User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Echosmith

You are making edits to an article while there is an on-going discussion on the talk page and no consensus has been reach. Nyth63 01:27, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. Please do not remove sourced information from the subject article while the discussing is still on-going.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyth83 (talk • contribs)

Baahubali is a Telugu movie

To the person who is saying it is bilingual, who dubbed the voice of telugu hero prabhas in the tamil dubbed version. You will be surprised to know it was Tamil actor Surya who DUBBED the voice for prabhas. Does this not make it a dubbed film. Never thought Tamils will stoop to this level of taking credit for someone else film. A film is decided on which industry produced it. It is Telugu film industry which produced and presented the film.I can quote several references from leading news agencies. Forbes,Guardian,BBC, CNN to name a few here. Admins have to interfere in this matter as wrong information is being spread in wikipedia.

Here is the trusted Guardian Site, where it states it is a Telugu film dubbed into Tamil (Actually it is also made in Tamil to evade Tax from Tamil Nadu). People please give due credit to Telugu and stop being cheap and taking the credit for the work that has nothing to do with Tamil http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jul/12/baahubali-the-beginning-review-fantastic-bang-for-your-buck-in-most-expensive-indian-movie-ever-made

Also they are including Telugu version collections in Tamil version which didn't even gross 50 crores from entire India and rest of the world in Tamil version and mentioning it is bilingual. I never thought Tamil will stoop to this level of taking credit for someone else film.

First time i'm seeing a movie which even didn't gross one-third Rs 50 crore(15%) of total collections in its original Tamil version is included in the list of Rs 401 crores gross that too by cheating and fooling people by including Rs 350 crores gross of Telugu version in Tamil version. -Padukati Raju

It is indeed bilingual per the multiple reliable sources Forbes to the Guardian to the Times of India to IBN to NDTV to The National which identify the film as bilingual Tamil / Telugu.

Please stop ranting on my talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 05:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Fun stuff, eh? Of course, all the redirects like here are now broken. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:41, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism

You can't undo the edit of another Wikipedia user just because you don't personally like it or think it's unnecessary. The article does not belong to a single person. If you want to discuss the matter, I encourage you to do it in the discussion section of the respective article. Otherwise, it will be considered vandalism.--190.48.100.17 (talk) 00:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

I see you're vandalising other Wikipedia pages as well. STOP IT NOW! (124.180.107.200 (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC))

Obligatory note

Mind WP:3RR on Mahabharat (2013 TV series) please. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 11:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Zindagi. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — TransporterMan (TALK) 15:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC) (DRN volunteer)

message from Slmnkh

Why you are block my editing. I am not violation. I put right thing. Bollywood movies is different from all indian movies. List of Highest Grossing Indian Movie Include all languages movies. I made only hindi language movies. Your are not give justfied reason to me to block my editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slmnkh (talk • contribs) 09:27, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@Slmnkh: Please read the multiple notes on your talk page. They explain why your edits are inappropriate and have been and will continue to be reverted. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

nett gross

Hey Red, do you have any idea what statements like "nett gross" mean in the context of Indian cinema? I know what a net total is, I know what a gross total is, so naturally you'd understand why, when I see Nett Gross at Dhoom, I might be confused. Appreciate any help you can provide. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:50, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: nope, i have no idea. It is probably something to do with the very complicated method of financing and money shuffling that happens in Indian cinema with money flowing back and forth between the producers, distributors and cinema owner's and distributors shares, and actors paying back cinema houses when their films flop.... I think it is generally deliberately obtuse to facilitate cronyism and tax avoision. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Holy crap, you mean there is an accounting scheme even worse than Hollywood accounting? —Strongjam (talk) 19:05, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, Hollywood's great. "What's the budget?" "$100 million" "What's the gross?" "$150 million" "Oh great, so we made a profit?" "Not even close, bub." Hey Red, do you suppose when the gross values for Bollywood films are being tallied they take into consideration all of the salaries of all the sockpuppets whose job it is to fudge gross values? Boy, that's a head-scratcher... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Upcoming Series on Zee Zindagi

The same template is used for all List of programs broadcast by networks.

• List_of_programs_broadcast_by_CBS#Upcoming_series
• List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Fox#Upcoming_series
• List_of_programs_broadcast_by_American_Broadcasting_Company#Future_programming
• List_of_programs_broadcast_by_HBO#Future_programming
• List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Comedy_Central#Future_programming
• AMC_(TV_channel)#Future_programming

I can give more examples, but you get the picture. I agree that we are not promotional platform but some of the listed programs have citations and proper references associated with them. Why do you feel the need to have to delete the entire section?I am following a template that is followed by other wiki pages. Why should Zee Zindagi not have to display upcoming series? I would suggest that you look at other pages on the wikipedia to see if there are other pages with the same format. I had specifically commented in the edits https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Zee_Zindagi&oldid=673594061 that I had followed the templates of List_of_programs_broadcast_by_CBS#Upcoming_series and List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Fox#Upcoming_series as reference. I am going to edit the "Upcoming Series" and put them back again. Manoflogan (talk) 23:35, 30 July 2015 (UTC)ManOfLogan

Now there is not so much inappropriate crap. But you could have cleaned it up yourself. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:58, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

One more thing, please stop removing "Future Section" from all the wikipages that I have listed of all the sections in my example. It is not promotional material (to use your word, "crap"), if it is cited with appropriate and reliable references. I have no intention of reverting all those changes yet. Some of those changes have already been reverted. I personally find it strange that you are the only wiki editor/admin who goes and removes the entire section, even when there are citations. I would also suggest that you go and read the comments of the discussion WP:Articles_for_deletion/Lists_of_programs_broadcast_by_networks. Many of the reasons that were cited is that these represent an index of what the networks is doing right, has done in the past, or what it plans to do, as long as it is backed by valid references. This is the exactly what an online encylopedia does. Manoflogan (talk) 03:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)ManOfLogan

AfD are only to determine whether or not the topic meets the requirements for a stand alone article. It in no way shape or form validates what content happens to have been inappropriately added to the article many years later. and, no, "It has a source!" is not a magic chant that mandates inclusion of content Wikipedia:Verifiability#Verifiability_does_not_guarantee_inclusion. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:42, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

The key phrase " Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article, and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article". From the edit logs of Zee Zindagi, you are the only user who thinks that references to future programming ought to be removed. Where is the consensus if the decision to delete is made by one person? In my opinion, you are making the arbitrary decision that "Upcoming programming" is promotional content. Every one does not seem to question the existence of the section. Deleting without getting community feedback is not a correct decision. You can add a infobox to the wikipage like it is done on other pages, but arbitrarily deleting sections is not the right approach. Manoflogan (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2015 (UTC)ManOfLogan

consensus is not determined by votes, but by policy backing. I have multiply policies WP:CRYSTAL / WP:UNDUE / WP:NOTADVERT just to name the biggies. What policies is your position based on? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding WP:CRYSTAL - It does not apply if there are valid references to the entries that something is about to happen. I provided examples in my previous comment. Regarding WP:UNDUE, we are a digital encyclopedia, what aspect of "list of programs broadcast by network XXX" gives undue preference to any entry? What exactly is your criteria of a list shows the programs broadcast by a network? There is no such preference applied to other wiki pages. I want to know if this is your subjective criteria that you think is applicable here? If yes, why is that? I don't see other editors applying the same criteria on other pages. Why should you apply the same? Regarding WP:NOTADVERT, how is this advertising if we are simply listing the list of programs previously and currently broadcast and about to be broadcast by the network? Relevant and correct citations. Advertising represents a narrative from a subjective point of view. We have listed valid references of the same. There are verifiable and citable. That DOES not make them subjective. You are the only editor who seems to object on any of these points. You remove all the entries that I have made because they are non notable. What is your criteria about them being "non-notable"? This is not a theory that has been disproved by critics such as "Global Warming". This is list of shows that are being broadcast by the network and have been mentioned with proper citations. You may challenge the references and I will prove that they are attributable. You should have no authority to remove the entries on the grounds of notability. Manoflogan (talk) 18:30, 1 August 2015 (UTC)ManOfLogan

For the record, I don't particularly have a problem with the upcoming section provided that it is amply sourced. This is fairly standard in TV network articles. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:05, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Notification of Arbitration Enforcement request

Hey, TheRedPenOfDoom, I've filed a request for enforcement of discretionary sanctions at AE involving the dispute at Race and Genetics that involved you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wajajad (talk • contribs) 00:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

RfC suggestion

Hello TRPoD,

What do you think of a group of advisors that take on issues that face the project and work to discuss and provide proposals to solve them? They should work independently of ArbCom and be made up of editors the community chooses. They should be sensible, and be able to cut out bloviation and disruption, and monitor discussions to ensure that consensus is reached. Thoughts? --ceradon (talk • edits) 01:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ceradon: I think that is closer - I think "moderators and facilitators who have experience in guiding large, fractious groups towards agreement" . Either third party or WMF hires some professionals to develop a Creative Commons licensed mediation training certification - and facilitators/advisors would be drawn from people who complete the certification. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:02, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I am indefatigable in my belief that consensus is not nearly as peachy a picture as some believe. I definitely do not believe it should be done away with completely, but I believe that something must improve. Your proposal is interesting. But, I fear that it would gain larger acceptance if we could the community is allowed more input as to who is the "adviser/facilitator". Perhaps, a few amiable editors are selected and then more people mentored by them later? --ceradon (talk • edits) 03:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Night of Knives

Hi,

You added a template to the Night of Knives page saying that the plot summary of the article is too long. Can you explain why? I was thinking that it might be too short (it definitely isn't complete).

Regards,

Ciridae (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Thanks for the update. Yes, the article currently is almost only the plot summary. But I think I'll add further sections and improve the entire article rather than reducing the plot summary length. -Ciridae (talk) 05:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Noelle Reno

You should probably take a look at WP:FULLNAME before reverting legitimate changes which meet the guidelines. -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

If one is going to preach about following following policy, one should follow the full policy. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#Pseudonyms.2C_stage_names_and_common_names. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

When you reverted you clearly didn't spot "care must be taken to avoid implying that a person who does not generally use all their forenames or who uses a familiar form has actually changed their name". The fact she uses her middle name is patently obvious from the article title - we don't assume our readers are morons. It's therefore unnecessary to point it out. "It is not always necessary to spell out why the article title and lead paragraph give a different name." This is all too common, unfortunately. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:06, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Necrothesp Does the addition meet WP:BLPPRIVACY, i.e. sourced and widely published? Not being a smart-ass--it is a legitimate question. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Since her full name was already included in the article (just in the wrong place), it's not particularly relevant in this instance. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:46, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I will seek out other sources so that I do not have a conflict of interest. I appreciate your civility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.134.200.242 (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

highest grossing films list talk page

In highest grossing list talk page i have mentioned support but no one is responding. Support for Telugu was more than that of support for telugu and tamil then why are u not changing n removing baahubali from the tamil list Padukati raju (talk) 06:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Review request

Hello!!! TheRedPenOfDoom

Please can you review the article Asad Ahmed Khan I think like Aahil Raza Ibrahim it should also be merged in Qubool Hai. As the sources seem to cover the actor not the fictional character.

Regards, Rishika.dhanawade (talk) 16:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of programs broadcast by CBS. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 21:19, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at List of programs broadcast by CBS. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 21:24, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Online mobs

Thanks for all of the links! I would have thanked you on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cecil (lion) (2nd nomination) but it was closed about 30 minutes after it was posted. I'll check out the information and see if there is anything I can add. It's already a full article and it would have to be very pertinent information to add any more to it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:25, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Final warning, please stop re-adding UNDUE tags NOW

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of programs broadcast by Comedy Central. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 21:27, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 21:44, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Burning ears

Hi T, in case your ears are burning, I mentioned you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. Hope I phrased things neutrally enough. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Claims of undue weight and advertising in TV articles

I would like to say to you that your claims that listing soon-to-be-broadcast programming lends undue weight and is considered advertising are invalid. It has previously been iterated to you that it is NOT considered advertising as long as there are sources to support the information. In addition, I don't at all see how future programming can lend undue weight to an article, since the articles already cover current and former programming. Also, I would like to quote from a recent ANI report: "Whilst not being a proof of sanity, or otherwise, can anyone list off some article where RedPen's efforts have been held up as an example of good editing? This is an editor with a serious WP:BATTLEGROUND problem, across every article I've ever seen them at. They have formal restrictions against them because of this on the Gamergate issue. In particular, they have a messianic belief in their personal absolute correctness, no matter what. Although I'm seeing some hyperbole from Electricburst1996 here, it's not hard to see how RedPen has inspired it." ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 00:58, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Electricburst1996: Thank you for beginning to discuss. However when you start with edit warring to remove tags that state " Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message." and then completely violate WP:TPG by blanking the discussion from the talk page and then [1] blatantly violate WP:NPA while simultaneously accusing me of acting in bad faith, and then conclude with the ludicrous claim "it is NOT considered advertising as long as there are sources to support the information" - can you see where I may struggle with WP:AGF towards your editing? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:05, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Let me ask you two questions that were already asked to you: what aspect of "list of programs broadcast by network XXX" gives undue preference to any entry? What exactly is your criteria of a list that shows the programs broadcast by a network? ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 17:53, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Electricburst1996: i am not certain why you cannot read the answers where they were posted before, but:

1)the subject of the article is "programs broadcast on X". given that it is in list form, every entry is being presented as of equal value to the subject of the article. presenting the names of items that have not ever been and may not ever be is providing some hoped for future state the same equivalency as the items that have been broadcast, WP:UNDUEly presenting non equal items as equal. This is tied in closely with WP:NOTADVERT because including not yet happened events in a list without context can ONLY be promoting the materials with a LOOK WHAT'S COMING!!!!. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

2) the criteria would include that the program had been originally broadcast on that station and that there is a reliable source that validates the claim and that the show has a blue link WP:LIST. Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate factoids that a station merely rebroadcast someone else's work provides nothing of encyclopedic value about the subject of the article, the station. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

If all future events are undue promotion, then we'd only write film articles once a film had been released, instead of with the current minimum threshold that it has to have started filming. Same with TV articles. Now, maybe we can agree that a series being re-run on a syndication network might not be noteworthy, but that's a different matter. At present, it appears to me that you are asserting as fact a position that is contrary to television article norms. Seems like something that you should float past WT:TV Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Mostly we shouldn't have articles about future films, but, at least in the film articles there is contextual information which is more than HEY! LOOK FOR THIS UPCOMING EVENT! - which is all that an appearance in a list article provides. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: I'm gonna have to side with Cyphoidbomb on this. It's NOT WP:CRYSTAL if there are sources to support the programming. Also, take it to WP:TV. Cyphoidbomb recently became an admin, and he has every right to block you if the situation gets out of hand. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 17:18, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

unless you have a time machine, of course it is WP:CRYSTAL -the sources are doing nothing but talking up things that have not happened yet, but are merely being planned and promoted. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:04, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

You are beyond reasoning at this point. All we're trying to do is have a reasonable discussion here and establish a consensus, but all you are doing is continuing to shove you opinion down our throats. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 23:24, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

You havent "reasoned". You have put forth positions that i have countered with multiple policies which individually, and particularly when read as a whole, support my position. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:29, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television, okay? ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 00:05, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need for that. And I'm certainly not going to block someone just because I disagree with 'em. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Alright then. Have we established a consensus on the matter yet? ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 17:24, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

6th Filmsaaz

How can you say that the references are not notable? If you have gone through the references then only you could see what is notable and what is not. I am sharing some links of newspapers and websites which are more reputed in India more than others. If you deny its notability than you must not edit on wikipedia. You have biased opinion always.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/chandigarh/a-shot-at-peace/article1-1060817.aspx http://www.glamsham.com/movies/news/13/feb/07-news-aligarh-muslim-university-gears-up-for-6th-filmsaaz-intl-film-fest-in-march-13-011306.asp http://www.tehelka.com/2013/05/govt-sponsored-kashmir-documentary-struggles-with-unofficial-ban/

If even now you find notability issue then please do let me know. AJ_Think 19:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

There are already 10 references in the given page which is secondary and reliable. You are ignoring the facts. AJ_Think 20:19, 12 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arifjwadder (talk • contribs)

Please go thorough these references which is published after the event got over [2]. Another is from Tehelka [3] which is very important as one of the documentary was allegedly put of under the pressure from the government. This link will provide the information about the screening of the film [4]. Half of the references dates prior to the event and other half after the event detailing the event. Newspapers like the Hindu carrying news are worth notabale, and if you say that the Hindu is not notable then it will be not good for the wikipedia. Therefore, you are requested to help remain the 6th Filmsaaz so that it could help the world of cinema. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arifjwadder (talk • contribs) 20:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: Do you actually read what is written on your talk pages? The Hindu and Times of India provided on the article page do not cover the subject in anything other than passing mention. The first two you link here are not reliably published sources with a reputation for fact checking, accuracy and editorial oversight one is a celebrity gossip site and who knows what the other one is. And the third one, which appears to be a reliable news paper, but it again merely mentions the event in passing discussion about another subject, it does not provide any significant coverage about the event. All three facets (reliably published, independent from the subject, in depth coverage) need to be met in the same source.

also please learn to sign your posts-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:46, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey

Haven't seen you on the GG pages in a while, why not? Do you really find these boilerplate Bollywood articles as interesting? 177.154.145.107 (talk) 09:08, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I am not certain why you care particularly what articles I edit, but some people edit Wikipedia because they care about the project and are not here to push an agenda. Why are you here? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:07, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Bollywood 100 Crore Club

Can you please explain what this is referring to? Are you referring to the December 2013 AFD? If you examine this version, you'll see that I used proper reliable sources which then went into this kind of version. Would you agree that using the names of actors, actresses, directors and films named in the specific reliable sources would be appropriate? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:55, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ricky81682: Hi, I dont see how any listing of items can be encyclopedic for that article. It is not an actual "club", there is no "membership", the only validation inclusion would be either 1) someone from the media said "x is a member of the 100 crore club" or 2) we compare a films box office take and if it is >100 add to the list. Both are pretty much arbitrary.

if 2) is the criteria, it is essentially a duplication of the List of Highest Grossing Films list and there is no need for that,

and if 1) it requires the capriciousness of the media to make a specific claim, at which point we are wandering into WP:IINFO. For example, given the extreme rise in the collections, it will not be long before there are a dozen films at the 100crore level every year and BIG films will regularly be in the 500-1000crore. So, in a few years imagine a "buddy" film film where an established star and a newcomer bolts out of the gate to the 500+ level - even the most trivial entertainment mag is unlikely to state "newcomer is member of the 100crore club" because it is so trite. and so without the declaration of the capricious media, the newcomer is excluded. imagine that same year a veteran actor is highly promoted with a "comeback" film that is hyped as "the biggest film of the year!" . However, the predictions are wrong and over the couple week run the film just scrapes to reports 101crore, but people think that number is fudged. Has-been actor then becomes the butt of comedian's joke about "Well, at least he's now in the 100 crore club" that goes viral and so has-been is entered on the list while the newcomer is not.

If the criteria are 1) OR 2) then you are really in WP:IINFO -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:27, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree. That's why I wasn't going for "every actor in a film that got past 100 crore" and just parroting the non-RS sources of box office revenue but instead a table based on articles that specifically described the actors as in the alleged "club." As I noted, none of the women counted (nor did a lot of the directors) but the sources did mention them. On the other hand, I understand ignoring all that as essentially WP:TRIVIA and leaving people to look at the top grossing films for whatever levels they want. Perhaps this content belongs somewhere else (Bollywood cinema or something) rather than as a stand-alone topic. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:31, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Project list

Thanks. Sorry if you had to do that by hand, I could have done it easily with Excel. Doug Weller (talk) 16:03, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Nope. It was a quick: find "[[" replace all with "*[[". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:05, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Of course. I used to be able to do that in the edit window but can't anymore. Have I forgotten to tick something in preferences? Doug Weller (talk) 16:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I copied it out and did the find/replace in Wordpad. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

User page

I suggest you make a user page. Iady391 | Talk to me here 16:54, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Utopiayile Rajavu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Puja. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Hi. Do you have an opinion of who 169.57.0.214 is a sock of? Bishonen | talk 09:37, 16 August 2015 (UTC).

It's the same pattern of behavior - officious warnings to editors who've been involved in GG - that was seen here on 1 June. The deleted edit to Black Kite's page is another issue. Blocked 3 months. Acroterion (talk) 13:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the clean up. [5] I didint know whose sock it was, but it was obviously someone's sock WP:EVADE scrutiny. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:29, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Geo TV

Why are you editing and undoing the shows? If you do not want the times, delete the times but leave the names of the shows. How can we source the content for your satisfaction as you clearly have nothing else to do and are just undoing all the work of others? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulaiman Ali (talk • contribs) 20:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Made me laugh

Your vigilance is greatly appreciated, TRPoD. Thanks for swiftly catching and reverting this vile and senseless act of vandalism.[6] Swarm ♠ 03:14, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I got confused between the bad edit and the edit summary of the good edit saying that it was removing bad stuff. oy. 11:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Canvassing

Hi Red, in case you missed it, I found evidence of canvassing, and worse, direct coaching of some of the editors who chimed in at the List of highest-grossing Indian films discussion. I've flagged the accounts accordingly: [7] Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh, it might also be of interest that there's an IP-hopping editor using California IPs who appears to be whispering to some of these people, including Marchoctober. I've pointed out some of these whispers in green on March's talk page. The one where the guy basically tries to blackmail NeilN is interesting. It's a conspiracy! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Well done Cyphoidbomb, in my (very personal) opinion, the California IPs who attack Ricky are 100% related to each other and are retaliatory to his comments on this topic; I have a feeling there is some sockpuppetry at play. And looking at the time stamps, it does seem as though if all those users have been canvassed, although I haven't thoroughly checked them all. Elspamo4 (talk) 23:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Bigg Boss Halla Bol

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I clearly do not understand why you chose to remove a whole article worth content from Bigg Boss Halla Bol. This is actually an official indian reality show and a derivative of the original franchise and has been constructed keeping in memory the guidelines provided by the Wikipedia Big Brother Project. I am appalled to see that you've shortened the entire cast to just 3 housemates. Therefore I would ask you to read this link which might help confirm the validity of the content you've removed. [8] If you do not understand how these pages work please see the links of similar articles below. If the issue is related to the sources confirming eviction and nominations all of these may be provided via google of any other search engine. I am happy to do it for you if this might aid your understanding.

Links of Big Brother article similar to the one you've edited:

• Bigg Boss 7
• Big Brother 12 (UK)
• Big Brother 6 (UK)
• Big Brother 15 (UK)
• Big Brother 17 (U.S.)
• Pinoy Big Brother: 737 – Part 1
• Pinoy Big Brother: Unlimited

More sources for the Halla Bol page: [9] [10] [11] [12]

--LulzWhateven (talk) 20:31, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

@LulzWhateven: We build our articles upon what reliable third parties have decided to cover about the subject. I removed content for which there was no evidence that third party sources had found worthy of covering. We are not collections of fan trivia.

And yes, most of those other articles needs LOTS of clean up to be appropriate for Wikipedia as well. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:46, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Firstly I feel Cyphoidbomb's recent edit to the page is very/more constructive. Secondly I understand what you present but my question is: 'Are you going to something about the UK, US + every-other-country versions?' because if you choose to do so you will not only face a heavier opposition but also might be coaxed into reverting what you did to the Bigg Boss page. Everything tabulated in those pages may it be evictions, nominations, statuses or house allotment is an exact replica of the page you chose to specific-discipline. Now you can deny that you are not targeting (read: bullying) a particular article but I do want to be around to find out whether taking this issue up onto an official discussion and trying to actually implement the changes that you vehemently claim can better Wikipedia will appear in your highlights. If you succeed so be it. I will pick up the broomstick before you and cleanup like I mean it. From the UK to the Pinoy, from the Pinoy to the Arabs and from the Arabs to the US. But all in the name of fairness. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. --LulzWhateven (talk) 21:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

@LulzWhateven: Accusing me of "bullying" for applying content policies? Strike such nonsense if you wish me to take you halfway seriously and respond to you. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:03, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Yes, removing the entire content of a specific page without discussing it on the talkpage when you can certainly see that the article is part of the Wikipedia Big Brother Project does make this article feel victimized and cornered. --LulzWhateven (talk) 22:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) - LulzWhateven, an article cannot be bullied and an article cannot feel. People *can* be bullied, but I would be very selective when pulling the "bullying" card, because these days it is an overused objection, typically for something trivial. "A cop pulled me over, he's BULLYING ME!" Kids sometimes actually kill themselves over real bullying and I don't think we should be trivializing that. You might object to TRPOD's tone, and you might consider the deletions rash, but let's please focus on the edit, rather than getting into the psychoanalysis. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:02, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Indian cinema - comment requested

Hi there, this is a form letter. (Aren't you special!) Since you edit around Indian cinema articles, your comments are solicited at this discussion at the Indian cinema task force. The question is: Should box office gross totals be labeled as estimates?

Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:26, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Sweet baby Jesus...

...check out the personal life section here. The meme "I can't even" comes to mind. Are you up to the challenge? There could be a wiki kitten in it for you!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:16, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

It's the Because We Can syndrome. Moriori (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Liz stepped in. (Thanks Liz!).--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For your continued efforts in making this place a clean one! —Vensatry (ping) 07:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Dawat-e-Islami

Thank your for removing some Un sourced content from DI , though there were references in the article it self about its presence in many countries . You would like to clean up Un sourced/non neutral content from Tablighi Jamat. ScholarM (talk) 06:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Phantom 2015 movie

Please stop removing the MSF paragraph from the movies description. You are very welcome to discuss this issue here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#MSF_Controversial_in_2015_phantom_movie. Cintema (talk) 12:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit war in Phantom movie

You keep reverting the User:Cintema contribution to Phantom (2015 film). Could you, please, explain what is wrong with the information added? Please reply at Cintema's talk page or (better) in Wikipedia:Help desk#MSF Controversial in 2015 phantom movie. --CiaPan (talk) 13:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kite-Eating Tree

added a link pointing to Set piece

Mahabharat (2013 TV series)

added a link pointing to Panchali

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Dosti Yaariyaan Manmarziyan

Hi! I have condensed the plot summary as per the note. So I hope you will please stop undoing my edits! Thanks!

Michelledantis (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Michelledantis

Association of international and national public organizations “Social protection”

Breaking all the rules of Wikipedia, You completely rewrote the page. Removed links, templates. Do not engage in vandalism. Your actions will be appealed, and I will ask the administrators to block your actions--Lidaz (talk) 07:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Good day! Dear TheRedPenOfDoom ! Please do not engage in vandalism. You completely distorted, copied pages of Eugenia Tymoshenko, The Voice of Peace (Ukraine) and the Association of international and national public organizations “Social protection”. In Your edit you can understand that You have a negative attitude to Tymoshenko. Please don't distort the page and do not break the rules.--Jan777 (talk) 14:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Do NOT remove discussion tags such as merge discussions until the discussion is complete. THAT is vandalism!

Your recent editing history 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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.--Jan777 (talk) 14:59, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Resistance

Ah, resistance to the Estimation template! From an editor who thought it was okay to copy/paste content from another site, no less... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Loham and Premam

Can you make sense of what's going on there? I added the latter to my watchlist for potential copyvios, and got an unattributed copy-paste today, but there's something on both that perhaps could use a pen of doom. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Please check your revisions

Re Sophie Hunter. I am adding a source for her son's name from People which is a reliable source by Wiki standards. I am in no way replacing it with a bad one. What I am removing is a non-notable pregnancy announcement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.146.46 (talk) 01:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Names/birthdates of sons/daughters of personalities are encyclopedic

No rule in Wiki not to add person's son, especially if it's public knowledge and has a reliable source to back it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.146.46 (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Ram Harijan

Did you notice that 2 days after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ram Harijan was deleted Late-development syndrome was created? Ram Harijan is now a redirect to it. A search on "Late-development syndrome" psychosomatic turns up nothing. Yes, "Late-development syndrome" is a term used in various ways, but the sources don't seem to relate to Harijan's concept. Doug Weller (talk) 08:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Melanie Philips

Would you mind trying to construct an argument instead of mindlessly undoing my work.

What I wrote is reasonable, sourced and, as far as I can tell, in the right place. If you think this is wrong please open a discussion or amend where you think there are mistakes.

Don't just undo over and over again and tell me to go to talk. You should surely know better... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.135.79.113 (talk) 23:34, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

List of Programs Broadcast by Zindagi

I have explained my position here Talk:List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zindagi_TV#Sources_and_attribution. You are being disruptive with your edits on List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zindagi_TV. Please believe me when I say that I am not the only person to say so. I would like to provide one sample for your perusal User_talk:Wikimandia#Request_your_feedback_on_the_points_that_I_have_made. Every source that I have provided is attributable.I hope that you will come to see that. I fulfilled my burden of proof according to WP:BURDEN. I WILL seek dispute resolution if these edit wars continue. Manoflogan (talk) 00:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic List of programmes broadcast by Zindagi TV. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — TransporterMan (TALK) 14:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC) (DRN volunteer)

The Unknown known

I undid most of your edits on the article as I believe most of my entries (in many cases verbatim) reflect the content and perspective of the movie, not commentary. I tried extremely hard to accurately summarize the documentary in the synopsis, nothing more but also nothing less. Please let me know if this was appropriate. If you feel strongly about removing the text, it's no big deal I don't really mind. Plumpy Humperdinkle (talk) 04:45, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

• Please justify your edits better before you delete a concise and accurate summary of the film. Edits need to be justified -- reactionary undo's turn this place into a battleground. Thanks Plumpy Humperdinkle (talk) 13:32, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • @Plumpy Humperdinkle: Justification is right there in the edit summary : removal of claims not verified by reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

telugu cinema

kindly stop your fan pov pushing and clutter in Telugu cinema with your low quality english and poor grammar, no ambiguity to merge anything, especially with your non sense.Arichuvadi (talk) 18:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at List of gangs in the United States‎, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your wholesale edit continues to overwrite my incremental sorting edits. Please stop. Also, there is no consensus to change the original formatting of the article. Checkingfax (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Warning3

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessumahatma (talk • contribs) 16:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Warning

Hello, I'm Jessumahatma. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions 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. This is your initial warning; if you remove or blank page contents from Wikipedia again, as you did at Mouna Raagam (TV Series), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your wholesale edit continues to overwrite my incremental sorting edits. Please stop.Let this be your final mistake. Also, there is no consensus to change the original formatting of the article. Jessumahatma (talk) 21:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tere Sheher Mein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bhupinder Singh. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Police Files

A tag has been placed on Police Files requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This is an unnecessary disambiguation page, so criteria WP:G6 applies. We could just move Police Files (TV series) back here and add a small note to the top of the page saying it could mean criminal records as well.

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 removed 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. IsraphelMac (talk) 23:19, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

	The No Spam Barnstar
	I have no idea how you knew that was a sockpuppet--but I trust you and I think it's really awesome you're bustin' 'em Krett12 (talk) 04:53, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Karan Singh Grover

please have a look at this page a few people have removed way too much content, and encyclopaedic information after you fixed it, maybe you can take it back to your own revision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.23.114.17 (talk) 13:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

List of Jains

See, I should always take that extra step. I clicked on the article, and saw that the religion was "Jain" so I left it on the list. Should've done what you did and check the history. Nice catch. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

		A plate of Jalebi for you
		Here is a plate of Jalebi for you. Jalebi is a sweet popular in countries of the Indian Subcontinent, specially in India, Pakistan, Bangaldesh. Hope you'll like it. For doing clean up at Afghan Jalebi (Ya Baba)‎. Thank you. Human3015TALK  18:23, 6 September 2015 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

I seem unable to respond to the messages you are sending me...there is no dispute over the birth and death dates of James Taranik. I looked at several bios (try Franklin D. Roosevelt) and none of them have citations for the dates. This man has passed away and he appears in the Biographies of Living persons category, which needs to be changed. I tried to contact you on your user page, but you have been blocked for sockpuppetry. When you made all these changes, you made errors in spacing. Please leave this page alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dchittur (talk • contribs) 20:30, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Dchittur

He's confused you with User:TheRedPenOfDooms. I think I've sorted out the misunderstanding at WP:Teahouse/Questions#Vandalism. Regards, --Rubbish computer 21:49, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Nimesh Kampani page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

Greetings sir, I'd like to invite you to check out the new page I created: Ideas and Contributions of Ghulam Ahmed Pervez, resulting from the discussion/advice/suggestions from all the editors involved in the Parwez discussion. We have a strong consensus on all the major issues now. The bio page and this newly created page are both in a stable state and on the path towards growth, on account of everyone's contributions. cӨde1+6 ^LogicBomb! 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Partisan gibberish

Hi Pen, re: this, I was the one who added the "partisan gibberish" because it appeared to be verifiable and reasonable to include. I also thought it would assuage the "Telugu! Telugu! Telugu!" contingent. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Did you find the appeasement worked? It rarely does. but if it did , then please restore. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Other than a few flare-ups the pro-Telugu thing seems to have abated and I don't see a particular reason to exclude this information, particularly if it has the ability to inflame disruption. The biggest issue we had to deal with were zealous editors affirming that this was solely a Telugu language film, which seems to have been adequately dealt with. Barring any objection from you, I would prefer to add it back. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: go ahead.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Danke. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Asrar (musician)

Hello TheRedPenOfDoom
Your edits on Asrar are unnecessary. You're removing all the sections from the article but there is no need of removing sections. The image which violated copyrights has been removed but please Stop removing sections from the article and discuss on talk page of the article before removing the content.
Thank You--Musa Talk  06:29, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

List of highest-grossing Bollywood films of 2015

I suggest you drop such disruptive behaviour as redirecting an article to itself and saying that there's nothing to merge although the AfD expressly mandated a merger. Thank you. Kraxler (talk) 22:18, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

IQ and global inequality

43.228.158.25 left a note at my talk, asking how to stop you from doing what you're doing. I basically said that I disagree with SPA-tagging of IPs' comments, but it would be inappropriate to tell you to stop or to remove the ones you've added. However, I left instructions that also apply to you: stop edit-warring! I count four Undid revision [number] by 43.228.158.25 by you, and four Undid revision [number] by TheRedPenOfDoom by the IP — I could block both of you for 3RR, but it wouldn't help anyone unless you keep up the warring. Nyttend (talk) 23:08, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

"This user has not specified a valid email address"

Oh crumbs, TRPOD, <deep sigh> I'm currently working an article about a Bollywood movie </deep sigh> but will probably give up on it pretty soon.
I don't know how you get the energy to keep going about this sorta stuff. Wow. But what I *do* know is that You. Are. Made. Of. Awesome.
--Shirt58 (talk) 13:07, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Sending you my condolences, Shirt58 for working on a Bollywood article. Be sure to take a screenshot of what it looked like before the box office corruption and ethnic warring destroyed it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Shirt58: . With the Bollywood and entertainment stuff, I just see my role as a janitor keeping stuff from buried in trash and occasional policing with regard to some BLP issues. There is not much "effort" expanded, just the same repetitive maintenance (over and over and over). But thank you for thinking of me and thank you for your efforts in actually building! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:30, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Aligarh Muslim University

Please stop your disruptive editing in the page with poor English reading and interpretation. You cant even understand that the notable alumni pages which you edited is already sourced pages and you are saying no sources are there. Funny you!!!EyThink (talk) 11:17, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Best Revert-er

It seems that you are only best revert-er. It is a suggestion from me that please stop non sense and add articles in Wikipedia.EyThink (talk) 11:36, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Aligarh Muslim University, Filmsaaz, 6th Filmsaaz

You are a fanatic. You think yourself the one who knows everything in this world and also think yourself to be the best judge who can decide which one is reliable source or not. If you think so then edit Wikipedia on your own. Create a post of Editor in Chief undermining all other editors.

Remember one thing we to have intellect to decide which source have notability or not. Sitting in one place you cant decide things of other places. So, in short concentrate in contribution to Wikipedia instead of disruptive editing. Add articles. Don't delete.EyThink (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Obligatory note to please watch WP:3RR on here. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:15, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

how do u know i am a sock

??Hypocrites deaf (talk) 15:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

oh, please. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

User Huggi and "Gastronomy of Singapore" template

Hi TRPOD, User Huggi really is bent on adding that template to all sorts of articles. Even to Jamie Oliver, Gordon Ramsay and every other celebrity chef who has a restaurant in Singapore, and also to restaurant chains who happen to have a franchise in Singapore. I have no idea what to do about this. I absolutely hate going to ANI over this but is there any other way? - Takeaway (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I have now removed most instances of this template from where they shouldn't be used. I hope it stays that way and no further action is needed. - Takeaway (talk) 17:39, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

accurate material

The information I provided is 109% ACCURATE. What do I have to list as references to keep the materials valid? HydroGrowPRO (talk) 23:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

PLEASE ADVISE

WhT do you want me to list as references?? HydroGrowPRO (talk) 23:30, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

If you ask somebody a question, better to wait a lot longer than four minutes before asking the same person the same question.

For the answer to your question, please read and digest Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:37, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Warning September, 2015

This is your only warning; if disrupt any editing instead of improving in Wikipedia again, as you did, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You are advised to improve articles and let other editors work on it.EyThink (talk) 06:42, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh dear. Precisely where did TRPoD disrupt any constructive, policy-compliant editing? Please supply a diff. -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

I understand about putting too much unsourced detail for Henry Hugglemonster. I'll try and see to put some sourced detail in it.

- HENHUG1035 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henhug1035 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Please watch the reverts...

Hi Red, please watch your reverts. My job is hard enough. :P Also, this is interesting. It looks to me like either the editor is logging out to war, or he's recruited a friend to help. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:14, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

(EL-738 (talk) 04:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC))

Kitty Terry here

Kitty Terry here...The circus? Really? I can't get a word of truth posted? What is so friendly and I don't mean to sound gruff...You have granted a front page of lies for a felon and my big beautiful life is denied by Wikipedia? I don't get you..What am I missing... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitty Terry aka Kitty Woodson Terry (talk • contribs) 14:42, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Where is got still no evidence of WP:GNG redirect to parent org on &tv do I leave it without editing or do I edit but take out the WP:GNG.

Hello, Concerning the removal you made on the TPEG page, I don't understand you removal, all TPEG 2 specifications have been made by TISA (which is an association, not a company) and submitted to ISO, so who could better write down what TPEG is about? I personaly did put some references to external web site and to ISO pages, plus TPEG2 application references, that you have removed without any discussion with me or some other editors. You would be welcome to put back what was written or write to the contributors. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by EPoulbot (talk • contribs) 14:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply, but what is more factual than the reference to ISO specifications ? Is there a place where we could chat/exchange ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EPoulbot (talk • contribs) 14:45, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

The Teahouse

Hello, Red Pen,

I appreciate your input there at the Teahouse. I really do. But will you please consider moderating your comments with a friendly word or two? A welcoming, encouraging phrase? If that is contrary to your "doom" persona, I understand. But I just thought that asking couldn't hurt. It is up to you. Thanks again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Help

Hey I guess this Turehnde is a sock of Durr-e-shehwar. The user is disruptively editing pages. Regards, User:Digvijay411 —Preceding undated comment added 04:32, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

really now? I was here to report your biased editing, and you are reporting me to be a biased editor? you have removed information from his contemporaries pages, and now have a problem when information is being removed from his page, wow, biased much?Don!

Yup, indef'ed, then unblock requested and declined. All business-as-usual. DMacks (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Jargon

Fair enough I can source the claim of Rickards appearing on Vixen, but Arrowverse is not jargon, just the same as the DC Animated Universe (DCAU) is not jargon, nor is the DC Extended Universe (DCEU) or Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). What should be considered jargon is calling ir "Arrow and The Flash and Vixen and comic-book tie-ins in which Felicity Smoak has appeared". Arrowverse, which is an official name backed by one of the creators of the series, is much more practical.Oraklebat (talk) 19:25, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@Oraklebat: If you can show me that it exists in a general language dictionary, then I will believe your claims that it is not jargon. Until then, we use established plain English. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:29, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I can show you several articles in which the word is being used and accepted. It should in this article as well. List of Arrowverse actors [[13]] Arrow (TV series)#Arrowverse Legends of Tomorrow Vixen (web series) The Flash (2014 TV series)#Arrowverse By your logic then Westeros should not be a section in World of A Song of Ice and Fire, Buffyverse should not exist as an article and neither should Whoniverse.Since all are words accepted in an infinity of articles, it should not be forbidden in the Felicity Smoak articleOraklebat (talk) 19:36, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@Oraklebat: That other articles do not comply with Wikipedia content policies is a really unconvincing position to move another article out of compliance.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

What I am saying is that your argument falls short. The Article Titles page clearly states that "Abbreviations and acronyms are often ambiguous and thus should be avoided unless the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject (e.g. NATO, laser, SCSI). It is also unnecessary to include an acronym in addition to the name in a title. Acronyms may be used for parenthetical disambiguation (e.g. Conservative Party (UK), Georgia (U.S. state)). For more details, see WP:ACRONYMTITLE." The Arrowverse is known as the Arrowverse, not as the shared universe in which Arrow, The Flash, Vixen and Legends of Tomorrow take place or anything like that. It is known as the Arrowverse. (I hope I don't appear aggresive but you do see my point don't you?)Oraklebat (talk) 19:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

NATO is known as NATO by everyone. The "arrowverse" is NOT known as "arrowverse" outside of the "arrowverse" fandom WP:JARGON . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:39, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

But that's a no-brainer. Of course that people who are not acquainted with it do not know about it. That doesn't make any sense. Plus, the Arrowverse is not known as anything else, only Arrowverse. It's what it's called. I don't know what more discussion can there be about this.Oraklebat (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

And that is the whole point of WP:JARGON . We use basic English terms that everyone understand and not the niche fanclub terminology. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Diyar-e-Dil

TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom This time you are being really destructive. You revamped the entire Diyar-e-Dil article and I remained silent there by obeying your edits, you claimed 60% of sources non-reliable and user generated, removed many information and most of all started adding issue tags on the page. Why don't you understand that not all references are 110% reliable, they are not meant to be remove. In one of the recents edits you just made on Diyar-e-Dil, you removed the newly added sources, if you claimed them to be NON-RELIABLE then why did u completely removed the production section? please note that if you have a personal issue with my editing then please don't destroy the article, the article is meant to serve the public. You have done this several times and this time you must not do it again. Sammy.joseph (talk) 06:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC) Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at article, you may be blocked from editing. Increasing disruptive editing, removing information and increases vandalism. This user has completely removed most of the sources claiming them user generated, started removing sections and shrinking important information. This User is increasingly warned by other users but continues to do so.

Reminder

Remember to mark your CSD pages as patrolled. Good luck! Charlie the Pig (talk) 04:44, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion on Merging Shriram Automall with Shriram Group

Hi, well, first of all thanks for your prompt feedback on Shriram Automall India Ltd. here i have one question on merging it with Shriram group. well, as Shriram Automall India Ltd. is a subsidiary of Shriram Group, thus it is an individual entity itself, so, is it fine to merge it with Shriram Group? I mean merging will add this content to Shriram Group or what? kindly suggest. ThanksRwadhaawa (talk) 11:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion on Merging Shriram Automall with Shriram Group

Hi, Thanks for your replay. well, I have read a little about Stub page in Wiki where an article consider as stub if it has a less information, now, here I would like to know what happen if this article will be remain as an individual article for readers other than merge it into Shriram Group page? in that case shall I have to provide more information on this page with suitable notability sources? also, what will happen if it will be merged to Shriram Group? Kindly suggestRwadhaawa (talk) 17:57, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Then Why don't you help me identify the reliable sources, what sources do you think can be used? Sammy.joseph (talk) 06:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Because TRPoD has no interest, commercial or otherwise, in the subject. Maproom (talk) 22:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Your response to my asking for help on user page C S Chaffee

Your response to my asking for help on my user page: "For a response to the second part of your question/comment: there are nearly 5,000,000 articles in Wikipedia, and, yes, a great many (if not the majority) fail to meet the standards for article content. However, it is not convincing in the least to say "That article over there is a pile of garbage and so this article should remain a pile of garbage too!" Do you actually feel that this response was in any way helpful? I was not making an excuse for my article, simply pointing out that I, like countless others, used both the Wikipedia guidelines and other published articles as examples in writing our Drafts. Pointing out that precedent matters. I would never for a moment suggest that other articles are a pile of garbage nor compare anyone's Draft to a pile of garbage. But that's just me.C S Chaffee (talk) 19:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that you use the Wikipedia guidelines, and do not try to follow other articles, many of which are piles of garbage. Maproom (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Removing Tables

The information provided in "Byomkesh (2014 TV series)" in the "Episode" section is 100% authentic. I have viewed the episodes and penned the list. So its my ardent request to not to delete the table in that page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suvo19 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

What makes you think that the episode list is of no Encyclopedic value? And for sources I can suggest links to youtube videos where the entire episode can be viewed online. Will that suffice?--Suvo19 (talk) 18:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

You are telling me those are episode names which is not the case. They are the stories which spans over multiple episodes. It will help people to view them online specifying the story which aired on which dates helping them to search content easily.--Suvo19 (talk) 18:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

So what is the work of an encyclopedia not to guide people?. I suggested an example not a use.--Suvo19 (talk) 18:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Good. Very well. Thanks for that definition. Then please answer me what makes you think there is no information in that list?--Suvo19 (talk) 18:57, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Insane Fellow

Please stay away from Aligarh Muslim University.Arifjwadder (talk) 20:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Maulana Azad Library

cant yo read this article (http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/india-today-universities-rankings-2012-aligarh-muslim-university/1/189328.html). What more you need.Arifjwadder (talk) 20:55, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Aligarh Muslim University

Will you please elaborate why it is unnecessary? And who the hell are you to decide which is necessary and which is not? Arifjwadder (talk) 20:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: per the basics of the manual of style. You dont place items in sub sections until you have sufficient content in the section so that multiple sub sections makes reading the content easier. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

the library subsection could have been there!!!! Firstly you have issues with citations and when it is sorted out you give some other reasons. I think you have been canvassed by some body.!!!!Arifjwadder (talk) 20:45, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: the library and its history has nothing to do with external academic ratings. Why would that information be lumped in there?-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:09, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Library and rankings were separate subsections of Academic profile. See University_of_Oxford#Academic_profile. Hope you will stay away now. Thanks..Arifjwadder (talk) 21:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: That another article is poorly organized is a terrible rationale to base your case on. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

now you are saying that University of Oxford is poorly organised!!!! funny you... can you remove the Wikipedia:Good articles tag from the article if you think like that? Arifjwadder (talk) 21:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: It got the "GA" status 7 years ago, and when it got the status [14] Nope, it did not lump its libraries with external ratings. If if were to be re-reviewed today, it is unlikely that it would keep them lumped together and maintain its "GA" status. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:24, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Where did AMU lump its library with external ratings?Arifjwadder (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: When you clumped it under the "academic profile" sections in which the rest of the content is (appropriately ) discussing the academic profile of external ratings. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:32, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: if it is so then instead of removing it you could have made another section. Why did not you do that?Arifjwadder (talk) 21:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: because there are a grand 2 sentences about the history of library, about when it was founded and when it was expanded. 1) that is insufficient content to merit a stand alone section and 2) it is HISTORY and there is already a section about HISTORY where it is appropriate to be covered. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: i don not find merit in putting the history of the library in the History section. There ar elot of things to be covered in History section. Arifjwadder (talk) 21:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Arifjwadder: when there is sufficient sourced content in the History section to merit subsections, then subsections can be added , but they are not necessary yet.

(and note that you dont have to {ping} me when you write on my user talk page, i get a notification whenever anyone writes here.) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For the efforts you have put in at Ahmed Mohamed (student) and the AfD! You deserve this! -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:58, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Apologetics?

I wasn't asking for specific definitions (nor did I ask you to define "apologetics" for me, but thanks, it reinforced what I took from your post). I was asking what you personally meant by "narrative". But the latter is beside the point. As I saw it, you were accusing WV of defending the apparent racism of Texas. All WV was doing, as I saw it, was explaining how Texas does things. That doesn't mean WV agrees with it. So there's no need to call it "apologetics for racism" nor WV an apologist for racism. WV was explaining that legally the authorities didn't do anything wrong, and that doesn't mean, you, WV, or anyone else has to agree with that (in fact that is the entire crux of this controversy). That there may not be notable incidents of white people who have also been detained under these laws doesn't make them de facto racist, nor anyone explaining them or their processes racist. It doesn't even mean the person explaining it agrees with it - that person's just explaining how the people involved were handling it and what made it possible. It may go against common sense, but their law apparently allows it to. I am now going to walk away from this like it didn't happen, as I've made my point. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 20:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Diyar-e-Dil

Hi Pen, Fushan has asked me to intervene at Diyar-e-Dil. Could you please tell me what specifically about this content you found problematic? I understand that you object to some of the references used, can you tell me which ones? I do understand that when editors make these giant edits it's difficult to see what was changed, but I can also understand from Fushan's perspective that he went through a lot of trouble and he's not getting clear edification on what is wrong with the content. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:31, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Diyar-e-Dil

Saw your your edits on my talk page, and yeah im working on that cleaning up thing. Sammy.joseph (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Diyar-e-Dil

what is your problem, there are thousands of articles that has not powerful sources, in Pakistan, the primary news paper published material very often. So we use sources that are less primary, but that doesn't mean they are crap. I have been very patient with you and never interrupt you edits, but what i have don in last edit of mine is not right. Please i am requesting you that you can trust me with the edits that they are not invalid, i also don't use references such as Reviewit and imdb, but refrences, like Brandsynario, HIP they are valid and they give information in our tv industry when other don't. you can review or change the edits but cannot undid. I am not other editors i know what i am writing and i am solely responsible for this. If i think any edits of mine that doesn't comply with rules and regulations i myself will delete it or remove it. Fushan007 ^Talk 18:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Comedy Nights with Kapil episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arbaz Khan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Message from jmcve146 regarding Dual Survival (season 5)

Episode descriptions are supposed to be descriptive. In case you forgot, here's the definition of describe: "1.give an account in words of (someone or something), including all the relevant characteristics, qualities, or events" I was using the actual descriptions released by the production company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmcve146 (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) Jmcve146, being snarky is probably not the way to go here. You're almost certain to inspire a puckish editor to snarkily reply in kind, "In case you forgot, here's the definition of copyright violation". You are not permitted to copy, or even closely paraphrase content from other sources, as this represents a copyright violation. Though we are allowed to use excerpts if properly attributed, we cannot base large portions of an article on these excerpts, and this is a specific problem with television episode summaries, since if everyone "excerpted" the way you did, the entire article would be one large copyright violation. The WikiProject Television community expects editors who have seen the episode to write summaries from scratch in their own words. You have a 100-200 word leeway to do so. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:54, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Message from Devmahatma

Hi. Thankyou, Devmahatma (talk) 18:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Incidentally...

I think this is what you meant to do. Have a nice day. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 02:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

A heads up

You might be interested in this.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Puff n' fluff

There is the increasingly popular "spam five references for a single statement" type of promotional puffery at Mahira Khan. Do you have any inclination to take a look?--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

i had worked on that one a while back and i thought it had been cleaned up, but maintenance is apparently a never ending task! At least there the ref spam seems mostly legit sources - so that is a plus. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

hahAHAHAHAHA

This sock puppet report is....astonishing. Just thought you'd get a giggle or two out of it. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 09:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

mawra hocane

Hi, I have noticed your speedy has just been removed from the above article by someone, when only advertorials, and a face-book page are being used as references – Oh, and least I forget, association with a famous person (which would make most of us eligible for our own WP article). I think it should be speeded again until the subject becomes notable. This smacks to me of 'paid editor' work. Together with User:Bulova1875 & User:IntrigueBulova

mawra hocane is mentioned on the google entry to:

>http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://benleewontsing.blogspot.com/2015/07/finished-work.html&sa=U&ved=0CDwQFjAHahUKEwicla6T56PIAhXGshQKHdg5Ajs&usg=AFQjCNH76LuSFkAPAeDDe21NKWnRYUaZYw< Of course there might be more than one person with this name but the site has photographs of the model.<

Also there is:

>http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/bulova-enters-indian-market-through-tieup-with-amazon/article6861319.ece&sa=U&ved=0CDQQFjAKOBRqFQoTCOKVya7jo8gCFctuFAodTaQIOw&usg=AFQjCNGfUqbhiTF1hjrkGW5kA8Zd6FASSw<

As you know, as a PR exercise companies give away free stuff so that it can be seen in the media. Wikipedia:Endorsements#Models It appears prima facie that their is a COI in bumping up the profile of one of their Endorsers above the notability water-level. As well as not declaring COI on articles about this company. Can any WP admin find out were all these IPS are located?--Aspro (talk) 13:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

ICTF FAQ

Hi RP, if you get any extra time, I'd appreciate if you could take a look at User:Cyphoidbomb/ICTF FAQ. I'm trying to put together a list of reliable/unreliable sources for the Indian cinema task force to make enforcing community preferences a little easier. Any help you can provide with adding links to RSN discussions or other discussions would be appreciated, or just fleshing out the various sections would be appreciated. No pressure, however. I was somewhat inspired after seeing editors at MSG-2 The Messenger add some box office values based on really dodgy blogs. Where some sites were estimating ~Rs. 4 crore, these blogs were claiming 100+. Also troubling when yesterday I noted some reviews that suggested very explicitly that the lead actor, a "god man" was paying people to attend screenings and things like that. Very questionable. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Colors Kannada and Colors (TV channel) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articles Colors Kannada and Colors (TV channel) are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

Both articles will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colors Kannada until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 articles during the discussion, including to improve the articles to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the articles.  --Bejnar (talk) 19:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Congressional terms

I think there's a big misunderstanding regarding the end date of Congressional terms back in the old days. Please see this discussion I started at the Help Desk. By the way, you've done a very nice job on the Tribe article. Czoal (talk) 03:37, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty

There was a change to her birthday left unreverted for how long I don't know, but then there's this series of edits started off by an editor who's been suitably warned, can you take a look and make sense of it please? cheers. I've semi-protected for unreverted BLP vios, but I suspect there are more. —SpacemanSpiff 05:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Zubeen Garg

Could use a second opinion regarding this with respect to WP:BLP and WP:RS. Thanks. Dl2000 (talk) 16:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brendan Miles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Riding. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Time and again I see you working to improve spammy biographies, to remove badly-sourced trivia, to introduce a neutral tone. Thank you, your efforts are appreciated. Huon (talk) 21:10, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Signa Vianen

I am sorry about the misunderstanding. Clearly I am new to this. Furthermore, the article is not promotional. The facts are there and you even removed links to authentic sources. The subject in that article is Dutch and the data has been online for all involved parties to see. If there had been errors, said parties would have edited those errors. I fail to see why you are so adamant to delete most of the article whereas there is absolutely wrong. I already made a request on the noticeboard, so that editors could keep a close watch after a stalker intentionally started adding crap to the content. And from what I have seen, you edited and then referred to my edits as `crap. It is not at all crap. It is all facts and one does not have to be Dutch to understand such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LondonTurk (talk • contribs) 22:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

To be honest, I am not engaging in any kind of war. I first looked up your ID and it said that you were an illegal editor. From there on I proceeded editing and even adding authentic sources as requested. You removed those. Basically, I fail to see what is the issue. You objected but to what did you object, since you removed authentic sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LondonTurk (talk • contribs) 22:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

BLP

Hello, TheRedPenOfDoom. I believe that in this edit you describe a living person in potentially defamatory terms. Per WP:BLP, I consider that inappropriate. I am not going to harass you about this; this is going to be my only comment on the issue. I do believe, however, that if you continue to use that kind of language in edit summaries other users will eventually have to address the issue. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Signa Vianen

You refer to it as being promotional, but it is called describing one´s individual assets. And it has been done often time, right here on Wikipedia. I have come across the strangest content over the years and I truly wonder what is the problem here. I do not see any pictures anywhere, I only see data, actual facts and records. Individuals have their individual track records. Suriname by the way is a third world country with a population under 600.000, it is easily understood that your skepticism originates from whatever cultural background you have. You need not alter the article, the facts were correct. And the dictionary was really the first of its kind, from Dutch to the local dialect and vice versa. This country used to be a Dutch colony and you are clearly unaware of its history. What kind of sources do you need, as you removed a link to visual content as published by a local university. Do you need newspaper articles perhaps or will you delete those too because you won´t understand a word of it as none of it is in English. Do reinstate article in its original form. = — Preceding unsigned comment added by LondonTurk (talk • contribs) 22:29, 5 October 2015 (UTC) Eraser of Stalker Edits 22:41, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

• I've removed the personal attack. RedPen, I've blocked this user and kept them from editing their talk page. Hopefully you won't receive any more harassment from this person. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For the tireless and thankless job of cleaning and recleaning and cleaning again and recleaning again the articles related to Indian television. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

S/O Satyamurthy

First of all, thanks for making your concerns clear. I mentioned about this in the article's history, but to make it clear, i give those refs here itself.

• failing to return distributor investment and being declared an above average - here which is ref no. 170
• two consecutive 50 crores - here by Oneindia Entertainment (now Filmibeat) which is ref no 171. DYK was also updated with this fact on 3 August 2015.
• 7th highest - here by IANS used as ref no. 169 (Here the publisher is India Today whereas the publisher of the article i used in S/O Satyamurthy page was CNN-IBN).

I've provided the answers now, in full detail. Hope these would solve the issues between us. Thanking you. Awaiting your reply, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:27, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Would you assist me

• Am I wasting my time to improve the articles for the credibilty of the project, and maintenance of the policies? May you assist me, I am wrong?! Notice board are helpless.Justice007 (talk) 12:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Sai Pallavi

I have no view on the nature of the changes you are making to this article but I note that you are currently at 7RR - I advise that you quickly self-revert. RichardOSmith (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Your edit to List of programs broadcast by American Broadcasting Company

While I do agree with your sentiments in this edit that the content is unsourced, your sentiment that the entire section lends undue weight goes against the consensus that was established at WikiProject Television. I just wanted to remind you. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 18:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Your Redirect

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Your redirection of Sindhu Bhairavi (TV series) has been taken into the notice of Administrators.Devmahatma (talk) 03:40, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kilmarnock and Troon Railway. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Felix Manalo (film) 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. Elizium23 (talk) 03:26, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

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:TheRedPenOfDoom reported by User:Electricburst1996 (Result: ). Thank you. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 04:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Halil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khalil. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Advances in Public Interest Accounting

Is there enough there now to stop the proposed deletion clock? I haven't gone through the rankings in detail, but the journal is both tracked and ranked by what appears to be a respectable and independent source.

Dreadarthur (talk) 19:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

As someone who teaches Accounting Theory regularly, I assert with confidence that the journal/book series is quite notable, but I know that is not good enough. Removed proposed deletion tag based on the journal's ranking by an authoritative independent source. Dreadarthur (talk) 19:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9mNQICjn6DibxNr

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hopefully this works

Hi, though a longtime user, I'm somewhat new to wiki editing, let alone messaging through it, so hopefully this is the proper format. For the page you referenced, I think I see the problem with some of the content of my edit, but not the minor parts like subtracting "most recently" in front of John Edwards and adding several citations to biographical information. I'm going to keep editing this page in the future, since its pretty thin and unorganized, likely focusing on information technology and some of its early uses in politics, since I think that would be pretty informative. If you think any of it is less than neutral, especially by wiki standards since I'm new to those, hopefully we can work together to cut that stuff out while leaving in the useful stuff. 15 October 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakgberg (talk • contribs) 20:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Epic

This is wonderfully epic. Plus, someone needed to say it just the way you did. Thanks for putting a big smile on my face and making me honestly LOL. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 22:15, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Mike Bidlo

You seem to have found a few references for Mike Bidlo that I didn't (I only found this) - you think the article is worth keeping? Was going to AFD without issue until I saw your reference adds. Primefac (talk) 00:52, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

@Primefac: I didnt actually find any of them, they were just misplaced in the article. Given that he is covered in the Oxford University art encyclopedia, i would say he's notable. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:26, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, good point. Primefac (talk) 01:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

@Primefac: and i did find a whole bunch more in google books that i dropped on the talk page. so he clearly meets WP:GNG, someone just needs to pull the content from the sources and footnote it. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:45, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I want your opinion on an article

Us at WP:AUTO are debating whether or not the article List of automobiles notable for negative reception should be deleted or kept. Seeing as you are active in maintaining List of films considered the worst, we want your opinion on the matter. Any input from you or anyone else who is active involved in looking after List of films considered the worst would be greatly appreciated! Karrmann (talk) 09:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Please don't remove आहट from Aahat

I noticed that you removed आहट from the article Aahat. Actually this is the word in Hindi, which means an approaching sound. It is not an inappropriate word. Similarly, you removed more Hindi words. These Hindi words will help the Hindi people to recognise correctly as this is a Hindi program. I have replaced these Hindi words in the article, and I am kindly requesting you not to remove those again. 122.176.242.218 (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

RP: WP:INDICSCRIPT doesn't address the infobox. If there is a parameter for an original language, e.g. |show_name=, wouldn't it be appropriate to include the Indic script in the infobox? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

GA nominee

Hai, I have nominated the film article Loham for GA-status. Which is currently on "Hold on" time and there are some corrections to be done before it ends. Mainly copy editing for grammer and writting style. For making it a good article there are some suggestions referred in Talk:Loham. I invite you to make your contributions to it. Charles Turing (talk) 08:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Mistake?

Hi RP, you thanked me for my reversion, but then reverted me. Mistake? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:50, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: whoah! thanks for catching that. the thank you was intended, the other was a completely wrong click. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:53, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Editing on my tablet has occasionally yielded unfortunate rollbacks. I understand completely. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Bidlo-Not Pollock.jpg

Thanks for your message, but you are mistaken to assert that the image is a copyright violation eligible for speedy deletion under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion. The image in question has been in place in the article, with a proper and valid fair use licence, since July 2007.

Your recent edits have removed the image from the article which means it is now a candidate for speedy deletion under section F12 of the criteria for speedy deletion. I know not all agree with the fair use doctrine, but I was active during 2006-2008 when the issue was discussed at length on WP and we settled on such use under strict criteria. I believe that the image is a good candidate for use in the article to enhance the subject matter and assist the reader's understanding of Bidlo as an "appropriationist" artist. Therefore, I am considering adding it, or others, back under a fair use licence before the image gets speedied.

Please take a little more time to consider all the factors involved and do not mistakenly place boilerplate template messages on my talk page which give the impression that I'm engaged in copyright violations. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Ken Ham

I think the consensus is heading towards retaining the old wording (i.e. with "prove", but not "wrong"). But we might need the discussion formally closed. StAnselm (talk) 20:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and closed the discussion and restored the word "prove". StAnselm (talk) 20:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world including WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 03:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Ennu Ninte Moideen

Check the lead section of this film article Ennu Ninte Moideen.--49.15.129.34 (talk) 11:57, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Rishabha

Hello, I am interested in improving the page, Rishabha. In august, you added the "tone" tag to the page. Can your point out the specific problems which can be fixed, so as to improve the page. Thanks in advance. Nimit (talk) 17:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

HUM TV

Why did you add a source section? No other wiki page has that, it's got nothing to do with it - the information provided on that page is all true. You can search it on the internet if you wish. Please stop reverting it. If you want to remove the timings section, feel free to do that, but leave the rest and stop shoving the info into all one table which makes it harder for the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulaiman Ali (talk • contribs) 13:46, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Republic of Heaven

Hello, I 'thanked' you when you put a 'delete' tag on 'Republic of Heaven', and note your 'pruning' of the OR. There are a couple of pages that the little information left could go. 'Republic of Heaven' is already in Locations_in_His_Dark_Materials#Republic_of_Heaven and could otherwise go into His_Dark_Materials#Terminology_used_in_the_books. My memory of the books was that the 'Republic of Heaven' was a notional place even within the books, the 'locations' page suggests otherwise.

My own experience of dealing with His Dark Materials pages, is that there was an awful lot of 'fan-sitey' pages created a few years ago, and the rest of us are left to clear up the mess therafter.

Are you going to propose this for deletion, as I think there is little prospect of it being save-able as it is or was? Pincrete (talk) 20:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

help desk

I responded there. Please reply there and my talk page. Thank you! --74.130.133.1 (talk) 21:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

again

Please reply at the help desk. --74.130.133.1 (talk) 21:15, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

thanks

for the help --74.130.133.1 (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

IP Address 117.199.165.20 or its variants indulging in digital vandalism on wiki pages of Pakistani dramas

The user is never signed in, but the user(s) end up changing the contents of the pages at large. The IP addresses are different, but it is possible that they hop a lot, but the MO is the same.

• Zindagi Gulzar Hai - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zindagi_Gulzar_Hai&type=revision&diff=687613210&oldid=687608140 (Last edit before your edit)
• Humsafar - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Humsafar&type=revision&diff=687606953&oldid=686136517 (Last edit before your edit)
• Jal Pari (TV series)- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jal_Pari_%28TV_series%29&type=revision&diff=687540951&oldid=685867657
• Talkhiyaan - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talkhiyaan&type=revision&diff=678387831&oldid=672980197

There are others and I will try to find them. Hopefully this is a good start. Manoflogan (talk) 07:02, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Mood 92.0 FM

Did you see anything to establish the name change from Mood 92.0 FM to simply Mood FM? All the initial research I see affirms the existing name, and that the change to Mood FM is not supported by any reliable sources, and even their parent company still list them under the longer name. My thoughts are to revert back to Mood 92.0 FM until reliable sources are found. Since you've done some editing here, I was wondering about your thoughts. Tiggerjay (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Requesting review for articles created by one User

I just recently noticed lot of articles created by a user Rajeshbieee, even without any valid references and all. So I'm requesting to review the articles created by this user and requesting to delete all the hoax articles from Wikipedia. I found that you always cleanup articles if there's no reference and all. Here's the list of articles created by Rajeshbieee, you can see somany articles even without any references. 117.245.8.98 (talk) 18:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

References

Category syntax

I assumed {{Category:American male authors}} was a typo so I silently changed it [15] but I see you have restored it [16]. Categories use square brackets. See Help:Category. I know users work with different things and have different knowledge but I'm curious. After 132,247 edits, do you actually think categories use curly brackets? PrimeHunter (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Adding notability

Hello! I am contacting you regarding this webpage: Airy_(software) Since the time you placed your note about “notability guidelines for products and services” I have added more external resources and some citations. The aim of this page is to describe the app which is listed here: Comparison_of_YouTube_downloaders. It was created taking into account webpages of another apps of such kind. Could you please reconsider your remark or advise me what changes should be made?MargoRaynolds (talk) 10:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

TS Madison picture removal

Hi I am TS Madison publicist we really appreciate you looking out for her wiki page as we know that the info being used is crucial that it be correct. Please allow us however to have her picture on her page. Madison herself has requested the pictures be put up if you have any doubts as to the validatiy please email her at booktsmadison@gmail.com and she will confirm for you that it is infact the real ts madison requesting the pictures but as I said they keep being taken down. Again so grateful for you being on top of everything but the pictures are owned by TS Madison herself and it would make her so happy to have a picture associated with her wiki page. Please allow us to do that for her. This has been so frustating for her. SHe deserves her picture to stay. Thank you.

Thank you so much

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ts_Madison is the profile I am speaking of . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladysoalpr (talk • contribs) 22:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ladysoalpr: I have left information on your user page how you can go about donating the copyright materials appropriately so that anyone can use them for any manner for free as is required. Please also note that these are NOT "profiles" - they are encyclopedia articles. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)