User talk:Cyctolaugh

I will generally respond on this page inside the section which has been added unless you request otherwise. Please watch this page if you leave me a message, and remember to sign your post with ~~~~. Thanks!

Your userpage

Your userpage was blatantly copied from that of mine. Please refrain from doing so in the future. King Prithviraj II (talk) 19:31, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now you have added a userbox which states you are a new page reviewer, which you are not. Please stop adding such misleading userboxes. King Prithviraj II (talk) 16:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Villu (film) 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: Villu (film) was changed by Cyctolaugh (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.873607 on 2018-01-01T18:04:15+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:04, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Vijay 62. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Vijay 62 was changed by Cyctolaugh (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.992723 on 2018-01-03T15:12:07+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:12, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mirrors

Thanks for contributing to the article List of awards and nominations received by Vijay. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Kuru (talk) 14:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fine will add reliable sources to that article which i am able to find thank you Cyctolaugh (talk) 15:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@(talk) added a reliable source times of india to the citation tag placed by you. Cyctolaugh (talk) 15:12, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Kuru (talk) 15:18, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@(talk) can you add semi protection to that article so that only authorized users can edit. previously the article was vandalised by unauthorised users. all our work goes in vain so if you could help Cyctolaugh (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ajith Kumar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MRF (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) 09:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts?

Cyctolaugh, are you using multiple accounts? If so, you should probably declare which accounts you are using on your user page so that people know you're using multiple accounts legitimately. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:28, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No this is the only account i have. thank you Cyctolaugh (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unconstructive

These changes don't make sense. If you disagree with the gross being reported by a source, you need to raise that issue on the article's talk page, not arbitrarily decide which figure feels better to you. This sort of thing is considered POV editing, i.e. cherrypicking information to conform to our own biases. Another way to go would be to present the data in the form of a range, like ₹112–167 crore. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC_

my edit in this issue was not unconstructive i saw some user discussing about this issue in vivegam talk page and since its mentioned final gross and the date is also a new date in the international business times article i made the necessary changes and also supporting source catch news article mentioning the same that the film collected only 112 crore in its lifetime. Cyctolaugh (talk) 08:06, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is unconstructive, for the reasons I mentioned above. You don't get to decide what the lifetime gross is. If multiple reliable sources differ, we present the range, unless there's a compelling reason not to. You didn't discuss the changes, so you presented no compelling rationale. There are two facts about Indian film financials: 1) They are all guesses. 2) They are subject to manipulation from all "reliable" sources. Thus, nothing is 100% accurate, and thus, we keep an open mind about the figures. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:32, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vijay drooling

I strongly recommend you very quickly scale back the drooling over Vijay. We're not here to puff up his article with poorly sourced content and "moving goalposts" accomplishments. This is a neutral encyclopedia, not a promotional vehicle or a fan website. I also strongly advise you to familiarise yourself with our reliable sources guidelines as well as our more specific guidelines for Indian film-releated topics at WP:ICTF#Guidelines on soruces. You certainly don't want to embarrass the encyclopedia and yourself by attributing content to shitty blog like worldblaze.in and telugusquare.com. I'm sure a discriminating person such as yourself knows that anybody can start a blog and print whatever nonsense they want. We certainly have higher standards than that. Koimoi isn't considered a good source, by the way. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 10:45, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

English

Here you erroneously make it sound like Vijay is currently "the most searched actor in Google". No, that might have been true in December 2014, but that doesn't mean it's true today. Unclear why we would need that old piece of information in the lead. Also, you are erroneously claiming that he is the "most searched actor". That is absolutely not what the source says. The source says "the most searched Tamil actor". Big difference because the world is a big, big place. This flaw is the difference between puffery and pernicious promotion. If English is not your primary language, you should consider editing at Wikipedia in your native tongue. Making big mistakes like this due to reading comprehension issues is simply not acceptable. And you made the same mistakes here where you claimed that Vijay is currently the most searched South Indian actor based on a useless 2014 source, then here where you unjustifiably removed the "South Indian" qualifier, which just looks like deliberate promotion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:39, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CyphoidbombThen you could have altered it right why are you removing the sourced content??Cyctolaugh (talk) 19:37, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because competence is required at Wikipedia and editors aren't here to clean up after your puffery-laden messes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]