Jump to content

Talk:Dill Mill Gayye

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

The character descriptions on this page were primarily duplicated from other sites, including this one and this one (both published in April 2008), this one (March 2008), this and this. As the article was established in August 2008, here, there can be little doubt that the material predates our use. If the contributors to this article choose to reestablish character descriptions, they must be written in original language in accordance with our copyright policy, unless permission can be officially verified. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please add KARAN WAHI-Dr. Siddhant Modi in cast —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.47.11 (talk) 04:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Protection

[edit]

For what reason this article is semi-protected? Max eueuieiieViwe 19:3hhhhhkkppllajshhuudyyyUser:Themaxviwe|Themaxviwe]] (talk • contribs) 19:36, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 70.26.104.202, 1 October 2010

[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} Episode No 700

70.26.104.202 (talk) 00:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 01:32, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

[edit]

The plot of this page is not only lengthy but has a lot of grammatical errors. I have to tried to fix some of them, to the best of my ability, but it still needs some work to make it more concise and clear. Rosh1294 (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dill Mill Gayye. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:23, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox image

[edit]

The current image, File:Dmg titlecard.jpg, keeps getting removed by IP address editors, and possibly the same one hopping around, without edit summaries to explain why the image is being removed. If this is not the current title card, then the current title card should be uploaded to replace this one instead of simply deleting this one. If the image keeps getting removed with edit summaries from IP addresses, the article could be protected against IP addresses for a time. Aspects (talk) 21:47, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dill Mill Gayye. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help

[edit]

<There are pending change reviewers who not letting anyone improve the article Dill Mill Gayye. If someone trying to add new informations in the article, they are removing it immediately calling it fake, violates edit etc. How can I edit that article Dill Mill Gayye when pending change reviews removing new and old edits from the article?> --Nada94064 (talk) 20:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, nobody has tried to add new information to the article for many months, but one person has used a large number of accounts to insert the same old text which violates several policies, over and over. That's why the article is protected. What is the new information you would like to add? --bonadea contributions talk 20:11, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

there are many people, not only one person who tried to add informations but you are not letting anyone edit the article. You removed "Airing History" and many more informations from the article which were oldest informations with sources go and check old revisions . people who trying to re-post those oldest informations you are calling them sock and removing their edits immediately. Well I am not talking about article protection but removing informations which you're doing pretty well.--Nada94064 (talk) 20:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nada94064: You removed "Airing History" and many more informations from the article which were oldest informations with sources go and check old revisions . people who trying to re-post those oldest informations you are calling them sock and removing their edits immediately. As I tried to explain you before ((Assuming you are 8.37.226.35 ) Wikipedia is not TV guide we don't add things like time slots etc plus we have a Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television which a user has to follow while editing a TV article. The information and sources which you are talking about are of no use as they violate various wikipedia policies. Please check MOS:TV and the welcome message I left on your talk page to learn about Wikipedia policies. Sid95Q (talk) 20:49, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know wikipedia has policies but I would like to ask a question why those policies are only for the article Dill Mill Gayye?? Please check the article Qubool Hai don't you think those policies should be use for this article too? Just like the article Qubool Hai many articles in english wikipedia are avaliable which are using for promotional but you all are doing nothing expect for sleep.--Nada94064 (talk) 21:19, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because of Disruptive editors like you very less editors are interested in editing Indian television related articles. Other stuff also exists on wikipedia but that cannot be used as a justification for adding disruptive material on other page. Please stop wasting your time in this disagreement and utilize this time in reading policies mentioned above so that you can really contribute something to this article if you interested. Sid95Q (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sid95Q the editors are not interested in editing india tv related articles because of wikipedian like you. As an exmple WP:BLP policies says you can use websites, blogs and tweets as sources of material of living person, unless written or published by the subject of the articles/self published blogs but when editors trying to edit BLP, someone coming and removing the edit saying the blogs, tweets are not acceptable as sources. Double standering also an another reason editors less interested in editing indian tv articles. "Main Cast" "Accidents" "Reception" and many more sections are acceptable in the articles Qubool Hai and other Indian TV Show articles, no one trying to remove those sections but when its come to Dill Mill Gayye you cannot add those sections there because those not meeting with Wikipedia policies. I just wondered why you can't use "Reception" sections when every Indian TV articles has and why editors not removing that sections from every TV shows articles when its not meeting with Wikipedia policies?--Nada94064 (talk) 05:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, you missed a word when you quoted BLP. WP:BLPSPS says "Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article." That does not mean that blogs or tweets etc. written by the subject are always okay as sources for a BLP, but the "never" should be clear enough. --bonadea contributions talk 06:06, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyphoidbomb: Please Help this user. Thanks. Sid95Q (talk) 05:57, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nada94064::Again your answer is in MOS:TV read it properly you will know what is the difference. So stop wasting our time We are not interested in gossip you are adding on this Page and please check WP:ELNO. Some of the information could be useful if you will read MOS:TV properly but you are more interested in comparing it with other articles which is of no use. One more thing dillmillgayye20.blogspot.com which you used as a reference is not a blog by established news organization which may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control so please read Wikipedia:BLPSPS properly. Sid95Q (talk) 06:19, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If that reference not accecptable than why you were not only removed it? And left a tag like [citiation need]? You didn't need to remove whole edit. How funny you are telling me about wikipedia policies but not doing your work properly you know what that reference is used to edit the BLP (Sukirti Kandpal). No pending change reviewers ever notice there's a selfpublished blog reference being used.--Nada94064 (talk) 07:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is just one example from your fancruft material. If something is wrong on other page that doesn't mean you can use it on other pages as well. I don't know when fanboys like you will stop this disruptive behavior. Sid95Q (talk) 07:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sid95Q Correction I'm not a boy but girl. If I need I can bring other articles issue on other pages too because policies or law should be equal for everyone. If my edits not acceptable because thats not meeting with policies than you have to remove those edits from other pages which are also not meeting with policies. All I can see after checked the history of the articles Dill Mill Gayye Bonadea and you were removed every new edits from here. An IP editor came and added a line in the section "Season 2 (2009-10)" but you were removed that one too. Is that one was also a violates edit? I'm really surprised to know that whoever trying to edit this articles everyones making violates edits.--Nada94064 (talk) 13:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nada94064: Fanboy is a pop culture term i was not specifying any gender over there and It looks like a case of Wikipedia:Meat puppetry or it is just one person who was earlier editing from 119.30.35.46 and 8.37.226.35 and when one IP was blocked that user created an account. Sid95Q (talk) 13:19, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thats bullshit My IP wasn't blocked and I created an account because the article Dill Mill Gayye sami protected thats I have no choice but create an account.--Nada94064 (talk) 13:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

that reference is used to edit the BLP (Sukirti Kandpal) Which reference? The dillmillgayye20.blogspot one? No, that is not used as a reference anywhere on Wikipedia, though it has been removed from various places over the past months. If you are talking about some other reference that violates WP:BLP or WP:RS, either let us know which one it is, or remove it yourself. Complaining vaguely that other volunteers don't keep on top of all Wikipedia's 5 million articles, when you are aware of a problem in specific articles without doing anything about it yourself, is not very constructive. Which also addresses your comment ...than you have to remove those edits from other pages which are also not meeting with policies - no, none of us "has" to do anything, because this is our hobby. Of course policies apply to all articles, but equally of course, that some articles violate policies is not a reason for editors to add non-compliant stuff to other articles. --bonadea contributions talk 14:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note I was pinged here and asked to help, but it's unclear what specific administrative service is needed. There are about a half dozen things being complained about. No, we don't have to fix every other problem in every other article before maintaining editorial standards here. That's like saying "If you don't want me to murder, you have to stop everybody else from murdering first." Not rational. As for the content that's being submitted here, assuming that's the basis of this dispute, a few thoughts: Including real-world content about how cast members were hired, or why they left the series, or why they were brought back after leaving, is actually encouraged by WP:TVCAST:
"Try to avoid using the section as a repository for further "in-universe" information that belongs in the plot summary; instead, focus on real-world information on the characters and actors (this could include, but is not limited to, casting of the actor or how the character was created and developed over the course of the series). The key is to provide real-world context to the character through production information, without simply re-iterating entertainment websites such as IMDb."
So if Anand had a dispute with the production house, and that caused her to quit, but then a drop in viewership forced the producers to beg her to return or whatever, that's reasonable to include if properly sourced and written in proper encyclopedic tone. The content about her leaving her fans "heartbroken" is marketing fluff that has no place in the encyclopedia. Same with the other content. It would need to be written properly and all of the relevant details included. It's unclear if Grover was fired, or if he quit. Etc. Now, where would it go? Well, it would belong in the cast list. One of the reasons why the community prefers prose to tables, is that tables like these, which are made to look so neat and clean, visually discourage the addition of any content that would disrupt the neat and clean look. So when we use tables, we're often preventing our readers from learning more about a series. (Incidentally, it looks like the cast section was originally converted to tabular format by a sock operator.) Lastly, I don't see why the details on the show's first-run broadcast was removed. Yeah, maybe we don't need a unique section for it, and yeah, it already exists in the lead, but maybe there's a more intuitive section for it in the body? And if not, couldn't the reference have been saved and moved to the lead? WP:NOTTVGUIDE exists because we don't want to turn articles into walls of insignificant data. But a show's first run date range is absolutely fine to include. If the objection was about the air times and change to the air times, then maybe that could have been discussed. Yeah, we don't want to go overboard with this info, and I personally don't like it when it looks like we're trying to drive viewers to the TV channel but there could be academic value, with proper context. "The show's ratings suffered in the first year because of its placement in the 9pm slot, but after the series was moved to 8pm, the show became the #1 series in that time slot." Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water, as the expression goes. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:36, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dill_Mill_Gayye&oldid=1201532007"