User talk:Shaku india

April 2013

Hello, I'm Vivvt. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Mughal-e-Azam because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! - Vivvt (Talk) 11:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Once again, your unconstructive and unexplained change to Mughal-e-Azam has been reverted.
Please stop wasting everybody's time, 99.237.143.219 (talk) 04:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Mughal-e-Azam, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. BollyJeff | talk 12:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to say this, but u will be blocked as ur edits are unacceptable to Mughal-e-azam. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you have legitimate complaints about the content, please bring them up on the talk page: Talk:Mughal-e-Azam. Otherwise, stop removing properly sourced stuff without discussion. BollyJeff | talk 12:24, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bollyjeff, You have been wrongly informed about the Colourisation project. The entire project was undertaken by Sterling Investment Corp Pvt Ltd through six different studios. If you can see the credits of the colour version, you will get full clarity. There is enough on record to show that what has been deleted was wrong.

I have the color version at home and will look at it, but the credits are just a list of names. Anyway those sources that you are discrediting are used a lot in this article. Why are you saying that they are wrong? Discuss this on the films talk page, and try to get consensus for the change with other editors. If you just keep reverting you will likely get blocked from editing. BollyJeff | talk 13:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your concern for consensus. I also appreciate your effort to see the film credits of the colour version. Let us then discuss your opinion.

I m presently looking at the credits of my DVD copy of MeA. It says Project design and direction - Deepesh Salgia. It also lists five colourisation team leaders; the first one on the list is Umar Siddique, the one whose name you keep removing. It then goes on to list dozens of others who worked on the restoration. So what is the problem with Siddique? BollyJeff | talk 02:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to see the names of Deepesh Salgia, Ummar Siddique and other Team Leaders in the Official Credit List of the Mughal-e-Azam ( Colour). Pl send me a scan/pic of the Official Credit list that you have seen. If I am satisfied with it, we can resolve the issue. And please note that I have no issue with any of the persons, whether Deepesh Salgia or Umar Siddique or any of the colourisation team members. I am closely related to one of the original crew of Mughal-e-Azam and also know people who have worked on the Colourisation and therefore would like the correct things to be displayed.

Meanwhile, as a courtesy, I have not changed anything on the page. But if I do not see any proof from your side, I would be forced to remove the wrong content and rightfully so. (You can mail me the details on shakutala.jain@gmail.com)

The internet is your friend, behold: YouTube Fast forward to 2:55:45. BollyJeff | talk 21:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since various editors are having different opinions, I suggest that we talk to an authentic person to confirm the same.

Shaku, u appear as an inexperienced editor who doesn't even know how to talk to people (both in wiki and real life). i do not mean to scold u, but whenever u talk, it appears as if u r cursing. also, pls remember to Sign your posts by simply typing ~~~~. As for Mughal-e-Azam, if u want to add content, please do so, but not remove existing and well-written/sourced content. BTW, everyone agrees with what User:Bollyjeff's opinion (he's one of the best editors I've known), strangely u r the only exception. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shaku, did you view the credits in the video that I posted above? I gave you what you were asking for, and still you reverted the sourced text. I do not understand. Wikipedia policies require reliable written sources or videos, not "I talked to a guy who said this". It is very clear. BollyJeff | talk 13:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Mughal-e-azam, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your edits are not actually vandalism, but mass deletion of content you believe is "wrong", even though they are all well-researched and sourced. Do that once more, and you will be blocked indefinitely. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kailash29792,

You and I and keep arguing on the matter. Instead of doing the same, let us talk to the authorities. Let us talk to the producers and the copyright holder Sterling Investment Corp Ltd (of Shapoorji Pallonji group). If you are okay, we can write a joint mail to them and settle the matter. The same has been suggested by Bollyjeff.

Further, his would also be in the interest of the film and also of wikipedia.

Let us work constructively towards finding a solution.

Best Regards, Shakuntala Jain (shakuntala.jain@gmail.com)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Shaku_india reported by User:Kailash29792 (Result: ). Thank you. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistent disruptive editing, as you did at Mughal-e-Azam. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 01:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In your sporadic history at Wikipedia, the only article you edit is Mughal-e-Azam, and you persist in removing sourced content in defiance of the consensus of other editors and despite warnings. If you return to that mode after expiration of this block, the next block will probably be indefinite.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I may not have edited any other article on Wikipedia but that does not prove that my knowledge of Mughal-e-Azam is incorrect. I have edited the data on Mughal-e-Azam after consulting the original producers i.e. Sterling Investment Corp Pvt Ltd ( Shapoorji Pallonji Group). it is only after consulting them, I have made changes. I also therefore suggested that if you do not believe me let us, jointly consult the authority in the matter.

Pl let me have your email address and we will jointly write to them. It will clarify the correct position and it is in everyone's interest that what is written on wikipedia is authentic and correct.

thats not the way Wikipedia works. Your personal knowledge or communications from the subject of the article are inappropriate and not reliable sources from which article content can be based. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean to say that the producer does not know about his film. What producer says is wrong. And what others say is correct ? I am clearly saying that we can jointly discuss with the producers. Let us have an open discussion with them. You will yourself be convinced on what is correct. Is it not in our common interest that users of wikipedia get the correct information.

i did not say that the producer does not know about his film (although what a producer says about his film may in fact be wrong or misleading). I said that you need to provide reliably published source and not simply claim that you have an e-mail. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the producer really cares to get it right, have them talk to Times of India or some such reliable source that will vet the information, and let them print it. Then Wikipedia can refer to the TIO source for this article. That's how it works. We cannot use as our source: "Shaku said that producer said this and that in an email". BollyJeff | talk 13:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shakuntala, you are failing to understand that we only take data from recorded evidence, but you are making edits without including any strong evidence. Instead u r removing verified content that was published in the newspapers and adding in extremely original research. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

conflict of interest

Hello, Shaku india. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

We do not "consult with the subjects" and then place their preferred content into the article. Wikipedia is NOT a free advertising/promotional webhost service. Wikipedia relies on what reliably published third party sources say about the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:42, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is not that I have a close connection with the subject. I am only saying that I have checked the contents with the producers. And I am surprised that you are saying that and outsider knows about making of a film than a producer. I have also checked its with film associations and other people who were part of marketing the film and people who were in distribution of the film. All cannot be wrong.

Hence this data has to be corrected. If it is not corrected, it would be against the spirit of wikipedia.

If that is the case, please provide us with evidence that support your claims. Evidence usually comes in the form of recorded interviews on video or newspaper. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]