User talk:VeronicaJoseph5

Unconstructive changes

Hi there, the net result of these changes doesn't appear constructive to me. You've removed three templates, two of them that couldn't possibly be the subject of dispute, without any legitimate reason to do so. You've also incorrectly moved the section "Recurring" from a level 3 subheading of Cast to a level 2 heading. Thus, I have reverted your edits. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:06, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, VeronicaJoseph5. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Vinita Chatterjee, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:30, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SURNAME

Why do you keep changing Chatterjee to Vinita like here and here? Unless you're prepared to argue that Chatterjee is a patronym, we otherwise always use surnames. Your response would be appreciated. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:50, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Star Parivaar

Re: these, as previously noted, Star Parivaar is not a valid award, as it is an in-house, self-congratulatory award. Community consensus established at WT:ICTF says that we should not include this award. If you resubmit it, it will be considered disruptive. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on Content

Need an Important discussion. I am a reputed journalist in Calcutta and i have added all relevant sources. Vinita Chatterjee is a well known bengali actor for all bengali audience. Therefore we have added all the relevant sources n No Blogs... Sources are Newspapers like Times of India, Ebela, Patrika Group, US Based Media Adbhut Media, Hotstar (Channel by Star Tv) etc. Not a single source is a private blog these are all reputed bengali, Hindi n English news portals. As per Bengali culture We donot prefer using Last name without Mr or Miss it is Disrespectful in our culture so i Changed Chatterjee to VINITA. Any other issues please tell me i want to clear all misunderstandings and Differences and give her the respect that she deserves. God bless VeronicaJoseph5 (talk) 01:03, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:10, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely Unjust

It feels like u have taken personal grudge against me and maligning a celebrity profile. VeronicaJoseph5 (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is no personal grudge--your edits have been extraordinarily problematic. See my summary of issues below. I wrote it before I found out that you had been blocked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of problems

Hi again, let's please keep this discussion here on your talk page. Here is a general summary of the problems I'm seeing at Vinita Chatterjee:

POV editing: Much of the content is written (especially before I started removing stuff) in highly promotional language. "Blockbuster", "famous", "prestigious", "legendary" etc. If you are in fact a journalist, you should understand the necessity to keep content neutral. We're not here to drool over the subject.
Removal of legitimate maintenance templates: please stop removing maintenance templates as you've done here and elsewhere. These help other editors understand the general problems that exist at various articles. You shouldn't be removing them until the issues are fixed. The COI (conflict of interest) template isn't one you should remove anyway, since another editor has expressed a concern that you might have a conflict of interest. If you are a journalist, you should understand why this would be a problem.
Original research: In some cases you've attempted to describe things that Chatterjee thinks. Like in these changes where you claim that the subject had an interest in science and research. How do we know that? It's not supported by a reference. Here you describe Vinnie Diaries as her "dream project". How do you know this unless you're inside her head? Any sort of content like that must be sourced and presented in proper encyclopedic tone and with appropriate context. "For six years Chatterjee tried to get TV producers interested in her project Vinnie Diaries" or something like that.
This is a collaborative project. While I appreciate your enthusiasm to edit that article, if other editors (especially far more experienced ones such as myself) are indicating that there are problems with your edits, it might be wise to listen. Otherwise you keep restoring problematic content to the article and either it will wind up protected so that you cannot edit it, or you will wind up blocked.
If you have a conflict of interest, you should post edit requests on the talk page instead of editing the article directly.

If you wish to respond, please do so below so we can keep the discussion in one place. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent discussion

Be kind enough n unblock me we can have a valid discussion... Im new to Wikipedia i was hoping for a guidance but not change of facts. U tell me if u are solving problems of others which u know is wrong should u be blocked or blamed. Upon goodwill i want a healthy discussion VeronicaJoseph5 (talk) 02:36, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to have a constructive discussion with you here. You don't need to be unblocked for that. It's crucial that you understand basic Wikipedia rules first. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to discuss any concerns here for now. Unfortunately your editing on Vinita Chatterjee has been highly disruptive and I am not sanguine that unblocking you would be in the interests of the project. That said, please note that the block is not indefinite and will expire in 31 hours. However if you continue your pattern of disruptive editing and ignoring the appeals of your fellow editors to slow down and abide by our guidelines, you are likely to be re-blocked. Please take the next day and read WP:NPOV, WP:NOPROMO, WP:COI, and WP:CITE.Also please do not keep creating new discussion threads for what is most likely a single discussion. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:43, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not related not paid

Reason for blocking is sited Unsourced or Poorly sourced content... Show me at least one Unsourced or poorly sourced website link... I thought u varified them... Then how can wiki block an honest editor. Its against ethics. If u block me today saying related tomorrow 1000s of her fans will start editing the template as we honor her as our celebrity. We Bengali z take it upon ourselves wen our artists are disrespected. Hope u understand the situation n restore honor VeronicaJoseph5 (talk) 02:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please DO NOT threaten to disrupt the encyclopedia. Any future threats of that nature will result in your being blocked indefinitely. Also we have the means to restrict editing on the article so that only established members of the community could do so. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No unsourced content : challenging Ethics of Wikipedia

i had a detailed discussion with the editor. Its edited n verified. No unsourced content. All sources are major news websites of popular Channels in Hindi, Bengali, English in India... This allegation is false and its an unethical accusation. I can challenge Wikipedia to prove me wrong. I have been personally attacked as an honest editor. I don't have a paid connection nor am i related to the celebrity. We honor her as our favorite artist. Hope u look into the matter sincerely n unblock me VeronicaJoseph5 (talk) 02:44, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop creating new discussion topics. If you want to respond to a comment, click "edit", scroll underneath the comment you want to reply to, indent using an appropriate number of colons, add your comment, and then sign your post. Thank you for clearing up whether you are paid or related. As someone related to the article subject, you shouldn't be editing that article per basic conflict of interest ethics guidelines. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]