Talk:Mahabharat (2013 TV series)

table for syndication not needed

Per the manual of style, WP:MOSTABLE tables should only be used when there is an obvious benefit to having the data in rows and columns. There is no benefit, let alone an obvious benefit to porking the syndications into a table. besides being impossible for newbies to edit, it draws WP:UNDUE visual weight to an incredibly minor aspect of the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:13, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

you know what dumbo your this kind of word let me feel haunted entry of this syndicated versions viewer who comes from that page by your edits. there first thought will be that this show is not of there respective channel. there next jiffy will be that if it's true then as per date 16th stats episode count of that syndicated versions need to be more then there expected as they feel that they missed some episodes which they not so next time do not directly edit any article page and read the log info clearly where i stats that regarding same issue for which you says it's issue i am in friendly chat with him so next time have some time before stoping some one and let them go by there way Hkansagra (talk) 19:47, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

huh wah? if I understand you, outside of the WP:NPA violation, the things that you are advocating for are items that people might come to the official website or a fansite to find. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so if they are coming here to find those non encyclopedic things and dont find them, well, we dont care. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:00, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Quite impressive that you understood any of that, in my opinion. I've read through the replies to my comment below several times now, and there are some words and phrases I recognise, but overall, I'm afraid I do, in the end, have to question the WP:COMPETENCE of an English wikipedia editor who seems to expect their fellow editors to be able to parse that kind of incomprehensible "stream of consciousness" stuff. Begoon ^talk 02:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

You Know What buddy as your this message stats let me clear to you my full point on which you used word i am advocating some items.

1. at first forgot everything that where i am from and as you says i have some no control over english language. i will clear this thing in simple demand and you will understand my point that what i was doing and what you are wanting it to be. suppose it to be i am from india's maharashtra state where marathi is regional language and i does not knows marathi but as per i seen few hindi episodes i came here to know the info on bangla language episodes which i knows the language. now in 24th episode there is a song on start of episode and i want it to hear it in bangla. now as per your edit which you want to be stay with give me the broadcaster's name at first other details are the next part of it. so far so long your edit does not holds same name of broadcaster of it. do not you think it's wrong as per when i came here to find about same and i not founding it. forgot about even the other sites in this same message i was saying only of your this edit excluding all pages of site does not matter.
2. as you kept my edits reverting if i need some help so whom i pick you are reviewer of wikipedia and i have one of friend in admin rights so i started friendly chat with him that if this user wants this and that to keep and i want some info to be added which according to me is right so how i can handle them. so while i am in chat with them and drop you a short note that i am in chat with this person who is senior to you in rank so read message and in place of pointing your opinion there you poked me on my single word "dumbo". do not you think that same from your side is personal attack to me without even saying your point on other matter on first note which you posted on my talk page. Hkansagra (talk) 07:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. The edit-warring over this, and the WP:SPAM link has now become tedious, and tendentious. I suspect the editor concerned is having difficulty understanding, due to a very poor command of English. This, however, is no excuse for continued disruption of this article against consensus, and of user talkpages. Begoon ^talk 18:24, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

dear begoo buddy before saying any link a spam do proper research. if that site is maintained by the channel broadcaster how can you say that link a spam. where there it fits to stay there or not telling official broadcaster site a spam is not a good deal at all as good reviewer on any site. starpravah.com is official network broadcaster's website with there own code of conduct not a site kind wikipedia where any one can edit any data and say it as true. in wikipedia if you says that my this link is spam and i need to remove it then it stand may be true and i will happily back off by removing that link. Hkansagra (talk) 19:59, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

you what i what i feels is that not i am but you are very poor on fact knowledge where to give some info sometime you need to brake some rules by not considering it.

there is no matter to understand begoo buddy in you and me on your call of link a spam. what i was saying is in example in above point 1 same in marathi language if that same song's dub work is not finished may be this is possible that they have not added other data. star network is not just a site so may be it has some data only there which are copy paste of starplus site but that does not means you say it a spam. spam word is may be a small word for us but for that full company it becomes black mark on there image so next time becareful you and me all knows what spam is you can in place of mark it with wp:spam page just say a short note that it "unfits criteria to stand as external link". the show is not ended so may be by the time when they finish dubbing work we may see new data where which is not a spam at all. so in basic sometimes to be good you need to hide some strong word on some other company and not a person.Hkansagra (talk) 07:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

To you both

by the way i am working on website's creation(from back end where "A" and "a" has different meaning so there is no chance for no control over this kind perfection) for more then a decade(10 years) so i knows the same things very well that what spam is and what need to be up and not needs to be up. encyclopedic or non encyclopedic contents. so next time before making some newbies a framed that they have no control over any particular language be sure on what you says to whom.Hkansagra (talk) 07:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry - I can hardly follow a word of what you say. You simply cannot expect other users to spend huge amounts of time digging a meaning out of your disjointed posts. I think you should read and consider the suggestion(s) that have been made about whether you can successfully collaborate on the English wikipedia, if you have this much difficulty making yourself understood.
There are so many misconceptions in what you have written about the way this project works that it would be hard to know where to start pointing them out, and the inability to communicate means I can't justify investing the huge amount of time it would take, for likely little success. Sorry. Good luck. Begoon ^talk 09:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced edits

An unregistered user keeps adding unsourced edits again. The user keeps adding an actress Sristy Rode as actress of Goddess Radha. However not only the character of Goddess Radha not present in the tv series the editor keeps reinserting this edit. I would like to request the editor to not to insert unsourced edits and discuss about the article on talk page. Thank you. KahnJohn27 (talk) 18:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Dubbed versions

I think it is utterly unacceptable to cite "undue weight" with respect to dubbed versions of the show. There are other sources in relation to dubbed versions and such content would warrant being included in the article. Ncmvocalist (talk) 11:53, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

It is clearly UNDUE weight to pull out in separate subsections ALL UNSOURCED. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:16, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

It's a bit rich to suggest separate sub-headings for different dubbed-versions (languages) of the series = undue for an article which is not even at GA class. Of course, inserted content can be restructured (if needed) or expanded (with citations to such easily-locatable sources), especially if it takes such a short time to do so. Alternatively, tags like "Citation needed" or "unreferenced" should be inserted to allow a short time for the issue to be addressed - especially when the content does warrant inclusion in another form. The article is clearly in need of further improvement, including more content so the article is more comprehensive, and removing the numerous red links in the infobox. But that doesn't happen when edits are simply reverted and the proposed content isn't even raised by the user reverting content for consideration on the talk page.

There is no coverage with respect to other dubbed versions, when there should be (based on content I've seen in other sources). That said, I will leave it at that for now and note that I might come back at a later time to go through those here when I have time and if nobody else bothers to in the meantime. Ncmvocalist (talk) 13:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Historical vs Mythological

@Dharmarajsinhparmar16: I have reverted this edit of yours, because this article keeps seeing the back-and-forth changing of "mythological" to describe the series, to "historical", and there have been no discussions about this. You need to seek consensus for the change, but I have opened the discussion for you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:06, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Note also this discussion, which addresses the matter. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Rudraksh Jaiswal name

Rudhraksh Jaiswal copy it in the name of rudraksh Jaiswal in cast Ssood0712 (talk) 12:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Karna disruption

The article is subjected to disruption from sock farm promoting all-things Karna as described at the ANI report and SPI report. As such, the amount of content effected was unknown. Requesting users with a knowledge surrounding this article do the needful in verifying and updating it. Thanks! — DaxServer (t · c) 09:46, 6 February 2022 (UTC)...