User talk:Ravensfire/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive for 2015

Saath Nibhana Saathiya

Hi! If you think the page is too bloated, kindly tell me and I will revise it. I love editing and especially love this show and will certainly trim it down - but please don't cut everything I have written. (Kamleshbhabhi (talk) 04:53, 22 January 2015 (UTC))

@Kamleshbhabhi: See your article talk page. You HAVE been told it is too long. Trim it down, a LOT, before trying to put it back it. And honestly, discuss your changes in the article talk page before making them. You have been warned about breaching 3RR which you are past and pointed to the MOS section for film plots. Ravensfire (talk) 04:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory

I notice you have reverted the definition sentence. Now I applaud your action -- the change was an apparent vandalism. But the definition sentence you restored does not agree with the article. A definition that agrees with the body of the article might read as follows: "A conspiracy theory is a pathological delusion consisting of a large and often complex explanation for events that does not agree with the facts." Quite honestly, I prefer the definition you restored, but whole article should not be maintained with the definition sentence in disagreement with the body. I have attempted to bring this conflict to the attention of the ad hoc community that maintains the page, and you can find my arguments in TALK. Perhaps you would care to venture your opinion in that forum. Slade Farney (talk) 05:49, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Danish Oil

Dear Ravensfire,

On the 1st of Feb I added the little known history of Danish Oil, which is verifiable, yet you removed it. May I ask why?

Regards,

Gavin Mason — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.185.228.47 (talk) February 12, 2015

Gavin, I removed it for a couple of reasons. First, it was completely unsourced. Generally, information in articles needs to be sourced to reliable sources (that page has info on what is a RS). Second, it seemed overly promotional in nature. In fact, I really thought it was from an external website that sold the product but didn't find a match. Finally, it was shoved at the beginning of the article when, if properly sourced and edited to be non-promotional in nature, it should be integrated into the existing article. A section on the history would be helpful, but again, we need sources for that. Hope that helps some. Ravensfire (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Brennan edit

Thanks for your note. How does one determine what is considered by Wikipedia to be a legitimate "source?" As I dug deeper on TPNN I can see how their reporting may be closer to rumor than proven facts. Although questionable, my personal experiences in the Middle East for many years was aligned with observations within an article I attributed as my source.

Over the years most of my problems with Wikipedia had been from others who doubt my original copyrighted images, submitted to contribute to Wikipedia content. I'm still learned about Wikipedia copyrights.

Thanks again. Initially, thought your editing carried another agenda. (Abuse). But your note helped clarify things.

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgy01 (talk (talk • contribs) February 14, 2015

@Edgy01: Dan, glad the note helped some. The best place to start is the reliable sources page. There's a lot of information there and I'll freely admit it's tough to determine what is and is not a reliable sources. For a lot of news-ish websites, it can often come down to a reputation for accuracy. That's very different from bias, as a site can be biased but still have a reputation for accuracy. If you aren't sure about a particular source, a great source is the Reliable Source Noticeboard. You can add a section there with the source you want to use, the article(s) you where you want to use the source and the information you want to add/change in the article and you'll get some feedback from various editors.

Something to note, however. The specific edit you made has some other issues around it that would have caused problems. Religion is a very touchy subject that has been used in the past to tar people unfairly. A general rule that has emerged in various discussions is that religion is what the person self-identifies as their religion. For example, someone is both in faith A but now practices faith B. What's their religion? Or someone practices faith A but periodically goes to faith B religious ceremonies. What's their religion? For that second example, I'll use myself as an example. My wife and I have different faiths but alternate which church we attend. Neither of us could be said to be of the other's faith, but someone else watching us might try to say I was of faith X, not Y. Tricky subject, isn't it? Ravensfire (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion notice of Pahawe manahce

Hellow,

Thanks for being Blunt and leaving message. It is website "pahawemanache.com" is not owned by me, but I am a regular reader of the same. This is a new website and very new experiment in a regional language in India. Let me know exactly which part of the page you want information/approval from owner of the website and I will try to contact him.

I am just trying to give information about this new website that gives movie reviews of World Cinema in Marathi. This is not a very common in my language(Marathi)

(You can see I have already contributed very much in Marathi Wikipedia about various topics including websites, history, art and culture. This is first time I am contributing on English pages so that those who don't visit Wikipedia in Marathi would also get this information.)

You have won

I'd like to edit other articles as well. Please stop to follow all my contributions. I'm asking generously. Thanks! AHLM13 talk 18:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Sure! As soon as I can be sure you understand editing in a collaborative manner and how to follow Wikipedia policies. Could be problematic based on our past edits and what you've said on your talk page though. You need to learn from the advice you've been given. Since you were given the same advice some months ago and showed a failure to learn, you've shown no willingness to change. Ravensfire (talk) 04:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Sargun Mehta

Hi Ravensfire, i need your suggestion. I am currently working on this article, and recently i see that she has added her hubby's (Ravi Dubey) surname and writes her name as Sargun Mehta Dubey on April 2014, but newspapers are still writes her name as Sargun Mehta, see recently published articles, [1], [2], [3], [4], I've added a comment on article talkpage, So please suggest me that this article should be move on a new name?, And please also suggest me that the article content is enough/better for GA nomination. Hetika (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Hetika:, I left a comment on the article talk page in the name issue. On the GA - I did a quick glance at the article. The sourcing looks good which is always nice to see - well done! The lead seems a bit long given the length of the article and could use some tightening up. There are lots of shows mentioned in the lead and that's probably something that can be reduced. Shows that represent significant and/or current events belong there, but the rest probably don't. There are also some layout issues in the lead - the italics are messed up someplace. I also noticed there are a lot of categories. I think there is some over-categorization there where you've got a child category and the parent category. For example, Category:Indian soap opera actresses is a sub-category of Category:Indian television actresses. Same with Bigg Boss category, you also have the parent listed. Generally, we only use the lowest category in an article. Ravensfire (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Thanks for help, And i've read this policies and will fix it, but i'm still confused in Layout issues, i don't understand about this policy; so can you fix any one of Layout issue for an example??? Hetika (talk) 15:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I've fixed some problems, and added more blp info with RS, The lead is now rewrite and removed unsignificant shows from the lede, and also removed head categories. So i request you to please check it again and notify me if any problems. Hetika (talk) 15:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

@Hetika:, I've been following your changes and they look nice. I'll try to review and comment sometime later today. Ravensfire (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The DAB pages about UIBE

Thank you for your remind of WIKI rules. The important issue is that is there any confusion about the similar names or entity using the same names. We don't think the case are here. The UIBE and SUIBE both affilicated with Education Ministry of China. The "Shanghai" is quite important for people to understand who it is. If people search for SUIBE they will add the "shanghai" anyway. But most of the searches with the exact "UIBE" or "University of International Business and Economics" will go to us like the google showing in

https://www.google.com/search?q=University of International Business and Economics&oq=University of International Business and Economics&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l3&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

The situation is we are later for the RM is the original page and the users wrongly accepted the RM request. We are hoping to fix this and please talk to us and Ahecht and other users in talk page of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_International_Business_and_Economics.

We are new here and thank you for you help for how could we get enough support or opposition to complete a new RM? Hope you could help Amuwazi and us to solve this and we would like to hear from SUIBE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{2}}}|{{{2}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{2}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{2}}}|contribs]]) 09:42, March 5, 2015‎ Hades1011

Merely having a copyright on something doesn't really matter on Wikipedia. You're totally ignoring that other entities can use the same abbreviation (UIBE) in other places or can be commonly referenced by similar (or the same) name. Wikipedia practice in those scenarios is to use a disambiguation page (or DAB) to direct editors to the correct page. The actions you and other editors have taken in this matter completely ignore Wikipedia's procedures and demanded, under threat of legal action, that we take your preferred approach. That's a rather poor way to address things and won't win you much help. From a dispassionate view, I think this is handled correctly though. The entities do have similar names, so a DAB is generally how we progress. In time, if it's determined that one page gets dramatically more views than another, a different approach may be taken, but that's something to consider sometime next year probably. Ravensfire (talk) 15:37, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

a hand

Hi, I hope you're fine.

On 17 February I edited S. Abdul Qayum's article, which were reverted from you. How did you notice that? Via watchlist? If so, how to utilise this tool properly? In my watchlist there are are various article. Also, whenever I edit any page, that article appears automatically on my watchlist? Is there any method to stop this? I actually want only my favourite articles to be included there. Can you help me with this? Thanks. -- AHLM13 talk 14:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Probably watchlist. Any article you create is, by default, automatically added to your watchlist. Any article you use Twinkle on is also automatically added to your watchlist. I don't think a general edit is added by default, you should need to check the "Add to watchlist" box. Once an article has been added, you can remove it pretty easily. I think there's a menu option if you're on the article and you can also edit your watchlist through View and Edit Watchlist option on your watchlist page. If you've got the Popup script enabled (Prefences -> Gadgets -> Navigation Popups), you can also add/remove by right-clicking on the article name. Depending on how many other scripts you use, there may be other ways articles are added to your watchlist. Ravensfire (talk) 04:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Advice

I thanks. I'm only trying to be constructive. But this needs reworking. If you read it you can see how so much is either - irrelevant, POV or in the wrong spot. I am really trying to faithfully improve the article. But everything has been undone. LOTS_Scholar (talk) 16:29, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Ravensfire

Have you ever read the WP:BLPABUSE? Please change your offensive username. Follow these steps here. [5] -- AHLM13 talk 14:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

You have the funniest ideas on how Wikipedia works, you know that? I do see abuse of BLP articles and strident POV pushing, AHLM13, but it from you. Ravensfire (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Why? I am the only who discovered your username which is offensive. Please change it. -- AHLM13 talk 17:14, 5 April 2015

Thanks for the good laugh! Well, small sad chuckle really. Ravensfire (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Are you joking with me? I am serious. Where are you originally from? Indian? Isnt'it?-- AHLM13 talk 10:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

You, of all people, are certainly not entitled to ask for such information, nor would I even consider reveaing it to anyone. That you're asking for it is just sad. The origin of the name is Indian (of sorts) - you might consider googling the words and enlighten yourself. Ravensfire (talk) 12:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ravensfire, i think your name is cool, i don't know what your name is based on, i like it from my readings of Norse and American Indian mythology Coolabahapple (talk) 00:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Coolabahapple: Thanks! My username is inspired by American Indian mythology. While sometimes considered a trickster, Raven is also often shown as the provider of light and/or fire, often using cunning to bring light/fire back to humans. He perseverance through difficulty is shown by his black feathers which started as white but turned black while carrying fire back from the smoke. It's interesting that most of the tales of Raven come from tribes in the Pacific Northwest, so they aren't universal. Powerful stories. Ravensfire (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Birmingham Central Mosque

Dear Ravensfire, I hope you are well. Can you please look at the recent edit history of Birmingham Central Mosque. It's not nice to be called a religious hypocrite by User:AHLM13 -- again -- merely because I asked for evidence for his addition. Thanks a lot, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@GorgeCustersSabre:, both Mbcap and I left warnings on AHLM13's talk page about the edit summary comment. Yeah, that was wrong for him to do. At this point, a warning is really all that can be done. Mbcap also pointed out WP:BURDEN, a policy which says that the person adding or restoring information is responsible for finding a reliable source that directly supports the claim. Not someone else, that person. I did note that AHLM13 left you a message on your talk page that is less than helpful. There is a phrase at the end that I could not find a translation for - if that's also a person attack, let me know and we'll take this to WP:ANI. Ravensfire (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

A word

Hi, Ravensfire. I wanted to stop by and thank you for your efforts addressing edit warring/overly exuberant editing at Muhammad Iqbal. I noticed your posts only after I had made similar posts. I wanted to explain that my messages were not meant to show any disrespect for your efforts. Also, I regret the appearance of "piling on". I was editing from work and failed to notice that you had already made the situation clear to the involved parties. Again, thanks....it's good knowing that I have help out there. Regards Tiderolls 02:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciate the comment. I think AHLM13's heart is in the right place, but there is definite room for improvement. I'm worried a bit that they just ignore anything I say, but hopefully the same concerns being raised by others will help them realize something needs to change. The tendency to edit-war with minimal discussion and the exaggeration of what sources say to puff up certain subjects are two big concerns of mine. Hopefully they'll improve before things go to various drama boards. Ravensfire (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

lakshmi mittal

You changed from "most richest" to "wealthiest". In this case wealthy means someone who possess a good patrimony, such Mukesh Ambani, who built the second most expensive house in the world. But Mittal doesn't posses all of these stuff like Ambani. -- AHLM13 talk 15:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Grammatically, "most richest" is terrible. "Wealthiest" means the same thing in common English and is much easier to read. Ravensfire (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Why can't I have access to you userpage? -- AHLM13 talk 15:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Huh? Why the heck would you need to touch my userpage? I don't have one - it's a redirect to my talk page. Ravensfire (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Calm down!!! I just wanted to see it, and not touch it, as everyone is free to see someone's userpage. You can see my one. You are always observing my contributions, but I never acted like you. Read WP:HARASS.-- AHLM13 talk 15:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, if you had acted like me you'd have edited based only on what the sources say, not what you want them to say. Ravensfire (talk) 16:14, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

You're changing the argument. I don't understand why you suddenly got angry. -- AHLM13 talk 10:43, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

good

I have seen your comment, so I am thanking you. I need to move this article [6], but I can't do it. Why? I need to move to "BRITISH PAKISTANI", without S, as for British Indian and British Bangladeshi. -- AHLM13 talk 16:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. On the page move, British Pakistani currently exists, but as a redirect to the plural title. That is what's preventing you from moving the page, so an admin will need to get involved. I looked in the talk page and archives and there was a previous request several years ago for the same move that didn't happen - see Talk:British_Pakistanis/Archive 1#Requested move 3. Please read through that discussion as it was closed as no consensus so you'll need to take in account the points raised there. It mentions some discussions at a WikiProject so you may also want to read those discussions. The right approach may be to make all of the articles plural.

Given that, you'll need to propose the move on the article talk page as this is a potentially controversial move. The full instructions are at WP:RM#CM.

Short version is create a new talk page section and put in this template: {{subst:Requested move|newName|reason=your reason}}

• Replace newName with your proposed name and add your reasons. Ravensfire (talk) 16:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

SPI

You've given a brilliant overview. I appreciate it. AHLM13 doesn't appear as a naughty guy, but he has the necessity to understand Wiki policies. I've noticed that you tried a lot to favour him almost in every situation. --115ash^→(☏) 08:23, 23 April 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. nafSadh did say 18:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

@Nafsadh:, Thank you for starting that, hopefully someone can calm down both parties and offer some advice that will be heeded. I think they are both passionate editors which is good, but can cause issues. Ravensfire (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

Please mention references

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kashyap G Rao (talk • contribs) 12:18, May 1, 2015‎

@Kashyap G Rao:, Relying on memory alone is an easy way to add incorrect information. Information on Wikipedia generally must be verifiable, so a reference is often added. In this case, right at the end of the quote from the review is the reference itself. It's that little [43] you see - click on that and you go to that reference in the ref section with a link you can click on. Of course, when you edited that section, the reference would have been there, including the URL so you could have used that. Finally, you could have simply done a web search and verified the information before changing. All of these are simple and would have taken you 15 seconds. In the future, please verify the information you add before making the edit. Ravensfire (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a lil mistake in this...

The son of screenwriter Salim, Khan began his acting career with a supporting role in Biwi Ho To Aisi (1998) The movie ws released in 1988 ....168.235.194.194 (talk) 13:58, 6 May 2015 (UTC)Sumi

Thank you for the correction, I've gone ahead and made it. Ravensfire (talk) 14:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Editing

Hello! I made another edit to the page, and am not sure if I did it correctly this time. I cited my sources and gave a reason for my edit, I am not sure if they went through.

Also, I am not sure how to sign!

Thanks! MWEST1977 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MWEST1977 (talk • contribs) 09:44, May 7, 2015‎

Thanks for the note - I'll leave a response on your talk page on sources, both what kinds of sources are good for Wikipedia, how to use them, plus some talk page stuff. Probably better (and more useful!) there than leaving it on my talk page. Ravensfire (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Source

The Source contains the actual released operation northwoods documents. It doesnt get any more reliable than that. It is what everything else on this subject is based off of!

Chaning the article

I found multiple reliable non-primary sources that support USApatriotmisunderstood's points of view. Is it okay if I go and revert to his edits and put the new sources in?

No, please let the discussion happen first so that we can stop this edit war. -- GB fan 20:18, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Balochistan

Oh, I see you've discovered the situation at Balochistan, Pakistan! Welcome! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Gee, thanks! Ethnic violence. Joy. And to be honest I thought I was making a small change that wouldn't cause any waves. How foolish am I! Ravensfire (talk) 16:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

The short story was that I happened upon this article in my capacity as a gnome. An IP was trying to add certain language about human rights abuses, etc. He we met with opposition from some of the page regulars, who may or may not have strong feelings about the subject. I believe one of the regulars was implicated as possibly being a Pakistani solidier, who wouldn't necessarily want to be called a human rights abuser. Those guys, actually, pretty much just voiced their opinions and didn't seem too resistant to the inclusion of some content about these unsavory issues if presented in a neutral way. The IP who started the whole ordeal turned out to be a sock operator, so that really polluted the first RfC, but I thought the issues he raised had merit. Two SPAs, however, jumped in later and were working hard to stifle any form of the human rights/economic strife/insurgencies going on in the province. Now it persists as I notice some of the back and forth with Zmaghndstakun. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:17, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Edward Snowden

Sorry about this and thanks for correcting me. Feel free to trout me for blindly reverting without reviewing the edit history carefully. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:07, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I did get a chuckle out of it after I got over my initial huh? reaction! No harm no foul! Ravensfire (talk) 18:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Why is there Zero chance??

Am not Advertising i just believe it should be Added along side with other search Engine websites like Bing,Yahoo & Google

What makes u think it should not be Added

Regards (iaealtd) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iaealtd (talk) 20:43, August 9, 2015‎

@Iaealtd: Yes, it's advertising. You want to add a brand new search engine next to a list of the largest search engines. Think about all of the other existing search engines out there that are far larger than the one you want to add that aren't listed. That text is the intro to the article, it's not intended to list everything. Ravensfire (talk) 01:46, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

But it has Additional features you can check it out :)

Regards (iaealtd)

That's nice. Ravensfire (talk) 04:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

WOP

You aren't a member. Don't be disruptive to the project.

There is indeed disruption, but it's coming from you. Please reconsider your actions. Ravensfire (talk) 22:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Supercentenarian article

Do you think you might be able to stop vandalizing the supercentenarian article. You keep removing the supercentenarians that have not been verified by the Gerontology Research Group like they are the be all and end all on this topic. The supercentenarians you are deleting have all been sourced. Furthermore, I have been tracking this article for years and most of the unverified supercentenarians eventually are verified by the Gerontology Research Group. I am a Gerontology researcher and this article, the WHOLE article, is invaluable to my research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ 24.158.47.1 (talk) 11:50, August 22, 2015

That's nice. You've got a couple of issues. First, see the WP:RSN discussion about sourcing for this where the community determined that table EE isn't a reliable source and shouldn't be used on Wikipedia. If you want to use it, that consensus needs to be changed. Second, the overbearing attitude is not helping you at all. Here's a hint - on Wikipedia, you're an editor like everyone else. There are no membership requirements to edit anything. There are no requirements to join a wikiproject. And finally, wikiprojects cannot overrule the general rules of Wikipedia. Right now, you are acting like this is a WP:WALLEDGARDEN that the WOP and GRG control. Nope. You need to reconsider your viewpoints on things.

For example, you start by saying, "that's nice". What the hell is nice about what I said? That is your way of demeaning people. You were the last to delete information which was CLEARLY sourced (much of it was anyway). That is vandalism. Those are the facts. Live with it. See how I just talked down to you? That is how you talk down to nearly every person you respond to. You would get more civil responses if you treated people with the same respect you demand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.47.1 (talk • contribs)

The only person with an overbearing attitude is you. That deleted information was invaluable to me and about ten other researchers as people around the world were identifying supercentarians, and they were SOURCING them. You need to drop your attitude. I have read your previous posts and you always have an overbearing, better than thou attitude. What are your qualifications? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.47.1 (talk • contribs)

In other words, you don't give a damn about anything else but you. YOU need to drop your attitude and actually work WITH wikipedia, not demand that Wikipedia works with you. On your site, I would expect that I would have to conform to your policies and processes. The reverse applies here. Trying to say others have the "better than thou" attitude? Coming and demanding this person gets blocked, or this person be de-admined, or only WOP members can decide? Demanding qualifications? Give me a break. Wikipedia doesn't work that way. It's community consensus and all the good and bad that comes with it. The community ultimately decided that table EE wasn't a reliable source for Wikipedia. That means don't use it as a source or anything sourced to it should be removed. If you want to be a part of Wikipedia, you have to honor that consensus, even if you don't like it. Ravensfire (talk) 17:51, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Here's a question for (or two). Do you acknowledge that a consensus determined that GRG table EE was deemed to not be a reliable source and in general should not be used on wikipedia? I'm not asking if you agree with that decision, just acknowledge it happened. Have you read the discussion on WP:RSN? Ravensfire (talk) 18:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

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) 17:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Heavy Metal Music

"...heavy metal music has proved to be far more complicated than has been previously suggested." This is not previously suggested. Even in the article..…..She states that heavy metal harmony typically uses modal harmonic relationships " That is Already is stated “Harmonically speaking, this means the genre typically incorporates modal chord progressions such as the Aeolian progressions I-VI-VII, I-VII-(VI), or I-VI-IV-VII and Phrygian progressions implying the relation between I and ♭II (I-♭II-I, I-♭II-III, or I-♭II-VII for example)” So you added something that says "as previously suggested" that has not ever been suggested, it makes no sense. Also the statement about Modal Harmonic Relationships why have it there instead of where Harmonic Modal relationships are mentioned already. Also what happened with this section being worked out first so people don't try and revert their point without reading and understanding it first. Thats what is supposed to prevent this. True? CombatMarshmallow (talk) 16:01, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Reverting something as "opinion" is utter garbage. Wikipedia is full of opinions on articles, that's part of it. Indeed, you've added opinion to the Heavy Metal article yourself, but called it "fact" because you agreed with it. It was sourced, but so was the above statement. Wordsmithing is probably needed, but your reason for reverting were terrible. Ravensfire (talk) 16:10, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

British Pakistanis

I believe you must from that community who is reverting my changes. your Religious view must not come when your are dealing with facts. British Pakistani Page has content that is not correct according to Pakistani Law — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aqwerislam (talk • contribs) 11:52, September 11, 2015

@Aqwerislam:, Thanks for discussing this. I don't disagree that it may be incorrect according to Pakistani law, but Pakistani law only determines how something will be handled in Pakistan. Our article on Ahmadiyya notes that it is Islamic and also notes that Pakistan is the only country to declare members of that faith to be non-Muslim. Everything I can see shows that the UK considers it to be a Muslim faith. An option may be to follow how some of the other Migration to the UK articles handle religion. Use a single list and put Islam (or Muslim) without breaking it down further. Ravensfire (talk) 17:10, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Grrrrr

You were correct. Was not intentional. I was trying to revert the vandalism. Thanks! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I figured that - annoying when it happens but glad to see multiple people reverting this guy. Ravensfire (talk) 21:30, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	GO TEAM! Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Arr45678

Yes I had a previous account of which I forgot my password and could not retrieve it....therefore new account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arr45678 (talk • contribs)

Good work!

Man, you were on it with the lyricsfilmi link spam! Good job. Are you aware of this tool? It'll help you find links to these problem sites all across the global project. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:38, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks ☺

Comment from someone who doesn't understand BLP

Your contention shall apply to the first editor who reverted my edit 3:31 on this day 23/09/2015 without discussion. The last information I added was referenced and thus can't be called poorly sourced. I have restored it to that version , and subsequent revert be discussed in the talk page of the article. Thank you JBDVIJASDVI (talk) 05:52, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Doesn't work that way and you are beyond 3RR and will be reported. Ravensfire (talk) 06:04, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Who is the sockmaster?

Hi Ravensfire. I noticed that you indicated on this user's talk page that they were a sock of a de facto banned user. Who is the sock master? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

It's TekkenJinKazama. You'll see on his talk page I call him Jin and he's admitted it. he's gotten better (mostly) and he'll just create a new sock so as long as he behaves I just watch him and try to correct as needed. Ravensfire (talk) 01:08, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Related to this, I've taken it to ANI to try to find out why no action has been taken to block this user. Please feel free to chip in. samtar ^(msg) 15:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Appreciate it - I've replied there. Ravensfire (talk) 15:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm noticing some questionable behavior recently like the unexplained removal of a maintenance template along with some pissy edit summaries like enough. some r jealous of G.A nomination plus shame to face d music and Please dont add shit tags or mispellings. The editors who do this sort of thing, especially the hostility nonsense, typically do not last very long. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb:Yup. I've left him notes before about the edit summaries but there's never a response. They've started to do some GA reviews which makes me nervous. My big worry is the lack of response when other comment on their talk page. Ravensfire (talk) 16:20, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I think this User:Yatan-verma is the sock of Jin. Jimmy Aneja (talk) 17:32, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Singh is Bliing deletion

Wassup? Wanted to tell you that can a page (which has enough relevant sources) kept for deletion? Ahhmm well, Singh Is Bliing is one. Same happened to Karanvir Bohra when it was nominated for deletion despite a relevant coverages. Well i'm happy to be a part of Wikipedia but not like this way! Derevation^{Give Me Five} 14:02, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Derevation:Yup, saw that. It was started too early, but even if it's deleted not, it will be undeleted at some point. Question for you - did you read teh Body swap article on what that term means before you started adding that category to films where it doesn't belong? And are you going to go back through and remove it from those articles? Ravensfire (talk) 14:24, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

North Bay Revisions

Good morning. This message was meant for another contributor, who happened to mention your user name. That said, I fully accept I should have paid better attention, no excuse. I have deleted the message, simply because it doesn't pertain to you.

22WHERO (talk) 15:43, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Jatiya Rakkhi Bahini source links

Thanks for letting me know about the issue of reliable sources. Can you please help me out by mentioning those sources that I have provided but not meets the guidelines of Wikipedia. I have already removed some personal blog links. If you give me some time I will replace the remaining unreliable sources soon.

Mudar Zahran - sent to BLP noticeboard.

I just sent the Mudar Zahran problem from WP:COIN to the BLP noticeboard. This is more of a BLP problem than a COI problem; this is a defamation issue, not a promotion issue, and in a touchy area. It looks like you also got the anon blocked, which quiets things down until the BLP people can get to the problem. John Nagle (talk) 19:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Nagle:, Good call on sending it to BLP. There's a fair amount of unsourced stuff in there and I'm leery about the Mossad claim. It's sourced, but the phrasing stinks and I can't verify sources in Arabic. I probably should have pulled out a hatchet on the article, not just some minor trimming and arranging. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 19:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: "intense pressure" is mentioned in source, and here's a source for the "..which he did later on" [7]. --Makeandtoss (talk) 22:30, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss:That's great if there's a source, but that needs to be in the article. The sourcing in that article is, frankly, not that good. Most of the early biography section is unsourced completely. Given the subject lives in England, I'm surprised there aren't any English sources for some of the claims. Given that I know nothing about the Arabic sources, there's a great deal of WP:AGF that these are high-quality, reputable sources. This is an extraordinary claim which needs really, really good sources. Some google searches aren't finding much of this which is a bit surprising. Ravensfire (talk) 22:41, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Well its not that extraordinary, here's from a purely personal point of view. The lies and propaganda he posts has gained himself wide hatred, even from his father. Here are some more sources [8], [9]--Makeandtoss (talk) 16:06, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments from a spammer

i did not promote jobsrecruit.in in my contribution. Many people here believe that this is the trustworthy source. So reinstate my contributions.Please consider my request. Nothing is promotional there. For CEO page, that is the official CEO page where students are directed to get their information. All my information are from a detailed research.

Please undo the corrections you made. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnandJesus (talk • contribs)

@AnandJesus:, Hmmm,you're spamming a website that shockingly your user name matches the person behind the website. So it's spam, with a massive wp:coi that you seem to think we won't spot. So to your request, I think not. Spam for unreliable websites such as yours will be removed on sight. Ravensfire (talk) 02:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The user Yimingbao

Hello. I'm Yimingguo, brother of Yimingbao. Did you vandalise the page User:Yimingbao? Yimingguo (talk) 21:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah - vague memories of that. There was a user who was blindly adding messages to random user pages. He was blocked and all of his edits reverted. If you look, Yimingbao's user page did not exist before the vandal created it to add his message. So cleanup from a vandal. Ravensfire talk) 21:39, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Where's your user page?!

Hello Ravensfire again. I noticed your chat page is your user page, but where is your user page? Yimingguo (talk) 21:01, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It is a redirect to the talk page. GAB^Hello! 21:04, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I asked Ravensfire not you GAB. User:Yimingguo^(talk) 21:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, but you should have listened to him as he's completely correct. Ravensfire (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Need your feedback re: possible sock

Hi R, I'm hoping to get your feedback on this guy. He strikes me as a possible sock of CosmicEmperor, but at Airlift (film) I'm seeing other characters like "MahnOfSteel" (a TekkenJinKazama) sock, but I'm also seeing a suspected Himesh Kuttiyal sock "RAKESHmanu". There's something about D'SuperHero's edits that's tripping my suspicion filter. Here are some comparisons: [10]. If you have any thoughts I'd like to hear 'em, but if not, no worries. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I originally thought it was a TJK sock and opened an SPI here on them. The CU results came back as unconnected though. And even with the behavior similarities, I'm not 100% convinced. I know that it IS a sock though - a truly new account is NOT that good at Wikipedia markup, sourcing and jargon right from the start. Something's not right, but you can't open an SPI saying "they're a sock of someone, I just don't know who!". The GA review D'SuperHero did seemed a touch cursory at first, but I think it was somewhat decent at the end. They did the same thing other TJK socks did by nominating an article for GA and THEN doing the revisions to bring the article up to GA status. But they have done solid edits. Honestly not sure on this one - I'm 99.9% sure it's a sock, but not as sure about who is the master. Ravensfire (talk) 21:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Gah! Looks like we're on the same page. If you think of anything, please keep me posted. I'm also getting bad vibes from Kulfikaju, whose first edits in Nov 2015 are at Qubool Hai an article with quite a few blocked editors. And WillShowU who appears to be a box office gross warrior with an account created in November. Not sure that he's a sock of anyone, since one of his first few edits was to yell at Cluebot, but the constant box updates give me pause. They sort of remind me of Aslishiva, who was recently indeffed, only Will seems more vocal. If I may make an unsolicited suggestion, I've found importScript('User:NuclearWarfare/Mark-blocked script.js'); to be a very valuable tool in spotting blocked users around the project. If you wanted to try it out, you'd have to add it to to your common.js file. When you look at an article's edit history, all of the blocked users will be stricken out, which makes it much easier to spot possible sockmasters and other disruptive accounts. Just a thought. Take care! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)