User talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

User:Mallika800 might be the same sock as ArjunSharma

Hi I just wanted to give some evidence against Mallika as I think she might be a sock of ArjunSharma, the same who reverted a lot of edits in Parth Samthaan.

Here is evidence: [1] Thanks please look into this. She is also done it on Dipika Kakar, Divyanka Tripathi & Hina Khan. But I'm not sure if I am right can you please look into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.89.179 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

You didn't reply to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.89.179 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

I apologise, however I have been busy. I appreciate your note. If you have more evidence, like several identical edits that either person made, that would be helpful. It's hard to build a case on one edit, and harder still if I may not be familiar with the sock. I also have filed an SPI on this user as I suspect them of being a different sock, but I could be wrong. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I just realised that ArjunSharma was one of the Dimpletisha socks. I'm already on top of this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Found few more, he you can she ArjunSharma had deleted the edits done by another edit and put his own sock edits on the top and then Mallika did the same thing [2]. It was eventually reverted by another sock but again Mallika being Arjun did those edits again on Hina Khan.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.89.179 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry!

Sorry for my mistakes, I will try to never repeat it. Sapian sam (talk) 05:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Bohemia

Sir, I've opened a discussion regarding the nationality of the subject in the article lead here which I think should be as per WP:ETHNICITY. Would you kindly give your opinion in the matter? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello! - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:08, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Creating a Netflix Original Indian Film

Hi, Netflix Today Launched the poster of Chopsticks Film See Here for the google result, and here for the poster update, I'm asking because I think the film needs to have an article on Wikipedia, it's not there yet, I want to create, all I'm asking is is the film notable enough to have an article ? so that I'll get started! WikiLover97 (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Oops sorry, the article has already been created by some other user, Chopsticks (2019 film) so I'll just edit there if needed :) --WikiLover97 (talk) 08:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive IP causing unsourced genre edits

Hi, I have been noticing a lot of vandalism from different IP addresses that actually tend to be similar. I mean there's minimal difference in them (Hope you understand it better). I have personally got tired of reverting the unsourced genre edits they're making and I see no solution. Can you help?

Here are the IP addresses, and most of the edits are the same between a few of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:84A5:FE3D:5E83:B697 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:A0C0:4E61:BD7:7C07 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:C459:90B7:1A4A:DCDC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:9FC:45B1:33D7:A8E

The page Nannaku Prematho is having the same, over and over "Thriller drama" edits, something a French IP also kept repeating. I have a faint doubt it might be that user but anyways the references said it's an action film and that's what it is. I'm OK with not writing action-drama although that's a different topic we'll discuss about some day. But these IPs need to be handled. Please have a look. (77Survivor (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC))

@77Survivor: I have opened a discussion at WP:AN to ask my adminly colleagues if they can figure out a way to block that IP range. Please keep your eyes peeled for responses. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:05, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I'm feeling disappointed to inform you that the IP address is back with its unsourced genre edits, and surprisingly in the same pages.

Have a look here, please. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:96C:6554:8276:446F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:4D76:6087:F8F6:E770 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A01:E35:8A13:2F70:541E:3613:B84E:4EC

Something has to be done. I'm glad to see some editors have quickly undone some of this user's edits, but still it needs a proper block. (77Survivor (talk) 11:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC))

@77Survivor: I'm not good with IP range blocks, which is what this requires. The best approach is for you to take this sort of thing to WP:AN and ask for help there. I will solicit another admin's help for you, but please go to AN in the future for help with range blocks. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Alright. I'll do the same if I ever encounter such more IPs in the future. Thanks for all your help at time :) (77Survivor (talk) 14:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC))

Ardaas Karaan (film)

Sir could you move Ardaas Karaan (film) to Ardaas Karaan, as now album article doesn’t exist. So, there is no need of disambiguation page. SangrurUser (talk) 02:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

BollywoodToday.in and NewsHelpline

Sir, can this be used as a source to support Rautela's caste? Although she self-identified her caste, BollywoodToday.in seems unreliable and I am confused about the reliability of NewsHelpline which supposedly took Rautela's interview. team about us. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: I would probably avoid it for now. While interviews are helpful for this sort of thing, it's difficult to trust these sites that we've never heard of. Even something like a known entertainment blog would be better than this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:49, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll remove it from the article. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Hii

Sock identification

DivyaSharma3210S is a sock of KaranSharma. Please check and block. This user blames people and harasses users all the time.

People or just you who are the same user and No Im not I don't even know who this karan sharma is and I am just telling what is right. We know what you are doing I am not harrassing any other user but am reporting them so they don't do any more edit warring and sock edits. He is blaming other users on there own benifit not oging to tollerate any lying or lame useless blames for no apparent reason. I am not even harrassing anyone the user is actually harrassing me and doing edit wars and plus they are just upset that they can't disrupt Prince Narula's and Karan Tacker's page. Divya Sharma (talk) 13:53, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Plus I am not this user the user is basically the person who got blocked and then when he knows that he cant disrupt he blames all his sock edits on other users.

Possible COI

Hi, I suspect that some editors are paid by or employed at Indian news media, many of which are the so-called reliable sources.

• Since joining Wikipedia, Sonalhayat has only been adding links to Scroll.in as references, in some cases even deleting legitimate sources and replacing them with the website.
• Many single edit accounts have been adding links to Bollywood Hungama. One recent account is Minalhungama, who recently popped up on my watchlist and reminded me of similar instances before.

I also remember a user adding links to The Times of India reviews, although I am unable to remember the account name. Should this be a matter of concern and a possible violation of Wikipedia policy? Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan: Thanks for the tip. I've blocked Sonalhayat for spam. I don't have time to look into the other one right now, but if you could please follow up with me in a couple of days, I'd appreciate it. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:23, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Please do take your time. DeluxeVegan (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Helloo

Please keep a check on User ABTheBoss. This person has been constantly adding non notable awards and in house awards at Shaheer Sheikh and Kuch Rang Pyar Ke Aise Bhi despite repeated warnings from users like ravensfire etc. Also this person puffs up Sheikh way too much and uses useless sources like Fuzion Productions. Please check. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:4223:E8B8:0:0:2373:58A0 (talk) 07:56, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

जयंत कुमार

This is Funny Can you look at this user जयंत कुमार (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) who himself added this category on his User page Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Dr Samkiv Kumar. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 10:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: Blocked on general principal. If he's going to self-identify, then he gets blocked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Hi User:Cyphoidbomb what is this PHP7 I have noticed on mine and yours as well. I read it but I couldnt understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.91.93 (talk) 15:39, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Reviewing my edits

Hello! I'm a newbie here (as far as the number of edits indicate), and I would like you to comment on my recent edits on the articles Peter and the Wolf (TV special) (not rated on talk section yet), Leif Ericson (film), The Magic Voyage, Stowaways on the Ark, Peter in Magicland and Liberation Entertainment, in terms of references, content, and overall style.

Thanks! If you can't do all of them (or if you can't at all), it's no problem! :) NickBlamp (talk) 18:00, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

@NickBlamp: Hi there, I didn't have time to look at all of them, but I did a quick scan of Peter and the Wolf. Overall it looks to be in good shape, although there is the overall question as to whether or not this special is notable. Per the General Notability Guideline, we typically establish notability by providing multiple mainstream sources that talk about the subject in detail, like a newspaper article that talks about its merits or how it was produced, or something. So you might want to be prepared should notability questions arise. A few other notes:

• I'd probably avoid using slashes / per WP:SLASH. Saying "...a live-action and animated series" works or "...a television series combining live-action stories with animated interstitials" might also work as it might more clearly explain the format of the series.
• We should avoid using eBay and Amazon as references. Similarly, if we're going to use a YouTube video as a reference, we have to be wide-eyed about potential copyright violations. As a rule of thumb, I usually stick to videos on verified channels. For instance if I were to cite a BBC News interview, I'd want to be sure that I was pointing to the official BBC website, such that it could be assumed that we are not endorsing pirated video.
• Blogs and other unknown websites are not great sources per WP:UGC, which talks about avoiding user-generated content. Even sites like IMDb are problematic because pretty much anybody can submit content there. But back to blogs and such, we typically don't care about the opinions of unknowns, preferring opinions from mainstream sources and established journalists.

Hope some of this helps. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Chhota Bheem and related pages

Hi can you check these 3 pages Chhota Bheem, Rajiv Chilaka and Green Gold Animations. It looks like same user is doing this from multiple accounts for example this edit [3] and this edit [4]. Sid95Q (talk) 08:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Another one [5]. Sid95Q (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Dialogues and screenplay, separated at birth

I remember you once asking how can there be separate writers for screenplay and dialogue of the same film. I too wondered how that is possible because I believed a screenplay covers every minute detail including dialogue. Perhaps this should solve the confusion. --Kailash29792 (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: Interesting. Thanks for linking to this. I just wish they went a little deeper into their explanation, because I'm curious about the methodology. That would be something interesting to add to an article about Indian cinema, i.e. how scripts are composed. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:52, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Page protection help

Hello @Cyphoidbomb: I need assistance as I created an article on the television series Vish: A Poisonous Story. But as I'm seeing the importance information and content regarding the series is being removed by Anonymous user, IP vandalism, Sukhjeet04. Who are updating the series article without proper sources and without proving npov. It is an new article. Which has once got deleted also as it can create by an blocked user. So I would request u sir to please help by page protection or extended confirmed user can edit the page. It would be very helpful. AR.Dmg (talk) 06:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@AR.Dmg: Hi there, I don't see sufficient examples of problematic editing at that article to warrant page protection. This edit by Sukhjeet doesn't look problematic, these IP edits were a little sloppy, but not clearly vandalism. This doesn't seem pernicious. So I don't quite see why we'd be protecting it. If you can explain, that would be helpful. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

/* Stalking */

What on earth are you on about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.129.86.150 (talk) 18:56, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

MyNation

Is this source reliable? It is part of Asianet Digital Network though. But some of its inputs are from Bollywood Life which is unreliable as per WP:ICTF - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: I would probably be disinclined to included it on the basis that we do not know which information was gleaned from BollywoodLife. Although I do appreciate their transparency. There should be more of that in Indian journalism. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, it was regarding this change which added gross figures. I believe it is better to remove it. Secondly, is this unreliable when it comes to budget? Source is IBTimes (reliable), but it itself cites BehindWoods which is unreliable as per WP:ICTF. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Again, I would probably be disinclined to include that. If a source is just regurgitating content found at another unreliable source, I don't particularly consider that helpful. It's part of the "we don't have any information, so we'll just publish whatever we can" cycle that plagues Indian entertainment. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I believe the sources used infobox here now is OK without all the above confusions. Have a look. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Sony Pictures Networks India

Hi check this edit [6]. Sid95Q (talk) 22:57, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cyphoidbomb, thank you for your valuable inputs on my edit. While I completely agree with your suggestions and recommendation, I humbly request your help in updating the data on the page, as it is inaccurate and outdated. Your contribution will certainly ensure that the content on the page is updated, accurate and unbiased, as required by Wikipedia.

For further clarification on facts and the data in the article, please feel free to log on to the about us page of Sony Pictures Networks India : https://www.sonypicturesnetworks.com/overview

Also sharing with you here, the link to access the fact sheet of the organisation, containing facts about the company and its business : https://www.sonypicturesnetworks.com/pdf/SPN-Fact-sheet-June-2019.pdf

Deeply grateful for your co-operation. Kindly also let me know which portions of the data you find to be inaccurate and I will help with changes in the best way I can.

Thanking you in advance and eagerly look forward to your response.

Aaronmacky (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

PR work

Administrator, I believe there is PR activity at "Mikhael (film)". Because, one new user whitewashed the critical reception section of the film by changing its overall reception from negative to mixed by removing all negative reviews from The News Minute, Firstpost, Malayala Manorama, Huffington Post, and description of The Indian Express saying they are "unreliable/poorly sourced", beside, removed the entire beginning-to-end plot and replaced it with a small spoiler-free synopsis and left a hidden note saying "DO NOT write script in Plot section", also removed the reference improve/copyedit tags [7][8]. The PR work of the film's makers were already known at the time of release when they tried to suppress the negative reviews from social media by misusing Facebook's copyright policies and blocking Facebook communities. Report of this incident present in the reception section was also removed. This particular user's other edits too gives an impression of a PR agent/paid editing - created a biotech company, Draft:Concord Biotech and edited Virtusa Corporation, an IT firm. I also doubt if this user is actually new to Wikipedia, as he neither talks or edits like a newcomer. It is possible this could be an alternate account of Paavada, who had also attempted whitewashing "Mikhael" and has edited biotech or IT related articles, such as National Institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad, Indian Council of Medical Research, Genome Valley, HITEC City, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation. 116.68.102.121 (talk) 08:48, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

New sock- thoughts on the master?

MahimaSeth - new user, very familiar, all the usual sock stuff. Can't decide which of the big three this is a sock of though - Dimpletisha, KaranSharma0445 or Abhishek4889. I'm leaning Dimpletisha - any thoughts/bets? Ravensfire (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: I'll look into it. Dimpletisha and KaranSharma0445 beef with each other, so if you see any edit-warring between them and someone else, that's probably what's happening. In that case, I'd just open a sock report for either of them and ask for a CU. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:56, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

This is interesting User_talk:Sukhjeet04#Block....-Sid95Q (talk) 20:29, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Assistance Regarding contest deletion

Hello @Cyphoidbomb: I need assistance regarding the article Fauzia Arshi, am I eligible to know about the deleted page Fauzia Arshi content. Would be very helpful to contribute to Wikipedia if u help. Thanks for your consideration. MDPMHG (talk) 04:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@MDPMHG: There is nothing in the deleted content that would be of help. The article was previously deleted because her notability as a Chief Operating Officer was not properly established. See this. The current version doesn't adequately establish her notability. You need to properly establish notability by meeting the General Notability Guideline or some other relevant WP:NOTABILITY criteria. Seeing all those references mashed together, most of which are passing mentions of the subject just looks like an attempt to make an article subject seem more important than they are, but nobody is fooled by reference bloat. Why do we have references after her name? Is her name in dispute? Also, have you had any other accounts at Wikipedia? Are you a paid editor? If you are, per WP:PAID, you must disclose this fact, along with who your employers and clients are. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:18, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Cyphoidbomb: Hello @Sid95Q: my fellow editor reminded me that I missed out giving a reply to the admin who has assisted me regarding the contest deletion. I'm 21 years old I'm a BCA students. My undergraduate is going on. One year undergraduate. And then MCA or MBA post graduate. I love tech. And also I prefer to edit article or create article on movies, series, music, games, gadget, wildlife, nature. I love editing Wikipedia at present I'm editing regarding topic of music, films and television. I'm not working with anyone. Nor I know about WP:PAID. Please tell me or guide so that I can prove it to Wikipedia that I'm a genuine editor. Should I have to submit my documents for verification. I have all necessary documents. voter ID, Pan card, Adhaar Card, Ration Card. And also you can do police verification that I'm a student I'm unemployed. Please help me. MDPMHG (talk) 11:42, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Kabir Singh

Hi, could you please keep an eye on this recently released film's page? There is massive POV and promotional editing going on here, with removal of anything remotely negative being a problem, among others. Compare the massive change the article underwent in a span of one day here for instance. Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 19:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Just minutes after posting this message, the article was reverted again to the non-neutral revision here, incorrectly claiming that the critics' roundup using secondary sources is just another negative review. DeluxeVegan (talk) 20:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan: I'll add the article to my watchlist, but if the user had a problem with the summary of "mixed", which is what I suspect that reversion was about, where is the source that describes the reception as mixed? We can't summarise critical response of our own opinions, because we could be reinforcing our own biases. Any opinion must be supported by reliable published sources. Have you attempted to discuss the reversion with the other editor? It might be beneficial to understand what specifically they objected to in their blanket reversion. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:35, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

I believe the reviews were indeed mixed per this source, and the film did garner widespread criticism for misogyny and toxic masculinity per this source. There are even many G-hits for kabir singh toxic masculinity. Both the sources were added to the article, and I don't understand why SameeNagi removed them. --Kailash29792 (talk) 04:12, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

@Kailash29792 and DeluxeVegan: I've posted a query on the article's talk page to see what their issue was. The revert seems a little rash if they only objected to one statement. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:26, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

ISC spam

Quick follow up question: is it ok to even include the "ISC" designation after the subject's name in the lede of articles such as Chota K. Naidu, K. V. Anand etc? A spot check of a few of the cited sources doesn't show them adopting such a convention and, again at a spot-check, I don't see "DGA" being suffixed to the names of even leaders of the Directors Guild of America. And DGA is a much more prestigious guild while ISC is just one of several membership groups for Indian cinematographers. Abecedare (talk) 22:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare: Excellent question. I raised this question a few times. At the Indian cinema task force in mid-September 2018, nobody responded. I also asked at WikiProject Film around the same time and two editors seemed to think that it would be OK in the lead, by virtue of being covered by MOS:POSTNOM.

But there's a difference between receiving a high honor like the Fellow of the Royal Society vs. joining a casting/directing/cinematography fraternity, so I was curious whether or not these affiliation postnomials were something we wanted to encourage or discourage. So I asked again later in March 2019 and only two other people responded. One editor thought it was fine in the lead, and another thought that it shouldn't be used beyond biographical articles (so not in film articles, for instance) but didn't specify where they thought it should go. Based on this, I have actively not deleted the post-nomials in the lead of some articles like for Naidu and Anand. Some I have reverted if the submitter also made the mistake of adding it to the infobox |name= parameter and to the incorrectly used |title= parameter. Since nobody seems to really care about this issue, I'm not trying to scrub the information from articles entirely, but so long as this small group of people keep pushing these attributions and doing it incorrectly, I think we need the filter. I'm happy to revisit the issue if/when these people start to talk. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:27, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

POSTNOM would limit it, at most, to the subjects article, in the lead only with a big caveat. "... or by a widely recognized organization that reliable sources regularly associate with the subject..." If that's met, especially the later part, then perhaps. Spamming it everywhere the person's name is used? No way. Ravensfire (talk) 23:49, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: 'zackly. That's the headache, like here and here and OMG look at this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:01, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Sheesh, just slightly promotional there from the group. I think your edit filter request is the right thing to do - it's out of control, needs to be stopped and that's the only way. Ravensfire (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

I completely agree with both of you. ISC doesn't qualify as either "subject's state of citizenship or residence", or "a widely recognized organization that reliable sources regularly associate with the subject". See also, this somewhat-related discussion at INB about the tendency to add suffixes and prefixes to ledes and infoboxes without sufficient justification. I will be AFK for a few hours but plan to either start another discussion or pro-actively remove the suffixes and then follow BRD. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 00:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare: In the last hour or so I converted some of them to {{Post-nomials}} in good faith. If the post-nomials are not consistent with community guidelines, obviously I don't care about keeping them. Part of why this has been bugging me, is that while it's fine if a cinematographer or director or casting director wants to indicate their affiliation in a movie's credits, that's a contract between them and the film's producer. We're not obligated to obey their "I want the affiliation after my name" preference; we don't have any contract with the subjects. It's like when you meet someone with a PhD in real life and you call him Mr. Smith and he gets all angry, "I'm Dr. Smith". Like, sod off, mate, I work just as hard as you do, lolz. That said, you always call the judge Your Honour. Also, shit, I just realised I've been calling them "post-nomials" this whole time, not post-nominals. Yikes. I guess that's why Dr. Smith is a Dr. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:18, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Infobox birth_place

Regarding this edit, I've to admit that I forgot the instructions mentioned in the template. Secondly, is it possible to write "Bombay, India" instead of "Bombay, Maharahstra, India". Since as per Template:Infobox_person, birth_place : Omit unnecessary or redundant details. For example, it is not necessary to state: New York City, New York, United States when New York City, U.S. conveys essentially the same information more concisely. I believe Maharashtra is not that necessary to be included in a BLP infobox.

On a similar note, should "Mumbai" be changed to "Bombay" in the Madhuri Dixit#Early life and background as well? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Please take my reversion as instructional, not critical. Your example above with New York isn't quite parallel, since New York City and New York State both have the same name. Most people could infer that a person was born in New York State if they were born in New York City, which is how they seem to treat it in Barbra Streisand. A better parallel: comedian Owen Wilson was born in Dallas, but we wouldn't write "Dallas, U.S.", because we usually include city and state. Another example: Stephen King was born in Portland, Maine, but there is also a Portland, Oregon. So it would be unhelpful to leave out the state. Please also keep in mind that we write for a global readership, and there are billions of people who are not familiar with Indian cities and states. I think we should be erring on the side of complete information, rather than aesthetics. And yes, I think Mumbai should probably be changed to Bombay later in the article, and again with context "present-day Mumbai". Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:16, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

That's totally OK sir. You've been helping me for quite some time. I know that was instructional. Actually I myself had enforced this in some articles in the past, but that day I wonder why I felt that mentioning only Mumbai would be better. Probably was distracted. I'll make changes to the article body as instructed by you. Thanks again. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Ketaki Kadam

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketki_Kadam This is the page of actress Ketaki Kadam

Please can you help by uploading her latest image https://www.instagram.com/p/BiHpy2LnBlj/?igshid=yes27j1ukj2z It will be of great help Anu1999 (talk) 08:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Anu1999: No. I'm not in the habit of uploading non-free images and I don't recommend that you attempt it until you are fully versed on our copyright policy and our non-free content criteria. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:11, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

WikiDroppr

Hi This user WikiDroppr (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) looks like another sock of VC4137. Just like the previous 2 accounts this user also started with Wikipedia Adventure and now this user is editing Indian TV series related pages. Sid95Q (talk) 19:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: With only 2 edits in main space it seems a little early to say that definitively, even though you may ultimately be right. It would probably be premature to even ask a CheckUser to look at it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:57, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Linking years to lists

Hi, is linking years to lists a standard practice? Ex: [[Bollywood films of 2006|2006]]? Menjobleeko11 recently popped up on my watchlist doing so on many film articles. I am not too sure, but if it isn't policy-mandated or anything, feel it would border on overlink. DeluxeVegan (talk) 08:45, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan: No, that's not a wise call on their part. Wikilinks exist to help readers learn about topics they may not already understand or be familiar with. We create links around words/terms that people may not know. Nobody looks at a year and thinks "Gee, I wonder what 2006 means", so it is fruitless to base a link on a common word/concept, and more fruitless to take the reader to a tangential article, like one about Bollywood films of that year. A more appropriate place for a link to Bollywood films of 2006 would be in a "See also" section, but it's rare that we do this in film articles. I will drop them a line. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:54, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for the clarification. DeluxeVegan (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

TV schedule sites as a source??

Hi I wanted to know that could we use sites like [9] as a source for programming?? Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 21:26, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: Hi Sid, I've never heard of that site. I'd probably avoid it, especially if we don't know whether or not it's user-generated, the way TV.com is to some degree. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:54, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Woohoo

	Happy Adminship	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing Cyphoidbomb a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! -- Mjs1991 (talk) 09:58, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

@Mjs1991: Thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:03, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Congrats C. Another year has flown by. Thanks for all you do here at the 'pedia! MarnetteD|Talk 14:31, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Thank you for the cheers and thank you also for all that you do here! Good, trustworthy editors make my unpaid job here much easier. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:37, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

To quote Goofy "gawrsh" you are making me blush :-) Thanks for the kind compliment and enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 14:45, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Swapnilraj55

Hi can you help this user Swapnilraj55 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). I think if you can guide him he will improve in future. The problem with this user is He is not following guidelines which makes even useful information disruptive I tried my best to help him but like all new users he is not understanding things, few days back he posted this and yesterday he did this [10]. I think if you will guide him his editing will improve like you helped me 2 years back. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 02:19, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

script needs fixing

See this edit. Wikilinking any part of a cs1|2 |title= parameter when |url= has a value causes an error.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:30, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: Aw crap! Thank you for catching that. It's a simple find/replace, because I'm not great with Regex. I usually spot these visually, but I must not have scrolled down. I'll be more visually diligent. Thank you again for noting it and for fixing it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:04, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Update: I deleted the rule. I just ran another batch and noticed that it wanted to do the same thing again in the context of a URL, so it seems like it would require too much babysitting. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:11, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Judgementall Hai Kya

Would you kindly "protect" the article. IPs making unsourced changes. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:29, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Appears to have been protected. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:53, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Need help

Hello sir, This user has been continously adding facebook, instagram and twitter pages which are official pages mostly handled by the offical person related to the respective articles. But I have reviewed some FA and good articles like Taare Zameen Par and Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham... among others and although they have offical social media pages they are not added as external links, now I am little confused on whether those edits are positive edits or not. Tolly4bolly 12:02, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Tolly4bolly: Hi there, I appreciate that you're reaching out to ask questions. Per WP:ELNO, "one should generally avoid providing external links to: ... 10. Social networking sites (such as Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram). Since we're not here to promote the subject, we shouldn't be driving traffic to their social media presences. Typically if they have an official website, that's generally considered OK to include. Hope that helps. I'll revert some of those edits so you don't have to be the bad guy. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:08, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@Tolly4bolly: Actually, I'm going to get clarification on this at the talk page of WP:ELNO, because the top of the list says "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject". So it's a bit unclear to me if we should never add these links or if we should only add them if they are verified. Also, I'm unclear on if it's okay to add multiple ones, because at some point it looks like advertising to me. I'll look into it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:53, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, I have reverted some edits by IP regarding filmcompanion.in and the reviews associated with that site as it looked blogs rather than other reliable sources like TOI, India Today. Can you please clarify whether the site is reliable or not? Thank you. Tolly4bolly 13:10, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Tolly4bolly: I would be disinclined to use them as a reference until they establish themselves as a mainstream source. Typically, anything that looks like a blog or "portal" (not really sure that that is, but you know it when you see it) I try to avoid. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:26, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are most welcome sir.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:05, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Shantiniketan

Thanks for pointing out the mistakes in the Shantiniketan article. I shall be grateful for your help in improving the same. Cheers. - Chandan Guha (talk) 05:58, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

ABP Live

Hi a user left a message on my talk page regarding this link [11] in which the user said Abp Live is not a reliable source. So I wanted to know is this site reliable source or not. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 16:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find tons of discussion about ABP Live, but I did find this, where Winged Blades of Godric, Adamstraw99 and Akhiljaxxn (albeit circuitously) seem to all consider it reliable. Hope that helps, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:40, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Reliable for routine reporting. Unreliable for reporting that has political relevance in any manner. ∯WBG^converse 18:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Few Questions

Hi needed some help here as in this article Legend of the Three Caballeros The nation in which the series first aired is different from the country of production. So I wanted to know how to use first_run and other related parameters as I was not able to find examples for that and in some articles comics and Films (Theatrical/television) are used in preceded by/followed by parameters and I removed them citing these parameters are only for TV series entries, So are these comics/Films entries valid?. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 21:07, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: I don't know if you've seen these, but there are instructions at each of the various templates. See Template:Infobox television and Template:Infobox film. In this case I probably wouldn't use the |first_run= for the Caballeros article, since it appears to only have run in one place. In the Television Infobox, |preceded_by= and |followed_by= are for television franchises like Star Trek. Star Trek: Voyager (1995) is |preceded_by= Star Trek: The Next Generation (1993), and followed by Star Trek: Enterprise (2001). |preceded_by= and |followed_by= were removed from the Film Infobox in 2011. Hope that helps! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Page move by blocked user suspected of sock puppetry

Sir is this move OK? I'm confused since "Hindi-films" seems like a better wording than "Bollywood". - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: They probably should have discussed the move though, since it is potentially controversial. Note also Lists of Telugu-language films exists. The move, however, may widen the scope of the list, since any Hindi-language film produced in another nation might be allowable. I don't know that the argument that "There is no conclusive evidence to say the term Bollywood refers to only hindi film industry.....in some sources it refers to entire Indian film industry" is a very strong one. I think it's well-established that Bollywood refers to the Hindi film industry, and other sources being ignorant of that fact doesn't sway me. But in principle it's not an awful move. Why not ask Kailash or one of those ICTF power editors? Hey, random tip, if you haven't already, go into your Preferences → Gadgets → and activate "Strike out usernames that have been blocked". When you look at page histories, you'll see which users have been blocked, which may make it easier for you to spot recurring socks, since they often have favorite articles. This will also make it easier to see how problematic the issue is. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:27, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Never thought "Strike out usernames that have been blocked" would be important until now. As for this move, I'll post it alongwith your comments here in the WP:ICTF, if you are OK with it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:21, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: I'm OK with your pasting my comment at ICTF. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:26, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: I didn't know you were going to post the entire conversation. I thought you'd post your general query to the forum and then just the relevant section of my large comment where I weighed in on the page move. Mind fixing that, please? Like: "I saw a page move and had questions about whether or not it was helpful. Cyphoidbomb said "blah blah blah"." Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh sorry. I copied the whole thing, but forgot to remove the irrelevant part LOL . Done that. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:35, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Diva166

Hi can you check this user Diva166 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). There is no change is the editing behavior. Sid95Q (talk) 17:20, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry!

I saw your message when I got up, cleared the alert from my talk, and meant to get around to it but forgot! Glad it’s been handled. If something’s waiting on me after a day or two in the future, feel free to poke me. I see all messages but can sometimes be forgetful in responding :/ TonyBallioni (talk) 03:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Thanks! I figured there was a strong likelihood someone else would get around to it. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Netflix as external link

Hi I was trying to find a discussion on netflix used as an external link for original film/ series as it might not be according to external links policy (WP:ELNO) but is used in many articles like Roma (2018 film) and Daredevil (TV series). The only discussion I was able to find on this was User_talk:Cyphoidbomb/Archive_23#Netflix_in_external_links?. So is it OK to use netflix as an external link for original programming etc. Sid95Q (talk) 12:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: Sometimes it helps to see if you can find out who added the links. In the case of Roma, it was in this edit by someone with 12 edits to their name, so they're probably not versed in Wikipedia protocols. At Daredevil it was this IP editor. So I'm still not feeling strong community guidance here. Two options: Open a discussion on the WP:ELNO talk page, or, maybe a stronger choice: ask the folks at WikiProject Television if they think it should be included. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I have started a discussion here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Netflix as external link. Warm Regards. --Sid95Q (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

crore or billion rupees

I got involved in a revert situation here citing WP:COMMONALITY. Not to mention, they also used rupee to dollar conversion templates which I believe is against consensus as per this discussion. Kindly see. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: I left them a non-warning here. They are technically correct about commonality, but I find this an impossible thing to enforce. I don't see the use of a rupee to dollar conversion in that edit. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:58, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Some IP reverted their edit here citing this consensus. And they used "INRConvert" template in the "Box Office" section. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:00, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: The guidelines surrounding this issue seem to be kind of a patchwork. The consensus you cited only refers to the Infobox, and the Indian cinema task force's policy is primarily that the conversion to dollars is unnecessary in the Infobox, so it's not recommended there. The consensus that @Cyphoidbomb is referring to concludes that, if used, all uses of "crore" and "lakh" must be given proper conversions to US dollars when referring to currency. Neither of them explicitly calls out whether the Indian numbering system terms are allowed for non-currency instances. And all of this is still contradicted by WP:COMMONALITY, which I side with. Practical enforcement is not really a strong argument for whether something should be allowed on English Wikipedia that is basically a non-native construction. There are many articles in "Indian English" which fail the grammatical test or the like, but clearly we don't change policy based on the fact that "somebody else is going to change it back and make the same mistake". It's also the same reason we don't use Chinese, Korean, German, or any other regional terminology to refer to large numbers just because they happen to use it commonly and colloquially in those areas. Accessibility is a tenet of WP, but in this case, within the confines of proper English: having an article explaining what a "crore" is makes sense, writing WP articles using the term "crore" doesn't. Anyway, I clearly disagree with the second consensus surrounding the use of "crore" and "lakh" on WP at all, but I digress; I don't know how to reconcile the patchwork that is the set of guidelines surrounding this. - Getsnoopy (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Dadasaheb Phalke Award and its pretenders

Do you know of any systematic efforts to clean up fake claims of having won the Dadasaheb Phalke Award from wikipedia bios? I recall having seen such claims in bios of minor TV stars in the past and today I came across someone who was apparently the "sole holder of the prestigious Dada Saheb Phalke excellence award 2016 in the field of fashion photography". I suspect that there are many more such pretenders hiding in this list. Abecedare (talk) 17:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare: I posted a similar query at ICTF talk page few days back Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Dada_Saheb_Phalke_Award/Dadasaheb_Phalke_International_Film_Festival_Awards.--Sid95Q (talk) 20:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: Ah, I'd missed that! Besides a clean-up of current links, I was wondering if we need to add a sentence/section to Dadasaheb Phalke Award about the Similarly named awards citing the HT article as a source? Abecedare (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare and Sid95Q: Interesting article. I can see why this irritates you! Typical marketing crap. I can't think of a quick way to do this, because ultimately we'd have to look at the claim, compare the claim against the list of winners, and remove the claim (or modify it). AWB allows for making lists based on various criteria. I could conceivably create a list of pages that link to this award, then manually remove the biographies of the authentic winners, and then clean up that way. Let me think about this for a bit. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare and Sid95Q: So in a case like this, what would we do? REmove the award from List of accolades received by Padmaavat? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I too am not sure on how exactly to deal with the problem, which is why I thought of asking you (and your talkpage watchers) with your greater experience with Indian cinema related articles. Some thoughts, taking the Ranveer Singh case as an example:

It may not be justifiable to entirely remove the "Dadasaheb Phalke Excellence Award" from Ranveer Singh, Padmaavat etc just because the award is not notable enough to have a wikipedia article of its own, irrespective of our personal assessment of the award/award-givers. On the other hand, it is inarguably wrong to wikilink that award's mention to Dadasaheb Phalke Award. So at a minimum, we should undo the wikilink. The problem is that many/most of these clone awards are unlikely to deserve a wikipedia article of their own (as I just argued at an AFD), and even if we remove the wikilink, (1) readers are likely to confuse the "Excellence" award with the DSP Award in any case, and (2) other editors are likely add back the link in mistaken good-faith.

So one idea would be to create the Similarly named awards section within Dadasaheb Phalke Award and then redirect any of these clone awards that don't merit an article of their own to that section. The clone awards that do happen to pass WP:GNG can have a {{Distinguish}} hatnote instead. What do you all think? Abecedare (talk) 17:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare: This seems to be a pretty significant issue, so I think we should discuss this in a central location, I'm going to respond to Sid's post at WT:ICTF. I encourage you to paste your comments there, if you wouldn't mind. Thanks and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Good idea. Will do (after a short afk). Abecedare (talk) 17:18, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

• I agree with Abecedare. Also, under "awards" (eith in BLP, or films), readers will most likely think/assume of these clone awards as a subcategory of the original. Most people dont even know that there is only one recipient per year. —usernamekiran(talk) 18:35, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: Would you mind commenting at WP:ICTF? Sid opened a discussion which I have since responded to. Abecedare hasn't commented yet. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:40, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Commented at ICTF now... coming around to the view that these are not even worth mentioning in the awardees' articles, but irrespective of how consensus on that develops we should be doing a better job helping readers make a distinction between the awards, as HT does in the above-mentioned and even more routine articles. Anyway, best to continue discussion at ICTF. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Abecedare, Sid95Q, and Usernamekiran: I've created WP:DADASAHEB and WP:PHALKE, which redirect to a new section I wrote at WP:ICTF. It may not survive long-term, but if it gets deleted, we can recreate it as an essay in my user space or something. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:56, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah Thank you. I think these links will be helpful in handling edits related to these counterfeit awards backed by some sloppy media coverage. Sid95Q (talk) 20:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Joy Badlani

Joy Badlani vandalism has spread to IMDb. Currently around 200 credits listed in his filmography. Few of the films I have seen and I remember no such characters. Someone has to take initiative to investigate this. Has this actor appeared in any movie actually? There's no verifiable sources on the internet, except some passing mentions which may likely be sourced from IMDb or Wikipedia itself. 2409:4073:2005:E66C:8DB9:6069:A930:D527 (talk) 06:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Anon, I wouldn't even know how to go about fixing this. I brought something similar up to WikiProject Film after seeing this BS biography. User Nardog suggested I make the corrections myself at IMDb or go to GetSatisfaction. I don't have the time for either at present and I don't think IMDb makes it easy to contact their staff. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:18, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Also, I think he has appeared in films. If you search for "Joy Badlani" (with quotes) at YouTube, you'll find a few things, including a poorly-assembled demo reel. (I don't want to link to it in case it is a copyright violation.) So the guy exists. Unless it's some other guy being named Joy Badlani. But stuff like this, where businessworld.in (whatever that is) lists him as a star of Sarkar after Keerthy Suresh, is a bit confusing, particularly when I search for Joy Badlani Sarkar at YouTube, I get nothing. He's either among the most prolific unknown actors in the world, or the details of his work are exaggerated. Compounding the problem, is that we can't rely on these random websites we find like this. How do we know they aren't using content harvesting bots that scrape pages like Wikipedia for info? Badlani's PR people need to get more journalists interested in him. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Successfully removed 19 credits at once, films that I have seen. It was rather easy, you just need to submit sources for proving he did not appeared in those films, I used [12], [13], [14], [15]. The only problem is you have to individually select each film. 2405:204:D08A:DAD6:8044:3F78:56D2:81B2 (talk) 19:23, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Wow, nice work! Seems so hard to prove that someone didn't appear in something. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:03, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Saaho

Recently, a user is removing "Tamil" as a language in which the movie was shot. He says it is dubbed. Initially he made a rather vandal like edit here. Now he's come up with a newsminute source which does mention that Tamil part was dubbed but doesn't even mention Malayalam here. The source which comes from a reliable agency is confusing since long standing sources like [16], [17] mention "Tamil" as a language shot concurrently with Hindi and Telugu. I reverted his edit citing WP:OR. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:29, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Did you ask them what the basis for their change was? Yes, it's unhelpful to just remove sourced content like this without some sort of proof of the claim they're making. They probably should have opened a discussion first. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:07, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I didn't ask him but he posted this in my talk page. And I replied there. If he makes a change again, I'll open a discussion at the article talk and ping you. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:25, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I probably would not have considered that edit vandalism, since he did explain in the edit summary. Unsourced assertion, perhaps. I also think you should have used an edit summary in your reversion. I can't stress how important edit summaries and opening discussions are. That said, these sorts of weird edits bother me. Just had a guy yesterday swap out an IBT gross for Andhra Box Office, just deciding on his own which fact was true. These just reek of confirmation bias, i.e. the attitude of "I believe something is true, so I look for information that supports that belief and reject all other information." Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:55, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you. More of a POV edit that was and I should have treated it that way. Actually yesterday I say this and in that moment, I was like... vandal!!. This Saaho article has drawn all sorts of POV pushers. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Liked your edit summary here :D - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Indian articles are so prone to this over-exaggerated language, and especially in this case, whomever submitted it isn't aware that the world is huge and there is no way that it performed better than most Western films. That, plus "blockbuster", "super hit", "disaster", "flop", etc--it's like the film version of caste, this hunger to label everything in absolute terms. SMH... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:15, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Hello Sir, I wanted to ask you about your opinion about the recent talks about the language in the film Saaho. For me it seems to be an over-interpretation of the mentioned sources trying to avoid mentioning Tamil as language. Luigi Boy ルアイヂ ボイ ^talk 20:52, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Review my article

Dear sir can you please review my article Draft:Nanna Prakara please and even move it from draft to article please please.Shreyashv26 (talk) 15:13, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

@Shreyashv26: New talk page comments go at the bottom of the page. I've fixed this for you. Soundtrack is one word. There are still numerous grammar/typographical errors on the page. There's no reference proving that filming began. Why do we care about marriage? Why are we including the film's rating. See WP:FILMRATING. Actually, you need to read that entire MOS:FILM page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Bhanwar singh vaish

SidSakpal (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) Looks like another account of Bhanwar singh vaish. Similar to this account Sidtalk (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Sid95Q (talk) 17:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

2019 in film

Hi Cyphoidbomb. Can you take a look at this discussion? There appears to be some general agreement but apparently not enough participants for a consensus. Pinging the article contributors once didn't work, so I am confused as to how to reach a solid agreement for a decision when there are not many participants. DeluxeVegan (talk) 04:11, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Ripapart (talk) 22:36, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

New user mass editing numerous articles

Rvls is an illegitimate account of Ritizubumab you blocked last year. Edits on same articles: Mohanlal, S. S. Rajamouli, Savitri (actress), Chiranjeevi, Telugu cinema. Comparing the former version and versions of Ritizubumab and Rvls: Mohanlal [18][19][20], S. S. Rajamouli [21][22][23] ("high fantasy works"). Rvls has edited the same articles as Uricnobel too. Rvls has made major changes at some articles, entirely rewritten Kannada cinema, Malayalam cinema etc. 2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58 (talk) 14:05, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Good eye. I agree with you! I'll take care of it, thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Unsourced / disruptive changes

Sir, IPs and a user are changing birth place of Ahsaas Channa from Jalandhar to Mumbai. But Jalandhar is sourced as per this which is used in the article. Would you kindly protect the page from further disruption. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:52, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Looks like this has already been handled. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

User:Islamic Ranger

Hi, can you please check out this user who has a clear agenda for ethnicity claims without proof and is a probable sock of the recent ips at ANI. On his talkpage the message to admins seems a snark, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 19:54, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ponyo, Bbb23, and NinjaRobotPirate: Could any of you look into this, please? I think we might be talking about Mtbltwimtblttph here. I don't know the specifics or scope of the disruption, but this Islamic Ranger recreated a category page created by the Mtbl*.* account. Also note the mocking comment on their talk page. This may have to be one that you keep looking out for, but I'm not trying to tell you how to spend your summer vacation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Is the master Muhammad Samiuddin Qazi (sami)? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I dunno about NRP, but Ponyo is on holiday at the moment. I don't know the meaning of the word. Anyway, I don't have time to do all the paperwork, but I've blocked Islamic Ranger and will post findings at the SPI tomorrow.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Bbb23. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Re User:2A02:C7F:2282:9800:7D97:BD4C:9975:7621

You blocked them for a month (1), but not before they pretended to be User:Radiphus and posted an inappropriate comment on my talk page (2). I think an indefinite block might be called for, as I suspect this might be a sock of User:ProudCitizen (who was recently blocked as per my filed complaint at EW). Maybe the impersonation attempt warrants an indef block? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:40, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@Jack Sebastian: Hi there, we don't indefinitely block IPs, we indefinitely block user accounts. I applied a /64 range block to hopefully irritate their efforts to hop IPs, and I have extended the block to 3 months since I later learned that they've been doing this crap since January. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:26, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Well, okay then. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 07:11, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Critical Response of Saaho

It is very clear from the reviews. Didn't you see the top references I've provided? Where's the question of misinterpretation? Are you an ardent fan of the film who doesn't want others to give genuine information.

Cyebyckk (talk) 23:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Spare me your phony indignation. You're not even welcome to edit at Wikipedia. Have your first account unblocked and then I'd be happy to educate you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:25, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

The nerve of some people. His unblock request is one of the most unintentionally hilarious Asks of the week. Its like asking to buy Greenland when you can't even afford a hotel. lol - Jack Sebastian (talk) 07:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are most welcome sir.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Comali

Greetings, reply to the message regarding this edit re: this edit, the lead actor of the film refered to the film's talking point as USP in the article. I forgot to cite the source. I too didn't know about the word USP until I came across the article. Should I now add the word in a different section with reference or should i just leave it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balasubramanianrajaram (talk • contribs) 02:44, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Balasubramanianrajaram: We should be presenting content in a way that regular people can understand. I don't know why he chose to use "USP", but if you don't know what it is, maybe the smart choice is to change the phrasing so that the jargon is accessible to everybody. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:32, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I have sourced correctly

You have claimed I didn't source new information I've added on Sanju's accolades section while I added two sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Correctoryamum (talk • contribs) 16:24, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

I made a stupid mistake. I apologised on your talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:27, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Maharshi (2019 film)

Hi, In Maharshi (2019 film), you changed the gross figure to an old edit, but the cited source doesn't mention that figure (₹245 crore), that India Today source is weird, the title says "Maharshi box office collection Day 7: Mahesh Babu film zooms past Rs 200-crore mark" and article says "According to trade analysts, the film has raked in nearly Rs 295 crore gross in seven days" and attributes a Non-RS Twitter account's tweet which says "#Maharshi crossed Full run gross of #BharatAneNenu 232.68 Crs within one week". -- Panda619 (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

and here, the makers of the movie released a poster for "175 crore at the worldwide box office in less than three weeks" and I used a very recent source from Times of India, which says "has grossed over Rs 175 crore at the global box-office in its full run" Panda619 (talk) 05:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Panda619: I yield. I thought I checked it for the 245 claim, but apparently my mind played tricks on me, but also, yes, I haven't heard of those Twitter sources, so, good catch, thank you. Please revert. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

RonakshiStan

Hi this user RonakshiStan (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) looks like another sock of Shiwam Kumar Sriwastaw who previously created this account Ronakshi (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Sid95Q (talk) 11:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Could also be Dimpletisha - see [24]. Regardless, need some good examples of similar edits (or even better, the same edits on the same page!) to really go to SPI. I'm 99.9% sure they are a sock, but there are too many active sockmasters in the Indian film / tv area. Ravensfire (talk) 15:01, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Edits like This reminds me of edit conflicts between Dimpletisha and KaranSharma0445 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). So RonakshiStan and InGrayscale (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) could be socks of Dimpletisha and KaranSharma0445. Sid95Q (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Sid95Q, Very possible, but SPI investigations need solid evidence. The editor comparison is one piece, but really more is needed. I think I've got something for RS, but haven't looked deep enough yet. Ravensfire (talk) 15:17, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

MGufran

Hi Cyphoidbomb, can you take a look at MGufran's contributions? They have been disruptively adding spam links at War and Laal Kaptaan. Thanks, DeluxeVegan (talk) 10:11, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

• Also, logged out editing. DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:18, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, DeluxeVegan. They've been blocked. If you see any more of this, let me know and we can add the link to the spam blacklist. I don't see any more instances. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:27, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Magadheera gross reports

Hi, just wanted to let you know about different gross figures reports of Magadheera, I think the 150 crore claim is from AndhraBoxOffice and has been circular reported by other sources. Here are some different figures with sources 80 crore (12), 104 crore (1 2) and here (104 crore), an interesting article where the director Rajamouli is talking about inflated Magadheera box office figures (video). Panda619 (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@Panda619: Since there has been clear doubt cast on the high figures, with some walking-back by Rajamouli, I'm happy to yield on this if you'd like to change it. But would you please participate in that talk page discussion so that it's clear what the rationale is for your changes. I'll be happy to respond there. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

In case I wasn't clear about the "clear doubt cast on the high figures", I was referring to the Hindustan Times article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:48, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb, there are conflicting reliable sources for 2.0 collections. So, we should change the 2.0 collections to 500-800 crores. tamil.samayam.com is the Tamil version of Times of India. https://www.hindustantimes.com/regional-movies/2-0-china-box-office-collection-rajinikanth-akshay-kumar-s-film-tanks-makes-just-rs-18-crore/story-gNxEIU4eabsjvEBtcwPdcJ.html https://tamil.samayam.com/tamil-cinema/movie-news/list-of-a-top-10-tamil-movies-of-all-time-worldwide-box-office-collection/articleshow/68112250.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.237.200.200 (talk) 10:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

WP:PRIMARYSOURCE

For years I've been trying to get Mullum Malarum to FA status, but my efforts always fail because there is always at least one cynical user whose comments are hard to address, let alone understand. In the latest failure, it was Fowler&fowler who partially (maybe more) opposed the use of the film's director J. Mahendran's memoir Cinemavum Naanum as it was a primary source. He did however say, "It can be used for some factual data, but not for sentences about the history of the writing". I raised this issue at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources#Memoirs as RS, where someone replied, "When used for information about the subject, or the subject's works, a memoir would be a primary source, which could be a reliable source but must be used with care, as explained on WP:Reliable sources. It could be a secondary source when the author is writing about works written by others". Sadly, the book doesn't have an OCLC or ISBN, does that make it non-RS? But there is third-party coverage, and I bought a copy years ago. Now do you believe the book can be used at all as a source in MM? If so, where all should it be removed? All I know is, primary sources cannot be used for info like box office collections. --Kailash29792 (talk) 04:29, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: I'm not much of a content creator, but I don't see what's wrong with using a primary source for small sections of content, and for uncontroversial claims, so long as they are properly noted, like "In his memoir, Mahendran explained that he did ___". I understand F&F's point about maybe not quoting, since translations might be open to interpretation, but I don't think we need an English secondary source to explain everything if that's what they expect. That said, I'm not familiar with the article or its progress so I'm not sure to what extent you were using it, though, and it seems like something the community could/should figure out. As for the quality of the memoir, I certainly can't issue an edict about that. Who published the book? Was it an established publication house? I don't think the lack of an ISBN should prevent a source from being used, but I'd probably only be comfortable using something that came from an established publishing house, where, presumably, there are fact-checkers and editors. Sorry that I can't be of any more help. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:59, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

This is what Fowler wrote

The problem here is that we have a book of recollections of J. Mahendran, the director of a movie, Mullum Malarum: Mahendran, J. (2013) [2004]. Cinemavum Naanum [Cinema and Me] (in Tamil). Karpagam Publications., published in the Tamil language, unavailable under the author's name on WorldCat (see here and here), or in the Library of Congress Catalog, or on Google books (all three list Tamil language publications); never translated; very likely not peer-reviewed before publication; and to my knowledge, not reviewed in an English language journal or newspaper after publication (see here) These recollections were being employed for citing text added to the Development section of the movie . Its assessment proved very difficult for this reviewer [...] that uncataloged memoir is not appropriate except by way of one or two vignettes that support statements in reliable secondary sources.

So what does that make the book? Usable or not? I shared with Fowler the development details translated so that he could verify, but I don't understand why he didn't use them. --Kailash29792 (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: Sorry, I was out of town for a few days. I think this is a little out of my league and I might recommend asking some of the folks at WT:IN or even at WikiProject Biography, since they would have ample experience about self-published sources. Does WP:SELFPUB help at all one way or another? If we knew for a fact that the memoir was written by the subject, for example, if he were hawking it on his verified Instagram channel or selling it on TV, then there might be a reasonable argument to use it based on WP:SELFPUB. But in the absence of certainly, maybe it's not the best choice? On the other hand, I don't know who'd go out of their way to fake an entire memoir. That just seems unlikely. Sorry I can't really be of much help here, and I sympathise with your frustration. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

ABTHEBOSS

Hi can you help this user ABTHEBOSS (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). I explained him here [25] and [26] that Star Parivaar Awards are not notable and also advised him to start a discussion on Indian Cinema Task Force talk page but this user is still reverting edits. Warm Regards. Sid95Q (talk) 18:35, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Here itb looks like the user logged out to revert the edit. Sid95Q (talk) 19:07, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Ronit Roy I think this page needs protection for a while. Sid95Q (talk) 11:35, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Sid95Q: Done. 2 weeks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Latest on our HK friend

• 101.78.169.241 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Reverted several edits, others seemed tolerable. Ravensfire (talk) 03:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Thanks for the heads-up! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:55, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

101.78.245.57 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), already reverted everything. Ravensfire (talk) 14:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Thanks, blocked. I'll see if there's any way to get a rangeblock set up. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Songs notability

Hello, could you share your view on this? WP:NSONGS #2, #3, most probably, are not applicable. I am unsure if millions of views/newspaper mentions on YouTube helps in notability. Regards --Titodutta (talk) 07:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@Titodutta: Hey there! Short story: this editor's contributions had the aroma of undisclosed paid editing. Brand new user, sloppy cookie-cutter articles thrown together, running across scores of article talk pages and fudging their article class assessments, etc. Later I learned that the user involved has been CheckUser indeffed as a sockpuppet of Vc4137, so even if any of those songs had standalone notability, they could absolutely be deleted on general principle (or specifically, G5 Speedy), which I guess they have been. In this case, my bullshit detector was picking up some serious stink and I acted accordingly. That said, I do very much appreciate your assumption of good faith and circumspect approach. You are a strong asset at Wikipedia for many reasons. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:55, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your action and message. Please let me know if I can help you in Indian movie-related articles or elsewhere. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 16:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Watermarked image

First of all you should talk respectively. And secondly I thought I can use any image which is free to use. Anyways now I'm cropping the image so I think I can use it on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ABTHEBOSS (talk • contribs) 03:27, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Replying at your talk page, where you are more likely to benefit from the discussion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Message at User talk:ABTHEBOSS

I dropped a message for you at User_talk:ABTHEBOSS#Repeated_unconstructive_edits. Notifying you here in case the user deletes the section from their talk page. --Tamravidhir (talk) 15:37, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Janhvi Kapoor

Hey Cyphoidbomb, do you think Janhvi Kapoor now holds up to the notability criteria? Since Kapoor has not had any release after her first film Dhadak, I thought nope and tagged it for speedy deletion under G4, but was reverted on the basis that she received an award for best debut. WP:NACTOR says nothing about awards, so I am a little confused here. DeluxeVegan (talk) 17:30, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

@DeluxeVegan: Speedy deletion won't work, but it could feasibly be redirected again. With two unreleased films in the hopper, there's still no indication she's met WP:NACTOR, since nothing really has changed since the last time it was redirected. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

User_talk:Sid95Q#reply_to_your_concern_regarding_me_adding_unverified_content_on_Wikipedia.

Hi can you help me here the user id repeating same things again and again. Thanks. Sid95Q (talk) 21:54, 24 September 2019 (UTC)