Jump to content

User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 17

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20

Comment by Rajivkilanashrestha

I'm not pretending as a administrator nor wants to be. Just trying to stop irrelevant edits doing by denim2016. I did discuss with the user for several times but no use. Thank you for your suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajivkilanashrestha (talk • contribs) 21:31, December 9, 2016 (UTC)

@Rajivkilanashrestha: New comments go at the bottom of the page, not at the top. I have moved it for you. And please remember to sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~ This will append a signature and time stamp to your comment. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Phineas and Ferb numbering discussion should be started again

We were in a long discussion on weather or not Phineas and Ferb episode numbering should be paired. The consensus was that it shouldn't. However, I have found new evidence that suggests that this discussion should be started again. First of all, around the time of the Phineas and Ferb finale, many websites said that the number of episodes was around 126. One even said "depending on weather you go by Wikipedia or the press releases.

Also, the original user that introduced this numbering, User:Dcbanners is one of many sockpuppets from User:Finealt, therefore, none of his comments should count. user HH (talk) 00:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Seeking an opinion...

What do you think about the presence of unsourced names at cast list of a telly serial, bolstered steadily at regular intervals by a particular editor without even minimally trying to discuss or build consensus. Also,how do you think of the message I posted at my talk page to her.Aru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 11:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@ARUNEEK:/@Winged Blades of Godric: Hi there. Firstly, a primary source (the TV show itself) can be used as a source for uncontroversial information about the work. If someone wanted to write a plot summary for a film, they wouldn't need to provide sources, because the plot is determined by watching the film. Same with basic information about cast, directors, etc. All that can be gleaned by watching the series. On the other hand, if someone is adding cast and characters to a TV series that has not been released yet, then it would be fine to request sources, per WP:CRYSTAL, because we can't verify cast/characters if the work hasn't been released. Or, if the editor had a history of perpetuating hoaxes, or if the article was a frequent target of vandalism, then I'd say that it would be reasonable to ask for sources. But if someone who is presumably working in good faith is watching the series and fleshing out the cast list accordingly, it seems needless to hound them into providing references. All they'd have to do is add {{Cite episode |access-date=10 December 2016 |series=Goyenda Ginni |season=1 |number=374}} which is a needless waste of their time.
Secondly, I think your comments to the user are over-the-top. They come off as unnecessarily condescending and I'd construe some of it as personal attacks. Mocking them for their lack of English skills and for using text-speak isn't how we promote civility. You're also saying pretty overtly that they're not competent, which is problematic too. Yes, there are times when we need to educate users on our competence requirements, but that's often done in a far more subtle way that than in a giant block of "you're not competent!" Lastly, I don't think that the grandiloquent style of writing you've employed is going to do much to make the user feel comfortable or make it any easier for them to understand the issues. If they have trouble understanding English, doubling-down on hard-to-understand flowery English is only going to confound them, and it's only going to make the tone feel more condescending. Them's my thoughts. Hope that helped. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Will will be re-adding the cast names back to the article.Ok!I also got aware of the formal rules regarding these policies.I definitely thought the rules were a bit more strict.And will be formally toning down my opinions on the message to her.Aru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 03:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind instructions.Hope, you won't mind me taking up your precious time.Cheers!Aru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 03:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Gabucho181/Joseph Raymond Hahn

Looks like our old friend on the Kids Choice Awards and Dan Vs. articles is on winter break and back at it. They haven't hit the latter yet but the KCA article has been in the same pattern as they tried last year, so fair warning that they're back. Nate • (chatter) 03:11, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mrschimpf: I semi-ed Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards. Let me know if you need more coverage. Also, I think it's Joshua, not Joseph. Take care, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:21, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Whatever their name they're a pest who needs to move on from Dan Vs. and all their vandalism. Thanks for the protection; should work for now. Nate • (chatter) 03:51, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Editing

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Sasural Simar Ka, 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. Diffs: [2] Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply:

So, what does appear constructive ? I did insert links in the edit summary. Can you clarify ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Detective RDS (talk • contribs) 17:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Detective RDS: Well, firstly, if you were trying to add references to the article, they should be incorporated into the article body not in edit summaries, since readers don't look at edit summaries to find references. See Referencing for Beginners if you're not sure how to do that. Secondly, you appear to be confusing {{citation needed}} with {{clarify}}. The comment I left on your talk page was specifically related to the changes you made here, where you removed a {{clarify}} template without addressing the problem that was raised in the |reason= parameter, namely, "This is the English Wikipedia." "Tai ji" is not an English phrase, and thus, it needs to be clarified what this means for our non-Indian readership. Aunt? Cousin? Daughter? Mistress? Friend? Grandmother? We write for a global readership, not just for Indians. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Roopal Tyagi edit

Latest revision as of 04:56, 13 December 2016 (edit) (undo) (thank) Cyphoidbomb (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 754390582 by Detective RDS Good faith edit, but to random readers, it's unclear what this means. We don't use slashes WP:SLASH for the ambiguity they create. Are these different characters? Twins? Reincarnations, what?)

Reply:

@Cyphoidbomb:

Pari used to call herself as Bubbly and the lead Armaan as Bunty most of the time for fun. I believe for that you need to watch the show in the first place, to understand.

At least glad that you have no objection with my last edit on Sasural Simar Ka page (hopefully). But watch out, someone edited and placed wrong actress name for the character Vaidehi. Kajol Shrivastav is playing the character Vaidehi, not Deepika Singh. How did you miss that, I wonder !— Preceding unsigned comment added by Detective RDS (talk • contribs)

Shenzhou7

Could you keep an eye on this user for the time being? When I look at their contributions, I'm really reminded of Josephlalrinhlua786, especially considering that 1. It was registered only a few hours after the last sock was blocked, 2. The intersection at Your Name ([1] [2]), and 3. The use of similar sometimes vague edit summaries, but I don't know if this is sufficient enough evidence to warrant a block at this point in time. Thanks. Sro23 (talk) 01:07, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@Sro23: - Blocked. Brand new user proficient with citations? Interested in US and foreign films? Seems quacky. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
BrandonJoe clearly isn't a new user. Same interest in the same US films plus a foreign one. Also the edits are always mobile. Sro23 (talk) 19:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
@Sro23: - Indeffed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:13, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Regarding User:4GFLY

Hey! You might to see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AdnanAliAfzal. It looks like the sock of another editor. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 20:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Rejoice

You'll be happy to know that the IP user you dealt with on Dan Hennessey has been reported and been blocked for 2 years. He/She has gotten on Santa's naughty list. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 08:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

Hello Cyphoidbomb: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Mona778 (talk) 03:31, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Hi, Cyphoidbomb

Just wanted to wish you a merry Christmas and hope that you get what you want! :) Foxnpichu (talk) 09:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

@Foxnpichu: Likewise, mate. Merry Christmas. Hope all is well with you. University treating you well? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:45, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Yeah. Everything good for you? Foxnpichu (talk) 21:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, things are always busy at the encyclopedia factory, but aside from that, no complaints. Keep your ears warm this frostbite season. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
You too! Foxnpichu (talk) 11:13, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Comment from Rohan Rajpipla

What about say?? My editing "Glamorous" in page of Shraddha Kapoor what is wrong?? Rohan Rajpipla (talk) 21:30, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rohan Rajpipla: First of all, new comments go at the bottom of talk pages, not in the middle of them. Secondly, your addition of "glamorous" is indistinguishable from vandalism. "Glamorous" is not an occupation it's an interpretive description. It's like calling someone "Beautiful" instead of "beauty pageant contestant", or "sexy" instead of "sex therapist". The |occupation= field is for jobs she has: actress, designer, singer. Those are jobs. Since I don't know what you were intending to do, it comes across as you expressing fondness for her. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Shraddha Kapoor is sexist girl in Bollywood — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohan Rajpipla (talk • contribs)
@Rohan Rajpipla: Who cares? This is an encyclopedia, not a blog. Our opinions don't belong in articles. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok I'm new user of Wikipedia so very soon i teach ever commands' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohan Rajpipla (talk • contribs) 22:25, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Merry

Season's Greetings, Cyphoidbomb!
At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD|Talk 16:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

007 accounts

I saw your comment at the Nscharan007 SPI. Were you thinking of Spamfree007 and his many socks? - Brianhe (talk) 22:50, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

@Brianhe: I appreciate your note. No, I wasn't thinking of those specifically. There were a few accounts that were editing the same article but had 007 in their names. Probably related to Indian TV. I meant to look into it, but forgot. Much thanks for the info though! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Nashtl007 (talk · contribs) turned up in the Mindcap SPI....? Brianhe (talk) 13:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Brianhe: This was really bugging me, so I kept an eye out. I think I finally found them here. Bollywood007 and Pranabesh007. What did it mean? Maybe nothing, but at the time I thought it was weird that these two 007 accounts were editing the same article. Anyway, closure. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
And also here I found Cinemaniac007. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:23, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

The Phoenix IPv6

Is back again, just by way of a heads up. Lankiveil blocked one account working on the Muppet Christmas movie, but there seem to be two active. Another user who doesn't know the meaning of insanity. --Drmargi (talk) 10:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: Thanks, I'll keep my eyes peeled. Which Muppet Christmas movie? There are several. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Oh, sorry; it was the Very Merry Muppet Christmas movie, the same one he'd edited previously. --Drmargi (talk) 18:18, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Good job! Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:48, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday Greetings! Cyphoidbomb

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!
Thank you for helping make Wikipedia a better place. Blessings. May we all have peace in the coming year. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very very much

At last my doubts have been cleared. So, only after getting a reliable source I will post the final verdict of xyz movie. Other than that, I won't just put up that it failed or succeeded. I have saved the respective pages you have mentioned in your reply. I will read them tomorrow morning. Thanks a ton and please keep in touch because I'm new to Wikipedia and I want to share my knowledge as much as possible. I know I have ended up making several mistakes so far and henceforth I will take care. Just don't get annoyed in case if I ask too much questions after this. :)

Regards, SBson1357 SBson1357 (talk) 20:29, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@SBson1357: See your talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:41, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

A sock you recently blocked

Thanks for taking care of 31.52.6.216 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). This is a likely Atlus Zachary sock. You can see some of the associated drama here and here. His M.O. is to make highly dubious, uunsourced changes to film and video game articles. A lot of the time, he'll seemingly make up production companies for films, then edit war almost indefinitely to keep them in the article. It's a real pain. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas Cyphoidbomb!!
Hi Cyphoidbomb, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!

   –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 22:08, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2017!

Hello Cyphoidbomb, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2017.
Happy editing,
Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Kenzie2012

Would you mind keeping your eyes on Kenzie2012, please. My gut tells me it's the IP user you dealt with on Dan Hennessey that's invading its 2 year block. I don't know how to report sock puppet users. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 03:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Arrangement of column in Sreemukhi's filmography

Hi there. I have added information of the movies in which Sreemukhi has appeared but I am facing problem regarding the year 2016 column which is appearing on the "movie" column. "https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sreemukhi#Filmography". Please can you arrange it? SBson1357 (talk) 04:25, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

@SBson1357: Hi, tables are not my strong suit, but I think I resolved the issue here. The problem was that the 2015 column beginning with Ettuthikkum Madhayaanai was trying to span 5 rows, when there was only 4 rows of data. So to compensate, it tried to swallow 2016, which resulted in an unbalanced table. By adjusting the rowspan to 4, I brought things back in balance. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:23, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Arrangement of Sreemukhi's filmography

@Cyphoidbomb : and you did it. Thanks. I understood the error. SBson1357 (talk) 07:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello Cyphoidbomb: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, GABgab 03:53, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Merry Christmas!

Amaury (talk | contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:36, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Articles created by me not visible on Google while searching

First of all, Merry Christmas. :) Hi there. Sorry to disturb. May I know why the articles I've created are not there when I search on Google. I mean when I type a particular page/person's article I have created on Google its not visible unlike other pages which may which may have been made long time back. Example: I created an article "Manalo Okkadu", a film. So while typing Manalo Okkadu on Google, the first thing which comes is "R.P. Patnaik" article on Wikipedia and not the article I created about the film. May I know what could be the reason? Are there any rules for Wikipedia that a newly created article needs some time to be visible while being searched on Google? SBson1357 (talk) 14:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

@SBson1357: Hi, Merry Christmas to you as well. To answer your question: I don't know. We have no influence over how Google ranks articles. Maybe it will take time, as you speculate. While Wikipedia is one of the most heavily visited sites on the internet, perhaps Google waits a while for articles to gain stability before posting them prominently in the search results. Speculation on my part, though. Sorry I'm of no help. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:12, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. It's fine. I just wanted to know what could be the reason. As such the pages I have created are of less prominence so maybe it will take a while. :) SBson1357 (talk) 15:14, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

I would characterize myself as lazy rather than a thief (as you have accused me). I was feeling lazy even to to respond to your talk, but your comment on Gross & Nett collections deserve/demand a response.

Is there a Wikipedia guideline for what should be used or how it should be referred? You say that existing numbers are Gross but I saw a Nett term used. Or is it that by default everything is Gross but when Nett is used, it has to clarified explicitly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by J mareeswaran (talk • contribs)

@J mareeswaran: See your talk page. I think it's better to keep the discussion in a single place. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:43, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

No surprise

Ten edits to get through auto-confirmed and then straight to Mungaru Male...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:20, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Always on it--you're a bad-ass! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
It's more like the sock is just lazy and makes it easy, but I'll take the compliment! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikisjanitor possible Sage of the Six Paths sock?

Does Wikisjanitor (talk · contribs) look like a Sage of the Six Paths sockpuppet to you? It's a relatively new account and has been editing the same articles that Sage and his socks have been? It has even restored some of Sage's edits that you reverted for block evasion. —Farix (t | c) 17:36, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry but your confusing me for someone else. I'm just cleaning up articles that might have mistakes and doing updates for the new year. Wikisjanitor (talk) 17:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
You've restored a lot of edits made by a block evading IP,[3][4][5][6] so there is a very strong suspicion that you are the very same person. And the timing of these edits are also very suspicious. —Farix (t | c) 17:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
It was this particular edit that was almost the same as an edit you just reverted that tipped me off. —Farix (t | c) 18:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Ronda Rousey

Thanks for protecting the page. I appreciate it. :D Thatwweguy 619 (talk) 06:07, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

The cast names, which I have added in Goyenda Ginni, without source have played minor or recurring characters in the series which don't have sources but they have played characters which you would know if you had seen the series and knew the real name of the cast. So, now to acknowledge theirs contribution towards the series, what can be done? (User talk:Thertho Bose)

@Thertho Bose: 1) Thank you for participating in discussion finally. I'm appreciative that you've chosen to open the dialog. 2) I don't think I've touched any of your recent edits at Goyenda Ginni, so I'm not quite sure what you're asking or what additions you're specifically referring to. I'm not sure if it helps, but we should be focusing on Main and Recurring cast (Recurring = cast/characters that have appeared more than once) since that's the scope of WP:TVCAST. Wikipedia doesn't aim to be IMDb, so we need to be selective about the cast/characters we add to these lists. One-time characters/cast are not really noteworthy. I'm not sure if that helps you at all, but feel free to clarify as needed. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Satellite Rights

Okay sure. I'm sorry for adding the "satellite right" information as I agree with what you've said. Thanks for informing. I'll take care of not repeating the same mistake again.

Regards, SBson1357 SBson1357 (talk) 18:22, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@SBson1357: I know you meant well. Thanks for understanding. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for that. :)
Can you just let me know what can I add or not add regarding a page related to a movie? Like I made a mistake about the "satellites right", so what are the required fields in it? Thanks. SBson1357 (talk) 18:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
I will reply in a few minutes on your talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:33, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello there. My username has been linked to another username for sock puppeting by SpacemanSpiff. I've been active on Wikipedia since November but back then I didn't knew what was sock puppeting. My first username had been blocked. I didn't knew that there was a term called sock puppeting for creating another username. After few days second one was also blocked. I created third one. It got blocked. I didn't create neither of the several several usernames for sock puppeting. I just wanted to and still want to contribute as much as I can contribute from my side for the field I love. Now, my this username has also been reported for sock puppeting. Since I didn't didn't knew what was sock puppeting during my first username I didn't even get a chance to ask SpacemanSpiff about that. I didn't create second one to fight with that person or anyone else. I just wanted to contribute silently and more carefully. Please let me know what is the problem with my editing. What is wrong with my contribution? Why am i not allowed contribute? For sure if this username also gets blocked, I will leave Wikipedia immediately because now I know what is sock puppeting. I want to contribute my knowledge towards Telugu films and artistes. I don't want to claim my old usernames anymore and I want to be active on Wikipedia through this only. Please help me. SBson1357 (talk) 14:56, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I want to be active on Wikipedia and gain knowledge and share as much as I know so as to make it easier and satisfying to viewers who read the articles. SBson1357 (talk) 14:58, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@SBson1357: What was your first user name? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

It's PradeepKumar308. Then I created KHAIDI NO.308. Then PradeepKumar316. And now this use. SBson1357 (talk) 15:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I ended up creating because of lack of awareness about sock puppeting. SBson1357 (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate your honesty. I think you should consider opening an unblock request from your original account, and explain in great detail that you understand the reasons why you were blocked. Note that it wasn't just for creating other accounts, it was for copyright violations as well. You'll need to read WP:COPYRIGHT and understand what it says. In your unblock request you will have to convince a reviewing admin that you understand why copyright violations (and sockpuppetry) are problematic as well as paint a convincing portrait of how you'll do things differently going forward. You didn't do that effectively in your UTRS unblock request. The key is to really understand these policies, and really visualise the problematic effects they have here. That's all I can advise. Also, if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. See WP:PAID. Honesty is the best policy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
One other thing, I am concerned that you have several recent copyright warnings on your SBson talk page. This worries me that you have not learned anything since your last block, so any unblock request made now is probably going to fail. You need to really understand why plagiarism, copying, and copyright violations are academically and intellectually dishonest. If you don't presently understand this, then you need to ask educated people around you (like teachers) as well as maybe research it online. People lose their careers over plagiarism and copyright violations, so this is an important life lesson as well. Why is it wrong to take a photo from someone's website and put it on your own without permission or attribution? Why is it wrong to take an essay that someone wrote, change a few words, then present it as your own content? Why is it wrong for an Indian film maker to take the plot of an American film and make a movie just like it? These are the things you should be thinking about. And don't be in a hurry. If it takes you a month to really understand it, then wait before you file you unblock. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Cyphoidbomb,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:25, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks without header}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year, my friend! Hope your 2017 on Wikipedia will be better than mine will be. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 08:36, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Cyphoidbomb!

Happy New Year!

Cyphoidbomb,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 12:56, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Fatmagul

Just saw your message ob my talk page, and yeah I think we should defiantly start a discussion to end this dispute. Sammy.joseph (talk)

Most read biography

Hi Admin! First of all, wishing you "Happy New Year"! (Sorry for being a day late.)

A list of 100 most read Pakistani biographies (on Wikipedia) was [ published] by Dawn (newspaper). Recently you have removed this info from Mawra Hocane, any special reason? Because this is also written on 4 or 5 more pages under my observation.

Hopr for your kind reply, Thanks! M. Billoo 00:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

@M.Billoo2000: Hi M, happy new year to you as well. I think it's a strange piece of trivia to include in an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia doesn't typically talk about itself when it's covering other subjects. I wouldn't object if we were talking about the subject being the most searched Pakistani on Google, or something of that nature, but it just seems weirdly self-referential to talk about Wikipedia at Wikipedia. I can't imagine Encyclopedia Britannica writing in an article on Tom Cruise, "Tom Cruise was the most popular article at Britannica.com." You're always welcome to get another opinion, though. Not sure where the best location would be though. Maybe some folks at WikiProject Biography would have some opinions. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! M. Billoo 00:43, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Cyphoidbomb!

Happy New Year!

Cyphoidbomb,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 09:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Duplicate

Hi Admin!

This account was created by me (for me), but I forgot it's password. I then made this account (which I am using), and want to continue using this. I recently tried to recover that through my email address, but now I think I don't want to use it... Is there any way to delete that account? (My edits here in early 2015 were reverted by you, and on that time I was very very weak to understand Wiki) Please, I don't want to be trapped in "sockpuppet case".

Sorry for my weak English (as I had said earlier too), and thanks for always being helpful! M. Billoo 20:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi M.Billoo2000 Thanks for the disclosure. I see edits from MBill00 in December 2016. Are you sure you've forgotten the password? You are allowed to have multiple accounts so long as you aren't using them for any disruptive reason. Some disruptive reasons would be: vandalism, edit-warring, voting from both accounts, harassment, etc. Legitimate reasons to use another account might be to edit on a public computer or a public network. You might consider putting Template:User alternative account name on the user pages, just so everything is out in the open. Being open about stuff is the best policy. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I have forgotten password, again after recovering. (I don't know why I thought to put a hard one there, currently working on easy passwords.) The userpage I had created saying "My nickname is Bill..." was just a fun I was trying... But now I don't want to use it, I want to be (some kind of) "expert user" from this account. Also, recently I asked for help on help desk (keeping hidden the December's edits), but nothing happened. Thanks for your kind response! M. Billoo 21:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Alibabavum 40 Thirudargalum DYK

Alibabavum 40 Thirudargalum is currently a DYK nominee, nominated by me. I want it to appear on the main page on 17 January (the centenary of its lead actor), but the DYK process is severely lagging. Could you please see if I correctly followed the rules, or have something left to do? Kailash29792 (talk) 04:24, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Just a gently reminder. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Ishq Hawa Mein

I think you're familiar with this one. Is "Cyber Power" linked to the farm? I initially thought it might be AwardPunjabi, but I think you and Ponyo know this better. Maybe GSS-1987 knows? I'm not filing an SPI as I don't know this farm, hoping one of you will if Ponyo doesn't get to it first. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

SpacemanSpiff, I'll check if I can find any evidence to link "Cyber Power" to AwardPunjabi or any other farm. Cheers – GSS (talk|c|em) 12:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
@SpacemanSpiff: I found some evidences to link "Cyber Power" to S..Yash and few more users (Sock farm AdnanAliAfzal):
  • Cyber Power's first edit was to recreate Karan Deol which earlier created by S..Yash but this time Cyber Power made it a redirect and the use of Thanks is common in both users.
  • with 4GFLY: Both user created thier userpage with Wikipedia Is My LiFe in bold.
  • with Fly Up: The use of capital "I" when writing is ([7][8]).
There are some more users who recreated S..Yash's work after his block. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I'd noticed the Karan Deol thing, but didn't get a chance to look more in detail. Them's some good notes, GSS! The boldface on the userpage is odd. Also, they basically welcomed themself on their own talk page with the giant list of helpful links. Both the creation of the user page + the self-welcome look like standard sock efforts to hide their redlinks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, they always try to hide their redlinks and Cyber Power also has a tendency to move pages and creating articles about the children of Indian film actors same like previous socks. GSS (talk|c|em) 15:49, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Including user 3OO per exactly the same behaviour as above e.g. creating user page with Wikipedia Is My Life (in slightly diffrent way My L!fe iS W!kipedia), recreated master's work Ahan Shetty as redirect and same behaviour in moving articles and creating redirect. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I think we're going to need a CU here. Looking at some of the articles 3OO has edited, I found AAS-786 as well, who created Nadeem_Javed. @Ponyo: If you get a second, could you please look into this? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
And Ctrl A too. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
I notice some intersections with Mriduls.sharma, including at Firangi (2017 film) - article created by sock of Mriduls. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
The following accounts are  Confirmed to each other:
I've traced the accounts back to 4GFLY and Fly Up so you're looking at this master. They should all be blocked and their contribs nuked where appropriate.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Ponyo! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 Thank you very much! Ponyo, So is there any need to apply G5 for the articles they created or you'll take care of that? GSS (talk|c|em) 04:58, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
GSS-1987 I think I got most of the article-articles. There were a shitload of redirects that may or may not need scrutiny. Some of them were weird--I doubt someone's going to use parentheses when searching for some of these people, but I don't know that all of them need to be deleted. Maybe I'll have a look tomorrow, or if you want to start flagging some, all the better. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:40, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
For this kind of nonsense Special:Nuke is your friend, I've done that for the remaining stuff from Cyber Power while I've handled the other sock stuff individually. —SpacemanSpiff 05:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh! got it and everything looks clean and tidy now. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 06:13, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Class.wrestling

You have blocked this editor (only for 31 hours, conceded) for what appears to be a single edit, a section blanking in an article, performed six days ago. Am I missing something? --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 22:21, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anthony Bradbury, the user blanked the plots section at Dangal (film) once, twice, thrice, I warned them here with a very clear explanation for why it was inappropriate, they blanked their talk page and then blanked it again. I didn't see the requirement to climb up the warning tree with them, since they were obviously doing something that was opposed by other editors. Hope that helps. Regards and happy new year, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:10, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
@Anthony Bradbury: - Had to edit above, so I'm re-pinging. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
My error. I had a long day and clearly missed seeing the other reversions.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 16:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

LDMaster1998 again

Hi Cyphoidbomb,

Katniss here, letting you know that LDMaster1998 is back off of his second block (both from you) continuing to add more unsourced, disruptive material to the same articles he was previously blocked for disrupting, in one case deleting other air dates while adding his fake "2017 TBA" ones. Diffs: 1 2 3 4. Thanks and happy new year! Katniss ♥ 19:50, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

@KatnissEverdeen: I've indeffed them since I don't get the sense that they understand what they're doing here. If they choose to communicate I'd consider unblocking them. Thanks for the info. Happy new year. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:11, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Questions

I think you're still active, so I'm going to ask you a few questions if you don't mind. Man, a lot of this stuff that seemed so obvious now seems either complicated or in shades in gray. An obvious sock of LTA vandal Jaredgk2008 just edited through the extended confirmed protection on Howie Schwab. I've worked on this article somewhat, mostly just to add a few references. It's OK if I block this sock, right? It's clear BLP-related vandalism, and this is a sleeper account made solely to vandalize ECP BLPs. There's another sock that I've found. He's contested the speedy deletion of two obscure articles created by the sockmaster, and he's restored a few of the sockmaster's reverted edits. Thing is, I was involved in arguing for this sockmaster's block at ANI, and I reverted a few of the edits from both the sock (before I was sure it was a sock) and the master. What about this guy? Can I block this sock? Argh. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: I've debated this very thing myself for months and took many steps to solicit lectures from other admins at AN and in other venues about 'involved', and few people really stepped up to help codify what being involved means. I'm guessing they'd prefer to wait until I screw up then lecture me about "what you ought've done is..." The general sense I get though, is that clear vandalism is fine. I'm of the opinion (and this means that I'll come to your defense when you're facing your first witch hunt at AN) that whether or not you participated in chasing a disruptive user before, if that disruptive user is back in violation of a block, block 'em. If you're confident that any other admin would have arrived at the same conclusion, I'd say go ahead. The whole point of getting the tools is that you're helping to take some of the pressure off other admins and to facilitate your usual stuff. Or, if you're not comfortable, you can always ask someone else until you get more comfortable. "Hey, I miiiight be involved here, can you take a look at this guy..."
Yeah, you're right about the shades of gray. My mantra has been that it's my job to enforce community guidelines and that sort of crap. If someone's editing way off base and they're unresponsive to discussion, then I'll probably wind up blocking them. I think NeilN (who has described himself as very conservative when it comes to involved) told me once that if you've expressed an opinion about content or a topic, that you're probably involved. I believe he even suggested that I try to avoid community discussions, say at WikiProject Television, because being part of the discussion process might make me involved. (At least I *think* he said that...) I don't subscribe to that type of rigidity, because everything can boil down to a content opinion. "My opinion is that you are misusing the |followed_by= parameter of the TV infobox... My opinion is that mentioning in detail salacious gossip about this actress's romantic life is totally inappropriate." I dunno. It's my job to wrangle the encyclopedia into some semblance of a shape, and I feel that in many ways, this is exactly what IAR is about. To give you an example, I've got this Campaign of Ignorance I've been dealing with for months. Editors going out of their way to remove actual real-world information, misuse parameters, edit contrary to any number of MOS guidelines, using bizarre interpretive language like "Second parallel female Antagonist"--anyway, it's been nuts. Am I embroiled in content disputes here? Is it a misuse of the tools to prevent these ignorant editors from fucking up the encyclopedia? You're a good guy with a conscience, so I know you'll wrangle with this as I have. I say go with your gut. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, there isn't really much in the way of instruction on Wikipedia. You get something akin to "try not to screw up too badly, and here's a few pointers. By the way, you can ignore all those pointers. But if you ignore them, we might lynch you." I was just reading through that Campaign page, actually. I hadn't seen those issues before – fascinating stuff. I've seen "secondary antagonist" but never "second parallel female antagonist". I used to search Wikipedia for key phrases, such as "it should be noted" and "critical acclaim by critics". It got to be a bit depressing to make so little headway, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:20, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate: That's why you got to get AWB! Although sometimes you wouldn't want to just swap out the phrasing, like if it were within the context of a quotation. I kinda wish AWB would just highlight selected phrases so that I could look at them and make the call. I did get rid of tons of "passed away" (instead of "died") instances with AWB. And yes, it's some weird shit that in Indian articles people feel compelled to tell you who is male and female. She's the lead FEMALE character? You don't say. Anyway, definitely read WP:INVOLVED and see if you can work out some kind of moral behavior set that seems convincingly in keeping with that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:30, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I was going to request access to AWB, but then I got distracted by other stuff. I'll probably get around to it some day. The whole "female" thing is perplexing to me, too. I'm guessing it's someone who really, really likes to be explicit about stuff. There was one gun-spotter who would go through dozens of articles and describe every firearm in loving detail, especially in plot summaries. I don't know what happened to him, but I'm glad it died down. The LTA vandal got blocked by a fast-acting admin, so that's one less problem. I think I'll just block his next sock on sight. It seems uncontroversial to me. The other case is still tough for me to figure out. I'm thinking it's alright, but I'll ask a CU for advice first. Thanks for the help. I do feel a bit less overwhelmed and confused by it all. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup

Hi! Am not sure if you have notice it or not, but the annual editing competition Wikipedia:WikiCup has started and the signup is open till 5 February 2017. The cup encourages content improvement and tries to make editing on Wikipedia more fun; and it did that for me last year. I have hence decided to drop this friendly note hoping that you would take part. Although the signup ends on 5th Feb, the earlier you sign in the earlier you start scoring. Happy New Year and Happy Editing! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:51, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Another Sage of the Six Paths sock

Boy, this guy is persistent.[9][10][11] —Farix (t | c) 18:20, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I'll stop, but I want to make a deal. 2601:8C:4000:1177:20C9:4646:67BA:9CA3 (talk) 18:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't make deals with liars.[12][13] Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for that and Thanks for Pointing

Its a request please Help me to save this Article .This deletion request and Consensus is out of nowhere. The Article is genuine and is verified too. Please Help Me Saving it. Thank You. HNGM (talk • contribs) 00:36, 11 January 2017 (IST)

@HNGM: I nominated it for deletion because I don't believe it warrants a unique article. Therefore, I have no interest in trying to save it. At best it should have been a single sentence at Comedy Nights with Kapil. Not everything in the world deserves a unique article. We have notability criteria for articles. See also our general notability guideline. I don't blame you for not understanding our guidelines as a new user when you created the article, but this is sometimes the effect of creating articles without having any experience or researching how to go about it. Just a thought. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:37, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Need your eagle eye

Happy New Year, Cyphoid! We've got an IP editor 24.197.246.91 who persists in adding Thomas as the last name of the Harold Finch character from Person of Interest in the character's article (see Harold Finch (Person of Interest). From what I can gather, he's gotten a fuzzy screenshot of the death certificate of Finch's father, and decided the placement of the name Thomas (which in dialogue is the father's first name) on the death certificate we can only partially see indicates that is Finch's last name. (He's also pushing the edit on the Wikia site as well, where the image can be seen: [14]; the admin there has also told him that the image is not sufficient to assume the Finch's real last name is Thomas). Trouble is, full images of Iowa death certificates of the period show the last name of a decedent are under the word Death on the certificate, and the first name is under Certificate, making the image consistent with dialogue identifying father's first name as Thomas, but the image is so fuzzy it's not reliable, regardless. Anyhoo, he's been reverted by at least two editors, but has reverted five times in the past 36 hours or so. He's gone quiet for the night, but I expect will begin again before long. If he does, it might be helpful to protect the article for a short time to make the point that the image isn't a reliable source. Would you mind casting an eye over the situation, and see what might be the best move? I could go to WP:RFPP of course, but that can be time consuming and this has gone on long enough. --Drmargi (talk) 16:05, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Drmargi: It hasn't happened in the last 8 hours. I'm inclined to wait for one more. I've dropped a warning on their talk page. If it happens again, I'll block them. If they hop IPs, then I'll semi-protect. I prefer protecting only if there are multiple IPs involved. Why penalize everybody, y'know? Happy new year! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:25, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
That seems reasonable. The least draconian approach to getting the problem solved is all that's needed. That's why I like to come to you with these issues: you understand the TV articles and take the least disruptive approach to them. --Drmargi (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Awwwwww.... Back to reality: the Arizona IP is back at User:2600:8800:3080:8370:49AC:70AD:8B91:B548. See Huell Howser and California's Gold. Ugh. --Drmargi (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
@Drmargi: - Handled. Thanks. Blocked 1 week. Most edits reverted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:43, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
That was quick. I love the exercises in insanity on Wikipedia. He expects a different outcome every time. The shame is he does do a certain amount of good editing, but it's so lost in the nonsense. --Drmargi (talk) 02:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I know it's satisfying to try to get to the "this guy's an X!" answer, but we deal with so many different types of people here that it's so hard to figure anything out and even if we do, what does it really matter? Maybe he's got a limited number of creative/intellectual outlets? Maybe there's a cognitive impairment affecting his ability to understand certain stuff? We can't assume everybody's equipped with the same skills that we might all take for granted. The best we can do is to try to be understanding, try to communicate, and if that doesn't go well, we ramp up the admin crap to protect the project. I mean, some of his/her edits are not bad, it's just when they turn off the main road that they become problematic. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:19, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

You're more charitable than I was (blush!) but I think I'm still coming off the drama with Twobells and all his accusations. And you're right; there are a lot of reasons why editors "don't get it" so to speak. It's nice of have the problem solved, at least for now. Given his previous persistence, I suspect he'll be back in time. --Drmargi (talk) 22:37, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Back

Phoenix IP is back again at 2600:8800:3080:8370:3935:92E4:DF96:F48D. Should we be opening SPI reports on him, do you think? --Drmargi (talk) 01:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

@Drmargi: It might be a good idea to log some of this in the MisterAnthony SPI, or at least to start an LTA report somewhere. Would you be willing to get this started? I've tried to tag my blocks with MisterAnthony / 24.251.24.185 or Phoenix, Arizona, so searching here for some of those terms might help with some of the busy work. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:03, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
And here he just does a lot of weird crap from butchering a reference, to arbitrarily lower-casing some of the templates, to blatantly ignoring the referencing requirement of |other_names=. In other words: the usual... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
That IP and another one were blocked overnight. Is it still worth doing? Given he seems to get himself blocked quickly; LTA seems more reasonable. I just can't help but think we should get those IPs documented. --Drmargi (talk) 20:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Holy, cow! I take a breather while my laptop charges and all hell breaks loose! --Drmargi (talk) 09:19, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Muppets LTA

Hi Cyphoidbomb. This isn't my usual area, but what would it take to get User:Cyphoidbomb/Muppets LTA listed at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse? I keep bumping into this/these person/persons. Thanks! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:33, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi 78.26, I moved it to Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Muppets LTA. So the short answer is: It wouldn't take much. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Ooh, I like the easy stuff. Thanks! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 18:37, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
@78.26: I went the extra mile and created a shortcut to the LTA. Check out WP:MUPPETSLTA. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Dangal (film)

Cyphoidbomb I found you active on Dangal (film) so I need your assistance. Please take a look at this ticket regarding cinematography credit in the article. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:25, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

@GSS-1987: I don't believe I have access to OTRS. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Okay, so the customer claiming to be the cinematographer of the film but he believes that the credit for cinematography is wrongly credited to Sethu Sriram (who is a cinematographer from the South India film industry) whereas it should be credited to Setu (Satyajit Pande). I did a little research but can't find anything in reliable source expect this which mentioned his name "Satyajit Pande" as a cinematographer of Dangal but a search result for Sethu Sriram as cinematographer of Dangal shows many reliable sources. As per my request, he attached some sources which included his name as a cinematographer but I'm not sure if those are reliable [15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't remember what was on screen when I saw it but [22] [23] seem to support Sethu Sriram. —SpacemanSpiff 17:47, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
😂 even me I think better to wait till I call the production house tomorrow for the confirmation. The customer also said that he shot Taare Zameen Par where he was credited as Setu. GSS (talk|c|em) 18:05, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
@GSS-1987: Looks like the change was made without explanation here by Josephjames.me. Joseph, can you please shed any light into where you got the information on who the cinematographer for Dangal was? You made this change 2 months before the film was released, so WP:CRYSTAL would have been a concern then. Setu was originally added here, but without a reference, and it's pointing to an unreleated article, so that's problematic. I'm inclined to change it, since we don't usually have people contesting something like this unless the information is wrong. My guess is that maybe Joseph made an assumptio/span>]] (talkn about who "Setu" was. I'm a bit confused, because the Reuters source that Spiff mentions above says very clearly that they updated the article to reflect that Sethu Sriram is the cinematographer, but then I also see this source which covers a social event and indicates Pande as DP. Why don't I remove the content and add a note that it needs to be verified from the onscreen credits? I'm just concerned that lazy journalists have used Wikipedia for their information and that we've become our own reference. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes! you are right and it's really sad that some lazy journalists write what they see on Wikipedia without doing their own research. I found these 2 videos on UTV Motion Pictures official channel. In this video at 3:09 the closing credit screen mentioned "SETU" as the DOP and in this video at 3:07 you can actually see him standing with the cast next to Girish Kulkarni (first from right). GSS (talk|c|em) 04:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Cyphoidbomb do you think the above information is enough to include the name of the DOP as SETU? GSS (talk|c|em) 04:49, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@GSS-1987: I think it's reasonable to change it to include Pande. I do wish they'd have included his full name in the trailer credits, because I fear this issue will come up again, and it's not really clear who Setu is. But I certainly won't object. You planning to use Template:Cite AV media? I would consider it just as a preventative measure. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:53, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
I think it's better if we use only SETU for now same as credited in the film and I notice he was also credited with the same name in Charas (2004 film), Taare Zameen Par and Dedh Ishqiya. The use of Template:Cite AV media will be the better option to avoid any issue in the future. GSS (talk|c|em) 07:19, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
I think I read about him and his work on Dangal in an interview. Can't find it now though :( — JosephJames 13:34, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Josephjames.me: I don't know when and where you read that interview because I tried a lot but failed to find anything and your changes were also unsourced so I think it's fair enough to make changes now as Cyphoidbomb said above we don't usually have people contesting something like this unless the information is wrong. The customer emailed again and he is ready to provide more evidence if needed. GSS (talk|c|em) 10:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I just found this source in Business Standard originally published by ANI News yesterday mentioned his full name as Satyajit Pande. GSS (talk|c|em) 05:22, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
@GSS-1987: Since Joseph hasn't responded with any further information, maybe it's wise to add Pande's name. The alternative would be to present it as disputed, with both names listed, until we get a more definitive confirmation. But again, I think it's probably more likely than not that Pande is the right guy. If not, well, joke's on us. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
I think as for now it's better to add just Setu to keep a safe side and if in future we get to see anything from the officials we can add the full name of the DoP whether Pande or Sriram. GSS (talk|c|em) 05:47, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Cyphoidbomb, Do you want me to make the changes as per the film credits and close the ticket or you think we need to wait a little more? GSS (talk|c|em) 11:22, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
@GSS-1987: I defer to your judgment. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:21, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Since I'm studying on this case I watched some official theatrical trailers of their films and I notice Sriram never credited as Setu but Pande always credited as Setu and I found one of his interview with Indian Express where he confirmed his full name as Satyajit Pande and the customer also sound very confident about his claim. So, I'm going to add Satyajit Pande using Template:Cite AV media and also will cite another reference to support his full name. I hope this is ok with you. GSS (talk|c|em) 16:57, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
@GSS-1987: Okay... Please go ahead. — JosephJames 17:26, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
✅ Done  Thank you very much! for your kind cooperation. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Surprisingly I just found this new ticket from akpfilms.com to confirm their DoP as Setu (Satyajit Pande) for Dangal and also Taare Zameen Par and they request to make necessary corrections which we have already corrected but I'm going to add Setu as well same as they mentioned in their message to avoid any misunderstandings. GSS (talk|c|em) 10:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

User:PlutoniumBackToTheFuture

I have a strong belief that User:PlutoniumBackToTheFuture may be a sockpuppet because of how familiar he is with editing, despite having made his first edit in October 2016. Could you please look into this? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: Any idea who I might be looking for? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:50, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Possibly Kichappan or AniceMathew. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Arijit Singh

Hi Admin! I want to complain about unexplained removal of content on Arijit Singh discography by 503hsuya, who was also warned on removing content from Arijit Singh's biography. (Is this complain allowed or not?) Thanks! M. Billoo 14:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi M.Billoo2000, if it happens a few times, you are encouraged to contact and warn the user yourself before notifying an admin. See WP:WARN for a list of the various templates you could use. You'll notice that they the warnings are arranged from left to right according to severity. Typically we start off with the lower level warnings, which are a little friendlier, and escalate if the behavior continues. Each template should allow you to include an article title as well as space for any additional comments, if relevant. Click on the template you're interested in for more info. I've warned this user for you. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind response and for always being helpful! M. Billoo 23:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2017

Let me edit list of highest grossing indian films there are so many wrongs there i can correct them. Ñóbßý øoooó (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for communicating with the user Cyphoidbomb (talk · contribs). Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Box office gross for Dangal

SalmanKhan243 (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)Sir, sorry for not providing links, but the amount given in BollywoodHungama is less than the actual gross, and according to the website koimoi, which provides the box office gross for films, Dangal has already grossed more than 700 crore rupees. Please check it out. Thanks. SalmanKhan243 (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

@SalmanKhan243: Koimoi is not considered a reliable source by Wikipedia's Indian cinema task force. Please see WP:ICTF#Guidelines on sources. You should also be aware that all Indian film gross values are estimates, and just because a figure is higher, doesn't mean that it is more accurate. Where there is a discrepancy between reliable sources, the content should be presented as a range. Note also that corruption is rampant in film financials, so all data should be treated with great scrutiny. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Dangal box office gross

SalmanKhan243 (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)Dear Sir, sorry for the inconvenience. I will not edit this page again unless I have the correct information. Thanks. SalmanKhan243 (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Reference errors on 17 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi.

Hello Cyphoidbomb,

Could you move Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Naruto: Shippuden episodes (season 21) to Template:Editnotices/Page/Naruto: Shippuden (season 21)? Thanks. -- 1989 (talk) 00:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

@1989:  Done - Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Could you also move Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Naruto: Shippuden episodes (season 8)? -- 1989 (talk) 00:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
@1989:  Done - Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:16, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
@1989: I think I got them back where they belong. Please double-check. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, they're fine. Thanks. -- 1989 (talk) 22:35, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hello C. I saw this thread Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Rotten Tomatoes FYI and went ay yi yi in my head. I know you deal with a ton of crazy stuff when it comes to Indian film articles but this is a step above - or below might be a better metaphor. I don't know if you saw any of this from 15/16 User:Rhododendrites/Chaney. I was impressed with the work that the editors who took part put in to track down all the ins and outs of that massive hoax. Depending on how far out of hand things get with the situation that you are dealing with you might enlist the help of any of the editors who posted on the talk page of the Chaney hoax. Now, I can't guarantee that any of them will have the time or the inclination to be of help but they might be able to suggest others that would be. Thanks for your work on things in general and this in particular. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 22:57, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Good notes, thank you as usual, MarnetteD - This is just one weasel who wants a little attention. It's not a big problem. As far as I know, there were only two recent instances, so basically he got away with a low level hoax for 3 months or so. I was more interested in pointing out that it is possible to fudge RT. The trailer he did is pretty lame. Might be worth a laugh. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah - the fact that RT could be tricked is what reminded me of the other situation. IMDb had fallen for the Chaney stuff and it wasn't until our work here that they removed stuff there. Thanks for making all the members of the film project aware of this. MarnetteD|Talk 23:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

68.184.124.119

Can you keep an eye on this IP address? They've continued their disruptive behavior after your previous block (for 1 week). Thanks. 172.56.39.178 (talk) 01:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive behavior such as? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Request to Review page on Jallikattu

Hi, Could you review my edits to the Jallikattu page for conformity to wiki standards.Krg353 (talk) 05:54, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Approval for New Page About Karthikeya Sivasenapathy

Hi, This guy Karthikeya Sivasenapathy is really trending in Tamil Nadu right now and has really become popular since the release of Hiphop Tamizha's 2016 music video Takkaru Takkaru. There are a lot of people who don't know about him and I think it is pertinent to have his wiki page reviewed and indexed for search engines quickly. It would be really nice if you could spare some time to do this. BTW please be patient as it is my first time creating an article on wikipedia and i may have made a few mistakes while doing so.

Thanks in advance, --Schandrasekar (talk) 16:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Schandrasekar Wikipedia is not a breaking news source, and we aren't here to address social media trending. Only subjects who meet either our general notability guideline or one of our more specific notability guidelines should have articles. Your objectives need to be to first properly establish notability by demonstrating the subject has been the subject of multiple in depth pieces (not casual mentions or interviews) by reliable published sources that are independent of the subject. You also need to be sure that the content is written from a neutral point of view. We're not here to simply regurgitate his beliefs. If there is criticism against him, that needs to be presented as well. Since this sort of thing typically takes time to establish, we normally recommend new users go through our Articles for Creation process rather than try to create live articles their first time out. You run the risk of seeing your hard work deleted. Please also familiarize yourself with our guidelines on reliable sources, as the quality of the references you submit will impact how the article is received by other Wikipedians. If you use blogs and press releases and other poor sources, this will work against you. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Ummm....okay but I'm pretty sure the guy is quite notable as there are a lot of news articles published about him leaving his job as a member of the TNAU...And his role in the Jallikattu protests alone should be enough cause for his notability I thought. If I am wrong in this then I guess it's upto you to decide if it should be deleted. Anyway I've added below a bunch of news articles the earliest being from 2014 when he gained popularity becoming a vice chancellor in the TNAU I believe.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/TNAU-Management-Board-member-resigns/article17063884.ece http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2017/jan/19/probe-to-be-sought-on-source-and-use-of-funds-by-animal-rights-groups-1561241.html http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/national/jallikattu-ban-protests-in-tn-enter-day-3-as-cmmodi-talks-yield-no-results/article9490744.ece http://www.indiaglitz.com/karthikeya-sivasenapathy-resigns-management-post-of-tamil-nadu-agriculture-university-to-protest-jallikattu-ban-tamil-news-177032.html http://www.indiawaterportal.org/news/karthikeya-sivasenapathy-and-his-mission-save-majestic-native-kangayam-breed-cattle-tamil-nadu http://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/bull-stop/article5609632.ece http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/coimbatore/Young-guns-will-be-DMK-face-this-poll/articleshow/51185372.cms

Thanks for the help. --Schandrasekar (talk) 16:47, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

So far, notability has not been properly established in the article. There's a passing mention here and an interview here. Interviews don't count toward notability because they are considered primary sources and wouldn't count as "independent". A speech doesn't count toward notability because it's not coverage about him, it's just him. This source you posted above is good as it seems to talk in some depth about him. If you could find one or two more of these and incorporate them wisely into the article, that would bolster your notability case. The sources that indicate his resignation from X organization don't really help. Indiawaterportal probably wouldn't count as a reliable source. Hope some of these comments help. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks...would it be acceptable to use Tamil language sources for the article? --Schandrasekar (talk) 17:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@Schandrasekar: Provided they are from reliable published mainstream sources like major news sites, major magazines, yes. The references do not have to be in English. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

86.151.23.22

Continuing persistent hoaxing after your previous block, thought I'd give you a heads up. Thanks. 73.96.113.123 (talk) 01:50, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Alaskan Bush People

Hi. Can you please take a look at Talk:Alaskan Bush People? There seems to be some sort of disagreement on the removal of templates and the apparent whitewashing legitimate aspects of the topic of the Brown family's convictions. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
message Ddrap14 (talk) 08:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


Thanks for the work involved with Sage of the Six Paths. Ddrap14 (talk) 08:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Capitalisation issue noted..

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2009prasanth (talk • contribs) 16:39, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

User:B.Bhargava Teja

He never replies to messages seeking to pacify him; he just deletes them and continues his disruptive editing. He also violates Template:Infobox film by replacing posters with DVD covers; worse than that, he uploads separate files. Can any admin (preferably you) please see his upload log and try to undo his replacement of posters with DVD covers? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: I take it, based on your comment at their talk page, that maybe you two are working this issue out. Is that correct? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:40, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
He finally responded and agreed to cooperate. There ends the matter... unless he diverges. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
@Kailash29792: OK, cool. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:44, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive_17&oldid=1085939087"