Jump to content

User talk:Cyphoidbomb: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 89: Line 89:
[[Special:Contributions/Rvls|Rvls]] is an illegitimate account of [[Special:Contributions/Ritizubumab|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 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohanlal&oldid=908848447][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohanlal&oldid=854608956][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohanlal&oldid=912246099], S. S. Rajamouli [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S._S._Rajamouli&oldid=911391176][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S._S._Rajamouli&oldid=854129638][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S._S._Rajamouli&oldid=911660885] ("[[high fantasy]] works"). Rvls has edited the same articles as [[Special:Contributions/Uricnobel|Uricnobel]] too. Rvls has made major changes at some articles, entirely rewritten [[Kannada cinema]], [[Malayalam cinema]] etc. [[Special:Contributions/2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58|2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58]] ([[User talk:2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58|talk]]) 14:05, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/Rvls|Rvls]] is an illegitimate account of [[Special:Contributions/Ritizubumab|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 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohanlal&oldid=908848447][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohanlal&oldid=854608956][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohanlal&oldid=912246099], S. S. Rajamouli [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S._S._Rajamouli&oldid=911391176][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S._S._Rajamouli&oldid=854129638][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S._S._Rajamouli&oldid=911660885] ("[[high fantasy]] works"). Rvls has edited the same articles as [[Special:Contributions/Uricnobel|Uricnobel]] too. Rvls has made major changes at some articles, entirely rewritten [[Kannada cinema]], [[Malayalam cinema]] etc. [[Special:Contributions/2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58|2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58]] ([[User talk: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. [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb#top|talk]]) 14:11, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
:Good eye. I agree with you! I'll take care of it, thank you. [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb#top|talk]]) 14:11, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

*Hello Mr. Cyphoidbomb, I made 1000 edits, and wikipedia thanked me for that, all of which were legitimate
*Just because you are admin doeasnt mean all other editors plagiarise and vandalise the article.s
*I am not an illegitimate user. I am not a sock puppet.
*You already know that I was not aware during the year 2010 when I was new to wikipedia, that I should not use different account names, when I first created padmalakshmisx.
*Out of compulsion I created these accounts. I made significant contributions to wikipedia. I am not using to different accounts to participate in vandalism clearly evident from my edits.
*Until this IP hints you, you did not know, because my edits were legitimate, efficient.
*If you dont unblock me, you are the looser, no one contribute and no one is as dedicated to wikipedia as I am.
*I even requested you to make my account padmalakshmisx into a legitimate one, and combine all my edits into one single user. You are least bothered to contact the arbitration committee, I told you I will give my government ID to prove that I am legitimate. The thing is you just want India related articles in low quality, and poor english grammar.
*Look at the quality of my edits and then speak. Compare my edits with this users edits, 2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58, dont thank this name less user, dont know how many fake IP address he is operating to edit wikipedia. If you have common sense protect my account and thank me with a barnstar.[[User:Rvls user|Rvls user]] ([[User talk:Rvls user|talk]]) 03:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

== mass edits are good ==

*Hello Mr. Cyphoidbomb, I made 1000 edits, and wikipedia thanked me for that, all of which were legitimate
*Just because you are admin doesn't mean all other editors plagiarise and vandalise the articles
*I am not an illegitimate user. I am not a sock puppet.
*You already know that I was not aware during the year 2010 when I was new to wikipedia, that I should not use different account names, when I first created padmalakshmisx.
*Out of compulsion I created these accounts. I made significant contributions to wikipedia. I am not using different accounts to participate in vandalism clearly evident from my edits.
*Until this IP hints you, you did not know, because my edits were legitimate, efficient.
*If you dont unblock me, you are the looser, no one contribute and no one is as dedicated to wikipedia as I am.
*I even requested you to make my account padmalakshmisx into a legitimate one, and combine all my edits into one single user. You are least bothered to contact the arbitration committee, I told you I will give my government ID to prove that I am legitimate. The thing is you just want India related articles in low quality, and poor english grammar.
*Look at the quality of my edits and then speak. Compare my edits with this users edits, 2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58, dont thank this name less user, dont know how many fake IP address he is operating to edit wikipedia. If you have common sense protect my account and thank me with a barnstar.[[User:Rvls user|Rvls user]] ([[User talk:Rvls user|talk]]) 03:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:40, 29 August 2019

Happy New Year..!

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 [1], [2], [3], [4]. 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)[reply]
Wow, nice work! Seems so hard to prove that someone didn't appear in something. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:03, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 [5], [6] 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)[reply]

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

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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 [7][8][9], S. S. Rajamouli [10][11][12] ("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)[reply]

Good eye. I agree with you! I'll take care of it, thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello Mr. Cyphoidbomb, I made 1000 edits, and wikipedia thanked me for that, all of which were legitimate
  • Just because you are admin doeasnt mean all other editors plagiarise and vandalise the article.s
  • I am not an illegitimate user. I am not a sock puppet.
  • You already know that I was not aware during the year 2010 when I was new to wikipedia, that I should not use different account names, when I first created padmalakshmisx.
  • Out of compulsion I created these accounts. I made significant contributions to wikipedia. I am not using to different accounts to participate in vandalism clearly evident from my edits.
  • Until this IP hints you, you did not know, because my edits were legitimate, efficient.
  • If you dont unblock me, you are the looser, no one contribute and no one is as dedicated to wikipedia as I am.
  • I even requested you to make my account padmalakshmisx into a legitimate one, and combine all my edits into one single user. You are least bothered to contact the arbitration committee, I told you I will give my government ID to prove that I am legitimate. The thing is you just want India related articles in low quality, and poor english grammar.
  • Look at the quality of my edits and then speak. Compare my edits with this users edits, 2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58, dont thank this name less user, dont know how many fake IP address he is operating to edit wikipedia. If you have common sense protect my account and thank me with a barnstar.Rvls user (talk) 03:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

mass edits are good

  • Hello Mr. Cyphoidbomb, I made 1000 edits, and wikipedia thanked me for that, all of which were legitimate
  • Just because you are admin doesn't mean all other editors plagiarise and vandalise the articles
  • I am not an illegitimate user. I am not a sock puppet.
  • You already know that I was not aware during the year 2010 when I was new to wikipedia, that I should not use different account names, when I first created padmalakshmisx.
  • Out of compulsion I created these accounts. I made significant contributions to wikipedia. I am not using different accounts to participate in vandalism clearly evident from my edits.
  • Until this IP hints you, you did not know, because my edits were legitimate, efficient.
  • If you dont unblock me, you are the looser, no one contribute and no one is as dedicated to wikipedia as I am.
  • I even requested you to make my account padmalakshmisx into a legitimate one, and combine all my edits into one single user. You are least bothered to contact the arbitration committee, I told you I will give my government ID to prove that I am legitimate. The thing is you just want India related articles in low quality, and poor english grammar.
  • Look at the quality of my edits and then speak. Compare my edits with this users edits, 2405:204:D404:F4C5:90A3:2A6A:BA64:BF58, dont thank this name less user, dont know how many fake IP address he is operating to edit wikipedia. If you have common sense protect my account and thank me with a barnstar.Rvls user (talk) 03:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]