Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

In Salaar, Deccan Chronicle states "production cost of 'Salaar’ is just Rs 270 crore-plus including star and technicians fees besides making costs and VFX" which means it is not overall production cost. Other sources which are more reliable gives clear budget. SonaMani1 (talk) 13:04, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mensxp is not reliable and others either are outdated such as this [1]. Deccan Chronicle gives detail on rumors of budget. RangersRus (talk) 13:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How other sources can be rumors? They too are reliable. SonaMani1 (talk) 13:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since your account is 5 days old, take time to go through WP:RS policy. RangersRus (talk) 13:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please continue purging it from articles. The only exceptions should be pre-2010 South Indian films articles as they don't have many sources. However, in Anniyan and Chandramukhi can you remove IndiaGlitz refs and still make the articles look coherent? Kailash29792 (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will look at those two pages. But there can not be any exceptions for any year articles when it comes to unreliable sources. I sympathize with you but I can not do so because of Wikipedia policy and guidelines. I have also seen arguments by other editors that so and so page has the same source so why not use it on this page or that page. I will continue to add citation needed tag where needed and editors can help in doing research to find reliable sources. RangersRus (talk) 11:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a great help to inform User:Kailash29792 before removing almost all of an article's sources like you did at Nepali (film). DareshMohan (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do add citation needed where necessary and editors are welcome to improve the article with reliable sources. If almost all the sources are unreliable, they will be removed but will be tagged with cn. RangersRus (talk) 17:46, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit on Anniyan. Now I need to find out how to rewrite sentences to match existing sources. DareshMohan is welcome to help. Kailash29792 (talk) 19:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who you are, where you are, [2] but I wanted to say thank you for your work in regards to unreliable sources. DareshMohan (talk) 23:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: It looks odd that Dookudu is a GA when you removed so many of its sources. DareshMohan (talk) 18:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: @DareshMohan: is this url reachable for you? Not for me.

[3] RangersRus (talk) 20:07, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the revert comment lots of typos i had. I was saying "Good faith. if it is just one src that is in question, it can be discussed on talk page but whole revert is not needed here. please discuss in talk page or ICTFSOURCES talk page how an untreachable blog https://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/10/01/machu-picchu-welcomes-rajnikanth-and-india/ is reliable. RangersRus (talk) 20:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RangersRus, here you go Kailash29792 (talk) 02:27, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review all or some instances of Indiaglitz and Behindwoods on Ayan (film) if @Kailash29792: agrees. DareshMohan (talk) 08:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to the removal of them from the reception section first. All other instance, please put cn. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please DON'T remove this from any article. Why do you doubt its reliability? Kailash29792 (talk) 11:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a database where crawlers upload court documents. Court documents, are not acceptable primary sources. The statement on the film page is supported by secondary independent new Indian Express source. "Court documents, are usually not acceptable primary sources because it is impossible for the viewer to know whether the person listed on the document is the notable subject rather than another person who happens to have the same name." Secondary independent source is much more acceptable and gives support to the statement. RangersRus (talk) 16:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starspawn is deleted G6. Please proceed with draft accpetance. -- Whpq (talk) 19:20, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i've done as you commanded me to and removed the 2 blog sites (Mumbai77 and Wordpress) references. I've added more books and news articles as references and have replaced the Mumbai77 ones with 'Chalo' the official partners of B.E.S.T. (the company which runs the buses in Mumbai). I hope this is better. Draft:Play House (Mumbai) Indianx123 (talk) 13:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

Anarchyte (talk) 09:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Numbers. I need your help. DareshMohan (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: thank you for the message. Is this not followed?

"Avoid beginning a sentence with a figure:

Use: There were many matches; 23 ended in a draw. Or: There were many matches. Twenty-three ended in a draw.

Not: There were many matches. 23 ended in a draw." Is someone not following this or you had different concern? RangersRus (talk) 12:07, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You must be talking about this "Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words." This rule should be followed. I was not aware of this and thank you for showing this to me. If someone is not following this, please show them this on editor's talk page. Please let me know where I can help. RangersRus (talk) 12:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many film articles use numbers sadly. Spy (2023 film). DareshMohan (talk) 13:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You declined this. Anther editor has made a pseudo acceptance, using AFC templates to do so, but is not an accepted reviewer in any sense, having only 167 edits in their edit log. You may wish to consider the article. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried but trying to find out who can help. You are right that it has been fiddled with that the move back to draft is not so simple (for me). The editor who moved also posted a fake AFC acceptance message. RangersRus (talk) 10:45, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover rights do not allow me to do this either. Thank you for commenting on the SPI. If you are unfamiliar with opening an SPI, Twinkle does it all, automagically.

The next question is to AfD or not to AfD. It is a disputed draftification, but does it pass WP:NFILM? It cannot be returned to draft without consensus at AfD now. See WP:DRAFTOBJECT

Reviewing drafts takes us down interesting paths! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:13, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Larkmean (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gaurav Kapadia ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello there,

Hoping you can help me learn. I'm not sure why Gaurav Kapadia's coverage in publications like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Financial Times is insufficient evidence of notability. He seems to keep a low profile—nearly zero interviews—which is one reason I want to create a Wikipedia page about him. Google Trends data shows his name is regularly googled: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=gaurav%20kapadia&hl=en

Specifically, I don't know if I agree with the assessment that there are only passing mentions of the subject in the citations provided:

• New York Times article about his wedding: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/fashion/weddings/26jain.html
• A full profile of him from the prominent Mellon Foundation as he joined their board: https://www.mellon.org/news/melissa-gilliam-and-gaurav-kapadia-join-mellon-foundations-board
• Several articles chronicling his career and focusing on him at the center of the fund he runs, including this one from WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/hedge-fund-launches-pick-up-despite-covid-19-pandemic-11596466800

I'd like to either revise my submission to make the subject's notability clear or be convinced that the subject is indeed not notable. I'm flexible and open, so I'm very down to learn that something I'm interested in doesn't meet the criteria. But in this case, I'm reading the contribution guidelines and reasoning for not getting published, and it doesn't make sense to me. Makes me think I just need to revise something in my submission or that some information must have been muddled in my writing.

In the finance and investing world, the subject is a well known figure, and after hearing him come up in technology and NYC conversations and having to learn his story on my own, I would like to understand what else I need in order to publish this information on Wikipedia as a central source of truth for others.

If there's anything you can help me further understand, I would be happy to put in the work to meet requirements. But at a glance, I'm not seeing the lack of reputable sources or lack of in-depth coverage in the information I've provided.

Larkmean (talk) 19:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some criterias to consider notability.

• The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times; or
• The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field; or
• The person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary (e.g. the Dictionary of National Biography). * The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

You have to avoid criteria based on search engine statistics (for example, Google hits or Alexa ranking).

Please make sure to use secondary independent reliable sources with significant coverage that shows that the subject meets the criteria above. Source like radaris.com is not accepted. When you believe that these criterias are met, please re-submit the draft. RangersRus (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look on Devara: Part 1 box office. While Pinkvilla stated it grossed only ₹403 in its final run,[4] BH stated that it grossed ₹521 crore in just 18 days.[5] BH source does not feel good for me here. Charliehdb (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Make a range from 408 - 521 and add both pinkvilla and BH sources. Some editors do make errors when reporting but BH is still reliable source. NDTV and Times of India have reported figure of over 500 globally so maybe it could be right but I did not find any other source that says 521+. RangersRus (talk) 13:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DNA reported the collection to be ₹380 crore. It too can be added. Charliehdb (talk) 13:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please add it as I'm not free nowadays. Charliehdb (talk) 13:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, then it will be 380 - 521 showing all three sources. RangersRus (talk) 13:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What in the world is this? I don't oppose your removal of unreliable sources, only the reliable ones like The Hindu. I can't readd them via mobile, so please explain why the Hindu sources were removed. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit was from Sep 26 before you corrected me after revert of same source on another page showing me that the archive link was verifiable even if url shows page not found. I will try to add these sometime today. RangersRus (talk) 10:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: The Hindu sources are on the page now. Thank you for reaching out. RangersRus (talk) 10:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you recently rejected my draft due to it being a fork from the Muhammad Ghori wiki. I read over the contect forks wikipedia and it states that it may be acceptable if the article proposed is a 'spin off' from the main wikipedia page (in this case Muhammad Ghori) to further expand on a sub-topic, in this case the assassination specifically of him. I was reading some of the examples on the wikipedia page describing where it may be acceptable and it was topics such as: the death of Michael Jackson spun off from the Michael Jackson wikipedia, so I feel it should be re-submitted to be added to the main space.

I can add on further information if you feel as though content is lacking specifically about his assassination, though the events specifically building up to it section has a decent amount of information already.

Thank you in advance. Zenithxxx (talk) 19:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Tourism in Adelaide. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and Most likely created by an LLM (Large-language model)/AI.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 00:48, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please address the subtitle vandalism being carried out by an editor on the List of highest-grossing Kannada films (KGF: Chapter 2). The editor is misrepresenting facts by selectively removing reliable sources and introducing sources that do not meet established reliability standards, enabling figures to be manipulated to suit their preferred narrative.

For ranking articles, giving undue preference to any particular film undermines the fairness and integrity of the entire ranking. Additionally, the selective removal of reliable sources compromises the credibility of the financial summary, as accuracy is paramount in such data, not arbitrary adjustments.

Due to personal reasons, I will be unable to contribute to Wikipedia for some time. I kindly request you to address this issue promptly. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 06:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user is problematic, and I can't report him without strong proof. Not via mobile at least. Could you please do something? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC) Please explain why he is annoying 94.249.100.194 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	A barnstar for you!
	Kudos on ranking among the top five most active pending changes reviewers over the past 30 days. Excellent work! – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I tell you what articles to cleanup? Roshan Basheer DareshMohan (talk) 23:34, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will look sometime tomorrow. RangersRus (talk) 01:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded Ezham Suryan with passing mentions due to lack of sources for Malayalam films. Lack of response at User_talk:Anishviswa#Ezham_Suryan. It might not be notable. DareshMohan (talk) 00:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The author is Jimpyarri of the page. I was not able to find any reviews. I think this at best can be redirected to Unni_Mukundan#Filmography. RangersRus (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article is older than 90 days, the redirect could be reverted. Due to new passing mention sources I added, should I send it to AfD? DareshMohan (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes send it to AFD. RangersRus (talk) 23:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Singer's abuse allegations are very well known. I fail to see why they shouldn't be mentioned in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.248.11 (talk) 04:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please attribute reliable source to the comment. RangersRus (talk) 04:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My draft is about a local transit hub that I personally find interest in. If this is considered "inappropriate",please explain. I personally do not find fault. BusMapper (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was not in the right format. Please look at other similar articles, improve the page and resubmit again. Please refer to WP:WBA. All you have is under references. RangersRus (talk) 19:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wdym not in right format? BusMapper (talk) 22:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of my references have a similar page. BusMapper (talk) 22:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See this page Bus station for format. References go to the bottom of the page and all the content about the subject goes above it. RangersRus (talk) 02:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my bad sry I'm a new editor BusMapper (talk) 12:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you even look at it before reviewing it? You declined it because it had no inline citations... when it clearly does? Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 23:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did look when I reviewed it here and that time there were no online citation. What you are seeing now is after my review the editor added urls. Is that clear now? RangersRus (talk) 01:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment said exactly, Please add page numbers, links, inline citation to help with verification. URLs aren’t required for sourcing but it does help. Denying based off that alone isn’t correct, if there was no sources then it would be a different thing. The editor also used {{sfn}}s with page numbers even before your review. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denied because I wasn't able to verify it then because url weren't there but yes it helps now to review it. Saw many articles where page numbers are made up with fake references so to be more cautious wanted to have the editor add more information to help with verification. This is ok because editors can improve the reference like they did to resubmit for review again which they did later after review. RangersRus (talk) 02:07, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

…? Just look it up on a search engine.. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 02:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did. RangersRus (talk) 02:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then if you can look it up on google or whatever, it didn’t fail verification. You can put the title and the author and go to whatever search engine and look it up and see it there. Like I said before, URLs aren’t required but are helpful, Denying based on no URLs shouldn’t happen. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 02:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said that I looked up on google but didn't catch what I was looking for as I could only get snippets with no verification. Nothing wrong in being cautious and denying actually helped the editor in improving. So all win win here. RangersRus (talk) 02:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But yes I will be more proactive in my best to search deeply. RangersRus (talk) 02:15, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed citations of International Business Times used for the Box Office section of this article per WP:IBTIMES. However, this section also uses TOI to source the figures. According to the discussion here, TOI is unreliable for box office figures, so can you check the section and see whether the sources should be removed? We are the Great (talk) 18:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Times of India is between no consensus to unreliable. When it gets its boxoffice reports from Sacnilk then it is completely unreliable. RangersRus (talk) 23:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please check whether this source is reliable or not? https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/malayalam/mammootty-madhura-raja-crosses-rs-100-crore-in-45-days-5751652/. Moviephilee (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replied in you talk page on same query. RangersRus (talk) 11:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RangersRus, I recently added pink villa source for Pushpa 2 bo, which is a reliable and widely used source in wiki linking [[6]]. Can you please add this to the BO range. PRIYAMANI7 (talk) 17:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested for page protection and added some list of users who are causing vandalism. Special protection on page will be needed so that only valid changes can be accepted by pending change reviewers. Let us wait and see what administration does. RangersRus (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, also the latest Pinkvilla numbers is [7]. I see this was removed in the page. Can you add this to the range in this and relevant pages for box office. PRIYAMANI7 (talk) 13:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RangersRus, if you are interested in editing information related to Pushpa film? You can also edit on Draft:Pushpa (film series) and Draft:Pushpa 3: The Rampage page. Tushar (talk) 15:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 06:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]