Please read this box first!
Welcome to my talk page! Questions, information, warnings? Say it here! Please post new topics at the bottom of this page, please sign your topic by placing ~~~~ (four tildes) at the very end, and please remember, assume good faith!You can click here to start a new topic.
Welcome!
Hello! I noticed your contributions to Chennupati Jagadish and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).
@Neveselbert:, the guidance in the {{Marriage}} template ("If the marriage ended because of the death of the article's subject, do not provide a date.") appears to contradict the guidance in the {{infobox person}} template, which says "For deceased persons still married at time of death, close the date range with death year" (see Template:Infobox person/doc § Parameters). Or am I misreading that?
No, you're not misreading that, you're right that the advice does appear to be contradictory, and should be amended/clarified. I'd say a discussion on the matter at Template talk:Infobox person, which is watched by more people, would be in order (with a note on Template talk:Marriage notifying watchers about said discussion). In the meantime, please avoid adding these death dates until this matter has been resolved. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk·contribs·email) 17:11, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Materialscientist promptly (within a minute or two) reverted their revert of my edit. There was nothing disruptive about my edit. I reverted vandalism (editors twice overwrote a disambiguation page with new content). Too bad, though, that Materialscientist did not revert their uw on this talk page. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 08:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Neelofa, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Fuzheado | Talk07:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fuzheado, I gave a reason ("remove names from infobox of non-notable persons") and the reason is valid. See the documentation for {{infobox person}} which says: |parents= "Names of parents; include only if they are independently notable or particularly relevant. " and |relatives= "Names of siblings or other relatives; include only if independently notable and particularly relevant." See also WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE and WP:BLPNAME. Also the addition is completely unsourced to independent reliable sources and so has not been verified. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 08:12, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for your message, and also the information s regarding the infobox's i added, it is very much appreciated, i was wondering if you can help me with and article for Vincent Ball and add relevant military information, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.43.249.174 (talk) 09:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, the use of a reference to twitter is within WP:PG:
Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
it does not involve claims about third parties;
it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
the article is not based primarily on such sources.
The information in the tweet helps to understand the birth day and year of de Lancie, which is not self-serving nor an exceptional claim, does not involve claims about third parties, is directly related to de Lancie, there is no reasonable doubt to its authenticity, and the article is not based primarily on this tweet or other similar social media. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 03:44, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Birthday
Hi, I saw you removed the birthday from the page for Kerry Butler due to IMdb not being a reliable source. What would be a reliable source for that as that seems to be a strange reason to remove it. The date removed is in fact Kerry Butler’s birthday.
Hi 209.171.88.82. WP:DOB gives some guidance on sourcing personal information like date of birth. Also read through Wikipedia:Reliable sources to learn more about what is and is not a reliable source. Some sites that are generally considered unreliable can be found at WP:RSP (it is not an exhaustive list). Sometimes the subject of an article will publish their DOB on their own website or they will reveal their birthdate in an interview published from a reliable source (note, "fan" sites" are not generally reliable). Be careful about citing social media as a source for information (see WP:SOCIALMEDIA). You also have be careful of sites that are copies of information that comes from unreliable sources (like IMDb and Wikpiedia itself (see WP:MIRROR). In some cases, primary sources can be used (see WP:PRIMARY). I know this can be frustrating when a person "knows" something is true, but Wikipedia only cares about what can be verified by reliable sources (generally independent secondary sources) and no editor (you, me or anyone else) is considered a reliable source. Good luck. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 14:08, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Taft family. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Your edit here to Taft family was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.nndb.com/people/124/000054959/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 14:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply] If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.
For the record, I did not add the nndb link to Taft family. The link was already in the article. I merely used Refill2 to fill out all of the bare urls, of which there were 33, only one of which was the nndb link. I've gone ahead and removed the nndb link (along with the unreliable findagrave links), but this is not a case of me spamming. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 18:48, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (108.56.139.120) is used to identify you instead.
In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page.
Dean Bandinelli
Hello User 108.56.139.120, I have noticed our back and forth regarding David Bandinel's information. I will admit that I am new to this Wikipedia "Academia", however I did provide two reliable sources relating to the birth/death dates, nationality and family of David Bandinel - the only references in the entire page may I add! Why did you conclude that these sources were unreliable? Furthermore, I am a direct descent of David Bandinel and have been researching him on and off for the last 10 years - so I am confident with the facts I am putting forth.
Regards, D-FRIEZ99 (talk) 23:17, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, may I ask why you keep deleting the Moonbyul pic? We, as fans, want to change it, with a new and better photo, is there any problem with the photo we put? Why do you keep deleting it? Yil3an7ayeteplzzbat (talk) 23:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CLCStudent, would you provide some more information on what you consider was vandalism at George Mantello? There were two errors from the previous editor's contribution [1] (missing equals signs for two infobox parameters), which I fixed [2]. In my second edit I cleaned up the infobox, including adding short description, removing fields that had values which are not in keeping with the MOS and the {{infobox person}} documentation. If I made a mistake or if you disagree with the edits I made, I am happy to discuss, but to say the edits are vandalism appears to me to be a stretch. Maybe this is just a content dispute or just a case of my having made a mistake in one of my edits. Appreciate your constructive feedback. Thanks. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 17:04, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I got your message, and I have something I would like too say. I didn't mean to intentionally be disrupted. Plus, on Marguerite Ray her IMDb bio referenced her burial and my reason for not using that per citation is because some may not take that as a reliable source on her. Had you given it a chance perhaps I could have found a more sincere citation. Also, I refused too be blocked by YOU, or anyone else for that matter, because I know my edits were done per innocence and good will! Finally, I can take a hint so with that said...
1) you're first message a week ago was enough!
2) NEVER contact me again and leave me be please!
3) I am OFFICIALLY retiring therefore after today there will be no more edits per my username because I can live without people like you constantly bothering me over diddly-squat.
4) Per the number 3 and 4, don't bother reciprocating too this for I don't care too hear from you or be bothered by your rudeness ever again.
That's all I have to say and I encourage you too not be a harasser with somebody else and, in addition, taking into consideration the current state of our world right not on top of the time of year we're in, you could have been a bit a little bit more pleasant towards me. Goodbye and good luck in improving on your human qualities since you proven today that you lack them.--Black BIC Ballpoint (talk) 12:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SalvadHistory of the Jews in Hungaryoran
What, honestly, you've never heard before of the SalvadHistory of the Jews in Hungaryoran?!!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (108.56.139.120) is used to identify you instead.
In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page.
Hi Cupper52, would you be specific about which parts of my edit you believe were not constructive or that you consider to be vandalism? Perhaps I made a mistake, in which case I would appreciate your help in identifying where that was so that I can learn and do better. Thanks. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, Cupper52, it was not tagged as vandalism. It was tagged as "possible vandalism". There's a difference between those. Before you revert a case of "possible vandalism" you need to review the specific edit and determine if there is any actual vandalism. If you can't identify the specific change that is vandalism, then you don't really have a case for reverting it. Is it possible that you made a mistake and pulled the trigger too soon on reverting a valid edit without really looking at the edit? I appreciate your good-faith helping to rid Wikipedia of vandalism, but I think you've made a mistake here. Mistake happen. I make them, too. I ask that you review and that if you cannot identify any specific change that is vandalism, that you revert your reversion of my edit. Thank you. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kemalcan, First, that was not a test edit by me. An editor (Yikes2004) added to the |associated_acts= list without discussing on the talk page as directed by the comment in the source which reads: "Please do not change this list without first discussing your proposal on the talk page. Do not include one-time collatorators." Here's Yikes2004's edit that added to the list without first discussing on the talk page. Second, I'd appreciate your not templating me for a good-faith edit that is not and was not contrary to any policy and that came with an explanation. You might disagree with my edit, but as long as I'm not violating policy that makes it a content dispute and not something worthy of templating me. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 10:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello thank you for your response, as it is clearly seen from your edit, you deleted "associated acts" without giving a specific reason. Next time, please support your deletion with sources and valid explanation. Thank you. --Kemalcan (talk) 12:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kemalcan, with respect, you need to look at my edit again, which was reverting an editor who added to the |associated_acts= parameter without discussing it first on the talk page. My edit only reverted a single addition to the parameter. It did not delete the |associated_acts= parameter. [3]There is clearly an explanation there in the edit summary. It reads "Please do not change the 'associated_acts' list without first discussing your proposal on the talk page. Do not include one-time collatorators." That explanation is just reciting, word-for-word, the direction given in the article for the |associated_acts= parameter. So, I ask you to restore my edit and leave a note here acknowledging your mistake in reverting my edit. There is no shame in acknowledging a mistake. I have made many mistakes myself and had to acknowledge them. Sometimes we jump the gun without adequately and carefully assessing the situation. Thank you. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't edit dance based Pages and people. Because I know the things and you don't know. I'm not requesting, I'm just warning you don't edit the page without knowing anything about him. FDMD04 (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
BrxBrx has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Ashwin Kumar Lakshmikanthan - In this Indian name, the name Lakshmikanthan is a patronymic, and the person should be referred to by the given name, Ashwin Kumar.
If you agree, I'm replacing his surname with his given name.
Hello, I'm XLinkBot. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Sucharita Tyagi have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Your edit here to Sucharita Tyagi was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/user/sucharitatyagi) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 10:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply] If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.
Hi, you are correct. I have reverted my edit and restored the correct version. I have struck the warning above. My apologies and happy editing! --Ashleyyoursmile!12:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For your clean up at Krithi Shetty and other WP:BLP articles. I think you should consider creating an account as it would allow using gadgets that aid you while you are editing. Keep up your good work! Ab207 (talk) 15:00, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be doing a lot of advanced editing. Why haven't you created a username? I understand it is not required, but I typically patrol for vandalism and often times anonymous users' intentions get misinterpreted as vandalism. No worries either way, just figured I'd ask. Thanks for the contributions! - PabloMartinez (talk) 02:13, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm impressed by the constant, steady high quality of your contributions. Thank you very much for your long-term committment. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
actually twitter is not an unreliable source to be honest because sam riegel's birth date information is not wrong. because it is a reliable source. If it were unreliable, it would be false information. but unfortunately this information seems correct. There is no wrong information in this. sam riegel's brandy is right and there is nothing wrong with that. Taliesin Jaffe information source effort is right, not wrong.
I'm not sure this information is false information.
It does not matter if the information is correct or not. It only matters if it can be verified by reliable sources. There is a lot of "correct" information that cannot be added to Wikipedia because it has not been documented by reliable sources. As Pongo has described on your talk page, the use of tweets in this manner is not an acceptable use as a source of the information. Tweets are not reliable except for some narrow exceptions which do not apply in this situation. 108.56.139.120 (talk) 20:53, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apologize
I'm so sorry for bothering you and for going too far.
Cine 2021 and 20222 leedohyun won twice in a row and its not added in his awards and achievement
It is not added in his awards and achievement while for some actors who were second place or even fifth place their award achievement js added in awards and nominations while lee do hyun won for 2 years consecutively as best new actor of the year by cine 21 and was featured in their magazine cover this year. Please add it. 212.175.35.12 (talk) 11:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
