User talk:5rtfgvb

Welcome!

Hello, 5rtfgvb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Pokkiri has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Dl2000 (talk) 21:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Ghilli seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Diffs: [1][2] Subjective adjectives like "huge", "chartbuster" and "blockbuster", etc don't belong in articles. We don't report one site's opinion as an incontrovertible fact. If someone "declared" the film "a giant piece of crap", would you think that was appropriate for inclusion? Same thing. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Ghilli. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Ghilli, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

POV fluff - final warning

If you continue to add content like this to articles, you are going to quickly find your account blocked. Wikipedia is not a forum for promotional, POV fluff or your unsourced analyses, and subjective adjectives like "blockbuster", "super hit" etc. are meaningless from an academic perspective. Consider this your final warning. Additionally, please stop marking edits as minor if they do not meet WP:MINOR. Minor edits include fixing typographical errors, adding punctuation, wikilinks, and similar cosmetic changes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your edit on my talk page here, I think it's best to keep the discussion in one place, since you are more likely to benefit from it than I am. You are not stating any fact that is worth repeating in an encyclopedia. "Blockbuster" is a meaningless adjective. It's like calling something "pretty" or "ugly". Neither of these are facts, they're subjective opinions. Presenting these opinions as incontrovertible facts is dishonest and serves no academic purpose. You are clearly missing this point, which is unfortunate since it will quickly result in your editing privileges being revoked. I strongly advise you to read WP:NPOV and quickly figure out why the content you are adding is inappropriate. Your suggestion that I "like tollywood" is baseless and way off topic. What I am talking about are longstanding Wikipedia guidelines, not personal preference. As I have noted before, if a newspaper declared a film "a steaming pile of crap", would you think that was appropriate for inclusion in an encyclopedia? There's no difference. We don't "declare" films with subjective labels. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from WP MANIKHANTA

please stop Vandalising article Prabhas other wise you may be blocked from further editing. With cheers WP MANIKHANTA ^Talk 02:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: note

Re: your anger-filled notes here, when you stop adding inappropriate content that contravenes established community guidelines, then you'll be left alone. How you are treated is entirely up to you. Your argument, "there are tons of more articles where 'Blockbuster' and 'Super hit' are used" is grossly insufficient. Just because there's litter in the street doesn't mean you are at liberty to add more litter to the street. Since you've now devolved to name-calling, you are now advised that personal attacks will not be tolerated. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Your recent personal attacks directed other editors are not acceptable. In view of your disruptive editing and continued refusal to abide by editorial policies and guidelines, now compounded by said personal attacks, I have blocked your account as it does not appear you have an interest in working in a collaborative environment. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well it appears that another administrator blocked you for disruptive editing, so clearly I was not the only person to object to your behavior. Note that indefinite blocks are not infinite. You may request an unblock by filling out an unblock request {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that in order to be unblocked, you will have to convince the unblocking administrator that you understand why you were blocked, and you'll need to convince them that you won't continue the disruptive behavior in the future. Please also note that you personally are not welcome to edit Wikipedia while blocked. Any edit that can be attributed to you may be reverted by any editor on sight, with no regard for whether or not the contribution is useful. See WP:REVERTBAN. You are also not permitted to create a new account, as this would constitute sockpuppetry, which is a violation of Wikipedia policy. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yamaguchi blocked me because it I did not agree with you. So I don't know who he is and I hope you have a good day blocking users and ruining Wikipedia. Is being a jerk really a job!? By the way I created another account through a different IP address so "Catch me if you can".5rtfgvb (talk) 23:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]