User talk:SpacemanSpiff

Wikipedia:Notability (awards)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Instead of taking it up directly to the village pump I wanted opinion of few more experienced editors on the subject topic. The subject is an inactive page which should be worked up on and brought back to life. We face various claims of notability by people backed for being award-recipient and I don't know why this page was left alone. I assume the idea was that GNG covers it all. But we do need some specific guidelines to point IDHT-editors to point to when non-notable award pages are created or when people claim to be notable for winning one of those trophies.
Although currently my interests in this page is to make my life simple in dealing with in-house glam awards, it does cover other people too. See Talk:N. R. Narayana Murthy for lengthy discussions on this topic. Also, #AwardWapasi being a trend it would be good to note which Awards when returned should be considered more notable rather than when received.
If you are not interested in the topic, do direct me to some editor who likes to write such essays enthusiastically. Talk page stalkers are also welcome. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:55, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

This is a perennial problem. Take a look at Ambarish Srivastava. Looking at that article you'd think he's the new Munshi Premchand and Edwin Lutyens in one person. The AfD deletion was reversed at DRV because he won the Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award which is run by some minor Congress politician. You have this on one extreme and then you'll regularly see Padma Bhushan and Padma Shri recipients being taken to AfD, and worse, tagged A7. I think since this involves BLPs and stuff you could ask TheRedPenOfDoom for their opinion as it might be of interest to them. I don't mind being a casual participant in a discussion on this but I expect it to be a time sink so I will not be an active participant. Also, typically Drmies has the answer to everything and you could ask him too. I think Hoary also has an interest in some awards (visual arts) and could possibly offer you some suggestions. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 14:04, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, there's a ton of awards that are nothing--I'm thinking especially of industry awards in K-pop and those kinds of things. And yes, they're used to establish notability, and unrighteously so. What gets my goat especially is the explosive proliferation of "List of awards received by Person X": revolting, and just another example of fan trivia and table porn. But I don't have that much interest in the topic: it's a fringe interest to me. I have written up a couple of award articles, for awards that I know to be notable and I think I usually have decent sourcing for it. But that's really what it requires: good third-party sourcing, not notes in the tabloids that someone received this or that. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, all of the India television stations have their own "awards" shows that they distribute like candy on their productions and actors and are actually the equivalent of "employee of the month" /advertisements with no actual merit for establishing notability. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:12, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Lots of things could be used to test the effectiveness of a awards notability guideline. Here are some suggestions of pages I've come across lately. Wheels (film), Furlenco, Easy Taxi, Rayat Shikshan Sanstha, BabyChakra, Sobha Ltd., Nasscom Emerge 50. - Brianhe (talk) 01:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: What do you think of the articles on the TV awards themselves? I just noticed that many of them have been created by a known sockfarm, or operators who match the same general profile:

• Indian Telly Award for Best Drama Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- created by sock
• Indian Telly Award for Best Game Show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- created by sock
• Indian Telly Award for Best Reality Show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- created by confirmed sock
• List of accolades received by 3 Idiots (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- created by confirmed sock
• BIG Star Most Entertaining Actor in a Romantic Role - Male (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- created by confirmed sock
• Indian Telly Award for Best Onscreen Couple (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- created by another suspicious ed.
• Colors Golden Petal Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- same suspicious ed.

You (RedPen) actually were contacted by one of these editors at one point [1], maybe you remember? - Brianhe (talk) 03:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

In-house Indian TV awards
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Colors Golden Petal Awards for Colors TV Sab Ke Anokhe Awards for SAB TV Star Jalsha awards for STAR Jalsha STAR Parivaar Awards for Star Plus Zee Rishtey Awards for Zee TV

These are in-house awards. Am not implying that other awards from Category:Indian television awards are notable. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I concur with User:TheRedPenOfDoom. The Indian TV awards are iffy because they're basically individual TV networks patting themselves on the back. The problem for us is that these awards sometimes do get covered in print and web media, which at first glance may seem to confer notability. In some cases the coverage may be from sources owned by or affiliated with the networks; in others they're just cheap gossip rags which will report on any content involving celebrities. In any case, it can be difficult to assess the reliability of the sources. —Psychonaut (talk) 07:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

• Pinging some editors I think might be interested in the reviving of the subject inactive page. @DGG, Piotrus, Thomas.W, Tokyogirl79, and Ryan Vesey: @Sphilbrick, Dennis Brown, and Bbb23: And now, if our "cabal" is big enough, should we move to a bigger better stage for our drama? Don't want to flood SS's talk page and then repeat all sayings on Village pump or elsewhere. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• I think that it should definitely move somewhere else, just because this will obviously become bigger. I'm absolutely down for helping to make this guideline more clear for others. I know that I typically give the same spiel about awards whenever they're mentioned at AfD or elsewhere: that less than 5% of awards are notable, less than 1% are completely notable (ala Oscars or Golden Roosters), yadda yadda. The reason I do this is because it's necessary and there isn't entirely a wholly clear guideline on this specific aspect. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• On Tokyogirl79's suggestion, perhaps this could be moved to Wikipedia talk:Notability (awards) as a prelude to a VPP discussion. I don't mind hosting the discussion here, but I don't have the time to get involved in this discussion. Anyone can feel free to copy paste there (or another appropriate location) and close it here. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hobby or paid editing? #3

Hello. Would you mind taking a look at Sargun Mehta? There's an SPA there who does nothing but add promotional trivia to the article (having edited nothing else since the account was created more than eight months ago...). Thomas.W ^talk 16:55, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

This is related to the section above, #2. I think there may be some COI issues, and have invited Brianhe to take a look at it to see if it matches Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kabir Vaghela. We have a fair few sets of TV/film PR agencies, but that's the one that's been most troublesome and active. I've added the page to my watchlist now and the good doctor seems to have reverted, will step in in case of any further edit warring. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Thomas.W ^talk 18:45, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I was looking around this mess and I found Portal:Sargun Mehta. This obviously goes back to some serious COIN promotion issues, I'll wait for Dharmadhyaksha to follow up on what Brianhe has suggested. —SpacemanSpiff 18:52, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Noticed that portal too, and was going to bring it up somewhere or other. Also: check out {{Star Plus Shows}} and {{Balaji Telefilms}}. - Brianhe (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I have seen Mehta's portal. But MFDs are very inclusive of portals. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Priyanka Chopra is currently there. Not related to any of these COIs, just probably fan made.‎ §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this, it appears to be some sort of good hand bad hand collaboration going on here and is very likely two people at an agency. —SpacemanSpiff 17:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding 'Chinna Jeeyar' wiki page

Hello, I'm SpacemanSpiff. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Chinna Jeeyar seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. It is also clear that you are now returning under a different account to perform the same edits, if you continue to do so you are likely to be blocked

Hello

In reference to your reply, I am not sure what you mean a different account, it might be that I added edit once without logging in and second might be from my official wiki login userID.

Regarding your question, I am not sure why the content is being removed as I added the references even. Maybe you are not liking it because it uses some sanskrit terms, that I am not sure. If grammar is a concern, maybe you could suggest some edits. But all the information that I posted in my edit is true and I can confirm that. Now the page has absolutely no information at all and it feels empty.

Regards Kalyan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krushna7 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Please read our policies and guidelines: WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS. Your edits have been in violation of all those. —SpacemanSpiff 17:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world including WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 07:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks SwisterTwister, I do need a drink of tea, if not something stronger! —SpacemanSpiff 05:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Donated artwork

Hello, my friend. How about a wikideal? If you could help nail down the text at Wikipedia:Donated artwork/Artists' welcome page based on your and Moonriddengirl's notes, I would do any dirty work you say. And I mean low work. I'll even go through articles you say and put references after punctuation. :) I mean it. :) The thing is, I am ready to just replace most of that page with "Read the CC license" and leave it at that. What do you think? Do you have any good friends over at commons who really know policy? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Anna Frodesiak, I'll get it to it in a few days, buried in with work and have bills to pay. —SpacemanSpiff 05:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Anna Frodesiak, I've made some changes and added a couple of examples for artists to check out. Feel free to clean up and/or cull. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Your AE request about 500/30

The 500/30 restrictions are now enacted at four articles and a talk page per my closure. Can you do anything further you believe is appropriate? Like apply templates? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks EdJohnston, I'll go about it within the next few days, real life/work has caught up with me so this'll have to wait a couple of days unless Bishonen or NeilN get to it before I can. —SpacemanSpiff 05:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll have a crack at it within the next day. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm definitely going to leave the templates to people who're on good terms with templates. Wasn't there also something remaining for MusikAnimal? Might be as well to ping him, anyway. Beautiful black labrador, Space! Bishonen | talk 09:04, 23 October 2015 (UTC).

I was just going to ask if we were still doing this. I can get to this today I think... I'll get the padlock added to {{Ds/talk caste}} then we can update the filters. About the template, is that the name we want to go with? This should be for general use for this editing restriction, the other example being GamerGate. Also, should we add a url= parameter to link to the ArbCom discussion? — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:55, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

If we're going to go with a general use template that can be repurposed then I'll leave that in your hands. I was just going to modify what we have for GG. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

An edit filter means that editors and admins don't need to police and revert edits from those users who don't meet the editing restrictions. It's also useful to have an edit notice like Template:Editnotices/Page/Gamergate controversy. Otherwise, you face a lot of questions from editors asking why their contributions have been reverted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

If you're replying to me, I think I was the one who suggested an edit filter in the first place :-) We also need a template message for the talk page. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm just joining in on the discussion, I wasn't responding directly to you. But this one is a response and I see you already suggested adapting the GG notices.

I created the categories mentioned in Template:Ds/talk caste like Category:Wikipedia articles under discretionary sanctions (caste) and Category:Wikipedia article talk pages under editing restrictions (caste) but the parent category, Category:Wikipedia pages under discretionary sanctions, uses "pages" not "articles". A similar category though is Category:Pseudoscience articles under discretionary sanctions if you want these categories to adopt a similar nomenclature. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:42, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, here's what I came up with: User:MusikAnimal/pp-30-500

This template provides a way to show a talk page notice, whether or not to activate the editing restriction (enforced by edit filter), and if so whether to use the padlock. I haven't wrote the doc yet but it would be something like:

• banner=yes Show the banner

  url=Special:Diff/12345 If the banner is shown, specify a URL to add the message "More information can be found [here]", linking to the ArbCom decision, for instance

• active=yes Whether to invoke the editing restriction on the page this template is on, enforced by an edit filter. This also puts the page in the categories Category:Wikipedia pages under discretionary sanctions and Category:Wikipedia pages under 30-500 editing restriction

  small=yes If the editing restriction is active, whether to use a padlock icon or show a banner

So for instance on GamerGate we would have {{pp-30-500|active=yes|small=yes}}. On the talk page we would have {{pp-30-500|banner=yes}} (since we just want the banner notification that the article page is protected). If we wanted the talk page to protected too you might use {{pp-30-500|banner=yes|active=yes}}. This will show the notification banner and a full-width banner about that the protection is active on that page.

You might want to change the wording, but I think this functionality encompasses everything we need. What do you think? — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

See a change to Talk:Nair which I made while blithely unaware of this whole conversation. Anyone may replace my talk page notice with an improved version. I based this one on the existing notice at Talk:Gamergate controversy. At the latter article we also have a 1RR and semiprotection which has not yet been applied to Nair, though this might be considered. EdJohnston (talk) 16:33, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

• Quick replies: MusikAnimal: The diff should be linked to the entries at WP:DSLOG. EdJohnston: 1RR isn't necessarily an issue at articles such as this as it mostly isn't about edit warring but about POV pushing via multiple SPA accounts (that aren't necessarily linked to each other) at different times which the 500/30 would likely take care of. Caste system in India on the other hand is a candidate for 1RR if and when activity picks up as there it's established accounts that aren't SPAs in the sense of individual castes but more of an ideological bent. NeilN: edit notices don't like me, could you look at edit notices for these articles; I think the text at {{Ds/talk caste}} may be appropriate here as the other template from MA is more general. Detailed replies later. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:10, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
• Lengthy replies:
  • @EdJohnston: I have now modified {{Ds/talk caste}} to mirror the note you placed on Talk:Nair and also modified the locks etc to suit our existing design hierarchy (and MA's sensibilities). It has now been placed on Talk:Nair, Talk:Jat people, Talk:Vanniyar, and Talk:Bhumihar. All have article editing restriction notifications while Nair also has talk page editing notifications.
  • @MusikAnimal: I have placed the current template for now; we can change to the new generic version when we have the new filter ready. Can you make the modification to Filter #698 to include Nair, Vanniyar, Jat people, Bhumihar, and Talk:Nair. Likewise, an editnotice to mirror the template and GG editnotice would be good.
  • @Liz: I'm not familiar with the category structures for these, I used names that appeared logical but if you think that needs changing then feel free to do it.
• If I've forgotten something (which is very likely), please remind me :) cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 13:45, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

(←) Okay, the filter has been updated to impose the editing restriction on all the aforementioned additional pages. It's currently in log-only, though, so you might see some edits come through. I'll set it warn/disallow when I'm convinced it's working as intended (it checked out with the batch testing, but no harm in being extra cautious :). We'll look into the template implementation later. Best — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Alrighty I did a bunch of manual testing and I think we're good, so I've enabled it. The warning if you are interested is at MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-500-30-restriction. Feel free to reword it. — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks MusikAnimal. I did a couple of test runs using SpacesockSpiff (talk · contribs) and tripped the filter at Talk:Nair, so it looks good. On creating an edit notice (to show when the edit button is clicked as opposed to after trying to save the edit), can we have one for all the articles or do we need to have separate ones for each page? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:06, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

The way that edit notices work you'll have to create a dedicated page for each (e.g. Template:Editnotices/Page/Nair), but you can use a template and transclude it on each page. I noticed at Template:Editnotices/Page/Gamergate controversy it's using Template:Ds/editnotice. We probably want a standardized discretionary sanctions editnotice like this, but we should create another one for the 500/30 restriction that we can transclude. — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

MusikAnimal, I've created one at Template:Editnotices/Page/Nair using {{Ds/editnotice}} and you can see it when you try to edit Nair. I had to play around with the words so as to not upset the source template (which seems to have been created primarily for 1RR restrictions). We can either use this everywhere, or modify Ds/editnotice to have a restriction code "500-30" to include this as an option, but that's beyond my skill levels. Pinging NeilN, Bishonen, EdJohnston to see if they would have a preference for one or the other (others feel free to chime in too, don't want to randomly ping). I would prefer a modification to Ds/editnotice as that would mean a single template with different restriction codes (looking at the GG editnotice, we might need to allow two restriction codes).—SpacemanSpiff 03:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Er… I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're asking there, Space. But about the Nair edit notice — is the filter working now, catching the naughty little MusikPuppet sock? If it is, I'm not sure about saying "if you breach the restriction" etc. How're they're gonna breach it? They can't — the filter will get them. Shouldn't the edit notice give some indication of that instead, for when it comes as a complete surprise to them that they can't edit the article? I mean, if it was me, I'd be non-plussed, and run complain in any venue I could find. ("Wikipedia is broken!") I know it says "may be removed" on the talkpage, but still, maybe in the edit notice as well? I do believe they're more likely to read the edit notice, because frankly, there's a lot of stuff on talk. (I wish we didn't have to have all the mostly useless WikiProject advertising at the top of talkpages.) And genuinely new users will perhaps not even know there is a talkpage.

Another question: does the talkpage warning, Accounts editing this page must follow policy and are subject to discretionary sanctions while editing this page, mean there's no need to give individual ds alerts to disruptive accounts? It doesn't, does it? I think they should still have one. Bishonen | talk 09:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

Hi Bishonen, AFAIAA, having edited in a few different topic spaces covered by DS, it is still necessary to give individual DS alerts. I wonder if that would be something bot-able? First hurdle would be suppressing repeat alerts, I guess. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 09:37, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Apologies for the interruption. Just wanted to add support to the idea of formalizing these restrictions as much as possible. FWIW, I think enforcement through allowing reverts is a sub-optimal method; especially for Talk pages - in effect, it is an enshrining of incivility - which can bring more heat than light to discussions in contentious topic spaces. (It can become another battleground or opportunity for a "win"). Blocks are also sub-optimal and not really what we should be doing in response to good faith edits, which are not innately disruptive.
Enforcement through a filter seems very much the best option - and in terms of technical implementation, it may be best to look at how semi-protection is done. It might be possible to use essentially the same mechanism, but with 500/30 instead of 10/4. This might also assist admins with implementing the restriction - as page protection seems more intuitive than setting up edit filters. Thanks for your time taken in reading. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 09:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

• @Bishonen:: The edit notice is currently on only at Nair, not at the other four pages (incl. Talk:Nair) -- I'm waiting for feedback before I place it on those. I tried editing with SpacesockSpiff at Nair and here's what I saw: (1) when I click "edit" I get to see Template:Editnotices/Page/Nair at the top, above the edit window; (2) despite seeing that if I make an edit, then the filter is tripped, disallows my edit, and gives the message that is now at MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-500-30-restriction. If I understand you correctly, you'd like to modify it to something to the effect of "...than 30 days old. Edits made by accounts that do not meet these qualifications may be removed. Accounts editing...". Part of the issue with the wording is that I've tried to use {{Ds/editnotice}} which is currently framed with 1RR in mind (there's too much template stuff in that for me to attempt any change). I've made the above change now, but we do need to modify the Ds template to make it cover all varieties of sanctions. The talk page warning is just a standard reminder that's part of all Ds talk page warnings and doesn't change the necessity of notifying accounts individually. {{Castewarningtalk}} that EdJ removed when adding the ds notification at Nair was similar and this one incorporates content from {{Ds/talk notice}} which is in use at over 2000 talk pages now. As for the wikiproject clutter, I think we probably can add a banner shell every time we add this template.—SpacemanSpiff 12:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

• Good change to the Nair edit notice. I think the new version is more realistic and informative, so that's great, if other people agree. Bishonen | talk 13:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC).

• It's big enough, and bold enough; unlikely to be missed, which is desired. If there's not yet an edit filter which prevents the actual edit, would it be worth including that the "changes may be reverted by any other editor"? To save on angst associated with reverts & undos. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 13:34, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

• Filter #698 takes care of it now so I don't think we need that option currently. —SpacemanSpiff 15:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

• @Ryk72: That probably would be the way to go iff the current remedies prove to be of some use and there's a larger scale usage for these type of sanctions than the current estimate of maybe 20 such sanctions. It would involve a new group of editors that'd be a hybrid between WP:Autoconfirmed and WP:Template editor so that protections could be set based on the user group, but I think it's early days to think of that right now. And on your other point, repeat ds alerts are currently flagged by an edit filter and you're asked to check before you leave one. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 October 2015

• Editorial: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching

• News and notes: Wikimedia lawsuit against NSA dismissed; Affiliates mailing list launched

• In the media: "Wikipedia's hostility to women"

• Special report: One year of GamerGate, or how I learned to stop worrying and love bare rule-level consensus

• Featured content: A more balanced week

• Op-ed: Wikipedia is significantly amplifying the impact of Open Access publications

• Arbitration report: Four ArbCom cases ongoing

• Traffic report: Hiding under the covers of the Internet

• Technology report: Tech news in brief

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Mahadeva Achchirama Children Home

Is it possible you to fix the above copyvio problem?UmakanthJaffna (talk) 15:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, SpacemanSpiff. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Marathas and Marathi people

Hello. Would you mind taking a look at Marathi people? AFAIK Maratha and Marathi people are not synonymous, with Marathas being a "warrior caste" that can be found in several states in India, not just Maharashtra, but an editor is now trying to let the entire Marathi people "bask in the glory of the Marathas", by adding a large chunk of text about various Maratha achievements to that article. And I quite simply don't know enough about it to enter into a long discussion with him... Thomas.W ^talk 19:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Uninvolved opinion: At first glance it appears that the lines are quite blurry here and it's more a case of WP:SYNTH and WP:DUE. I'll ask Kautilya3, Sitush and Abecedare to take a look at the content as they are quite familiar with these areas. —SpacemanSpiff 02:53, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Maratha is indeed a "caste," as the top note says (finessing the fine details of the Indian caste system). Marathi is a language. Both the terms presumably derive from Sanskrit Maharashtra. I will watch list the pages. - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Uploaded photos

Hi, this is surprising to know that some of the photos which has been taken by myself have been removed from the pages. I believe I hold the copyright for those photographs and I have mentioned it in the licence too. One of the photos which you have deleted "ActorKTSPadannayil.png" has been now uploaded in wikipedia common and I am adding it to the wikipedia page K. T. S. Padannayil as well. I am confused here as the photograph has been taken by myself only. please guide me.Rajeshbieee (talk) 15:09, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Your old account Rajeshbiee was blocked for exactly this reason, you've been uploading clips of images as your own work, so please do not say that you don't know why. You've been warned on your talk page. Continuing to reupload these images here or on Commons is going to result in you getting blocked. —SpacemanSpiff 15:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

• Just saw the warning on copyright violation, but see I have taken several photographs of many people as I am working in film industry and I hope to upload more photos with right license. Expecting your guidance here.Rajeshbieee (talk) 15:42, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Please stop claiming copyright ownership when you are clearly not the copyright owner. You've done this here and to circumvent the deletions here, you went and uploaded on Commons. Any further such activity is going to result in you getting blocked. —SpacemanSpiff 16:52, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Hello, I noticed Semi-protection for Dravidian peoples page is suppose to expire tomorrow. I request long term/indefinite Semi-protection for Dravidian peoples page to stop any form of disruption or vandalism from unregistered users in the future. Thank You. Kannadiga (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2015 (UTC)