User talk:Varad27

May 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Kriti Sanon has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Kriti Sanon was changed by Varad27 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.880586 on 2014-05-16T17:01:19+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 17:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Heropanti, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. — Abhishek ^Talk 17:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Heropanti. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 09:35, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"verdict"s by box office india

Box office india simply applies arbitrary "verdicts" to films as can be seen in their annual summaries where films that have higher gross AND nett get a LOWER "verdict" - their "verdicts" are completely meaningless pieces of hoo ha that have no encyclopedic value. And "semi hit" - what the fuck is that?-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 09:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

please show me the certification granting BOI the "official" capacity to do anything, let alone name something a "semi hit". The are just website. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

you have added and readded multiple times, against multiple editors , with no policy or guidelines to support your position other than "other crappy articles exist too and so this one should be crappy as well. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BURDEN everything that is challenged MUST have a source. Everything else should have a source. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then omit these lines from 'Queen' film page....

The movie also emerged a major commercial success, becoming the highest-grossing Bollywood film of all-time in the month of March and the most profitable movie of 2014[6] and is currently the fourth-highestgrossing Bollywood film of 2014.

It has boi as source. Then ragini mms 2 has boi source...and i have a list of 57 more film pages. Lets re- edit them all..and bring a uniformity in wiki pages...

Main tera hero semi hit status.....doesnt even contain the verdict link....

The film released on 4 April 2014 to mixed reviews from critics and was declared Semi Hit by the box office. [5][6] It is a remake of the 2011 Telugu film Kandireega.[7][8]Varad27 (talk) 13:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)varad27[reply]

you dont seem to get it. That some other pages fail our requirements is not a reason that we should allow more pages to fail the requirements. so to actually improve the encyclopedia, you can provide sources for the unsourced claims, or remove them, but you cannot restore unsourced content without providing a source. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We, the editors, are not so helpless that we allow the other pages to carry the flaws. What were the previous editors doing all these days? While you are reverting back each and every word of my edits, why were you guys silent about other pages to which i am pointing? Varad27 (talk) 15:46, 17 May 2014 (UTC)varad27[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dhoom 3 and Gunday in conflict regarding BOI as reliable/unreliable source

Either BOI is reliable source for all the movie pages in the entire wiki...or else not for any. There are irregularities regarding unreliable sources...

Most of the paragraphs of more than 136 recent movie pages have references from koimoi, bollywoodhungama, boi... When i add reference from these sources, it is immediately reverted back by fraudulant editors... Why so?

Before adding/deleting any such ref.... please hold a talk meeting.....and bring a uniform code for ref... make it clear which sources are reliable....and keep it reliable for all movie pages....

WE can't be partial to one set of films and favor the other set.... we are not the paid agents of particular film makers.Varad27 (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2014 (UTC) varad27[reply]

Yaariyan page has yet been unattended...

The page carries a clear msg that it has the feel like an advertisement.... in the interest of a specific party.... And the wiki editors are WHERE?

Varad27, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Varad27! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But i am not new user... the other editors showing irregularities.... help them learn the unreliable/reliable sources meaning..Varad27 (talk) 16:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)varad27[reply]

2014 movie pages containing hit/flop status from reliable/unreliable BOI

Mr Joe B. Carvalho Karle Pyaar Karle Jai ho Youngistaan Dishkiyaoon

The above movie pages contain the hit/flop status in main section..ref by box office india.

The matter goes to gunday, dhoom 3 problem....whether boi is a reliable or an unreliable source? It can't be reliable for few of the films and unreliable for others..

for that matter, ref from koimoi, bollywoodhungama...etc too need to finalized as a reliable/unreliable source.

Like Gunday page, Jai ho carries the same 'Semi hit' status... and ref is BOI. Both, semi hit as well boi ref have been strongly objected to by editors in Gunday page. What happened with Jai ho?Varad27 (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2014 (UTC)varad27[reply]