Jump to content

User talk:IndianBio/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

Reference Errors on 8 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Cheek to Cheek

When you've done those couple of points I can pass it.  — ₳aron 17:12, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I just did a couple more, but don't know if I can personally fulfill the entire to-do list due to offline schedule. Thankfully, it's almost complete :). Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm starting now, sorry guys for procrastinating. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 07:03, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar for You!

The Good Article Barnstar
For your contributions to bring Cheek to Cheek to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work!  — ₳aron 11:22, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks a lottttt. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 11:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Pee Cee

can we add "Pee Cee" in her lead as she is widely regarded by this name. Now, she is evn more popular by this name as all the media and people call her that. What's your thought on this?—Prashant 11:14, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I think the lead should consist of any official/legal names only. I might be wrong but I thought I read that in WP:BIO policy. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 11:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Like ShahRukh Khan? It uses several popular names.—Prashant 12:08, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Don't Stop the Music (Rihanna song)/archive1

Hey Bio. Can you please check out the PR? I want to bring the article to FA, so I would like to see your comments how further to improve the prose. Thanks! — Tomíca(T2ME) 21:15, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Of course I will Tomica. One of my very favorites :) —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:07, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/86.131.166.245

I posted on his/her talk page that Musicnotes he/she added. But he/she probably ignored and reverted its revision. Can you add pages (marked as current) on your watchlist that preventing his/her repeatedly. 115.164.215.130 (talk) 15:58, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 15 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

"incorrect formatting"

What was the issue with this edit?—Kww(talk) 05:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

@Kww:, there was errors in the formatting I saw, I had reverted it and am working on resolving the errors. The sales were not being reflected and the chart peaks also in some of them. Give me sometime. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Kww I have resolved them and replaced the article with the {{singlechart}} and {{Certification Table Entry}} templates. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 08:39, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Discography help?

Hi there. I'm working on some discography articles, but have run into a brick wall and could use some guidance. You were recommended to me as someone who could possibly help. I've written out a bunch of stuff on an article talkpage, Talk:Shinhwa discography#Issues still to resolve and would love any feedback you could provide. I plan to continue working on other discographies in the future, and this would be immensely helpful. Thank you so much for any help! Shinyang-i (talk) 14:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Love Won't Wait

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Love Won't Wait you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cloudz679 -- Cloudz679 (talk) 21:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

In case you haven't watchlisted the review page, my initial findings are there. Thanks, C679 17:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cheek to Cheek (album)

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Like a Prayer

Hello IndianBio. I noticed that you're very active on the Madonna articles, I'm relatively new here; My name's Christian and, like you, am a Madonna Fan. I recently decided to begin working on my favorite Madonna album, which is "Like a Prayer", you can find my work here, I was wondering if you'd be interested in helping me expand it.

--Chrishm21 (talk) 22:08, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chrishm21, I'm actually not developing anything at the moment. So please continue developing it and I have pinged Bluesatellite who I remember wanted to notify him/her when Like a Prayer was to be developed. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:10, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Bluesatellite has also stated that Like a Prayer is his favorite Madonna album. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Great then, he/she can help Chrishm out. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:20, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Sure, I'll help everything I can. I'm just too moody to do an article alone, that's why so many pending works on my sanboxes :p Bluesatellite (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Please forgive the stalker comment: I'm not as huge a Madonna fan as some people on this thread, but I also think this is her best album and deserving of at least a GA status. I don't know what the view is in the US and elsewhere in the world, but in the UK the critics generally agree that this and Ray of Light are Madonna's two best albums. But more than that, it also marks a key transition from Madonna the pop artist of the 1980s to Madonna the adult musician, exploring more serious topics such as Catholicism and her failing marriage. As such, it should definitely be a prime candidate for improvement. I won't be back in the UK until the end of the year, but I can get hold of some back issues of UK music magazines (NME, Q, Melody Maker, etc.) from 1989 if you'd like them for the album reviews section, plus improve the citations for Rolling Stone... they're probably more noteworthy than the Yahoo! and Daily Vault reviews currently in the article. Richard3120 (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Love Won't Wait

The article Love Won't Wait you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Love Won't Wait for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cloudz679 -- Cloudz679 (talk) 19:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Madonna Article

A technical glitch occurred in one of my edits. Fixed it. Israell (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Bio. Long time... Thank you for your all help in my contributions. Cheers!, Chrishonduras (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

template:singlechart

I don't see any evidence that you are testing your changes to the singlechart template before putting them live. Please test, get it to work, and then add it to the actual template. Mistakes in that template can damage many articles, and every edit forces the Wikimedia software to regenerate every article that uses it. Live changes are both dangerous and expensive. Additionally, can you show me any discussion where Zobble has been agreed to be a reliable source? I didn't put it in singlechart originally because it doesn't appear to meet WP:RS.—Kww(talk) 05:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Kww: sorry I did not know about the test box, and apologize for it. Will surely remember it. As for Zobbel, I added it to the template {{singlechart}} based on its presence in {{album chart}}. I did not look for a reliability discussion. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:55, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Certification Table footnotes in Love the Way You Lie

Hi IndianBio,

Some time ago, you removed a footnote regarding BPI's inclusion of on-demand audio streaming below the Certification Table. However, you kept the one having to do with RIAA. If you don't mind, might I ask why? This is less me questioning your edit than it is my complete ignorance about how certifications work at all. I just wanted your explanation so that the edit would make sense to me. If there's something I'm missing here, do tell me please!

Thanks. The Wikipedian Penguin 20:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

@Wikipedian Penguin: first of all apologies for missing out your ping here completely. Now if you are referring to this edit, then if you notice, the {{Certification Table Bottom}} template used has a provision for making Streaming=true parameter, which will inturn give the dagger symbol. Hence manually adding the symbol for UK is not required anymore. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 11:19, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Tidal

So much love ^_^ — Tomíca(T2ME) 10:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Tomica, this is awesome! All of our favorite artists together. I just wish Taylor would have been there too. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 11:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
She was too busy celebrating with JT their iHeartRadio Awards :D. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Pretty sure she is going to join Tidal, the money they are taking per month seems a little expensive isn't it? —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 13:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I didn't see how much they take tbh. However, I really hate streaming services and I really think the charts should have not took streaming into counting positions, it's really blah. Especially for albums, which is more awful. — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Look at Nicki Minaj and Mark Ronson's albums, so high on the Billboard charts with so little sales. All because of streaming. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 13:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
That's my point. Flop albums receiving high positions. Non-sense. Or songs that stay on the top for 100ds of weeks just because of the streaming. An example is the stupid "Uptown Funk". I even wonder how that song is a hit, so annoying -_-. — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Seriously, beyond irritating that song is. I never like these random one-hit wonder songs, case in point, "Blurred Lines". —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 13:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Haha, weirdly i did like "Blurred Lines" at the beginning (when no one knew it), but later it became overrated. I really hope "Bitch Better Have My Money" replaces the stupid Funk. It's still #1 on iTunes, however, I am not sure how much airplay receives. — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
BBHMM would require high streaming and very very good, around 500K sales for it to beat UF. I don't think it can do it now, but maybe after 2/3 weeks. UF seems like it might pass 14 weeks also. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 17:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. Btw, I listened to Rebel Heart (Super Deluxe Edition) and I can say that the album is good, it's definitely better than MDNA. So sorry it flops :/. However, I really think the leaks affected it. Also the single underperform(ed). I really love "Ghosttown", I hope an iconic video is coming. — Tomíca(T2ME) 18:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Yeah I like the album, but not all of it. Lets be real, this is definitely a flopping album, and I love "Ghosttown" very much, but radios won't play it. Fuck them ageist a--holes. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 03:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, honestly, it has a lot of fluff, especially in the second portion of the album. I love the title track though, can't see the reason for her to include it on the deluxe and not on standard edition. And yes, I don't know what's the problem with the radios not playing her -_-. — Tomíca(T2ME) 14:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Input at GA reassessments

Hey IndianBio! Since you're into albums, can you provide some input about the GARs on Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Billion Dollar Babies/1 and Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Blues for the Red Sun/1? Thanks a bunch.--Retrohead (talk) 18:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure Retrohead, will get to it shortly. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 18:40, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stillhrithik

Hello IndianBio,

I noticed your comments at the SPI for Stillhrithik and given your username, I assume you are mostly involved in editing Indian-related topics. So I thought you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Richa101091, this is currently the 3rd SPI I've opened against Richa101091, and one of the socks I listed on this most recent SPI was User:1Majd the same editor accused of being a sock of Stillhrithik. More likely both users are socks of Richa10191. I've been tracking this for a little while and it seems there is a HUGE meat/sock farm for these Indian-related film topics. I'm pretty sure this is paid editing by a large group to promote Hrithik, Fox Star Studios and related film companies. Take a look at the contribs of the users I listed as socks and they are all purely edits to these types of articles. Almost all of them have redlinks for their usernames. I believe they create hundreds of logins to Wikipedia, edit one or two articles a few times and then login as a new user to continue editing. Often old usernames that haven't been blocked will login after several months and do a few more edits again. Unfortunately the users I've listed at this SPI seem to only be the tip of the iceberg, I'm afraid there are hundrends of articles that they have tainted with their paid editing. I hope I'm wrong and just seeing ghosts, but I doubt it and am fairly certain Checkuser will reveal some startling results. -War wizard90 (talk) 06:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

No you are not wrong. This is definitely paid editing to promote Hrithik Roshan. Just the editing on Paani was enough proof. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:45, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Sargun Mehta/archive1

It's a request you to please add your comment here. Hetika (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. Politely declining. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 16:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay. :) Hetika (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Your constant undoing of certifiable facts

It seems that you just cannot allow any corrections on your many contributions to Wikipedia that what was originally written by yourself. You only consider European release dates for Madonna albums, and when I point out a mistake , such as the official name of Madonna's Blond Ambition tour, you immediately revert it and call my reference self-research. I will certainly obtain certifiable sources to prove what is official and what is not.

Boytoy77 (talk) 21:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)Boytoy77Boytoy77 (talk) 21:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I did not write any content on the Blond Ambition World Tour and neither am I interested in it. What I'm not going to allow is original research such as naming the tour and appending it with 90 without providing sources, which is your onus, not mine. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 16:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Reverts Why are you reverting List of most viewed YouTube videos? It seems like this is a pattern of behavior. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: are you trying the WP:IDHT with me? I said constantly (not only me, another user), that you update all the views of the videos listed there, else don't. This is not a fancruft list that would apply to fans coming and updating the views of their faves, which you strongly seem to be doing. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:44, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
No What I'm saying is that you can't take out cited information from the encyclopedia because another part of an article is incomplete. The solution isn't to remove cited information to make it less accurate: it's to include more accurate information. Also, the version to which you are reverting wasn't all updated at the same time, so your point really makes no sense: you're reverting to an even less accurate version. How is that preferable? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:49, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Lol, do you even know that YouTube views change every 1 hour of the day? So you mean to say that I should be updating the views every hour? Tough luck pal, I have a life. And the views are changed wholly after every 5 days. Wait for it, simple as that. Its not about being "current" ya know. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
And FFS, don't accuse me of being a reverter just because of some fanboy wishing to change a name of their own whim above accuses me of doing so. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:53, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Fan If you don't care, then don't revert... That's the easiest way to let it be and not care. And I'm not a fan of Taylor Swift or Psy (I've never even heard the Psy song). I didn't accuse you of being a "reverter" but you did revert the page several times. You accuse me of being a fan of something but I'm not a fan of it. Except maybe accurate information. You're not answering the question or paying attention to my argument. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:25, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Neither are you, I'm telling you clearly, if you want to update, then update for all of them, else let them be as per the date they were last updated. Because if you update for two of the videos, and leave the rest, now that's incomplete per the date, nor does it tally with the data. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:28, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Questions What questions did you ask me that I ignored? The revision to which you reverted is even more inaccurate. How is that preferable? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Its not inaccurate, I explained to you, the views are as per the date they were updated. Nothing inaccurate about it. We update all the views periodically after 5–6 days and not just one video. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 02:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

About changing genres

Hi IndianBio,

The reason for which I changed genres in some Lady Gaga's articles is because I think there are some imprecisions despite the cited sources. About the Artpop song, for example, if you link the 14th reference you'll see it's written "full on tech ballad". This word dosen't make the song a real techno track. If you listen to the song it is obvious that it isn't of the techno genre but is more dance pop and synthpop oriented. There aren't accurate sources about the genre of Artpop but it's not necessary to be an experienced music critic to understand that it's not a techno track.

I also added the word "dance pop" for Poker Face and Love Game and "synthpop" for Paparazzi and Bad Romance because these genres are dominant in these songs and the sources that I noted are generic and someone was deleted. Besides the dance pop and synthpop genres in the respective articles were cited in the past years so I wonder why they are deleted.

In Born this way (album) article it's written in the text "The music of Born This Way stems from the synthpop and dance-pop oriented styles" but in the box on the right side it's only written "dance pop" as genre. I think it's necessary to revise it.

Sorry if I am too fussy and I hope I didn't cause problems. -Davean12 (talk) 18:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Davean12, it is great that you cared to explain them. Now Wikipedia goes by the policy of verifiability, which is when a source is present in the article through which it can verify the content. It does not go by our thoughts of a song's genre, which is considered original research and strictly forbidden here. So even if you may disagree with the said genres, if you can provide an updated source which lists the genre that you want it to be, we can add it, else not. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 16:35, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm not a music critic but in time I learnd to recognize the most well known genres, so I can notice when there's an imprecision. Besides, the recognition of a genre doesn't come from my thoughts but from a fact and my experience. The articles from which you draw the sources aren't always written by people who know the topic very well. It's not a problem if you don't cite the word "dance pop" for Poker Face or "synthpop" for Bad Romance but the genre of Artpop is clearly wrong. About Artpop the 14th source come from an article of Harper's Bazar, a fashion magazine, so they aren't very experienced about music. My advice is if there aren't articles that cite the genre of the song in an accurate way it's better not writing anything about that. -Davean12 (talk) 20:14, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
@Davean12: It does not matter whether you find the source correct or not on a topic as subjective as music sub-genre or genre. If you want to question the source in general for it's specific notability, please bring it up with it's supported projects. Do not just replace them with what you feel is correct, as that is against WP:OR and WP:SUBJECTIVE. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:21, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Andrzejbanas: It's obvious that you don't understand what I wrote. My corrections weren't subjective and I didn't invent anything. I'm not that kind of person. Firstly I didnt't change genres, I only added genres that are written in the text and cited in the sources already and I only modified the style of some phrases not the general meaning (this is about the Tick tock, Your love is my drug and Take it off articles). I changed genres when I noted divergence between the cited word in the text and the source. For the Warrior album article you cited the word indie pop. I checked the respective source and this word doesn't appear on that, but techno-pop appears instead, so I replaced them. I also put the source number 2 for the word electropop because in that one this word is cited. You can check if you don't believe me. Besides, you put the word pop rock for the song Blah blah blah but there wasn't a source about that and it didn't mentioned in the text. The word dance is cited both in the text and in the source instead. I don't agree about the subjective of music genres. They can be subjective for people not because they really are subjective but because of the little knowledge about recognizing music genres. I'm not doing WP:OR and WP:SUBJECTIVE because I checked all the sources before replacing genres. Davean12 (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Davean12, please take this discussion to the appropriate forum, which is WP:OR and WP:SUBJECTIVE. Not my talk page please. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

It is mostly a grammar issue

Do you have something against correct grammar? My revisions not only make your entry better; they make your entry grammatically correct. Leave it alone, please.Miro101 (talk) 08:16, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Miro101 you are continuously adding the dance as tango, which is not supported by any of the sources, and being a synopsis, should not require one, but we cannot add our own interpretation. You are being warned for adding original research and if you do not stop, you will be reported and get yourself blocked. Simple as that. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 16:37, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Template: Certification Table Entry

I think we have a problem with the one for Denmark. As of November 2014, they changed the shipments (ex. it was 15,000 for Gold, now it's 30,000), however, it still shows 15,000 even when you make the certyear=2015. Do you know how to fix this issue? — Tomíca(T2ME) 18:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Lemme take a look Tomica. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 07:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Update: Sorry no luck, those codes are more complex and I'm not well-versed in HTML. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 07:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
I posted on the talk page. Hopefully someone cares to fix it :). — Tomíca(T2ME) 16:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Hi, I'm sorry but I only edit the "4x Platinum" about Canada's certification on Taylor Swift's 1989 article, so... I don't know why I would be blocked (!?) WeNeverGoOutOfStyle (talk) 19:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Question

Hi, Bio!. I have one question. I can add like a source Allmusic, by some covers of Madonna songs, like this. Thanks, Chrishonduras (talk) 20:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello Chris, yes AllMusic is a reliable source so it can definitely be used. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 05:33, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 20 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
A long-overdue barnstar to one of the hard-working editors on Wikipedia. And, for your amazing work particularly on music articles. —Prashant 06:42, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, a real surprise to receive this barnstar from you Prashant. The feeling about your work on Priyanka's articles are same as well. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:50, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, you deserve more and more. I just sat down and thought I never gave any barnstar to anyone, so I gave these to all the brilliant users I know. Keep up the good work.—Prashant 06:57, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Only Girl (In the World)/archive2

Hello. I re-nominated "Only Girl (In the World)" for FAC 8 days ago, but I haven't had any comments. As you commented in the previous one, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind re-reading and seeing if I have address your comments from the previous nomination. Thanks.  — ₳aron 10:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Madonna (entertainer)#Infobox image

Please join this discussion if you are interested. –Chase (talk / contribs) 00:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Chasewc91, I did and thanks. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Infinity (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pop. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Cannot edit

This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.
IndianBio (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Janeedward". The reason given for Janeedward's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Deepas

Accept reason: IP allocation in your part of the world is just a nightmare... I've added IP block exemption to your account for the time being, so you should now be able to edit. Yunshui 雲水 08:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Not sure if I'm doing it correctly, can an administrator help me out? —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 06:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Yunshui, I don't know, should I stop using the machine from this IP then? —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 09:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
No, you're good - the IPBE will allow you to edit through autoblocks, so even if you're on a blocked IP, you can still do your thing. Yunshui 雲水 09:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

hello there

It's hard to not admire a person that has taken the time to revert EACH & every ONE of my edits on various pages (well, not each & every one of them, but darn close enough) since I joined this site about a year back. But recently, I've been doing a little thinking and I can't help but wonder that perhaps, this is your way of insinuating that maybe, just maybe... you're interested in something more? Garett lzs (talk) 08:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)garett_lzs

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Garett lzs (talk • contribs) 08:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IndianBio/Archive_18&oldid=1139318866"