User talk:Ravensfire

I will generally respond on this page inside the section which has been added unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you leave me a message, and remember to sign your post with ~~~~. Thanks!

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Welcome!

Welcome message!

Hello, Ravensfire! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! -- Levine2112 discuss 04:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Note to self ...

Note to self, <rantmode on> since the VPN we use at work is hard-blocked and I technically don't meet the requirements for WP:IPBE (yes, I know, I don't, it's just a serious pain to try to work through mobile device when I'm actually on a full laptop!). </rantmode off>

Ravensfire (talk) 14:47, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Ravensfire!

Happy New Year!

Ravensfire,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:35, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Search Engine Optimization

Apologies for bothering you. I just received a message from you about my editing at the Search Engine Oprimization page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_optimization

After reading everyhting, I did not understand what I had to do so I deleted my contribution and not to cause further trouble.— Preceding unsigned comment added by NamiSwan64 (talk • contribs) 15:22, January 1, 2020 (UTC)

Bigg Boss

Hi Ravensfire I don’t want to complain but Shehnaaz for Bigg Boss is used everywhere and User:Kaustubh42 doesn’t seem to understand I have also said this on the talk page but he is still saying. Shehnaaz name is spelt like this as it’s common. Please make him understand ShehnaazGill1210 (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

ShehnaazGill1210, you are BOTH at fault here. There's a core concept on Wikipedia called WP:BRD - Boldy make a change, but when it gets Reverted, Discuss it on the talk page. You haven't bothered with that last part but keep edit-warring. You cannot control someone else's actions, but you are always in control of yours. Ravensfire (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

And then it just turns out this is another sock of a person who thinks they are above the rules and policies of Wikipedia, who manipulates others, who ignores anyone else, who is just there for their own personal gain. And then wonder why I revert their edits. Ravensfire (talk) 21:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Steve Walsh (musician)

I noticed that you didn't fix all of the vandalism, so I restored the article to the last good version.--2601:153:901:60C0:4030:5257:78E8:CB2E (talk) 01:47, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

(IamAkashVJ)

// Sorry Ravensfire (talk) i'm just fresher here.. sorry for unsourced update which i update.. i don't know the rules of wikipedia.. i just read ur msg.. after that i read Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines & Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia here after i don't do that type of things. i start learn from here. .if i do anything plz info or tell me i wil correct my mistake. thank you IamAkashVJ (talk) 01:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Michael Behe

Hi Ravensfire,

Thank you for your feedback. However, I am confused as to how my edit does not adhere to the Wikipedia's neutrality policy. I simply removed the word "pseudoscientific" in an article referring to Intelligent Design. In fact, placing "pseudoscientific" there at all is what violates the neutrality policy. There is no reason for that word to be there. It has an obvious bias and is NOT in keeping with Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Thank you Easwans (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Easwans, Quite simply, your definintion of neutral doesn't match what Wikipedia uses. "Neutral" in Wikipedia's terms means to describe something as it is generally described by high quality secondary sources. ID as a scientific view is strongly derided by the reliable source. The page on WP:NPOV may be helpful to you. Ravensfire (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

You can also look on the article talk page and the archives for the multiple previous discussions about this and the reasoning into why Wikipedia uses the term pseudo-science. Ravensfire (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Dr. Blofeld CCI cleanup effort

Hello. You are invited to join the Dr. Blofeld CCI cleanup effort, a project which aims to cleanup and resolve the largest copyright investigation on the site. Directions on how to help are at the main cleanup page. It is ok if you choose not to assist, as a large amount of people are already helping out- but your contributions would be appreciated, even if you make just a few. 💴Money💶💵emoji💷Talk💸Help out at CCI! 00:39, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Web archive

Hi! Is there any simple way than wayback machine to archive the references for Wikipedia articles? Noobie anonymous (talk) 07:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, unfortunately, that's the easiest way to archive that I know about. There are scripts that help a lot with that though. Ravensfire (talk) 13:19, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Tanaji

Income 143.75 core Adityarajpanigrahi (talk) 17:25, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Adityarajpanigrahi, I'm going to assume you mean this film - Tanhaji? The gross in that film is sourced to a solid source, so you've got to give a different source. Your post is better left on the article talk page though. Ravensfire (talk) 18:06, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Ok Adityarajpanigrahi (talk) 15:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sachin Bandara

The article Sachin Bandara has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sources do not appear to meet the notability requirements at WP:CRIN/WP:NCRIC.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 23:24, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

User edits

This user is creating drafts of announced films and moving it instantly, violating WP:NFF ([1][2]). I believe this user knows that too as he removes the hidden note here for adding those films. Also reverting[3] edit without explanation. 2409:4073:284:F4C9:1528:D8A8:4D49:C6A1 (talk) 14:24, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I've notified them of both. For what it's worth, I think the Visual Editor sometimes strips out embedded comments. I could be wrong, but that's my supposition. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, it can, but sometimes inconsistently. The template editor needs some more work and there needs to be a better way to include instructions for how to use template fields and show them in the editor. I know there is a templatedata section that is supposed to help, but I don't know how well that system works let alone if it actually gets noticed/read by editors. Ravensfire (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Could you please move those two film articles to draft. It's better that way than getting deleted. 2409:4073:187:C18A:D962:32F5:E560:41FF (talk) 15:19, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest Claim

I have no connection to any of the parties whose pages I am editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AtlantaResearcher (talk • contribs) 23:39, January 20, 2020 (UTC)

Of course not! It's not like all of your edits are obviously promotional or anything like that. Nope - nothing to see here. Clearly no COI or undeclared paid editing happening. Clearly! Ravensfire (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Ravensfire good call see User:Croonerman. Long term sock/meat puppet promoting for Brian Evans. It's basically been a 5 year whack a mole issue with socks. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:57, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hell in a Bucket, Oh how interesting ... I wish I could say I'm shocked, but sadly I'm just jaded and used to it. Thanks for the background, this will be easier to handle if / when I spot them back on the article. Ravensfire (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Award referencing

Hey there, re: this, I'm not sure how easy it is to source a lot of the Indian awards. I keep running into obstacles like, Award Entity A only posts current winners on their website. Take the Indian Telly Awards. Where do I go to verify this content? Their website only has the current winners. There's some foresight! Ah, but maybe I can check The Wayback Machine! Damn, no, requires Flash. Here are the 13th Annual Edison award nominees. Note the lack of a date. Gee, I wonder who was nominated in 2015. First I'll go to their root domain since they don't have any navigation buttons, then I'll go here where the link says "Edison Awards Nominee Announcement 2015". A blank page. Great. Mind-boggling.

My New Years Resolution was to get really hardcore about these awards, because it seems like these marketing teams create these biographies, drop a bunch of unsourced, difficult-to-verify awards, and never bother improving the sections. It really is bizarre--they add references for tons of other stuff, but almost never for awards. Anyway, I don't expect you to do anything. I just wanted to rant. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, yeah, I've hit that as well. Sometimes there's a decent newspaper source that lists the actual winners which really helps. I'm frankly shocked that these award websites don't have a simple History page showing the past nominees and winners for their awards. That just makes sense to me - clearly though I'm just talking crazy like that!

Just as fun, when I'm searching for sources for an award, sometimes sources use the event number (The 9th Annual Ravensfire Roast Awards!) and other times it's the year (2020 Ravensfire Roast Awards!) but is that year the current year, or the year in which the movies are considered.... GAAAHHHHHHH!!!! I've already started the day ranting at an unrepentant edit-warrior that should know better, this is a much better soapbox to crawl up on and bellow out my frustrations! Ravensfire (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

The lack of historical foresight across Indian entertainment is fascinatingly frustrating to me. Most of the film posters don't have billing blocks. Rarely do you ever know who the official "stars" are of a film. The trades never publish their own "top 20 highest-grossing films" lists with agreed-upon figures. Everybody just assumes Wikipedia is correct I guess? In TV articles, people will remove actors that are no longer on the show, as if these people should be forgotten. I have tons of complaints about this subject area... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Even the sources considered "reliable" sometimes just copy paste stuff from Wikipedia. Number of Sockmasters are increasing day by day and so is these stupid terms like "Parallel Lead". Some issues are "cultural" like the concept of copyright which a lot of people from India are not well taught about but other times it is just stubbornness of the user which is very difficult to handle. Sid95Q (talk) 19:45, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism at Naagin (2015 TV series)

Hello, Can you please deal with User:Bakwas Drama. This user is highly disruptive. Keeps reberting to versions with unsourced, made up info, adds supporting characters in starring, adds in house awards (Zee Rishtey, Colors Golden Petal Awards) and keeps reverting to version before a user copy edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4055:29f:e5df::2e2:60a1 (talk) 10:02, January 27, 2020 (UTC)

At this point, you are both edit-warring over the article and that's a bad thing. You both need to go to the article talk page and start discussing the edits. I'm going to leave warnings on both of your pages about edit-warring and also see about getting the page fully protected to force some discussion. That's about all I can do at this point though, sorry. Ravensfire (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Not surprisingly, the IPv6 was CU blocked and Bakwas Drama was indeffed as a sock of Balaji Telefilms Limited. So it's a bit hilarious that either of these trespassers would be riding any sort of moral high horse. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:25, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, I know - I was laughing at the irony of it .. and laughing fake-hysterically at the just insane number of socks in this area. At times, I wish CU checks were run periodically to look for the more regular sock masters but I know that's against CU policy (and for good reasons). Ravensfire (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't know why it couldn't be an automated process. Let the CPUs look through suspicious ranges for potential abuse and then ping the CUs for further investigation. How'd that be any different from me digging through anon edits? Unfortunately, I'm not technologically bright enough to bring something like that to fruition. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Ha! Just noticed that the parallel plea from Bakwas was on my talk page. Silly. (BTW, did you know your signature talk button doesn't work? Your name links to your talk page, but not the talk. On purpose?) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, well, it *should* be working, I'll have to play around with that later on when I have more time. Interesting, obviously something minor, love wiki-code sometimes! Ravensfire (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Not Both

Hey, re: this, I asked Bbb23 to take a look and they responded that there was no evidence of socking. Thought you might wanna know. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Devoleena Bhattacharjee

Actually, that article was fake, her actual date of birth is 22 August 1990.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Saswata 7773 (talk • contribs) 06:17, January 29, 2020 (UTC)

Saswata 7773, Without any evidence of the source being fake or a source to support 1990 as the birth year, Wikipedia will always stick with a sourced number. Ravensfire (talk) 14:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

And on the subject's talk page, I already gave this editor advice on how to potentially remedy this: Since they claim to know Bhattacharjee, they should have her contact the source and have the source issue a correction, which is standard for quality news outlets. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Looks like the user has a propensity for being a birth year expert. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:57, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Check few websites like stars unfolded.com, wikibio, wikiwiki etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saswata 7773 (talk • contribs) 14:40, January 29, 2020 (UTC)

Saswata 7773, first, those aren't reliable sources by Wikipedia standards. I know they get used from time to time, but they also get removed when spotted because they are just junk websites. Second, if you find a good source, you should update the page WITH THE SOURCE. Be aware that if you use a bad source, it will be reverted. Also, please sign your talk page posts by added ~~~~ at the end. Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 19:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Actually I was looking older posts of rucha hasabnis,where I saw a post of her and devoleena with caption, that devoleena is celebrating her 27th birthday and that was 2017 post also on her birthday 22 August.

Stewing in the Big Boss cauldron

Hey! I saw this edit while looking at page histories to support an SPI case and got sad. I've seen you revert and report quiet a lot of edits dealing with the mess of an area that is Big Boss and related biographies. You end up extending a little bit of good faith and it turns out to be the same sockmaster. :( I just wanted to let you know that I respect and appreciate your work and patience that mostly goes unnoticed. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 11:16, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Hellknowz, thanks, I really appreciate the kind words. That edit certainly wasn't my best side ever, but nice to know folks understand the frustration that can arise. Thank you for that, and likewise for all your efforts in this area as well. It's a really unique area of Wikipedia. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 15:09, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

A user is forcing only one-sided view in articles.

What do you do when a user is forcing only negative view in a section of an article? I had edited the "critical response" section of two films because it showed only the most negative comments made by critics, that too in unnecessary details, which left the section will too much length. I trimmed the section and added all the major mentions from negative to positive, backed by the original links to the sources. But, user Harshil169 has been reverting my edits. I saw his contribution history and he has primarily targeted articles related fil director Vivek Agnihotri and his films. In reality, Vivek's films did earn negative reviews, but there were positive ones as well.

I want to know, what should be done if a section of an article shows only one side? And what to do if somebody keeps reverting the edits?

Yeh Rishtey Hain Pyaar Ke

Hi. I noticed and understand your frustration of removing Yeh Rishtey Hain Pyaar Ke from your watchlist due to the continuous edit warring by User:Krish990, which continues still. I have provided the reliable resources and facts of Sheikh and Sharma alone being the main leads while Arora and Priyam playing Pivotal roles. That user provides only unreliable sources and facts for his points which makes no sense. Despite discussions in talk page of the series, he is not listening. This issue should be somehow stopped soon. Can you Please return back for that page and help in sorting it out through one way or another. Thanks and regards Noobie anonymous (talk) 10:04, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, I hear you, but this editor just doesn't care about anything other than their preferred version. I'd handle it either through WP:AN3 as edit-warring over content, not as a 3RR violation, or talk to the blocking admin. Ravensfire (talk) 16:51, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. But still there seems no improvement in the issue. He still edit wars it despite reverting. This should be stopped soon. Noobie anonymous (talk) 09:57, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, it probably needs to go to ANI if it continues. I wouldn't do it now though - try to get some discussion on the article talk page. If you take this to any noticeboard, your behavior is also evaluated, and right now both of you are reverting back and forth without much recent discussion. You need to push the discussion, even if they don't respond. Ravensfire (talk) 14:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

I discussed in the series and also his talk page but he still not listening. Noobie anonymous (talk) 15:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, I'll point to my previous advice. You may want to start with the original blocking admin (Ritchie333) to see if they have a different suggestion, but ANI may be the only option here as they won't discuss the issues and you are trying. Ravensfire (talk) 16:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! But I think Ritchie 333 is inactive since March 15. And even Krish 990. Noobie anonymous (talk) 09:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, And I see they've reverted back. Something to consider is posting on WP:ICTF for guidance, but for the behavior, you probably need to take it to ANI at this point. Ravensfire (talk) 14:43, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

I have reported the issue in ANI. Noobie anonymous (talk) 13:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, perfect, and a nice neutral summary. I've replied to it. Ravensfire (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance and support. Hope this issue ends soon! Noobie anonymous (talk) 17:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

And now User:Siddiq X follows Krish990 steps in the same article. I think they are sock puppet of Krish990. Noobie anonymous (talk) 16:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Noobie anonymous, Hmmm, that's an interesting edit. Editor interaction [4] shows some overlap, actually more than I would have though. Edits by each to Hussain Kuwajerwala [5] and [6] are somewhat close. Obviously the edits to YRHPK are very similar, that could be a copy-paste from a newer editor. From the timelines of their edits, they are close on Feb 22nd, but they don't really intermingle. Is it worth an SPI? Ummmm, probably, just to know one way or the other. Ravensfire (talk) 21:13, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Arijit Singh 2020 Edits

Dear Ravensfire

Thanks for letting me know about the policies. I will take care of that in the future. However, the link which I have added to the song's title Azaadi Ke Liye was its Lyrical link and that's the reason why I have added the same.

Regards Suprem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supremsanaye (talk • contribs) 11:41, February 26, 2020 (UTC)

Supremsanaye, It's not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards and as lyrics generally are copyrighted and lyric sites don't license them, it's a copyright violation and Wikipedia doesn't link to those. Ravensfire (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Sidharth shukla

Hey , I request to edit Sidharth page to make it better .many things are available. As There is no content about his modelling career ,where he became 1st asian to have won world's best model and other modelling work. No media image such as most desirable men in india , biz personallity of the year , ormax media etc. About his personal life. His media image. Awards section is not complete and full table of awards should be updated Princepratap1234 (talk) 10:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Princepratap1234, All of that is something you should be able to do, but you MUST have reliable secondary sources to support everything and avoid any promotional tone. Awards need to be notable, not just some marketing fluff, which often means there should be a Wikipedia article on the award. Ravensfire (talk) 13:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not good at this. If you or someone other can do this then it will be good for the page. Princepratap1234 (talk) 13:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Princepratap1234, I'm not familiar with the subject and not really interesting in them, so I'm not a good person to ask for that. You can leave sources on the talk page and hope someone will add them and related material to the article. The WP:ICTFFAQ page is a great place to help identify if the source you want to use is generally considered reliable or not. Remember that not everything online is considered reliable, most of it is not in fact. If it's a blog, or looks like a blog, probably not good. Ravensfire (talk) 14:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

With all respect clear my doubts

Hii your activities and edits makes me think you are connected to PR of Indian celebrities and does paid work here on Wikipedia which is illegal. I might be wrong but can you make me clear how after your edit Shenaaz Gill, Paras Chhabraa pages dont have any issues Tag. Also many unreliable sources has been used in their Wikipedia page. It reads advertising too. Kindly check and let me know. With all respect Lily Flingg (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Lily Flingg, that's a humorous request, but easy enough to honor. Nope, not connected to a PR of any type, not connected to any celebrity of any type and I absolutely do NOT do any paid work on Wikipedia. I'm more of a wiki-gnome, working on removing bad sources when added, tweaking phrasing and cleaning up/assisting editors that didn't quite do things the right way. On your comment about many unreliable sources being used, yes, that's correct. And the right approach is to replace or remove them when spotted, NEVER to add more. Making the problem worse is not helpful. Likewise, edits like this where you added a substantial claim without a source aren't helpful - readers need those sources so they can refer to them to verify the statement, one of the core principles of Wikipedia. Thanks. Ravensfire (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Exactly, being a teacher by profession I notice these days people are not putting any efforts to edit and create worthy pages. Mostly everyone are busy in creating and editing pages of new artist. Or you can say promoting, advertising. So was checking!! Forgive if I sound rude Lily Flingg (talk) 18:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Lily Flingg, no worries! It's not something that I'd take offense over or worry about, given the state of the world. Good luck! Ravensfire (talk) 18:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gurbaksh Chahal; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate, thank you for the warning, noted. Was not planning on anything further. Ravensfire (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but people get really annoyed when I don't warn "the other guy". And then it turns into a big dramafest that I have to deal with. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

NinjaRobotPirate, I figured, and honestly, it's warranted given the article and the dramafest that's already happened around it. Appreciate it! Ravensfire (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Rule

How to remove UPE tag from Shore City Shopping Centre ?

Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indian Tech Lover (talk • contribs) 10:16, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

@Indian Tech Lover: Honestly, as long as it's substantially what was written by the blocked editor, it needs to remain. Are you connected to that editor or are being paid to edit the article and haven't made the required declarations (read WP:PAID)? Ravensfire (talk) 15:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't aware of Wikipedia rule. I have declared it, please review and let me know if there are any errors. Sorry again and thank you. Indian Tech Lover (talk) 16:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Indian Tech Lover, thank you for that. Honestly, it's a questionable article. It was moved to draft space by MER-C who's an extremely experienced editor because the overall tone was / is still frankly promotional. The sources are all pretty much around the sale and purchase. There some unsourced stuff in there. When you moved it into main article space as a new editor, that's going to set off all kinds of alarm bells in most experience editors. Hence my question about being paid. Frankly, I think it would be best to be back in draft, cleaned up (think boring writing, this is an encyclopedia) and go through the WP:AFC process. I'm not part of that process, I do more quiet edits. Ravensfire (talk) 22:42, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Nahshon Anderson wiki deletion

Hi Raven:

I'm Nahshon Anderson. You've made edits to my page. My wiki article was recently nominated for deletion, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nahshon_Dion_Anderson. This was my response, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:David_Fuchs#Nahshon_Anderson_Wiki_article_deletion. Thanks for reading my message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shootingrange78 (talk • contribs) 17:05, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

Shootingrange78, thank you for making your comment. Wikipedia is a tricky place sometimes, and it's geared towards the mainstream mostly because of the reliable source demands and how notability is defined/measured. The Anderson article has been a mess for a while - obvious promotional editors at times, obvious contrary editors at times. BLP violations, unsourced statements, just stuff that isn't good. As written, it's a "meh" article at best right now. Fuchs' analysis on the deletion page is very thorough and details, more than usually seen. It highlights some weaknesses that need to be addressed, especially the sourcing. For notability, good in-depth articles from publications that have a decent footprint are by far the most helpful. Interviews generally aren't considered when viewing notability (see the notability page), it's those articles written by someone else about you that are the most helpful. I think your response is a good basis for a comment on the AFD page, but there, something that focuses on specific additional sources and areas of improvement would be most helpful. The AFD has been categorized in multiple lists which interested Wikiprojects watch which will get some additional eyes. Just some thoughts. Ravensfire (talk) 22:33, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Image update for celebrities/Important Personnel

Hello Ravensfire,

I just saw your note on the image update. My intentions was not to update anything which is inappropriate. Obviously we don't venture out to take snapshots of those Celebrities/Important Personnel to update images in Wikipedia or any public forum. Having said that I tired all different options to update image after giving credit to the source but all my efforts went in vain. As a last resort I just chose to tag it as my own to avoid getting the image deleted. I might be doing it the wrong way, I would appreciate if you could redirect me on how to update images to Celebrities or Important personnel. I reiterate that my intentions is not to violate anyone's rights or take credit for anything that is not mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinkwiki (talk • contribs) 18:29, March 26, 2020 (UTC)

Thinkwiki, I hear where you've coming from and you're not the only person who's done this, but it's just flat wrong and needs to stop. The really bad thing was taking credit for someone else's work - that's what you did when you said it was "own work". Someone else put the effort and skill and you just claimed it behind their back. Think about how you'd feel if someone else took credit for your effort. Don't do that again.

The other thing to realize is that Wikipedia strives to be a free encyclopedia, which means more than just zero cost or who can edit it, but free in terms of rights, allowing others to reuse the content without a fee, just attribution. To do that, everything in the encyclopedia must be free, including the images. Now, the English Wikipedia does hedge a bit on images, using a doctrine in US law called Fair Use, where some copyrighted images can be used in very limited circumstances. Please read over the WP:Non-free content page carefully, especially around images. Non-free images of anyone living are just not allowed, don't try, it won't happen. It's because someone could take a picture and donate it. Movie posters are allowed, for the article on the film only, because there is no other option. You've probably seen some images from Bollywood Hungama that have been uploaded to Commons. They've decided to allow relicensing of their images using a free license as long as the image was taken in certain circumstances - one of their parties or events that was in India and was taken by one of their photographers.

I'll be honest, you probably shouldn't upload images for a while. You need to learn more about Wikipedia, about copyright and about licensing. If you don't, you'll probably end up making a mistake and your history will hurt you and possibly end up with being blocked from editing. Copyright is something that Wikipedia takes VERY seriously, and you've seriously breached it. Ravensfire (talk) 02:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Desamuduru Album Cover

I edited the image by extracting it from music player. What should I do in order not to loose the image?Bangaru ramu (talk) 00:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Bangaru ramu, With non-free images - which is what that image is as it's a copyrighted work - any use of it must full under fair-use. Wikpedia's non-free content page has guidelines on how to use non-free images and one of them is to keep the use to a minimum. For film articles, the rule is to use the film poster and only include the soundtrack cover in very rare circumstances where the soundtrack cover generated significant comment in reliable sources. WP:FILMSCORE talks more about this. Ravensfire (talk) 13:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, you've tagged the image as being free. Please indicate where you found that the image was released as free. Images are protected by copyright by default and they have to be explicitly granted by the creator to be free. I really, really hope you didn't falsely state the image was free, that's copyright infringement - you CANNOT just upload any image you find from your music player and claim it's free. Wikipedia depends on you be honest about files, and when you aren't, it can cause issues. Ravensfire (talk) 13:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Amazon.Bangaru ramu (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Bangaru ramu, Sigh, so it's not free. Okay, I'll tag it to be deleted. Please don't do something like this again - you cannot lie about where you get the image and expect other editors not to spot it and to question your uploads in the future. Ravensfire (talk) 13:34, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Google once. Images on Amazon are free. Bangaru ramu (talk) 14:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Bangaru ramu, no, they aren't. They are free in terms of cost because you can right-click and download, but they are NOT free with regards to copyright. That requires a very specific declaration. I can guarantee that Amazon doesn't have that because they aren't the rights holder. Ravensfire (talk) 14:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Good edits are being removed and un-updated content exists

If good authority website link appears spammy then what about the completely irrelevant non-working (404) links? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pramod.R.Tiwari (talk • contribs) 12:48, April 1, 2020 (UTC)

This edit [7] is adding an unreliable source that's promotional and basically spam and if you continue, will end up on the spam black list. Don't spam your promotional stuff on Wikipedia. Ravensfire (talk) 18:52, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Dollar value in movie article

Hello Wikipedia Editor, I received a "Red coloured notification" saying "Your edit on ‪Kesari (2019 film)‬ was reverted. Undid revision 948743350 by Mr.Regalis (talk), Per WP:ICTF co". I am unable to understand what this red message means. So it would be very kind of you if you could be troubled to explain what you meant. I think all I did was to duplicate the template that was already in the article at a few more places so that it is easier for the reader to make sense of the currency value. Yours truly. Regalis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Regalis (talk • contribs) 15:44, April 2, 2020 (UTC)

Mr.Regalis, For a couple of different reasons, there's a consensus not to use the INRConvert template in article leads or infoboxes. You can see the latest discussion around this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Proposal: INRConvert in film articles. In the main body of the article, it's okay to use the template. As your edit added that template to values in the infobox and lead, I reverted the change. Ravensfire (talk) 20:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I see, thanks a lot for the kind explanation. That linked discussion says on the top that the Result was: rejected. Although the people who made comments seem to say what you have explained above. I have no intention to argue with you or anyone over this trivial issue. But I will point that you also removed the templates from the main body of the article. Even though you said that it is not prohibited to add them in the article body. So can you please re-add the templates in the main body as they are acceptable. Many thanks. Regalis

Can you please act to rectify your removal or respond about the contradiction between your response and actions ? --Mr.Regalis (talk) 08:32, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Mr.Regalis, respectfully, I will, in due time (which generally means when I'm actually editing Wikipedia as opposed to working or asleep). Generally, when your edit is reverted, the understanding is that the entire edit is reverted because that's how the Wikipedia editing system works. The responsibility for making any parts of the edit that are good are up to the person who made the edit originally, not the person that reverted. I'm not here to clean up after your mistakes. Ravensfire (talk) 14:07, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Appreciate your kind reply and patience, while I understand about the Editing process. To be honest, I was a bit upset to see my edits being deleted. It led me to question myself about the point of editing Wikipedia, if someone will remove it anyway. Now, I do understand your point regarding infobox, so I was hoping that you could have only removed the offending ones that were in Infobox and not all of them. Is there a rule/or policy that asks to delete all the edits instead of the offending ones. I have read a few Wikipedia policies in past few days, but there are so many of them, it is hard to read all of them. If you could link me to the policy that says all edits (as opposed to some) are allowed to be deleted, I would be very grateful. I personally feel that removing good edits on technical grounds are contrary to the objective of building an Encyclopedia. Finally, I am not in a hurry, but I just wanted a clear resolution one way or the other, which is why I posted on this talk page. I would appreciate if you could restore some of my edits, I can also do it if you allow me to. Finally, Please accept my sincere apologies if my post here had caused you any trouble. Thanks. Mr.Regalis (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2020 (UTC)