User talk:Harihara19091965
February 2019
[edit]
Hello, I'm Wiki KuthiVaiyans. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Viswasam, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 08:20, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi kuthadi kuthiyans . I have posted a valid reliable source for Viswasam collections, You seem to reduce collections for Viswasam , I have written what majority websites say as collection for Viswasam . Thank you
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Viswasam. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 09:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Dear brother , firstly I want to say that the collections which you have updated is a mistake . When majority of Reputed sources say #Viswasam crossed 180 crores long ago , 170 crores seems like you are giving discount . Secondly , i m editing based on information from National reputed medias like India today, If u want area wise break up for #Viswasam also , I am ready to provide you. KINDLY dont make any changes here after . I am editing it only based on authentic sources . Ib times is not a authentic box office source , it only updates news which other trackers say , moreover it has not revealed exact Viswasam collection as of now.
Once again thank you .
- As I said before in the talk page, IB times figure is the recent one and IB times is considered reliable like any other mainstream media and the source you are providing is just a prediction, So stop making changes until you have a recent reliable source for your claim. Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 09:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Viswasam. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 10:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Ib times is not a reliable source , Souces like india today have said #Viswasam grossed 180 crores brother , but you dont seem to look at that .Moreover , Ib times hasnt exactly revealed collection of Viswasam . Its a prediction by Reputed India today , if anything is incorrect , I will make a change .Thank You.
Dear brother , You have to look at what majoriy reputed sources say. Ib times hasnt even revealed exact collection , ib times is a website which just shares reports of other websites/trackers , I am astonished that you are'nt aware of this . In case , if reputed medias update diffrent collection , I will be first one to change this collection , until then Kindly dont edit this . Thank You .
- Read WP:RS, recent source should be used and IB times is reliable as India today and actually In this matter India today is one who is just circular reporting a tracker's tweet like most source. Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 10:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 10:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
NOT AT ALL FAIR BROTHER . It seems like you want to despirately reduce #Viswasam collections.
IB TIMES clearly mentioned that according to trackers- he himself gets figures from trackers only , that it has crossed 170 crores . Ib times itself is not a box office website . I am only posting what India today has written , I DONT find anything wrong in that . IF any reputed website further changes , then i will edit the collection . Until then , dont change this brother . Thank you.
I have majority reputed websites in my side to prove my claim , My friend is too a extended confirmed user , If you keep wantedely reducing Viswasam collections . I will too keep posting correct figures , I have proofs of reputed websites also . THANK YOU BROTHER WHY WAS I BLOCKED ? I Posted what majority reputed medias said about VISWASAM, i have proof also for that . I kindly request to be unblocked , this is not at all fair . Kindly unblock me , i will not take this lightly . THANK YOU .
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. User:Ymblanter (talk) 11:56, 10 February 2019 (UTC)WHY WAS I BLOCKED ? I Posted what majority reputed medias said about VISWASAM, i have proof also for that . I kindly request to be unblocked , this is not at all fair . Kindly unblock me , i will not take this lightly . THANK YOU .
- You were blocked because you overstepped three reverts within 24h, see WP:3RR. If you want to be unblocked you need to post an unblock request as detailed in the template above.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:26, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Harihara19091965 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I didnt revert 3 times brother . I posted Viswasam collections based on majority reputed sources like India today , Indian express, Bollywood life and many more like that. But My edit was repeatedly changed just because of unconventional source from IB TIMES where even collection was'nt clearly mentioned . So , I kindly request You to unblock me now . Thank you . Harihara19091965 (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Decline reason:
By my count you reverted 8 times, well over the 3RR line. As you don't seem to understand why you were blocked, I am declining this request. To be unblocked early, you will need to indicate that you understand WP:3RR and describe the proper way to resolve a content dispute with another editor. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
{{unblock | reason=Brother kindly understand . I reverted because another user constantly kept changing my edited collection despite of me posting with authentic reputed source to support my claim . I m extremely sorry for this . Kindly unblock me and give me a chance to prove my claim .Another user without any supportive claim kept on changing my edited collection brother . Kindly be fair . [[User:Harihara19091965|Harihara19091965]] ([[User talk:Harihara19091965#top|talk]]) 12:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)}}
- I've properly formatted your request, your explanation should replace the "your reason here" text in the block notice. Someone else will review this- but it doesn't matter why you were reverting. Everyone in an edit war thinks they are correct, that is not a defense. You will need to do as I asked above. 331dot (talk) 12:21, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Harihara19091965 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Thank you brother . Its another user who repeatedly kept changing my edited collection without any supportive claim on his side . I m sorry for this because I was forced me to revert despite of me providing strong authentic sources to support my claim. Kindly unblock me and give me a chance to prove my claim brother . Once again , Thank you .
Decline reason:
This is a case of WP:IDHT. You engaged in an edit war. At the moment, you are strongly indicating you would continue editing in the same way if unblocked. That's grounds for extending your block indefinitely, not for lifting your block. If you continue editing like this once your block expires, that is exactly what will happen. And in the future, one open unblock request at a time. You had two. Yamla (talk) 13:21, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Harihara19091965 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
reason: In what way is this fair brother ? I only updated What majority of reputed sources tell about #Viswasam collections with valid proof too , If my claim is wrong - I can be blocked - I agree with it . But there's no warning / block for another use who kept on changing my edit without any solid proof on his side ?? I REALLY dont understand how this works then ?? Not fair at all
Decline reason:
You have been directed to the edit-warring policy multiple times, above, yet it still appears that you either have not read it or do not understand it. Based on the content of your unblock appeals I am fairly convinced that your problematic behaviour will continue once your block expires, and to that end I have extend the block to indefinite. You will not be able to edit here again until you post an unblock appeal that shows you have understood what edit-warring is, why it is problematic, and how to avoid it in future. Yunshui 雲水 09:23, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
To the next reviewing admin, please consider extending the block. --Yamla (talk) 21:49, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Harihara19091965 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Ok brother , NOW I understood all the edit warring policies , i completely read all the policies now from wikipedia page . I will strictly follow the existing rules here on , kindly unblock me now brother . Thank you . EXTREMELY SORRY FOR MY MISTAKE .
Decline reason:
User is unresponsive. Yamla (talk) 12:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
"You will not be able to edit here again until you post an unblock appeal that shows you have understood what edit-warring is, why it is problematic, and how to avoid it in future." Your unblock request doesn't address these points. Explain edit-warring in your own words, explain why your edits were a problem, and tell us exactly how you'd avoid it in the future. At this point, you probably only get one more chance before losing access to this talk page, so think carefully. --Yamla (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)