User talk:Torterra Ketchum 5999

This editor is an Apprentice Editor and is entitled to display this Service Badge.

This editor is a Novato and is entitled to display this Wikipedia Picture Story Book.

August 2017

Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Reyhna Malhotra have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

November 2017

Hello, I'm LakesideMiners. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Ishqbaaaz— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Lakeside Out!-LakesideMiners 16:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Ishqbaaaz Edits

Hi User:Abir susnigdha,

See you last Contribution. Can you tell me what are trying to do? Please explain me on my talk page.

Siddiq Sazzad (Chat) 16:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Torterra Ketchum 5999. You have new messages at Talk:Ishqbaaaz#More_problematic_cast_changes.
Message added 07:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

It would be appreciated if you'd please participate in this discussion before you make any more changes to the cast list at Ishqbaaaz. Your edits, while well-meaning, are not consistent with established community guidelines, so we need to sort out what the plan is for the article before moving against community consensus. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Speculative content

Hi there, re: this edit, you wrote "However, her identity as the third and youngest Kapoor sister may soon be revealed." Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so it's not our job to attempt to predict or guess the future. Anything that is scheduled to happen in the future must be sourced if we include it. Thank you for understanding. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:21, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Ishqbaaaz cast reordering

Re: these changes, please see WP:TVCAST for instructions. We organise cast according to their introduction into the series, with new members being added to the bottom of the Main and Recurring lists. You moved a number of cast members around without providing any explanation or supplementary information that might make it clear why you made the changes you did. I've reverted these changes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:51, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Is there a reason why you have added plot content in a character list? That's what the giant Plot section is for. The cast section is supposed to provide brief explanations of the characters, then focus on real-world information like how the character was shaped, who it was modeled after, how the person got the role, etc. The goal is List of Millennium characters, not an ever-expanding wall of in-universe content replete with bizarrely interpretive choices like "He is truly the "Ravana" in Shivaay-Anika's Ramayana", "being the all-in-all in Goa", "marry him by fair means or foul." Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I have tried to remove all the unnecessary and "bizarre" info, and shortened some character details but if you still feel the character details to be unnecessary retelling of the plot, feel free to remove those, leaving only the name of the characters and the respective actors. Anyway, it's totally impossible for me to get info like how the character was shaped, who it was modeled after, how the person got the role, etc. Abir susnigdha 00:58, 3 February 2018 (UTC).

Dil Se Dil Tak

Hi Abir susnigdha, if you feel the plot version I reverted to was outdated, please do update it, but as per WP:PLOT, they shouldn't exceed 500 words. As for the lyrics under soundtrack, please read WP:NOTLYRICS and WP:NPS. Therefore, I'm doing the necessary changes for now. Thanks, MT Train^Discuss 14:23, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Please don't log out to engage in edit-warring

Hi there, you made this edit with the comments "omakara and gauri are the parallel main leads along with rudra and bhavya,", which was reverted by Siddiqsazzad001. I then see this exact same edit from IP 117.225.157.105, followed by this edit, which,surprise surprise, adds interpretive "parallel lead" labels into the article. It's pretty clear that you logged out to make these changes, maybe because you thought you'd avoid scrutiny? Please don't do this. This is a really shady way of editing, and it's also just annoying. Familiarise yourself with our sockpuppetry policy. If you disagree with a change someone made, your recourse is to open a discussion with that person and seek consensus for your version.

Also re: "Main Male Lead" and "Main Female Protagonist" and "Parallel Male Lead" we don't need editors to apply subjective labels like "protagonist" or "antagonist" or "hero" or "villain". (See WP:ANTAGONIST, which is widely accepted by WikiProject Television as well.) If we had clear character descriptions that conveyed what roles the characters had in the narrative (John Doe is a jealous businessman who has vowed revenge on Jack Smith) then we wouldn't need interpretive labels. And just from a logic perspective, if we have a "Main cast" section, you don't need to tell readers that a person is "Main". That's needlessly repetitive. Same with "Lead". If they appear at the top of the Main section, we can assume they're lead. "Parallel" or "subordinate" or whatever is all still interpretive. These things would have to be sourced, but really, we don't need them. They don't appear at List of Millennium characters, for example, and this is a featured list.

And lastly, this is super annoying: we don't need to be told who the boys and girls are. We can tell who the Male ___ and Female ___ are, simply by looking at them. I have no idea why, but this is a weird convention that seems to only appear in Indian TV articles and it just reeks of gender bias. Like, would we say someone is the Indian lead and someone is the Pakistani lead? We need to elevate these articles to a higher standard. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

No, Mr. Cyphoidbomb whatever allegations you are putting on me are totally bizarre and unjust. When the characters of omkara and gauri were listed beneath rudra and bhavya in the main cast section, then i just didn't understand why are a certain section of people now, all of a sudden, finding omkara-gauri's roles in the series to be less significant and only next to the significance of rudra and bhavya's roles. May be because om-gauri haven't been given a prominent track for a long time now, but again from you, I have learnt that an actor doesn't cease to be less important in a wikipedia article based on a tv show, even if he/she quits the series or is not made prominent for a long time. "If the characters were initially credited as main/starring, then they should remain listed that way. Per WP:TVCAST, we are supposed to present the entire history of the notable cast, not just a snapshot of the most current lineup. If there is real-world information about the causes of the reduction of the characters' screen time that can be found in reliable sources, or if reliable sources have commented on the decline of screen time, it might be of academic value to add that. But again, we can't be writing from a fan perspective."These are the exact words of "valuable" advice that you gave me and which I have since followed when I wanted to remove the characters of omkara, gauri, rudra and bhavya from the main cast and place them in the recurring cast. So, I made the this edit with the comments "omakara and gauri are the parallel main leads along with rudra and bhavya,", which was reverted by Siddiqsazzad001. I just wanted to make those editors understand that anyone shouldn't change the structure of the cast section as the way they want whenever they get that feeling.

But, now out of the blue you come and tell me "surprise surprise" you have done sockpuppetry, "we don't need editors to apply subjective labels like "protagonist" or "antagonist" or "hero" or "villain"" and also term me as super annoying for something done which I am not aware of at all. I know very clearly everything you have tried to teach me in the above comment and I think it to be totally insensible and rather foolish of you to take a small coincidence for my attempt to "avoid scrutiny" ?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Listen one thing very clearly I am giving words to my knowledge and putting it down in black and white here for the betterment of an internet article regarding the serail which I really prefer. I am doing all these for a social purpose i.e. communal knowledge on the said subject in an era when individual opinions, fan perspectives, misleading content being common in reputed info-providing platforms like wikipedia. I am doing my job as and editor honestly and the right way, so why the hell do I need to be such frightened form those idiotic people who write things on the site that general public are expected to read as if they are writing a personal diary. I who is honest in disposition doesn't need to be a coward to be fearful of avoiding scrutiny from such fools out there who don't even know the basic essence of an encyclopedia. Here, I am trying on almost a regular basis to make at least one article rich and vivid with info and other things that a reader would find easy to understand and get to know about the serial. But again here I have to face discrimination from administrators like you who go on such long talking nothing but baseless nonsense before even crosschecking their so-called suspicion. Is this the identity I have created on my so far short time period as an wikipedia editor??????? You go on putting baseless allegations on me, making me responsible for the illogical edits done by another fool going by the IP 117.225.157.105. And you go on teaching me a vast array of things as if I am a kindergarten kid. I am making this very reply to you from my own IP. Go and check it for your solace. Do you know how much of my time you have cost for nonsense shit like this based on someone else's lunacy. First, you administrators let anyone contribute to the encyclopedia without even judging the accuracy of his contribution(s), you don't accept the protective content requests made by the few editors like me who know their jobs to prevent the ongoing vandalism, and then you go blaming us editors for the effect of your very own negligence and carefree attitude. Such bloody lunacy! totally annoying! I know I am using rather strong language here, but i want the criticism to get to your head and you take immediate necessary actions and precautions regarding the afore-mentioned subjects I threw light on, especially the important matter regarding the continuous baseless change in the structure of the cast section and rest article without providing any reason for doing so. Also don't rebuke someone on the basis of your mere suspicion. I made the comments for the understanding of those people out there, if someone gets influenced of the raw language used by me in the comments for the public understanding and goes on to write things build up by his own "creative mind" in the article, how is that my liability and why do I need to write such a long essay to make myself clear in fornt of administrators?????????????!!!!!!! It was so unthoughtful and stupid of you. Totally not expected!!!!! I would also like you to apologize for the discredit you brought to me to satisfy your suspicion. Take your job as an administrator more effectively and more importantly righteously!Remember wikipedia is a platform dedicated to the readers, don't always, like a machine, abide by rules that are useless and potentially harmful fro the readers. Use your conscience, develop your approach and discuss it of more clearly for individual as well as mass betterment. From Abir susnigdha 21:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC).

@Abir susnigdha: I thought this discussion was closed at here [1]. Siddiqsazzad001 (Talk) 17:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: Have you even read my comment? It's not about any discussion, it's my reply regarding the defamation made about me on account of mere baseless suspicion. Don't be callous to the mistake made by a person, whoever he may be.Abir susnigdha 23:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC).

@Abir susnigdha: I am watching this show regularly. Ishqbaaaz story is mainly focussed on three brothers, one of the Omkara that you removed again [2]. If you do like this then It might be claimed for vandalism. Be aware. Siddiqsazzad001 (Talk) 18:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: What nonsense! I didn't remove Omkara from anything, I just reverted the arrangement of the main cast back to original - Shivaay, Anika, Omkara, Gauri, Rudra and finally, Bhavya. First of all omkara and gauri were all of a sudden placed in the recurring cast and then shifted to the main cast, only beneath rudra and bhavya. I just reverted it back to square one, the way it should be. Yet claims of vandalism are made upon me, who is trying to get the things in proper order. First you jump into discussions of other people, and then you make baseless claims on others as if no one knows better than you and no one is as ardent a viewer of the show as you are; and finally, you build up false stories only to engage in random fights. Hence, in my opinion, you are the one who needs to be aware of his permissive attitude first.Abir susnigdha 00:35, 2 March 2018 (UTC).

March 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ishqbaaaz. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Siddiqsazzad001 (Talk) 00:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: It seems you are day-dreaming making repeated claims of vandalism on my part, however, quite the contrary, you can't cite directly whatever vandalism I made. Nor I would ask, as your opinion plainly doesn't matter. You please continue your experiments, sorry "costructive edits" for making wikipedia better. I would suggest you to restore the characters (like Mahi) that you just removed without explanation citing them to be"duplicates"????????????? Also, the current ordering is not totally as per policy as you listed Viha Gori over Amrapali Gupta and others introduced much earlier. Also you made extended cameos and special/guest apppearances like Mallika in the recurring cast. Pleas take note of the above.

END OF DISCUSSION Thank you Abir susnigdha 09:49, 2 March 2018 (UTC).

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Phagun Bou, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TRP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

How to upload non-free poster

Now you are an extended confirmed user. You have to learn that how to upload non-free poster. Read this WP:NFCC policy first.

• Go to Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, as you are experienced user, so click Plain form for local uploads

• Upload the non-free and then add destination filename (Ex. Y- The Flash poster.jpg but N -PCTV-036.jpg}

• Use this template for Summary (author, source, URL, fair use rationale if applicable, extra tags, etc.): Non-free Poster Template

• Add correct information and upload it.

Hope you learn soon. Happy editing! Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 06:14, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

 Note: If you upload poster for Star India content then please use only Hotstar source poster not other. Because Hotstar is an official source.

@Siddiqsazzad001: Thanks for the guidelines. From Abir susnigdha 13:31, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Madhumita Sarkar as Iman.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Madhumita Sarkar as Iman.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:11, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Aparajita Ghosh Das as Roopkatha.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Aparajita Ghosh Das as Roopkatha.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Rishi Kaushik as Ranojoy.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rishi Kaushik as Ranojoy.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:13, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Badshah Moitra.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Badshah Moitra.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:14, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Roosha Chatterjee as Shruti in Kusum Dola.PNG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Roosha Chatterjee as Shruti in Kusum Dola.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:14, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Misuse of Non-free license.

Hi Abir susnigdha,

Please do not upload WP:BLP photo using non-free television license. That is the misuse of the license. This license is only for Film and Television poster. Not for person. Please see WP:NFP. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:20, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: Then how can I upload images of those actors?. From Abir susnigdha 23:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@Abir susnigdha: That is the good question. You can upload at Wikimedia Commons. But note that Commons doesn't accept copyright file and need the permission of the author. I know its very difficult for you. But do not upload without permission of author or owner. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 18:33, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Aparajita Adhya as Roopkatha in Kusum Dola.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aparajita Adhya as Roopkatha in Kusum Dola.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Ichche Nodee.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

No personal attacks, no edit-warring

Hi there, re: this, whether someone calls you a name or not, you are not allowed to levy personal attacks. You should also know that you are engaged in an edit-war and are one breath away from being blocked for that. I've previously asked you not to edit while logged out, and while you previously denied doing that, it's pretty obvious that you're doing that now. Please stop. I've warned Sunit Roy about their improper behavior as well. The both of you need to go to the talk page and start discussing things instead of reverting each other petulantly. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:49, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the log out thing. I changed my username and hence, wasn't logged in then as I didn't want to anymore use my old username for making edits. I hadn't thought it would be that problematic / problem-arousing. Anyway, I have re-edited Kusum Dola article's plot and cast section in my own language and thus, it doesn't anymore contain Sunit Roy's style of writing. So, I am removing the template message of COI accordingly. Torterra Ketchum 5999 00:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate the explanation, thank you. However, the dispute over the content has not been resolved, so reinstating the disputed content is not an option open to you, because it perpetuates the edit-war. You should open a discussion and seek consensus for the changes you wish to insert. If after a reasonable amount of time (say, a week or so) the other user doesn't participate, then it might be acceptable to move forward. But the status quo should be maintained until that time. Other changes can be made to the article if need be, but they should not be in disputed areas. Also, the COI tag should remain. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:07, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

I am already tired of editing on a single article for such a number of times. Also I didn't silently reinstated anything, I informed you, the admin before hand. I am not interested involving myself in a discussion with and seeking consensus from an editor whom you say have a conflict of interest, but I know his editing really degrades the level of article, if one goes through the grammatically incorrect and sometimes illogical sentences and continuous removal of the 7 references on his part, one can see it himself. I even personally changed the See also and other sections of the article as per instructions given by you. But you again reverted them. If you really think that the present state of the article is perfect let it remain like that forever or edit the page as per the latest revision by Arjayay on 5 June if you ever feel so. I am out of this now. Thank you Torterra Ketchum 5999 10:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. David.moreno72 02:27, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

This is the third time I am getting a block threat. Go ahead! You do't even need to inform me and block my account, so that I can set myself free form this self-imposed spontaneous task turned chore. User: Torterra Ketchum 5999 10:03, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kusum Dola, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. TMG^talk 19:26, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Kusum Dola, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Diff: [3] Whatever this analysis is that you have restored, it must be attributed to a reliable source. Per your edit summary "sourced theme published at official site, noted in external links", the only external link I see is this, which has none of the content you've restored. Also, if you are copying content from a website without proper attribution, that is almost certainly a copyright violation. Do not restore this content again without proper attribution/sourcing. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:16, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, the analysis you restored is unsourced, and that fails WP:OR. The tone is also problematic, since encyclopedias don't have opinions about things "falling into place". That is a subjective idea, not an objective one, the same with the analysis of symbolism. We don't write what we think, we write what reliable published sources think. Please note that any content that has been removed for a lack of source requires you to find a source if you choose to resubmit it. Without that analysis to provide context, we can't justify the inclusion of the logline summary from the official website. You'd be hard-pressed to find many well-written TV articles that include a quote of the official series premise. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kusum Dola. 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. TMG^talk 16:20, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

@The Mighty Glen: You accuse others of what you do yourself. I didn't revert your edit first, You were the one to remove huge data and even entire sections with what you call "explanation". Where have you got the consensus to edit yourself. I was discussing things properly on the talk page, but instead of joining in, you like some unprofessional, come and disrupt the article with your view/opinion and even go to the extent of nastily claiming an unjust COI association. You are the one who is edit-warring NOT ME!!!! Torterra Ketchum 5999 21:57, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Kusum Dola. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. TMG^talk 17:55, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

I will see that you get blocked for purposefully disrupting an article, engaging into an edit war by continuously reverting the other editor's contributions though he tries to discuss things peacefully at the talk page. But you go on with your unreasoned claims and unexplained reverts. Enough, I am lodging a complaint against you! Torterra Ketchum 5999 23:29, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Kusum Dola. TMG^talk 18:16, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Your calling it unsourced doesn't make it unsourced. Also, if you had problems with some particular paragraph or section, I would have understood, but you disrupted the entire article to satisfy your ego, and please threaten someone else for a block, as I have also read MOS TV AND know what is right, which you seem to have forgotten. Go forward and block me if this is wikipedia's policy or I don't know some dirty politics!!!

Torterra Ketchum 5999 23:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

User:The Mighty Glen

Actually mentioned user has some kind of ego problem and he has on special mission to disrupt articles for example: he removes Badshah all discography claiming unsourced and so many examples which i cant present here. So the summary of my talk is please dont argue with him he has benefits of some extended users and at the end you will be blocked because you are not senior more than him. I know him very well from past and recently whenever i edit Shweta Tiwari or other indian pages, he make my edit undone. He is pshyco for sure and need treatment dont argue and done war with him please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.8.37.251 (talk) 19:17, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

IP editor, if you're going to complain about people, you should be aware that Wikipedia doesn't tolerate personal attacks. Attempting to diagnose an "ego problem" or claiming that he is on a "special mission to disrupt articles" or that he is "pshyco for sure" are not constructive opinions, and would generally qualify as personal attacks. Please comment on content, not on the contributor. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:51, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Why the hell is this section created on my talk page??? Just because I made a complaint against the mighty glen, it doesn't mean that other ip editors would make complaints against him on my talk page. It should be done on that editor's own talk page or the admin's talk page or the Mighty Glen's talk page, NOT MINE. I AM NOT BEARING AN AGENDA TO PUT THE MIGHTY GLEN DOWN, I JUST REPORTED WHERE I THOUGHT HE WAS WRONG, NO PERSONAL ISSUES AT ALL.

In the above complaint made by the IP editor, it has a tone of abuse, which I completely discourage and hence will remove this section from my talk page later on. Torterra Ketchum 5999 11:02, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018

Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. David.moreno72 07:42, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

It has now gone up the head! You are removing cast members now and tagging them as notable! I ask you are you the one whose look out or opinion has set up a criteria for which cast member is notable and which one is non-notable???? You are trying to take ownership by posting your mere opinion publicly! Torterra Ketchum 5999

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style. David.moreno72 07:54, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Your edits are disruptive, you are removing a certain section of the cast tagging them as non- notable. Who are you to decide single-handedly which one is notable or not??? I have filed a complaint against you. Torterra Ketchum 5999

Edit warring needs to stop. As this is a content dispute, you need to discuss this matter on the article talk page or consider dispute resolution processes. Further edit warring could result in your being blocked. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I am open to discussion, but some editors are not discussing and removing loads of data and even references based on their individual opinion without any suitable explanation. Torterra Ketchum 5999 13:50, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

It seems that you have been given an explanation derived from the Manual of Style(WP:TVCAST). I honestly don't know at this time if that is correct or not, but you need to discuss the merits of that claim on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

He is not discussing at all and removing the cast section now tagging not as per WP:TVCAST in the edit summary, but won't discuss it on the talk page and point out what in particular he finds not as per WP:TVCAST and will keep on reverting edits with the edit warring and blocking threats. Torterra Ketchum 5999 13:58, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I have warned them for edit warring as well; edit warring by others does not give you the right to do so. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

So what am I supposed to do other than revert his disruptions if he is not discussing, and all he is doing is removing cast members and other data as per his opinion. He has seemingly taken the resolve to keep the cast members having a wikipedia page and those who have not are being deleted from the cast by him. I can only report and revert in this cas if he is not discussing at the talkpage and sending me block threats persistently! Torterra Ketchum 5999 14:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I've stated what you need to do. Not every person involved with a TV show merits articles or inclusion in other articles, based on guidelines. David.moreno is editing based on guidelines, which they have informed you of. If you haven't already, you should review them. If you disagree with the interpretation or merits of the guidelines, you need to discuss that. If you revert again, you will be blocked. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

But there is nothing in the guidelines that only cast embers with a reference tagged or having a wikipedia page are allowed to be listed and others are not! They are just trying to utilize being seniors than me. Also, they are the ones to initiate reverts. I don't get it why they are being supported! Still if you disagree, block me and nullify my account. Torterra Ketchum 5999 14:16, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Edit war

Your recent editing history at Kusum Dola shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 08:49, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Sanyashi Raja poster.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Signature

Hi there, Please remember to sign your posts using four tildes ~~~~. This will append your signature and time stamp. In these edits[4][5] you're missing date/time stamps. If you've edited your signature in such a way as to suppress this information, you will need to fix this by going into Preferences, scrolling down to Signature, and fixing whatever markup you've changed. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:31, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Fictional ages

Hi there, re: your edit summary here, I think you're confused about what a fictional age is. I'm talking about the ages of fictional characters i.e. ages of characters in fiction, i.e. fictional ages. It is correct to describe them as fictional ages. I don't mean that anyone was lying about the age. If the ages have been mentioned in-universe, that's fine, and I won't remove them further, but noting in the article when the ages were mentioned (in the form of a reference) would be helpful. We have {{Cite episode}} for that. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:09, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Ke Apon Ke Por (2016 TV Series).jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 21:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Torterra Ketchum 5999. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary quote marks

Hi there, I've opened a discussion here about misuse of quotation marks. I'm mentioning it to you because in this edit I see more unnecessary quote marks. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:18, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Star-Jalsha-Serial-Sreemoyee.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Star-Jalsha-Serial-Sreemoyee.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ke Apon Ke Por (2016 TV Series).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ke Apon Ke Por (2016 TV Series).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jiyon Kathi.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jiyon Kathi.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Khorkuto.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Khorkuto.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Naagin5.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Naagin5.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ghum Hai Kisikey Pyaar Meiin.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ghum Hai Kisikey Pyaar Meiin.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Guddi (2022 TV Series) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Guddi (2022 TV Series), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 09:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Why make a hurry to move pages into mainspace? The draft space is also a good and ideal place to develop pages, and then move it to main space. Please improve the draft in the draft space before moving it to mainspace. Thanks. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 09:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Torterra Ketchum 5999 If Guddi (2022 TV Series) is deleted. Find the archive version at (https://web.archive.org/web/20220114212117/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guddi_%28TV_series%29) 2402:3A80:1A48:512E:E887:C4EC:FE9C:3C65 (talk) 10:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

What do you mean? The first time he moved the draft to mainspace, it was not developed. So, I draftified it. When he again moved it back to mainspace, I saw that it was still not developed. But the draft already existed. So, I sent it for CSD. The article already exists Guddi (2022 TV Series), and it is also developed now. Why will it be deleted? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 12:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Guddi (2022 TV Series)

A tag has been placed on Draft:Guddi (2022 TV Series) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

delete to make way for move

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 10:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022

As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to Guddi (TV series), give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Torterra Ketchum 5999, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Torterra Ketchum 5999|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. 2402:3A80:1C40:F326:70BC:B551:3D94:A187 (talk) 14:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

We have strong evidences that you are either employed or being paid by Magic Moments Motion Pictures to create articles for their TV shows. If you continue to do so, you may be restricted to create/edit new/existing articles. 2402:3A80:1C40:F326:70BC:B551:3D94:A187 (talk) 15:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

In the initial statement above you stated their edits gave the "impression" of something. that is an accurate statement. Yet, just six minutes later you said you had "strong evidence" of something. What changed in six minutes? Anyone can make that claim about anyone else when no proof is needed to validate the claim. I understand full well the implications of paid editing. I hate it when it happens to the detriment of the encyclopedia. But paid editing is not against policy when the editor follows policy in announcing their status as a paid editor. However, I equally dislike when editors throw around such verbiage as calling others sock puppets, paid editors, vandals and such without having definitive evidence to prove it. If you have it then reveal it, if not to the public then to admins or ArbCom. I see no reason to make threats to try and coerce this editor whether they are paid or not, whether they have a coi or not. The editor has been properly warned and a request was made to state whether they are a paid editor or not. We are to assume good faith in the absence of a response to the degree that it does not become disruptive. This has nothing to do with the validity of the contents of the article above nor whether any article should exist or not. It also should not be seen as an advocation for this particular editors actions or behavior of which I have not personally looked at. This is simply a response to an IP editor making claims about another editor on Wikipedia without providing any of this "strong evidence". --ARoseWolf 18:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf Well if you are talking about getting strong evidence then here it is. First of all, see all his creations. He created Desher Maati,Khorkuto and Sanyashi Raja, all of which are produced by Magic Moments Motion Pictures. To add on, he even created the production page too. Secondly, nothing so much detailed is known about Guddi (TV series), and he has also created a huge list of cast. The problem is not the huge list of cast, but the problem is that how does he know who will be acting in which role? There is not much publicity about the show yet, and moreover, no promo has been released yet by Star Jalsha. Then if know one knows what is coming up, leave alone executive producers, cinematography, theme music composer, or director, my question is how does he even know about the cast? And that is where paid editing comes into action, and specifically when you see that the author is only interested in shows by Magic Moments Motion Pictures, and Leena Gangopadhyay. So what do you think? Is this evidence not enough?

Moreover, the IP editors you are referring to is actually a really experienced user, User:Amkgp, who was blocked for some of his misdeeds which I am not interested in at all. He helps others here, and is very familiar with Wikipedia's policies, and he has also made many sockpuppet investigation requests, and all of them has been blocked, except me. So, these things tells that he is quite an expert here, and specially he also looks at each and every article to keep of vandalism of bengali article stubs. I am saying all these, not to advertise him, or because I like him. I am saying all these to let you know his actual identity. And, there might be other "strong evidence" that he has, so it is best that he looks at this comment. Thanks, and regards, and please don't misunderstand me. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:54, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Itcouldbepossible, are you claiming that the IP above is a blocked editor? Also, I am not concerned with "strong evidence" that can not be physically presented. I believe an accuser should have to face the accused and present their case, especially since such serious claims are being made. If Torterra Ketchum 5999 is a paid editor and they refuse to disclose this then they risk being blocked indefinitely. My point is they have been warned so I see no reason to further threaten them with accusations. My second point is that the same IP started out by saying they had an impression that moved to strong evidence in only six minutes. As much as I loathe sock puppetry, undisclosed paid editing and vandalism, I equally loathe when accusations are bandied about based on circumstantial evidence or someone's personal feelings. Any editor here can be accused of being a sock puppet. Hell, I was accused of being a sock puppet once and this is the only account I have ever had or will ever have on Wikipedia. I was vindicated in the end but it is very unnerving how quickly anyone can throw out accusations and make claims based on little more than the fact an editor may edit or create articles in a series about something they like or enjoy. Is Torterra a paid editor? Possibly. But I choose to act in good faith until something more than the hunch of another editor is presented. --ARoseWolf 13:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf Well yes, the IP is a blocked user, but it appears that he likes editing Wikipedia, so he edits from his IP. Well, I am really at a loss to understand what you mean by "physically presented". The evidences that I am giving aren't they enough. And they really refused to disclose any connection by this reply of theirs. And no one is threatening them with accusations. I never said a thing to them, except to bring the issue up at ANI, which had a really bad result, and draftify their page when it was in an undeveloped state. And truly speaking, I don't understand what you mean by My second point is that the same IP started out by saying they had an impression that moved to strong evidence in only six minutes. Well, that is all that I can present to you at this moment. Regards, and a happy new year too. Thanks. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll try to address your comment fully: "I am really at a loss to understand what you mean by "physically presented". The evidences that I am giving aren't they enough. And they really refused to disclose any connection by this reply of theirs. And no one is threatening them with accusations."Honestly, no, the evidence is not enough to accuse them of being an undisclosed paid editor. Perhaps that will be the end result. Perhaps not. That's the issue. There is room for doubt. They have refused to say they are connected to this tv producer. That is not a crime. I think it would make everyone's life so much easier if they would but if we are to assume good faith then we can not jump to conclusions. Everything you provide as "evidence" is purely circumstantial based solely on your personal view point. "yes, the IP is a blocked user, but it appears that he likes editing Wikipedia, so he edits from his IP." It doesn't matter if the blocked user likes to edit Wikipedia or not. They are violating policy every time they edit from an IP address no matter what the contents of the edits are. Nothing they edit going forward is good faith edits because they are evading a block. ""And no one is threatening them with accusations. I never said a thing to them, except to bring the issue up at ANI, which had a really bad result, and draftify their page when it was in an undeveloped state." In fact, this entire thread started with two warnings which included threats made by the IP if the editor did not disclose their paid editor status which is only mandatory if they are, in fact, a paid editor. Neither the threats of being restricted nor the strong arm tactics were necessary. This is not an interrogation. I never mentioned you until you brought up the identity of the IP and only kept it in reference to this when it involved you. I never said you made threats against anyone. You did, however accuse them of paid editing at the ANI. You contradicted yourself on the ANi discussion too. In the initial filing you said "The editor must have been paid to create the page.", however, during the discussion when something occurred (AfD) that you didn't want you stated "Well, I said that there might be paid editing involved." There is a huge difference between "must" and "might". "Must" signifies there being little doubt. "Might" leaves significant room for doubt. We shouldn't ban or block based on what might be. And truly speaking, I don't understand what you mean by 'My second point is that the same IP started out by saying they had an impression that moved to strong evidence in only six minutes' . Again addressing the direct comments of the alleged blocker user editing as an IP, the first warning containing the comment "give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic" came six minutes before they followed it up with the "strong evidence" comment. My question to the IP, not you, is what happened in six minutes that changed from the impression of something to strong evidence. This is very similar to the "might" vs "must" comment. Hopefully that cleared everything up. --ARoseWolf 17:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf: See first of all I never had any account. They may think me of AMKGP but I am not. I have been contributing here and other interwikis since more than 9 years as anonymous editor and I don't intend to create an account. See TV series Guddi cast is not announced neither on TV nor in print or digital media. Even show name was not available when created. Thus, how can one get so much details much before with nearly zero data verification. I later tried to get WP:RS but what I got is specalutive news that I added in the article. You have already seen how the creator ignored paid editing query from your side as he dont want to get into drama which is one of the ways of not being dragged to topic ban or complete ban discussions. I would suggest to keep this user under your watchlist, so that whenever he creates new article you will come to know about the connection and be more sure how is creating articles much beforehand in violation of WP:CRYSTAL for Magic Moments Motion Pictures. Let's stop this here for all. I have made my point. Happy editing. 2402:3A80:1A48:F5F2:430B:2659:78F3:E93B (talk) 05:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

All those times you were referred to as Amkgp by @Itcouldbepossible and you never once thought to address it until now? Sounds awful familiar to me. No one can be forced to answer anything. It is a choice. Just like we cant prove you are or are not this other editor, neither can we prove this editor has an undisclosed coi. You want us to follow good faith practices in regards to you and we should. However you want us to wave that in regards to this other editor? That is what has become apparent. And that is what should not become tolerated practice. Please do not make groundless accusations anymore by saying you have strong evidence when all you have is your own hunch. Voice it, warn them and then Leave it at that and let others discuss the merit of your claim against them without you claiming some concrete evidence that doesn't exist. Happy editing to you as well. --ARoseWolf 14:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf Well thanks for the detailed explanation. You pinged me before you wrote about warning the user unnecessarily, and that is why I thought you were telling "My point is they have been warned so I see no reason to further threaten them with accusations." to me. So, it clearly is a miscommunication. How will I understand what you are telling me, and what to the IP. Anyway sorry for that. And all those you are telling about the IP, I understand it well. Yes, he should not have written anything else after issuing the warning. That was wrong from his part. And about the later thing, it is quite suspicious too. I accused him to be Amkgp in many places, but in neither places he acknowledged this accusation. It is the first time, he is saying here for the first time. And, if the thing he is saying is true, then yes, I truly owe him a big "sorry". Itcouldbepossible^Talk 13:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Itcouldbepossible, thank you for that acknowledgement and I also see where you could be confused by my initial statement. I could have worded it more clearly. I apologize to you for the confusion. Everything that has been said here could be true but the fact there is room for significant doubt, all can be explained to have happened by other means, shows why we can not jump to conclusions. You and I have only been editing for less than two years each. We have so much to learn still. I am very principled and I believe in the principles of this community and this encyclopedia even if I don't always believe the way they are enforced or are executed is the best. I had hoped what we had was miscommunication and I had hoped we could come together and see each other's perspective which I believe has happened. No one deserves to be wrongly accused as being a sockpuppet. You know how frustrating and debilitating that is. Likewise, being warned repeatedly about the same exact edits because someone believes you are a paid editor when you are not could be crushing. If they are a paid editor they have been warned and will be watched I am sure. But if they aren't then we could have driven away someone that would eventually learn and grow, nurtured and focused by this community into a great editor. That's why assuming good faith is so critical when there isn't real evidence beyond a hunch, a feeling or a view point. --ARoseWolf 14:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf Oh, I love your sweet reply. Yes, I accept all that you say. In my previous reply, I forgot to address the might vs must comment. Actually I did not see what I had written in the ANI, and what I had written in the AfD, and truly speaking, I was very least bothered about if it might be paid editing or it was obviously paid editing. I just put in my view there, which I think I was wrong in doing so. And really, I now it is time to stop thinking about this matter, until fresh evidences turn up. So its best to stop it here. Thanks and regards. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Paid creation of Guddi (TV series) regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Please comment on it, to defend against the accusations that are being brought against you. Thank you. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Seriously I have a real life I dont have so much time or energy to engage in your silly courtroom drama over mere television articles LOL🤣🤣🤣🤣

You could also just settle this by answering the accusations. You call it silly courtroom drama but it's actually a serious claim and you should take it serious if you value editing here. The subject of the articles, television, more specifically produced by one particular company, are a content issue. The accusations being made are not about content but about you as an editor. --ARoseWolf 14:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Guddi (TV series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guddi (TV series) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guddi (TV series) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022

Hello, Torterra Ketchum 5999. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 2402:3A80:1A48:F5F2:430B:2659:78F3:E93B (talk) 04:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions to Guddi (TV series) has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. 2402:3A80:1A48:F5F2:430B:2659:78F3:E93B (talk) 04:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

This editor has been warned over these exact same edits three times now. Enough is enough. The edits you claimed were reverted have actually been restored so the above warning about reverted edits should be stricken. This appears to be a misguided attempt to WP:HUSH a suspected editor with an undisclosed coi. This is not the conduct we should expect from an experienced editor [6]. --ARoseWolf 14:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

Hello, I'm C1K98V. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gud Se Meetha Ishq, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 02:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)