User talk:Kishfan

September 2017

Hello, I'm Jeff G.. I noticed that you made a change to an article, 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. — Jeff G. ツ 02:58, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

You are Welcome

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so very much Fylindfotberserk.Kishfan (talk) 19:56, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mohit Chauhan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ghulam Ali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 11:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kishore Kumar reverts

Please see WP:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:Harassment, dont revert good faith edits and threaten/harass other users either. A section has been started on the talk page Talk:Kishore Kumar on the edit and it's reason. If you disagree with the edit come and discuss on the talk page politely otherwise I may have to report it to the admins before it turns into an edit war. 211.27.122.36 (talk) 05:29, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have a history of edit war and disruptive editing. Moreover, this ip you are using is suspected sock ip of blocked master sock User:Wolf Cola. So please stop your disruptive editing.Kishfan (talk) 07:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tamanna (actress), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nadaan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tamanna (actress), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you change my edit in K S Chithra page, yesterday she has won her eight filmfare award. For the god's sake please stop removing my edits. Harshasimha (talk) 03:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Listen Harshasimha, You were previously blocked due to sock puppetry and again you are adding un sourced material that is why I reverted your edits. The material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct. Please also read WP:NOTTRUTH and do not make disruptive edits.-Kishfan (talk) 15:05, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Hello, Kishfan. You have new messages at Creativity97's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re-placing the file

The file uploaded by me is in public domain whereas the coloured one is in fair use. Fair use images are only used when there is no other image (in public domain) to illustrate the subject. I hope the coloured file is not deleted by someone on the same pretext. Regards. Vrishchik (talk) 09:05, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on most of my recent edits

Why is everyone ganging up on me instead of taking a strong stand against vandalism? If you keep supporting vandals against good editors (you can confirm that by looking at my earlier edits), people like me will give up and leave Wikipedia forever, and people will no longer trust Wikipedia as an impartial source of information.

If you have an issue with one or more of my edits, talk to me about it instead of reverting every single change I've made in the past two weeks. I'm a reasonable person when it comes to discussion but not when people revert my change for no reason.

This is *MY* final warning: if WP editors keep treating me this way, I'm going to leave, and you will lose one of your sources of knowledge for Indian music and for physics. RagaBhakta (talk) 18:32, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Listen RagaBhakta, you are engaged in edit war and removing reliable sources from the articles. Please read WP:EDITWAR. You cannot just blatantly revert others' edits because you simply think they are not correct. If you continue like this, you will be facing a block soon. So calm down and remember "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar".-Kishfan (talk) 18:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other people are doing the same thing with my edits (reverting). You can't expect me to sit back and just let people walk all over me. RagaBhakta (talk) 03:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Listen RagaBhakta, you are not doing any good to Wikipedia by blatantly reverting edits of experienced editors including an admin. If you continue like this, you will be blocked soon. Remember editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct so my best advise is to calm down and read WP:NOTTRUTH.-Kishfan (talk) 08:22, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

Hi Kishfan. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have temporarily enabled rollback on your account until 2018-09-01. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback should never be used to edit war.
If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! TonyBallioni (talk) 02:51, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni, thank you.-Kishfan (talk) 05:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Rafi

Hi, I observed that RagaBhakta is back at attacking this article using various ips so i have just gotten the page semi-protected indefinitely... hope it saves some of our trouble -- Adamstraw99 (talk) 21:56, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adamstraw99, semi protection can only stop ip user from disruption but nevertheless you did the right thing. I will look into the edits of this master sock and they will be blocked if they continue with this.-Kishfan (talk) 08:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kishfan. You have new messages at Talk:Atal Bihari Vajpayee.
Message added 15:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DBig Xray 15:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Kishfan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Momina Mustehsan

Hi! In reply to your recent revert, see my talk page. Your edit summary doesn't clarify your complete edit. If you only had a problem with YouTube reference per WP:V that you linked, you could have updated another source instead that you think could be better. Does removal of sourced content matter? M. Billoo 14:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Billoo! The material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add their own views to articles simply because they believe them to be correct. Please read WP:NOTTRUTH. Poorly sourced and promotional statements must be removed as per W:POV but if you find some reference for the claim, please re-add the content. Regards.-Kishfan (talk) 22:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blood Brother (upcoming film) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Blood Brother (upcoming film). Since you had some involvement with the Blood Brother (upcoming film) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Kishfan (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

There is no named account associated with me and yesterday it was confirmed that the suspected IP is clearly a sock of Wolf Cola as confirmed by a clerk here[1]. Moreover I request to remove sock puppet investigations against my name. @Bbb23: it is also clear now that I have never indulged in sock puppetry so please do not block me on this at least (: Regards Kishfan (talk) 12:44, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I blocked you per Cabayi's request. If Cabayi were an administrator, they could have blocked you themself. I am unblocking you per Cabayi's request.Bbb23 (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi: I believe you misspoke when you said that "[103.255.6.97] is clearly a sock of Wolf Cola" as it contradicts your earlier finding. If so, please correct the SPI and comment here as well. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, 103.255.6.97 (talk · contribs)'s contributions for last July show a revert battle with Kishfan. Linked03 (talk · contribs) (= Unilexis (talk · contribs) ≈ Wolf Cola (talk · contribs)) now reports the IP as a sock of Kishan based on the edit history of Hridaynath Mangeshkar (Kishfan edits, Linked03 reverts, IP reverts, Linked03 reverts and reports Kishfan to SPI). So, either...

The DHCP fairies have taken an IP that opposed Kishfan last July reassigned it to Kishfan now; or
It's a static IP under the control of Wolf Cola that is being used to fabricate a case against Kishfan.

While clerking Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kishfan#09 March 2019 I did consider the possibility that Wolf Cola was somehow fabricating a case against Kishfan but, denied any CU confirmation between named user and IP, not wanting to go WP:BEANS, and the advice on the Wolf Cola SPI to go where the evidence led me, decided it was too outlandish to contemplate. It now looks quite credible.

I've amended the current & previous SPIs. Cabayi (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi: You have two seemingly conflicting sets of edits here, once in July 2018 and currently. I'm not sure how you resolve that conflict behaviorally, but your technical comments are not supportable unless Wolf Cola and Kishfan edit from the same location. If you look at the May 6, 2018, report in the Wolf Cola archive, Kishfan alleged that three IPs were being used by Wolf Cola. All three geolocate to Australia. The 103.255. series geolocates to Pakistan.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, so we have WC as 211.27.122.36 in Australia until 24 July 2018, and 103.255.6.97 in Pakistan battling Kishfan on 24 July. The history says 103.255.6.97 is not Kishfan, the disparity in location says it's not Wolf Cola. If the case for 103.255.6.97 being Kishfan fails, then the 9 March case for 103.255.7.41 and 103.255.6.84 being Kishfan looks unsustainable. The IPs are neither Kishfan nor Wolf Cola, but a third editor getting in the mix. Cabayi (talk) 00:31, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cabayi Here is a quote for you by Sigmund Freud, From error to error one discovers the entire truth. This sock master is after me for the last 10 months since I got them blocked every time and they are far more consistent than any one can imagine and I can assure you they will strike again. Bbb23 is quite hesitant to accept my unblock request on their part ): but nevertheless I am hopeful. Last but not the least I am Kishfan and not Kshan (: Regards.- Kishfan (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I should have learnt by now, everybody's name is spelt ctrl-c ctrl-v. Sorry. Cabayi (talk) 00:31, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cabayi Is there any possibility me getting unblocked? Because I only see stubbornness on the part of some who are too reluctant to accept their mistake and going WP:BEANS.-Kishfan (talk) 06:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kishfan (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Really surprised to be blocked again. Last time Bbb23 had to unblock me because there were retaliatory SPI investigations against me and confirmed by a clerk here[[2]] . I think it's again a mistake and case should me reviewed. I am fully aware of the consequences of sock puppetry and there is no iota of doubt about it. I am not blaming the admin but to err is human and it has been again and again proved in my case.Kishfan (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is a clear technical match between you and Umair Aj, and there is enough behavioral evidence to make it obvious that this is not an accident. For example: 1 and 2. This is hardly "poles apart". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:50, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This is based on checkuser evidence. You, Dectone, WaheedMF, and Umair Aj all seem to be using the same computer on the same IP range. It would help if you could explain this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:29, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NinjaRobotPirate, grateful you have shown concern. I have my personal laptop with only one legitimate account which I am using for more than one year. As far as IP range is concerned, previously I was mistakenly blocked by the same admin but then a clerk confirmed it was all a set up. It all started from Playback singer when different socks of master sock Wolfcola started attacking me (Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wolf Cola/Archive). After that I was proven not guilty (: but have again landed into same situation. I do not mind if you would initiate SPI against me again but I do not deserve this present block. Interestingly, last time the same IP range was editing in my favor apparently which caused the suspicion. And if you look into all this objectively (that I am sure you are doing), you will reach on to the same conclusion that I did not require to do all this. -Kishfan (talk) 09:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't really the same kind of situation. Checkuser blocks are based on data from the server logs, so it's impossible for this to be a setup. You have been on the same IP address as the other accounts listed above, and you are Technically indistinguishable. We know this much is true from the server logs, so you have to start from there in your explanation. If you know who those other accounts are, you should say so. That would be the quickest way to resolve this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay got it NinjaRobotPirate. But the other accounts who are using the same IP range are poles a part from my editing style and behavior and interestingly I hardly edited Waheed Murad (may be for once or twice) which is the bone of contention. Secondly there must me hundreds of editors using the same IPs so how could I comment on them? I can only give my assurance that I am not operating with any other account and this is my only account. If I try to be more reasonable then I must say that there is no content dispute going on between me and any other editor neither I am engaged in any sort of edit war so logically speaking there is even no remote need to operate with multiple accounts. Again I can assure you I am not the one who is associated with the accounts you mentioned whether they are using the same Ip range. I hope you understand the awkward situation I am into once more (: and the best I can do not to edit those pages which they normally edit.-Kishfan (talk) 12:44, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kishfan (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

NinjaRobotPirate, the 2 you have provided is actually supporting my argument. I already mentioned that it all started from Playback singer when I reverted Wolf Cola's obvious vandalism here [3] and here [4]. Umair Aj's edit I restored because Wolf Cola were continuously attacking and removing images of Indian and Pakistani singers and if I am not forgetting, that was the only edit of Umair Aj I reverted. So if you carefully analyse Wolf Cola's edit history, you will find me just reverting their obvious vandalism. I hope I have made my point and very humbly request again to unblock me.-Kishfan (talk) 14:19, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No meaningful chance this is a coincidence. Yamla (talk) 14:59, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Putting aside the two diffs presented by NRP, the intersection between you and the master account is rather significant. Also, the two accounts are also similar in that they purport to be counter-vandalism accounts. You're going to have to do two things to ever get unblocked. First, you're going to have to acknowledge your socking, which has been going on for many years, even before Kishfan and other accounts were created. Second, you're going to have to explain why you've repeatedly lied and why Wikipedia should ever trust you to edit in the future. All this will have to be done from the master account, not here as I am revoking Talk page access.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]