User talk:Krish!/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Featured lists

It's a pain for my eyes to read your talk because of the pink colour (For some unknown reason my eyes can't hold it and I get dizzy) so I'd like if we continue this thread I'm starting on my talk, Okay? Nothing personal, of course. I see that you have an interest in featured content, and recently in featured lists. I see that your list has received several opposes so it's difficult that it will pass this time. So, I'd like to help you on your endeavors about getting that list (and others) to featured list status, and helping you learn as much as possible what constitutes a fueatured list, and how to write one. Do you accept? :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I have to postpone our collaborative work on Barfi! some additional time. I am somewhat stressed recently and I need to drain that our first. You can go ahead and start expanding the article, I will jump in when I manage to regain my calmness. I will still help you with your featured list(s) as I said, of course. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 03:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm Don't expand the lead too much okay? It will look buggy xD Anyways, I will polish it more later. Have a nice day :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your amazing work at List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra - I've to say you have put in great amount of time and effort for making the article what it is today. It'll be an FL in future undoubtedly. Its really good to see you working positively with dedication on such articles. Keep it up! TheSpecialUser TSU 04:34, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For your hard work on Priyanka Chopra's List of awards and nominations. Keep it up! GleekVampire (talk) 16:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Peer review

Pks, articles often stay at peer review for a week or two without getting any comments. Your list hasn't even been at FLC for two days. Peer review isn't meant to be a quick process, since it takes us reviewers time to get around to articles sometimes. There are a lot of articles on the PR page, and often people will take on the oldest so that they don't go without a review. Don't fear; your article will get attention eventually. If you were planning on article work elsewhere, by all means tackle that while you are waiting for a review. Many people do article work at a lower stage while waiting for reviews. Also, don't think that I've forgotten your request; I am busy and may not be able to provide an immediate review, but I will do it at some point, hopefully this week. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I hope you keep your promise and work on it.—PKS:1142 · ^(TALK) 19:35, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've started reviewing your article at PR, waiting for your reply there! Cheers, Zia Khan 00:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy new year!

	Happy new year!
	May 2013 bring lots of happiness and perhaps a change for the better here on Wikipedia. Good luck with the Priyanka Chopra awards list and I hope you can take it to FL one day. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 03:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

NDTV interview link

This is really good. I can see using this in several areas of the article, including the new artistry section. It only confirmed the Army School though, from what I could see, right? If you can find more things like this, it would be awesome. BollyJeff | talk 00:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad It helped you. I would definitely do that. Well, I'm helping IndianBio on the artistry section as I want it to merge as fast as we can.....Coz its near top position on GOCE and there is also a drive in this month. Its it possible that someone may grab the article. So, we have to as fast as we can.—PKS:1142 · ^(TALK) 03:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I added it to the main article already. You are right we need to get the new section in soon. Maybe I can help on it too. We'll see. BollyJeff | talk 03:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Ya, its nice. Hey, the article is very near at GOCE position ,we have to do whatever we have in a day or two. We should start working on that section. What's say.—PKS:1142 · ^(TALK) 03:48, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

You know, I am not really sure what else to put here. It wasn't my idea anyway. BollyJeff | talk 03:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

My sandbox

Appreciate your interest and help in the Chopra artistry section, but please never delete content from my sandbox. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Okk, I'm not gonna even help ok. That's you are saying. Well my point was to complete it within a day or two as it is near top position at GOCE. I removed the lines which were unwanted. We can't add a whole section describing a particular scene.—PKS:1142 · ^(TALK) 07:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I did not say not to help. I said I appreciated it, but don't delete content. The section is unfinished and needs polishing and does not help if you delete stuff on your whim. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 07:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, you should use the references of "Public image" to build that section. It all say about her roles, critics and experts advice on Chopra's acting. I would provide every link you want. Are you ready for the work.—PKS:1142 · ^(TALK) 07:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

You have misunderstood the section. The section does not talk about her public image and its analysis, rather its an analysis of Chopra's acting style, her delivery, the impact of her roles and influences she mustered up. Teh Public image is how the media and the general public sees her and how she is perceived in a third party sense. Clear? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 08:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I knew better ok. You misunderstood me, I was saying to use the sources of that section as some of them also talk about her acting style. If I was not understanding that so, how and why I added that influence section. Please, don't say that I'm don't understand certain things and you are an expert.—PKS:1142 · ^(TALK) 08:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't implying that at all. I was suggesting and explaining what the section was all about. If you say you understand, I'm fine. Cheer up :) —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 09:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

reply

Oops, sorry. I was talking about the artistry section. I don't know what else to put there. For sex symbol, we have several other editors agreeing that it should be in, so I hope you can understand and let it be. BollyJeff | talk 15:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Krish!. You have new messages at Smarojit's talk page.
Message added 07:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 07:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I am not here to engage in petty squabbles with you. I undid a revision by you, for the betterment of the article and for no personal agenda. I am sorry if you misunderstand that. Happy editing. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 13:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Help

Prashant  Talk to Me  04:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Why do you want to change the image? The current one is perfectly fine! Besides, she didn't even win anything at Filmfare. Anyway, just wanted to inform you that changing info box images without valid reasons is against wikipedia policies! GleekVampire | talk! 04:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

What about wrong infos....I want that image coz I want a notable Award like filmfare's jpeg.thats it.Prashant  Conversation  05:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

What wrong infos are you talking about? LOL it doesn't matter which awards show the picture is taken at. It just has to be clear enough for people to see it properly! and I think the current one is perfectly fine. So if you really wanna change it then you'll have to discuss it on the talk page and give better reasons than the one you just provided. GleekVampire | talk! 05:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Don't be so rude. The current picture is not up to the mark.Prashant  Conversation  05:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Look, I don't want to argue over such petty issues! I was just informing you. BTW, what is wrong with the current image? I'm pretty sure users Bollyjeff, IndianBio and Smarojit will agree that there's no need to change it. GleekVampire | talk! 05:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Friendship support??? I'm not here for the same too. Don't argue. Wikipedia is not once property. Don't ever talk to me. Do your work. Happy Editing.Prashant  Conversation  05:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

This isn't "friendship support", it's just common sense! Exactly, Wikipedia is not anyone's property so please don't change things without discussing with the other editors of that particular article. FYI, I'm not interested in talking to you either but since we're working on the same article I will have to tolerate you! :) You've already been blocked once, don't repeat the same mistakes you made last time. Coz if you get blocked again, it'll be permanent! This is not a threat, just a warning! Happy editing! GleekVampire | talk! 05:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Feeling sorry for you coz I'll never going to be blocked in future as I had no other issues. You are tolerating me....so you finally said the "Truth" I can't say the same coz I think you and other editors on Chopra article are wonderful. I forgot that I'm the most idiot. I didn't contributed anything to any article. My contributions are not good. Thank you for making me realize.Prashant  Conversation  05:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I never said that you're not a good editor. You've done a lot of good work on Wikipedia, for which I even gave you a barnstar. As for my comment about tolerating you, I said that because you're always stubborn and argumentative. You seriously need to work on your communication skills. Anyway I wasn't trying to make you realize anything. Everything I said was for the betterment of the article and for no personal agenda. Cheers! GleekVampire | talk! 05:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, but I always take everyone's permission. Yes, I'm quite weak in communication. Nevertheless, its ok. I don't have any problems with anyone. I'm here to learn and you could really help me. I want this from you and others too.Prashant  Conversation  06:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Great! Don't hesitate to contact me if you need any information. GleekVampire | talk! 06:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Off course, Can you give me the link for the 19th screen awards popular choice link as the existing one is dead now. If you found pls add that.Prashant  Conversation  06:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Please contact User:GleekVampire. I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for. I don't know wha the 19th screen award popular choice link is... Mkdw^talk 08:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Krish!. You have new messages at Mkdw's talk page.
Message added 08:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mkdw^talk 08:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Krish!. You have new messages at Mkdw's talk page.
Message added 08:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mkdw^talk 08:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Reply

No, I don't understand. One moment you seem vulnerable and ask for help, and the very next moment you accuse me of bad-faith, plagiarism and what not. No one doubts the fact that you work hard, and no one will, because you have put in a lot of work on several Chopra-related articles. But a lot of editors have issues with you (and rightfully so) for the way you behave. You keep saying that you want to learn, but you NEVER pay attention to any advice, use foul language, and constantly accuse other editors of being mean to you (which is quite obviously not true). So, I suggest you to take some time off, study for your exams (which is much, much more important than editing here), probably join a communication course and then get back to editing. Cheers. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 03:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

New version of artistry section

It may be more balanced, but still repeats information from the rest of the article. Some of the reviews could just be added into the main article body. It just doesn't add enough to warrant its own section, I think. BollyJeff | talk 13:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Balan's "Media image and artistry" section is not a rehashing of her career. It mainly talks about her trying to change her image, her body issues, her female hero status, and has a much shorter list of honors like in Chopra's "Public image" section thrown in as well. It is different. We don't have to have a section like that. Chopra's article is quite huge and already has double the sources of Balan's. BollyJeff | talk 14:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Its not just me. Also ask Dwaipayan, IndianBIO, and smarojit to review your sandbox. I would like to here their comments. BollyJeff | talk 15:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I am sort of busy now, and the time I have in Wikipedia is going to the article Kareena Kapoor. So I could not take a deeper look at Priyanka! The section in your sandbox seems repetitive definitely.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Your copy-edit request for Parineeti Chopra

Hi, Pks1142, I have removed your copy-edit request for the above article from the GOCE Request page. I've done this because you already have three articles awaiting copy-edit; we ask that requesters don't add more than three requests at the same time. Please feel free to re-add the article to the queue once one of the other requests has been fulfilled. Thanks for your understanding. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I have re-added your request above because another editor has fulfilled your request for copy-edit to List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

be very careful removing refs

Please make sure any award ref you remove are covered in that link; do not assume. Also, some may be used for other info than just awards. Here is the BH link for the later awards in case you dont have it already: link. It should be archived too. BollyJeff | talk 17:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if this work is really necessary. No one has complained about the article size or number of refs. What if someone comes along and says the BH awards link is not reliable. Then we have lost all those other refs. I was myself was concerned about this on the Kareena review, but so far it seems to be okay. I am just saying, it may be safer to leave it alone. BollyJeff | talk 18:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

You are giving me a heart attack here. Please stop removing all our work for no reason!!! BollyJeff | talk 18:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I think I see what you are doing. But to use that "lifetime" source, the reader will have to search for all the films from a particular year, and count down to see which one is 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc; whereas with the old sources they are labeled 1, 2, 3. Using this new source makes it much harder to verify and borders on original research. I am sorry to doubt you, but you have to understand, your history here has been a little bit rocky. Why do you propose to replace only negative reviews with "journey" and not positive ones? BollyJeff | talk 20:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but only if they are truly not needed; same sort of criticism/praise, no quotes, etc. Thank you. BollyJeff | talk 20:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Here is journey3: <ref name=journey3>{{cite web|title=Exploring the box office journey of Priyanka Chopra: Part 3 |url=http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/celebrities/features/type/view/id/3604/ |publisher=Bollywood Hungama|author=Tuteja, Joginder |date=23 June 2012|accessdate=29 January 2013}}</ref> BollyJeff | talk 21:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

One talks about witty dialogs and that she has nothing to do. The other specifically says that she shows no promise. Does the replacement verify either one of these? If not, I would leave them both. BollyJeff | talk 21:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I think you should NOT delete any reviews from the article coz as far as I can remember all the useless ones were already removed and/or shortened. BTW, have you heard of the saying, "Too many cooks spoil the broth"? I think you should back off and let BollyJeff and the other "experienced" editors handle the article, at least until it passes the FAC! I did the same, you should too or else you'll end up ruining the article completely! We're both new and inexperienced. This is just a friendly advice. Don't take it personally! Cheers! GleekVampire | talk! 00:15, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Barfi!

Hello. Nice to connect with you on Wikipedia. Actually, I was not so keen in improving Barfi's page though I personally like that film a lot. Some other user requested me so I just browsed through all possible available sources on the internet and then improved the section. I'm seeing the particular listed source by you (interview on telegraphindia.com) for the first time. Its true, different media, home or international have their own ways of interpretations or reports. If you can improve that part that's good.
Arjann (talk) 13:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Please expand the Marketing section by adding reliable sources like NDTV Movies, The Times of India, Hindustan Times, IBN Live, India Today and Mumbai Mirror, none other than these (For more information, please see Kahaani#Marketing). ----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 07:35, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was talking about the Promotion section. ----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 07:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand. I also have exams starting from tomorrow but it is a 20-marks unit test and it will last till 11 Feb. Till I will work on Jab Tak Hai Jaan.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 13:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Parineeti Chopra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PR (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Pks1142/sandbox5

I will start the copy edit, but it would be nice if I had access to the sources that are cited in the section, so if could temporarily add them, that would be nice. This is helpful when I am confused by something and need to refer to the references. Thank you. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 13:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I need one for that analyst too, at the end of the first paragraph. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 15:20, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

There's no Hindustian Times source. You attribute to HT even though the quotations are taken from Bollywood Hungama. Now I'm confused. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 16:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I finished the copy edit but you should read my hidden comments in edit mode to make the right amendments. Good luck. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 13:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Help!

I need an editor with a high level of proficiency in the english language at a level of either five (5) with English as a professional language, or English as a native language proficiency. Who can copy/edit List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra. Please help.Prashant  ✉  15:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

The article looks fine; what in particular would you like edited? Kevin12xd (talk) (contribs)

The prose is needed according to FL. Currently,It is an flc. So, please help me, it was Edited by GOCE but still, reviewers are telling it weak. They said ut should be edited by an editor having high level of proficiency in the english language at a level of either five (5) with English as a professional language, or English as a native language proficiency. Wikipedia:Featured list_candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra/archive2.Prashant  ✉  16:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

By now there are three rather detailed lists of suggestions at Wikipedia:Featured list_candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra/archive2. I implemented some of them; you can probably fix another couple of those issues. Huon (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I'll review the list after the objections raised by other reviewers have been resolved. It's more important for you to take care of their issues than anything else related to this list, so I want to give you the chance to do that before adding any input. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Help

1. May I use use live video source as reference in featured articles or list?

When I'm not able to find notable sources.Prashant  ✉  10:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

There is a guideline for this at WP:YT. It tells us that the use of video sources should be looked at carefully on a case-by-case basis. Be very careful with anything that is or might be copyright infringement. You're welcome! – Paine (Climax!)  13:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Thank you for the kind words, but a lot of others were involved including yourself. You don't need to spread the word, that was for the peer review. Now I think its pretty much up to the Wikipedia veterans and administrators. Thanks again, BollyJeff | talk 16:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I answered your latest questions on my own talk page. I thought we were done with so many changes now. The mods I made yesterday were because a reviewer on Kapoor said that oneindia was not good. There are still two more remaining; if you could find good replacements that would be nice. If you want to see all the GAs that I did, check my user page. BollyJeff | talk 19:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank's for those good sources! BollyJeff | talk 13:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Please, no more fiddling with the article now. The reviewers are complaining of too many changes since nomination. BollyJeff | talk 14:33, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Many reviewers will say to remove it, as they already have. We have been told time and again that this section is WP:FANCRUFT. It just goes on about the arc of her career, which is a duplicate of the text already in the career section, and adds more praise, WP:PUFF, and WP:PEACOCK. Please do not risk the FAC by adding this. BollyJeff | talk 15:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I have seen Balan's section and I already commented on why it's different. I haven't read the others yet, but I will. Why can't you just let it go? Not every article has to be a carbon copy of the others. BollyJeff | talk 15:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

FA article Preity Zinta does not have this section. None of these GA actors articles have it: Farhan Akhtar, Genelia D'Souza, Kajol, R. Madhavan, Rajinikanth, Rani Mukerji, Ranveer Singh, Riya Sen, Shriya Saran, Taapsee Pannu, Vikram (actor). Kamal Haasan has an "Acclaim and criticism" section which is a bit different. Only Dimple Kapadia and Kareena Kapoor have a section like this, so it is not a must have. BollyJeff | talk 17:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

You are gonna cause the FAC to fail if you keep it up. Wikipedia is about Wikipedia:Collaboration first. We have been told that the artistry section is not needed by many other editors, and despite what you may say, that is still the case. We don't always get what we want it a collaborative environment, so let it go. BollyJeff | talk 16:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

In My City

Hi Pks1142, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, or to correct or revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Done - feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

February 2013

Yes, But my issues were resolved and I supported that. It was editors fault...he changed things many times during flc. Read my earlier comments also. I think you misunderstood it. Some points raised by me were true as they were unclear from written text.Prashant  ✉  04:37, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

So your issues involved including negative reviews for Kapoor's performances, while on the other hand you have repeatedly tried to remove all negative comments from Priyanka Chopra's biography and her song In My City? --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 04:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

You have always humiliated me and never ever appreciated my work on this Wikipedia. So, what should I assume about you. You should have helped me without hearting me as I always have been through humiliation, discrimination and anger in my real life too. I think nobody sees my hard work. You should have appreciated but you only complain

I wanted to removed the Bollywood life source because it is not a notable source with could go against in its GA. That's why. And, about chopra's I only wanted it about Saat Khoon Maaf's reception as there is no need....as the similar films of Kapooes like Dev and Chameli and Balans Salaameishq. That's why performance oriented films. Prashant  ✉  04:51, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Appreciate what hard work? Indulging in hypocrisy? Operating another account to give yourself awards. Sure! Having said that, I and a lot of other editors have always appreciated you whenever you have contributed constructively (and you have quite a lot of times). But you have been notorious for doing a lot worse too... So, no point in justifying your hypocrisy now. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 04:52, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I told hundred times that I never run that account. Its was my friend's and not mine that's why I removed all his awards. Don't called me hypocrat as according to me its an abuse and personal attack. Also, may I know when? You have appreciated me. I haven't seen you. In fact I was among first ones who congratulated you on Balans fac.Prashant  ✉  04:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, so is that the new story now. So why did you remove those awards, if they were awarded by a "friend". Weren't you blocked for two weeks because of that? --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I was blocked for two weeks but not for any edits or fight. Because Green Parakeet abused many accounts or may be I have abused to some IP who were writing sexual comments on a few articles. FIRST READ THE TAGLINE OF THAT BLOCK WHICH READ BLOCKED FOR ABUSING MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS AND NOT FOR EDITING OR ANYTHING ELSE.Prashant  ✉  05:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Why are you yelling? Please, for the nth time, I request you to assume good faith. You cannot prove a point by yelling and shouting, and consequently crying about it. If you can't handle constructive criticism, why don't you take up a different hobby. Play an instrument or something. Or go for a long walk. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

And btw, "abusing" different accounts does not mean literally abusing them. LOL! :P --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I was not yelling at you. I'm always ready for criticism. In fact my whole life is under god's microscope. I was criticized was and discriminated like no one. I think we should be friends because only I had passed the olive branch but you never excepted it. I had no issues with you nor with anyone. Long conversation, Facebook, twitter chat? Wanna know you. What you think.Prashant  ✉  05:20, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Why were you discriminated against? But anyway, your personal life has nothing to do with your edits here. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

No I'm just saying it has nothing to do with my edits. I said because you said in not ready for constructive criticism. That's y I said its natural to me as I am constantly criticized and I can handle with smile. How about we should talk and end up our issues. Are you ready to do so coz you are a great help and tutor. What's say?Prashant  ✉  05:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

See Prashant, I don't have any issues with you and your personal life. So there is no point in talking about that. I (and a lot of other editors) have issues with some of your edits and your unprofessional behaviour. I am taking the time out to talk to you, so that these conflicts can be avoided in the future. That's all. Now, even after all this if you keep up with the same things, then I have nothing to say or do. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Smarojit for your kind gesture. You would not see any kind of misbehaviour from my side. Okk...let it go. Say Something about your other projects on wiki...i think Kajol or Rani may be next FAC.Prashant  ✉  05:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, yeah. I am also working, a bit slowly, on Aishwarya Rai's article. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:50, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

That's nice. How about if I pick Katrina Kaif?Prashant  ✉  05:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, pick any article that interests you. But remember, be neutral. --smarojit ^{(buzz me)} 05:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes....neutral for sure. Happy editing. See you soon after my exam. I'll work on kaif all day long today and then after exam. I think her article needs a good direction seeing she is big star. Cheers!Prashant  ✉  06:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Krish!. You have new messages at Navhus's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reply

What is so important now? As you observed yourself, I prefer to just do the work to improve articles, without a lot of chit chat. BollyJeff | talk 13:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Cool your jets. It's not being vandalized enough for protection. I already asked another editor associated with FACs if I should have other editors take a look, and he said these reviews can take long time and I should not do that and just be patient. BollyJeff | talk 14:14, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Hello, Krish!. You have new messages at Amakuru's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Pks, I wanted to request you not to go around asking people to come and comment on the FAC. It has not been much time since the nomination and eventually reviewers will crop up, but this continuous line of asking people will be seen as canvassing, leading to serious cancellation of the nomination. Please understand this. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Why you see only negative things in my edits. I know your eyes are always glued to my contributions? Please, why you are not letting to do my work and do your work as well. If something is to discuss, only then you should contact. Happy editing.Prashant  ✉  06:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Why did you do that? Asking 30 editors to look at the FAC! We just discussed above how this should not be done, and you did it anyway, as usual. And you are still changing the article as well! It might be helpful if you were to revert those messages, an just wait patiently. BollyJeff | talk 16:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

You weren't aware? You said, "I think you should ask for comments by posting to other seasoned reviewers". I answered, "I already asked another editor associated with FACs if I should have other editors take a look, and he said these reviews can take long time and I should not do that and just be patient". How could you not be aware? BollyJeff | talk 17:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Just please stop making any edits for a while. BollyJeff | talk 18:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)