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)

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)

Dear Zindagi

Hi Cyphoidbomb! I have left a message on here, and waiting for a good reply... Hope for your kind response. Thanks! M. Billoo 07:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Cyphoidbomb! Please warn Hcns (I am notifying the user too), who is using "junk" language in the edit summary of article. And in my point of view, the user has removed the content which might have been reviewed by you. I think Hcns is trying to act like an Administrator, or something above Admin power. Hope for your strong response against Hcns, Thanks! M. Billoo 18:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for cleaning up all of those movie articles. It must be a serious pain with how messy some of them are, and I appreciate you taking the time to do it. I'd have done it myself, but I probably would go nuts as I don't have the patience, haha. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 21:55, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi NOTNOTABLE, thanks for your note, I appreciate the praise. Yeah, it really sucks. Indian film articles in particular are plagued by a number of issues. One Indian user once explained that there are a lot of regions that are getting access to the internet, and many of these people are just not highly-educated. The more irritating aspects involve paid editing rings that exist to promote films and TV series, inflate or deflate financial figures (depending on who's paying them), aaaand sockpuppets, vandals and other irritants. And oh yeah, I love the phrases "the film declared all-time blockbuster status", "super hit", "flop", "failure"... Uck. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I was mostly referring to the people who simply promoted film/TV articles until the article raved about them, as the people who simply aren't educated enough to know English well enough are good faith and aren't too bad. Didn't know about the people who took it the other way, however. Huh. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 22:19, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Help with an SPI

Hey Cyphoid. Joseph is back. After the user TheGoodLion was blocked, and new account immediately started up, FernandoDC and it seems to most definitely be Joseph. The SPI was fill out (here), but there might be a back log and Fernando is still editing, across many articles, which is an issue, given what they've been blocked for. Anything you could do to help? Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93:  Done - Have a good one, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Per your comments in closing the SPI, any articles to keep an eye on would be films still in the box office and/or opening in the coming weeks. The point being, the articles you may have on your watchlist now, they may have moved on from those articles. Would it be beneficial to drop a note at the film project too about this? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure, might as well let them know. I don't do a whole lot of editing in western films anymore. There was a much bigger problem in Indian cinema, so I'm gnoming over there. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:46, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Understood. I'll drop a line at WT:FILM. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Angrej

There is no point of adding co producer in the template as its an unknown tag for template and it wont be visible.RG | (talk) 18:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Godara.rahul: A valid statement, but in both edits[1][2] infobox parameters like |film_name=, |image_size=, |border= keep getting moved to the bottom of the infobox. The image formatting typically appears at the top which is where editors will expect to find them. It's possible that this is a problem created by the Visual Editor that you are using--Visual Editor is buggy--but you should please double-check your changes to see if you're accidentally causing other problems by clicking "Show preview" and "Show changes" before committing the changes to the article. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

While doing visual edit the template rearranges itself. When seeing it may look like the image is at the top but in template it is not. RG | (talk) 18:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Unprotect

Why protect the page Pulimurugan. ? There was no disruptive editing.--2405:204:D008:1DC6:4C5:A34F:BE0A:18AE (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

For failure to seek consensus on talk page as is required per WP:BRD. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

So I got my answer on that. Now, on what basis you removed that content ?. One editor claimed this and removed a sentence based on his own original research. How should we know what he is telling is correct ?. It was he who should have opened discussion (anyway I am going to start it now). Based on an "original" claim, the content should not be removed. If the editor have a contradictory evidence or any materiel supporting the claim, it is wise to remove the content until consensus is reached, but this case its otherwise. 2405:204:D008:1DC6:4C5:A34F:BE0A:18AE (talk) 16:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Take it to the talk page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Okay. What about restoring the content. It's the result of the discussion that decides the removal/alteration of the content in this case. 2405:204:D008:1DC6:4C5:A34F:BE0A:18AE (talk) 16:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

You're putting the cart before the horse. I think this will be quickly resolved, and considering I think Plutonium might have misinterpreted the content, the content stands a good chance of being restored. What I can't allow is the back-and-forth in the article, so the status quo will temporarily remain. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and I've opened a discussion for the both of you. I don't know why it's so difficult to do that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

You can unprotect the page. The issue is resolved. 2405:204:D187:EAC:F1E7:990B:EFC6:3CD6 (talk) 21:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Plot

I want to add plot in Pulimurugan. Current plot is partial and incomplete. I saw the tag. The excess plot details will be trimmed by editors in the coming days. Moreover, the film do not follow a straight narration, there are lots of flashbacks and non-linear story. Currently the plot is written in its direct story order, if it is written in the original non-linear style, it will be much longer and breaks the continuity. 2405:204:D30B:CC6E:64A1:4EFE:E931:8B0F (talk) 18:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you for your note. I've undone my reversion so you can work on the plot, but any effort you can make to compress it and remove extraneous details that don't materially improve our understanding of the plot would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. The current plot (852 words) is incomplete and partial. Trimming that version to 700 word will make it difficult to add the rest of the plot as it will further increase the length. But if the complete plot is added, the whole plot can be trimmed to 700 words. I have prepared a full plot with 946 words, will trim it in coming days. 2405:204:D30B:CC6E:64A1:4EFE:E931:8B0F (talk) 18:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Much obliged, thank you. If the entire plot of Star Wars can be done in 650 words (what with nerds around the world wanting to add details about their favorite scenes...) then I have faith it can be done here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, I have trimmed the plot to my best. Maybe someone can trim it better. Now its at 729 words, and I have removed the tag, hope you don't mind. You can re-add it if it still has problems. By the way, can you protect that page. Recently some editors are regularly vandalizing the box office numbers. 2405:204:D30B:CC6E:C4FD:CBB9:624:D34A (talk) 20:54, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

IP User From February

You know that user you blocked back in February for edit warring on Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends? Well, it back and is vandalising Sullivan Bluth Studios. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@FilmandTVFan28: I've left the user a note on their talk page, but please take a stronger leadership role (since you are an experienced editor) and open discussion yourself on article talk pages. Nobody's gonna die if the wrong information/undesirable version exists for a few days. If you open discussion, invite them via talkback (IPs don't have watchlists, so they don't necessarily see the talk page posts) and they refuse to participate, your argument will always be stronger. Give it a shot. Take care, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:42, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Understood. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 00:44, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

A non-cooperative user

Thertho Bose (talk · contribs) seems to either not understand that there is a need to provide rationale behind his controversial actions of reordering and adding unsourced names to cast-list of films and telly-serials or is simply nonchalant to respond to any query addressed to him on his talk page.Maybe he mixes in some good edits now and then but I think that shall not insulate him from participating with other editors in building consensus.It's really problematic when someone goes on with an attitude that essentially speaks-Well, I am right and the rest of the world is wrong.I think maybe a short block will do more good than harm.Aru@baska^{❯❯❯ Vanguard} 14:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@ARUNEEK: I strongly feel that he will wind up blocked again. If he continues the reordering without explaining, please let me know. I blocked him yesterday, but had to unblock since I discovered that his edit was (probably coincidentally) consistent with community guidelines. It seemed a bit heavy-handed to keep him blocked if he was actually right. But the burden on establishing that he is editing a according to community rules and double checking his work should not fall on other editors. He should be explaining "The title sequence of the show credits Doe, Smith, Jones, and Singh in that order." Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, probably the coincidence only saved him!Anyway, do you find any strong semblance between his edits and that of Tahia Akter Chowdhury (talk · contribs).Same adding of unsourced names to film-cast, lack of any reply/adherence to comments on talk pages, almost same field of edits-majority of both of their edits being Bengali films and telly-serials.I will put my money that there's something fishy there!.After all,thanks for your quick reply.Aru@baska^{❯❯❯ Vanguard} 15:12, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@ARUNEEK: There isn't much overlap between the two and Tahia tends to make mobile edits, where Bose does not. So it's possible, but no smoking gun yet. I'll look at it in more detail later. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:19, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Silverscreen.in

Could you please dig deep and see if this site passes WP:RS? I know it conducts many exclusive interviews, but I can't find any third-party sources about it. Besides, I got a job offer there, but my joining of it becomes meaningless if it fails RS. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: It's going to take more than just me. From their About page, they are a startup. Startups don't meet the established reputation aspect of WP:RS, which I find very important. An issue that does need discussion on a community scale, is how we can use sources that are not "reliable". Like, if the community dislikes IndiaGlitz or FilmiBeat, does that mean we can't use any of their info? If they print an interview, or they publish a film release date, maybe those could be used, since it's not likely they're totally writing bullshit interviews or faking release dates. Some sites (probably most sites -- and after Kabali, I don't like Financial Express/Indian Express) we might not trust for box office figures because of how polluted the waters are on financial figures, but for less-controversial data, maybe some of these wonky sites are fine? That's worth discussing in a wider arena. Also, if you start working there, congrats! You're a talented editor/writer and I know you'll do well. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi C. I saw you edit summary and I wanted to tell ya that yep adding pings to a previously saved post does not work. Someone explained that simply resigning is read by Wikisoftware as changing the time stamp which does not activate the ping (or something like that anywho) so you need to perform a whole new post. I'll go ahead and ping @Kailash29792: for you with this edit. Cheers and enjoy your Sunday. MarnetteD|Talk 01:51, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeaaaah, I appreciate the note. I've known that for a while but was more into just finishing the post and pretending that a ping would occur even when I knew it wouldn't. Thanks for the assist, MD. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:35, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, thank you very much for your advice. So silverscreen.in articles attributed to external reliable sources also become reliable, right? Kailash29792 (talk) 03:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Meh. My preference is to try to quote the original source, since a source that regurgitates another isn't doing any new fact-checking. If we don't like Andhraboxoffice.com, but TOI quotes Andhraboxoffice, are we getting any strength out of that? Andhra is a blog, we don't know if it's reliable. TOI repeats the data, but do we assume any data was confirmed independently? I don't think that a source repeating another source becomes a reliable source. It's the independent fact-checking, the reputation for accuracy, and the clear editorial principles that make a source reliable. Not sure if that helps you or not. Regards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:19, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

67.218.18.234 again

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pamelyn_Ferdin&diff=prev&oldid=752886499 MartinSFSA (talk) 12:31, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@MartinSFSA: Blocked 3 months. If they start up again, let me know. Without speculating about them too much, based on some of their prose additions, I believe they lack the appropriate skills to edit here constructively. The bulk of their edits are indistinguishable from vandalism as a result. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:00, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks as always. Description "This is a vandal post" was doubtless meant for me, but seems a fair summary of their work. MartinSFSA (talk) 00:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Ae Dil Hai Mushkil

Hi Admin!

For Dear Zindagi, you've told that "critic's response" should be meaningful encyclopedic context and idea should be organized in some clear way. But here in Ae Dil Hai Mushkil, there is mentioned a long comment of a critic, what to do? As I've tried for Dear Zindagi, I would also try for this if you permit me.

Hope for your kind reply, Thanks! M. Billoo 19:22, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Tried to update, waiting for your response. Thanks! M. Billoo 18:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Basic Criteria Doubt

Hello @Cyphoidbomb, I had a doubt. I wanted to know that what is the basic criteria for creating an actor's article on Wikipedia. He/she should have worked in how many shows (minimum no. Of shows) to be eligible to be added on Wikipedia as an actor? Because sometimes on Wikipedia I have noticed that some articles of actors on Wikipedia get deleted under the criteria of being non notable and other things. Can you please help me with this? Regards, YAP123456 (talk) 04:31, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi YAP123456, thanks for asking. The relevant criteria is WP:NACTOR. The subject should have multiple significant roles in major films/TV shows, etc. As a rule I would probably consider a recurring character on a TV series, not just a one-time appearance, as a significant role. In films, starring roles would be ideal, but if they've played significant supporting characters (not just "Pizza guy" or "Cop #2", but real beefy roles) that might be fine as well. You should probably also keep our general notability guideline in mind, which says that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." If the media is writing significant articles on the subject (not passing mentions, not interviews) then that will boost the notability. Really it all boils down to what other editors feel are multiple significant roles. We're not in a hurry to create articles on people, and Wikipedia too often gets used as a social networking site and as a promotional site for upcoming actors. The bar should be pretty high for inclusion, so I'd say when in doubt, wait. Regards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Creating Godha (film)

Godha is a 2016 upcoming Malayalam film. It has almost finished shooting and has many references for the same. I would like to create its page, but the title has been blocked by repeated earlier deletions and requires an administrator to open it. If you could do that, it would be very helpful. PierceBrosnan007 (talk) 09:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

The page - Godha_(film) PierceBrosnan007 (talk) 09:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Undo Dandupalya

Hai! I have cited with genuine reference. how it would be puffery. As per ur perception if u would be considered it would be exaggerated. Then almost article have the puffery. What do u say for this. Wiki is there for real updates. Could u find any weasel words in my edits?. Am not more familiar to wiki. As I seen a long time it has their real facts in their page with reference. Do u justify yourself for removing my edits. Thanks and regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.49.162.218 (talk) 09:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey Cyphoidbomb

Hey, Cyphoidbomb i have become an honest editor and one thing i want to tell you that i am Mriduls.sharma. Please give me a second chance or block me i am sorry i came here because all these articles which Krimuk90 left were becoming outdated and vandalized. I came here to become a sincere editor but i know i am telling the truth to you will block me but i just need to tell truth because i want some indian to take care of all bollywood and especially plot of all films. If you want to give me a chance then accept as L.D. White or block me and revert all my edits. But please call Krimuk90 back on this encyclopedia he/she is a brilliant editor and i have given his/her password back which is krimuk123.I am sorry i have lied but i have no option . I have reverted all vandal edits of ips on befikre article and made it protected for one month. Regards as new name L.D. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:07, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

By the way my orignal account Mriduls.sharma is compromised you have accept me as L.D. White. Regards L.D. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)