User talk:Rcrox

Welcome!

Hello, Rcrox, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Rocky Rajesh, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Qwertyus (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rocky Rajesh

The article Rocky Rajesh has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Qwertyus (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rocky Rajesh

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Rocky Rajesh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 17:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rocky Rajesh

The article Rocky Rajesh has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Tassedethe (talk) 23:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing tags

Please stop removing the clean up banners posted on Thalapathy Dinesh unless you (or someone else) has actually addressed the concerns laid out. In this case, the article will need to have citations to reliably published third party sources that discuss the subject of the article in a significant manner. Note that IMDB does not qualify. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:45, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop creating articles about living people without proper sourcing

Please stop creating articles, particularly those about living people, without providing reliably published sources to show that the subject of the article meets the criteria for having a stand alone article: primarily that they have received significant coverage about their work in reliably published sources. Continually creating articles without appropriate sourcing is disruptive and can lead to you being blocked from editing. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Thalapathy Dinesh, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at List_of_Tamil_films_of_2011, you may be blocked from editing. See this edit [1] where you insert information in blatant contradiction to what the source says. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:58, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Thalapathy Dinesh

The article Thalapathy Dinesh has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

Subject fails WP:NENT

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rocky Rajesh

The article Rocky Rajesh has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

fails WP:ENT

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:15, 24 October 2013 (UTC) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:15, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Super Subbarayan

The article Super Subbarayan has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

fails WP:N

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Judo. K. K. Rathnam

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Judo. K. K. Rathnam requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 17:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

Hello, I'm Kailash29792. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Anjaan (2014 film) because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Enough of using the term "bagged"! It is unencyclopedic. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Anjaan (2014 film). I believe it is YOU who has been adding the term "bagged" to any Kollywood article all these years through different IP addresses, despite multiple warnings. Do it again, you're blocked. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:12, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Manjapai. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Thomas.W ^talk 10:19, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W, I would not call his edits as exactly trivial, but he violates two rules: WP:FILMRATINGS (he adds information on the film's censor rating without deep analysis) and he adds the unencyclopedic slang term "bagged", to any article he touches. It seems he does not watch his talkpage, and strong action must be taken for his negligence as warnings appear ineffective on him. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:54, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but strong action can't be taken against him unless he's been properly warned (and there is in effect a time limit for how old a warning can be). Which I'm sure he knows since he's IP-hopping (switching between multiple IPs) most of the time. Thomas.W ^talk 11:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 12 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Suriya page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arya (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeeva (film). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:59, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources

Your edits here, here and here are problematic because you keep adding incomplete and unreliable sources. IMDb is not a reliable source. See WP:RS, WP:RS/IMDB or WP:TVFAQ. The Tamilrockers reference you included does not resolve because it's not a valid URL. We also do not link to potential copyright violation sites as Tamilrockers, a torrent downloading site, appears to be. References must be from reliable published sources with a reputation for fact checking and clear editorial oversight. Resubmitting the same problematic references over and over doesn't endear you to the community and makes you look disruptive at worst and incompetent at best. I urge you to read WP:RS. There are at least 7 previous links to this guideline on your talk page. If you resubmit problematic content or sources again, I will interrupt your editing privileges. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Rajesh filmography

Hi there, a couple of things:

It seems to me that you have been editing while logged out, since you've restored the "Extra Fighter" content that was previously added by IP users [2][3][4] until the article was protected by @Bishonen:. Logging in to bypass article protection and to perpetuate an edit war, is disruptive, and you should not be editing while logged out if you have an account, since this starts to look an awful lot like sockpuppetry.
I have disputed the utility of this section because it's unclear what "Extra Fighter" means, or why we care about. You have failed numerous times to participate in the discussion on the talk page. Thus, your restoration of the content is done without consensus, and is disruptive.
The content you restored is not adequately sourced, so the other aspect of my complaint is not properly addressed.

I urge you to participate in the discussion at Talk:Rocky Rajesh and achieve consensus for the inclusion of this information, otherwise, I will seek further administrative intervention. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's how it seems to me too. Edit warring logged out, and then logging in when the article has been protected, is both disruptive and uncollaborative. The protection was explicitly done to make the IP (=you) come to the talkpage to discuss, and instead you evade it and continue to edit war. I see you have never responded to any calls to come to the talkpage for discussion before, either, not ever posted on this, your own, talkpage. You have been here nearly three years, so I would hope you're aware you have a talkpage. In any case, this disruption has gone too far. You have been blocked for 48 hours, see below. Please note: don't edit logged out while you're blocked. That would be Block evasion, which is regarded seriously here; click on the link to see how seriously. Bishonen | talk 09:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

February 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for disruptive editing, see above. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 09:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Rocky Rajesh

I'm not sure why you are so reluctant to participate in the discussion at Talk:Rocky Rajesh, but content disputes can only be resolved through talk page discussions, not through edit-warring. Edit-warring is extraordinarily disruptive. If you think, for some reason, that you have ownership over that article, and that you can continue to add unsourced and potentially trivial content to articles, you are incorrect and the community will not tolerate it. I strongly advise you to participate in discussion and to explain why the content you are adding belongs in the article. If you fail to do this, I will ask that your editing privileges be suspended again. I will also point out that per WP:BURDEN, if content you submit is challenged as unsourced, the burden is yours to dig up references to support the additions if you resubmit them. So that's two obstacles you need to overcome: consensus for inclusion, and reliable sourcing. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You've edited again, but still have no consensus for inclusion. What's your game plan? To get blocked indefinitely and cause the article to get slapped with long-term protection? That's not much of a plan. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 12:54, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More issues

This is not a minor edit, so it should not be marked as minor, and the content is unsourced. You need to provide references when you add content like this. This also is not a minor edit, and should not be marked as such. Further, we do not use blogs as references, because anybody with an internet connection can proclaim themselves an expert on any subject and set up a blog. Please familiarize yourself with our guidelines on reliable sourcing. And if you continue to make poorly sourced contributions, or continue to mark non-minor edits as minor, I will ask that your editing privileges are suspended. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:58, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Theri (film). Diff: [5] As previously explained, faceless blogs should not be used as references, because any random person can set up a blog and claim to be an expert in any field. Also, you again inappropriately marked this edit as minor. Read WP:MINOR Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This block was related to this edit. We don't use random YouTube videos as references. We only use references from reliable published sources with established reputations for fact-checking and clear editorial standards. Since you never explain your edits and you've had persistent problems understanding what does and does not constitute a reliable source, you can use this time to read up on our reliable sources guidelines and our guidelines on user-generated content. Anyone with an internet connection can create a YouTube channel and upload videos. That doesn't make them experts. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to 24 (2016 film), as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Diff: [6] It's also unclear why we care about this financial detail, and you are invited to discuss on the article's talk page, where a conversation has already begun. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continuation of disruptive editing

Not surprisingly, you are continuing your disruptive editing, for instance, the resubmission of satellite sales with no attempt to discuss, and the addition of garbage references that don't meet WP:RS or WP:UGC. I'm not sure what's confusing to you about our requirement that information come from reliable mainstream sources, not blogs, but that's of no concern to me. The next time you submit unsourced or poorly sourced content, your editing privileges will be revoked. You're not making the encyclopedia stronger by adding junk data and junk references. You're just perpetuating the notion that Wikipedia can't be trusted as accurate. As for the sales of satellite rights, there's no provision in MOS:FILM for the inclusion of this bizarre financial information. If the Indian trades want to obsess about this microfinancial data, that's their business, but Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, so the onus is on you to argue for inclusion. Also, last warning about incorrectly marking minor edits as minor. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries, WP:MINOR, etc., etc.

Here you made odd choices for character names. I don't understand what the point of "(Subramani)" is. Is that a nickname? The character's last name? Why is it wrapped in parentheses? You didn't use an edit summary, so other editors have no way of knowing. You should also be aware that we're not here to document every permutation of a character's name. If they are credited as "Manikandan", readers are probably smart enough to figure out that Mani is a diminutive without being spoon-fed the information. You should use the name the character is credited as. If the credits say Mani, use that. If they say Manikandan, use that. We aren't here to replace the experience of watching the film.

Lastly, you are again marking non-minor edits as minor. Please stop and please familiarize yourself with WP:MINOR. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "What is WP:MINOR". Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:FILM - please familiarize yourself with it

Re: this edit, there is no provision at MOS:FILM for the inclusion of satellite rights information in film articles. Unless you're willing to seek consensus by opening a request for comment in some central, intuitive location like WT:ICTF, existing consensus prevails. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. We're not here to catalog every financial detail of every released film.

Aaaaaand again, this is not a minor edit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:50, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For these: [7] - Not a minor edit, addition of unsourced content, and submission of content that is inconsistent with MOS:FILM. [8] - Not a minor edit, unsourced, and inconsistent with MOS:FILM. Generally though, your persistent failure to discuss your edits at this community editing project, is ultimately very disruptive.

Note that while your block is indefinite, that does not mean forever. You are at liberty to request an unblock, but for as long as this account is blocked, you, the editor behind this account, are not welcome to edit at Wikipedia. Any edit you make while evading this block may be reverted by any user. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rcrox. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]