User talk:Sai Raghavendra Puranam/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 22

Inclusion of Crew Section in Baahubali

Okay Thanks! :DChanducharmer (talk) 10:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Good Night Dude :DChanducharmer (talk) 16:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Have you gathered opinions of those users who edit in Baahubali Article about addition of crew section? :) :P Chanducharmer (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh Thanku! :D I'll discuss it on Baahubali talk page :p Chanducharmer (talk) 05:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Aagadu

Hi Raghu.

Its me, Pavan Jandhyala. Myself am just like any other user in wiki. You always have some Interesting things for me when you revert my edit. Let me come to the point. I do know very well that Mirchi9 is not a professional site and using Timesofap was a bit uncomfortable for me while dealing about Prakash Raj's character. So after i saw them in reliable sources like The Times of India and involvement of Bangalore Mirror in the ublishing of news, i saw Prakash Raj's tweets in his Twitter also and i changed the sources. Your revert was fine. Removal of V. V. Vinayak's project info was fair though i concentrated on the words "shoot simultaneously". But you called Wikipedia not a Newspaper, that sounded much interesting, as we folks are using Newspaper sites for Data and moreover for Future generations, this film's info is just like something which can give maximum info about the project at one place. I think in good faith that you, Krzna and others developed Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu with that perspective only. If not since it is a good faith assumption you can rule it away easily. But what i felt is, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia which can provide most of the news at one place in detail regarding anything. So, i conclude by one statement. When clarification of rumors is considered, rumors are also considered since they make the matter complete. Or else what on earth would have made you guys quote the names of Nayantara, Trisha, Bhumika Chawla, Anushka Shetty, Amala Paul, Sneha are mentioned in the article though they confirmed their non existence in the project. Dont ever remove that, nor this. They all are part of a History though you don't consider them as such.

Thank you

Yours Sincerely (Even though if you are deeply annoyed by my statements and actions) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:37, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Inclusion of Soundtrack/Music Section in Baahubali

even in future, it's necessary to include soundtrack section. why don't we include now? is it okay? :) Chanducharmer (talk) 04:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay I understood :D Chanducharmer (talk) 12:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

How can I communicate with you other than on wikipedia? Are you on any social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter? :) Chanducharmer (talk) 06:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Reply

Alright. :| Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Heart Attack

Hi Raghu. Hope u are doing good. TheRedPenOfDoom is frequently reverting my edit on Heart Attack article regarding the reviews i used in the reception and left on the Times of India and Oneindia and removed 123T, idlebrain, apherald etc. Aren't they reliable. He did the same in the case of Yevadu and you reverted his edit. When i reverted the changes back, he asked me to prove their reliability by WI:PROVEIT. How to prove their reliability, can u help me in this matter ? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

An Edit war has already started and i prevented myself from violating the 3 Revert rule. I can't desert that article but i don't think that user will listen to me or anyone else. He is well known for that. Well, its time to leave Heart Attack and proceed to other articles. Wikipedia has many and these type of users are also many. Anyways, thanks for your response on an issue which never reflected in your watchlist :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

SVSC

Hi can u get back to me what was the supposed change i have done regarding SVSC film an what u revrted back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.82.176.88 (talk) 17:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Please read our guidelines about what qualifies as a reliable source. Just because something is on the web, even if it has a million visitors a day, does not make it a reliable source that can be used to support encyclopedia content. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:35, 28 February 2014 (UTC)