User talk:Paglakahinka

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! - Managerarc™^talk 20:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: disambiguition pages needed

Disambiguation pages must only be created if necessary. Please note that if there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed – it is sufficient to use a hatnote on the primary topic article, pointing to the other article. --- Managerarc™^talk 19:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits seem to be ok. I will take a detailed look at the article later when I have time. --- Managerarc™^talk 17:45, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please use proper citation templates such as cite web or cite news for references. Also avoid over linking. Link only the first occurrence of an item in the article.--- Managerarc™^talk 21:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jaanwar

In response to your msg at User:Jerzy#Jaanwar, i've started a broader & perhaps more populous discussion at Talk:Jaanwar#Is there a primary topic for the WP title "Jaanwar" ? where your further thots would be valuable.
----Jerzy•t 09:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You responded to what i wrote there in part with

instead of making things complicated just create a disambiguition page so that who oever wants to know can know about the details of the film they are looking for.

which is about your dissatisfaction with me, not about the article. So I'm responding here, where it is relevant.
If you're not interested in the why part of my answer, you're presumably not interested in how to become an effective, rather than merely well-intending, editor. When you're ready to take experienced colleagues' views more seriously than your own expectations, there probably will be others willing to advise you (and likely they will suit you better than i). But don't expect further response from me -- least of all in the form of further comment on my fixes for your reiteration of what i previously reverted and explained.
--Jerzy•t 21:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In order to keep the discussion together, I've copied your response on my talk page here (and touched up your formatting):

oho what happened?
i did not see your message.
it seems you are angry or hurt from your message.
i really did not intend to...
be clear in what you say.
i did not understand what am i supposed to do.
what you had asked me to do?
--Paglakahinka (talk) 16:17, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I regret that i am in a terrible rush trying to get things done off-line and am unsure how long i'll be too distracted to reply. In the meantime, know that i've been neither angry nor hurt, tho dissatisfied. I'm sorry that i have to ask you to be patient, and that for the moment my best advice to you is not good enough to avoid having you probably misunderstand it.
--Jerzy•t 21:54, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some related cleanup. I don't see anything calling specifically for action by you. If you have a specific request for me, things have quieted and I should be able to respond more quickly than before. Thanks for your attention.
--Jerzy•t 19:42, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jaanwar

Hi, you requested on a project talk page (the wrong page, but never mind) that Jaanwar (1983 film) be moved to Jaanwar. But that already redirects to an article about another film. Following usual Wikipedia practice, I'll convert Jaanwar into a disambiguation page which links to all films of this title. I hope this addresses your request. Regards, Sandstein 18:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

At the first occurrence of the reference, instead of <ref> tag use <ref name> for example <ref name=cite1> details here </ref> Now if you want to insert the same reference again only use <ref name=cite1 /> Hope that helps! --- Managerarc™^talk 16:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Message

Hello, Paglakahinka. You have new messages at Jayarathina's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Jayarathina (talk) 19:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

images

the images were probably deleted/removed because they failed to follow wikipedia's and the laws regarding copyright. see WP:COPY / WP:IMAGE / WP:FAIR for more information. Active Banana (^bananaphone 11:34, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No because they are covered by copyright and are not available for free use and distribution as is required by Wikipedia. Active Banana (^bananaphone 14:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re Shashi Kapoor

Hi, what exactly you want to be done there. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 17:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See first of all a separate filmography page for the actor isn't needed. He has hardly done some 50 odd films. A separate page is needed only when an actor has done more than 100 films. It has already been suggested to merge the filmography with the main article. Also having a separate column for producer and director is not necesssary, since that would make the table more cluttered. See Shah Rukh Khan's page for assistance in filmography. For extended filmographies check Rajinikanth filmography and Kamal Haasan filmography. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 06:03, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm okay! right now I'm busy with Hema Malini, will probably do it later. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 12:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ya her career section will be expanded soon. Currently am working on it. And yes her association with Rajesh Khanna will find a place in the article. Also more about sholay and Prem Nagar will be added. You can have a look at my sandbox, though I'm not fully done with. Commander _{(Ping Me)} 18:04, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeetendra Filmography

I have added a merge templete to merge the above page with the main article, Jeetendra. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~:It was just a suggestion, as other film stars have their filmography on their main page rather than having it as a separate page --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)~~ Never mind, read the bit you pointed out. Will remove that merge template right away --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:50, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to be rude, but is there any reason why you cannot do that yourself? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 11:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you edit the page, there should be a toolbox just above the text box. If you click the second button from the right, it should allow you to create a table :) --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you really want me to, then sure I will --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Before I start, where do you want this table? Do you want it kept in the talk page or what? And you will need to tell me what cell names you want me to put in the tables. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 15:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will create it in the discussion page in case you have any problems with it. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 10:22, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have already started. Please be aware though, that I have things to do in real life that will take precedence over what I do here. If you find that problematic, then I would suggest you find someone else to do it. If you don't, then I will get it done as soon as possible. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 11:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. It was not meant to sound harsh and I'm sorry if it has done. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:22, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about half way through it. Should be able to finish it within a day or so, if other things don't get in the way. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 17:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have put it here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Skamecrazy123/Jeetandra_Film_Table). Once I have finished it and its ok with you I can move it to the relevant page --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would it then be better if I did separate tables for every year, if thats what you want? Whatever you want done, I am sure it will be no problem :) --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. No problems. It may take me a bit more time than I thought, but it will get done. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of that will be sorted, don't you worry --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you keep anything to do with the filmography on my talk page please? Only because I normally don't bother to check the talk pages of anything on my userspace. Thanks. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 16:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I have used the filmography you asked me to. The four other rows aren't visible at the moment because nothing has been put into the cells (remember, you only asked me to put the year and the film name in). Also, if you want to help putting things in there, please feel free to. Just because it is in my userspace doesn't mean you can't pitch in and help if you want :). --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 17:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have already said why there aren't lines there. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 17:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only way to do that is to put information in. If you want me to do that, then I may as well put the proper information in. If you don't want me to do that then I will leave what I have done on the filmography page and let you get on with it. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 17:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you want me to put the information in, despite telling me at the start that you just wanted me to fill in the year and the film names? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 17:41, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "Producer" and "director" columns are really necessary. Most filmography pages don't have those. Moreover that will make the table look more cluttered. Commander _{(Ping Me)} 17:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Filmographies

According to WP:MOS they are not necessary. Anything that finds a special mention such as awards can be included in "Other Notes". Also why did you move Gemini Ganesan to "Gemini Ganeshan". That was not his screen name. It must be either "Gemini Ganesh" or simply Gemini Ganesan. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 18:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hema Malini

I'll start to work on it tomorrow. Try to add contents according to the chronological order of her career. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 18:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will do that shortly. But please don't edit war in that article. Commander _{(Ping Me)} 07:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "citwf" is a reliable one. Try adding sources published by newspapers or books. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 12:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not discouraging anybody. If you think citwf is reliable go to the link suggested by sitush and ask there. Commander _{(Ping Me)} 14:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is better you discuss the issue with the editor and use the article's talk page to resolve any disputes. Edit wars are certainly not helpful. ---Managerarc™^talk 14:36, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gemini Ganesan

I have moved this page to Gemini Ganesan, his actual screen name. Also you should not remove others' comments without valid reasons. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 12:32, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing

Please stop canvassing, as you have done recently regarding the Hema Malini article. This is unacceptable behaviour - see WP:CANVASS. You really do seem to have an ownership issue with articles & it would be much easier for you and everyone else if you could resolve that. - Sitush (talk) 14:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on J. Jayalalithaa. 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.

In particular, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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; 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 continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. Sitush (talk) 14:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot open a discussion and then start changing things within minutes of doing so. You have been warned before about this sort of behaviour. - Sitush (talk) 14:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on J. Jayalalithaa. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
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; 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sitush (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article J. Jayalalithaa, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 15:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Deccan Herald article, for one, does not say what you think it does. This is why it was removed, and the reason was explained at the time. - Sitush (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of dubious source

Despite being told by several people today that citwf is probably not a reliable source and that if you want to use it then you should take it to WP:RSN, I note that you have now started to use it at J. Jayalalithaa also. Are you really this silly? You are ignoring consensus and trying to steamroller things. Please revert and take heed of the advice given to you by me, at least two others above and Moonriddengirl regarding this source. . - Sitush (talk) 15:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Shrik88music (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not.

If you are not a sock puppet, and would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. —SpacemanSpiff 16:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Paglakahinka (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Not a Sockpuppet. Moreover citwf was not the only source i have provided. Whats wrong with this version - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._Jayalalithaa&action=historysubmit&diff=437906225&oldid=437881836? In spite of having written everything in discussion page, i fail to understand why should i be blocked? Managerac had asked me to not worry about getting blocked etc instead be bold and express what you want with the reliable sources.Point is am not sockpuppet!If this is the reason for the block then its totally unfair. As far as edit is concerned, i have provided my version and seniors need to see what i wrote was it not validated with necessary sources?Block is totally unfair .Iam the one who has asked people to discuss things in discussion talk page.its others who are reverting.Example why is Sitush not being blocked and being allowed to edit in this manner. See the difference between hsi version and mine - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._Jayalalithaa&action=historysubmit&diff=437909084&oldid=437881836. Lots of information has been removed by that user.I have done nothing wrong. Also go through "Recent Edit issues" in talk page of jayalaithaa artcile.I repeat am not some sock puppet!Paglakahinka (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This account is absolutely obviously a sockpuppet account. The evidence is overwhelming. Please don't waste both your time and ours by creating yet more obvious sockpuppets. Just go and find something else to do instead of editing Wikipedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

-->

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Paglakahinka (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Whats obvious? How can you say iam a sockpuppet? I have nothing in common with any user! Moreover the questions i raised regarding Jayalalithaa article is unanswered! (probably because people concerned if they investigate would come to the conclusion there was nothing really wrong about my version!) rest of the comments are as written above. Iam not a sockpuppet. You should appreciate instead my Valuable contributions!Paglakahinka (talk) 04:24, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your edits look very much like those made by the other blocked accounts, and you're editing from the same network range as them. I don't see anything to indicate you're a different person. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Paglakahinka (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I want myself to be unblocked. I have been blocked due to insane appeal by a suer who has destroyed the article Jayalalithaa. Anyways thats a seperate matter about which in detail i have discussed above. But what do you want me to do now? I want to contribute to wiki and if this way I am blocked unfairly without listening to my justifications, what do you expect me to do?Give me a chance.Paglakahinka (talk) 14:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC) (talk) 14:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified sock of banned user. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:54, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Choti Bahu concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Choti Bahu, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Choti Bahu concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Choti Bahu, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 19:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Talk:Choti Bahu/Attribution

Hello Paglakahinka. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Attribution".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Talk:Choti Bahu/Attribution}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Red Rose(film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Red Rose(film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 4 § Red Rose(film) until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:19, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]