User talk:Cyphoidbomb

List of highest-grossing Indian films : Addition of a new source

Indian Express ,India Today Can these be added as reliable sources to make a change in the existing content here? —Ananth Sk (talk) 17:11 , 5th November 2016 (UTC)

Huell Howser

Just a heads up: our Arizona IP appears to be back at Huell Howser, block evading using IP12 accounts. I've reverted a couple sets of edits as block evasion, but it may be time for semi-proaction if it keeps up. --Drmargi (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: Thanks, I'll keep an eye out. I just mass rolled-back a bunch of their recent edits. I have a feeling this is going to be irritating and difficult. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:36, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and of course so long as that other IP, 24.251.24.185, is blocked, feel free to revert away if you feel so inclined. There's no 3RR worry. Obviously if you think they improved something you're not required to revert, but you're also not required to give a shit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:38, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I mass reverted a bunch of stuff in the articles about Rocky Horror and Tim Curry. For knows where else he'll jump, and using how many IPs. I agree: irritating and difficult captures it nicely. --Drmargi (talk) 07:41, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Drmargi I have a tool that's basically a one-click deal, so if it gets too overwhelming, let me know and I'll handle it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Will do. These were all in a line, and largely nonsense, so they weren't a hassle, but I've seen others that were. You're a pal! --Drmargi (talk) 07:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: - Looks like MisterAnthony might be one of the IP's previous accounts. Just mentioning it FYI. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:10, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw that last night, and was thinking of mentioning it. Did we identify another account? I can't think whether we did or not. --Drmargi (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: I don't recall. :( Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:02, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I think I'm thinking of Robbery/Sarah down a bit. And while I have you, have you ever dealt with an editor named Twobells? --Drmargi (talk) 05:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: Name doesn't sound familiar, no. I work a lot more in Indian film/television crap these days. It's an area of the encyclopedia that needs far more babysitting, so much of my time is spent dealing with problems in that arena rather than in western stuff. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Your logic is flawed? Duh!

What a rude and uninformed person you seem to be. If you cannot provide sources to verify that someone is what he claims he is, then that is flawed, so is your understanding of the process. If someone has credits, then the movie will say that or there is verifiable record somewhere. In this case we find none. Therefore logically only Shirisha Kunder or one of his hatchet men (such as yourself) would have placed this information. Please apologize for your rudeness. You do not have to apologize for your flawed logic. you have to live that.2602:30A:C7D7:E590:DC69:72B4:CDEF:D6AB (talk) 23:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Avoid the personal attacks or you're quickly going to find yourself unwelcome to edit at Wikipedia. I described your logic as flawed, because it describes something you've done, not who you are. Re: this, as I've explained, a film can be used as a source of uncontroversial information like credits. If you're saying that you've seen those projects and there is no mention of the subject's involvement in those roles, then you should open a discussion on the talk page and explain that, and then if consensus exists, the content can be removed. It's not that difficult. But you making strange declarations like "IMDB gives no credit to Shirish Kunder for any of these claims. If this information is not public, then it must have been placed there by Shirisha himself." just isn't how we do business. IMDB is not considered a reliable source anyway. WP:RS, WP:RS/IMDB, WP:TVFAQ... Regardless, you need to start discussing changes if you feel so strongly about the subject. In many cases I'd probably agree with you, but I don't think you have full objectivity here. I may also press for a topic ban if this keeps up. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:38, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

You can press for what ever you like. That is your choice. I think I have every right as the next person to point out flaws in material. I don't believe that registered Wiki users (Whatever names you give your selves barn star or cookie or what ever! Seems like role playing in fantasy land)have the sole right. You may have etiquette and or ways and means; but, that means nothing to me, as I live in the real world. Instead of wasting your time and energy picking fights, you should simply follow the trail that I followed to see that there is no source for those three categories. So if there is no verifiable source then how did this information come by? It could have only been placed by someone who has a vested interest in the matter. The most probable source would be the person who the page is about. I have done some forensics, and have located at least one contributor from Mumbai who has edits only two pages in three years Shirish Kunder and one of his movies. Now that seems like a pattern. If you cannot see that from your own wiki log, then maybe you are interested in throwing you weight around because of whatever title you accord yourself. This clique like mindset has to be eliminated from wiki. If you are fair, then first investigate if those three sources have a verifiable source, then have the decency to admit it and apologize. It takes someone with integrity to do that. Thank you2602:30A:C7D7:E590:DC69:72B4:CDEF:D6AB (talk) 00:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I have nothing to apologize for, so don't hold your breath. Your approach to that article has been extraordinarily disruptive. FYI, there's an WP:ANI case open about your editing. You should consider responding to it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hard Work Appreciation

I really appreciate the hard work you've done here. I imagine your 2016 on Wikipedia is better than mine. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 09:49, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Cyphoidbomb.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Designated Survivor

I hate to bug you again, but... We've got an editor, Robberey1705 who persists in adding a secondary market international distributor to the infobox for the show. He's been reverted by a couple editors, but persists in reverting, and isn't using the talk page. I jumped into the fray this morning, and have given him an edit warring warning on his talk page, but that didn't seem to have any effect; he immediately reverted my edit. He's determined he's right. Would you want to have a little chat with him, or is AN3 a better choice? He's staying just this side of 3RR so far. --Drmargi (talk) 19:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

He's on the talk page, finally, after leaving a fairly incoherent post on my talk page first, but very aggressive. --Drmargi (talk) 19:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Drmargi: I've dealt with him before as you can see from his talk page history. He's had a history of poor sourcing, failing to discuss, and responding with disproportionate frustrated responses. I'll look into it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I glanced at his TP history, and it didn't look promising. That's why I bugged you. I'll leave it in your capable hands. And he just left me a retaliatory warning. That's king of usual in these situations, though. --Drmargi (talk) 19:24, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys, I am here to offer help. I also have had problems with this user, who changed their username a few months ago. I wouldn't mind helping if it is needed. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 19:31, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: What was his previous user name? He doesn't seem familiar, but I might have crossed paths previously. --Drmargi (talk) 19:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Their previous username was User:Sarahcarterslover. It redirects to their new username. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 19:43, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I remember that user well. --Drmargi (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oh riiiiiight. I remember that name. I remember them for shouting "violation!" in their edit summaries often. I've left a fairly thorough and reasonable (I think) note on their talk page. Cross your fingers. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad to see that the old coconuts are still working ;P In all, yes that person who shouted in every edit summary about "violations" and vandalism with the narrative that they are right no matter what. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 21:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

They seem somewhat more subdued, at least per the discussion on their talk page. It might be a good opportunity to AGF and start anew. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, somewhat, but they're still stridently insisting "I am right, and everyone else is wrong, and doesn't know what they're talking about." That's not hopeful. --Drmargi (talk) 04:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. Also, their OWN behaviour is always there. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 16:31, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

WP: DISRUPT @Cyphoidbomb has not provided sources for Sections 4.8, 4.9. WP:FAILEDVERIFICATION

@Cyphoidbomb seems to be the maintainer of the page Shirish Kunder. Request other editors to take over as the edits individual is making is in violation of WP:DISRUPT and WP:FAILEDVERIFICATION. Individual does not provide sources for sections, this person is the only one privy to that information, therefore it follows that this person must be the one maintaining the page. Also violates WP of neutrality. and WP:CIVILITY. A couple of WP:ANI have been filed. Thank you.2602:30A:C7D7:E590:B8EE:9644:8C6F:FF93 (talk) 21:29, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Take it to ANI. This nonsense doesn't belong on my talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:29, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

What about your nonsense seeing promos designer in credit crawl. Cite it now. Sure this belongs here, if you feel it is nonsense, that is your perception and your problem. Is it not like 3.00 am in the morning in India? Saaaad2602:30A:C7D7:E590:B8EE:9644:8C6F:FF93 (talk) 21:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Take it to ANI. I don't need to have a fruitless discussion with you in two different places. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:57, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

For your collection

		The Purple Barnstar
		Good grief Cyphoidbomb. Between the above and the AN/I thread you certainly deserve this. For the record to any and all concerned the invective and accusations are FALSE FALSE FALSE. I hope that you have a pleasant weekend in spite of this. Cheers MarnetteD|Talk 22:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Ha haa! Greatly appreciated, MD. Thank you. Man, what a time suck. My weekend shall remain unfettered! Yours too, I know. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Don't be biased

Hi, I wanted you to know that the controversies which I have posted on Naagin's Wikipedia page are not based on my opinions. Actually the controversies which I have posted are based on the real facts about 'Naagin Tv Series'. So if you you remove what i have posted then i am not being biased, you are, because you are removing anything that does not praise the show. Read all the content before removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzaroon95 (talk • contribs)

@Kzaroon95: See your talk page. The content you've submitted is completely inconsistent with MOS:TV and constitutes original research. It is wholly unencyclopedic. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:15, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Stop Your Biasness Please !

Kindly, please first read the whole content which i posted on Naagin's wikipedia page before coming to a conclusion that i am being biased or you are. The things that i posted are not opinions they are facts. Almost every celebrity has separate section for his controversies so why can't i create a separate section for controversies.So what do you want? that we just praise the show. Is the Wikipedia for praising shows or giving information. If we can not give controversies of the show on its Wikipedia then why do other celebrities have a separate section for there controversies example Salman Khan controversies. Then why don't you go and remove all of the controversies from other pages as well. Stop your biaseness and let me do what i am doing because they are not my opinions they are facts and if you do not have knowledge about the show then it is not our fault. We know about the show much more than you do. So please stay away from naagin's page and let me do my job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzaroon95 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Kzaroon95: I've explained this on your talk page. Your ruminations and rhetorical questions are tonally inconsistent with an encyclopedia, and they contravene MOS:TV#Things to avoid. Your personal observations and complaints have no place in the article per WP:OR. And I'm going to ask you this one more time: please stop posting comments anywhere other than at the bottom of the talk page, and sign your comments with four tildes. (~~~~). Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:33, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Stop Your Biasness Please !

Try to understand that i am not giving my own opinions . I am just telling facts. I have seen the show so i know much more than you do. So please kindly read what i am saying properly. If it is not allowed to give controversies then why do we have controversies on celebrities Wikipedia pages just answer this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzaroon95 (talk • contribs) 04:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

What I am telling you is far more important than what you are telling me, because what I am telling you represents community consensus, and it is my job to enforce community consensus. On the contrary, what you are telling me represents an opinion from someone who has no experience editing at Wikipedia. Again, I don't fault you for not knowing the rules, but when someone who is far more experienced says, "hey, there's a problem here", maybe, just maybe they happen to know more than you do. Your ANALYSIS contravenes WP:OR and MOS:TV#Things to avoid. Read those pages and try to absorb some of it. Also, please keep the discussion on your talk page. It's too confusing having to respond in two different places, and you are more likely to benefit from this discussion than I am. Respond here please. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:47, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Stop Your Biasness Please !

If you are not a reliable source then why are removing what i am posting on Naagin's wiki. If they in actually are my own opinions not facts then why is not anyone else removing it. If anyone else also feels they they are my opinions then someone else would remove it too. The things that i posted are facts and they are talked on different websites, youtube videos etc. As i said before that you do not have knowledge about the show so you would not understand. So if anyone else also feels that what i have posted is wrong then he will remove it too! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzaroon95 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Please stop responding on my talk page. The appropriate place to ask your questions is on your talk page, where the bulk of the very detailed, very thorough information I've provided is located. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:55, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Another day, another Ishq Hawa Mein sock. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ponyo: At this rate, it might be easier just to vet who isn't a sockpuppet of X or Y. I swear... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

There are days when I'm nearly convinced that it's all one person behind all socks having a great big laugh at our expense.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Bhishoom

I have a feeling he is a sockpuppet of Padmalakshmisx due to his editing style and brief edit summaries. Could you please do something about this? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:29, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: That thought occurred to me as well once I got a whiff of the editing style. I need as much help as I can get, so yes, I can do something about it, but I also need your input in the form of diffs. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:56, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not usually so good at that. I suspected the user only based on what I have listed here. The rest only a die-hard investigator can analyse. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)