotice is not a valid editnotice and should also be deleted - It's an add for a draft page that should never be moved to article space. In closing the RM, the nominator should be directed to make an edit request at Talk:Top Gear (2002 TV series) if he really wants an editnotice. That done, Top Gear (2002 TV series)/Editnotice should be deleted. At least that's my opinion. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Somebody closed the RM today. One down... --AussieLegend (✉) 07:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Veerappan

Firstly, I have not included any pov commentary, secondly, I have in fact corrected my self and removed lot of clutter as suggested by you. It is unprofessional to know that you have deleted references added by me. I cant agree with your point of view 100 percent always. You do not own any copy right or patent on wikipedia. It is a mutual environment. If you tube references are a problem for you I will delete them, for that you need to allow time. Disruptive editing is another false accusation on me from you. I am willing to work along side with you, not against you, at the same time I cant stick to your point of view.Lamppost3 (talk) 15:43, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Modernfamily90

That user is a WP:DUCK sockpuppet of Nkapoor21, no need to bother with AGF. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nkapoor21. – nyuszika7h (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Nyuszika7h! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

From Seth Adam

Thanks for mentoring me on Wikipedia and teaching me from right and wrong. SethAdam99 (talk) 05:33, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Cyphoidbomb. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Yamaguchi先生, thanks, I got the ball rolling on it, and yes, I agree. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello Cyphoidbomb, thank you again, as always, for your efforts to bring articles in line with the aims of our encyclopedia. At your convenience, would you please add KGF (film) to your watchlist, as it is in need of treatment to resolve issues of promotion and puffery. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Always happy to help, User:Yamaguchi先生. Added to watchlist and redirected, as WP:NFF is the bare minimum standard for film articles to exist. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

User:172.88.96.237

Would you take a look at this IPs reverts on The Americans (2013 TV series)? He persists in removing appropriately listed recurring characters for reasons all his own, then won't discuss on the talk page. Now he's made a WP:POINTY mass addition, and it's becoming disruptive. He needs a little "come to Jesus" lesson on how to handle an edit conflict. Thanks! --Drmargi (talk) 02:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Online newspaper

regards aforementioned subject, I thought there was this template missing, as there remains a number of newspaper published online only. This might help segregate print media from news print online. If there seems no need for a template as such please go ahead as no spam intended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hirahussain110 (talk • contribs) 22:22, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Blogs as references

Reference your message, I appreciate you educating me on some norms and points to ponder. Regarding advertising a particular website (www.pakistanviews.org), its a news website quoting references from news agencies in Pakistan and worldwide. Its not blog related or opinionated. I was just contributing information to the article that adding my views. My apologies if it seemed otherwise. As for the adjective used in most of the contributions, I will take note of that and ensure not to give you an excuse to ban the website or my account.

Moreover, please advise how wiki might consider www.pakistanviews.org a source of news in Pakistan than considering it a blog site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hirahussain110 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hirahussain110 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

dubious

I delete this line as it is dubious - The film is based on Ram Gopal Varma's Kannada-language docudrama Killing Veerappan. Langarhouse (talk) 09:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Possible re-entry

The contributions of User:Langarhouse bear an eerie resemblance to the ones by Padmalakshmisx's socks. I doubt this user to be a new sock. Please check the contributions once and let me know what you feel. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Pavanjandhyala - I'll take a look, but it would be helpful if you'd dig up some evidence as well. I don't particularly enjoy the tedious SPI work. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

None does. I will try to find some. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Pavanjandhyala, I've opened the case with evidence. Anything in addition that you add would be appreciated. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Why was it necessary to remove the Kabali teaser record details even though I gave a reliable source?

I gave a reliable source(from The Hindu) that states the YouTube records set by Kabali. The producers have actually mentioned the same on Twitter. Then why did you have to remove that? Should I give the link to the producers' twitter status as the source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.83.138 (talk) 12:39, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

123.236.83.138, the explanation was included in my edit summary as "WP:TRAILER contravention". WikiProject Film is not concerned with mundane marketing techniques like teaser releases. We're not here to promote films, after all, nor are we here to act as historians, documenting every aspect of the film. That said, there was no mention of a record in the prose removed. The line read "The movie's teaser was released on May 1, 2016 and garnered over a million views within an hour and 5 million views within 22 hours." Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

IP Hopper Problems

I'm having problems with an IP hopper again. This one kept on editing on Adventures of the Little Koala the way it wanted and how I edit my talk page. I tried to do what you told me, but nothing worked. I guess dealing with IP hoppers is not my thing. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 03:58, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi FilmandTVFan28, I've admonished the user for badgering you on your talk page. That's clearly not appropriate. In my opinion, I don't see a whole lot of value in insisting that the "As of May 11, 2014, neither DHX Media nor CBS Home Entertainment have announced plans for a DVD release of the series" content remains. I'd say that if we haven't heard anything in years, we can safely assume that nothing's going to happen with it, without needing commentary to that effect. Instead of winding up with a stress headache, it might be more efficacious to drop the stick and save your energy for a more significant issue. I know it's not satisfying to hear, but nobody's going to die if a flimsy piece of non-information is removed from the article. And, as I'm always quick to say, at the first sign of trouble, it's always wise to open a discussion on the talk page so that your hands are clean should any admin start to scrutinize potential edit-warring behavior. Trust me, I do it all the time when I think that something's about to get funky. If you have any more problems with this person badgering you on your talk page, let me know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you and I suppose you're right. It's not really worth it have that info remain on Adventures of the Little Koala. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 04:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

PMFJI but... for the specific items being deleted by the IP6, no, they're not that important. But the IP6 has given no rationale for their deletion other than claiming that they're "useless" or "unnecessary"—and is doing that in edit summaries, not in talk page discussions. The IP6 further apparently believes the repeated, vehement exhortations in edit summaries are binding on other editors, are sufficient to prevail in a content dispute, and are the way we do things here. I understand that "let it go" makes sense in some disputes. But in this case, I feel it important that the IP6 not be left with the impression that her or his behavior is either acceptable or effective. Jeh (talk) 10:47, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Editing Dishoom

I have edited article Dishoom but you have reverted that edit. Why have you reverted my change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dangerous Khiladi 5 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Arvind Vegda

Sorry for reverting your edit without explaining. I am about to add references such as [14] about birthdate. And regarding privacy issues, facebook page of their upcoming film openly announced his birthday here. Hope it clarifies things regarding his birthday. Should I restore to previous version and then add refs? --Nizil (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Nizil Shah, thank you for your reply, but I wouldn't use an unverified Facebook account, or a blog like bollywoodbindass.com as the source of the information. I thought I was pretty clear about that in my comment on your talk page. WP:UGC is the relevant guideline about user-generated content. We don't use blogs as references as anyone can start a blog and call himself an expert. There's no telling where a blog got the information--they may have gotten it from Wikipedia, which means that Wikipedia would be referencing itself, which it also cannot do. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I know that they are not reliable enough sources. It is quite common problem in Indian biographies that reliable information on such things are not easily available as RS. I will refrain from adding this info now and will try to keep finding better source. Regards, -Nizil (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Kabali budget.

Multiple sources, (rather a majority) have reported that the budget of Kabali is ₹ 70 Crore, out of which ₹ 50 Crore is the lead actor's remuneration, while the rest, i.e, ₹ 20 Crore has gone into production and other fees. So, it does not make sense to put the budget between a range (that too with a 90 crore gap), just because one report quotes the budget as ₹ 160 Crore. Thanks. IndianCinemaRasigan 14:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

IndianCinemaRasigan: You may use any source you like, but Filmibeat cannot be one of them as it fails WP:RS. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:20, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

IndianCinemaRasigan, if there is a range of opinion on the budget, it's not unreasonable to present that information in the form of a range. You're free to open a discussion on the article's talk page to solicit opinions from the community on whether or not the number is erroneous, but a typically-reliable source is reporting a 160 crore budget. That could very well be a mistake. But what, you alone are making the decision? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Question regarding reference

Hello dear, I want to write birth date of my favorites celebrities, so I searched Google and found this website: http://www.famousbirthdays.com . Here the website says: "Celebrities are profiled in a simple and entertaining format. Each celebrity profile contains popularity rankings based on user activity. Intuitive search engine takes users directly to the page they are seeking. Optimized website for use across desktops, tablets, and smartphones. Over 12 million monthly unique users. The team is based in Santa Monica, California. Please tell me this website is reliable for Wikipedia reference? Zafar24Talk 00:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Zafar24 Have you looked at WP:RS? Or WP:UGC? Who runs this site? What journalistic professionals, skilled in proper journalistic techniques like fact-checking, are running this site? Do major news organizations reference famousbirthdays.com as the source of reliable information? If you can't find the answer to those questions, you shouldn't use the site. Anyone can open a colorful website and call himself an expert on celebrity birthdates. What we care about is if the sources have established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:04, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Question on using Press Release as a reference

This is a press release that a certain show will start broadcasting on a particular date http://www.indiantelevision.com/television/tv-channels/gecs/zindagi-presents-paani-jaisa-pyaar-by-humsafar-director-sarmad-sultan-khoosat-160607 Can I use this as a reference? Manoflogan (talk) 00:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Manoflogan, press releases, which represent primary sources can be used sparingly for non-controversial content like the start of a broadcast schedule, however I temper that statement with an encouragement that you should stick to mainstream sources that publish press releases, as we wouldn't want to accept content from hoax websites or sites that just print any-old-press release. I haven't looked at this site, but I have not heard of it. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for List of Mann Mayal episodes

An article that you have been involved in editing—List of Mann Mayal episodes —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Sammy.joseph (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment from 122.169.8.227

Obviously, somebody has not seen the reference or citation 2 in Mohenjo Daro (film) article, which has useless and totally unrelated post from the so called credible sources. The other was at least related to the film's earnings before its release, which is very much to the point and related. But for that one also needs a bit of common sense, eyes and vision, apart from having a face. Blinds or fools would find it difficult to read and understand and only run after some big names, irrespective of it making no sense. Had it been for publicity, the whole of Wiki would be flooded with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.8.227 (talk) 21:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

122.169.8.227 No idea what you're talking about. We don't use blogs as references. Period. If content is improperly sourced, flag it with {{cn}} or remove it. Adding a poor reference written by lord-knows-who to support it is not helpful. Using edit summaries might be helpful as well. That's why they're there. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Please update the boxoffice collectiond Itsapu (talk) 12:05, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Housefull3

Plesse update the box office collections.It is 172.47crore in 12days Itsapu (talk) 12:09, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Itsapu, the best place to request changes is typically the article's talk page, and nobody's going to make a change unless you provide a reference from a reliable source. Blogs do not qualify reliable sources. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

The Cat in the Hat

We got another problem. An IP user is vandalizing The Cat in the Hat, The Cat in the Hat (TV special), and The Cat in the Hat Knows a Lot About That!. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 20:36, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

FilmandTVFan28 - I've blocked the IP. If it flares up again from a Minnesota IP in the next few hours, please consider taking it to AIV because I'm going to be busy IRL for a bit and may not be able to help. Let the patrolling admins know that the user has hopped IPs and point the admins in the direction of this discussion. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the block C. FilmandTVFan28 I have put a couple of the pages on my watchlist and will help if I can. I did report this IP to AIV but I think you got the block in before anyone could look at that post C. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 21:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

67.218.18.234 again. MartinSFSA (talk) 15:51, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

MartinSFSA - Dealt with. Thanks for the tip. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Housefull3

Housefull3 collects 177.60 crore in two weeks.Check bollywoodhungama.com and update it Itsapu (talk) 16:42, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Itsapu, why don't you post this comment, along with a link to the reference that supports your assertion, on the talk page at Housefull 3, so that other editors don't have to do your research for you. We're volunteers, not slaves. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Cyphoidbomb. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Please delete this page you created

Creating an editnotice because of a single disruptive user is a major violation of WP:BITE – which is a guideline, by the way! I can only imagine how many constructive edits may have been scared off by the terrifying message box. Mdrnpndr (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

There's already a default copyright notice that appears on all pages, so I don't know why you consider it a major violation of WP:BITE. I just made the existing note more noticeable. BLPs have giant pink warnings that instruct users about the importance of sourcing. Is that a major violation of WP:BITE? Children's television articles are rife with problematic copyright additions (chiefly out of ignorance) and I felt it a useful addition to pre-empt more damage. If you're asking me to remove it as a favor to you because you find it visually off-putting, a friendly note to the effect of "Hey there, since we haven't had any copyright problems at X article since Y date, would you consider removing the edit notice", would have been a better approach. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Eh, you're probably right... I suppose it would also have been faster to write that instead, come to think of it. On the other hand, I'm still somewhat miffed about your lack of response to this, so the lecturing seems more than a tad hypocritical. Mdrnpndr (talk) 21:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Theft

How, exactly, is my edit to Theft not constructive?--Trisha Gaurav (talk) 05:18, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Trisha Gaurav: It has no relevance to the article. Amaury (talk) 05:30, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cyphoidbomb. You have new messages at Talk:Kabali (film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

(120.144.52.147 (talk) 06:39, 18 June 2016 (UTC))

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Condensing/lengthening episode summaries more efficiently

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Condensing/lengthening episode summaries more efficiently. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:28, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I think you may want to do the following...

I think you might want to extend Superkeegan9100's block to indefinite and revoke his talk page access. He is handling his current block horribly, just like all his previous blocks. I believe things are most certainly not going to get better from here. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 23:15, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi EB, your points are noted. If the talk page disruption continues, I'll disable his talk page access, but I'm not quite ready to indef. I'd like to see how things go after the block expires. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:17, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

UTRS account

I've activated your account, thank you for volunteering.--v/r - TP 02:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Vicky Kaushal

I don't understand what link you thought was unrealiable and that you removed and why did you remove the picture I added I wanted to make that the main picture but i dont know how to because that up to date picture of him. Also I have cited awards and you can even google yourself that he won awards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranveer mooch (talk • contribs) 20:46, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ranveer mooch, it's not other editors' job to Google information to support content that you add. That's your responsibility. All content should be accompanied by a reference, which you have subsequently provided, so thanks for that. The image placement you chose is not consistent with other articles. If you want that in the infobox, I'll place it there for you, although I'm sure it will wind up deleted, since you claim to be the copyright holder, yet the image can be found here, among other places. You're probably going to need to clear that up.

Also, Wikipedia, along with other user-generated sources like blogs, discussion forums, unverified Twitter accounts, IMDb, etc. may not be used as references, because anyone can add content to these sites and claim it is accurate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Can't you add a picture that isnt yours? I accidently claimed it was mine but its on websites yes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranveer mooch (talk • contribs) 09:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Laetitia Sadier

This article has the a e close together, can you move the article. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

TheAmazingPeanuts - Why? Maybe that's how she spells her name. If you want to provide an explanation that is derived from an established guideline, I'd be willing to consider it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

You're probably right. I look at the sources, and it's turn out that some of the sources do spells her name that way, so my bad. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 18:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

User:Hell With Arun

The user seems to be promoting Aditya Pancholi everywhere, making unexplained changes to cast of film articles and he's not willing to stop despite warnings. I am not sure how to deal with this. Does this fall under WP:ADVOCACY? - Managerarc™ ^talk 18:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Managerarc, that's an essay, not a guideline/policy, but if the user is disruptively adding one person to a ton of articles, that could be indicative of paid advocacy, which is not tolerated. Edits like this are clearly problematic, because he's adding his fluffy opinion to articles. Even an edit like this might be problematic, because while it is true that Pancholi was in the film, did Simran star opposite of two people? That seems oddly gratuitous. Normally a female lead stars opposite a male lead, not two male leads. Why did Hell With Arun add the name to the front of the list? He didn't explain, so we don't know. Consistent lack of explanations can be problematic as well. Why did HWA move Pancholi up in this edit?

So if all this happens frequently, a pattern of disruptive behavior can be determined. For instance, a while back there was a big problem with two editors, one who was a huge Mammootty fan/advocate/sycophant, and another who was a huge Mohanlal fan/advocate/sycophant. These guys kept edit warring across numerous articles, because one guy wanted to put his favorite actor at the front of the list, and the other guy wanted to put his favorite actor at the front of the list. They'd even stoop to fighting over film poster images--"See, Mammootty appears on the left, so his name should go first!" Total mind-numbing bullshit. So my point is that even if Hell With Arun is making changes that are factually correct, if he's doing so in such a way that it doesn't make sense or that it adds needless clutter, or if there's a pattern of him putting someone at the front of the list when they might not deserve to be there, then over time that can be considered disruptive. For example, Template:Infobox film instructs editors to order cast by the billing block on the film's poster. That's typically a problem in Indian films, as you don't usually find billing blocks on their posters--so what guideline is HWA using to decide order? The film's credits? Where's his explanation? WP:FILMCAST gives guidance for the rest of the article. Is HWA following this guideline? We don't know, because he doesn't explain. So you might want to keep a notes file on him, because this pattern is disruptive.

Frankly though, if he keeps demonstrating poor decision making in other areas, like the introduction of his personal editorials noted above, or the copyright violations that he's already been warned about, he's already on the path to being blocked again. Keep up the good editing, M! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed reply. He's at it again today and I don't think he's going to stop anytime soon. - Managerarc™ ^talk 15:12, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Marathistar.com

Hello Cyphoidbomb, Sorry to say but I can not agree to your statements. Marathistar.com is not a blog. It is a website. There should not be any issue for using information as source from the same. (Reliable source is a question mark) Another point is that, why we are so rigid for birthdate? I can show you many Wikipedia pages of personality where source/references are not added for DOB. For eg. Purushottam Laxman Deshpande, Mangesh Padgaonkar, Prashant Damle. There could be thousands of such cases. I do not see, it is mandatory to have source for each and every word or date in Wikipedia. Kindly consider my views and revert the changes you have done. Coolgama (talk) 06:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

The fact that other poorly-referenced pages exist is not a valid argument (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). All statements about living people must have references per WP:BLP, and also see WP:BLPPRIVACY. And since as you say, "reliable source is a question mark", that's problematic. We can't just have any source, all cited sources should be reliable. nyuszika7h (talk) 15:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Coolgama, I will reply on your talk page, as it makes sense to keep the discussion in one place. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Sock vandals

Cyphoidbomb, would you take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Buddieboy_93. There is also a related discussion at ANI. He's been blocked once for adding unsourced and irrelevant genres, is ignoring warnings on all three talk pages and clearly editing disruptively on dozens of TV articles. There are five editors trying to stay on top of his edits, he's so prolific. So far, the two requests for action have been met with crickets, and he's still at it. --Drmargi (talk) 19:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Drmargi, it looks like everybody's been blocked already, so I'm not sure what I can do here. But if it flares up again, lemme know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Taken care of. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN: and @Cyphoidbomb: Wonderful. Thank you both. As long as he's under control, I'm a happy camper; when five of us are playing Whack-A-Mole with him, it's pretty frustrating, and it's gone on for weeks and weeks. I appreciate your patience with my impatience! --Drmargi (talk) 19:54, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: If he pops up again, it's very easy for Neil or I to mass revert his edits. We've got this cool tool, you see, and it's pretty damned fun to use! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

But it's pretty scary the first couple times you use it! --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:14, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I agree with that. I was stoked when the edit summary feature was added. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Cool!! I'm handing my mallet off to you two, with a big smile!! --Drmargi (talk) 20:35, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Cyphoid

You please update it.Housefull3 collected 193 crore.Check talkingmoviez.com/Housefull3 hit or flop Itsapu (talk) 03:57, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Itsapu - No. We do not use blogs as references. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:46, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Superkeegan9100

Superkeegan9100 may have to be indeffed now, especially considering that he continued to add unsourced/unreliably sourced material and continues to mislabel ALL of his edits as minor, not to mention his combative edit summary of "Are you ***ing kidding me? No, REALLY! ARE YOU ***ING KIDDING ME?!?!? WIKIPEDIA ITSELF IS AN UNREALIABLE SOURCE! I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THESE TWO ARE ***ING RELIABLE SOURCES! TAKE YOUR EDITS AND SHOVE 'EM UP YOUR REAR END!" He is obviously showing that he can't change. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 18:02, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Electricburst1996, sorry for the late reply. I was going to handle this, but I see JamesBWatson took care of it already. Sheesh, what a problem child. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 12:00, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Query

Do you think this new user could be a sock of Smauritius? They have an interest in the same subject and both indulge in quick reverts to other editors whose edits don't match their version. Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Krimuk90, I'm unfamiliar with this sockmaster, sorry. The editor interaction analyzer might be a good place to start. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

69.92.26.62

69.92.26.62 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Hi Cyphoidbomb,

This IP is continuing their disruptive editing after your previous 31 hour block. It may be worth keeping an eye on them further. Cheers. Tevlev3 (talk) 23:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

@Tevlev3: Handled, thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:20, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia Position

Hi There, I want to ask you that what are the different positions for wikipedia members. And what should we do for the promotion of the Positions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dangerous Khiladi 5 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

User:ImSorryOkay?Thankyou!

Hi again Cyphoidbomb,

I've come across this user that looks to be performing sock puppetry. They wrote something about you on their userpage and then deleted it right away? Any thoughts here? Cheers. Tevlev3 (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

NOTE: It looks to be Gabriella~four.3-6 (talk · contribs). Tevlev3 (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Tevlev3, thanks. You are correct that it's Gabriella. Indeffed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Janatha Garage - Cast Order

When I viewed the edit history of Janatha Garage, the original order of cast which was followed by many, including you had Mohanlal's name first as it ought to be. It was changed by someone in the middle. I have re-instated it, to the standard that was followed before. MesopotemianVulture (talk) 08:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

MesopotemianVulture, "as it ought to be" is a declarative statement. What are you basing this declaration on? Cast in the Infobox should be ordered per the film poster's billing block per Template:Infobox film instructions. This guideline represents community consensus. I don't see a poster in the article, so naturally I don't see a billing block. So "as it ought to be" looks to me like an arbitrary assertion based on personal preference. You're welcome to clarify this, but you're really going to need to bring a poster billing block to the table. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Reeth Mazumder

The style seems very very familiar to one of the farms that I've handled in the past. I came to it via this edit which at first I thought was Padmalakshmi. This is clearly a promo-film farm, but I can't seem to remember where I've seen that style (the images added are all of professional quality too), maybe you or Ponyo who are closer to the topic area have an idea? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

It's User:Padmalakshmisx. Now blocked and tagged along with Gridhalur, joining this band of ne'er-do-wells.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

I guess I should trust my first instincts! His writing style has changed significantly over the past six years, and so has the range of topics (languages). I've just nominated the images for deletion at Commons. I was thinking that account may've been related too and that got me a bit confused as I haven't known this one to have had access to high quality images, which fits in with Cyphoid's opinion and there's likely a few collaborating groups. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:20, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

With these kinds of paid-editing sockfarms it may not always be the same guy behind the computer so you see variations over time. It's more of a Orangemoody/Morning277-style sock campaign. In other words, the most entrenched intractable kind.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Rtkat3

Thanks for your message, Cyphoidbomb. Nothing gets done at ANI, which in terms of the various problem-resolution methods on Wikipedia, I've found to be a paper tiger. I tried blocking him once for his refusal to stop that behavior and the result was it was one of the reasons I lost my admin privileges, after which I drastically reduced my overall Wikipedia editing, and my interaction with others. I would suggest starting a discussion with active editors and admins on the comics project, like User:Tenebrae, see if there's a specific policy, guideline or MOS rule that he could be said to be violating, and if there isn't, formally codify the "summary-only" rule regarding the sections in which he likes to add cruft, and if he continues to violate it, block him then. Another suggestion would be that an admin or two try talking to him to get him to stop. I'll participate in any discussion, but I really don't feel like spearheading it, given my past in such matters. Thanks again. Nightscream (talk) 13:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Bulk revert?

Upwindow a way, you and @NeilN: mentioned you could bulk-revert. Would you take a look at a series of edits by 107.77.227.97, who has altered the leads of a group of TV series streaming on Amazon Prime or Hulu to describe them as "web series". I caught and reverted two, but when I looked at his contributions, there are upwards of 20 more that need to be reverted. Obviously, web series and streaming series are very different beasts, one arguably being a subset of the other. Is hat something you can do? --Drmargi (talk) 18:04, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Drmargi - Dunzo. The one wrinkle is that if the user has any other current edits that are constructive, I'd be reverting those as well. When I click the mass rollback button it rolls back all the ones marked "current". Anyhow, wasn't a problem here. Happy weekend! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, that's handy. The ones I looked at were all the same, so I think we're good. Happy weekend to you, too!! --Drmargi (talk) 18:41, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Nova Scotia socker

FYI, I did some digging and made a table of the Nova Scotia sock's past edits and IPs for reference. Find it useful to point to something to demonstrate long term abuse by IPs. Can find it at User:EvergreenFir/socks#Lolijij_and_Baddeck.2C_Nova_Scotia.2C_Canada_IPs. Cheers. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:18, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that, Ev. Not a fun project by any means. What about a shortcut? WP:BADDECK? If you need help with that, I can do it for you tomorrow. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Are shortcuts to userspaces okay? Not opposed to one. I usually just copy-paste the section needed when reporting to AIV. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:27, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, I don't see why not. I don't see anything at Wikipedia:Shortcut that prohibits it. Might be worth a question at the help desk though. I don't think it has wide usage, but if you need to point people to a specific page, I don't think it's reasonable to keep eating up your time by locating the page, then copying it and pasting it. This is exactly the sort of thing a shortcut is beneficial for. Alternatively, you could create and maintain an LTA page like Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Gabriella~four.3-6. Then a shortcut would generate no questions. But it seems like such a trivial matter that I'd be happy to support "ignore all rules" here. One thing that has always bugged me about editing at Wikipedia, are the inefficient uses of time. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:57, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Do you recall who the user/IP was that was obsesswith with Warner Bros. Distribution. Just ran across Special:Contributions/2601:81:C400:662C:855D:7660:DFED:5BD4 and seems to be the same person. Locates to NJ (which has been on my radar but I don't have a case file for them). Ping me in reply plz EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:23, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Found it... Mount Laurel, NJ. Making table now. Let me know if you've tracked this one at all. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, nope, doesn't sound familiar. The only NJ ones I'm really aware of are Gabby Comito and the NJ Pooh vandal. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:41, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

See User:EvergreenFir/socks#Animation_producers_and_distributors_-_New_Jersey.2C_Comcast. Lot more to add to it. Is the "NJ Pooh vandal" the same as the fecal bandit aka User:Yourname? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, Pooh as in Winnie-the-Pooh. Most of his activity was from 2013-2014. He's in here somewhere. Mostly he kept adding gibberish to Winnie-the-Pooh properties. I believe some of the IPs traced to a school for behaviorally challenged kids. Here's one example. I've seen a flare-up of disruptive edits to Pooh articles from NJ IPs lately, but I dunno if it's the same dude. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:30, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Just stumbled across this here, was doing some research on the Vodkapoise sockfarm, which may be connected to other sockfarms. Check the 22 June edits from this account, one of the Vodkapoise socks: Special:contributions/Rebutcopernicus. -- Brianhe (talk) 14:20, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

BTW Ithink it's likely BestFiens and Brightify are the same operator, though their SPIs are currently listed separately. - Brianhe (talk) 14:25, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Kabali new poster

Hi there! I just changed a new poster of Kabali but it doesn't to be appear on the main page. The poster is directly taken from the official page of Kabali at Facebook. Help me to make the new poster appear on the main page. Click on the poster and you will see a different poster. From Amarnath Da Vinci. Amarnath Da Vinci (talk) 10:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Assuming by "main page" you mean Kabali (film), it shows up fine for me, try clearing your browser's cache with Shift+F5. – nyuszika7h (talk) 10:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@Amarnath Da Vinci: Forgot to ping. nyuszika7h (talk) 10:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks fine to me, too. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive IP editor

Sorry to bring more drama to you, but this is getting rather frustrating. For a while now, an IP editor has been insisting on changing sourced content and adding unsourced cast members to The Fearless Four (film). I found this article after following some unrelated vandal who was going on a spree through children's animated films. In this edit, I removed a few people who were listed as "uncredited" in the cast list. I searched all over the internet (Variety, the IMDb, the The Big Cartoon DataBase, Turner Classic Movies, etc), and I couldn't find any mention of their involvement. I also added a few sources, such as a citation to the British Film Institute for the country of origin and other production details. The IP editor has been intermittently edit warring for months to reinstate the uncredited cast members (without a source), change the country of origin, and add other unsourced content. Could you semi-protect this article for a brief period of time? I started discussions on Talk:The Fearless Four (film) and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 60#Sourcing on a German children's film, and I've asked the IP editor to provide a source several times; nothing brings discussion. I suspect this is a hoax, but how do you prove that? I don't want to edit war over it, but the content is being repeatedly re-added/changed without a source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate, very frustrating to good-faith editors such as yourself. I've reverted this stuff. Looks like crap to me. Germany --> Gremany, removal of reference shortcut, unsourced additions. Garbage. Will protect for a bit to get them to talk. If they don't, I'll protect again. Lemme know, please. Take care, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

yu gi oh dark side of dimensions release date

Hi okay I have read that 4k media Inc has announced that the film will be released in early 2017 so must I change to that period or wait until the movie premieres ? Acodomy (talk) 23:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Acodomy I don't know what article you're referring to, but you'll need references from reliable published sources like major newspapers, major magazines, etc. WP:RS, WP:REFB. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:16, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Girl Meets World episodes#Unnecessary to show seasons for descriptions of Riley and Cory

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Girl Meets World episodes#Unnecessary to show seasons for descriptions of Riley and Cory. More people thinking parentheses are okay. nope.png Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:05, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Dishoom edit in Cast section

Hi there, I had a question regarding your edit of Dishoom. You removed Parineeti Chopra from the Cast section. Here is the source of her cameo and special appearances in the film; if you could add that in, that would be great. Thanks! 76.23.34.181 (talk) 07:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, while I appreciate the reference, even if sourced I don't see what the value is of adding it. The cast section is intended to list the actors who portray significant roles. Cameos are not significant roles. Please see WP:FILMCAST: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, so it is encouraged to name the most relevant actors and roles with the most appropriate rule of thumb for the given film: billing, speaking roles, named roles, cast lists in reliable sources, blue links (in some cases), etc.

Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

crore

Can we please keep millions and billions in the Indian film articles instead of crore? It was mentioned in the convert template discussion how it is preferred not to use crore, which is a country specific number representation. BollyJeff | talk 17:00, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Bollyjeff, I don't particularly care either way--that is to say, I find millions/billions to be easier to understand (because I'm a non-Indian Westerner), but it is difficult when dealing with references that refer to everything as "crore" to have to do mental calculations. I also think it's an uphill battle that has no easy solution. All the fly-by-night users will keep converting back to lakhs and crores. That's the main reason why I don't make an effort to convert. Also I just noticed that WP:MOSIN seems to favor the conversion of Indian currency to USD. We may want to consider an RfC on that if we don't think it's necessary. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:09, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

INR Convert

Hello,

 I saw the notifications earlier today (about an hour or two ago), but not when you sent me the messages. 
 Also, thank you for giving me a reason because like you said, I most likely would not go back and change the template. I like to use it because I live in the United States, so it helps me understand how much a Bollywood movie has made.
 Once again, I apologize for using the template, and I'll be sure to not do it again.  Notneha (talk) 03:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Also, I realize there were four issues raised, but I provided one as an example when I replied. Notneha (talk) 03:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

AppearsTwinkling

ya the how to change the original article with no edit option..and i am not getting paid sir... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AppearsTwinkling (talk • contribs) 17:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

AppearsTwinkling, regardless of whether or not you are getting paid, even if you know this person, you have a conflict of interest and are strongly discouraged from editing the article, because people who are close to a subject have a very difficult time writing objectively, as you have demonstrated. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

List of The Backyardigans episodes

Hi Cyphoidbomb,

A month ago, I sought consensus for reordering the episodes on List of The Backyardigans episodes by referring to an order used by iTunes and Nickelodeon's schedule. You were involved in an earlier discussion on the same topic. No one has objected to my proposal, and it seems that you approved of referring to iTunes back in December, but since it has been a few months I thought it best to run my changes by you before saving any changes. Would you be fine with me changing the order to match the one used here? I decided to reopen the discussion about the episode order because of a concern over the air dates which we currently use to order the episodes, since they are not agreed upon by several sources. For example, Zap2it provides an air date of May 3, 2010 for the series' final episode, whereas TV Guide provides an air date of December 16, 2012. As of the moment, I haven't found a RS listing the date we currently use (May 31, 2010), but Nick Animation Studio's site states that the series ran until May 31, 2011. I may open a discussion on which source we should use for air dates, but for now, I just want a second opinion on changing the episode order.

Hopefully this message wasn't too long. Thank you! The Last Wikibender 03:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi the last Wikibender, I don't have any emotional investments in that article, so I may not be the best person to ask. Ideally the show should be organized by the episode airdates, but in the absence of that information, or if the information cannot be sourced reliably, it might be prudent to change the order. I'll admit, I haven't spent much time looking into this, though. Whatever your decision, you might consider adding a note somewhere obvious so that readers know that the order has been changed and may differ from the airing order. If you can find a quality source for the airdates, then I'd keep them in that order. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:44, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Help

Need your presence here. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:37, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Kamal Haasan Sir's real name

@C.bomb What is the real name of India's popular actor Kamal Haasan Sir? Is it Parthsarathy Srinivasan ? In the given reference (of that article) It is written that his name is only Parthasarathy not with Srinivasan. o! flower, talk to me,10:39 am, 22 July 2016 (UTC).

You could research more into this. But I remember that on NVOK, he simply said "Parthasarathy". Kailash29792 (talk) 10:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Senthoora poove, I have no idea, sorry. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Vandal on the Muppets pages

You are doing a good job undoing the vandalism done by an anonymous contributor that has been vandalizing the pages associated with The Muppets. --Rtkat3 (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2016 (UTC)